The Ultimate Aiming System REVISITED

[3andstop]

I'm starting my own thread so I can't be accused of stealing one even if the topic is aiming.

Maybe it's because I'm old school, maybe it's because I failed trigonometry, maybe it's because I hate to think of someone learning to play pool by twisting their body, stick, or arm, or shifting anything else while in a pool stance stroking a pool shot.

This is not a rhetorical question. Why even deal with these elaborate systems, trying to figure out how to estimate them, understand them, deploy them and last but not least, believe there can be any measure of consistent accuracy with them if you are required to wave your arm around after you are in your stance?

Pivoting? What the hell, if I move my tip a (you know what) hair after I'm in my stance on any shot 3 or more feet away, I'm missing that shot. I honestly don't understand how any instructor could condone these swinging actions.

Why deal with anything complicated if there exists something simple that does the same thing, (probably better and more consistently)?

More importantly, why make something complicated that doesn't have to be complicated?

Ok, so if you didn't see this video already, and if you would like to experiment with an alternative method of aiming that is as simple and straight forward as could be, please go to the link below.

If you don't want to read the entire thread, just go to post number #17 for instructions on how to see the video that is linked in that post.

Be your own judge, but I thought it was time to re-post this in case some of the new posters missed it.

I have absolutely nothing to gain by showing this post other than giving folks a virtual shake of the shoulders and saying "snap out of it with this jumping through hoops stuff ... wtf are you going crazy for? This is so freaking simple and deadly accurate."


http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=210645

 

[barryc]

Aim

I have an idea. If you don't like it don't use it!

barryc

 

[Vanquiz]

Thanks for sharing, Rep for post #17

Edit : Just finished watching the video, holy crap, I dont think aiming could be more simpler than that, cant wait to try and test it tomorrow. Hope my eyes can see straight, lol.

 

[3andstop]

I have an idea. If you don't like it don't use it!

barryc

I don't use it. I have an idea, go troll someone else's thread, I started this one to inform anyone who isn't familiar with this and is racking their brains trying to figure out how to reinvent the wheel.

 

[Mikjary]

3,

What about your own personal experience with this system? Do you use any adjustments or have any problems with certain shots? This system was not fully discussed on the other thread except for its limitations. I think it would be interesting to hear about your own views and examples.

Best,
Mike

 

[3andstop]

3,

What about your own personal experience with this system? Do you use any adjustments or have any problems with certain shots? This system was not fully discussed on the other thread except for its limitations. I think it would be interesting to hear about your own views and examples.

Best,
Mike

Mike, in all honesty, the only flaw I find with it is not with it, but with my delivery and trust in it at times. This aiming system was taught to me in the late 70s as a compensatory way to merge aiming point vs contact point. I've used it ever since and some years later came across this video.

I'm 59 now, only play a few times a week at home, but I still run my 40s and 50s in straight pool. My high run is 78. So that gives you an idea of my playing speed. When I miss it's because my delivery failed not this aiming system.

I even hate to call it a system because it is ( in my mind) the only definitive way to stroke a shot. No guessing or estimating.

Alignment and delivery is everything in pool. You have to envision the shot, project the line all the way from the joint of your cue, through the CB and let that lines edge touch the point of aim on the OB.

Like a laser was shining the line. As an example if you are shooting a shot that requires you to cut it to the left, project that line in your mind along the left edge of your cue as I said, so that it touches the point of aim on the OB.

The important thing is, when you deliver the stroke, your entire cue stick stays to the right side of that line and only the very left edge of the cue runs along that line as you deliver the cue through the CB and to the point of aim on the OB.

The harder we shoot a shot, the more prone we are to delivering poorly, so of course there are additional variables to overcome besides using an aiming system.

What I like about this is you have a specific target to aim at. For those who say you are aiming into space on steep cut shots, yes the center of your cue is aiming into space, but it's edge is running along the line that touches the point of aim on the OB.

Don't apply english after you align yourself. You set up with the english you intend to use. Doing it this way, it doesn't matter what english you use the line of aim is the same.

Perhaps some people can see this better than others and so be it, but the fact remains, this differs in two respects to all other systems I've read about. One, you can use any english you want and it doesn't matter. And two, it is a direct line of aim, not an estimate of center of ball, 3/4s of a ball, 1/2 a ball and so on.

