Aiming techniques

[drivermaker]

I remember a little bit of reading about it in another aiming thread hear. As I recall it is pretty much bogus as well. Another point your stick theory and none of those work.

In YOUR own words to Teach...THAT'S BULLSHIT. You don't even know what there is to know. You assume it's bogus based on guys that have never learned or used it, or are on the outside looking in because Hal wouldn't even give them the time of day, let alone the systemS. That's a capital S for a reason too. It's plural. Now your making YOURSELF look stupid.

 

[Teacherman]

Are there two of me?????

 

[pete lafond]

This is a subject that causes a shitstorm of shitstorms on all of the forums. Out of respect to Hal (Houle), those that have been taught by him don't put it down in writing, and those that have NOT been taught end up saying that it's all garbage, impossible, geometrically ridiculous, or everyone that promotes it is part of a brainwashed sect. I have the utmost respect for Hal, so the above should tell you where I'm going with this. However, if you'd like to speak to him yourself, PM and I'll give you his phone #. In your case, you're experiencing some of it right now, so you should understand.

I would guess that if you have been playing pool for at least 1 - 2 years there should be no reason to look at the cue ball except for a quick glance. Object ball to pocket is the mental map and then object ball area is the focus. After that the mind lets the body fly the tip of the cue to its destination. What ever english is used (middle is english also) the mind automatically adjusts for the best OB spot. This is why I believe that Teacherman's invention, screw a CB to a tip, is a much better learning tool for beginners. It gives a true sense of tip to OB. These other tools (IR) are just gimmicks, as they do not assist you with preparing your mind.

 

[Rickw]

I've talked to Hal on the phone and I use his system especially when I can't find the line. I've played for years and mostly rely on just finding the line while I'm standing, getting down and spot the ob and shoot. When it's a real tough shot and I'm not sure where the line is, I'll hone in using Hal's system. There is one shot that Hal's system doesn't work that well for me, Drivermaker, and that's cutting the ball on the rail side of the pocket.

Let me try to explain it. When I'm cutting a ball towards the pocket and the cb is in the center of the table and the ob is 3 inches off the rail, the aiming point just doesn't work that well for me. Conversely, if the cb is closer to the rail and the ob is further away from the rail, the aiming point is dead on for me. Does this ever happen to anyone else?

 

[drivermaker]

I've talked to Hal on the phone and I use his system especially when I can't find the line. I've played for years and mostly rely on just finding the line while I'm standing, getting down and spot the ob and shoot. When it's a real tough shot and I'm not sure where the line is, I'll hone in using Hal's system. There is one shot that Hal's system doesn't work that well for me, Drivermaker, and that's cutting the ball on the rail side of the pocket.

Let me try to explain it. When I'm cutting a ball towards the pocket and the cb is in the center of the table and the ob is 3 inches off the rail, the aiming point just doesn't work that well for me. Conversely, if the cb is closer to the rail and the ob is further away from the rail, the aiming point is dead on for me. Does this ever happen to anyone else?

PM me and we'll discuss it further. Just tell me what system you're using up front.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... I have it from good sources that Steve Davis, Stephen Hendry, and Ronnie O'Sullivan look at the cue ball last. My Joe Davis book also stresses this. ... .

I believe that those statements are false. I know the first is false for Alison Fisher, and I suspect that since she had the same coach as some of the men players that they look at the same thing she does during the forward part of the stroke: the object ball. Which page of which Joe Davis book?

 

[bruin70]

I believe that those statements are false. I know the first is false for Alison Fisher, and I suspect that since she had the same coach as some of the men players that they look at the same thing she does during the forward part of the stroke: the object ball. Which page of which Joe Davis book?[/QUOTE

the owner of a pool room in northridge, ca,,,,mark,,,,said he put this issue up to many of pros, as he happens to know them fairly well. he said he proved with slo-mo that they all looked at the cb last,,,,something that they were totally unaware of and shocked by.

in any case, it only proves we all have our own way. i THINK i look above the cb towards to ob, and maybe that's my problem.....I LOOK AT NEITHER !!!

 

[bruin70]

Why do you need to see a contact point when your stick is pointed somewhere else on a very high percentage of the shots?

i guess i'm confusing some....i don't really NEED to see the contact point. i basically feel the angle. finding that contact point is for those shots that i...just...simply...can't...see. like i'll stare at a shot and not have a clue as to where my line is.

right,,where the stick aims and where the contact point is are two different things. so why look for it? well, the brain computes the two pieces of data and conveys the optimum line of aim.

 

[bruin70]

Bruin,
I will tell you that I was very impressed with the Spider, it is GREAT at showing you the exact contact point. I've always had a little trouble in determining the exact contact point on the horizontal axis of the object ball. A few minutes with the Spider really helps. A little expensive, but if you work much with beginning players definitely worth it.

You would be very interested in Hal Houle's aiming system. I went through some of the systems with a friend who has worked with Hal. This system and variations worked well (at least for slight cuts and radical cuts - didn't seem to work as well for close to half ball hits) without even looking at the pocket or the contact point - strange but true. Trouble is, it seems to require quite a bit of fiddling with front and back hands; but it certainly seems to work - for me more of a curiosity than something I will use regularly.

i don't shoot much anymore,,,but i've come up with one "system" that works really well for me. it has pretty much cured me of the "overcut on the hidden pocket shot", and this shot has plagued me for my whole life.

i focus on WHERE the pocket is. not the ob or cb/ob angle.....just where the pocket is located. it occured to me that i focused so much on ob, co/ob, etc, that i never paid attention to just where the pocket is. bill bradley calls it "a sense of where you are". all the greats know where everything is. they have a perfect sense of distance and space.

and i noticed that the good players can play on a dark table. i asked this guy once how he did this so well, as if the table were lit. he said, "i just know where the pocket is". this was years ago, and i only recently reflected back on his statement.

so now, when i walk up to and around the table , i don't even look at the cb/ob layout until it's time to actually shoot. i only look at the pocket. so when i get down on the shot, i know where the ob has to go. i'm tellin' ya,,,it has cured me of the hidden pocket shot.

 

[Williebetmore]

I believe that those statements are false. I know the first is false for Alison Fisher, and I suspect that since she had the same coach as some of the men players that they look at the same thing she does during the forward part of the stroke: the object ball. Which page of which Joe Davis book?

BJ,
I'll PM you with the sources. Are you aware of any formal studies on this issue? I'm much more interested in scientific evidence than hearsay (though of course so far all I have to go on is second hand info). I was only assuming/wondering about the WPBA players.

 

[Rod]

i only see angles and never contact points but you get the idea.

I've never seen a contact point. Even starting out all I could see was an angle. We all do what we do but I don't understand how people see a contact point. Once you see it, take your eyes away, the contact point isn't there anymore. Looking at a round shining sphere isn't ideal for finding a specific spot.

(For those that see it.) How big is this contact point? Is it a small colored dot? LOL How does one know where the opposite side of the c/b will contact there? If you see the angle, you don't care where the contact point is, it doesn't matter.

A ball has 1/2 of the pocket blocked. It is dead straight in except for clearing a tiny fraction of the ball you must go past and just catch the pocket edge. You find the magical contact point for dead straight in, so you adjust your eyes over .010 and locate that spot? Isn't dead straight where the c/b covers the o/b exactly? For those that can see a spot dead center, all the best. I'd rather the c/b be a hair .008 off center hit on the o/b. That I can detect far easier.

Of course in the end with any method, if your stroke isn't straight it won't go anyway.

Rod

 

[JLW]

Very interesting thead. Here's my 2 cents worth:

I think that most experienced pool players begin to "see" where the object ball needs to be hit. I know that when I'm playing good I don't have to consciously think about ghost balls or any other aiming system. I just know by looking that it's the correct contact point and that I will make the shot if I hit that point.

And as far as shot making goes, I think that these aiming techniques sometimes get more credit than they deserve. Any novice who plays on the bar tables on the weekends can, over time, develop a decent sense of where to aim to make shots. What's more important for consistent shot making, in my opinion, is that you have good fundamentals- balanced stance, level cue, good solid bridge, straight repeatable stroke, knowledge of patterns and how to use english, etc. It doesn't matter how well you aim if you don't shoot where you're aiming. And most people I see playing pool have horrible fundamentals.

 

[pete lafond]

I'm not sure anyone looks for a spot on the object ball or they see any angles in particular. What I see anyway is a path to the portion of the pocket the object ball will travel. Based on this when I get down to make a shot, I already see the path and then stroke my tip to that point of the object ball that I intend to hit to send it on its path. Hitting a hockey puck, a tennis ball, shooting hoops.. the mind interprets the path and the force required and good results will happen based upon experience. The last thing a basketball player, hockey player or whatever wants to do is to analyze angles or to look for spots before they shoot. Yes those are reactive sports but there is no difference except in pool people have to much time to think about how they are going to make a shot. I imagine this is were playing allot or practicing helps by training the mindand giving it experience. In the middle of a match if you get out of stroke, you have to trust your mind more and question it less. Loosen up muscles through a more rapid stroke, followed by a normal stroke. When I get out of stroke I let my mind know I trust it by making sure that I completely follow through. I have found that when I shoot the worst is when my stroke is incomplete. Looking at a good free through shooter, the hands continue forward after the ball has been released. Just my thoughts. As Poolshark52 said, see the object to the pocket.

 

[3RAIL KICK]

Same subject-I dont get it

I think that what I try to do, is send the CB down a path that upon arrival at the OB, the collision (contact) will send the OB down the DESIRED PATH toward the 'pocket', another ball for a carom, to a cushion for a bank shot or wherever it is I wanted the OB to go.

When it works-I really don't know why. It seems, that when it is working, things just look right and feel right.

At some level (not conscious thought) I think I am 'seeing' what appears to be the angle formed by the 2 lines visualized from imagining the line from the entry point of the pocket to the OB, and then from OB to CB. I 'see' this angle best while still standing and looking generally down the line of what will become this CB to OB leg of the two lines that are the the two legs of this DESIRED PATH angle leading to the 'pocket'.

Now I step directly to the table still 'seeing' the angle, and settle into my stance on the table maintaining my body alignment oriented to the cueball path line that I've just judged to be the first leg of creating this CB aiming path toward the OB. In recognizing the angle needed to 'pocket' the ball, I think I incorporate the two concepts that for the two balls to move away from each other (and toward the desired directions after collision) they must contact each other at the right spot on both balls. Only the CB is moving down its collision path toward the OB. So as part of this alignment process that starts while still standing behind the CB, I take my best guess at designating the proper path (aiming point) for the CB to roll into the OB, striking it at the proper contact point to send it along the DESIRED PATH (post strike).

When its working, I think the 'ghost ball' concept helps define the desired directional leg of the angle to the 'pocket' (OB to 'pocket' = 'pocket' to OB) and therefore helps identify the needed contact point on the OB to get OB movement down this line to the 'pocket. Getting the right cueball path figured out in order to result in proper contact between the CB and OB is the most critical part.

I can only really see full ball and half ball shots and have an idea of whats going to happen. I wish I had an aiming system that works. I dont. I have an opinion about how balls can be shot toward the desired target(s), but I dont have a system for getting it done.

Add in 'squirt', 'skid', 'throw', 'deflection', 'drag', 'grab', inside english and who knows what else, I'm surprised I ever make a ball.

Oh yeah- what in the world are the filipinos doing scraping the felt at the base of the center of the cueball during warm up strokes, when they end up hitting either some severe or disguised englished shot anyway.

I dont get it.

 

[pete lafond]

:

Oh yeah- what in the world are the filipinos doing scraping the felt at the base of the center of the cueball during warm up strokes, when they end up hitting either some severe or disguised englished shot anyway.

I dont get it.

The tip if the stick is out of their way so they can see things more clearly. Warm up strokes are just to keep muscles loose.

 

[CaptainJR]

I'm not sure anyone looks for a spot on the object ball.

two sentences later

and then stroke my tip to that point of the object ball.

pete
point on the object ball and spot on the object ball, mean the same thing.

 

[pete lafond]

two sentences later



pete
point on the object ball and spot on the object ball, mean the same thing.

Sorry CaptainJR for being unclear. What I meant to say here was NOT to look for a spot on the object ball and then to aim for that spot. During alignment I am visualizing the OB path, it's all mental imaging as a result of repetition, and then stoke to tip to send it down that path. It's a feeling backed with confidence that enables a perfect shot. When I do not play much with intensity I do not see the path that clearly, however if I play a lot that path is very clear and I feel as If I can not miss.

 

[CaptainJR]

Sorry CaptainJR for being unclear. What I meant to say here was NOT to look for a spot on the object ball and then to aim for that spot. During alignment I am visualizing the OB path, it's all mental imaging as a result of repetition, and then stoke to tip to send it down that path. It's a feeling backed with confidence that enables a perfect shot. When I do not play much with intensity I do not see the path that clearly, however if I play a lot that path is very clear and I feel as If I can not miss.

What I'm saying pete is that, you started out by saying "I'm not sure anyone looks for a spot on the object ball" and that is simple not true. "Almost everyone does look for a spot on the object ball" Good player and when your shooting good you don't have to walk around and look from behind the ball to find the spot.. You just know where it is.
Ever watch pool on TV? You see them all do it. If they have a tough shot you will see them walk around behind the object ball and look at the shot. What are they looking for? They are looking to make sure they know where that spot is.
I really don't think we are disagreeing on anything. Your just talking about, when your shooting good, it's a feel and a line, not consciously thinking about a spot on the object ball. But your conscious mind can't come up with that line without subconsciously knowing where that spot is. It is the spot that determines the line. There is nothing else to use. Your conscious feel is determined by the subconscious knowledge of where that spot is. Your subconscious knows where that spot is because of all the times you've played that shot before. When you walk up to a real tough shot that you haven't played that often your subconscious isn't as sure where that spot is. That is why the shot looks tough and why you can miss the shot. Thus when they have a tough shot, they walk around to the shot and reinforce there subconscious with a conscious look at that spot.

 

[chefjeff]

i wish there were a spot-on way to see the contact point. i mean,,,all these aiming systems are good, but they're somewhat like stock market systems,,,they're just different views of the same data. and the data is "where the cb/ob contact is".

but the data is what's needed. if i see "the shot" it is because i see where the cb/ob contact is. if i don't see the shot, it is because i can't visualize the contact point. actually, i only see angles and never contact points but you get the idea. all an aiming system tries to do is clarify the confusion.

the only "system" that tries to address the issue of EXACTLY WHERE the contact point, is the light system. ok,,,,,it's a much ridiculed system, and i don't know its intricacies,,,,in fact, i don't know it hardly at all. however, it's goal is to point you to the contact point. all other systems, at some point, asks you to make a JUDGEMENT on where the contact point is....as with the "exact/equal opposite" technique, a "guess" is still required as to where that contact point is before assigning its opposite point to the cb.

i'm gonna have to try this light thing. some pople swear by it.

If I want to see the contact point, I use a mirror system that I originally developed for myself about fifteen years ago, but it was also published by someone else in P&B a while back, I heard. I figured someone else had discovered this before I did, but I figured it might be one of those closely held secrets.

One day while working on my aiming, I happen to be pointing my cuestick at the object ball in line with my target (the pocket). As I looked for the contact point, I saw the reflection of my ferrule on the object ball. Low and behold, it was right on the contact point! Wow, I thought, a way to actually see the contact point during play.

To do this, place the cuetip on the cloth where the ghost ball sits. Dark balls work best and the position of the table light can affect the quality of the reflection.

This isn't something to live by for every shot, but it can be used effectively to get your stroke or for a tough shot that needs a little extra time for aiming.

One other thing...a player I taught this to tried it in a tournament and the opponent accused him of marking the cloth with chalk from his tip, so that's something to consider, too.

If you want to be able to actually see the path of the ob, I have a nice technique for that, too, but if I tell ya, I'll have to kill ya.

Jeff Livingston

 

[FLICKit]

What I'm saying pete is that, you started out by saying "I'm not sure anyone looks for a spot on the object ball" and that is simple not true. "Almost everyone does look for a spot on the object ball" Good player and when your shooting good you don't have to walk around and look from behind the ball to find the spot.. You just know where it is.
Ever watch pool on TV? You see them all do it. If they have a tough shot you will see them walk around behind the object ball and look at the shot. What are they looking for? They are looking to make sure they know where that spot is.
I really don't think we are disagreeing on anything. Your just talking about, when your shooting good, it's a feel and a line, not consciously thinking about a spot on the object ball. But your conscious mind can't come up with that line without subconsciously knowing where that spot is. It is the spot that determines the line. There is nothing else to use. Your conscious feel is determined by the subconscious knowledge of where that spot is. Your subconscious knows where that spot is because of all the times you've played that shot before. When you walk up to a real tough shot that you haven't played that often your subconscious isn't as sure where that spot is. That is why the shot looks tough and why you can miss the shot. Thus when they have a tough shot, they walk around to the shot and reinforce there subconscious with a conscious look at that spot.

Brief note: Spot on object ball does not always correspond to path of the object ball. You can hit the exact same spot on object ball and get many different object ball paths as a result. You can use english or throw and alter the path by a few degrees. You can line up on an object ball, and simply place the cue ball in various different angles, if each hit the exact same spot on object ball, will result in various different object ball paths (some very minor). Minor differences are not usually significant because ball will still go into pocket. English, throw, cling, speed,... all can impact path of the object ball.

If you need more proof, then try this experiment. Put a ball about 4 inches from pocket. Mark a spot on table at least 2 feet away and put object ball there. Put cue ball anywhere you want, and try to send object ball, into ball near pocket and make that second ball cleanly into pocket (no rails). You will very clearly see the differences in your object ball path.