Common aiming system?

Da Poet

Pool is Cool
Silver Member
I'm a relatively newer player and I've never really had a solid system for cut angles. I've been bouncing back and forth between a loose version of Hal Houle's system (before I knew that it was called that) and the ghost ball. Maybe I'm repeating something some else has already been doing, and I'd like any opinions on this newer method that has helped me tremendously. I'll call it the football method. Maybe someone else has called it that or something else already.

Let's suppose it's a hard right cut, maybe 50 degrees or so. It seems relatively easy, (for me anyway) especially before getting into shooting position, to determine the contact point of the object ball. When I transition down into my stance to make the shot, (Just above table view) I look at the distance between the contact point and, in this case, the left edge of the object ball. This is half the football. I then picture an imaginary spot of where I think the other half of the football should be. The imaginary right edge of the "football" is in reality, the right edge of the ghost ball. Basically, overlap two circles and you get a football with the contact point precisely in the center of the football. When I hit the shot, when practical, I make sure to maintain eye contact with the object ball until I hear the contact to see if I actually made the football the right size.

If your concerned about throw or cueball size, you can adjust you aim before you determine the contact point slightly if you wish. Other than that, it seems suspiciously simple.

If this is a common thing to do then I'm sorry to take up space here. I'm a newer player and new to the forum and I was just curious. I recently discovered that I have a stigmatism in my right eye that messes up my depth perception so it sort of forces me to come up with something other than feel. I also like it because it works no matter how close or far away the object ball is.

I'd enjoy any and all comments both positive and negative.

Da Poet
 
Da Poet said:
I'm a relatively newer player and I've never really had a solid system for cut angles. I've been bouncing back and forth between a loose version of Hal Houle's system (before I knew that it was called that) and the ghost ball. Maybe I'm repeating something some else has already been doing, and I'd like any opinions on this newer method that has helped me tremendously. I'll call it the football method. Maybe someone else has called it that or something else already.

Let's suppose it's a hard right cut, maybe 50 degrees or so. It seems relatively easy, (for me anyway) especially before getting into shooting position, to determine the contact point of the object ball. When I transition down into my stance to make the shot, (Just above table view) I look at the distance between the contact point and, in this case, the left edge of the object ball. This is half the football. I then picture an imaginary spot of where I think the other half of the football should be. The imaginary right edge of the "football" is in reality, the right edge of the ghost ball. Basically, overlap two circles and you get a football with the contact point precisely in the center of the football. When I hit the shot, when practical, I make sure to maintain eye contact with the object ball until I hear the contact to see if I actually made the football the right size.

If your concerned about throw or cueball size, you can adjust you aim before you determine the contact point slightly if you wish. Other than that, it seems suspiciously simple.

If this is a common thing to do then I'm sorry to take up space here. I'm a newer player and new to the forum and I was just curious. I recently discovered that I have a stigmatism in my right eye that messes up my depth perception so it sort of forces me to come up with something other than feel. I also like it because it works no matter how close or far away the object ball is.

I'd enjoy any and all comments both positive and negative.

Da Poet


I think stigmatisms are fairly common and for sure I have one in my left eye. It doesn't interfere with my aiming simply because were I aim and were I make contact result from experience of play (just my opinion). This is a normal compensation. What is important is that your head is aligned the same way all the time to insure this.

Regarding aiming; If you are new, then now is the time to adapt to a solid aiming system because it will be easier for you. You just might want to take lessons at this point because you will benefit most being new.
 
pete lafond said:
I think stigmatisms are fairly common and for sure I have one in my left eye. It doesn't interfere with my aiming simply because were I aim and were I make contact result from experience of play (just my opinion).

Thanks, it is encouraging to know that experience can overcome a stigmatism. It has shaken my confidence a bit. Maybe that's why I started thinking about having a more solid aiming system just to back things up a bit in case things started getting out of hand. I always looked at aiming systems as more of a life ring than a substitute for a real boat, but this one seems to have a little of both.
 
Da Poet said:
... . Maybe I'm repeating something some else has already been doing, and I'd like any opinions on this newer method that has helped me tremendously. I'll call it the football method. Maybe someone else has called it that or something else already.
... This is half the football. I then picture an imaginary spot of where I think the other half of the football should be. The imaginary right edge of the "football" is in reality, the right edge of the ghost ball. Basically, overlap two circles and you get a football with the contact point precisely in the center of the football. ...
A "football" is a good description of the shape. It has also been called a "lens."

This system was first described (so far as I know) by Paul Hahn. Bob Byrne gives him credit for it in his "Advanced" book. A couple of descriptions from Billiards Digest articles are in

http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/1999-11.pdf and http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/2004-06.pdf

It is also in Randy Kukla's book on aiming.
 
Bob Jewett said:
A "football" is a good description of the shape. It has also been called a "lens."

This system was first described (so far as I know) by Paul Hahn. Bob Byrne gives him credit for it in his "Advanced" book. A couple of descriptions from Billiards Digest articles are in

http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/1999-11.pdf and http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/2004-06.pdf

It is also in Randy Kukla's book on aiming.

Thank you very much. I checked out the links and nothing against Dr. Dave, these articles were much more direct in the strengths and weaknesses of each system described. This was my first journey requesting info on this forum and I am grateful for the time and input.

It's funny, I guess I'm a big believer in systems. To me it's a little like knowing the yardage in golf. You still have factore like wind, dry or damp conditions etc. I recognize the feel factor and know there is no substitute for practice, but also, I am in construction, and honestly, a lot of times when I go and pick up material, after twenty years I still have to look at the tag or grab a tape measure to check whether I have an eight foot piece of material or ten. When it's important, you shouldn't guess.

Thanks again,

Da Poet
 
Your article clarified Da Poet's system for me. Thanks for the reference, Bob.
JoeyA

Bob Jewett said:
A "football" is a good description of the shape. It has also been called a "lens."

This system was first described (so far as I know) by Paul Hahn. Bob Byrne gives him credit for it in his "Advanced" book. A couple of descriptions from Billiards Digest articles are in

http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/1999-11.pdf and http://www.sfbilliards.com/articles/2004-06.pdf

It is also in Randy Kukla's book on aiming.
 
Back
Top