John Schmidt's and Corey Deuel's comments on aiming systems
- Thread starter PoolSharkAllen
- Start date
I don't doubt CJ when he says he was using his technique in that match - but that doesn't change my opinion that the "offcenter" technique doesn't really add to his great shotmaking skills (but as I said, the "aiming small" part is great).
pj
chgo
Last edited:
PJ:
I think you need to take your analyst hat off and go to the table and play around with this for a few hours. We both get too analytical at times--- forget the science for a moment and give his technique an honest "go" from a player's perspective.
The reason why I'm saying this is because I played with this for over 4 straight hours on the table the other night and let's just say I'm intrigued enough to keep experimenting with this for a long time to come.
Logically, sure-- why not just hit the center, right?
Practical application-- it's easier to not hit the center on purpose.
Make your next post based on practical application as I'm interested in reading more of your thoughts from that perspective, not the logical perspective (which you've already made perfectly clear).
Looking forward to it.
Dave
I think you need to take your analyst hat off and go to the table and play around with this for a few hours. We both get too analytical at times--- forget the science for a moment and give his technique an honest "go" from a player's perspective.
The reason why I'm saying this is because I played with this for over 4 straight hours on the table the other night and let's just say I'm intrigued enough to keep experimenting with this for a long time to come.
Logically, sure-- why not just hit the center, right?
Practical application-- it's easier to not hit the center on purpose.
Make your next post based on practical application as I'm interested in reading more of your thoughts from that perspective, not the logical perspective (which you've already made perfectly clear).
Looking forward to it.
Dave
CJ:
I just wanted to say your hair in that video was the 6-ball favorite over your competitors in that event.
I have a question regarding the technique--
I'm left eye dominant, right handed when playing. I find cutting to the left easier than to the right. Do you find you have to calibrate your tip position (how MUCH inside you choose to use) based on the direction of the cut? Have you had to go through any trials/tribulations regarding that? Do you adjust your eye position slightly based on the direction of the cut?
Looking forward to your answer-
Dave
I just wanted to say your hair in that video was the 6-ball favorite over your competitors in that event.
I have a question regarding the technique--
I'm left eye dominant, right handed when playing. I find cutting to the left easier than to the right. Do you find you have to calibrate your tip position (how MUCH inside you choose to use) based on the direction of the cut? Have you had to go through any trials/tribulations regarding that? Do you adjust your eye position slightly based on the direction of the cut?
Looking forward to your answer-
Dave
Joe T
Well-known member
I gotcha, just wanted to make sure you were experiencing what I was while watching him hit those shots while knowing what he has told us.
For anyone;
Is the amount of squirt distance the same for center cb to 1/8 tip accidental side as an 1/8 tip intentional side to a 1/4 tip additional side, all hit at the same speed? Is it exactly double?
Here's a pertinent quote from my cue natural pivot length resource page:
Squirt angle varies nearly linearly with tip offset, and tip offset varies nearly linearly with cue pivot angle. This is what makes the BHE and FHE methods effective, provided swerve and throw are also taken into consideration.
The technical details (for the math and physics nerds), along with some plots and other related conclusions, can be found in:
Regards,
Dave
Yes, it's the same amount of "squirt error" whether:
- you're trying to hit centerball and instead hit 1/8" left of center
...or...
- you're trying to hit 1/8" left of center and instead hit 1/4" left of center
...or...
- you're trying to hit 1/8" left of center and instead hit centerball.
That's part of the point I've been trying to make about this technique: it doesn't matter if you're trying to hit centerball or you're trying to hit offcenter - the magnitude (and direction) of any error will be the same.
pj
chgo
It's exactly as hard to hit an offcenter point as it is to hit the centerball point. And when you miss either point the results of that error will be the same.
The choice isn't between hitting dead center and hitting anywhere to one side of it. The choice is between hitting dead on centerball and hitting dead on another point. In other words, it's not a choice with a practical difference.
Based on your comment above, it isn't clear to you.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
Living Legend
Banned
Hey Dave, i have yet to try CJ system out on a table, but i have a very strong feeling it "plays similar" to "PRO1" with the "inside pivots only" and not the outside pivots. I dont know how he finds the contact point because he has not talked about that yet though.
I think if you know cte you can pick up cj system quickly also.
