Double the distance aiming (DD).

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
Equal Opposites. 8 to 8.


View attachment 493696

Easy for you?

Be Well

YES. For me an 8 to 8 or 9 to 9 when using his system was the easiest because the edges on both are far more sharp and clear visually without using the imagination and fat part of both balls for the "tweeners".

I love aiming with edges. Not always because I never thought about it or considered edge visuals. Now it's the ONLY WAY to fly. Try it, you might like it. Works for any system.

Even with Joe Tucker's system you could start with edges to edges in a full ball hit for straight in shots and work your way from right to left along those 18 marks for right cuts, and edge to edge working your way right along those 18 marks for left cuts. Same with fractional aiming. Then you also don't have the "beyond 1/2 ball dilemma" with nothing to aim at while using imagination.

The eyes can be trained either way. Whatever works best after training yourself. For me now, it's an edge to something.

Btw, great graphics with the two balls numbered that way.
 
Last edited:

bbb

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I'm not following you. What his system does is have both halves of OB and CB numbered from 1-9 and 0 in the centers. Each set of 1-9 is either for left cuts or right cuts. It has nothing to do with rails other than the 1-9 numbers are aligned straight between the rails, not at an angle.

If the shot calls for a #4 on the left side of the OB for a right cut, it will be a #4 on the right side of the CB which will be the two contact points for both balls to impact. See the alignment with those two numbers.

It's equal and opposite contact points.

yes what you say is true
but he gives you reference points on what number to use based on where the object ball is and the pocket you are aiming at
in other words where the object ball would be for a 4 to work
i dont want to give his system away since its for sale
if you want more info pm me and i will go into more detail
 
Last edited:

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
yes what you say is true
but he gives you reference points on what number to use based on where the object ball is and the pocket you are aiming at
in other words where the object ball would be for a 4 to work
i dont want to give his system away since its for sale
if you want more info pm me and i will go into more detail

OK, now I know what you're saying and that's correct. It comes in the form of a full table grid workbook/reference guide with squares throughout the length and width of the table and where CB and OB might be laying with corresponding number matches. The training balls must also be situated a certain way to the rails when determining the correct # match.

I have the entire system with the actual numbered pool balls, flat discs to place anywhere, and the grid layout. I also took a couple of lessons in person with Joe Tucker many years ago.

You must also have the system. I, like you, don't want to divulge the exact specifics.

Thanks for your generosity to help.
 
Last edited:

LAMas

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I heard about this system on Don Feeney's video more than two decades ago.
It is a geometrically correct system imo ( on center ball shots and not considering CIT ).
It works well on thick or little angle shots for me.
It's really dead nuts on small angle shots.
The system also taught me about the relation between CP and center of the cue ball. Some people actually teach center of OB to contact point as a system. And it's just plane wrong .

Past half-ball hit, I can't make it work for me.
On thin cuts, I instinctively look at the side of the cue ball and try to get a feel how much of the OB it will hit. I think most players do on thin cuts.

Joey,
As mentioned, some prefer to visualize CP2CP aiming and there are different ways to accomplish that.
- Equal opposites
- Contact point distance to the center of the OB matching the contact point on the CB
- Numbers on the OB to match the corresponding obverse numbers on the CB

The rub is on thin cuts, where the points are near the edge of OB and CB creating a line, moving the stick parallel to that line over to the center of the CB must be precise or he shot will be off.


If the parallel shift is precise (parallel) then the CP2CP will be effected regardless of the distance between the OB and CB (even though the OB may looks very small down table).

To accomplish this parallel shift, one can use a ruler to measure the distance to the center CB at the CB and use that distance at the grip hand - parallel. Using a ruler at the poolhall is cumbersome shot after shot.

There re variations that can be effected to accomplish this without a ruler and here is one:

aiming 1.PNG
aiming 2.PNG
aiming 3.PNG
aiming 4.PNG

Be well
 
Last edited:

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
Joey,
As mentioned, some prefer to visualize CP2CP aiming and there are different ways to accomplish that.
- Equal opposites
- Contact point distance to the center of the OB matching the contact point on the CB
- Numbers on the OB to match the corresponding obverse numbers on the CB

The rub is on thin cuts, where the points are near the edge of OB and CB creating a line, moving the stick parallel to that line over to the center of the CB must be precise or he shot will be off.


If the parallel shift is precise (parallel) then the CP2CP will be effected regardless of the distance between the OB and CB (even though the OB may looks very small down table).

To accomplish this parallel shift, one can use a ruler to measure the distance to the center CB at the CB and use that distance at the grip hand - parallel. Using a ruler at the poolhall is cumbersome shot after shot.

There re variations that can be effected to accomplish this without a ruler and here is one:

View attachment 493778
View attachment 493779
View attachment 493780
View attachment 493781

Be well
This is geometrically correct, but I think it's physically impractical to accomplish with enough precision unless you're adding to the "mechanical" motions with (probably subconscioius) visual corrections. It's no different in that respect from other "reference" systems - maybe better than most, since you're starting with the contact points.

pj
chgo
 

LAMas

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
This is geometrically correct, but I think it's physically impractical to accomplish with enough precision unless you're adding to the "mechanical" motions with (probably subconscioius) visual corrections. It's no different in that respect from other "reference" systems - maybe better than most, since you're starting with the contact points.

pj
chgo

I agree.
If one can hold the stick on the line with the bridge and grip firmly and just bend at the waist to slide the stick (parallel) to the center CB, this is easier and may work for some.:smile:
Be well
 

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
I agree.
If one can hold the stick on the line with the bridge and grip firmly and just bend at the waist to slide the stick (parallel) to the center CB, this is easier and may work for some.:smile:
Be well

For once I have to agree with PJ. There are many times while playing when I get too lazy to retrieve a mechanical bridge for long stretch shots while using a 24" bridge. Sometimes more sometimes even less. Invariably I'll miss the shot 90% of the time.

Then I berate myself for being stupid because I didn't get the bridge where my miss rate would probably be 50%. I hate those things and it shows but still better than a super long bridge, stretching or not.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
For once I have to agree with PJ. There are many times while playing when I get too lazy to retrieve a mechanical bridge for long stretch shots while using a 24" bridge. Sometimes more sometimes even less. Invariably I'll miss the shot 90% of the time.

Then I berate myself for being stupid because I didn't get the bridge where my miss rate would probably be 50%. I hate those things and it shows but still better than a super long bridge, stretching or not.

I had the same occasional bad habit with using a bridge -- too lazy, or not willing to break my rhythm. I broke the habit by playing my left-handed self against my bridge-using self. Races to 5 or 7, bridge BC against lefty BC. It improved both skills. Bridge BC always won, which made me want to practice left handed more often. But as I got better with the bridge I found myself not thinking twice about getting it when needed.
 

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
For once I have to agree with PJ. There are many times while playing when I get too lazy to retrieve a mechanical bridge for long stretch shots while using a 24" bridge. Sometimes more sometimes even less. Invariably I'll miss the shot 90% of the time.

Then I berate myself for being stupid because I didn't get the bridge where my miss rate would probably be 50%. I hate those things and it shows but still better than a super long bridge, stretching or not.

LAMas didn't recommend actually shooting with the 24" bridge. See last step.
 

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
LAMas didn't recommend actually shooting with the 24" bridge. See last step.

AaaaaHaaa! I completely glossed over the picture and missed it. Still not my cup of tea. Too much work to make what I feel is a simple shot (for me) with the equal and opposite visuals he questioned.

When I see an 8 or 9 as well as 1, 2, 3, 4, they jump out. But then again, I modified it somewhat over time by using the EDGE of the CB as opposed to matching up the equatorial numbers on both balls for certain numbers.
 

LAMas

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
LAMas didn't recommend actually shooting with the 24" bridge. See last step.

Thanks again,

The diagrams were instructional to demonstrate the logic of achieving the important parallel shift to CCB and should be simplified to suit the shooter.
One way is to use a mechanical bridge with a long handle. Though not parallel, it effects a very small angular deviation from parallel if pivoted from the end of the handle.


If one shifts the end of the handle a bit towards parallel, it can be even more accurate - don't over shift. :smile:

Be well
 

LAMas

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Joey,
As mentioned, some prefer to visualize CP2CP aiming and there are different ways to accomplish that.
- Equal opposites
- Contact point distance to the center of the OB matching the contact point on the CB
- Numbers on the OB to match the corresponding obverse numbers on the CB

The rub is on thin cuts, where the points are near the edge of OB and CB creating a line, moving the stick parallel to that line over to the center of the CB must be precise or he shot will be off.


If the parallel shift is precise (parallel) then the CP2CP will be effected regardless of the distance between the OB and CB (even though the OB may looks very small down table).

To accomplish this parallel shift, one can use a ruler to measure the distance to the center CB at the CB and use that distance at the grip hand - parallel. Using a ruler at the poolhall is cumbersome shot after shot.

There re variations that can be effected to accomplish this without a ruler and here is one:

View attachment 493778
View attachment 493779
View attachment 493780
View attachment 493781

Be well


Edge aiming then parallel shift to CCB.

EDGE AIMING.jpg
 

LAMas

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Quarter OB

Edge aiming:1.4ths.
 

Attachments

  • quarters.JPG
    quarters.JPG
    34.1 KB · Views: 367
Last edited:

LAMas

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
DD when OB & CB are too close

DD when OB & CB are too close the distance B is a bit larger than A.
Adjust the aim a bit to the outside of DD or use outside English.

Capture.jpg

Be well.
 

LAMas

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Double Distance (DD) aiming is similar to Double Angle (AA) aiming - same results.

AA aiming.JPG


Be well.
 
Top