How Do You Aim?

[Pidge]

Since the Aiming Forum is a hot potato at the moment with all the talk of CTE, I'd like to start something new, fresh and hopefully something that doesn't end in a bashing war. Hopefully we can gather enough responses so that someone lurking and reading this can pick up something useful to help them pocket balls.

I'll start by describing how I aim. Its basically a mixture of fractional overlaps and back of the ball contact point to contact point. On most shots on a pool table, English pool table and snooker table I look at the OB, pick out the contact area on it, and match that up with the CB. For example if the contact area on the OB is exactly on the right 1/4, the I draw a visual line from the left 1/4 of the CB to the right 1/4 of the OB and parallel shift over to centre cue ball. That sounds far more complicated than it actually is. I rarely look at the pocket when picking out the contact area on the OB...after all, the pockets never move and I've played this game enough to memorize where the pocket is in relation to the balls. Obviously this method doesn't take into account CIT if you select a contact point directly lined up to centre pocket, I think this is why I don't look at the pocket. Experience must have taught me to pick a contact point out to over cut the ball slightly, add in the fact my parallel shift probably isn't parallel (once I match the contact points up I can see the shot line) and I just sort of get down to shoot along this shot line. Its simple, quick, not complicated and does what I need.

I must add, I've trialed almost all aiming systems out there, and haven't found one that I would call "bad". I have found most over complicate a simple task and I choose not to use them when it counts. So feel free to post how you aim, what systems you may use and why you do what you do.

 

[dougster26]

Since the Aiming Forum is a hot potato at the moment with all the talk of CTE, I'd like to start something new, fresh and hopefully something that doesn't end in a bashing war. Hopefully we can gather enough responses so that someone lurking and reading this can pick up something useful to help them pocket balls.

I'll start by describing how I aim. Its basically a mixture of fractional overlaps and back of the ball contact point to contact point. On most shots on a pool table, English pool table and snooker table I look at the OB, pick out the contact area on it, and match that up with the CB. For example if the contact area on the OB is exactly on the right 1/4, the I draw a visual line from the left 1/4 of the CB to the right 1/4 of the OB and parallel shift over to centre cue ball. That sounds far more complicated than it actually is. I rarely look at the pocket when picking out the contact area on the OB...after all, the pockets never move and I've played this game enough to memorize where the pocket is in relation to the balls. Obviously this method doesn't take into account CIT if you select a contact point directly lined up to centre pocket, I think this is why I don't look at the pocket. Experience must have taught me to pick a contact point out to over cut the ball slightly, add in the fact my parallel shift probably isn't parallel (once I match the contact points up I can see the shot line) and I just sort of get down to shoot along this shot line. Its simple, quick, not complicated and does what I need.

I must add, I've trialed almost all aiming systems out there, and haven't found one that I would call "bad". I have found most over complicate a simple task and I choose not to use them when it counts. So feel free to post how you aim, what systems you may use and why you do what you do.

One question I have is;

When you get behind the shot line on your pre shot routine, is it on your contact to contact point, or do you move when you parallel shift? I appreciate you starting this thread and I hope a lot chime in to help with tips to improve one's game.

 

[Pidge]

One question I have is;

When you get behind the shot line on your pre shot routine, is it on your contact to contact point, or do you move when you parallel shift? I appreciate you starting this thread and I hope a lot chime in to help with tips to improve one's game.

Do you mean do I look down the contact to contact point line, or through the parallel lone through centre cue ball when I get down? I stand looking down the contact to contact point line, but once I see the shot line everything revolves around that. So my right foot points straight down the shot line through centre cue ball, and I drop into my stance. The matching of contact points is purely to give me a quick, clear view of the shot line. Once I find that I concentrate on getting my cue along this line.

 

[sfleinen]

Pidge:

I'd shared my method of aiming long ago, in this thread (link and quote below). Although I share only one quoted post out of that thread, I encourage you to read the other posts around it (before and after it), to get an idea of how this all unfolded.

Anyway, this is the aiming system I use today. Even though you've seen me create a thread related to helping discover the math behind CTE, I'm not sure if it can replace the knowledge and level of execution I've gained from my own system. But we'll see, won't we?

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=3630574#post3630574

Shaky1:

That's the reason why there are different aiming systems -- because different people have different abilities. Some have great 3D spacial visualization/perception, others don't. But where a person doesn't have this ability, they make up for it in another ability that the other [spacial-visualization-gifted] person does not have. However, I believe spacial-visualization ability can be built, with repetition and memorization.

This is where, believe it or not, an advanced method of using ghostball concepts comes in -- back-of-ball aiming. But there's a snag with this method -- you have to memorize some ball-to-ball relationships! That is to say, you have some homework to do.

What I'm talking about here is, can you recognize, say, a half-ball hit and the angle it produces upon collision? ("Recognizing" a half-ball hit is easy -- that's a core relationship used in other aiming systems like pivot-based aiming. But do you know the angle it produces upon collision?). Can you recognize a 1/4-ball hit, and the angle it produces? 2/3rd-ball? 3/4-ball?

If you don't, do this:

1. Set that ball relationship up on your table
2. Forget about the pockets on your table -- stuff them with towels so that you can't pocket balls in them and so they won't be a distraction for you. (Or better yet, do this on a 3-cushion/billiards table.)
3. Shoot that shot -- shoot a half-ball hit, or 1/4-ball hit, or 2/3rd-ball hit, or what-have-you.
4. Stay down on the shot -- stay in your "Finish" position.
5. Observe where the object ball goes -- what angle it takes.
6. Memorize it -- shoot this over and over and over again. Reposition the cue ball and object ball differently on the table each time, and shoot this same ball-to-ball relationship over and over again.

The idea is that you don't want to be concerned about the "pockets" on your table -- you only are concerned about the angles produced by different ball-to-ball relationships, and you're trying to memorize them.

You need to do this for the following CRUCIAL (i.e. fundamental) ball-to-ball relationships:

• 1/4-ball hit
• 1/3rd-ball hit
• half-ball hit
• 2/3rd-ball hit
• 3/4-ball hit
• 7/8-ball hit

Shoot those over and over, and MEMORIZE them! This is your "kit" -- you need to recognize these ball-to-ball relationships anywhere on the table. And when you do, you'll obviate the need to have to "see" or "visualize" a ghost ball -- a ball that isn't there and which will introduce considerable error if you don't have the ability to automatically "see" it. Memorize these ball-to-ball relationships, recognize them when you see them on the table, and YOU WON'T HAVE TO VISUALIZE A GHOSTBALL! Commit these to your "kit" and you'll bring back consistency into your game.

Believe it or not, those half-dozen ball-to-ball relationships I've bulleted above for you will give you an incredible amount of mileage. Those six ball-to-ball relationships occur in the lion's share of most shots you'll see on the table. I'm not kidding. When I view a table layout and pick out my shot, I go, "ah, that's a 1/3rd-ball hit, I know that one!" -- and then go fire it in.

The beauty of this style of aiming is that:

• You will remove having to "visualize" a ghost ball in the shot.
• You are adding a *tangible relationship* in its place.
• You are giving yourself something to shoot at that removes the pocket from your line of aim. This is key, because you are now concentrating on only aiming at a 1/3rd, or 1/2, or 3/4, etc. ball relationship -- you are not focusing on the pocket. What this will do, is lessen the tendency to "steer" your cue, because you're not focused on the pocket.
• You will greatly increase your ability at carom and combination shots.

Trust me on this one -- find yourself a quiet place to play, and just focus on hitting ball-to-ball relationships. Notice I said "hitting" and not "pocketing." The reason should be clear, because pocketing the ball is not the value here -- memorizing the angles produced *is*. Afterwards -- after you feel comfortable with recognizing a certain ball-to-ball relationship on the table (i.e. it's committed to your memory), set that shot up where the angle produced leads the object ball to a pocket, and shoot it. You'll notice that you "see" shots differently now, and you're not focused on the pocket any longer. Rather, you just "see" the ball-to-ball relationship, and you know that if you deliver your cue correctly to put that cue ball onto that object ball (i.e. "eclipsing" the object ball by that ball-to-ball relationship amount), you just *know* the object ball is heading for the pocket.

Thoughts?
-Sean

-Sean

 

[dougster26]

Do you mean do I look down the contact to contact point line, or through the parallel lone through centre cue ball when I get down? I stand looking down the contact to contact point line, but once I see the shot line everything revolves around that. So my right foot points straight down the shot line through centre cue ball, and I drop into my stance. The matching of contact points is purely to give me a quick, clear view of the shot line. Once I find that I concentrate on getting my cue along this line.

That's what I thought. I line up with my right foot and eye position over the actual path that the cue ball is going to take to make the shot. I tend to visualize the contact to contact and then make a slight adjustment with my body and head during my pre shot routine. I probably shouldn't be moving but if I am stepping in on the line then I tend to think I'm OK. When watching the pros, they step in on the line, so I think I need to work on this and not make any unnecessary movement.

 

[randyg]

HOW DO I AIM?

In the standing position I acquire my Angle, Speed and Spin.
Then I use CTE on about 90% of my shots. I use Off-Set Aiming on the other 10%.

I really don't think about aiming during game time, BUT I sure have to teach several aiming systems in Pool School.

randyg

 

[CJ Wiley]

get down on the shot as if you've already made it

No "aiming system" is effective unless it allows you to get down on the shot as if you've already made it. This means the "pre shot routine" must rehearse almost all aspects of the actual shot to enable this to happen.

"if a pool player can see farther than others it's because they've stood on the shoulders of giants" - unknown

 

[Pidge]

Pidge:

I'd shared my method of aiming long ago, in this thread (link and quote below). Although I share only one quoted post out of that thread, I encourage you to read the other posts around it (before and after it), to get an idea of how this all unfolded.

Anyway, this is the aiming system I use today. Even though you've seen me create a thread related to helping discover the math behind CTE, I'm not sure if it can replace the knowledge and level of execution I've gained from my own system. But we'll see, won't we?

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=3630574#post3630574



-Sean

That's exactly how I learned growing up. The countless hours my dad would place a red on the table, give me the cue ball and say put the white down for a 3/4 ball hit. I'd place it, he'd check it, id shoot it.

Once you start recognizing the relationship between OB travel and fractions the game becomes easier. Its one thing having a system to pot balls, its another to have one to use in safety battles. I personally think its the most complete way of playing.

As always, your post was written very well and I think a lot of players reading it will be able to take something from it

 

[Pidge]

No "aiming system" is effective unless it allows you to get down on the shot as if you've already made it. This means the "pre shot routine" must rehearse almost all aspects of the actual shot to enable this to happen.

"if a pool player can see farther than others it's because they've stood on the shoulders of giants" - unknown

I'm not sure I follow, CJ. What exactly do you mean by having the PSR rehearse almost all aspects of the actual shot? What aspects are they? I sort of understand what you are trying to say, but I can't be quite sure

For what its worth I agree you should get down as if you've made the shot. Think you've made it, believe you will make it and you will start making more shots. Same with position. Don't just stand there trying to figure it out to the inch. I tend to look at an area I want to be in and a route jumps to my head almost instantly and without giving it much thought I'm down and my feathering strokes are doing the figuring out, as far as speed goes.

 

[Mirza]

I've always wondered how exactly do you aim fractional because obviously you can't just imagine a line perpendicular to the inside edge of the CB which goes to the 1/4, 1/3...spot on the OB since the overlap would be bigger that way (OB is shrinked, CB imagined over the OB would be not).

So how do you do it? Imagine GB and 2D overlap over OB to be 3/4, 2/3...and aim in the center of that GB, or what? If it is like that and again you have to imagine some GBs that aren't there, why is it better for you than GB?

Pidge:

I'd shared my method of aiming long ago, in this thread (link and quote below). Although I share only one quoted post out of that thread, I encourage you to read the other posts around it (before and after it), to get an idea of how this all unfolded.

Anyway, this is the aiming system I use today. Even though you've seen me create a thread related to helping discover the math behind CTE, I'm not sure if it can replace the knowledge and level of execution I've gained from my own system. But we'll see, won't we?

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=3630574#post3630574



-Sean

 

[Pidge]

What a lot of players do is they recognize the 2d overlap say, inside edge of CB to inside 1/4 on OB making it a 3/4 ball. They then just aim centre cue ball at the outside 1/4 of the OB.

Its more about recognizing the major fractional overlaps, and the angles they produce and memorizing where to aim centre cue ball to create these overlaps.

 

[Mirza]

What a lot of players do is they recognize the 2d overlap say, inside edge of CB to inside 1/4 on OB making it a 3/4 ball. They then just aim centre cue ball at the outside 1/4 of the OB.

Its more about recognizing the major fractional overlaps, and the angles they produce and memorizing where to aim centre cue ball to create these overlaps.

Well that is exactly what I'm talking about, that wouldn't be problem at all IF the CB and OB would be the same size, but they aren't, OB looks smaller so you can't just imagine a perpendicular line going from inside edge of the CB to inside 1/4 of the OB because then the center of the CB surely wouldn't be aimed at outside 1/4 of the OB, since its smaller then CB in our field of vision?

 

[ronscuba]

I must add, I've trialed almost all aiming systems out there, and haven't found one that I would call "bad". I have found most over complicate a simple task and I choose not to use them when it counts. So feel free to post how you aim, what systems you may use and why you do what you do.

I also find some of them way too complicated. But, maybe a little complicated is a good thing because it forces you to focus and makes your routine repeatable ?

My aim method is very simple. So simple that sometimes I take the shot for granted, don't focus and miss. I think I might need to add a little something to the process just to keep me focused.

 

[Pidge]

No, you don't visualize anything. You first recognize the angle, then you say to yourself right, this is a 3/4 ball angle and you automatically through memorization know where to aim your cue through centre cue ball. When you learn this method you have to visualize but after time you automatically know where aim at the ball, or outside the ball on thinner cuts.

 

[sfleinen]

No, you don't visualize anything. You first recognize the angle, then you say to yourself right, this is a 3/4 ball angle and you automatically through memorization know where to aim your cue through centre cue ball. When you learn this method you have to visualize but after time you automatically know where aim at the ball, or outside the ball on thinner cuts.

That's right! When you've truly memorized that table of "reference cuts" (and I mean commit them to muscle memory where they literally jump out at you in table layouts), there is no "having to focus" there. The more you get rid of your conscious mind in these things, the more successful you'll be.

* Conscious mind for picking out the patterns and how to solve the table. "Think while standing."

* Subconscious mind for shot execution. "Turn the mind off, and execute."

-Sean

 

[duckie]

Since there is nothing to aim with, I don't aim.

What do you use to aim with? And I don't mean what you see in your minds eye, but what is in the real world.

With a rifle there are sights and then the target, things you can touch and see.

But in shoot making, there is nothing to use.

So, you really are not aiming but just estimating where to put the CB.

With more experience, you get better at estimating.....HAMB.....

 

[Pidge]

Since there is nothing to aim with, I don't aim.

What do you use to aim with? And I don't mean what you see in your minds eye, but what is in the real world.

With a rifle there are sights and then the target, things you can touch and see.

But in shoot making, there is nothing to use.

So, you really are not aiming but just estimating where to put the CB.

With more experience, you get better at estimating.....HAMB.....

Have you hit a million balls? I must have done by now
And to keep it short, I use the two balls and my stick to aim, why don't you try it? No sexual pun intended.

 

[scottjen26]

I primarily use SEE as well as a new method that Ekkes and I and a few others have been working with, essentially SEE with some new alignments and adjustments.

I stand behind the shot on an extension of my aim line for the particular type of shot I'm shooting, 3 alignments and 1 additional adjustment for very thin cuts. Depending on the rhythm I'm in and the difficulty of the shot, I will look at this line for 1 - 3 seconds to make sure I'm lined up correctly. When playing at my top speed I will often pick up the alignment on my way into the shot in a very subconscious manner, wish that happened more often.

Once I pick my alignment line, I start to bend into the shot in a particular manner (per the system) and then just focus on center CB and move into my final shooting stance. The initial bend creates an offset and results in an air pivot, sweep, etc. that's always referenced with aiming systems. Once down on the shot I will use my experience to visually verify that I feel like I'm lined up correctly, especially for shots in the high percentage category. This helps catch me in case I made any mistakes in alignment or shuffled or tweaked my way out of the shot line. Then take a few warmup strokes, pause, and shoot.

For tougher and/or longer shots, I generally don't worry so much about the visual validation. I spend an extra second or two lining up and am a little more careful in moving into the CB. Once there I just try to stay on the line and not let myself stray based on a feeling of being lined up too thick or too thin. I can't see that far anyway, so I just try and line up and put a straight stroke on it.

As a bonus, the system provides for adjustments for slower shots or stun shots, where CIT comes into play, as well as for english, so I incorporate those adjustments into my initial alignment. Doing so lets me just shoot the shot without tweaking anything for those effects. As long as I remember to hit the shot the way I intend to...


Whether using an aiming or alignment system or not, I think it's important to stand behind the shot and visualize it and have a consistent way to move into your final shooting position. Follow the same routine breeds consistency and helps with focus under pressure situations. For me, I largely feel like I'm shooting the same 2 shots over and over which has helped contribute to a consistent preshot routine.
Scott

 

[Straightpool_99]

...................

 

[Pidge]

This

Even a rifle without sights can be aimed down the barrel. I primarily use the stick for aiming, aided by shadows and edges. Even if you consider the stick an extension of your arm, and thus are merely "throwing" the ball at a target, at a minimum you still have to align the stick and the cueball some kind of way.

Claiming that we do not aim pool shots at all is at best ignorance and at the worst obscurantism. I'd wager that most of the people actively debating on this forum are at least close to having hit a million balls. HAMB does not work as an explanation of anything. Nothing magical happens once the millionth ball has been hit, nor is there a linear (or otherwise direct correlation) relationship as far as I can tell between the number of balls hit and ability. True, if you started measurements at ball 100 and ended at ball 1 000 000 you'd be better, but what if you started at ball 500 000 and ended at ball 700 000, I'm not at all conviced that you'd always be better at that time. There may in most cases be a general trend upwards in mobility, but this is not always the case and there may be several slumps where you appear to go down in ability.Sometimes people will even lose ability as time goes by for no obvious, good reason. Improvement seems to happen at different times of a players career and often in great leaps almost overnight in many cases. What I will say is that improvement seem to happen at times where you spend the most amount of time in average at the table, or directly after such an intensive playing period.

I know of no other precision sport where anyone would suggest doing something a million times unsupervised and expect that to lead to an optimal rate of development, and I don't believe for a second that pool is an exception to the rule that qualified instruction and supervision will accellerate development.

What you've said is spot on. You can hit a million balls but if you don't have the knowledge, problem solving abilities of determination to pick apart why you miss, getting that stroke as repeatable as can be, learn from your mistakes and use those million balls in an effective manner then you still wont be anywhere near a professional standard. Some people may be, others may be a weak B player.