even on thin cuts because you visualize a thicker cut first then adjust to make it a thinner hit ?
Does visualizing the tangent line an aiming system ?
- Thread starter JoeyInCali
- Start date
when you can visualize a tangent line on thin hits while down, you're probably lined up too thick
So then do you just keep guessing? SVB has a system for extremely thin cuts that’s pretty strong
And he also told a color commentator he aims low on the cue ball all the time because he sees the hit much better .
SVB trolled the world and the believers are getting dizzy lining up the side of the ferrule.
Experience in doing what svb does paints a different story. It works very well and it’s very easy. I only use it on extreme cuts with distance between the OB and CB.
It only works on angled shots . Not thin cuts . Unless you are applying inside and playing off the deflection.
Believe me, I've heard of that system many many years ago. I thought it was magic with the ob frozen on the rail .
Many have hustled with ball frozen on the end rail and it looked like an impossible cut . They have mastered aiming the side of the ferrule and have mastered missing the ball going in and slicing it on the rebound .
Thin cut with distance between the balls. Aim the side of the ferrule to the outer edge of OB and it slices real thin. It works. I use it occasionally
Works for me pretty good.
Yes and something interesting--the cue ball always looks too thick until it hits the contact point, for any given cut angle.
Not in my opinion. Because in order to know the tangent line you have to know the contact point and be able to aim to have the cueball hit it. But it can be a good double check if your visualization skills are strong. I always ask people I teach to show me the tangent and many of them cannot do it the first time I ask them to.
Actually, you don't have to .
You need to know the angle to the pocket .
If you cannot visualize the tangent line consistently, I guess stun shots to get in shape is useless to you .
Or the billiard from cue ball to another ball .
Joey, the tangent line has nothing to do with the angle to the pocket. There are several vectors that a ball can take and still go into the pocket. Each one of those vectors has a different tangent at contact.
Why do you have to be a dick? I am merely answering your question with my opinion based on the available information.
Check Dr. Dave's website for confirmation of what I said.
You can actually use the tangent line as a starting point for aiming pretty well when you're aiming a carom shot. I would show you the really easy way to do this but you wouldn't ever use it just because it came from me.
Dude, take a chill pill .
It does have to do with the angle to the pocket .
You stand in front of the ball towards the pocket and that tangent line is 90* to that .
You don't have to know the contact point . You can do a test. Cover the object ball with a playing card matching the angle towards the pocket .
You won't be able to see the contact point but you can tell the angle of the shot .
This was discussed recently. You may want to look it up.
I've played enough carom billiards that for some shots I can aim by where I send the cue ball. That includes thin shots.
I consider "the tangent line" (the one perpendicular to the shot line that JB thoughtfully ignores so he can expound on the ambiguity of the term) part of contact geometry. When for instance you use equal angle, you have also reciprocal tangents revealing themselves. These tangents have everything to do with the shot. (unlike the CTE edge tangent)
What would that angle be? Cover how? A line comes from the pocket and through the object ball then the tangent line is ALWAYS 90 degrees to that line. There is no other angle. So then what are you asking exactly? If one can use that tangent line to figure some other angle like the angle from the cueball TO the tangent line?
What EXACTLY do you mean when you say "angle of the shot"? A shot where the task is to pocket a ball consists of two spheres where the first one of them is propelled towards the second one and the second one then is propelled towards the target.
Tangent lines are clearly defined in pool. That is a line that the cueball takes after contact and it is always and exactly 90 degrees from a line formed by the contact point and center of the contacted ball. So when you use a term like "angle of the shot" where is that angle derived from and how is it identified? Do you tell yourself a number to identify it such as 34.2 degrees? If so how do you determine this number?
You tell me to chill but actually it is you who came across like a jerk in response to my comment on your question. Unlike you I AM interested in all things pertaining to aiming in pool because I find it to be a fascinating and interesting topic that is deeper than many believe. Most books and videos on pool instruction that I have read and seen don't really spend much time on aiming and I think that this is the wrong approach. A pro player/instructor said to me the other day, in response to my query as to what he considered to be the most important skill characteristic to assess with a new student is, that for him visual acuity is the most important. He said he has to know if the student can see accurately first because all else flows from that. Specifically he said that a person can develop "perfect" fundamentals which break down under certain shots because of their visual acuity.
