Best scientific aiming explanation

As a Mechanical Engineer, I understand your math and your conclusions, but do see a few issues. Nothing to do with your calculations, but to do with the equipment. As a pool player, I collect things... like cue balls. I have a collection of about 20 or so different cue balls. Everything from a measles ball to red circles, red dots, blue dots, black circles, every kind of magnetic ball I could find, oversized cue balls (very common on older bar tables) and they all weigh differently and have different density. This has a drastically different effect on, not only cue ball direction of travel after the hit, but on another thing, that as a physicist (I am just making an assumption that you are a physicist) I thought you would calculate in, and that is cling. Cling happens... the slower the roll of the cue ball, the MORE it happens and it changes the point at which the balls "release" from each other, which changes cue ball path. Also, Cue ball path is determined greatly by the "condition" of the cue ball and object ball at impact. I'm not talking about whether they are clean and polished or dirty and rough, although that DOES make a difference, but WHAT the cue ball is doing when it contacts the object ball. A rolling cue ball will NOT release on the 90 degree tangent line from the shot. It varies greatly from 90 degrees to 30 degrees, depending on A) angle of shot and B) speed of the CB. The only way to insure that you get very close to that 90 deg release is to insure that the cue ball is sliding at contact with the OB... no forward roll, no backwards roll... a pure slide.

In any case, as an engineer, I really enjoyed the math and the concept. As a pool player, quite honestly, I didn't find it useful, but that does NOT mean I didn't find it interesting!

Thanks for posting,

Bob

Edit... I just want to be sure I'm clear on one statement that I made... Except on a dead straight in shot, the cue ball ALWAYS leaves the object ball on the "tangent line" or a line 90 degrees from the travel angle of the object ball but, except under certain conditions, that path will almost immediately deviate. The "condition" of the cue ball, as I described it, (sliding, rolling, backspin, etc) determines what it does in that instant after contact.
 
Last edited:
BobN said:
Joey, No... I do NOT look at the contact point using Pro One.
Click to expand...

Then, if the pocket is open ( no balls near it ) you wouldn't walk to the OB and look at it ( towards the pocket ) before shooting ?
 
Contact point aiming has to have some compensation involved or many shots will be under cut. Drawing a diagram does not take factors into consideration like friction and the effects of speed and spin.

The best point of this video was the speed each ball attained after the collision. This would relate directly to cue ball control and using anything from pocket speed to a very firm stroke.

Best,
Mike
 
I think all these systems work to a certain level

Mikjary said:
Contact point aiming has to have some compensation involved or many shots will be under cut. Drawing a diagram does not take factors into consideration like friction and the effects of speed and spin.

The best point of this video was the speed each ball attained after the collision. This would relate directly to cue ball control and using anything from pocket speed to a very firm stroke.

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

It also helps to be able to hit the cue ball precisely. Sometimes I wonder how many people that argue which "aiming system" is better can actually hit the cue ball where they're "aiming". ;)

There's not been a player, that I've aware of, that reached World Championship Status using a mechanical "aiming system". I hope I'm wrong and can talk to this player for a few minutes, it would certainly be interesting to hear the response to a few key questions.

I believe most of these systems work to a certain level, then it's more about touch and feel for the pocket, creating zones and understanding margin of error. imho
 
CJ Wiley said:
It also helps to be able to hit the cue ball precisely. Sometimes I wonder how many people that argue which "aiming system" is better can actually hit the cue ball where they're "aiming". ;)

There's not been a player, that I've aware of, that reached World Championship Status using a mechanical "aiming system". I hope I'm wrong and can talk to this player for a few minutes, it would certainly be interesting to hear the response to a few key questions.

I believe most of these systems work to a certain level, then it's more about touch and feel for the pocket, creating zones and understanding margin of error. imho
Click to expand...

I agree completely CJ. There has to be some visualization of th two balls colliding and what happens after that.
 
I know JB has talked about this before. One of the biggest benefits of CTE/Pro One is the ability to make shots that have never been practiced before.

1. Take a bunch of C level players.
2. Make them each shoot Colin's Potting Drill and record their scores.
3. Take the two players that have the most similar scores.
4. Let Player A practice the drill as often as they want for a month.
5. Don't allow Player B shoot the drill at all, but have someone proficient in Pro One teach them CTE/Pro One.
6. Make them each do the drill again and record their scores after a month.

I'm not rich, but if I were, I'd bet it all that Player B would have the higher score the 2nd time around.
 
CJ Wiley said:
It also helps to be able to hit the cue ball precisely. Sometimes I wonder how many people that argue which "aiming system" is better can actually hit the cue ball where they're "aiming". ;)

There's not been a player, that I've aware of, that reached World Championship Status using a mechanical "aiming system". I hope I'm wrong and can talk to this player for a few minutes, it would certainly be interesting to hear the response to a few key questions.

I believe most of these systems work to a certain level, then it's more about touch and feel for the pocket, creating zones and understanding margin of error. imho
Click to expand...

What I have been saying for the past year is that aiming and execution are separate. The very first thing you have to do is aim. Whether that is by some kind of hyper-conscious by-the-numbers type of method or whether it's more of a just-see-it type of method. The shooter has got to make a decision as to where to put the cue down.

Once the cue is down then the shot can be manipulated in a positive fashion or a negative one. This is where precision striking comes in. Where ever you intend to hit the ball and where you need to hit the ball is where you must hit the ball or the results are unlikely to be what you wanted.

But, if you aimed wrong, even a tiny bit, and your stroke is laser straight you will likely miss. The two parts to the shot are aiming and execution. I have missed straight in shots to the side by dogging the stroke.

Any method of aiming other than pure feel starts out "mechanical" in my opinion. Even your TOI + 3 Part Pocket method takes 3 solid weeks per your instructions to get into a fluid state.

As for getting to world class I guess the only example I can point to of a player that I would consider to be world class who I know trained extensively with CTE/ProOne from the time he was a good B-A player to his now world class level is Landon Shuffett. He is also a good example of what good sustained coaching can do for a player.
 
BeiberLvr said:
I know JB has talked about this before. One of the biggest benefits of CTE/Pro One is the ability to make shots that have never been practiced before.

1. Take a bunch of C level players.
2. Make them each shoot Colin's Potting Drill and record their scores.
3. Take the two players that have the most similar scores.
4. Let Player A practice the drill as often as they want for a month.
5. Don't allow Player B shoot the drill at all, but have someone proficient in Pro One teach them CTE/Pro One.
6. Make them each do the drill again and record their scores after a month.

I'm not rich, but if I were, I'd bet it all that Player B would have the higher score the 2nd time around.
Click to expand...

I am all-in right beside you.
 
JoeyInCali said:
Then, if the pocket is open ( no balls near it ) you wouldn't walk to the OB and look at it ( towards the pocket ) before shooting ?
Click to expand...

No. With an open pocket like you describe, I just don't concern myself with contact points, so I really have no need to get behind the ball and see that point or the track to the pocket. I can see everything I need to know about any shot from behind the cue ball. There are times I will get behind the OB (pocket partially blocked by another ball, caroms, combinations, etc), but for an open pocket, there is no need to get behind the OB and look at it towards the pocket.
 
JB Cases said:
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
Click to expand...


Agree, that this is a great trainings-aid. Especially if i start with beginners or not-so-advanced players i really like to explain with help of *back of ball
aka *aiming by numbers* system. And here i use the ghostball very few, to explain the tangent-line and how to use it.
Aiming by numbers is really a nice idea developed by Joe T.
 
taking advantage of a natural phenomenon and using it to create better results

JB Cases said:
What I have been saying for the past year is that aiming and execution are separate. The very first thing you have to do is aim. Whether that is by some kind of hyper-conscious by-the-numbers type of method or whether it's more of a just-see-it type of method. The shooter has got to make a decision as to where to put the cue down.

Once the cue is down then the shot can be manipulated in a positive fashion or a negative one. This is where precision striking comes in. Where ever you intend to hit the ball and where you need to hit the ball is where you must hit the ball or the results are unlikely to be what you wanted.

But, if you aimed wrong, even a tiny bit, and your stroke is laser straight you will likely miss. The two parts to the shot are aiming and execution. I have missed straight in shots to the side by dogging the stroke.

Any method of aiming other than pure feel starts out "mechanical" in my opinion. Even your TOI + 3 Part Pocket method takes 3 solid weeks per your instructions to get into a fluid state.

As for getting to world class I guess the only example I can point to of a player that I would consider to be world class who I know trained extensively with CTE/ProOne from the time he was a good B-A player to his now world class level is Landon Shuffett. He is also a good example of what good sustained coaching can do for a player.
Click to expand...

What I strongly recommend is taking advantage of natural human phenomenon.
an-amazing-phenomenon-12097.jpg
If any of our senses are lost or damaged our other senses will be amplified. I'm told this is true in cases of blindness, deafness, and even with taste, feel, and smell.

I say this because it explains my process for getting down on pool shots, and why I believe it's very effective. When I'm above the shot I am mostly gathering information with my eyes - seeing the connection between the cue ball and object ball - aware of the table, completely, and visually.

As information is absorbed by my eyes, I start to feel my hands preparing for what the shot will feel like. As I get down on the cue ball I"m ONLY looking at the cue ball for 4-5 seconds until I'm completely locked into the {Inside} spot that I'm contacting. The cue ball "feels" like my only target.

Only after I'm completely locked in do I shift my attention to the object ball, but not visually, at this point my senses have shifted to kinesthetic (the sense of feel) and I'm "feeling the object ball with my eyes".

The reason I believe it's important to go from more visual to more kinesthetic is it will create more of a heightened sense when I need it (than keeping them equal). This is taking advantage of a natural phenomenon and using it to create appealing, and more consistent results. I suggest you give it a try and "see" what it's like to "feel" with your eyes. 'The Game is the Teacher'
 
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...

Are you using BHE even when you using a LD shaft to play side spin?


JB Cases said:
I simply add more or less tip offset depending on the shaft.
Click to expand...

How about two to three tip off centre? Do you use BHE for LD shaft?
 
BeiberLvr said:
There is nothing wrong with using BHE with a LD shaft.

Whether or not someone actually uses it is of there own personal preference.
Click to expand...

Do you experience any difficulty when playing side spin using BHE on a LD shaft?
 
icem3n said:
Do you experience any difficulty when playing side spin using BHE on a LD shaft?
Click to expand...

None. I don't know the details, but I do know it does have it's limitations.

Personally though, whatever method I use to apply side spin, I very rarely go past one tip. Even before using Pro One, I've always stuck pretty close to the vertical axis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top