Aiming Sytems re-take!
- Thread starter Colin Colenso
- Start date
JoeyInCali said:
This may just be my pesemistic mind working, but I feel like the better a player gets, the less likely they are going to give up any real detail on thier aiming system...Thier descreptions always seem to be as vague as possible...Read the aiming secrets of the pros...They are all pretty vague descriptions and usually end up with something like..."you have to feel the shot"...or "hit it a million times" ......It's seems to me like asking your high ranking religious leader of any kind some of the "difficult to answer" religion question....you always end up getting the "you have to have faith my son"
It's like that episode of South Park where all the kids are told they are going to go to hell if they don't go to confession....One of the kids asks..."But what about Timmy?....He can't go to confession...all he can say is Timmy!" ....The Nun turnes into a tap dancer.....
....Enter HH...someone that will answer the difficult questions about "aiming" ...He may very well be the messiah....(JK)
Before he got married, I bet.Rude Dog said:Yeah right! So what DO you think about when you're playing well? And when was the last time you played well enough to use that statement?
Colin Colenso said:
The first aiming system I invented (discovered) was to look at the line from the CB to OB and then the distance from the center of the OB to the contact point. Double this distance and aim the center of the cue at that point and you are guaranteed to hit the contact point. It doesn't matter what the angle is. (I've convinced myself of this via geometrical proof, only works if OB & CB are same size)
That worked great when I was younger and playing a lot, but it requires accurate vision and judgement. Both suffer when not playing a lot (and with age) so I eventually abandoned it for pure 'feel' system.
The Aiming system that I invented/discovered last week is much simpler. I don't want to go into great detail on it because I suspect it is similar to other systems AND I don't have it all worked out yet. Basically I aim different parts of the cue STICK tip at the contact point. Depending on the angle of the shot, I aim a different part of the tip at it. If someone is motivated, they can recreate what I did in an hour of practice by themselves.
some caveats:
1) This is not perfectly accurate, but it is within the tolerances for most tables' pockets. It does not work for Combos, for example, because the margin of error is much smaller.
2) I moved my stick under my nose and straightened out my head vertically before implementing this system, otherwise I don't think it would work because your perspective is skewed. I used to favor my right eye slightly.
3) The reason that this system created such a HUGE jump for me is that all of my fundamentals are excellent. I hit the ball straight and where I want to and my speed control is nearly perfect on most shots. The only thing that has drifted off to keep me from my prime was the deterioration of my vision, which has impaired my ability to see EXACTLY where to line up to make the correct contact. The first system I used requires better vision and judgement. I'm not old, 38, but I've had enough of a change in vision to make a difference.
One interesting thing is that hitting the balls in the correct spot changed my position play slightly. I must have been compensating with english to pocket balls before and since rolling them straight and hitting the correct contact spot, the angles and speed of the CB is different. This is a minor adjustment more than offset by making the balls better.
Colin - just a note for you -
When I was 18, I was a ski racer for a ski area team in Colorado. The North Korean national ski team came to train with us for a week. Korea was preparing to participate in the winter olympics for the first time in their history. They selected 8 or 9 great athletes and were teaching them how to ski. The first day they were there, we had a race and I beat all of them. But they were so hungry for knowledge and so open about it. They trained tirelessly and instead of being defensive about losing, they openly admired how good I was and asked me questions about my technique. By the end of the week they had all improved so much that they beat everyone on our team. They then went on to other (better) teams and eventually trained with the US ski team. Everyone I talked to talked about how fast they were improving. They skied in the olympics after one year of skiing and you know what? They didn't embarrass themselves, they skied okay. I learned a big lesson about getting better that week that I've carried with me.
