Poolology Confusion

SkinnyPete · Sep 11, 2017

I've gone over the poolology book and I like the simplicity of the system. Spending some time with it on the table has really helped me to learn to quickly identify 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 ball hits.

Now I've run into some confusion and I don't know if these are holes in the system or if I screwed up somewhere And I apologize if this has already been covered.

Looking at a diagram of a table, long sides horizontal, let's say the we have an object ball 1 diamond from the top and 1 diamond from the right side. Lets say the target pocket is the closest pocket, the top right corner pocket. The object ball sits on the dividing line of zone A and zone B, either way it has a position value of X.

The cue ball is sitting 1 diamond from the top rail, so its natural line through the object ball and to the short rail obviously is 1 diamond from the top, giving it an alignment value of X.

This says X/X or 100% of the cue ball needs to overhang? in other words too thin to cut? looks like a makeable shot to me. Am I applying the system incorrectly here?

(My software says this particular shot has a 74% overhang)

Another problem I came up on is the side pocket aiming zone numbering doesn't add up. Take diagram D, lets say your object ball is sitting on position value 50 somewhere, the cue ball is below the obj ball so the natural line points to the opposite side of the table. What doesn't make sense to me is the values at the opposite end of the tables around the top right pocket. As my cue ball moves from left to right under the obj ball, the cut to the side pocket gets thinner and thinner, how is it that my alignment value goes up as it moves up the long rail and then goes back down when it turns the corner onto the top short rail?

sixpack · Sep 11, 2017

I've noticed that exact same issue.

bbb · Sep 12, 2017

i suggest a pm to brian

BC21 · Sep 12, 2017

Glad to hear you're having success with 1/4 ball shots and thicker. That is the most accurate span of fractions for the system, which covers most every cut shot once a player develops good position play.

What distinguishes Poolology from most aiming systems is that it is geared toward helping a player develop a feel for shots. The book states that anytime the ob position value is equal to the alignment value the shot falls beyond the system's parameters. Due to the nature of how it was developed with circular patterns and then linearized to make it a more user-friendly system, certain limitations arose, particularly how the numbers begin to breakdown around the 1/8 fraction. This is where it is up to the player to pay attention, learn, and adapt.

In the example given, it's obvious that the shot can easily be made. When the numbers fall outside of system capabilities, it's up to the capabilities of the individual player, which helps the player develop his or her own feel for certain shots.

Regarding the side pocket shot, the alignment values around that corner pocket (between the end rail and side rail) are designed to accommodate all ob positions from the opposite side of the table, accounting for collision-induced throw and margin of error. The numbers work unless your side pockets are super-shimmed. A Diamond table has 5" side pockets and the system works like a charm. Refer to diagram D3 and the "note" that follows the diagram.

SkinnyPete · Sep 12, 2017

BC21 said:
What distinguishes Poolology from most aiming systems is that it is geared toward helping a player develop a feel for shots.

That it does well, I've discovered that I can spend an half hour just sinking basic cut shots 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 referenced by the poolology number system and the next day my shooting in match is much better. That is, my feel for correct angles is much better and I don't actually use the system during the match play... The system seems to calibrate me.

The book states that anytime the ob position value is equal to the alignment value the shot falls beyond the system's parameters.

Okay, I must have missed that part, I was aware that it wasn't accurate at the foot spot but I didn't remember reading about problems along the zone lines. I will keep this in mind.

cookie man · Sep 12, 2017

BC21 said:
Glad to hear you're having success with 1/4 ball shots and thicker. That is the most accurate span of fractions for the system, which covers most every cut shot once a player develops good position play.

What distinguishes Poolology from most aiming systems is that it is geared toward helping a player develop a feel for shots. The book states that anytime the ob position value is equal to the alignment value the shot falls beyond the system's parameters. Due to the nature of how it was developed with circular patterns and then linearized to make it a more user-friendly system, certain limitations arose, particularly how the numbers begin to breakdown around the 1/8 fraction. This is where it is up to the player to pay attention, learn, and adapt.

In the example given, it's obvious that the shot can easily be made. When the numbers fall outside of system capabilities, it's up to the capabilities of the individual player, which helps the player develop his or her own feel for certain shots.

Regarding the side pocket shot, the alignment values around that corner pocket (between the end rail and side rail) are designed to accommodate all ob positions from the opposite side of the table, accounting for collision-induced throw and margin of error. The numbers work unless your side pockets are super-shimmed. A Diamond table has 5" side pockets and the system works like a charm. Refer to diagram D3 and the "note" that follows the diagram.

So the shot in the picture above is not make able strictly by using the system?

cookie man · Sep 12, 2017

SkinnyPete said:
That it does well, I've discovered that I can spend an half hour just sinking basic cut shots 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 referenced by the poolology number system and the next day my shooting in match is much better. That is, my feel for correct angles is much better and I don't actually use the system during the match play... The system seems to calibrate me.

Okay, I must have missed that part, I was aware that it wasn't accurate at the foot spot but I didn't remember reading about problems along the zone lines. I will keep this in mind.

If the system works well, then why not use it in the match?

BC21 · Sep 12, 2017

cookie man said:
So the shot in the picture above is not make able strictly by using the system?

This system provides very accurate aim points for cut shots as thin as 1/8, with very limited exceptions where the system begins to breakdown near a 1/8 calculation. This particular shot is bordering the 1/8 breakdown point, but a 1/8 aim will more than likely work. There are countless shots that fall between straight-in and a 1/8 hit, and the system covers nearly every possible scenario. For the rare times when it doesn't work, the player can easily figure out what do based on their knowledge of how the system works.

The great thing about Poolology is that if gives the player the freedom to become the type of shot maker that just sees the shots. Part of this process is to have the player begin to think for himself instead of becoming a slave to the system.

As for the diagramed shot, the book specifically states that on any shot where the two determining values are equal, the system can't be used. This doesn't mean the player can't determine a proper aim. I do not assume the player is helpless. Instead, I assume he or she is fully capable of learning a shot on their own.

BC21 · Sep 12, 2017

cookie man said:
If the system works well, then why not use it in the match?

I have, many times over the last few years. I use it whenever I feel unsure of a shot or have a high-pressure shot that tries to shake my confidence. It's not a CTE type of system. This is more of a tool for developing a certain skill. You work with the tool enough and eventually you wing yourself off of it, naturally.

SkinnyPete · Sep 13, 2017

cookie man said:
If the system works well, then why not use it in the match?

I don't know it all. I've only spent an hour or two playing with it and only in a few different zones and most of that was focusing on learning to recognize 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 ball hits for baseline references. So my focus hasn't been to learn the full system itself, yet. It works well for what I've used it for, I haven't practiced using it in a game type situation and don't yet have all the numbering diagrams memorized.

cookie man · Sep 13, 2017

BC21 said:
I have, many times over the last few years. I use it whenever I feel unsure of a shot or have a high-pressure shot that tries to shake my confidence. It's not a CTE type of system. This is more of a tool for developing a certain skill. You work with the tool enough and eventually you wing yourself off of it, naturally.

Fair enough. But if you are working with something and practicing with something shouldn't it be something to use all the time with confidence?

BC21 · Sep 13, 2017

Not particularly. Players practice with all sorts of nifty little tools and gadgets, but they don't whip them out during a match. What's cool about this tool is that you can use it in a match. It's all about how comfortable you feel with it. Keep in mind that this system is not a magical method meant to replace skill development. The goal is to improve and develop pocketing skills in a fraction of the time it would take using traditional methods that involve countless hours of trial and error.

cookie man · Sep 13, 2017

BC21 said:
Not particularly. Players practice with all sorts of nifty little tools and gadgets, but they don't whip them out during a match. What's cool about this tool is that you can use it in a match. It's all about how comfortable you feel with it. Keep in mind that this system is not a magical method meant to replace skill development. The goal is to improve and develop pocketing skills in a fraction of the time it would take using traditional methods that involve countless hours of trial and error.

Again i hear you, but if i am learning to play and using a system to pocket balls, then i sure as hell want to use it in a match. I want to build my game around that system not put it on the shelf till i'm afraid of a shot.

BC21 · Sep 13, 2017

cookie man said:
Again i hear you, but if i am learning to play and using a system to pocket balls, then i sure as hell want to use it in a match. I want to build my game around that system not put it on the shelf till i'm afraid of a shot.

This system can be used anytime on any table, as long as you've worked with it enough to understand it, and also able to accurately and consistently hit the aim points. It's like the player that buys a jump but has no idea how to really use it. He'd be a fool to whip it out in a match before practicing with it first, as least becoming confident with straight-foward easy jump shots.

Vorpal Cue · Sep 13, 2017

It's a 45* angle that can be made with a 3/4 ball cut. I set it up for right and left cuts and had no problem with it. It was easier for me to use a 45 perspective and pivot but that's my preferred method.

I took your diagram and extended your lines and added a line that's perpendicular to the shot line that runs through the center of the cue ball. That makes it a right triangle with two equal sides. If the sides of a right triangle are equal the angle is 45*. This triangle method will work across the entire table. With a little work it's fairly easy to find angles within 5*. That's probably close enough to use the quarters system and it's perfect for finding the visuals for the pivoting system I use.

cookie man · Sep 13, 2017

BC21 said:
This system can be used anytime on any table, as long as you've worked with it enough to understand it, and also able to accurately and consistently hit the aim points. It's like the player that buys a jump but has no idea how to really use it. He'd be a fool to whip it out in a match before practicing with it first, as least becoming confident with straight-foward easy jump shots.

But it's your system and you don't use it all the time, kinda strange

BC21 · Sep 13, 2017

cookie man said:
But it's your system and you don't use it all the time, kinda strange

I've had others ask the same question. Even had a guy ask about what percentage of the time I happen to use it. All I know is I sometimes use it. Maybe it's 20% of my shots normally, and sometimes maybe 50%, then other times 0%. All I know is that sometimes a shot comes up that automatically says, "Stop....use the system". Maybe it's a key shot, or it's my out ball, everything hinges on it....that's when I really wanna make sure I'm going to pocket the ball. And yes there are times when I rattle a shot and then tell myself I should've used the system. But I'm 49 years old and have been playing for 34 years. I'm lucky to be incorporating the use of it as often as I do. For someone younger just starting out, or someone that had been away from the game for several years, they'll probably get more use out of the system than a guy like myself, or Dan, or Lou. It's difficult to abandon 3 decades of playing a certain way in order to adapt 100% to something new.

cookie man · Sep 14, 2017

BC21 said:
I've had others ask the same question. Even had a guy ask about what percentage of the time I happen to use it. All I know is I sometimes use it. Maybe it's 20% of my shots normally, and sometimes maybe 50%, then other times 0%. All I know is that sometimes a shot comes up that automatically says, "Stop....use the system". Maybe it's a key shot, or it's my out ball, everything hinges on it....that's when I really wanna make sure I'm going to pocket the ball. And yes there are times when I rattle a shot and then tell myself I should've used the system. But I'm 49 years old and have been playing for 34 years. I'm lucky to be incorporating the use of it as often as I do. For someone younger just starting out, or someone that had been away from the game for several years, they'll probably get more use out of the system than a guy like myself, or Dan, or Lou. It's difficult to abandon 3 decades of playing a certain way in order to adapt 100% to something new.

Well i played for 3 decades before adapting to CTE, which i now use on every shot,
Just makes sense to use the most reliable way to aim, the way you practice, all the time to not just make key shots, but every shot. I'm 57, not that age has anything to do with it.
But to each his own. Use it when you need it.

BC21 · Sep 14, 2017

cookie man said:
Well i played for 3 decades before adapting to CTE, which i now use on every shot,
Just makes sense to use the most reliable way to aim, the way you practice, all the time to not just make key shots, but every shot. I'm 57, not that age has anything to do with it.
But to each his own. Use it when you need it.

Cool. And yes, to each his own. The difference between CTE and the method in my book is this: CTE requires you to choose one of three OB reference points depending on shot angle, locate a certain focal point (perspective) that allows you to visualize multiple visual lines from that point, then decide if it's thick or thin, based on experience. All of this leads to a CCB solution. Apparently, once a player becomes proficient, it only takes 2 or 3 seconds to get the solution. With Poolology the player looks at the numerical OB position on the table, looks at a numerical value relating to the center-to-center line between CB and OB, then gets a fractional aim point solution at the back of the OB. The solution can be a simple math comparison or often just visualized using the rail. It helps a player build a mental database of shots so that eventually the solution is automatically known as soon as you see the relationship between the the balls and the table. With CTE you must always follow the same steps to arrive at a CCB solution.

stan shuffett · Sep 14, 2017

BC21 said:
Cool. And yes, to each his own. The difference between CTE and the method in my book is this: CTE requires you to choose one of three OB reference points depending on shot angle, locate a certain focal point (perspective) that allows you to visualize multiple visual lines from that point, then decide if it's thick or thin, based on experience. All of this leads to a CCB solution. Apparently, once a player becomes proficient, it only takes 2 or 3 seconds to get the solution. With Poolology the player looks at the numerical OB position on the table, looks at a numerical value relating to the center-to-center line between CB and OB, then gets a fractional aim point solution at the back of the OB. The solution can be a simple math comparison or often just visualized using the rail. It helps a player build a mental database of shots so that eventually the solution is automatically known as soon as you see the relationship between the the balls and the table. With CTE you must always follow the same steps to arrive at a CCB solution.

By far, your best description of CTE that I've read. At proficiency, though, there are no steps that are discernible. It's See and align. The beauty of understanding CTE at its proficiency level is that the player knows exactly what has occurred at the subconscious level. I can just drop on a shot and align in 1 second or less having factored in 3 known lines. Our visual functioning concerning CTE happens at speeds that are faster than the fastest super computers in the world. This is precisely one of the reasons that providing explanations for aiming has been difficult not just for me but for any pro. CTE is certainly step-oriented when learning but that has to be put aside for using it at a professional level.

Stan Shuffett

Poolology Confusion

Registered

AzB Silver Member

AzB Gold Member

https://www.playpoolbetter.com

Registered

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

https://www.playpoolbetter.com

https://www.playpoolbetter.com

Registered

AzB Silver Member

https://www.playpoolbetter.com

AzB Silver Member

https://www.playpoolbetter.com

Just galumping back

AzB Silver Member

https://www.playpoolbetter.com

AzB Silver Member

https://www.playpoolbetter.com

AzB Silver Member