"Aiming Systems" are Junk, DO the Work!

[BC21]

Well, I have to disagree. If CTE perceptions lines on the OB are not easier to see than contact points, why do it? AND, in my lesson yesterday, we spent about an hour on "forced follow" shape. There are many, many places on the pool table where the only position can be found through "forced follow" and not what most of you have seen, the OB sitting close to the pocket and you want to stay on the end rail. Either clusters or the perfect angle must be gained this forced follow way. I'm pretty damned sure very few of you have ever seen this but my instructor can do it and teach it. AND, the most important thing to know is the portion of the pocket for the OB from an angle. I may do a video where the CB can be positioned straight in for the 9 ball on the spot or on down the table for a shot down there. Anyway, the 1,2,3,4,5 of the pocket makes all the difference... a HUGE difference. So... if your aiming system has your ball going into the center, how can you do this stuff?.... you've got to come off of it and shoot contact to contact points to fathom the different portions of the pocket. If you've seen what I've seen, you'll quickly realize "no aiming system" except contact can do it.

Any method of pocketing balls can become as automatic as flipping on a light switch. It takes experience to reach that level. Using traditional aiming methods like gb and contact points are surely proven paths to getting there. But it's also a long and winding path that requires a lot of table time and dedication, which many players are not able to invest.

That's where an aiming system can help reduce that investment, straightening and shortening that long road to improvement. Now, if the system you choose to adopt does not lesson your invested time and effort, then you may as well stick to the old-school traditional aiming methods. Why spend several years developing enough experience to precisely use a system if less effort would be required to precisely use gb or contact points?

 

[HawaiianEye]

I don't think anybody in the history of pool has ever gotten to the highest level of playing by spending as much time worrying about aiming as many of the people on this forum do.

If you can't aim by the first year or two of playing, you may as well just give it up. Aiming is easy. Hitting the aim point consistently is the problem and that is usually because you haven't lined up correctly, you have a flaky stroke, you get up while shooting, or some other mechanical error.

There is NO SUCH THING as OBJECTIVE aiming that will work for every occasion. Everything you do on the table requires some sort of input and execution by the player, which means that "feel" and "mental and physical adjustments" will be included in the shot.

At some point, you have to learn things on your own. Yapping on here all day and arguing about fractions, CIT, swerve, deflection, etc. isn't going to do much but let you know those things exist. You have to figure them out on your own.

 

[sixpack]

I don't think anybody in the history of pool has ever gotten to the highest level of playing by spending as much time worrying about aiming as many of the people on this forum do.

If you can't aim by the first year or two of playing, you may as well just give it up. Aiming is easy. Hitting the aim point consistently is the problem and that is usually because you haven't lined up correctly, you have a flaky stroke, you get up while shooting, or some other mechanical error.

...

If that were true then players would miss straight in shots as often as they miss cut shots of similar length. That isn't true in my experience.

Most players I see don't have a clue about where to aim shots that aren't automatic for them.

 

[Dan White]

If that were true then players would miss straight in shots as often as they miss cut shots of similar length. That isn't true in my experience.

Most players I see don't have a clue about where to aim shots that aren't automatic for them.

I've always thought that if you consider the years and years it takes to pocket balls well, 90 or 95% of that multi year learning curve is caused by the difficulty of delivering the cue straight, not in figuring out where to send the cue ball (aiming).

It's simple. Anybody who plays beyond a certain advanced level knows that you don't need a system to help you aim at that point. You just see the balls and get down on the shot in the correct place. It is the beginners who don't realize this and get preyed upon.

Poolology is the only aiming system that recognizes this fact. It is intended to shorten the learning process and get you to the point where you just see the shot and aim without thinking.

 

[sixpack]

I've always thought that if you consider the years and years it takes to pocket balls well, 90 or 95% of that multi year learning curve is caused by the difficulty of delivering the cue straight, not in figuring out where to send the cue ball (aiming).

It's simple. Anybody who plays beyond a certain advanced level knows that you don't need a system to help you aim at that point. You just see the balls and get down on the shot in the correct place. It is the beginners who don't realize this and get preyed upon.

Poolology is the only aiming system that recognizes this fact. It is intended to shorten the learning process and get you to the point where you just see the shot and aim without thinking.

I see players up to pro level that miss long cut shots more often than long straight shots. If knowing where to aim was not the problem they would not miss those shots any more than straight in shots.

 

[JoeyInCali]

I see players up to pro level that miss long cut shots more often than long straight shots. If knowing where to aim was not the problem they would not miss those shots any more than straight in shots.

Are you saying they don't know how to aim cut shots ?
A pro makes the spot shot 80% of the time .
In fact, I didn't see Dennis or Scott Frost miss a spot shot in their one-pocket match.

I bet most of their misses were due to applying English and they hit the CB too hard or too soft hence nullifying their squirt and throw allowance.

 

[Dan White]

Are you saying they don't know how to aim cut shots ?
A pro makes the spot shot 80% of the time .
In fact, I didn't see Dennis or Scott Frost miss a spot shot in their one-pocket match.

I bet most of their misses were due to applying English and they hit the CB too hard or too soft hence nullifying their squirt and throw allowance.

Of course. In reality there is often more required than just straight follow on the cue ball. You have to know how to apply english and account for squirt and swerve (which are more pronounced on long shots). Probably the least difficult part of a long shot is aiming it. I guess another way of saying it is the longer the shot the more stroke errors come into play.

It would be interesting to compare straight in shot % vs a cut shot %. It would have to be the same cut shot over and over of course. Another thing is that it isn't as easy to deliver the cue ball to the intended spot when it is a cut shot. Even shooting to the left or right creates different challenges to the eye. So while a straight in gives you a simple target, a cut shot requires other challenges to put the cue ball where you intend. For example, I had a habit of steering the cue shaft towards the object ball rather than stroking straight through to the empty space where you want the cb to go. Missing in that case is not caused by not knowing where you need the cue ball to go, but rather in not being able to get it there.

 

[goin2bepro]

Straight vs cut

Most players I talk to say long straight shots are the hardest. I would think this is because of english, draw, follow, etc that changes the action on the cue ball. They know where to aim but can't adjust to make the cue ball strike there while also accounting for throw whether intended or not.

 

[sixpack]

Are you saying they don't know how to aim cut shots ?
A pro makes the spot shot 80% of the time .
In fact, I didn't see Dennis or Scott Frost miss a spot shot in their one-pocket match.

I bet most of their misses were due to applying English and they hit the CB too hard or too soft hence nullifying their squirt and throw allowance.

And they make a straight in shot of similar length 90+% of the time.

I watched matches all day every day of the west coast swing. I saw pro players miss a lot of cut shots and a lot of spot shots. Not Shane. Not the top pros, but a lot of pros.

The only reason I brought up pros is because the claim is that once people have been shooting a few years they know where to aim every shot. I have seen it in every level player from beginner to low level pro. Even people who have been playing a long time.

It appears to me that shots that require more 'judgement' than pure aim are ones that players are more likely to miss. Cut shots, backward cut shots, etc...

That implies to me that on cut shots they don't see the aim point as accurately as they do on straight in shots.

Which further implies that they could improve their shotmaking if they had a way to accurately get to the correct aim point.

Spot shots are a little bit of a misleading case because pros practice spot shots regularly and know where the fractional aim points are for them. i.e. if it's on this line it's a 1/2 ball hit. They will make spot shots more regularly than similar cut shots where the cue ball in not on the spot.

Which also argues that they don't know exactly where to aim as consistently as we like to think.

 

[JoeyInCali]

And they make a straight in shot of similar length 90+% of the time.

I watched matches all day every day of the west coast swing. I saw pro players miss a lot of cut shots and a lot of spot shots. Not Shane. Not the top pros, but a lot of pros.

The only reason I brought up pros is because the claim is that once people have been shooting a few years they know where to aim every shot. I have seen it in every level player from beginner to low level pro. Even people who have been playing a long time.

It appears to me that shots that require more 'judgement' than pure aim are ones that players are more likely to miss. Cut shots, backward cut shots, etc...

That implies to me that on cut shots they don't see the aim point as accurately as they do on straight in shots.

Which further implies that they could improve their shotmaking if they had a way to accurately get to the correct aim point.

Spot shots are a little bit of a misleading case because pros practice spot shots regularly and know where the fractional aim points are for them. i.e. if it's on this line it's a 1/2 ball hit. They will make spot shots more regularly than similar cut shots where the cue ball in not on the spot.

