Visualizing the balls as horizontal sections through the equator basically reduces the 3D problem to 2D, and casts the aiming problem as that seen in carom pool (that game played on a wooden board with discs instead of balls). Is aiming easier in carom pool compared to regular pool? I would say yes. Furthermore, if you are writing code for aiming problem calculations, the initial step is to ignore the spherical nature of the pool balls, and treat them as discs. So, for those who can actually see past the spherical nature of the balls and visualize them as equatorial discs, there may be a real advantage in aiming.
Seeing the contact point on the object ball.
- Thread starter jimstone
- Start date
Allison Fischer has said that she looks at the point on the OB that is farthest from the pocket.
I know this thread is about contact points
But if you use fractional aiming
You could just aim directly at a spot on the object ball
And not have to try to aim somewhere else to make a certain spot on the cue ball hit a certain spot on the object ball
Just saying…..
But if you use fractional aiming
You could just aim directly at a spot on the object ball
And not have to try to aim somewhere else to make a certain spot on the cue ball hit a certain spot on the object ball
Just saying…..
Yes. You aim directly at an estimated target. Like I said previously, you determine the stick alignment with CPG. No guesswork. No aiming at la la land.I know this thread is about contact points
But if you use fractional aiming
You could just aim directly at a spot on the object ball
And not have to try to aim somewhere else to make a certain spot on the cue ball hit a certain spot on the object ball
Just saying…..
Except fractional aiming (like all systems) only gets you close - you have to estimate the actual aim line from there. Very rarely does fractional aiming put you directly on the correct aim line with no adjustment.… if you use fractional aiming
You could just aim directly at a spot on the object ball
And not have to try to aim somewhere else to make a certain spot on the cue ball hit a certain spot on the object ball
Just saying…..
pj
chgo
I have never played where perimeter lighting was used yet. Its also not my only method for aiming. I use ghost ball, contact point, fractional, and CTE, doesn't everyone use multiple aiming "systems"? On super thin hits how would you even use contact point or fractional, to me that would be essentially ghost ball because you are trying to put the cue ball at a point to barely touch the OB. Its really hard to even see the contact point in a case like this. straight shots or close to straight I use contact point, its very easy to see the contact point and the pocket at the same time. I would guess I use all of the aiming systems at the same time unconsciously, one system backs the other one up. I like CTE because for me it gets feet and body in the right in the right place, it forces me to always move forward into a shot, never slide sideways into a shot.
I shoot thin hits by the tangent line. It's like billiards. You do have to get familiar with the sides of the balls but it's like shooting any other shot.
Last edited:
My point was with fractional aiming you have a direct target not trying to juxtapose 2 contact patches as @straightline would say (i think)
but it's better than missing all the time
A well known way to connect the contact points (assuming you can "see" the OB contact point) is to aim CB center to the point twice the distance from the OB's center or twice the distance from the OB's outside edge to the contact point. This is called "double distance" (when doubling from centerball) or "double overlap" (when doubling from the ball's edge).
You can also learn to simply recognize the distance to aim from the OB's center or contact point for the cut angle needed.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
Thick or thin cut I aim directly at the contact point whether I’m using side or not. I know other players who swear by ghost ball, cte, track system .. whatever but your brain is making corrections for you most of the time. Case in point ..
We took a ruler at the hall years ago. Setup a shot about 7 feet from CB and ask the player to pinpoint the center of the ghost ball as I stepped away from object ball with a ruler held vertically. They said stop when they thought ruler was at center of ghost ball. We then measured distance and all the measurements were different, one player marked at 1 5/8 inches if I remember correctly. The weird thing is that each player made the shot with no problem.
It’s a reference point and after much practice your brain will make the corrections until you ‘feel’ it’s right. After many years the same has happened to me and although I know it’s not possible to aim directly at the contact point due to the “relationship of the spheres” it works perfectly for me. I don’t even see the balls as round, don’t care, I see the contact point clearly, better when I was younger, and the ball goes in the hole. I’d aim the same way if the balls were square
We took a ruler at the hall years ago. Setup a shot about 7 feet from CB and ask the player to pinpoint the center of the ghost ball as I stepped away from object ball with a ruler held vertically. They said stop when they thought ruler was at center of ghost ball. We then measured distance and all the measurements were different, one player marked at 1 5/8 inches if I remember correctly. The weird thing is that each player made the shot with no problem.
It’s a reference point and after much practice your brain will make the corrections until you ‘feel’ it’s right. After many years the same has happened to me and although I know it’s not possible to aim directly at the contact point due to the “relationship of the spheres” it works perfectly for me. I don’t even see the balls as round, don’t care, I see the contact point clearly, better when I was younger, and the ball goes in the hole. I’d aim the same way if the balls were square
Remember, however, that there is a margin of error allowed to each side of the center pocket line, so a little error either way should still pot the ball--of course, the error can be larger as the ball is closer to the pocket.
I learned pretty quickly that one cannot aim *directly* at the contact point, as it creates an undercut situation, and corrected my aim to compensate. I think that it is also possible to instead train oneself to aim at the 'closer' side of the pocket (overcut) and THEN aim at the CP,so that the natural undercut is compensated for by using the overcut, line-to-pocket. I'm sure that still falls apart at some point, but if the offset of the aimpoint to the contact point is consistent, then maybe the divergence in the two lines would be consistent--the object ball aiming line, compared to the traveled path. [I've often wanted to test on this, but never think about it when I'm actually near a table.]
Never understood the logic in "aiming" at the contact point. You're looking at a spot that creates a line NOT parallel to your cue. It's close, and like I said earlier, you're aiming instinctively anyway, but why create a line you can't actually follow?
IMO, the only "spot" that makes sense is the spot your stick is pointing at. This is the only spot that is parallel to the stick. You pick a corresponding spot on the OB, or on the cloth if it's away from the OB. The spot can be a light reflection on the ball, or an inlay feature on the ball, or a shadow on the cloth, or a piece of lint on the cloth, or a divot on the cloth, etc.
This is not an aiming method, because it's not telling you how thick or thin to hit the ball for a given shot and intended CB position play after the shot. You need to know that based on experience. But once you know that, this method's purpose is to keep your eyes parallel to the stick direction, so your eyes don't subconsciously throw your stick crooked mid stroke.
This is not an aiming method, because it's not telling you how thick or thin to hit the ball for a given shot and intended CB position play after the shot. You need to know that based on experience. But once you know that, this method's purpose is to keep your eyes parallel to the stick direction, so your eyes don't subconsciously throw your stick crooked mid stroke.
In my case, that is what I mean, although I would add that I mean the *intended* contact point. Due to the curvature of the balls (equators), the cueball will *impact* at an "earlier" spot on the ball. I can see that the actual impact point could then been interpreted as the "contact" point.
Sorry, if the is pendantic but I wanted to (over-) clarify.
Not always. I have a student who actually thought that his stick should point through the center of the cue ball and at the contact point on the object ball. He was having a lot of trouble pocketing balls. The real problems came when he consciously and carefully used that "system". Of course he hit every cut shot too full. He played much better if he played relaxed and without the system.
With fractional aiming, adjustments must be made on nearly every shot. Fractions only clearly define a few cut angles (full, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4…).
pj
chgo