Reed Foley
New member
Yes, magnified you can see the 9 ball wobble ever so slightly = Foul.
Yapp winning, with a foul! Just like Maradona making a goal with his hands :D
- Thread starter smoochie
- Start date
With as much respect as I can muster, this clip does show the 9B moving to the left a hair. From the available clips, it's better than 50/50 it moved due to the impact on the cue ball - jogged loose so to speak. How much djya have on this?
Interesting that peering through this moment, there appears to be the Dr. Dave jacked up CB foul going on.
Here is another video of the shot at the 21:47 mark. For those on a computer you can pause any youtube video (the space bar can be used to pause/play with a bit more precision) and then while the video is paused you can advance and rewind the video one single frame at a time by using the comma and period keys. That really lets you look for any movement in the most precise detail.
I think the jury is still out as to whether there was a foul here or not for several reasons. In the video I posted above the nine only appears to ever so very slightly "move" at the exact same moment the shadow of the shaft disappears from the yellow part of the nine ball, and that shadow moving across and then disappearing from the nine ball, combined with the way cameras capture images and the way even subtle lighting changes affects the way it captures things, could possibly be creating the optical illusion of subtle ball movement that didn't actually happen.
Also, the nine does not appear to move at all until a full 5-6 frames after the cue shaft is clearly away from the nine ball, which further supports it being an optical illusion because if the nine moved from contact with the shaft it would have occurred immediately, not six frames later.
Then you have the fact that in the above video the nine doesn't appear to move until six frames after the shaft is away from it, but in the close up video from post #7 it appears to move instantaneously, and it isn't just case of the the video above being too far away to see until six frames later either. You can see it clearly and just fine, the two videos are just showing two different things. This again seems to indicate artifacting in the recordings and/or an optical illusions being created in the recordings due to the changing shadows and lighting on the nine ball causing problematic lighting changes for the camera. In the video from post #7 you can even see the 6 ball "moving" very slightly as well, so we know for sure some level of camera illusion and/or artifacting is occurring.
One thing is certain. If this was a foul, and the jury is still out in my mind due to the discrepancies noted above although I don't dismiss the possibility, it was so unbelievably slight that as Bob said it is much more likely that it would not be felt by the shooter during a forward stroke where the very, very slight brush of the nine happened at almost the exact same time as cue tip hit the cue ball, and during one of the final balls of the final game to win the US Open and $100,000 at that.
I think the jury is still out as to whether there was a foul here or not for several reasons. In the video I posted above the nine only appears to ever so very slightly "move" at the exact same moment the shadow of the shaft disappears from the yellow part of the nine ball, and that shadow moving across and then disappearing from the nine ball, combined with the way cameras capture images and the way even subtle lighting changes affects the way it captures things, could possibly be creating the optical illusion of subtle ball movement that didn't actually happen.
Also, the nine does not appear to move at all until a full 5-6 frames after the cue shaft is clearly away from the nine ball, which further supports it being an optical illusion because if the nine moved from contact with the shaft it would have occurred immediately, not six frames later.
Then you have the fact that in the above video the nine doesn't appear to move until six frames after the shaft is away from it, but in the close up video from post #7 it appears to move instantaneously, and it isn't just case of the the video above being too far away to see until six frames later either. You can see it clearly and just fine, the two videos are just showing two different things. This again seems to indicate artifacting in the recordings and/or an optical illusions being created in the recordings due to the changing shadows and lighting on the nine ball causing problematic lighting changes for the camera. In the video from post #7 you can even see the 6 ball "moving" very slightly as well, so we know for sure some level of camera illusion and/or artifacting is occurring.
One thing is certain. If this was a foul, and the jury is still out in my mind due to the discrepancies noted above although I don't dismiss the possibility, it was so unbelievably slight that as Bob said it is much more likely that it would not be felt by the shooter during a forward stroke where the very, very slight brush of the nine happened at almost the exact same time as cue tip hit the cue ball, and during one of the final balls of the final game to win the US Open and $100,000 at that.
Last edited: