Honest Question For Aim System People . . .

RRfireblade said:

I'm really just curious about this ,

If I'm wrong then feel free to correct me , to use any system you have to estimate the angle to the pocket , the distance between balls , account for squirt/deflection/etc , english and throw.

Then you apply 'The system' to where to hit the OB and/or CB.

After all that estimation , what is it that makes it so hard to learn to simply estimate where to hit the OB to send it to the pocket ?

Click to expand...

Finding the contact point on the OB is very easy. Finding the contact point on the CB that must contact the contact point on the OB is a bit harder.

Aligning the contact point of the CB to contact the OB contact point is where it gets tricky.

RRfireblade said:

I'm really just curious about this ,

If I'm wrong then feel free to correct me , to use any system you have to estimate the angle to the pocket , the distance between balls , account for squirt/deflection/etc , english and throw.

Then you apply 'The system' to where to hit the OB and/or CB.

After all that estimation , what is it that makes it so hard to learn to simply estimate where to hit the OB to send it to the pocket ?

Click to expand...

To be able to aim comprehensively using any degree of spin and speed then your list pretty much covers all the variables you'll have to deal with.

Many shots commonly played will have less variation than a cueist's actual aiming and stroking ability.

But once you start playing a wider range of shots with varying degrees of English, then you either have to start learning all these shots and how they vary with speed or begin to learn some methods to estimate the effect of these variables, so you can adjust for them.

For example, a soft stun shot at 3/4 ball needs to be aimed about 6 inches differently over the length of the table compared to playing that same shot as a power draw shot. Playing the same shot with soft stun and heavy OE means you'll have to aim about 6 inches to the other side of the pocket. That's 12 inches of variation for the exact same contact point over 8 feet of travel. Believe it or not, that is the type of variation that occurs. Good luck feeling that.

Learning based on trial and error alone takes a lot of hard work. A system can put you into a pretty accurate range automatically, if you can learn to see these angles reasonably well with just on standard shot, such as firm natural follow.

Anyway, you've approached a very broad topic with different categories such as aiming, squirt adjustment, swerve adjustment, BHE, pivot points, CIT and SIT etc. Better to focus in on one thing at a time.

Colin

RRfireblade said:

I'm really just curious about this ,

If I'm wrong then feel free to correct me , to use any system you have to estimate the angle to the pocket , the distance between balls , account for squirt/deflection/etc , english and throw.

Then you apply 'The system' to where to hit the OB and/or CB.

After all that estimation , what is it that makes it so hard to learn to simply estimate where to hit the OB to send it to the pocket ?

Click to expand...

Amen to that. Man if I had to break out the protractor during any sizable ball run as many times as I had a cut shot during that run, I'd pop a dozen blood vessels and hemorrhage to death before the end of my inning. :speechless:

I know I keep singing the same song but, for those who have read it from me before, feel free to disregard it, and consider it written for those who may be interested.

It is far less about the aim as it is about the actual delivery of the cue ball accurately to that point of aim.

All this half ball, quarter ball, 11/32nds ball hits are going to make you nuts.

IMHO too many players devote their efforts to improve with the impression that they are not getting the point of aim / contact right, when in fact they do not fully appreciate the extremely delicate precision needed to properly deliver a fluid accurate stroke that places the cue ball where you already know it has to go.

This is the reason we miss, not because we need some formula to calculate the angle of a shot. Even it this angle thing was a factor, and IMHO it not only isn't, it borders on ridiculous, you STILL have to stroke the shot with the exact precision to deliver the CB correctly.

Here is a great idea that a very good player suggested as an easy way to determine if your delivery is in fact an issue. Anyone interested, do yourself a favor and try it if you want to learn a ton about your stroke instantly.

Throw a dozen balls on the table. Completely disregard the pockets. No pocketing of any balls. Simply choose any of the balls on the table, and shoot the cue ball at it, at NO ANGLE, completely straight.

