How Fractional Aiming Systems Help

[Patrick Johnson]

JoeyA:
...are you saying that Ghost Ball is not an aiming system?

I don't think it matters whether we call it a system, a method, a technique or whatever - there's no "bright line" distinction between these terms. What matters is how it functions compared with other ways and how those differences make aiming easier or harder for individual players.

Ghost ball is one of several ways to visualize the exact final aim for any shot. These rely on the shooter's ability to accurately visualize the position of the OB contact point and one or two other spatial relationships. They include simple contact point-to-contact point aiming, ghost ball, double-the-distance, parallel lines and maybe others I'm forgetting. I think of these as the "exact" methods.

The rest are ways to visualize a "starting point" relatively near the final aim for any shot, from which the shooter estimates the final aim (sometimes with the help of additional system steps). These rely on the shooter's ability to choose the closest starting point from a short menu of "system alignments" and then refine his aim from there using judgment gained from experience. I think of these as the "approximate" methods.

"Exact" and "approximate" have become loaded terms in AzB aiming discussions, but I don't use them to suggest that one is better or worse than the other. "Exact" methods have the advantage of focusing directly on the final aim, but require visualization abilities not shared by everybody. "Approximate" methods offer easy-to-visualize "starting points", but leave estimating the final aim to the shooter. Both kinds require different skills and offer different advantages/disadvantages that are weighed differently by different shooters. Neither kind (nor any individual way within a kind) is inherently "best" at its job for everybody.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...if this is your description of "feel", then not just every aiming system, but every shot in the world that has ever been attempted is made on feel.

As we've been saying for 15 years.

The academics have beaten this "feel" horse to death, especially as it relates to aiming system. :deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse:

That horse is a zombie judging by the lingering resistance to the f-word still showing in this thread.

By the way, I think another definition of "feel" applies to these aiming system discussions. Whenever/wherever a system's instructions stop being precise and "robotic" but require "interpretation" by the shooter, feel enters into the equation.

pj
chgo

 

[champ2107]

i will get to dr dave stuff later today when i have time. I will cut and paste something below i have read and found interesting for someone.


I'm going to describe a phenomenon in pool that works unconsciously ...it will take some experimenting, but will make the game SO much easier....first set up a straight-in shot to test how accurately you're hitting the cue ball (balls about 3' apart is fine)....then create a slight angle and get down JUST like it was straight in only this time let your eyes focus on the same side of the cue shaft as you're cutting the ball (if you're cutting it to the right use the right side)....now look at the object ball's center to the right side of the cue shaft and hit the ball....even though you were lined up straight to the object ball's center when you hit the cue ball it will automatically cut the ball
to the right (and should make the shot)....this is because the perception of the shot is an ILLUSION....furthermore, I can go down putting my tip to the center of the cue ball (after accessing what needs to be done) and visually the tip will move where it needs WITHOUT ME MOVING IT.....it's like pointing your finger out in front of your eyes and making it move by using less or more of your dominant eye ... this will seem like you're mentally moving your finger.....and in my example I feel like I can mentally move the cue tip....this is the first step to controlling the illusion so that every shot will "seem" straight in...Try that and I will get to the second step.

 

[dr_dave]

Hey - so when ya gonna post that video ... I know most of us are dying to see how you've incorporated DAM.

On second thought, just purchase VEPS and VEPP. They include 13 hours of video of Tom Ross, Bob Jewett, and I using DAM effectively to pocket a wide range of shots (not just staged shots in a potting drill). Don't expect me to spoon-feed you DAM for free. Shell out the cash or get a lesson. (Sound familiar?) :grin:

Regards,
Dave

 

[stan shuffett]

Dr. Dave, can you give me 5 shots where my cte pro one shooting system breaks down as a complete shooting system as taught on my DVD?

For all 5 shots place the CB on the center spot. All shots can be cut shots to any pocket.

Each CB OB relationship must have a CTE visual and an OB aimpoint.

Please include distance and angle with visuals and pivot direction for each shot. (My grid layout on my DVD may be used for easy and repeatable set-up.)

I will verify your correct choice of visuals and pivot.

Then as a group we can shoot and discuss these shots according to cte pro one prescription.

I am willing to train up to 3 top professionals that can also give their personal feedback on the cte pro one shooting system and their experiences with your 5 shots that you say will break down according to what I teach on my DVD.