It's amazingly simple and accurate if you allow yourself to align your stance to it, and trust it. I only wish I could explain it better. Give it a try, it's very straight forward.

I would like to add, when you align your shot, pause with your cue tip at the CB, envision that line and depending on which side you are cutting the shot to, run the entire girth of your cue outside that line, allowing only the edge of your cue to run right along it as you stroke. Pausing at the CB is important IMO.

 

[Mikjary]

I have put some time into this system and have known of an offshoot called ferrule aiming for many years. I wanted to get your take on the setup and aiming points. I've asked others what they consider the contact point is and it varies. I've also wondered about how it compensates for throw as ghostball users have to deal with?

For me personally, I am interested in any adjustments for thinner cuts when the balls are close together. I find some inconsistencies and it is possibly where I'm picking up the contact point.

What is your take on straight ins or almost straight in cuts?

Best,
Mike

 

[3andstop]

I have put some time into this system and have known of an offshoot called ferrule aiming for many years. I wanted to get your take on the setup and aiming points. I've asked others what they consider the contact point is and it varies. I've also wondered about how it compensates for throw as ghostball users have to deal with?

For me personally, I am interested in any adjustments for thinner cuts when the balls are close together. I find some inconsistencies and it is possibly where I'm picking up the contact point.

What is your take on straight ins or almost straight in cuts?

Best,
Mike

What a feeble attempt I've just made at trying to demonstrate the line you stroke along using this method. I found a graphic and played with it. It came out ridiculously terrible. It's not supposed to be aimed perfectly, rather show how the cue runs along the line's edge. I'll put it at the end of this.

On straight ins, as the video mentions at the end, you can use either side of the cue. A few of my buddies discussed this part of the video and came to the conclusion that the reasoning was, you are still using a definite aiming line rather than relying on "the center of the cue stick" which is arbitrary.

On slight cuts, still use the proper edge.

As far as compensating for throw, I'm assuming you mean when using side spin english on the CB. The entire shot line is sort of parallels when aiming with your english and it aligns and shoot identical to center ball.

On thin cuts with balls close together the cue tip is pointing out to nowhere, but that line exists from the point of aim on the OB still exactly along the side of the cue.

I have an idea, that may prove helpful in alignment. Rather than envisioning the line from the stick to the OB, try looking at it backwards from the OB back threw the CB and along the edge of the cue stick.

This and the ferrule aiming in my mind is the same concept. Envisioning the shot can differ perhaps within our minds when thinking of it as either ferrule or side of cue.

When I align using side of cue, I envision this very long laser straight line that can emanate all the way from the butt of the cue if you like, I envision it from about the joint. I see it as an extension of the cue and as I place the cue in my bridge I see that line ever so slightly touching the aim point on the OB.

Calling it a ferrule aiming technique, I fear is doing the system a possible injustice in cutting that imaginary line short and only seeing it come from the ferrule to the OB. No matter, it is a comfort zone for me.

PM me, if you're near by, come over, we can break open a can of Geritol by the old GC and go over it.

 

[AtLarge]

3andstop -- since you are yet again touting the Mullen Method as a great method for a wide range of shots, I'm compelled to repeat the analysis that I presented back in November.

Here's what I heard Mr. Mullen say in the video to define the method:

1. Find the intended contact point on the object ball (OB).
2.a. For a cut shot to the left with no english, point the cue stick through the center of the cue ball (CB) with the left edge of the ferrule (or stick) aimed at the contact point.
2.b. For a cut shot to the right with no english, point the cue stick through the center of the CB with the right edge of the ferrule (or stick) aimed at the contact point.
3. Stroke straight back and through on this aiming line.​

What follows are eight pictures. I used a half-black/half-red ball to represent the OB. It has a clear line separating the two colors. I aligned this separation line vertically and pointing at a corner pocket. I placed this OB frozen to a CB that is on the head spot. So the necessary contact point (ignore collision-induced throw) is on the equator of the OB on that vertical line where red meets black. The eight pictures below are the following (all cut shots are to the left):

Picture #1. The CB on the spot and the OB frozen to it, with the line of centers pointed at a corner pocket.

Picture #2. The CB removed and the OB left in place. To make the shot without english and ignoring throw, the CB must pass over the center of the white dot in the middle of the black spot (i.e., through the center of the ghost ball).

