How Does Your Potting Rate - Potting Test.

Dave Nelson said:
Colin

Your proposed rating system would put me at D which is probably pretty close.

My only rating comes from our straight pool round robin which has been ongoing for about 2 1/2 years now. I started out at c-, the lowest rating and about a year ago was moved up to C. We just finished a session and I have 9 wins to 4 losses and would probably be moved up to C+ if we had another session. Unfortunately circumstances have evolved which make it appear that it's over.

I'm going to work on the weakest shots and take the test again in a day or so. I think I should be able to do 40. I'll certainly post my next score no matter what it is, no fudging.

Dave Nelson
Click to expand...
Thanks for that feedback Dave, it helps me get a feel for placing those ranges properly. Hope you can get your eye in a bit better the 2nd time around and move into the C range.

Sounds like you're really a C player, so either you had a bad day, my C range is too high, your table is overly tough, or your game strategy and or shape skills are ahead of your potting skills. We should be able to work that out as more players post results.

Colin
[edit]
I just updated the ratings on the front page. C is now 30 to 44, so if you're a mid C player, then you'd average about 37-38 for this drill. That's getting close to 50% and none of these shots are easy.

Rating System
-------------------------------------------------
Under 20: Bad eyes, possibly drunk, needs a doctor, doesn't know what the chalk is for, should try bowling.
20-29: Beginner / Casual Player
30-44: C
45-59: B
60-69: A
70-79: Pro Level Potter - Not necessarily pro level player of course.
80: PR#@K - Please take up bowling so we can have a chance.
---------------------------------------------------------
 
Last edited:
Fatboy said:
This is a fantastic test to evaluate potting skill, which is very important in any game, it just might be the most important shot because whrn you are shooting the 9 ball in 9B you just need to pot it , not playing shape. The exception would be in one pocket where the CB might have to be controlled.

I really like this test and am going to take it in about a week and post up my results. I would guess mid 50's will be my score on a 9' GC4 with 4.25" poclets. I will measure the pockets and post the score(s).

Thank you very much for thinking of this and posting it. I read this whole thread carefully and will continue to!

best

eric
Click to expand...
Thanks and you're welcome Eric.

Don't forget that very often in 9-ball and 10-ball that the game decider is often the first ball potted which is often a tough pot. Also, a tough pot often decides the outcome of safety battles, which usually decides the result.

Being a confident potter helps you get the better end of many of these match turning points, as well as sink those slightly nerve-racking final 9-balls.

Colin
 
Again Thank You Colin For Your Effort and Time...

Colin Colenso said:
Thanks and you're welcome Eric.

Don't forget that very often in 9-ball and 10-ball that the game decider is often the first ball potted which is often a tough pot. Also, a tough pot often decides the outcome of safety battles, which usually decides the result.

Being a confident potter helps you get the better end of many of these match turning points, as well as sink those slightly nerve-racking final 9-balls.

Colin
Click to expand...


Mr. Colin,

I pot better than I play-in very general terms, I looked long and hard at the test, the backward cuts will be the hardest for me, I noticed long ago that when I cut right to left I have a higher success % (To the best of my recollection) the differents was pretty big. I used to keep records back in 93. I did make 53 spot shots with out a miss(I had a friend spot them up for me-it was my personal best), I got in the high 20's many times. I'm excited about this, when I get back to town and am instroke I will report here and PM to you as well. I think this test is perfect not to hard or easy its a good balance of real life shots. Bravo!!! thanks again, Eric P

ps I'm going to bed. I hope this thread gets ALOT of interest. I will do my part. thanks again!! :) :) :)


PS 2: I'm going to stick to my estimate of mid 50's. Leaning towards 50 nore thn 40's. This is on a average day-on a extridonary day maybe mid to low 60's, I hope I'm too consertative with these numbers, but who knows its not contest if I get 15 I wont be embarassed-I might have some cheap cues for sale ;).
 
Last edited:
Went to buy a printer last night but came up dry at the discount store I stopped by.At least for the money I wanted to spend.I need one anyway,but this was one more good reason.I'll get to this skill test this weekend I think.

Then I'll post my score so nobody else will feel bad about posting theirs.lol.
 
I just tried this drill on my home seven foot table with 4.5" pockets.

A couple of things I noted:

This drill is not necessarily easier on a 7' table. I had to shoot shots with a rail bridge that could have been done from a surface bridge on a 9' table.

The drill should be done using all 4 corner pockets. When I did "round2" my score dropped quite a bit, which I think was due to shooting backed up against a wall, and I instinctively shorten my backstroke.

Went 9 for 16, left one hanger (does that count for a half?).

I consider myself at a beginner or low-intermediate level. Have played about 2 hours per week for the last 15 months. I'll try it again tomorrow using the pockets not used today.
 
Colin Colenso said:
Dave,
I did some googling of CJ Wiley and only found reference to:
a. He says you need to see the aim line before you get down on the shot.
b. A reference that said he sights the center of the OB or the edge of the OB, depending on the cut angle I guess.

I didn't see anything on parallel type systems from him. Can you briefly summarize his aiming system for me?

Colin
Click to expand...

He sights a piece of the CB to OB edge and parallels to center while sighting that line. So he sights one line and strokes the other.
 
I spent the afternoon playing 3 cushion with a friend who is rusty but knows the game pretty well. We played for nearly 3 1\2 hours. I was amazed that i scored 13 billiards. My friend of course scored 40 some in the same period of time. Tomorrow I play straight pool with my arch enemy, Half Fast Larry(we hate each others guts but it doesn't interfer with our friendship)Monday I get down to improving my test score.

Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow creeps in this pretty pace, or something like that.

Dave Nelson
 
SpiderWebComm said:
Joe:

I think I caught something others might not have in your videos. I think I have identified your full aiming system. Obviously, 'aiming by the numbers' is your system, but I don't think you've ever really described how you personally do it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but here's what I perceive your procedure to be:

For shot number 1, you aim your tip through a small chunk of the CB to a small chunk of the OB (which you know is less than 7). You then pivot your tip slightly until you 'feel' 7 (off that chunk) and then you parallel over to center ball to give you the offset required to make the ball. I tried this on my table and make balls well this way. I never considered using a pivot and parallel with your system.

I'm surprised how similar these aiming systems are at their core. You're close to C.J. Wiley's parallel system and close to a fractional pivot - almost a hybrid. I think what held me back with aiming by the numbers is feeling a number from an entire ball. Sighting a chunk and pivoting to fine tune and then paralleling for the offset works wonders.

Am I correct or did I get lucky with some baloney? Watching your tip in these videos is priceless. Everyone can learn from this.

Dave
Click to expand...
Hey Dave,

I hope you caught it, cuz I said ?Spidey this is gonna look like a pivot? but you?re kinda right about it. When I have it pivoted over which I do on thin cut shots it does 2 things for me; 1 it gets the stick out of my vision and that helps me see less double vision which helps me aim and 2 it does put me more in touch with that part of the ball that I?m aiming with.

I have not tried to align by the numbers off center and then pivot. I did happen to think about it also this past week and have yet to try it but if I were a betting man I would bet it would work and both you and I would probably like it because #1 the numbers are a pretty exact starting point which makes me happy and you?ve got the pivot down pat. Also I think it may make the pivots a little less extreme which might make them easier to repeat. I will try a few right now. I just got home from teaching all day, kinda wiped.

Looks like I?m not away fidy ($50) tonight.
 
Colin Colenso said:
Dave,
I did some googling of CJ Wiley and only found reference to:
a. He says you need to see the aim line before you get down on the shot.
b. A reference that said he sights the center of the OB or the edge of the OB, depending on the cut angle I guess.

I didn't see anything on parallel type systems from him. Can you briefly summarize his aiming system for me?

Colin
Click to expand...
I used & liked his system prior to inventing mine. What I don't like about it is the same as what I don't like about all fractional methods; you must first guesstimate the angle and then apply the required ball hit. But with his he breaks the cue ball up vertically into (I think, bad memory kills me all the time) 7 or 9 slices, 3 or 4 left and right of center . He then aims one of these slices at the center or the edge of the object ball depending on the angle of the shot. I even came across a black & white striped 8 ball I bought because it had 7 even slices bwbwbwb. I liked it and can understand how it made him hit with such commitment.
He is also mad or was mad about someone stealing it years ago. Not sure who, where, what or when but do remember him saying something unpleasant about it years back.
 
Joe T said:
I used & liked his system prior to inventing mine. What I don't like about it is the same as what I don't like about all fractional methods; you must first guesstimate the angle and then apply the required ball hit. But with his he breaks the cue ball up vertically into (I think, bad memory kills me all the time) 7 or 9 slices, 3 or 4 left and right of center . He then aims one of these slices at the center or the edge of the object ball depending on the angle of the shot. I even came across a black & white striped 8 ball I bought because it had 7 even slices bwbwbwb. I liked it and can understand how it made him hit with such commitment.
He is also mad or was mad about someone stealing it years ago. Not sure who, where, what or when but do remember him saying something unpleasant about it years back.
Click to expand...
In case you didn't know Joe, this is very similar to Hal Houle's method. Same basic idea as far a breaking the cueball up into sections and aiming that section line to the object ball center or edge. Hal starts with just three total cueball lines (left 1/4, center, right quarter) aiming to the center or edge of the object ball. That 1/4 line on the cueball is what he's refered to the edge of the "small ball," an imaginary circle 1/2 a ball diameter (1/4 ball to the edge).