Last edited:
Dam that was as strong as Gorrilla breath
Thanks 4 the link
Thanks 4 the link
Well stated. I agree. Also, hitting a small amount off-center (on purpose or accidentally) also creates a small amount of swerve (in addition to a small amount of squirt), and swerve varies with shot speed, shot distance, cue elevation, and conditions. This could also affect the results of the shot.
However, none of this factors in the mental side of things. If hitting slightly off center feels better and makes one more confident, it will probably be more effective, regardless of the underlying physics.
Regards,
Dave
Last edited:
CJ, thank you for taking the time to share this stuff with us, and to continue interacting with the forum. This has been a real treat.
Myself, I am a rank novice, so attempting any "advanced technique" isn't something I should be spending a bunch of time with. (Stroke, stance and mechanics are my greatest need of improvement and refinement.). Still, I messed around with this, just a little, last night....and I think even I can take advantage of this, in a limited manner.
I had a funny grin on my face the first few times I tried it. I'm looking forward to spending more time with it.
Thanks again. You have brought the forum up several notches recently.
Myself, I am a rank novice, so attempting any "advanced technique" isn't something I should be spending a bunch of time with. (Stroke, stance and mechanics are my greatest need of improvement and refinement.). Still, I messed around with this, just a little, last night....and I think even I can take advantage of this, in a limited manner.
I had a funny grin on my face the first few times I tried it. I'm looking forward to spending more time with it.
Thanks again. You have brought the forum up several notches recently.
And, as I've said, the added focus on "aiming small" (at a part of the pocket) is also beneficial. In fact, I suspect this is the major benefit.
pj
chgo
PJ:
Actually, that's the cool thing about this...the magnitude isn't as important, as long as it's all in the direction you want. You aim at the teat on the near side of the pocket, put maybe half tip of inside on the cueball...it pushes (squirts) the cue ball thinner than the aim point, which sends the object ball clearing the teat you were aiming at. From there, you've got the whole pocket for the variance of the track...which varies depending on the velocity and if you hit the cue ball with more inside than you wanted, etc. It's A LOT of variance doing it this way.
This is a misperception.
You've got the same 1-pocket target that you did without this technique, and the same potential for error (except the potential for error may be magnified by squirt/swerve considerations).You aim at the teat on the near side of the pocket, put maybe half tip of inside on the cueball...it pushes (squirts) the cue ball thinner than the aim point, which sends the object ball clearing the teat you were aiming at. From there, you've got the whole pocket for the variance of the track...which varies depending on the velocity and if you hit the cue ball with more inside than you wanted, etc. It's A LOT of variance doing it this way.
pj
chgo
Agreed. If nothing else, this might help provide more focus while aiming, which is always a good thing.
Also, carefully focusing on exactly where you want the tip to hit the CB is probably another powerful benefit. This should increase tip placement accuracy and consistency, which is also a good thing.
Regards,
Dave
Living Legend
Banned
where have we seen all of this before
PJ:
Actually, that's the cool thing about this...the magnitude isn't as important, as long as it's all in the direction you want. You aim at the teat on the near side of the pocket, put maybe half tip of inside on the cueball...it pushes (squirts) the cue ball thinner than the aim point, which sends the object ball clearing the teat you were aiming at. From there, you've got the whole pocket for the variance of the track...which varies depending on the velocity and if you hit the cue ball with more inside than you wanted, etc. It's A LOT of variance doing it this way.
Well now, set up this little shot below and let me know how you do. Its the 10 ball in the side pocket and yes I made this shot on the first try. This is one pic of a few shots I took yesterday while I practice 14.1 for 4.5 hours. I made it and continued the run from there. 14.1 will stress test any aiming system.
It is just amazing how few real world shots are really discussed when talking about the application of systems.
Last edited:
PJ:
Actually, that's the cool thing about this...the magnitude isn't as important, as long as it's all in the direction you want. You aim at the teat on the near side of the pocket, put maybe half tip of inside on the cueball...it pushes (squirts) the cue ball thinner than the aim point, which sends the object ball clearing the teat you were aiming at. From there, you've got the whole pocket for the variance of the track...which varies depending on the velocity and if you hit the cue ball with more inside than you wanted, etc. It's A LOT of variance doing it this way.
If you touch the "teat", with "helping" inside english should increase your percentage of pots.