I like to keep it simple, but I also like to visualize in 3D (it comes naturally to me). Here's a simplified 3D visualization that I use - marking the distance from the OB contact point to the aim line.
pj
chgo
Basic Aiming - My thoughts and approach
- Thread starter Matt_24
- Start date
pj
chgo
I wonder how many hundreds or thousands of shots it took you, as well as others who focus on contact points,
to become consistent and simply know or recognize most shots automatically without having to reference the contact point anymore. I realize that's probably not something that can be narrowed down to any certain number of shots, but maybe can be narrowed down to a specific time frame, which would be different for everyone based on individual learning and practice habits.
It seems like a time-consuming process due to the fact that the ob contact point is a bit trickier to focus on from the cb end/perspective of the shot. Unless there is a specific marking exactly where the contact point is, the convex surface of the ob's circumference and the solid color of the ball provide a weak point of reference. Add also the estimating involved with aiming perfectly parallel to that contact point when the distance from the point to the aim line varies with different cut angles. It's no wonder why rote takes so long for most players, or why most players never get any better than average when it comes to pocketing balls. There is so much guesswork involved that it takes quite a bit of practice just to develop a good eye or sense for the ghostball or contact point references. It's not until this development occurs that a player is then able to start developing good shot recognition skills, where you simply recognize the cb-ob relationship without always having to refer to the ghostball or contact point.
I think a lot of players could develop quicker shot recognition skills by paying more attention to the aim line in reference to the ob, like fractional aiming, rather than focusing on estimated contact points and ghostball centers. It would be interesting to do a longterm experiment and study the results of each method, those who use known fractional aim lines vs those who estimate ghostballs and contact point offsets, to discover which methods lead to automatic shot recognition more efficiently.
Last edited:
i dont know how to label this system so i need help
i think its contact point to contact point(maybe just overlap) but i am sure you experts will tell me
i "see " the line from the object ball to the pocket
i then try to make the cue ball hit that spot
i jokingly say
mrs giordano wants a ...blank... slice of procsuitto
i think its contact point to contact point(maybe just overlap) but i am sure you experts will tell me
i "see " the line from the object ball to the pocket
i then try to make the cue ball hit that spot
i jokingly say
mrs giordano wants a ...blank... slice of procsuitto
I believe I do the same thing, minus Mrs Giordano...lol.
I certainly don't estimate trying to line up a hidden cb contact point to the ob contact point. I rarely even look for the contact point on the ob. I look at the ob line to the pocket, then look at the cb line to the ob, matching up the appropriate cb-ob relationship/overlap needed based on experience.
And I think the opposite. Go figure.
Visualizing fractions (+ "pivot" direction, etc.) vs. the OB contact point are both estimations, and the difference comes down to preference and personal skillset. I could "see" OB contact points from the first day I played, and still appreciate not having to estimate how far (and which direction) to aim from which estimated fraction.
pj
chgo
From some of the post, I’d like to point out one thing.
At some point, you must make your pool playing personal. Your playing must be customized to suit your needs and no one else’s.
Kinda like a custom fitted leather racing suit for motorcycles........which I have. It fits like a glove.
Same with your pool game.......it must be custom fitted to you.
At some point, you must make your pool playing personal. Your playing must be customized to suit your needs and no one else’s.
Kinda like a custom fitted leather racing suit for motorcycles........which I have. It fits like a glove.
Same with your pool game.......it must be custom fitted to you.
I agree, traditional fractional aiming is guesstimation work and requires time develop a good eye for it. It's rote, just like many other aiming methods. But I'm not talking about guessing or estimating which fraction to use, not talking about picking the nearest quarter and adjusting from, surely not talking about using any pivoting techniques.
What I'm saying is that if a player knows the exact fractional aim line needed to pocket the ball, then there is no guesswork, no trial and error. The player starts off knowing exactly where to aim the vast majority of shots, which allows the development of shot recognition to begin right from the start. With ghostball and other guesswork/estimation aiming the same player would first have to develop consistency with the method before reaching a point where most shots are being aimed correctly, and from here is where the brain begins to develope shot recognize, by repeating successful shots over and over again.
I did an experiment with my wife a few years back to prove this point -- that if for every shot someone were to say "aim here", you would find yourself making more shots than if you relied on guesstimation. But my wife was not a pool player, so I would like to do a similar experiment with 2 equally skilled groups of average pool players with decent strokes. One group would use nothing but ghostball or contact points or the old quarters fractional system, their choice. The other would use Poolology or some other method that provides an aimline without relying on guesswork/estimation. After practicing just a few hours a week for 3 or 4 weeks, it'd be interesting to see which group shows the most improvement when it comes to pocketing balls.
