I have made opinions on some of your comments within your post by using blue color and have made comments about some also here in my own replying post.This will be most likely my one and only post in this sub forum.
The title of the thread is most certainly wrong - there are myriads of ways to aim, e.g.:
:wink:[/B]<====yes there are a lot of ways to aim
But I very much agree with this:
That's how I aim as well. I wouldn't call it ghost ball path though, just cue ball path.
I don't see the the point in using intermediate guesses/visualizations to get to the right line, which is what aiming systems do. Somehow get you to the right line.
In order for anyone to precisely see the center of the cue ball at impact (ghost ball aiming), or the overlap fraction between cue ball and object ball (fractional aiming), or.. (well, don't mention CTE), they must already be familiar with the shot picture. If the shot is unfamiliar, neither ghost ball location nor fractional overlap estimation will be accurate and the percentage of making the shot will be below the player's average. Nobody denies that, from whatever aiming system camp they come from.
But if a player is familiar with the shot picture, they might as well go straight to seeing where the cue ball needs to in the first place and skip the intermediate visualization altogether[/B[COLOR="Blue[B][COLOR="Blue"]"]].<====wrong, this idea leads to alignment inconsistency
[/COLOR][/COLOR]This, in my view, has the additional advantage of not only working for potting/banking, but also for safety play, caroms, kicks, billiards, etc. Throw (cut and spin induced), swerve, deflection, all can be factored in directly without having to modify intermediate calculations/guesses. Just aim a little thicker/thinner, instead of adding/subtracting 1/16th to/from the fraction or visualizing a ghost ball that will send the object ball to a point of the pocket instead of center pocket.
The only aiming system I'm aware of that doesn't require being familiar with the shot picture is Poolology. But in the hour or so that I experimented with, it didn't work out so well on my 7ft table.
I very confident that snooker players do not use an aiming system other than seeing the lines and verifying with their gut. At least I've never read anything about such things, and I did search.<=====I know 8 personally who do, your world is too limited. There are millions of "billiardists" out there who never heard of you or me or this forum.
They do talk about fractional hits quite often, but that is not to be confused with aiming for the pocket. It is always in relation to position play or breaking out clusters. Examples: potting the black into the corner is a half ball shot <===there are experts here who say there is no such thing as a 1/2 ball hit. and will send the cue ball into the cluster of reds, or cannoning into the red closest to the cue ball with a full ball hit will split the reds nicely and leave a shot on, etc.
Out of interest, does anyone know of carom/billiards players using a "system" to get to the first ball correctly (not talking about diamond systems)? I wouldn't think so as the first ball can go anywhere as opposed to a corner or side pocket, and they use side spin almost all the time.
Use whatever way works for you to pocket balls and play position. But don't claim any system works better than others. If you do, you are most certainly wrong, just like any other religious claim<===wrong again. A mere value statement based on your own views of life This sub-forum should be closed, lol
Have a nice day.
"This sub-forum should be closed"
ABSOLUTELY! I agree. Close this sucker down and throw anyone who tries to use it into jail as traitors for collusion with the Russians. (And the headlines will happily read: "Aiming Forum for Pool Shooting site Closed, Five Hardheaded Pool Shooting know-it-alls and a few CTE students now Homeless. Pelosi reported to be in ecstasy")
Have a nice day.
Last edited: