My (I hope) 1 rail kicking method

Joe T

Joe T

Well-known member
Has anyone ever heard of or seen this method for 1 rail kicks? I’ve been using it for many years, believe I invented it but also find that hard to believe. I teach it in my class and would love to have it named the JT method but can’t do that till we know if someone else originated it. Calling Bob Jewett.

I refer to it as the imaginary cue ball method.
The real cue ball is “A” in all diagrams.

http://CueTable.com/P/?@3ACYv1QPeV4RPQk1lPeV3laoi3laoi3laoi4lMOU4mPQk4mPhm1mPhh@

Step #1 is an educated guess (sounds bad I know but don’t sweat it). In diagram #1 I have the cb “A” and have to kick 1 rail at the 1 ball so my first step was to place an imaginary cb (cb B) on the same line that my real cb is currently sitting on. I place it in an area that I think will be close to causing a hit on the 1 ball (if I’m wrong it’s no big deal at all and most players will always be close). And I usually place it on a diamond or the same distance my real cb is away from a diamond so it makes finding the midpoint all that much easier.

Step #2 find the midpoint between the real cb and the imaginary cb.

Step #3 is my favorite part and is the reason I use this method. I get to slide my stick from the midpoint over to my imaginary spot or cb to see if the 1 ball is in that path. If my educated guess was way off I can simply change it now and remeasure, if it was close as it usually is I can adjust to speed & spin.

To me having the ability to check the path is the strong part of this method. I know other mathematical systems are correct but feel they leave too much to faith in the way of I hope I measured that right and lack the ability to check the cb’s actual path.

Often I’ll determine the speed and spin before measuring because I’ll have a certain plan in mind of how I’m going try and get safe or try to make the ball so if it’s at a slow speed I’ll have the cb going long in mind prior to measuring and if I plan on shortening the shot I’ll have that in mind prior to measuring.

Here’s how I do a few others with the imaginary cb in front or behind the intended object ball.
http://CueTable.com/P/?@4AWGb1QAGU4RAQJ1lAGU2laqE4lVIy4mAQJ4mAWm1mAOu@

http://CueTable.com/P/?@2ANIN4QXNX3RWgY4lXNX1lAOk3labg3mWgY4mcFW@

http://CueTable.com/P/?@3ARTD4QVWx3RJoA4lVWx1lFtj1lFtj3lRKf3mJoA4mbVA3mbFA@

Remember when you find the midpoint that that is the point the cb must contact so do not aim the center of your cue at it or you’ll always hit before your mark, you have to use the side of the cb into the cushion as if you were cutting a ball 90 degrees across the table. #9 cp for you aiming by the numbers folk.

Don’t get caught using the chalk on the rail or worse the table using it as your imaginary cue ball! I believe that falls under some kind of misuse of equipment rule.

Ps there are times where this method is not practical and then I’ll probably use double the distance method.
 
Joe T said:
Has anyone ever heard of or seen this method for 1 rail kicks? I’ve been using it for many years, believe I invented it but also find that hard to believe. I teach it in my class and would love to have it named the JT method but can’t do that till we know if someone else originated it. Calling Bob Jewett.

I refer to it as the imaginary cue ball method.
The real cue ball is “A” in all diagrams.

http://CueTable.com/P/?@3ACYv1QPeV4RPQk1lPeV3laoi3laoi3laoi4lMOU4mPQk4mPhm1mPhh@

Step #1 is an educated guess (sounds bad I know but don’t sweat it). In diagram #1 I have the cb “A” and have to kick 1 rail at the 1 ball so my first step was to place an imaginary cb (cb B) on the same line that my real cb is currently sitting on. I place it in an area that I think will be close to causing a hit on the 1 ball (if I’m wrong it’s no big deal at all and most players will always be close). And I usually place it on a diamond or the same distance my real cb is away from a diamond so it makes finding the midpoint all that much easier.

Step #2 find the midpoint between the real cb and the imaginary cb.

Step #3 is my favorite part and is the reason I use this method. I get to slide my stick from the midpoint over to my imaginary spot or cb to see if the 1 ball is in that path. If my educated guess was way off I can simply change it now and remeasure, if it was close as it usually is I can adjust to speed & spin.

To me having the ability to check the path is the strong part of this method. I know other mathematical systems are correct but feel they leave too much to faith in the way of I hope I measured that right and lack the ability to check the cb’s actual path.

Often I’ll determine the speed and spin before measuring because I’ll have a certain plan in mind of how I’m going try and get safe or try to make the ball so if it’s at a slow speed I’ll have the cb going long in mind prior to measuring and if I plan on shortening the shot I’ll have that in mind prior to measuring.

Here’s how I do a few others with the imaginary cb in front or behind the intended object ball.
http://CueTable.com/P/?@4AWGb1QAGU4RAQJ1lAGU2laqE4lVIy4mAQJ4mAWm1mAOu@

http://CueTable.com/P/?@2ANIN4QXNX3RWgY4lXNX1lAOk3labg3mWgY4mcFW@

http://CueTable.com/P/?@3ARTD4QVWx3RJoA4lVWx1lFtj1lFtj3lRKf3mJoA4mbVA3mbFA@

Remember when you find the midpoint that that is the point the cb must contact so do not aim the center of your cue at it or you’ll always hit before your mark, you have to use the side of the cb into the cushion as if you were cutting a ball 90 degrees across the table. #9 cp for you aiming by the numbers folk.

Don’t get caught using the chalk on the rail or worse the table using it as your imaginary cue ball! I believe that falls under some kind of misuse of equipment rule.

Ps there are times where this method is not practical and then I’ll probably use double the distance method.
Click to expand...

That's pretty cool. I'm a bit of a system hound and I don't recall at least seeing this here on AZ.

I sometimes do a version of this http://CueTable.com/P/?@3ARTD4QVWx3RJoA4lVWx1lFtj1lFtj3lRKf3mJoA4mbVA3mbFA@ by using the tip of my cue where I think cueball B should be and sizing things up from there, but I really like your first example. Hadn't quite looked at those that way before. :D
 
Not trying to overthink what you are doing, it doesn't sound much different from angle in/angle out theory. Two balls on the same line using mid speed center ball english aim at the midway point between them. You will almost always get a hit at least using this. Of course the rails and felts play into that as well. This works for balls on the same line, and you have to make adjustments if they are not etc...
 
I do something very similar, Joe (and teach it), but feel free to claim it and name it. I visualize it this way (I think of it as "moving the rail up"):

CueTable Help



CueTable Help



Great minds... :)

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
Neil said:
Here's the actual way I do it Joe. Very similar to yours, but I think, a little easier. A estimate the angle with my cue stick to the rail. Then, on that line, I put an imaginary cueball parallel to the actual cue ball. Then, you just cut the distance in half between the two cueballs. Adjust lines as needed to find your angle where the imagimnary cueball is on line to half way from contact rail point to cb and ob is on line from rail contact point to imaginary cb.

CueTable Help

Click to expand...

Hey Neil, I understand you can't invent math but you sure can have a method named after you if you come up with one. Your method here is the same no?
 
Spimp13 said:
Not trying to overthink what you are doing, it doesn't sound much different from angle in/angle out theory. Two balls on the same line using mid speed center ball english aim at the midway point between them. You will almost always get a hit at least using this. Of course the rails and felts play into that as well. This works for balls on the same line, and you have to make adjustments if they are not etc...
Click to expand...

Angle in, angle out takes a little more estimation to visualize, I think?
 
"T" said:
That's pretty cool. I'm a bit of a system hound and I don't recall at least seeing this here on AZ.

I sometimes do a version of this http://CueTable.com/P/?@3ARTD4QVWx3RJoA4lVWx1lFtj1lFtj3lRKf3mJoA4mbVA3mbFA@ by using the tip of my cue where I think cueball B should be and sizing things up from there, but I really like your first example. Hadn't quite looked at those that way before. :D
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I usually do, use my tip.

I don't like many systems and forget many that I do learn but do feel they are needed to improve ones perception.
 
That is the way that I usually do it. Didn't really think anything about being the inventor of it or the first to do it that way, just thought that was the way to do it. See many other players do the same thing.

Always thought of it as a way to get a decent estimate. After that I tweak it a little and try to adjust for speed and kind of english that may need to be applied if there are balls in the way.

Mika shows a good system in his DVD. I have used it after seeing it and have also been getting good results with it.
 
Joe T said:
Angle in, angle out takes a little more estimation to visualize, I think?
Click to expand...

Yes and no...if the ball is "in the same line" as the cue ball you can count the diamonds in between them and use your cue to do so if need be...of course then it will be considered the diamond system which kind of goes hand in hand with hitting a center ball medium speed shot with what you are showing. It would definitely be more estimation when judging if they are not lined up on an easy path you are correct there.
 
Spimp13 said:
Yes and no...if the ball is "in the same line" as the cue ball you can count the diamonds in between them and use your cue to do so if need be...of course then it will be considered the diamond system which kind of goes hand in hand with hitting a center ball medium speed shot with what you are showing. It would definitely be more estimation when judging if they are not lined up on an easy path you are correct there.
Click to expand...

Agreed......
 
Joe T said:
Has anyone ever heard of or seen this method for 1 rail kicks? I’ve been using it for many years, believe I invented it but also find that hard to believe. I teach it in my class and would love to have it named the JT method but can’t do that till we know if someone else originated it. Calling Bob Jewett.
Click to expand...


On a side note, I don't think the question is really who invented what first, but who has published and named the idea first.

You may have just done that already, who knows? :D
 
:) I hate to say it but count me in among those who also had it... pretty much the exact same thing, same visualization. I like it.

Another little trick I use to augment it: Start out measuring a 45 degree track that will get you close. Then take difference between your actual landing point and the desired landing point, calculate 2/3rds of that distance. That's how much 'adjustment' you must make to your kick angle to get a hit. Obviously it's gonna vary from table to table.

I'll steal your example. The CB starts at point A, let's say that's 3 inches 'left' of that diamond it's close to (pretend the diamonds are on the rail, if you know what I mean). Shooting at 45 degrees, the contact point on the long rail is about 3 inches to the left of that nearest diamond. It would contact the 2nd long rail about 3 inches left of the diamond nearest the red arrow.

So for the sake of easy math, let's say it's gonna land 3 inches to the left of the 1 ball. Therefore adjust your aim by 2/3rds (2 inches) and you should get a hit. Not sure what the math is behind it, I just know it's a nice rule of thumb to work from.

CueTable Help

 
  • Like
Reactions: sjm
I use all the things you use, Joe. My approach is very similar to yours. It's all about applying intuitive geometry, and I describe it as being an application of the "rule of equal distance," meaning that on a one rail kick without english, if the cue ball (real or imagined) and object ball are equidistant from the rail of origin, you can split the vertical diamonds to find the point of aim.

Example 1: In the kick below, I start by visually lining up the kick and mentally placing an imaginary cueball at the point of equal distance, meaning the point at which the imaginary cueball and the object ball are equidistant from the long rail. My imaginary cueball is at A, which lies at diamond 1, and the object ball lies at diamond 3, so I know I can make a good hit by aiming at diamond 2 to make a good hit.

CueTable Help



Example 2: In the kick below, I need to project the imaginary cue ball backward to the point of equal distance. My imaginary cueball is at A, which lies at diamond 1, and the object ball lies at diamond 3, so I know I can make a good hit by aiming at diamond 2 to make a good hit.

CueTable Help



Another well-known application of these concepts for one-rail kicks is what's called "image table aiming" in which the cue ball or object ball is projected to an imaginary adjacent pool table.
 
sjm said:
I use all the things you use, Joe. My approach is very similar to yours. It's all about applying intuitive geometry, and I describe it as being an application of the "rule of equal distance," meaning that on a one rail kick without english, if the cue ball (real or imagined) and object ball are equidistant from the rail of origin, you can split the vertical diamonds to find the point of aim.

Example 1: In the kick below, I start by visually lining up the kick and mentally placing an imaginary cueball at the point of equal distance, meaning the point at which the imaginary cueball and the object ball are equidistant from the long rail. My imaginary cueball is at A, which lies at diamond 1, and the object ball lies at diamond 3, so I know I can make a good hit by aiming at diamond 2 to make a good hit.

CueTable Help



Example 2: In the kick below, I need to project the imaginary cue ball backward to the point of equal distance. My imaginary cueball is at A, which lies at diamond 1, and the object ball lies at diamond 3, so I know I can make a good hit by aiming at diamond 2 to make a good hit.

CueTable Help



Another well-known application of these concepts for one-rail kicks is what's called "image table aiming" in which the cue ball or object ball is projected to an imaginary adjacent pool table.
Click to expand...


