Mosconi Aiming

Ralph Kramden

BOOM!.. ZOOM!.. MOON!
Silver Member
The first image shown is from page 75 in the book 'Winning Pocket Billiards' by Willie Mosconi.
For a long time after I bought this book I tried to align imaginary stripes on both the CB and OB.
I never had much luck doing that. Not that I can run 526 balls or 50 but I think image 2 is better.

image.jpg
Image 2 shows the contact points that the stripes in image 1 can not. Knowing that the edges of
both balls are an equal distance to their contact points will always give CB aim points on the OB.
image.jpeg
 

sixpack

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The first image shown is from page 75 in the book 'Winning Pocket Billiards' by Willie Mosconi.
For a long time after I bought this book I tried to align imaginary stripes on both the CB and OB.
I never had much luck doing that. Not that I can run 526 balls or 50 but I think image 2 is better.

View attachment 515665
Image 2 shows the contact points that the stripes in image 1 can not. Knowing that the edges of
both balls are an equal distance to their contact points will always give CB aim points on the OB.
View attachment 515664

Ok. I looked at the 2nd photo and thought "Hey, that's incorrect!" - And then I realized that *I* was incorrectly aiming...lol. I was subconsciously doing a combination of two things that was giving me the wrong results on certain shots.

That explains a bit. Thank you for posting this.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
The first image shown is from page 75 in the book 'Winning Pocket Billiards' by Willie Mosconi.
For a long time after I bought this book I tried to align imaginary stripes on both the CB and OB.
I never had much luck doing that. Not that I can run 526 balls or 50 but I think image 2 is better.

Image 2 shows the contact points that the stripes in image 1 can not. Knowing that the edges of
both balls are an equal distance to their contact points will always give CB aim points on the OB.
Looks to me like he was illustrating "parallel lines" aiming (the stripes all aligned the same way are the parallel lines). I think it's an OK way to illustrate that, especially before laptop drawing programs, and a simple enough visualization to take to the table.

pj
chgo
 

Ralph Kramden

BOOM!.. ZOOM!.. MOON!
Silver Member
Looks to me like he was illustrating "parallel lines" aiming (the stripes all aligned the same way are the parallel lines).
I think it's an OK way to illustrate that, especially before laptop drawing programs, and a simple enough visualization to take to the table.
pj
chgo

Using parallel lines is OK, but to connect those lines is problematic unless your angles are small.
My drawing wasn't computer generated either and also is somewhat guesswork (As is all aiming)

What I do show is a CB much larger than the OB. The center of both, the large CB & small CB is
aligned with the dashed line even though they are both different sizes. The CB appears to be the
same size only when it contacts the OB. The edges of both CB & OB are an equal distance from
their contact points, but they appear different when both balls are at a distance. (The guesswork)

Mosconi ran 526 balls. I won't try to dis him but trying to aim parallel lines is too much guesswork.

Again IMO... Carl

.
 
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
In the original little book, his first book, Mosconi's lines are very misleading. The illustrations show the line for pocketing balls going from center cb to the contact point on the ob. Glad to know that little glitch was fixed in later books/printings.
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The first image shown is from page 75 in the book 'Winning Pocket Billiards' by Willie Mosconi.
For a long time after I bought this book I tried to align imaginary stripes on both the CB and OB.
I never had much luck doing that. Not that I can run 526 balls or 50 but I think image 2 is better.

View attachment 515665
Image 2 shows the contact points that the stripes in image 1 can not. Knowing that the edges of
both balls are an equal distance to their contact points will always give CB aim points on the OB.
View attachment 515664

I've seen those lines before somewhere. Willie was a smart guy.
 

Mkindsv

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
In the original little book, his first book, Mosconi's lines are very misleading. The illustrations show the line for pocketing balls going from center cb to the contact point on the ob. Glad to know that little glitch was fixed in later books/printings.

I personally aim center cue ball to object ball contact point. Really, even when using english I adjust my stance to be aiming at the contact point after I apply the english (otherwised english cp to ob cp)...works fantastically, unless I have a pretty severe cut I am about 95 percent or better while aiming this way. I honestly think people tend to try to make aiming far too difficult.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
I personally aim center cue ball to object ball contact point.
Apparently that can be a workable visualization (if you say so), but you know that with any cut angle it's physically impossible to hit the object ball contact point with the center of the cue ball, right?

pj
chgo
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
I personally aim center cue ball to object ball contact point. Really, even when using english I adjust my stance to be aiming at the contact point after I apply the english (otherwised english cp to ob cp)...works fantastically, unless I have a pretty severe cut I am about 95 percent or better while aiming this way. I honestly think people tend to try to make aiming far too difficult.

That's weird. Must be a vision thing. I aim center cb toward where it needs to be to pocket the ball. If I aimed it at the contact point I'd hit every shot too thick and miss everything except straight in or near straight.
 

Imac007

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It’s about several parallel lines

Air line a cue from contact point to contact point. Then simply parallel shift the cue to the center of the cue ball. The shifted line, now through the cue ball center, is the ghost ball line. It fails to account for throw. On shots of 3 feet or less it is useable. However, nearly every aiming system uses it as a reference line.

The contact point on the object ball is always the farthest part on the ball away from the pocket. The line from there to the pocket center is another reference line. Parallel shift that line until the parallel line passes through the cue ball center. The line from the face of the ball through center exits on the front of the ball. The exit point is the cue ball contact point. That is a method of finding the contact point for each ball to establish the contact point to contact point line.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Air line a cue from contact point to contact point. Then simply parallel shift the cue to the center of the cue ball. The shifted line, now through the cue ball center, is the ghost ball line. It fails to account for throw. On shots of 3 feet or less it is useable. However, nearly every aiming system uses it as a reference line.

The contact point on the object ball is always the farthest part on the ball away from the pocket. The line from there to the pocket center is another reference line. Parallel shift that line until the parallel line passes through the cue ball center. The line from the face of the ball through center exits on the front of the ball. The exit point is the cue ball contact point. That is a method of finding the contact point for each ball to establish the contact point to contact point line.

You're right (if you can accurately visualize the contact points) that it works for shots where the ob is close to the cb. But even at 3ft the ob appears about 27% smaller than the cb (from the cb's perspective), so using a true parallel shift should result in an overcut. That's probably why it takes a lot of practice/table time to get good and consistent with contact point aiming... because at varying distances the two lines (contact point to contact point and ccb to ghostball center) vary in degree of separation, never really being parallel.
 
Last edited:

Ralph Kramden

BOOM!.. ZOOM!.. MOON!
Silver Member
Looks like just another fancy drawing that gets to the ghost ball.
https://youtu.be/6_pkT2Nm2Hs?t=21
There he talks fractional.

All that talk still leads to visualization of the two balls colliding.

He talks fractionally but says to move a little bit further. He doesn't say how much.
At 2:00 he tries to miss the 7. His brain is so instilled to compensate.. he makes it.

I don't believe he used the ghost ball to visualize cut shots. He was a great player.
Bruswick paid him to play. Golf pros get paid to play, and thousands of wanna' be
golfers are the spectators wishing they could be a pro. The same goes in billiards.

.
 

Ralph Kramden

BOOM!.. ZOOM!.. MOON!
Silver Member
Using parallel lines is OK, but to connect those lines is problematic unless your angles are small.
My drawing wasn't computer generated either and also is somewhat guesswork (As is all aiming)

What I do show is a CB much larger than the OB. The center of both, the large CB & small CB is
aligned with the dashed line even though they are both different sizes. The CB appears to be the
same size only when it contacts the OB. The edges of both CB & OB are an equal distance from
their contact points, but they appear different when both balls are at a distance. (The guesswork)

Mosconi ran 526 balls. I won't try to dis him but trying to aim parallel lines is too much guesswork.

Again IMO... Carl

.

Air line a cue from contact point to contact point. Then simply parallel shift the cue to the center of the cue ball. The shifted line, now through the cue ball center, is the ghost ball line. It fails to account for throw. On shots of 3 feet or less it is useable. However, nearly every aiming system uses it as a reference line.

The contact point on the object ball is always the farthest part on the ball away from the pocket. The line from there to the pocket center is another reference line. Parallel shift that line until the parallel line passes through the cue ball center. The line from the face of the ball through center exits on the front of the ball. The exit point is the cue ball contact point. That is a method of finding the contact point for each ball to establish the contact point to contact point line.

You're right (if you can accurately visualize the contact points) that it works for shots where the ob is close to the cb. But even at 3ft the ob appears about 27% smaller than the CB (from the cb's perspective), so using a true parallel shift should result in an overcut. That's probably why it takes a lot of practice/table time to get good and consistent with contact point aiming... because at varying distances the two lines (contact point to contact point and ccb to ghostball center) vary in degree of separation, never really being parallel.

The 2nd image in post #1 shows the dashed CCB aim path... The path of the CB edge is not
parallel to the dashed line of the CB centers. That isn't because the cue ball edge doesn't run
parallel to the CB center. The CB looks smaller at a distance while CB centers stay centered.

.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
The 2nd image in post #1 shows the dashed CCB aim path... The path of the CB edge is not
parallel to the dashed line of the CB centers. That isn't because the cue ball edge doesn't run
parallel to the CB center. The CB looks smaller at a distance while CB centers stay centered.

.

Exactly. If the ob is a foot away from the cb, and we aim to hit a 1/2 ball shot, we are aiming slightly less than 1.125" from center ob because at a foot away the ob looks smaller. At a foot away it's more like a 2.05" ball instead of 2.25". At 3ft it looks like a 1.64" ball, so we'd have to aim 0.82" from center ob to create a halfball hit, instead of aiming an actual 1.125". We just know, regardless of how small the ob might look, that aiming at the edge produces a 1/2 ball hit.

This stuff affects parallel type contact point aiming, but not fractional aiming. In fractional aiming you simply aim center cb to a spot or vertical line on the ob that will produce the cb-ob relationship needed to pocket the ball. The aim line passes through the ghostball but you're not referencing or aiming at a ghostball.
 
Last edited:

Mkindsv

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Apparently that can be a workable visualization (if you say so), but you know that with any cut angle it's physically impossible to hit the object ball contact point with the center of the cue ball, right?

pj
chgo

Yeah...I completely.understand what you are saying here. I was looking at some of the diagrams, on here...and trying to draw some up the way I do it. Theorhetically, the way I aim shouldn't work...but it does. I make ball after ball after ball shooting this way. Like I said though, no extreme cuts and banks / kicks dont work this way either, anything up to about a 60 degree cut though, goes in like its on a string.
 

Ralph Kramden

BOOM!.. ZOOM!.. MOON!
Silver Member
Exactly. If the ob is a foot away from the cb, and we aim to hit a 1/2 ball shot, we are aiming slightly less than 1.125" from center ob because at a foot away the ob looks smaller. At a foot away it's more like a 2.05" ball instead of 2.25". At 3ft it looks like a 1.64" ball, so we'd have to aim 0.82" from center ob to create a halfball hit, instead of aiming an actual 1.125". We just know, regardless of how small the ob might look, that aiming at the edge produces a 1/2 ball hit.

This stuff affects parallel type contact point aiming, but not fractional aiming. In fractional aiming you simply aim center cb to a spot or vertical line on the ob that will produce the cb-ob relationship needed to pocket the ball. The aim line passes through the ghostball but you're not referencing or aiming at a ghostball.

Like this... https://forums.azbilliards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=508376&d=1545612514

The drawing in the attachment above shows the overlaps of 2 equal sized balls.. When both balls collide they are the same size.

If Center CB is aimed at any OB fraction line.. at any distance,. the CB overlaps the OB as shown on the drawing for that angle.

.

.
 

Ralph Kramden

BOOM!.. ZOOM!.. MOON!
Silver Member
In the original little book, his first book, Mosconi's lines are very misleading. The illustrations show the line for pocketing balls going from center cb to the contact point on the ob. Glad to know that little glitch was fixed in later books/printings.

The first image is from page 52 in his first book.. copyright 1948,1959
In other pages he shows how to find contact points through center CB.

He stresses the importance of hitting the CB centerline for most shots.

image.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    80 KB · Views: 284
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
The first image is from page 52 in his first book.. copyright 1948,1959
In other pages he shows how to find contact points through center CB.

He stresses the importance of hitting the CB centerline for most shots.

View attachment 515935
View attachment 515936

Yep, that illustration (page52) is simply showing the cb-ob fractional relationships. The very next page is one of the misleading ones I was talking about that and shows the aim line going to the ob contact point.

picture.php
 

Ralph Kramden

BOOM!.. ZOOM!.. MOON!
Silver Member
Yep, that illustration (page52) is simply showing the cb-ob fractional relationships. The very next page is one of the misleading ones I was talking about that and shows the aim line going to the ob contact point.

picture.php

I believe on page 53 he is only showing how you can find the CP by aiming through CCB.
On pages 54 & 55 he then explains how CCB aiming to OB contact point is too thick a hit.

image.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Top