Aiming by Fractions.

I'm just curious.....

Im a little bit of a pool nut/geek and what I wanted to talk about is something that has been wrongly discredited by what I would call esoteric knowledge builders who oftentimes say things that are correct but have little to no value to you as a player and is completely the wrong way to play this game. People such as Bob Jewett and Dr Dave do fall into this category and your both in your own right intelligent people however you just don't know how to play the game, im sorry im just trying to be honest as it is how I feel when I read your stuff online and here on these forums which I've read for a long time. This is my first post and I feel like participating in this discussion with anyone that is willing......................................................................
........................................................................................
Thanks - I got that out my system :D been wanting to write this for months. :D

when you go to a party...................do you take a leak and a dump in the middle of the living room?? :eek:

td
 
You hit it right on the head Woody, this is all very similar to the Joe Tucker numbers system. I just recently started using that and it seems to work for me. Its also very easy. Deals with the parallel contact points.
 
Fractional Aiming

Im a little bit of a pool nut/geek and what I wanted to talk about is something that has been wrongly discredited by what I would call esoteric knowledge builders who oftentimes say things that are correct but have little to no value to you as a player and is completely the wrong way to play this game. People such as Bob Jewett and Dr Dave do fall into this category and your both in your own right intelligent people however you just don't know how to play the game, im sorry im just trying to be honest as it is how I feel when I read your stuff online and here on these forums which I've read for a long time. This is my first post and I feel like participating in this discussion with anyone that is willing.

Now I'm going to explain how you use this as a process to getting better at potting in pool in the real world so it makes perfect sence to you and I'll explain to you what the Full Ball, 1/4, 1/2 and 3/4 ball Fractional Ball Aiming technique really is.

Imagine your Joe x., he's a low down league player who can kinda cue in a straight line with enough precision where he has the accuracy to pot the easy balls but can't pot a ball if his life depended on it just because he doesn't know where to aim.

First thing he needs to do is shoot every cut angle as a 1/4 1/2 or 3/4 balls. He makes the decision up high before he shots perhaps visualising with a ghost ball technique as to which he thinks is closest until he knows where these references shots go. Sure his game is going to go down as this obviously is not enough angles, nobody is disputing this but what he's learning is basically reference points. He needs to do this for a few months until he learns exactly where the OB is going with all of these reference points as well as he does Full Ball. Even an idiot isn't going to cut the OB on the wrong side because the full ball straight reference line is there and its intuitively and empirically obvious. The same goes for these other hits if you learn them.

At this point the player will recognise if one of these reference points is totally on or whether he has to play within a zone. He has improved his accuracy to within the quarters of the object ball. He has gotten that much better and chances are he'll be potting the easy to medium difficulty shots consistantly. When he needs to improve his aiming again and he can do the same process to divide the hits into eighths with the added bonus that his game won't go down quite as far as it did the first time through.

It also allows you in practice to set up your reference shot and just control cue ball speed and spin so much better as you'll have a mental register from your reference shots of how the cue ball reacts to that cut angle. Even knowing and acknowledging these reference cut angles burned into your memory, you'll start seeing the cue ball deflection angle in your mind and your position game will get that much better too. A player should do this primarily with the full ball, 7/8, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4 and 1/8 shots. Theres basically six shots you need to master all around the table to be amazing at position. You got to ask yourself questions like, if I hit this a 1/2 tip above center what happens.

Thats how you play pool, not some vague ghost ball visualisation which is intuitive guessing when your down on your shot. Pretty soon you don't even have to think about it - you know the shot or the zone and you let your mind do its thing to concentrate on other matters like position and speed.

From this point, the player should be pretty good by now and be getting a little respect in his pool hall, can then move from vertical ball striking now he has the ability to keep the ball in line without english so he doesn't need to use side on the cue ball to get it to do what he needs it to do if he is clever enough to play the correct routes with the correct speed and because he is used to moving in specific amounts this ability will also help him learn to adjust for the deflection when he does have to hit those shots that needs side spin.

Man, guys like Bob Jewett and Dr Dave (sorry just using you guys as the classic example) are just so out of touch of reality. I mean for crying out loud nobody is saying there is only three cut angles, one of which will line up to the pocket yet you created that strawman arguement to back up your opinion without even understanding what it is you were critiquing.