Times are changing. I had this same conversation with Dr. Cue (Tom Rossman) a couple of years ago, and he adamantly refused to entertain or consider my theory about rapidly programming the brain by eliminating the trial and error of some old school aiming methods. He was 100% ghostball, too closed minded and stuck in his ways to listen to anything remotely challenging to the traditional HAMB method. Kept saying the "ghostball is always 1.125" from the ob on every shot". I would point out that the 1.125" distance looks different from every shot angle, making it difficult to pinpoint. He'd hear none of it. Lol. Other than that, he was a great guy.
I'm gonna steal this analogy! Very nice. When I'm watching a buddy run out, I'll be sure to tell him his game fits him well.
The traditional 5 lines or "quarters" fractional aiming method doesn't, but the fractional system in the Poolology book does provide an aim line by using some simple math, no guesswork, no trial and error. It gives you the correct cb-ob relationship needed to pocket the ball, which does require some spatial skills. Then all the player has to do is deliver the cb to where it needs to be.
People with great spatial skills can recognize where the cb needs to be without using any system or method other than just looking at the shot. Imo that should be the ultimate goal, to just see the shots and automatically recognize where where the cb needs to be. For most of us this involves a lot of repetition, successful repetition, before we begin to automatically just see the shots. For others it seems to never fully develop, more than likely due to inconsistent stroke mechanics or lack of table time.
One must be able to consistently deliver the cue in a manner to send the cb to where it needs to be. Developing dependable and consistent shot recognition is typically something that occurs after one develops a consistent enough stroke to send the cb to where they "think" it needs to be based on their best estimate of ghostball or contact point or fraction or whatever... Eventually, with enough practice, thinking becomes knowing. Prior to developing a good stroke, the player really doesn't know if a missed shot is due to faulty aiming estimations or faulty stroke. That's why/how HAMB works -- the player develops stroke and aiming skills simultaneously through tons of trial and error. One without the other makes it a time-consuming journey.
But the process can come about much quicker by reducing the trial and error involved with aiming. In other words, I believe if you could give a player a great consistent stroke, they could develop aiming skills fairly quickly. Vice versa, if you could provide accurate aiming skills, the player could develop a consistent stroke fairly quickly. But simply giving someone a good stroke isn't possible. They have to develop it. You can, however, give someone good aiming. For example, you can stand by every shot and point at a spot on the ob or the cloth and say "Aim here." If the shot is missed it is surely not because the player didn't know where to send the cb. The miss can be attributed to stroke mechanics/cue delivery. Without someone or some method that tells you exactly where to aim, you must rely on your best experienced estimates/guesses, and misses could be attributed to either faulty aiming estimations or faulty stroke mechanics.
Last edited:
Ever considered how many balls a major league pitcher has thrown in their lifetime?
Or how many balls a pro golfer hits.....
Or how many balls a tennis player hits.....
All in their lifetime?
A bunch........
Consider throwing of a ball to a glove.......
How can you place the ball in the glove without the ball being in your “ vision center”.......meaning the ball is offset from where you were central vision is looking.
Could it be that you are throwing the ball to where you are looking? No “reference marks” used on the ball nor the glove.
Why can’t that be the same in pool? Why the need to imagine anything other than where to put the CB?
Or how many balls a pro golfer hits.....
Or how many balls a tennis player hits.....
All in their lifetime?
A bunch........
Consider throwing of a ball to a glove.......
How can you place the ball in the glove without the ball being in your “ vision center”.......meaning the ball is offset from where you were central vision is looking.
Could it be that you are throwing the ball to where you are looking? No “reference marks” used on the ball nor the glove.
Why can’t that be the same in pool? Why the need to imagine anything other than where to put the CB?
Hand-eye coordination and muscle memory based on experience are the things that make it happen. And it is similar to shooting pool shots, as far as simply sending the cb to where it needs to be based on what you see. But with baseball the glove is a solid focus/reference point, plainly visible. You can see the target without having to guess or estimate its exact location. In pool, the target location is not so obvious, not so plainly visible. From behind the ob it's easy to see because it's a straight line to the pocket, but from behind the cb it's much more challenging to pinpoint the exact target location, considering that it's located somewhere just outside the surface of the ob (as with ghostball), or some certain offset distance from a spot on the convex surface of the ob (contact point). For many shots these things are not plainly visible because the perception of the distances from ob surface/contact point to ghostball center varies depending on shot angle/perspective, so it all strongly relies on imagined/approximated/estimated visualizations, based on one's own experience.
When a third baseman snatches up a hot ground ball and whizzes it sidearmed to first base, there is a general sense of direction, not a precise point of focus. The player on first base must make his glove meet the ball. It seems like this is typically for how a lot of pool players aim. They use a general target area, then while they are down on the shot they fidget around until they recognize something that looks/feels right. In baseball the 3rd baseman has no time to fidget, but he knows if he can send the ball in the general direction of first base, the 1st baseman will catch it. Sometimes it's perfect, other times it's not.
That's not good enough for pool. In pool the target must be 100% fixed, exact/known/visible, like when a pitcher throws a fastball straight into the catcher's mitt without the catcher having to move the glove in order to meet the ball. And from the years I've spent around pool tables everywhere, it's obvious that many players don't see exactly where the cb needs to be on every shot. They estimate an aim line then get down on the cb and start moving their cue a little left, a little right, trying to lock onto something that they really can't see. In order to play great pool, you have to be able to see and know exactly where the cb needs to be before you get down on the shot. And this doesn't mean there won't be some final adjustments made to account for any spin you might be using.
Last edited:
Ronnie Alcano used to bet he'd run a rack without looking at the object in his final stroke.
He was so good, Busti told his friend not bet against it.
Busti used to play behind his back as handicap.
Pros are sick.
He was so good, Busti told his friend not bet against it.
Busti used to play behind his back as handicap.
Pros are sick.
Yep. There comes a point in skill level where you simply look at the shot, supplying to your brain all the pertinent data it needs to execute the shot. There is no pivoting or fidgeting the cue around to find the right aim, other than what is necessary to ensure you are lined up in accordance with what you saw while standing. That's when all the aiming was done, while you were standing and looking at the cb-ob relationship.
Buddy Hall used to live here in Tulsa and he once said that a good local player, Brian Jones, had best pre-shot routine he'd ever seen. When asked why Buddy said it was because Brian stood straight up and square to every shot before dropping down. He did all his aiming well before getting into position to hit. Brian was a multi-time winner on the Midwest 9ball tour and a top 1p player until health issues forced him to stop playing. His mechanics were text-book.
That's a hell of an endorsement -- Buddy Hall saying your psr is best he's ever seen!
I know when I get down on the cb, ready to shoot, if I start tweaking my aim or fidgeting around for what looks right, I feel like I'm probably about to screw up. If I go down into the shot already knowing exactly what I'm going to do, where I'm sending the cb, ect... I feel confident and sure. I shoot it like I know I'm going to make it, even if I don't make it. Standing up and restarting the psr when a shot feels awkward or questionable is good habit to develop. It's also one of the roughest habits to develop.
Maybe a using a pitcher to illustrate my idea wasn’t the best choice.
How bout a quarterback instead?
There is no target to throw a football at.........unless the receiver is stopped dead in his tracks.
Most times a quarterback is throwing to empty space hoping the receiver gets there in time to catch it..........like the long bomb thrown in last night game.
If a quarterback can learn to throw a football to a empty space, is learning to put the CB in a empty space any different?
How bout a quarterback instead?
There is no target to throw a football at.........unless the receiver is stopped dead in his tracks.
Most times a quarterback is throwing to empty space hoping the receiver gets there in time to catch it..........like the long bomb thrown in last night game.
If a quarterback can learn to throw a football to a empty space, is learning to put the CB in a empty space any different?
I thought the baseball pitcher analogy was a good one, as those guys are actually sending the ball to where they want/need it to be. They use the catcher's mitt, the plate, and even the batter as references for doing this, similar to a pool player using the ob as a reference for knowing or estimating where to send the cb.
A guarterback does have a target in mind everytime the ball is thrown. He doesn't just whizz the ball into some arbitrary area hoping the receiver catches it. He uses the play route and the receivers location and speed as references for knowing where the ball needs to be at the right time, then he puts it there. Sometimes they throw it away to prevent getting sacked. Sometimes they have less than 3 or 4 seconds to process all the options, and the results aren't optimal.
A pool player sending the cb to an exact or approximate target area can only be compared to a thrown football if the ob is moving, like doing wing shots, or if the football is being thrown to a stationary receiver. Still, as with baseball, the precision of ball placement is nowhere near the precision needed to play pool. There is nothing on the receiving end to fix/save an inaccurate ball placement. In baseball or football, the person on the receiving end can go out of their way to fix a bad throw. When playing pool, if the cb isn't sent to the exact place it needs to be, no ob is going to miraculously go out of its way to fix it.
You just contradicted yourself.
When the quarterback releases the football........where he is throwing is not moving, so the CB does not need to be moving. Its a spot where he thinks the football needs to be based on .......wait for it.............throwing a football forever...........extensive experience throwing a football. Practice, practice.
Same with pool.........learn to see where to place the ball from lots of practice. Forget trying to aiming.
If a quarterback can learn to see where to place the football without a real target, so can pool players.
Cause in pool, there is no real target either, just where to place the ball from extensive practice. Trail and error.........until there is no more trail and error.
Just as a quarterback learns where to place the football based on what he is seeing combined with experience, the pool player does the same thing.
Learning precision takes time. It requires the player to have a set standard for what is a good shot and bad shot.
Just accepting anywhere in the pocket as a good shot will not lead to precision. If the ball does not go where you want, it’s a bad shot and the player needs to make adjustments.......even if the ball went in the pocket, just not where you want.
If a pool player can not precisely place the OB where they want it...........it because they haven’t practice doing so.
Last edited: