Post a reply

Straightening up

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Rarely a good shot to play but, when I play a double into the middle (particularly at a fine angle) and miss it, sometimes there is hope that it may go in the other side on the next bounce ( a treble). However, almost without fail it will not and the object ball straightens up to be more parallel with the top cushion. I cannot understand this effect as it cannot be due to side. I may be wrong but it seems more pronounced when the shot is played with force.

Re: Straightening up

Postby acesinc

I think this is a completely normal effect; has occurred on every snooker table I have ever played on. If you are not actually playing a double and instead just bang an object ball cross cushions with power, on about the fourth or fifth rebound, it will effectively be parallel to top cushion just bouncing back and forth between two points henceforth. (If you were to just strike cue ball, you probably would not see the same effect because chances are, there will be spin applied to the white, intended or no, and of course, that would affect the rebounds.)

As to why this occurs, I can only speculate but I believe I have a fair idea. First off, the effect is far less pronounced on American style pool tables. The old adage about calculating a double is that the angle of incidence is allegedly equal to the angle of reflection. This is much closer to being true on an American table than an English table. I actually learned a lot about this when I originally attempted to set up my table 25 years ago. It is a Brunswick-Balke-Collender made in the USA back in the 1920's. I had cut my teeth on Rileys when I lived in England. Well, I came to find out that the rubber of the cushions actually has a different shape beneath the cloth. American design is sort of like an upside down triangle and English design is like an upside down letter "L" which basically means American cushions come to a point and English cushions have a prominent flat face. Add to that American design Snooker balls are 2-1/8" diameter, larger than English standard 2-1/16". Long story short.......I had no idea about these things when I purchased the old used table; Snooker is not exactly a thriving market over here with very little available especially when you are on a budget so you takes what you can gets. I explained to my Canadian table fitter that I was looking forward to the table playing just like what I was used to back in England. He said, "You're crazy. This is a Brunswick..." and explained all these things. So I guess a combination of me looking pathetically sad and him being a ridiculously nice guy meant that in the end, he brought my rails back home to his machine shop in Toronto and he re-worked them to accept the "proper" rubber and ball size, so in all likelihood, I am currently in possession of the only Brunswick-Balke-Collender snooker table that plays to exact English standards.

That was all an aside eventually leading to my theory of your query. In my ongoing study of the game, one of the tidbits I came across is that the contact point of the cushion to the ball is theoretically at a height of 0.62 times the diameter of the ball....think of it like the ball is a globe: the point at which the ball will contact cushion is well above the equator. Add to that the fact that on English snooker cushions, the flat face of the cushion means there is a lot more material above that contact point......as the "globe" sinks into the cushion, a lot more energy is being absorbed in the "northern hemisphere" and there is no material at all in the "southern hemisphere", just open space. You might think, "Why doesn't it rebound off the cushion at the equator?" Historically, when the rails were added to billiards table hundreds of years ago, their sole purpose was to keep the balls from falling off the edge of the table. And of course, they serve the same purpose today and more. If the rebound contact point is too near the equator, the balls would have a tendency to jump up and off the table A LOT. Remember that video with all of the spins applied and balls bouncing around? Snooker is quite a three dimensional game so the shape of the cushions are designed to retain the balls and direct the rebound back to the bed of the table if bouncing.

So the upshot is that all the extra rubber material in the "northern hemisphere" tends to absorb that energy so that the angle of incidence does NOT equal the angle of reflection. With the American pointed design, there is less material above the equator so the rebound is more accurately reflected. For exactly the same reason, it is tougher to play at the White from tight on cushion on the English table.

Re: Straightening up

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Thanks Ace for the detailed response. I had not considered this before but need to give it some thought before I totally understand it.

Re: Straightening up

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Tested this again today. The straightening up of a treble (or more bounces) is much more pronounced when the shot is hard. If you play soft, then there is no noticeable straightening up effect. I think it therefore occurs because the deformation of the cushion is not symmetrical as it is deformed more on the ‘far side’ of the shot.

Re: Straightening up

Postby acesinc

rekoons wrote:So this is the opposite of the slide effect on more oblique angles then?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-NZHx- ... e=youtu.be


I suppose that is a way that you can think about it if it helps you to judge your stroke correctly. In my mind though, I see the two effects as having two completely different and (in my opinion) unrelated causes. First off, I will say that (again, in my opinion,) anything that Barry Stark says, believe it. Incredibly intelligent snooker guy and I think his presentation is excellent to make the point clear. Coaching is about communication....a coach may know everything there is to know about a subject but if he cannot effectively communicate that knowledge to a student, then he is not a very good coach. Just because someone is a very good snooker player does not necessarily mean that person will be a good snooker coach. Barry Stark is a fantastic coach, the whole package.

But more to your point, what I was trying to say early on about "straightening up", I believe it occurs because a firm strike of a ball INTO the cushion causes the rubber to compress, and then of course it de-compresses, pushing the ball away from it like it is a trampoline. However, the ball will reflect at a straighter angle because the rubber absorbs a lot of energy into it before pushing the ball away. This is where language fails me...I am having a hard time communicating this concept properly. I think BadSnookerPlayer hit this nail on the head when he described it as, "I think it therefore occurs because the deformation of the cushion is not symmetrical as it is deformed more on the ‘far side’ of the shot."

But the "sliding" is an easy concept for me to explain. Similar to "squeeze", "slide" is just a term that we use, a word to connect the idea with the reality of what actually happens in the physical world. (By this, I mean we use the term "squeeze" but nothing is actually getting squeezed at all and we use the term "slide" but nothing is actually sliding at all......these are simply words that we use so that others know what effect we are talking about when we say these words.) So what is it then that is actually happening when the cue ball is "sliding" off the rail? Easy to understand....

First, imagine setting up White on Green spot, Brown on Brown spot and simply strike Brown along the Baulk line straight into the cushion. Of course, it rebounds straight back at you. Now, same thing but take Brown away and strike White directly into the cushion. You can do one of three things: centerball strike White rebounds straight back at you, left side on White and it reflects toward Blue spot, right side on White it reflects toward Baulk cushion. So spins have an effect on how a ball comes off cushion. That is obvious. But what is NOT obvious is that the cushion will INDUCE spin onto a ball simply by the friction between the two surfaces.

Now, let's apply that knowledge you probably already had to this concept of "slide"....a similar scenario to Barry Stark's but a slight change. Black on Black spot and place White on a theoretical spot which is the exact mirror image of the Black spot on the Baulk end of the table and we are going to strike side cushion on Yellow spot side. Again, with the "equal angles" theory, you would need to hit the White to the space that is occupied by the middle pocket in order to hit Black. But you know that is not true. If you hit a spot on cush a few inches to Baulk side of middle pocket, White will "slide" off the cushion and strike the Black on spot. What happens is easy to understand....you strike White centerball, but when White strikes a GLANCING BLOW on the cushion, the cloth of the cushion has a gripping effect on the surface of the cue ball because of simple friction (very much like a well chalked tip has a gripping effect on the cue ball), so this gripping effect will INDUCE spin on the White. Might be easiest to think of it this way.....White WANTS to travel in a perfectly straight line. But the cushion gets in the way. ONLY think of the right hand edge and the left hand edge of the cue ball (again, assume like Barry Stark's video we are hitting the cushion on the Yellow ball side). When White contacts cushion, the RIGHT edge of the cue ball slows down dramatically through contact with cushion while the LEFT edge of the cue ball wants to continue travel in a straight line. This then describes exactly HOW the spin is imparted by the cushion. It is exactly the same as if you yourself applied the left spin with your cue tip. So as the White rebounds off the cushion, it "slides" off at a more shallow angle exactly like when you struck White along the Baulk line with left had side applied. Simple.

The more shallow the angle, the more glancing the blow, the more spin will be imparted onto the White by the cushion. This is strictly a matter of experience and judgement by the player. The truth is, very, very few players probably understand the physics of what is happening as I explained it above. Instead, it is just a matter of experience, and trusting the gut instinct, and learning over time, and simply referring to the idea as "slide".

