Aiming Metrics

[BC21]

.............

It’s a way more complex task than we typically realize. The best we can do is feed our subconscious as much relevant data as possible, including, if possible, OB equators, and get out of the way (the hardest part for many).

pj
chgo

I do believe we tend to make it complex because it's so hard to "get out of the way" and let the brain do its work. That's the learning curve. We feed all the info, all the metrics or visual data to our brains, and eventually it developes an accurate subconscious-level aiming program, then all we are doing is feeding simple data into it. That's why when people ask how someone "feels" our just knows where to align the stroke or "aim" the CB, the answer isn't right there on the tip of the tongue or bobbing up and down on the shallow waves of our mind where it can easily be reached. The answer lies deep in the stillness of the mind where all our other subconscious programs reside.

Sorry if I'm side-tracking the thread. I just think we make things more complicated than they really are by trying to control actions and thoughts from the splashy surface of the mind, when in reality absolute control emanates from a calmer, deeper place.

 

[cookie man]

The top and bottom portions of the OB and CB are irrelevant when it comes to aiming.

Even for straight in shots? I'd have to disagree with this.

 

[Vorpal Cue]

Trust the subconscious to give you perfect aim? I call B.S. It may make a person move the platen on a Ouija board to spell out Beetlejuice but it plays no part in the aiming process. The conscious mind is fully in charge.

With Poolology for example, the system breaks down when shooting at the side pockets when the balls are in certain zones. Do you keep missing the shots until your subconscious adjustments kick in or do you consciously derive a 'fudge factor' to use on those shots that puts the ball in? Once you find the solution you consciously use it when the shot presents itself. I don't think anyone is going to write a book called 'Zen and the Art of Sphere Collisions' anytime soon.

 

[BC21]

Even for straight in shots? I'd have to disagree with this.

I'm not talking about the visual process of aiming. I surely don't imagine two circles. I just mean the reality of two balls colliding, and the visuals used for most aiming processes, is not a complicated 3D process. All the reference points are located on the equators of the balls, unless you're using shadows or lighting.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Trust the subconscious to give you perfect aim? I call B.S. It may make a person move the platen on a Ouija board to spell out Beetlejuice but it plays no part in the aiming process. The conscious mind is fully in charge.

The conscious mind is the only part you directly perceive or control, so it's understandable that it seems like that's all that's happening - but it's really the tip of the iceberg. The vast bulk of mental processing, particularly for something so demanding and precise, happens below the surface in the subconscious.

There are no obvious visual signals that tell you when a shot is lined up correctly - you just "know it when you see it". That's your subconscious at work.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I'm not talking about the visual process of aiming. I surely don't imagine two circles. I just mean the reality of two balls colliding, and the visuals used for most aiming processes, is not a complicated 3D process. All the reference points are located on the equators of the balls, unless you're using shadows or lighting.

But again the equators of the balls (and any reference points on them) must be visualized on 3D balls at various distances in 3D space using our binocular vision from above. It's a VERY complicated visualization process; we're just not aware of it as it happens - like we're not aware of the "basic" process of the visual cortex making a 3D picture out of the dual pictures our eyes feed it.

It can seem pretty simple, but that's because we're only consciously aware of a tiny fragment of it.

pj
chgo

 

[Vorpal Cue]

The conscious mind is the only part you directly perceive or control, so it's understandable that it seems like that's all that's happening - but it's really the tip of the iceberg. The vast bulk of mental processing, particularly for something so demanding and precise, happens below the surface in the subconscious.

There are no obvious visual signals that tell you when a shot is lined up correctly - you just "know it when you see it". That's your subconscious at work.

pj
chgo

And that opinion is what I'm calling complete B.S.

Aiming is a conscious activity and my mind is completely in charge of all factors involved in it's execution. To state otherwise is just silly IMHO.

 

[BC21]

Trust the subconscious to give you perfect aim? I call B.S. It may make a person move the platen on a Ouija board to spell out Beetlejuice but it plays no part in the aiming process. The conscious mind is fully in charge.

With Poolology for example, the system breaks down when shooting at the side pockets when the balls are in certain zones. Do you keep missing the shots until your subconscious adjustments kick in or do you consciously derive a 'fudge factor' to use on those shots that puts the ball in? Once you find the solution you consciously use it when the shot presents itself. I don't think anyone is going to write a book called 'Zen and the Art of Sphere Collisions' anytime soon.

It's not so much trusting the subconscious. It's trusting the feedback you get after supplying your brain with all the necessary data for any given shot. And that data is continually coming in through our senses, filtered consciously and then fed into the program for a subconscious response.

Poolology is no different than any other aiming system when it comes to learning and developing an aiming process. There are shots that require a player to recognize little subtleties or system errors where tweaking is needed, but this helps build the how-to programming that is going on in the deeper mind. Conscious input and filtering is always a part of the aiming process. With a good relationship between our conscious thoughts and our subconscious knowledge we find ourselves playing solid pool without over-complicating the process.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

And that opinion is what I'm calling complete B.S.

Aiming is a conscious activity and my mind is completely in charge of all factors involved in it's execution. To state otherwise is just silly IMHO.

How do you decide when your shot is aimed correctly? What are the conscious signs?

pj
chgo

 

[Vorpal Cue]

Interpreting the feedback is a conscious act. Once you correct the problem, which may be the stroke and not the aim, you add it to your conscious memory not the subconscious one. Once the shot comes up again you consciously retrieve it from memory. There's no warm and fuzzy feeling, it's a conscious decision.

For contact point shooting I pick out the points I need and stroke the ball to make them contact. I determine the points I need with a conscious decision not until my liver tingles.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

For contact point shooting I pick out the points I need and stroke the ball to make them contact.

