How good is your cue ball control?
Dan White
how to pocket balls, but not so much on knowing where the cue ball is going.
http://CueTable.com/P/?@1AHCU4BIkp4CLVs2PFXk4WLVs4WKxa4WLGb4WLGb2kFXk1kEhX4kMDX4kPev@
You're playing straight pool and want to peel the 3 away from the 2, which
is your break ball. Don't worry about strategy -- this is purely a set up
to illustrate cue ball control.
Here are 2 questions:
1. Can you predict the cb path toward the 3 well enough to KNOW that you
will hit it (and NOT the 2) with natural follow.
2. If you have determined that natural follow will not put you on the 3,
can you reliably alter the cb path to make it hit the 3?
This is not a question as to whether it can be done. I'm wondering whether
YOU can do it! Think in terms of:
1. Of course I can do this 100% of the time, blindfolded, who can't?
2. I'm probably 50% likely to make that shot.
3. Maybe if I practice it a few times first.
4. Forget the 3 ball, I'm lucky if I pocket the 1!
Thanks - just interested in how good you guys are.
dwhite
Dhakala
At lying? ;-)
JakartaDean
> Dan White wrote:
>
>>
>>1. Of course I can do this 100% of the time, blindfolded, who can't?
>>2. I'm probably 50% likely to make that shot.
>>3. Maybe if I practice it a few times first.
>>4. Forget the 3 ball, I'm lucky if I pocket the 1!
>>
>>Thanks - just interested in how good you guys are.
>
>
> At lying? ;-)
>
But if we can lie, definitely 1
lfigueroa
Yes, I can change the path.
But, I probably wouldn't shoot it that way because the outcome for the
next shot is tough to predict and you're likely to send the three ball
to the end rail and end up having to shoot your beak ball. Instead I
might softly go off the two ball, figuring it'll stay there, bumping
into the three, and hope for a shot on the three into the side or up
table corner pocket.
Lou Figueroa
Jim Eales
news:38OdnR0CbfxZYYzY...@comcast.com...
> http://CueTable.com/P/?@1AHCU4BIkp4CLVs2PFXk4WLVs4WKxa4WLGb4WLGb2kFXk1kEhX4kMDX4kPev@
>
I think I could hit the three, but am not sure that I could do it and not
move the two reliably, so I guess I would be in the 'have to try it a few
times' category.
Jim Eales
Jal
Dan White wrote:
> 1. Can you predict the cb path toward the 3 well enough to KNOW that you
> will hit it (and NOT the 2) with natural follow.
Probably not, which I guess means no.
> 2. If you have determined that natural follow will not put you on the 3,
> can you reliably alter the cb path to make it hit the 3?
No.
> This is not a question as to whether it can be done. I'm wondering whether
> YOU can do it! Think in terms of:
>
> 1. Of course I can do this 100% of the time, blindfolded, who can't?
> 2. I'm probably 50% likely to make that shot.
> 3. Maybe if I practice it a few times first.
> 4. Forget the 3 ball, I'm lucky if I pocket the 1!
Your question is about consistency, I think, which is the hobgoblin of
us casual players. It all depends on which version of myself shows up
at the table. The one that gets to enjoy the illusion of emerging
mastery every now and then might execute this successfully 20 - 40 % of
the time. The other one would be watching his opponent attempting it.
Overall, I would say my chances would be 5-15%. I'm kind of assuming
that a pro would do it as diagrammed only about 50% of the time, which
includes not moving the 2-ball.
Hard to estimate though and I'm not sure if I'm giving myself too much
credit or not enough? We can definitely eliminate #1 :}
Jim
John Black
@comcast.net says...
I'd have to practice it a few times before I knew my consistency. But
this brings up a point. As a beginner, I had trouble breaking clusters.
But then when I advanced to the point where I could break them, I was
amazed and how often I STILL would end up with no shot or a poor shot.
You mean I have to not only break it but break it the right way? By
hitting one ball and not the other and with the right speed, etc.?? Of
course in the back of my mind, I knew that but I still thought if I just
broke it up, I should end up with "something" more often than I actually
did.
John Black
David The Hamster Malone
Dan White wrote:
> This is not a question as to whether it can be done. I'm wondering whether
> YOU can do it! Think in terms of:
Not a snowballs chance in Purgatory. If I made the 1 I'd probably miss
the 2 & 3. If I hit the 2 or 3, I'd likely miss the 1 in the side.
Actually in thinking how I'd approach that problem, I'd much more
likely attempt to hit the 1 ball with right draw and try to spin it
back of the 2 & 3 so I could shoot the 3 in the side or more likely the
far end bottom pocket. Why break up balls unpredictably if you don't
have to?
David "The Hamster" Malone
Ed McCune
Put me in this category too.
Ed
mcc...@standardab.abremove remove remove to email
_____________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
DMHenrie
"Dan White" <dwhi...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:38OdnR0CbfxZYYzY...@comcast.com...
Aboo
three. But as to your original question I would say my answer is 2. 50%
of the time.
----
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
Dan White
news:s8wQg.194948$5i3.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Yes, I can hit the three ball.
>
> Yes, I can change the path.
Let's say the cue ball wants to go to the 3 naturally, but you want to hit
the 2 or even the right side of the 2. Do you achieve this with center ball
so that the cb rotation is less than natural, but more than stun by the time
cb-ob contact occurs? Do you have enough precision at this distance to move
the cb direction wider and wider by a ball at a time? Say, miss the 2 on
the right side, and so on...
>
> But, I probably wouldn't shoot it that way because the outcome for the
> next shot is tough to predict and you're likely to send the three ball
> to the end rail and end up having to shoot your beak ball. Instead I
> might softly go off the two ball, figuring it'll stay there, bumping
> into the three, and hope for a shot on the three into the side or up
> table corner pocket.
>
Well, like I said, this wasn't much about strategy. I prolly should have
put the balls in different spots on the table and not said "straight pool."
:) BUT, since you bring it up, how are you going to bump the 2 ball without
moving it from that angle? I'm not sure I see what you are doing there. I
don't know why, but when I click on the Cuetable in this post the cue ball
arrow points back up table as if it had draw. My mistake I guess.
dwhite
Dan White
news:1158863593.9...@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Overall, I would say my chances would be 5-15%. I'm kind of assuming
> that a pro would do it as diagrammed only about 50% of the time, which
> includes not moving the 2-ball.
>
Thanks. I do think your pro estimate of 50% is way too low. I think they
can do it 95% of the time. Or, to be more precise, they can identify 100%
of the time whether the 3 ball can be hit or not, and execute that hit
correctly 95% of the time. When I say "not hit the 2" I think it is OK if
the 2 moves just a little, but not enough move it more than a half inch or
so.
dwhite
Dan White
news:MPG.1f7c99afe...@news.chi.sbcglobal.net...
> this brings up a point. As a beginner, I had trouble breaking clusters.
> But then when I advanced to the point where I could break them, I was
> amazed and how often I STILL would end up with no shot or a poor shot.
> You mean I have to not only break it but break it the right way? By
> hitting one ball and not the other and with the right speed, etc.?? Of
> course in the back of my mind, I knew that but I still thought if I just
> broke it up, I should end up with "something" more often than I actually
> did.
>
Yeah, I think this is one difference between century ball runners and
individual rack runners.
dwhite
Dan White
news:1158866266.2...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Dan White wrote:
>
> > This is not a question as to whether it can be done. I'm wondering
whether
> > YOU can do it! Think in terms of:
>
> Not a snowballs chance in Purgatory. If I made the 1 I'd probably miss
> the 2 & 3. If I hit the 2 or 3, I'd likely miss the 1 in the side.
Aw, I think you misunderestimate yourself.
>
> Actually in thinking how I'd approach that problem, I'd much more
> likely attempt to hit the 1 ball with right draw and try to spin it
> back of the 2 & 3 so I could shoot the 3 in the side or more likely the
> far end bottom pocket. Why break up balls unpredictably if you don't
> have to?
>
That's a good point. What may be unpredictable for one may not be for
another. So, you get more than one way to run a rack.
dwhite
Ed Chauvin IV
wrote:
I already did. BTW, you're on 2 fouls.
Ed Chauvin IV
--
DISCLAIMER : WARNING: RULE # 196 is X-rated in that to calculate L,
use X = [(C2/10)^2], and RULE # 193 which is NOT meant to be read by
kids, since RULE # 187 EXPLAINS homosexuality mathematically, using
modifier G @ 11.
"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
--Terry Austin
Ricky W. King
one and hoping to carom the cue ball into the three?
If I were playing this shot.....play a carom off the two ball....pocket the
three. Two ball should go toward the side and toward the corner allowing for
a shot on the two.....then play for a side pocket break shot on the one.
"Dan White" <dwhi...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:38OdnR0CbfxZYYzY...@comcast.com...
Dan White
not a question about what the best shot or strategy is. It was a post about
how accurate you are in predicting cue ball travel. Pretend it isn't
straight pool. It is just 3 balls.
thanks,
dwhite
"Ricky W. King" <rwk...@pbtcomm.net> wrote in message
news:eevdn8$bjf$1...@news04.infoave.net...
