Geometrically correct aiming systems?
- Thread starter Macint0sh
- Start date
drivermaker said:
I think we're making the same point as far as when to think and when not to think. In practice, aka the LEARNING stage, you SHOULD consciously think about everything you're doing. Once again, learning requires a methodology. (BTW, I'm not hung up on the word "system." Notice that I put it in quotes in the first place in my first post, and I subsequently used the terms "methodology," "technique," and "conscious thought." They all describe the same thing.) Once learning has been done, though, and things we thought about consciously have been absorbed, there shouldn't be a need to think about them anymore. We think about those things during practice so we don't have to think about them during match play. I've written an article called Preparation of the Mind about this.
-djb
CaptainJR said:
I think what you're describing in your second part first is the estimation of the distance between the aiming point and the contact point. I totally agree with your evaluation - it is an estimation, first and foremost. Some people are better at that estimation than others, usually due to experience, but it is still an estimation. I don't agree with your first part second, and here's a hint as to why I don't think prescribed aiming "systems" (or methodology, or technique, or method, or style, or whatever floats your boat) work: contact points and aiming points themselves are estimations! Think about it. Even when you think you're looking at a contact point, you probably aren't. The reason longer shots are harder is because your ability to estimate has to be finer due to a smaller margin for error. Can a system help the human eye estimate an estimate of an estimation better?
Looking at a ball to try to judge the contact point is not an aiming system. I do it on EVERY shot as part of my pre-shot routine. Knowing the supposed contact point does not take into account throw, swerve, fullness of my bladder, deflection, humidity, cloth nap, gravitational pull of the moon, the Corialis effect, how long ago I ate, nerves, the house of the rising sun, the volume of the jukebox, sunlight on the table, or currency exchange rates. Most of these things can change the contact point (I'll leave it up to you to figure out which ones can.
). Until something can account for all these things and more, I'm sticking with my subconscious.-djb
drivermaker said:He never answered shit.
O.K., O.K. already. I dial 1-510-581-3010 and when this deep voice comes on I say: "Hey Hal, I need some more help...gimme another method of aiming". Works everytime if you show respect, are likable, and not a bad mouthing prick about his methodology".
Damn you Drivermaker!! Made me laugh out loud with that one.
I didn't ask how to learn it, I asked you to explain it. Small distinction.
If I do call that number, it is pretty important that I actually be at a pool table right? And have my cell phone fully charged? My curiosity is going to get the better of me, and we all know what happened to the cat.
Yeah, you need your phone charged. You need to be at a pool table. Leave a message. Hal will call you and foot the bill. He's 80 or something and has lots of stories. He'll tell you that you only need 3 reference points. You'll try it and then he'll tease you that there's a 2 reference point system, but he doesn't use either one. He uses the ONE reference point system... He'll tell you how Mosconi aimed, or any of the old masters for that matter, and how to bank any ball. It's worth a call just to bs with him. No matter what you believe, go along with him and you WILL learn something.
drivermaker
Banned
DoomCue said:
You're exactly right...that's why Hal's methods are different. THERE ARE NO CONTACT POINTS. You visualize by overlapping the CB/OB, using edges and tops of balls, and sometimes your cue itself, but not necessarily. Other times you're only looking at balls and your cue shaft and tip don't even exist. Deflection is pretty much ruled entirely out of the equation because you're using backhand english. Throw can be entirely ruled out also on some of his methods, or, you can use it to your advantage with others to make balls. You just gotta know what does what and when to use it. He has 20 different ways of lining up and stroking, not just one.
His ways of aiming account for most of the CB/Cue stick phenomenon that occur on the table, I left nerves in your post because I think that's an entirely unpredictable happening that grips more buttholes than will be admitted to, and better left for another post and can affect anyone at any time regardless of what you're using.
But hey, if all you want to use is intuition, be my guest. In striking a golf ball to make it slice or hook, I can do that intuitively by picturing some things in my minds eye right before taking it back and getting my body parts to fire in synchronization to do it because of my skill level and years of playing. I am a pro. However, it's a hell of a lot easier to hook or slice the ball if I set up right from the beginning with some physical alterations, one of which is the set up, or aligning and aiming my body and club head in such a fashion to get that ball to curve almost automatically. Think about that and what I just said.....
Last edited:
drivermaker
Banned
Mungtor said:If I do call that number, it is pretty important that I actually be at a pool table right? And have my cell phone fully charged? My curiosity is going to get the better of me, and we all know what happened to the cat.
yep....yep.......and yep.
aiming
I been reading this thread. I think if you have been playing a couple of years, you know where to hit the object ball. The problem is that you don't hit where you are aiming at. Bert Kinister, in his "Aim to Win," tape says to extend your cue tip to the spot on the object ball you want to hit. This helps big time. I am not sure if this is a aim technique or a stroking techinque.
In, "Winning One Pocket," there is a sugestion that you use a bracket method to focus on the spot you want to hit. It works, try it. Aim to the right, aim to the left, then aim where you want to hit.
John Alexis
I been reading this thread. I think if you have been playing a couple of years, you know where to hit the object ball. The problem is that you don't hit where you are aiming at. Bert Kinister, in his "Aim to Win," tape says to extend your cue tip to the spot on the object ball you want to hit. This helps big time. I am not sure if this is a aim technique or a stroking techinque.
In, "Winning One Pocket," there is a sugestion that you use a bracket method to focus on the spot you want to hit. It works, try it. Aim to the right, aim to the left, then aim where you want to hit.
John Alexis
I'm not a great player by any means, a low to mid B. That said, I would have to agree with the people who don't have a system. I approach a shot and just know where to hit it. If someone asks me to explain how I hit it, I have a hard time communicating that to them, because I'm not conscious of what exactly I did. This is especially true of high english shots. Assuming the same cue ball and object ball position, and english, I have to aim for completely different spots on the ball to pocket it at various speeds and various strokes. My aiming "point" would probably be considered fullness of hit, but I don't consciously say to myself "aim for 1/4 hit", etc. I just get up there and I instinctively "know" how to position my body and make the ball.
And yes, I did read The Inner Game of Tennis and I agree with its theory. Off topic, but I used to be the type that would get mad at every miss and start cursing at the balls and my opponent. I've even broken about 15 shafts and 4 butts. As soon as I read that book, it was like a light switch flipping in my head. The next day, and for the following few years up until now, I have removed all emotion from the game. Including the good emotion, which can also be dangerous. Now I look at the squinters, and the mouth movers, and the clenched teeth expressions people make while they shoot and just laugh to myself because of all the energy they are wasting with all of those facial expressions.
And yes, I did read The Inner Game of Tennis and I agree with its theory. Off topic, but I used to be the type that would get mad at every miss and start cursing at the balls and my opponent. I've even broken about 15 shafts and 4 butts. As soon as I read that book, it was like a light switch flipping in my head. The next day, and for the following few years up until now, I have removed all emotion from the game. Including the good emotion, which can also be dangerous. Now I look at the squinters, and the mouth movers, and the clenched teeth expressions people make while they shoot and just laugh to myself because of all the energy they are wasting with all of those facial expressions.
drivermaker
Banned
JPAlexis said:
I can't help you too much on that theory, but the other guy that posted on here is one of the foremost authorities in pool and aiming in the country. He writes for a website. He's a couple of posts above here...Doomclueless...I'm sure he'll come in to help. He's really a nice guy and can tell you a lot.
drivermaker
Banned
DoomCue said:
There you go JP, I told you he was good.
I'm not a great player by any means, a low to mid B. That said, I would have to agree with the people who don't have a system. I approach a shot and just know where to hit it. If someone asks me to explain how I hit it, I have a hard time communicating that to them, because I'm not conscious of what exactly I did. This is especially true of high english shots. Assuming the same cue ball and object ball position, and english, I have to aim for completely different spots on the ball to pocket it at various speeds and various strokes. My aiming "point" would probably be considered fullness of hit, but I don't consciously say to myself "aim for 1/4 hit", etc. I just get up there and I instinctively "know" how to position my body and make the ball.
Tap, tap, tap.
It doesn't matter what aiming system you have. The body, eyes, grip, bridge and elbow have to be in line.
Tap, tap, tap.
It doesn't matter what aiming system you have. The body, eyes, grip, bridge and elbow have to be in line.
drivermaker
Banned
JoeyInCali said:
Joey...think back to the very first times you came to a table. Somebody probably showed you how to aim. What was it? Was it the arrow method where you put your cue tip up to the OB and aimed at the pocket from behind and said "ah ha that's where the CB has to hit it" And then you realized that if you hit it there with the center of the CB on a cut that you would miss, so you adjusted. Or did someone teach you the ghost ball? What was it in the beginning?
drivermaker
Banned
jer9ball said:
Nevah..!!!
True that until I realized that alignment and a straight stroke is more important. I'm a much better player now than when I was trying all these esoteric aiming systems. I've heard them. Tried them all.drivermaker said:
Now, I look to control the cueball, I see the tangent line, line up to the line I need to be. Balls go in more consistently. I imagine the cb and ob colliding and what happens ( I stare at them for 2 seconds on pause before the final stroke), then I DELIVER the cueball to it.
I don't aim the tip, quarter of the cueball, equal parts, mirror image, shadow, center of cb, or whatever.
drivermaker
Banned
JoeyInCali said:
I'm with you on this, but in the beginning we all pretty much did it the same way. You go in the first time and put the cue in an open bridge, and when I say open I mean open. Unless somebody shows you, typically you stick the cue in the crease of your thumb and forefinger with your thumb spread wide apart from the index finger with the tips of your fingers in the air and not even on the cloth. Then somebody gets your thumb tucked in close, and then you fumble around learning a closed bridge.
With aiming, someone shows you a straight in shot to the side pocket and says hit both balls in the middle. So, you learn center of CB to center of OB for straight shots and keep poking and learning to stroke.
When you have a cut, the next step is usually what I mentioned before. Place the tip of the cue in the middle of the OB that lines up to the center of the pocket. Now go back to the CB and try to hit that spot on the OB. Well, you have better success with this than doing nothing, and it makes sense.
Usually next, the evolution comes around to a ghost ball because you realize that hitting the contact point with the center of the CB won't cut it. When you place a REAL ball on the contact point of the OB and then go back to your CB, you can see that the FRONT of the CB must hit off center to make it go in. And you visually start ingraining that into the minds eye.
If you have enough imagination, or someone points it out, you can now get into fractional systems and see that the cueball can be a 7/8, 3/4, 1/2, 5/8, 1/4, 1/8, or edge to edge hit to make it go. If your imagination is good enough, you can also start seeing equal and opposite or mirror images. Remember now, that you've already been hitting hundreds, maybe thousands of balls to see this and slowly train your mind, so it's getting more and more acclimated to various sightings and training itself.
Then somewhere down the line you realize that throw, speed, cling, english and OTHER factors come into play and what you currently learned DOESN'T work to make all balls, so you have to retrain your thinking, eye, and mind to make those adjustments when you apply something. And then after another million balls you don't have to think much about crap. It's internalized...
However, we still have to see SOMETHING. Even you said, "I LINE UP THE LINE I NEED TO BE, and IMAGINE THE CB AND OB COLLIDING." Joey, you're now using the JOEYINCALI aiming system. From whacking balls and trying all of the ones that have come down the pike as you stated, you've transcended all of them individually without having to think about it, and have made a compilation of them into the "I SEE IT-I GOT IT-I KNOW WHERE TO HIT IT" system for you. But you ARE SEEING SOMETHING AND AIMING OR LINING UP, that's all I'm saying. How in the hell do you get there if you don't? HOW DO YOU DETERMINE THE LINE YOU NEED TO BE? Isn't determining that a form of aiming, either arm/cue/body or the CB/OB/POCKET?
It just doesn't enter the concious thought process, that is until you go into a slump and have to start rethinking and retraining yourself. Correct?
Last edited:
drivermaker
Banned
DoomCue said:
I didn't come around...on this particular subject you and I were pretty much in agreement the entire time and you even stated it earlier. I was coming to it from a different angle by saying that all of us ARE using an aiming system. We just don't know what the hell it even is any more. But more than likely it's a compilation of all the ones I listed...agreed or not?
But...and however, there is something else out there that I don't think you know about and many others don't either. If you did, you would have understood about the slight head, and I do mean slight head offset from time to time. It's Hal Houle's system which is quite unique, and like anything else has to be consciously learned and thought about while shooting, but later like all the rest you don't have to and I think it's one of the most effective ways of aiming and playing, although doubted and constanly trying to be debunked by the physics and geometry guys. I could care and give a shit less, IT WORKS!