Recently saw this. Any thoughts from the denizens of the aiming asylum?? https://www.cuedrills.com/tangent-line-aiming/
Tangent aiming.....................
- Thread starter garczar
- Start date
I skimmed the main page....
As a player that manlipulates the CB with some level of spin on literally every shot, I think this system would require excessive re-calculation. ...but I guess every system has that on some level. That and determining carom angle may just be the most difficult part of the game. Sure a few inches isn't that tough, but if you're no where near a contact rail it screams overly difficult.
To be honest once they claimed: "when the cue ball is sliding and hits an object ball, it always separates at 90 degrees from the cut angle" , I tuned out.
As a player that manlipulates the CB with some level of spin on literally every shot, I think this system would require excessive re-calculation. ...but I guess every system has that on some level. That and determining carom angle may just be the most difficult part of the game. Sure a few inches isn't that tough, but if you're no where near a contact rail it screams overly difficult.
To be honest once they claimed: "when the cue ball is sliding and hits an object ball, it always separates at 90 degrees from the cut angle" , I tuned out.
I like that it provides more visual information for shots. But it really doesn't seem like estimating the tangent line carom would be any more effective or efficient as estimating the contact point or ghostball. It's sort of an indirect way of aiming. I mean, if you can recognize where the cb needs to be in order to send it along the tagent line, then you already know where it needs to be in order to pocket the ball.
They may have mis-phrased it but doesn't the CB leave the OB at a 90/tangent if its not spinning?
I guess theorically speaking yes...
Well, does it or doesn't it???
In theory yes, in practical application the odds of hitting with absolute zero spin are small. Most of the time you can't even strike the CB with a flat cue. Depending on the force of the shot the CB could be hopping. Lots of variables to playing caroms.
For one thing, the triangles could help pick a spot on the o.b., which is still contact point aim, etc.
I learned carom billiards at the same time I learned pool. They may seem the same, but I learned them completely differently as far as feeling the shots. For three cushion, I had only a rough idea of where the first object ball was going. At pool, my idea of where the cue ball was going was similarly hazy. As the two games sort of came together for me, I found that on some shots at pool a good way to aim was by controlling where the cue ball went. If the cue ball goes there after contact, then the object ball must go into the pocket, so just send the cue ball there.
I don't do that anymore. As I recall, it was mostly for thin cuts.
I don't do that anymore. As I recall, it was mostly for thin cuts.
Calling Mr.Straightline to the stage....
I spend too much time in this corner of the forum...lol
Yes. when i shoot really thin cuts I aim where cueball is going when OB is going to pocket. It is easier than normal aiming. Also straight/almost straight I use same principle.
The statement is correct even if the cue ball is not sliding.
The initial direction off contact regardless of object ball contact is along the tangent line.
Even on a draw shot the cb travels the tangent line before drawing back, except for straight in shots because there is no tangent line.
On rail shots the cb follows the tangent line for a very short distance (equal to the amount of cushion compression). Proof of this is the fact that you can shoot a frozen ball a little thick or a little thin to maneuver the cb as needed. If the cushion were rigid this wouldn't be an option because the cb wouldn't be able to follow the tangent line for that fraction of second that it does when the cushion compresses.
Last edited:
draw/follow shots both start down the TL then alter direction.
Interesting test for those that care enough to try....
Set up any cut shot and use donuts to mark not only the starting points of the CB and OB, but also the 90 degree tangent line path lets say 1ft from the OB. Hit this shot as much as you like, however you like, and see what percentage of the actual tangent paths split the donut down the middle.
Not hit the dount. Split the donut. Seeing as the this 90degree rule is a certainty I'm expecting near 100% results when someone is purposely trying to pull it off.
Set up any cut shot and use donuts to mark not only the starting points of the CB and OB, but also the 90 degree tangent line path lets say 1ft from the OB. Hit this shot as much as you like, however you like, and see what percentage of the actual tangent paths split the donut down the middle.
Not hit the dount. Split the donut. Seeing as the this 90degree rule is a certainty I'm expecting near 100% results when someone is purposely trying to pull it off.
I don't spend enough. The illogic involved has a very tiny safety window. Carom aiming works for the obvious reasons and it's part of contact geometry. I think the value in an aiming systems is it gets the shooter in the habit of shooting the cue ball at another ball with a specific collision in mind.Calling Mr.Straightline to the stage....
I spend too much time in this corner of the forum...lol
That would be tough to do 100% of the time. Regardless of the fact that every cut angle produces an immediate 90° separation (tangent line) between the cb and ob's post impact paths, trying to hit the perfect angle everytime to send the cb exactly down a pre-planned tangent line requires 100% cut accuracy.
But, seriously, it doesn't have to be so perfectly accurate. Just being able to recognize the tangent line is very helpful for cb control, despite whether or not we hit that exact tangent line. But I don't think it's all that useful for aiming, except maybe very thin cut shots.
Last edited: