Snooker discussion : What do you think causes a kick?

i see something years ago, with Steve Davis actually, that explained it was chaulk on the object ball that was the main cause. not the white as most think...

i see something years ago, with Steve Davis actually, that explained it was chaulk on the object ball that was the main cause. not the white as most think...

A speck of anything on eiither ball on the point of contact. No point cleaning afterwards or before, it is just random. Look in a beam of light coming shining through a window, you will see clouds of crap in the air.

Good evening gentlemen. :)

The second reason, besides chalk, for the unfortunate effect known as a kick is the fact that the cueball is airborne when it strikes the colour.

In my estimation, the percentage of kicks caused by a foreign body between the balls (probably a speck of chalk dust) and the explanation stated above is about equal.

Dealem - I saw that too. Davis thought it might have been static electricity, but he was proved wrong. Evening Poker :)

Good evening Alex. :)

How are you sir?

airborn ,really PM? I've seen dolly slow rolls be kicked mate? It really is a conundrum!

It is surprising isn't it Brodie!

I have come to this conclusion, however, after studying the snooker balls in ultra slow motion using specialist camera equipment. On super-fine cloths it only takes the slightest of downward blows to get the cueball airborne; imperceptable to the naked eye of course, but the white is actually bouncing in far more shots than you would possibly imagine.

You know how the commentators always mention (and show in slo-mo) when the cueball or colour jumps at the precise moment it kicks? Well, these are the instances when the white was airborne (as opposed to the chalk-induced kicks).

If the cueball strikes the colour on its downward trajectory, the colour jumps. If it strikes it on an upward trajectory, the white jumps.

The kicks suffered on the dolly slow rolls you mention, sir, are of course caused by chalk.

Yep, theres a combination of factors on various shots. Now that is frustrating!

I must admit I was expecting another debate to match the topspin discussion.

This is obviously not such a contentious (or interesting) issue. :)

Isn't it something to do with oil or some greasy minuscule substance that is caused by the heat of the lights?

I think the balls should be replaced every frame and the old ones put in a sterilizer.

Well bloody hell I do apologize. I'll come up with a written thesis tomorrow, how many words is acceptable?!

Just kidding, beer influenced pm, i'll come up with some physics/thought in the morn ;) :D

Any foreign body between the balls as they collide can cause a kick, Mr Nibbs.

As to whether the lights and the heat they generate has a hand in encouraging such a situation, I'd be bound to admit the possibility, yes sir.

No, no Brodie, I wasn't referring to you sir. :)

I just meant there are far fewer contributors this evening than took part in my last snooker discussion.

oh..........give it time my son give it time :D

Here you go poker, a special BBC Panorama investigation video.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/sol/newsid_4960000/newsid_4961300/4961300.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=6&ms_javascript=true&bbcws=2

That's excellent Mr Nibbs, I've never seen that clip before. Thank you sir. :)

I cannot hear the audio at the moment, unfortuantely, but will rectify that problem tomorrow morning. Can you tell me if it touches upon my theory at all?

What they did was hit a ball on a table with no chalk and no static (they took the electric off with some alcoholic based solution) and they got a kick straight away.

The theory is that some oil used in the production of the cloth is causing the kick.

I see, thank you.

Were they inferring that chalk never causes a kick? Because that would be plainly wrong. There are a few well-known trickshots that rely on chalk-induced kicks (you rub some on the object ball) and such a practice can be relied upon to achieve the desired result.

An interesting test with John Parrott and Martin Clarke. No doubt whatsoever that the chalk caused the cueball to bounce further. And I like the fact that they used a stimpmeter to guarantee a fair control of weight.

cheers mr nibbs, very interesting. I definitely think its time they develeoped a special chalk for snooker/pool which doesn´t leave debris around. Personally I always play with a soft chalk as I find hard chalks crumble rather than smear. My regular opponent uses a harder chalk and often gets kicks and miscues...though it could be that he is just carp.

Were they inferring that chalk never causes a kick?

They didn't categorically imply that no, just that they could get an instant kick without chalk and static electricity. Although presumably that means they are taking chalk out of the equation.