Like what you've describe with CJ and whoever wrote the "Ultimate Aiming System," I've added a few more sections, and by adding sections, it's always two at a time (left and right) until I stopped adding points because there seemed to be enough.

Fred
 
Cornerman said:
In case you didn't know Joe, this is very similar to Hal Houle's method. Same basic idea as far a breaking the cueball up into sections and aiming that section line to the object ball center or edge. Hal starts with just three total cueball lines (left 1/4, center, right quarter) aiming to the center or edge of the object ball. That 1/4 line on the cueball is what he's refered to the edge of the "small ball," an imaginary circle 1/2 a ball diameter (1/4 ball to the edge).

Like what you've describe with CJ and whoever wrote the "Ultimate Aiming System," I've added a few more sections, and by adding sections, it's always two at a time (left and right) until I stopped adding points because there seemed to be enough.

Fred
Click to expand...
Oh I know Fred but CJ delivered it pretty much cut and dry, with a lot less negativity of others & with a little less mysticism. So maybe thats why I listened a little better. Plus he was running out like a mad man with it.
 
Joe T said:
Oh I know Fred but CJ delivered it pretty much cut and dry, with a lot less negativity of others & with a little less mysticism. So maybe thats why I listened a little better. Plus he was running out like a mad man with it.
Click to expand...

Maybe that's why nobody ever listens to me. :eek:

Fred <~~~ needs to run out more often
 
JB's pocketing test

Well I tried it and I have to say I need a lot of work. Here is my video of me doing this on our new table. I think that the pockets are really too tight - just over a ball's width. The table is also unsteady and the cues are as long as the table. Even so I was able to overcome all that and make a shot or get close on some.

Unfortunately the camera ran out of battery towards the end. If I get ambitious and acquire better batteries then I may do it again.

Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-4VQX8cKZw
 
Colin, thanks for the test, I really learned a lot in a short period of time.

I am a C+ player, Valley 7 ft. bar box. factory pockets and felt, new.

1st time,

1a 3 1d 4
2a 4 2d 5
3a 4 3d 5
4a 4 4d 4
5a 5 5d 5
6a 5 6d 3
7a 5 7d 5
8a 3 8d 3
33 34 total-67

I repeated the test to evaluate my aiming system (see ball, hit ball) by shooting each shot in numerical order one at a time and then repeating.
ie. 1a, 2a, 3a to the end and then repeat 5 times. I had about the same results with a 65 total.

Things I discovered:

1. I address the ball a little different shooting at pocket a as opposed to pocket d.

2. I perceive the same shot in d as a different angle in a. I perceive 3a as about 5% but 3b as about 8%.

3. I have a harder time with the straight shots compared to the hard cuts. I practice maximum cuts frequently.

4. I need to use what I learned from Earl and practice my rail bridge. I have always used a closed low bridge when shooting from the rail and in the test I had an easier time aiming with a rail bridge.

Next I am going to choose a target area for the cue ball and not count the pocket unless I can get the cue ball in the target area. How large do you think the target area should be?????

Thanks again,
Mark
 
JB Cases said:
Well I tried it and I have to say I need a lot of work. Here is my video of me doing this on our new table. I think that the pockets are really too tight - just over a ball's width. The table is also unsteady and the cues are as long as the table. Even so I was able to overcome all that and make a shot or get close on some.

Unfortunately the camera ran out of battery towards the end. If I get ambitious and acquire better batteries then I may do it again.

Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-4VQX8cKZw
Click to expand...

That's funny!
 
Mrcreg

I use a 5 inch paper disk. It's a pretty interesting exercise. I count it a hit if the diameter of the ball overlaps the edge of the disk.

Dave Nelson
 
JB Cases said:
Well I tried it and I have to say I need a lot of work. Here is my video of me doing this on our new table. I think that the pockets are really too tight - just over a ball's width. The table is also unsteady and the cues are as long as the table. Even so I was able to overcome all that and make a shot or get close on some.

Unfortunately the camera ran out of battery towards the end. If I get ambitious and acquire better batteries then I may do it again.

Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-4VQX8cKZw
Click to expand...
Wow ... those are about the tightest pockets I've every seen!

Can we conclude from your test that Hal's aiming method does not work very well, or was it just the tight pockets? :confused: :wink:

Thank you for sharing your cute video. I liked it,
Dave
 
Good day at Break & Run. I beat Half Fast Larry 100 to 82 at straight pool. Then we played our usual 8 ball race to 5 for 5$. We have been doing this for a couple of months now and Larry was into me for about 50. I had never won a race. Today I did.

Tomorrow, heavy practice on my weak shots and then another try at the test. I feel confident that I can beat that 32.

Dave Nelson
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top