Banking without diamonds
- Thread starter Mikjary
- Start date
We have a winner! Congratulations Dead Crab. Sights is the correct answer.
You may claim your prize no later than 6:35 pm, May 31, 2011, at any Miracle Bread Company bakery in your area. Enjoy your new bicycle.
And remember:
"When it's time for a treat, but you're dead on your feet.
And the cars broken down, and it's too far to town.
Just reach for our sack, and then make you a snack,
from the best bread that there is around."
I enjoyed it, too the first time I used it. The good news is after some work with it, I have been using a variation for two and three rail banks that may turn out to be magical. :grin: And you're quite welcome!
Best,
Mike
Mike,
I tried it, but for me I was more accurate with the CTE or 90/90 approach. Was easier for me to see the lines or aim points as opposed to seeing the contact points, I found I could fine them just fine when imagining the line from the pocket, but then when I went back to the CB it was tough to keep that point in my sights. Any advice for that, maybe I was doing something wrong?
For the ones that did work, I setup the object ball with the number at the contact point I needed to aim at, for those they worked pretty well but the cut banks were more accurate than the crossover banks, for me at least.
Certainly await any more info you may have on 2 or 3 railers, which typically require a lot of feel and experience to even get close. They don't come up much in normal games, but in one pocket or safety play that could be very useful information...
Thanks!
Scott
I tried it, but for me I was more accurate with the CTE or 90/90 approach. Was easier for me to see the lines or aim points as opposed to seeing the contact points, I found I could fine them just fine when imagining the line from the pocket, but then when I went back to the CB it was tough to keep that point in my sights. Any advice for that, maybe I was doing something wrong?
For the ones that did work, I setup the object ball with the number at the contact point I needed to aim at, for those they worked pretty well but the cut banks were more accurate than the crossover banks, for me at least.
Certainly await any more info you may have on 2 or 3 railers, which typically require a lot of feel and experience to even get close. They don't come up much in normal games, but in one pocket or safety play that could be very useful information...
Thanks!
Scott
Ekkes,
With your talent and experience as a top instructor and Darren's phenomenal pocket billiard talent (I don't know much about his instructing talent) this sounds like the makings of a thread of its own. Can't wait to see and here more about this. Teaming up with Darren Appleton is a DYNAMITE thing to do. Wishing you great success.
JoeyA
There are two ways to adjust when you start to get a lot of throw from cutting the object ball backwards, towards the pocket or if you want to shoot with a firm stroke. You can add a tip or more of outside english to compensate for the throw and speed.
Another way I use is to aim the inside edge of the cueball to the contact point. Lining up mirror image points on the rail with a ghostball adjusted for throw will bear out these angles. On extreme cut back banks, I add a tip of english also. Using the edge of the cueball allows you to aim at the contact point without moving off of the object ball.
Thin crossover banks will use a tip of reverse english to compensate for the throw on the object ball.
Using english in any banking system to compensate for speed and throw is a given. The methods I've shown are for a soft shot that is not affected much by cut induced throw (CIT) and following natural banking angles. You can build on your banking by experimenting with this method and understanding basic banking principles of throw, spin and speed.
Best,
Mike
mIKE,
I've used your banking method this past week with good results. One can use your methods and compare them with other aiming methods, like the ones in Jimmy Reid's DVD's and confirm that they all seem to make the cue ball go where it needs to go.
I think most aiming systems give the shooter a confidence that helps them deliver a straighter, smoother stroke than what they would not normally have. Your banking method description get a thumbs-up from JoeyA.
Thanks,
A straight back bank or dead bank, will use a center to center hit between the cue ball and object ball. This will be aimed between the front and rear contact points on the object ball, or center of the object ball.
An almost straight back bank, or a bank that is just a few degrees off of center to center, will be aimed an eighth to a quarter of an inch off of center. In the pool table layout, the three ball is a straight back bank, with no aiming adjustment needed. The front and rear contact points agree with a center to center aiming line or hitting the middle of the object ball.
The five ball is shown to be a few degrees off of a center hit to make the bank. The center of the front and rear contact points moves over an eighth inch or so to the right to pocket the ball.
As the bank moves away from a close to straight in bank, the front or rear contact points can be used. The one ball could be banked with a lot of right hand spin, but using the rear contact point with an adjustment for cut induced throw would be the better choice. Position play dictates the stroke.
Practicing with this method allows you to know when this change of contact points is needed. I estimate the change to be at around 7-10 degrees off of straight in, depending on speed and english, etc. Again, this method is only a baseline and is affected by speed, spin and throw. I'm making these shots shown with a soft stroke.
Best,
Mike
Last edited: