Fractional Aiming - Analysis of Houlian Adjustment Method

[Colin Colenso]

Colin has since modified his posts on that point in spite of having stated that he had heard the "move the bridge hand" advice from "trusted" advisers.

Jim

Jim,
I was paraphrasing, not quoting. It was my assumption that an 'adjustment' to the system would be best explained as a bridge shift.

I still think this is the clearest way to describe what is going on. It is a method I am familiar with using when making adjustments for throw.

If you don't think that both methods arrive at the same solution please explain why.

Colin

 

[av84fun]

Colin, I am please that you have amended your original statements because they were an inaccurate description of the system. And yes, there IS a difference between "placing" the bridge hand correctly and "adjusting" it once it has already been placed on the table.

Making the "on table" adjustment that you originally proposed will cause the ALIGNMENT of the body and its various parts to be skewed.

Properly executed, the pivot and NOT a bridge hand shift brings the stroking arm into correct alignment. Conversely, the bridge hand shift would mess up the alignment.

Regards,
Jim

It would seem that a lot of confusion has been caused by using the term bridge hand adjustment, rather than bridge hand placement.

In essence, I really can't see a difference in the end result, whether you place the bridge on the line and then shift it left or right, or if you simply place it left or right.

The question still remains as to the how users of this system decide where to place their bridge, how far from the standard position, remembering that they have to consider the following.

1. Distance of CB to OB: (Adjustment Related). The further the CB from the OB, the greater will be the effect of the adjustment compared to the sideways shift in bridge position. eg. If the CB is 6 feet from the OB, it would require about 1/6th the amount of sideways adjustment as for a separation if 1 foot. Do you place the bridge closer to the line for long shots? Has this proven itself a problem in execution of this system?

2. Distance of CB to OB: (Aim Related). As the CB and OB come closer together, the resultant angle of a Center-to-Edge aim becomes increasingly smaller / fuller than a true half ball hit. For 1 foot of separation it is a few degrees fuller, for smaller distances it thickens the angle so much it is basically unusable.

3. Bridge Length: For a shorter bridge length the amount of sideways adjustment is magnified, hence a smaller adjustment is required. A larger bridge length means a larger sideways adjustment will be required. This may help in fine tuning the adjustments. The cue's pivot point won't have any bearing on this unless you intend to use english.

4. Throw: This aiming system does not take into account the very significant effects of throw according to the amounts of speed and spin. i.e. You might have the shot aimed well for a soft roll shot, but if you hit a power follow shot, the pot will be overcut by about 3 degrees. Conversely, you might aim correctly for a firm follow shot, but if you play a soft stun shot you'll undercut by several degrees. Do users of this system aim intuitively differently for soft stun shots verses power follow shots?

5. The player must intuitively estimate how much the pot angle differs from the standard. Is there a method to approximate this, such that an appropriate adjustment width can be made. e.g. 33 degrees will require a smaller off center placement than a 37 degree cut.

Colin

 

[LAMas]

If you adjust your bridge 1/4" to the side, then a 12" pivot will cause the CB's path to deviate from the center-to-edge line by 1/16" less per 9" of CB travel than a 9" pivot.

If you adjust your bridge more than 1/4" to the side the difference will be greater, and if you change the pivot length by more than 3" the difference will be greater.

These differences (1/16" per 9" of CB travel or more) are enough to miss most shots, so some adjustment must be getting made for different pivot lengths, even beyond 9".

pj
chgo

pj, Thanks - what I was thinking.

This answers my question that different offsets (cue placement off of center at start) are required for different distances.

Different offsets are required for different cut angles.

I looked at this in Acad and found that a 13mm cue shaft and tip shaped to the diameter of a nickel (.84"D) when moved parallel to the line that goes from the center of the CB to the outer edge of the OB by 1/2 the tip diameter or 6.5mm results in 2 degree angle away from the original Center/CB outside/OB line.

This will allow me to cut the OB <90 degrees to the path of the CB at 18" or 1 1/2 feet. At 20" I will miss the OB and at 6" I will severely undercut the shot.

I can create a look up table in a graphing calculator to give me the proper offset for the cue tip off of center start for a given distance between the CB and OB and angle of cut and then take out a measuring tape and.....would that be sharking?

After all of this, I will revert to the doubling the distance method and practice instead.

 

[Koop]

Where is the pivot point for this? Does it vary depending on the cue? Does it vary depending on whatever stroke is placed on the cue ball? How far off the center line of the cueball should the offset start? Does that depend on the distance of the cue ball to the object ball?

Thanks.

Flex

Hi Flex,

The pivot point for me is my bridge hand if I am understanding you correctly. I don't have a very long stroke but the pivot occurs within my bridge hand.

The offset of the tip is completely what you are comfortable with as long as you are offset to begin with. Some go close to the edge and some, like me, go about a half tip to a tip. It does not vary for me regardless of the shot.

Distance has no bearing when I am aiming.

Hope this helped.

Koop

 

[Koop]

pj, Thanks - what I was thinking.

This answers my question that different offsets (cue placement off of center at start) are required for different distances.

Different offsets are required for different cut angles.

I looked at this in Acad and found that a 13mm cue shaft and tip shaped to the diameter of a nickel (.84"D) when moved parallel to the line that goes from the center of the CB to the outer edge of the OB by 1/2 the tip diameter or 6.5mm results in 2 degree angle away from the original Center/CB outside/OB line.

This will allow me to cut the OB <90 degrees to the path of the CB at 18" or 1 1/2 feet. At 20" I will miss the OB and at 6" I will severely undercut the shot.

I can create a look up table in a graphing calculator to give me the proper offset for the cue tip off of center start for a given distance between the CB and OB and angle of cut and then take out a measuring tape and.....would that be sharking?

After all of this, I will revert to the doubling the distance method and practice instead.

Hi Lamas,

Are you using the same shot no matter the cut? Just want to make sure we are comparing apples to apples. If it's a thick cut or not much of a cut your tip should be outside to begin with and then pivot back to center. If it's a thin cut you would start out inside and then pivot back.
Just making sure we are on the same page.

Thanks,
Koop

 

[Colin Colenso]

Colin,

There's no bridge hand adjustment---- don't care who you heard it from. It's bad information.

Dave

So placing the bridge hand left or right of the standard line is not bridge adjustment? Or do you not do this, as others have stated they do?

What is it about so many Houlians that make them so antagonistic and unhelpful when it comes to sharing and gaining knowledge of the systems?

Colin

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...If you line up from center to edge (I understand that to be the cue shaft through center of CB to edge of OB)......If you then pivot the cue to whatever it needs to be pivoted to by whatever process based on the shot angle.......does that not put english on the CB?

Apparently you avoid putting english on the CB by carefully choosing how far to the side you place/adjust your bridge hand before pivoting - so that your pivot will bring your tip back to centerball with just the right amount of angle correction to change the cut from half-ball to whatever is actually required for the shot.

It sounds to me like Hal's old "3-angle" (fractional aiming) system reduced to two angles (the "thin cut angle" and the "fat cut angle") which (just like the fractional system) act as reference angles from which to make the necessary subconscious adjustment for the actual shot angle. I suppose there are refinements that add some interim angles too, again like the fractional system.

So it seems there probably isn't really anything new under the sun, except the path from A to B. But that doesn't mean it isn't a better path for those who like it, just as double-overlap is better for those who prefer it than ghost ball.

pj
chgo

 

[Colin Colenso]

Colin, I am please that you have amended your original statements because they were an inaccurate description of the system. And yes, there IS a difference between "placing" the bridge hand correctly and "adjusting" it once it has already been placed on the table.

Making the "on table" adjustment that you originally proposed will cause the ALIGNMENT of the body and its various parts to be skewed.

Properly executed, the pivot and NOT a bridge hand shift brings the stroking arm into correct alignment. Conversely, the bridge hand shift would mess up the alignment.

Regards,
Jim

Jim,
That is a fair explanation why placing is preferable over bridge shifting. Thanks.
Colin

 

[LAMas]

Hi Lamas,

Are you using the same shot no matter the cut? Just want to make sure we are comparing apples to apples. If it's a thick cut or not much of a cut your tip should be outside to begin with and then pivot back to center. If it's a thin cut you would start out inside and then pivot back.
Just making sure we are on the same page.

Thanks,
Koop

I am responding to the example shot. The problem I have is for any given distance and angle of the cut - how far away from the center of the CB do you start- 1/2 shaft diameter, full shaft diameter 1/2" or 3/4" etc. - this hasn't been answered - please do.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

What is it about so many Houlians that make them so antagonistic and unhelpful when it comes to sharing and gaining knowledge of the systems?

Good question, but I think it has more to do with their ability to describe it than their willingness. Difficulty visualizing and describing these things seems to go hand in hand with liking these "subconscious" kinds of systems. That makes sense to me.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Making the "on table" adjustment that you originally proposed will cause the ALIGNMENT of the body and its various parts to be skewed.

Properly executed, the pivot and NOT a bridge hand shift brings the stroking arm into correct alignment. Conversely, the bridge hand shift would mess up the alignment.

Why does moving your bridge hand mess up the alignment but moving your back hand doesn't?

pj
chgo

 

[Colin Colenso]

Agreed.

Nice postings Colin. We may not agree on everything but I appreciate the time you've put into this.

Regards,
Koop

Cheers mate,
For the first time in many threads I think some of us are learning a bit more about this type of system and that should be good for everyone.

I still don't think I would use this system, but I'm starting to get a better idea of how it works and even how I would be able to develop a system of adjustments to make it more accurate.

Perhaps one day there will be something like a definitive set of articles on the various systems, adjustment methods and so on:yikes:

And we will all live happily ever after :grin:

Colin

 

[Koop]

deleted.....

 

[Koop]

Why does moving your bridge hand mess up the alignment but moving your back hand doesn't?

pj
chgo

Because we said so dammit

 

[lfigueroa]

Good question, but I think it has more to do with their ability to describe it than their willingness. Difficulty visualizing and describing these things seems to go hand in hand with liking these "subconscious" kinds of systems. That makes sense to me.

pj
chgo

How do you describe or prove something that is so much silliness? That's the problem for the ghost hunters, the UFO folks, Big Foot enthusiasts, and the Houlegains

I think the reason folks have some success with these kinds of systems is that maybe they haven't focused in on the issue of aiming, in a systematic fashion before. Using any system and trying to fractionate a task -- like aiming -- can certainly help anyone who hasn't been doing that before. That's where the value this, or any other system, is.

Everyone is going to assign their own individual values to the adjustments and angles and lengths and pivots and back hand motions. And that is what makes the system work, regardless of its flaws. The mind and body find a way to make it work.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Colin Colenso]

How do you describe or prove something that is so much silliness? That's the problem for the ghost hunters, the UFO folks, Big Foot enthusiasts, and the Houlegains

I think the reason folks have some success with these kinds of systems is that maybe they haven't focused in on the issue of aiming, in a systematic fashion before. Using any system and trying to fractionate a task -- like aiming -- can certainly help anyone who hasn't been doing that before. That's where the value this, or any other system, is.

Everyone is going to assign their own individual values to the adjustments and angles and lengths and pivots and back hand motions. And that is what makes the system work, regardless of its flaws. The mind and body find a way to make it work.

Lou Figueroa

Interesting point, but I don't assume all users of this system are ignorant. Some have said they find other methods to deal with certain shots that don't seem to work with the system for them.

Though the ability to sub-consciously adapt is a valid one for many players. Most enthusiasts I meet learned that correct aiming is done by pointing the cue at the contact point opposite the pocket on the OB, which of course would result in severe undercutting on wider angle cut shots.

They adjust by aiming differently and by swooping, yet most of them would swear they are aiming the cue at that point and even deny that they swoop.

Amazingly, quite a few of them become decent potters. The best way to ruin their game, at least in the short term, is to tell them what is really going on.

Colin

 

[SpiderWebComm]

So placing the bridge hand left or right of the standard line is not bridge adjustment? Or do you not do this, as others have stated they do?

What is it about so many Houlians that make them so antagonistic and unhelpful when it comes to sharing and gaining knowledge of the systems?

Colin

Colin,

Maybe I misread your earlier post...once your bridge hand is set, it's not moved... that's what I meant. The bridge hand is always left/right of the line. When you get really advanced, you'll work the system so you're always on the left side of the line, pivoting to the right.

Forgive me for being cryptic... I'd rather not educate the world on this stuff. It's not my place. I've flown many miles, drove berserk number of miles, and spent many months tracking down certain people to get my info. I'm not gonna educate many "jackasses" on here for free (NOT YOU, BTW).

There are a lot of know it alls on this subject who shit on what they don't know and then shit some more when you won't educate them and the world for nothing. For me, I made it my job over the years to find those who knew (WHEREVER they might be) and bartered the information out of them instead of dogging people on forums for the info. I know that's harsh, but that's how I feel. If someone who knows the ins/outs/guts of this stuff doesn't wanna post a cook-book on how to do it...ah well. Get it the way they got it.

 

[Koop]

Interesting point, but I don't assume all users of this system are ignorant. Some have said they find other methods to deal with certain shots that don't seem to work with the system for them.

Colin

Colin,

This is exactly why you don't see many people going on and on about the system. People ask for details and then you get others who come on and make you feel like it's not worth the effort. I was having fun with this thread but I will step aside now.

Keep up the great posts man, I enjoy them.

Koop

 

[LAMas]

Cheers mate,
For the first time in many threads I think some of us are learning a bit more about this type of system and that should be good for everyone.

I still don't think I would use this system, but I'm starting to get a better idea of how it works and even how I would be able to develop a system of adjustments to make it more accurate.

Perhaps one day there will be something like a definitive set of articles on the various systems, adjustment methods and so on:yikes:

And we will all live happily ever after :grin:

Colin

I agree. It is just a starting point - better than shoot the CB to the left side of the OB to send the OB to the right.....

 

[Colin Colenso]

Colin,

Maybe I misread your earlier post...once your bridge hand is set, it's not moved... that's what I meant. The bridge hand is always left/right of the line. When you get really advanced, you'll work the system so you're always on the left side of the line, pivoting to the right.

Forgive me for being cryptic... I'd rather not educate the world on this stuff. It's not my place. I've flown many miles, drove berserk number of miles, and spent many months tracking down certain people to get my info. I'm not gonna educate many "jackasses" on here for free (NOT YOU, BTW).

There are a lot of know it alls on this subject who shit on what they don't know and then shit some more when you won't educate them and the world for nothing. For me, I made it my job over the years to find those who knew (WHEREVER they might be) and bartered the information out of them instead of dogging people on forums for the info. I know that's harsh, but that's how I feel. If someone who knows the ins/outs/guts of this stuff doesn't wanna post a cook-book on how to do it...ah well. Get it the way they got it.

Dave,
I know you're a good poster who contributes a lot of good opinions.

There has always been some tension with these aiming systems when discussed. I just want to understand them better and hopefully, as a result, accumulate some information that can be basically agreed upon and linked to for the many future pool aspirants who want to learn about systems and how they might go about applying them, and possibly improving them.

One regret I have in life is that it took 10+ years of playing before I even found any useful resources. And since then it has been a continual process of sorting the wheat from the chaff. Not being in the US has made me reliant on the internet and there are many in that boat. I hope to be one of those who are able to make better information available to more people more readily.

Colin