My day with Hal Houle and his aiming system

Sometimes I Feel As If I'm Preaching To The Chair

Patrick Johnson said:
Although I think this may be what Hal means:

CueTable Help



I KID Hal! (Couldn't resist.)

pj
chgo
Click to expand...



The second shot shown is exactly MY system of shooting the 4 ball REALLY hard until the 15,30 & 45 degree angles eventually find the 90 degree angle pocket at the end of the rainbow. It works for me and I'm glad that you understood my previous post and illustrated it it for the non-believers..... thanks PJ
Doug
( I wish that I could come up with a clever name for my system....... other than The Smorg ) :)
 
Patrick Johnson said:
So your saying they both go because of some subconscious aim or stroke adjustment, right? If you actually hit them both the same way without adjustment, then this is the result:

CueTable Help



Sorry to be so simplistic, but there's lots of confusion going around.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Yes, I know it sounds and looks inaccurate, but, as I stated in Bert Kinisters video, he actually states that the difference in the two balls can be as much as 1 1/2 balls out of line of the straight in shot. Yes, you do aim at the same point, but in the aiming process with the relationship of the pocket in mind, you might not hit in the same spot, but you subconsciously shoot the ball in the pocket.

All I can do is say, try it. I viewed it-tried it and it worked. I don't mess with success. If it ain't broke, don't fix it....:D
 
I'd be willing to chip in on Joe's system if it could be sent to someone like Pat Johnson or Bob Jewett for study and objective review.
Click to expand...

I guess Bob has already reviewed it and I've already talked with Joe and he has generously sent me his stuff so I can try it out. Only got it a coupla days ago and haven't had time to get into it yet. I'm not an aiming system kinda guy (could you tell?), but based on my brief scan it looks interesting.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
I guess Bob has already reviewed it and I've already talked with Joe and he has generously sent me his stuff so I can try it out. Only got it a coupla days ago and haven't had time to get into it yet. I'm not an aiming system kinda guy (could you tell?), but based on my brief scan it looks interesting.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Cool! I'll look forward to reading your review on it, if/when you write one.
 
klockdoc said:
Yes, I know it sounds and looks inaccurate, but, as I stated in Bert Kinisters video, he actually states that the difference in the two balls can be as much as 1 1/2 balls out of line of the straight in shot. Yes, you do aim at the same point, but in the aiming process with the relationship of the pocket in mind, you might not hit in the same spot, but you subconsciously shoot the ball in the pocket.

All I can do is say, try it. I viewed it-tried it and it worked. I don't mess with success. If it ain't broke, don't fix it....:D
Click to expand...

Isn't the 4 Ball actually a 15 degree cut to the pocket? Or you don't look at the 4 Ball path to the pocket and just shoot it straight?
 
Cuebacca said:
These aiming threads could go on forever like this. It seems like a little bit of progress has been made, but there just seems to be a communication gap for whatever reason between those "in the know" and those that have yet to see what the big deal is.

6 hits is just too few, IMO, (and also proven by geometry) to cover all shots. Sorry. One aim for ALL SHOTS just sounds too ridiculous. Sorry. I'm sure there is more to it than that, and it probably ends up being a trick statement, where if we found out what the heck it means, we would say, "well why didn't you just say that in the first place?". What I suspect is that there are 6 course SAM points, and those could be further divided into, for example, 24 sub-SAM points. Maybe the "one aim" (HAL system) means "the correct aim", ie., the single aim that is exactly dead straight in front of you after aligning your body and stance perfectly for the given shot. Perhaps it is as simple as that, but if it is, I wish it could be stated in those terms instead of terms that seem to be intentionally elusive. As a person who has an open mind, but at the same time is a bit skeptical, I have to admit it is frustrating.

The one system that I think is getting too little attention here is Joe Tucker's. Joe has jumped into these threads briefly a couple of times and he mentioned that his system has more contact points. I forgot how many, but even the main contact regions are divided into smaller ones, for example, spot #4.2, or however he calls it. Although Joe hasn't said much about his system here, he also hasn't said anything that made me say, "WTF is he talking about?".