If you actually understand what is happening and why, I believe you will dramatically shorten your learning curve and you will begin to play these types of shot much more accurately immediately. Good luck!
Last edited by acesinc on 11 Dec 2018, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Straightening up

Postby acesinc

Oh, and by the way, Rekoons, here is another related but not obviously related version of the "slide" effect. Have you ever noticed how, if you are trying to pot a ball at an angle that is maybe two feet away from the corner pocket and it is actually physically touching the cushion, it seems like it is much easier for some reason than potting the same ball just a small distance off the cushion, say a quarter inch or so?

This is due to the same "slide" effect. In either case, it is critical to strike at a very accurate potting angle but you have just a little larger margin for error when the object ball is touching the cushion. This is because when that ball starts to move after contact with White it immediately has the "slide" effect on it....it is hugging that cushion because that edge of the object ball is continuously in contact with the cushion so that edge is constantly in a state of deceleration while the free edge away from the cushion is constantly trying to travel in a straight line. So it seems to stick to that cushion like glue. Makes sense. But when the object ball initially starts out even slightly away from cushion, you will nearly always get that "glancing blow" and it will then bounce away and not pot.

You probably already knew that touching cushion seems easier to pot but you never really knew why.

Re: Straightening up

Postby rekoons

Ace, indeed, i noticed that but never stood still as to why exactly.
The way you explain it makes total sense! I love the little bits of information/explanation <ok>

By the way, yesterday we had our weekly 6 frames (won 3, lost 1 on pink and didn't really got good chances in the last two), and on one occasion was snookered over almost the length of the table similar to the Barry Stark video with the middle pocket in the way for an 'equal angle on/angle off' hit. Usually I would add a little side and hit the object ball say half the time. Now I ignored the 'equal angle on/angle off' played plain ball, no side and chose a spot on the cushion taking the slide effect in account and hit the o.b. bang on first try :-D

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.

Re: Straightening up

Postby acesinc

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).

rekoons wrote:...

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!

Re: Straightening up

Postby rekoons

This is the video I referred to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukAEfRD ... e=youtu.be

The other phenomenon you describe sounds logic if you think of it, and I probably have seen something like it on telly, but i'm not absolutely sure.
As for why this should only occur in the baulk direction, and not the other way is beyond me. All I can think of is perhaps the run of the cloth? I know delicate slow shots (roll up safety for example) over distance have a higher chance of veering sideways towards the baulk end as opposed to the black end of the table.
Exactly why that is i haven't researched yet. undoubtedly you can explain this too!

as to my 'potential', the potential *may* perhaps be there but as long as I can't exercise properly or with routine I'll always be stuck on running out of position in the 20 range or just missing sitters because the cue action (pre shot routine, whatever you call it) is not hammered in through adequate hours of practice.

but that applies to anyone, doesn't it? :-) we all think, or even feel, we are capable of more, but unless one tries to really make a concious effort to drastically increase the hours of practice, and the quality thereof. nothing will change and we're stuck forever in your natural talent level. that's where life kicks you in the nuts and reminds you of other priorities in life and chronic time restraints because of kids, work,... etc <laugh>

having said that i'm seriously contemplating building my own little 'snooker house' in our garden before I turn 40, which is less than a decade away. So i've still got some time left to pull the trigger.

Re: Straightening up

Postby Badsnookerplayer

Rekoons if you can make thirty then you can make fifty. No doubt about it. You are easily young enough to improve loads.

My opinion - and I am far less qualified than Mr Stark - is that technical coaching is good when you begin perhaps, but for us middling players there are real dangers in trying too hard to do everything 'by the book'.
Some principles always apply i.e. look at object ball on last stroke, pause on last backswing... but don't lose your enjoyment by trying to sweat on technique. Believe me I have driven myself mad for two years and played poorly. Wasted years of toil and frustration!! Only in the last two months when I thought 'sod it' and just played relaxed and positive minded have I started to build good breaks and pot long balls again.

