What's the lowest cut shot angle possible??

[Maniac]

I'd like to see what answers I can get from azb'ers out there on what their opinion is (or scientific fact) they can give me on what the lowest possible angle of a cut shot is possible. There obviously are gonna be two categories here, the middle-of-the-table cut shot, and the cut shot where the object ball is frozen on a rail. Let me hear your opinions and/or examples of real-life shots.
I realize that there isn't a way for most of us to measure what angle of a shot we may have made, so an honest estimate is fine.

Maniac

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

I'd like to see what answers I can get from azb'ers out there on what their opinion is (or scientific fact) they can give me on what the lowest possible angle of a cut shot is possible. There obviously are gonna be two categories here, the middle-of-the-table cut shot, and the cut shot where the object ball is frozen on a rail. Let me hear your opinions and/or examples of real-life shots.
I realize that there isn't a way for most of us to measure what angle of a shot we may have made, so an honest estimate is fine.

Maniac

That's easy. 91 degrees is the lowest possible angle for a cut-shot. You need line-of-sight. If you have that, you can make it.

 

[bomber]

A professor of physics from the University of Kentucky once told me that if the object ball and the cue ball are in a straight like then it is impossible to cut the ball 90 degrees or more if you hit the ball perfectly straight with absolutely no english. He says that it is impossible due to the shape of the balls. He says that it appears that you can but the measurements are minutely off if all variables are perfect. (This can be argued...I am not a doctor of physics...just relating the story)

The amount of english, the stroke you use, and the manner in which the cue ball strikes the object ball does make it possible for other possibilities. Ive see those top players do some of the craziest stuff with a ball.

I have seen balls cut off the spot into the corner pocket when the cue ball is in the jaws of the opposite corner pocket on the same end of the table. This is STRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Obviously, I cant do this but it can be done.

 

[PROG8R]

I'd like to see what answers I can get from azb'ers out there on what their opinion is (or scientific fact) they can give me on what the lowest possible angle of a cut shot is possible. There obviously are gonna be two categories here, the middle-of-the-table cut shot, and the cut shot where the object ball is frozen on a rail. Let me hear your opinions and/or examples of real-life shots.
I realize that there isn't a way for most of us to measure what angle of a shot we may have made, so an honest estimate is fine.

Maniac

I won some $$ from a few rail birds with this one once.

CueTable Help

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

I won some $$ from a few rail birds with this one once.

CueTable Help

I can make this shot in three tries. However, it's not a cut-shot. You're actually contacting the rail first with inside english.


The only way you could actually cut the ball in is if you masse it. That's it.

 

[PROG8R]

I can make this shot in three tries. However, it's not a cut-shot. You're actually contacting the rail first with inside english.


The only way you could actually cut the ball in is if you masse it. That's it.

Sure, but they dont know that.

 

[Andrew Manning]

Well, it really depends how you define cut angle. From a physics perspective, conservation of momentum and kinetic energy etc., you can't cut a ball 90 degrees, but you can cut it any angle up to (but not including) 90. This assumes no spin, and that you define cut angle as the angle between the CB's velocity infinitessimally before contact and the OB's velocity infinitessimally after contact.

Spin sort of has an "all bets are off" effect on the physics basis of that last paragraph, though. If there's enough friction between the ball surfaces, and if the CB has a high enough spin-to-speed ratio, then there's no theoretical limit to cut angle. If we assume that no billiard balls have more than X coefficient of friction between their surfaces, and that no cueist can get higher than Y spin:speed ratio, then we could calculate a limit for maximum angle of cut, but I don't know how to come up with those numbers.

And of course, there's "thinking outside the box" of cutting billiard balls. You can masse the CB, which means the CB path just before contact can be radically different than the angle at which the balls are set up. Using rail-first inside english also changes the angle like that. Going three-dimensional can do it, too. If you jumped the CB at a steep enough angle that it was able to land on the back side of the OB on its way down, then you'd be cutting at an angle that's mostly down into the table but partly directly back toward you. Once it lands after its hop, you basically cut it straight backwards. But the angle as defined above was not more than 90 degrees. You've just gotten creative with the CB path in order to produce a creative OB angle.

