John Schmidt's and Corey Deuel's comments on aiming systems

[mattp]

Back cuts?

If I am understanding this correctly CJ, you are saying to use this technique even on shallow angle back cuts. I have a hard time believing this would be the ideal pocketing method for anybody with these shots because the speed and non helping English are less conducive to pocketing the ball as opposed to hitting outside a little softer. That way you have less speed AND helping English. Plus you are aiming just as full as with inside because you are spinning it in.
As I said before, I really like this for standard type(non back cut) shots.
Is anyone else messing with this having the same issue?:frown:

 

[LAMas]

With the OB close to the rail and the pocket down table on that rail, inside english would cause the OB to accept a helping english. CCW rotation if the OB is close to a rail on the right and CW rotation on the OB if it is close to a rail on the left.

For a backcut, inside english would not be helping. If you use a bit of inside on a backcut, you will need to aim for the far facing of the pocket in order to apply helping english to the OB. If you apply too much inside, the OB will squirt (more) and be overcut and be sent to the center of the pocket and not glance off of the far facing.

The way I see the logic of CJ's method, One aims the OB at the side of the pocket that will accept helping english effected by at touch of inside
inside english...and not the center of the pocket.

By using a touch of inside english, the OB squirts toward the center of the pocket with helping english.

With a touch of inside, the possible errors are that you don't hit a touch, but instead you hit the center CB ball and the OB goes to the side of the pocket that you were aiming at.

If you hit the CB with more than a touch of inside, the CB will squirt more and send the OB to a bit more than the center of the pocket to the otherside of the pocket that you were aiming at.

:smile:

 

[Mikjary]

If I am understanding this correctly CJ, you are saying to use this technique even on shallow angle back cuts. I have a hard time believing this would be the ideal pocketing method for anybody with these shots because the speed and non helping English are less conducive to pocketing the ball as opposed to hitting outside a little softer. That way you have less speed AND helping English. Plus you are aiming just as full as with inside because you are spinning it in.
As I said before, I really like this for standard type(non back cut) shots.
Is anyone else messing with this having the same issue?:frown:

Matt,

Whether you're hitting a back cut or regular cut shot, you're still hitting the object ball on the same side is the way I see it. The direction to the pocket for the object ball is the same on both shots. There may a difference in throw because of the angle of the cut being more or less, but the principle is the same. Just some obvious observations.

If you feel more confident with soft outside then you can always use that. I don't feel comfortable with certain shots cueing inside because I like to use outside, too. I always aimed center pocket and let the ball go into the hole adjusting for squirt on all the different shots. Lots of adjusting. High left, low left, high right, low right, soft shots, hard shots...always adjusting. I decided I would get past my comfort zone and see what'll happen without all the compensating. When I win the US Open I'll tell you if it was worth it! :smile:

Best,
Mike

 

[JB Cases]

Joey, Hi old Buddy...

When this thread was only about 600 posts, it was sort of fading out, like on page 4 or 5...I dug it out, and made a post, saying I wonder if I can 'gig' somebody, into cranking it up, and double the posts...Ha, here we are, at over 1600 posts, and NO visable end in sight..:boring2:

What does this say about the intelligence, of the average "Aiming System" responder ? Could it be, that NO ONE cares, or understands what the other is saying ?

Wheres my buddy Lou F ?...Has he given up ?...He may be the smartest guy on the forum, if he has !...:barf:..

View attachment 243744

If hitting a million balls is the only way to get good then writing a million words is the way to get information across.

Persistence.

 

[Mikjary]

The way I see the logic of CJ's method, One aims the OB at the side of the pocket that will accept helping english effected by at touch of inside
inside english...and not the center of the pocket.

By using a touch of inside english, the OB squirts toward the center of the pocket with helping english.

With a touch of inside, the possible errors are that you don't hit a touch, but instead you hit the center CB ball and the OB goes to the side of the pocket that you were aiming at.

If you hit the CB with more than a touch of inside, the CB will squirt more and send the OB to a bit more than the center of the pocket to the otherside of the pocket that you were aiming at.

:smile:

Big E,

The simplicity of your statement means you don't understand what everybody else is saying either! Even though you've probably used the center pocket method like me for many years, you don't have a clue. :smile: You're better off not trying this method because you play really good with the old tried and true center pocket method. Why take a chance when you're already top notch? Don't change a thing. :grin-square:

Seriously, in order to see a change, we need to put out an effort to look at what we're doing in a different light. We can all swing a bat or golf club and think it's the right way, but why don't we achieve any more than fleeting glimpses of excellence? Bad genes? I don't like to listen to people who put limits on ideas. CJ's method is there for the taking. No strings. I'm glad you checked it out. Take care!

Best,
Mike

 

[ENGLISH!]

Matt,

Whether you're hitting a back cut or regular cut shot, you're still hitting the object ball on the same side is the way I see it. The direction to the pocket for the object ball is the same on both shots. There may a difference in throw because of the angle of the cut being more or less, but the principle is the same. Just some obvious observations.

If you feel more confident with soft outside then you can always use that. I don't feel comfortable with certain shots cueing inside because I like to use outside, too. I always aimed center pocket and let the ball go into the hole adjusting for squirt on all the different shots. Lots of adjusting. High left, low left, high right, low right, soft shots, hard shots...always adjusting. I decided I would get past my comfort zone and see what'll happen without all the compensating. When I win the US Open I'll tell you if it was worth it! :smile:

Best,
Mike

Mike, I agree.

As I've stated before I employed this method after my eye injury some 20 years ago & then gradually got back to playing with both inside & outside again. I have not yet taken the time to use just the inside consistantly since CJ introduced it here but I certainly intend to do so. I guess I can readily realeyes the advantages to it as I have already used it consistantly in the past.

RJ

 

[Mikjary]

RJ,

I, too, came back after a long layoff. The game is still without equal. I feel nothing is unknown physically about it. And most experienced players can do mechanically what the pros do. The difference between the pro and the advanced player is the way they perceive what they do. The mental aspect is so huge, yet simple when the right door is unlocked.

Your past experience and mine help us to see a simple concept presented in a new light. What is dismissed by many without personal trial and error, will push a few to new levels with a bit of effort on their part. I'd like to be on that train and go somewhere with my game!:smile:

Best,
Mike

 

[CJ Wiley]

My goal is for you to turn your cue and cue ball into a weapon

If I am understanding this correctly CJ, you are saying to use this technique even on shallow angle back cuts. I have a hard time believing this would be the ideal pocketing method for anybody with these shots because the speed and non helping English are less conducive to pocketing the ball as opposed to hitting outside a little softer. That way you have less speed AND helping English. Plus you are aiming just as full as with inside because you are spinning it in.
As I said before, I really like this for standard type(non back cut) shots.
Is anyone else messing with this having the same issue?:frown:

To use the "touch of inside" you must accelerate your stoke. If you have a particular shot that you can't accelerate then you need to look at using outside "helping english". And when the balls are very close there's really no issue about deflection anyway. When the balls are close I look for a way to use the "touch of inside" and accelerate first...if there's no way to do this effectively I'll spin the ball in.

I've said several times now that I recommend you use the "Touch of Inside" on EVERY shot for 2-3 straight hours. This is a learning process and you'll be FORCED to learn shots and strokes that could learn NO OTHER WAY.....if you take that stroke and use it in your regular game, with a different type of english THAT'S OK to do (It's just not the best way in my opinion)....the benefit is you've learned another way to do it and it may be MORE effective for you than how you did it before.

I'm helping YOU build an arsenal of new and effective shots using the "Touch of Inside" system. This is the calibration system I used to become one of the most feared money players in the world. There's no stings attached, I'm not asking for donations, and if you choose to someday thanks me I'll respectively and congruently say "you are welcome".

If you're having trouble with this in any way please contact me on my athlete's page at the bottom of the page, my Inbox on here isn't big enough and keeps filling up. I"ll be happy to "steer you through" any issues you may be having.

I've answered EVERY question anyone has ask so far, that isn't just trying to play "word games" and argue points that only apply to video/virtual pool games. My goal is for you to turn your cue and cue ball into a weapon that you can dominate the Game with, not just play it. :wink:

 

[SpiderWebComm]

CJ's inside technique is the best for steep, hard 14.1 break shots.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

 

[Jal]

...
I've answered EVERY question anyone has ask so far, that isn't just trying to play "word games" and argue points that only apply to video/virtual pool games.

Word games?

Can you tell me what's wrong with the following which I posted earlier?

"If you think you're aiming for the "thick" side of the pocket accurately (without the squirt yet factoring in), but are in fact undercutting it by one-half pocket +, and the squirt would have taken you back to center pocket had you aimed to the thick side accurately, you're still going to undercut it by more than one-half pocket, even with the squirt compensation.

And if you think you're aiming for the thick side of the pocket accurately (without the squirt yet factoring in), but are in fact overcutting it by one-half pocket +, and the squirt would have taken you to center pocket had you aimed accurately, you're now going to overcut it by more than one-half pocket."

How is this any different than aiming for center pocket without the inside english and accompanying squirt, and missing because you were half a pocket off? If you're saying that one can aim more accurately at the thick side of a pocket than center pocket, and the vast preponderance of misses occur from overcutting shots, at least for some players, then I see your logic, though wonder about the premise.

Jim

 

[JB Cases]

FWIW another bonafide Champion, Jimmy Reid, once told me the same thing about hitting balls when learning a new technique, namely that you have to do it relentlessly until you know you have it without a doubt. He also used to say you should start a training session by hitting balls for 15 minutes with only right spin, 15 min only left spin, 15 min draw, 15 min follow etc.... He said that this loosens you up and shows you what the table is doing.

 

[Slh]

I've answered EVERY question anyone has ask so far, that isn't just trying to play "word games" and argue points that only apply to video/virtual pool games. My goal is for you to turn your cue and cue ball into a weapon that you can dominate the Game with, not just play it. :wink:

OT:
did you play virtual pool 4? Do you think it is a realistic game or not?

 

[JoeyA]

One way that CJ's technique is different is that this technique forces the shooter to more sharply focus their attention to where you're aiming the object ball.

The other thing that is different is that you are using a touch of inside, which prevents you from using a touch of unwanted outside.

A third thing is the cue ball will react differently when it contacts the rail after striking the object ball.

If you want more reason to master this technique you might consider:

If you're aiming the object ball toward the center of the pocket (without squirt), most of us get rather lazy in our aiming. This technique of CJ's is similar to practicing on tight pockets as far as the additional attention to aiming the object ball is concerned.

If you get lazy and the object bal isn't aimed at the center of the pocket (wthout squirt),you could easily and accidentally put RIGHT or LEFT side spin on the cue ball forcing a miss by throwing the object ball into the point. I know it's happened to me and I have to imagine that it has happened to others.

The bottom line to all of this is that there are many ways to make balls, get shape etc. It is to our advantage to learn them all and to excel with all techniques and perspectives. CJ's technique is a different perspective and utilizes a touch of inside AND in addition to the extra focus that is required, additional attention is paid to acceleration of the cue stick.

Like he aiming system, CTE/Pro1, CJ's technique taps into some of the problem areas of excellence in cueing.

People want to complain about why they don't play as well as the pros and they want to blame it on their lack of talent or their day time job, their practice time etc., but the truth is that some people want to be the authority on how pool is perceived. The bare bones of perception at least as far as pool is concerned is that it is different for each of us.

I don't believe this back and forth "chatter" about the sameness of these two techniques is designed to help improve our pool games.

The "chatter" is an attempt to establish dominance over words that have little relationship to the vast portion of pooldom.

I enjoy learning things that actually help my pool game and despise those things that attempt to limit that learning.

If you haven't been able to master CJ's technique in 3 or 4 hours on the table, then perhaps you just don't have the precision that is needed to do so. If that is the case, then you may be better off using the center of the pocket without a touch of inside.

Which technique is better for you? It really doesn't make any difference to me. What I mean by that is that it OK if you are a champion set in your perfect ways and it is ok if you are just beginning your journey or somewhere in between.

Our journeys in pooldom are long and varied. May our paths cross often.

Hope to see some of you at the BIG EASY bar table extravaganza (in New Orleans) slated for THIS COMING WEEKEND. Lee Brett and Glen Atwell will be there along with other notables. Louisiana has some GREAT tournaments in the next few weeks and top players will be attending from all over the world.

 

[8pack]

One way that CJ's technique is different is that this technique forces the shooter to more sharply focus their attention to where you're aiming the object ball.

The other thing that is different is that you are using a touch of inside, which prevents you from using a touch of unwanted outside.

A third thing is the cue ball will react differently when it contacts the rail after striking the object ball.

If you want more reason to master this technique you might consider:

If you're aiming the object ball toward the center of the pocket (without squirt), most of us get rather lazy in our aiming. This technique of CJ's is similar to practicing on tight pockets as far as the additional attention to aiming the object ball is concerned.

If you get lazy and the object bal isn't aimed at the center of the pocket (wthout squirt),you could easily and accidentally put RIGHT or LEFT side spin on the cue ball forcing a miss by throwing the object ball into the point. I know it's happened to me and I have to imagine that it has happened to others.

The bottom line to all of this is that there are many ways to make balls, get shape etc. It is to our advantage to learn them all and to excel with all techniques and perspectives. CJ's technique is a different perspective and utilizes a touch of inside AND in addition to the extra focus that is required, additional attention is paid to acceleration of the cue stick.

Like he aiming system, CTE/Pro1, CJ's technique taps into some of the problem areas of excellence in cueing.

People want to complain about why they don't play as well as the pros and they want to blame it on their lack of talent or their day time job, their practice time etc., but the truth is that some people want to be the authority on how pool is perceived. The bare bones of perception at least as far as pool is concerned is that it is different for each of us.

I don't believe this back and forth "chatter" about the sameness of these two techniques is designed to help improve our pool games.

The "chatter" is an attempt to establish dominance over words that have little relationship to the vast portion of pooldom.

I enjoy learning things that actually help my pool game and despise those things that attempt to limit that learning.

If you haven't been able to master CJ's technique in 3 or 4 hours on the table, then perhaps you just don't have the precision that is needed to do so. If that is the case, then you may be better off using the center of the pocket without a touch of inside.Which technique is better for you? It really doesn't make any difference to me. What I mean by that is that it OK if you are a champion set in your perfect ways and it is ok if you are just beginning your journey or somewhere in between.

Our journeys in pooldom are long and varied. May our paths cross often.

Hope to see some of you at the BIG EASY bar table extravaganza (in New Orleans) slated for THIS COMING WEEKEND. Lee Brett and Glen Atwell will be there along with other notables. Louisiana has some GREAT tournaments in the next few weeks and top players will be attending from all over the world.

Your kidding rite?While one mite come used to it on few different shots in a few hours try using it with draw ,high and start running out racks using this.Not sure you master anything in a few hours.:wink:

 

[JoeyA]

Your kidding rite?While one mite come used to it on few different shots in a few hours try using it with draw ,high and start running out racks using this.Not sure you master anything in a few hours.:wink:

No, I'm not kidding. But in defense of your perspective, I was talking about mastering the basic use of a touch of inside on all shots which was what most of the discussion in this thread has been about.

If you're talking about winning tournaments every week using this technique, it might take a bit longer. :grin:

 

[Patrick Johnson]

JoeyA:
I don't believe this back and forth "chatter" about the sameness of these two techniques is designed to help improve our pool games.
The "chatter" is an attempt to establish dominance over words that have little relationship to the vast portion of pooldom.
I enjoy learning things that actually help my pool game and despise those things that attempt to limit that learning.

I don't believe this kind of gratuitous insult is designed to improve the tone or content of discussion here.

Once again, Joey, you're trying to create division between those who see things your way and those who don't, making friendly discussion of differing views that much more difficult.

pj
chgo

 

[CJ Wiley]

I do not use spin enough to have to adjust for it

Word games?

Can you tell me what's wrong with the following which I posted earlier?

"If you think you're aiming for the "thick" side of the pocket accurately (without the squirt yet factoring in), but are in fact undercutting it by one-half pocket +, and the squirt would have taken you back to center pocket had you aimed to the thick side accurately, you're still going to undercut it by more than one-half pocket, even with the squirt compensation.

And if you think you're aiming for the thick side of the pocket accurately (without the squirt yet factoring in), but are in fact overcutting it by one-half pocket +, and the squirt would have taken you to center pocket had you aimed accurately, you're now going to overcut it by more than one-half pocket."

How is this any different than aiming for center pocket without the inside english and accompanying squirt, and missing because you were half a pocket off? If you're saying that one can aim more accurately at the thick side of a pocket than center pocket, and the vast preponderance of misses occur from overcutting shots, at least for some players, then I see your logic, though wonder about the premise.

Jim

Using inside english, Jim, is making a huge mistake. I've said MANY times I do not use spin enough to have to adjust for it. It's deflection that is used to over cut the object ball into the center or far side of the pocket.

 

[CJ Wiley]

break, take ball in hand and run out using the "touch" of inside on EVERY shot.

Your kidding rite?While one mite come used to it on few different shots in a few hours try using it with draw ,high and start running out racks using this.Not sure you master anything in a few hours.:wink:

You can learn a LOT of new shots if you just break, take ball in hand and run out using the "touch" of inside on EVERY shot. You will find you can do it even better on shots that before looked like they required "outside" english.

If I could show you guys in person it would be MUCH quicker. I'm doing my best in writing, it's just a challenge, and I DO like challenges. :wink:

There are no exeptions, if you don't try this system using it EVERY TIME for 2-3 hours you might as well not try it at all. The ones that question it have not tried it, it's obvious to me and the ones that actually do. When you experiece it you will certainly have a different set of questions. More than just argueing over "are you aiming at the center" or not. This won't even be on your mind once you see what the "Touch" of Inside will do.

 

[sfleinen]

[...]
If you get lazy and the object bal isn't aimed at the center of the pocket (wthout squirt),you could easily and accidentally put RIGHT or LEFT side spin on the cue ball forcing a miss by throwing the object ball into the point. I know it's happened to me and I have to imagine that it has happened to others.

And I offer this: if you are "accidentally" putting spin on the cue ball, it has NOTHING to do with your aim -- but rather with the first part -- "laziness." (I.e. a lackadaisical stroke, where you're not getting the required squirt from the cue ball.)

[...]
People want to complain about why they don't play as well as the pros and they want to blame it on their lack of talent or their day time job, their practice time etc., but the truth is that some people want to be the authority on how pool is perceived. The bare bones of perception at least as far as pool is concerned is that it is different for each of us.

Joey, I'm not sure who you're referring to here, but I don't think anyone here -- at least that I've seeen -- is 1.) complaining about why they don't play as well as the pros; 2.) scatter "blame" around on various things not related to their commitment to practice, including that "day job" thing.

And I'd be careful with that comment, by the way, because you're making it sound like -- even among those of us that really truly give it our all, but know the hand we're dealt when it comes to "life responsibilities" -- that somehow we're really not giving it our all, and should rearrange our lives to make room for more practice.

I for one sometimes do the "<sigh>, life gets in the way" thing, but it in no way indicates my level of commitment to play as well as I can. I know what I'm capable of, but I'm also NOT an irresponsible person.

To play pool at the pro level, along with the required talent, you have to have a level of focused commitment -- read another way, TIME.

Some of us don't have enough hours in the day to also make room for that focused continuous commitment of time. But then, those of us know that, and although always on the prowl for improvement (being students of this game we love), are happy that we have a balanced life.

So please, be fair with your comments.

I don't believe this back and forth "chatter" about the sameness of these two techniques is designed to help improve our pool games.

??? Not sure where the "sameness" argument is coming from. If anything, what I see are people discussing the DIFFERENCES between CJ's technique, and what they (he/she) would presume to be "normal" or traditionally-taught technique.

The "chatter" is an attempt to establish dominance over words that have little relationship to the vast portion of pooldom.

I enjoy learning things that actually help my pool game and despise those things that attempt to limit that learning.

If you haven't been able to master CJ's technique in 3 or 4 hours on the table, then perhaps you just don't have the precision that is needed to do so. If that is the case, then you may be better off using the center of the pocket without a touch of inside.

No, Joey, I disagree with your broadbrush swipe like this. In fact, if you want to compare accuracy, I'll meet you head-on on a snooker table -- and I mean a 12-footer, too.

And, although aiming at a particular part of the pocket requires more accuracy than aiming at the pocket's "abyss," I disagree with your "advice" that folks who aren't used to dissecting the pocket into parts to aim at, and don't get it in 3-4 hours on the table, should just give up even attempting to master CJ's technique. That's like you saying that folks who don't "get" aiming at portions of the pocket, should just give it up after 3-4 hours at the table. This is bogus advice.

Which technique is better for you? It really doesn't make any difference to me. What I mean by that is that it OK if you are a champion set in your perfect ways and it is ok if you are just beginning your journey or somewhere in between.

Well, for you to make this comment in the first place, apparently you *do* care.

I'm surprised at your post, Joey. You're apparently lashing out at a bunch of folks undeservedly.

-Sean

 

[8pack]

You can learn a LOT of new shots if you just break, take ball in hand and run out using the "touch" of inside on EVERY shot. You will find you can do it even better on shots that before looked like they required "outside" english.

If I could show you guys in person it would be MUCH quicker. I'm doing my best in writing, it's just a challenge, and I DO like challenges. :wink:

There are no exeptions, if you don't try this system using it EVERY TIME for 2-3 hours you might as well not try it at all. The ones that question it have not tried it, it's obvious to me and the ones that actually do. When you experiece it you will certainly have a different set of questions. More than just argueing over "are you aiming at the center" or not. This won't even be on your mind once you see what the "Touch" of Inside will do.

I've been working on this while playing(practicing running balls)and let me tell you it doesn't feel normal.:smilenot yet)While shooting one certain shot over and over becomes easier taking it into game play well thats another story.This type of shooting is not mastered in a short while. The answers for the misses are really more clearer but the comfort zone is not there yet .(havnt done it enough yet i guess,it will take me more than 3 hours):grinAlso this touch of the inside is probably better with a normal shaft.I tried it with a 314 and then a regular shaft and the touch spot moved.If i where to play this way all the time I dont think switching shafts would be a good ideal.

If you could put a percentage on much you do this during the game what would it be?