Contact Point + Bridge Shift Aiming System

Colin Colenso

Colin Colenso

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Here is a pretty simple aiming system that some might want to try. It should be sufficient to take most shots to a pocket if executed fairly well.

That said, I'd recommend it as a guide, as a way to get close to the angle, such that it assists one to develop their intuitive judgement of accurate alignment.

Using a 14 inch bridge length, align through Center Cue Ball (CCB) to the farthest point on the OB from the pocket. i.e. The Object Ball Contact Point (OBCP).

A: Estimate the distance from Center Object Ball (COB) (straight shot), to this OBCP in tips. As a guide, 1/2 ball is approx 1 tip (14mm) and fine cut is approx 2 tips (28mm).

B: Then estimate the distance between CB and OB in diamonds.

Calculate: Distance from COB to CPOB (e.g. 1 tip for 1/2 ball) divided by distance between CB and OB, let's say 2 diamonds in this case.

So for a 1/2 ball hit with 2 diamonds between CB and OB, the Bridge needs to shift 1 tip/ 2 = 1/2 tip or 14mm/ 2 = 7mm in the direction of the cut.

So for this shot, cutting the OB to the left, we would firstly align through CCB exactly to the OBCP, then shift the bridge V 1/2 tip left, then pivot to CCB to establish the final aim line.

I'd suggest players check the line and perhaps adjust in small amounts if it seems necessary during the pivot back to CCB.

If calculations are done quite well, this method should be sufficient for most pots.

This assumes approx 14 inch bridge length, which is perhaps longer than some use. If you have a 12 inch bridge, estimate the distance in feet instead of diamonds. If a player has a longer bridge or a thinner cue, some adjustments will be required, but generally, this system is pretty close. As distance increases and angle increases, I'd rely on it as a rough guide only though.
 
Last edited:
Alternatively, imagine a 3/4 ball cut left to right from 5 diamonds away.

The OBCP is approx 1/2 tip from COB, or 6 or 7mm. Align CCB to OBCP then shift bridge 1.2 to 1.4mm to the right. (7mm/5 to 6mm/5 or 1/2 tip divided by 5 = 1/10th tip width).

Pivot to CCB and this will be close to the required potting line.
 
Last edited:
Out of all the aiming systems I've read about or tried, this is by far the most complicated.
 
Is there an iPhone app for this system, or do I need to run it on my laptop? :D

Just kidding. Many systems seem complicated at first (I'm still struggling with CTE) but become second nature with time. Like learning how to walk. I think the goal of any system is that it eventually becomes "feel" because your brain has done it so many times that it runs through the steps so quickly you don't even realize it's done so.

I'll give it a try, although my success with pivot/shift systems is limited so far.
 
Sorry Colin,

I have to agree with Beiber. I did not even finish reading it before I said, I want no part of all that.

CTE pulled me in with the supposed totally objective system assertion.

You ran me away with complexity.

Maybe, I'm just getting too old.

I hope it helps others.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

PS A thought just hit me but I'll just hold onto it for now.
 
Last edited:
BeiberLvr said:
Out of all the aiming systems I've read about or tried, this is by far the most complicated.
Click to expand...
Well, this system is actually geometrically accurate, unlike most systems. The geometry is kind of complex, that's why feel is such a crucial aspect in most systems.

Double the distance and perceiving CP to CP are geometrically fine, but have perception challenges.

Just an option and it may help some to get in the ball park with a little approximating math.

FWIW, I think this system is a lot simpler than Pro 1 as a ball park alignment system.

Colin
 
ENGLISH! said:
Sorry Colin,

I have to agree with Beiber. I did not even finish reading it before I said, I want no part of all that.

CTE pulled me in with the supposed totally objective system assertion.

You ran me away with complexity.

Maybe, I'm just getting too old.

I hope it helps others.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

PS A thought just hit me but I'll just hold onto it for now.
Click to expand...

I probably need some diagrams to make it easier than following words. It's not really complex, just 1 aim point and 2 distances followed by simple division and an approximated bridge shift. That's everything... no left or right pivots from 1/2 tip after guessing a line that somehow relates to CTE and ET (A or B or C or 1/18).

And the advantage is, that the system is actually geometrically provable and understandable.

Colin
 
bdorman said:
Is there an iPhone app for this system, or do I need to run it on my laptop? :D

Just kidding. Many systems seem complicated at first (I'm still struggling with CTE) but become second nature with time. Like learning how to walk. I think the goal of any system is that it eventually becomes "feel" because your brain has done it so many times that it runs through the steps so quickly you don't even realize it's done so.

I'll give it a try, although my success with pivot/shift systems is limited so far.
Click to expand...

Good luck! Let me know how it goes. It takes a little practice and some familiarity with the angle of shot to guess the distance from Center Object Ball to Object Ball Contact Point. US players may prefer 16th of an inch of 1/10th of a tip to mm.

But if one wishes to follow it precisely, knowing their exact bridge length and paying close attention to the angle, initial alignment from CCB to OBCP and bridge shift, then it can potentially be a pure aiming system, not just a ball park aiming system.

Cheers,
Colin
 
Note: I'm not promoting this system as THE WAY TO AIM, just putting it out there as an alternative aiming system. It has been discussed in years past, so it's not my original thought, I just wanted to present it in as simple way as possible as an introductory, but I do think it has potential as a ball park aiming method for those who want to work at it.
 
Colin Colenso said:
Well, this system is actually geometrically accurate, unlike most systems. The geometry is kind of complex, that's why feel is such a crucial aspect in most systems.

Double the distance and perceiving CP to CP are geometrically fine, but have perception challenges.

Just an option and it may help some to get in the ball park with a little approximating math.

FWIW, I think this system is a lot simpler than Pro 1 as a ball park alignment system.

Colin
Click to expand...

Sorry, but any system that requires math (no matter how basic) is not going to be more simple than one that doesn't.
 
Also, let the records show that it was English and Colin that both mentioned CTE first in this non-CTE related thread.

Just wanted to point that out in case things get out of hand as they usually do.
 
The Cue as a Diamond Distance Calculator

Colin,
It is a tad complicated but worth a try. I use my cue as a diamond distance calculator and it works well.

To the point on the shaft where the lacquer line in is very close to 2 diamonds and of course half way to that point is 1 diamond distance.

A point a few inches past the the joint is 3 diamond distance and and entire 58 inch cue is approximately 4 and a half diamonds.

I use this when calculating Object Ball/ Cue Ball Separation distances and it works great.
 
6th grade math does most players' heads in it seems. No wonder CTE and TOI type systems find so many enthusiasts.
 
Colin Colenso said:
I probably need some diagrams to make it easier than following words. It's not really complex, just 1 aim point and 2 distances followed by simple division and an approximated bridge shift. That's everything... no left or right pivots from 1/2 tip after guessing a line that somehow relates to CTE and ET (A or B or C or 1/18).

And the advantage is, that the system is actually geometrically provable and understandable.

Colin
Click to expand...

Hi Colin,

I 'knew' it was geometrically correct when you put it out. It just goes to show the complexity of what is truly involved.

Perhaps it should be required reading on the subject of aiming.

Most men are more of a visual being so perhaps pictures & diagrams would be helpful.

I'll read it again, s l o w l y, & see if I can boil it down for my 'renaissance' mind.

Best 2 Ya & Cheers,
Rick
 
Colin,

Okay, I read it again & it is not that complicated at all, really.

One clarification.

When you said as a guide, 1/2 ball '=' 14mm, did you really mean 1/4 ball, as in 1/2 way from center to edge?

Is so, I got it.

Otherwise, I don't, as roughly 64mm for a ball / 2 = 32 & not 14.

Cheers,
Rick
 
ENGLISH! said:
Colin,

Okay, I read it again & it is not that complicated at all, really.

One clarification.

When you said as a guide, 1/2 ball '=' 14mm, did you really mean 1/4 ball, as in 1/2 way from center to edge?

Is so, I got it.

Otherwise, I don't, as roughly 64mm for a ball / 2 = 32 & not 14.

Cheers,
Rick
Click to expand...
I read it to mean for a half ball pot, the contact point would be half way from centre to edge and then its the distance from that to the edge. It confused me also.

I feel its a valid method if you can work all this out quick enough as to not throw you out of rhythm. But I tried it and I was taking forever to run a rack. I'm not a fan of pivoting and I tend to stay away but I thought I would give this a try. It isn't for me.

I've said it before and I will say it again. Aiming is the easiest part of pool so systems for aiming, whilst pointless IMO, should be quick and easy to follow.
 
Pidge said:
I read it to mean for a half ball pot, the contact point would be half way from centre to edge and then its the distance from that to the edge. It confused me also.

I feel its a valid method if you can work all this out quick enough as to not throw you out of rhythm. But I tried it and I was taking forever to run a rack. I'm not a fan of pivoting and I tend to stay away but I thought I would give this a try. It isn't for me.

I've said it before and I will say it again. Aiming is the easiest part of pool so systems for aiming, whilst pointless IMO, should be quick and easy to follow.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I think that's it.

I've not tried it yet as it turned me off with the calculations. I'll give it a look when I have a chance.

For most of playing time, I've been a see it & hit it type with very good results.

Right now, if anything. I am occasionally using the shadow, sort of as a near check for my alignment once down just to see how it matches up & I only started doing that since finding out about my cross dominant eye issue.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick
 
ENGLISH! said:
Colin,

Okay, I read it again & it is not that complicated at all, really.

One clarification.

When you said as a guide, 1/2 ball '=' 14mm, did you really mean 1/4 ball, as in 1/2 way from center to edge?

Is so, I got it.

Otherwise, I don't, as roughly 64mm for a ball / 2 = 32 & not 14.

Cheers,
Rick
Click to expand...

Hi Rick,
The ball at 2.25 inches is 1.125 inches from center to edge, or about 28mm or a bit over 2 tips. The contact point for a half ball hit is half that, hence approx 14mm or nearly 1 tip.

Partly responding to Pidge here too. It is hard work to do this, as it was hard to do arithmetic tables in our early days, as it takes time to learn CTE etc.

One would need to learn to do the math in a couple of seconds prior to each shot to work out the pivot shift required, then align to contact point and then bridge shift.

Of course it won't suit all, but it can be a an objective way to put a player in the ball park if they become au fait with the measurement estimations and the quick division, which will require more effort when trying to be more accurate instead of rounding off.

Cheers,
Colin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top