Aim System proponents, answer this?

i see track lines for position
so i try to make the ball and get the cue ball on the angle /track line with the correct spin to get position
if i need to "cheat" the pocket i do
to get on the correct line
curious what you instructor thinks of that

This is a tough question. Due to speed, spin, throw, etc...I'm not sure any system can guarantee pinpoint accuracy within the pocket. What I present in Poolology is a system designed to send the OB to center pocket from certain OB positions, shifting left or right of center as the OB moves away from a full pocket view, then into the pocket facing as the OB gets closer to the rail. Any stun shot or spin can easily alter this, and that's why I stress the importance of developing a feel for shots.

I believe any aiming system that claims perfect center pocket for every shot is simply ignoring the human factor involved in pocketing balls. And ignoring the aspect of tweaking a shot for certain position play.

denwhit said:

Okay, a simple question for everyone that believes in an aiming system of one kind or another. let's take all aiming systems a step further. I've taken enough lessons from my teaching pro to know how he played when he did. He says he can't remember a shot where he didn't divide the pocket up into at least 5 segments in his mind. 1 being thick, 5 being thin, 3 in the middle. Then he would watch where the ball actually went in. OTHERWISE, after the ball has gone two rails and he discovered he was long on his shape, how would he know how to analyze the shot and learn? Did hit the CB too hard and hit his mark on the pocket OR did he hit it with perfect speed but were too thick on the pocket? And of course vice versa, short on shape position... was it because of faulty speed or perfect speed but hit the pocket too thick? Now, you tell me what "aiming" system will solve all of that? How many here play like that? Or do you play like, Okay success, my aiming system works because the ball went in, problem solved?

Click to expand...

What about aiming systems makes you think that one can not look at the pocket after the hit to see exactly where the ob went into the pocket?

BC21 said:

This is a tough question. Due to speed, spin, throw, etc...I'm not sure any system can guarantee pinpoint accuracy within the pocket. What I present in Poolology is a system designed to send the OB to center pocket from certain OB positions, shifting left or right of center as the OB moves away from a full pocket view, then into the pocket facing as the OB gets closer to the rail. Any stun shot or spin can easily alter this, and that's why I stress the importance of developing a feel for shots.

I believe any aiming system that claims perfect center pocket for every shot is simply ignoring the human factor involved in pocketing balls. And ignoring the aspect of tweaking a shot for certain position play.

Click to expand...

I don't know of any aiming system that claims that one will make a perfect center pocket shot for every shot. I do know of several that claim that the system will put one on the correct shot line for a center pocket shot. Which is a far different claim than the one you just made.

bbb said:

i see track lines for position
so i try to make the ball and get the cue ball on the angle /track line with the correct spin to get position
if i need to "cheat" the pocket i do
to get on the correct line
curious what you instructor thinks of that

Click to expand...

That's all well and good. But, here's a question for you- do you know how to fairly accurately alter the natural track line when needed to do so? (such as with draw and follow)

denwhit said:

But how about before the hit and the aiming part? Let's say I need to hit super thin (5) on the pocket to get the line and speed I need for shape. What aiming system will help me with that? Seems to me that all aiming systems are only about pocketing a ball. In equals success.

Click to expand...

OK, why do you think that once one knows how to get to center pocket, that they then are unable to adjust a little for a different part of the pocket?

Neil said:

That's all well and good. But, here's a question for you- do you know how to fairly accurately alter the natural track line when needed to do so? (such as with draw and follow)

Click to expand...

........Yes
That's how you get to different spots on the table from the same shot set up

denwhit said:

Okay, a simple question for everyone that believes in an aiming system of one kind or another. let's take all aiming systems a step further. I've taken enough lessons from my teaching pro to know how he played when he did. He says he can't remember a shot where he didn't divide the pocket up into at least 5 segments in his mind. 1 being thick, 5 being thin, 3 in the middle. Then he would watch where the ball actually went in. OTHERWISE, after the ball has gone two rails and he discovered he was long on his shape, how would he know how to analyze the shot and learn? Did hit the CB too hard and hit his mark on the pocket OR did he hit it with perfect speed but were too thick on the pocket? And of course vice versa, short on shape position... was it because of faulty speed or perfect speed but hit the pocket too thick? Now, you tell me what "aiming" system will solve all of that? How many here play like that? Or do you play like, Okay success, my aiming system works because the ball went in, problem solved?

Click to expand...

I have a simple question for you that I asked before and you didn't answer. Who is your teaching pro? Was he a name everyone would recognize from tournaments and longevity in pool?

