Aiming Is Really Simple

[SpiderWebComm]

Now, do you promise to make up with PJ, and promise to be a good boy when you guys disagree in the future.

Regards,
Dave

As a matter of fact, for the record, PJ and I agree on FAR more things than we disagree on. We've been very civilized lately - and I even sent him a rep not long ago.

Cte works - I just can't prove it mathematically yet--- although I'm close. I just need some software that will help me rotate a line from any pivot point.

 

[dr_dave]

As a matter of fact, for the record, PJ and I agree on FAR more things than we disagree on. We've been very civilized lately - and I even sent him a rep not long ago.

That's more like it. :grin-loving:

Civility is refreshing,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Cte works - I just can't prove it mathematically yet--- although I'm close. I just need some software that will help me rotate a line from any pivot point.

Why do you always try to use math to prove stuff that is so obvious? Just line up and pivot, and the ball goes in the hole. You don't need equations to prove this. :frown:

If you wanted a more complete and informative response, I would feel compelled to provide a couple of links, but I know you don't like that.

Regards,
Dave

 

[JoeW]

Got a hole in my swimming pool and have not had time to work on the other stuff. In the mean time see Dr Dave, here, here and here. :thumbup:

 

[SpiderWebComm]

why do you always try to use math to prove stuff that is so obvious? just line up and pivot, and the ball goes in the hole. You don't need equations to prove this. :frown:

If you wanted a more complete and informative response, i would feel compelled to provide a couple of links, but i know you don't like that.

Regards,
dave

.................

 

[pwd72s]

This is one of the reasons I am purchasing a set of Jimmy's DVD's also. You can't digest "Almost everything I know" in a few short hours. It's worth watching several times fo shizzle.

JoeyA

Jimmy's DVD's are great...now if only I had a home table. Watch the DVD, run to the table, working on one step at a time. Simply no way to have a table here, unless I have a room added.

 

[JoeW]

Swimming pools can wait. There are important things in life !

I ran the study again shooting from the left. The first photo shows the set up. As can be seen I used Joe Tucker’s aim trainer to insure I was on center ball for all shots in this study. The trainer rails never hit the cue ball. In my judgement I stroked as intended and did hit center ball with the cue tip on all recorded shots. There were two times that my concentration wavered and those shots were discarded

I did not look at the first diagram previously posted so as to avoid bias. However, I do remember some of the locations. When the study was completed I compared it to the first diagram and saw that the last time I made the shot from the third diamond near the rail. I went back to the table and tried that shot. It went in so I added different shading to indicate that it was an after thought.

Shown below are the study results as shot from the left side of the table. Each object ball was pocketed three times before the results were recorded.

Shown below are the results from the first study shot from the right side of the table and included here for comparison.

The results are highly similar though I made the shading a little more explicit in diagram Two.

I do not think that I am unconsciously compensating. With over 30 years working with the unconscious and the sub conscious I do know a little about these concepts and how they function. If anything there was a very decided attempt on my part to stroke and hit the ball exactly as needed. Of course I am as subject to the effects of sub and unconscious manipulations as other people but I suspect that I am also more aware of these effects than many people.

In each of these studies I am aiming the front dead center of the cue ball at the clearly identified contact point as previously indicated.

OK I have done my homework. Now it is time for someone else to try it and confirm or refute my findings.

 

[JoeW]

I think, but I am not sure, that these shots go into the pocket because of the curvature of the balls. While the front dead center is “aimed” at the contact point, the front dead center does not “hit” the contact point. The curvature of the balls results in a slightly off front dead center hit.

I suspect that the mathematicians among us need to take into consideration the curvature of the balls in their formulas for permissible error. On the one hand these shots should (?) result in a thicker hit, however, the cue ball roll or momentum probably has some offsetting effect. I’ll leave that to the theoreticians. For me empiricism rules and theory needs to come into line with the facts, if indeed what I have shown are a facts.:sorry:

 

[dr_dave]

In each of these studies I am aiming the front dead center of the cue ball at the clearly identified contact point as previously indicated.

OK I have done my homework. Now it is time for someone else to try it and confirm or refute my findings.

Joe,

I tried the two extreme shots in your diagram on my table (with the OB at the footspot and on the rail). I aimed the center of the CB directly at the required contact point on the OB. I used a striped ball with the stripe vertical, and the number at the required contact point to provide an easy aiming target. I tried each shot several times, and missed each consistently by almost 6 inches! Here is the diagram from my October '08 BD article that shows what is going on geometrically:

Are you aligning your vision the same way on each shot so you perceive the straight line through the cue and the center of the CB the same way? If you shift your head left or right for different cuts, it is easy to deceive yourself into thinking your cue is aimed through the CB center to the OB contact point. When I tried the shots, I used the same head position over the cue for each shot.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Joe,

You don't need math or fancy words to know that if you aim the center of the CB at the desired OB contact point, you will miss the contact point (see the diagram in my previous post). However, as I pointed out, it is easy to fool your visual perception and "see" a different line of aim (e.g., by moving the "center" of your vision off the line of aim).

Regards,
Dave

I think, but I am not sure, that these shots go into the pocket because of the curvature of the balls. While the front dead center is “aimed” at the contact point, the front dead center does not “hit” the contact point. The curvature of the balls results in a slightly off front dead center hit.

I suspect that the mathematicians among us need to take into consideration the curvature of the balls in their formulas for permissible error. On the one hand these shots should (?) result in a thicker hit, however, the cue ball roll or momentum probably has some offsetting effect. I’ll leave that to the theoreticians. For me empiricism rules and theory needs to come into line with the facts, if indeed what I have shown are a facts.:sorry:

 

[JoeW]

There may be something to the head alignment as you indicate. I tend to shoot with the stick slightly to the right of my nose on both left and right shots but I may be changing to compensate. I will look into it !

I do attempt to line the whole stick (from front to back) and put a great deal of effort into attempting to visualize (or estimate) the exact front dead center of the CB aimed at the OB dead center contact point. I sincerely find it a mystery as to why these shots go. Hence my lengthy discussion.

I have not discussed compensating for shots that don't go as it is not important at this point. However, I do compensate on the shots that don't go by aiming with the "side" of the CB relative to dead center.

 

[pooltchr]

Joe, it's pretty common knowledge that on anything other than a straight-in shot, the aiming point and the contact point are different. You may think you are aiming at the contact point, but if the shot is going in, you must be making an adjustment.
Dave's diagram clearly shows that aiming at the contact point will result in undercutting the shot every time.
Steve

 

[JoeW]

Perhaps the phenomena results from simply learning where dead center is and then allowing the brain functions to take over. However, one of the things that I do for these studies is I very intentionaly do not play the ball to the pocket. My aim is solely focused on aiming at the contact point.

If there is brain compensation it is not at all in my awareness.

 

[CocoboloCowboy]

:thumbup:Lots of good Information in this THREAD!:thumbup:

 

[dr_dave]

Perhaps the phenomena results from simply learning where dead center is and then allowing the brain functions to take over. However, one of the things that I do for these studies is I very intentionaly do not play the ball to the pocket. My aim is solely focused on aiming at the contact point.

If there is brain compensation it is not at all in my awareness.

Joe,

I think we must be missing something obvious here. Are you sure your definitions and interpretations of the following phrases agree with those implied by my diagram: "center of the CB" and "OB contact point" and "aim the cue along the line through the center of the CB straight at the OB contact point?" It doesn't make sense to me that you can come close to making any of those shots (except the ones very close to straight-in) if you are using the same definitions (unless you have grotesquely large pockets and/or roll-off in all directions toward the pocket). I trust that you are being careful and consistent, but those shots just shouldn't go if you are doing what you are apparently saying you are doing.

Here's the diagram again for reference:

Do you see how badly shots are undercut if you in fact "aim the center of the CB at the desired OB contact point"?

Regards,
Dave

 

[JoeW]

I see what you are illustrating and I understand it. What you refer to as the impact line is the intersection of the front dead center of the CB and a point on the OB in my thinking. So I think that we are on the same page. We have the same idea about the contact point as the point opposite the center of the pocket.

Perhaps you could try the 1/2 diamond offsets from the straight in shot to see if those shots will go for you.

I think that it takes a few shots to get used to aiming the front of the CB at the contact point for anyone who has not tried this technique. One of the things I can see when I am shooting in this way is that the CB is traveling down the exact line I intend to have it on. This too requires some close observation. I can see the cb hit exactly as I have intended. Perhaps this is part of the process.

It may require shooting a few (several?) shots to get the feel for seeing the CB travel and strike as intended. On the other hand maybe everyone does this.

The other issue is CB speed. I use something like lag speed with a dead center or slightly below dead center hit. Depending on the distance to the shot lag speed is only slightly faster than pocket speed or just a little more power than is needed to pocke tthe CB. It would probably rebound by a diamond off the rail on a missed shot.

 

[JoeW]

In my description the "actual impact line" should be aimed at the "required contact point."

I agree that when the OB is too close to the pocket my described shot will not go. Some distance, perhaps two diamonds, is needed between CB and OB and between OB and pocket, perhaps more.

Hope that Clarifies what I mean.

 

[dr_dave]

I see what you are illustrating and I understand it. What you refer to as the impact line is the intersection of the front dead center of the CB and a point on the OB in my thinking. So I think that we are on the same page.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Here's the diagram again:

Diagram A - undercut resulting from aiming at the contact point

and here's another diagram from my October '08 BD article:

Diagram B - basic ghost-ball aiming terminology

There are two impact lines in Diagram A. The "required impact line" is the ghost-ball "line of centers" required to make the shot (neglecting throw), as shown in Diagram B. The "actual impact line" in Diagram A is the "line of centers" created by aiming the center of the CB at the required contact point on the OB. As shown in the diagram, the actual contact point in this case is very different from required contact point. To hit the required contact point, you must aim the center of the CB at the center of the required ghost-ball position (see Diagram B). This would create contact along the desired "line of centers" impact line. Forget all of the lingo ... the diagrams explain it all.

I think that it takes a few shots to get used to aiming the front of the CB at the contact point for anyone who has not tried this technique.

Are you talking about contact-point-to-contact-point aiming here? To me, the "front of the CB" means the point farthest away from the tip with a center-ball hit. Are you visualizing the required contact point on the front of the CB, and are you aligning this with the visualized contact point on the OB? If you are, that would explain why all of your shots are going. This is called contact-point-to-contact-point aiming, and it does work if executed properly (provided throw isn't too large for the distance, angle, and pocket involved). This might explain the discrepancy.

Regards,
Dave

 

[JoeW]

I do use the contact point to contact point aiming for shots that don’t go. This CB contact point is relative to front dead center of the CB.

The shots described in the diagrams are based on aiming the front dead center (your impact line touching the OB in Figure A) at the contact point as shown in Figure A. It surprises me that many of these shots go when everything and everyone tells me they can't go. I found them in my attempts to learn the limits of using front dead center aiming at the contact point.

 

[pooltchr]

Joe, If I understand your terminology, "front dead center" of the cue ball can not physically ever touch the contact point unless it is a straight in shot. The part of the cue ball that will actually make contact with the OB is offset from "front dead center" on all cut shots.
Steve