This is what is written in pool magazine

"#12 ranked Nesli O'Hare explains
what she was taught. "The technique I use
was taught to me by Efren Reyes.
According to Efren, there are three kinds
of hits on any object ball. First, there's
looking at the center of cue ball to the
point of aim if the shot is a full ball hit. If
not, you can divide the object ball into four
quarters, sighting your cue ball edge to the
point of aim"

Now if Efren Reyes is saying this, you should listen. You must realise when it comes to playing this game in comparision to him you are a school boy and when he says something, you have to listen. Do you seriously think that someone of Efren Reyes class and intelligence thinks there is only three cut angles, one of which will line up to the pocket???? I mean by your actions, you think your better than Efren Reyes for critiquing things he says and you use strawman arguements to achieve this. Let me tell you this, Efren Reyes would wipe the floor with you on the pool table every day of the week and twice on sundays. You don't even put the effort in to understand. Get a grip and get a reality check... You want to be working out what the best players are doing... not your over-theoretical hogwash.

Thanks - I got that out my system :D been wanting to write this for months. :D

Well Stated... I agree
 
I still have a fractional aiming system on paper, at least I think that's what it was. Not sure just where it is, now. Now, who came up with that? I believe it was Hal Houle, who no longer teaches it. He swore by it for some years, though.
 
...
On Dr Dave's site he has this.

"A common aiming system based on fractional-ball aiming claims there are only three different aims for all cut shots: a "15 degree cut," a "30 degree cut," and a "45 degree cut." Here, I show that these aims are equivalent to 3/4-, 1/2-, and 3/4-ball-hits, and I show the 15 and 45
degree angles are not exact. Also, I show an example shot "in between" two of the aim references to show a deficiency of the method."

He's talking like he's throughly discrediting it. If your bad at aiming this is the way to get it better. How do you define a good shooter? You define him by the margin of his range and how much he can miss by. This is the way to increase your accuracy because by its very definition this is accuracy.

He does mention in the passing 'reference shots' but then he just continues like he's just totally destroying it making diagrams to show a shot between a half ball and a quarter ball that neither of them will make... yeah, but nobody said that....
That's not true. Many people have described aiming systems is such simple terms before (e.g., "There are only three lines of aim, and no adjustment is required." or "Just align and pivot, and the ball goes in the hole for any shot."). The only things I may have "discredited" are the outrageous claims made by some people when describing some aiming systems.

I think your description of how fractional-ball aiming can be a useful tool for practicing and developing as a player is excellent.

Good job!

Regards,
Dave
 
I think you make some reasonable points and have some reasonable descriptions. I'm not quite sure where the negativity about Bob Jewett and Dr. Dave comes from. I suspect they would more or less agree with what you say.
No disagreements here.

Thanks Mike,
Dave
 
Lets face it, ghost ball aiming has been around since people questioned how do I pot the ball in pocket billiards... Dr Dave is a nice example of this because he said before he read anything on the subject of pool he thought he invented this concept. I mean Dr Dave must of seriously thought that the rest of the world was stupid or something but whatever. People would of learned this concept very quickly as soon as the game existed.
I think you must be misquoting me here. I can't imagine I ever said or wrote that I thought I invented ghost-ball aiming. That's ridiculous. As you point out, ghost-ball aiming is an intuitive concept that anybody wondering about aiming would easily stumble upon. Now, maybe I was describing and/or illustrating the ghost-ball-cue-pivot method (see NV 3.2). When I first thought of this approach, I had not seen it before. Although, this approach is also too obvious to not have been known or used by others before. Regardless, I think the ghost-ball-cue-pivot method can be very useful for novice players when they are first learning how to aim. I think your suggested fractional-ball process is also good.

BTW, for the record, I don't think the rest of the world is stupid. :confused:

Regards,
Dave

PS: I would be curious to know where you think I claimed that I thought I invented ghost ball aiming. Please let me know. If I did write such a stupid thing, I would be curious to know the context of the statement to see what I was thinking. Thanks.
 
Everybody that you've singled out agrees with just about everything you said about fractional aiming - in fact, their main message has always been that fractional aiming is a reference system. Your disagreement should be with those who try to describe fractional aiming as an "exact" system with only three actual cut angles - that's who Bob and Dave (and me and several others here) have disagreed with.
Well stated. I agree. Thank you.

Regards,
Dave
 
Excellent post. For some reason, I feel like trying out this thing you call "PRACTICE." It sounds like a good approach. :thumbup:

Regards,
Dave

You know ... reading about all these systems and completely eye popping rituals people try to go through before a shot is simply mind blowing!

It is a wonder that any of these people get better after calculating serious math equations and chinese arithmitic all the while focusing on their stance, stroke, head placement, what kind of tip do I use, is my stick an 18 1/2 or a 19 and will I play better using a 12 1/2 mm shaft or a 12.75? Aim ...Shoot!

Good lord people..... Practice! Put the time in! Try new stuff while PRACTICING! Did I mention practice? Don't cloud your mind with all this theory! Practice! I played 12 hours a day when I was young learning and PRACTICING! We allm start off in the world of suck.... I guarantee Efren sucked when he started! You know what.... he PRACTICED!

P.S. By the way ... the way to get better.... PRACTICE!
 
The impression regarding you "inventing the GB" probably comes from this, which is posted on your web site:

#################################
from Spiderman:
You are correct, that is a fine article. But, as even that author concludes, it will never be "put to rest". Luckily, it doesn't really matter. The numerous pros interviewed used a vast and disparate array of aiming techniques. "Ghost Ball" seemed to be the only somewhat-recurring assertion, but not to a dominant extent. There were even one or two who claimed to aim by "feel".

Personally I use the "ghost ball" technique most often, but not to exclusion of others. I learned to play with no coaching, and "ghost ball" was something I thought I invented .
###############################

When it isn't snipped out like this, it can easily give the impression that you said it, but when read carefully, it is someone else being quoted on your site.
 
Mathew,
By making statements like you have made here it seems like you want to stir controversy. You reply a couple of times and then dissapear. You also show you knowledge of the game and it's players and it's greatest supporters by making these statements.
-
If your ever looking for a game -I'll play you any day, you can use your fractional aiming and I will just play my game.you name the date, time, place, game, ammount.
 
There are different kinds of fractional systems, by the way. Not every fractional system goes cb center to OB center, 1/2, 1/4, 3/4, etc, and then fire.

For instance, there's a system that starts from a point on the inside half of the CB and points to a fraction of the OB and then you pivot (not cte or 90/90).

An example that covers many thick-shot angles is 1-tip to the inside of the CB pointing to the center of the OB and then pivot to center.

Just thought I'd contribute. ;)
 
There are different kinds of fractional systems, by the way. Not every fractional system goes cb center to OB center, 1/2, 1/4, 3/4, etc, and then fire.

For instance, there's a system that starts from a point on the inside half of the CB and points to a fraction of the OB and then you pivot (not cte or 90/90).

An example that covers many thick-shot angles is 1-tip to the inside of the CB pointing to the center of the OB and then pivot to center.

Just thought I'd contribute. ;)

Dave you always post something interesting when it comes to aiming.
I was wondering have you ever went to the table and had a shot and
had to think Hmmm which aiming system do i want to use for this shot.
You know way to much stuff, but its great that you share your
Knowledge.
 
Dave you always post something interesting when it comes to aiming.
I was wondering have you ever went to the table and had a shot and
had to think Hmmm which aiming system do i want to use for this shot.
You know way to much stuff, but its great that you share your
Knowledge.

I know how to make any shot on the table. It's my crooked stroke that gets me into trouble. Anyone know a system for that? Thanks, btw :)
 
Last edited:
In all seriousness, the person who has done a great job with systemizing the stroke is Mike Davis. He pivots from the shoulder joint instead of the elbow and releases the muscle tension, letting gravity drop the cue down. It's not unlike Ben Hogan, who at the top of his swing, would let the club drop at the acceleration of gravity.

If there's a short-cut to stroking straight, I'm guessing gravity has something to do with it. Human muscles are too flawed for the majority of us. I don't buy the million ball theory. I've met some people who have hit a GAZILLION balls in their lifetime... and they still suck.

Anyways, this is just a theory/opinion. I might be totally wrong.
 
There are many pros that use fractional aiming. It actually helps you visualize cut shots without "aiming in the air" or ghostball. The way I was taught was a simple method.

Aiming is easiest whilst standing. Like I said earlier, if you played Cue Club (a 2D perspective - overhead view) vs Virtual Pool 3 (a 3D perspective like in the real world)... potting is much harder on virtual pool 3 without a shadow of a doubt. The more the eyes are placed towards the horizontal contact point plane parallel to the table the harder it is to aim.

Just think about it, if you were to view the ball from this plane there would be no reference point to aim using many of the other aiming systems because the angle of the pot is always straight from this vantage point. However it is far easier to sight from this angle.

Ghost ball is great for helping you establish the aim up high before the shot, however, it basically sucks for when your down on your shot. Thats why you need these reference points to establish where your going to aim.

For example... Joex has now mastered the 4 basic reference lines of full ball, 1/2 ball, 1/4 ball, 3/4 ball. He looks at his shot and he evaluates "Ok this shot is between a half ball and a quarter ball but its slightly more towards half ball than it is quarter ball." He has now got information he can take to the shot when he goes down to it when his perception is more towards that plane I just discussed. Just the ability to differentiate those four cut angles gives you that ability to take the judgement you have from evaluating the shot, and using what little elevation your eyes have above the horizontal contact point plane to feel and judge the cut angle.