Ron Shepard
"Dan White" <dwhi...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Let's say the cue ball wants to go to the 3 naturally, but you want to hit
> the 2 or even the right side of the 2. Do you achieve this with center ball
> so that the cb rotation is less than natural, but more than stun by the time
> cb-ob contact occurs? Do you have enough precision at this distance to move
> the cb direction wider and wider by a ball at a time? Say, miss the 2 on
> the right side, and so on...
There are three ways to accomplish that, and having the cue ball
sliding rather than rolling when it hits the 1-ball is one of them.
Another way is playing the pocket with the 1-ball; that is, you send
the 1-ball to the side of the pocket rather than straight down the
middle. You just have to change the cue ball angle a little bit
because the distance from the 1-ball to the 3-ball is over two
diamonds. If the cut angle is a half-ball hit, then this won't work
so well, but it looks like the hit is a little fuller than a
half-ball, so you do have some carom angle change to work with.
The third way is with shot speed. When the cue ball caroms off the
1-ball, it doesn't head straight toward the 2-3 cluster. It really
caroms off toward the foot spot, and then the natural roll topspin
causes it to curve over toward the cluster. If you shoot slowly,
then that curve sends the cue ball toward the 3-ball side of the
cluster, and if you shoot faster then it will hit the 2-ball (or
even miss the cluster entirely with enough speed). The actual path
of the curve, which is a parabola, depends on how slick is the cloth.
The rebound angle is also affected by the relative weights of the
cue ball and the 1-ball. If you are playing with a light cue ball,
it will carom off more towards the middle of the table, and if you
are playing with a heavy cue ball it will carom off more towards the
cluster.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
Ed Chauvin IV
What are the other 99 differences? ;-)
Dan White
news:ron-shepard-22C1...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <pq2dneDHjYZGgo7Y...@comcast.com>,
> "Dan White" <dwhi...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Let's say the cue ball wants to go to the 3 naturally, but you want to
hit
> > the 2 or even the right side of the 2. Do you achieve this with center
ball
> > so that the cb rotation is less than natural, but more than stun by the
time
> > cb-ob contact occurs? Do you have enough precision at this distance to
move
> > the cb direction wider and wider by a ball at a time? Say, miss the 2
on
> > the right side, and so on...
>
> There are three ways to accomplish that, and having the cue ball
> sliding rather than rolling when it hits the 1-ball is one of them.
>
> 1-ball, it doesn't head straight toward the 2-3 cluster. It really
> caroms off toward the foot spot, and then the natural roll topspin
> causes it to curve over toward the cluster. If you shoot slowly,
> then that curve sends the cue ball toward the 3-ball side of the
> cluster, and if you shoot faster then it will hit the 2-ball (or
> even miss the cluster entirely with enough speed). The actual path
> of the curve, which is a parabola, depends on how slick is the cloth.
>
Thanks Ron. I haven't found that there is a noticeable change in cb
direction with speed *at the speeds typical* for straight pool. I'm talking
about speeds less than lag speed (or say lag speed plus a half table
length). I haven't noticed even a half ball change over 2 diamonds at these
speeds, but if you think there should be one, I'd sure try again. I
understand that if I'm going into a cluster with a bit more speed, then the
cb will rebound wider.
I didn't mention cheating the pocket because I figured it to be a half ball
hit, and that creates the widest cb rebound.
dwhite
lfigueroa
angle pretty readily. This relates to the last Wei table thingy we were
doing. The idea is not to put stun on the ball, but to hit it just
below center so that it leaves the object ball with just a touch of
draw. That's what alters the angle. At such a short distance I'm
pretty sure I could hit the side of the ball that I wanted.
I figure the two ball doesn't move much because I'm caroming it straight
into the three, so theoretically it should stay right there.
Ron Shepard
"Dan White" <dwhi...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Ron Shepard" <ron-s...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ron-shepard-22C1...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> > In article <pq2dneDHjYZGgo7Y...@comcast.com>,
> > "Dan White" <dwhi...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Let's say the cue ball wants to go to the 3 naturally, but you want to
> hit
> > > the 2 or even the right side of the 2. Do you achieve this with center
> ball
> > > so that the cb rotation is less than natural, but more than stun by the
> time
> > > cb-ob contact occurs? Do you have enough precision at this distance to
> move
> > > the cb direction wider and wider by a ball at a time? Say, miss the 2
> on
> > > the right side, and so on...
> >
> > There are three ways to accomplish that, and having the cue ball
> > sliding rather than rolling when it hits the 1-ball is one of them.
I should have mentioned this before. A good way to judge these
shots is to imagine that you are playing a drag shot where you want
the cue ball to hit the object ball straight on and then roll
forward a small distance (say 2 inches, or 4 inches, or 6 inches).
This kind of straight-on drag shot is something that everyone should
practice and be familiar with. Then on the cut shot, you imagine
that you are shooting the drag shot, and this tells you the
appropriate vertical tip offset for the given shot speed. If you
want the cue ball to carom off perpendicular, then you shoot "as if"
you are playing a stop shot; if you want the cue ball to curve just
a little bit forward of perpendicular, then you shoot "as if" you
are playing a drag shot with 2 inches of roll; if you want the cue
ball to curve a little more forward, then you shoot "as if" you are
playing a drag shot with 4 inches of roll, and so on. This is a way
to take a complicated shot that depends on many things and simplify
part of it so that it depends on only one or two things.
> > The third way is with shot speed. When the cue ball caroms off the
> > 1-ball, it doesn't head straight toward the 2-3 cluster. It really
> > caroms off toward the foot spot, and then the natural roll topspin
> > causes it to curve over toward the cluster. If you shoot slowly,
> > then that curve sends the cue ball toward the 3-ball side of the
> > cluster, and if you shoot faster then it will hit the 2-ball (or
> > even miss the cluster entirely with enough speed). The actual path
> > of the curve, which is a parabola, depends on how slick is the cloth.
> >
>
> Thanks Ron. I haven't found that there is a noticeable change in cb
> direction with speed *at the speeds typical* for straight pool.
Yes, if you want the cue ball to slowly roll down and nudge the
3-ball, then that limits what you can do with shot speed.
> I
> understand that if I'm going into a cluster with a bit more speed, then the
> cb will rebound wider.
Yes, this is the main effect. No one else had mentioned this, so I
thought I would add it to the thread. As you say, it may not apply
so much to this particular shot. Also, it depends on cloth speed.
On slick cloth, the effect is larger than on slow cloth.
> I didn't mention cheating the pocket because I figured it to be a half ball
> hit, and that creates the widest cb rebound.
Understanding why natural roll half-ball caroms work the way they do
helps you to know when to use them *and* when the effect works
against you. If the cut angle is a half-ball hit, then you know
that changing the cut angle a little bit (playing the pocket) does
not change the cue ball direction.
Using a half-ball hit as a reference point also tells you which side
to play the pocket with the object ball. If the cut shot is thicker
than a half-ball hit, then hitting the object ball *thinner* sends
the cue ball wider; if the cut shot is thinner than a half-ball hit
then hitting the object ball *thicker* sends the cue ball wider. It
is always surprising to me when I see an experienced player play a
shot like this backwards; to most of us here in RSB, where we talk
about this from time to time, it seems so obvious that it is second
nature and almost isn't worth mentioning.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
Teo
>
> http://CueTable.com/P/?@1AHCU4BIkp4CLVs2PFXk4WLVs4WKxa4WLGb4WLGb2kFXk1kEhX4kMDX4kPev@
>
>
> Here are 2 questions:
> 1. Can you predict the cb path toward the 3 well enough to KNOW that you
> will hit it (and NOT the 2) with natural follow.
I'll go with 40% :). When I'm 'on', and the game feels too easy, I'd
be a zen cueist and just do it flawlessly. When I am struggling not to
leave myself hooked or shooting too softly to hit a rail on one of my
safes, I miss by a mile or scatter the cluster indiscriminantly. The
more I play, the more I move towards the former, fortunately.
> 2. If you have determined that natural follow will not put you on the 3,
> can you reliably alter the cb path to make it hit the 3?
I can reliably alter the path (using most of the methods Ron mentions).
Whether it helps me hit the 3... see above.
Teo
cuetable
Most of the time I am lucky : )
Just want to take this chance to demo the <Tangent Line> function, which
is very useful in this case
From the original by Dan:
http://CueTable.com/P/?@1AHCU4BIkp4CLVs2PFXl4WLVs4WLGb2kFXk1kEYX4kLec8kPev@
1, Click on the cue ball once
2, Press "h" key to turn on the ghostballs for cue ball (or click on the
<GhostBallOne> in the toolbox)
3, Click on the ghostball contacting the 1 ball
4, Press "J" key (capital case) to turn on the tangent line (or click on
the <TangentLine> in the toolbox)
Now you should have this:
http://CueTable.com/P/?@1AHCU4BIkp4CLVs2PFXl4WLVs4WLGb2kFXk1kEYX4kLec4kPevzc1vEYXhkj@
There seems to be appx. 30 degrees gain from the line. With top follow it
might look closer to this on the table (shift-clicking on a ghostball with
toggle its point bt sharp corncer/curve point ):
http://CueTable.com/P/?@1AHCU4BIkp4CLVs2PFXl4WLVs4WLGb2kFXk1kEYX8kDrB8kERF4kLec8kQkozc1vEYXhkj@
Thank you all for supporting the new table!
Cheers
Wei
CueTable.com
Vinnie
After setting up the shot and trying it several times, I've discovered
that is is easy to send the cue ball into the three by cheating the
pocket and using a soft stroke. However it is extremely difficult to hit
just the three without sending it all the way to the foot rail. I was
much more consistent on getting a leave by caroming off the two and
three softly. So as far as hitting just the three, I am a 1.5, but
leaving the three as illustrated is almost impossible for me.
Vinnie
Dan White
> I find that just by moving up and down the cue ball, you can adjust the
> angle pretty readily. This relates to the last Wei table thingy we were
> doing. The idea is not to put stun on the ball, but to hit it just
> below center so that it leaves the object ball with just a touch of
> draw. That's what alters the angle.
I was surprised when I originally learned this. I guess the cb takes time
to transition from stun to full natural roll. I always figured that follow
was follow even if the cb started off with stun.
dwhite
Dan White
> >
> > Thanks Ron. I haven't found that there is a noticeable change in cb
> > direction with speed *at the speeds typical* for straight pool.
>
> Yes, if you want the cue ball to slowly roll down and nudge the
> 3-ball, then that limits what you can do with shot speed.
>
Well, at least on my table, I can nudge the 3 or send it to the foot rail
and up, probably, without noticeable change in cb path.
Your suggestion to practice drag shots was interesting. I'll have to try
it.
dwhite
Dan White
news:1b76a$45143bc5$40711857$25...@donobi.com...
>
> After setting up the shot and trying it several times, I've discovered
> that is is easy to send the cue ball into the three by cheating the
> pocket and using a soft stroke. However it is extremely difficult to hit
> just the three without sending it all the way to the foot rail. I was
> much more consistent on getting a leave by caroming off the two and
> three softly. So as far as hitting just the three, I am a 1.5, but
> leaving the three as illustrated is almost impossible for me.
>
Sorry, I didn't put too much thought in where the 3 and cb went after
contact. The idea was just to illustrate contact with the 3. The real
question for you is how well you did the first time or two you tried
(rhetorically of course). If not so well, then there is something for you
to work on. I think to be a really good player you have to know on the
first try whether you are going to hit the 2, the 3, or both.
dwhite
Vinnie
>first try whether you are going to hit the 2, the 3, or both.
>
>dwhite
>
Good point. You only get one chance in a real game. That is why it is
important to practice shooting stun shots at different lengths and
speeds and to learn the cue ball path on half ball hits and quarter
ball hits. Once those are ingrained, it is a lot easier to analyze and
adjust the path for the shot at hand.
Vinnie
Gregory
> The real
> question for you is how well you did the first time or two you tried
> (rhetorically of course). If not so well, then there is something for
you
> to work on. I think to be a really good player you have to know on
the
> first try whether you are going to hit the 2, the 3, or both.
1/2 ball hit on the 3-ball on the 1st try.
Over the next 19 tries -
2-ball hit 4 times,
cluster miss on the draw side 4 times,
cluster miss on the follow side 11 times.
Thanks for the lesson, Dan.
Dan White
news:lIpRg.14737$8s6....@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
Were your misses due to misjudging the path that the cb wanted to take
naturally, or were you trying to alter the cb path with center ball/ draw
and pocket cheating?
dwhite
Gregory
> Gregory wrote
> > 1/2 ball hit on the 3-ball on the 1st try.
> > Over the next 19 tries -
> > 2-ball hit 4 times,
> > cluster miss on the draw side 4 times,
> > cluster miss on the follow side 11 times.
> >
>
> naturally, or were you trying to alter the cb path with center ball/
draw
> and pocket cheating?
yeah, all of that
Duane
> 2. I'm probably 50% likely to make that shot.
> 3. Maybe if I practice it a few times first.
> 4. Forget the 3 ball, I'm lucky if I pocket the 1!
I can make the 1 and direct the cue into either the 2 or 3 or both. So
I would say I'm about the 3...I could hit just the 3 after a few
practice shots.