Has anyone tried this aiming method?????

P

PocketPoint

Banned
I would say this MIGHT be possible for someone with EXTREME dedication, or if the person is a complete psycho.

With practice, could you determine the precise angle of the cut shot just by looking at it, and then associate that angle with how full you hit the cueball?

For example, I could eyeball that the cut angle is 10 degrees, so I'll hit the cueball 7/8 full, or something along those lines?

I am betting this is possible with the human eye, although most people wouldn't have the concentration to do it.
 
PocketPoint said:
I would say this MIGHT be possible for someone with EXTREME dedication, or if the person is a complete psycho.

With practice, could you determine the precise angle of the cut shot just by looking at it, and then associate that angle with how full you hit the cueball?

For example, I could eyeball that the cut angle is 10 degrees, so I'll hit the cueball 7/8 full, or something along those lines?

I am betting this is possible with the human eye, although most people wouldn't have the concentration to do it.
Click to expand...

I think this is pretty much what we all do, except without the intermediate step of determining a number for the angle and a number for the overlap.

When the shot looks "like this" from above, the aim needs to look "like this" from down low.
 
I get your point but I think its worth it to say that your efforts would better be spent on something more productive, like position play or something of that sort. Which is why I dont think anyone would bother trying this.
 
Back-of-ball / "eclipse" aiming technique

PocketPoint said:
I would say this MIGHT be possible for someone with EXTREME dedication, or if the person is a complete psycho.

With practice, could you determine the precise angle of the cut shot just by looking at it, and then associate that angle with how full you hit the cueball?

For example, I could eyeball that the cut angle is 10 degrees, so I'll hit the cueball 7/8 full, or something along those lines?

I am betting this is possible with the human eye, although most people wouldn't have the concentration to do it.
Click to expand...

PocketPoint:

This is old. And, respectfully, is getting old (the topic of aiming systems, that is). This method of aiming you describe above is called the "Back of Ball" (or BOB) technique. I sometimes refer to it here as the "eclipsing" technique, because that's what you do with the cue ball over the object ball.

Here's a good snooker video series that describes this technique:

Part 1 of 2:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mL3NOn-A9Bs

Part 2 of 2 (this is the best one):
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kLjSlHr38dc

I dare say this is the most automatic -- and therefore most accurate -- aiming "system" (if you want to call it that) on Earth. Why? Because of that first word -- automatic. Once you commit to memory the foundation angles and their variances, you don't have to "think" about aiming. This is a "catalog"-based aiming system, if you will -- "oh, I see we have here a 1/3-ball hit. Turn to page 2 in the catalog, and there's the solution." And this lookup happens instantaneously and automatically.

If you can keep your conscious mind out of your own way (your conscious mind has the nasty habit of stepping on your subconscious mind's d*ck), the BOB / eclipse aiming technique is the most accurate, especially under pressure.

Hope this is helpful,
-Sean
 
sfleinen said:
PocketPoint:

This is old. And, respectfully, is getting old (the topic of aiming systems, that is). This method of aiming you describe above is called the "Back of Ball" (or BOB) technique. I sometimes refer to it here as the "eclipsing" technique, because that's what you do with the cue ball over the object ball.

Here's a good snooker video series that describes this technique:

Part 1 of 2:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mL3NOn-A9Bs

Part 2 of 2 (this is the best one):
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kLjSlHr38dc

I dare say this is the most automatic -- and therefore most accurate -- aiming "system" (if you want to call it that) on Earth. Why? Because of that first word -- automatic. Once you commit to memory the foundation angles and their variances, you don't have to "think" about aiming. This is a "catalog"-based aiming system, if you will -- "oh, I see we have here a 1/3-ball hit. Turn to page 2 in the catalog, and there's the solution." And this lookup happens instantaneously and automatically.

If you can keep your conscious mind out of your own way (your conscious mind has the nasty habit of stepping on your subconscious mind's d*ck), the BOB / eclipse aiming technique is the most accurate, especially under pressure.

Hope this is helpful,
-Sean
Click to expand...

PocketPoint, the guy writing the above quote not only "gets it", but he is insightful in his writings and puts into words what some of us cannot.

With hours upon hours of practice, if you have the "knack" for shooting pool, you will no longer need to worry with aiming as much as your brain will do it "automatically" for you. When you get there (and you may already be there) focus more on proper stroke technique, position play, etc. Improving those areas and others are what's gonna jump your game up a level or two.

Maniac
 
Last edited:
Gene suggests doing this in his Perfect Aim DVD.

If you notice players lining up their cue on a ball they are not only looking at the contact on the OB but they are checking out the angle. If it is around 30 degrees it is a 1/2 ball hit. To see what 30 degrees look like lay your cue on the line from the middle spot of the end rail and the side pocket. That is 30 degrees and 1/2 ball aim.
 
A friend of mine who is a very good pool player asked me to program his HP calculator to let him calculate arctangents from diamond measurements. If you don't know what arctangents are, don't feel bad because he didn't either. The simple program allowed him to look at the position of the line of the object ball and calculate the angle the ball made with the cushions. For example, the object ball path on a spot shot is at 45 degrees to the cushion (either cushion).

The next step was to calculate the angle of the line from the cue ball to the object ball relative to a cushion. For example, if you place the cue ball for a spot shot so your stick is over the corner pocket, the line of the cue ball (the line of your stick) forms a 15-degree angle with the long rail. Given the 45 degree angle and the 15 degree angle, most people can figure out that the cut angle is 30 degrees.

A few players will be able to tell you how much of the object ball the cue ball has to hit to cut the ball 30 degrees. The last part of the system was for my friend to memorize the cut angle for hit fullness. (Half-ball gives 30 degrees, for example.) He memorized the angles to 64ths of fullness. For example, on the spot shot, he knew that for a 31/64ths full shot, the cut angle is 31.0 degrees, so that if he expects 1 degree of throw, he should aim for 31/64ths full rather than 32/64ths (half ball).

Well, the real last part of the system, as with any system, is to practice it. He is the kind of person who could practice it for a few days at a time.
 
I do this routinely. I have posted in the past about method to estimate the cut angle. Once you have that, there is a specific aim point relative to OB center.

I'm not going to repeat it all here, it is in the archives.

It does take time and effort to learn, but certainly no more difficult than other legit aiming methods.
 
Bob Jewett said:
A friend of mine who is a very good pool player asked me to program his HP calculator to let him calculate arctangents from diamond measurements. If you don't know what arctangents are, don't feel bad because he didn't either. The simple program allowed him to look at the position of the line of the object ball and calculate the angle the ball made with the cushions. For example, the object ball path on a spot shot is at 45 degrees to the cushion (either cushion).

The next step was to calculate the angle of the line from the cue ball to the object ball relative to a cushion. For example, if you place the cue ball for a spot shot so your stick is over the corner pocket, the line of the cue ball (the line of your stick) forms a 15-degree angle with the long rail. Given the 45 degree angle and the 15 degree angle, most people can figure out that the cut angle is 30 degrees.

A few players will be able to tell you how much of the object ball the cue ball has to hit to cut the ball 30 degrees. The last part of the system was for my friend to memorize the cut angle for hit fullness. (Half-ball gives 30 degrees, for example.) He memorized the angles to 64ths of fullness. For example, on the spot shot, he knew that for a 31/64ths full shot, the cut angle is 31.0 degrees, so that if he expects 1 degree of throw, he should aim for 31/64ths full rather than 32/64ths (half ball).

Well, the real last part of the system, as with any system, is to practice it. He is the kind of person who could practice it for a few days at a time.
Click to expand...

Bob I've been messing with doing the same thing and I use my aiming lines from my system as constant references to figure the angle. The object ball is easy cuz I know all the angles to the hole but have to guess a little or shift my cue over when it comes to figuring the angle my cb is approaching the ob. Its kinda crazy but ya never know?
 
Mike is 100% correct.................

mikepage said:
I think this is pretty much what we all do, except without the intermediate step of determining a number for the angle and a number for the overlap.

When the shot looks "like this" from above, the aim needs to look "like this" from down low.
Click to expand...

This is the way it is. This is the way we all naturally aim the shot if we look at it from above before we get down.

The tough part though is you can look at the shot as if you were right eye dominant from above standing back 5 feet from the cue ball and you can shift over 3 or four inches and look at the shot as if you are left eye dominant.

In this position they will both look good.

It's on the way down that we naturally shift to the real pool shooting dominant eye. On the straight in shots we almost naturally get there all the time. But on the angle shots it's a little more difficult.

When you get down and the shot doesn't look quite right it's because the non dominant eye is in the position trying to work as the dominant eye just a little or sometimes a whole lot. If it's a little you might still make the shot or just rattle it. If it's alot you miss it by a whole lot.

This also is why sometimes you get down on the shot and it doesn't look right so you get back up and go back down again and it looks better.

It looks better because now the dominant eye is in the correct position.

It's basically so simple but yet difficult sometimes to see it unless you understand how this work.

When we stand back 20 feet from the shot we can appear to not have a dominant eye because the eyes seem to work as one but as we move closer it's all about the dominant eye being in the correct position.

We all have 2 eyes,2 feet,2 hands. Our eyes for the most part all work the same unless there is some kind of injury or medical problem. Anyone that learns how to get and keep these eyes in the correct position can see the shot as well as anyone in the world. Once you learn how to get and keep the eyes in this correct position you can now practice shooting the shots with the brain getting the correct information. Now you can you confidently start coordinating your body with what your eyes are seeing.

Now when you practice seeing the correct image your game can and will improve to the level of your natural ability depending how hard you work at it.

But without the right image going to the brain you seem to be stuck at one level for years with hardly any or little improvement.

It's just the way it is?

CTE, Pro One and Perfect Aim all have one good thing in common. They help a player get these eyes in the correct position. There is only one spot to have the eyes to see the shot correctly. If your there it looks good. If not you need to learn how to get them there if you want to get the most out of your pool game.

Have a great day geno............
 
Last edited:
Bob Jewett said:
A friend of mine who is a very good pool player asked me to program his HP calculator to let him calculate arctangents from diamond measurements. If you don't know what arctangents are, don't feel bad because he didn't either. The simple program allowed him to look at the position of the line of the object ball and calculate the angle the ball made with the cushions. For example, the object ball path on a spot shot is at 45 degrees to the cushion (either cushion).

The next step was to calculate the angle of the line from the cue ball to the object ball relative to a cushion. For example, if you place the cue ball for a spot shot so your stick is over the corner pocket, the line of the cue ball (the line of your stick) forms a 15-degree angle with the long rail. Given the 45 degree angle and the 15 degree angle, most people can figure out that the cut angle is 30 degrees.

A few players will be able to tell you how much of the object ball the cue ball has to hit to cut the ball 30 degrees. The last part of the system was for my friend to memorize the cut angle for hit fullness. (Half-ball gives 30 degrees, for example.) He memorized the angles to 64ths of fullness. For example, on the spot shot, he knew that for a 31/64ths full shot, the cut angle is 31.0 degrees, so that if he expects 1 degree of throw, he should aim for 31/64ths full rather than 32/64ths (half ball).

Well, the real last part of the system, as with any system, is to practice it. He is the kind of person who could practice it for a few days at a time.
Click to expand...

Now that is dedication! It makes me wonder how accurately a person can parse "64ths" on a round object ball (I realize roundness doesn't really factor in, since it's just a point on a surface)! I remember this being covered in Capelles Play Your Best Pool, as well as how much error there is depending on the distance of the OB to the pocket (and ball speed). It also makes me wonder how well someone could determine, say, a 51 versus 54 degree angle to the pocket. Without that knowing that the appropriate 64th wouldn't matter. That arctangent (whatever that is) lit up something in my head: a 45 degree angle to the pocket is obvious and bisects both rails equally, so a 30 (or 60) angle would have a similar relationship to the rails, 1:2 ratio right? Wonder if I could make that useful w/ the diamonds... probably...

It definitely makes a nice reference! I'm going to try and figure out how to turn my digits into a mobile, accurate protractor (thanks Dr. Dave: relaxed peace sign is 30 degrees, there's one!) :grin:
 
Last edited:
Years ago my instructor taught me a bit of this system but only as far as recognizing the half ball hit. It sure did make that shot a no brainer.
Geno, I'm going to play around with that when I get home. I usually play on autopilot and do sometimes get back up because the shot doesn't look right. I never knew why that was. Thank you for the explaination.
 
TimmyB80 said:
thanks Dr. Dave: relaxed peace sign is 30 degrees, there's one! :grin:
Click to expand...
... For me (and for most people), relaxed, but firm is 30; relaxed is about 27; stretched is about 34. For more info and demonstrations, see:

Two peace signs is 60. Half a peace sign is 15. 45 is obvious (half of 90 or 1 1/2 peace signs). Angles in between can also be judged between the references.

FYI, several methods for approximating cut angles are described here:

Although, I wouldn't personally recommend such an analytical approach to aiming.

Regards,
Dave
 
... a 45 degree angle to the pocket is obvious and bisects both rails equally, so a 30 (or 60) angle would have a similar relationship to the rails, 1:2 ratio right? ...
Click to expand...
No, not for 30/60. The diagonal of the table (ratio of sides 4:8 or 1:2) has an angle of 26.57 degrees with the long rail. Some people who don't much care for accuracy accept this as 30 degrees. 3.5 degrees is a large error in things like this.
 
Bob Jewett said:
No, not for 30/60. The diagonal of the table (ratio of sides 4:8 or 1:2) has an angle of 26.57 degrees with the long rail. Some people who don't much care for accuracy accept this as 30 degrees. 3.5 degrees is a large error in things like this.
Click to expand...

30 degrees would be the 1st diamond up from corner pocket on long rail and 20 degrees would be 1st diamond from corner on the short rail.
 
Joe T said:
30 degrees would be the 1st diamond up from corner pocket on long rail and 20 degrees would be 1st diamond from corner on the short rail.
Click to expand...
Not exactly, though. If you are actually using the round spots that are marked on the rails, everything will depend on how far back from the rails you measure.

For 30 degrees the ratio of side lengths is 8:4.6188 or 4:6.9282. I suppose you could take 4:7 (29.74 degrees) and be OK, but the measurement should be at the nose of the cushion. For 20 degrees the ratio is 8:2.9118. 8:3 would be 20.55 degrees, which would usually be close enough.
 
Let me know what you found...........

JolietJames said:
Years ago my instructor taught me a bit of this system but only as far as recognizing the half ball hit. It sure did make that shot a no brainer.
Geno, I'm going to play around with that when I get home. I usually play on autopilot and do sometimes get back up because the shot doesn't look right. I never knew why that was. Thank you for the explaination.
Click to expand...

I think you might be pleasantly surprised. It is what it is. Give me a call and I'll help you with the fine tuning. 715-563-8712

Looking forward to your call. Have a great day geno..........
 
******************
It makes me wonder how accurately a person can parse "64ths" on a round object ball (I realize roundness doesn't really factor in, since it's just a point on a surface)! I remember this being covered in Capelles Play Your Best Pool, as well as how much error there is depending on the distance of the OB to the pocket (and ball speed). It also makes me wonder how well someone could determine, say, a 51 versus 54 degree angle to the pocket. Without that knowing that the appropriate 64th wouldn't matter.
****************************

You can make life a lot easier if you use millimeters. For cuts up to 30 degrees, the aim point is 1 mm per degree of cut away from OB center. Above 30 degrees, it is about 0.8 mm per degree of cut from the OB edge.

Angle estimation the way I do it is pretty reliable up to about 45-50 degrees, and I admit that above that it gets a bit shakey. Nailing the estimate of a 54 degree cut is difficult, but for a 34 degree cut, it is easy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top