I don'y understand why a positive view should make balls go in but it just does.

If you build the snooker house then you will make a ton I reckon.

Good luck!!

Re: Straightening up

Postby rekoons

Yeah I realise I've likely-possibly-maybe got the basics quite right, and probably right enough to allow improvement just by increase of exercise - without having to tinker a lot with technique basics.

One of the guys I play snooker with, and rank just a bit better than me, hit a 46 break 12 months ago, it was a one-off cause this year he hasn't topped 30. He plays more than me, and could devote all his spare time if he so wishes, but isn't as eager as I am to put the work in to improve.

he has the time, but not the motivation, I have the drive but not the time (to always drive to the club and arrange my agenda) <laugh> cruel life

my top break of 36 happened years ago after a period of months in which I played two or three times a week for a total of at perhaps 6 - 9 hours a week. I was younger i.e. life was simpler, no commitments and knew about 25% of the knowledge I have today about snooker (technique wise). Totally unaware of how I held the cue back then, or delivered it, or if my follow through was any good… I wasn’t even aware I was making a ‘high’ break at the moment. (and it wasn’t an easy one with balls over the pockets, 4 pinks and one black I believe, I just got down on the shot and played it without much thought and with confidence built up as a result of a lot of training/exercise.

This illustrates the very very important point you make about not focus too much and just enjoy the game. Over the last 2 months or so I fell into this trap and focused way too hard on my grip (unfurling of the fingers, which fingers touch the cue, etc…), I had a few bad sessions, got a bit frustrated and then decided to decrease my focus on the grip to like 10% and let it happen naturally as I’ve always done, and instead focus more on delivering the cue straight. I guess if you restrict focus on the end goal (deliver that cue straight), that is a more useful general cue (pun intended) than to focus on every individual step (grip, elbow, back swing, follow through,…) necessary to achieve the same end goal. I don’t know if this makes much sense, and if I explained it well (me from Belgium, me not know English :shrug: )

To wrap up, I also feel or believe I have it in me to make a 50, but I acknowledge that it won’t ever happen without more exercise (exercise, not over focusing and getting frustrated :-) ). Or perhaps a one-of like my mate with his 46.

Re: Straightening up

Postby acesinc

Well, this thread has taken a turn but that is fine because we are probably the only three reading anyway! :| Good morning, guys.

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Rekoons if you can make thirty then you can make fifty. No doubt about it.


Absolutely agree with this. As a player who can only put a few hours a week into playing the game, it mostly depends on how the balls arrange themselves in any given frame. Most players who are only on table 2, 3, 4 hours a week have little control over ball position so if either player is sloppy about this, the table quickly becomes untidy. And at that point, it would be difficult for even a good player to run 40 or 50 because the Colours against cushion and such. So it is probably not only your fault that you run very few 30's; it is also because of your opponents at this stage of your development.

To help improve my positive outlook, rather than thinking of the SCORE of the break, I like to consider how many balls I pot for the break. Sometimes, Pink and Black are just tied up and out of the frame so you cannot run a good scoring break without those high point values. Put it this way:

A) If you can run four balls in a row regularly (every frame or two), you are in the "teens" break level (16, 15, 14 if the high colours are available)
B) Six balls in a row, you can run breaks in the 20's In my opinion, going from four ball to six ball breaks is the biggest step. As a low level amateur, if my opponent was 20 or 25 points up, I already felt defeated even if there were a lot of balls on the table. Now, with confidence, I know I can pot those six balls inside one minute and I am right back in the frame. Knowing you can run 20 breaks regularly is the BIGGEST increase to your confidence. (Are you here yet, Rekoons? If not, I am certain you will get here soon.) Even if you run three Reds, three Blues for break of 18, you clearly have the skills needed to run 24 points.
C) Eight balls in a row, you are at the 30's level (but it must be Pink and Black to actually reach 30 or more). This is where I am at right now (not every frame or two because again, it depends on how the balls lie so I knock in a 30 break about one of five frames or so, but I make a lot of eight ball breaks in the 20's). If you can pot eight balls in a row and it is not just a one-off as you say, then now you are really achieving something. The four and six ball breaks may have happened because there were "easy balls" near pockets or whatever, but eight balls in a row means that you must have made good pots and you must have gotten the White ball into reasonably good position for the next.
D) Ten or twelve balls, now you are in the 40's range. It is tough to get 40 with ten balls because that is a Black with each Red. But when you reach level "C" above, it is no big deal to knock two or four more balls in the pocket if the Reds are out in the open.
E) It will take fourteen balls to reach into the 50's. That means seven Red, seven Colours. And this is about the limit of Reds being out in the open. In a social game, amateur league or whatever, the Reds are very often knocked against cushions long before this stage is possible. So making 50's will always be tough if either of the two players tends to knock balls out of play.
F) Greater than 50 break, you are now approaching high level amateur and Professional skills. The big difference is that with A) through C) and sometimes with D) and E) above, you can make those breaks just from balls sitting in the open, but to make 50 breaks, you will probably have to manipulate the balls....breaking up clusters, nudging balls off the cushion, recovering a Colour that your opponent callously pushed to the cushion in playing a safety. The skills required to reach 50 and above do get more technical than simply potting balls and leaving position on the next one.

So to modify what BadSnookerPlayer said slightly, when you can make 30's with some regularity, you definitely have the skills to make 50's occasionally. In my opinion, the really good news about that is that once you have the skills to make half centuries regularly (my current goal), then you have ALL the skills necessary to reach a century occasionally.


Badsnookerplayer wrote:I don't understand why a positive view should make balls go in but it just does.


No truer words ever spoken.

Re: Straightening up

Postby acesinc

rekoons wrote:One of the guys I play snooker with, and rank just a bit better than me, hit a 46 break 12 months ago, it was a one-off cause this year he hasn't topped 30. He plays more than me, and could devote all his spare time if he so wishes, but isn't as eager as I am to put the work in to improve.


When I first started playing at 19 years old, of course I was not very good at all. After about two years playing, I somehow got a break of 48, a clearance, Reds with Blue, Pink, Black, and all the Colours taken from their spots. 12 balls. It could have been on telly. Like a perfect break. I literally went and sat at the bar with a beer for ten minutes because I could hardly breathe.

I have no idea what happened. That was a one-off. At the time, I thought, "Well, that was a big step. Now I will make a lot of high breaks!"

What a fool I was! At that time, I only had maybe one or two eight ball breaks in the low 30's, and even only a dozen or so breaks in the 20's. Really, I was just a four ball teens breaker who happened to get a fluke one-off of 48 one time. That stood as my high break for about 26 years. (To be fair, I didn't play at all for about 15 or 16 years.) So the point is....don't worry too much about what that one-off high break is. A much more important goal is to bring your normal, regular break score up to a bigger number.....go from a regular four ball breaker to a six ball breaker. Or from a six ball breaker to an eight ball breaker.

rekoons wrote:he has the time, but not the motivation, I have the drive but not the time (to always drive to the club and arrange my agenda) <laugh> cruel life


Similarly, one of my occasional opponents is an incredible potter. He can pot very difficult balls as good as a professional. But he never seems to have any idea where the White ball is going. He might line up for a pot and I think to myself, "Well, he should score a lot here....this Red will lead to a simple Black and he is in the balls. Maybe a break of 30 or 40." Then he strikes so hard, he pots and the White comes all the way back to Baulk cushion! So he pots a ridiculous difficult Yellow in middle pocket! Then another long Red. You really never know where the White will end up or which ball he will take next. But his potting is amazing. I am the opposite. My potting is bad, but my positioning is excellent, so once I finally pot a ball, I usually pot four or six or eight balls straightaway because all of those pots are so easy that I just can't miss. So I often say, if we could combine my friend's amazing potting with my own amazing positional play, we could give Ronnie O'Sullivan a pretty good frame.

rekoons wrote:I don’t know if this makes much sense, and if I explained it well (me from Belgium, me not know English :shrug: )


This makes perfect sense. I never would have guessed that English is your second language. You write English nearly perfectly. :spot on:


By the way, thanks for that link to the Barry Stark video. I think you were mistaken when you thought the word for the effect was "push"....I believe Mr. Stark referred to the effect as "squeeze", the same word that is used when two balls are in line for a plant, but the plant will run off line if it is not played correctly. This can definitely be confusing which is why I prefer the American terminology for these types of situations.

