How beneficial is an aiming system?

[AtLarge]

So if you see a snooker player bring his cue into the shot from the side, your assumption is that of "this must be a visual sweep to the cue ball" thing?

-Sean

No, I don't think it's only that. Here's a related post from Stan 15 months ago:

... I worked with Allison Fisher in September of 2011 at her home. I picked her brain concerning this very topic.
Allison does perceive a shot line at ball address but after that "shot line perception" she slightly adjusts her stance, MINUTELY producing an offset, and she then bends into the shot line. Allison was very clear about this.

She liked the PRO ONE visual references for the repeatability factor when we discussed her offset. Allison is a technician and does NOT keep her eyes on the PERCEIVED shot line from ball address all the way to full stance. I got that info first-hand. ...

I'm no snooker expert. But I do believe Stan's claim about snooker players goes against conventional wisdom. Perhaps it would be fine if he just said that some snooker pros sweep in from an offset rather than implying that they all do.

 

[sfleinen]

Snooker players are not putting their eyes on a shot line and moving straight in a bit more than pool players are.
It is plain and simple. Offsets are part of it.

Stan Shuffett

Stan:

We're going in circles. I'm asking you to elaborate on why you think *any* cue-to-cueball positioning in snooker that "looks like" it may have any sideways movement is "automatically a visual sweep to cueball," and you keep answering "because it is so." And then you go as far as to say "all those decades of snooker instruction" have it wrong related to what you see snooker players doing -- which is a facepalm moment if there ever was one.

You're ascribing your own reasons to why a snooker player may bring his cue in slightly from the side, because "you want it to be so." This movement we know from snooker circles is actually is an artifact of the cue being positioned on one side of his body, which is a conservation of movement rather than a pedantic "top down" elevator movement.

-Sean

 

[Slasher]

Here are a few snippets of what renowned instructor and former pro Mark Wilson, 2014 Mosconi Cup captain, has to say about aiming systems in his new book Play Great Pool:

• Finding an adequate aiming system is far easier than "finding" excellent stroke fundamentals
  
  
• Aiming a pool shot is a function of judgment, as opposed to relying on some external gimmick
  
  
• Some of the advice you receive from aiming system advocates will be vague, or even defy logic and science
  
  
• All aiming systems are just approximations that get you close to the ideal line, and all require some judgment if you are going to achieve the highest level of proficiency
  
  
• Aiming systems that require a "pivoting"' movement after you have set up to stroke the ball, or pivoting motion of the right arm during the stroke, should be avoided
  
  
• It is common for most players to see improvement when they try any new aiming system
  
  
• The "Ghost Ball" system is easy to grasp for novice players, and has enough accuracy to be used by even by the majority of professional players and most of the very best.
  
  
• Because they have completely mastered whatever aiming system they started with, all elite professionals aim virtually all of their shots by instinct, intuition, and almost subconscious judgment.
  
  
• Your aiming system must be able to deliver the object ball to a specific portion of the pocket opening; just pocketing the ball is not sufficient for professional-level play. This is the major drawback of pivoting aiming systems and "magic" aiming systems. The "Ghost Ball" method will allow you to achieve this goal of increasing your pocketing options.
  
  
• In my association with elite professional players, none of them has ever professed a reliance on an unorthodox aiming method.
  
  
• Adopt the "Ghost Ball" system or a system recommended by a reputable instructor, then stick with it. Perfecting your stroke will be much more difficult to master than perfecting your aiming system.
  
  
• The vast majority of your misses will be due to faulty stroke, not due to faulty aim.

And the truth shall set you free.

 

[sfleinen]

No, I don't think it's only that. Here's a related post from Stan 15 months ago:

​

I'm no snooker expert. But I do believe Stan's claim about snooker players goes against conventional wisdom. Perhaps it would be fine if he just said that some snooker pros sweep in from an offset rather than implying that they all do.

That is precisely my problem -- that Stan makes these "sweeping statements" (forgive the pun; maybe "blanket statements" would be better) concerning how most of snooker players align to the shot.

And yes, his claim does indeed go against conventional wisdom, because he's taking one player -- just one player -- and saying basically "all" or "most" of snooker players do this. And then saying snooker instruction "has it all wrong."

I mean, that's a head-scratching moment (if not a facepalm moment) if there ever was one.

I'm not, by the way, trying to say there's no value to his methods of teachings. Let's get that one out of the way right now. In fact, I myself am very interested and will be pursuing CTE/Pro-1 knowledge. But in the spirit of marketing, we shouldn't engage in revisionist history, or revisionist common knowledge as taught in snooker circles.

-Sean

 

[stan shuffett]

And the truth shall set you free.

Just because something is in a book does not make it fact.

Mark does NOT understand real CTE nor can he use the system. That MUST be taken into account. If what I say about real CTE connecting to a table is true then assumptions that others make about what CTE is without true knowledge has to be factored in.

Stan Shuffett

 

[juspooln]

Here are a few snippets of what renowned instructor and former pro Mark Wilson, 2014 Mosconi Cup captain, has to say about aiming systems in his new book Play Great Pool:

• Finding an adequate aiming system is far easier than "finding" excellent stroke fundamentals
  
  
• Aiming a pool shot is a function of judgment, as opposed to relying on some external gimmick
  
  
• Some of the advice you receive from aiming system advocates will be vague, or even defy logic and science
  
  
• All aiming systems are just approximations that get you close to the ideal line, and all require some judgment if you are going to achieve the highest level of proficiency
  
  
• Aiming systems that require a "pivoting"' movement after you have set up to stroke the ball, or pivoting motion of the right arm during the stroke, should be avoided
  
  
• It is common for most players to see improvement when they try any new aiming system
  
  
• The "Ghost Ball" system is easy to grasp for novice players, and has enough accuracy to be used by even by the majority of professional players and most of the very best.
  
  
• Because they have completely mastered whatever aiming system they started with, all elite professionals aim virtually all of their shots by instinct, intuition, and almost subconscious judgment.
  
  
• Your aiming system must be able to deliver the object ball to a specific portion of the pocket opening; just pocketing the ball is not sufficient for professional-level play. This is the major drawback of pivoting aiming systems and "magic" aiming systems. The "Ghost Ball" method will allow you to achieve this goal of increasing your pocketing options.
  
  
• In my association with elite professional players, none of them has ever professed a reliance on an unorthodox aiming method.
  
  
• Adopt the "Ghost Ball" system or a system recommended by a reputable instructor, then stick with it. Perfecting your stroke will be much more difficult to master than perfecting your aiming system.
  
  
• The vast majority of your misses will be due to faulty stroke, not due to faulty aim.

That was very well wrote by Mark, thanks for posting it. Can't wait till my copy arrives

 

[stan shuffett]

Stan:

We're going in circles. I'm asking you to elaborate on why you think *any* cue-to-cueball positioning in snooker that "looks like" it may have any sideways movement is "automatically a visual sweep to cueball," and you keep answering "because it is so." And then you go as far as to say "all those decades of snooker instruction" have it wrong related to what you see snooker players doing -- which is a facepalm moment if there ever was one.

You're ascribing your own reasons to why a snooker player may bring his cue in slightly from the side, because "you want it to be so." This movement we know from snooker circles is actually is an artifact of the cue being positioned on one side of his body, which is a conservation of movement rather than a pedantic "top down" elevator movement.

-Sean

I agree. Circles .
Pool players and snooker players are essentially on the same page when it comes to visual intelligence. Throw out the traditional instructional material because that is not what the players are doing.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Johnnyt]

Stan, were you in, or are you in sales? Johnnyt

 

[chalkhed]

I haven't bothered to read a good amount of this thread because it seems like it devolved into another aiming system argument, but to the OP:

If you're an apa 6, I'm guessing you aim fine already. My guess would be that drilling yourself on position play would be beneficial. Until I started doing position drills (like make a shot and get the cueball to end up on a sheet of paper somewhere on the table that I move around), I wasn't as aware of how off I was on some of my english choices and speed control, especially with full table position.

Doing drills like these (can be found in Dr Daves Billiard University Test, Pro Skill Drills, some of Burt Kinister's videos) I think is a great way to both reinforce aiming, as you have to shoot a single shot with many different types of english, and improve your accuracy of position play.

Edit: Just thought of another - When I just want to screw around, I've found that playing american rotation against myself has also massively helped out

 

[Banks]

Contact point and ghost ball aiming have you aligning to and moving into an imaginary shot line is very difficult to do. That's what I like about CTE PRO 1. It gives you the ability to move into the shot line objectively from a unique visual perception unlike anything else I have seen. The visuals followed by a rotation to center cue ball, connects you to the pocket. This aiming system is powerful in that respect, but it also gets you into a pre-shot routine. That is a very professional approach to to playing this game.

How is it very difficult to align to "an imaginary shot line", but you "move into" a shot line comprised from 3 different A/B/C lines and a rotation so then it's suddenly easy?

I very directly asked Stan to point where the science is.. he side-stepped the question.

I've also asked for proof of people getting better. Proof.. not just an already good player saying "I'm more awesomer".

I've gotten nothing in response to those.

I just want an answer that can be cross-referenced.

This is why I haven't been missing anything after the creation of an Aiming System forum.

 

[Johnnyt]

I haven't bothered to read a good amount of this thread because it seems like it devolved into another aiming system argument, but to the OP:

If you're an apa 6, I'm guessing you aim fine already. My guess would be that drilling yourself on position play would be beneficial. Until I started doing position drills (like make a shot and get the cueball to end up on a sheet of paper somewhere on the table that I move around), I wasn't as aware of how off I was on some of my english choices and speed control, especially with full table position.

"Doing drills like these (can be found in Dr Daves Billiard University Test, Pro Skill Drills, some of Burt Kinister's videos) I think is a great way to both reinforce aiming, as you have to shoot a single shot with many different types of english, and improve your accuracy of position play."

I agree with this. Johnnyt

 

[stan shuffett]

How is it very difficult to align to "an imaginary shot line", but you "move into" a shot line comprised from 3 different A/B/C lines and a rotation so then it's suddenly easy?

I very directly asked Stan to point where the science is.. he side-stepped the question.

I've also asked for proof of people getting better. Proof.. not just an already good player saying "I'm more awesomer".

I've gotten nothing in response to those.

I just want an answer that can be cross-referenced.

This is why I haven't been missing anything after the creation of an Aiming System forum.

I did not side-step anything. My info is out there loud and clear.
If you want the truth then work it.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Banks]

I did not side-step anything. My info is out there loud and clear.
If you want the truth then work it.

Stan Shuffett

You're the one making the claims. Provide the proof. You should have that information from all of the "discussions" that have taken place here. Otherwise, I say ghost ball works better than anything out there.. prove me wrong.

 

[measureman]

Funny how you say you have never used an aiming system, then describe a system to learn how to aim. Whether you like it or not, you do use a system. If you didn't, you wouldn't even be able to hit the ball, let alone make it. You just aren't consciously aware of what your system actually is.

Good point. I really had not thought of it that way.I do use some aiming tricks.But not a "system" as others are touting.
For instance I shoot long shots and long straight shots good enough for people to ask how I do it.The "system" i use is self taught and probably used by others,but nobody told me about it. It just came to me.
I get my aim by looking thru the ball at a spot on the rail and shoot for that and just let the object ball "get in the way".
Long straight shots i pick a spot in the back of the pocket and aim for that and just let the object ball get in the way.
So yes I guess i use a system of sorts but it's all mainly self taught thru trial and error.

 

[stan shuffett]

You're the one making the claims. Provide the proof. You should have that information from all of the "discussions" that have taken place here. Otherwise, I say ghost ball works better than anything out there.. prove me wrong.

My research and proof is readily available and it shows absolute connection to 2x1 tables only.

My work is out there. No need to think it's not.

Stan Shuffett

 

[boogeyman]

So I'll start with some background on me. I started playing pool about 2.5 years ago at the age of 23 by joining my friends APA team. I had pretty much 0 experience but knew that I would love it as I am very competitive, and love physics and geometry. Bowling and drumming are two other things I excelled at previously, which require a lot of repetitive hand eye coordination type practice so I figured pool would be perfect for me.

Here's where I'm at now. I'm a 6 in the APA and i win about 65-70% of my matches each session. I know that APA skill levels are not the best indicator but it's the only way I can describe my "speed" on the internet in a way that most everyone can relate to. I'm proud of the fact that I've gotten to where I am in a relatively short time but know that I am still a VERY small fish.

I'm wondering now what is the best way to improve further. Obviously its practice practice practice, but what KIND of practice. Some people tell me to just "feel" and others preach aiming systems, and TOI, and all that jazz. One of the best players I've ever seen, Shannon Murphy from cinncinnati, said he pretty much just feels what he's doing. I think this is a little unfair though since he started playing at a VERY young age and has had some extremely good instruction throughout his life.

So far in my progression I've tended to try both. I've watched most of Dr. Dave Billiards videos and they have given me an understanding of what is actually going on from a physics standpoint. I then try and see it for myself on the table and put it in my memory banks. I know about cut induced throw/spin, spin induced throw/spin, rail spin reversal, the limits of a miscue, and so on. But is it worth it to actually THINK about all that when playing? I feel like it's much better to let your subconscious do all that.

So basically at this point in my game would it be beneficial for me to look into an aiming system? I'm afraid of "cluttering" my head with things that are best left to the subconscious. Does anyone have any thoughts?

Nahog. The best advice for you, since you are virtually just beginning, is to practice only center ball, high and low.
AVOID USING ENGLISH AS MUCH AS YOU CAN.
Get these cueing mechanics down solid, and keep the game as simple as you possibly can.
That will improve your game better than any aiming system.

 

[Neil]

Here are a few snippets of what renowned instructor and former pro Mark Wilson, 2014 Mosconi Cup captain, has to say about aiming systems in his new book Play Great Pool:

• Finding an adequate aiming system is far easier than "finding" excellent stroke fundamentals
  
  
• Aiming a pool shot is a function of judgment, as opposed to relying on some external gimmick
  
  
• Some of the advice you receive from aiming system advocates will be vague, or even defy logic and science
  
  
• All aiming systems are just approximations that get you close to the ideal line, and all require some judgment if you are going to achieve the highest level of proficiency
  
  
• Aiming systems that require a "pivoting"' movement after you have set up to stroke the ball, or pivoting motion of the right arm during the stroke, should be avoided
  
  
• It is common for most players to see improvement when they try any new aiming system
  
  
• The "Ghost Ball" system is easy to grasp for novice players, and has enough accuracy to be used by even by the majority of professional players and most of the very best.
  
  
• Because they have completely mastered whatever aiming system they started with, all elite professionals aim virtually all of their shots by instinct, intuition, and almost subconscious judgment.
  
  
• Your aiming system must be able to deliver the object ball to a specific portion of the pocket opening; just pocketing the ball is not sufficient for professional-level play. This is the major drawback of pivoting aiming systems and "magic" aiming systems. The "Ghost Ball" method will allow you to achieve this goal of increasing your pocketing options.
  
  
• In my association with elite professional players, none of them has ever professed a reliance on an unorthodox aiming method.
  
  
• Adopt the "Ghost Ball" system or a system recommended by a reputable instructor, then stick with it. Perfecting your stroke will be much more difficult to master than perfecting your aiming system.
  
  
• The vast majority of your misses will be due to faulty stroke, not due to faulty aim.

Marks' book is fantastic. I have recommended it highly numerous times. That does not mean that everything in it is correct though. He is expressing his views as he knows them. That is all. In this case, he is very wrong. And that , I know for a fact. Quite frankly, I am still amazed at his stance on it. His entire book is about precision, until he gets to actual aiming. Then, it's just get on this line to this imaginary ball sitting there. You have got to be kidding me! Every thing is precision, precision, precision, but aiming is "just take a guess at where the center of that imaginary ball is supposed to sit.". Makes no sense at all. Despite having met with Stan, Mark showed his actual lack of knowledge about that system just by his statement about using all parts of the pocket.

 

[measureman]

Not even Ghost Ball?

I will admit that I've been playing for about 53 years I have no idea what the ghost ball aiming system is and at this point I don't want to know. I just hit the ball where it says "go"to me.
I have to get out of this thread.I can see a war coming.

 

[Big C]

How is it very difficult to align to "an imaginary shot line", but you "move into" a shot line comprised from 3 different A/B/C lines and a rotation so then it's suddenly easy?

I very directly asked Stan to point where the science is.. he side-stepped the question.

I've also asked for proof of people getting better. Proof.. not just an already good player saying "I'm more awesomer".

I've gotten nothing in response to those.

I just want an answer that can be cross-referenced.

This is why I haven't been missing anything after the creation of an Aiming System forum.

Aligning the CB edge to a/b/c aim points on an OB and CB center to OB edge is not hard. The rotation I admit, can be tricky. But like anything it takes work and can be mastered. I like that better than trying to see something that is just not there. I used to be an aim by feel/instinct, ghost ball, contact point player. But no longer, now that I have learned CTE PRO 1.

I don't think I have ever seen a post where Stan side-stepped or back-peddled. What science do you need? The beauty of CTE PRO 1 is that it is all about visual and physical intelligence with the objectivity of known aim points and a physical rotation that puts you on the correct path to the pocket.

You want proof of someone getting better? My personal story is that I recently started playing again after a four year layoff. I completely stopped playing during that time. I started playing around again this past December. Since then I started playing in a nine ball league and was rated as an A player. Shortly after I discovered Stan's system and ordered his DVD2. I worked on it daily and within eight weeks I improved to a AAA and placed 3rd in a local 10 ball tournament with some really good local talent.

 

[Neil]

How is it very difficult to align to "an imaginary shot line", but you "move into" a shot line comprised from 3 different A/B/C lines and a rotation so then it's suddenly easy?

I very directly asked Stan to point where the science is.. he side-stepped the question.

I've also asked for proof of people getting better. Proof.. not just an already good player saying "I'm more awesomer".

I've gotten nothing in response to those.

I just want an answer that can be cross-referenced.

This is why I haven't been missing anything after the creation of an Aiming System forum.

I guess you figure that if you post that nonsense enough times, people will believe it. But why you even want people to believe it is still beyond me. There have been numerous posts about the science of it, and why it cannot be mathematically shown, and even if it could, it would mean nothing to you. There have also been numerous posts, including mine, and Gerry's, of people getting better using it. You can say we were already "good", but that term is very subjective. Good compared to whom?

If you don't want to learn a different way to aim, then don't. It's that simple. But for you and others to get on here and do nothing but bash something you know nothing about when others are trying to help someone, well, what do you call that? How is that helping the OP at all? So, since you aren't trying to actually help anyone here, what is your point of posting at all?? Just to cause angst on here?? And, that is not just for you, but for the others that have no idea what they are even talking about.