-Andrew

 

[scottycoyote]

i think the actual true "cut shot" angle you can possibly make is like 86 or 88 degrees. You can make one greater than that but only by shooting a massee where you curve the cueball back into the object ball. Im talking cut shots now, not rail first.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I'd like to see what answers I can get from azb'ers out there on what their opinion is (or scientific fact) they can give me on what the lowest possible angle of a cut shot is possible. There obviously are gonna be two categories here, the middle-of-the-table cut shot, and the cut shot where the object ball is frozen on a rail. Let me hear your opinions and/or examples of real-life shots.
I realize that there isn't a way for most of us to measure what angle of a shot we may have made, so an honest estimate is fine.

Maniac

We had a vote and a long discussion on roughly this topic -- the question was what kind of spin was best for thin cuts. There was an article about it in the September (or so) Billiards Digest.

Frozen to the cushion: put the object ball on the short rail a diamond from a pocket. Put the cue ball near the diagonally opposite corner pocket. Cut the object ball along the short rail to the "wrong" corner pocket (it travels 3 diamonds along the short rail). There was a proposition shooter who would play this shot with multiple tries -- you had to bet high to get him to the table.

Non-frozen -- about an 80-degree cut is the thinnest I can make a reasonable percentage of the time (25% or so). When you look at such a cut on the table, it seems to be beyond 90 degrees until you do the geometry.

A word about your wording. Usually, a "0-degree" cut means that you are driving the object ball straight ahead with a completely full hit, like a stop shot. A "90-degree" cut means that the object ball travels at a right angle to the initial path of the cue ball. I assume you are asking about the thinnest possible cut which is also the largest angle of cut.

If you allow masse shots, I've done 180-degree cuts.

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

i think the actual true "cut shot" angle you can possibly make is like 86 or 88 degrees. You can make one greater than that but only by shooting a massee where you curve the cueball back into the object ball. Im talking cut shots now, not rail first.

I simply cannot see how that would physically be possible. I mean, forget pool. There are rules to physics. If you don't have line-of-site, you can't hit the contact point necessary to produce such an angle. Aside from jumps and masses (yes, fun stuff), you need to be able to see your contact point. anything less than 90 degrees and you're talking about a point that's on the other side of the object-ball.

Although you can throw a ball a few degrees, this is really only evident when you're hitting a meatier part of the object-ball. The thinner the cut, the less of an influence english will have. There simply isn't very much friction happening when two balls come in contact so spin becomes trivial at steep angles.

 

[VonRhett]

Practice THIS:

START(
%AH5V3%Pg6O5%UD1E1%VH1U2%eB4a4

)END

It is the thinnest cut that is make-able, without the aid of a cushion, masse, etc. A Champion 14.1 player showed it to me. You MUST have a very smooth stroke; the ball will basically float over to the pocket. NO ENGRISH, hehehe.

My first attempt took me 8 tries, regulation 9-ft, tight holes. Now it's 1/3 when I'm in-stroke.

Bob J, a couple of us were practicing this the other night at CBC, on the tight pocket tables (4-1/16")

-von

 

[RedGuru]

Practice THIS:

START(
%AH5V3%Pg6O5%UD1E1%VH1U2%eB4a4

)END

It is the thinnest cut that is make-able, without the aid of a cushion, masse, etc. A Champion 14.1 player showed it to me. You MUST have a very smooth stroke; the ball will basically float over to the pocket. NO ENGRISH, hehehe.

My first attempt took me 8 tries, regulation 9-ft, tight holes. Now it's 1/3 when I'm in-stroke.

Bob J, a couple of us were practicing this the other night at CBC, on the tight pocket tables (4-1/16")

-von

 

[VonRhett]

Oops - here it is:

CueTable Help

 

[ShootingArts]

flex

After all of the high level cyphering is done it still has to be remembered that the surface of both balls flexes considerably sometimes making the impossible possible.

Hu

 

[Jal]

I simply cannot see how that would physically be possible. I mean, forget pool. There are rules to physics. If you don't have line-of-site, you can't hit the contact point necessary to produce such an angle. Aside from jumps and masses (yes, fun stuff), you need to be able to see your contact point. anything less than 90 degrees and you're talking about a point that's on the other side of the object-ball.

Are we all in agreement that the cut angle is measured from the cueball's direction and not from the line of centers between the balls in their pre-shot positions?

Although you can throw a ball a few degrees, this is really only evident when you're hitting a meatier part of the object-ball. The thinner the cut, the less of an influence english will have. There simply isn't very much friction happening when two balls come in contact so spin becomes trivial at steep angles.

Actually, and this surprised me when I first realized it, theory preidicts that maximum throw increases with cut angle. If you keep the cueball's speed constant and adjust your english to get the most throw, the largest amount occurs as you approach 90 degrees.

Against this, throw decreases with cueball (surface) speed, and at these cut angles you definitely need a lot of speed to propel the object ball.

Still, it predicts that at a cut angle of 85-90 degrees, with a cueball speed of 12 mph, which is pretty fast, you can throw the object ball backwards along the tangent line by 5 degrees. And you can probably add another degree from the rotation of the tangent line due to the compression of the balls.

But there is a catch: the difference in english which results in throwing the object ball maximally forward along the tangent line, not throwing it at all, or throwing it maximally backward, shrinks with increasing cut angle. Getting the spin just right becomes very difficult near 90 degrees.

Jim

 

[BRKNRUN]

Oops - here it is:

CueTable Help

From my observation, the shot you have shown is a 90 degree cut to the center of the pocket...That means if you under cut it slightly 88 degrees you will still make the ball.

If move the OB to the rail and move the CB left the same distance...It looks like a 90 degree cut....

What you have set up just looks steeper because of the angles...

When the OB is very near the rail you don't have the opportunity to undercut the ball and still make it...except on a bar box where then you can use the more receptive pockets to your advantage on cut shots by playing the OB off the rail just a little......(JMO)

 

[Bob Jewett]

Oops - here it is:
...

Are you sure the object ball is at diamonds 1-1?

 

[BRKNRUN]

I'd like to see what answers I can get from azb'ers out there on what their opinion is (or scientific fact) they can give me on what the lowest possible angle of a cut shot is possible. There obviously are gonna be two categories here, the middle-of-the-table cut shot, and the cut shot where the object ball is frozen on a rail. Let me hear your opinions and/or examples of real-life shots.
I realize that there isn't a way for most of us to measure what angle of a shot we may have made, so an honest estimate is fine.

Maniac

I am usually not one for numbers math etc....I have a simple way I judge weather or not I can cut in a ball that is very near (but not frozen) to the rail. If I can fit the tip of my shaft in between the contact point edges (in bwtween the imagined line from the contact points to the rail) of each ball....I can cut it in.....If not I am looking for a bank or safe.

As the OB moves away from the rail or is frozen to the rail......I use other methods to determine if I can make the ball.

 

[VonRhett]

Yes, Bob. Right at the corner of the box. Cue is on the spot. Tough shot. It's as much a measure of your eyes as anything else.

Are you sure the object ball is at diamonds 1-1?

 

[Roadie]

I'd like to see what answers I can get from azb'ers out there on what their opinion is (or scientific fact) they can give me on what the lowest possible angle of a cut shot is possible. There obviously are gonna be two categories here, the middle-of-the-table cut shot, and the cut shot where the object ball is frozen on a rail. Let me hear your opinions and/or examples of real-life shots.
I realize that there isn't a way for most of us to measure what angle of a shot we may have made, so an honest estimate is fine.

Maniac

How much are you willing to bet to find out?

On the road you'll run into a hundred proposition shots that center around cutting a ball in from a seemingly impossible angle. Using just center ball it is possible to pocket balls at what appears to be more than 90 degrees. I don't know if this is due to to friction, throw, deflection or some other property I can't define. I know it works and usually requires me to look beyond the ball I am shooting at or I will hit the object ball to full and not make it.

Using throw and slight masse' just about anything is possible. My partners and I used to have a lot of fun playing with shots such as The One's no-rail spot shot. One of the people in our group was particularly adept at this one but we couldn't ever get anyone to bet anything worthwhile on it.