My 2 cents on aiming systems

[SpiderWebComm]

Their isn’t a 100% accurate aiming system.

In my opinion, there are multiple accurate aiming systems that are 100%. It's how WE align to the visuals repeatedly correct on CB and OB with the eyes, head, feet, body, cue position, and stroke that can make any and ALL aiming systems work 100% or like a hack that rarely picks up a cue to play.

Everyones mind processes information differently. I’ve personally use different aiming systems on different shots. I’ve found the ghost ball to be extremely useless for me except on super thin shots.

Have you tried two VISIBLE parts, like edge of CB to edge of OB? It's amazing how the edge of that white CB shows up so distinctly across the entire face from edge to edge on the colored OB. When it gets to a certain point, you can then use the other edge side of the CB.

 

[azhousepro]

This is not going to turn into another typical name calling aiming thread.

 

[cookie man]

But that’s the way non users of aiming systems like it

 

[Dan White]

Funny ..I am a long time lurker and this will be about my second post ever here .but I've been trying to read thru the insanity on this section for days. After trying to digest how some folks are in love with aiming systems and some are vehemently against them..the light bulb in my head went ding!

Now I'm not a smart man , but I'll give you a little bit of my background so this rambling makes sense. I am not a professional pool player ..far from it . I would consider my self a better than average bar player who loves the game. Ever since I was a young kid I have been obsessed with accuracy of any kind.

This led me to competitive archery ..both compound and recurve ..as well as to owning and operating my own firearms shooting school and building custom precision rifles.

The one thing I have noticed and can attest to. In shooting sports is that there are a million ways to skin a cat...but none of them will work without a solid understanding of the fundamentals.

About a year ago I decided to get better at billiards. I bought a table..hired a coach and started watching more YouTube than I'd care to admit.

About the 3rd video that popped up was an aiming system that as most do claimed if you learned it correctly you would never miss again..well I've heard this before in the shooting world more than once!

Needless to say I was intrigued and I started messing with all sorts of aiming systems to try and get ahead in my learning..and this is what I found.

Aiming systems work..infact most of them have some kind of merit.

Each one is designed by an individual that's brain naturally keys in on the fundamental idea of the system and it just seems to work for them

One aiming system is not better than the rest for everyone...however one might be best suited to your personal learning and shooting style.

People who don't use aiming systems are almost violently aggressive towards those that do (kind of kidding)

People who use aiming systems tend to think every one should atleast try it

The hard truth here is every one uses some type of aiming system. Whether it is subconscious and has been derived through a million shots on the table or in the field . Or it was designed and marketed in a book.

The closest parallel I can draw from the shooting world is that of traditional archery where there are two distinct groups of shooters who share these same arguments daily

One group believes that the only way to shoot is to pick up a bow and instinctively send an arrow to the target ..and if you have really good hand eye coordination and a little luck this works..(it also helps if you have shot a million arrows )

The second group would be gap shooters and folks with aiming systems..these folks have spent countless hours figuring out a system that works well for them and increases the chance of hitting a bullsye and believe me there are probably more of these systems than there are pool aiming systems...if for no other reason than people have been shooting pointy sticks at shit for 1000s of years!

In conclusion when it comes to competitive archery ...every champion uses an aiming system wether they want to admit it or not..one might be consciously aiming ...or one might be aiming through repetition and muscle memory...but they are all aiming.

Same goes with billiards we all aim...we all learn and process information differently..some need more references than others..but the best shooters are the ones that spend enough hours on the table to find something that is repeatable and works for them!

Good post but I think to call aiming naturally, through HAMB, isn't really an aiming system. It is aiming, of course, and I suppose you could make a stretch to call it an aiming system, but in the context of actual "aiming systems" that people teach and sell, HAMB to me is more like a lack of an aiming system. It's all about recognizing when the shot looks to be "on." It doesn't matter what silly fan dance aiming gyrations anybody goes through when addressing the ball. When you are down on the shot and about to shoot you have to decide whether it looks like it will go. Nobody plays by ignoring the pocket no matter what they say.

