Is the Game of Pool Geometrically Correct and/or Complete?

[CJ Wiley]

My belief after years of playing competitively "in the zone, " teaching, conceptualizing advanced techniques/systems and studying the deep levels of the "mental game," is that the game of pool is geometrically correct and complete (both mentally and physically).

Not only because of the two squares creating a rectangle, which in turn allow many triangles to form (when you take into account banks, ball pocketing, jump shots, combinations, caroms, masse's and position play, etc.) - also because of the straight line of the cue AND the perfect spherical shape of the balls. If any of these factors were missing from the game I don't think it would be complete and correct - that's pretty darn impressive!

What do you think, is this why the game of pool aligns to the human subconscious so perfectly, enabling {seemingly} miraculous feats to be accomplished on the pool table? Is this why advanced techniques and systems seem to work at almost a supernatural level? (supernatural meaning "natural" in a super way)

 

[pdcue]

My belief after years of playing competitively "in the zone, " teaching, conceptualizing advanced techniques/systems and studying the deep levels of the "mental game," is that the game of pool is geometrically correct and complete (both mentally and physically).

Not only because of the two squares creating a rectangle, which in turn allow many triangles to form (when you take into account banks, ball pocketing, jump shots, combinations, caroms, masse's and position play, etc.) - also because of the straight line of the cue AND the perfect spherical shape of the balls. If any of these factors were missing from the game I don't think it would be complete and correct - that's pretty darn impressive!

What do you think, is this why the game of pool aligns to the human subconscious so perfectly, enabling {seemingly} miraculous feats to be accomplished on the pool table? Is this why advanced techniques and systems seem to work at almost a supernatural level? (supernatural meaning "natural" in a super way)

Of course the GAME is correct.

The understanding of its structure by most players is less than complete.

The ability to verbalize the concepts and details involved is sadly lacking in all but
a few individuals. This is not helped by the tendency of some to invent their
own definitions for words.

Dale

 

[PINKLADY]

i just read your first sentence to KK9, and he informed me that:

"not necessarily. if you adjoin the 2 SQUARES @ their POINTS, then it's NOT a RECTANGLE."

would you like to disprove him on visual concept? cause he won't listen to me, CJ.

 

[KoolKat9Lives]

i just read your first sentence to KK9, and he informed me that:

"not necessarily. if you adjoin the 2 SQUARES @ their POINTS, then it's NOT a RECTANGLE."

would you like to disprove him on visual concept? cause he won't listen to me, CJ.

That's total BS Pink! I'm currently on the 16th hole, 2 shots out of the lead in the Nawleans Zurich tourney.

You're such an inshitagator!

Oooooh kool, just made a 20' bird with a geometrically correct Pro V 1.

KK9 <-- don't wake me from my dream in my geometrically correct bed please

 

[Jaden]

Do you have to be eaten first???

That's total BS Pink! I'm currently on the 16th hole, 2 shots out of the lead in the Nawleans Zurich tourney.

You're such an inshitagator!

Oooooh kool, just made a 20' bird with a geometrically correct Pro V 1.

KK9 <-- don't wake me from my dream in my geometrically correct bed please

Do you have to be eaten by an aligator first before you can become an inshitagator????

And I would think that no one could know you were an inshitagator until you become an outshitagator????

Jaden

 

[fastone371]

I concur with CJ. The game of pool completes me.:grin-square:

 

[3andstop]

My belief after years of playing competitively "in the zone, " teaching, conceptualizing advanced techniques/systems and studying the deep levels of the "mental game," is that the game of pool is geometrically correct and complete (both mentally and physically).

Not only because of the two squares creating a rectangle, which in turn allow many triangles to form (when you take into account banks, ball pocketing, jump shots, combinations, caroms, masse's and position play, etc.) - also because of the straight line of the cue AND the perfect spherical shape of the balls. If any of these factors were missing from the game I don't think it would be complete and correct - that's pretty darn impressive!

What do you think, is this why the game of pool aligns to the human subconscious so perfectly, enabling {seemingly} miraculous feats to be accomplished on the pool table? Is this why advanced techniques and systems seem to work at almost a supernatural level? (supernatural meaning "natural" in a super way)

......... :scratchhead::scratchhead::scratchhead::bow-down::bow-down::help::shrug::thud::killingme:

 

[MahnaMahna]

Speaking of gators.....

 

[LAMas]

The only geometrically correct shot is the straight in shot.- one line from the center of the pocket or target through the center of the OB to it's contact point hit with the CB contact point through the center of the CB without off center English. Any cut angle away from the straight in shot will experience cut induced throw and alter the geometrically correct angle or thicken it.

It is easy to aim the center of the CB at the edge of the OB for these are easily visualized and achieves a geometrically correct 30 degree cut angle, but if hit with center CB the result will be short of 30 degrees - you can mark lines on the cloth to demonstrate this.

If one imparts the correct amount of outside English follow or draw, one can achieve the geometrically correct 30 degree cut angle...this is the hard part...how much for different separations between the CB and OB.

 

[Allen Brown]

Actually, the pockets on the table break up the two squares that form a rectangle. So therefore the game of pocket billiards is not complete. 3 Cushion, on the other hand, is a complete game. Have a good day.

 

[Mikjary]

C'mon, CJ! There's nothing to argue about in this thread! It'll die with less than 50 posts! :grin-square:

If I start thinking about things that're geometrically correct, I won't be able to make a ball. I'll just say that the game looks like it's correct.

Best,
Mike

 

[robsnotes4u]

Really?

It is geometrically correct because you have triangles? Take 3 points and you have a triangle.

Can anyone give a definition of Geometrically correct?

 

[Colonel]

It is geometrically correct because you have triangles? Take 3 points and you have a triangle.

Can anyone give a definition of Geometrically correct?

The answer is purple, because aliens don't wear hats


Why am I the Colonel? Because I always get the chicken

 

[Slider]

i just read your first sentence to KK9, and he informed me that:

"not necessarily. if you adjoin the 2 SQUARES @ their POINTS, then it's NOT a RECTANGLE."

would you like to disprove him on visual concept? cause he won't listen to me, CJ.

Perhaps the two squares need to be slightly overlapped? That way one of the squares is a "touch inside" the other.

Ken

 

[Shaft]

The answer is purple, because aliens don't wear hats

You beat me to it! I was just about to give the very same answer.
Geez.

 

[Tony_in_MD]

I think a pool table is like the Monolith in 2001. Step inside and a whole new world awaits.

 

[takeitdown]

Circle, square, trapazoid I don't know. If somebody doesnt bet at least 3 digits, pool is a very boring game.

For all the form made by angles and rails, the infinite action a skilled player can create with the cueball is where the majic really lies.

 

[iusedtoberich]

Eddie Robbins book winning one pocket covers this. The cushion nose to cushion nose of a 1x2 ratio might not have been the best choice. Neither are where the diamonds are placed. The reason is if you follow the center of the ball (the gully line) it does not measure 1x2 like the cushion to cushion measurement does.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

I like the part about the perfect sphericity of the balls. I hate playing with square balls, you can't draw your rock worth shit with them.

Personally, I don't think the angles are what make the game. Angles are easy. Any six year-old can see the angles. Mastering friction is what makes the game so damn difficult, and so rewarding as you learn to control it.

Frictional forces are everywhere in pool, from the chalk on the tip to the throw on a cut shot to the drag of the cloth on the ball to the interaction with the rails. Without friction the game wouldn't even be recognizable. And the worst part is, you can't see it directly like you can an angle. All you can do is to try and understand it by the way the balls react, then learn to use it to get them to behave the way you want them to.

 

[boogeyman]

You beat me to it! I was just about to give the very same answer.
Geez.

We know darn well, that pool is not a perfect game. Too many external factors come into play that "modify" it, e.g. squirt, throw.
If it pool were geometrically correct then why is angle of incidence hardly ever equal to angle of refection?

Give me a break, CJ.
Is your question merely for the sake of self-promotion again?