Contact Point and Visual Distortion

[Brookeland Bill]

Observation. I’ve never settled on a system to aim other than the mirror image for bank shots. The other day I decided to look at the object ball and mentally draw a line around the circumference of the ball lined up to the pocket. Instead of using the line as my target I aimed the cue ball a “hairsbreadth“just inside the line To pocket the ball. What I’m thinking is what we perceive as the cue ball contact with the object ball is not reality. When trying to make contact between two spheres and bent over the closest of the two (I.e. cue ball) there has to be some distortion when aiming and an ad has to be made to correct that distortion.

 

[bbb]

could you draw a picture to demonstrate the concept?

 

[BilliardsAbout]

A ball’s equator tends to be lower than perception tells you in the full stance and tends to bend into a “smiley face” shape (see below), so the contact point needs adjustment, otherwise one can cut too thickly:

 

[BC21]

A ball’s equator tends to be lower than perception tells you in the full stance and tends to bend into a “smiley face” shape (see below), so the contact point needs adjustment, otherwise one can cut too thickly:

View attachment 744516

This is why I started to gravitate toward fractional aiming, using the width/diameter of the ob to pinpoint an aim line. There is no tricky sphere perception or distortion involved, no trying to estimate a contact point offset or whatever, just the simple width of the ball, which is always the same and always plainly visible.

The mind is pretty quick at developing spatial skills. I wish I had started my pool-playing venture with fractional aiming years ago, rather than the less-concrete method of imaginary ghostballs.
Actually, I believe a combination of ghostball visualization and solid fractional style aiming lines would be ideal for beginners. Giving the mind a more solid and consistent visual reference (from ccb to a point along the width of the ob), while at the same time visualizing where the cb needs to be, would likely be most efficient and effective for developing aiming skills, in my opinion.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

This is why I started to gravitate toward fractional aiming, using the width/diameter of the ob to pinpoint an aim line. There is no tricky sphere perception or distortion involved, no trying to estimate a contact point offset or whatever, just the simple width of the ball, which is always the same and always plainly visible.

The mind is pretty quick at developing spatial skills. I wish I had started my pool-playing venture with fractional aiming years ago, rather than the less-concrete method of imaginary ghostballs.
Actually, I believe a combination of ghostball visualization and solid fractional style aiming lines would be ideal for beginners. Giving the mind a more solid and consistent visual reference (from ccb to a point along the width of the ob), while at the same time visualizing where the cb needs to be, would likely be most efficient and effective for developing aiming skills, in my opinion.

I hear you, but even faster IMHO is "Hit that spot . . . too thick or too thin? . . . Shoot it again . . . "

But I like your methods including reasonable fraction lines. I don't know anyone who can clearly see 1/32 of a ball's width and so on.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

A ball’s equator tends to be lower than perception tells you in the full stance and tends to bend into a “smiley face” shape (see below), so the contact point needs adjustment, otherwise one can cut too thickly:

This is why I started to gravitate toward fractional aiming, using the width/diameter of the ob to pinpoint an aim line. There is no tricky sphere perception or distortion involved, no trying to estimate a contact point offset or whatever, just the simple width of the ball, which is always the same and always plainly visible.

Estimating distances from center ball is the same on a higher or lower equator - one isn't thicker/thinner than the other.

My advice to readers: caveat emptor. Not everybody who claims to be an "instructor" knows what he's talking about.

pj
chgo

 

[BC21]

Estimating distances from center ball is the same on a higher or lower equator - one isn't thicker/thinner than the other.

My advice to readers: caveat emptor. Not everybody who claims to be an "instructor" knows what he's talking about.

pj
chgo

View attachment 744568

But the contact point is lower than it looks when looking down on a ball, simply because we see more of the top of the sphere than the bottom. I think that's what Matt was getting at.

Doesn’t make a difference to me, because I use the diameter of the ball, not the fat equator/circumference. That simplifies the whole bs mystery of aiming two spheres. The diameter always looks the same, regardless of perspective - it's just a plain circle everytime.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...the contact point is lower than it looks when looking down on a ball, simply because we see more of the top of the sphere than the bottom. I think that's what Matt was getting at.

He was trying to say it makes you hit fuller on the OB:

A ball’s equator tends to be lower than perception tells you in the full stance and tends to bend into a “smiley face” shape (see below), so the contact point needs adjustment, otherwise one can cut too thickly:

That's not true - for instance, a half ball contact point (midway from center to edge of OB) looks the same on both "equators". That's because you don't measure the distance along the equator, but by visualizing the midpoint between center and edge, which is the same no matter how the equator is tilted. What you're really visualizing (both ways) is the midpoint of the 3D center's radius.

pj
chgo

 

[bbb]

Estimating distances from center ball is the same on a higher or lower equator - one isn't thicker/thinner than the other.

My advice to readers: caveat emptor. Not everybody who claims to be an "instructor" knows what he's talking about.

pj
chgo

View attachment 744568

patrick are you mixing up apples and oranges?
meaning distances go with fractions
matt is talking about contact points
i think ?
i could be wrong

 

[Patrick Johnson]

patrick are you mixing up apples and oranges?
meaning distances go with fractions
matt is talking about contact points
i think ?
i could be wrong

Fractions and contact point visualization work the same whichever "equator" you're viewing - they both appear at the same places along the equator, tilted or not, because either way you're viewing the equator with your eyes in the same relative position to it (so it looks horizontal/uncurved to you).

pj
chgo

 

[bbb]

Fractions and contact point visualization work the same whichever "equator" you're viewing - the both appear at the same places along the equator, tilted or not, because either way you're viewing the equator with your eyes in the same relative position to it (so it looks horizontal/uncurved to you).

pj
chgo

got it
thanks patrick

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Estimating distances from center ball is the same on a higher or lower equator - one isn't thicker/thinner than the other.

My advice to readers: caveat emptor. Not everybody who claims to be an "instructor" knows what he's talking about.

pj
chgo

View attachment 744568

Rather than consider my credentials as an instructor, perhaps think of me as an extremely well paid coach.

I have no quarrel with you, but I'd love to coach you in how to have a meaningful discussion while being a nice person.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Rather than consider my credentials as an instructor, perhaps think of me as an extremely well paid coach.

So… unqualified and extremely overpriced. Thanks for the warning.

pj
chgo

 

[BilliardsAbout]

So… unqualified and extremely overpriced. Thanks for the warning.

pj
chgo

My dear chap, you are your own warning.

I try to see you as a potential child of God, but you are one of the nastiest people I've encountered--and you're talking to someone who shares Jesus Christ with hardened atheists and etc. often!

Is there a pill or something you can take to become a nice person? You speak to everyone on AZ like you have persistent, scratchy Shingles.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...you are one of the nastiest people I've encountered--and you're talking to someone who shares Jesus Christ with hardened atheists and etc. often!

Insults and bragging about your "Christianity" in the same sentence...

Sounds about right.

pj
chgo

 

[sparkle84]

My dear chap, you are your own warning.

I try to see you as a potential child of God, but you are one of the nastiest people I've encountered--and you're talking to someone who shares Jesus Christ with hardened atheists and etc. often!

Is there a pill or something you can take to become a nice person? You speak to everyone on AZ like you have persistent, scratchy Shingles.

I'd absolutely love to read some of your posts on the Atheists forums. Could you post a link please.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Insults and bragging about your "Christianity" in the same sentence...

Sounds about right.

pj
chgo

Hey, PJ, my first name ain't "Baby," it's Janet--Miss Jackson if you're nasty!

 

[BilliardsAbout]

I'd absolutely love to read some of your posts on the Atheists forums. Could you post a link please.

Thanks for asking, I can save you much time here:

No one is perfect except Jesus. The bad news is imperfect people cannot exist in a utopia, so neither of us can go to Heaven.

The good news is Jesus Christ loves us, died a horrible death by torture on the cross then rose, to perfect us.

Trust Jesus today for eternal life, when He meets us, He will perfect us for Heaven!

 

[sparkle84]

Thanks for asking, I can save you much time here:

No one is perfect except Jesus. The bad news is imperfect people cannot exist in a utopia, so neither of us can go to Heaven.

The good news is Jesus Christ loves us, died a horrible death by torture on the cross then rose, to perfect us.

Trust Jesus today for eternal life, when He meets us, He will perfect us for Heaven!

What does that have to do with my post? Did you space out and mean to reply to someone else or is it just another reading and comprehending instance?

 

[DeadStick]

Fractions and contact point visualization work the same whichever "equator" you're viewing - they both appear at the same places along the equator, tilted or not, because either way you're viewing the equator with your eyes in the same relative position to it (so it looks horizontal/uncurved to you).

pj
chgo

I think this may be what Matt and Brian were referring to. I put a strip of blue tape on the one ball, then a dot at the true equator contact spot, and another dot higher up from the equator.

If you’re estimating a fractional hit by standing behind the shot line, finding the contact point, then keeping your eye on it as you move to the aim line, then if you’ve chosen a contact point above the equator it will indicate too thick of a fractional hit.

Bonus: that last pic makes it clear why we tend to over cut jump shots, and how thick you need to aim this one in particular depending on how high in the air the CB is at contact.