A lot of my students arrive with absolutely no insight on where the CB needs to touch OB to pot the ball.
I am only using GB enough that they grasp the basic concept, not that it is a "good" aiming system {or is any for that mater}.
My aiming system is guessing....who use the Guessing System?
- Thread starter smiling_Hans
- Start date
I am only using GB enough that they grasp the basic concept, not that it is a "good" aiming system {or is any for that mater}.
Hit A <Thousand> Balls. HAMB lite for ammechahz.
And both what I do and how it answers your question. The way I do it provides the complete alignment before you get down leaving only fine adjustment if you need it before pulling the trigger.
The big secret of transitioning from <see> to <shoot> is diligent work on the mechanics till you can move fluidly from the former to the latter. So far I have it down to planting my feet.
I still don't see how you cannot imagine what the shot looks like when the cue ball hits the object ball.
snookered_again
Well-known member
picture 2 shots, one with a smaller object ball, the other with a larger one. the cue ball is the same size as the OB .
you are trying to just nick the edge of either ball.
if you were to shoot at the center of each ball, the angle would be the same for both balls, but if the object was to just nick the edge, that would be a larger angle ( from the centerline)..
sure compare a shot to hit the edge of the buckshot to the edge of the basketball, you'd definitely be on a different angle there, in relation to it's center line. The player makes the adjustment, sure but it's a different angle. he's even further off the centerline, by a number of degrees in this case.
oscargrouch
Active member
I may have forgotten the point at this point, but where are you putting these different sized balls? If you replace the pool balls with ping pong balls, where are you putting the ping pong balls? If you're putting them in the center of where the pool balls were, then yes, it changes the angles. But what's the point? Sure, you've created a different shot.
If you put them at the contact points, though, then the angles don't change.
If you put them at the contact points, though, then the angles don't change.
snookered_again
Well-known member
let me put it this way. hitting the center of the OB is not dependent on ball size, but on a thin cutshot, as ball size increases you are then shooting at an angle between that centerline and the surface of the outside of the ball. this angle will increase with the ball size.
the cutshot means you are shooting with your aiming direction off in space , away from the OB.. you can envision a ghost ball there if you like, and that you are shooting at the center of the ghostball.
as the ball size changes , the player is making this compensation in angle to achieve a thin cut. that angle off centerline is larger as the ball size increases.
where the balls are is immaterial but you can think of taking a thin cutshot from the head of the table , trying to pocket a ball in the side pocket that is right in frot of the sidepocket.
the CB is on the headraiil about 6 inches from the same side rail. to make the shot you need to hit the thin edge of the ball. Its not a hard shot but if you dont compensate properly you will either hit too much of that ball by the side pocket or you will miss the ball..
your aiming point is off in space away from the object ball by nearly half the diameter of the ball (or the distance of the radius ) away from the OB..
as ball size in the exampel increases youd be aiming further off in space and you are naturally making that compensation.
my point was that the amount of compensation comes pretty naturally. If I were to make that shot my eye would focus on the contact point , the thin edge of the ball, NOT the imaginary center of the imaginary ghostball.. if you wre to replace those two balls for ones of a different diameter, most here would be able to make the shot, but they are aiming at a different angle dependent upon the size of the ball.
now if you play on a pool table with 1 1/4" then turn and play with 2 1/16" you are changing that required angle..
most wouldnt even consider that since the balls are of a different size, they are making a shot at a different angle ( as measured from center) to knick the edge and put the ball in the side.
as the ball gets bigger so does the distance from it's center to the outside of the ball, and thus the shot angle is different. a larger ball would have a shot angle that was further away form the rail. your true aim point is nearer to the rail with smaller balls, further from the rail with larger balls.
as a player moves fromt a 8 ball table to a regulation snooker table, the balls are of different size and the cutshots are at a different angle. Its so obvious during play that you would be compensationg perhaps without even realizing it, youd probably be able to make the shot as I described it, but you are in fact changing your shot angle slightly to compensate for the balls being different in size.
I think after an hour it may just naturlaly become a non issue for most but during the first game it might throow them as they are getting used to compensating for the need for newly adjusted angles. the two tables will have completely different characteristics and weight and table speed and the way cusuons work and pocket size and shape is also diferent True, but that was outside my point.. It was just that the shot angle changes, along with ball size.
the cutshot means you are shooting with your aiming direction off in space , away from the OB.. you can envision a ghost ball there if you like, and that you are shooting at the center of the ghostball.
as the ball size changes , the player is making this compensation in angle to achieve a thin cut. that angle off centerline is larger as the ball size increases.
where the balls are is immaterial but you can think of taking a thin cutshot from the head of the table , trying to pocket a ball in the side pocket that is right in frot of the sidepocket.
the CB is on the headraiil about 6 inches from the same side rail. to make the shot you need to hit the thin edge of the ball. Its not a hard shot but if you dont compensate properly you will either hit too much of that ball by the side pocket or you will miss the ball..
your aiming point is off in space away from the object ball by nearly half the diameter of the ball (or the distance of the radius ) away from the OB..
as ball size in the exampel increases youd be aiming further off in space and you are naturally making that compensation.
my point was that the amount of compensation comes pretty naturally. If I were to make that shot my eye would focus on the contact point , the thin edge of the ball, NOT the imaginary center of the imaginary ghostball.. if you wre to replace those two balls for ones of a different diameter, most here would be able to make the shot, but they are aiming at a different angle dependent upon the size of the ball.
now if you play on a pool table with 1 1/4" then turn and play with 2 1/16" you are changing that required angle..
most wouldnt even consider that since the balls are of a different size, they are making a shot at a different angle ( as measured from center) to knick the edge and put the ball in the side.
as the ball gets bigger so does the distance from it's center to the outside of the ball, and thus the shot angle is different. a larger ball would have a shot angle that was further away form the rail. your true aim point is nearer to the rail with smaller balls, further from the rail with larger balls.
as a player moves fromt a 8 ball table to a regulation snooker table, the balls are of different size and the cutshots are at a different angle. Its so obvious during play that you would be compensationg perhaps without even realizing it, youd probably be able to make the shot as I described it, but you are in fact changing your shot angle slightly to compensate for the balls being different in size.
I think after an hour it may just naturlaly become a non issue for most but during the first game it might throow them as they are getting used to compensating for the need for newly adjusted angles. the two tables will have completely different characteristics and weight and table speed and the way cusuons work and pocket size and shape is also diferent True, but that was outside my point.. It was just that the shot angle changes, along with ball size.
Last edited:
I follow what you are saying, but wanted to mention that the angle going to the larger ball changes *if the change retains the center location*. To retain the angle, as I think oscargrouch may be envisioning, the contact point would be kept, while the center of the larger ball moves towards the pocket.
I agree, and think even lower-skilled players...probably subconsciously...lean into contact point on thin cuts. My only evidence (guess) is that using the full Ghost Ball process--where the cue tip is placed on the table, then the cue is pivoted over the cue ball and shot line--never seems to be used for thin cuts. This would actually seem awkward, since the shot line would rotate away from the object ball--"off in space" as you put it.
smiling_Hans
Well-known member
I'm still confused about this pivot.
Again, I'm trying to see what this CTE is all about and the pivot part is damn confusing.
Once any player lines up a shot they should be down on the shot and shoot. The pivot part doesn't seem very productive and it goes against the fundamentals of approach.
Again, I'm trying to see what this CTE is all about and the pivot part is damn confusing.
Once any player lines up a shot they should be down on the shot and shoot. The pivot part doesn't seem very productive and it goes against the fundamentals of approach.
snookered_again
Well-known member
I think maybe we figured out why pool is hard ;-)
to pocket a ball that is 4 feet from the CB, sure just draw a line from the pocket through the OB and you have the contact point , easy right?
