AIMING BY HALVES - A Fractional Technique

[JC]

How does this help you with a shot you have never practiced before that comes up in a game?

There is no such shot for those who have played thousands of hours of pool.

This logical approach to finding the correct solution to a problem applies almost universally in the world. When finding the problem with a complex electrical circuit it's often referred to as a "split search".

 

[lfigueroa]

I remember a comment someone made about the way Lassiter sometimes aimed. First he would intentionally aim too full, then he would aim too thin, then he would go to "just right" and shoot. Maybe he was using something very similar to halves. The next step beyond binary search is linear interpolation.

Eddie Robin describes this approach as the "bracket method" in WOP. He writes:

"You are about to learn one of the most valuable tools known for increasing natural abilities...the bracket method.

To utilize an ability you must be able to focus it. For example, the more you focus your sense of sight on something, the better you will see it. On the other hand, if you don't focus your sense of sight on an object, you won't be able to see it at all. This is as obvious as saying that an unused ability can't accomplish anything.

Now you might ask, how does this explanation help one shoot pool? You'll be surprised at how much your abilities could be increased by simply learning how to focus those you already have.

Let's take a few examples. You may sometimes have a strong feel for how thick or thin to hit a ball in order to cut it into a pocket, and you may find that other times you have almost no feel at all for an almost identical shot. When you haven't sufficient feel, use the following method.

Aim to hit the ball slightly too thick, and then slightly too thin. Until you are experienced with this method, you may have to repeat those two steps once or twice. The result is that your feel will increase as a result of narrowing the area in which you are focusing your attention."

And then he goes on to describe what I've used for years to estimate 3-rail kicks:

"To get back to the subject of developing one's natural ability in determining angles into and out of cushions, you can use the bracket method to accomplish that also. Whenever your 'feel' is lacking somewhat, just aim to miss on one side and then aim to miss on the other. You can do this with measurement of direction, as in the examples given so far, or you can do it with measurement of speed, spin, elevation of cue, or anything else, for that matter."

Lou Figueroa

 

[JB Cases]

There is no such shot for those who have played thousands of hours of pool.

This logical approach to finding the correct solution to a problem applies almost universally in the world. When finding the problem with a complex electrical circuit it's often referred to as a "split search".

Not true.

Most amateur players will have dozens of such shots that they have not practiced.

 

[Neil]

Since you like to be such a stickler on proper terminology, you should stop using the term "feel". Braille shooting is a foul, you don't "feel" the shot, you sense it.

You and others have stated how this method you describe is a viable method of aiming. It has been stated that if you miss, next time just hit it fuller. If that doesn't work, hit it thinner next time. Really? You need written instructions to figure that one out? This method is often used on the practice table, and all to frequently by the lowest level of players on the game table.

Problem is, it doesn't get any better. On the practice table, you can keep shooting a shot until it is burned into your memory on where to hit it. In a game situation, you only get one try. Which puts your method just one step above the poke and hope method.

Practice , it is one way to learn. But with any "new" shot, you are right back at square one. In the gauntlet of aiming systems, with some being at the college level, this one is right there with the pre-schoolers. It never gets any better than guess until you get it right, then shoot it enough until you memorize that angle. In a game situation, confronted with an unfamiliar shot, you are essentially at the mercy of poke and hope.

 

[sfleinen]

Eddie Robin describes this approach as the "bracket method" in WOP. He writes:

"You are about to learn one of the most valuable tools known for increasing natural abilities...the bracket method.

To utilize an ability you must be able to focus it. For example, the more you focus your sense of sight on something, the better you will see it. On the other hand, if you don't focus your sense of sight on an object, you won't be able to see it at all. This is as obvious as saying that an unused ability can't accomplish anything.

Now you might ask, how does this explanation help one shoot pool? You'll be surprised at how much your abilities could be increased by simply learning how to focus those you already have.

Let's take a few examples. You may sometimes have a strong feel for how thick or thin to hit a ball in order to cut it into a pocket, and you may find that other times you have almost no feel at all for an almost identical shot. When you haven't sufficient feel, use the following method.

Aim to hit the ball slightly too thick, and then slightly too thin. Until you are experienced with this method, you may have to repeat those two steps once or twice. The result is that your feel will increase as a result of narrowing the area in which you are focusing your attention."

And then he goes on to describe what I've used for years to estimate 3-rail kicks:

"To get back to the subject of developing one's natural ability in determining angles into and out of cushions, you can use the bracket method to accomplish that also. Whenever your 'feel' is lacking somewhat, just aim to miss on one side and then aim to miss on the other. You can do this with measurement of direction, as in the examples given so far, or you can do it with measurement of speed, spin, elevation of cue, or anything else, for that matter."