Forget pockets, drive the balls into rails, drive them into other balls, it doesn't matter. Just pick an OB, decide what is needed to hit it straight on, no matter where it ends up going.

What does matter is stop your cue ball DEAD each time. Short distance, long distance, any ball, any position. Just simply shoot to stop the cue ball completely and totally dead.

No angles involved here. Everything is straight on. See if you can stop your cue ball dead each time. If you can't, then forget all that geometry, and work on your delivery because you're not hitting the cue ball where you think you are and the most accurate estimation of a pocketing angle isn't going to matter a hill of beans unless you can hit it there.

3andstop said:

Amen to that. Man if I had to break out the protractor during any sizable ball run as many times as I had a cut shot during that run, I'd pop a dozen blood vessels and hemorrhage to death before the end of my inning. :speechless:

I know I keep singing the same song but, for those who have read it from me before, feel free to disregard it, and consider it written for those who may be interested.

It is far less about the aim as it is about the actual delivery of the cue ball accurately to that point of aim.

All this half ball, quarter ball, 11/32nds ball hits are going to make you nuts.

IMHO too many players devote their efforts to improve with the impression that they are not getting the point of aim / contact right, when in fact they do not fully appreciate the extremely delicate precision needed to properly deliver a fluid accurate stroke that places the cue ball where you already know it has to go.

This is the reason we miss, not because we need some formula to calculate the angle of a shot. Even it this angle thing was a factor, and IMHO it not only isn't, it borders on ridiculous, you STILL have to stroke the shot with the exact precision to deliver the CB correctly.

Here is a great idea that a very good player suggested as an easy way to determine if your delivery is in fact an issue. Anyone interested, do yourself a favor and try it if you want to learn a ton about your stroke instantly.

Throw a dozen balls on the table. Completely disregard the pockets. No pocketing of any balls. Simply choose any of the balls on the table, and shoot the cue ball at it, at NO ANGLE, completely straight.

Forget pockets, drive the balls into rails, drive them into other balls, it doesn't matter. Just pick an OB, decide what is needed to hit it straight on, no matter where it ends up going.

What does matter is stop your cue ball DEAD each time. Short distance, long distance, any ball, any position. Just simply shoot to stop the cue ball completely and totally dead.

No angles involved here. Everything is straight on. See if you can stop your cue ball dead each time. If you can't, then forget all that geometry, and work on your delivery because you're not hitting the cue ball where you think you are and the most accurate estimation of a pocketing angle isn't going to matter a hill of beans unless you can hit it there.

Click to expand...

Great post. Too many people are caught up in this hocus pocus fairy tale search for the magic holy grail of aiming. Repetition and practice will give you all you need to figure out where to hit the ball, and to be able to properly deliver the cueball to the correct contact point. All an aiming system does is get you in the vicinity, and you still have to adjust using intuition/experience anyway.

Almost all misses are the result of your cue delivery/stroke, not because you did not know where the contact point on the object ball was (incorrect execution, not incorrect aim). If you need help even getting in the vicinity of the pocket, then by all means use the system of your choice.

It's kind of like losing weight, you can only do it through diet, or exercise, or both, there are no short cuts but people will keep searching for them anyway.

That is a great post. It's something natural that happens with repetition - your body starts to know it, not just your mind. It's almost like a pathway opens up between your mind and your stroke, and it may only last for a brief second, long enough to hear the little voice say "That's it do it NOW", and you'll know the precise moment the cue ball leaves your tip that the shot's going to go - you can feel it.

And it comes from constant play. Ain't it Grand?

Poolplaya9 said:

Great post. Too many people are caught up in this hocus pocus fairy tale search for the magic holy grail of aiming. Repetition and practice will give you all you need to figure out where to hit the ball, and to be able to properly deliver the cueball to the correct contact point. All an aiming system does is get you in the vicinity, and you still have to adjust using intuition/experience anyway.

