CIT, SIT, Deflection aim adjustments: At the object ball vs at the pocket?

[Lanten77]

I did some wording edits:

Is there any consensus as to which of the following is the better "method" to make aim / shot-line adjustments for CIT, SIT and deflection? (Taking each one separately).

To (hopefully) clarify my question:

Regarding adjusting for deflection only: Adjusting where the cue is pointing in order to compensate for deflection, and end up with the same contact point as it would be with a vertical-center hit, makes perfect sense to me. And this is what I mean by making an adjustment "at the object ball."

But for SIT or CIT (like with a soft short shot) and negligible, if any deflection, it seems to make equally good sense to me to adjust my target "at the pocket" (for instance like aiming to hit the point of the pocket knowing it will get thrown to the center) instead of more specifically adjusting my contact point on the object ball.

Of course I understand the end result is the same, and ultimately the contact point on the object ball changes either way.

I'm just wondering, for high-level players, which way they would tend to "see" or think about these aiming adjustments/ compensations?

So, for SIT and CIT, is it better to be consistent and always adjust your contact point target or aim in the same way, like for instance, always in relation to the object ball (rather than an aim point adjustment at the pocket)?

Or, like aiming, is it better to just use whichever method you "see" better, or that works better for you?

Or maybe "how you see it" changes depending on the angle of any given shot...?

Thank you!
Bob

 

[BilliardsAbout]

In general, top players make few conscious adjustments when pocketing balls. There are occasional exceptions, such as when a player intentionally throws an object ball off-line to improve the cue ball's position. For example, instead of cutting the five-ball in with center ball, a player might choose to throw it in while applying significant left english to position the cue ball better, intentionally enhancing throw and requiring a slightly different sighting on the OB for targeting.

 

[FranCrimi]

I think mainly their adjustments are to the point of contact on the ob. It's more palatable to go through their normal aiming process to pocket the ball and then make an adjustment to the contact point rather than aim for a miss or near miss. But there's nothing wrong with aiming for a miss or near miss as well. To each his own.

As for consistency --- everything we do is a system, even if the player is more of a feel player than a calculating player. So, yes, repeating the same way of going about it is normal. However, the more advanced the player, the more they can feel slight adjustments beyond their basic system, such as taking into consideration things like humidity or cloth condition. While variables like this can't be measured, they can be felt, which comes from memory, based on experience.

 

[JeremiahGage]

There are so many factors that are involved with aiming, that it mostly comes down to just how good are you able to simulate how the balls are going to move on the table, given a certain aim, swing speed, and tip contact. When I miss shots or position due to not accounting for or misjudging the physical effects involved (deflection, throw, etc.), then I go and practice that particular shot to get a better sense of it.

I've created a diagram that shows the complexities of a shot, to give you a model to help guide your practice.

FWIW, I'm always looking at the direction of the cue ball (mostly somewhere near the object ball) on my final swing. I want everything in a straight line for maximum consistency.

 

[Lanten77]

I think mainly their adjustments are to the point of contact on the ob. It's more palatable to go through their normal aiming process to pocket the ball and then make an adjustment to the contact point rather than aim for a miss or near miss. But there's nothing wrong with aiming for a miss or near miss as well. To each his own.

As for consistency --- everything we do is a system, even if the player is more of a feel player than a calculating player. So, yes, repeating the same way of going about it is normal. However, the more advanced the player, the more they can feel slight adjustments beyond their basic system, such as taking into consideration things like humidity or cloth condition. While variables like this can't be measured, they can be felt, which comes from memory, based on experience.

Thanks, Fran. Makes sense to likely stay with just contact point adjustments. The two ways of seeing it are so closely related, and in my mind I kept going back and forth, leading to uncertainty and less confidence in my setup. So sticking to one way seems like it will help.

 

[Lanten77]

There are so many factors that are involved with aiming, that it mostly comes down to just how good are you able to simulate how the balls are going to move on the table, given a certain aim, swing speed, and tip contact. When I miss shots or position due to not accounting for or misjudging the physical effects involved (deflection, throw, etc.), then I go and practice that particular shot to get a better sense of it.

I've created a diagram that shows the complexities of a shot, to give you a model to help guide your practice.
View attachment 845884
FWIW, I'm always looking at the direction of the cue ball (mostly somewhere near the object ball) on my final swing. I want everything in a straight line for maximum consistency.

Thanks, Jeremiah. Very interesting how you put that diagram together!

 

[Lanten77]

In general, top players make few conscious adjustments when pocketing balls. There are occasional exceptions, such as when a player intentionally throws an object ball off-line to improve the cue ball's position. For example, instead of cutting the five-ball in with center ball, a player might choose to throw it in while applying significant left english to position the cue ball better, intentionally enhancing throw and requiring a slightly different sighting on the OB for targeting.

Thank you. It would be nice to experience that unconscious level! I'm not sure I have enough years left on Earth to do it though!!

 

[Lanten77]

There are so many factors that are involved with aiming, that it mostly comes down to just how good are you able to simulate how the balls are going to move on the table, given a certain aim, swing speed, and tip contact. When I miss shots or position due to not accounting for or misjudging the physical effects involved (deflection, throw, etc.), then I go and practice that particular shot to get a better sense of it.

I've created a diagram that shows the complexities of a shot, to give you a model to help guide your practice.
View attachment 845884
FWIW, I'm always looking at the direction of the cue ball (mostly somewhere near the object ball) on my final swing. I want everything in a straight line for maximum consistency.

By the way, your podcasts are awesome!! Great guests. One suggestion though would be to not ask as many of the exact same questions for every guest. But keep them coming please!

 

[FranCrimi]

Thanks, Fran. Makes sense to likely stay with just contact point adjustments. The two ways of seeing it are so closely related, and in my mind I kept going back and forth, leading to uncertainty and less confidence in my setup. So sticking to one way seems like it will help.

Your thread just reminded me of a story. I was often hired to shoot shots for TV shows and films. Once when I was hired for a daytime drama, the director wanted me to just barely miss shots. The script called for the character to miss several shots, but almost make them. I tried, but kept making the shots. My brain wasn't wired to aim to miss. Eventually I did miss enough shots to satisfy the director, but that was the strangest job I had. So I think players will tend to naturally aim to make the shot and then adjust the aim point.

I remember at the end of the shoot thinking that I hoped everyone on set knew I was supposed to miss shots otherwise it looked like I was a total failure on set.

 

[Lanten77]

Your thread just reminded me of a story. I was often hired to shoot shots for TV shows and films. Once when I was hired for a daytime drama, the director wanted me to just barely miss shots. The script called for the character to miss several shots, but almost make them. I tried, but kept making the shots. My brain wasn't wired to aim to miss. Eventually I did miss enough shots to satisfy the director, but that was the strangest job I had. So I think players will tend to naturally aim to make the shot and then adjust the aim point.

That's funny! They should have hired me!!

 

[bbb]

You didnt like my answer ?
(inside joke )

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Seems to me it's best to adjust your aim for squirt/throw the same way you aim it in the first place (contact point or pocket target).

pj
chgo

 

[Lanten77]

Seems to me it's best to adjust your aim for squirt/throw the same way you aim it in the first place (contact point or pocket target).

pj
chgo

That makes sense, thanks, PJ. My brain doesn't always think sensibly though when I'm standing behind the shot...

 

[garczar]

No offense but this is where 'half-a-million balls' rears its ugly head. You just have to shoot a TON of spin shots to figure it out. No one can tell you how, too much feel involved for one and secondly we all strike the cb different yielding different spins/ squirt/throws/etc.

 

[Lanten77]

No offense but this is where 'half-a-million balls' rears its ugly head. You just have to shoot a TON of spin shots to figure it out. No one can tell you how, too much feel involved for one and secondly we all strike the cb different yielding different spins/ squirt/throws/etc.

Well, HALF a million balls sounds a lot better than a million balls! I recognize this fact but I'm making as many attempts as I can to shorten my learning curve since I'm old! Thank you.

 

[manwon]

Is there any consensus as to which of the following is the better "method" to make aim / shot-line adjustments for CIT, SIT and deflection? (Taking each one separately).

The absolutely best thing you can do is use center ball hit as often as possible. When, I say center ball I speaking about dead Center, Top and Bottom. This will minimize swerve and cue ball spin so long as you go no further than a half a tip off center. Most, people don’t realize that top English - follow and Bottom English-draw will pick up spin after contact with a ball of a rail, dead center ball doesn’t really react this way.

This also is very important when using English to spin the cue ball. If you go no further than half a tip off center there is only a small amount of spin and curve to compensate for. If you go more than a half tip off center you must compensate for the curve between the object ball and cue ball.

To (hopefully) clarify my question:

BBB (my old friend and pool mentor) inspired some wording edits:

Regarding adjusting for deflection only: Adjusting where the cue is pointing in order to compensate for deflection, and end up with the same contact point as it would be with a vertical-center hit, makes perfect sense to me. And this is what I mean by making an adjustment "at the object ball."

But for SIT or CIT (like with a soft short shot) and negligible, if any deflection, it seems to make equally good sense to me to adjust my target "at the pocket" (for instance like aiming to hit the point of the pocket knowing it will get thrown to the center) instead of more specifically adjusting my contact point on the object ball.

Of course I understand the end result is the same, and ultimately the contact point on the object ball changes either way.

I'm just wondering, for high-level players, which way they would tend to "see" or think about these aiming adjustments/ compensations?

So, for SIT and CIT, is it better to be consistent and always adjust your contact point target or aim in the same way, like for instance, always in relation to the object ball (rather than an aim point adjustment at the pocket)?

Or, like aiming, is it better to just use whichever method you "see" better, or that works better for you?

Or maybe "how you see it" changes depending on the angle of any given shot...?

Thank you!
Bob

 

[FranCrimi]

The absolutely best thing you can do is use center ball hit as often as possible. When, I say center ball I speaking about dead Center, Top and Bottom. This will minimize swerve and cue ball spin so long as you go no further than a half a tip off center. Most, people don’t realize that top English - follow and Bottom English-draw will pick up spin after contact with a ball of a rail, dead center ball doesn’t really react this way.

This also is very important when using English to spin the cue ball. If you go no further than half a tip off center there is only a small amount of spin and curve to compensate for. If you go more than a half tip off center you must compensate for the curve between the object ball and cue ball.

If you're worried about not being able to compensate for squirt when using more than a half tip off center, then pool isn't the game for you.

The pros use as much side spin as needed. The late great Buddy Hall told me, "You have to be able to play all over the cue ball." Does that sound like no more than a half-tip off center to you?

Players have different styles of playing. Efren for example, plays all over the cue ball because he prefers to spin the ball into position. He seems to have adapted pretty well to squirt issues, don't you think?

Other players prefer to punch or stun the cue ball whenever possible. Different style of play. But all of them know how to play all over the cue ball.

Why limit players with advice like that?

 

[manwon]

If you're worried about not being able to compensate for squirt when using more than a half tip off center, then pool isn't the game for you.

The pros use as much side spin as needed. The late great Buddy Hall told me, "You have to be able to play all over the cue ball." Does that sound like no more than a half-tip off center to you?

Players have different styles of playing. Efren for example, plays all over the cue ball because he prefers to spin the ball into position. He seems to have adapted pretty well to squirt issues, don't you think?

Other players prefer to punch or stun the cue ball whenever possible. Different style of play. But all of them know how to play all over the cue ball.

Why limit players with advice like that?

Louie Roberts taught me how to play pocket billiards, and I don't limit myself to a 1/2 English in Pocket Billiards or 3-Cushion Billiards. But, for young players who do not have the compensation already built into their stroke to start off with a half cue tip is all they need. Not being able to hit dead cent ball is a serious problem most young players have, while they don't understand that they are missing because they are over spinning cue ball..

Yet, after a young player can consistently use a center ball hit to stop, Stun, Follow and draw the ball in my opinion maximum English is in fact detrimental to their games. I may not have been clear but this is what I was alluding to when I made those comments and I stand behind them.

Very respectfully
Criag

 

[boogieman]

The absolutely best thing you can do is use center ball hit as often as possible. When, I say center ball I speaking about dead Center, Top and Bottom. This will minimize swerve and cue ball spin so long as you go no further than a half a tip off center. Most, people don’t realize that top English - follow and Bottom English-draw will pick up spin after contact with a ball of a rail, dead center ball doesn’t really react this way.

I agree. I'm not saying to NOT use english/side spin (you aren't either I think), but if you can make a shot with the vertical axis there are less potential things to go wrong. If you can get the same shape with follow (bending tangent line forward) or draw (bending it backwards), there's just less complications. You don't accidentally throw a shot, rattle a pocket due to deflection/squirt not being compensated, spin grabbing off the rail or not grabbing due to humidity or dirty/worn cloth and so on.

If you need it for shape, sure, be intimately familiar with side spin, you need it. But if you don't need it the KISS method can save you from potential errors.

 

[manwon]

I agree. I'm not saying to NOT use english/side spin (you aren't either I think), but if you can make a shot with the vertical axis there are less potential things to go wrong. If you can get the same shape with follow (bending tangent line forward) or draw (bending it backwards), there's just less complications. You don't accidentally throw a shot, rattle a pocket due to deflection/squirt not being compensated, spin grabbing off the rail or not grabbing due to humidity or dirty/worn cloth and so on.

If you need it for shape, sure, be intimately familiar with side spin, you need it. But if you don't need it the KISS method can save you from potential errors.

What I was trying to say is that new players should master all center ball hits before moving on to side spin. Then in the beginning only use half a tip of English and once mastered, then a player can move out to a full tip. Thats the way I was taught, along with lots of stroke training. By the time I mastered the steps above, I didn’t have to compensate for spin, the compensation was naturally built into my sight picture and stroke. To this day when I get down to get my sight picture, I see an imaginary line running from my tip through the cue ball to the contact point on the object ball. Then all I have to do decide the spin I am going to use, take some warm up strokes and follow through and bang.

Thanks for you comments, I appreciate the fact that you could understand what I was trying to say.