With the CB on the head spot.. the 15 racked balls run 30 degrees down each side.
That would be a 1/2 ball hit on the head ball, and the most important angle to know.
.
Best way to train for accuracy
- Thread starter precisepotting
- Start date
With the CB on the head spot.. the 15 racked balls run 30 degrees down each side.
That would be a 1/2 ball hit on the head ball, and the most important angle to know.
.
This link shows how to set up 1/4, 1/2 and 3/4 ball hits on a table. You have to scroll down a little to see the table illustrations.
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#fractional
Yes, you are 100% correct.....Mosconi did not advocate or discuss fractional aiming in his little red book. He
included the standard "quarters" illustration as a reference for what the cb-ob relationships look like on cut shots. He specifically discusses contact point aiming, and the only thing pertaining to fractions anywhere in the book is the quarters illustration. But, as you stated, I also believe he used fractional relationships in his aiming.
CCB to a specific aim point is the way to go when using fractional aiming. It's straight-forward simplicity.
I prefer Dr. Dave's "Vision Center" exercise:
Making the ball is, of course, important, but it's just as important to see that on a straight in the cue ball doesn't drift left or right after object ball contact and that it has no spin. Using a measle ball helps here.
Now if you can do this 9/10, all of these are in pretty good shape:
1. You are sighting the shot well.
2. Your stroke is accurate and repeatable.
3. You are not aiming off center (left or right) and compensating with spin.
Making the ball is, of course, important, but it's just as important to see that on a straight in the cue ball doesn't drift left or right after object ball contact and that it has no spin. Using a measle ball helps here.
Now if you can do this 9/10, all of these are in pretty good shape:
1. You are sighting the shot well.
2. Your stroke is accurate and repeatable.
3. You are not aiming off center (left or right) and compensating with spin.
I think "those silly fractions" are easier to see and line up with the edge of the CB. It's a very clear defined border and overlap from the edge of the CB to a fraction on the OB like a phase of the moon in it's various stages.
Aiming the fat thick center of the CB is guesswork because it's not clearly defined on the fraction of the OB.
You also don't want to aim the center of the CB to a contact point either because it will result in a miss. The center of the CB does NOT strike the contact point. The contact point (or fraction) is struck by an equal and opposite contact point on the CB.
I agree.... the center of the CB does NOT strike the contact point. The contact point is ALWAYS halfway
between the OB center and where the CB center is aimed... unless it's an exact centerball hit on the OB.
That's why CCB to any OB fraction works. Aim CCB at the OB edge and the contact point is 1/2 way between... the OB goes 30 degrees.
Aim center CB halfway between OB center and OB edge and the contact point is 1/2 way between. The OB goes 15 degrees... ALWAYS.
I don't agree with your statement aiming CB center to a OB fraction will miss. You just need to know the fraction aim point for your angle.
Is the "fat thick center" of the CB used for straight in shots? Do you use a clearly defined CB edge for straight in shots.. or the CB center?
.
I use both. Right CB edge to right OB edge; CB center to OB center; left CB edge to left OB edge. I'm looking for a 100% FULL ECLIPSE.
Last edited:
Exactly....contact point always halfway between the required fractional aim point and ob center, as viewed from ccb.
A 1/2 ball hit is the center of the CB lined up to the edge of the OB with produces a 30 degree cut.
Where is the center of the CB lined up ACCURATELY with a visual reference beyond the edge of the OB for the OTHER 60 degrees?
I’d like to see the OP attempt on video 30 of his shots in a row and have “greater than 90% success rate”. 
Low500...Interesting that you respond very positively to Randyg's suggestions, because he IS the "big shot instructor" of them all. I know because I have been teaching with him for more than 15 years now, and we have been teaching these concepts for 30 years. We have also trained several dozen PBIA instructors to teach the same things we teach...so the information is available to anyone who wishes to search out these instructors.
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
No arguments from me.... I've tried many ways to aim in 60 years of playing... yours being no exception.
My thoughts are that some way works for everyone. My eyes aren't good now but my way works for me.
All aiming systems that come along will have some merit to someone. All should be tried and test driven.
.
Here....https://youtu.be/1RxeCICwS6A
It takes practice to develop precision and accuracy. It's no less accurate than using a precise and consistent bridge and offset pivot, either manually or with a visual sweep, both of which also require practice to develop accuracy for thin cuts. I believe those are what Stan calls "one liners".
What you demonstrated in the video is exactly what I said. You're aiming the center of the CB off into space with no actual real visual on the OB for the center of the CB. It's complete guesswork while bringing in a Ghost Ball image. Might as well just use Ghost ball itself without the fractions.
You could have used fractions all the way across the OB with a fixed true visual by using the EDGE of the CB instead of the CENTER and it would have covered every angle from 0 to 90.
For those who get uppity and want to report posts, I'm not bashing. Just saying another approach to get all of the fractions without guessing off into space.
Last edited:
Center CB aimed at....
OB edge ............. 30 degrees
.280 from edge.... 40 degrees
.560 from edge.... 50 degrees
.840 from edge.... 60 degrees
1.120 from edge.. 90 degrees
.
Last edited:
I understand. But it's not difficult to aim through the center of the CB to a place that puts the inside edge of your shaft 3/10 of an inch away from that fixed edge of the OB. That creates a quarter ball hit, and it's much easier than trying to visualize a ghostball center at 1.125" away from the center of the OB along the precise line needed to pocket the ball. An eight hit is aiming through ccb to put the edge of the shaft at about 6/10 of an inch from the ob edge. Those are very accurate aim points.
And even Stan Shuffet teaches the one liner shots by using another ob placed behind the ball you're trying to pocket so you can have a ccb reference to assist with visualizing the shot perception. I don't have a problem using one line for my reference, one line from ccb to a known aim point on or near the ob. If you need two, great. Whatever works for you.
Yes, but I think easier to use your shaft as an aiming tool to measure the distances. Instead of trying to visualize 0.840 inches from ob edge, simply reference the inside edge of your tip or shaft...it should be 6/10 of an inch away from ob edge for a 1/8 fractional hit. For a 3/8 hit the edge of the shaft should be flush with the OB, etc...
There's a difference between Stan and you. He USES CTE in his every day play. You don't use Poolology. All that you're talking about above isn't for yourself. Might sound great on paper, in theory, or with the math but you choose to use something else that can't be described.
Not once in the video do I say to aim at the ghostball. I simply used a ghostball to shown where the CB needs to be to produce the fractional hit. If you watch more than 35 seconds of the video you'll see that I move the ghostball out of the way in order to show exactly where to aim in REFERENCE to the OB edge, NOT the ghostball center. By aiming at a known point in reference to the edge of the OB, the aim line happens to pass through the ghostball. But instead of aiming at some estimated center point of an imaginary ghostball, I am aiming beyond that to a specific distance away from the OB edge.
Your comment about Stan using CTE and me not using Poolology is wrong, and pointless. I do use Poolology when I need to use it, like on certain shots where maybe I don't feel confident in what I'm seeing, or I'll use on every shot to get myself back in stroke if I feel like I'm not seeing the shots as automatically as normal. Nonetheless, none of this makes a difference. What I show in the video, or on paper, or with math, can easily be proven on the table. It's an aiming tool that players can use when they need or want to use it.