Shaft aiming

bbb

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Can anybody explain this video in detail please?
https://youtu.be/vKs-Fb4fFcg

Really pretty straightforward. Here's a link that includes this technique. I haven't seen where anyone discusses its limitations.

https://www.pooldawg.com/article/pooldawg-library/what-the-fck-are-you-looking-at-a-guide-to-aim

i think the link above did a great job
my 2 cents
we all know the contact point on a cut shot of cue ball/object ball is not the aim point
so the edge of shaft is the compensation
 

hogie583

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I just got done playing around with it. 314 shaft... 12.75 diameter tip. Find pocket line and just use the left or right side of shaft aimed ob contact point from ccb. Works great up to little more that half ball hit. For straight in up to few degrees center shaft to contact. Or you could divide your shaft up into sections for the few degrees you need. All others look right down the outside of shaft. Make sure tip is at center cue ball look inside down the shaft to contact points. You can play at a very high level with this too.
Shot some extremely close cb to ob 8 feet from pocket. Warp speed drilled them. Shaft diameters will change the hit to the contact point. Once you get dialed in you can have fun with it. Made some nice full table bank too. Have fun!
 
Last edited:

Saturated Fats

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I imagine it must start to fail when the CB is very close to the OB and/or when the cut is very thin. True?
 

JoeyInCali

Maker of Joey Bautista Cues
Silver Member
I think Shane pulled people's legs and he's laughing about it .


Shane won't even share his racking secrets .


This one is just another one that just shakes my head.
Can you really see the side of the shaft and line it up ?

If you can see some 6MM to either side and aim to a spot on the object ball, why not just aim the center of the tip some 6MM away from that spot on the OB?

And in the end, you still need to visualize the two balls colliding .
From which I can tell, people can describe what they are doing but really aren't doing what they are describing b/c they know from shooting so many balls, where it's a go or no go .

I bet most competent players can go down and line up the two balls WITHOUT a cue, and most can tell if it's a go or no go.
 

Saturated Fats

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
And in the end, you still need to visualize the two balls colliding .

Clearly, this method does not depend on being able to visualize the two balls colliding. I depends on being able to visualize the OB's contact point and the side of the shaft that is inside the angle.
 

The-Professor

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I think Shane pulled people's legs and he's laughing about it .


Shane won't even share his racking secrets .


This one is just another one that just shakes my head.
Can you really see the side of the shaft and line it up ?

If you can see some 6MM to either side and aim to a spot on the object ball, why not just aim the center of the tip some 6MM away from that spot on the OB?

And in the end, you still need to visualize the two balls colliding .
From which I can tell, people can describe what they are doing but really aren't doing what they are describing b/c they know from shooting so many balls, where it's a go or no go .

I bet most competent players can go down and line up the two balls WITHOUT a cue, and most can tell if it's a go or no go.

Joey,

I rarely chime in regarding aiming, but I thought I would share my opinion here.

1. I think this is exactly how Shane aims. The center to center is pretty obvious for straight in shots... But I wanted to mention Shane explanation of his slight cut aiming method. Shane uses the outside of the shaft and aligns that with the outside edge of the object ball. If you look at the article posted it is similar to the shot that Jennifer mentions Shane aiming at the "shadow" on cut side with center of the cue. If you look at that visual, you can see that you would get to the exact same line by aligning the outside of the tip with the outside edge of the object ball. I have no clue why/how this works, but it works perfectly and is repeatable.

2. I don't think you have to really imagine the object balls colliding at all to pocket balls successful using shaft alignment or edge to edge aiming systems. If your stroke is repeatable you just point, align, and stroke, and then geometry takes over once you understand the cut lines and cue tip placement.
 

The-Professor

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I think Shane pulled people's legs and he's laughing about it .


Shane won't even share his racking secrets .


This one is just another one that just shakes my head.
Can you really see the side of the shaft and line it up ?

If you can see some 6MM to either side and aim to a spot on the object ball, why not just aim the center of the tip some 6MM away from that spot on the OB?

And in the end, you still need to visualize the two balls colliding .
From which I can tell, people can describe what they are doing but really aren't doing what they are describing b/c they know from shooting so many balls, where it's a go or no go .

I bet most competent players can go down and line up the two balls WITHOUT a cue, and most can tell if it's a go or no go.


I was also going to say that some players do aim at the 6mm away from object ball on cuts with very good consistency, but I personally believe using the edge as an aiming point creates a more objective angle and calls for less subjective guessing (how much is 6mm?)
 

JoeyInCali

Maker of Joey Bautista Cues
Silver Member
Joey,

I rarely chime in regarding aiming, but I thought I would share my opinion here.

1. I think this is exactly how Shane aims. The center to center is pretty obvious for straight in shots... But I wanted to mention Shane explanation of his slight cut aiming method. Shane uses the outside of the shaft and aligns that with the outside edge of the object ball. If you look at the article posted it is similar to the shot that Jennifer mentions Shane aiming at the "shadow" on cut side with center of the cue. If you look at that visual, you can see that you would get to the exact same line by aligning the outside of the tip with the outside edge of the object ball. I have no clue why/how this works, but it works perfectly and is repeatable.

2. I don't think you have to really imagine the object balls colliding at all to pocket balls successful using shaft alignment or edge to edge aiming systems. If your stroke is repeatable you just point, align, and stroke, and then geometry takes over once you understand the cut lines and cue tip placement.

He also said he aims different parts of the shaft. And that that different shafts are aimed differently.
 

paultex

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
......yeah, and that's why he has varying stroke elbow and grip hitches associated with different shots and effects. If he's aiming with shaft edges etc, it's just a reference point and there's still an additional offset requirement needed and that goes back to the "3 things that must happen" to achieve a outcome in pool and the human connection to it.

