I'd love to try what you're suggesting, but based on your post-- I have no clue what you're really saying.
Re-post and give us step-by-step details as to what you're doing so we can replicate it.
Does anyone else understand? If so, help me catch-up.
Dave
This is something to just tinker around with and maybe it will help with perception or it may unlock something for you. If you wanted to make it into a system it would be a fractional system.
Matching up "quarters" from the cue ball to the object ball works in many ways, shapes and sizes. The question to ask your self is this: Is it creating a consistent connection that allows me to hit all parts of the pocket at will....if you can't do this, then you must use spin, and when you spin the ball you induce a "glancing blow" that doesn't give as strong a "feedback", thus reducing your touch and feel for the game.
Will Efren go down in history as having great eyesight (does anyone even know if he has 20/20?) or will he go down in history as having a great Touch, and Feel for the game of pool.....I can't speak for all champion players, but I have yet to hear any of them say they won a tournament because they were "aiming" or seeing particularly good that day....that week....or at all for that matter.'The Game is the Teacher, if We Listen'
Of course the connection has to be there. That's really what all the conversation about aiming is about, finding a way that connects the active parts, body and cue, to the inactive parts balls and pockets, that is reliable. As you get better you get more in touch with that and more consistent. As some reaches your level, world class, then they will have had to come up with something that they use constantly. No one gets to that level by using different methods each week.
I feel like aiming has long been something people just took for granted. Of course when you see efren play no one comments on his aiming because making balls automatically means he aimed correctly. Same with you, no one could watch you play and say you are using TOI on every shot. People discuss results not method.
But the level of interest in aiming indicates to me the deeper issue of people not being able to find that consistent connection by focusing on touch and feel and hitting a million balls. I think that once they do focus on aiming then they do discover the connection and that leads to a better touch and understanding of how to fine tune the shot when it called for.
I think any such ball-to-ball methods force the shooter to use the real objects they can see to make the connection.
This thread is funny. My interpretation of the OP's post is to purposely line up at an angle that is not even close to making the ball. And then just trust your body to see if it will make an adjustment on its own, maybe even mid stroke, to make the ball. The half ball alignment is of no consequence, and was just an example. He could have said aim the CB 3 inches to the left of every OB instead.
Instead, half the posters make this a CTE or a TOI or an ETC thread, and take it all literally.
I'll throw in my own acronym, BTW, this is my opinion of shane's "Stick aiming system". He described some helping visual reference he came up with for some certain shots, in a couple of minutes on TAR video. And it spawned dozens and dozens of pages of "proof" that this is what Shane does, based on his brief explanation. The exact same concept is happening in this thread. Someone takes a "he said" and turns it into "gospel".
Yes, someone pissed in my cornflakes!
This thread is funny. My interpretation of the OP's post is to purposely line up at an angle that is not even close to making the ball. And then just trust your body to see if it will make an adjustment on its own, maybe even mid stroke, to make the ball. The half ball alignment is of no consequence, and was just an example. He could have said aim the CB 3 inches to the left of every OB instead.
Instead, half the posters make this a CTE or a TOI or an ETC thread, and take it all literally.
I'll throw in my own acronym, BTW, this is my opinion of shane's "Stick aiming system". He described some helping visual reference he came up with for some certain shots, in a couple of minutes on TAR video. And it spawned dozens and dozens of pages of "proof" that this is what Shane does, based on his brief explanation. The exact same concept is happening in this thread. Someone takes a "he said" and turns it into "gospel".
Yes, someone pissed in my cornflakes!
This thread is funny. My interpretation of the OP's post is to purposely line up at an angle that is not even close to making the ball. And then just trust your body to see if it will make an adjustment on its own, maybe even mid stroke, to make the ball. The half ball alignment is of no consequence, and was just an example. He could have said aim the CB 3 inches to the left of every OB instead.
Instead, half the posters make this a CTE or a TOI or an ETC thread, and take it all literally.
I'll throw in my own acronym, BTW, this is my opinion of shane's "Stick aiming system". He described some helping visual reference he came up with for some certain shots, in a couple of minutes on TAR video. And it spawned dozens and dozens of pages of "proof" that this is what Shane does, based on his brief explanation. The exact same concept is happening in this thread. Someone takes a "he said" and turns it into "gospel".
Yes, someone pissed in my cornflakes!
...snip....Actually Shane gave someone else about a 30 minute lesson on how he aims trying to explain the method he uses. ...snip...
...snip....I think perhaps you are misunderstand the OPs point here. He is merely saying he was playing around with something that he found to work. And it's completely true that it works. Not perfectly for all shots but for a lot of them.... snip....
hearsay![]()
and more he said she said leading to gospel
I can see how people will interpret things differently. Only way to be sure in this case is for the OP to come back and clarify.
This is the right idea, but remember, just bored and playing around with things, not extolling a new or revolutionary aiming system. Or any aiming system at all. Just being interested in how the human spirit can make a correction from a half ball starting point.
I liked that thread that tried to describe every aiming system on the planet, wish we could start that one up again !!
This thread is funny. My interpretation of the OP's post is to purposely line up at an angle that is not even close to making the ball. And then just trust your body to see if it will make an adjustment on its own, maybe even mid stroke, to make the ball. The half ball alignment is of no consequence, and was just an example. He could have said aim the CB 3 inches to the left of every OB instead.
Instead, half the posters make this a CTE or a TOI or an ETC thread, and take it all literally.
I'll throw in my own acronym, BTW, this is my opinion of shane's "Stick aiming system". He described some helping visual reference he came up with for some certain shots, in a couple of minutes on TAR video. And it spawned dozens and dozens of pages of "proof" that this is what Shane does, based on his brief explanation. The exact same concept is happening in this thread. Someone takes a "he said" and turns it into "gospel".
Yes, someone pissed in my cornflakes!