Stan Shuffett

 

[8pack]

On second thought, just purchase VEPS and VEPP. They include 13 hours of video of Tom Ross, Bob Jewett, and I using DAM effectively to pocket a wide range of shots (not just staged shots in a potting drill). Don't expect me to spoon-feed you DAM for free. Shell out the cash or get a lesson. (Sound familiar?) :grin:

Regards,
Dave

Staged shots in a potting drill.Your a good man Dr dave but the drill offers a little more than that.I could clue you in but wont.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Dr. Dave, can you give me 5 shots where my cte pro one shooting system breaks down as a complete shooting system as taught on my DVD?

Why not use the 3 shots Dave posted on his website long ago? Here they are with his question about them (hope you don't mind the cut-and-paste, Dave):



Shot "A" is about a 10-degree cut, shot "B" is about a 15-degree cut, and shot "C" is about a 20-degree cut. All three shots fit into the "thick cut" category of CTE. Also, the CB-to-OB distance is the same for all three shots. If the bridge length and pivot amount is the same for all three shots, a pertinent question is: What do you do differently with the alignment and/or pivot steps of CTE to pocket each of the three shots?

 

[stan shuffett]

PJ, PJ!!!!!Simply unbelievable!!! These shots and their solutions are a study chapter on my DVD.
You saw my DVD, right? Apparently not!! And therein is a major problem. You profess to have studied my material but this proves otherwise.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

PJ, PJ!!!!!Simply unbelievable!!! These shots and their solutions are a study chapter on my DVD.
You saw my DVD, right? Apparently not!! And therein is a major problem. You profess to have studied my material but this proves otherwise.

You asked for shots to explain, Stan. If your explanation is "it's on my DVD", why did you ask in the first place?

pj
chgo

 

[JoeyA]

I don't think it matters whether we call it a system, a method, a technique or whatever - there's no "bright line" distinction between these terms. What matters is how it functions compared with other ways and how those differences make aiming easier or harder for individual players.

Ghost ball is one of several ways to visualize the exact final aim for any shot. These rely on the shooter's ability to accurately visualize the position of the OB contact point and one or two other spatial relationships. They include simple contact point-to-contact point aiming, ghost ball, double-the-distance, parallel lines and maybe others I'm forgetting. I think of these as the "exact" methods.

The rest are ways to visualize a "starting point" relatively near the final aim for any shot, from which the shooter estimates the final aim (sometimes with the help of additional system steps). These rely on the shooter's ability to choose the closest starting point from a short menu of "system alignments" and then refine his aim from there using judgment gained from experience. I think of these as the "approximate" methods.

"Exact" and "approximate" have become loaded terms in AzB aiming discussions, but I don't use them to suggest that one is better or worse than the other. "Exact" methods have the advantage of focusing directly on the final aim, but require visualization abilities not shared by everybody. "Approximate" methods offer easy-to-visualize "starting points", but leave estimating the final aim to the shooter. Both kinds require different skills and offer different advantages/disadvantages that are weighed differently by different shooters. Neither kind (nor any individual way within a kind) is inherently "best" at its job for everybody.

pj
chgo

Now, it doesn't matter if ghost ball is an aiming system, method, technique or whatever; but it matters greatly to "you" guys that CTE/Pro1 is not an aiming system.

"You" guys are something else. I'm tired of reading your constant spin on what the definition of an aiming sytem is as well as your attempts to malign CTE/Pro1.

I have tried to keep an open mind on this thread to see what can be learned in it. I learned that "you" guys like to make up your definitions as it suits your agenda. "F" that.............

It's just not worth wading through the constantly redefining of terms to see if there is something in your posts that might help my game.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Since there seems to be such a demand for such a video, I've decided to put it out on an "aiming systems" DVD instead. If you really need to see me shoot and apply DAM, you will need to shell out the cash when the DVD comes out (unless you want to come to Colorado for a private lesson). The DAM DVD will reveal all of the powerful secrets of how the pros aim so proficiently. I am confident the DAM DVD will revolutionize the pool world. For more marketing claims, see the DAM resource page.

If you are good boy, I might add you to my list for getting a free copy. On second thought, I won't add you to the list unless you can win that pissing contest we have discussed in the past (without standing on bricks).

Regards,
Dave

PS: BTW, I do still plan to post a video online some day (since you continue to ask for it). However, what would it prove or disprove? For example, if I posted a video of me using CTE and missing a bunch of shots, would that prove that CTE is terrible? And if I post a video of me making a lot of shots with DAM, would that prove that DAM is great?

PS: I am actually serious about doing an "aiming system" DVD, but I have another project I need to finish up first.

Cute. It'd be great to shell out money to watch your hack technique with aiming systems. Sure, count me in.

What will the result of your DVD sales on the forum?

Will Lou say it's too difficult to understand and want his money back?

Will you give Lou, Pat Johnson, and all other "naysayers" a free DVD for being so loyal with all of your caustic remarks regarding CTE/PRO1 or
90/90?

Will Pat Johnson reveal that DAM is nothing more than PSR with no real benefit to aiming?

Will Lou suddenly change his tune and praise aiming systems as well as adopt one that prevents him from ramming balls into the rail?

Will this help Patrick from fidgeting and bobbing his head up and down like a lizard?

Will it be entitled "FEEL, THE ONLY WAY TO AIM"?

Would you be so kind to make the first Chapter a complete explanation of what "FEEL" is, how it's transferable from one person to another, how it's taught, and how it's exactly the same from one player to the next?

And the biggest question is, will you be accused of nothing more than plagiarizing the work of legit aiming experts such as Hal, Stan and RonV?

Maybe that's why I always bug you to post a video. Since you're so busy debunking aiming systems, I kind of think it's appropriate to debunk your ability as a player - and prove you can actually benefit from mastering one of the systems you so frequently knock.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...it matters greatly to "you" guys that CTE/Pro1 is not an aiming system.

It does?

Is "'you' guys" your new label for "Joey's enemies"?

[snip the rest of Joey's tantrum]

pj
chgo

 

[stan shuffett]

Pj, my dvd contains what you asked for.
Visuals of cte and ob aimpoint for each of the 3 shots are on my dvd.
Also I indicated 1/2 tip pivot and proper pivot direction.

You clearly have not viewed my DVD with proper study as you have suggested.

Again, unbelievable.

Stan

 

[champ2107]

You asked for shots to explain, Stan. If your explanation is "it's on my DVD", why did you ask in the first place?

pj
chgo

as your going down the line of this set up you will adjust to each shot using reference points as your guide and since this is a potting drill and how it is set up you will need to make finely tuned adjustments going across the table if you continue that setup to the rail with your visual skills at the standing position. This is how it would be done from my experience using cte/pro1 and its pretty basic stuff/routine if you know the system and this is my opinion and not stans and dont forgrt this is a drill and not a game of 9 ball.

Does this answer the question Pj?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Pj, my dvd contains what you asked for.
Visuals of cte and ob aimpoint for each of the 3 shots are on my dvd.
Also I indicated 1/2 tip pivot and proper pivot direction.

You clearly have not viewed my DVD with proper study as you have suggested.

Again, unbelievable.

Stan

So when you asked for shots to explain you meant you'll only talk about shots that aren't on your DVD?

OK...

pj
chgo

 

[stan shuffett]

Pj, you are the one that asked for the explanations of those 3 Dr. Dave shots. I did not ask. There is a study chapter on my DVD FOR THOSE 3,SHOTS. You were not aware of that. I hope everyone will read our posts concerning this. It says a lot.
I am disappointed in you.
You Did an AZ review without proper study of my DVD. AND THIS PROVES THAT FACT!!!

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Does this answer the question Pj?

It's not my question; I just posted shots in response to Stan's request. But I think your post contains the only answer we're likely to get: "you will need to make finely tuned adjustments with your visual skills".

pj
chgo

 

[champ2107]

Pj, you are the one that asked for the explanations of those 3 Dr. Dave shots. I did not ask. There is a study chapter on my DVD FOR THOSE 3,SHOTS. You were not aware of that. I hope everyone will read our posts concerning this. It says a lot.
I am disappointed in you.
You Did an AZ review without proper study of my DVD. AND THIS PROVES THAT FACT!!!

This is the frustrating part of these threads that sends people on tilt in here! certain people claim to be knowledgeable and they are clearly not.

 

[champ2107]

It's not my question; I just posted shots in response to Stan's request. But I think your post contains the only answer we're likely to get: "you will need to make finely tuned adjustments with your visual skills".

pj
chgo

yep that would be correct with that set up continued across the table to the rail. you seem to have an issue in your blue fonts? is there something wrong?

 

[stan shuffett]

Pj, stop trying wiggle out of this. I explained very clearly what I wanted from Dr. Dave and you piped in about the 3 SHOTS. So I informed You that the explanations you asked for were on my DVD. Therefore, you did not bother to study those shots on my DVD. Your study was incomplete and you submitted review anyway. Again, unbeleivable that you'd asked about Dr Dave's 3 shots.

Stan