So maybe just maybe ..if we try to understand that all of these systems have the same goal in the end and that no matter how bat shit crazy it sounds to us it probably works for someone, but none of them will work with out a solid fundamentalfoundation...this forum and the shooting world would be a better place!

Yes, and if we speak nicely to the jihadists and explain to them that we all want world peace maybe they will stop beheading people.

 

[cookie man]

Good post but I think to call aiming naturally, through HAMB, isn't really an aiming system. It is aiming, of course, and I suppose you could make a stretch to call it an aiming system, but in the context of actual "aiming systems" that people teach and sell, HAMB to me is more like a lack of an aiming system. It's all about recognizing when the shot looks to be "on." It doesn't matter what silly fan dance aiming gyrations anybody goes through when addressing the ball. When you are down on the shot and about to shoot you have to decide whether it looks like it will go. Nobody plays by ignoring the pocket no matter what they say.


Yes, and if we speak nicely to the jihadists and explain to them that we all want world peace maybe they will stop beheading people.

So now aiming system users are “jhadists”. Real farking nice comparison you big A&& hole

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Good post but I think to call aiming naturally, through HAMB, isn't really an aiming system. It is aiming, of course, and I suppose you could make a stretch to call it an aiming system, but in the context of actual "aiming systems" that people teach and sell, HAMB to me is more like a lack of an aiming system. It's all about recognizing when the shot looks to be "on."

Best thoughtful and on the money post ever about HAMB.

It doesn't matter what silly fan dance aiming gyrations anybody goes through when addressing the ball. When you are down on the shot and about to shoot you have to decide whether it looks like it will go. Nobody plays by ignoring the pocket no matter what they say.

Nobody does ignore the pocket. I think you misunderstood what that means. As a long time player which you are and I am, if all that you see is the CB/OB orientation on the table and the distance between them along with other pockets, you know where the target pocket is. And yes, it could be blocked by a screen. Many times, there's more than one option for pocketing the OB to get better position for running the table by getting proper angles so the easiest shot might not be the way to go for one ball in order to get to all balls.

Once you see the layout of the CB/OB to the desired pocket, focus is no longer on the pocket. It's only on the CB, the OB and the tip of the cue. The pocket doesn't have to be double checked, triple checked, or quadruple checked with alignment. But I also know that's not how many players see it, learned to see it, or are willing to change seeing it that way. Not that it doesn't work effectively, but just different and another way.

And Cookie was right about your last comment about Jihadists. You just had to throw that in and keep the shit flowing, didn't you? There's misidentification and accusations on who the Jihadists really are on this forum.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

…in the context of actual "aiming systems" that people teach and sell, HAMB to me is more like a lack of an aiming system. It's all about recognizing when the shot looks to be "on."

HAMB is the most obvious, but all methods rely on recognizing when the shot looks to be “on”. Systems just identify “landmark” alignments to assist that recognition.

pj
chgo

 

[SpiderWebComm]

HAMB is the most obvious, but all methods rely on recognizing when the shot looks to be “on”. Systems just identify “landmark” alignments to assist that recognition.

pj

What are all the things involved with the shot looking to be "on"? If it's this simple among the millions of pool
players worldwide, why is there such a disparity between low level play, high-level play and everything in between for consistently pocketing balls? Obviously, "looking on" is there for all of them but the results aren't. Are there better ways and more ways to get the CB and OB to BE ON? I say, "YES". I KNOW "YES".

10 years ago, Colin Colenso came up with a pure "potting test" with the CB and OB placed at different points of the table. His video is no longer available. However, Dr. Dave has it on his website: https://billiards.colostate.edu/resource_files/Colin_potting_drill.pdf

A number of members took the test, but it had to be on video unedited. There were plenty of failures who thought what they were seeing between CB and OB was "ON". Only TWO members got a perfect score. I did and so did Dan White. THAT'S IT! However, I can pretty much guarantee what I was seeing, what Dan was seeing, and how we were seeing it to line up the CB/OB and pocket was NOT the same. I have to think both of our strokes were in pretty good shape at the time also.

 

[cookie man]

I am glad to see this post stopped the name calling

I’d like to know how someone on here gets away with calling people Jhadists

 

[SpiderWebComm]

See post 39 and 40
And yes there were no more direct name calling but its the same yada yada yada between the usual suspects with veiled insults

This isn't a religious forum. It's about POOL. Trash talking and pool go hand in hand whether on a forum or in person.

I apologize for getting alittle carried away
Carry on men
Have fun

Say two Our Fathers and three Hail Mary's and you will be absolved, my son.

 

[bbb]

This isn't a religious forum. It's about POOL. Trash talking and pool go hand in hand whether on a forum or in person.

Say two Our Fathers and three Hail Mary's and you will be absolved, my son.

i did as you commanded
i hope i am forgiven.......

 

[SpiderWebComm]

i did as you commanded
i hope i am forgiven.......

Yes you are. But that will only last until you piss your wife off. And with women, it doesn't take much.

 

[bbb]

Yes you are. But that will only last until you piss your wife off. And with women, it doesn't take much.

she got pissed off 18 years ago
been a happy single man ever since.......

 

[SpiderWebComm]

she got pissed off 18 years ago
been a happy single man ever since.......

 

[azhousepro]

Yes, and if we speak nicely to the jihadists and explain to them that we all want world peace maybe they will stop beheading people.

There is a fine line between good humor and bad taste. You are way over that line here.

 

[azhousepro]

So now aiming system users are “jhadists”. Real farking nice comparison you big A&& hole

I'm not sure that was exactly what was said. Was it in poor taste? Definitely. Did he call all aiming system users jihadists? I don't think so.

 

[Dan White]

I'm not sure that was exactly what was said. Was it in poor taste? Definitely. Did he call all aiming system users jihadists? I don't think so.

With all due respect, I think cookie or whoever reported my post is trying to play gotcha. I didn't call ANY AIMING PEOPLE jihadists. I picked what I believe to be the most extreme example of people who cannot be reasoned with (terrorists) and presented them as one to reason with. It's a parody and has nothing to do with the aiming people. It points out that the aiming and non aiming people are never going to agree, hence the wink.

It's my fault. If I have to explain it then it wasn't a very good joke. Or, maybe it was a good joke told to the wrong audience.

Let me rephrase my original statement: Getting aimers and non aimers to agree is as likely as making cute fuzzy little puppies and kittens look ugly. NOT GONNA HAPPEN!

Does that work for you, cookie?

 

[cookie man]

I'm not sure that was exactly what was said. Was it in poor taste? Definitely. Did he call all aiming system users jihadists? I don't think so.

Of course that was the comparison. It wasn’t a stretch to see that. And I’m not surprised by your reply.

 

[cookie man]

With all due respect, I think cookie or whoever reported my post is trying to play gotcha. I didn't call ANY AIMING PEOPLE jihadists. I picked what I believe to be the most extreme example of people who cannot be reasoned with (terrorists) and presented them as one to reason with. It's a parody and has nothing to do with the aiming people. It points out that the aiming and non aiming people are never going to agree, hence the wink.

It's my fault. If I have to explain it then it wasn't a very good joke. Or, maybe it was a good joke told to the wrong audience.

Let me rephrase my original statement: Getting aimers and non aimers to agree is as likely as making cute fuzzy little puppies and kittens look ugly. NOT GONNA HAPPEN!

Does that work for you, cookie?

100% backtracking bullshit from you.

 

[cookie man]

The “we “ in your post was clearly referencing your side talking to the aiming system users or in your mind “ jhadists “. There’s no mistaking your intent and it was in severely bad taste. But you just make it worse by laughing off.