Pivoting as a Means of Alignment Compensation

Colin Colenso

Colin Colenso

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've noticed a few good potters who align their tip left or right of center cue ball, then pivot during the stroke to hit their intended CB target. Bustamante is one example, who aligns left of the CB.

This weekend I observed an Australian 8-ball player (playing UK 2 shot rules on a 7-foot table, which requires significant potting accuracy), Luke Foster, who aligns almost every shot with between a touch and a full tip to the left.

I noticed when the further away the OB is, the further left he aligns the tip. A clipped video of several of his shots can be seen here: http://www.tubechop.com/watch/6556434

If that link doesn't take you to 5 hour 31 mins and 28 seconds into the video, try this link: https://youtu.be/YahA04IcNPg?t=5h31m28s or manually move to there in the youtube video.

His second last yellow is the clearest to view this alignment method.

Apparently, he had reached a high level as a junior player before it was pointed out he was doing this. He doesn't do it deliberately, it is instinctive and he feels like the is aligned directly to his aim in his peripheral vision. When he aligns his cue to CCB, apparently he hits everything right of where he thinks he is aiming.

I have a similar alignment tendency, to hit right of where it looks like I am aimed to. I did some experimentation with aligning left of CCB, then pivoting, and after a little tweaking of bridge length and amount of offset, I started potting surprisingly well.

I've talked a little before about perceptions of dominant eye seeming to cross-over from close / peripheral to further / focused distances. This may play a role in how this works for some.

Below is a before and after image of Luke pivoting. The after is slightly transparent so the amount of pivot can be clearly gauged.

Colin
 
Last edited:
Though it pains me to raise the topic, for fear of turning this thread into a flame war, it does make me wonder if part of the success of the 1/2 tip manual pivot in CTE, in some players who have had alignment issues, may be due to an improved perception of alignment with the cue aligned to the side.

Perhaps some CTE'rs can testify as to whether they have more success to one side than the other when manual pivoting, or to finding success with smaller offsets when close to the OB, and larger offsets when further away?

Colin
 
"...I have a similar alignment tendency, to hit right of where it looks like I am aimed to. I did some experimentation with aligning left of CCB, then pivoting, and after a little tweaking of bridge length and amount of offset, I started potting surprisingly well.

I've talked a little before about perceptions of dominant eye seeming to cross-over from close / peripheral to further / focused distances. This may play a role in how this works for some...."

I don't pivot. I do swipe on some shots.

I have a "vision center" problem and use my cue to locate where the CB touches the cloth and then drop d0wn on the shot. Otherwise, I send the OB right.

I also warm up with straight in shots and adjust the cue location under my chin or cheek for I am right handed with right eye dominance.

Be well
 
LAMas said:
I don't pivot. I do swipe on some shots.

I have a "vision center" problem and use my cue to locate where the CB touches the cloth and then drop d0wn on the shot. Otherwise, I send the OB right.

I also warm up with straight in shots and adjust the cue location under my chin or cheek for I am right handed with right eye dominance.

Be well
Click to expand...
That's similar to how I have tried to 'get my eye in' over the years.

When I'm playing hours per day and often during a tournament, my eyes tune in really well and anything looks pottable and the CB goes where my perceived alignment suggests.

But most other times, I feel like I have to aim left, to miss a little, to make the shots. It's frustrating and exhausting, to have to stare so hard and double check on alignment for signs that my perception is on track.

I think I'll experiment a little more with the off center alignment to see if it can aid my perception, or perhaps even provide a clutch for when I'm not quite feeling the line on a shot....those ones usually miss.

And perhaps just to get a better understanding of perception tendencies / anomalies generally.

Cheers, Colin
 
Colin Colenso said:
Though it pains me to raise the topic, for fear of turning this thread into a flame war, it does make me wonder if part of the success of the 1/2 tip manual pivot in CTE, in some players who have had alignment issues, may be due to an improved perception of alignment with the cue aligned to the side.

