How many aiming systems have you gone through?

[(((Satori)))]

Throughout your years of playing pool, how many aiming systems have you gone through?

I myself have pretty much stuck to the same method I learned with. I have however experimented with a few but I have not been able to replace the original method.

After all of the methods you have used which one did you determine to be best, the one you have stuck with? The method I use is simply finding the ghost ball, lining up my back foot with the line of the shot, dropping into my stance from there, then firing away trusting that I have lined up correctly.

 

[Yoda4962]

All of them !

Throughout your years of playing pool, how many aiming systems have you gone through?

I myself have pretty much stuck to the same method I learned with. I have however experimented with a few but I have not been able to replace the original method.

After all of the methods you have used which one did you determine to be best, the one you have stuck with? The method I use is simply finding the ghost ball, lining up my back foot with the line of the shot, dropping into my stance from there, then firing away trusting that I have lined up correctly.

And I am willing to try anything new that i hear about. My goal is to grow, and growth only comes from experimentation and curiosity.

 

[(((Satori)))]

And I am willing to try anything new that i hear about. My goal is to grow, and growth only comes from experimentation and curiosity.

Is there one that you have had the most success with or any tricks that you like to go to when you can't see the shot right with your system?

 

[Yoda4962]

straight ins

Is there one that you have had the most success with or any tricks that you like to go to when you can't see the shot right with your system?

i suggest practicing straight -ins until your arm freezes up. this usually happens after about 10 hours of non stop straight ins. You must perfect your ability to hit what you aim at, then worry about WHAT to aim at.

Max Eberle's straight in drills are a short cut to better pool.

Once you do that, the CTE is the way to go !

 

[randyg]

I can teach about a dozen different aiming systems. If the shoe fits, wear it.

I use three systems in my personal game. One main and two auxillary.

randyg

 

[(((Satori)))]

I'd like to hear what you prefer.

 

[bdorman]

I've only been playing for a year, but in that time I've explored various methods (I say "explored" because it's not like I've committed to any of them and put in 50 hours of practice with nothing but that system).

Ghost ball, pivots, parallel shifts, and so on.

About 3 months ago I developed my own system which I'm sure is not unique. I think of it as an "Equal Overlap" system, as below:

It works particularly well for me because I have arthritis in my neck and I can't sight the OB when I'm down on the shot.

 

[AtLarge]

... About 3 months ago I developed my own system which I'm sure is not unique. I think of it as an "Equal Overlap" system ...

Congrats on arriving at that geometrically correct method on your own. And you're right, it's certainly not new. In his 1982 book billiards accuracy, Marvin Chin called it "the 2-point equal portion system."

 

[sfleinen]

Congrats on arriving at that geometrically correct method on your own. And you're right, it's certainly not new. In his 1982 book billiards accuracy, Marvin Chin called it "the 2-point equal portion system."

Additionally, one should take this system a step further, and memorize common "overlap relationships" -- e.g. full-ball, 7/8th-ball, 3/4-ball, 2/3rd-ball, 1/2-ball, 1/3rd-ball, 1/4-ball, and "thin" and "thinner" cuts.

E.g. if you get down and sight the object ball for a 2/3rd-ball hit, you should -- right from your perspective behind the shot -- see a "bee-line" to where that object ball is going to go.

That's the approach most often used in snooker, and is described in this two-part video:

Part 1 (pretty simplistic and can skip if you like; talks more about stance than aiming):
http://youtube.com/watch?v=iP4RvZJMPd8

Part 2 (gets much more interesting):
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kLjSlHr38dc

Aiming and sighting correctly:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mL3NOn-A9Bs

HTH,
-Sean

 

[LAMas]

Kudos.
I have a problem with parallax and vision center.
So, I use my stick to line up point A with point B while standing (stance) and as I drop down, I leave my stick on the table in that position and move the tip, bridge and the butt parallel from there to the center of the CB and in line with the desired path of the CB to the OB as shown in your diagram.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Very interesting. It's good practice even without an arthritic neck to do most of the aiming from an erect position.

The issue I have is with those players who start their aim process by standing behind the cue ball so it is full with the object ball. You would start standing on the ghost ball/cb line, right? Dr. Dave did a survey one time and there are both types of players, and others, in abundance.

 

[BeiberLvr]

I always played by feel. Then I bought the SEE system and it works really well. In the past month I've been using Pro One, and that's my go to on every shot now.

 

[(((Satori)))]

I always played by feel. Then I bought the SEE system and it works really well. In the past month I've been using Pro One, and that's my go to on every shot now.

If I understand the see system correctly, it requires you to change your stance? Is that right?

 

[BeiberLvr]

If I understand the see system correctly, it requires you to change your stance? Is that right?

The only time my stance ever changed was on shots where I had to pivot slightly. On those, I would have a wider stance with my back leg out more.

If anything, both SEE and Pro One actually improved my stance since it taught me how to align properly to make the shot.

 

[AtLarge]

Additionally, one should take this system a step further, and memorize common "overlap relationships" -- e.g. full-ball, 7/8th-ball, 3/4-ball, 2/3rd-ball, 1/2-ball, 1/3rd-ball, 1/4-ball, and "thin" and "thinner" cuts.

Congrats on arriving at that geometrically correct method on your own. And you're right, it's certainly not new. In his 1982 book billiards accuracy, Marvin Chin called it "the 2-point equal portion system."

