Visual Alignment - a few comments

mikepage

mikepage

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Try this experiment. Cut a two-inch wide by three-inch tall rectangle out of a piece of paper and tape it on your bathroom mirror. When you look into the rectangle you --assuming you are a black cat-- will see something like this:
both.JPG

Take a few mental notes on what you see, like
(1) your left ear is aligned with the left edge of the opening,
(2) your right ear is aligned with the right edge of the opening, and
(3) your nose is in the middle
(4) The window--which is not square-- appears square

Now close your left eye. You will see something like this:

right.JPG

a few more mental notes:
(1) left ear still aligned with left edge
(2) nose no longer in the middle but rather close to the right edge
(3) right ear is out of view

Now close your right eye. You will see something like this:
left.JPG

a few more mental notes:
(1) right ear still aligned with right edge
(2) nose no longer in the middle but rather close to the left edge
(3) left ear is out of view

When we look with both eyes open and can see the whole face, what eye is providing the sense of alignment? Clearly for the parts of the face that we can only see with the left eye, the left eye is providing the alignment. What about the parts of the cat's face that we can see with both eyes but are close to the left-eye-only parts? The left eye must be playing a big role there because we don't see a discontinuous change.

I think how we meld these images together to produce a combined both-eyes image is complicated and probably very individual. The details probably depend on what our mind thinks is important in the views in front of us.

For instance when we are down on the shot, and only one of our eyes can see the pocket, many of us are probably not going the throw out that information. If you're down low on a thin cut to the left, there are head positions where the left eye can see the edge of the object ball and the right eye can't. In those head positions, I think we would nearly all get our sense of alignment from the left eye, even those of us who consider ourselves right-eye-dominant.

This stuff is very very complicated. And anyone who claims to understand it probably really doesn't.

For the most part I think we should let our mind do its thing. But there probably are some best practices that are helpful in pool.

The single most important one, imo, is to get a good visual perspective on the shot (aka, aim) BEFORE the feet are done moving.

In our classes we have the students choose one of the fractional aim relations: half-ball (center to edge) or quarter ball or three quarter ball, etc and approach the shot with that perspective.

In my opinion, the most valuable part of most "aiming systems" is they get you to do this--aim before the feet stop moving.
 
One Heck of a Cat

mikepage said:
Try this experiment. Cut a two-inch wide by three-inch tall rectangle out of a piece of paper and tape it on your bathroom mirror. When you look into the rectangle you --assuming you are a black cat-- will see something like this:
View attachment 256850

Take a few mental notes on what you see, like
(1) your left ear is aligned with the left edge of the opening,
(2) your right ear is aligned with the right edge of the opening, and
(3) your nose is in the middle
(4) The window--which is not square-- appears square

Now close your left eye. You will see something like this:

View attachment 256852

a few more mental notes:
(1) left ear still aligned with left edge
(2) nose no longer in the middle but rather close to the right edge
(3) right ear is out of view

Now close your right eye. You will see something like this:
View attachment 256851

a few more mental notes:
(1) right ear still aligned with right edge
(2) nose no longer in the middle but rather close to the left edge
(3) left ear is out of view

When we look with both eyes open and can see the whole face, what eye is providing the sense of alignment? Clearly for the parts of the face that we can only see with the left eye, the left eye is providing the alignment. What about the parts of the cat's face that we can see with both eyes but are close to the left-eye-only parts? The left eye must be playing a big role there because we don't see a discontinuous change.

I think how we meld these images together to produce a combined both-eyes image is complicated and probably very individual. The details probably depend on what our mind thinks is important in the views in front of us.

For instance when we are down on the shot, and only one of our eyes can see the pocket, many of us are probably not going the throw out that information. If you're down low on a thin cut to the left, there are head positions where the left eye can see the edge of the object ball and the right eye can't. In those head positions, I think we would nearly all get our sense of alignment from the left eye, even those of us who consider ourselves right-eye-dominant.

This stuff is very very complicated. And anyone who claims to understand it probably really doesn't.

For the most part I think we should let our mind do its thing. But there probably are some best practices that are helpful in pool.

The single most important one, imo, is to get a good visual perspective on the shot (aka, aim) BEFORE the feet are done moving.