There is another YouTube channel that I go to occasionally that you might find useful. This guy is NOT a proper coach but he does seem to be a very good club player and he makes a lot of very short videos to make simple points to help your game especially if you don't practice too much but you just play club matches. Since English is your second language though, you might have a hard time understanding him because he speaks very fast. So maybe you can slow down the YouTube speed control if it is difficult to understand him. I don't even know his name; I just call him the "Break from Life" guy because that is the name of his channel. If you want to take a look, his channel is here:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCca4FZ ... 4bTTDdXOTg

Re: Straightening up

Postby rekoons

Most players who are only on table 2, 3, 4 hours a week have little control over ball position so if either player is sloppy about this, the table quickly becomes untidy. And at that point, it would be difficult for even a good player to run 40 or 50 because the Colours against cushion and such. So it is probably not only your fault that you run very few 30's; it is also because of your opponents at this stage of your development.


very true.

A year or 2 ago a friend of my missus had a new lover, turned out this guy was obsessed with snooker (even had his own table but no room or house big enough :-D ) and was regularly hitting 40’s and 50’s with a high break of 60 something.

Around that time I played like once a month or so, so I was thrilled with the perspective of playing more snooker in the future against a superior player. A few weeks later we played 6 frames, lost them all but that’s not the point.

The point is: I was super focused and thrilled for this session, and we were playing on competition tables, with brushed and ironed cloth with competition balls against a far superior opponent, so conditions were very, very good for my standards.
In my first visit I made 3 reds and blacks for 24, even had a 30-odd points advantage mid frame, but he pegged me back at the end on the colours. :irk:
In the second frame I also made a 20+ break and for the remainder of the ‘match’ multiple 10’s, but he had clicked into gear scoring at least a 20+ in each frame and a couple of 30’s as well. So in the end he beat me very comfortably 6-0, I only really threatened him the first frame.

But still I was happy with my own performance, not even slightly bemused in losing 6-0.
We were both going for our shots and leaving the opponent in when we missed (obviously I let him in a lot more, but that’s something you need to get out of your mind: don’t think about what you will leave if you miss, just hope it goes in), so over most of the 6 frames we played, the balls were really nicely situated.

Unfortunately he and his girlfriend broke up and I only see him in the club from time to time, he recently hit an 84… :dizzy:

I lost a frame yesterday purely out of frustration, it was against our ‘weakest’ friend, he tends to bash the balls, hasn’t got any feel or touch for position, moans when the balls run bad for him… that stuff. Because he doesn’t play for position and hits the balls hard, they tend to end up along the cushion. The table was a nightmare and together with good run for him, no chances for me it got the better of me and lost the plot… It’s my own fault, I know. :emb: On the other hand I won 2 very good tense frames against the guy I consider the best ATM :john:

Never thought I would be typing so much about my own snooker on here, but since I don’t have acces to people as interested in snooker as myself to chat with IRL I’ll just do it here <laugh>

Re: Straightening up

Postby rekoons

Like a perfect break. I literally went and sat at the bar with a beer for ten minutes because I could hardly breathe.

I have no idea what happened. That was a one-off. At the time, I thought, "Well, that was a big step. Now I will make a lot of high breaks!"

What a fool I was! At that time,


That sounds all too familiar rofl

Well my working day is nearly done, have the day off tomorrow since we're going on a weekend holiday, :D not sure when I'll be posting again but I am thoroughly enjoying our little conversation here!