You have only three aim points on the OB. Center ball and the two OB edges. Four lines left off center on the CB and four lines right on the CB and obviously center ball for straight in shots. Thick shots are easy to see the aim points because they are the exact equal opposite contact points.

For hits between Full Ball and 7/8ths when your down and feeling the shot, I would advise to just to aim at what you think is the contact point because the difference between the contact point vs the aiming point is so close that it really doesn't make any difference to what a human is capable of. However for anything above this, don't think about the contact point at all...think about your zone and feel it.

So, for thick shots you line one of your fraction lines on either the left or right side of the CB to the center of the OB. For thin shots you line up a fraction line on the CB to the OB edge. Once you find the fraction you want you connect the dots from CB to OB and bring yourself down on a parallel line to CB center.

You have to remember that the eyes play tricks on you. Why I would generally advise not turning or tilting the head with the dominant eye theory. The eyes will be close when your down on the shot to being in line with the edges of the CB.

Sighting 101...

When looking at the OB

Basically you want to use the eye 'picture' that is on the side of the CB that is towards the cut angle. Lets say you want to cut a ball as thinly as you dare possible and the pot angle is towards the left, so your hitting the right side of the OB. Your left eye will be right along the edge of both the OB and the CB. Your right eye will allow you to see more around the edge of the OB due to its perspective causing you to miss.

When looking at the CB

You must use both eyes to picture the center line of the cue ball when cueing because neither eye is be centered on the cue line.

I think this is similar to what you are talking about with the 1/2 1/4 1/8...and so on. It's a great method to use for those of us that have never been able to see the ghost ball. Why do you think Jewett wouldn't agree with fractional aiming?

Basically what I think your describing is just doing the fractional ball method but with only full ball and 1/2 ball which is fine but obviously the more fractions you have down pat, the more accurate you will be.

Your absolutely right that a player can use fractional aiming with or without ghost ball aiming. I try not to use Ghost ball aiming because its an inaccurate system due to the properties of throw but for me its like an evil crutch.

However without using Ghost Ball in your evaluation, fractional ball aiming is the only "system" that takes into account for throw which includes that compensation. For a half Ball hit, it is said to be 28 degrees in reality, I never got the protractor out to find out but you see that memorised 28 degree angle.

Don't get me wrong.. he is a very intelligent guy but in his artical it is obvious it is written from a Ghost ball aimers perspective when he talks about what I wrote in the paragraph above which is the difference from learning from someone intelligent who plays maybe ok but not great vs a player like Efren who basically will try out concepts and keep or dump what works on a real level.
 
Last edited:
Although I think maybe you should lighten up a little, you do have a valid point. When it comes to aiming, pool's engineering division falls apart.

On the other hand, I've got the aiming thing pretty well nailed, but still have a straight pool game (10 ball rack, 7' table) that consistently gets stuck on 8 and 9 ball runs. And that is about as far as superior aiming will take you. The better you get at aiming, you find out it isn't as important to a good pool game as you thought.

Sure the better someone is at aiming, then its time to learn to position the cue ball but fractional ball aiming is more than just an aiming system. Its a whole system to play by.

There is also more to a player than his ability to run out such as controlling the cue ball and OB at the same time and again fractional ball references helps here control the speed of both balls.
 
Everybody that you've singled out agrees with just about everything you said about fractional aiming - in fact, their main message has always been that fractional aiming is a reference system. Your disagreement should be with those who try to describe fractional aiming as an "exact" system with only three actual cut angles - that's who Bob and Dave (and me and several others here) have disagreed with.

Kinda makes me wonder if you've ever really read anything about it or if you're just trolling for controversy.

The Fractional Ball aiming system isn't just a system for aiming. They see it as such.

They Visualise the system in conjunction with the Ghost Ball system and then because the Ghost ball still has the problem with throw characteristics.... they then make the jump that the Fractional Ball Method has this same fallback just because they can't get their mind away from that Ghost Ball (as depicted by Jewetts artical in 2007). Tell me, if your not visualising a Ghost Ball but merely using a memorised angle won't that angle also include that throw characteristic?
 
Last edited:
So you've been reading a long time and what you've learned from Bob Jewett and Dr. Dave is that they are arguing against a strawman version of fractional aiming? And your amazing contribution is to use fractions as a reference point?

Maybe you should start reading without your head up your ass.

Yada, Yada, Yada. I know by responding im just giving you the attention you desired.

I've made your day but its ok because it will give you a short spell of happiness before the low self-esteem kicks back in...
 
Back
Top