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

[PINKLADY]

I also love the nights when I miss 14 shots to every one made, it's like magic!

shhh!!!! i conveniently left that part out -

no it's funny. tonight i went in. no plans on cracking my cue (although i brought it in....) and basically, with all these threads in my head, said F-it. hadn't shot in almost a year. i only broke once - then simply threw the balls onto the table haphazardly as a "break". and just....shot.

ran drills like i used to.

i'm telling you - WHAT A FEELING! i just let it go - and shot. yes, i know GEOMETRY. PHYSICS. blah blah, yada-yada. maybe it's a female-thing? i am NOT knocking ANY aiming system. but i'm telling yáll, i'd lineup the shot. then get down on it. focus. and then....blurrrr....

i don't even know what i was looking at. maybe the tip of my cue? all i know, is that i FELT it. adjusted slightly to it, blindly. and then, saw EVERYthing. in one skewed vision. sink.

i even got compliments from KK9. especially when i cut them 90 degrees (with a Lot of Inside English; FIERCE).

i'd have to claim PHYSICS, with a Touch of PMS....

 

[RED LITE]

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)

CJ's the guy with the expertise and history.........but...

Maybe I don't understand his question/issue. But my (much less experienced) opinion is that geometry is only part of the picture. Ordinary geometric assumptions are modified on the pool table. For instance, the banking angle varies with speed and the cushion characteristics. Likewise, the use of English on the cue ball modifies how it rebounds off a rail; and contact-induced-throw modifies the geometrically-expected collision result between two balls.

And these effects (bank speed, English, throw) are difficult if not impossible to quantify accurately. It takes experience and "feel".

RL

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

I don't believe that the challenges in shotmaking revolve around things like " line of aim," or "learning to cope with the effects of friction." It's pretty simple. The challenge of shot making revolves around either shooting a center ball and producing no deflection or deliberately shooting a ball with just the right amount of deflection. Doing one or both of those things proficiently is the only thing that will cause balls to drop with consistency....and it ain't easy!

I never said shotmaking revolved around the effects of friction. The question was "Is the Game of Pool Geometrically Correct?" Most of the game revolves around position play, not shotmaking. Friction plays an enormous role in position play, even if we don't think about it that way when we play.

Picture what position play would be like in a world without friction. First off, you would have to have a mechanical connection with the cue, because no grip would be strong enough to allow you to stroke the cue in a forward direction (the taper of the cue would allow a backstroke). You would have to hit dead center ball every time or you would miscue. So, no spin would be possible. The CB would slide the entire way to the OB every time, send the OB straight and predictably along the line of centers (no CIT, SIT, or skidding), and come off the OB at a 90º angle and slide endlessly around the table, hitting rail after rail without slowing down.

The OB would either go in the hole or join the CB in its travels as they both slid around hitting rails or other balls, setting them in motion as well. Heck, without friction we wouldn't even need "perfect sphericity" in the balls because they wouldn't be rolling, they'd be sliding along the frictionless cloth. We could use hockey pucks.

Eventually they would comes to rest because there would still be energy losses in the ball-ball and ball-rail collisions, but they would always come to rest either on a rail or against another ball. Not the best shape to get for your next shot (every "roll" would be an unlucky one), but at least the game would be "geometrically correct".


Of course, this is just a silly thought experiment, but I think it makes a my point. Although nobody thinks about friction while they play, it's profound effect on every aspect of play makes the entire game far from being geometrically correct... and far more interesting.

 

[Matt]

...they would always come to rest either on a rail or against another ball.

I think this is my favorite part.

...but at least the game would be "geometrically correct" [without friction].

Well, the rails (and the balls as well, technically speaking) would presumably still have some give to them, so that would still screw up with the geometrical "correctness" because the point of reflection would vary with speed and the ball rebounding from the rail would slide down the rail a bit during that contact time.

If you make everything rigid, or at least very close to rigid, the system would behave more like an air hockey table, where you do get fairly true "angle in equals angle out" reflections off the sides.

 

[CJ Wiley]

I favor a game without unneeded spin because the cue ball feels heavier.

CJ's the guy with the expertise and history.........but...

Maybe I don't understand his question/issue. But my (much less experienced) opinion is that geometry is only part of the picture. Ordinary geometric assumptions are modified on the pool table. For instance, the banking angle varies with speed and the cushion characteristics. Likewise, the use of English on the cue ball modifies how it rebounds off a rail; and contact-induced-throw modifies the geometrically-expected collision result between two balls.

And these effects (bank speed, English, throw) are difficult if not impossible to quantify accurately. It takes experience and "feel".

RL

Yes, you're right "english" does change the natural angles between the cue ball and the object ball....it's also about physics.

I favor a game without unneeded spin because the cue ball feels heavier....anyone that's using the TOI Technique will know what I'm referring to.

When spinning the cue ball it will go extra distance off the rails, but this sometimes gets us in trouble.....and it's harder to judge with outside influences such as humidity, and "less than perfect" table conditions.

 

[Dunnn51]

I just can't answer this seriously, as I think the game has sooooo many variables, how can it be complete?

Perhaps I am confusing "complete" with "perfect"

Where does one of Corey Deuell's Crazy draw shots come into this picture ?? :scratchhead::scratchhead:

 

[alstl]

When polynomial rectification and orthorectification are applied and a multitemporal analysis performed I have determined there is a slight flaw in the geometry of the game of pool which can only be corrected with TOI.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[Banks]

When polynomial rectification and orthorectification are applied and a multitemporal analysis performed I have determined there is a slight flaw in the geometry of the game of pool which can only be corrected with TOI.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

The question should've been, "Is blue the right color?"

Physics is the teacher.

 

[CJ Wiley]

Clear your messages when you get a chance

I was glad to hear your details of your "perfect pool night".....I've tried to respond a number of times the last couple of days, but your inbox is full.

Clear your messages when you get a chance, and I'll put in my "2 cents worth".

shhh!!!! i conveniently left that part out -

no it's funny. tonight i went in. no plans on cracking my cue (although i brought it in....) and basically, with all these threads in my head, said F-it. hadn't shot in almost a year. i only broke once - then simply threw the balls onto the table haphazardly as a "break". and just....shot.

ran drills like i used to.

i'm telling you - WHAT A FEELING! i just let it go - and shot. yes, i know GEOMETRY. PHYSICS. blah blah, yada-yada. maybe it's a female-thing? i am NOT knocking ANY aiming system. but i'm telling yáll, i'd lineup the shot. then get down on it. focus. and then....blurrrr....

i don't even know what i was looking at. maybe the tip of my cue? all i know, is that i FELT it. adjusted slightly to it, blindly. and then, saw EVERYthing. in one skewed vision. sink.

i even got compliments from KK9. especially when i cut them 90 degrees (with a Lot of Inside English; FIERCE).

i'd have to claim PHYSICS, with a Touch of PMS....

 

[DrGonzo]

I would say the geometry is incorrect, while the physics is of course correct.

 

[CJ Wiley]

won't be available (in the United States) until later this year

That's the advanced TOI chapter and won't be available (in the United States) until later this year at www.cjwiley.com

When polynomial rectification and orthorectification are applied and a multitemporal analysis performed I have determined there is a slight flaw in the geometry of the game of pool which can only be corrected with TOI.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[CJ Wiley]

The perfection of pool has been there all the time

I never said shotmaking revolved around the effects of friction. The question was "Is the Game of Pool Geometrically Correct?" Most of the game revolves around position play, not shotmaking. Friction plays an enormous role in position play, even if we don't think about it that way when we play.

You can play perfect position every time and if you don't make the ball it's all "null and void". Pool is complete at the highest level, and incomplete at the others.....the catalyst is the player, I've never seen a missed shot without a player involved (or a poor position play either). The incredibleness of playing is to see how our minds, bodies, and the game coordinate, and align to make perfection possible.

The perfection of pool has been there all the time, it's simply up to us to discover. 'The Game is the Teacher'

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

... they would always come to rest either on a rail or against another ball.

I think this is my favorite part.

Me, too. Because they always end up there anyway in my case. In a world without friction, at least I'd have a good excuse.

 

[CJ Wiley]

friction can be a great thing

Me, too. Because they always end up there anyway in my case. In a world without friction, at least I'd have a good excuse.

Yes, indeed, too bad life's not that smmmoooottttthhhh. Of course friction is an essential thing is some ways.....is that "science fiction," or "science friction". :groucho:

 

[CJ Wiley]

it's best to "model" champion players to unlock this mystery in our own games.

The game of pool is perfect if we can just figure out how to uncover it for yourselves. This takes what it takes, and usually it's best to "model" champion players to unlock this mystery in our own games.

I used to practice with Buddy Hall in Tampa Florida when we both lived there and he was always an inspiration.....at times I would try to imitate his stroke/grip/tempo and found out that it worked really well for Buddy and not so well for me....that's the issue, even though we all have common denominators in our games, we still have to find a way to do it our own way.
Buddy has shown me things that don't work for me, but work for other people and I've learned the same type things from Omaha John, Mike Lebron, Efren, Hopkins, David Howard, Earl Strickland, Jr. Weldon, Jersey Red, Eddie Taylor, Big John, Doug Smith, etc.

When you pay attention around guys like this you'll often pick up key bits of wisdom, especially if you know how to elicit it. Sometimes you can use it directly, and other times you have to tweak it a bit to conform to your own personal style....learning to improve is more of a journey than a destination....and just like travel broadens our horizons, so does understanding how others experience their personal reality, especially at the highest level.

We, that strive to discover the perfection in the game realize that we express ourselves through the game, AND the game {paradoxically} must express its self though us..... and this, in appearance is as unique as a fingerprint.

 

[ceebee]

Geometrically correct or complete

I do not believe that Pool & Billiards is correct or complete.

There is lots of geometry that can be used to base your feelings and/or opinions on, but the game is laced with variables. Variables that have to be considered before pulling the trigger.

It's a great game, sort of like Forrest Gump's box of chocolates, where you never know what you are gonna get...

Good Luck.

 

[Jaden]

I got into this argument with a really good player in OKC...

I do not believe that Pool & Billiards is correct or complete.

There is lots of geometry that can be used to base your feelings and/or opinions on, but the game is laced with variables. Variables that have to be considered before pulling the trigger.

It's a great game, sort of like Forrest Gump's box of chocolates, where you never know what you are gonna get...

Good Luck.

I was trying to show where most people on kicks and banks make their mistake when using angle in/angle out and that's that people try to aim center ball and that just doesn't work.

You have to aim through the contact point and shift to center ball to know where to aim, the contact point being the place on the ball that makes contact with the rail (whether that be the CB on kicks or the OB on banks) that is parallel with the rail.

The wider the angle, the greater the disparity between center ball angle in/angle out and CP angle in/angle out.

This player claimed that it couldn't possibly be accurate, which both is and isn't true.

There are no such things as banks or kicks where SOME feel doesn't come into play because of firmness of hit, etc...

What "SYSTEMS" do is 1.) Give you a starting point that you can trust and 2.) Help to isolate problems with your stroke and 3.) Give you something to focus on during the shot to keep stray thoughts from creeping in and throwing you off.

IOW, "Systems" give you a systematic approach that is much better at giving you repeatability and consistency and determining the causality of failure.

Jaden

 

[CJ Wiley]

this happens when we're willing to give up control in exchange for connection.

Playing pool is a way of self expression...like a musician, it's essential to be connected to the experience, and even get the sensation "I'm not just playing the game, the game is playing me." .....and paradoxically, this happens when we're willing to give up control in exchange for connection.

I do not believe that Pool & Billiards is correct or complete.

There is lots of geometry that can be used to base your feelings and/or opinions on, but the game is laced with variables. Variables that have to be considered before pulling the trigger.

It's a great game, sort of like Forrest Gump's box of chocolates, where you never know what you are gonna get...

Good Luck.

 

[CJ Wiley]

The cue ball is FLAT and one dimensional for the purposes of aiming.

I can't help but wonder how anyone could think you could play pool (or anything else) at the highest level without a system. Whether we want to realize it or not there is a conscious or unconcious system for all aspects of pocket billiards. That goes for pocketing balls, playing zone position, lining up your eyes correctly relative to the line of the shot, etc.

The main thing with aiming is the way we connect the two balls together BEFORE getting down on the shot. If anyone doesn't think we have a system for that I will tell them they're living in a fantasy world.

The thing that intermediate players are missing is there's 2 lines when aiming and one uses the edge of the cue ball and the other uses the center of the cue ball. And to understand this you must stop looking at the balls like they're round....they are, for all intents and purposes FLAT and one dimensional for the purposes of aiming.

I go over a lot of this in my 3rd volume of Ultimate Pool Secrets, but after talking to Stan, Hunter, and Corey, I realized I was doing something else unconsciously that is more of the foundation of his system.

This has done wonders for my understanding how it all comes together and has enabled me to "remember" exactly how I was doing it in my prime. When playing good (gambling) I would expect to miss about one ball an hour (that I was trying to pocket) , and when I was playing great I would not make one ball every 2 hours.

When I played Efren in Seattle for 14 hours I missed 6 balls total (that's my top speed). If anyone thinks I didn't use a system to do that that's fine.....but I'd challenge them to shoot a gun or bow without sights, because that's how they're playing pool if they don't know how to utilize systems in their pool game. 'My Game is the Teacher'

PS: regarding "aiming systems" --------> "even walking down a flight of stairs requires a "stepping system".

I understand why Pros say some of the things they do about him not having an aiming system....however, I also don't think they would say the same things to me in private....everyone has a system, and you also know if you analyze it too much without completely understanding it your game will suffer greatly....at some point it's essential to keep from "thinking" about the unconscious activity too much.

However, I for one have sacrificed my level of play quite a bit to figure this stuff out and when I start playing seriously again I'll also try to "not think about my game"....that's why it's virtually impossible to teach at a world class level and play at that level at the same time..

I was trying to show where most people on kicks and banks make their mistake when using angle in/angle out and that's that people try to aim center ball and that just doesn't work.

You have to aim through the contact point and shift to center ball to know where to aim, the contact point being the place on the ball that makes contact with the rail (whether that be the CB on kicks or the OB on banks) that is parallel with the rail.

The wider the angle, the greater the disparity between center ball angle in/angle out and CP angle in/angle out.

This player claimed that it couldn't possibly be accurate, which both is and isn't true.

There are no such things as banks or kicks where SOME feel doesn't come into play because of firmness of hit, etc...

What "SYSTEMS" do is 1.) Give you a starting point that you can trust and 2.) Help to isolate problems with your stroke and 3.) Give you something to focus on during the shot to keep stray thoughts from creeping in and throwing you off.

IOW, "Systems" give you a systematic approach that is much better at giving you repeatability and consistency and determining the causality of failure.

Jaden

 

[stan shuffett]

An excellent post, CJ.

Stan Shuffett

I can't help but wonder how anyone could think you could play pool (or anything else) at the highest level without a system. Whether we want to realize it or not there is a conscious or unconcious system for all aspects of pocket billiards. That goes for pocketing balls, playing zone position, lining up your eyes correctly relative to the line of the shot, etc.

The main thing with aiming is the way we connect the two balls together BEFORE getting down on the shot. If anyone doesn't think we have a system for that I will tell them they're living in a fantasy world.

The thing that intermediate players are missing is there's 2 lines when aiming and one uses the edge of the cue ball and the other uses the center of the cue ball. And to understand this you must stop looking at the balls like they're round....they are, for all intents and purposes FLAT and one dimensional for the purposes of aiming.

I go over a lot of this in my 3rd volume of Ultimate Pool Secrets, but after talking to Stan, Hunter, and Corey, I realized I was doing something else unconsciously that is more of the foundation of his system.

This has done wonders for my understanding how it all comes together and has enabled me to "remember" exactly how I was doing it in my prime. When playing good (gambling) I would expect to miss about one ball an hour (that I was trying to pocket) , and when I was playing great I would not make one ball every 2 hours.

When I played Efren in Seattle for 14 hours I missed 6 balls total (that's my top speed). If anyone thinks I didn't use a system to do that that's fine.....but I'd challenge them to shoot a gun or bow without sights, because that's how they're playing pool if they don't know how to utilize systems in their pool game. 'My Game is the Teacher'

PS: regarding "aiming systems" --------> "even walking down a flight of stairs requires a "stepping system".

I understand why Pros say some of the things they do about him not having an aiming system....however, I also don't think they would say the same things to me in private....everyone has a system, and you also know if you analyze it too much without completely understanding it your game will suffer greatly....at some point it's essential to keep from "thinking" about the unconscious activity too much.

However, I for one have sacrificed my level of play quite a bit to figure this stuff out and when I start playing seriously again I'll also try to "not think about my game"....that's why it's virtually impossible to teach at a world class level and play at that level at the same time..