Perhaps some CTE'rs can testify as to whether they have more success to one side than the other when manual pivoting, or to finding success with smaller offsets when close to the OB, and larger offsets when further away?

Colin
Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with CTE at all Colin. Another possibility for them pivoting is a natural aiming method they found that works for them that is very similar to 90/90 aiming system.
 
Another aiming method is to aim center of cue ball at the ob contact point, with the tip lined up parallel, but a tip of inside (edge of the tip through the center of the cb at the ob contact point). Then on the follow through you hit center ball.
For a certain range of cuts, it can be a valid method with a defined starting point.
 
Mirza said:
Or maybe they are using a system like this, but just are not willing to share:

http://www.billiardsthegame.com/offset-and-pivot-aiming-systems-395
Click to expand...
There appear to be similarities, and perhaps a little overlap here and there, but what I am working on has a significant difference.

I've just had a 3 hour session and I'm more than pleasantly surprised at how consistent and accurate this method is for me, with a little better understanding of cue offset, bridge length and aim perception with a left cue offset.

Firstly, it doesn't work for me as a kind of double distance from contact point type pivot system, where one would aim to the contact point (thick hit), then pivot to the thinner hit. That would require left offset for right cuts and right offset for left cuts. I am only using a left offset, then pivoting to center, approx 1/2 tip.

Basically, I align with the cue parallel, but left offset from CCB, visualizing the CB intersecting to make the pot, then I pivot to CCB, at which point the alignment, particularly on longer shots, looks to be right of where I should be aiming. Never the less, this aim is quite accurate most of the time.

If I move my head to the right, I can actually perceive, through what seems to be my less dominant right eye, that this alignment actually looks correct, or close to correct.

It is this perception, with head shifter a little right, that I usually try to focus in on, but it is a weaker perception for me, even less bright.

So essentially, my strongest / clearest visual perception gives aims me left of where I perceive it to be, hence the pivot is a manual correction to this mis-perception.

Interestingly, the width of offset appears to be partly self-correcting, in that, if I offset further left, my aim perception also shifts left, such that the larger pivot from wider offset increases the amount to which the pivot brings the aim back in line.

This is not perfect self-correction, but it appears to help. I find that around 1/2 tip offset is sufficient for longer shots, a little more if the bridge is longer and less when shorter. As the CB approaches the OB, the offset decreases down to about 1/8th tip when 6 inches apart.

Not for everyone, that's for sure, and I'll see over time if it continues to perform and can be refined for consistency. What I did experience was an ease in setting my pre-pivot alignment, using my clearest, though erroneous, visual. This was a lot less mentally straining than trying to force myself to see a more accurate, but less clear visual.

Makes me think, one's dominant eye may not always be the eye which has the strongest vision, or perhaps it's more complex than that, in terms of how our brain deals with perceptions from two points at different angles and different capabilities and interprets this to us.

Perhaps one can train the brain to tell us what we want it to tell us, or instead, perhaps we can learn to systematize a compensation method to correct what our brain is offering us, then strengthen our connection to the signal that the eyes and brain seem determined to offer us.

Colin
 
Last edited:
Colin Colenso said:
There appear to be similarities, and perhaps a little overlap here and there, but what I am working on has a significant difference.

I've just had a 3 hour session and I'm more than pleasantly surprised at how consistent and accurate this method is for me, with a little better understanding of cue offset, bridge length and aim perception with a left cue offset.

Firstly, it doesn't work for me as a kind of double distance from contact point type pivot system, where one would aim to the contact point (thick hit), then pivot to the thinner hit. That would require left offset for right cuts and right offset for left cuts. I am only using a left offset, then pivoting to center, approx 1/2 tip.

Basically, I align with the cue parallel, but left offset from CCB, visualizing the CB intersecting to make the pot, then I pivot to CCB, at which point the alignment, particularly on longer shots, looks to be right of where I should be aiming. Never the less, this aim is quite accurate most of the time.

