Is there any way to determine cut angle in degrees?
- Thread starter booville
- Start date
Method and Diagram
Estimating the angle of central intersection can be assisted by imaging an additional rightmost line (slanted right). The angles of the shot, angle on the near rail and the intersection at the cue and object balls are all the same. Note the distances on the top and bottom rails from the intersection. They are about 1 1/4 diamonds (red) horizontal on the top rail and about 3/4 diamonds (red) on the bottom rail. Since the leftmost and rightmost lines are parallel to each other the horizontal distance from one rail can be transported to the opposite rail. That is the total horizontal distance 2 diamonds (black) is equal to the intersection angel on both rails. This is easy to calculate and apply.
Distance Total = 1 1/4 (top, red) + 3/4 (bottom, red) = 2 diamonds (black)
Does this help. A little small. Need to work on resizing on Image Shack.
Estimating the angle of central intersection can be assisted by imaging an additional rightmost line (slanted right). The angles of the shot, angle on the near rail and the intersection at the cue and object balls are all the same. Note the distances on the top and bottom rails from the intersection. They are about 1 1/4 diamonds (red) horizontal on the top rail and about 3/4 diamonds (red) on the bottom rail. Since the leftmost and rightmost lines are parallel to each other the horizontal distance from one rail can be transported to the opposite rail. That is the total horizontal distance 2 diamonds (black) is equal to the intersection angel on both rails. This is easy to calculate and apply.
Distance Total = 1 1/4 (top, red) + 3/4 (bottom, red) = 2 diamonds (black)
Does this help. A little small. Need to work on resizing on Image Shack.
You have to include the distance the diamonds are back from the rail nose or gutter and the diameter of the ball, assuming you want the ball to go to the center of the pocket.
Oops. When I saw the 15 inches, I thought of this method which has been discussed before:
The tip of the cue is at the center of the ghost ball. The distance X is the base of an isosceles triangle. If X is measured in quarter inches, it gives the angle, pretty nearly. Here are x (in) x (in/4) actual angle and error:
1 4 3.82 0.18
2 8 7.65 0.35
3 12 11.48 0.52
4 16 15.32 0.68
5 20 19.19 0.81
6 24 23.07 0.93
7 28 26.99 1.01
8 32 30.93 1.07
9 36 34.92 1.08
10 40 38.94 1.06
11 44 43.02 0.98
12 48 47.16 0.84
13 52 51.36 0.64
14 56 55.64 0.36
15 60 60.00 0.00
16 64 64.46 -0.46
17 68 69.04 -1.04
18 72 73.74 -1.74
19 76 78.59 -2.59
Nice find Bob. I see your method has a wider range of angles with acceptable error tolerances. I will probably steal it.
I mean use it.
I mean use it.
just shoot the ball in
That's funny...:lol:
Wrong.
You have to make this game as complicated as possible.
You have to make this game as complicated as possible.
Bob Jewett posted:
***************
The tip of the cue is at the center of the ghost ball. The distance X is the base of an isosceles triangle...
*******************
From a practical viewpoint, it is important to note that the tip of the cue need not be at the GB center. Since the GB center may be 7' away, a more practical approach is to place the 15" mark on your cue over the CB, with the tip on the estimated CB-GB line (as discussed, for long shots the CB-OB line is often adequate for longer shots). Then pivot the cue around the tip until it lies parallel to the OB-pocket line. Estimate the base of the triangle in inches, multiply by 4, and you are done. For really close shots the method can be used by extending the estimated CB-OB line "behind" the CB.
This saves a lot of reaching. For intermediate and long shots, the 30" point of the cue is often easiest to use (just 1" above joint), and then the multiplier is 2 instead of 4.
Good catch on the isoceles vs. right triangle provideing better results at high cut angles.
***************
The tip of the cue is at the center of the ghost ball. The distance X is the base of an isosceles triangle...
*******************
From a practical viewpoint, it is important to note that the tip of the cue need not be at the GB center. Since the GB center may be 7' away, a more practical approach is to place the 15" mark on your cue over the CB, with the tip on the estimated CB-GB line (as discussed, for long shots the CB-OB line is often adequate for longer shots). Then pivot the cue around the tip until it lies parallel to the OB-pocket line. Estimate the base of the triangle in inches, multiply by 4, and you are done. For really close shots the method can be used by extending the estimated CB-OB line "behind" the CB.
This saves a lot of reaching. For intermediate and long shots, the 30" point of the cue is often easiest to use (just 1" above joint), and then the multiplier is 2 instead of 4.
Good catch on the isoceles vs. right triangle provideing better results at high cut angles.
i have never went into all this.
i think you guys want to get better
go play good players as cheap as you can
play tourneys as well.
forget all this stuff in this thread
learn on the table
just my opp
I understand and agree with your point.
All of the calculation is to get one close on the shots. After that a feel is developed. Some people just approach a problem like this as an engineer.
Why would someone with different skills leave them unused?
A method like this will get you in a ball park range.
The difficulty is in using mental powers and after lining the shot up just to relax and let your mind settle a bit. Then the feedback will be the shot is on, or no it is not. When you can line up nearaly on for a shot, the mental feel part comes quicker. I say this as someone who took up pool as an adult.
It is my view to use everything you can to get better and not limit yourself to what another thinks is sufficient. No offense intended.
yes what ever works for you.
i just think so many players on here think to much.
you have to go out and do it.
With due respect for your natural abilities, can or have you taught anyone to shoot as well as you?
Most good shooters that one would play in tournaments won't take the time to teach their opponent.
That leaves the one who wants to improve to study the better player from his seat. This could be a slow process for most.
You are gifted.:smile:
i do give lessons
and noone i have tought plays my speed.
but hell there are maybe 20 in the usa that do.
i am gifted but i put my time in dont worry.
i just would like to see players on here get out play more
and do these whatever you call it less.
i think thats how you get better
like i said thats my opp.
Gotcha...I think. So you programmed for aiming 'through' the diamonds, and you considered the center of the corner pockets to be where a ball would be tangent to extensions of both cushions into an imaginary corner (like a ball wedged in a corner on a carom table).
Darn, I should've guessed that with the hints about where the errors went to zero. I see the confusion now since it's essentially the same method. It just keeps the measurements in the nice linear range by halving the angle and doubling the result (more or less).
Robert
Sorry...
But you are woefully mistaken. It's easy to say that knowing degree angles for cut shots is useless because the entirety of the pool world has no application for this information. Very few people actually know how to apply angle measurements in order to pocket, kcik or bank at a ball/target. In the near future you'll see what the full scope and power of this kind of information is... that is when Robert Publishes his work.
Really the argument that knowing 1 degree difference won't help you get position or show you the proper way to stroke a shot to make a ball is moot because you (pool world in general) don't have a way to apply the knowledge. But you should know that 1 degree difference in a shot is and can be everything... especially if you are an aspiring 1 pocket player.
I myself, to this point, have done things the old fashioned way. Grinding out 8 and 9 hour sessions daily for summers at a time in order to improve my game. I've done well with that method and have beaten top players. I've traveled to tournaments across the country, gambled, taken lessons, the whole 9. I know that's one of the biggest factors in being able to compete against and beat the top pros. With that said, seeing what im seeing now, and looking at the top pros, i can identify their weaknesses, and realize their limits. Their models are restricted and mine won't be. It will happen in time and when you have access to the full scope of things i think you'll change your mind.
I know because i've had the great fortune of being exposed to this information before alot of people have. I know that when I officially apply these things and it becomes the new foundation for my game, that it's gonna be tough action out there for alot of people. I love this game and everything associated with it (for the most part). You sound like you're very passionate about it also. So i wouldn't go so far as to say there's no value in more information because when it comes down to it, the more you know, the more weapons you have, and the higher the probability that you'll outlast your opponent.
Knowledge isn't alone enough of course, you gotta get in the box and tear it up and apply what you've learned through those quality hours. I think you agree with that. But would you rather spend 1,000 hours spent of trial and error, or would you rather spend 1,000 hours executing every single time exactly what you intend to... I'm telling you it's scary stuff to think about. Good luck in your game and endeavors and I hope you get a chance to really see this stuff in action soon. Catch you out there.
:thumbup:
But you are woefully mistaken. It's easy to say that knowing degree angles for cut shots is useless because the entirety of the pool world has no application for this information. Very few people actually know how to apply angle measurements in order to pocket, kcik or bank at a ball/target. In the near future you'll see what the full scope and power of this kind of information is... that is when Robert Publishes his work.
Really the argument that knowing 1 degree difference won't help you get position or show you the proper way to stroke a shot to make a ball is moot because you (pool world in general) don't have a way to apply the knowledge. But you should know that 1 degree difference in a shot is and can be everything... especially if you are an aspiring 1 pocket player.
I myself, to this point, have done things the old fashioned way. Grinding out 8 and 9 hour sessions daily for summers at a time in order to improve my game. I've done well with that method and have beaten top players. I've traveled to tournaments across the country, gambled, taken lessons, the whole 9. I know that's one of the biggest factors in being able to compete against and beat the top pros. With that said, seeing what im seeing now, and looking at the top pros, i can identify their weaknesses, and realize their limits. Their models are restricted and mine won't be. It will happen in time and when you have access to the full scope of things i think you'll change your mind.
I know because i've had the great fortune of being exposed to this information before alot of people have. I know that when I officially apply these things and it becomes the new foundation for my game, that it's gonna be tough action out there for alot of people. I love this game and everything associated with it (for the most part). You sound like you're very passionate about it also. So i wouldn't go so far as to say there's no value in more information because when it comes down to it, the more you know, the more weapons you have, and the higher the probability that you'll outlast your opponent.
Knowledge isn't alone enough of course, you gotta get in the box and tear it up and apply what you've learned through those quality hours. I think you agree with that. But would you rather spend 1,000 hours spent of trial and error, or would you rather spend 1,000 hours executing every single time exactly what you intend to... I'm telling you it's scary stuff to think about. Good luck in your game and endeavors and I hope you get a chance to really see this stuff in action soon. Catch you out there.
:thumbup:
The value of labels
At times people develop labels (words) to help them identify a sequence of events. For instance you may have a set of labels for the amount of power that you use when playing pool. There is a “soft shot,” “medium shot” and a “hard shot.” These descriptive labels are used by your brain to determine what should be done when you coordinate your muscles. While it is probably true that no two “hard shots” are identical because there are limits to human physiology and the different requirements for each shot, the label is a template that is used with other templates such as “a little running English,” to help you decide how to play a shot.
Labels help you organize your non-verbalized thinking. With a sufficient amount of practice you have developed many templates to assist you. It is partially for this reason that you recognize a particular shot and the several adjustments that are needed. When you tell the less experienced player to use “a little low running English,” he doesn’t know what you are talking about, why he should use it, or what it will do.
With sufficient experience and attention to detail the experienced player “sees” things at the table that the less experienced player does not see. That is why he “knows” that your next shot is a scratch shot. While he may not say to himself that the shot is two degrees off and therefore the CB will go to the center pocket, he has learned to make exquisite calculations about colliding spheres. Unfortunately some people do not have the verbal skills to tell you what they see but they may indeed see those small angles – and they know it is the angles they are using. The person who can verbalize what he sees and then uses this information is better positioned to make these templates and then integrate them with the other templates for determining a shot.
While you may not see the need for precise determinations of cut angles and how this information can be used to improve you game it does not mean that it is not useful. Think of it this way, precise language serves a function for organizing all of our behaviors. Perhaps it is worth learning to estimate precise angles and how they can be used – with or without words.
At times people develop labels (words) to help them identify a sequence of events. For instance you may have a set of labels for the amount of power that you use when playing pool. There is a “soft shot,” “medium shot” and a “hard shot.” These descriptive labels are used by your brain to determine what should be done when you coordinate your muscles. While it is probably true that no two “hard shots” are identical because there are limits to human physiology and the different requirements for each shot, the label is a template that is used with other templates such as “a little running English,” to help you decide how to play a shot.
Labels help you organize your non-verbalized thinking. With a sufficient amount of practice you have developed many templates to assist you. It is partially for this reason that you recognize a particular shot and the several adjustments that are needed. When you tell the less experienced player to use “a little low running English,” he doesn’t know what you are talking about, why he should use it, or what it will do.
With sufficient experience and attention to detail the experienced player “sees” things at the table that the less experienced player does not see. That is why he “knows” that your next shot is a scratch shot. While he may not say to himself that the shot is two degrees off and therefore the CB will go to the center pocket, he has learned to make exquisite calculations about colliding spheres. Unfortunately some people do not have the verbal skills to tell you what they see but they may indeed see those small angles – and they know it is the angles they are using. The person who can verbalize what he sees and then uses this information is better positioned to make these templates and then integrate them with the other templates for determining a shot.
While you may not see the need for precise determinations of cut angles and how this information can be used to improve you game it does not mean that it is not useful. Think of it this way, precise language serves a function for organizing all of our behaviors. Perhaps it is worth learning to estimate precise angles and how they can be used – with or without words.
Fractional aiming has been around for a long time......
Hi there,
No matter how you slice it or dice it our eyes naturally fractionally aim. 1/3 1/2 1/4 1/8 are identifiable measurements that we can visualize in our mind.
Whether you know it's 1/4 or just guess at the amount you are fractionally aiming.
Hi there,
No matter how you slice it or dice it our eyes naturally fractionally aim. 1/3 1/2 1/4 1/8 are identifiable measurements that we can visualize in our mind.
Whether you know it's 1/4 or just guess at the amount you are fractionally aiming.
That's close to the figure I got (+/- .0295). I wonder if your number is larger because you allowed for ball overlap of the points (which would make it more realistic than mine)?
Very true. Robert Byrne points out that a 30-degree cut on a spot shot can be set up by placing the cueball on a line going from the edge of the object ball to the inside jaw/point of the pocket diagonally opposite the target pocket:
If you wanted to be slightly more precise about it, since pocket sizes vary, let Z be the distance from the center of the upper right corner pocket (intersection of the adjacent cushion noses) to the point where the cue crosses the nose of the short cushion. On a 9' table (100" X 50"), Z is 3.739". This puts the point where the cue crosses the cushion slightly closer to the center-line of the table than the inside point of the pocket, for typical pocket sizes.
In general, and for the heck of it, given table length L, and ball radius R, with L being 100" on a 9' table:
Z = [(3/4)L - 2R/Sqrt(2)][1 - tan(15)] - (1/2)L
where Sqrt(2) = 1.41421..., and tan(15) = 0.26795....
This is a formula where the terms have been re-arranged in order to make calculation a bit quicker. The Sqrt(2) divisor comes from the ghostball position and the fact that cos(45)=sin(45)=1/Sqrt(2).
As you point out though, when adjusting for throw while still executing a half-ball hit, you'll want to shorten up on Z a bit. With a rolling cueball and a 30-degree cut, you should expect very little throw, about 1/2 degree or less, unless it's moving very slowly (based on Dr. Dave's plots). If we go with 1/2 degree, an approximate adjustment to Z would be to use tan(15.5) instead of tan(15) in the above formula. Tan (15.5) = 0.27732 and the adjusted value of Z on a 9' table is then 3.050". Projecting this across the width of the pocket opening (multiplying by 1/Sqrt(2)), this distance is 2.16". So for a 4" pocket, this puts the cue crossover point virtually at the inside point of the pocket. With a wider pocket, it's a touch inside of the point.
Jim
Jal,
Thanks for the math lessons, but I don't delve into that arena for I give my charge numbers to the mathematicians, structural and thermal analysis gurus who are the subject matter experts and have their respective pedigrees.
I on the otherhand use the CAD tools to diagram the math...but then the math is rounded off for the sake of graphic speed - so there may be round off errors.
What you revealed to me about the diagonal on the the pool table being ~26 degrees is that though I aim at the edge of the OB, it goes into the pocket because of CIT since I shoot center CB. To neutralize the CIT, I should shoot with a hair of outside English and deal with the resulting squirt - to get the calculated angle.
What many of the fractional aiming systems describe and that I have diagrammed do not include CIT influence on the actual angle. Some sage here alerted me to CIT, but until now I didn't absorb it.
Thanks.
Thanks for the math lessons, but I don't delve into that arena for I give my charge numbers to the mathematicians, structural and thermal analysis gurus who are the subject matter experts and have their respective pedigrees.
I on the otherhand use the CAD tools to diagram the math...but then the math is rounded off for the sake of graphic speed - so there may be round off errors.
What you revealed to me about the diagonal on the the pool table being ~26 degrees is that though I aim at the edge of the OB, it goes into the pocket because of CIT since I shoot center CB. To neutralize the CIT, I should shoot with a hair of outside English and deal with the resulting squirt - to get the calculated angle.
What many of the fractional aiming systems describe and that I have diagrammed do not include CIT influence on the actual angle. Some sage here alerted me to CIT, but until now I didn't absorb it.
Thanks.