When A Ball Is Almost In Your Way. . . . . . .

[zeeder]

DCP,
Where do you come up with these dilemma's? You must be cursed. There is no frickin' magnet effect (if you believe that you'll believe Loogootee had a chance to win state).

Now Willie, you know that even though there is no magnetic force being applied there is gravitational force! The force is calculated as follows:

Where

FYI, gravitational constant = 6.67300 × 10^(-11) m^3/(kg*s^2)

 

[Kimmo]

LOL! let me note that up! I'll try to remember this the next time I play planetary pool....
"the tiny bluewhite planet in the black hole in the corner off the carom with the orangeish ball with a funky ring around it"

 

[Williebetmore]

Now Willie, you know that even though there is no magnetic force being applied there is gravitational force! The force is calculated as follows:

Where

FYI, gravitational constant = 6.67300 × 10^(-11) m^3/(kg*s^2)

Z-man,
You are correct in assuming that all matter has a gravitational force. If you carry out your calculation, you will find the the amount of gravitational pull exerted by the interfering ball is QUITE SMALL, in fact almost infintessimal, in fact less than the atmospheric pressure exerting a force on the cue ball (though I know you are already aware of this). I try not to use gravitational force in my calculations before shooting.

 

[mjantti]

Z-man,
You are correct in assuming that all matter has a gravitational force. If you carry out your calculation, you will find the the amount of gravitational pull exerted by the interfering ball is QUITE SMALL, in fact almost infintessimal, in fact less than the atmospheric pressure exerting a force on the cue ball (though I know you are already aware of this). I try not to use gravitational force in my calculations before shooting.

We also have to take into consideration how much the air flow will move the ball(s). When balls are far away, the air flow around the balls is laminary, but when the ball approaches another ball, the air has to move away between the balls thus creating turbulentic air flow. The heavier the AC in the pool room, the more turbulence will you have among the balls.

 

[chefjeff]

I'm not sure this is what really happens, twisting wrist. What normally occurs is that the backhand will assist in the stroke to get a little more action on the cue ball. It is just not spinning the ball, it is also digging the cue ball into the cloth which is were the action comes from and causes the cue ball to move in an arc.
This can be done at a low or high speed shot and is developed by feel more than anything.

I don't think it works either, Pete...that's why I'm asking for proof. If it does, is it really a good weapon?

I have a friend that tends to make up things, and last summer he tried to tell me how to do this and explained why he thinks it works. This guy is a banger, and knows almost nothing about the details of pool, so I dismissed his argument.

And now this summer, the subject comes up again and I'm curious if it's really true. If the cueball is digging into the cloth, then an unlevel cue must be doing it. But what if Wayne keeps his cue level? Then what is really happening?

Wayne...can you prove to us your assertion about doing the twist?

Let's do the twist, like we did last summer, let's twist again like we did last year. around, around, around, around we go....---Chubby Checkers

Jeff Livingston

 

[pete lafond]

I don't think it works either, Pete...that's why I'm asking for proof. If it does, is it really a good weapon?

I have a friend that tends to make up things, and last summer he tried to tell me how to do this and explained why he thinks it works. This guy is a banger, and knows almost nothing about the details of pool, so I dismissed his argument.-[/I]Chubby Checkers

Jeff Livingston

I use this shot often on both short shots and table distance shots. It is a shot that relies on total feel. It can be shot with a soft or firm stroke. In actuality the shot requires that you dig the cueball into the cloth as this gets more desired action. It is not a raised stroke or anything like that, just looks like a normal stroke. The back hand gets more into play. This shot works and works very well.

An example below were the eight ball is slightly hidden by the nine ball is were this shot would be used.
START(
%HK1Z1%IP9Y8%Pi8S6

)END

 

[Black-Balled]

Isn't it true that the OB either gets by the ball or it doesn't?
you have to remember that it is a ball that you are trying to get in the pocket, not a line. It has mass that is tangible and must be accounted for.
It's like I tell my good friend, Benjamin Burnhard, "do you aim?"!
Now, it is true that you can make OB jump when there isn't a path, but that is not to be used for fun. McCready, you listening (re: that Sigel match I was asking you about!)?