If I move my head to the right, I can actually perceive, through what seems to be my less dominant right eye, that this alignment actually looks correct, or close to correct.

It is this perception, with head shifter a little right, that I usually try to focus in on, but it is a weaker perception for me, even less bright.

So essentially, my strongest / clearest visual perception gives aims me left of where I perceive it to be, hence the pivot is a manual correction to this mis-perception.

Interestingly, the width of offset appears to be partly self-correcting, in that, if I offset further left, my aim perception also shifts left, such that the larger pivot from wider offset increases the amount to which the pivot brings the aim back in line.

This is not perfect self-correction, but it appears to help. I find that around 1/2 tip offset is sufficient for longer shots, a little more if the bridge is longer and less when shorter. As the CB approaches the OB, the offset decreases down to about 1/8th tip when 6 inches apart.

Not for everyone, that's for sure, and I'll see over time if it continues to perform and can be refined for consistency. What I did experience was an ease in setting my pre-pivot alignment, using my clearest, though erroneous, visual. This was a lot less mentally straining than trying to force myself to see a more accurate, but less clear visual.

Makes me think, one's dominant eye may not always be the eye which has the strongest vision, or perhaps it's more complex than that, in terms of how our brain deals with perceptions from two points at different angles and different capabilities and interprets this to us.

Perhaps one can train the brain to tell us what we want it to tell us, or instead, perhaps we can learn to systematize a compensation method to correct what our brain is offering us, then strengthen our connection to the signal that the eyes and brain seem determined to offer us.

Colin
Click to expand...

Did you go straight down towards that 1/2 tip left cue tip position with your vision AND your tip, or did your vision go to center CB and tip to the left?
 
Mirza said:
Did you go straight down towards that 1/2 tip left cue tip position with your vision AND your tip, or did your vision go to center CB and tip to the left?
Click to expand...
I take my tip straight to the left of CCB, but I keep my left (seemingly stronger) eye on what I think is the line from CCB to the OB (perhaps contact point, but not specific focus).

I feather the cue at about 1/2 tip offset and align bridge until it feels like the CB, traveling parallel to this cue direction, would contact the OB on the pot line (or ghost ball position), though I never visualize an actual ghost ball, just where I think the CB needs to go.

From there I pivot to CCB and shoot firm generally, to reduce CIT or stroking errors, looking mainly at the CB during the stroke to avoid steering.

If my visual perception from here was good, then the pivot would send the CB right of aim, but it seems I have a perception tendency that is off about a degree, which seems to correspond to the pivot angle I'm producing.

Interestingly, at one stage I started to consistently miss a particular shot by hitting too far left. After a few attempts I realized I was aligning my tip right of CCB and pivoting left, doing the same process in a mirror like fashion to the opposite side. This highlighted that there is a clear perception difference to one side as it doubled my error.

Colin
 
Last edited:
Colin Colenso said:
I take my tip straight to the left of CCB, but I keep my left (seemingly stronger) eye on what I think is the line from CCB to the OB (perhaps contact point, but not specific focus).

I feather the cue at about 1/2 tip offset and align bridge until it feels like the CB, traveling parallel to this cue direction, would contact the OB on the pot line (or ghost ball position), though I never visualize an actual ghost ball, just where I think the CB needs to go.

From there I pivot to CCB and shoot firm generally, to reduce CIT or stroking errors, looking mainly at the CB during the stroke to avoid steering.

If my visual perception from here was good, then the pivot would send the CB right of aim, but it seems I have a perception tendency that is off about a degree, which seems to correspond to the pivot angle I'm producing.

Interestingly, at one stage I started to consistently miss a particular shot by hitting too far left. After a few attempts I realized I was aligning my tip right of CCB and pivoting left, doing the same process in a mirror like fashion to the opposite side. This highlighted that there is a clear perception difference to one side as it doubled my error.