In our classes we have the students choose one of the fractional aim relations: half-ball (center to edge) or quarter ball or three quarter ball, etc and approach the shot with that perspective.

In my opinion, the most valuable part of most "aiming systems" is they get you to do this--aim before the feet stop moving.
Click to expand...

Mike,

Im sorry but I have a bad sense of humor...this cat...he knows a lot about....vision.....can he run out too?.....lol
 
Mike:
In our classes we have the students choose one of the fractional aim relations: half-ball (center to edge) or quarter ball or three quarter ball, etc and approach the shot with that perspective.
Click to expand...
A (hopefully) quick tangent, Mike: does "approach the shot with that perspective" mean physically approach the shot from that angle?

pj
chgo
 
mikepage said:
I think how we meld these images together to produce a combined both-eyes image is complicated and probably very individual. The details probably depend on what our mind thinks is important in the views in front of us.

For instance when we are down on the shot, and only one of our eyes can see the pocket, many of us are probably not going the throw out that information. If you're down low on a thin cut to the left, there are head positions where the left eye can see the edge of the object ball and the right eye can't. In those head positions, I think we would nearly all get our sense of alignment from the left eye, even those of us who consider ourselves right-eye-dominant.
Click to expand...

Good post, especially this part.

Best,
Mike
 
Visual Alignment

Mike,
On a more serious note the first post of the thread takes vision apart into pieces and lets you understand some things about it and you end it by simply saying....that its probably good to let vision do its work.

I agree. A few weeks ago someone posted a link somewhere to a Snooker site where the guy coached snooker players on their aiming. The link was awesome.

This guy took a mirror and taped up and covered everything but a small strip down the center and set it opposite a pool table behind the side pocket.

Then he put a camera on the opposite side and he had two players come in and get into shooting position to pot a shot in the side pocket.

The camera revealed how player #1 let his head move to the side before settling into position. Then he did player #2. Player number 2 went perfectly down into position and illustrated what he wanted done. Then he cross blended the 2 players and you could really see how far out that Player #1 was.

I had been having some trouble on selected days then had days everything was perfect and I thought on this for a long time.

The minute I made myself go straight down into the shot regardless of whether or not I was set up right, my game went up. If I was too far out I would just get back up resight my shot and get down again closer to perfect, make micro adjustments and let it roll.

The visual adjustments as you point out I found to be the first line of defense against a missed shot. If you are not visually aligned first your body will be contorted into a forced alignment as you adjust instead of a natural down position where everything is set, solid and more comfortable. I personally noted that when gross adjustments are made the body has to do things and this affects the shoulders which are attached to the body and then its possible to get your stroke swing off of a perfect line.

I will try to post the link if I can remember where I saw it.

Great post and great point.
 
Mikjary said:
Good post, especially this part.

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

That was interesting.

I posted this on the Main Forum.

I performed an experiment a while back, I have my own table so it was easy to do.

I got a piece of 3x5 paper and punched a 1/4" hole in the center. I placed pool balls at different distances away from the head rail all the way down to the foot rail.

Standing at the head rail, I held the card up away from my eyes at a distance that allowed me to see the closest OB. I then brought the paper back to my face keeping the OB in sight thru the hole. When the paper was right on my face the hole in the paper was dead center on my right eye.

Now here is where it gets interesting. As I repeated this excercise for the balls further away from me, I noticed that when bringing the paper back to my face the hole was moving closer to the bridge of my nose and no longer centered on my right eye.

So, this experiment would suggest to me that the further a ball is away from you the less your dominent eye is involved and that both eyes are seeing the same point at the same time.

John
 
336Robin said:
Mike,
On a more serious note the first post of the thread takes vision apart into pieces and lets you understand some things about it and you end it by simply saying....that its probably good to let vision do its work.

I agree. A few weeks ago someone posted a link somewhere to a Snooker site where the guy coached snooker players on their aiming. The link was awesome.

This guy took a mirror and taped up and covered everything but a small strip down the center and set it opposite a pool table behind the side pocket.

Then he put a camera on the opposite side and he had two players come in and get into shooting position to pot a shot in the side pocket.

The camera revealed how player #1 let his head move to the side before settling into position. Then he did player #2. Player number 2 went perfectly down into position and illustrated what he wanted done. Then he cross blended the 2 players and you could really see how far out that Player #1 was.

I had been having some trouble on selected days then had days everything was perfect and I thought on this for a long time.

The minute I made myself go straight down into the shot regardless of whether or not I was set up right, my game went up. If I was too far out I would just get back up resight my shot and get down again closer to perfect, make micro adjustments and let it roll.

The visual adjustments as you point out I found to be the first line of defense against a missed shot. If you are not visually aligned first your body will be contorted into a forced alignment as you adjust instead of a natural down position where everything is set, solid and more comfortable. I personally noted that when gross adjustments are made the body has to do things and this affects the shoulders which are attached to the body and then its possible to get your stroke swing off of a perfect line.

I will try to post the link if I can remember where I saw it.

Great post and great point.
Click to expand...

Nice post Robin.

I would like to see that demo also. Please post the link when you have time.

Thanks

John
 
Patrick Johnson said:
A (hopefully) quick tangent, Mike: does "approach the shot with that perspective" mean physically approach the shot from that angle?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Yes. When we say approach along the line of the shot, this is what we mean by line of the shot.

I think many players are sloppy about this step, and approach more-or-less along the line of the shot, like generally along the line between the balls. Then their feet end up a half inch or an inch to one side or the other from where they should be. Then you have two problems: (1) the comfortable stroke wants to do something different than what you want it to, and (2) the stroke-strain for cuts to the left is different than it is for cuts to the right.

So if you're doing approximately a quarter-ball cut to the right, and the center of the cueball needs to be aligned with a spot a quarterball out from the left edge of the cueball, then this--a quarter ball out from the left edge of the cueball--is what you look at while approaching the shot. Don't worry about the cueball: your mind sees that.
 
mikepage said:
Yes. When we say approach along the line of the shot, this is what we mean by line of the shot.

I think many players are sloppy about this step, and approach more-or-less along the line of the shot, like generally along the line between the balls. Then their feet end up a half inch or an inch to one side or the other from where they should be. Then you have two problems: (1) the comfortable stroke wants to do something different than what you want it to, and (2) the stroke-strain for cuts to the left is different than it is for cuts to the right.

So if you're doing approximately a quarter-ball cut to the right, and the center of the cueball needs to be aligned with a spot a quarterball out from the left edge of the cueball, then this--a quarter ball out from the left edge of the cueball--is what you look at while approaching the shot. Don't worry about the cueball: your mind sees that.
Click to expand...

Mike -- What you seem to be advocating -- approaching along the line of the shot -- seems to be wholly different from what CTE/Pro-One requires and from what Stan Shuffett says many (most?) top pros do, namely, rotate into the shot line from an angle. I don't know if you have been following what Stan has been posting recently, but here's an example: http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=3942670&postcount=1.
 
AtLarge said:
Mike -- What you seem to be advocating -- approaching along the line of the shot -- seems to be wholly different from what CTE/Pro-One requires and from what Stan Shuffett says many (most?) top pros do, namely, rotate into the shot line from an angle. I don't know if you have been following what Stan has been posting recently, but here's an example: http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=3942670&postcount=1.
Click to expand...

I haven't been following much. But I think the comparison is apples to oranges. I haven't seen Stan play. But I spent hours watching Stevie Moore practice at QMasters. What I'm talking about is consistent with what Stevie appears to do. He bends over away from the table with his stick sideways and finds the line. Then he approaches the table getting into position rotating the stick--and perhaps his gaze-- in from left to right.

I believe we need to "find the line" twice, once before our feet stop moving and again when we get the stick on the line.

I'm talking about the first of these. Much of the discussion here in this forum is about the second. If you do the first well, then the details of how you do the second are probably not critical. It is of course important to do it a consistent way. And I like rotating in so that I am not biased by the line of the stick.

To be successful,we have to
(1) put our stick on the correct line
(2) stroke straight

I think the best way to do this is to
(a) find the line
(b) approach and get in position with the stick mostly out of view
(c) find the line again, putting our stick on it by rotation or whatever
(d) stroke straight

Paying sufficient attention to (a) and (b) allows you to accomplish (d).
 
