1pwannabe please explain the 3 rail route of the 1ball

[lll]

that danny shot in your thread
several of us would like to know
the cue ball path would be nice too
thanks

 

[Frank Almanza]

that danny shot in your thread
several of us would like to know
the cue ball path would be nice too
thanks

If it was low right and jacked up I would love to see the stroke he put on that cue ball to have it wind up where it did. Any video of it?

 

[12squared]

This was the last action match played in the Action Room that was PPV by Ray Hanson (Big Truck). He may have recorded it to post up at a later date. I was watching it on PPV but to be honest I was so tired after my trip I was spacing out most of the time while watching so I am no help

Danny and Shannon were playing an ahead set for $10K agreeing to stop after 8 hours of play prorating the money - they ended up even after 18 games (I think).

Dave

 

[1pwannabe]

I wish I could post the route, and I very much wish I had a video of the match, but it was streamed real time and no way to download it that I know of.

The shot was hit very hard, so naturally the cue and object ball moved at a high speed. The stream wasn't the best either, so that made it choppy as well. I remember the cue ball following behind the 1 for a bit, but at a sharp angle so it zig zagged back across and then across again to where it stopped.

The guys providing commentary on the match said wow, he 3 railed it. Maybe with a lot of left the cue ball would take a sharp left direction and then zig zag like that, but I haven't set up the shot to try it yet. Time has passed and I watched the entire 9 hour session, so my memory is pretty hazy by now.

They both played excellent 1P. That table has 3 7/8" pockets and all week the gamblers who played on it struggled. But it was amazing to watch Shannon and Danny hit shots effortlessly on it, like it wasn't tight at all. I remembered that most of all, how they didn't seem to mind and didn't hang balls as much as others all week.

 

[straightback]

I wish I could post the route, and I very much wish I had a video of the match, but it was streamed real time and no way to download it that I know of.

The shot was hit very hard, so naturally the cue and object ball moved at a high speed. The stream wasn't the best either, so that made it choppy as well. I remember the cue ball following behind the 1 for a bit, but at a sharp angle so it zig zagged back across and then across again to where it stopped.

The guys providing commentary on the match said wow, he 3 railed it. Maybe with a lot of left the cue ball would take a sharp left direction and then zig zag like that, but I haven't set up the shot to try it yet. Time has passed and I watched the entire 9 hour session, so my memory is pretty hazy by now.

They both played excellent 1P. That table has 3 7/8" pockets and all week the gamblers who played on it struggled. But it was amazing to watch Shannon and Danny hit shots effortlessly on it, like it wasn't tight at all. I remembered that most of all, how they didn't seem to mind and didn't hang balls as much as others all week.

Well, this is an anticlimactic ending to this mystery!

 

[petie]

I wish I could post the route, and I very much wish I had a video of the match, but it was streamed real time and no way to download it that I know of.

The shot was hit very hard, so naturally the cue and object ball moved at a high speed. The stream wasn't the best either, so that made it choppy as well. I remember the cue ball following behind the 1 for a bit, but at a sharp angle so it zig zagged back across and then across again to where it stopped.

The guys providing commentary on the match said wow, he 3 railed it. Maybe with a lot of left the cue ball would take a sharp left direction and then zig zag like that, but I haven't set up the shot to try it yet. Time has passed and I watched the entire 9 hour session, so my memory is pretty hazy by now.

They both played excellent 1P. That table has 3 7/8" pockets and all week the gamblers who played on it struggled. But it was amazing to watch Shannon and Danny hit shots effortlessly on it, like it wasn't tight at all. I remembered that most of all, how they didn't seem to mind and didn't hang balls as much as others all week.

The fact, if we are to take it as fact, that the cue ball FOLLOWED the 1 ball for a bit lends credence if not certainty to what I have thought since this dilemma was posted a few days ago--namely that it looks to me like the shot was a 2 railer. In this scenario, the cue ball hits the 1 ball on the right side and sends it off the end rail and then the side rail where it sails toward Danny's pocket but just glances off the rack as it is goes by it. The cue ball goes off the right side of the one ball, off the right side rail, off the end rail and off the left side rail. If hit with a ton of right hand English and maybe some draw, this kills the cue ball about where we find it after the shot. Now I will read all the other posts to see if mine is redundant. Chances are it is.

 

[LSJohn]

The fact, if we are to take it as fact, that the cue ball FOLLOWED the 1 ball for a bit lends credence if not certainty to what I have thought since this dilemma was posted a few days ago--namely that it looks to me like the shot was a 2 railer. In this scenario, the cue ball hits the 1 ball on the right side and sends it off the end rail and then the side rail where it sails toward Danny's pocket but just glances off the rack as it is goes by it. The cue ball goes off the right side of the one ball, off the right side rail, off the end rail and off the left side rail. If hit with a ton of right hand English and maybe some draw, this kills the cue ball about where we find it after the shot. Now I will read all the other posts to see if mine is redundant. Chances are it is.

I think you're right Pete. I didn't notice earlier that the stack had been contacted.

 

[Billy Jackets]

The fact, if we are to take it as fact, that the cue ball FOLLOWED the 1 ball for a bit lends credence if not certainty to what I have thought since this dilemma was posted a few days ago--namely that it looks to me like the shot was a 2 railer. In this scenario, the cue ball hits the 1 ball on the right side and sends it off the end rail and then the side rail where it sails toward Danny's pocket but just glances off the rack as it is goes by it. The cue ball goes off the right side of the one ball, off the right side rail, off the end rail and off the left side rail. If hit with a ton of right hand English and maybe some draw, this kills the cue ball about where we find it after the shot. Now I will read all the other posts to see if mine is redundant. Chances are it is.