Which also argues that they don't know exactly where to aim as consistently as we like to think.

With straight in shots, they don't apply ( if any of English ).

Not all spot shots are shot as half ball. They often move that cue ball in the kitchen depending on the layout . They still nail it .
Cut shots are missable b/c the margin for error is less than most straight in shots.
The pros still nail those rail shots with angles consistently.
Angled or straight, dun't matter to them. They still aim for that contact point.

 

[Dan White]

And they make a straight in shot of similar length 90+% of the time.

I watched matches all day every day of the west coast swing. I saw pro players miss a lot of cut shots and a lot of spot shots. Not Shane. Not the top pros, but a lot of pros.

The only reason I brought up pros is because the claim is that once people have been shooting a few years they know where to aim every shot. I have seen it in every level player from beginner to low level pro. Even people who have been playing a long time.

It appears to me that shots that require more 'judgement' than pure aim are ones that players are more likely to miss. Cut shots, backward cut shots, etc...

That implies to me that on cut shots they don't see the aim point as accurately as they do on straight in shots.

Which further implies that they could improve their shotmaking if they had a way to accurately get to the correct aim point.

Spot shots are a little bit of a misleading case because pros practice spot shots regularly and know where the fractional aim points are for them. i.e. if it's on this line it's a 1/2 ball hit. They will make spot shots more regularly than similar cut shots where the cue ball in not on the spot.

Which also argues that they don't know exactly where to aim as consistently as we like to think.

You make some valid points, but I think you have to make a distinction between knowing where to aim the cue ball vs actually getting the cue ball to that spot. I doubt anybody has ever tried to sort that question out. I'm saying that even when a pro misses a cut shot it is likely not due to aiming wrong (unless they are fatigued, distracted, etc.). On the other hand, I agree that it is easier in theory to pocket a straight in shot vs a cut shot of the same length. Aside from the aiming consideration, ball and cloth conditions can have an impact on the cut shot while they will not on the straight in. However, once the shot is learned, it is about the same.

I have had trouble with back cuts, like many people. This is definitely because I am aiming wrong. I play mostly straight pool and hitting an extreme and long back cut isn't a typical shot. So, i haven't hit enough of those shots to make them automatic. Knowing all this, if I'm just more careful and pay attention, my success rate on those shots is higher.

Edit: One other consideration. I don't think it is completely fair to use professional players as examples of aim vs stroke. If you have devoted your life to playing the game, you may very well have a perfect stroke and always get the cue ball to the spot you intended. At that point the ball will go in if you aimed right and if you took all the table conditions into account correctly. Rempe told me the guy who adjusts to the conditions quicker will win. The other 99.9% of players are going to have significant stroke problems and also aim problems. Again, not every shot is "easy" to aim, OK, but in COMPARISON with the stroke, I'm sticking to 95/5% or maybe 90/10%.

 

[sixpack]

You make some valid points, but I think you have to make a distinction between knowing where to aim the cue ball vs actually getting the cue ball to that spot. I doubt anybody has ever tried to sort that question out. I'm saying that even when a pro misses a cut shot it is likely not due to aiming wrong (unless they are fatigued, distracted, etc.). On the other hand, I agree that it is easier in theory to pocket a straight in shot vs a cut shot of the same length. Aside from the aiming consideration, ball and cloth conditions can have an impact on the cut shot while they will not on the straight in. However, once the shot is learned, it is about the same.

I have had trouble with back cuts, like many people. This is definitely because I am aiming wrong. I play mostly straight pool and hitting an extreme and long back cut isn't a typical shot. So, i haven't hit enough of those shots to make them automatic. Knowing all this, if I'm just more careful and pay attention, my success rate on those shots is higher.

Many people have tried to sort it out.

I have spent considerable time trying to sort it out and have learned quite a bit. Both from purely scientific aiming systems (ghost ball, double the distance, etc...) and referential systems like CTE and others I have found or made up.

That's why I'm making the assertion that I'm making.

For whatever reason there are a lot of shots on the pool table that are difficult to aim. Players of all levels miss those shots more often than shots that are easier to aim. That implies that aiming is not as straightforward as is generally accepted.

Also, just another side point. You say that you play 14.1 mostly and so you don't practice long back cuts often and so you don't make them as often as you should...That implies that you don't know where to aim. You have to practice to get better and then they are good for a while but it fades. That implies you don't consciously know where to aim the shot. You have to 'feel' it.

When you miss that shot, it isn't your stroke that lets you down, it's your aim. You use the same stroke on shots that you make regularly.

 

[JoeyInCali]

When you miss that shot, it isn't your stroke that lets you down, it's your aim. You use the same stroke on shots that you make regularly.

Then those with perfect aiming system shouldn't miss.

Why do you miss when you already have a perfect aiming system? Better system than the pros use ?
But, the pros can give you the 7-out easily if you're just a B-player .

 

[sixpack]

Then those with perfect aiming system shouldn't miss.

Why do you miss when you already have a perfect aiming system? Better system than the pros use ?
But, the pros can give you the 7-out easily if you're just a B-player .

And pros that have perfect strokes should never miss. And 3rd year players with perfect strokes should never miss.

Yet everybody misses.

It's obvious that both aim and ability to deliver the ball are important.

There are two claims that I see repeated on here. The first is that aim is trivial and 2nd year players know how to aim every shot. The second is that most misses are because of faulty stroke and not fault aim.

I am disputing those claims. Nothing more.

 

[JoeyInCali]

And pros that have perfect strokes should never miss. And 3rd year players with perfect strokes should never miss.

Yet everybody misses.

It's obvious that both aim and ability to deliver the ball are important.

There are two claims that I see repeated on here. The first is that aim is trivial and 2nd year players know how to aim every shot. The second is that most misses are because of faulty stroke and not fault aim.

I am disputing those claims. Nothing more.

They have worldly stroke but sometimes mishit the ball.
But, they still need to shoot over .900 to win a major tournament .
Hell, Dennis shot some .930+ and lost to SVB.
Aiming is trivial to them already. They've shot the same shot thousands of times. They already the angle of approach embedded in their minds.

When you miss that shot, it isn't your stroke that lets you down, it's your aim. You use the same stroke on shots that you make regularly.

Again, then you shouldn't miss. You already have a perfect aiming system and you use the same stroke to those shots regularly.
But, you still miss a lot , relatively speaking compared to the pros. A lot more. If you didn't , you'd be a pro.
What's holding you back ??? It's your stroke and delivery.

 

[sixpack]

They have worldly stroke but sometimes mishit the ball.
But, they still need to shoot over .900 to win a major tournament .
Hell, Dennis shot some .930+ and lost to SVB.
Aiming is trivial to them already. They've shot the same shot thousands of times. They already the angle of approach embedded in their minds.


Again, then you shouldn't miss. You already have a perfect aiming system and you use the same stroke to those shots regularly.
But, you still miss a lot , relatively speaking compared to the pros. A lot more. If you didn't , you'd be a pro.
What's holding you back ??? It's your stroke and delivery.

I don't have a perfect aiming system and I don't have a perfect stroke. And I've never claimed to have either. It's not hard to figure out why I miss. Trying to figure out whether it was the stroke or the aim is what led me to all of the experimentation and thought to come to the conclusion that I have.

Again, I'm not talking about Dennis and Shane. I'm talking about 3rd year players up to about Fargo 720 or so.

 

[JoeyInCali]

I don't have a perfect aiming system and I don't have a perfect stroke. And I've never claimed to have either. It's not hard to figure out why I miss. Trying to figure out whether it was the stroke or the aim is what led me to all of the experimentation and thought to come to the conclusion that I have.

Again, I'm not talking about Dennis and Shane. I'm talking about 3rd year players up to about Fargo 720 or so.

So, they miss more often because of their aim, not their stroke ?

 

[sixpack]

So, they miss more often because of their aim, not their stroke ?

The contention that I am disagreeing with is that players who have been playing 2-3 years have already shot all the shots and know where to aim so the reason they miss is because of their stroke.

I think incorrect aim is responsible for more than a trivial amount of misses for those players between 3 years and up to a low level pro.

 

[JoeyInCali]

The contention that I am disagreeing with is that players who have been playing 2-3 years have already shot all the shots and know where to aim so the reason they miss is because of their stroke.

I think incorrect aim is responsible for more than a trivial amount of misses for those players between 3 years and up to a low level pro.

And you are also contending that with the pros .

 

[sixpack]

And you are also contending that with the pros .

Yes, up to low level pros. Like fargo 700-720. Not Shane and Dennis.