Johnny V aiming system... The Clock

[Patrick Johnson]

LOL!!!! ARRRRRGH

Ok look at your drawing on post #54. Do you see the blue line between the CB and the Ghost ball Centers? Are you saying that if I put the cueball anywhere on that blue line that the object ball is not going to go at a 45 degree angle?

It will, but only because I used the ghost ball to estimate the angle in the first place.

Now look at my drawing in post #60. The blue line in that drawing is where the cue ball is if you use the object ball to estimate the angle in the first place.

Do you see the difference?

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

a friend of mine MIO explain this too me months ago and also say it's a shape system.

They're not the same. The shape system uses the clock to show you where to hit the cue ball with your tip (to put the right kind of spin on it for shape). This system uses the clock to show you how to aim the cue ball at the object ball (nothing about where to hit the cue ball with your tip).

pj
chgo

 

[jondrums]

Patrick and Bluepepper - I think I understand your point very well, and it is clear that Johnny V isn't understanding you. I believe the confusion is that Johnny is subconciously using a "successive approximation" method.

In other words, he probably uses the "blue line" to figure an approximate cut angle (hour). Then mentally place a ghostball and try to estimate the cut angle again based on the ghostball center. Or then again, maybe not. Either way, this is how I would solve the problem you bring up.

Anyway, I firmly believe that most of these systems become very inappropriate as the CB gets closer to the OB. Then you need to use a different system because visualization of the final cut angle is very hard to judge. Bob Jewett described a very nice system for these kind of shots here.

 

[Billiard Architect]

It really doesn't matter how it is seen. I understand your reasoning and you understand mine. And really if the cueball was moving all over the table on one shot then there would be a reason to argue the point more. But in reality either way it puts the ball in the pocket and that is all that matters.

 

[Chi2dxa]

Ok here is one that I have been working on...

Look down on the object ball and picture a clock face on the ball. On the very bottom (contact point for a straight in shot) is 6 o'clock. Determine which path you want the object ball to go. Then figure the opposite time.. example... if you want the ball to go in a 1 o'clock path then the opposite time would be eleven. Now get behind the cueball and line it up so that where the arcs of the cueball and object ball intersect is equal to the opposite time you determined before... the picture explains what i mean...

Johnny "V" your system is working like a hopped up 62 Chevy (and that my friend is a GOOD THING). My home table is a 9 foot Gandy with Gorina Granito Basalt cloth. I took my act to the stage at my local poolhall to see how it would play and it was off just a bit, long on some shots rattled the pocket on most. They have 9 foot Gold Crowns with 860 Samonis on them which is real grabby compared to Granito. Granito is like playing on ice with water on top. I knew it was not the system because It works to the tune of 4 extra balls on my table so I refused to make any alterations to it. I stuck to my guns and came home and sure enough it still worked so it was the cloth that I needed to make adjustsments for. Your system is the greatest thing that has happened to my pool game in a long time so do not let these negative az guys screw with your head. I am going to put 860 back on my table one day so the transition from home to poolhall is not so drastic but for now I can live with it. It has been just a couple of days now and I can see the fine tunning transfoming that 62 Chevy into a Fararri. Consider this would you? The guys that I play against have been using there system for years and trust me everybody has a system so just think of where I will be in just a months time. The people that say they do not have a system just cannot put there system into words like you have(you know the ones....I shoot by feel....yeah feel this you shoot by feel folks). My safety play has improved using the Clock because now I can SEE where I want the cb and ob to go. I am taking this act back to the stage tonight so see how it plays in a barbox tournament and I will keep you posted.

 

[CueAndMe]

Johnny "V" your system is working like a hopped up 62 Chevy (and that my friend is a GOOD THING). My home table is a 9 foot Gandy with Gorina Granito Basalt cloth. I took my act to the stage at my local poolhall to see how it would play and it was off just a bit, long on some shots rattled the pocket on most. They have 9 foot Gold Crowns with 860 Samonis on them which is real grabby compared to Granito. Granito is like playing on ice with water on top. I knew it was not the system because It works to the tune of 4 extra balls on my table so I refused to make any alterations to it. I stuck to my guns and came home and sure enough it still worked so it was the cloth that I needed to make adjustsments for. Your system is the greatest thing that has happened to my pool game in a long time so do not let these negative az guys screw with your head. I am going to put 860 back on my table one day so the transition from home to poolhall is not so drastic but for now I can live with it. It has been just a couple of days now and I can see the fine tunning transfoming that 62 Chevy into a Fararri. Consider this would you? The guys that I play against have been using there system for years and trust me everybody has a system so just think of where I will be in just a months time. The people that say they do not have a system just cannot put there system into words like you have(you know the ones....I shoot by feel....yeah feel this you shoot by feel folks). My safety play has improved using the Clock because now I can SEE where I want the cb and ob to go. I am taking this act back to the stage tonight so see how it plays in a barbox tournament and I will keep you posted.

If it's really working this well for you I'll give it a more thorough try. The little bit I've tried it I had a hard time finding and retaining the proper "V" from behind the shot.
Let me just make sure I'm doing it properly, and that it's not just a visualization issue for me.

Step 1: From above the table look down upon the object ball to find the time that points to the pocket.
Step 2: From table level behind the cueball, find that time on the Cue Ball.
Step 3: Once the Cue Ball time has been "set" find the opposite time on the Object Ball.
Step 4: Connect these points and shoot.

Is this right?
I'm all for a system that works. If this works, I'll use it.

 

[Jal]

It really doesn't matter how it is seen. I understand your reasoning and you understand mine. And really if the cueball was moving all over the table on one shot then there would be a reason to argue the point more. But in reality either way it puts the ball in the pocket and that is all that matters.

I'm afraid this is another example where players pocket balls in spite of their aiming system, not because of it. Or, what their aiming systems actually does, is not what they think it does.

Unless you're at the stage of development where you're still missing a large percentage of shots, the system, if used 'as is', is going to be taking your game in a direction you probably didn't intend on.

I know that sounds kind of harsh, but apparently you've put little effort in trying to understand the criticism.

Jim

 

[Billiard Architect]

I'm afraid this is another example where players pocket balls in spite of their aiming system, not because of it. Or, what their aiming systems actually does, is not what they think it does.

Unless you're at the stage of development where you're still missing a large percentage of shots, the system, if used 'as is', is going to be taking your game in a direction you probably didn't intend on.

I know that sounds kind of harsh, but apparently you've put little effort in trying to understand the criticism.

Jim

My problem Jal is I will only argue a point so far and if I cannot explain myself clearly I give up. I understand what you are saying but you are not considering how I am trying to explain my side. So I really am at this point right now. Sorry.

 

[TheConArtist]

isn't this like the EZ shot

Images from there site.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

isn't this like the EZ shot

Images from there site.

No, the clock in this system shows where to hit the cue ball with your tip to get shape - nothing to do with aiming. The clock in the V system shows how to aim the CB at the OB to pocket the shot - nothing to do with shape.

pj
chgo

 

[Dead Crab]

It will, but only because I used the ghost ball to estimate the angle in the first place.

Now look at my drawing in post #60. The blue line in that drawing is where the cue ball is if you use the object ball to estimate the angle in the first place.

Do you see the difference?

pj
chgo

Yes, but that difference is negligible for the great majority of shots, which have a CB-OB distance well over 12". And when you get out in the 25-45 degree cut angle range, you may be fudging in a couple of degrees to compensate for throw, anyway.

Furthermore, if the shooter is more accurate in estimating the "clock time" from the CB-OB reference than from an imagined ghost ball point, there may be no practical advantage.

Awareness of this for short shots is important, but I certainly wouldn't scuttle an otherwise correct system because of this. (assuming the system is otherwise correct. I haven't had time to scrutinize it yet)

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Awareness of this for short shots is important, but I certainly wouldn't scuttle an otherwise correct system because of this.

Of course not, since all you have to do to eliminate it is use the ghost ball rather than the OB to measure the angle.

pj
chgo

 

[Jal]

Yes, but that difference is negligible for the great majority of shots, which have a CB-OB distance well over 12".

When the CB-OB distance is 22.5", the errors at the 1:00, 1:30, and 2:00 positions (object ball direction measured from the CB-OB line instead of the CB-GB line) are 3.1, 4.4 and 5.2 degrees, respectively. That is, you'll be undercutting the ball by this much. If, in addition, you underestimate the object ball's impact angle, which you will about half the time unless you have a bias, the error will be greater. I wouldn't consider this necessarily negligible when the OB to pocket distance is more than, say, a foot.

And when you get out in the 25-45 degree cut angle range, you may be fudging in a couple of degrees to compensate for throw, anyway.

Yes, but you need to over-fudge it to compensate for both throw and the intrinsic undercutting the system produces.

Furthermore, if the shooter is more accurate in estimating the "clock time" from the CB-OB reference than from an imagined ghost ball point, there may be no practical advantage.

There may be an advantage, but an adjustment needs to made when you really need some accuracy, eg, you're facing something more than a dink shot.

Jim

 

[CueAndMe]

I gave it another try today, and even if the angles were spot on geometrically, the visualization is much too difficult for me. A simple double overlap encasing of the contact point is far easier. It's a great idea Johnny, but to me it's an idea that may lead to something else more workable rather than a system to use as is.

 

[LAMas]

I gave it another try today, and even if the angles were spot on geometrically, the visualization is much too difficult for me. A simple double overlap encasing of the contact point is far easier. It's a great idea Johnny, but to me it's an idea that may lead to something else more workable rather than a system to use as is.

I too find it more difficult to visualize the "V" accurately on longer shots where the CB appears to dwarf the OB.

On the otherhand, on very close shots where I cannot see the contact point on the equator (to double off of) of the OB because it is hidden by the CB; the "V" is easily seen, lined up and not distorted as I describe when the separation is great. I will use this "V" on shots where the CB and OB are close together.

Thanks Johnny V.

 

[CueAndMe]

Interesting. You don't find that the closeness ruins the ability to pick the right clock time?
Thanks

 

[jondrums]

Here is a quick calculation of the errors injected into the system if you use the center of the OB and the center of the CB to estimate the clock angle.

This is a function of how close the OB and CB are. When they are one ball space away, the error is 30 degrees, or one hour on the clock face. If you are able to commit some of the close angles to memory, you could make adjustments fairly easily. Anything over two hand spans away is about 10-15 minutes of adjustment.

hope this helps someone.

 

[CueAndMe]

Thanks for the graph. I've wondered about this for a while.

 

[LAMas]

Interesting. You don't find that the closeness ruins the ability to pick the right clock time?
Thanks

I found it interesting that since the balls are spherical LOL, The "right clock times" "rotate" upward to the edge (perimeter/horizon) especially when you are above the shot as may be the case when the CB and OB are very close together and you esp. if on the rail.