I haven't tried Joe's system, nor do I know him personally or anything like that, but I have tried one of his other instructional products, which was great. I don't have the time to study an aiming system right now because I have too many areas of my game that are weaker than my aiming, so I would prefer to spend my time on those and come back later and check into aiming systems. However, if others are interested too, I'd be willing to chip in on Joe's system if it could be sent to someone like Pat Johnson or Bob Jewett for study and objective review.

Joe's website is http://www.joetucker.net/start.html . Click on "products" and then "Aiming by Numbers Method" and "Aiming by Numbers Workbook". It would only cost a few bucks each maybe if 10-20 people chipped in. Obviously, the reviewer shouldn't be able to simply post the entire system/materials online for us to steal, but if a known non-believer gave the thumbs up, then perhaps others non-believers would at least buy into the idea that it's worth checking out.

P.S. Sorry if my tone above was negative. It's not my intention to put down Hal's system nor the SAM system. It's just that it's not practical for some of us to seek these systems out, due to geographical and other constraints, whereas Joe's system can be easily purchased online. I would be interested sometime in considering the Cue Tech school for my fundamentals and other issues, but I just cannot justify the cost and time investments for SAM alone. If and when I am able to attend for my other learning objectives, I will gladly open my mind to SAM as a bonus. :)
Click to expand...

I recently had a Joe Tucker lesson in RI (the only time I drove HOURS for a lesson). I learned so much, I was giggling 5 hours home. Within a few weeks, I broke my high run record in straight pool. This guy comes HIGHLY recommended.

Dave
 
curses foiled again!

Smorgass Bored said:
The second shot shown is exactly MY system of shooting the 4 ball REALLY hard until the 15,30 & 45 degree angles eventually find the 90 degree angle pocket at the end of the rainbow. It works for me and I'm glad that you understood my previous post and illustrated it it for the non-believers..... thanks PJ
Doug
( I wish that I could come up with a clever name for my system....... other than The Smorg ) :)
Click to expand...

I came back to this thread for the 42 time to ask a serious question and you have sidetracked me yet again!

How about calling this strategy "The Big Whack Attack!"?

Hu
 
Randy or Scott, a clarification please

I printed out the "SAM is RAD" sheet and was reading over it. near the bottom it says, "By pointing the tip of your cue stick through the core of the Cue-Ball, you are finding the "line of centers" to the target ball(#1). Now shift your Cue Stick(stay in core of cue ball) to your pre-selected aim point(2,3,4, ..) on the target ball."

When you shift to your new aim point at SAM 2-6, do you realign the tip of the cue stick to still hit precisely through the core of the cue ball or do you hit the same outside spot on the cue ball as when you were aiming through the center of the cue ball and at SAM 1?

Thanks,
Hu
 
Yeah I really do try to stay out of the aiming threads because they never really seem to produce too much but I jump in when questioned or somebody recommends that they are a waste of time and then I?ll try to briefly chime in and remind them that they might not be giving the best advice.

Thanks for bringing my method into the conversation though. I?ve never been shy about how it works, don?t try to hide it at all and previously I tried to start a section on aiming so we could all save a lot of time http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=17682&highlight=aiming+section .

And here?s another one I found while looking for that one that reminded me why I like stay out of them.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=26884&highlight=aiming+section

My system is meant to improve a player?s perception of both the cps on the ob and I think more importantly the cps on the cue ball. Once you know the obs cp with my method you automatically know the cbs matching cp and then it?s all about constantly improving your perception of both. Nothing magical and it?s not for everyone but it can and has helped many.

If I ever get the time I?ll be putting out another instructional and it?ll be based on position play by the numbers. Because my numbered contact points are broken down into 10 degree increments it becomes a very precise way of determining the tangent lines and helps players realize where the cb is going and also helps them realize their limits when faced with certain shots.

That?s it for now; I have to go practice for the first Joss event of the season in Maine that I?m going to MISS!!
 
ShootingArts said:
I printed out the "SAM is RAD" sheet and was reading over it. near the bottom it says, "By pointing the tip of your cue stick through the core of the Cue-Ball, you are finding the "line of centers" to the target ball(#1). Now shift your Cue Stick(stay in core of cue ball) to your pre-selected aim point(2,3,4, ..) on the target ball."

When you shift to your new aim point at SAM 2-6, do you realign the tip of the cue stick to still hit precisely through the core of the cue ball or do you hit the same outside spot on the cue ball as when you were aiming through the center of the cue ball and at SAM 1?

Thanks,
Hu
Click to expand...

All SAM shots are aligned through the center core of the CB. The only time that changes is to adjust for adding sidespin.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
 
Thanks Scott

Scott Lee said:
All SAM shots are aligned through the center core of the CB. The only time that changes is to adjust for adding sidespin.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...

That is what I assumed both about the original alignment and when adding sidespin but having worked in R&D I am painfully aware of the danger of assumptions. I try not to make any at all.

Thanks again, your contributions to the board are greatly appreciated.

Hu
 
Scott Lee said:
All SAM shots are aligned through the center core of the CB. The only time that changes is to adjust for adding sidespin.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...

Ok, so that makes a bit more sense. So why is the line going through the OB in the SAM page referenced above at an arbitrary angle? Does that add more 'corrective slop' to the aim point?

Thanks!
RC
 
I'm a skepetic to all of this as much as the most others but I'm also open minded to the possibilities of such 'systems' for alignment , aim or whatever. The problem for me is as a machinist by trade I deal with hard specifics and precision which is how I look at most things including pool. I also acknowledge tolerance and included variables that might allow for flaws on the hard set up of a 'system'.

So . . .

Is it really so hard for someone with a working knowledge of the process to outline it in the most basic form ?

I mean I understand the whole Teacher gotta make a buck thing , and if that's the whole answer then just say so. But every critic that posts a question gets torn apart because they "Have it all wrong" then we are told look for the info , it's been posted and then everything that's been found and found to be flawed get's responded with "that's the 'old' system , we don't teach that anymore.

Well help us out . . . please. :) Stop with the you have to travel to the mountain stuff and see the light. :D If the mountain was anywhere near , trust me I would. ;)

Anyone ?
 
sixpack said:
Ok, so that makes a bit more sense. So why is the line going through the OB in the SAM page referenced above at an arbitrary angle? Does that add more 'corrective slop' to the aim point?

Thanks!
RC
Click to expand...

This is one reason it's difficult to describe SAM in words or pictures. The idea behind SAM is really to give the shooter a specific aiming point visually to be able to make the shot. It is explained in the hand-out we give to students, but rarely does the light go off until it is actually put in practice on the table.
Steve
 
Several years back I talked to Hal on the phone and he relayed a couple aiming systems to me. They worked pretty well and I've used them to confirm my aim when I'm unsure. He asked that I not talk about the systems and I agreed to keep it too myself. Although I can't see what harm it would do to divulge it I did give my word and that's that. I suppose that's the case with his other "students".
 
JimS said:
Several years back I talked to Hal on the phone and he relayed a couple aiming systems to me. They worked pretty well and I've used them to confirm my aim when I'm unsure. He asked that I not talk about the systems and I agreed to keep it too myself. Although I can't see what harm it would do to divulge it I did give my word and that's that. I suppose that's the case with his other "students".
Click to expand...

Have to say that Hal has his own PR operation going, with requests to not talk a about his systems.

Those who have it are in-the-know; the rest of us have to just guess about it.

Not a problem for me, as I already have an aiming system that works just fine, thank you.

Flex

Edit: P.S. And mine doesn't depend on figuring out what the precise angle is, say 15 or 30 or 45 or whatever. Probably only works for me though. And it works differently for cuts to the left versus the right, due to a visual perception issue with my eyes. Joe Tucker goes into this problem at length in his teaching videos, especially with the 3rd Eye Stroke Trainer, and his more recent one using his new invention with lasers.
 
Last edited:
Scott Lee said:
The 4-ball is indeed a SAM 2, aka a 15 degree cut.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...

Question.......... To simplify things, a 15 degree cut would be a quarter ball aim. Would this aim point on the object ball be where the base of the ball (on the left or right side-depending on direction of the shot), just touches the table?

If it is, at this point, where would the tip placement be aiming. Splitting the tip at this point?
 
klockdoc said:
Question.......... To simplify things, a 15 degree cut would be a quarter ball aim. Would this aim point on the object ball be where the base of the ball (on the left or right side-depending on direction of the shot), just touches the table?

If it is, at this point, where would the tip placement be aiming. Splitting the tip at this point?
Click to expand...

I used the Cut Angle Calculator from Cue Table and it appears that the outside edge of the tip is aiming at the spot where the ball contacts the table.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top