Almost all misses are the result of your cue delivery/stroke, not because you did not know where the contact point on the object ball was (incorrect execution, not incorrect aim). If you need help even getting in the vicinity of the pocket, then by all means use the system of your choice.

It's kind of like losing weight, you can only do it through diet, or exercise, or both, there are no short cuts but people will keep searching for them anyway.

Click to expand...

wow... how come when I bring up the fact that there are no real reliable systems in pool and that its just people trying to find some "magic" way to get better, I get everyone jumping on the bandwagon to say how wrong I am?

BTW poolplaya9, these are my sentiments exactly. I got to the level I am today by 10-14 hours of PRACTICE every day for about 10 years. It really is magic.

Aiming and Stroke are 2 different things.

You need to work on both. An aiming system without a stroke is worthless. If you've got a good stroke, an aiming system MIGHT help you.

I just learned my first system and it has helped me incredibly. Especially on tough cuts against the rail on the money ball. If my strokes a little off it doesn't help at all.

MM

Harry Potter Learns Spellcasting

I let a lot of these "why do people do something this way" posts go by. Maybe it is good for chatter, but other than that I'd ask "why do people care how people do something"? While I usually don't have the time to respond to the op, I'm avoiding work here, so here goes.

Point 1

In order to explain something how to do something, you have to say something. Telling someone to shoot the cue ball so that the ob goes where you want it is a little nebulous, it doesn't tell them anything specific. Granted, if the person had time on their hands, they could take this wisdom nugget and bash balls on the table for several hours, days, weeks, or months to get the hang of it. Otherwise, it is helpful to be able to explain something useful to them. Hence - a system.

Point 2

The bane of the education system up until the turn of the century was that one way of teaching should be able to help everyone learn the material. Obviously, this was very very wrong. Some people need to see something explained in a different way for it to make sense. Having a few ways to explain the material makes it easier for more people to understand the material (hence - systems).

Point 3

Pool, as most other physical activiites, is performed by someone's mind telling the body what to do. Your first few times, you may need to get the hang of it, but after a while, you can get repeatable results. You don't get results because your mind sends geometric and physics to your arm. Obviously a system alone cannot make the shot. A good system gives you a shortcut to improve your learning curve.

Point 4

People that excel at an activity forget that they had to learn how to do it at somepoint. Perphaps a pool player took 4 weeks off and got the hang of ball-pocketing, or perphaps someone gave him some a system that helped him do it faster. The point is that now most people do not have time to learn pool by feel alone. In my case, my game improved faster when I learned something that I could apply to the game.

Point 5

Some systems, while not helpful to some across the full spectrum of shot angles, illuminate pertinent points that may not have been obvious before the system was explained. For instance, the half-ball hit is one of the most useful things I learned about aiming, but before I learned about it, it never occurred to me that aiming at the edge of the ball would be useful.

Point 6

I learned systems for aiming and kicking, and I improved my shotmaking and kicking drastically. I don't have time to spend 6-10 hours in the pool room repeating shots. I took some advice, and used it to accelerate the process. Sometimes in games, I still use the systems to get back to basics, then apply my experience to come up with the exact shot I want. It works for me.

Why did someone have to explain spellcasting to Harry Potter? Couldn't he watch someone do one and then take it from there?

PS, I don't really believe in Harry Potter and magic, but to someone new to the game, the shots that people can make may seem like magic. A system can take some of the magic out of it.

Although I'm in ASS (Aiming System Seeking) mode these days, I understand why others don't want to think about systems. Maybe they've let you down in the past, or maybe you're perfectly happy with the way you currently pocket balls. I'm not satisfied with my feel for shots. It lets me down too often. I'm a decent player, but I want to be an excellent player, and for me there's nothing good about hitting a plateau. That's why I'm open to new systems or any new advice.
In fact, I really like 3andstop's recommendation. It would be a good way to occasionally check your ability to hit a target dead on.

Poolplaya9 said:

Great post. Too many people are caught up in this hocus pocus fairy tale search for the magic holy grail of aiming. Repetition and practice will give you all you need to figure out where to hit the ball, and to be able to properly deliver the cueball to the correct contact point. All an aiming system does is get you in the vicinity, and you still have to adjust using intuition/experience anyway.

NOT IF YOU USE THE CORRECT AIMING SYSTEM.

Almost all misses are the result of your cue delivery/stroke, not because you did not know where the contact point on the object ball was (incorrect execution, not incorrect aim).

THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE AND THEREFORE, YOU CANNOT CITE ANY THAT WOULD SUBSTANTIATE THAT POINT. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHETHER FAULTY AIM OR A CUEING ERROR CAUSED ANY GIVEN PLAYER TO MISS.


If you need help even getting in the vicinity of the pocket, then by all means use the system of your choice.

It's kind of like losing weight, you can only do it through diet, or exercise, or both, there are no short cuts but people will keep searching for them anyway.

Click to expand...

Liposuction.

And if repitition and practice are all that is needed, how come most of the players I see who have literally spent their entire lives hanging out in pool halls are still B players at best?

Do you have any evidence to show that the top 10 players practice more than the others 54 in the event?

As I have stated previously, advanced aiming is a distant second to shape-related skills but those who believe that there is no SUPER-ACCURATE aiming system just happen to be wrong. Just because they don't know it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Do you think that Bustamante is a FOOL?

Do you KNOW how all top players aim? Even if you ask them, many would probably lie.

Regards,
Jim

(-:

Wybrook said:

wow... how come when I bring up the fact that there are no real reliable systems in pool and that its just people trying to find some "magic" way to get better, I get everyone jumping on the bandwagon to say how wrong I am?

BTW poolplaya9, these are my sentiments exactly. I got to the level I am today by 10-14 hours of PRACTICE every day for about 10 years. It really is magic.

Click to expand...

Because you ARE wrong. Simple as that.

Please forgive my ignorance for not knowing who you are. Are you a championship player?

Regards,
Jim

You make some excellent points. I too recently posted about doing stop shot drills.

But I have some points of disagreement with you. YES...the stroke is VITAL and no aiming technique based on a system or "feel" is going to do any good for players to can't stroke it well.

Having said that, it would be possible to teach a person to have a fantastic, dead straight, repeating stroke without them ever hitting a pool ball! Or at least, just shooting a CB into pockets.

But put that person on a table with balls on it and they will be APA 3s regardless of their perfect stroke.

Advanced pool requires a COMBINATION of interrelated skills.

And no one I know has suggested that ANY aiming system will MAGICALLY turn a banger into a champion. It is just the anti-aiming system crowd who repeats such accusations.

But just because an extremely effective aiming system won't make anyone a champion DOES NOT mean that the system is FOS or that its proponents are hysterical nutcases.

Some even complain that a given aiming system HAS LIMITATIONS! Well, so F'ing what??? USE it when it WORKS BRILLIANTLY and do something else when it doesn't!!!!

That is a WAY better plan than the C Bangers use which is to use one "method" that works 70% of the time and dogs it 30% leading to their inevitable loss of the match.

Again, I agree with much of what you posted but we do disagree on the above points.

Regards,
Jim

3andstop said:

Amen to that. Man if I had to break out the protractor during any sizable ball run as many times as I had a cut shot during that run, I'd pop a dozen blood vessels and hemorrhage to death before the end of my inning. :speechless:

I know I keep singing the same song but, for those who have read it from me before, feel free to disregard it, and consider it written for those who may be interested.

It is far less about the aim as it is about the actual delivery of the cue ball accurately to that point of aim.

All this half ball, quarter ball, 11/32nds ball hits are going to make you nuts.

IMHO too many players devote their efforts to improve with the impression that they are not getting the point of aim / contact right, when in fact they do not fully appreciate the extremely delicate precision needed to properly deliver a fluid accurate stroke that places the cue ball where you already know it has to go.

