OK Colin, let's talk aiming.
- Thread starter CaptainJR
- Start date
What is it that we are looking at here? A computer generated 3D image? Well, sort of. Computers are very very good at geometry. What they can do is figure out exactly how much smaller the object ball is than the cue ball when it is two diamonds away from it. It is still just a two dimensional image. It is exactly what you would see if you were looking from the same spot at the same shot from the same distance (here is the kicker), if you had one eye closed. There is your excuse if you answer the poll wrong. And it is a very legitimate excuse.
I'll try to start things off again by asking a couple questions.
Do you think the best pool players have better than average depth perception?
Do you have your eyes exactly square to the cue ball or is one normally farther away than the other? Even more importantly which ever you do are you sure your consistent about it?
I'll try to start things off again by asking a couple questions.
Do you think the best pool players have better than average depth perception?
Do you have your eyes exactly square to the cue ball or is one normally farther away than the other? Even more importantly which ever you do are you sure your consistent about it?
Last edited:
I think it's #4, but I play some VP3 on my PC at home, and this shot plays very differently at different speeds. I think the physics in the game overestimate the effects of ball-on-ball friction and thus throw (and I know Fred would say a lot of real pool players do too) because the alignment in picture #4 will put the ball straight in the pocket at pocket speed or a little more, but if you hit it hard, it will overcut by about half a diamond. Putting a little draw on the cueball also increases the cut.
Also, about virtual pool being too tough without the cheater lines, I've never used them, and I can run a rack of nine ball at least one out of three tries on a nine-foot table in that game. I've run over 30 in straight pool. I know that's hardly pro level, but for someone who plays the game once in a while, I think it means I can aim pretty well without the lines. It just takes some time to adust to the computer screen's two dimensions. I usually move the camera angle up and down a bit while I'm aligning in order to make sure I have an accurate sense of where the balls lie. I find the overhead view can also be helpful in judging the angle to the pocket.
-Andrew
Also, about virtual pool being too tough without the cheater lines, I've never used them, and I can run a rack of nine ball at least one out of three tries on a nine-foot table in that game. I've run over 30 in straight pool. I know that's hardly pro level, but for someone who plays the game once in a while, I think it means I can aim pretty well without the lines. It just takes some time to adust to the computer screen's two dimensions. I usually move the camera angle up and down a bit while I'm aligning in order to make sure I have an accurate sense of where the balls lie. I find the overhead view can also be helpful in judging the angle to the pocket.
-Andrew
CaptainJR said:
Sheesh Capt'n, you lead us to some strange and interesting places ... this is one of the former imo. I have no answer, they all look about the same and my zoom-eyes aren't working today, just like yesterday, a story of my life. Thankfully on a pool table I am able to judge the line and sometimes even execute. Of course I use a bunch of views to come to my judgements as Colin describes ... and both eyes mostly
Dave
PS I think this is the first time I've seen three consecutive followups by a thread originator ... maybe some kind of record ?
Last edited:
I'm going to say #2 makes the shot, #3 is undercut and #4 is overcut. Very tough to tell. They're all pretty close to the same. A lot of what makes effective aiming possible (IMHO) is being able to judge where the two balls are (relative to one another and the pocket) in space. Awful tough to do in 2 dimension.
How long are you going to keep us hanging, JR?
Picture number 2 is the maker. chefjeff, JLW, StevenPWaldon, tjlmbklr, TommyT where the 5 people that got it right.
Although they were all very close. You could see a difference and JLW showed this by being so specific and accurate with his answer. Pretty darn good JLW!
Picture number 1(4B) - very slight undercut.
Picture number 2(6B) - goes in the hole.
Picture number 3(8B) - little more of an undercut than 1
Picture number 4(10B) - very slight overcut
Picture number 5(12B) - missed by the most and is undercut
To all the people that said they all look the same. Thank you for making my point.
This was a very carefully chosen shot. Move the object ball to the right and the pocket gets bigger. Move the ball to the left and you can start catching the left rail a little and still make the shot if the speed is right. This shot has to be deadly accurate.
What aiming system is this accurate? Only two that I know of. They are 1. finding the contact points on the object ball and cue ball, and 2. the ghost ball. To make this shot you must find a very very specific contact point. All the people that said "they all look the same" prove this. There is one other system that can be this accurate if you can see it accurately enough and that is doubling the distance but that system still requires finding the contact point on the object ball. Notice all the systems I talk about here involve the contact point. Any system that doesn't use the contact point is not accurate enough to make this shot.
I'm not saying that people that use these non-contact point systems can't make the shot. I am saying that it is not there system that is doing it. It can get them close then they would have to fine tune.
What about the "feel" people? I know them pretty well. After all, I'm one of them. Yup, on 95 percent of my shots I'm shooting them by feel. The question is, what am I feeling? The contact point, that is what I'm feeling. Do you want to say your feeling an angle? Finding an angle is also finding the contact point.
The contact point, that's it. The game of pool is based on it.
Although they were all very close. You could see a difference and JLW showed this by being so specific and accurate with his answer. Pretty darn good JLW!
Picture number 1(4B) - very slight undercut.
Picture number 2(6B) - goes in the hole.
Picture number 3(8B) - little more of an undercut than 1
Picture number 4(10B) - very slight overcut
Picture number 5(12B) - missed by the most and is undercut
To all the people that said they all look the same. Thank you for making my point.
This was a very carefully chosen shot. Move the object ball to the right and the pocket gets bigger. Move the ball to the left and you can start catching the left rail a little and still make the shot if the speed is right. This shot has to be deadly accurate.
What aiming system is this accurate? Only two that I know of. They are 1. finding the contact points on the object ball and cue ball, and 2. the ghost ball. To make this shot you must find a very very specific contact point. All the people that said "they all look the same" prove this. There is one other system that can be this accurate if you can see it accurately enough and that is doubling the distance but that system still requires finding the contact point on the object ball. Notice all the systems I talk about here involve the contact point. Any system that doesn't use the contact point is not accurate enough to make this shot.
I'm not saying that people that use these non-contact point systems can't make the shot. I am saying that it is not there system that is doing it. It can get them close then they would have to fine tune.
What about the "feel" people? I know them pretty well. After all, I'm one of them. Yup, on 95 percent of my shots I'm shooting them by feel. The question is, what am I feeling? The contact point, that is what I'm feeling. Do you want to say your feeling an angle? Finding an angle is also finding the contact point.
The contact point, that's it. The game of pool is based on it.
Attachments
CaptainJR said:
I hate to tell you this, CaptJR, but I used my 5 point aiming technique to pick image number 2, the correct answer.
It's "right/right" in my terminology. Without my system, I would not have had a clue which shot would pot the ball, as the ghost ball wasn't really visible in these images. On a real table, I could've used ghost ball, but I wouldn't have.But then I wasn't concerned with shape, so juicing the CB would have made me adjust somewhat, like you say we all do. I have an ingredient called, "Feel the Shot" that comes just before Sqeezing the Trigger. If I don't "feel" right, I force myself to stand up and go into my stance again until I "feel" right, then I take the shot. So, I use both an aiming system and "feel"...am I banned from AZ now???
Jeff Livingston
chefjeff said:I hate to tell you this, CaptJR, but I used my 5 point aiming technique to pick image number 2, the correct answer.
But then I wasn't concerned with shape, so juicing the CB would have made me adjust somewhat, like you say we all do. I have an ingredient called, "Feel the Shot" that comes just before Sqeezing the Trigger. If I don't "feel" right, I force myself to stand up and go into my stance again until I "feel" right, then I take the shot. So, I use both an aiming system and "feel"...am I banned from AZ now???
Jeff Livingston
Banned? Certainly not. And you just backed up what I said above. You use feel to adjust your system. Let me ask you this. You say you used "right right" in your system to pick number 2. What would picture number 1 and picture number 4 have been called in your system? They are only about 1/16 of an inch different at most. Or lets say I move the object ball 1/16 of an inch to the right, what would you have used then?
Colin Colenso said:Hi JR,
Just saw this thread.
I'd guess no.3, but really it is hard to tell not having a real 3D perspective as we do in real life.
I do not have a way that I can be sure of making this shot, but if its a 5" pocket I'd be pretty confident
Hey Colin I've done some practice on five inch pockets and then some analysis and they aren't easier than tighter pockets.....
Let me explain why....
When you have 5" pockets compared to say 4.5". There is rail missing, so if you come in from an angle and are a little bit off it 1) goes farther before it hits the rail, which makes it a little farther off and 2) The rail is cut at a wider angle, so when it rebounds it rebounds at an angle more deviant from the pocket which enhances not decreases the liklihood of a rattled ball. Just thought I'd throw it out there. Because most people assume that tighter pockets are automatically harder
Jaden said:
I've seen some larger pockets with more open cut angles that are not as accepting, especially shooting down rails, as I would have expected, but generally speaking I would say, especially on open table shots, that wider pockets allow a greater margin of error.
I think the problem is that when they set up tables for large pockets, the width at the back of the pocket is fixed -- they aren't going to reshape the pocket iron. This means that the angle of the jaws has to taper more going into the pocket, leading to more rejections of fast shots down the rail. I think that if they kept a constant facing angle, larger pockets would always be easier.Colin Colenso said:
I agree that for shots like spot shots, where the facing angle is not an issue, larger pockets are always easier.
CaptainJR said:
It's not so simple. This game is programmed for a certain amount of contact friction on cut shots which affects the throw of this shot.
I know the programmer very well, in fact, he's one of my best friends. He programmed the game to take what he refers to as a "thick line". These tiny differences in angles you have given are just enough to take the throw into account. More throw sends shot number 4 in, less throw sends shot #2 in.
Chris
CaptainJR said:
It's no accident that pool players love this game. My friend's name whose company wrote the program is Steve Chaplin, President of Celeris. He's a very strong pool player known out here as "tall Steve". When he has the time to be in-stroke, he can hold his own against the top competition .
I had the opportunity to try out the beta test for the very first Virtual Pool game when they were just onto it. I was amazed at the physics they could produce in the simulation. The fact that he is a computer programmer, graphics expert, and a good player was just the right combination. As far as physics go, he now knows more about the physics of the game than anyone I believe. He starts talking about vectors and so forth and I just fall asleep.
There is also an arcade game he wrote called "Jam Up Pool" - the game is a blast too - you play various skilled hustlers and work your way up to the top guy - kind of like a real pool hall.
Chris
Im a little confused, doesn't every system ultize a contact point in one way or another? In order to do any of these systems you have to aproximate a contact point or else your aiming blindly.
Im not sure what this actually proves. Especially since the image we are given is a simulation of being down in your stance. I don't know about everyone else but when I aim I do so standing up, I then get down and stay perfectly still (except for my eyes and stroking arm of course).
Im not sure what this actually proves. Especially since the image we are given is a simulation of being down in your stance. I don't know about everyone else but when I aim I do so standing up, I then get down and stay perfectly still (except for my eyes and stroking arm of course).
Last edited:
A half-ball hit, which you might use to shoot spot shots from a particular location, has no explicit contact point in the aiming. All you worry about is the cut angle. There are systems that align the side of the ferrule with something on the object ball, but not the contact point. There are also systems which have you aim at a particular light reflection on the object ball or shadow under the object ball, but these also don't have a contact point in them.Cameron Smith said:
Back Into the Real World
In real life those shots are all aligned the same. I doubt anyone is aligning themselves by "the pixle" in real life....and I would doubt anyone has an accurate enough stroke to hit "the intended pixle"...
Bottom line in "real life" a "system" weather it be "contact points" "ghost ball" "HH 3-line" "Aim and pivot" "Pivot and aim" "Shadow system" "light system" "shadlight system" "voodoo magic system" is a "tool" that aids in gaining the right "feel" for the shot.
Here is the circle of life...When you first start this game you play by almost 100% feel (even though you have none)....Shortly you will find a "system" that you will begin to rely on almost 100%...(because you have no feel)....you may try 1 or 100 systems until you finally find one that what??......."feels right to you".....You now get better and better and what happens, you start to play more by "feel" than you do system...(because your system is now second nature).....by the end of your pool life...and hopefully when you have reached "world beater" you are back to playing by almost 100% feel...
In real life those shots are all aligned the same. I doubt anyone is aligning themselves by "the pixle" in real life....and I would doubt anyone has an accurate enough stroke to hit "the intended pixle"...
Bottom line in "real life" a "system" weather it be "contact points" "ghost ball" "HH 3-line" "Aim and pivot" "Pivot and aim" "Shadow system" "light system" "shadlight system" "voodoo magic system" is a "tool" that aids in gaining the right "feel" for the shot.
Here is the circle of life...When you first start this game you play by almost 100% feel (even though you have none)....Shortly you will find a "system" that you will begin to rely on almost 100%...(because you have no feel)....you may try 1 or 100 systems until you finally find one that what??......."feels right to you".....You now get better and better and what happens, you start to play more by "feel" than you do system...(because your system is now second nature).....by the end of your pool life...and hopefully when you have reached "world beater" you are back to playing by almost 100% feel...