Your approach to the opportunity you've earned with the IPT has reminded me of that week. I see the approach that you've taken to improve your game to the level you'll need and it reminds me of the way they approached it. You are openly seeking knowledge and asking for other peoples opinions and input. You are carefully weighing what people are telling you to see what might work for you and reject what won't. You are also working your butt off. Based on your posts here, I think I could probably play fairly even with you now, possibly better, but I see you improving at such a great rate that I know if I don't approach it the same way, you'll leave me, and many others far behind. If you keep up this approach and don't ever, ever give up, I see great things for you on the IPT. I will be following your matches closely. I will also be working on my game for the Q School next year or open events to get out there and join you.
Cheers,
Regas
Last edited:
Honestly after all these years I have no idea what system I use, it's all reflex and memory now.
I can't see a real point of contact, I can't even read the #'s on the balls with my vision it doesn't matter I just have it all in my head and go by instinct. It's like I approach the shot just knowing what to do and automatically make the right choices without even thinking about it. If I do think about a system I end up second guessing my natural instinct and mess it up, the more I think the worse it gets
It's amazing what the mind can do, I make extreme cut shots from 8' and the damn object ball is so blurry I can't make out the edge of the ball, even I'm amazed I make such thin hits, so I'm not subconsciously using an aiming system or contact point, the brain just takes over and does what it has done for years.
I thought getting glasses would be good, but when I did, I found myself second guessing my brains judgment (which works) and really messed up my game.
So if I use a system, I guess it's called fuzzy logic
I can't see a real point of contact, I can't even read the #'s on the balls with my vision
it doesn't matter I just have it all in my head and go by instinct. It's like I approach the shot just knowing what to do and automatically make the right choices without even thinking about it. If I do think about a system I end up second guessing my natural instinct and mess it up, the more I think the worse it gets It's amazing what the mind can do, I make extreme cut shots from 8' and the damn object ball is so blurry I can't make out the edge of the ball, even I'm amazed I make such thin hits, so I'm not subconsciously using an aiming system or contact point, the brain just takes over and does what it has done for years.
I thought getting glasses would be good, but when I did, I found myself second guessing my brains judgment (which works) and really messed up my game.
So if I use a system, I guess it's called fuzzy logic
Thanks for the detailed reply Regas!sixpack said:
I like your way of getting to the ghost ball center by estimating the double of the radius to the contact point. I never thought of doing it that way, but I will try visualizing it. My eyes are still 20/20, though I'm almost 40.
I'm also gonna try to wrap my head around some aiming methods, see what works best over the next few weeks. I won't be chopping and changing all the time, but trying a few things to sort out problem areas...shots I'm not so confident with.
Re-note to me:
Your encouragement is very much appreciated
I've prepared for tournies before when I used to play a lot and was quite successful at prepping myself into form. But that was a slightly different game (English 8-ball). And this is a different challenge and opportunity. It is something I must take more seriously than previous events. This may be my once in a lifetime opportunity and if I don't do the work I'll probably be straight out of each event without a result.
So if I'm gonna do it, I better give it the fairest whack I can. I know I'm a smarter player and person now than I was 10 years ago, but now I've got to re-find that old stroke and tune my table management, breaking and other stuff so I go in there knowing I can run enough racks to keep me in the games and knowing I have a chance if I work hard and smart and cool enough in my matches.
One thing I learned in early life, training in track-and-field as a decathlete was that with focus, creativity and hard work you can lift yourself well above the average. You can't always necessarily be the best, but you can get to higher levels, where you can get a closer perspective on how to climb higher still.
So I plan to work hard and smart and take a good game to the US. How good it will be compared to the top and lesser pros I'm not sure. I can't worry about that too much. Just prepare and then do my best with the opportunities I'm presented in the matches.
If I can win a few rounds, I hope that inspires some of the AZ members to greater ambitions.
drivermaker
Banned
Jimmy M. said:
I've been saying this FOREVER on here and you would have thought I was some kind of psycho voodoo practitioner based on the number of guys that have denied it, fought it, fought me, called it something for beginners only, or what the hell ever else could come to their mind.
It's super to finally see a few good players figuring it out and speaking up.
(you're good Jimmy...not as good as RudeDog...but none the less, pretty damn good)
2wld4u said:
I believe that most of the pros use this very same system. Most other systems tend to be very limiting to the player. While they may seem simple at first, as the player wants to advance to the next stages they need to retrain themselves. Not so good.
J. Lee actually looks at round objects at home and finds the tiniest spots on them and focuses.
The other advantage to this aiming technique from the tiniest spot on the OB to the pocket is that the player can see the entire shot more easily. When in the zone, the aim is picked up so quickly that the player doesn't even notice the system is even active.
When shooting at an angle were it is not possible to see the line to the pocket, it is the brains experience of many years of play to create a mental image of this.
jsp said:
As promised, I detail the aiming system that I use to help supplement the ghost ball method. Refer to the figure below. Before beginning, you must note that I superimposed a set of x/y axes on top of the object and cue balls. These axes will aid in a consistent description of the spatial positioning of the contact points of the balls. The origin of the axes (where the x/y axes intersect) fall at the exact center of the ball, and each axis is parallel to the rails of the table. It is important to note that these axes do not shift or rotate depending on the location of the ball on the table; they remain fixed as how I described it.
The first step is to draw a line going from the center of the intended pocket to the center of the object ball (purple dashed line). Extending this line to the opposite edge of the object ball gives you the object ball contact point (blue dot). To find the contact point of the cue ball, you simply just reflect the location of the cue ball contact point about the axes origin, as shown in the upper left portion of the figure. Geometry tells you that reflecting the object ball CP about the origin will always give you the location of the cue ball CP (red dot) regardless of the location of the cue ball on the table (of course, assuming the shot is still make-able). This is illustrated in the figure with three different locations for the cue ball. For each case, the cue ball CP is in the same location (with respect to the ball’s axes).
Once you have the location of the cue ball CP, the next step is the draw a line through the object ball CP and the cue ball CP (green line). Then, you just simply imagine the line parallel to that line that goes through the center of the cue ball (orange line). This new line is what should direct your aim, since geometry tells you that this line connects the centers of both the cue ball and ghost ball. To make the shot, you just stroke through this line (black arrow).
So to briefly summarize the steps of the system in colors, the order would be purple line, blue dot, red dot, green line, orange line, and black arrow (sorry, the colors didn’t come out correctly in the figure while converting it to a jpeg). In the most basic terms, it’s a contact point to contact point system. The advantage of this system is that you don’t have to estimate the location of the ghost ball’s center. It’s a system I worked out myself, but because of its simplicity I doubt it’s anything novel. If anyone knows the exact name of this system, let me know.
Attachments
Here's my aiming technique. First, I see the ball-wide path that the OB would have to travel to hit the pocket where I want. I see the edge of the OB that would have to be hit to drive the OB down this path, but I see it as a plane the same size as the cue ball (i.e., I see it as a 2-D figure). I then see the plane of the CB that would have to coincide with (strike) the plane of the OB. I can usually do all this from behind the cue ball, but on really acute cuts I need to walk around behind the OB and sight down the pathway to the pocket. I've seen Cliff actually take his stick and place it over the path to the pocket as a way of better visualizing that pathway. I also visualize the speed of stroke I will be using and determine in my mind if this will cause any "drag" effect on the OB I'm cutting and adjust accordingly, either by spin or degree of cut. BTW, can anybody concur that hitting a cut shot with bottom spin will turn the OB in a way favorable to its going in the pocket?
Zorro said:
1. Placing the stick over the path is the most accurate way to find the point to the back of the pocket. You can see the width of the path and next find the point to the back of the pocket. My opinion is a line is much easier than a width because a width is dimensional and it is more to focus on. Either way, the important think here is to see the entire path which you do.
2. Hitting low on the cue ball minimizes throw and delays curve (has an opposite effect when hitting the rail first). I know someone will probably disagree, but I am saying "minimizes". You can confirm this by placing an object ball close, not on, to the rail. Shoot the shot with high and low. You will notice with low the ball is overcut a little. So low keeps the lines on track.
Last edited: