My Aiming Routine
- Thread starter Johnnyt
- Start date
JT:
Are you actually going to ask such a question, with what's going on now with some of these aiming threads?
In the spirit of answering your question, however, here's a YouTube video that describes the "back-of-ball" or "eclipse" aiming technique used in snooker, which is the technique I personally use:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kLjSlHr38dc
(Terminology note as used in the video: "plain ball shot" means a dead-straight-in shot.)
-Sean
Kevy explains aiming and shooting in this video and anyone quite well and anyone who watches this video will improve their ability to pot balls. I wonder if Kevy has a video on making shape. I especially like what he had to say about learning how to aim at the 12 minute mark on.
I used to use what I call, contact point to contact point aiming. I put in some quality time using manual CTE/Pro One, actually manually pivoting and getting the mechanics down pat. As that progressed and I gained more confidence with CTE/Pro One, it morphed into Pro One, which is more of an auto-pilot form of the manual CTE/Pro One. As I used this, I seem to gain more precision with everything, my alignment, my cue tip placement, my aiming and now after many months of using CTE/Pro One I hardly think about the steps and do most of my aiming standing up. I think I am back to what some people might call instinctive aiming, but the reason it seems instinctive is that my precision has increased as a direct result of learning CTE/Pro One.
I've taught individuals how to use CTE/Pro One on a limited scale and some of them are astounded by the accuracy that they can pot certain shots.
I am in the process of learning the SEE SYSTEM now and will "see" how that goes. My initial impression is that the SEE SYSTEM by Ekkes is similar in some ways to CTE/Pro One.
If a person can simply see the sighting line and the correct aiming line and place their bridge hand in the perfect spot for potting the object ball, they have no need for any aiming system. For those that have some trouble doing that, the different aiming systems can be of GREAT BENEFIT.
Like Johnny mentioned, there is a certain placebo affect gained from the initial learning of an aiming system but it is more than a placebo. Aiming systems make people pay attention, some more than others.
Some aiming systems seem to be complicated to some people and for others it is easy to assimilate. Personally, I struggled quite a bit in learning CTE/Pro One but in the long run, I believe it has made me a better cueist.
I've taught individuals how to use CTE/Pro One on a limited scale and some of them are astounded by the accuracy that they can pot certain shots.
I am in the process of learning the SEE SYSTEM now and will "see" how that goes. My initial impression is that the SEE SYSTEM by Ekkes is similar in some ways to CTE/Pro One.
If a person can simply see the sighting line and the correct aiming line and place their bridge hand in the perfect spot for potting the object ball, they have no need for any aiming system. For those that have some trouble doing that, the different aiming systems can be of GREAT BENEFIT.
Like Johnny mentioned, there is a certain placebo affect gained from the initial learning of an aiming system but it is more than a placebo. Aiming systems make people pay attention, some more than others.
Some aiming systems seem to be complicated to some people and for others it is easy to assimilate. Personally, I struggled quite a bit in learning CTE/Pro One but in the long run, I believe it has made me a better cueist.
Thanks for the update, Joey. I was wondering what you are using now, and whether you had reverted to CP-to-CP or feel.
I started out with Ghost Ball, more or less, because that's how Dad taught me to aim. I aimed every shot from behind the cue ball when I was 8-18.
I started league pool, and someone suggested I line up the shot from OB to pocket before CB to OB. That worked pretty well too.
I got into one of the CTE threads, and once somebody explained with CTE stood for, I realized that if you took center-ball CB to edge OB as a starting point, you could look at every other shot as a variation on that.
Lately I've taken to lining up straightforward shots (less than 15 degrees cut angle) from behind the CB again. 15 to 45 degree cuts I aim at the edge of the ball and cheat inside or outside to match the apparent angle. 45 to 80 degree cuts I line up OB to pocket, then CB to OB. 80-90 degree cuts are ghost ball shots, where I'm literally aiming the center of the CB to a point in the air near the OB. Sadly my percentage is higher on 85-90 degree cuts than 45-80 degree. It's probably because I spend more time thinking about them.
Rail shots I ghost ball, period.
Banks I aim as cut shots, which works better for me than thinking of them as banks. Kicks I look at angle in and angle out then adjust english after I get behind the CB again.
I started league pool, and someone suggested I line up the shot from OB to pocket before CB to OB. That worked pretty well too.
I got into one of the CTE threads, and once somebody explained with CTE stood for, I realized that if you took center-ball CB to edge OB as a starting point, you could look at every other shot as a variation on that.
Lately I've taken to lining up straightforward shots (less than 15 degrees cut angle) from behind the CB again. 15 to 45 degree cuts I aim at the edge of the ball and cheat inside or outside to match the apparent angle. 45 to 80 degree cuts I line up OB to pocket, then CB to OB. 80-90 degree cuts are ghost ball shots, where I'm literally aiming the center of the CB to a point in the air near the OB. Sadly my percentage is higher on 85-90 degree cuts than 45-80 degree. It's probably because I spend more time thinking about them.
Rail shots I ghost ball, period.
Banks I aim as cut shots, which works better for me than thinking of them as banks. Kicks I look at angle in and angle out then adjust english after I get behind the CB again.