It was the 3rd stage of the drag shot i was referring to. My natural cuing action was to cue very low down, as Jimmy White does. I used a lot of drag. The problem with this way of addressing the ball is that you are perhaps more liable to add side to the cue ball and sending it off line.

What do you think PM?

gabrial, all good players cue low down, the cue must be horizontal to the bed. The bridge hand raises according to where you are striking the cue ball.

Some cue much lower than normal though Blacky.

If you take Jimmy he is extremely low, but he gets the action on the white ball.

Look at Hendry and he is not aiming as low down the cue ball. Hence he needs more effort for cue ball action.

Yes, Jimmy addressed the ball very low and feathered it a lot too. He is a year older than me and was my hero, I once played Tony Meo.

O'Sullivan is comfortably the best player I've seen, his ball striking is so pure. He's the only one in the last ten years I'd be bothered to watch tbh. The fat lad Lee is another beautiful player in terms of smoothness of strike.

I never liked Parrott, he seemed to blast everything

On the subject of the game's greatest exponents, three-cushion-billiards is the most beautiful and elegant of all cue sports in my opinion.  Aside from the obvious method of ball to cushion to cushion to cushion to ball a viable cannon can also be achieved by striking one or more of the required three cushions before your cueball makes contact with the object ball. In other words, your cueball could strike cushion one, cushion two, cushion three, and then the object balls immediately after one another and this still counts as a scoring visit.

Here's a clip of the late, great Sang Lee scoring a remarkable 29 in just two innings. Truly a billiard genius.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxrWpRlN9Y4&feature=related

Anybody new to three-cushion-billiards who watches the clip posted above would be forgiven in thinking the game was easy.  I'm a big admirer of Rocket Ronnie's formidable prowess on the green baize; he's the best snooker player there has ever been in my personal opinion.  Fantastically gifted.  Believe me when I tell you, however, Mr Lee's skill overshadows Ronnie O'Sullivan's talents by some margin.

Good afternoon, AM.

It is covered in some depth earlier in the thread, sir.  If you could find an hour or so to have a read through I think you might find some interesting little snippets of information that can help one's game.  It is rather lengthy, though, so it's understandable if you don't have the time.

Essentially, the only reason to strike the cueball above centre is to start it off rolling naturally, as opposed to sliding or backspinning.

That should read "your question" of course.  My apologies.  Damn, how I hate making typo errors!

I'm not sure if the majority who disagreed with me earlier in the thread (quite forcibly in certain cases) have changed their minds, sir, but I think it is fair to claim that some are now of a different opinion.

That particular scenario has cropped up rather frequently, Patrick!

Don't worry though, sir, I realise it has grown into a very long thread and it is tiresome to trawl all the way through to find an answer.  The banana stroke to which you allude is actually an incidence of backspin, not overspin (topspin).  The cueball's forward momentum going into the cushion makes it backspin upon leaving it, time and time again on some occasions.

hmm,will have to think about that one PM,thanks for answering a much asked question without getting antsy though

When I play, the cue ball definitely moves forward when I strike it above centre (after it hits the object ball )

I guess these techniques work better with the fine cloths the pros play on and of course, the better the player

Resurrected for the UK championships.

Good afternoon, Ovalman.  It's already been done, sir.


Whilst in New York, I was browsing a science forum on the internet.  Boring I know, but there you go.  Anyway, imagine my surprise when I discovered a thread with the title Snooker Discussion : Putting Topspin on a Cueball.  Upon opening, I found it was an exact copy of this thread.  A poster going by the name of Snooker Loopy had cut and pasted my posts on to the science forum and passed them off as his own!

Here's the link:

http://www.thescienceforum.com/physics/22657-snooker-discussion-putting-topspin-cueball.html

I regret to report that the good folks of The Science Forum were also unenlightened in the ways of topspin.

Pokermonster

Hello sir, Yes i also picked up on Hendry and his inaccurate claim. In showing a slow motion of a two tone cue ball( i think it was two tone, or spotted. )he was explaining the motion of a drag shot. In explaining the transformation of motion from reverse roll to forward roll. He made the comment that the cue ball transfers into `top spin`. When of course it is only forward roll.

Not a great ambassador for accurate cue ball motion knowledge.

Good evening, AG.

I actually missed that one, sir, so that makes two errors from the great man!  I was referring to a comment he made about topspin making the cueball spin forwards.

I did, AG!

I sent a comprehensive and erudite email to snooker@bbc.co.uk and they had the downright temerity to ignore it.

The BBC are not interested in reporting the truth.

Pokermonster - I live in Sheffield and had the opportunity to chat to Rishi last year. I will approach him again at the Crucible once again but this time i will educate him on the `top spin` mythology.

This knowledge could ruin his career if the likes of Hendry are ignorant to the facts.

As Pokermonster?

On your EMail did you divulge your real identity?

Pokermonster from Betfair Chit Chat.   And tell him to read this thread.

I will pitch myself outside the Crucible in April and petition this thread Pokermonster.

I actually spoke to him about Frankel last year and nothing about snooker. This year i will give him the knowledge to challenge Hendry, Davis, The Darling of Dublin, Scouse, Dennis, Mumbles and Tash.