Best scientific aiming explanation

JB Cases said:
This is not an explanation of aiming at all. It's an explanation of what happens when the balls collide.

The aiming is already done when the lines are drawn. Which as it turns out works perfect with a protractor in hand.
Click to expand...

Exactly, squirt and swerve are all forms of English that effect the path to the point of CONTACT.

Contact point is the alpha and omega of AIMING. Nothing else matters more? The model assumes ZERO English applied.

Squirt swerve are all variables that vary depending on speed, equipment and friction.

Are you saying aiming for low deflection cues are same for non low deflection?

These aiming systems assume ALOT of variables are consistent regarding squirt and swerve and deflection prior to contact.

This video helps illustrate the contact point which is the ONLY true aiming point. In my opinion.

Kd
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 
Kid Dynomite said:
This is the best scientific explanation of accurate aiming systems. All the other stuff to me is mumbo jumbo. Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSVmzvXM-n4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Kd

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

I am aware that Stevie introduced you to Pro One and that you were favorable with your comments concerning the system.

Also, you and Stevie are going to teach together in An Ultimate Pool School.

Are you supporting what Stevie will teach about aiming in your school or will you refer to his lesson in aiming as Mumbo Jumbo? Just curious.

Stan Shuffett
 
stan shuffett said:
I am aware that Stevie introduced you to Pro One and that you were favorable with your comments concerning the system.

Also, you and Stevie are going to teach together in An Ultimate Pool School.

Are you supporting what Stevie will teach about aiming in your school or will you refer to his lesson in aiming as Mumbo Jumbo? Just curious.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

Wow,

I think you have me confused with someone else. Your system seems to adjust the aiming point to Compensate for deflection, swerve and squirt.

Many aim and can't adjust for those factors. If ANY system helps players execute hitting the CONTACT point i suggest they use anything that works for them! Like Malcolm X said "by any means necessary"

My comment was not directed at any system or anyone. There just seems to be a ton of Systems claiming superiority!

FYI, i never spoke to Steve Moore and we don't have any plans to teach at the ultimate pool school. He never taught me his system.

I posted this as additional food for thought. No more no less.

Kd
Mike Wilson

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 
Last edited:
Kid Dynomite said:
Wow,

I think you have me confused with someone else. Your system seems to adjust the aiming point to Compensate for deflection, swerve and squirt.

Many aim and can't adjust for those factors. If ANY system helps players execute hitting the CONTACT point i suggest they use anything that works for them! Like Malcolm X said "by any means necessary"

My comment was not directed at any system or anyone. There just seems to be a ton of Systems claiming superiority!
FYI, i never spoke to Steve Moore and we don't have any plans to teach at the ultimate pool school. He never taught me his system.

I posted this as additional food for thought. No more no less.

Kd
Mike Wilson

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...


My bad, Lol... I apologize. I did mix you up. Thanks for the quick clarification.

Stan Shuffett
 
Kid Dynomite said:
Exactly, squirt and swerve are all forms of English that effect the path to the point of CONTACT.

Contact point is the alpha and omega of AIMING. Nothing else matters more? The model assumes ZERO English applied.

Squirt swerve are all variables that vary depending on speed, equipment and friction.

Are you saying aiming for low deflection cues are same for non low deflection?

These aiming systems assume ALOT of variables are consistent regarding squirt and swerve and deflection prior to contact.

This video helps illustrate the contact point which is the ONLY true aiming point. In my opinion.

Kd
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Exactly.
The bottom line is one has to visualize where the cueball ends up
at what speed and spin ( if any ).
Soft shots might swerve, hard shots might squirt, etc.
I was shooting some right inside English last night, I had to aim
half a ball to the right of the ob.
 
Kid Dynomite said:
Exactly, squirt and swerve are all forms of English that effect the path to the point of CONTACT.

Contact point is the alpha and omega of AIMING. Nothing else matters more? The model assumes ZERO English applied.

Squirt swerve are all variables that vary depending on speed, equipment and friction.

Are you saying aiming for low deflection cues are same for non low deflection?

These aiming systems assume ALOT of variables are consistent regarding squirt and swerve and deflection prior to contact.

This video helps illustrate the contact point which is the ONLY true aiming point. In my opinion.

Kd
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Exactly.
The bottom line is one has to visualize where the cueball ends up
at what speed and spin ( if any ).
Soft shots might swerve, hard shots might squirt, etc.
I was shooting some right inside English last night, I had to aim
half a ball to the right of the ob.
 
Kid Dynomite said:
Exactly, squirt and swerve are all forms of English that effect the path to the point of CONTACT.

Contact point is the alpha and omega of AIMING. Nothing else matters more? The model assumes ZERO English applied.

Squirt swerve are all variables that vary depending on speed, equipment and friction.

Are you saying aiming for low deflection cues are same for non low deflection?

These aiming systems assume ALOT of variables are consistent regarding squirt and swerve and deflection prior to contact.

This video helps illustrate the contact point which is the ONLY true aiming point. In my opinion.

Kd
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

What contact point? Can you take a laser pointer and put it on the contact point?

I actually thought you were joking with posting this video.

Again, on paper with a protractor one can draw perfect lines. The diagram was in support of this.

math%20behind%20cb%20contact.jpg


Has actually nothing to with pool playing except that pool balls make excellent tools to show physics concepts.

If you are looking for a contact point and think you are looking at one then you are using visual interpolation to essentially feel your way into the shot. And there is nothing wrong with that if you are comfortable with your game using that method. However it is simply not right to assume that what you do is right for everyone else and that any other method that is not contact point estimation is essentially mumbo-jumbo.
 
leafs07 said:
Is there a specific aiming system that does not allow you to do this? I know using cte/pro1 all I have to do is look at the object ball when bridged to do this?
Click to expand...

None IMO. You'll have to know your shaft and cue really well.
If you had an ivory ferrule and a hard tip, you're gonna aim the same?
I doubt it.
 
As for claims of superiority, well obviously this is something each person needs to figure out for themselves. But in general anything which can be measured objectively leads to better results on average than anything which is estimated.

The carpenter's rule is measure twice and cut once. You say that contact points are the one true aim......well if I give you a one foot board and ask you to make a line that bisects it with no measuring tools how often do you think you will get two 6" sections?

I am going to guess never. Now you might be very close on some and off on others. But if you needed precision then you would never try to do it by eye.

And yet, we are asked to bisect a pool ball to determine a contact point from about 4-5 away for the purpose of somehow lining up behind the cue ball along the correct line that sends the cue ball precisely to that contact point from any angle. Not once but hundreds of times a session. In a game where precision counts this seems like a terribly imprecise method which requires amazing ability to focus on an area representing the contact point and automagically adjust to the right shot line.

And this does work for some people. But for most it does not. For those people perhaps a more objective way to tie the cue ball and object ball together would be more comfortable and reliable.
 
JoeyInCali said:
None IMO. You'll have to know your shaft and cue really well.
If you had an ivory ferrule and a hard tip, you're gonna aim the same?
I doubt it.
Click to expand...

With a center ball hit? 100% gonna aim the same way with every cue.

And because I use BHE I aim the same with LD shafts and with normal shafts. I simply add more or less tip offset depending on the shaft.

To clarify, I follow the exact same prescription to aim no matter what cue I am using. I will be happy to demonstrate this in person, using both center ball hits and the same shots with side spin.
 
JB Cases said:
With a center ball hit? 100% gonna aim the same way with every cue.

And because I use BHE I aim the same with LD shafts and with normal shafts. I simply add more or less tip offset depending on the shaft.

To clarify, I follow the exact same prescription to aim no matter what cue I am using. I will be happy to demonstrate this in person, using both center ball hits and the same shots with side spin.
Click to expand...

Not center ball hits.
9 and 3 o'clock.
 
JB Cases said:
What contact point? Can you take a laser pointer and put it on the contact point?

con·tact [kon-takt] Show IPA
noun
1.
the act or state of touching; a touching or meeting, as of two things or people.


I actually thought you were joking with posting this video.

Again, on paper with a protractor one can draw perfect lines. The diagram was in support of this.

math%20behind%20cb%20contact.jpg


Has actually nothing to with pool playing except that pool balls make excellent tools to show physics concepts.

If you are looking for a contact point and think you are looking at one then you are using visual interpolation to essentially feel your way into the shot. And there is nothing wrong with that if you are comfortable with your game using that method. However it is simply not right to assume that what you do is right for everyone else and that any other method that is not contact point estimation What aiming does not involve contact estimation??? Contact is defined above!!!is essentially mumbo-jumbo.
Click to expand...

John I have to say "Uncle" I can't win!!!

KD
Mike Wilson
 
Kid Dynomite said:
Exactly, squirt and swerve are all forms of English that effect the path to the point of CONTACT.

Contact point is the alpha and omega of AIMING. Nothing else matters more? The model assumes ZERO English applied.

Squirt swerve are all variables that vary depending on speed, equipment and friction.

Are you saying aiming for low deflection cues are same for non low deflection?

These aiming systems assume ALOT of variables are consistent regarding squirt and swerve and deflection prior to contact.

This video helps illustrate the contact point which is the ONLY true aiming point. In my opinion.

Kd
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Fwiw, Max Eberle said he looks at that contact point when shooting
So has Jeanette Lee.
 
Kid Dynomite said:
John I have to say "Uncle" I can't win!!!

KD
Mike Wilson
Click to expand...

It's not about winning. The point is that a contact point can be drawn. It can be then connected to lines on the drawing and calculations derived from those plotted points.

But when you have a an actual sphere that you cannot touch, only observe, then you can only focus on a general area where you think that the balls should contact each other.

That's exactly what we are doing when we claim we are seeing the contact point. We don't actually see a point because there isn't one that is visible.

What we do has nothing to do with diagramming a shot. Instead it has everything to do with spatial awareness and coordination between the signals the brain is getting and the action the brain directs from there.

What's the diameter of a pool ball? 2.25". Ok make two marks that you think are 2.25" apart. Now put a dot in the center of those two marks. Now measure it. How did you do?

I totally agree that the most natural thing in the world is to point the cue through the object ball into the pocket and mentally mark the place where that line exits the back of the object ball. And then it's natural to try to hold focus on that spot while you let your body get into position. And I think that some people are very very adept at it.

My whole thing is that if you are able to be accurate with this then don't fool with aiming systems at all. Don't fix what isn't broken.
 
JB Cases said:
It's not about winning. The point is that a contact point can be drawn. It can be then connected to lines on the drawing and calculations derived from those plotted points.

But when you have a an actual sphere that you cannot touch, only observe, then you can only focus on a general area where you think that the balls should contact each other.

That's exactly what we are doing when we claim we are seeing the contact point. We don't actually see a point because there isn't one that is visible.

What we do has nothing to do with diagramming a shot. Instead it has everything to do with spatial awareness and coordination between the signals the brain is getting and the action the brain directs from there.

What's the diameter of a pool ball? 2.25". Ok make two marks that you think are 2.25" apart. Now put a dot in the center of those two marks. Now measure it. How did you do?

I totally agree that the most natural thing in the world is to point the cue through the object ball into the pocket and mentally mark the place where that line exits the back of the object ball. And then it's natural to try to hold focus on that spot while you let your body get into position. And I think that some people are very very adept at it.

My whole thing is that if you are able to be accurate with this then don't fool with aiming systems at all. Don't fix what isn't broken.
Click to expand...

Joe Tucker nailing tough shots using opposite contact points might beg to differ.
Jimmy Reid's equal parts system ? Isn't that same as connecting the two
contact points?
Assuming both balls are the same size.

and, if you're using CTE, you don't need to look at the contact point ?
 
Last edited:
JoeyInCali said:
Joe Tucker nailing tough shots using opposite contact points might beg to differ.
Jimmy Reid's equal parts system ? Isn't that same as connecting the two
contact points?
Assuming both balls are the same size.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is a way to measure and connect the balls. It is not the same as looking at ONE contact point and aligning by feel. Joe is using a system to assign numbers to the face of the ball and giving the task of training yourself to be able to recognize the proper numbers and see the portions quickly.

This is an updated version of the parallel aiming system which also works but is cumbersome to use. Joe's version I think is much easier.

But it makes my point, the more OBJECTIVE references you have the more accurate you can be. So if you can train to break the balls into portions and align properly to those portions you will be more accurate in my opinion.

So here you would get a special set of balls, a workbook, and two DVDs on the method. Not exactly a "simple" use of the contact point. But certainly a very effective one.

aimingbynumbers.jpg

tucker-aiming.jpg
 
JoeyInCali said:
and, if you're using CTE, you don't need to look at the contact point ?
Click to expand...

No, I never do. I can't speak for other CTE users but I absolutely do not look for or at contact points when I have used CTE to aim a shot. The only time I use them is if I want a specific tangent or on one rail kicks to use the Double the Rail method ( which I learned from Jimmy Reid in person). Then I will revert to using the CP method to feel my way into the line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top