Setting aside how you pick out the points...

How do you align the stick/CB/OB correctly to make them contact? What are the conscious signs of that?

pj
chgo

P.S. I'm primarily a contact point aimer too - but I think that's only part of what's going on mentally.

 

[Vorpal Cue]

Setting aside how you pick out the points...

How do you align the stick/CB/OB correctly to make them contact? What are the conscious signs of that?

pj
chgo

P.S. I'm primarily a contact point aimer too - but I think that's only part of what's going on mentally.

How do you know when the scope on your rifle is lined up? Can you consciously visualize a crosshair on the aiming line? I think that's all there is to it.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

How do you know when the scope on your rifle is lined up?

This is the perfect comparison, because the differences are so stark.

Aiming a rifle you put one eye on the same one-dimensional line as the rifle sight(s) and the target and align them so one is directly behind ("covers") the other. But you can't do that in pool, because you're using both eyes and neither of them is on the same line as the stick/CB/OB - they're always above it. (Ignoring the more demanding task of choosing the things to align, seeing them accurately, and figuring out how two spheres should appear when they are aligned.)

Can you consciously visualize a crosshair on the aiming line? I think that's all there is to it.

I think that's a major oversimplification, but I'm not trying to change the way you do it - you see it (conceptualize it) the way that works best for you and that's the objective. We all tell ourselves the "aiming story" that makes the most constructive sense to us - me too. I like probing behind the stories because I believe the more real info the better for my outcome.

pj
chgo

 

[Vorpal Cue]

This is the perfect comparison, because the differences are so stark.

Aiming a rifle you put one eye on the same one-dimensional line as the rifle sight(s) and the target and align them so one is directly behind ("covers") the other. But you can't do that in pool, because you're using both eyes and neither of them is on the same line as the stick/CB/OB - they're always above it. (Ignoring the more demanding task of choosing the things to align, seeing them accurately, and figuring out how two spheres should appear when they are aligned.)


I think that's a major oversimplification, but I'm not trying to change the way you do it - you see it (conceptualize it) the way that works best for you and that's the objective. We all tell ourselves the "aiming story" that makes the most constructive sense to us - me too. I like probing behind the stories because I believe the more real info the better for my outcome.

pj
chgo

I'm not telling myself an 'aiming story', I'm telling you an aiming fact. It's not an oversimplification it's the whole process. You can program a robot to shoot pool. It's a game that's ruled by geometry and the entire aiming process can be determined mathematically.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I'm not telling myself an 'aiming story', I'm telling you an aiming fact. It's not an oversimplification it's the whole process.

OK, glad it's working for you.

You can program a robot to shoot pool. It's a game that's ruled by geometry and the entire aiming process can be determined mathematically.

Sure, I've seen the videos of robot players. But once again your example illustrates my point. The only part of our brains that can imitate (in real time at the pool table) the computational power of a computerized robot is... wait for it... our subconscious.

pj
chgo

 

[Vorpal Cue]

OK, glad it's working for you.


Sure, I've seen the videos of robot players. But once again your example illustrates my point. The only part of our brains that can imitate (in real time at the pool table) the computational power of a computerized robot is... wait for it... our subconscious.

pj
chgo

Again, I call B.S. You pick the contact points empirically and align them consciously.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Again, I call B.S.

Call away. That's why we're here.

You pick the contact points empirically and align them consciously.

Both contact points are estimations - pretty good estimations after some practice, but still estimations.

I think aligning them is probably the most "conscious" part of the process, with the most real time visual info being used - but I also think we need the subconscious to give us the green light when it's right.

pj
chgo

 

[Vorpal Cue]

Call away. That's why we're here.


Both contact points are estimations - pretty good estimations after some practice, but still estimations.

I think aligning them is probably the most "conscious" part of the process, with the most real time visual info being used - but I also think we need the subconscious to give us the green light when it's right.

pj
chgo

They're conscious estimations and a conscious alignment. After that the aiming process is done. No eureka moment is needed.

The feely part of the shot is most likely your concern over the stroke portion of the shot execution.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

They're conscious estimations and a conscious alignment. After that the aiming process is done. No eureka moment is needed.

How do you know when your conscious estimations and alignment are on?

The feely part of the shot is most likely your concern over the stroke portion of the shot execution.

Sounds like "feel" means emotional to you - to me it just means directed by the subconscious.

In fact, I try to be as deliberate as possible about my stroke and every other aspect of my play - but I think of that mostly as "training" for my subconscious and body.

pj
chgo

 

[Dan White]

I'm not telling myself an 'aiming story', I'm telling you an aiming fact. It's not an oversimplification it's the whole process. You can program a robot to shoot pool. It's a game that's ruled by geometry and the entire aiming process can be determined mathematically.

I believe it is an over simplification. There is no way on earth to know for 100% certainty that the cue is on the aiming line from the tip of the cue to the butt. You are using 2 eyes from above the cue and you can't even see more than half of the cue while in shooting position. Your brain will play tricks on you.

I know this from personal experience because, as a left-handed player, I had the inside corner of my dominant left eye over the cue. I shot pretty deadly most times, but I eventually learned that I did so with a crooked cue. I would straighten it out only during the forward stroke. The set up and back stroke were crooked to the shot line. This worked fine up to a point. I found when I hit the ball hard I was no longer able to control this process and my game suffered. I stopped playing and worked on my stroke mechanics and found all this out over several years.

Net result: I now shoot with my non-dominant right eye over the cue (inside corner). For me, only this visual position allows me to have the cue straight on the shot line and also LOOK LIKE it is on that line. I don't believe in "vision centers" as used often in this forum. I think you have to figure out how to get everything perfectly aligned and then just get used to what that requires.

But then again I could be wrong.

Welcome back, PJ!