I thought about this as a possible shot also ' but why would the announcers say he 3 railed it?
I wish someone who saw the shot could remember if it went around the table or just up and down.
I'll be right back, I have to ask my wife where I left my teeth.

 

[treeMan]

Why couldn't it have been a straight draw shot? The cue ball would have probably been bouncing, which caused it to follow the 1 for a bit, then the draw took and it swerved into the left side rail and back out to where it stopped. That's my guess. I think LSJohn also suggested 7 o'clock draw.

tree

 

[Frank Almanza]

Ok, I took this shot to the drawing board and because of my skill level I moved the cue ball away from the rail about six inches keeping the same angle and after about 15 to 17 tries I was able to get the results as described. I now can see that someone with a high skill level pulling this shot off being jacked up and with the cue ball that close to the rail.

I don't think that the one ball reached the last long rail and can see how it could have nudged the 12 ball a bit.

I'm sure we all have tried shots that looked bizarre but at that moment to us they looked possible and we shoot them and are not surprised that we did it.
Conclusion: it can be done but extreme skill is required

 

[petie]

Why couldn't it have been a straight draw shot? The cue ball would have probably been bouncing, which caused it to follow the 1 for a bit, then the draw took and it swerved into the left side rail and back out to where it stopped. That's my guess. I think LSJohn also suggested 7 o'clock draw.

tree

The only reason I didn't suggest straight draw is that he was so jacked up. Also, draw right is a natural kill shot on the cue ball.

 

[petie]

Ok, I took this shot to the drawing board and because of my skill level I moved the cue ball away from the rail about six inches keeping the same angle and after about 15 to 17 tries I was able to get the results as described. I now can see that someone with a high skill level pulling this shot off being jacked up and with the cue ball that close to the rail.

I don't think that the one ball reached the last long rail and can see how it could have nudged the 12 ball a bit.

I'm sure we all have tried shots that looked bizarre but at that moment to us they looked possible and we shoot them and are not surprised that we did it.
Conclusion: it can be done but extreme skill is required

2 rail or 3 rail, Frank?

 

[Tom Wirth]

I posted this in the members forum and did a copy and paste here.

Hey Frank, Have you tried the shot any other way? Such as three rails up and back using only the short rails, or as a two rail shot instead of three? A third possibility might have been to play the shot two rails but rail first. I think I need to see this shot or at least be somehow convinced that the shot was struck as a conventional three rail shot.

My problem is in that the shot makes no sense to want to shoot as it is being described. So I'm not saying it can't be done but that it is entirely impractical.

BTW Frank, As you are well aware, we are all at a disadvantage when shooting off the rail. You moved the cue ball out a bit and succeeded once in, how many tries? We might all fail to pull off that shot even once from that close to the cushion.

Tom

 

[unoperro]

I posted earlier in this thread that I shot it as it lies. I couldnt control whitey. Made the 3 railer 2nd try. Who really knows what he was trying? Brumback said in the members thread there were many VERY Aggressive shots by Danny. Many seemed ill advised.

Even the commentaters may be wrong about what happened?
Maybe the commentaters were right but op's recollection is off?

 

[Frank Almanza]

I posted this in the members forum and did a copy and paste here.

Hey Frank, Have you tried the shot any other way? Such as three rails up and back using only the short rails, or as a two rail shot instead of three? A third possibility might have been to play the shot two rails but rail first. I think I need to see this shot or at least be somehow convinced that the shot was struck as a conventional three rail shot.

My problem is in that the shot makes no sense to want to shoot as it is being described. So I'm not saying it can't be done but that it is entirely impractical.

BTW Frank, As you are well aware, we are all at a disadvantage when shooting off the rail. You moved the cue ball out a bit and succeeded once in, how many tries? We might all fail to pull off that shot even once from that close to the cushion.

Tom

I shot the three rails to try to duplicate the shot as described. Since the twelve and eleven balls were slightly moved it had to be a three rail bank.

I succeeded once in close to twenty tries but came close to getting the same reaction a few other times, enough for me to feel that it's a viable shot from someone with great skills. Players like Martinez and Corey. I also think that if one is comfortable in shooting off the rail that the cue ball reacts much better for what is needed of it because of the slight masse you will get from it.

The up and down three rail bank using only the short rails is a shot that I have never had any success with and would never attempt in a game unless it's the only shot available and had to be shot, don't see that happening in a game of one pocket but maybe in other games where there is no other choice.

 

[gulfportdoc]

I shot the three rails to try to duplicate the shot as described. Since the twelve and eleven balls were slightly moved it had to be a three rail bank.

I succeeded once in close to twenty tries but came close to getting the same reaction a few other times, enough for me to feel that it's a viable shot from someone with great skills. Players like Martinez and Corey. I also think that if one is comfortable in shooting off the rail that the cue ball reacts much better for what is needed of it because of the slight masse you will get from it.

The up and down three rail bank using only the short rails is a shot that I have never had any success with and would never attempt in a game unless it's the only shot available and had to be shot, don't see that happening in a game of one pocket but maybe in other games where there is no other choice.

I too tried the described shot. And like you I moved the CB away from the rail about 6-8 inches. I was able to get similar results to the outcome pictured, including the CB leave, within 5-6 tries. But it took the best draw stroke I could muster. I didn't bother trying it jacked up off the rail. I simply don't have that powerful of a stroke.

The up and down shot-- I don't think it's there.

Of course the 3-rail shot itself is a very poor choice. But the discussion has been, how was it accomplished.

~Doc