Pictures #3 through #8. The cue stick placed across the center of the spot, i.e., on the proper line of aim, to make shots at 15-degree intervals: 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, and 75 degrees.​

Here is what one can observe from the pictures:

1. For a straight shot, the edge of the cue stick needs to point to one side or the other of the contact point, not at it. So the Mullen Method is not accurate for straight shots. [But if the shot is a real short one, pocket slop may be sufficient to absorb the angled hit that would result from using the Mullen Method.]

2. For a 15-degree cut, using the cue stick in the pictures, the shot is pretty much "right on," i.e., the left edge of the ferrule is in the same vertical plane as the contact point, and the shot would undoubtedly be pocketed.

3. For a 30-degree cut (half-ball shot), the left edge of the ferrule in the picture is pointing to some point on the OB, but it is to the right (outside) of the contact point. So, using the Mullen Method, if you aimed the left side of the ferrule at the contact point, you would under-cut the shot. [The shot might still "go" if the OB is close enough to the pocket, but probably not if it is a long distance from the pocket.]

4. For properly aimed cut shots of 45, 60, and 75 degrees, the cue stick points entirely outside the right edge of the OB. Using the Mullen Method on these angles would drastically under-cut the OB.​

My conclusion, then, is that the Mullen Method, if followed literally and exactly, is really "right on" (to the center of the pocket) for just one cut angle. For the stick I was using (13mm ferrule), that angle was approximately 15 degrees. However, it is approximately "on" for some small range of angles (somewhere greater than zero and less than 30 with my stick), and may pocket many of these shots because of pocket slop. The method may serve as a good approximation method within that range of shots. It may also serve as a good starting point for the player to make further refinements of the aim.

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]

 

[LAMas]

AtLarge,
My thoughts exactly.:thumbup:

 

[Wheeljack]

I have used this since 3andstop first posted it a few months ago. I find it very accurate.

Atlarge, I appreciate the time you took to set all this up and show how the system should work, but, for me, I am happy going along with a 'black box' theory situation and just accepting that it seems to work VERY accurately for me.

I have only encounted 3 problems that I can think of using this system:

1. I have a hard time hitting rail-frozen shots accurately and consistantly with this system. I'm not sure why, but anytime I'm having to contact a rail (either first or at the same time) with this system I lose accuracy.

2. Break shot. I just can't get a feel for it using this system. I practice it, but cannot seem to find a comfort zone at break speed.

3. Kick shots. Refer to #1. My kick shots are not as accurate. I can't explain why.

So, let's go over the good (as I see it):

1. The system is easy to follow and simply laid out.

2. For me, it is extremely accurate for basically all other shots with the exception of the one's I mentioned above.

3. I did not have to make ANY changes to my approach, stroke, etc... when beginning to use this method. Within 15 minutes I was use to the process. Within an hour of employing this method I was consistantly pocketing shots that I was much less accurate at shooting with my previous (ghost ball) method.

4. I think this method works perfectly for straight in shots. I can drill multiple straight-in shots in a roll using this system. When I was using ghost ball aiming I was a bit more sporadic.

@3andstop: Thank you for posting this originally, you have helped my game tremendously. I'm still a banger, but at least I'm a more proficient banger now

J.

 

[AtLarge]

... For me, it is extremely accurate for basically all other shots with the exception of the one's I mentioned above. ...

I'm really curious how some people, you included, apparently use the Mullen Method to good effect.

Let me ask you a couple of questions. Suppose you are shooting a 45-degree cut shot to the left. Where is your head/eye position for that shot relative to the cue stick? Are you looking down the left edge of the stick, the center of the stick, or somewhere else? Now suppose it's a 45-degree cut to the right. Are you looking down the right edge of the stick, the center of the stick, or somewhere else?

 

[Mikjary]

Some shooters use this system and swear by it. Geometrically it can be shown to be lacking in many different angles, so what's up with that? I know a guy who plays at an open level with a similar system and he says there is no adjustment at all for these cuts. He sees them as just another application of his aiming alignment.

In the last year I have been studying systems like this including Cte, 90/90, other stick aiming systems, and a system supposedly that came from Buddy Hall that possibly Archer uses. They all have one thing in common...visual perception alignments.

