Aiming by Fractions.

Tommorow I will respond to Dr Dave. and his posts. I will try to respond to each individual as you took the time to write to me and this is my thread, I will take the time to respond in turn but think it will be an interesting discussion.
 
Mathew said:
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.





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.



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.



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.
Click to expand...

I think you misread my post. With that system it's aimed in the air. I described it in it's simple form 1/8ths. You could divide the CB into as many aim points as you want. Your sighting off the top of the CB and sliding in to position with your bridge hand parallel to your aim points.
 
Mathew said:
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
Click to expand...

You lost my interest when I read that statement. You also lost any chance to be credible.

Bob Jewett and Dr. Dave are accepted members of the pool/billiard community who have put in countless hours of work and written volumes about the game. They approach the game with an open mind and the scientists desire to learn and prove.

When you "dis" them... you with no credentials, you establish yourself as a big mouth nobody with an inflated idea of your own opinions.

With that incredibly stupid statement you completely blew your chance to be a credible member of this forum and have firmly established yourself as just another loud-mouth.
 
Mathew said:
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,
Click to expand...

If you've really "read everything," then you would know that Bob Jewett has run over a hundred balls in 14.1 and has a National Collegiate title to his credit. If that counts as "don't know how to play the game," then the rest of us aren't even worthy to be in your presence.


Mathew said:
This is my first post and I feel like participating in this discussion with anyone that is willing.
Click to expand...

You might have tried a bit more congenial approach to an introduction. Even if I agree with much of what you have to say, you've turned me off as a self-serving know-it-all with no concept of how to communicate. But, then again, I'm a nobody, so that shouldn't affect you one way or the other. Have fun (but hopefully not in a Fast Larry sort of way). You might actually learn something.

Fred
 
Last edited:
DC,

Thank you for pointing this out. I'm glad that's settled. For the record, the quote is from my FAQ site, where I post what I think are good answers (from many people) to many questions, mostly from the AZB and BD CCB forums. This ghost-ball quote, from Spiderman on the BD CCB forum, is here:


Regards,
Dave

Dead Crab said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
Thank goodness I don't have to think about how I am aiming! This one is for Drivermaker - I just 'feel' the ball into the pocket.:D I agree with you about Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett, having nothing against them personally: both contribute to pool but I can't stand reading any of their articles - the most left brained concepts known to mankind.

One thing you are wrong on is that you can't tell how good a beginner can aim by how far they miss the ball. An erratic stroke or faulty stance can cause this also. Even good players can aim but not shoot straight because of a faulty stroke.

Secondly, I remember Efren saying that he picks a spot on the object ball to aim at. I was shocked, but that is what he said (sorry, I can't quote the source).

One thing that you said I totally agree with and have to give you kudos for recognizing this. I don't use the fractional aiming system, but if you setup a 90 degree plane off the point of contact so you can follow where the cue ball will go after making contact, you can get a better feel of where to aim and a better sense of the direction and speed of the cue ball. Plus, for whatever reason, this helps my aiming as it serves as a check to the 'feel' method.
 
whitewolf said:
... I agree with you about Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett, having nothing against them personally: both contribute to pool but I can't stand reading any of their articles - the most left brained concepts known to mankind. ...
Click to expand...
If you "can't stand reading" our articles, I recommend you don't read any more in the future. I don't want you to hurt either side of your brain. :p :cool:

Dr. Dave
 
The solution of course is that fractions and the ghost ball must be combined.

Place the ghost ball at the point of contact on the object ball.

Now place the cue above the ghost ball, aimed through the centre line of the ghost ball, and the aim point of the cue on the object ball is revealed. Like, for example, a half ball hit has the cue aimed splitting the edge of the object ball.

I've never understood why the pool professors tend to talk either of points on the cue ball or the position of the ghost ball as if they are completely separate and exclusive topics. They should be two halves of a single aiming lesson IMO:D:D:D

It would end sales of ghost ball gizmos.
 
