Is there an app for that?
Ferrell aiming
- Thread starter Rono8275
- Start date
Is there an app for that?
Here’s the thing guys and gals.
When you put that bullet in the barrel of a gun, the barrel and its bore and its aim points you use are all lined up.....so one doesn’t have to worry about the bullet.
If you stand with your cuestick and the shaft is in between your eyes in front of you, and due to parallax you will seem to “see through” the shaft or could say it becomes opaque looking.
The shafts sides at the lower end line up with the edges of the cb (the shaft gets bigger closer and smaller farther from the eyes). And the top end will be on the ob....
If you used ghost ball then you’d just line it up with the sides of the ghostball.
If you were using fractional type then you’d see the shaft overlapping the ob at whatever lap
If you look at the shadows and use the ferrule/tip whatever it’ll work there too.
When you line up the cuestick with the ball like that superimposing their diameters on one another.....
Well then when you bend over you don’t have to imagine the edges of the cb anymore, you just point your stick at your spot.
There are ball Aimers and shaft aimers. Among the shaft aimers there are diff styles.
Just because someone says sides of shaft or ferrule doesn’t mean they are necessarily using my or Shane’s method, could be s.a.m. Or fractional.....could be ghost ball.
With this type of aim style fidgeting while down isn’t really an option, you will gaff up the purposeful relation of the shaft to the cb and the shot....you can move on the vertical axis but not really much more than a very fine if at all horizontal one, BHE....won’t work here either.
This put in that way should make much more sense in regards to the common uses of shaft aiming.
It’s not for everyone, yes many many players use a version of some form by way of using the shaft basically as a pointing device when shooting.....how they get to where they are aiming at is a broad subject.
I just wanted to make that perfectly clear because the discussion seemed to zone in on particular method/s and that/those few are not required to be used to use your cuestick to aim and align.
Now throw English in there.
Now how in the heck is that done shooting like that? Is your next head scratcher right
.
-best wishes
Greyghost
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
When you put that bullet in the barrel of a gun, the barrel and its bore and its aim points you use are all lined up.....so one doesn’t have to worry about the bullet.
If you stand with your cuestick and the shaft is in between your eyes in front of you, and due to parallax you will seem to “see through” the shaft or could say it becomes opaque looking.
The shafts sides at the lower end line up with the edges of the cb (the shaft gets bigger closer and smaller farther from the eyes). And the top end will be on the ob....
If you used ghost ball then you’d just line it up with the sides of the ghostball.
If you were using fractional type then you’d see the shaft overlapping the ob at whatever lap
If you look at the shadows and use the ferrule/tip whatever it’ll work there too.
When you line up the cuestick with the ball like that superimposing their diameters on one another.....
Well then when you bend over you don’t have to imagine the edges of the cb anymore, you just point your stick at your spot.
There are ball Aimers and shaft aimers. Among the shaft aimers there are diff styles.
Just because someone says sides of shaft or ferrule doesn’t mean they are necessarily using my or Shane’s method, could be s.a.m. Or fractional.....could be ghost ball.
With this type of aim style fidgeting while down isn’t really an option, you will gaff up the purposeful relation of the shaft to the cb and the shot....you can move on the vertical axis but not really much more than a very fine if at all horizontal one, BHE....won’t work here either.
This put in that way should make much more sense in regards to the common uses of shaft aiming.
It’s not for everyone, yes many many players use a version of some form by way of using the shaft basically as a pointing device when shooting.....how they get to where they are aiming at is a broad subject.
I just wanted to make that perfectly clear because the discussion seemed to zone in on particular method/s and that/those few are not required to be used to use your cuestick to aim and align.
Now throw English in there.
Now how in the heck is that done shooting like that? Is your next head scratcher right
. -best wishes
Greyghost
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Best wishes? Are you leaving forever?
I believe I have boiled down "aim" to aiming the entire stick itself as if its floating in space and then simply aligning or......drum roll please, POSITIONING the entire body around the cue as a COMPLETE offset, to be able to deliver the force energy directly toward the target line. Anything less, is a warp deflective twist. The tip and shaft is irrelevant to offcenter axis contact, relevant to shotline. If the back of the stick goes toward the target, within physic limit factors of pitch OR cueball axis allowance, relative to path, the cueball holds the intended line and will not recognize "sqwirt".
Easy enough. No longer do people have to succumb to "things". Thou is't truly free my children. Rejoice in thy knowledge and praise thy deliver'er liberatorism. Thou does not have to toil in the fields no'mo.
On the fifth day, HE created exoskele'tort and it was good.
Best results y'all, Hopes and wishes is for suckers. I shall send O'sullivan to retirement with my'en 14mm force delivery tingler.
Bye!
☢👁
⚛🐿
I believe I have boiled down "aim" to aiming the entire stick itself as if its floating in space and then simply aligning or......drum roll please, POSITIONING the entire body around the cue as a COMPLETE offset, to be able to deliver the force energy directly toward the target line. Anything less, is a warp deflective twist. The tip and shaft is irrelevant to offcenter axis contact, relevant to shotline. If the back of the stick goes toward the target, within physic limit factors of pitch OR cueball axis allowance, relative to path, the cueball holds the intended line and will not recognize "sqwirt".
Easy enough. No longer do people have to succumb to "things". Thou is't truly free my children. Rejoice in thy knowledge and praise thy deliver'er liberatorism. Thou does not have to toil in the fields no'mo.
On the fifth day, HE created exoskele'tort and it was good.
Best results y'all, Hopes and wishes is for suckers. I shall send O'sullivan to retirement with my'en 14mm force delivery tingler.
Bye!
☢👁⚛🐿
Did the bleak equal really reject the hit? The polished disaster can't stain the effect of banking, though the blaring audience can't slip the series of aims needed. Is the practise cycle better than the status? All I know is that the unsteady group prays into the opposite depression.
.
That randomly generated sequence of words made more sense to me than several posts in this thread. This must be what it's like to have a stroke. It's like I can understand the words, but the meaning is completely garbled.
.
That randomly generated sequence of words made more sense to me than several posts in this thread. This must be what it's like to have a stroke. It's like I can understand the words, but the meaning is completely garbled.
Best wishes? Are you leaving forever?
I believe I have boiled down "aim" to aiming the entire stick itself as if its floating in space and then simply aligning or......drum roll please, POSITIONING the entire body around the cue as a COMPLETE offset, to be able to deliver the force energy directly toward the target line. Anything less, is a warp deflective twist. The tip and shaft is irrelevant to offcenter axis contact, relevant to shotline. If the back of the stick goes toward the target, within physic limit factors of pitch OR cueball axis allowance, relative to path, the cueball holds the intended line and will not recognize "sqwirt".
Easy enough. No longer do people have to succumb to "things". Thou is't truly free my children. Rejoice in thy knowledge and praise thy deliver'er liberatorism. Thou does not have to toil in the fields no'mo.
On the fifth day, HE created exoskele'tort and it was good.
Best results y'all, Hopes and wishes is for suckers. I shall send O'sullivan to retirement with my'en 14mm force delivery tingler.
Bye!
Like Barry Stark says, you aim with your grip hand.
And like Bert Kinister says in vol. 11 Advanced Fundamentals, you align your body to allow your arm to naturally fall down onto the shot line.
Nice post.
John
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks, I believe this is why the average pool player who is apt to run a twenty or so in straight pool or consistently run out from the 5 or 6 and occasionally break and run out in nine ball, miss wildy on fairly basic shots on a snooker table. The bigger heavier balls in pool are more resistant to warped delivery and shorter distance masks the "miss" in effect because the ball is pocketed but poor position of cb is dismissed as "speed control" issues.
Then when speed is supposedly adjusted properly, the pocketing suffers in many cases, and the whole issue either way is misalignment typically in the mechanical area, where visual is usually correct.
Scope and rifle don't quite match.
If fluid alignment is not achieved, then timing becomes the volatile factor and that's not a good way to play imo for obvious reasons. Enter pressure into the equation and it's game over mate unless pedigree is developed.
Id rather develope the delivery system and there's too much evidence out there, proving my theory or opinion to be correct.
Preachin to the quior to some but not everyone. I am sure you agree as I know you delve into these things.
Maybe they were too cool for school? Their blithering is annoying and not worth bothering to read. They sound like idiots. They need to knock off the jive crap and learn to communicate. They're not making any fans here.
"My Vorpal cue jabbed 'er wonky and the shot went snicker-snack. 'Twas brillig."
Just sayin'. :wink:
Actually I kind of agree with you.
That’s exactly why I fell into a dressing the ball like I do and use my cue instead
I’m just pointing it and letting elbow fold closed as the hand swings: every person can stand up and give that quick snap elbow bend with no cue in hand, everyone can bend over and with out the balls make an effortless swinging motion with superb momentum and acceleration.
Now put the cb there.....and suddenly the smooth fluidity is gone and now choppy and elbow droppy blah......
For hundred years people have told everyone shoot through the cb, follow through the cb etc. no don’t hit it stroke it......blind leading blind and even at times fearfully addressing the white round ball as it were.
So noticing that 9999/10000 don’t ever truly have a lot of benefit with that; I figured I’d just line up with it perfect, then drop in and forget about it close the trap that is my arm and touch my tip at what lies ahead.
I find the other way brings many, cue stick worries because they don’t truly know the cue and that helps build fear or intimidation from the cb.
I’m not saying it’s the wrong way to teach or learn but Itsceasy to see how it effects many players and stunts them
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
LOL My school was too cool for me.
I believe what is happening in that case, is the eyes are influencing the mind-muscle link to the stroke delivery.
This is why, even pointing the stick in the stand up, needs an offset requirement for particular shot relationships as I'm sure you know there are shots where this technique does not work by itself.
The pesky gap scenario that I call the blade runner equation.
But what about thickening up the relationship at farther distances?
We tried that with promising results but then the thickening agent is relative to what side of the angle you are forced to stand on.....annnnnd another mutation arises. We made you as perfect as you can ever be.
The pointing technique works as well as you can maintain or understand, transition shifts in eye alignment from stand up to address and or stroke offset compensations and or bridge length compensations and or grip position compensations and or grip tuck and roll positions and or skew shifting of eyes while down on the shot.
The eyes while down on the shot can only skew so much toward the physical mechanics aspect. But boy does it have a big effect and overall, the eyes not only control aiming, but delivery as well.
This has got to be why, when stroking at nothing and stroking with a cb and ob in front of you as a target, is wildly two different things.
I have not solved this dilemma yet in the form of "understanding" other than feel and experience BUT, I have verifiers in the stroke itself, based on stance and sequences.
Spring tensions and looseness of stroke on left or right of center cb axis.
BUUUUUUTTTTTTT, once again the blade runner equation raises its ugly head at now a 5% factor with all verifiers in congruency, yet, it fails because of "there's something else and it ain't no man, we're awwwl gonna DIE"
The predator equation.
But anyway, line up on center axis to contact point and when you have that ready to pull the trigger, now turn your head to the left about 30-40 degrees but still try to see the shot the best you can, despite the funky visual, and pull the trigger.
You now get a right English spin while being originally set up for center cb contact at ob aim point or whatever ever the fk one wants to call it.
A visual/physical pivot.
The same works for vertical pitch as well.
Left and right shaft bias can be controlled also by how far or close your eyes are to the cueball.
Set up normally for a center axis delivery of a zero angle. Now bring your face closer to the cb by 6 inches or more or as close as you can get and pull the trigger and then tell me what side of the object ball the cb collides with, resulting in a left or right miss.