This is exactly what I do as well! Okay, I'm a constantly stuggling "B" player, but it is very, very cool to see great minds think, well, think somewhat similar. :D
 
Joe T said:
Has anyone ever heard of or seen this method for 1 rail kicks? I’ve been using it for many years, believe I invented it but also find that hard to believe. I teach it in my class and would love to have it named the JT method but can’t do that till we know if someone else originated it. Calling Bob Jewett.

I refer to it as the imaginary cue ball method.
The real cue ball is “A” in all diagrams.

http://CueTable.com/P/?@3ACYv1QPeV4RPQk1lPeV3laoi3laoi3laoi4lMOU4mPQk4mPhm1mPhh@

Step #1 is an educated guess (sounds bad I know but don’t sweat it). In diagram #1 I have the cb “A” and have to kick 1 rail at the 1 ball so my first step was to place an imaginary cb (cb B) on the same line that my real cb is currently sitting on. I place it in an area that I think will be close to causing a hit on the 1 ball (if I’m wrong it’s no big deal at all and most players will always be close). And I usually place it on a diamond or the same distance my real cb is away from a diamond so it makes finding the midpoint all that much easier.

Step #2 find the midpoint between the real cb and the imaginary cb.

Step #3 is my favorite part and is the reason I use this method. I get to slide my stick from the midpoint over to my imaginary spot or cb to see if the 1 ball is in that path. If my educated guess was way off I can simply change it now and remeasure, if it was close as it usually is I can adjust to speed & spin.

To me having the ability to check the path is the strong part of this method. I know other mathematical systems are correct but feel they leave too much to faith in the way of I hope I measured that right and lack the ability to check the cb’s actual path.

Often I’ll determine the speed and spin before measuring because I’ll have a certain plan in mind of how I’m going try and get safe or try to make the ball so if it’s at a slow speed I’ll have the cb going long in mind prior to measuring and if I plan on shortening the shot I’ll have that in mind prior to measuring.

Here’s how I do a few others with the imaginary cb in front or behind the intended object ball.
http://CueTable.com/P/?@4AWGb1QAGU4RAQJ1lAGU2laqE4lVIy4mAQJ4mAWm1mAOu@

http://CueTable.com/P/?@2ANIN4QXNX3RWgY4lXNX1lAOk3labg3mWgY4mcFW@

http://CueTable.com/P/?@3ARTD4QVWx3RJoA4lVWx1lFtj1lFtj3lRKf3mJoA4mbVA3mbFA@

Remember when you find the midpoint that that is the point the cb must contact so do not aim the center of your cue at it or you’ll always hit before your mark, you have to use the side of the cb into the cushion as if you were cutting a ball 90 degrees across the table. #9 cp for you aiming by the numbers folk.

Don’t get caught using the chalk on the rail or worse the table using it as your imaginary cue ball! I believe that falls under some kind of misuse of equipment rule.

Ps there are times where this method is not practical and then I’ll probably use double the distance method.
Click to expand...

Joe,
Another top player uses your system as well as myself. When I looked at the diagrams I wondered if you had someone walking around in my pool room watching me practice kicking. :eek::wink:

DeadPoked: There you have it. Are you satisfied?

It works for me.
JoeyA
 
CreeDo said:
Another little trick I use to augment it: Start out measuring a 45 degree track that will get you close. Then take difference between your actual landing point and the desired landing point, calculate 2/3rds of that distance. That's how much 'adjustment' you must make to your kick angle to get a hit. Obviously it's gonna vary from table to table.
Click to expand...

Actually, it varies from shot to shot. For "equal angle" kicks:

- The adjustment on the top rail is 1/2 the adjustment needed at the OB if the OB is the same distance from the top rail as the CB.

- The adjustment on the top rail is less than half the adjustment needed at the OB if the OB is farther from the top rail than the CB.

- The adjustment on the top rail is more than half the adjustment needed at the OB if the OB is closer to the top rail than the CB.

Because 1/2 is definite and easy to estimate, I find the adjustment needed at the same distance from the top rail as the CB (and extend the line to the OB wherever it is). Of course, since this adjustment is for "equal angle" kicks, it's just a reference that must be fine tuned for things like forward roll on the CB lengthening the kick angle, rail friction shortening the kick angle, etc.

I'd diagram examples for you, but the new Wei table, although it's a nice improvement, seems to still need a little debugging before it can handle lots of lines and text.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top