Me:
...does "approach the shot with that perspective" mean physically approach the shot from that angle?
Click to expand...
Mike:
Yes. When we say approach along the line of the shot, this is what we mean by line of the shot.

I think many players are sloppy about this step, and approach more-or-less along the line of the shot, like generally along the line between the balls.

...

...if you're doing approximately a quarter-ball cut to the right, and the center of the cueball needs to be aligned with a spot a quarterball out from the left edge of the cueball, then this--a quarter ball out from the left edge of the cueball--is what you look at while approaching the shot.
Click to expand...
Yes, initially aligning yourself to an obvious fractional relationship helps (as shown by the popularity of fractional "aiming" systems), and fractional relationships are a more accurate option than simple center-to-center. I try to be even more accurate with my initial alignment by using CB center-to-ghostball center. I don't think my visualization of the ghostball's center is accurate enough to aim by, but it's probably closer on average than the nearest fractional relationship. I visualize the CB and OB contact points to finalize my aim, but don't use that visualization for the initial alignment because it lacks the quick certainty of using the CB center.

pj
chgo
 
Mr. Page,

Can you perhaps elaborate why you think we should lose the visual of the line & the re-esatablish it again?

I'm not suggesting that doing that is bad or anything because I certainly believe that we can stop, be interupted or whatever & then re-establish the line.

However, often, once I find the line & really see it well, I find that I want my eye to stay on that line (kind of like planting your chin) & move my body & cue into position so I can execute along that line.

I'm just curious as to your reasoning.

Thanks in advance &
 
ENGLISH! said:
Mr. Page,

Can you perhaps elaborate why you think we should lose the visual of the line & the re-esatablish it again?

I'm not suggesting that doing that is bad or anything because I certainly believe that we can stop, be interupted or whatever & then re-establish the line.

However, often, once I find the line & really see it well, I find that I want my eye to stay on that line (kind of like planting your chin) & move my body & cue into position so I can execute along that line.
[...]
Click to expand...

When I'm up and approaching the table I can see the line. That is, my gaze is over the cueball and toward the aim point in the vicinity of the object ball. As I start to bend over my gaze is still on the line.

Then as I'm getting the stick into position I have to focus on the tip and cueball. When I'm partway down, my gaze changes from seeing the cueball-object ball line to seeing the cueball with the tip coming in from the left.
 
mikepage said:
I haven't been following much. But I think the comparison is apples to oranges. I haven't seen Stan play. But I spent hours watching Stevie Moore practice at QMasters. What I'm talking about is consistent with what Stevie appears to do. He bends over away from the table with his stick sideways and finds the line. Then he approaches the table getting into position rotating the stick--and perhaps his gaze-- in from left to right.
Click to expand...

But "the line" Stevie (or any CTE/Pro-One user) is finding initially is not the final line of the shot, it's the "visuals" for the shot (CTE line and edge-to-A/B/C line) to position the eyes/body prior to the rotation to the shot line.

I believe we need to "find the line" twice, once before our feet stop moving and again when we get the stick on the line.

I'm talking about the first of these. Much of the discussion here in this forum is about the second. If you do the first well, then the details of how you do the second are probably not critical. It is of course important to do it a consistent way. And I like rotating in so that I am not biased by the line of the stick.
Click to expand...

But you're rotating to the same line you previously identified, right? With Pro-One, the final line is unknown until the rotation.

Obviously, CTE/Pro-One is a different animal from most other aiming methods. I just wondered how you felt about Stan's observation that pros approach the final shot line from an angle, and that this lends support to CTE/Pro-One.
 
mikepage said:
When I'm up and approaching the table I can see the line. That is, my gaze is over the cueball and toward the aim point in the vicinity of the object ball. As I start to bend over my gaze is still on the line.

Then as I'm getting the stick into position I have to focus on the tip and cueball. When I'm partway down, my gaze changes from seeing the cueball-object ball line to seeing the cueball with the tip coming in from the left.
Click to expand...

Mr. Page,

Thanks. I kind of do a similiar thing as I'm getting into shot position my focus on the line is briefly diverted to the tip & cue so I can get them aligined with the shot line & my focus goes right back to the shot line.

Thanks Again &
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top