John Schmidt's and Corey Deuel's comments on aiming systems
- Thread starter PoolSharkAllen
- Start date
Just curious, can this be attained by starting at a geometrical center pocket aim, then add the touch of inside with BHE? I think the BHE would also move the "aim" the correct direction. I would think this puts the correct spin on the ball to make it "want" to go to the pocket if it touches a rail. This is the same concept Brumback uses with banks. ie. aim an inch or so long on the rail with a touch of inside english to shorten the shot. With the ball wanting to slide into the pocket, it essentially makes the pocket a bigger target.
Folks:
I think some of the issues we're overlooking here -- and I think CJ may agree with me because of his experience with snooker instruction -- are these points:
- Aiming at center pocket on *pool* equipment can lead to "laziness" in whether you're really hitting what you're aiming at. If you're not paying attention that you missed the center of the pocket, that "sloppage" in the abyss of pool equipment's pockets may go unnoticed -- and depended upon -- if you let it.
- CJ's "touch of inside" technique -- which pushes all that "sloppage" to one side of the pocket -- forces you to be more accurate. If you miss on the wrong side of the pocket (i.e. you get too fat of a hit), you will either knuckle the ball, or rail it. That's one way to "force" being more accurate with your aim, but it ain't the only one.
- Other cue sports don't have the plethora of alternative aiming techniques as pool does, because the focus is placed where it should be -- the center of the pocket, and the equipment won't let laziness rear its ugly head.
I'm working with CJ's technique, but more for expanding my knowledge of throw and swerve, as well as the characteristics of my individual stroke. It's actually a hoot to play with, and I thank CJ for introducing it!
But I personally am going to continue to aim at a target that is a "pocket within a pocket" so-to-speak. I aim at a snooker pocket within the pool table's pockets, and I can immediately tell whether I hit my mark, because the space on both sides of the object ball as it enters the pocket doesn't lie.
-Sean
Beginner here, so these might be stupid questions.
I thought inside english was considered "non-helping" as far as ball pocketing was concerned and required aiming for a thinner cut to compensate ? BHE is supposed to cut down or minimize deflection so the aim adjustment is for how much the english affects the OB ?
CJ's method of cueing parallel inside results in no effective english, but deflects the CB so you aim for a thicker cut ? The deflection of the CB results in the actual cut being thinner than the aim ?
..........
I agree with all of this - except the part about CJ probably agreeing with it. This is what I've been describing as the real benefit of this technique, with the same proviso (in blue above), but with the additional proviso that it doesn't sound to me like the best way either.
pj
chgo
The "non-helping" designation refers to whether or not the english is 'helping' to counteract cut induced throw. It doesn't have a more general meaning of, "it is unhelpful to use inside english".
[edit]
BHE doesn't cut down or minimize deflection, BHE seeks to take the existence of deflection out of the equation when aiming. At least, that's the reason that I, personally, use BHE. I suppose there may be other reasons...
Also, I reread your original question more carefully, and w.r.t. inside english, the question of whether a thinner cut is required depends on the cut angle and speed: Shallow and slow cuts, yes, thinner and faster cuts, no...
Last edited:
If you truely want to see where laziness comes from, go look in the mirror.
This notion that aiming at the center pocket will create laziness is male bovinae excrement.
Ooh this little inside, accelerating stroke thing is called a stun shot with inside.
The excuses people make up in order to accept something that does nothing but add a unnecessary degree of difficulty to shot making is mind boggling.
This notion that aiming at the center pocket will create laziness is male bovinae excrement.
Ooh this little inside, accelerating stroke thing is called a stun shot with inside.
The excuses people make up in order to accept something that does nothing but add a unnecessary degree of difficulty to shot making is mind boggling.
It's also often used to mean spin that will turn the ball toward the pocket when it hits the pocket facing.
pj
chgo
If you take it literally, I agree - aiming at the center of the pocket is just as precise as aiming at any other part of the pocket, if you do it precisely.
But I think what's really meant by it here is the common practice of just "aiming at the pocket" without regard to what part of the pocket - we think we're aiming at the center of the pocket, but because it's often hard to tell whether or not we hit the center of the pocket we can slip into accepting any made shot as "good enough".
pj
chgo
Ah, our favorite QA Tester! I see you skimmed my post, and didn't read past the items in the bulleted list. Hint: read further, and pay particular attention to the description under the bulleted list. The full measure of your advocated "completeness in quality assurance" should then be fully realized.
-Sean
Yes, the two are equivalent, as I've said ad nauseum (I know, I know).
That's not the central thing CJ's talking about, but I think it's been mentioned as a side benefit.
pj
chgo
Yes, thank you.
[edit]
And, actually, have I misspoken? Is the english used to counteract cut induced throw only referred to as 'gearing' english? Or is it also referred to as 'helping' english?
Last edited:
I just took a look in Dr. Dave's glossary, and he does, indeed, define 'helping english' as being the same as 'outside english', designed to reduce cut induced throw.
Notwithstanding, your other reference to the english transferred to an object ball that 'helps' it to want to turn to the pocket off the pocket facing, as 'helping english' is acknowledged.
Yes, I have heard them as the same and is how I used it in my post.
So is outside english "helping" or "gearing" and therefore you can aim for a thicker cut compared to inside english ?
I think the answer is still in the other part of my post (that I added as an edit, so you may have missed it :embarrassed2
:swest said:
I think the answer is still in the other part of my post (that I added as an edit, so you may have missed it :embarrassed2
Then I must be dumb because I don't understand how using a touch of inside BHE is the same as using CJ's touch of inside parallel.
Seems like the cue will be angled different and the amount of aimed cut is different.
If they have the same amount of tip offset and hit the same target (center of pocket), they couldn't possibly be different. Only one cue angle will do it.
pj
chgo
Hitting the center of the pocket is a result, not an incentive.
Yes, Sean, you are on the right track for sure. You are putting yourself into a situation where the better you stoke the ball (with acceleration) the better your results. Hitting the center of the pocket is a result, not an incentive.
Yes, Sean, you are on the right track for sure. You are putting yourself into a situation where the better you stoke the ball (with acceleration) the better your results. Hitting the center of the pocket is a result, not an incentive.