Good to hear you could make use of this knowledge Rekoons, and you will retain it to recall in future situations. I actually thought of another example of the "slide" effect which you have very probably seen and that nearly no one (except us odd duck mechanical engineering types) would relate to as being exactly the same cause and effect. In fact, this discussion has made me think of a few things I would like to write down so I will try to start a new thread here in the Coaching Q&A section in the next few days or a week maybe.
As for the new example, imagine you are potting a Red into (Yellow side) middle pocket from somewhere around the Pink spot. On rare occasion, under just the right circumstances, the Red may just clip the near (Black side) jaw, careen across the pocket to strike the far (Yellow side) jaw, and it then hugs the Yellow side cushion perfectly and occasionally will pot into the Yellow corner pocket or nearly so. Or same thing Green side of course. I have seen this once or twice professionally and dozens of times on my table. I have even seen it once professionally a stroke at the Black corner pocket, rattle the jaws, and the object ball rolls along the side cushion and fell into the MIDDLE POCKET! Extremely unusual that one, but I witnessed it once. Generally, anyone watching one of these events figures, "Deficiency in the table, ball must have rolled off or something out of level." You now know better.
I think most players simplify things in their heads and only imagine the one dimensional straight lines: cue ball line to contact object ball, object ball line to pocket. Sort of like laser beams of light bouncing around perfectly on and against mirrored surfaces. Of course, that is not true at all but it can simplify the thought process. In reality, of course, balls are constantly spinning, and swerving (a two dimensional arc instead of a straight line), and even bouncing up and down in the third dimension of depth! All of which adds to the complexity of the motion of these little spheres. But if we bog our brains down too much with excess thoughts like this, it will take 10 minutes for just a single stroke! So mostly, one is best to think about things in the simplest way possible, but understand that sometimes you need to pull out your "unusual knowledge" base when the stroke requires it such as the case with this slide escape.
I said, "You now know better," above to give you time to digest the information yourself but in case you have not figured out how this is related to slide, that Red strikes the near jaw of middle pocket which starts a RIGHT side spin on it. It careens across and strikes the other jaw which also causes RIGHT side spin, amplifying it, so now it runs near the cushion (so close that it looks like it hugs the cushion the whole time but it doesn't actually***
), and all the RIGHT side induced into it causes it to swerve into the cushion and so it continues, hugging that side cushion all the way until it pots into the Yellow pocket. Now you know. Slide.
If you have ever seen this occur, then continue to try to recall an example of this occurring in the other direction.....mirror image, Red travels down side cushion and fall into Black corner pocket. Chances are, like me, you will not recall THAT event ever happening because in my experience, it never has. ***
There is a completely different (and mind boggling) reason why this only happens going toward the Baulk corners but we should save that for some other discussion. For now, post again and let me know if you have seen this version of the slide effect and if you are interested, we can discuss why it only works toward Baulk end (or let me know if you have seen the same thing toward Black end).
I also put into practice something else I saw on the Barry Stark video's: the push effect (I believe it is called) at very thin cut pots which knocks the o.b. off course, straightens the path of the cue ball so you miss the pot on the thick side. To counter this you can try 2 things: add a little left or right side (right side for thin left cut, left side for thin right cut), or intentionally play the shot a tad thinner. I choose the second option, and actually I believe I already always play these shots thinner unaware of the underlying reason, but from a bit of experience I guess.
I have not heard anyone refer to the "push effect"...I don't think I have seen Barry Stark's video with that yet. (I watch video instruction helter-skelter, I talk to people, I read books; mostly I experiment on my own table, come to conclusions with the results, then keep an eye out to see if any of the "experts" agree with my conclusions.) I did see a Nic Barrow video once in which he invented a device to try to precisely measure this effect. I don't recall much as that was long ago but what you are calling "push" certainly does exist. It is very nuanced stuff and a lot of very good players totally dismiss it as being insignificant, but scientifically speaking, it definitely exists and it has a provable effect.
I am a Snooker player by nature even though I am American by nationality (there aren't too many of us). I rarely play American pool at all and so I tend to use the English terminology but sadly (for Snooker players), the American vernacular is often more "useful" to describe effects like this. I say "useful" because the American terminology is often much more descriptive to what is actually occurring rather than just being a stand-in word like "squeeze" or "slide". So this effect you are talking about (we may call it "push" for now) is described in "American"
as "Cut Induced Throw" or CIT for short (Americans like their acronyms). "Throw" is an American stand-in word to mean any time that you would expect a ball to travel in a particular direction but it travels in a different direction than expected. "Squeeze" and "helping side" are a couple examples in which the object ball is "thrown". "Cut Induced" is exactly what it sounds like....when you "cut" the object ball at angle (in English, you could say you "snick" the ball but "cut" also includes much thicker contacts than a "snick"), the resulting friction of the contact will induce a slight but noticeable spin in the object ball so that it will veer (very slightly) off its expected course. This is exactly the same as swerving the cue ball, except to a much, much smaller degree and we are talking here about the object ball that is "swerving" (ever so slightly).
Your two possible "solutions" to the CIT problem are EXACTLY correct. This tells me that you have very good observational skills, you also recall those previous observations and incorporate that knowledge into future situations. Therefore, you have a lot of potential, that is exactly what it is all about. Congratulations!