Aha! but then picture a thin shot, now you are aiming 1/2 a ball away from the contact point so you are just grazing the OB with the CB
so you have adjusted yourself and you are compensating , lets imagine that was one degree of adjustment.
now go put that same ball further or closer and you have maybe half a degree or maybe 2 degrees adjustment, that's just compensating for the distance from the contact point to the center of the imaginary ghostball..
I dont even know what to call it. the surprising bit for me is we are all making this compensation, if we did not we could hardly make any balls.. we almost never actually shoot at the contact point but it feels like we do. we dont think in terms of any measured adjustment, we just rely on experience mostly..
we learn by doing and failing and somehow we input the adjustments into our brains, we must in order to improve.. I think so much happens on a subconscious level.
throw in some spin and squirt and throw and toss in terms like sqwerve and it gets way more complex.. now we are adjusting our shot angles to compensate for all that.
This website seems to try to explain it. I find it challenging to wrap my head around. Personally I feel I should work at really understanding all this more completely as it might help me a whole lot.
I bet there are a lot of really talented players that couldn't even explain all this stuff..
even just applying spin and adjusting for squirt on a ball 12 feet away is hard.. then you realize the balls path is curved too..
this is all "throwing a real curveball" into he mix.
billiards.colostate.edu
to pocket a ball that is 4 feet from the CB, sure just draw a line from the pocket through the OB and you have the contact point , easy right?
Aha! but then picture a thin shot, now you are aiming 1/2 a ball away from the contact point so you are just grazing the OB with the CB
so you have adjusted yourself and you are compensating , lets imagine that was one degree of adjustment.
now go put that same ball further or closer and you have maybe half a degree or maybe 2 degrees adjustment, that's just compensating for the distance from the contact point to the center of the imaginary ghostball..
I dont even know what to call it. the surprising bit for me is we are all making this compensation, if we did not we could hardly make any balls.. we almost never actually shoot at the contact point but it feels like we do. we dont think in terms of any measured adjustment, we just rely on experience mostly..
we learn by doing and failing and somehow we input the adjustments into our brains, we must in order to improve.. I think so much happens on a subconscious level.
throw in some spin and squirt and throw and toss in terms like sqwerve and it gets way more complex.. now we are adjusting our shot angles to compensate for all that.
This website seems to try to explain it. I find it challenging to wrap my head around. Personally I feel I should work at really understanding all this more completely as it might help me a whole lot.
I bet there are a lot of really talented players that couldn't even explain all this stuff..
even just applying spin and adjusting for squirt on a ball 12 feet away is hard.. then you realize the balls path is curved too..
this is all "throwing a real curveball" into he mix.
Squirt, Swerve, and Throw Confusion - Dr. Dave Pool Info
Answers to frequently-asked questions about squirt, swerve, and throw confusion in pool and billiards.
billiards.colostate.edu
oscargrouch
Active member
I think maybe what you're talking about when you say "aiming" is where your cue tip is going? Which it is a tricky thing to figure out where to aim the cue tip when it's outside the object ball. I think this might be where CTE and all these other aiming systems came from in the first place - a way to solve for the issue of where do you aim the cue when its path gets outside of the object ball?I think maybe we figured out why pool is hard ;-)
to pocket a ball that is 4 feet from the CB, sure just draw a line from the pocket through the OB and you have the contact point , easy right?
Aha! but then picture a thin shot, now you are aiming 1/2 a ball away from the contact point so you are just grazing the OB with the CB
so you have adjusted yourself and you are compensating , lets imagine that was one degree of adjustment.
now go put that same ball further or closer and you have maybe half a degree or maybe 2 degrees adjustment, that's just compensating for the distance from the contact point to the center of the imaginary ghostball..
I dont even know what to call it. the surprising bit for me is we are all making this compensation, if we did not we could hardly make any balls.. we almost never actually shoot at the contact point but it feels like we do. we dont think in terms of any measured adjustment, we just rely on experience mostly..
we learn by doing and failing and somehow we input the adjustments into our brains, we must in order to improve.. I think so much happens on a subconscious level.
throw in some spin and squirt and throw and toss in terms like sqwerve and it gets way more complex.. now we are adjusting our shot angles to compensate for all that.
This website seems to try to explain it. I find it challenging to wrap my head around. Personally I feel I should work at really understanding all this more completely as it might help me a whole lot.
I bet there are a lot of really talented players that couldn't even explain all this stuff..
even just applying spin and adjusting for squirt on a ball 12 feet away is hard.. then you realize the balls path is curved too..
this is all "throwing a real curveball" into he mix.
Squirt, Swerve, and Throw Confusion - Dr. Dave Pool Info
Answers to frequently-asked questions about squirt, swerve, and throw confusion in pool and billiards.
snookered_again
Well-known member
im trying to understand CTE from here:
billiards.colostate.edu
it seems like he's trying a spin shot because he's looking at the cueball and picking a spot that is off center. I dont think thats exactly the point of it. I think the object is to hit the cueball on center, but somehow he's referring to the distance from the center of the CB to find his shotline or where the cue is actually pointed.. Then making the shot actually on center , and not a spinshot..
I'm not really sure if I got that right, I still cant; really wrap my head around it.. might take a few re-reads and some patience I guess.
I think what I'm doing is aiming more by way of feel , where my bridge and cue hand are, maybe paying less attention to how the cue is pointed. or "aimed" more to the location of contact and sort of relying on my instincts?
It may not be correct from a more experienced standpoint.. of course I do look down the cue but I'm certainly not using " a number of cue tips from the center of the CB" as a reference..
===========
let me keep this part separate
* I think I do habitually try to spin the ball to try to direct it off the first cushion it hits. Usually that's to try to get position on the next shot or to try to avoid scratching where it seems a natural scratch shot..
I think I also sort of veer to the right of center of the CB.. On a shot where the OB is to go to the left of center, (and the reverse) this is because I'm sort of trying to match the speed of the spin of the ball to the cut.. In this case the spin applied is not being used to control the CB's deflection angle.. or how it reacts off the first cushoion..
to try to expain that better :
If I hit centerball on a shot to the left, and it runs across the table with no spin at all applied, then when the balls collide, the impact will then try to spin the CB counterclockwise and the OB will try to spin counterclockwise as well.. Since I am not trying to apply spin to the OB, hitting the cueball a bit to the right of center is allowing the impact to not apply spin to the object ball. Im basically trying to reduce the situation where the balls are slipping upon each other..
I compare that to doubleclutching in a car, which is basically disenguaging the gears, lifting the clutch , giving it gas and causing the gears in the transmission to run at a speed that matches, then depressing the clutch again to make the shift and the car and the transmission and drivetrain are happier because Im then not forcing the synchromesh to speed or slow the gears.. Its removing the shockload and makes a smoother transition. You will often hear harley riders do this as they gear down as they roll up to a light.
with the is counterclockwise spin on the "to the left" shot, wiht the spin applied , the balls arent; skidding together so much. I think I believe this to be right.. I think that applying this bit of spin is causing the OB to NOT be spinning from the impact, but rather, to roll straight, with no spin applied.
Now if a more experienced player reads that, and what I said makes sense, they may or not agree and I'd be interested to know if applying such spin is the correct thing to do. or not. I do not know if this has anything to do with the CTE (Center to edge aiming system) I don't think it does.. might be related..
CTE Aiming System - Dr. Dave Pool Info
Answers to frequently-asked questions (FAQs) about the Center-to-Edge (CTE) aiming system.
billiards.colostate.edu
it seems like he's trying a spin shot because he's looking at the cueball and picking a spot that is off center. I dont think thats exactly the point of it. I think the object is to hit the cueball on center, but somehow he's referring to the distance from the center of the CB to find his shotline or where the cue is actually pointed.. Then making the shot actually on center , and not a spinshot..
I'm not really sure if I got that right, I still cant; really wrap my head around it.. might take a few re-reads and some patience I guess.
I think what I'm doing is aiming more by way of feel , where my bridge and cue hand are, maybe paying less attention to how the cue is pointed. or "aimed" more to the location of contact and sort of relying on my instincts?
It may not be correct from a more experienced standpoint.. of course I do look down the cue but I'm certainly not using " a number of cue tips from the center of the CB" as a reference..
===========
let me keep this part separate
* I think I do habitually try to spin the ball to try to direct it off the first cushion it hits. Usually that's to try to get position on the next shot or to try to avoid scratching where it seems a natural scratch shot..
I think I also sort of veer to the right of center of the CB.. On a shot where the OB is to go to the left of center, (and the reverse) this is because I'm sort of trying to match the speed of the spin of the ball to the cut.. In this case the spin applied is not being used to control the CB's deflection angle.. or how it reacts off the first cushoion..
to try to expain that better :
If I hit centerball on a shot to the left, and it runs across the table with no spin at all applied, then when the balls collide, the impact will then try to spin the CB counterclockwise and the OB will try to spin counterclockwise as well.. Since I am not trying to apply spin to the OB, hitting the cueball a bit to the right of center is allowing the impact to not apply spin to the object ball. Im basically trying to reduce the situation where the balls are slipping upon each other..
I compare that to doubleclutching in a car, which is basically disenguaging the gears, lifting the clutch , giving it gas and causing the gears in the transmission to run at a speed that matches, then depressing the clutch again to make the shift and the car and the transmission and drivetrain are happier because Im then not forcing the synchromesh to speed or slow the gears.. Its removing the shockload and makes a smoother transition. You will often hear harley riders do this as they gear down as they roll up to a light.
with the is counterclockwise spin on the "to the left" shot, wiht the spin applied , the balls arent; skidding together so much. I think I believe this to be right.. I think that applying this bit of spin is causing the OB to NOT be spinning from the impact, but rather, to roll straight, with no spin applied.
Now if a more experienced player reads that, and what I said makes sense, they may or not agree and I'd be interested to know if applying such spin is the correct thing to do. or not. I do not know if this has anything to do with the CTE (Center to edge aiming system) I don't think it does.. might be related..
Save yourself. There's still time.
This is the funny part. If you no longer have any ball to aim at, line up the reciprocal carom tangents.
I like math, so I worked this out...
The angle difference for a cut shot, when comparing 2 1/4" pool balls to 2 1/8" snooker balls, is about half a degree with 1ft between cb and ob. More distance between cb and ob greatly reduces this already small/insignificant difference. At 3ft, for example, the difference is only 0.2°. At 5ft it's 0.1°.
So, if we setup a 60° cut shot using pool balls with 3 ft between cb and ob, then replace the pool balls with snooker balls, the shot angle would change by only 0.2°.
snookered_again
Well-known member
on a snooker table, it's common to try to put the blue ball ( 5) in the side pocket with a slim cut angle. Its normal position is in the center of the table.
There is a very small margin of error between a hit and a miss if the CB is on either end rail and it's only a slim cut to pocket the blue. lets say for example it is 6 inches off center ( away from the target side pocket) and on or near the rail, can it be made at 4 inches? now you are splitting hairs..
the shot becomes impossible when the speed of the object ball needs to be ridiculously fast because there is very little impact to drive the blue ball towards the side pocket. that might look like the blue making the pocket but at only enough speed to pot,, and the CB going end to end 3-4 table lengths.
5 point foul if it' s miss. I don't know what that would calculate to in degrees.
the shooter can try to apply some spin to increase or degrease the impact speed to try to throw the ball, but there are some limits where the shot becomes extremely unlikely and should be rejected. Then he's also dealing with squirt and that requires some correction , spin could help but it may also just be complicating things.
often the shooters other option is to try to put it in a corner pocket, (if he has a clear shot ) but the corner pockets are generally further away and much fussier on a snooker table than a 8 ball table. By attemptin ght ecorner instead, he's then less likely to completely miss the ball..
the corner shot is often safer, because the corner pocket shot is hitting a lot more of the ball and the side shot requires a very thin margin between a hit and a miss.
of course the cue ball will end up in a completely different place depending which shot is chosen. spin will affect that too , of course.
it can be a fun shot to practice on any table.. You can find out yourself.. How close can you be to the center of the table with the cue ball which is on or near an end rail, and still be able to pot a ball in the center of the table into the side pocket? If you tried this shot with the CB a foot off center, no problem, but there is some practical limit how far you can shift that CB towards center, with it still at or near the rail, and still make the shot.
- if the CB is actually on the rail, then you have another issue, You must shoot with top only, since you are on the rail, this decreases your chances because if you only have the top of the ball, your accuracy will be reduced.
I think practicing this and lerning your limits can help one decide what level of difficulty the shot is and wheather or not they would choose to to attempt it during a game.
there is some point as you move the CB towards center, where any player would say no that's not a practical shot, my fail rate is too high of a percentage to try that shot.
if you change ball sizes, the dynamics of this fairly commonly needed shot aren't really much different but there is definitely a difference in the shot angle , since the distance from the center of that blue ball and it's outside edge are then different.
That's what I was trying to point out.
There is a very small margin of error between a hit and a miss if the CB is on either end rail and it's only a slim cut to pocket the blue. lets say for example it is 6 inches off center ( away from the target side pocket) and on or near the rail, can it be made at 4 inches? now you are splitting hairs..
the shot becomes impossible when the speed of the object ball needs to be ridiculously fast because there is very little impact to drive the blue ball towards the side pocket. that might look like the blue making the pocket but at only enough speed to pot,, and the CB going end to end 3-4 table lengths.
5 point foul if it' s miss. I don't know what that would calculate to in degrees.
the shooter can try to apply some spin to increase or degrease the impact speed to try to throw the ball, but there are some limits where the shot becomes extremely unlikely and should be rejected. Then he's also dealing with squirt and that requires some correction , spin could help but it may also just be complicating things.
often the shooters other option is to try to put it in a corner pocket, (if he has a clear shot ) but the corner pockets are generally further away and much fussier on a snooker table than a 8 ball table. By attemptin ght ecorner instead, he's then less likely to completely miss the ball..
the corner shot is often safer, because the corner pocket shot is hitting a lot more of the ball and the side shot requires a very thin margin between a hit and a miss.
of course the cue ball will end up in a completely different place depending which shot is chosen. spin will affect that too , of course.
it can be a fun shot to practice on any table.. You can find out yourself.. How close can you be to the center of the table with the cue ball which is on or near an end rail, and still be able to pot a ball in the center of the table into the side pocket? If you tried this shot with the CB a foot off center, no problem, but there is some practical limit how far you can shift that CB towards center, with it still at or near the rail, and still make the shot.
- if the CB is actually on the rail, then you have another issue, You must shoot with top only, since you are on the rail, this decreases your chances because if you only have the top of the ball, your accuracy will be reduced.
I think practicing this and lerning your limits can help one decide what level of difficulty the shot is and wheather or not they would choose to to attempt it during a game.
there is some point as you move the CB towards center, where any player would say no that's not a practical shot, my fail rate is too high of a percentage to try that shot.
if you change ball sizes, the dynamics of this fairly commonly needed shot aren't really much different but there is definitely a difference in the shot angle , since the distance from the center of that blue ball and it's outside edge are then different.
That's what I was trying to point out.
Last edited:
SeniorTom
Well-known member
If you do too much thinking when you are in competition, it will destroy your shot in my opinion. The best way to shoot is almost instinctual or from the subconscious from practice sessions that have trained your brain to think this way. When people are in the so-called Zone, no matter what sport, there isn't a lot of thinking going on from the conscious mind, it all comes natural from all the training they've done in the past. It really is a thing of beauty when one operates while in the zone.I think maybe we figured out why pool is hard ;-)
to pocket a ball that is 4 feet from the CB, sure just draw a line from the pocket through the OB and you have the contact point , easy right?
Aha! but then picture a thin shot, now you are aiming 1/2 a ball away from the contact point so you are just grazing the OB with the CB
so you have adjusted yourself and you are compensating , lets imagine that was one degree of adjustment.
now go put that same ball further or closer and you have maybe half a degree or maybe 2 degrees adjustment, that's just compensating for the distance from the contact point to the center of the imaginary ghostball..
I dont even know what to call it. the surprising bit for me is we are all making this compensation, if we did not we could hardly make any balls.. we almost never actually shoot at the contact point but it feels like we do. we dont think in terms of any measured adjustment, we just rely on experience mostly..
we learn by doing and failing and somehow we input the adjustments into our brains, we must in order to improve.. I think so much happens on a subconscious level.
throw in some spin and squirt and throw and toss in terms like sqwerve and it gets way more complex.. now we are adjusting our shot angles to compensate for all that.
This website seems to try to explain it. I find it challenging to wrap my head around. Personally I feel I should work at really understanding all this more completely as it might help me a whole lot.
I bet there are a lot of really talented players that couldn't even explain all this stuff..
even just applying spin and adjusting for squirt on a ball 12 feet away is hard.. then you realize the balls path is curved too..
this is all "throwing a real curveball" into he mix.
Squirt, Swerve, and Throw Confusion - Dr. Dave Pool Info
Answers to frequently-asked questions about squirt, swerve, and throw confusion in pool and billiards.
snookered_again
Well-known member
true, focus is so important, that's why sharking ( disturbing a person to intentionally upset their opponent) is effective, and common.
There is always one and it is somewhat of a learned skill to tune them out or to avoid playing with people with such low class ethics without creating undue disturbance. It would be interesting to her what tactics are used in this situation, we all face it at one time or another to varying degrees.
There is always one and it is somewhat of a learned skill to tune them out or to avoid playing with people with such low class ethics without creating undue disturbance. It would be interesting to her what tactics are used in this situation, we all face it at one time or another to varying degrees.
I don't guess. I use cte and 90/90.
Might be too much work for you but for those of us who have taken the time to learn the process it's not work at all. Takes a second or two at most to align the objective reference points. Actually makes it much faster and easier for a system aimer in my experience compared to when I aim by guessing.
That’s easy for her to say.
Are you confused about putting the tip of the cue low below the equator and striking the shot? Are you confused about
putting the tip high above the equator and striking the shot? Are you confused about putting the tip parallel right or left of CCB
and striking the shot? I guess it doesn't make sense that you can do the same thing by pivoting (angling) the cue left or right of center or high and low to accomplish the same thing as well as it telling you where the tip of the cue should be pointed and angled to aim the shot. You're confused because you just don't know what there is to know as are many others on here and have been for decades.
It's simple, not confusing. Fact is, it can be done WITHOUT a pivot. It's called CTE Pro1 and all that's done is aim the edge of the CB and the center of the CB onto the OB simultaneously. Every time the CB strikes the OB from dead straight in to the thinnest of cut, the edge of the CB and center of it will be clearly visible on the OB like a lunar or solar eclipse.
How to photograph a solar eclipse
Astrophotographer Josh Dury gives his best tips for photographing a solar eclipse.
If this is still confusing, you may be a long lost relative of "Bob Hope", with your name being "NO HOPE".
Your brain and imagination are 100% stuck in cement. And where are these fundamentals of approach? Are you saying that the edge of the CB and center CANNOT be seen overlapping the OB from anywhere on the table? Are you saying that the tip of the cue aimed or pointed at a specific part of the OB doesn't speak to you and say what needs to be said on what's going to occur at impact whether straight on or angled?
Last edited: