Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

[Wybrook]

Sorry Adam, but your statement alone shows you don't know what you don't know. I know there are at least 26 aiming systems out there. No way you have tried them all with enough time to definitely state that none of them work. My level of play is plenty high enough to know exactly how I aim. You don't even admit that you use an aiming system, and don't even realize that you do. It is impossible to make any ball without using some kind of system. Not going to argue it with you. But, despite your level of play, you simply aren't qualified to make the statement you have.

This is not a personal attack on you, but if you are using an aiming system per se, then your skill level is not as high as you think it is.

The aiming system I use is what my brain lines up and tells me.. its a ton of calculations all done in a split second, factoring in every detail..
I developed this "aiming system" by shooting millions of balls...

The conventional terminology when describing "Aiming System" is as defined on a piece of paper.. with aiming points and parallel lines and such.. I have seen them. These only work on a very small percentage of shots and can be easily broken by varying a couple things..

For a quick example, if you change the speed from soft to very hard on a slight cut shot with outside, the contact point that the CB needs to contact the OB to make the ball in the pocket varies by a couple mm, however, the "aiming point" varies by as much as 2-3".. How can that be???

I have yet to have someone show me an aiming system that you don't have to make manual, arbitrary adjustments to eventually pocket the OB.. I can do the same thing by saying that my aiming system says to hit the ball on the opposite side of the ball as the pocket.. (and adjust where needed)

If you go to Derby I would be glad to have you show me any aiming systems you can contrive.. I like seeing new information and new ideas, as well as see how others got to the level they are at.

I will show you my proof if you show me your system.. Instead of rehashing all this on here....

 

[Neil]

This is not a personal attack on you, but if you are using an aiming system per se, then your skill level is not as high as you think it is.

The aiming system I use is what my brain lines up and tells me.. its a ton of calculations all done in a split second, factoring in every detail..
I developed this "aiming system" by shooting millions of balls...

The conventional terminology when describing "Aiming System" is as defined on a piece of paper.. with aiming points and parallel lines and such.. I have seen them. These only work on a very small percentage of shots and can be easily broken by varying a couple things..

For a quick example, if you change the speed from soft to very hard on a slight cut shot with outside, the contact point that the CB needs to contact the OB to make the ball in the pocket varies by a couple mm, however, the "aiming point" varies by as much as 2-3".. How can that be???

I have yet to have someone show me an aiming system that you don't have to make manual adjustments to eventually pocket the OB.. I can do the same thing by saying that my aiming system says to hit the ball on the opposite side of the ball as the pocket.. (and adjust where needed)

If you go to Derby I would be glad to have you show me any aiming systems you can contrive.. I like seeing new information and new ideas, as well as see how others got to the level they are at.

Adam, I would love to go to Derby, as I have never been there. Almost made it last year, but plans fell through. That was my last chance to go. Not physically able to anymore and not going if I can't play in it. However, I'm sure Scott or Randy or some other instructors will be there. I'm sure they would be willing to spend a little time talking about the subject with you.

 

[mantis99]

...but this is wrong....

Aiming systems do not work.. Even the basic ones.

For example, shooting a ball that is 5 feet away, to the left with hard inside, top... you are actually "aiming" on the left side of the OB.. As you hit the ball softer, you start adjusting more to the right to eventually, when you hit that shot super soft, you actually "aim" to miss the OB on the right side..

"Aiming" is about shooting enough balls that your brain figures out about where to hit the CB to make the OB go in a hole that is hopefully big enough...

Anyone that advocates "aiming systems" basically thinks they are using something, but their mind makes subconscious adjustments to put them in correct alignment.. They attribute it to their "system" when its really not..

After using CTE for the past few years, I can confidently say that the above statement is incorrect, at least the part suggesting that an aiming system is nothing but subconscious adjustments. When I first started using it, I wasn't sure why I was making more balls given the many ideas put out there. However, after making several shots where I just had no view of the pocket that would really allow any accuracy with subconscious adjustments, and forcing myself to only stay in the line that CTE gave me, I am now convinced that the system itself actually works.

I do however, agree with Patrick that any system requires feel to perform. While I believe CTE to be a completely structured system, our ability to perform that perfectly is limited, and requires some feel. I believe that my subconscious compensates for the errors I make with the system, allowing me to still make balls, even though I have slightly messed up the structure of the system. I don't think that the system gets me close and my subconscious does the rest all the time as Patrick suggests, but I do think their is a certain amount of feel needed to perform the system, and I do think my subconscious jumps in when I do mess it up.

That is different though than the statement I quoted that suggests that the system is inherently flawed, only getting you close to the correct shot line with your subconscious taking over from there. I have made too many banks and shots in the center of the pocket where I could not see the pocket during the shot using CTE that I am thoroughly convinced now that CTE structurally works. Missed shots are due to my own stroke errors or my own error getting into the correct line established by CTE.

In the end, I don't think we will ever be able to prove wither way which is side of the fence is correct about why it works, I just feel that the last several years of using CTE have swayed me to the side suggesting that it must be structurally sound from the results I have had with certain types of shots that would really limit MY personal level of feel.

 

[randyg]

The OB contact area can also become smaller at the same distance, depending on OB angles into the pocket.
A 40 degree cut angle will accept balls using a slightly larger contact area than an OB cut angle of 20 degrees.

The pocket mouth is widest when the OB enters from 45 degrees. Again IMO

.

How can this be?

randyg

 

[Patrick Johnson]

The OB contact area can also become smaller at the same distance, depending on OB angles into the pocket.
A 40 degree cut angle will accept balls using a slightly larger contact area than an OB cut angle of 20 degrees.

The pocket mouth is widest when the OB enters from 45 degrees. Again IMO.

randyg:
How can this be?

I think he must be saying the effective pocket size is smaller from some angles, so the contact area is smaller too. Another factor is the effective contact area depending on cut angle - the more side-on the view, the smaller the effective area.

pj
chgo

 

[BeiberLvr]

This is not a personal attack on you, but if you are using an aiming system per se, then your skill level is not as high as you think it is.

The aiming system I use is what my brain lines up and tells me.. its a ton of calculations all done in a split second, factoring in every detail..
I developed this "aiming system" by shooting millions of balls...

The conventional terminology when describing "Aiming System" is as defined on a piece of paper.. with aiming points and parallel lines and such.. I have seen them. These only work on a very small percentage of shots and can be easily broken by varying a couple things..

For a quick example, if you change the speed from soft to very hard on a slight cut shot with outside, the contact point that the CB needs to contact the OB to make the ball in the pocket varies by a couple mm, however, the "aiming point" varies by as much as 2-3".. How can that be???

I have yet to have someone show me an aiming system that you don't have to make manual, arbitrary adjustments to eventually pocket the OB.. I can do the same thing by saying that my aiming system says to hit the ball on the opposite side of the ball as the pocket.. (and adjust where needed)

If you go to Derby I would be glad to have you show me any aiming systems you can contrive.. I like seeing new information and new ideas, as well as see how others got to the level they are at.

I will show you my proof if you show me your system.. Instead of rehashing all this on here....

Hey Adam.

This is Jon W. Remind me next time i see you at cue phoria about this conversation.

I no longer use any commercial aiming systems but did spend a year learning CTE. I'll let you pick my brain on it.

 

[HawaiianEye]

I think he must be saying the effective pocket size is smaller from some angles, so the contact area is smaller too. Another factor is the effective contact area depending on cut angle - the more side-on the view, the smaller the effective area.

pj
chgo

I think that is what he is saying also.

 

[Cory in DC]

This is not a personal attack on you, but if you are using an aiming system per se, then your skill level is not as high as you think it is.

The aiming system I use is what my brain lines up and tells me.. its a ton of calculations all done in a split second, factoring in every detail..
I developed this "aiming system" by shooting millions of balls...

The conventional terminology when describing "Aiming System" is as defined on a piece of paper.. with aiming points and parallel lines and such.. I have seen them. These only work on a very small percentage of shots and can be easily broken by varying a couple things..

For a quick example, if you change the speed from soft to very hard on a slight cut shot with outside, the contact point that the CB needs to contact the OB to make the ball in the pocket varies by a couple mm, however, the "aiming point" varies by as much as 2-3".. How can that be???

I have yet to have someone show me an aiming system that you don't have to make manual, arbitrary adjustments to eventually pocket the OB.. I can do the same thing by saying that my aiming system says to hit the ball on the opposite side of the ball as the pocket.. (and adjust where needed)

If you go to Derby I would be glad to have you show me any aiming systems you can contrive.. I like seeing new information and new ideas, as well as see how others got to the level they are at.

I will show you my proof if you show me your system.. Instead of rehashing all this on here....

I think I saw this "system" attributed to Allison Fisher: Aim the cueball to contact the part of the object ball that's farthest from the hole. But I don't really think that's what people mean by aiming system.

Question: is backhand english considered an aiming system?

I would say no, because it's not about finding the contact point. In any case, I use BHE on some shots (when there's distance and I need power and high left/right, BHE works pretty well for me), but no aiming system per se, beyond HAMP/PITH.

 

[Tennesseejoe]

CTE has not had "updates" per say, but Stan has put out many videos that present the same material in different ways because different people learn differently.

I took an 8 hour class from Stan and then a year later asked to take a short refresher. Stan's answer was that he changed everything and that I would need to start over with another 8 hour class.

 

[Wybrook]

I took an 8 hour class from Stan and then a year later asked to take a short refresher. Stan's answer was that he changed everything and that I would need to start over with another 8 hour class.

Of course... so they have something to sell...

The New and Improved Aiming System...

 

[stan shuffett]

I took an 8 hour class from Stan and then a year later asked to take a short refresher. Stan's answer was that he changed everything and that I would need to start over with another 8 hour class.

That is simply untrue!

Stan Shuffett

 

[Banks]

Of course... so they have something to sell...

The New and Improved Aiming System...

More centerer pocketer than before. Works with two curtains.

 

[RiverCity]

More centerer pocketer than before. Works with two curtains.

And a smoke machine....... :thumbup:

 

[Pidge]

I look at the pocket, then the OB, then the CB, then by this point I've picked my line of aim subconsciously and my eyes get drawn back towards the OB along this line of aim and I get down.

Some may call it a system, others may call it feel. Either way, it's very quick, very simple and works for me.

 

[Dan_B]

Lines Of Thought = system,

I pulled the lever on “always using aiming system”;
seemed to be having decent results with targeting that furthest point from the pocket on the OB, this is the third line of thought that has been helpful from a tip that I picked up from a poster here, so simple.
The next line of thought is the lining up for the shot that the fellow posting a chapter a week here points out.
The second thought is, where do I, must finish, very important, especially if there are boundaries.
My first thought, is, do I have a shot? ... touch of reality, feelings.

 

[Spimp13]

That is simply untrue!

Stan Shuffett

haha thread has potential...Tennesseejoe, care to elaborate?

 

[stan shuffett]

haha thread has potential...Tennesseejoe, care to elaborate?

On September 25, 2008 Joe came to my facility for a Stroke and Pro One lesson.

First of all my PRO ONE course was likely about 5 hours in length, not 8 as was implied.

September 2008 was strictly my PRO ONE era. That was 19 months before I refined Pro One to include specific visuals.

Joe contacted me.....nearly 2 years later and I said yes I did have newly refined material.
Pro One has never changed......what evolved was specific visuals as well as more info concerning details of the pivot. An update would have been very simple.

We discussed an update....NEVER the need for 8 more hours of a do over.

I suggested that I could update his lesson in an hour or two at JOBs in Nashville and save Him the trip to Kentucky.

I did see Joe there a time or 2 and the lesson did not materialize. He was either playing or perhaps I was in a situation myself. There was NEVER a discussion of an 8 hour do over.
I did not even conduct 8 hour aiming classes.

John is a fine man and good player and I am still happy to update him and I will do a 3 hour update for him at no charge.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Ralph Kramden]

U

I think he must be saying the effective pocket size is smaller from some angles, so the contact area is smaller too. Another factor is the effective contact area depending on cut angle - the more side-on the view, the smaller the effective area.

pj
chgo

Exactly... The farther the pocketing distance for the OB the smaller the contact area. When the OB is close you can hit a much larger contact area. When the OB starts getting farther away the contact area gets smaller... and smaller.

If the OB is an equal distance from the pocket, and ONLY the angle changes, the pocketing contact area will become smaller also. Shooting the OB straight into a side pocket from 12" and directly from across the table, the contact area might be 3/16" and it can go in hitting either pocket edge.

Keep the straight in OB distance at 12" but change the angle for the OB so the CB is on the head spot. That same 3/16" contact area now shrinks to 1/8" or less and the OB won't pocket if it touches the near tit. Both object balls are the 12" distance but the pocketing contact area changes in size.

This happens on the corner pockets as well. Shoot directly at the back of the pocket at 45 degrees. With the same OB distance, change the angle to 15 or 20 degrees. The size of the pocket contact area will change.. not by much.. but it's a smaller pocketing contact area on the narrower angles.

Again IMO.... Hope this also answers, "How can this be?" from randyg.
.

 

[duckie]

The contact area never changes size. This is based on the size of the balls only.

What is being discussed is the margin of error which is that area on the OB that the CB can contact and the OB goes in the pocket.

The contact area for a center pocket shot is always the same no matter distance.

There is a difference in just putting the ball in the pocket and putting the ball into a specific part of the pocket. Just putting a ball in the pocket is what margin of area does. To put the ball into a specfic part of the pocket requires contacting a specfic area on the OB and not a range of area size that just allows the ball to go any where in the pocket.

 

[Ron Swanson]

Adam, I would love to go to Derby, as I have never been there. Almost made it last year, but plans fell through. That was my last chance to go. Not physically able to anymore and not going if I can't play in it. However, I'm sure Scott or Randy or some other instructors will be there. I'm sure they would be willing to spend a little time talking about the subject with you.

Are scott and randy advocates of aiming systems?