This subject has been beaten to death in other threads for it's non-mathematical foundations and lit up and stomped out some more. I look at it a different way. I think these systems are the next generation and we are just beginning to understand how the mind and eyes work together. At leasty publicly. In private I'll just bet this information has been passed around to a lucky few and not the rest of the fish, but that's been covered in another thread.

As far as this stick aiming method is concerned, I wouldn't be so sure about disproving things with a few real world photos. A little further examination is in order and not with trig functions and isoceles triangles. The way the eyes perceive the shot alignment should be looked at. There is enough anecdotal evidence about satisfied customers using this system with consistent results for many years to possibly glean an insight of how it may actually work. It may work for a select few, it may work for many.

I have found that this system works best for me with a nose center alignment with both eyes doing the aiming. For the thinner cuts that don't work on paper, using the eye on the opposite side as the cut (left eye, right cut and vice versa) to sight the aiming line down the cue. This moves the eye out to the edge (right eye for right cut and vice versa) of the cue ball for an edge to edge alignment. With these sighting alignments, the thinner cuts are possible.

I will try in another post to tie in Richard Kranicki's work on this visual alignment from, Answers To A Pool Player's Prayers, and Geno's work on Perfect Aim.

Best,
Mike

 

[AtLarge]

... I will try in another post to tie in Richard Kranicki's work on this visual alignment from, Answers To A Pool Player's Prayers, and Geno's work on Perfect Aim. ...

Thanks, Mike. Getting at the visuals was the purpose of my post #12 above.

Clearly, successful users of this aiming method must be doing something visually that is outside the norm for the way to sight a shot. I seem to remember someone in another thread on this topic saying that it even works for him on extreme cuts. Well, to me, if I'm just fanning an OB with a center-ball hit on the CB, I see an enormous gap between the edge of the OB (where the contact point is) and the edge of my cue stick -- roughly a 7/8" gap (half a ball diameter minus half a stick diameter) "up close" and perceptually something less than that if the OB is far away.

So I'm interested in learning whatever we can about how the Mullenites close such gaps in some consistent manner.

 

[jingle]

I like it!

I don't know how, but this technique works for me on most shots. It has been one of the best "tips" I've picked uo so far in my years on AZB. I don't use it on straight-ins because I just aim at the base of the OB (easy enough). I also don't use it on paper thin cuts that you can basically line up CB edge to OB edge and get the needed result. All other angles it works great for me. I don't know how, but it does. One caveat though, when using english I think it works best with strokes in the soft to medium-hard range. Super soft or hard strokes with english require some adjustment. (like always)

 

[Wheeljack]

I'm really curious how some people, you included, apparently use the Mullen Method to good effect.

Let me ask you a couple of questions. Suppose you are shooting a 45-degree cut shot to the left. Where is your head/eye position for that shot relative to the cue stick? Are you looking down the left edge of the stick, the center of the stick, or somewhere else? Now suppose it's a 45-degree cut to the right. Are you looking down the right edge of the stick, the center of the stick, or somewhere else?

I position my head fairly vertically over the cue in a position where my right eye is above my cue. I just started doing the right eye thing a couple weeks ago after doing the dominant eye test that was posted by another user. I find it does allow me to focus in on the shot better.

I do this whether it is a left or right side cut shot.

 

[3andstop]

Well, I gotta tell you guys, that I don't know if Dave Mullen's explanation of this has some words in it that could mislead or misdirect the concept.

I don't know this Mullen fellow and was actually very surprised to see this video.

Back in the 70s I frequented a poolroom where the counter man, about 65 or 70 yrs old then, (not the owner, just daytime counter help) would shoot racks of straight pool on table one (which was right next to the counter), in between dealing with phone calls, postman, customers, and so on. The guy never missed.

I loved grabbing a cup of coffee next door and sitting in the chair watching this guy run balls like it was so simple. Constantly running 100s. One day I asked him how the hell is it you never miss? In his own way, this was the system he explained to me.

Now, if Dave Mullen is saying something that would lead some to believe you are aiming away from the CB, I missed it, or I didn't interpret it that way.

Regardless, you are approaching your shot on the line you need to shoot on and stroke along side the imaginary line that extends past the point of contact on the OB.

I imagine that line extending from the side of my cue shaft straight past the aiming point on the OB with it just touching that aim point as though the line could extend straight through objects.

I've never studied the ways to explain this system. I'm sure I'm doing a rather poor job of it, and I'm sorry for that.

One thing I'll generically say. If you got in your shooting stance over the table with no balls on the table at all and just made a few practice strokes, those strokes should be a dead straight line from your backswing to your follow through.

With this method of aiming, as you stand behind the shot chalking your cue, you see the line coming from the OBs aim point, back in your direction to the CB.

You get down on your shot aligning the cue stick with this line, like about ever other pool player in the world does, the only fine tuning or refinement is, you align the side of your shaft to it rather than the center of the cue tip.

Doing so somehow compensates for the curvature of the balls and makes the aim point and contact points come together to be the same. and that's all any of us want, hit the ball where it goes in the pocket.

The system automatically accounts and compensates for english. It's so simple.

IMHO what no one should ever do is see the alignment of their shot, get down in their stance ..... the one I mentioned above where your cue stick delivers in a straight line from backswing to follow through .... get down in that stance, and then, pivot your body or your arm or your wrist or whatever it is they say to pivot. That is simply poor form.

I dunno, everyone should have the knowledge to at least try this simple method of accuracy without worrying about believing only elaborate complicated things will improve their accuracy.

That is why I reposted this. After a certain amount of time it gets lost in the threads, and since I'm not out to profit by it, there is no marketing of it, so folks new here may not have had the benefit of knowing about it.

And, if I were still playing out and about, LOL, I may not have mentioned it myself.

 

[3andstop]

@3andstop: Thank you for posting this originally, you have helped my game tremendously. I'm still a banger, but at least I'm a more proficient banger now

J.

Wheeljack, you are very welcome. You say you're still a banger, but somehow I doubt that, I don't know how well you play, and I'm no world beater myself, but improving is always a combination of many refinements and corrections. In the past I've always been grateful to the folks that offered me suggestions.

Anyway, if I may offer you a few other things to play with now that you are comfortable with this aiming method. These are things I feel are extremely important to improving.

Always stop at the CB if you are not now and allow your brain a final fine tuned look at your shot, but try these things.

An ever so slightly slower forward stroke than your current forward stroke with a slight acceleration through the CB, and a looser hold ( I'd rather call it a cradle) of your butt hand on the cue. Don't tighten that grip until you've contacted the CB and you absolutely must tighten it or loose the cue stick.

These things IMO mentally allow your brain to know the line you want to stroke on, and physically better allow it to happen with less muscle tightening.

 

[Vahmurka]

sorry I didn't take time to read all the posts in this thread due to lack of time, I can only tell now I feel very positive about the aiming hint 3andstop gave. I noticed it by occasion in his first very thread about it ("How I Aim" it was I recall). It was easily adapted to my aiming technique, so I tried it and it worked magic on some shots I had trouble with. For example, a back cut to the corner where to OB is around side pocket, CB two diamonds behind (you don't see the pocket). After I started to use this "shaft/ferrule" technique I made the shot one by one. That said, on most "easier" shots I aim like my instructor taught me (contact point aiming), and whenever I feel uncomfortable or my instinct says doubts about my approach - I use shaft aiming in addition to my feel, and it never let me down. I keep repping 3andstop for sharing his method every time I'ma allowed. Thanks again pal, it's easy and it's working for me!

 

[3andstop]

sorry I didn't take time to read all the posts in this thread due to lack of time, I can only tell now I feel very positive about the aiming hint 3andstop gave. I noticed it by occasion in his first very thread about it ("How I Aim" it was I recall). It was easily adapted to my aiming technique, so I tried it and it worked magic on some shots I had trouble with. For example, a back cut to the corner where to OB is around side pocket, CB two diamonds behind (you don't see the pocket). After I started to use this "shaft/ferrule" technique I made the shot one by one. That said, on most "easier" shots I aim like my instructor taught me (contact point aiming), and whenever I feel uncomfortable or my instinct says doubts about my approach - I use shaft aiming in addition to my feel, and it never let me down. I keep repping 3andstop for sharing his method every time I'ma allowed. Thanks again pal, it's easy and it's working for me!

My pleasure, I'm happy to see it's working for you! :thumbup: