Aiming techniques

[CaptainJR]

Another aiming thread. I always put in my two cents in an aiming thread. With reason though. When your shooting well I agree that an aiming method is not used, it's just feel. Sometimes though when your missing a few shots and don't know why, you need something to fall back on. So I'm adding this to show that additional aspect of the ghost ball method that seems to be overlooked. Well not really overlooked, but I think it is just a little more specific. Remember this is in addition to the ghost ball, not in place of it.

It would seem that using the ghost ball method is quite simple. Draw a line through the object ball to the pocket and put an imaginary ball on the opposite side of the object ball. Then hit the cue ball to replace that imaginary ball. This being so simple, why is it a problem for some people to understand? Because it is mostly a 'in your minds eye' visualization. Using this you have four things you can see. The cue ball, the object ball, the pocket and the spot on the object ball you need to hit. The rest of it you have to visualize. Problem, when you walk back to the cue ball how do you know that you still have that imaginary ball in the right spot?

What I'm showing here is an additional point of reference. When your talking 'in your minds eye', you can use all the points of reference you can muster up. I have shown this to beginning players and seen immediate results. It's been like a revelation to some. "OH! I see now!"

Using the ghost ball you are already drawing an imaginary line through the object ball to the pocket (red line). This shows you where the cue ball needs to hit the object ball, at spot 'A'. Take your line and move it to the cue ball in a parallel fashion (green line). On the opposite side of the cue ball you will find the spot on the cue ball that needs to hit the object ball 'B'. That's it, make 'B' hit 'A'.

 

[TheBook]

Another aiming thread. I always put in my two cents in an aiming thread. With reason though. When your shooting well I agree that an aiming method is not used, it's just feel. Sometimes though when your missing a few shots and don't know why, you need something to fall back on. So I'm adding this to show that additional aspect of the ghost ball method that seems to be overlooked. Well not really overlooked, but I think it is just a little more specific. Remember this is in addition to the ghost ball, not in place of it.

It would seem that using the ghost ball method is quite simple. Draw a line through the object ball to the pocket and put an imaginary ball on the opposite side of the object ball. Then hit the cue ball to replace that imaginary ball. This being so simple, why is it a problem for some people to understand? Because it is mostly a 'in your minds eye' visualization. Using this you have four things you can see. The cue ball, the object ball, the pocket and the spot on the object ball you need to hit. The rest of it you have to visualize. Problem, when you walk back to the cue ball how do you know that you still have that imaginary ball in the right spot?

What I'm showing here is an additional point of reference. When your talking 'in your minds eye', you can use all the points of reference you can muster up. I have shown this to beginning players and seen immediate results. It's been like a revelation to some. "OH! I see now!"

Using the ghost ball you are already drawing an imaginary line through the object ball to the pocket (red line). This shows you where the cue ball needs to hit the object ball, at spot 'A'. Take your line and move it to the cue ball in a parallel fashion (green line). On the opposite side of the cue ball you will find the spot on the cue ball that needs to hit the object ball 'B'. That's it, make 'B' hit 'A'.

This is the same method that Jimmy Reid uses in his "No Time For Negative" instruction video.

 

[LAMas]

Cap,
Well said and accurate but still hard to do.

 

[CaptainJR]

Incidentally, this come in real handy on that 9 ball for the set win when you don't quite trust just going on 'feel'.

 

[CaptainJR]

Cap,
Well said and accurate but still hard to do.

Yes, it's still not easy. You still have to use a good stoke to do it. But at least it gives you a little better idea of where you want the cue ball to go. If you don't know where you want it to go, a perfect stroke isn't going to help you.

Notice that when down on the ball you can't see the spot on the cue ball. It is on the opposite side. That is why I didn't say that it was adding a fifth thing that you can see. It just adds another 'in the minds eye' reference point.

 

[bruin70]

sounds like you're getting the aiming point and contact point mixed up a little.

VAP

no. i think maybe what i'm saying is not being interpreted correctly. it's probably easier for me to show rather than explain.

 

[vapoolplayer]

Another aiming thread. I always put in my two cents in an aiming thread. With reason though. When your shooting well I agree that an aiming method is not used, it's just feel. Sometimes though when your missing a few shots and don't know why, you need something to fall back on. So I'm adding this to show that additional aspect of the ghost ball method that seems to be overlooked. Well not really overlooked, but I think it is just a little more specific. Remember this is in addition to the ghost ball, not in place of it.

It would seem that using the ghost ball method is quite simple. Draw a line through the object ball to the pocket and put an imaginary ball on the opposite side of the object ball. Then hit the cue ball to replace that imaginary ball. This being so simple, why is it a problem for some people to understand? Because it is mostly a 'in your minds eye' visualization. Using this you have four things you can see. The cue ball, the object ball, the pocket and the spot on the object ball you need to hit. The rest of it you have to visualize. Problem, when you walk back to the cue ball how do you know that you still have that imaginary ball in the right spot?

What I'm showing here is an additional point of reference. When your talking 'in your minds eye', you can use all the points of reference you can muster up. I have shown this to beginning players and seen immediate results. It's been like a revelation to some. "OH! I see now!"

Using the ghost ball you are already drawing an imaginary line through the object ball to the pocket (red line). This shows you where the cue ball needs to hit the object ball, at spot 'A'. Take your line and move it to the cue ball in a parallel fashion (green line). On the opposite side of the cue ball you will find the spot on the cue ball that needs to hit the object ball 'B'. That's it, make 'B' hit 'A'.

good post,

i think what you are describing here is the "exact equal oppossite" method. you find the contact point on the object ball, and the exact equal oppossite spot on the cue ball is what makes contact with the spot on the object ball.

its a very accurate way of aiming.

VAP

 

[Bob Jewett]

... i think what you are describing here is the "exact equal oppossite" method. you find the contact point on the object ball, and the exact equal oppossite spot on the cue ball is what makes contact with the spot on the object ball.

its a very accurate way of aiming.

It's geometrically correct in that it gives the same answer as the ghost ball method -- the same answer in terms of where your stick must be pointed to make the shot. It's also in Mosconi's little books and in Byrne, so I would hope that everyone here is familiar with that system.

It's important to note, however, that you still have to make a correction for throw or the system is not accurate enough to put the ball in the pocket for longer shots. This is also true of the ghost ball system. Both can be corrected by adjusting the target to allow for the throw; instead of the center of the pocket, choose a spot near there that allows for the amount of throw that the shot will produce.

You get more throw on a stun shot than with draw or follow. You get more throw with a sticky cue ball, but clean is not always better. I have seen very clean balls with lots of throw because of the kind of polish that was used on them (automotive products).

 

[woody_968]

You shouldn't be slowing down or speeding up your stroke! You should maintain the same stroke, just increase or decrease the pendulum distance.

Zim

I agree with you Zim, and am glad that you said something as I wouldnt want others to misread what I had tried to say.

I read in his post (maybe I misread read his as well) that he didnt think people with a fast stroke should slow down. I think there are many otherwise good strokes out there that are thrown off by the tension a fast back stroke and jerky transition into the forward stroke can create.

I was just curious as to what his oppinion was on maintaining a fast stroke.

Woody <---- knows that there is no place for deceleration in a good stroke

 

[pete lafond]

I agree with you Zim, and am glad that you said something as I wouldnt want others to misread what I had tried to say.

I read in his post (maybe I misread read his as well) that he didnt think people with a fast stroke should slow down. I think there are many otherwise good strokes out there that are thrown off by the tension a fast back stroke and jerky transition into the forward stroke can create.

I was just curious as to what his oppinion was on maintaining a fast stroke.

Woody <---- knows that there is no place for deceleration in a good stroke

He said "Don't slow your stoke down, it the worst thing you can do." That makes sense.

 

[Teacherman]

He said "Don't slow your stoke down, it the worst thing you can do." That makes sense.

In 8 and 9 ball, I would say 85-90% of all shots can be made with the same speed of stroke. Or better said.....length of stroke.

 

[TheBook]

I haven't heard anyone suggesting the Spider. In the stupid question department: Can the Spider be used in a game or tournament?

 

[vapoolplayer]

I haven't heard anyone suggesting the Spider. In the stupid question department: Can the Spider be used in a game or tournament?

not to get off the subject here, but if someone can't imagine what the spider shows in their head..........they're better off taking up bowling or ping pong.

the spider seems like a good idea for beginners.........but it costs 170 bucks and after a few times using it, the player can see the same thing without the spider and now all they have is a 170 glow in the dark toy.

VAP

 

[woody_968]

He said "Don't slow your stoke down, it the worst thing you can do." That makes sense.

It depends on how you take it on if it makes sense or not. If you are taking it as to not decelerate I would agree that it makes sense. But in the context that it was written I take it as saying dont slow down the overall stroke tempo. If that is what he meant I just wanted to hear a little more on why he feels this is the case.

 

[CaptainJR]

You shouldn't be slowing down or speeding up your stroke! You should maintain the same stroke, just increase or decrease the pendulum distance.

Zim

Zim
I'm don't know if I'm taking this out of context or not. Maybe I didn't quite follow the whole thing. But I'm going to have to disagree with this 'keep the same stroke speed' thing.

I'm a firm believer in keeping the distance from your bridge hand and the tip of the stick as small as possible. So to get a little more speed on the cue ball I'm going to increase the speed of my stroke, not move my bridge back so I can take a longer stroke.

Or did I misunderstand what you were talking about?

 

[pete lafond]

It depends on how you take it on if it makes sense or not. If you are taking it as to not decelerate I would agree that it makes sense. But in the context that it was written I take it as saying dont slow down the overall stroke tempo. If that is what he meant I just wanted to hear a little more on why he feels this is the case.

He is not on this forum that often, I would suggest you private him asking him for a response. He is a very strong player having beat many pros in not just nine ball but 14.1. Runs 100's.

Interesting story as I heard. Back in his youth he asked Irving Crane for a game of 14.1. Irving agreed. Poolshark52 ran out, 100, against Crane. Then Crane looked at him and said, "Who the hell do you think you are?" Interesting story. If you ever get a chance to watch this guy, you will be wowed. Never slams break shots, very well patterned. Just a great player and great guy too.

 

[FLICKit]

Zim
I'm don't know if I'm taking this out of context or not. Maybe I didn't quite follow the whole thing. But I'm going to have to disagree with this 'keep the same stroke speed' thing.

I'm a firm believer in keeping the distance from your bridge hand and the tip of the stick as small as possible. So to get a little more speed on the cue ball I'm going to increase the speed of my stroke, not move my bridge back so I can take a longer stroke.

Or did I misunderstand what you were talking about?

Generally speaking you should keep a consistent stroke speed that is basically effortless in all aspects of the forward stroke. This produces consistency, repeatability, and control.

Some people shorten the backswing a little, for reasons that you mentioned. Then upon executing the shot they have a very slight acceleration, which gives some people a little bit more control. Feels like you're pushing the cue ball around the table, as opposed to slapping at it or banging (which more people do than will admit to it).

When you use muscles to stroke, everyone has a twitch or tendency to go in one direction or another (left or right). I mean everyone... even the super top pros. For some or many they've reduced this left or right motion to a very slight amount. For others, even top players, they have enough experience that they've just naturally learned to compensate and correct for these motions, even without any conscience thought.

The issue is that when most people try to take a small backstroke and produce a big/powerful stroke it tends to amplify this left or right motion. This is quite significant in most cases. Too significant to overcome in many cases. Thus they tend to miss, or at least be outta control with the cue ball on the bigger, longer, more powerful strokes.


In my opinion, it seems as though the women top players focus more on being fundamentally sound (i.e. Allison Fisher and Karen Corr). A male example might be Ralph Souquet. But on the whole the men top pros are more loose and carefree with their strokes, and have just learned to compensate from experience. You see many philipino players whose strokes are wild and all over the place, but yet they know what they're doing (i.e. Efrem Reyes, or Bustamante). Basovich (kid delicious) would be an american example.

 

[Teacherman]

Why define "fundamental" based on what lesser players do.

Maybe.........just maybe ........he better players are more fundamentally sound.

After all, if repeatability is the point, who repeats better...........lesser players?..........or the best.

 

[FLICKit]

Why define "fundamental" based on what lesser players do.

Maybe.........just maybe ........he better players are more fundamentally sound.

After all, if repeatability is the point, who repeats better...........lesser players?..........or the best.

Repeatability might be best defined as something that you can relay to others to do with success. Not simply what one particular player can do.

Look at golf, lee trevino was a top pro player, but his backstroke is so unique that noone would recommend anyone else attempt to swing like him. Nonetheless there is a fundamentally sound approach to the game, that can be backed up and verified by virtually all the experts.

 

[bruin70]

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.