The science bloke thinks its something to do with the cloth, an oil used in cutting the cloth.

I see. Very interesting Mr Nibbs. Thank you again sir.

Goodnight gentlemen. :)

HOW COME NOBODY COMPLAINS OF KICKS or cleans the white ball in a pub game?

HTH
Brodie 27 Feb 00:16

Pokermonster, the answer imo is static. Accounts for kicks when screw has been applied AND when the ref has rubbed the cueball clean and it STILL kicks. Static attracts cue dust and its kick city!
Send me a cheque sooooon!

An interesting thread Poker.

My experience of "kicks" usually occurs when I hit a stun-run through. Routine pinks off the spot being the worst offenders.

Haven't read all the posts above but for what it's worth my opinion is that no one thing causes a kick. Recently at the Crondon Park event the commentators were waxing lyrical about the outrageous amount of kicks the players were having, it was obvious that the players were actually having a laugh about it. It was freezing cold outside with heating up to the max so no doubt these two combining forces caused some atmospheric turbulence. I remember the first couple of days of the Grand Prix last year being similar, it was as though the room took a few days to properly acclimatise - the venue is huge and I don't think that helps. A venue which is compact and properly insulated like the Crucible will usually I would say make kicks far fewer. Of course, the chalk bit doesn't help and on the modern cloths the chalk tends to hang around longer which is why you often see players sweeping their hands across the table. In the case of Ryan Day it has become something of a ritual. Anyway, that's my two-penneth. I didn't know snooker discussions took place on here, thanks to GVG for pointing it out. If anyone is interested in betting on snooker or just the game in general my contribution is at snookerbacker.com

Thanks for you reply SB. The thanks should go to Poker.

He's the one who raises these issues.

Despite Pokers amusing tale about a snooker quiz, we like a bit of snooks on chit-chat :)

yes its the chalk on cue ...when it hits the precise same spot on the ball from a previous shot.....some players chalk excessively......like hendry...others like higgins or ronnie lightly chalk..in the upcoming world champs ..watch who chalks cue heaviest...will get most kicks.

Thank you for your contributions, gentlemen. :)

The general consensus appears to suggest that there a several contributory factors to a kick: chalk, light, heat, static attracting dust, a bobbling cueball etc.

And many thanks for the link to your website, Snookerbacker. I'll save it in the favourites list, sir.

Thanks PM. I've posted up a preview this morning on the qualifiers for the Crucible which get under way today for anyone that is interested. Sborting have priced them up and there are trading opportunities on here. It's at snookerbacker.com

Has John Virgo been reading my threads? :)

Pokermonster 27 Feb 00:33

It is surprising isn't it Brodie!

I have come to this conclusion, however, after studying the snooker balls in ultra slow motion using specialist camera equipment. On super-fine cloths it only takes the slightest of downward blows to get the cueball airborne; imperceptable to the naked eye of course, but the white is actually bouncing in far more shots than you would possibly imagine.

You know how the commentators always mention (and show in slo-mo) when the cueball or colour jumps at the precise moment it kicks? Well, these are the instances when the white was airborne (as opposed to the chalk-induced kicks).

If the cueball strikes the colour on its downward trajectory, the colour jumps. If it strikes it on an upward trajectory, the white jumps.

I think it's caused by grease coming from the players' hands on to the cloth and from there on to the cue ball.

never knew john travolta played the game

the best post ive ever read on here is that kicks are caused by crumbs left by stephen lee

Quite a few kicks again this year.

Aren't kicks just a ready made excuse for missing a ball? When we play snooker we miss hundreds each game. I wonder how many are due to kicks and not jsut shyte shots as is ordinarily the case?

Personally, I find watching snooker about as exciting as watching paint dry

But, if you want a laugh, turme off the sound and put the subtitles on

The best one being 'The Crucible', that becomes the crystal ball

It's strange how one's memory plays tricks.  I could have sworn that I started this thread, but it was actually Father Maguire.

when someone doubles the black in to win a match.

The cueballs are always airborne during a game in the places I go to play snooker. Although that's usually because they're being swung around somebodies head in a sock.

Gadzooks frasier, where have you been?

Around and about Slippy, and still posting on the dark side. Unfortunately I lost confidence in betfair when after 8 years of trying i finally won a bet. So i thought it best to leave for a while and reassess my punting strategy.

they happen from the crumbs stephen lee leaves behind on table from his sandwiches

and the grains of coke snorted from michaelas naked butt cheeks.

[img]http://community.cdnbf.net/community.betfair.com/user/pokermonster/poke...

Old trick on a pool table was to put a bit of grit under your finger nail, then tap down on the table in front of a pocket and to say slam the black in here. Astonishment abound when the black bounced on the table deposited grit, and flew off the table over the pocket.

I think it's caused by grease on the cloth transferred there from the players' hands.
Players should have to wear a glove on their bridge hand.

Although not the only factor, chalk dust between white and object ball most definitely is a common cause of kicks.

The remedy to this problem, of course, is to eliminate the need for billiard chalk as an anti-slip agent.  To my mind, the very fact that we require chalk to prevent a cuetip from miscueing indicates a poorly designed cuetip.  There has to be a better material for the job than leather in my opinion.  Some form of rubber, perhaps?

Ball being off the table if the only logical theory. Can a bit of chalk or dust logically cause a kick to happen? Of course not..that's a myth

Chalk does cause kicks, sir, and such an effect is easily provable.  Indeed, a few trickshots (my speciality) rely on the fact.

Also humid room as more chalk gets stuck to the cueball.

Just bumping a few threads I wanted to save from the upgrade.  My apologies for cluttering the forum.

I've always assumed they're caused by chalk dust. Most of the players and ex-players seem to think the same although Stephen Hendry said most are caused by bad cueing.

Btw, anyone else think that Ricky Walden looks like the actor Neil Dudgeon?

I think they're caused by grease from the players' hands when they place the cue ball in baulk or smooth the nap with their hands.

The club I play in most often, the cloth is fairly slow and rarely cleaned, the balls are old, and it's often underheated. Kicks are rare.

Sometimes, though not enough these days sadly, I play on a tournament table which is well looked after, newish balls, thin cloth, and kicks are much more prevalent.

The notion that imperceptible downward or upward motion on the cueball causes most kicks is a relatively new idea among the BBC's motley crew of commentators, but one I have favoured for a few years. It seems to me that the addition of an absolute master of the game, Stephen Hendry, to the commentary team has seen this idea gather favour, as he is pretty adamant that bad striking is the cause of most kicks.

The guy I play with most often on the bad tables in my club gets many more kicks than me. He thinks it's luck, but I keep telling him it's because he cues like a p*sshead with parkinson's, whereas  I cue like a God.

Just found this thread from Father Maguire in the archives.  I remember sending an email to the BBC about this back in 2010 when I mentioned an airborne cueball as a major cause of kicks.  They never had the decency to reply, but I notice that the theory is now widely accepted in commentary.

Thought Shaun Murphy and his scientists had cracked this? oils from the cloth.

Murphy and his team then created a lacquer which the balls are cleaned prior to a match. It seemed to negate the kicks.

Did it actually work, AG.  I'd be most surprised indeed, as video footage of airborne cueballs causing kicks is conclusive in my view.

It was the Lisbon event last year PM. They used a polish by Aramith, obviously Murphy praised it, even Mark Williams and a few others. They had no kicks but ball control was well, it was used by players an excuse as to why they could control the ball.

How interesting.

When I had a cue factory we sometimes used to polish the balls with silicon spray for a laugh.  It made them almost unplayable, but you couldn't half make the cueball do some weird and wonderful things.

Another typo, attempting to concentrate on far too many things at once.

*it was used by players an excuse as to why they could not control the ball.


I wonder if the players can tell the difference between a bouncing ball kick effect to that of a separate entity kick which the polish negates.

Probably not, AG.

Matthew Stevens just had a massive kick on the black, caused by poor cueing I believe on that occasion.