The offset comes in many forms and must happen because a visual reference is simply not enough, thus Stan and sweeps or a pivot or offset in body alignment etc etc.

I assume there isn't much debate or uncertainty about what I just stated. I assume i am preaching to the choir..... I think.

One stop shopping is pure target shooting and I don't know if this is reasonably possible or even necessary. Offsets and or redirects is completely acceptable and totally sound. I don't know why a sequence of events is necessary or seems to be, but that's part of the voodoo because of perception ultimately or something like that I guess. I think it's perception and your eyes and brain have a hard time pinpointing right out of the gate, a 3 dimensional reality when starring at a 2 dimension visual along with other table distractions and hindrances.

Sure, over time when better understanding and programming is achieved, one can fall into shots, which can be mistaken for target shooting, but it's not.

Any way, im standing by my words unless someone can convince me otherwise with facts and ideas on how for the average person, a shaft system alone can achieve all the needed requirements to complete the majority of shots that are not short hanger shots hanging in the pocket etc.

Have a nice day and remember to donate to the Orcollo relief fund after I send him home broke an' hiz fam'lee gonna relly feel'it mang.
 

The-Professor

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
He also said he aims different parts of the shaft. And that that different shafts are aimed differently.


Exactly...he aims with the center of the shaft (the example shown in the attachment).... and both outsides (left and right edges) of the shaft, so he uses one of those three parts of the shaft depending on the cut angle.

I
 

The-Professor

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
......yeah, and that's why he has varying stroke elbow and grip hitches associated with different shots and effects. If he's aiming with shaft edges etc, it's just a reference point and there's still an additional offset requirement needed and that goes back to the "3 things that must happen" to achieve a outcome in pool and the human connection to it.

The offset comes in many forms and must happen because a visual reference is simply not enough, thus Stan and sweeps or a pivot or offset in body alignment etc etc.

I assume there isn't much debate or uncertainty about what I just stated. I assume i am preaching to the choir..... I think.

One stop shopping is pure target shooting and I don't know if this is reasonably possible or even necessary. Offsets and or redirects is completely acceptable and totally sound. I don't know why a sequence of events is necessary or seems to be, but that's part of the voodoo because of perception ultimately or something like that I guess. I think it's perception and your eyes and brain have a hard time pinpointing right out of the gate, a 3 dimensional reality when starring at a 2 dimension visual along with other table distractions and hindrances.

Sure, over time when better understanding and programming is achieved, one can fall into shots, which can be mistaken for target shooting, but it's not.

Any way, im standing by my words unless someone can convince me otherwise with facts and ideas on how for the average person, a shaft system alone can achieve all the needed requirements to complete the majority of shots that are not short hanger shots hanging in the pocket etc.

Have a nice day and remember to donate to the Orcollo relief fund after I send him home broke an' hiz fam'lee gonna relly feel'it mang.


To be clear, its not just a "shaft section" aiming system. The problem with most people in terms of aiming is that they don't have a straight or reproducible stroke. You can line up perfectly, but if your stroke is crooked a shaft aiming method won't help you at all. All a shaft aiming method does is show you where to aim given that you can hit the ball on a straight line.

I will also throw out there that there isn't as much adjustment needed for English as most people let on. It is really a fairly small adjustment except for the most extreme cases of English.
 

JoeyInCali

Maker of Joey Bautista Cues
Silver Member
Exactly...he aims with the center of the shaft (the example shown in the attachment).... and both outsides (left and right edges) of the shaft, so he uses one of those three parts of the shaft depending on the cut angle.

I

Yeah.
Sorry, I think he's laughing while some believe what he said.
 

paultex

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
To be clear, its not just a "shaft section" aiming system. The problem with most people in terms of aiming is that they don't have a straight or reproducible stroke. You can line up perfectly, but if your stroke is crooked a shaft aiming method won't help you at all. All a shaft aiming method does is show you where to aim given that you can hit the ball on a straight line.

I will also throw out there that there isn't as much adjustment needed for English as most people let on. It is really a fairly small adjustment except for the most extreme cases of English.

Very true but straight in accordance to what? But I get your drift, meaning "straight" down the line. Personally, I think even that is too difficult and I believe it's the reason why snooker players stand and align the way they do. Its too difficult to play "pool" in snooker and achieve a high level but of course I see no reason it couldn't be done as well with a 14mm cue. One would just have to know how to make it work.

In the case of van boening though, I've seen enough to where, he manipulates his grip and shooting elbow a lot and has different hitches in that get up, for different shots.

But, they did ask him how he "aims" and I am making a point about "delivery", so I'll just stfu now because I forgot that it's two different things.

Your statement about English though, is purely relative to certain factors and I don't think the shaft system itself covers this but once again, im talk'n out my ass but I believe im closer to the truth on that one.

Is there an offset in bridge placement associated with the shaft system?

Maybe the nature of the system, forces or helps produce a offset like back hand English does?

Like I said, I don't know but, English application is too loaded with variance factors, but I don't doubt what I don't know. In other words maybe its that way for you and not the next guy.

Also, what do you consider English? Or extreme English?

I know for a fact I can say what is extreme for me and I believe it's the true limits of physics itself or close to it. Extreme English is at the limit of miscue, relative to center cb in direct line of a shot path. This gives "extreme" relevance if you understand what I mean but I've never heard it expressed in those terms before.

Is it important? Imo yes.

Why? Well that's the million dollar question I won't argue with because that opens the door on how one should play vs what works etc etc. I like EVERYTHING and try to learn as much as possible and ill debate stuff but generally never dismiss anything.

Any way thanks, your post was informative and I think joeincal is making some important points for sure.
 
Top