Automatic aiming

What would be better? Just randomly picking out where to hit the OB to make it and learn from that, or being told exactly where to hit the OB and learn from that.
Randomly shooting would be better. Get used to applying sides and feeling the deflection, swerve and throw. No aiming system can account for this "feel".
 
Last edited:

Woodshaft

Do what works for YOU!
My rule of thumb for aiming is: The tuffer the shot angle (when object ball not on the rail), the simpler the stroke.
Only follow or center cueball, no right or left. Use a short, compact, "almost golf short putting-like" stroke.
Don't hit it hard, unless absolutely necessary for shape.
Never misses😁
 

Deruki

Well-known member
Systems have their place, and they ALL work in some way or another. Same as instinctive shooting. Being intelligent enough to use both is where the benefits are maximized.
It's working great for us!

Has us shooting 600 level pool after decades of implementation heading into our golden years!!

Meanwhile our peer Earl is shooting them in like skeet with whatever he does..............
 

Deruki

Well-known member
The contact patch on a cb is not infinite. How do you explain miscues? Half ball etc are COMMON aim points. Yes, you have to adjust based on feel, but there are angles that come up most often and you can make most shots just using those points. Ever see a rempe training ball? There are points to place your tip. Most people need a visual aid to imprint in their minds.

If you play by feel only, that's OK. Other established methods are not bullsh it just because you don't use them.
If the pocket was exactly the size of the ball a bunch of stroking variable would play a much larger role in potting a ball or not but they are close to double or larger along with sliding down the side rail leeway on a bunch of them. This is why whether or not a certain fraction hit aiming spot is an exact science or not is moot. It's close enough to take to the bank.
 
Top