Dr.Dave I don't dispute that different systems and aiming techniques compiled with numerous other theory applications all geared toward improving your game does. I am of the opinion that most of this stuff is really for the player who can run a 1 or 2 pack in 8 or 9 ball and has simply hit a wall in the improvement catogory. I think once your understanding of the game itself has gotten to a certain point, improvement can be had by learning the finer details using these systems while being able to handle the vast information involved. The lesser player (bottom teir league player or the player who can't use the simplist english) I feel just cannot handle all the complicated information it takes to understand the systems much less actually do it. It comes a time where enough is enough and to much is actually doing more harm then good. When I say "just practice", I feel a player just starting out needs to learn the basics first rather then mind blowing systems. Run a rack of 8 ball first or just understand how to at least. Being able to stroke properly and follow through, knowing what different types of english gives you and what to expect from it. KNOWING WHAT A SAFE IS AND THE IMPORTANCE OF IT. Just a simple understanding of what is expected and how to achieve it then and only then step up in the knowlege dept. What is your opinion on this and what level of player do you try to cater to when you write? Would be very interested in what you think on this.
 
Dr.Dave I don't dispute that different systems and aiming techniques compiled with numerous other theory applications all geared toward improving your game does. I am of the opinion that most of this stuff is really for the player who can run a 1 or 2 pack in 8 or 9 ball and has simply hit a wall in the improvement catogory. I think once your understanding of the game itself has gotten to a certain point, improvement can be had by learning the finer details using these systems while being able to handle the vast information involved. The lesser player (bottom teir league player or the player who can't use the simplist english) I feel just cannot handle all the complicated information it takes to understand the systems much less actually do it. It comes a time where enough is enough and to much is actually doing more harm then good. When I say "just practice", I feel a player just starting out needs to learn the basics first rather then mind blowing systems. Run a rack of 8 ball first or just understand how to at least. Being able to stroke properly and follow through, knowing what different types of english gives you and what to expect from it. KNOWING WHAT A SAFE IS AND THE IMPORTANCE OF IT. Just a simple understanding of what is expected and how to achieve it then and only then step up in the knowlege dept. What is your opinion on this and what level of player do you try to cater to when you write? Would be very interested in what you think on this.
 
Mathew,

I'm not sure if this has been said, but I think we all agree that there is only one spot for the cue ball to hit the object ball to make any given shot (of course the pockets are wider than the ball so there is room for movement of that spot). And I hate to say this...but the Ghostball will get you to this spot if used properly.

Joe Tucker's aiming system gets you there because he is giving you the information as to what spot on the cue ball needs hit the aim spot on the object ball. This is also what the Ghostball does.

Dr. Dave, Bob Jewett, Mike Page and many others mention that you can also aim at a spot on the table 1 1/8" from the object ball in line with the object ball & pocket you intend to pot. This is also what the Ghostball does (places the base of the cue ball where the center of the Ghostball would be).

I agree fully with Patrick, Dr. Dave, Bob Jewell, Mike Page, etc., that those that talk about the fractional aiming method has only full; 3/4; 1/2; 1/4; & thin, are not telling the whole story. There are adjustments made to these fractions to make "all the shots" that many of them don't talk about. In other words, the description is incomplete or they are not aware of the adjustments being made.

Mathew, at least you talk about using the 1/4 ball aiming method as a start to begin to see the angles and what part of the cue ball needs to hit the object ball for those shots, and after getting the feel through "PRACTICE", you suggest they go to 1/8 ball to get to pot more shots. Many that talk about these types of systems do not bring this up. And it's amazing that the Ghostball takes you to all the points needed to pot a ball. Yes, the fractional method is a good way to introduce new players to get a feel of where to hit the object ball.

It just sounds like the Ghostball is just not for you - maybe you have difficulty in visualizing the Ghostball - that is why there are many different systems out there so you can find the one that works for the way you think/feel & visualize. But there is no denying that if used properly, the Ghostball takes you where you need to be on all shots – it is self-adjusting. I just don't understand the hostility against this method and those that take the time to share it with the world/us. I want to thank them!

If someone would have shared with me the adjustments needed when using the fractional ball system, I would have learned it cover to cover, but they were unable to share the secrets to make it useful during a game. It remains in my mind a very useful guide that I need to adjust if I plan to make a ball in the majority of shots, so it’s just not for me. I guess that’s why they have chocolate & vanilla ice cream.

Welcome to the forum.

Dave
 
Last edited:
JimS said:
You lost my interest when I read that statement. You also lost any chance to be credible.

Bob Jewett and Dr. Dave are accepted members of the pool/billiard community who have put in countless hours of work and written volumes about the game. They approach the game with an open mind and the scientists desire to learn and prove.

When you "dis" them... you with no credentials, you establish yourself as a big mouth nobody with an inflated idea of your own opinions.

With that incredibly stupid statement you completely blew your chance to be a credible member of this forum and have firmly established yourself as just another loud-mouth.
Click to expand...

Yup, totally agree!! With Fred, also.
 
ShootingRazbone said:
... Being able to stroke properly and follow through, knowing what different types of english gives you and what to expect from it. KNOWING WHAT A SAFE IS AND THE IMPORTANCE OF IT. Just a simple understanding of what is expected and how to achieve it then and only then step up in the knowlege dept. What is your opinion on this
Click to expand...
I'm not exactly sure what you are asking here, but I think I agree. Obviously, to be able to play pool well, a person needs to be able to aim accurately, align accurately, stroke accurately, know how much speed to use on different shots, control speed accurately, have a good understanding of where the CB will go with different types of shots (and be able to control this), etc!

ShootingRazbone said:
and what level of player do you try to cater to when you write?
Click to expand...
That depends on what I am writing. Many on my BD articles have deal with the topics on the list above (e.g., see my "Fundamentals" series, "Stroke Tune-up" article, and series dealing with the 90 and 30 degree rules). I think most people at most levels can benefit from this stuff. Some of my articles (e.g., the series on squirt, swerve, and throw) are certainly not appropriate for beginners. They are also not appropriate for people who don't like to understand how and why certain things happen at the table. Some of my articles are just for fun (e.g., see my "Beer Goggles" article), and I hope a wide range of pool magazine readers enjoys these, but I could be wrong.

Regards,
Dave
 
Last edited:
JimS said:
You lost my interest when I read that statement. You also lost any chance to be credible.

Bob Jewett and Dr. Dave are accepted members of the pool/billiard community who have put in countless hours of work and written volumes about the game. They approach the game with an open mind and the scientists desire to learn and prove.

When you "dis" them... you with no credentials, you establish yourself as a big mouth nobody with an inflated idea of your own opinions.

With that incredibly stupid statement you completely blew your chance to be a credible member of this forum and have firmly established yourself as just another loud-mouth.
Click to expand...

My sentiments exactly.
 
dr_dave said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know people that have read snooker books and did the fractional aiming technique also due to the fact that snooker players are the best in the potting department and have completely misread. They aim for half-ball when the potting angle is between two reference shots and then their subconcious tells them they aren't going to hit the pocket and they then steer their stroke to try and make the ball which is a pretty disasterous way of doing it...eventually they give up on the idea and just play intuitively without even learning what it had to teach.

What I have a quarm with is that you phrased your artical as though that is what fractional ball aiming is all about. When you mentioned the reference angles, it was as though you were saying "the aiming system is faulty but it could be useful for this".

Now in your defence, I have seen things written which depict fractional ball aiming in a pretty poor light because the proponents are saying things that are outwith logic but what you should of done was on how to use the reference points... I mean there is so much that is written on it and you dismissed the most beautiful part of the system. The most beautiful part of this system is not just the aiming abilities it gives but the power it gives for an individual to understand position.

The track lines off of the OB can be now practiced for an exact angle and now you can start categorising it by the line that the OB is to the pocket. For example, you could show a shape whereby a half ball hit with rolling ball will take you directly up and down the table and do the same for a three quarter ball hit and know the person knows exactly the angle where to place the cue ball even if the OB is somewhere between these two lines if he needed to take that route... The possibilities are endless! You just skimmed right over the whole subject like it was a possible good thing about a faulty system.

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
Click to expand...

I do thank you for showing me a good civility here and hope that you can understand that I'm not here just trying to stir the pot. I just want a good solid discussion and if you think im wrong on something you are more than welcome to have an open communication with much brutal honesty as you wish also and I will take no offense whatsoever. The very purpose of a forum is to discuss and exchange ideas, its just my style to be very blunt because from past experience its the only way to get people fired up in a debate to where the deep thinking comes out inorder to defend a position.
 
Last edited:
dr_dave said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yes I have to apologise for that because I read that thread a while back, somewhere in mind it registered that it was you that said that.

Thankfully it still illustrates my point that Ghost Ball was probably the first aiming method because it takes just a small amount of critical thinking to work out.
 
whitewolf said:
Thank goodness I don't have to think about how I am aiming! This one is for Drivermaker - I just 'feel' the ball into the pocket.:D I agree with you about Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett, having nothing against them personally: both contribute to pool but I can't stand reading any of their articles - the most left brained concepts known to mankind.
Click to expand...

Even good 'feel' players usually play the half-ball fractional aiming technique on the subconcious level. The vast majority of people don't sight the cue ball edge inorder to aim with do so with the cue itself and they can see that they're aiming at air or ball.

I think its far better from a technical perspective to have two aims when sighting your shot. The cue in relation to the forward direction that the individual wishes to propel the CB and the CB edge to the OB.

One thing you are wrong on is that you can't tell how good a beginner can aim by how far they miss the ball. An erratic stroke or faulty stance can cause this also. Even good players can aim but not shoot straight because of a faulty stroke.
Click to expand...

Definately. The players potting ability is defined by his accuracy to send the cue ball to his desired line of aim and his accuracy in aiming. However, there are many many players who cue well enough to pot a whole lot better than they do now.

I like the exercise where the player hits full ball shots trying to follow the cue ball into the pocket for this.

Secondly, I remember Efren saying that he picks a spot on the object ball to aim at. I was shocked, but that is what he said (sorry, I can't quote the source).
Click to expand...

If it is an accurate paraphrase, I don't really see the contradiction from how he and Nesli O'Hare was quoted in Pool and Billiard Magazine. Fractional aiming is all about defined spots on the OB to strike and then using them as reference points to get your line of aim.

Really you have to give it to Reyes to work out why its technically advantageous to sight down the side of the cue ball rather than down the cue stick.

One thing that you said I totally agree with and have to give you kudos for recognizing this. I don't use the fractional aiming system, but if you setup a 90 degree plane off the point of contact so you can follow where the cue ball will go after making contact, you can get a better feel of where to aim and a better sense of the direction and speed of the cue ball. Plus, for whatever reason, this helps my aiming as it serves as a check to the 'feel' method.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. However, to my mind aiming by these fractions is still a feel method as it doesn't try to show you a specific line of aim except for when your reference angle is dead on and is merely a way to cut down on the margin of error you can be out by.
 
Last edited:
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.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
Mathew:
The Fractional Ball aiming system isn't just a system for aiming.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is.

They Visualise the system in conjunction with the Ghost Ball system and then because the Ghost ball still has the problem with throw characteristics...
Click to expand...

The ghost ball system has no "problem with throw characteristics". No system adjusts automatically for throw; it's an adjustment that must be added to any system, including fractional aiming.

Tell me, if your not visualising a Ghost Ball but merely using a memorised angle won't that angle also include that throw characteristic?
Click to expand...

What's a "memorized angle"?

From your posts here it's pretty obvious that you don't know nearly as much about this subject as you think. Read more; talk less.

pj
chgo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top