Colin
Click to expand...

Cool.

Try the alignments in the link I posted with this kind of pivoting (always from the left), it just might work :)

Alignments are simple, inside edge of the CB to inside edge of the OB, inside edge of the CB to center of OB and inside edge of the CB to outer 1/8 of the OB, and pivot from left to right, here its recommended to use half a ball pivot, but smaller should work also.

And if it works, I want a video :)
 
Chuck Fields said:
Another aiming method is to aim center of cue ball at the ob contact point, with the tip lined up parallel, but a tip of inside (edge of the tip through the center of the cb at the ob contact point). Then on the follow through you hit center ball.
For a certain range of cuts, it can be a valid method with a defined starting point.
Click to expand...
Yes Chuck, this has the potential to be an accurate aiming system. I discussed a couple of posts back how what I'm doing differs from this method.

The method you mention (not sure if it has an accepted name) has a significant problem, being that the tip offset needs to increase with cut angle and decrease with distance to OB. You'd need to be quite the mathematician and very skillful at adjusting tip offset and perceiving the parallel line to the contact point.

If one can align to / perceive the line to the contact point well, it would seem easier to just learn to aim to double distance or to learn to estimate the required shot line by other visualizing methods.

If I were to try that, I'd be struck be the same problem, being a tendency to aim left of the contact point, which would make other adjustments pretty useless.

In adjusting for a perception error, it appears the error is angular, hence it increases in error over distance, but not according to cut angle, hence, a pivot of the same angle would seem to be able to negate the error for all cut angles and all distances.

I could also adjust by a simple bridge shift right each time, or by aiming a degree right on every shot. In fact, those are methods I've tried over time with varying success. The pivot seems a little more effective and intuitive this far into trialing.

Hope that makes sense.

Colin
 
Colin Colenso said:
Yes Chuck, this has the potential to be an accurate aiming system. I discussed a couple of posts back how what I'm doing differs from this method.

The method you mention (not sure if it has an accepted name) has a significant problem, being that the tip offset needs to increase with cut angle and decrease with distance to OB. You'd need to be quite the mathematician and very skillful at adjusting tip offset and perceiving the parallel line to the contact point.

If one can align to / perceive the line to the contact point well, it would seem easier to just learn to aim to double distance or to learn to estimate the required shot line by other visualizing methods.

If I were to try that, I'd be struck be the same problem, being a tendency to aim left of the contact point, which would make other adjustments pretty useless.

In adjusting for a perception error, it appears the error is angular, hence it increases in error over distance, but not according to cut angle, hence, a pivot of the same angle would seem to be able to negate the error for all cut angles and all distances.

I could also adjust by a simple bridge shift right each time, or by aiming a degree right on every shot. In fact, those are methods I've tried over time with varying success. The pivot seems a little more effective and intuitive this far into trialing.

Hope that makes sense.

Colin
Click to expand...

I guess what I was getting at, is that several players, pro's included, use several little visual tricks such as this one. When spectators look at what they are doing, they focus on the pivot etc. When in reality, they are just starting at a 'known' starting point and going from there.
Some people like to put way too much thought into what is happening, instead of trying to figure out why it is happening. And the why isnt always as convoluted as people make it out to be..... :grin:
 
Chuck Fields said:
I guess what I was getting at, is that several players, pro's included, use several little visual tricks such as this one. When spectators look at what they are doing, they focus on the pivot etc. When in reality, they are just starting at a 'known' starting point and going from there.
Some people like to put way too much thought into what is happening, instead of trying to figure out why it is happening. And the why isnt always as convoluted as people make it out to be..... :grin:
Click to expand...
I think you're right Chuck, our perceptions tend to change during sessions, day to day and year to year, so experienced players tend to be familiar with a bag of tricks to adapt to finding a way to adapt and make shots when not right in the groove.

Cheers, Colin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top