"Aiming Systems" are Junk, DO the Work!

[Bobkitty]

Lol. I'm lost. But I do believe a good system can get a player hitting the pocket consistently much quicker than the old conventional rote system of trial and error. Any shot can be looked at fractionally. A player can aim for any fractional shot and easily fine tune the resulting hit to be as thin or as thick as needed.

Hey Brian, it doesn't matter. I think "Poolology" is a great work and hell of a feature for a book, but I don't use it. I can see how some might use it. I just use my brain to think of how to cut the ball and it works. If I can't make it over and over, I'll try it again on the practice table and try it again until I groove it. Like back cuts were and are difficult for me, but now I've spent the time DOING THE DRILLS. AND, the rest of the story is to get great conventional angle shape on the next ball and the next so the run out is possible.

 

[mohrt]

As I continue to practice and doing the work, I'm super convinced that you guys looking for an "aiming system" are trying to NOT do the work.

There is a big difference between looking for a magic pill, and using a system that makes ball pocketing more efficient/effective. No aiming system is a magic pill that takes away all work. However, they can make the work more productive, gaining knowledge you can use the rest of your life.

If you are a "C" player, then take on learning an aiming system, you are still a "C" player until you gain the experience and WORK it takes to become efficient/effective with the knowledge at hand.

 

[Bobkitty]

There is a big difference between looking for a magic pill, and using a system that makes ball pocketing more efficient/effective. No aiming system is a magic pill that takes away all work. However, they can make the work more productive, gaining knowledge you can use the rest of your life.

If you are a "C" player, then take on learning an aiming system, you are still a "C" player until you gain the experience and WORK it takes to become efficient/effective with the knowledge at hand.

I'm better than that, but 15 minutes with my pool pro, teaching professional would teach everyone that there is NO aiming system that works. He knows them all. I wish other people could do the same. Show me the "diving ball shot" using CTE, fractional, SAMBA, etc. etc.

 

[Neil]

The ( 40%) of my post was taken out of context. I meant to say that of the 60% of the OB that can be hit upon using fractions, SAMBA, CTE, etc. etc., 40% of the hits can not be aimed by any system in any way.

You sure seem to have a lot to say about pool when you are just learning how to play. You don't know what you don't know, and making statements like you did above just prove that point.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

You sure seem to have a lot to say about pool when you are just learning how to play. You don't know what you don't know, and making statements like you did above just prove that point.

Thanks for saying what you did and the way it was phrased. Right on the money!

I was going to do it myself before you did but couldn't put the words together properly that didn't have the hammer crashing down on my head for 3 months to a year.

(I don't have those "Get Out Of Jail Free Cards" nor do you)

 

[bbb]

Lol. I'm lost. But I do believe a good system can get a player hitting the pocket consistently much quicker than the old conventional rote system of trial and error. Any shot can be looked at fractionally. A player can aim for any fractional shot and easily fine tune the resulting hit to be as thin or as thick as needed.

brian
your quote above thats bolded i would like to comment on
on most shots i can just "see " the shot line and get the cue ball to hit that spot on the object ball to pocket it
however i do struggle on back cuts...the more back cut the more struggle
like many i tend to over cut them
one thing that i have started to do which has helped me is
i pick two fractions that are close to the cutting angle
for example
i imagine if i hit a half ball it goes alittle fat
if i hit a quarter ball it goes alittle thin
i imagine where on the rails the misses would be
then i zone in on where the hit should be and fire away
my succes rate has increased alot.....:smile:
please do not respond that if i had an aiming system or better method i wouldnt need the mental masturbation...i will say that for you.........

 

[bbb]

to denwhit
you may have explained this but how do you aim???

 

[bbb]

to denwhit
those using an aiming system are "doing the work"
because it takes table time to make the system work for them
any aid to see the cut angles for the players that dont readily see them
has its place for the improvement of play for many
jmho

 

[cookie man]

The ( 40%) of my post was taken out of context. I meant to say that of the 60% of the OB that can be hit upon using fractions, SAMBA, CTE, etc. etc., 40% of the hits can not be aimed by any system in any way.

Are you proficient enough with all the aiming systems to be able to make such a broad statement? I know IN FACT that you are wrong for including CTE in your statement

 

[Bobkitty]

You sure seem to have a lot to say about pool when you are just learning how to play. You don't know what you don't know, and making statements like you did above just prove that point.

Neil, I know you have taken the BU table exam, but I don't see anyone else on here so far that has done so. I've scored 111 on it without even seeing it before. My teacher had just earned his teaching credential with Dr. Dave and he just sprung it on me. I think I could get into the 120-130 range practicing on it before another testing.
I can just see him play pool and of the 75 different spots on the OB, the 60% can be done on an aiming system and the 40% that can NOT be aimed by any system comes from him. I've seen it demonstrated many, many times. He knows the aiming systems and can demonstrate this to everyone. (See my OP).
Let's see someone do the 'diving ball shot' using an aiming system.

 

[Bobkitty]

to denwhit
those using an aiming system are "doing the work"
because it takes table time to make the system work for them
any aid to see the cut angles for the players that dont readily see them
has its place for the improvement of play for many
jmho

Hey, I don't usually think about it.... but I guess I use Willie Mosconi's system; I look at the edge of the OB 180 degrees out of the hole (making up for throw) and try to make the edge of the CB hit that spot. I don't look at the edge of the CB, just the middle. RD uses this also.

 

[bbb]

Hey, I don't usually think about it.... but I guess I use Willie Mosconi's system; I look at the edge of the OB 180 degrees out of the hole (making up for throw) and try to make the edge of the CB hit that spot. I don't look at the edge of the CB, just the middle. RD uses this also.

Thanks for the reply
Don't know if that's willies way but that's how I aim too

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I have no idea what motivates non pro players to do what they do or choose to use what they use while on the pool table playing the game. It almost seems like they throw darts at the wall which are lined with the "technique of the day to work on."

But I think what most should consider is the SOURCE from where information is coming.

For my money and I think most is it should come straight from long time winning pro players themselves as well as certified pro instructors who have a history of teaching and success with the top pro players and amateurs at all levels...not to mention being nationally known and respected for what they've done in the game of pool as players, live instruction, and books/tapes/youtube videos.

If it's coming from a forum member, take it with a grain of salt. That includes me as well as everyone.

Since this thread was started as a NON-AIMING, NO NEED TO AIM thread by a forum member as taught to him by what I would consider a somewhat obscure local instructor in a small audience of the NW part of the country, you be the judge.

Here's Johnny Archer and Shane Van Boening discussing AIMING and how they do it at length. They differ, but it's a very important part of how they play and use it on every shot. Shane uses the shaft and different parts of the ferrule/tip whereas Johnny uses contact points. They also discuss how Stevie Moore has improved from CTE Pro1.
Start at 36:57 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUT7-RdKdeA

Willie Mosconi illustrates contact point aiming but refers to a shot as a fraction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItPxJuAoimE

Thorsten Hohmann and Mike Massey: Go to 3:30. Mike talks about aiming at the contact point - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPn3Wzp4NT8

Stevie Moore gives a quick lesson on CTE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1mlnRiAXA8

Joe Tucker explaining his Contact Point aiming system. For the math guys and scientists, this is probably 100% geometrically correct where 100% of ALL SHOTS
will work using it. Not 40% or some other made up number pulled out of a hat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umDcg6D3-tI

I could go on and on with this all day. What I have NOT found is a pro player or pro instructor stating they don't use an aiming system of some kind or find them useless and JUNK.

Consider the SOURCE.

 

[Bobkitty]

Most pool players "aim". I know I do. But, it doesn't have to come from a system. Willie Mosconi was probably the best pool player on earth and he stated; "I pick the part of the OB opposite the hole and make the edge of the CB hit that". THAT could be considered; "aiming" and it doesn't need to come from a book or DVD. That method of aiming makes the OB go to where it's needed and not to the pocket (for instance like CTE, because of 1 X 2 table length MAKES THE BALL INTO THE POCKET according to Stan). What to do if you're playing 9 ball and the 9 ball sits just 1/2 diamond away from the pocket and you are at the other end of the table with a 20-40 degree cut into it. How about you're aiming the OB for a safety? Now, what to do, does CTE, SAMBA tell you that or you've got to aim it differently. That is our point.... Of the 75 spots on the 180 degrees on the OB, 60% might be available on some sort of aiming system, BUT the other 40 % are not. You've got to aim it out. That is the case, WHY work on learning these years and years learning the "aiming" systems?

 

[SpiderWebComm]

ALL AIMING CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO AN EXISTING AIMING SYSTEM. In other words, when aiming it's a result of some system that exists whether known or unknown.

Doesn't matter whether trying to pocket a ball, bank a ball, or play a safety.

If there's NO AIMING involved, it's called BANGING done by BANGERS. Just SMACK the SOB and hope for the best. The harder you hit it the better, like spinning a roulette wheel.

Once again, ALL AIMING COMES BACK TO AN EXISTING AIMING SYSTEM.

I've never seen the quote from Willie Mosconi as mentioned. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I've never seen it. Could someone please post it as well as the source.
(tape, specific book title, link, etc)

 

[BC21]

to denwhit
those using an aiming system are "doing the work"
because it takes table time to make the system work for them
any aid to see the cut angles for the players that dont readily see them
has its place for the improvement of play for many
jmho

Great post. A player can spend years developing a mental database of shot angles and all the little intricacies needed to bring a sense of feel into the process. They can do thousands of drills and put in thousands of hours, "doing the work" needed to become a great player. OR, the same player can utilize an aiming system that provides a shortcut to developing a mental database of shot angles. The system can provide a much quicker learning/programming process than the conventional rote method of thousands of shots and countless hours of table time.

Rote is an aiming system also, just not a very efficient one. The average player doesn't invest the required time needed to make it an efficient or effective learning process. This doesn't necessarily mean the average player is lazy and doesn't want to put in the work. It simply means they have other interests that also require the use of time. But the desire to become a better player is still there, and this brings them to aiming systems, kicking systems, banking systems, etc... anything that can possibly improve their game without having to spend every waking hour working on it.

A player should recognize the potential benefits of such systems quickly, within a few hours or days of first using it, in order for it to become a quicker learning method that the old school rote method. If you have to spend weeks or months trying to get a system to work for you, you are really learning via rote and not by the system you've chosen as a "shortcut". If you're system provides obvious improvement within a short time frame, either immediately or within a few days, then it's obvious you are on the right path, a shortcut that can dramatically reduce the amount of time and work needed to reach a higher skill level.

So if you're looking to improve your shot-making consistency and find yourself unable to invest the table time (work) needed to improve, try a few different aiming systems. I guarantee, when you find one that easily works for you, it'll be a great boost for your game.

 

[Bobkitty]

https://youtu.be/6_pkT2Nm2Hs
Willie Mosconi explains his aiming technique.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Here's the link I posted where Mosconi talks about his aiming.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItPxJuAoimE

It's the SAME VIDEO as this link where 180 degrees is NEVER MENTIONED.

https://youtu.be/6_pkT2Nm2Hs

A ball can only be cut 90 degrees to one side or the other and that's stretching it. Closer to 87-88 degrees.

THIS IS CALLED AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE CONTACT POINT AIMING SYSTEM!

Which means, wherever the contact point is on the OB that is in a DIRECT LINE TO THE POCKET, IT MUST BE STRUCK AT AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE CONTACT POINT ON THE CB.

Joe Tucker simplified the entire system for learning purposes with his numbered training balls. There's NO GUESS WORK AND NOTHING NEW.

IT'S AN AIMING SYSTEM! EQUAL AND OPPOSITE CONTACT POINT AIMING SYSTEM WHICH SPANS APPROXIMATELY 3mm FROM CONTACT POINT TO CONTACT POINT ON BOTH BALLS. 0-9

If the Contact Point on the OB is struck by any other point on the Cue Ball that is NOT equal and opposite, the shot will be MISSED. Unless a bunch of spin is being used to throw the ball in.

NOTHING NEW. ONE OF THE OLDEST AIMING SYSTEMS ON RECORD.

IT'S A SYSTEM; IT'S A SYSTEM; IT'S A SYSTEM! AN AIMING SYSTEM!

NEIL HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD WHEN HE POSTED THIS: "You sure seem to have a lot to say about pool when you are just learning how to play. You don't know what you don't know, and making statements like you did above just prove that point."

 

[paultex]

Aiming system is a method of delivery. You can't aim if you don't deliver in conjunction with what you see.

To me, aiming = eyes

Delivery = body, from head to toe

Aim + miss or make = faulty delivery + proper delivery = aim

Yes, even "make" doesn't always mean success, just the same in a antipode way as "miss" = success.

Question:

If you line up a spot shot at a 25 degree angle and aim full ball center to center zero angle and make the shot, is this success?

I personally have a big problem with that because I don't think that is success unless it's part of a devised and understood method of delivery due to alignment, which encompasses many things.

It was mentioned by op about utilizing a mosconi method and shooting a particular shot that accounted for throw, so the aim aspect is obviously skewed to account for the phenomenon of "throw".

I personally know what throw is but I think that if it's mentioned, it should be specified as to what exactly does it mean. Accounting for a phenomenon = delivery and not the other way around because I can aim three different ways and apply the same effect and still achieve the same outcome.

This is why I think aim = non sequitur in typical discussions because the topics usually seem or is based on object ball rather than playing cue ball. If you play object ball and have command on 3 sides of the cueball, then there's no way you are aiming at what you see for 2 of those 3. You are letting object ball dictate your alignment/delivery and that is fine if you can trust the visual but it's a difficult game of trust that I personally cannot control to a high percentage and since I know for a fact that we are not individual and share commonality to a high degree, then most have the same problem of trust and I have concluded that from a relatively large enough sample size, no different than marketers who base majority thought and opinion on small sample sizes, concluding most think a similar way.

So that takes me round back full circle that alignment is the system so you can have all 3 sides of the cb in control and aim at what you see or else you end up being a 1.5 dimensional player instead of 3.

IMO, even good players and alot of pro's are not 3.0. Shane van boening is not because he admits he has a harder time applying right English for particular shots and he correctly said its probably due to a disparity in visual alignment and I agree and admire him for saying that.

 

[BC21]

https://youtu.be/6_pkT2Nm2Hs
Willie Mosconi explains his aiming technique.

Like many great players, Mosconi was a natural and played by a sense of feel. He just saw the shots and automatically recognized the angles. You can't teach that, so he explains a method that he thinks will help others be able to just see the shots also. That's why he stresses locating the contact point, then he points out the importance of visualizing the fractional relationship between the balls on impact.

The problem with contact point aiming is this: You stand behind the OB and easily locate the contact point, but then you stand behind the the CB from a different perspective and somehow have to accurately locate that OB contact point from there. And if you can do this on a solid color ball with no distinguishing marks to help pinpoint exactly where that contact point is, you have an incredible sense of visualization. Now you have to approximate the proper aim line to send the CB down so that an inverse proportion/fraction of it hits that contact point on the OB. That's hard to do, which is why the conventional aiming method takes so long to master, and why most players never master it.

For those that want to learn the way Mosconi was teaching in the video, it may be helpful to know that the contact point for any shot is exactly halfway between a center-to-center hit and the fractional aim point needed to pocket the ball. But if you don't know exactly which fractional hit is needed, you're only guessing at an approximate contact point. If you can always see the required OB contact point from behind the CB, then all you have to do is aim away from that point at the same distance the contact point is from a straight on (center-to-center) view between CB and OB. If you already know the fractional hit needed to pocket the ball, you can ignore all of this and simply aim for that fraction.