Aiming Sytems re-take!

[Colin Colenso]

It has been a while since aiming systems have been discussed, though some sparks have re-ignited over in the Backhand English thread. suprise, suprise

Most now have recovered from their bruises from previous discussions...even DM's knuckles have mostly healed up Though the palm of his hand is still a bit blistered *couldn't resist*

Anyway, I've learned a few things in previous discussions and put my foot in my mouth a few times too. I'll likely do it again, but going out on a limb with a viewpoint is sometimes the best way to expose our weaknesses and to learn.

So, I want to revieve an aiming discussion. Newbies might benefit from reading some of the previous aiming threads.

The reason is, I am re-assessing my take on aiming systems. That doesn't mean I don't think 'feel'...let's call it intuitive judgement "IJ" isn't important. I think it will always play a large role in billiard skill. Speed for one thing.

So, what system to use? I like aspects of the 'Aim and Pivot' method proposed by Fred. I have argued that the system is not universal, that is, it cannot account for all distances, all angles, all bridge lengths and all speeds. However it may be a useful approximation through a relatively wide range of shots (say 70-80% of english shots played in matches).

That's enough to kick the thread off. Hopefully it can lead to a better understanding of aiming systems, how many we need, which are the easiest and when to just wing shots and learn them through repetition.

Also, lets not just discuss aiming systems for using English, how about some systems for standard potting of straight and angled shots.

 

[Cornerman]

So, what system to use? I like aspects of the 'Aim and Pivot' method proposed by Fred.

Just for clarification, there is now a forum user named "Fred" who is not me. Welcome Fred.

That's enough to kick the thread off. Hopefully it can lead to a better understanding of aiming systems, how many we need, which are the easiest and when to just wing shots and learn them through repetition.

There are a few shots that I've always had problems with, visually/optically. So, today, I go to a system almost everytime. Mostly, the shots I've typically had problems with are blind backcuts, and thin cuts up the rail, but not on the rail.

Target is at A

Show Me the Wei 9-ball Table


START(
%An7L8%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%IL7O4%Pq3U2
%Qs3B4
)END

START(
%Aj3P0%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%IL7O4%Pk6V9
%QZ7A4
)END

START(
%Ad4Y7%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%IL7O4%Pf4U5
%QB1[2
)END

START(
%AV7Y8%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%IL7O4%PX1V0
%QB1[2
)END

.

Regards,

Fred Agnir <~~~ from the Cue Makers Corner

 

[CaptainJR]

I've been doing a lot of thinking about this lately. The backhand english thread stirred things up for me. (I still may reply to it) I started thinking about how complicated it all is. Adjusting for throw, deflection and how speed effects both of them. I'm more and more convinced that after you get by the basic ability to pocket a ball, it is all feel accomplished by repetition.

But that entire statement is just telling me that I probably use english to much. LOL

 

[LastTwo]

Sometimes IJ alone is not enough. Everyone has those days when they just can't focus clearly, and on those days, playing by feel just doesn't work. I have found that aiming systems help 'spark' a level of concentration, and when you reach that level of clear focus, IJ combined with an aiming system can work wonders. Of course shotmaking does not rest on aiming alone. You need to be lined up properly to start with, and you need to be in control of your stroke and where your tip goes.

 

[pete lafond]

I've been doing a lot of thinking about this lately. The backhand english thread stirred things up for me. (I still may reply to it) I started thinking about how complicated it all is. Adjusting for throw, deflection and how speed effects both of them. I'm more and more convinced that after you get by the basic ability to pocket a ball, it is all feel accomplished by repetition.

But that entire statement is just telling me that I probably use english to much. LOL

Hey Captain. How you use or even if you use BHE is not that important. It is sorta like showing a baseball player to throw a curve. Once he is able to make the ball move, he will later develop his own style to produce effects. Look at all of todays pitchers with diferent motions and movements yet delivering similar results. The pool stroke is the same, much of this stuff is self developed and finds its place over time and experience. Mechanics play a little role here rather it is an adaption thing. You are right that english is over used by some but then again if they are comfortable there is nothing wrong.

 

[Hal]

I imagine the cue ball frozen to the object ball and in line with the pocket. That's where I want the cue ball to be at contact. I guess you call this "ghost ball".

 

[jsp]

I imagine the cue ball frozen to the object ball and in line with the pocket. That's where I want the cue ball to be at contact. I guess you call this "ghost ball".

The "ghost ball" technique is surely the most straight forward aiming technique to understand. However, the problem with the ghost ball technique by itself is that it is difficult to correctly imagine the exact placement of the ghost ball, especially for long shots with significant cut. There is an aiming technique that I use that supplements the ghost ball system, so you don't have to try to imagine, place, and shoot at a ghost ball. However, explaining this surely needs a diagram, and I do not have the time to draw one up here at work. I'll try to work on it tonight and post it.

 

[Hal]

I'll try to work on it tonight and post it.

That would be very considerate and generous of you. I would love to see it.

 

[bruin70]

one i use on hard to see shots, is to visualized circles drawn on the table rather than balls. in other words, i visualize a 2-d diagram of the shot, on the table.

instead of seeing A, i see B. if that's hard to see, i'll sometimes use the cast shadows. the shadows may be off, but they still show the angles well.

 

[CaptainJR]

Hey Captain. How you use or even if you use BHE is not that important. It is sorta like showing a baseball player to throw a curve. Once he is able to make the ball move, he will later develop his own style to produce effects. Look at all of todays pitchers with diferent motions and movements yet delivering similar results. The pool stroke is the same, much of this stuff is self developed and finds its place over time and experience. Mechanics play a little role here rather it is an adaption thing. You are right that english is over used by some but then again if they are comfortable there is nothing wrong.

Sometimes I use BHE, sometimes I use parallel english, sometimes I use F(orward)HE and sometimes I swoop. All depends on the speed, distance of the shot, how much english I need and if it is natural or reverse english that I'm going to be using. Post under BHE thread forth coming. I think that might be what your talking about when you say 'my own style'.


Incidentally I did get my Slip Stic. It is great! already and I understand it will be even better when I get my shafts to the cue smith so that he can remove the original finish that is on them. Thanks
JR

 

[Jimmy M.]

Everyone uses a "system".

According to Webster:
"an organized or established procedure"

Even people who play on feel do so in some sort of systematic fashion. To call some aiming procedure in which you aim the side of your shaft to hit the point on the cloth where the shadow intersects with the reflection off the ball (sarcasm) a "system", and say that the person who aims on feel doesn't use a system, is just incorrect.

 

[sixpack]

It has been a while since aiming systems have been discussed, though some sparks have re-ignited over in the Backhand English thread. suprise, suprise

Most now have recovered from their bruises from previous discussions...even DM's knuckles have mostly healed up Though the palm of his hand is still a bit blistered *couldn't resist*

Anyway, I've learned a few things in previous discussions and put my foot in my mouth a few times too. I'll likely do it again, but going out on a limb with a viewpoint is sometimes the best way to expose our weaknesses and to learn.

So, I want to revieve an aiming discussion. Newbies might benefit from reading some of the previous aiming threads.

The reason is, I am re-assessing my take on aiming systems. That doesn't mean I don't think 'feel'...let's call it intuitive judgement "IJ" isn't important. I think it will always play a large role in billiard skill. Speed for one thing.

So, what system to use? I like aspects of the 'Aim and Pivot' method proposed by Fred. I have argued that the system is not universal, that is, it cannot account for all distances, all angles, all bridge lengths and all speeds. However it may be a useful approximation through a relatively wide range of shots (say 70-80% of english shots played in matches).

That's enough to kick the thread off. Hopefully it can lead to a better understanding of aiming systems, how many we need, which are the easiest and when to just wing shots and learn them through repetition.

Also, lets not just discuss aiming systems for using English, how about some systems for standard potting of straight and angled shots.

Colin,

You beat me to it, I've been thinking of starting an aiming thread for a few days now. I was a proponent of 'feel' if you will. I believed that anyone who had played the game knew where to hit the ball and their problems were mostly based on getting the ball to go there.

That has all changed. I decided when I was practicing the other day to develop an aiming method and see if it worked better for me.

Wow. I don't know if the process of creating a system has clarified where I should be aiming or what, but all of the sudden I'm making balls like crazy. I've always been a good shotmaker, but that took it to another level. Two days later in leagues, I ran two racks of 8-ball from the break on a tight 9' table. I would have run the third as well but for a position error, not missing a shot. We only play 3 games in the league I'm in.

The other day I just threw out balls and ran 8-ball racks, first one group, then the other, in a couple of hours I can count the times I didn't run out both groups on my fingers. Most of the times I missed it was because the aiming system I developed wasn't quite granulated enough for the shot required. So I shot every miss over and over until I figured out how to apply my system to it.

So, open apology to all the aiming system apologists out there that I've thought were full of hot air in the past.

Cheers,
Regas

 

[Colin Colenso]

Colin,

You beat me to it, I've been thinking of starting an aiming thread for a few days now. I was a proponent of 'feel' if you will. I believed that anyone who had played the game knew where to hit the ball and their problems were mostly based on getting the ball to go there.

That has all changed. I decided when I was practicing the other day to develop an aiming method and see if it worked better for me.

Wow. I don't know if the process of creating a system has clarified where I should be aiming or what, but all of the sudden I'm making balls like crazy. I've always been a good shotmaker, but that took it to another level. Two days later in leagues, I ran two racks of 8-ball from the break on a tight 9' table. I would have run the third as well but for a position error, not missing a shot. We only play 3 games in the league I'm in.

The other day I just threw out balls and ran 8-ball racks, first one group, then the other, in a couple of hours I can count the times I didn't run out both groups on my fingers. Most of the times I missed it was because the aiming system I developed wasn't quite granulated enough for the shot required. So I shot every miss over and over until I figured out how to apply my system to it.

So, open apology to all the aiming system apologists out there that I've thought were full of hot air in the past.

Cheers,
Regas

Hi Regas,
Great to hear you've found something to lift your game to a higher level!

What systems were you trying out and what did you notice when implementing them?

Colin

 

[BRKNRUN]

Everyone uses a "system".

According to Webster:
"an organized or established procedure"

Even people who play on feel do so in some sort of systematic fashion. To call some aiming procedure in which you aim the side of your shaft to hit the point on the cloth where the shadow intersects with the reflection off the ball (sarcasm) a "system", and say that the person who aims on feel doesn't use a system, is just incorrect.

What is your system?

 

[JoeyInCali]

What is your system?

I'm gonna take a wild guess.
He hits the contact point of the object ball.
Somehow he just hits it.
I saw Max Eberle do a combo on the 9-ball almost frozen to the rail a few weeks back. Max points at the ob's contact point to make the 9. Hits it and 9 sinks in cleanly.
Pros do make me sick sometimes.

 

[BRKNRUN]

I'm gonna take a wild guess.
He hits the contact point of the object ball.
Somehow he just hits it.
I saw Max Eberle do a combo on the 9-ball almost frozen to the rail a few weeks back. Max points at the ob's contact point to make the 9. Hits it and 9 sinks in cleanly.
Pros do make me sick sometimes.

I am more expecting something like I use a Intel Pentium with Lunix ver5.6 or some sh..crap like that....


You may be right......However...Keep this in mind....Sometimes pointing your cue at the "actual contact point" is part of a "system" to determin the "aim point" on the OB....It may only look like they are simply hitting a contact point.

The contact point and aim points could be two different things depending on the system you use.

 

[JoeyInCali]

You may be right......However...Keep this in mind....Sometimes pointing your cue at the "actual contact point" is part of a "system" to determin the "aim point" on the OB....It may only look like they are simply hitting a contact point.

The contact point and aim points could be two different things depending on the system you use.

Could be but Max said he finds the smallest spot on the ob to hit, lines up and hits it.
I believe J. Lee has said the same thing.

 

[Jimmy M.]

What is your system?

I guess I do sort of use the "aim and pivot" method but, does anyone actually have their cue perfectly parallel to the target line when they use English? I'm not sure if they do. As far as lining up, I do it on feel. Yes, if I feel like I'm struggling I'll be more systematic about it. I'll try to visualize the angles between the pocket/ball/cue-ball and align my body accordingly. However, if I'm playing well, I'm not thinking about any of that.

 

[Rude Dog]

I guess I do sort of use the "aim and pivot" method but, does anyone actually have their cue perfectly parallel to the target line when they use English? I'm not sure if they do. As far as lining up, I do it on feel. Yes, if I feel like I'm struggling I'll be more systematic about it. I'll try to visualize the angles between the pocket/ball/cue-ball and align my body accordingly. However, if I'm playing well, I'm not thinking about any of that.

Yeah right! So what DO you think about when you're playing well? And when was the last time you played well enough to use that statement?

 

[Jimmy M.]

I am more expecting something like I use a Intel Pentium with Lunix ver5.6 or some sh..crap like that....

Actually, it's an AMD running FreeBSD 4.10-RELEASE, if you really want to know.