Sean -- You're introducing something completely different from what bdorman diagramed. What he calls his "equal overlap" system is a geometrically correct continuous aiming method that stands solidly on its own feet. It's basically contact-point-to-contact-point aiming. It's continuous as opposed to discrete because it works directly (ignore throw) for all cut angles.

What you are describing is a version of fractional-ball aiming. That is a discrete method in that it involves a limited number of cut angles if performed robotically without additional adjustments. In other words, what you described is not necessarily a "step further" nor a step that "should" be taken. Some people definitely prefer it to the contact-point-to-contact-point methods, but I just wanted to make clear that it is not the same thing.

I'm sure you know all that, but it seemed strange for you to tack fractional-ball aiming onto bdorman's method.

[Edit: I see this post has finally shown up in the thread. When I originally hit the "Submit Reply" button, I got a message that said my post would have to be reviewed by a moderator before it was posted. I don't recall ever seeing such a message in the past. Anyone know what that was all about?]

 

[scottjen26]

Aimed by feel for 15 years - not really ghost ball (since I just never could visualize that properly), more of an overlap method just seeing how thick or thin to hit to make the ball go where I wanted.

Played with 90/90, limited success because of insufficient knowledge of the adjustments needed. Too bad the DVD never came out...

Learned CTE, then CTE/Pro1, with the discussions here and work put in found that very reliable, especially on shots that were previously much more of a guess for me like thinner backcuts etc.

Learned SEE, currently using that in sort of a hybrid mode with CTE/Pro1. The initial alignments are actually very similar, each has it's pros and cons. With either (or both) my ball pocketing is improved over my old method. Stance did not change, but my initial position behind the shot was modified/improved to support the aiming process, PSR was definitely improved.

Am at a point now where the alignment process happens very quickly, seamlessly, on many shots, and I can fall back to a more structured approach on tougher or more critical shots. Don't think anyone not experienced with pivot type systems would even know that I was doing something different when shooting, vs the very mechanical approach I started out with. Practice breed confidence and consistency.

Scott

 

[bdorman]

Kudos.
I have a problem with parallax and vision center.
So, I use my stick to line up point A with point B while standing (stance) and as I drop down, I leave my stick on the table in that position and move the tip, bridge and the butt parallel from there to the center of the CB and in line with the desired path of the CB to the OB as shown in your diagram.

That's a great idea. I'm going to try it tomorrow!
Many thanks.

 

[Zippo]

Throughout your years of playing pool, how many aiming systems have you gone through?

I myself have pretty much stuck to the same method I learned with. I have however experimented with a few but I have not been able to replace the original method.

After all of the methods you have used which one did you determine to be best, the one you have stuck with? The method I use is simply finding the ghost ball, lining up my back foot with the line of the shot, dropping into my stance from there, then firing away trusting that I have lined up correctly.

Well, I started aimming by feel, it was unreliable. Then I discovered the ghost ball method and undestood why I had the tendency to undercut everything. The ghost ball method lasted a week because it was hard for me to actually see the ghost ball so I moved to the "contact point to contact point" method. I stuck with that method for a while. It worked ok. I practiced a lot with it and if I played everyday it was fine but if I didn't play for a couple of weeks it was a little hard to play ok again. It was very stressful for my eyes. Then, I discovered CTE and Pro One (Thanks Stan, Mohrt, Spiderwebcomm and JB for all the info, blogs and videos) and stuck with it. I tried the See System too and it worked fine.

In conclusion, I play 95% CTE, 5% SEE, "contact point to contact point" if the pocket is partially blocked and sometimes (very rare) a modified ghost ball.

 

[Ratta]

Right at the beginning *trying* to find and see the ghostball. Soon searched for another option, that would guide/help me to get better on the *striking line* and to see where i have to shoot.

Used contact to contact (similar to aiming by numbers), a stick aiming system and finally something i created (what many others also are doing!) for me personally, *to connect* the necessary points.


Nowadays, that i not really play anymore it s more about earning and learning more knowledge- knowing many aiming systems now. Very useful to help a student out, to *find his way* to find out what works for him at least.
Now i use often also other aiming systems over a longer period, just to get better understanding and learning. It s fun for me
Atm giving Pro1 the time as soon as i have the time and feel good enough to spend some descent hours weekly at the table.

lg from overseas,
Ingo

 

[bdorman]

Very interesting. It's good practice even without an arthritic neck to do most of the aiming from an erect position.

The issue I have is with those players who start their aim process by standing behind the cue ball so it is full with the object ball. You would start standing on the ghost ball/cb line, right? Dr. Dave did a survey one time and there are both types of players, and others, in abundance.

Hi Matt,
My first "stance" is direct from the OB to the pocket to determine the contact point. I find that I'm more accurate if I line that stance up like I'm lining up a shot; it just keeps me from becoming lackadaisical about it.

While keeping my eye on the OB contact point, I move my stance to the line behind the CB where the overlap (distance A and distance B) are equal. My accuracy improves if I take that sighting one step back from my final shot position and step into the shot, rather than trying to line it up from the final shot position (less chance of parallax error, I guess).

The only time I look at the shot from "CB full on OB" is when it's almost straight in. I think I do it because I find the equal overlap hardest to determine when it's an almost-straight-in shot. It's probably a bad habit and I should just work more at determining the equal overlap using my regular system, above.

Someone recommended starting with a view of CB-to-pocket, then OB-to-pocket, then equal overlap. I've tried that but I didn't really see what it brought to the party.