 

[AuntyDan]

Where

FYI, gravitational constant = 6.67300 × 10^(-11) m^3/(kg*s^2)

No no no, where do you get this stuff from? Don't they teach you anything in school these days? THIS is the equation that rules ALL shots in Pool:

COF = (M * NF) / (FT * EOS)

COF = Chances of F**king Up
M = Money you will loose if you COF
NF = Number of friends watching you play
FT = Fingers of Tequila drunk
EOS = Ease of shot

As you can clearly see, the easier the shot, the more you've drunk, the more friends watching and the more money you will loose the greater the COF factor.

 

[Boro Nut]

...you will find the the amount of gravitational pull exerted by the interfering ball is QUITE SMALL, in fact almost infintessimal

Putting it into perspective, pick up the ball. Weigh it in your hand. That's the puny effect the entire gravity mustered by the whole of the planet earth has on the ball.

Obviously, in the Northern Hemisphere though, balls potted to the right-hand side of the pocket will fall more often than those to the left-hand side, due to the Coriolis effect.

Boro Nut

 

[pete lafond]

Isn't it true that the OB either gets by the ball or it doesn't?
you have to remember that it is a ball that you are trying to get in the pocket, not a line. It has mass that is tangible and must be accounted for.
It's like I tell my good friend, Benjamin Burnhard, "do you aim?"!
Now, it is true that you can make OB jump when there isn't a path, but that is not to be used for fun. McCready, you listening (re: that Sigel match I was asking you about!)?

Your correct. Do not look for a line to the object ball, this is short sighted and is not a pool shot except for very early beginners. If anything it is the oject balls path to the pocket players look for.. Ask any very good pool player and I do not mean a bar box player. I mean go to the pool room and ask the player who can often run 100+ balls or put several racks of nine ball away in several sets of nine ball.

 

[zeeder]

Very nice

However, mathematically speaking, this formula is more accurate thusly:

COF = (M*NF*FT)/EOS

...where EOS is ranked as 1 being a duck, 2 being more difficult, etc.

When calculated as such, your chances of f**king up rise with each dollar, each friend, and each drink. And at any given combination of dollars, friends, and drinks, your chances of f**king up are greatest if the shot is a duck.

LOL

Mary

Actually, the EOS should be 1 for a duck and then as the shot becomes more difficult approach 0 as this will make COF approach infinity...lol.

 

[zeeder]

Z-man,
You are correct in assuming that all matter has a gravitational force. If you carry out your calculation, you will find the the amount of gravitational pull exerted by the interfering ball is QUITE SMALL, in fact almost infintessimal, in fact less than the atmospheric pressure exerting a force on the cue ball (though I know you are already aware of this). I try not to use gravitational force in my calculations before shooting.

Willie,

I thought you knew me well enough to know that I did actually calculate the force...lol. It's about 1.9x10^-6 N between the balls given 1mm of distance as they pass. This is also assuming a weight of 6oz for the balls. It wasn't as small as I thought it was going to be but it is still quite small.

 

[DaveK]

I largely agree with you, here, Dave. I first became aware of the wrist twist when Tony Robles showed it to me in about 1995. Still, it is not the only means of using a little squirt/swerve to your advantage in avoidance of an obstructing object ball. All that aside, however, if you practice the wrist twist, you'll get very good at it, and your view on this matter may change.
Guess I'm just suggesting that you keep an open mind here, Dave.

My mind is so open things just pour out and onto the ground, SJM That said, especially here on the Internet, if someone cannot defend a claim in the face of reasonable questions and criticisms (this might be my problem ), I tend to question the claim even more. I greatly appreciate you chiming in with the Robles info. I'll give it a try, and was planning to anyway. I am guessing that the twist should happen right through the contact (as opposed to before contact, after contact would not have any affect). The motion the twist will generate is across and down on the ball, if I am imagining the shot correctly, which would account for Petes comment about 'digging in'. The overall result of this stroke should be a squirted cueball which does a slight massee back the other way. Most of my shots are shaped like that anyway, I may as well try another method.

Dave

 

[DaveK]

I knew it! You must be kin to the Dr. Dave who writes all of those scientific articles for Billiards Digest.

All us Daves are real clever ... just ask Koop, or Mr. Wilson, they'll tell you.

Dave