Fractional aiming & systems like it

HawaiianEye said:
I agree. It seems that a lot of people think ONE approach fits everyone and that is not the case. Pool can be as simple or complicated as one makes it. It is up to the individual to "understand" what works best for THEM.

There are only two things to accomplish in any pool shot. Put the object ball where you intend it to go and put the cue ball where you need it to be. If you can do that, it doesn't matter what cue, what stroke, what tip, or what method you use.

Knowledge and experience is the teacher and sometimes one comes before the other.
Click to expand...

I don't want you to feel I'm picking on your statements, because I'm not. What you have written that I highlighted in red.... I feel too many make the mistake of taking that statement as all you need. I feel that it goes much beyond that.

It takes not only that, but being able to do it repeatedly. Many feel that just because the ball went in, and they got good enough shape to make the next ball, that all is fine. But, what they may have failed to see is that they barely made the ball, and their position play should have been much better.

It wasn't fine, because either they chose wrong, or they executed wrong. The game takes top precision to be repeatable. One should always be looking at what part of the pocket they wanted the ball to go in, and if it actually went in there, or they were off a little. If they don't know if they were off a little, it's just a matter of time before they are off enough to miss the ball. Same goes with position play.
 
randyg said:
Great question deserves an answer.

Not all brains think the same. Some students see lines while others see spots or points on a ball. Other students like fractions and degrees while some may like numbers.

It is the job of a good instructor to find an aiming system that fits the student. Not all students see the same as the instructor.

In our School we approach aiming with several different choices. I am able to teach at least a dozen different systems so our students can be comfortable with the one they choose.

I think an aiming system finds you, not the other way around.

All aiming system come to the same conclusion. Which one you choose has to be correct for you to help you enjoy ball pocketing.

Once you learn the system then you practice the system then you forget the system!

randyg
Click to expand...

Tap Tap Tap!
Very well written- wonderful description!
Hope all is well Randy,
take care
 
Patrick Johnson said:
I'm not very familiar with it - shadows, right?

If it's shadows, it's vaguely similar to Fractional Aiming just because it uses "reference" alignments. But because shadows move depending on the OB's position relative to lights, pockets and the CB, it's also fundamentally different than the fixed reference angles of Fractional Aiming.

I don't know enough about it to have a strong opinion one way or another - I have opinions about how it's been described here, but I'm not sure those descriptions are accurate.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

From what I remember, when I was looking into the SEE system, is that it uses the point where the shadow meets the edge of the ball. That point is constant, and essentially is dividing the ball into thirds. It also uses the three angle system as well.
 
tonythetiger583 said:
...the point where the shadow meets the edge of the ball. That point is constant...
Click to expand...
I sincerely doubt that point is constant, even on the same table. It may be close enough to use as a rough reference, but too approximate for my taste.

Still, to each his own...

pj
chgo
 
For the most part, people and their thinking and learning, can be broken down into two types; concrete and abstract. The method with which people learn can be further broken down into, seeing, hearing, writing it down, doing or a combination of one or more.

For the most part I'm a concrete person. I have all the well known DVD's of CTE, 90/90, etc. I have to admit, I just don't "get" it. I wish I did. Not because I'm looking for a new or better system but that it would be nice to have another tool available.
The ghost ball and fractional methods I can relate too and use both.

I believe that abstract thinkers and learners are better suited to the CTE type of systems.

This is something that the instructors have to recognize. There is no need to be offended because player's prefer one way or another, or have trouble understanding the material. I have wanted to take lessons from some instructors that specialize in these "abstract" methods after watching their DVD's. But quite frankly the vitriol shown in the Aiming Conversation section has turned me off.

I do hope to hook up with Randy G. this summer and maybe pick up some of this. Randy is always a gentleman in his teaching. I appreciate his class in teaching and posting.
 
Ralph Kramden said:
The pocketing contact point will always be 1/2 the distance from the center of the OB to the center of the CB.

The CB center must be aimed past the pocketing contact point by the equal distance from the vertical center
of the OB, whether the CB is aimed straight to that equal distance point, or the CB is deflected into that point.
.
Click to expand...

This can be done only if cb-ob distance is up to 2 diamonds. After that, you are aiming a significantly bigger cue ball to a significantly smaller object ball. The truth is that it's really tough to "fight" our visual intelligence.....

My opinion .
 
ps611846 said:
This can be done only if cb-ob distance is up to 2 diamonds. After that, you are aiming a significantly bigger cue ball to a significantly smaller object ball. The truth is that it's really tough to "fight" our visual intelligence.....

My opinion .
Click to expand...

Do you have a cognitive explanation of what you mean by 'visual intelligence'?

I've heard it said that even some blind people have good visual-spatial intelligence.

Thanks in advance should you have an answer.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

PS The reason I'm asking is that when I look down a set of railroad tracks the vision would tell me that they meet on the other 'end' but my true powers of reason tell me that that is not true. That seems a rather simple 'fight'.
 
Last edited:
ENGLISH! said:
Do you have a cognitive explanation of what you mean by 'visual intelligence'?

I've heard it said that even some blind people have good visual-spatial intelligence.

Thanks in advance should you have an answer.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

PS The reason I'm asking is that when I look down a set of railroad tracks the vision would ell me that they meet on the other 'end' but my true powers of reason tell me that that is not true. That seems rather simple 'fight'.
Click to expand...

When you try to develop a method for pocketing balls you have to be sure that this method works all the time. And at any cb-ob distance. If your "method" tells you that you play let's say a half ball hit at 2 diamonds and the same angle at 4 diamonds, exactly the same way then this method is wrong and it misleads you. It is your visual intelligence that makes the shot and not your "system" or "method".

Visual intelligence is your "enemy" when trying to develop a ball pocketing system-method. And the results can be very misleading. You have to practice like you are an "idiot" until you understand what's going on.

One question for you Rick. And I will not say anything else. Go to the table and practice shots at cb-ob distance about 4,5-5 diamonds. Straight-ins, thick cuts, half ball hits, 45 degrees, 60 degrees, thin and super thin cuts. Can you tell me how often you over-cut the thick cuts and under-cut the thin cuts ?????
 
ps611846 said:
When you try to develop a method for pocketing balls you have to be sure that this method works all the time. And at any cb-ob distance. If your "method" tells you that you play let's say a half ball hit at 2 diamonds and the same angle at 4 diamonds, exactly the same way then this method is wrong and it misleads you. It is your visual intelligence that makes the shot and not your "system" or "method".

Visual intelligence is your "enemy" when trying to develop a ball pocketing system-method. And the results can be very misleading. You have to practice like you are an "idiot" until you understand what's going on.

One question for you Rick. And I will not say anything else. Go to the table and practice shots at cb-ob distance about 4,5-5 diamonds. Straight-ins, thick cuts, half ball hits, 45 degrees, 60 degrees, thin and super thin cuts. Can you tell me how often you over-cut the thick cuts and under-cut the thin cuts ?????
Click to expand...

I can tell you now that when I miss, it is much more often than not an overcut except for the near 1/2 ball hits that any misses might be 50/50.

Keep in mind that I've been playing for more than 4.5 decades & I'm not using the method that Ralph was describing.

I hope your point, whatever it is, can be of help to me & others.

But I did not see an explanation of what you mean by 'visual intelligence'. It was just a general question & not specifically related to what 'Ralph' was talking about. I guess I should have made myself more clear.

Now it seems you're saying that 'visual intelligence' is or can be a hurdle to be overcome while someone else seems to consider it an ally.

I understand what spatial understanding is & I understand how some can understand 2D representations of 3D depictions better than others. Spatial understanding is a good thing for visual artists, architects etc.

Is spatial understanding what you mean when you say visual intelligence or do you simply mean the visual picture that our mind sees & has to interpret?

Again, Thanks & Best 2 You & Yours,
Rick
 
Last edited:
cookie man said:
Is feel better than a rough reference?
Click to expand...

I think most 'feel' is based off of rough visual references.

I just asked about 'visual intelligence' because, to me, one might refer to visual intelligence as the memory of 'pictures' of shots that went well.

Our subconscious uses every bit of input that it can get. Our subconscious might combine conscious input with the memory of a 'visual picture' of a successful shot & we, our subconscious, might make the adjustment from the conscious input to match that picture & when the real conscious world matches the subconscious & 'visual intelligence' & it 'feels' right, we pull the trigger.

Just some thoughts while not fully knowing what some mean by 'visual intelligence'.

Best 2 You, Yours, & All,
Rick
 
Last edited:
Ralph Kramden:
The pocketing contact point will always be 1/2 the distance from the center of the OB to the center of the CB.

The CB center must be aimed past the pocketing contact point by the equal distance from the vertical center
of the OB, whether the CB is aimed straight to that equal distance point, or the CB is deflected into that point.
Click to expand...
ps611846:
This can be done only if cb-ob distance is up to 2 diamonds. After that, you are aiming a significantly bigger cue ball to a significantly smaller object ball. The truth is that it's really tough to "fight" our visual intelligence.....

My opinion .
Click to expand...
I think that's backward. "Double the offset" gets more accurate as the CB/OB distance gets longer, not shorter, and the apparent sizes of the two balls doesn't figure into it.

pj
chgo
 
cookie man said:
Is feel better than a rough reference?
Click to expand...
They're different things. Feel is how we aim; references help us in that process. Some references are more precise than others (more "objective" - e.g., fractions), some are more accurate (closer to the actual aim line - e.g., ghost ball).

None of them replace aiming "by feel", but any of them can help if it matches your needs and playing "style".

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
They're different things. Feel is how we aim; references help us in that process. Some references are more precise than others (more "objective" - e.g., fractions), some are more accurate (closer to the actual aim line - e.g., ghost ball).

None of them replace aiming "by feel", but any of them can help if it matches your needs and playing "style".

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

I am not a part of your, WE AIM BY FEEL......just for the record.

Stan Shuffett
 
Patrick Johnson said:
They're different things. Feel is how we aim; references help us in that process. Some references are more precise than others (more "objective" - e.g., fractions), some are more accurate (closer to the actual aim line - e.g., ghost ball).

None of them replace aiming "by feel", but any of them can help if it matches your needs and playing "style".

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Maybe related, maybe not, but do you have an opinion on what causes steering of the cue?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top