Is Glen going to be tightening your pockets down to 4 1/2" or less and changing the rails which might produce more bounce?

If so, please produce and post a video of your pro and you running a couple of racks of 9 ball to illustrate these 5 points of entry into the ultra tight pockets and the sensitive rails.

Before shooting, make it a "call shot" for which part of the pocket it will be going in and why chosen for the position on the next ball and angles for a few more.

We can then see if he and you hit your mark and get good enough shape to run racks.

Fair enough?

denwhit said:

Okay, a simple question for everyone that believes in an aiming system of one kind or another. let's take all aiming systems a step further. I've taken enough lessons from my teaching pro to know how he played when he did. He says he can't remember a shot where he didn't divide the pocket up into at least 5 segments in his mind. 1 being thick, 5 being thin, 3 in the middle. Then he would watch where the ball actually went in. OTHERWISE, after the ball has gone two rails and he discovered he was long on his shape, how would he know how to analyze the shot and learn? Did hit the CB too hard and hit his mark on the pocket OR did he hit it with perfect speed but were too thick on the pocket? And of course vice versa, short on shape position... was it because of faulty speed or perfect speed but hit the pocket too thick? Now, you tell me what "aiming" system will solve all of that? How many here play like that? Or do you play like, Okay success, my aiming system works because the ball went in, problem solved?

Click to expand...

I wonder how 3 cushion players move the CB around the table so masterfully since they have no pockets to work with? They work off of the OB just like pool players do.
Pool is actually a derivative of the pocketless game. We might even be teaching our game backwards-ball pocketing then position. The way it should really be is hit the OB in such a way as to move the CB here or there. CTE is perfect for position play in that a known line can always be used for how the CB contacts the OB. Forget about dividing the pocket!

Stan Shuffett

I understand where you're coming from, Dennis. For object balls within 3 diamonds or so from a full pocket, I often play left or right side of the pocket in order to get specific shape for the next shot. On longer shots I just make sure to hit the pocket. The thing about aiming systems that many people don't like to admit, is that after continued use of the system your brain begins to learn and adjust for the tolerances, creating a feel for manipulating the aim here and there as needed.

Logically, the easiest and most accurate place to make these fine tunings is on the OB end of the shot, because the OB is closest to the pocket. With contact point aiming or parallel shifts and pivots, a contact point leading to left or right of center pocket would be the starting point. With exact contact points being difficult to focus in on, a certain amount if developed feel is probably needed. CTE is CCB focused, so the tweaking would be done on the CB end of the shot I suppose, which also requires a developed feel. Stan posted a video a couple of weeks ago to show how it can be done, cheating the pocket one way or the other. With fractional ball aiming, the player can aim for a slightly thinner or thicker hit as needed, exactly how much thinner or thicker involves....you guessed it....feel.

Any system that puts the balls in the pocket, anywhere within the pocket, will eventually (or hopefully) lead a player to developing the ability to manipulate OB placement within the pocket. Since this requires just the right amount of speed, or spin, or aiming adjustment, or whatever, I believe the skill needed to accomplish such fine tuning is player-oriented, not system-oriented. Though some systems may provide a quicker path to developing this skill, it's still up to the player.

denwhit said:

Okay, a simple question for everyone that believes in an aiming system of one kind or another. let's take all aiming systems a step further. I've taken enough lessons from my teaching pro to know how he played when he did. He says he can't remember a shot where he didn't divide the pocket up into at least 5 segments in his mind. 1 being thick, 5 being thin, 3 in the middle. Then he would watch where the ball actually went in. OTHERWISE, after the ball has gone two rails and he discovered he was long on his shape, how would he know how to analyze the shot and learn? Did hit the CB too hard and hit his mark on the pocket OR did he hit it with perfect speed but were too thick on the pocket? And of course vice versa, short on shape position... was it because of faulty speed or perfect speed but hit the pocket too thick? Now, you tell me what "aiming" system will solve all of that? How many here play like that? Or do you play like, Okay success, my aiming system works because the ball went in, problem solved?

Click to expand...

Thank you, this is a very thoughtful question you've raised:

1. How many books and CDs etc. advocate playing for pinpoint position with the cue ball? Most of them, probably mine, too, LOL.

2. Most amateurs cannot consistently drop the cue ball on a tiny spot--so they need slightly different advice here IMHO. Pocketing the ball thicker or thinner than dead center, therefore, doesn't affect their cue ball speed enough for them to notice!

3. Aiming systems aren't position systems. Aiming systems are meant to help players score balls in pockets.

denwhit said:

Okay, a simple question for everyone that believes in an aiming system of one kind or another. let's take all aiming systems a step further. I've taken enough lessons from my teaching pro to know how he played when he did. He says he can't remember a shot where he didn't divide the pocket up into at least 5 segments in his mind. 1 being thick, 5 being thin, 3 in the middle. Then he would watch where the ball actually went in. OTHERWISE, after the ball has gone two rails and he discovered he was long on his shape, how would he know how to analyze the shot and learn? Did hit the CB too hard and hit his mark on the pocket OR did he hit it with perfect speed but were too thick on the pocket? And of course vice versa, short on shape position... was it because of faulty speed or perfect speed but hit the pocket too thick? Now, you tell me what "aiming" system will solve all of that? How many here play like that? Or do you play like, Okay success, my aiming system works because the ball went in, problem solved?

Click to expand...

My opinion is that it is not practical to divide up the pocket on today's equipment, specifically Diamond tables.

I used to play on nothing but GCs and I think with the older models, and with some other brands, you could make an argument for different aiming points within those larger pockets. Then, in the last decade or two, it seemed like many tables were tightened up with shims or extended cushions and that went out the window.

Now I play on Diamonds and other than at a few angles I don't believe you can really divide up the pocket. Most of us do not have sufficient accuracy for those very small adjustments nor is it such a good idea to risk missing the shot entirely.

I'd occasionally run 80, 90, and rarely a 100 on a shimmed GC. Now on the Diamonds, I run 50 or 60 and want to go out and get drunk to celebrate.

Lou Figueroa

lfigueroa said:

My opinion is that it is not practical to divide up the pocket on today's equipment, specifically Diamond tables.

I used to play on nothing but GCs and I think with the older models, and with some other brands, you could make an argument for different aiming points within those larger pockets. Then, in the last decade or two, it seemed like many tables were tightened up with shims or extended cushions and that went out the window.

Now I play on Diamonds and other than at a few angles I don't believe you can really divide up the pocket. Most of us do not have sufficient accuracy for those very small adjustments nor is it such a good idea to risk missing the shot entirely.

I'd occasionally run 80, 90, and rarely a 100 on a shimmed GC. Now on the Diamonds, I run 50 or 60 and want to go out and get drunk to celebrate.

Lou Figueroa

Click to expand...

Excellent! Especially the celebration.

denwhit said:

No, it's not fair at all. I posted a concept of a way to play pool. I never said I play that way. I want to and I'm learning to but I'm a student.

If you don't play that way, why bother paying for lessons when the guy is telling you to do it?

At least we know who Jack Nicklaus was taught by, Jack Grout. What is your supposed pro player turned instructor's name?

Let's see you running rack after rack using CTE

Click to expand...

OK, but what I'm going to post is a video of me from a few years ago when Colin Colenso was doing his best to invalidate the accuracy of CTE by designing a pure potting test from all over the table.

I used CTE on every shot to prove it's accuracy. I also purposely had the radio going so no one could say I stopped and edited the tape to do a retake. This was all done in one shot, the very first time I attempted it.

How about YOU duplicate the test doing whatever you do? Your instructor can also try. I'll come back in to edit this with the table layout for each shot but right now I don't know where to find it.

OK, FOUND IT. Knock yourself out as well as your instructor, Champ. http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=122451&highlight=potting+test

It won't matter that I post it, you'll be tap dancing and double talking your way out of doing it with some kind of lame excuse. But then again, you can prove me WRONG by doing his potting test. Btw, I love being proved wrong because it keeps me on my toes, so DO IT. You might even find fault that I missed a ball because my focus was lost for a split second. Click the link below:

https://vimeo.com/112628068

denwhit said:

I think for the mere mortal on a tight table, dividing up the pocket in 3 segments is good enough for the correct feedback. "Ball in Jaws" is a great example. You can hit the OB full and take all the energy off the CB or you can pick a segment, hit it thin thinking about tangent line and move the CB around the table with ease.

Click to expand...

"Balls in Jaws" is an entirely different situation than balls far enough away from the pocket along with distance between the CB and OB

Then there are shots where you hardly have any pocket to shoot at and don't. You have to aim at the outside pocket wall for shots with the OB close to the rail especially on long shots the length of the table.

You have a 4 1/2" pocket which is tight to begin with and are now reducing it down to a 3" portion which is a little larger than the 2 1/4" ball itself.

Not a very high percentage shot to make unless your first name is Shane.