I found your question to be interesting and it is something that I have pondered at times at the table while working out ideas related to aiming. I like to explore every way to use identifiably objective references and tangent lines are one such reference. But I would not call the identification of a tangent line an aiming system because a tangent is created by a collision and the collision has to occur by two objects meeting and diverging after the collision. In pool any time a collision occurs that is not at a 100% ZERO angle the divergence will be at 90 degree to the collision. So it follows that the tangent line is identified by where the expected collision will occur and that is identified by other means such as drawing a line from the desired path of the object ball through the back of the object ball opposite to the direction of travel.
And this then informs the path of the cueball to contact this point. Where the path of the cueball crosses this line does form an angle and that could be called the "angle of the shot" but what exactly that angle is can only be determined objectively and acceptably accurately without a protractor in a few instances. Straight in shots are zero angle. Half ball shots are 30 degrees. We commonly use the term cut angle to describe shots rather than "angle of the shot". The cut angle is determined as I stated above by the angle formed by the line from the desired cueball path crossing the line of desired object ball path.
Here is a page at Dr. Dave's website that gives a guide on how to estimate cut angles. https://billiards.colostate.edu/faq/cut/estimating-angle/
The basic issue I think is how useful and practical is it to know the exact degrees of a cut angle? And is there a danger to being wrong?
Well, clearly if one can identify a contact point then one can identify a 90 degree tangent line and that gives some objective information. But how useful is that for coming up with a angle without the use of actual measuring devices as pertains to the task of aiming a pool shot.
Here Bob Jewett created an illustration that claims that the distance in inches as measured by a cue stick pointing at ghost ball center and a cuestick pointing at the object ball path as measured from the butt of the pool cue is equal to or very close to the actual cut angle.
Clearly this evokes an image of a protractor. But my question is what practical use is this? If the ghost ball center is known then there is no need to derive a cut angle value for the aiming and execution of the shot. We cannot use any rulers , templates or external measuring devices per the rules for competitive play. So what practical value is there to knowing a cut angle by the value of that angle in degrees?
I would think that there is some value there but it increases or decreases based on the shooter's ability to accurately find this value. What we don't know offhand is what is the difference to the outcome if one misidentifies the angle as 18 degrees instead of 19 degrees?
And by the same token identifying the tangent line is relatively easy but does this help with aiming the shot in the first place? I can tell you that I have developed a method of my own that does use the tangent line as the starting point for figuring the aim but I use it primarily for judging where I want the cueball to go more than where I want the object ball to go. I find it works reasonably well and is fairly easy to do. There is no need to think about or try to identify cut-angles.
So, yes tangent lines can be used as part of an aiming method but by themselves are not an aiming method in my opinion. They are a piece of data that is very useful for both aiming and execution when deciding where to aim and what speed and spin to apply.
As a very good player told me years ago, "it's the tangent lines baby, all about the tangent lines". This sounds good but one needs a deeper understanding of the physics involved to use tangents in pool. Dr. Dave, Mike Page, Bob Jewett and others have done excellent work in this regard to help players understand those physics in my opinion.
:freak:
Any line that touches the surface of a ball is a tangent line.
The subject is already shooting at a ball. Quit manufacturing arguments. WTF???
Any line that touches the surface of a ball is a tangent line.
The subject is already shooting at a ball. Quit manufacturing arguments. WTF???
LOL, for the vast majority of aiming conversations we deal in equatorial contact points and the tangents based off of those estimated contact points aligned with simple Newtonian physics. Yes the shooter is assessing the shot with the intention to shoot the shot. Aiming is always the prelude to taking the shot in billiards sports. If you need to see some math that covers the physics involved this website might be of interest to you. We typically don't use equations to estimate tangent lines and deviations from those tangent lines.
Physics Of Billiards
The physics of billiards, with discussion on conservation of momentum during ball collision, ball sweet spot, and slipping.
www.real-world-physics-problems.com