This is the reason we miss, not because we need some formula to calculate the angle of a shot. Even it this angle thing was a factor, and IMHO it not only isn't, it borders on ridiculous, you STILL have to stroke the shot with the exact precision to deliver the CB correctly.

Here is a great idea that a very good player suggested as an easy way to determine if your delivery is in fact an issue. Anyone interested, do yourself a favor and try it if you want to learn a ton about your stroke instantly.

Throw a dozen balls on the table. Completely disregard the pockets. No pocketing of any balls. Simply choose any of the balls on the table, and shoot the cue ball at it, at NO ANGLE, completely straight.

Forget pockets, drive the balls into rails, drive them into other balls, it doesn't matter. Just pick an OB, decide what is needed to hit it straight on, no matter where it ends up going.

What does matter is stop your cue ball DEAD each time. Short distance, long distance, any ball, any position. Just simply shoot to stop the cue ball completely and totally dead.

No angles involved here. Everything is straight on. See if you can stop your cue ball dead each time. If you can't, then forget all that geometry, and work on your delivery because you're not hitting the cue ball where you think you are and the most accurate estimation of a pocketing angle isn't going to matter a hill of beans unless you can hit it there.

Click to expand...

RRfireblade said:

That was part of my point in that is seems like the typical system requires more figuring than just picking a point and trying to hit it.

Most of the posts on aiming systems lately I don't have the patience to even read post the first post or 2.

Sometimes AZ makes me wonder if I'm playing the same game as everyone else here.

Click to expand...

Just wait till you've been wading through all the various opinions and arguments for 5 years

Forums are great to learn to express your ideas more clearly, to get feedback, to receive new ideas and perspectives. Maybe to provide reviews to point you in the direction of better books, videos, posts.

That's a lot better than nothing, but it takes a lot of wading and a lot of thinking to build useful knowledge.

Colin

av84fun said:

Liposuction.

Click to expand...

That isn't losing weight (at least as I meant it), that's having it physically and surgically removed. I guess having a leg amputated would be losing weight too if you want to play word games.

av84fun said:

And if repitition and practice are all that is needed, how come most of the players I see who have literally spent their entire lives hanging out in pool halls are still B players at best?

Click to expand...

This is perhaps the easiest question I have ever seen on the forum. It comes down to the amount of time and effort put into practice and playing, and the amount of talent and ability the person has. All else being equal, the more practice, the better the player. Most champions got to where they are by playing pool 30+ hours a week (often much more) for an extended period of time. A champion can maintain their level (or close to it) with somewhat less hours, but they couldn't have gotten there without putting those long hours in. Of course, they couldn't have gotten there without the talent and ability either.

The talent and ability includes hand eye coordination, being able to maintain intense focus, strong determination and drive, holding up under pressure, etc. Some people just don't have the talent to be much better than a B player. At some point, even if you play for 60 hours a week for 20 years straight, you will reach the limit of your ability and will not show any more significant improvement. 99+% of people do not possess the ability to be a solid pro, no matter what they do.

av84fun said:

Do you have any evidence to show that the top 10 players practice more than the others 54 in the event?

Click to expand...

They have more talent, put in more practice and/or playing time, or both. Or they had a better day (or the opponents had a worse day) that day. Common sense and logic is your evidence.

av84fun said:

As I have stated previously, advanced aiming is a distant second to shape-related skills but those who believe that there is no SUPER-ACCURATE aiming system just happen to be wrong. Just because they don't know it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Click to expand...

There is NO super accurate practical aiming systems other than the brain and muscle memory. There are however systems that are somewhat accurate, and that can be made super accurate when the player adds in some feel, intuition and experience, whether they do it consciously or subconsciously.

