Right Neil, Good post
Coming Soon... the end of all aiming system calculating.
- Thread starter 3andstop
- Start date
Right Neil, Good post
If a robot shot all three of them the same way two of them would miss. This is because a robot is incapable of making unconscious adjustments - it can only follow the system instructions exactly, over and over.
You're making adjustments that you're not aware of; that's the only possible explanation, whether you believe it or not. And that's probably why the system is good for you - it allows you to make the adjustments without being aware of them, which for some reason makes it easier for you.
Other players (like me) like to work more consciously with their unconscious aiming ability - knowing when it's being used and trying to consciously improve its accuracy. If one way is objectively better or worse than the other, I don't know which is which. Because of the intensely personal nature of working with our subconscious abilities, I think this is a prime candidate for "whatever works best for you".
pj
chgo
The edge of your stick is a straight line that points to a precise point near the OB contact point. Your eyes can only see that differently if you're not sighting along the edge of your stick. If you're not sighting along the edge of your stick then you have to define exactly where to place your eyes in relation to your stick in order to have the "correct" view for each shot - and that position will be different for different cut angles and different shot lengths (not to mention different amounts of sidespin).
Saying "it's how you look at it" doesn't solve anything - it further complicates everything.
And, by the way, those are photographs, not 2D drawings.
pj
chgo
Such as?.........
Are you saying the pivot point is at your bridge?
I think you are getting closer to solving the MYSTERY of why it is not
adding up on paper for some.
Last edited:
Good system. I like it. It looks like a good way to teach a new player to make balls. As they develop, subconciously, the mind will see how they miss some shops and addd the neceessary fudge factor to keep going.
Sure, on paper it does not work. There are many things in life which do not work, but our subconcious is trained to overcome this and make things work.
If a system is close enough to get you 75% or so, that is a starting point for subconcious adjustments. That is the trouble with ghost ball and fractional aiming. . .people taught those methods arre still missing too many balls to build confidense and continue on.
Sure, on paper it does not work. There are many things in life which do not work, but our subconcious is trained to overcome this and make things work.
If a system is close enough to get you 75% or so, that is a starting point for subconcious adjustments. That is the trouble with ghost ball and fractional aiming. . .people taught those methods arre still missing too many balls to build confidense and continue on.
My pivot is at the hip
How anyone can support any system that requires lining up and/or moving any part of the cue or your body in a direction other than parallel to the line of the shot is beyond me. If I tried to make any sort of adjustment after I bent over to address the ball I would miss almost every time. Ridiculous. Sorry. After reading the explanations above I am certain they support my argument. How can you possibly clear your mind and relax your stroke if your are moving and adjusting right up until you hit the cue ball? Note that I am not saying a beginner would not be helped at first by it. But at some point that person would need to break away from it and rely on judgment or he/she would never reach the highest levels. Unfortunately, old habits are hard to break and once it's ingrained, it will stick and forever be a distraction.
Smaller balls and pockets are not the only reasons pro snooker players come over and pick up 9-ball and start kicking everyone's ass after they've retired from snooker because they can no longer compete.
Smaller balls and pockets are not the only reasons pro snooker players come over and pick up 9-ball and start kicking everyone's ass after they've retired from snooker because they can no longer compete.
Last edited:
No, I'm saying that for a given shot your bridge has to end up in the same place no matter how you pivot (or you'll miss the shot), so the mechanical instructions necessary to tell you how to do that have to be very complicated (because there are so many different places it has to be for different shots).
I think the instructions can be the simplest (though still too complicated) if they tell you where to place your bridge. To tell you exactly how to "air pivot" or "hip pivot" or some other loosey-goosey thing, they'd have to be even more complicated.
pj
chgo
I am going to borrow your pictures because they are perfect....It is amazing how seemingly all the systems end up here...
If you look...you will see that if you use the "center" of your shaft instead of the side of your shaft....the 15 - 30 - 45 degree angles is the base of the 3-line method.....
15 - Center CB to 1/4 OB
30 - Center CB to Edge OB
45 - 1/4 CB to Edge OB
Using the center of your shaft...you don't have to accomodate for thicker and thinner shafts....
This also shows the problem that I run into with ALL methods....When you get beyond the 30 degree cut....the alignment line (where your cue points) is "off the object ball".....
When you get to this range (35 - 85 degrees) this is when all methods seem to break down for me. I think it is a combination of the lack of ball reference and the requirements for accuracy of both method and stroke going up.
Seems like you always see methods demonstrated making shots that are either 15 or 30 degree shots...I would love to see a demonstration of ANY method that consistently makes longer non hanger shots that are between the 45 - 80 degree range.
I equate these longer higher degree angles in pool to hitting a 3 iron in golf....Anyone can hit 8 irons good all day...But practice with a 2 or 3-iron for very long and it has a tendancy to ruin your confidence in your game... :wink:
If you look...you will see that if you use the "center" of your shaft instead of the side of your shaft....the 15 - 30 - 45 degree angles is the base of the 3-line method.....
15 - Center CB to 1/4 OB
30 - Center CB to Edge OB
45 - 1/4 CB to Edge OB
Using the center of your shaft...you don't have to accomodate for thicker and thinner shafts....
This also shows the problem that I run into with ALL methods....When you get beyond the 30 degree cut....the alignment line (where your cue points) is "off the object ball".....
When you get to this range (35 - 85 degrees) this is when all methods seem to break down for me. I think it is a combination of the lack of ball reference and the requirements for accuracy of both method and stroke going up.
Seems like you always see methods demonstrated making shots that are either 15 or 30 degree shots...I would love to see a demonstration of ANY method that consistently makes longer non hanger shots that are between the 45 - 80 degree range.
I equate these longer higher degree angles in pool to hitting a 3 iron in golf....Anyone can hit 8 irons good all day...But practice with a 2 or 3-iron for very long and it has a tendancy to ruin your confidence in your game... :wink:
Here are the eight pictures. I hope this presentation is helpful for at least some of the readers.
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
That's your position but it's not necessarily reality. I could show any method to ten people and many of them will take to it right away and look fluid in a matter of hours. Others might require days and others might never look fluid. The system exists outside the person, how a person adapts to it is an individual thing.
Would you say that you are a better player than Jimmy Reid? David Matlock?
Both of these players played at the "highest levels" and both of them are system fanatics.
There is a substitute for the judgment that comes from practice. It's called an aiming method. Do you not think of Ghost Ball as an aiming system?
So if I take two amateurs and let them both loose on a table for a week with zero instruction of any kind and after one week I measure their ball pocketing percentages - then I give one of them the ghost ball method and measure again after another week which amateur is likely have a higher percentage of pocketing?
Which amateur is more likely to be able to make shots that they had not practiced prior to shooting them?
Practice wrong, play wrong. I can shoot a million shots but if I am constantly being forced to adjust because I can't "judge" the aim line properly then I have practiced one million shots the wrong way.
What if I am on shot 500,000 and my miss/make percentage is still about 50% for a particular shot and then someone shows me an aiming system and suddenly my make percentage goes up 70%? What would you say then?
For 1 SVB is not a retired snooker player, I would think before I spoke.
The pinoys are not snooker players. So there goes half your post.
And for the other half I played serious for 20 yrs and leveled out
YEARS ago. I was a pretty good player but my inconsistancy held me
back. After changing over to an advanced form of cte, I dont have
that problem anymore. I now have the ability to beat great players and
do on a regular basis. This is a FACT. So the rest of your post shows your
speaking of something you know nothing about. I dont want this to sound negative, But your findings are ridiculous
Your going to be very enlightened when it all comes out. It really is not all that complicated.
If I put the butt of my cue against my leg or hip and shift away radially with the hip being the axis of the rotation away from CTE...is that what a hip pivot would be?
thanks to the OP. gonna give this a try tomorrow and give it chance. If it helps great, if it doesnt no harm done. It seems simple enough. When did they find out the world wasnt flat?
I'm sure that's true - if it really was all that complicated it would be impossible to get anybody to use it. I think it really is not all that exact.
pj
chgo