Jal said:
It seems that everyone who does understand basic geometry, with maybe a few exceptions, finds the descriptions of Hal's methods to be sorely wanting.
With the umpteen systems it is claimed he has invented, you would think that he or his followers would be willing to cough up just one to show that there is something there worth knowing.
Jim
JAL,
Perhaps you are looking for a mathematics instructor rather than a pool instructor.
If you want something mathematically pure; I'm not really sure any aiming system will satisfy you. Once you find that perfect spot on the object ball, you still have to hit it. Your mind and body must perform so that whitey goes to the right place. If a system gives you a close enough approximation to that contact point, allowing success on most shots; then that system over time will give you enough good feedback to play pool well.
In my case, I have trouble seeing the teeny-tiny little contact point on the object ball (I have a form of color-blindness). Hal's system allows me to approximate the correct line as long as I can see the center of the cue ball and the edge of the object ball.
Will it work for every shot? I don't know, Hal thinks so, I'm ambivalent.
Is it mathematically sound? Who could possibly care?....there is NO TRICK to finding the proper contact point, the ghost ball system will easily find you the perfect contact point (though you need to adjust for throw); but damn, it takes a lot of visualization to set up perfectly and make perfect contact on difficult and longer shots. AN APPROXIMATION IS ALL ANY OF US HAS ON ANY SHOT IN POOL; it's up to us to refine the approximations to develop consistency (assuming everyone has a perfect stroke like mine
).
In summary, NO ONE really needs much help figuring out where to hit the object ball, even beginners can figure it out quickly with a little help. We need help hitting that spot; something Hal's system helps a lot of people do.
When I used Hal's system and compared it's results on every stroke to the contact point given by the "Spider" laser ghostball aiming thingy...it was the same almost every time...it helps you send the cue ball to the proper contact point on most shots. That gives us the feedback necessary to develop consistency; with MUCH less agonizing over setup and aiming; but does not insure that every ball will go (though Hal might disagree
).
Successful pocketing over time will give the student enough hand-eye feedback to develop confidence; and that's what it's all about in my opinion. Ease in setup and pocketing allows the player to spend more time concentrating on strategy and position; both valuable goals.
As for "coughing up" some info for others; the reason is
common courtesy as explained before, not some mystical cult ruling.
P.S. - Having said all of that, I would love for a mathematician to have at this system to see what the limits are; because the approximation seems right on for the majority of shots - it would be great to see if there are limits for radical cut shots or shots with the object ball close to the cue ball (shots on which my use of the system seems to be less successful than others).
P.P.S. - I am also aware of your expertise (and that of Bob J.) in the physics area, and would defer to it.....fortunately the physics principles (inviolable as they are) also only help us understand the game and continue on our quest to pocket balls; they do not assure success.
(inside joke)
