Ghost Ball Aiming System= Wrong

Before anyone defends the ghost ball method anymore, try what I said to try in one of my other posts.

As for other aiming systems, yes, I believe they can be used as a crutch for amatuers and beginners. For intermediate and above, aiming systems become more of a distraction than a tool. Most professional players admit they do not use aiming systems, most of them never did use an aiming system. It's all feel, memory, experience, etc.

If a pool teacher can get his students to shoot the CB exactly to wherever they aim each time, that is much more important than teaching them how to aim at cut shots. If a player cannot get the CB to go where he aims at consistently, teaching an aiming system is pointless. Sure he knows how to aim, but the question is can he execute?
 
This thread is starting to take on the theme of, what's more important, an aiming system...or...the stroke. Both! They're two separate functions that intertwine and are somewhat co-dependent on each other. You can have the greatest and most pure stroke in existence, but if your aim is off it's only going to produce a perfectly stroked shot that missed the pocket. On the flip side, you can know every aiming system on the planet, but if your stroke is out of kilter, you'll still miss the pocket. For those that say that the top pro's play without an aiming system, that's just a fallacy. You can call it the "rote/repetitive/intuitive system"
and have Frank Sinatra singing "I Did It My Way" in the background, but it's still A SYSTEM developed by the individual over the years. More than likely it encompasses many of the named systems, such as Ghost Ball, Equal and Opposite contact points, Tri or Quad Sections, Arrow aiming system, lights and shadows system, etc., but it's a part of some kind of known system(s). The stroke, for whatever reason, needs constant work and can never be perfected because it's just human foibles.
Sometimes it's not even the stroke, it can be that your balance is a little off, you're tired and just get loose and sloppy, your focus isn't there, and a multitude of factors. When both your aim and stroke are miserably off on any given day, this is why topless bars were invented. Fuhgitaboutit!

.............drivermaker
 
pro-player said:
I have always felt that the main reason why most players miss simple shots is because of faulty mechanics, not incorrect aiming. I believe that aiming is not as big a part of the game as some may claim it is. For example, why does anyone miss a dead straight-in shot?
Click to expand...
Hi pro-player,

The only time I've missed a straight in shot is when I stretched across the table and attempted to put a power draw on the cue ball and jumped the cue ball right over the ball and straight into the pocket - no net! (Yes, I see that's indicative of a faulty stroke, not faulty aim...)

I tried posting back to this thread this weekend, but for some reason, can't log into the forum from home - yes, I've cleared my cookies...

I've been tested several times and I can see and stroke the center of the cue ball, and I've also been tested and I hit and aim where I'm intending to be hitting and aiming. So, I know I'm seeing what I'm seeing. I can also see that the cue ball hits *exactly* where I'm aiming it to hit. But I've just aimed it wrong.

I do agree to a point with you, however, I believe that I'm in a minority - that stroke flaws are the more normal cause for misses - and yes, I do that sometimes. But I'm also convinced that I, especially when practicing and trying, am stroking well and hitting exactly what and where I intend to hit. I'm just not so sure of where I want that hit to be.

And yes, after a few years of experience, I'm getting better at "guessing" where to hit, but it surprises people when I say that I'm not certain that the ball will go - I'm just hoping I'm hitting it where it should be hit.

Hope that makes sense.

So, you can see that I am drawn towards anyone who seems to believe what I'm saying and understands that I am hitting what and where I'm trying to hit - it's just the wrong place because I'm not sure how to aim in a way that makes sense for me.

Although, hopefully, Joe's not talking about that quarter-ball/half-ball/etc. (Hal Houle) aiming system that's currently becoming so popular. I don't appreciate that method at all. The premise that this is "oh, about a 30-45 degree shot" so you always hit exactly a half ball hit and it will always fall. I don't buy that for a second. Doesn't work for me.

And, Joe, I tried emailing you this weekend, but I've apparently got an old email address for you. :(
 
In this wei example, lets suppose all the object balls are different cue ball positions and the cue ball is our target object ball. So we're gonna shoot this spot shot from at least these 15 different positions.
First question to pro player. Do you know what this object ball has in common with these 15 different cue ball positions?
START(
%AO0Z7%BU1Z7%C[3Z6%Da2Z8%Eg4Z6%Fm4Z7%Gr5Z6%Hr8V0%Ir7O8%J`3O1
%K`5U1%Lg6U4%MZ6Q4%NT4T6%Og8O6%PN9O4
)END
Next question, if you knew the answer to that one. Do you think aiming all 15 of the shots exactly the same way would help to promote consistency and confidence in a players overall game?

#3 If your is yes we've just agreed on an aiming system that can help us and future players. If your answer is no, I can see we're never going to get anywhere with this topic and I'll stop asking questions.

Joe T
 
Man is that ever a tough position to analyze let alone comprehend! Would you kindly just show a picture of 3 or 4 balls including the cueball so I can understand the position better?
 
Last edited:
I think Joe T's point with all of that was that no matter which object ball you are shooting, you have to hit the target ball in the same place to put it in a pocket.

Now what I want to see is a decent description of an aiming system other than the ghost ball system. Every time an aiming thread pops up there are people advocating different ones, but nobody can ever seem to articulate it.

Not to since John out, but I have yet to seen a decent description of Hal Houle's system anywhere (including the RSB archives), and reading about Monk Clicks is enough to make anybody give up. I would think that with the awesome WEI table nearly anything could be described.
 
Not that I want to be a negative nelly, but the original post is full of inaccurate information and it should be pointed out so that people reading this don't think this is comming from the mouth of a "pro player". Apologies if this has already been pointed out.

pro-player said:
The more angle there is, the more throw or bend.
Click to expand...

No the amount of throw that occurs during "contact induced throw" actually peaks at around 30 degree (give or take a few degrees) cut shots and then is reduced after that. With a soft shot speed the amount of throw will be approx 6 degrees.

pro-player said:
In order to do this successfully, you have to aim a bit thicker on the object ball then you would if you were aiming at a ghost ball. Aim exactly at the ghost ball, and you will skim the object ball very thin, overcutting it.
Click to expand...

No, to compensate for contact induced throw, you have to aim the cut shot thinner not thicker. Aiming thicker and you would miss by twice the margin of the ghost ball aim. If you were really daring you could try to eliminate the throw and make the ghost ball 100% accurate by using the right amount of outside english to allow the cue ball to roll off the cue ball (but then you have to compensate for deflection and swerve).

I'm not even going to comment on the 90 degree cut shot.

Sorry but letting this misinformation slide would be a crime.

- 8ballbanger
 
8ballbanger

Hi 8ballbanger, you don't know what you're talking about.

I am curious since you live on the other side of the equator things might be backwards for you from what they are here, being that your toilets and sinks flush and drain the opposite way of ours. :D

First, I have been playing professional pool for 13 years. Second, when you cut a ball to the left, you are hitting the right side of the object ball, inducing right spin on the object ball, causing it to throw to the right. Aiming thinner does not make sense, you are supposed to aim thicker to compensate for this. Third, more throw occurs at a medium stroke then a hard stroke. And fourth, please post your comment about the 90 degree cut shot, I need some more entertainment.


*I forgot to add that the throw does not take place instantaneously, the ball will travel left for a split second, then swerve right.
 
Last edited:
Mungtor said:
I think Joe T's point with all of that was that no matter which object ball you are shooting, you have to hit the target ball in the same place to put it in a pocket.

Now what I want to see is a decent description of an aiming system other than the ghost ball system. Every time an aiming thread pops up there are people advocating different ones, but nobody can ever seem to articulate it.

Not to since John out, but I have yet to seen a decent description of Hal Houle's system anywhere (including the RSB archives), and reading about Monk Clicks is enough to make anybody give up. I would think that with the awesome WEI table nearly anything could be described.
Click to expand...


For me it is really hard to describe Hal's systems because I don't fully grasp them myself. I haven't been able to puzzle out the geometry yet. The Wei table is inadequate because Hal's sytems translate to 2 dimensional illustration poorly. Also Hal has asked those of us that he has shown his systems to not try and describe them in these forums. He is always available for lengthy conversation however. He reccomends that you be near a pool table when you call. I would seriously recomend a phone with an earpiece so that you can converse with both hands free. The stuff he will show you will blow you away and feel quite awkward and wrong. But it will work when your inner voice will be screaming that it won't. If you try and explain it online you will be derided as a brainwashed Houlite :-)) Hal's number is 510-581-3010 and his email is HalHoule@aol.com . Please don't prank call him. Whether you agree or disagree with him just please show him respect for being 80 and having been around when our legends were becoming legends.

Now - does anybody agree with my theory that all systems are geared towards putting the body/cue in the proper line to make the ball?

John
 
Mungtor said:
Now what I want to see is a decent description of an aiming system other than the ghost ball system. Every time an aiming thread pops up there are people advocating different ones, but nobody can ever seem to articulate it.


Your prayers have been answered. Todd Leveck has done the most comprehensive job ever done to articulate the different aspects of almost every aiming system out there in his book,
"Aiming on the Cutting Edge" How to Develop a Precision Aiming System for Pocket Billiards. You can learn more at
www.billiardinstruction.com and the book costs $34.95 +S&H. For some, close to $40 bucks causes a gag reflex along with whining about the price, but the same cry babies are losing that much to lesser players over time, or, remaining frustrated at their level of play, and that's even a higher price to pay. Another book with a superior system is billiards accuracy by Marvin Chin and can be purchased through www.billiardfanatic.com. And for those that say aiming systems don't work, please articulate what YOU are doing to "aim" the cue ball and cue to hit a specific point on the object ball. I see the word "aim" mentioned numerous times, but in the same breath saying that a "system" doesn't work. Bullshit!! If you are in fact able to determine contact points on the OB to make a given shot from a certain angle, and know that it takes a certain contact point on the CB, with or without spin, you have "systemized" a way to achieve that. Nobody is just firing the CB "in the vicinity" like Yosemite Sam is firing his 6 shooters in the air hoping that it'll land on a target.

........................drivermaker
Click to expand...
 
Originally asked by Instroke

Now - does anybody agree with my theory that all systems are geared towards putting the body/cue in the proper line to make the ball?

That is an interesting thought, but I can't agree that it is really a function of an aiming system. It seems to me that body/cue alignment is a result of chosing an aim point based on a system. For a system to work on body/cue alignment it would have to address stance which, with the exception of applying back hand english, they don't seem to.

I can't speak for Hal's system since I don't know it. I will probably e-mail him at some point to try to learn about it, but I would feel kinda weird calling him from my local pool hall and trying to learn over the phone. Maybe after a few e-mails. :)
 
Mungtor said:
I think Joe T's point with all of that was that no matter which object ball you are shooting, you have to hit the target ball in the same place to put it in a pocket.

Now what I want to see is a decent description of an aiming system other than the ghost ball system. Every time an aiming thread pops up there are people advocating different ones, but nobody can ever seem to articulate it.

Not to since John out, but I have yet to seen a decent description of Hal Houle's system anywhere (including the RSB archives), and reading about Monk Clicks is enough to make anybody give up. I would think that with the awesome WEI table nearly anything could be described.
Click to expand...

Hey Mungtor,
True you have to hit the ob in the same place but I was looking for something a little more detailed and I was hoping pro player could tell us what all 15 different angled shots have in common besides that. It should be fairly easy to figure out the answer I'm looking for if you reread my other posts. If he doesn't answer I will and then I'll give you a detailed description of my method. (not ghost ball).

Pro player, it is true that when cutting a ball from right to left you are hitting the object ball on the right but that applies right spin to the object ball not left. And the spin doesn't make the object ball curve to either, it is throw off line but thats due to collision induced throw from the cue ball and it is thrown to the right not the left.
 
Re: 8ballbanger

pro-player said:
Hi 8ballbanger, you don't know what you're talking about.

I am curious since you live on the other side of the equator things might be backwards for you from what they are here, being that your toilets and sinks flush and drain the opposite way of ours. :D

First, I have been playing professional pool for 13 years. Second, when you cut a ball to the left, you are hitting the right side of the object ball, inducing left spin on the object ball, causing it to throw to the left. Aiming thinner does not make sense, you are supposed to aim thicker to compensate for this. Third, more throw occurs at a medium stroke then a hard stroke. And fourth, please post your comment about the 90 degree cut shot, I need some more entertainment.
Click to expand...


I find it very hard to believe that a pro pool player of 13 years does not know the behaviour of contact induced throw. However I do accept that if a person were to learn to aim purely by feel that they could obtain a professional level without actually knowing how they aim. If this is the case, I would think that the person in question should not be giving advise on a subject they do not know about to us "lower level" learners.

The subject of contact induced throw is explained at length and in great detial by Ron Shepard in Amateur Physics for the Amateur Pool Player. I stand by his knowledge and suggest you read this document yourself. If you still have faith in the validity of your initial statement, I suggest you post it to RSB and see how many people accept its validity.

BTW, the 90 degree cut is impossible because of your exact reasoning, but since the hit has to be thinner rather than thicker to compensate for throw it becomes impossible rather than possible. The only way to move an object ball 90 degrees is if its frozen to a cushion and you hit it cushion first with max english, but this only has the illusion of a 90 degree shot (due to cushion compression) and is in fact less than 90. I am reasonably certain you are just hitting 85 degrees and thinking it is 90.

- 8ballbanger
 
I feel really sorry for people who don't think a 90 degree cut shot is possible. In fact, you can go way past that. You don't even need to put sidespin on the cueball to get more throw.

As soon as the website for the WEI table is up and running, I will post a few shots that are very possible, that I can do, and you don't even have to be a pro to do them. You just need a good eye and a straight stroke.

8ballbanger, how do you ever expect to get past the "chump" status of a pool player if you don't drop some of those lousy books and try things for yourself? There is no book on how to do certain things Efren Reyes can do. You need to watch and learn, expand your mind, and stop believing that the more books you read the more you know about pool. Judging by your outrageous statement, I don't think you've hit more than a thousand balls in your life. Wow, I am amazed that you even got someone else to believe you.

I cannot get the WEI table to work, can someone else try posting it up here for me so I can help a chump become a better player? Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top