So true. When you hear one guy telling another "My shaft is better than your shaft" you know you must be in a pool room!
(Or at least you hope you are!!!
)Steve
poll: what aiming system do u use.
- Thread starter sr 9ball
- Start date
So true. When you hear one guy telling another "My shaft is better than your shaft" you know you must be in a pool room!
(Or at least you hope you are!!!
)Steve
That's true, but we're not talking about aiming at a single spot. We're talking about the error formed by the angle difference between aiming at two spots: the ghost ball center (GB) and the contact point (CP).
The angle formed between the CB and two aim points on an OB changes with the distance between the balls. Since the CB, GB and CP are 3 points of a triangle and the GB and CP are fixed, when you move the CB you change the angle formed by all 3.
Ah, this is the cause of your misunderstanding. It's true that any point on a sphere is a ball width from its center, by definition, but that's not the relevant distance in this case.
What matters is the distance from the GB center to the CP from your perspective since that determines the line of aim from the CB. That is only equal to a ball width for a 90 degree cut and is progressively less as you approach a straight in shot (where it's 0.)
That's a gross underestimate of the error, and there's no "might" about it. The geometry is very simple and it's easy to determine exactly the distance you're off by aiming at the CP directly. That's how Patrick made his chart, which is accurate.
As Patrick's chart shows, the CP vs GB error for a 14.5 degree cut is 7.3 degrees, which is roughly 1/2-diamond (~3 balls) across the table width and a full diamond (~6 balls) across the length of a 9'. That's why it's obvious to us that you're unknowingly compensating when you make the shot the way you describe.
Btw, I have tried it, and I'm not surprised at all by where the ball goes instead of into the pocket
Robert
Figured I might as well make an on-topic post in this thread for once
I use my own aiming system. I completely ignore contact points and ghost balls. I make conscious corrections for spin, speed, friction, inelasticity and elevation. I use exactly the same aiming system for pool and three-cushion billiards for all shots and am a strong player of both.
Robert
I'd be interested to hear about your aiming system, Robert.
pj
chgo
That's true, but we're not talking about aiming at a single spot. We're talking about the error formed by the angle difference between aiming at two spots: the ghost ball center (GB) and the contact point (CP).
The angle formed between the CB and two aim points on an OB changes with the distance between the balls. Since the CB, GB and CP are 3 points of a triangle and the GB and CP are fixed, when you move the CB you change the angle formed by all 3.
Ah, this is the cause of your misunderstanding. It's true that any point on a sphere is a ball width from its center, by definition, but that's not the relevant distance in this case.
What matters is the distance from the GB center to the CP from your perspective since that determines the line of aim from the CB. That is only equal to a ball width for a 90 degree cut and is progressively less as you approach a straight in shot (where it's 0.)
That's a gross underestimate of the error, and there's no "might" about it. The geometry is very simple and it's easy to determine exactly the distance you're off by aiming at the CP directly. That's how Patrick made his chart, which is accurate.
As Patrick's chart shows, the CP vs GB error for a 14.5 degree cut is 7.3 degrees, which is roughly 1/2-diamond (~3 balls) across the table width and a full diamond (~6 balls) across the length of a 9'. That's why it's obvious to us that you're unknowingly compensating when you make the shot the way you describe.
Btw, I have tried it, and I'm not surprised at all by where the ball goes instead of into the pocket
Robert
Thank you Robert for your clear explanations. 15 degrees might be too much angle but 10 degrees or less it seems to work. I have shown this to "C" players with no previous experience with this technique and they make the ball (mostly on bar boxes). The are amazed how they can make long shots (no such think as a long shot on a bar box!). It probably helps "C" players since it forces them to stay on the line of aim with their cue.
At 15 degrees its very possible I am subconsciously making an adjust for the increased angle. I will be consciously looking at this the next time I practice.
This is a mini version of "approximation" aiming systems. A conscious starting estimate ("less than 15 degrees", "about a half ball hit", "more/less than half ball", etc.) might give the subconscious a leg up on finishing the job. If it's working for you...
By the way, I'd like to give honorable mention to Bob - he not only didn't mind (much) that I told him he must be subconsciously adjusting his aim, he actually repped me for showing the math. Rep back to you, Bob, for not assuming my blundering offer of information was an attack on your virility.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
He repped me also. The words "thank you" were involved. I don't think he really understands how these aiming threads are supposed to work.
Robert
Is using the lights out of style?
I'd love to share it with you, Patrick. As you'll hopefully discover, it's more than just an aiming system as it's usually thought of (although it's certainly that, too.)
I'm actually in the process of preparing some of it for publication and would appreciate your feedback in particular in the near future. I have great respect for your understanding of the physics and psychology of aiming systems (and pool in general), and I mostly agree with your take on these things in the endless debates over the years (however grumpily expressed at times
) That's what will make your evaluation of this new approach so much more interesting to me, regardless of your final verdict.Robert
I've PMed you my email address. Look forward to seeing it...
pj
chgo