Your system certainly isn't an exception to the rule. Is there a new one you want to share that maybe I haven't heard about? I'll be waiting a long time, because none of them can account for squirt, swerve, throw, speed, table conditions, and ball conditions etc, even IF you were able to get one to work great on a single table under only one set of conditions and only one type of hit on the cueball (like centerball).

av84fun said:

Do you think that Bustamante is a FOOL?

Click to expand...

IF he has a practical aiming system that he believes works all the time under all conditions, and if he believes it does NOT require any adjustments based on feel, experience or intuition, then yup, he's a fool, or at least he would be completely misinformed and sadly mistaken.

av84fun said:

Do you KNOW how all top players aim? Even if you ask them, many would probably lie.

Regards,
Jim

(-:

Click to expand...

Using that logic, you could also say that if any player claimed to use an aiming system that they could be lying. I know that many pros have been asked how they aim (there was even a whole article on it in a pool magazine years ago where quite a few pros told how they aimed), and none of them have yet claimed any systems that do not require adjustments based feel, intuition and/or experience. Nobody but them truly knows how they do aim, but there is NO doubt how they don't aim.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that aiming systems don't work. I'm saying they don't and can't work as claimed without adjustments from feel, intuition and/or experience.

I have a calculator in my skull, it is called the brain. I see players pointing at a diamond then the next diamond and then a final diamond and proceed to miss the shot by a mile. I keep the game simple, I study the shot and use the calculator in my skull and shoot. Yes, I had to program the calculator, I didn't buy it off the shelf.

Poolplaya9 said:

That isn't losing weight (at least as I meant it), that's having it physically and surgically removed. I guess having a leg amputated would be losing weight too if you want to play word games.

Click to expand...

I was kidding...lighten up! (-:

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that aiming systems don't work. I'm saying they don't and can't work as claimed without adjustments from feel, intuition and/or experience.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That comment presumes that you are intimately familiar with the dynamics of EVERY aiming system known to EVERY pool player in the world.

Are you?

Further, with respect to CTE ON CENTER BALL HITS AND UNTIL AN OUTER LIMIT IS REACHED OR UNTIL THE CB/OB GET TOO CLOSE TOGETHER...the method if applied correctly DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY ADJUSTMENTS...CONSIOUS OR OTHERWISE.

I don't know of ANYONE who has EVER suggested that CTE works on ALL SHOTS.

But posters like you INSIST on suggesting that someone is claiming that a given system is infallible and flawless and without limitation.

Please direct me to a SINGLE post where someone has suggested that.

If not, then why do posts like yours attempt to win a "debate" when there is no debate to win????

I just don't get it.

And what if there was a system that worked flawlessly but only on ONE SHOT. There are such systems you know...such as on frozen ball combos that are not "on". Wouldn't you want to know them?

ONE LAST TIME...when english enters the equation and/or when CTE "runs out of gas" which it does on a small minority of shots...then you enter Pro One and YES...feel...judgement...training...practice...call it what you want absolutely comes into play.

Is ANYONE disputing that?

But I propose what I consider to be irrefutable logic...that it is better to adjust form a KNOWN baseline then to "feel" the centerball line of aim and then adjust by "feel" to account for cueing issues.

Regards,
Jim

BillyKoda said:

I have a calculator in my skull, it is called the brain. I see players pointing at a diamond then the next diamond and then a final diamond and proceed to miss the shot by a mile. I keep the game simple, I study the shot and use the calculator in my skull and shoot. Yes, I had to program the calculator, I didn't buy it off the shelf.

Click to expand...

Well, I see players pointing at one diamond then the next diamond...then shoot a 3 rail kick to the CHOSEN SIDE of the OB.

One of them is Efren Reyes.

(-:

Jim

av84fun said:

Well, I see players pointing at one diamond then the next diamond...then shoot a 3 rail kick to the CHOSEN SIDE of the OB.

One of them is Efren Reyes.

(-:

Jim

Click to expand...

Apparently he programmed his calculator with version 2.0 code! :grin: I wonder how many games he played to get that system down?