Ghost Ball Aiming System= Wrong

Im going to tell you all for the last time, you do not aim thinner. It is very hard to explain in words, but if you have to aim thinner, why is it possible to cut in shots at 90 degrees or more? Here are a couple shots that I can do, you can do, Efren can do, anyone can do with an un-flawed stroke.


wei table


START(
%AD8W7%PO9Z0%QB0[3%WC6[5%XD5X5%YF0V5%ZP0Y9

)END

^that one is quite simple, and it can go in clean. The shot is 90 degrees.

START(
%AF6J1%Pg6O4%WC9Z5%XF4J8%YG4H9%Zf4O2

)END

^I saw Efren make this shot in a game of one pocket, it took me a few tries, but I made it.

START(
%Ag3X0%Bd2W4%Pl9Z5%WE5Z8%Xf2X1

)END

^ This is a demonstration of "bending" balls. The edge of the 2-ball is blocking the 1-ball's direct path to the pocket. In this case, you aim slightly thinner on the 1 ball, and will still make it.


I hope this helps you understand where I am coming from. What you are saying is that for every shot, you must "bend" balls. Let me explain to you, that shooting like this is not only aim, it is also how good you hit the cueball. Shooting on the "thinner" side of the balls is the incorrect way to become a consistent pool player. When you shoot thinner, you are shooting on a line that is very shaky, because the amount of "bend" or throw varies with every shot.

What I am trying to explain is that learning how to shoot on the "thicker" side of an object ball negates most "bend" or throw, making you more consistent. That is what I mean by compensation. Compensation to minimize bend.

If you HAVE to aim thinner for every shot to go on, how is it possible to make 90 degree cut shots? Set up a ghost ball, and notice that it is impossible for you to skim this ball at 90 degrees to make it. You have to aim slightly thicker to sink this shot, and you have to hit the cueball nice and clean with authority.
 
pro-player said:
Im going to tell you all for the last time, you do not aim thinner. It is very hard to explain in words, but if you have to aim thinner, why is it possible to cut in shots at 90 degrees or more? Here are a couple shots that I can do, you can do, Efren can do, anyone can do with an un-flawed stroke.
Click to expand...

It is thinner, I have provided a table setup from Fred that proves this, please try it, post the results and stop your nonsense.

It is because of the thinner hit requirement that a 90 degree hit is impossible. If you genuinly hit the object ball at 90 degrees, no energy would be transfered to the object ball and it would go nowhere!

Where is your proof that it is a thicker hit? I have provided two sources one theoretical and one practical that you can try yourself. What is your argument besides "I saw Efren do this".
I once saw Efren do this shot for $100:

START(
%A\1M8%Pb3T8%QB0[3%UD3T4%VR7[4%WD3I3%X[2M8%Y]2O5%Za6T0%[R3Z7
%\C1I0%_D5D4%`O5N8%aC2S8
)END

For what its worth, I believe that the 90 degree shots you described would be possible with a gentle masse, but that is still not more than 90 degrees, cause you have changed the approach angle.

- 8ballbanger ($100 poorer - dam that Efren is good)
 
If I can cut shots at 90 degrees, if Efren can, wow, I must be defying physics.

Let me explain something to you. Spend your whole life reading physics books on pool, the reactions of the balls, etc, it's not going to get you anywhere. I am not trying to teach an aiming system, I am explaining how the object balls react when you hit the cueball good. There are things that can be done on a pool table that seem to defy physics, such as cutting a 90 degree angle shot.

When you stand by what you read, you limit yourself to learning things, because the text will say that certain things arent possible. What I am saying is that they are possible. It is possible to cut a ball 90 degrees, and even past 90 degrees, with no masse. I don't expect you to believe me over some book or physicist, but I told you to go and try those shots. You said that when a ball is frozen to a rail, the only way you can cut it 90 degrees is with english hitting the rail first. Did you know that you can do that over 90 degrees? You can cut a ball backwards like that. Try it, don't limit yourself.

Efren learns some amazing shots by watching beginners play. They bang the balls around, something goes in. He sees it, practices it, and sometimes he will use it against somebody. People call him the magician. I've witnessed Efren shoot a spot shot, with the cueball behind the headstring, pocket the ball in the corner, and stop the cueball dead. It is not a masse shot. While table conditions, weather, and the condition of the balls make a difference of what can and can't be done, you would be surprised at the amazing things I've seen done in the past 20 years.

I honestly wasn't aware that so many people aim the way you described. I'll tell you what, go ask Efren Reyes, Jose Parica, Johnny Archer, Earl Strickland about that. Ask them how cut shots feel when they are in stroke. They will all tell you that everything is a thicker type of hit. The object balls roll true, they bend or throw barely at all. When you hit the cueball bad, the balls bend and throw alot. This is an inconsistent way to play.
 
hope this post doesnt sound like i'm takin sides, i'm just tryin to understand this whole concept and learn..

this will probably be mainly aimed at pro player
when cutting a ball fine, i would have thought that any throw or bend applied to the object ball would cause the object ball to bend or be thrown in the same direction as the cue ball is hit, so in this case how can it be bent "past" 90 degrees? or am i wrong.

also, when saying to aim thicker to compensate for bend and throw, i'm under the impression that sure it will reduce throw and bend, but the thicker cut on the object ball would cause it to be "undercut" and miss a pocket on the far side..
 
When you cut an object ball to the left, you are hitting the right side of the object ball, putting right english, which causes the object ball to throw right.

A physicist decided that in order to pot the ball, you have to aim thinner to compensate for this.

The problem that arises, is how can one be consistent and accurate, when throw occurs? There is no exact way to measure the amount, therefore you cannot control the shot exactly how you want it.

What I am explaining is that players who aim and hit the cue ball like this will never become great players. They are playing on a thin and inconsistent line, which inhibits accuracy in potting the balls and position play.

What makes Earl Strickland Earl Strickland, or Efren Reyes Efren Reyes, is not only their amazing knowledge and consistency, but also how good they hit the cueball. The two above, and every other professional player in the world, hits the cueball the opposite way that the people arguing with me hit the ball. Once you learn how to play on this "line" the game becomes much easier, the cueball feels like it has a remote control to your mind.

You can aim the same exact way, with the same exact english, but how you hit the cueball will determine if the object ball and cue ball will obey you after you execute. The reason why this is hardly recognized by most people who "study" the game, is becase a miss can be associated with so many other things, i.e. bad mechanics, lack of concenctration, etc. Your mechanics plays a huge role in how well you hit the cueball. If you hit the cueball bad, it's gonna hit the object ball and cause it to turn. If you hit the cueball good, most of the time you are gonna hit the object ball and have it roll true. If you consistently hit the cueball bad, you are going to learn to play that way, and never become a consistent player.

There is a huge world of difference. A good stroke is not only how well you can play position, it is also a solid, consistent hit on the cueball.
 
Pro-player when I am playing well everything seems like thicker hit, but I dont think u should try and explain the 'pyshics' of it, its like trying to explain how it feels to be in dead stroke, you just cant, you have to see it your self. Tho now that you kind of explained it, I remembered watching some pros and wondering how they can draw the cb on a thin cut shot but draw it like the shot is thicker. I dont think its really aim, I think its just from a really good stroke, but how you hit the balls makes it FEEL like its thicker, when it may just be normal.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: 8ballbanger

8ballbanger said:
Look, I never called Ron Shepard and Fred Agnir the supreme authorities on pool. There may or may not be higher authoritiese out there, but if there are they are not signing their own names on the internet.

There may or may not be higher authorities out there? What a moron! How about the major names of authors that write books on pool like Byrne, Ray Martin, Phil Capelle, and many others. I could understand if you quoted them. They're signing their name on a book and a major publishing deal, not some internet article that anyone can have printed. What I'd like to know is how someone, that many thousands of miles away, comes to land on two amateur pool players that like writing thesis for fun, as his pool instruction hero that also have no professional playing experience? You must be a real mental giant yourself.

You would back a player you don't know (who doesn't know which way the ball gets thrown and thinks he can pot 90+ degree shots) $1000. Man do I smell tuna! :D

If you're such an RSB fan and internet junkie, you could also find the speed of Ron and Fred right on the net. Equal offense and Fargo scores are to be found if you search. That's somewhat of an indicator. 67, 87, 96, and a high of 127 in equal offense is something to be afraid of? As stupid as you sound, even you might be able to beat that. No...I smell money!

...................drivermaker
Click to expand...
 
To me pro-player makes sense on most things except for explaining the physics of hitting it thicker. I know what he means, because when i am playing good it does feel thicker, and the cb acts like the shot is thicker which makes position play easier. What 8ballbanger said about hitting thinner sounds more resonable because of direction of throw, but what pro-player said about hitting the cb good also makes sense. sometimes when i am bad out of stroke, I kind of get lazy and and the cb feels like it weighs as much as me. when i miss the balls it looks like they 'turn' and miss by alot. When I am in stroke and playing really good, i am hitting the cb with authority and putting my tip strait thru the cb, and the object balls never seem to throw. When i am playing like this my accuracy is so good and my position play is so good, i can even choose what side of the pocket i want to pot a ball to play better position, even on long shots.
 
Drivermaker wrote:

There may or may not be higher authorities out there? What a moron! How about the major names of authors that write books on pool like Byrne, Ray Martin, Phil Capelle, and many others. I could understand if you quoted them. They're signing their name on a book and a major publishing deal, not some internet article that anyone can have printed.
Click to expand...


Having a publishing deal doesn't make anybody's words more valid than somebody who isn't published. I've read books by Capelle, Byrne, and Martin, along with internet articles by Blackjack Sapolis, Johnny Archer, Ron Shepard, and countless others. Getting something published doesn't mean shit.

One example is where either Byrne or Martin writes about how Mosconi's book has the information on banking balls all wrong. Obviously each one of them got a book published, but they contradict. Which one is right? The one with the highest straight pool run?

The only real way to learn how to sink balls is to play. However, if you want to know why things happen, you just read as much as you can and try to learn a little from everything.
 
Mungtor said:
____________________________________________________
The only real way to learn how to sink balls is to play. However, if you want to know why things happen, you just read as much as you can and try to learn a little from everything. [/B]
Click to expand...
____________________________________________________


I agree 100% about sinking balls to learn how to play, just as KM gave out his practice routine for knocking in thousands of balls each day, and also your quote about learning from many sources. But I think you're missing my point with 8bb, and that is he seems to be placing Shephard and Agnir up at the highest rung of the ladder for pool knowledge. If I was arguing aspects of the golf swing with someone from Australia and being from the USA, I'd quote articles from known entities in the game of golf from Australia like Greg Norman, Stuart Appleby, Ian-Baker Finch, Bruce Devlin, and Bruce Crampton. I highly doubt quoting Biff Boomerang and his amateur brother Buff Boomerang who were aspiring golfers that said they had just discovered the secret of golf while practicing for months on the Outback and using wild kangaroos as targets, even though they had degrees and posted their findings on the internet from their laptops.

.................drivermaker
 
After shooting the same exact "straight in" shot at least a thousand times, I was then prepared to shoot the cueball off center but a millimeter or two to add "english" to the shot. That systems works well for me. That's how I learned to steer the cueball around the table.

Look out, Keith!
 
I asked Keith in another thread and it looks like pro-player was right about 90 degree cuts.

"LastTwo, it is possible to cut a ball 90 degrees without a masse shot. Actually, if you hit the ball with a good stroke, center cue-ball, the object ball sometimes will cut more, hitting the object ball as thin as you can. Takes a lot of practice, though." -Keith

pro-player I think you got mixed up on throw, even though everything else seems to be pointing that ur right.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 8ballbanger

drivermaker said:
8ballbanger said:
Look, I never called Ron Shepard and Fred Agnir the supreme authorities on pool. There may or may not be higher authoritiese out there, but if there are they are not signing their own names on the internet.

There may or may not be higher authorities out there? What a moron! How about the major names of authors that write books on pool like Byrne, Ray Martin, Phil Capelle, and many others. I could understand if you quoted them. They're signing their name on a book and a major publishing deal, not some internet article that anyone can have printed. What I'd like to know is how someone, that many thousands of miles away, comes to land on two amateur pool players that like writing thesis for fun, as his pool instruction hero that also have no professional playing experience? You must be a real mental giant yourself.

You would back a player you don't know (who doesn't know which way the ball gets thrown and thinks he can pot 90+ degree shots) $1000. Man do I smell tuna! :D

If you're such an RSB fan and internet junkie, you could also find the speed of Ron and Fred right on the net. Equal offense and Fargo scores are to be found if you search. That's somewhat of an indicator. 67, 87, 96, and a high of 127 in equal offense is something to be afraid of? As stupid as you sound, even you might be able to beat that. No...I smell money!

...................drivermaker
Click to expand...

FWIW, I did say that Capelle wrote the same thing about requiring a thinner hit to the ghost ball to compensate for throw.

I also said that the table setup shot I described is so conclusive to the direction of throw that it would not matter if a five year old girl wrote it (or a dog or monkey or even <shock horror> an aussie :D)

Do it yourself and shut up. The test is located here:

http://groups.google.com.au/groups?...0111060534.22de830e@posting.google.com&rnum=1

I AM NOT ASKING ANYONE HERE TO BELIEVE THE THEORY BEHIND IT.

IT IS A PRACTICAL TEST THAT CAN BE DONE BY ANYONE ON A REAL LIFE POOL TABLE.

IF YOU WANT TO IMPROVE YOUR GAME GO TO THE TABLE AND TRY IT AND STOP LISTENING TO IDIOTS ON THE INTERNET.

Once you understand this concept, you will realise that 90 degree shots are impossible. 89.8 degree shots you might be able to move the ball a millimeter, but not 90.

The playing speed of Ron and Fred have nothing to do with this and I don't understand why you would bring it into the argument. Like I said, a five year old girl who never touched a cue in her life could have come up with the theory, it is sound and repeatable by independant parties who doubt it.

cheers - 8ballbanger
Click to expand...
 
8ballbanger you are being silly, you are acting like people dont know this already. Even pro-player admited this, he is just saying you can hit balls a different way to minimize throw.

Also, I asked Keith McCready about 90 degree cut shits, read my quote above your post.
 
I still agree with 8 ball, someone can look at a shot and think it is 90 degrees, and then make it, and brag on the internet, but in reality it was 88 degrees or whatever, a 90 degree shot without masse or english or hitting a rail first, is impossible, it is common sense........
 
Mick you'd think someone like Keith who's been a master of the game all of his life would know the difference, and the possibilities more than someone who just thinks hes right because of 'logic' he discovered from a few average pool players who made posts on the internet.
 
pro-player said:
If I can cut shots at 90 degrees, if Efren can, wow, I must be defying physics.

Let me explain something to you. Spend your whole life reading physics books on pool, the reactions of the balls, etc, it's not going to get you anywhere. I am not trying to teach an aiming system, I am explaining how the object balls react when you hit the cueball good. There are things that can be done on a pool table that seem to defy physics, such as cutting a 90 degree angle shot.

When you stand by what you read, you limit yourself to learning things, because the text will say that certain things arent possible. What I am saying is that they are possible. It is possible to cut a ball 90 degrees, and even past 90 degrees, with no masse. I don't expect you to believe me over some book or physicist, but I told you to go and try those shots. You said that when a ball is frozen to a rail, the only way you can cut it 90 degrees is with english hitting the rail first. Did you know that you can do that over 90 degrees? You can cut a ball backwards like that. Try it, don't limit yourself.

Efren learns some amazing shots by watching beginners play. They bang the balls around, something goes in. He sees it, practices it, and sometimes he will use it against somebody. People call him the magician. I've witnessed Efren shoot a spot shot, with the cueball behind the headstring, pocket the ball in the corner, and stop the cueball dead. It is not a masse shot. While table conditions, weather, and the condition of the balls make a difference of what can and can't be done, you would be surprised at the amazing things I've seen done in the past 20 years.

I honestly wasn't aware that so many people aim the way you described. I'll tell you what, go ask Efren Reyes, Jose Parica, Johnny Archer, Earl Strickland about that. Ask them how cut shots feel when they are in stroke. They will all tell you that everything is a thicker type of hit. The object balls roll true, they bend or throw barely at all. When you hit the cueball bad, the balls bend and throw alot. This is an inconsistent way to play.
Click to expand...

Let me explain somthing to you, there is a lot of difference between an 87 degree cut and 90 degree cut, but when you are watching someone else playing from an angle yourself, I bet most people wouldn't be able to pick it, myself included.

Yes I did know that you could use the max english on a ball that is frozen to the cushion to pot seemingly greater than 90 degree shots. The only problem is that this is not a >90 degree shot it is effectively less than 90 degrees. You are hitting the cushion with power and english and the cueball compresses into the and changes angle as it goes into the cushion, reducing the approach angle of the cut to less than 90 degrees. THAT SHOT IS A PARLOUR TRICK.

By your logic if I kick at an abject ball cushion first and the object ball comes back through the point where the cue ball was, then I have hit a 180 degree cut. NO THE CUSHION CHANGES THE APPROACH ANGLE OF THE CUE BALL.

Look I have a new theory as to why you don't understand this point, maybe you really are a pro player and have only play in tourney conditions where the balls are really clean and new, so contact induced throw doesn't have a large impact.

AND FOR THE LAST TIME I AM NOT LIMITING MYSELF TO THEORY! I GAVE A REAL WORD TEST TO PROVE THAT THROW MAKES YOU UNDERCUT THE SHOT WHEN USING THE GHOST BALL!!

HERE IS THE LINK AGAIN:
http://groups.google.com.au/groups?...0111060534.22de830e@posting.google.com&rnum=1

TRY IT YOURSELF!
 
try marking a shot on the table using an accurate framing square or equivalent, marking a 2 feet by feet right angle, put object ball at intersection apex of ball, cue ball at end of one ray, make object ball travel down the line for 2 feet. not just "judge' what 90 degrees is, mark it exactly. it is impossible without masse etc.
 
LastTwo wrote:

Mick you'd think someone like Keith who's been a master of the game all of his life would know the difference, and the possibilities more than someone who just thinks hes right because of 'logic' he discovered from a few average pool players who made posts on the internet.
Click to expand...

I don't want anybody to take this as an insult to Keith at all (especially if RSB's JAM drops by) but...

Since Keith is a professional player, I'm not sure that he has taken the time to set up the sheer number of test cases that the amature physics guys have. I'd venture that the simple reason for that is because Keith's time is best spent pocketing balls (which will make him his living) rather than screwing around with bizzare setup shots that will never occur in a match.

People do a lot of things when they shoot that they might not even be aware of. Keith may be able to cut in a ball at a 92 degree angle, but he may also use masse or english unconsciously. It doesn't make it any less than incredible that he can do it, but it may not be happening the way that he thinks.

Pro-player believes that you can cut a ball at more than 90 degrees without any masse or english. People also thought the earth was the center of the universe and made up all kinds of stuff to explain the behavior of the other planets. Believing it didn't make it true in that case, and it won't do it here. I'm not even saying that you can't make a cut at more than 90 degrees. Just not with a center ball hit, no matter how "firm" you hit it.
 
Try hitting a 90 degree shot with the cue stick parallel to the table, withthe cue tip dead center on the cue ball. No massee whatsoever. It is easier than another possible shot that can "throw" an object ball at a more acute angle - with extreme english (the cue should be spinning when it touches the object ball).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top