AIMING VIDEO - part 2

randyg said:
Once again, well done.

You state that a 1/2 ball aim is a 1/2 ball hit???????....randyg
Click to expand...


Yes I use the two interchangeably.

I think Scott referred to a 45 degree cut angle as a "half ball hit." I guess that would be a little fuller than a 1/4 ball aim. I don't like that terminology because it's too easy to confuse the concepts.

I prefer to say half-ball aim and half-ball hit mean the same thing.
 
Last edited:
Very Nice!!

you got green from me also. Thanks for a real well done explanation and a place to start.
 
mikepage said:
Yes I use the two interchangeably.

I think Scott referred to a 45 degree cut angle as a "half ball hit." I guess that would be a little fuller than a 3/4 ball aim. I don't like that terminology because it's too easy to confuse the concepts.

I prefer to say half-ball aim and half-ball hit mean the same thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, caught that too. Glad you made that determination. I prefer the say "hit".

One thing I thought was really difficult for me anyway was "using a sight line" from the edge of the cue ball to the object ball, or, anything in that method of aiming.

We were talking in the first thread (video #1) about the thin cut shots sighting, so, I thought I would try that theory in a local tournament. I couldn't do it. I had to go back to just overlapping the edges. Just couldn't see it.

One thing I did find out in using the 1/4 and 3/4 ball aims is that I had to locate an aiming point. The half-ball aim is easy because you are aiming to the edge of the object ball with my cue. The 1/4 ball hit is also easy, I use the inside edge of the cue and aim it at the the base of the ball where it first leaves the table. The 3/4 is another story though. Have to think on that one.

To me it is a good double check system. I never had any real problem finding the line to the pocket, but, after learning this I discovered that it makes it lot easier. I can see the angles a lot faster.

I can see this being a big benefit to NEW players and players that have experience also. I would totally recommend that any new player that finds this interesting and helpful, to seek out one of the qualified Instructors and learn the SAM system to improve their game.

Very good explanation. Greens coming to you...:D
 
Another great job, Mike! A couple questions:

You say in the beginning that the "contact points line" may be the best choice for a "sight line" and then reinforce this idea by focusing on contact point lines thereafter. Are you advocating that? Stimulated by your first aiming video, I've tried to kickstart a discussion of the choice of sight lines in another (poll) thread.

I had a little trouble understanding how to use your last chart. Could you elaborate?

Thanks,

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
Mike, appreciate the video. Very interesting. The confusion in my mind involves the "sight" line. I'm assuming that this is in essense the result of your binocular vision. If this is so, it seems that the alignment of the head over the cue is moving laterally depending on the amount of cut. Is this what you are saying? I feel pretty comfortable that my head position seldom varies very much laterally. Maybe this is my misunderstanding. Your comments would be appreciated.
Your videos are great. Keep up the great work!
 
mikepage said:
I prefer to say half-ball aim and half-ball hit mean the same thing.
Click to expand...

Mike...They don't mean the same thing at all! A half ball aim ends up with a 30 degree cut angle. A half ball hit (or a quarter ball aim) ends up with a 45 degree cut angle. Significantly different...

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
 
Scott Lee said:
Mike...They don't mean the same thing at all! A half ball aim ends up with a 30 degree cut angle. A half ball hit (or a quarter ball aim) ends up with a 45 degree cut angle. Significantly different...

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...

Actually a quarter-ball aim doesn't lead to a 45 degree cut angle; it's 48.6 degrees. Either way, from where did you get the terminology calling either 48.6 degrees or 45 degrees a "half-ball hit"?

As I said, I don't think that's good terminology because it's so easily misunderstood.

I mean we have a whole generation of players who have grown up with Byrnes's books. He has a Chapter in his "Advanced" book called "Importance of the Half-Ball Hit" by which he means the one that gives a 30 degree cut angle. Koehler's book is the only other one I have in front of me. He too refers to a "half-ball hit" as the 30 degree one. And I think it's far more widespread than that.

I don't see any reason to mess with it.
 
Misunderstood by whom?

A half ball hit is just what it is. A half ball aim is quite different.....SPF=randyg
 
Misunderstood by whom?

A half ball hit is just what it is. A half ball aim is quite different.....SPF=randyg
 
randyg said:
Misunderstood by whom?

A half ball hit is just what it is. A half ball aim is quite different.....SPF=randyg
Click to expand...

Misunderstood by the recipient of your words.

Try this Randy.

in google type in "half ball hit."

You will get over 1000 hits,
from Byrne
Tom Simpson
wikipedia
Bob Jewett
Capelle
Koeller
Ron Shepard
Dr. Dave
inside pool mag
billiards digest

and the list goes on

Every single one of these sources uses "half ball hit" to mean a cut angle of 30 degrees, not 45 degrees.

I suspect the phrase had its meaning before any of these people were born.

Changing "half ball hit" to mean a cut angle of 45 degrees at pool would be like at baseball changing the meaning of "strike out" to mean when the batter strikes the ball outside the foul line.
 
randyg said:
Misunderstood by whom?

A half ball hit is just what it is. A half ball aim is quite different.....SPF=randyg
Click to expand...
"Half ball" means different things if you use it that way. It means "half ball overlap" (two dimensional) when you use it with "aim" and "halfway around the circumference from center to edge" (three dimensional) when used with "hit".

There's no particular reason that "hit" must mean "where the CB hits the OB" rather than "the hit that results from a particular overlap", and some good reasons it shouldn't.

One is that your new definition breaks with tradition without a clear benefit.

Another is that using two different definitions of "half ball" adds confusion rather than reducing it.

Another is that there's no easy way to describe the aim necessary to hit the evenly-spaced OB contact points you want to describe with your definition of "hit". For instance, the common overlap that comes closest to a 45 degree cut (your "half ball hit") is the quarter ball overlap (CB edge to OB quarter), but that produces a hit closer to 50 degrees than 45. How do you instruct somebody to achieve your "half ball hit"?

pj
chgo
 
How do you instruct somebody to achieve your "half ball hit"?
Look at the pocket, send the ball there.:D
Center of the cb hits the outside edge of the ob. Halfball!
( center of cb really does not hit the ousided edge but who cares? just pretend it does )
 
Patrick Johnson said:
"
One is that your new definition breaks with tradition without a clear benefit.


Well, one clear benefit, for one or two peoples, is:

It makes it sound like you have something new, special, and exclusive to offer, when really it's just the same old hamburger. Madison Avenue has been doing this forever ;-)

Lou Figueroa
just loves
these aiming threads :-)
Click to expand...
 
randyg said:
Misunderstood by whom?

A half ball hit is just what it is. A half ball aim is quite different.....SPF=randyg
Click to expand...
Nope, you're wrong, Randy. A half-ball hit is the same as a half-ball aim and it results in a 30-degree cut (in the absence of throw). This is the absolutely standard way of referring to the shot. The way you have adopted is out-of-whack and confusing. Perhaps it won't be confusing to your students if they never read any of the many books that talk about fractional aiming, but if they do read such books they're sure to have some trouble understanding what those authors are talking about.

At the minimum, I think you owe it to your students that your nomenclature is unlike the standard nomenclature. Failure to do that is a disservice to your students.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top