Lou Figueroa

And people wonder why Eddie's books are fetching the [what some call outlandish] prices they do? I have both (W.O.P. and S.M.S.), and I have to say, they are probably the most chock-full of information about the inner secrets of pool in general -- not just one pocket. Those books have paid for themselves over and over.

What Eddie describes (he's actually a mouthpiece for folks like Lassiter, since the info came directly from them in many cases) was a way to help "open" the conduit to the subconscious feel for the shot that you *do* have -- you merely have a blockage in getting at the information. You've seen that shot before; if you've played enough pool, it's not a "new" shot at all. You just need a way of narrowing the "brackets" that separate the possible from the impossible. ("Impossible" meaning that excessively thick cut on one side [of the shot's "makable window"] and excessively thin cut on the other side [of the shot's "makable window"] that WON'T make the shot.) Continue to move those brackets inwards until <click!> your subconscious goes, "Aha! I indeed *have* seen that shot before -- just aim 'here'." Suddenly, you're now comfortable with a shot that, at first glance, you had no concrete clue how to aim at.

Good stuff!
-Sean

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Since you like to be such a stickler on proper terminology, you should stop using the term "feel". Braille shooting is a foul, you don't "feel" the shot, you sense it.

I didn't make the term up, Neil. How many pool players do you know who say they aim "by sense"?

This method is often used on the practice table, and all to frequently by the lowest level of players on the game table.

I agree it can be particularly useful for less experience players - thanks for pointing that out. It's simple to understand and use, and instructional in the fundamentals of aiming.

On the practice table, you can keep shooting a shot until it is burned into your memory on where to hit it. In a game situation, you only get one try.

Of course that's why there is a practice table. Having a structured and inherently instructive way to learn improves the results of practice.

In the gauntlet of aiming systems, with some being at the college level,

I don't think any aiming systems are really more "sophisticated" than any others; they just offer different approaches for different tastes/abilities. I also don't think any are really more "accurate" than any others; that's also the result of the "fit" between system and user.

It never gets any better than guess until you get it right, then shoot it enough until you memorize that angle. In a game situation, confronted with an unfamiliar shot, you are essentially at the mercy of poke and hope.

I'm sure you don't mean you think practice is useless, Neil. And I'm sure you agree that no system replaces practice. So I guess your message is unclear.

pj
chgo

 

[Neil]

Pat, I'm not going to get into a tit-for-tat and dissect every word you say to discredit what you say like you like to do in the aiming threads. I said my piece. Which is this- if you think guessing is a viable or proper way to aim, and think it is some of the greatest knowledge to come down the pike and is worth paying big dollars for, well, have at it, and good luck.

 

[JC]

In a game situation, confronted with an unfamiliar shot, you are essentially at the mercy of poke and hope.

You guys keep talking about an "unfamiliar shot". What is this mystery shot that suddenly has never come up before during decades of play? Cut shots are extremely finite in variation and every variation comes up often on the table. As time goes on and skill advances I think we can get out of practice on some low percentage cuts as safety play becomes the better part of valor. But do they ever become "unfamiliar"? Do we miss them because we don't recall how to aim them? Or is it more likely because we fail to deliver the cue ball at the correct aiming spot, which we clearly recognize?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

How Accurate is Halves?

No system does all the aiming for you, but fractional systems get you closer. How close does Halves get you?

To narrow the Aim Range enough to make a majority of shots within 30 inches of the pocket by simply aiming at the center of the Aim Range (without any further adjustment) takes three "halving" steps - thicker or thinner than half ball plus two more. One more "halving" step is enough to make all shots within 30 inches and a majority of shots within 60 inches.

But a majority of shots isn't enough. How are the rest made?

By making one more thicker/thinner judgment like the judgment that allowed you to "feel" whether the shot was thicker or thinner than half ball, 1/4 ball, etc. It isn't necessary to "halve" the Aim Range again at this level, just adjust as much as you "feel" is necessary.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I said my piece.

Thanks for chiming in, Neil. Always good to have constructive comments.

Which is this-

Oh, sorry - thought you already said your piece. Please say it as often as you think is helpful.

...if you think guessing is a viable or proper way to aim,

I think "guessing" is at the heart of all aiming, and different players (and systems) have different ways of coping with it. This is one of them.

...and think it is some of the greatest knowledge to come down the pike and is worth paying big dollars for...

I think you're thinking of the claims made for another system.

pj
chgo

 

[tattoosbyjay]

If it's unusable for you I recommend you don't use it.

Thanks for recognizing its cuteness.

pj
chgo

i think what you are explaining is kind of how i aim it helps me see the aim point on the object ball more clear and in my opinion i think its a good way to aim , cause in the end all that matters is hitting the ball at the correct contact point

 

[JoeyA]

The thing I see about the halves way of aiming is that you have an infinite number of guesses and even when you think the shot is on, you don't know if it is on any more than the man in the moon. Unless you have hit a million balls and then you might have some "experience" that will give you hints if your subconcious recognizes one of those million shots.

But hey, if it works for you, have at it. I've probably done the same thing on banking multiple rails; you know, guessing the if I hit the object ball the path will be here, if I hit it with a little outside it MIGHT go there and so forth and so on. Guessing is OK if you guess well. But like I said, each to his own.

 

[JB Cases]

You guys keep talking about an "unfamiliar shot". What is this mystery shot that suddenly has never come up before during decades of play? Cut shots are extremely finite in variation and every variation comes up often on the table. As time goes on and skill advances I think we can get out of practice on some low percentage cuts as safety play becomes the better part of valor. But do they ever become "unfamiliar"? Do we miss them because we don't recall how to aim them? Or is it more likely because we fail to deliver the cue ball at the correct aiming spot, which we clearly recognize?

Trust me - there are plenty of them. Cut shots that just look wrong because in the past you wouldn't even consider trying them.

But I have shown diagrams of such shots dozens of times.

The point is, again, that no matter WHAT the shot is when you have a reliable aiming system that does not rely on guessing, fidgeting, trial and error, or enough feel to matter, then with such a system you can have an excellent chance at making the shot.

So if you and I start our pool career at the same time then while you are practicing single shots over and over I will be making shots I haven't practiced and doing it consistently. Eventually you will catch up to my shotmaking ability but by then I will be way ahead of you in position play and strategy. Eventually you will catch me on that too and then it will come down to who has more heart.

Which might very well be you since you chose the "hard" way to get there.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

JB Cases: "the fidget method"
SpiderWebbCom: "utterly unusable"
Neil: "this one is right there with the pre-schoolers"
JoeyA: "hey, if it works for you"

The CTE Rabid Response Team - ever vigilant.

LOL.

pj <- Halve Not jersey sales up
chgo

 

[champ2107]

Eddie Robin describes this approach as the "bracket method" in WOP. He writes:

"You are about to learn one of the most valuable tools known for increasing natural abilities...the bracket method.

To utilize an ability you must be able to focus it. For example, the more you focus your sense of sight on something, the better you will see it. On the other hand, if you don't focus your sense of sight on an object, you won't be able to see it at all. This is as obvious as saying that an unused ability can't accomplish anything.

Now you might ask, how does this explanation help one shoot pool? You'll be surprised at how much your abilities could be increased by simply learning how to focus those you already have.

Let's take a few examples. You may sometimes have a strong feel for how thick or thin to hit a ball in order to cut it into a pocket, and you may find that other times you have almost no feel at all for an almost identical shot. When you haven't sufficient feel, use the following method.

Aim to hit the ball slightly too thick, and then slightly too thin. Until you are experienced with this method, you may have to repeat those two steps once or twice. The result is that your feel will increase as a result of narrowing the area in which you are focusing your attention."


Lou Figueroa

sorry PJ im not here for anything other then to point out some things that sound familiar to me. lou and sean :thumbup: have to love this site and its members, just unreal to me lol

 

[softshot]

Zeno's Paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise.

Nice one Pat..

 

[JoeW]

This is probably one of the better ways to train the eye to see aim lines and angles. When it is all said and done this the most important part of any aiming system.

 

[JoeyA]

The CTE Rabid Response Team - ever )vigilant.

LOL.

pj <- Halve Not jersey sales up
chgo

Will you at least have Dr. Dave put a link on his web site for the shirts so we will be able to be reminded about where to order the shirts on a regular basis?

BTW, what's the price and actual wording? I prefer collared shirts and UnderArmour is my favorite.

JoeyA (grrrrrrr)

 

[mista335]

This is gonna be a good thread.

I'm always willing to learn from a scientific approach. :smile:

This is a belated April Fool's Day joke.

 

[sfleinen]

Will you at least have Dr. Dave put a link on his web site for the shirts so we will be able to be reminded about where to order the shirts on a regular basis?

BTW, what's the price and actual wording? I prefer collared shirts and UnderArmour is my favorite.

JoeyA (grrrrrrr)

Jerseys are "resources," aren't they? If so, Dr. Dave has a "resource" page for them, link guaranteed.

-Sean <-- prefers Hanes, so that the collar lies flat -- no bacon.