Fractional Shot "Coverage"

Based on some of the comments in this thread it might be worth reviewing the difference between fractional aiming and pivot aiming, IMO. Boiling it down to its essence:

In fractional or traditional aiming you have one straight stroke and many, many aim points.

In pivot aiming you have a very small number (say 3 or 5) fixed aim points and many, many pivot adjustments.

A well known CTE user told me that if you don't have any problem imagining a ghost ball then there is no need for CTE. He prefers to aim at a point on the ob and then use his experience to tell him how much to pivot.

The two methods are simply two sides of the same coin. Nobody has ever said that pivot systems don't have merit. It is just that some people oversell or misunderstand what pivot systems actually provide the player.

sacman is a great example. I'm happy for him that he found something that suits him and he should continue to pursue that avenue. However, his success not a result of a system that takes judgment and rote learning out of the game.
 
BC21 said:
Actually, 2mm is closer to a 1/32 fractional aim adjustment., not 1/16.
Click to expand...

Ball is 28.575 mm radius. Let's drop the decimal part. 2/28 = 1/14.

A 32nd would be 28/32 or about .75 mm : a 16th, 28/16 or about 1.75 mm
 
Dan White said:
...his success not a result of a system that takes judgment and rote learning out of the game.
Click to expand...
Not directly.

But it's possible that belief in that is an important confidence builder, helping avoid the nagging doubt that can undermine learning.

Some system users defend the idea so zealously that the belief seems like an important part of the system's functionality for them.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Not directly.

But it's possible that belief in that is an important confidence builder, helping avoid the nagging doubt that can undermine learning.

Some system users defend the idea so zealously that the belief seems like an important part of the system's functionality for them.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

The power of positive thinking, placebo's, etc are definitely real factors. I think such things (in other words, confidence builders) translate into a more relaxed delivery of the cue, which is of paramount importance. That one thing alone, relaxation, can virtually catapult a player into a higher level of play practically instantly regardless of what system they are using.

Whether the player ultimately recognizes the "hidden" shortcomings of a particular system, or whether he manages to subconsciously work around those areas, may be an individual thing.
 
Vorpal Cue said:
Ball is 28.575 mm radius. Let's drop the decimal part. 2/28 = 1/14.

A 32nd would be 28/32 or about .75 mm : a 16th, 28/16 or about 1.75 mm
Click to expand...

Fractions are determined by the diameter of the ball, not the radius. Example: 1/2 ball shot = asin(28.575/57.15, which is 30°.

An eight of a ball would be 7.1mm (57.15÷8).
1/16 would be 3.6mm
1/32 would be 1.8mm (2mm is close enough)

It shouldn't be considered difficult to see a 2mm difference in aim for CTE users, considering Stan refers to one of the 15° perception visuals as being a "tick" away from the quarter, or something like that. He says there are 360 ticks on the ball. That would make one tick equal to about 0.5mm. If you can visualize a 0.5mm difference on the ob, 2mm should be a breeze.
 
Last edited:
Patrick Johnson said:
Not directly.

But it's possible that belief in that is an important confidence builder, helping avoid the nagging doubt that can undermine learning.

Some system users defend the idea so zealously that the belief seems like an important part of the system's functionality for them.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

You need to transpose the A and R in your avatar. Pure crap of the day.
 
Dan White said:
The power of positive thinking, placebo's, etc are definitely real factors. I think such things (in other words, confidence builders) translate into a more relaxed delivery of the cue, which is of paramount importance.
Click to expand...
I think it's also important for aiming - doubting your aiming judgment distracts from the effective operation of your subconscious aiming computer. If you don't believe it works, then it probably won't - an "alternative" explanation for how you're aiming can help put that doubt aside and allow it to do its thing.

Ironic that denying it might make it work better...

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Not directly.

But it's possible that belief in that is an important confidence builder, helping avoid the nagging doubt that can undermine learning.

Some system users defend the idea so zealously that the belief seems like an important part of the system's functionality for them.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Vorpal Cue said:
You need to transpose the A and R in your avatar. Pure crap of the day.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's what I mean. Thanks for the example.

pj
chgo
 
LAMas said:
I suppose one can move between those white triangular aim angles. Then you can cut the OB at the angles in between. Very useful.:thumbup:
Click to expand...
Yep, fractional aiming and its derivatives are "reference angle" systems. I don't use them but I can see how they can be effective, whatever the user's understanding of it may be.

pj
chgo
 
Fine-tuning the fractional aim point can be done using your tip as a gage. Half ball shot example: Aiming straight through ccb to split your tip on the outer most part (edge) of the ob creates a 30° shot angle. This means 1/2 the width of your tip overlaps the ob and the other 1/2 is outside the edge.

Now if the actual shot needs a slightly thicker hit than half ball, let's say between a 5/8 ball hit and a 1/2 ball hit, it doesn't have to be guesswork. Instead of trying to aim 3.5mm (about 1/16 of a ball) thicker than a half ball aim, you can aim your tip so that 3/4 of the tip overlaps the ob and 1/4 is outside the edge of the ob. Depending on tip size this is very accurate. With a 13mm tip the slight aim adjustment creates a shot about 1/18 thicker than a half ball. A 14mm tip would make it closer to a true 1/16 difference. You need to experiment with your own cue to learn exactly how much a quarter tip, or third tip, or whatever, affects the shot angle.

By using your tip in this manner, you can really fine tune any fractional aim and become very accurate.
 
BC21 said:
Fine-tuning the fractional aim point can be done using your tip as a gage. Half ball shot example: Aiming straight through ccb to split your tip on the outer most part (edge) of the ob creates a 30° shot angle. This means 1/2 the width of your tip overlaps the ob and the other 1/2 is outside the edge.

Now if the actual shot needs a slightly thicker hit than half ball, let's say between a 5/8 ball hit and a 1/2 ball hit, it doesn't have to be guesswork. Instead of trying to aim 3.5mm (about 1/16 of a ball) thicker than a half ball aim, you can aim your tip so that 3/4 of the tip overlaps the ob and 1/4 is outside the edge of the ob. Depending on tip size this is very accurate. With a 13mm tip the slight aim adjustment creates a shot about 1/18 thicker than a half ball. A 14mm tip would make it closer to a true 1/16 difference. You need to experiment with your own cue to learn exactly how much a quarter tip, or third tip, or whatever, affects the shot angle.

By using your tip in this manner, you can really fine tune any fractional aim and become very accurate.
Click to expand...
its interesting to me that i have always been a contact point to contact point aimer
but lately i am using fractional aiming more often
i like aiming at what i am trying to hit rather than aiming so a cue ball contact point can hit the object ball contact point
for the tweeners (not pure shots) my subconcious fudges the aim point
when using english tho i go back to contact point to contact point since the cue tip is not in the center and i havent learned how to compensate for the offset
sorry for a digression patrick
carry on men
 
CP2CP aiming is good and you can see where the edge of the CB is aimed at as a double check.

Be well
 
BC21 said:
By using your tip in this manner, you can really fine tune any fractional aim and become very accurate.
Click to expand...

bbb said:
lately i am using fractional aiming more often
i like aiming at what i am trying to hit rather than aiming so a cue ball contact point can hit the object ball contact point
Click to expand...
I do a version of both: I use the OB contact point as my reference point (like a fractional reference) and aim my stick a certain distance from it depending on the cut angle. Here's an illustration of that.

pj
chgo

View attachment 88095
 

Attachments

  • shot.jpg
    shot.jpg
    72.6 KB · Views: 230
Last edited:
Patrick Johnson said:
Do you mean at OB center? I don’t visualize that, but I can add it...

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Not sure if someone asked already, or even I've asked and already forgot, but what software do you use for these great illustrations?
 
BC21 said:
Not sure if someone asked already, or even I've asked and already forgot, but what software do you use for these great illustrations?
Click to expand...
The realistic table, balls and cue are Virtual Pool 4's excellent game graphics. I set up the balls, screengrab it and add graphics and text in a simple drawing program called SmartDraw. I often do it just to help me visualize something I'm thinking about.

VP4's pool physics and animation are also the best and most realistic I've ever seen, accurate enough to be a useful learning tool. You can even compete online.
[/shameless plug]

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top