Tell me if you try it and I know which way it misses and I'll state it and you tell me if i was RIGHT.
Last edited:
I mostly understand, I think, what you are trying to convey.
Tho I do believe the eyes have a lot to do with what happens to the stroke.
Alignment I believe has even more to do with it.
Well let me water that down some.
They are both equally weighted in his they effect one another.
A scope always aims right where it is aimed at, now how we mount that scope, and how we peer through it....is what determines what we hit.
I’m a firm believer that bad alignment initially creates things like swooping strokes and rollingwrists etc. because the line that the arm can move in with the cue does not match what the eyes are looking at.
Rolling a wrist let’s that arm open using rotation to maintain direct course to the target.
Like a jab is thrown, it’s just on a diff axis. Fencers use those motions as well.
But again these sports require one to position themselves as a small target, and they require much balance especially in regards to front to back motion.
For them that’s just how it’s got to be. Or they would just be back hand slapping one another all day.
Sure we can learn to shoot like that. Earls got how many world and us open championships?
I think this is the reason so many worry so much about the aiming....they feel just fine at the table, so it must be my eyes?
we use our eyes all day long.... and never throw them under the bus like that.
Or it’s the cue...no it’s the tip or shaft lol.
I think most would agree that just because we can do something, doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
And the idea is for however one may choose to see the shot, they must have the cue and the eyes and the body positioned so it can deliver in a straight line all coinciding with one another.
It is that simple.
The more we venture away and the more gremlins were going to experience.
One can plainly see it between the social commentary between pool and snooker players.
Snooker players just don’t have all these fundamental areas rearing their ugly heads on every shot.
Everyone knows it’s mechanically refined and simplified.
Fight the nature of the beast. But the hoppes, earls, and effrens of the world are the oddity not the standard.
I’d bet my entire check Jeff bagwell would never teach someone to step backward hitting a baseball lol.
Some things we do and teach others is just that plain silly
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Tho I do believe the eyes have a lot to do with what happens to the stroke.
Alignment I believe has even more to do with it.
Well let me water that down some.
They are both equally weighted in his they effect one another.
A scope always aims right where it is aimed at, now how we mount that scope, and how we peer through it....is what determines what we hit.
I’m a firm believer that bad alignment initially creates things like swooping strokes and rollingwrists etc. because the line that the arm can move in with the cue does not match what the eyes are looking at.
Rolling a wrist let’s that arm open using rotation to maintain direct course to the target.
Like a jab is thrown, it’s just on a diff axis. Fencers use those motions as well.
But again these sports require one to position themselves as a small target, and they require much balance especially in regards to front to back motion.
For them that’s just how it’s got to be. Or they would just be back hand slapping one another all day.
Sure we can learn to shoot like that. Earls got how many world and us open championships?
I think this is the reason so many worry so much about the aiming....they feel just fine at the table, so it must be my eyes?
we use our eyes all day long.... and never throw them under the bus like that.
Or it’s the cue...no it’s the tip or shaft lol.
I think most would agree that just because we can do something, doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
And the idea is for however one may choose to see the shot, they must have the cue and the eyes and the body positioned so it can deliver in a straight line all coinciding with one another.
It is that simple.
The more we venture away and the more gremlins were going to experience.
One can plainly see it between the social commentary between pool and snooker players.
Snooker players just don’t have all these fundamental areas rearing their ugly heads on every shot.
Everyone knows it’s mechanically refined and simplified.
Fight the nature of the beast. But the hoppes, earls, and effrens of the world are the oddity not the standard.
I’d bet my entire check Jeff bagwell would never teach someone to step backward hitting a baseball lol.
Some things we do and teach others is just that plain silly
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very good.
I suppose you see a curved stick at address sometimes, mainly to the left but can be visually manipulated through physical alignment to curve to the right as well.
It means something in reality, despite visual warp. This can be used as another verifier.
I believe our paths will cross one day sir. That will be a good day I believe.
In pool, whats in front of you is practically unimportant in comparison to behind you.
Visual warp is a good way to generally describe a few of the workings yes. Especially in regard to what appears to be the balls edge.
No ive never noticed my shaft curving besides its perspective of that shrinking cone, directly away.....it would most def not work the same if the shaft were a linear tube.
Now don’t get me wrong sometimes when I look through it, there is a ghost of itself (shaft). Generally speaking to the left....it’s faint and I have always disregarded it. It is just a remnant of half itself
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For the record, I have today achieved the platform toward what I hope will be 100% alignment awareness. I no longer have to look where my feet are. This has been ultimately what I've been working for, 10-12 hours every day for approximately 13 months. I now have complete awareness of how to align properly on both sides of the cueball and you in fact, helped solidify a few things that, ironically have been working on a few days prior to discovering your jiberish'ish'ish.......ish.
3 sides to a cb, 3 relative angles of attack per side.
I can "see" it now. This is a monumental achievement for me and now I feel extremely tired and I feel as if the weight of the world is lifted off my shoulders. I never lost my mind, but I feel the insanity has lifted away. This has been infinitely harder than 15 hours a day, average, in the oilfield, 6-7 months at a time with no days off. To me, that was easy but this pool thing has been much funner.
Look at this picture of what is 3 snooker balls. Which color or what ball is what, is of no matter.
They are just 3 spheres in 2 dimensional reality when looking at the pic.
I said they are spheres in reality. All Concentric in reality.
Based on the picture alone, would you consider me ignorant or a liar or delusional, based on the picture and my statement in a complete vacuum?
It's obvious, something is wrong with said statement and or photo. Can you tell me what you see in the picture about each ball?
Attachments
Last edited:
From Paultex
Can you tell me what you see in the picture about each ball?
Here is what I see.
1. Ball shadows
2. The darkest shadow edges are at the 1/4 ball edge (where the ball and the shadow meet.) The ghost (lightest) shadow is the ball edge.
3. The center of the darkest shadow is the center of the ball.
Just noticed in Paultex pics That the white ball shadow is smaller than the red ball shadow. (the red ball being further away)
As the square is moved around the cue ball the opening between the square and the cue ball gets smaller and smaller.
This is what I see.
John
Can you tell me what you see in the picture about each ball?
Here is what I see.
1. Ball shadows
2. The darkest shadow edges are at the 1/4 ball edge (where the ball and the shadow meet.) The ghost (lightest) shadow is the ball edge.
3. The center of the darkest shadow is the center of the ball.
Just noticed in Paultex pics That the white ball shadow is smaller than the red ball shadow. (the red ball being further away)
As the square is moved around the cue ball the opening between the square and the cue ball gets smaller and smaller.
This is what I see.
John
Attachments
Last edited:
From Paultex
Can you tell me what you see in the picture about each ball?
Here is what I see.
1. Ball shadows
2. The darkest shadow edges are at the 1/4 ball edge (where the ball and the shadow meet. The ghost (lightest) shadow is the ball edge.
3. The center of the darkest shadow is the center of the ball.
This is what I see.
John
The ball shadows in paultex's image are not centered under the ball like in your photo. It's obvious in his image that the light is emanating from a light fixture somewhere above center table. The only time the balls will have a perfectly centered shadow is when they are sitting under the light source, as shown in your photo, or if you have a wide light with parabolic louvers/lenses, like the Diamond lights. So the shadow may not always be a good reference for aiming.
Why because it changes from table to table would that not make it a good reference for the ob?
Ever ponder on how it moves in ratio in our perception as we move around the shot and away and toward it , is exactly the same table to table?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It is jibberish ish ish
when some one brings black science man over to give us the correct nomenclature , then I’ll use those words. If you think those are wild you should see some of the initial brainstorming thoughts I’ve written on it over the years.....total retard savantry
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk