Poolology: Side Pocket Aiming

[7stud]

Below is a shot for which Poolology was unable to calculate a meaningful fractional cut, yet it was a 3/8 fractional cut. The 5-ball was on the 36 position value and the alignment value was 40. Unfortunately, the alignment value has to be less than the position value to get a proper fractional cut. I examined the shot, and a 1/2 ball fractional aim point felt too thick to me, so I hit the shot with a 3/8 fractional cut (edge of cue aligned with edge of ob). I hit the 5-ball with pocket speed, and it dribbled in.

Does anyone else want to try that shot and see what they think?

 

[BC21]

Below is a shot for which Poolology was unable to calculate a meaningful fractional cut, yet it was a 3/8 fractional cut. The 5-ball was on the 36 position value and the alignment value was 40. Unfortunately, the alignment value has to be less than the position value to get a proper fractional cut. I examined the shot, and a 1/2 ball fractional aim point felt too thick to me, so I hit the shot with a 3/8 fractional cut (edge of cue aligned with edge of ob). I hit the 5-ball with pocket speed, and it dribbled in.

View attachment 708959

Does anyone else want to try that shot and see what they think?

For every shot you show where the system either does not work or where the shot just happens to fall outside of the systems parameters, I can show 10 shots that work just fine. Lol

Please understand that the system is a tool to help develop fractional aiming skills. If you setup a random shot, and the system doesn't give you an accurate aim line, but you find the correct aim line by aiming thinner or thicker than the reference provided by the system, you are DEVELOPING aiming skills.

No aiming system can replace the aiming computer between your ears. In other words.... when/if the Poolology system doesn't work, use other aiming tools, like your eyes and a little common sense.

 

[bbb]

Below is a shot for which Poolology was unable to calculate a meaningful fractional cut, yet it was a 3/8 fractional cut. The 5-ball was on the 36 position value and the alignment value was 40. Unfortunately, the alignment value has to be less than the position value to get a proper fractional cut. I examined the shot, and a 1/2 ball fractional aim point felt too thick to me, so I hit the shot with a 3/8 fractional cut (edge of cue aligned with edge of ob). I hit the 5-ball with pocket speed, and it dribbled in.

View attachment 708959

Does anyone else want to try that shot and see what they think?

are you on a mission to show where poololgy breaks down?

For every shot you show where the system either does not work or where the shot just happens to fall outside of the systems parameters, I can show 10 shots that work just fine. Lol

Please understand that the system is a tool to help develop fractional aiming skills. If you setup a random shot, and the system doesn't give you an accurate aim line, but you find the correct aim line by aiming thinner or thicker than the reference provided by the system, you are DEVELOPING aiming skills. No aiming system can replace the aiming computer between your ears. In other words.... when/if the Poolology system fails to work, use other aiming tools, like your eyes and a little common sense.

7stud
i suggest you read the bolded parts above how ever many times it takes you for it to sink in
good luck with your game....

 

[BC21]

Sorry for the long post...(it's a 2 minute read)

I don't mind the public display of Poolology's errors or system failures. The system isn't perfect, as I've mentioned here many times. And it's not magic. However, for the vast majority of shots that pool players most often face, the system provides pretty solid aim lines, or fractional aiming references, without having to guess at the shot angle or which fraction to use.

It's been suggested by a few people that I should update the Poolology book to explain exactly where the system is most accurate, as well as where it is least accurate. Though I respect that opinion, the reason I haven't done this is because I don't believe it is needed.

Simply practicing with the system for 20min or so each day, paying attention to exactly where you're aiming (and to the results you're getting), quickly helps the player develop an eye for the most important and most objective shot - the HALFBALL shot.

The entire system is geared around the halfball shot. And there's a reason for this: The halfball aim is the dividing line between THICK and THIN cut shots, and it's quite amazing just how often 25 to 35 degree cut shots come up. It is by far the most common shot angle range that we face.

If a player knows when a shot is a dead halfball aim (either from using the Poolology system or simply recognizing the angle from experience), that player also knows when the shot is a little thinner or a little thicker than a halfball aim. The mind figures this stuff out on its own, exactly how much thinner or thicker. This is how the system helps players develop a good eye for cut shots.

With that said, Poolology is not the type of system that players should rely on forever. It is a tool/system that should be used to help the player build solid aiming skills. The ultimate goal of the book is to help players become system-free. But that doesn't mean you'll never use it again. It just means 99% of the time you won't need it.

Certain shots might come up here and there where you fall back on the system when needed, similar to when you see a player put the cue tip at the ghostball position and then swing the cue around over top of the cb. You will even see PRO players do this sometimes. 99% of the time they just see the shots and know exactly how to shoot them, but occasionally they will revert back to physically verifying the ghostball location.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Does anyone else want to try that shot and see what they think?

Maybe I missed something, but I have no idea which pocket you are shooting the 5 ball to. The side?

 

[BC21]

Maybe I missed something, but I have no idea which pocket you are shooting the 5 ball to. The side?

The corner is definitely the better shot (in my opinion), but yes 7stud was referring to the side.

I believe I'll backpeddle some here and commit to fixing the largest discrepancies in the Poolology book. Not sure when I'll get it done, but it's apparently something that needs to be done, mainly with Zone C and with side pocket position values 40 thru 80. The fix for side pockets is simple - I'll tighten the parameters for the 40 thru 80 as shown in the pic here. Not sure yet how I will address the Zone C issues.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Maybe I missed something, but I have no idea which pocket you are shooting the 5 ball to. The side?

So, the shot is to the side. The cut angle for the shot in the image is very close to a 20-degree cut. That is fuller than a half-ball hit.

A 20-degree cut must be shot slightly fuller than a 5/8-full hit, unless I did my trig wrong.

Since the OP is quite sure the hit was thinner than half ball, and 3/8ths worked for him, the diagram is wrong. A 3/8-full cut is 39 degrees, ignoring friction.

 

[BC21]

So, the shot is to the side. The cut angle for the shot in the image is very close to a 20-degree cut. That is fuller than a half-ball hit.

A 20-degree cut must be shot slightly fuller than a 5/8-full hit, unless I did my trig wrong.

Since the OP is quite sure the hit was thinner than half ball, and 3/8ths worked for him, the diagram is wrong. A 3/8-full cut is 39 degrees, ignoring friction.

You are spot on. The fractional aim points used in Poolology are not perfect fractional aims, due to using the shaft edges in conjunction with the ob edge.

In other words, in the Poolology book, a 5/8 aim produces a shot result around 22.7° with a 13mm shaft. So maybe that is what the op meant, a 5/8, because that would work for this shot, as CIT would push it closer to about 21°.

But, honestly, the op's main point was to highlight the fact that the Poolology system does not cover this shot. And that's an acceptable point, because it's true. The shot is outside of the system parameters.

I appreciate any feedback/complaint about the system. It is beneficial and will eventually make the system even better.

 

[7stud]

Maybe I missed something, but I have no idea which pocket you are shooting the 5 ball to. The side?

Sorry, the thread title is "Poolology: Side Pocket Aiming", so my questions in this thread are about fractional aim points for the side pocket.

On the long rail, the 5-ball should be positioned two "ticks" closer to the side pocket than the 1st diamond from the side pocket, where there are 10 ticks between the virtual side pocket diamond and the 1st diamond from the side pocket. On the Poolology grid, that would be an object ball position of 36. On the end rail, the 5-ball is halfway between the virtual corner pocket diamond and the 1st diamond, or 5 ticks closer to the corner pocket from the 1st diamond. Then, if you line up the cb so that the cb-ob line of centers points to the 40 diamond from the side pocket, as shown in the diagram, I find that the fractional aim point is between 1/2 ball and 3/8 ball. That was just a random shot that came up during a practice session, and the corner pocket was blocked, so I endeavored to sink the 5-ball in the side pocket, and I decided to run the numbers using Poolology.

The calculated Poolology number is 40/36, which is meaningless. The exact fractional aim point isn't really important because the point of my post was to see if I was doing something wrong because it's the first shot that I've come across where Poolology didn't provide a meaningful aim point for a shot that required at least a 3/8 fractional aim point--"at least" meaning equal to or greater numerically than 3/8, e.g 3/8, 1/2, 5/8. Typically, I find that as the fractional cuts get really thin, e.g. 1/8 or smaller, then sometimes Poolology won't provide a meaningful fractional aim point, and BC21 has stated that the system doesn't work well as the cuts get thin.

I also want to say, Poolology didn't come up with a 5/8 fractional aim point when the shot actually required a 3/8 fractional aim point, so I was not led astray. Instead, the Poolology math told me, "You are on your own.", and I can accept that.

 

[Thresh]

Sorry, the thread title is "Poolology: Side Pocket Aiming", so my questions in this thread are about fractional aim points for the side pocket.

On the long rail, the 5-ball should be positioned two "ticks" closer to the side pocket than the 1st diamond from the side pocket, where there are 10 ticks between the virtual side pocket diamond and the 1st diamond from the side pocket. On the Poolology grid, that would be an object ball position of 36. On the end rail, the 5-ball is halfway between the virtual corner pocket diamond and the 1st diamond, or 5 ticks closer to the corner pocket from the 1st diamond. Then, if you line up the cb so that the cb-ob line of centers points to the 40 diamond from the side pocket, as shown in the diagram, I find that the fractional aim point is between 1/2 ball and 3/8 ball. That was just a random shot that came up during a practice session, and the corner pocket was blocked, so I endeavored to sink the 5-ball in the side pocket, and I decided to run the numbers using Poolology.

The calculated Poolology number is 40/36, which is meaningless. The exact fractional aim point isn't really important because the point of my post was to see if I was doing something wrong because it's the first shot that I've come across where Poolology didn't provide a meaningful aim point for a shot that required at least a 3/8 fractional aim point--"at least" meaning equal to or greater numerically than 3/8, e.g 3/8, 1/2, 5/8. Typically, I find that as the fractional cuts get really thin, e.g. 1/8 or smaller, then sometimes Poolology won't provide a meaningful fractional aim point, and BC21 has stated that the system doesn't work well as the cuts get thin.

I also want to say, Poolology didn't come up with a 5/8 fractional aim point when the shot actually required a 3/8 fractional aim point, so I was not led astray. Instead, the Poolology math told me, "You are on your own.", and I can accept that.

I already said this before, when the position value and object ball value get close or equal each other, it is a 45 degree or 1/4 hit.

Rise over Run. 1-to-1 slope = 45-degree

How to Estimate a Cut Angle - Dr. Dave Pool Info

Answers to frequently-asked questions about how to estimate a cut angle in pool.

billiards.colostate.edu

If your confused, pretend the side pocket is a corner pocket. Now your just in zone B.....and from your picture the values look to be 8/8. Rise over run.... 1-to-1....1/4 hit. To avoid the nipple of the side pocket, maybe a hair thicker.

 

[7stud]

I already said this before, when the position value and object ball value get close or equal each other, it is a 45 degree or 1/4 hit.

Your rule doesn't work for the shot I diagramed above:

Nor does your rule work for this Zone A shot:

Position value (the dashed line across the table is numbered 30 in the Poolology system) = 30
Alignment value (the diamond where the line of centers drawn through the cb and ob points to) = 30

Quarter ball hit? Of course not.

Rise over Run. 1-to-1 slope = 45-degree

How to Estimate a Cut Angle - Dr. Dave Pool Info

Answers to frequently-asked questions about how to estimate a cut angle in pool.

billiards.colostate.edu

If your confused, pretend the side pocket is a corner pocket. Now your just in zone B.....and from your picture the values look to be 8/8. Rise over run.... 1-to-1....1/4 hit. To avoid the nipple of the side pocket, maybe a hair thicker.

 

[Thresh]

Your rule doesn't work for the shot I diagramed above:

View attachment 709192

Nor does your rule work for this Zone A shot:

View attachment 709183

Position value (the dashed line across the table is numbered 30 in the Poolology system) = 30
Alignment value (the diamond where the line of centers drawn through the cb and ob points to) = 30

Quarter ball hit? Of course not.

I mean you need to pretend the side pocket is a corner pocket, picture a 7th rail going across the middle of the table.

Now what would your object ball values be? In other words can keep the exact relationship and angle between the cue and object ball, shift it all the way down to the corner pocket. It's the exact same shot, same angle just shifted down table

 

[Thresh]

Your rule doesn't work for the shot I diagramed above:

View attachment 709192

Nor does your rule work for this Zone A shot:

View attachment 709183

Position value (the dashed line across the table is numbered 30 in the Poolology system) = 30
Alignment value (the diamond where the line of centers drawn through the cb and ob points to) = 30

Quarter ball hit? Of course not.

Your 30/30 example. Rise over Run to the ghost ball position.

Also, use common sense. What aiming system works for extreme almost 90 degree cuts? I shoot edge to edge and call it a day.

 

[BC21]

I mean you need to pretend the side pocket is a corner pocket, picture a 7th rail going across the middle of the table.

Now what would your object ball values be? In other words can keep the exact relationship and angle between the cue and object ball, shift it all the way down to the corner pocket. It's the exact same shot, same angle just shifted down table

That's a great way to look at it. Also, when I wrote Poolology, I didn't expect players to use it much for very simple shots near the pocket. That's typically not when most players struggle trying to estimate an aim line.

With that said, I have finished making revisions for the side pocket aiming section. I will post an updated image ("Side Pocket Aiming Zone") here soon. I'm not sure why I didn't notice the obvious discrepancies before.
I have no excuses, but I'm glad 7stud brought it to my attention.

 

[BC21]

This is a more accurate Side Pocket Zone for Poolology. The ebook and printed editions have been revised to reflect the changes.

An ob sitting in the small dark rectangle on 40 requires a slightly thicker hit (1/8 thicker) than the system indicates.

 

[7stud]

What am I doing wrong for this shot:

I had to revisit the side pocket grid lines for this shot. The 1-ball is on the center line between the two side pockets, and the Poolology book says that for balls on the centerline, you are supposed to use the 10,20,30 grid lines to figure out the position value (p. 83, 85). As far as I can tell, the position value for the 1-ball is 7, i.e. three ticks inside the 10-10 line. The alignment value is 14, which gives a nonsensical overhang of 14/7. What am I doing wrong? Or is it that the grid doesn't apply to balls inside the 10-10 line? But looking at the diagram, I could easily move the 1-ball in the direction of the other side pocket until it sat directly on the 10-10 line, then I could move the cb so that the alignment value was again 14, and once again that would give me a nonsensical overlap of 14/10. I must be doing something wrong.

 

[Bob Jewett]

What am I doing wrong for this shot:



... I must be doing something wrong.

In my view that kind of shot -- not a real bad angle and very close to a large pocket -- should not require a system. Mark the shot accurately with donuts. Shoot it ten times, noticing each time whether the ball goes in the center of the pocket and noting how full it felt that you were hitting the ball. That should get you zeroed in.

Now, shoot the shot ten more times. If you don't make the shot nine or ten out of ten, there is almost certainly something wrong with your fundamentals. Fix that problem.

 

[bbb]

What am I doing wrong for this shot:

View attachment 714840

I had to revisit the side pocket grid lines for this shot. The 1-ball is on the center line between the two side pockets, and the Poolology book says that for balls on the centerline, you are supposed to use the 10,20,30 grid lines to figure out the position value(p. 85). As far as I can tell, the position value for the 1-ball is 7, i.e. three ticks inside the 10-10 line. The alignment value is 14, which gives a nonsensical overhang of 14/7. What am I doing wrong? Or is it that the grid doesn't apply to balls inside the 10-10 line? But looking at the diagram, I could easily move the 1-ball in the direction of the other side pocket until it sat directly on the 10-10 line, then I could move the cb so that the alignment value was again 14, and once again that would give me a nonsensical overlap of 14/10. I must be doing something wrong.

why do you continue to post problems and not just PM brian directly?
isnt he the best one to answer your question?

 

[Zerksies]

I swear some of you people geek out on too much stuipd stuff.

 

[7stud]

What am I doing wrong for this shot:

View attachment 714840

I had to revisit the side pocket grid lines for this shot. The 1-ball is on the center line between the two side pockets, and the Poolology book says that for balls on the centerline, you are supposed to use the 10,20,30 grid lines to figure out the position value (p. 83, 85). As far as I can tell, the position value for the 1-ball is 7, i.e. three ticks inside the 10-10 line. The alignment value is 14, which gives a nonsensical overhang of 14/7. What am I doing wrong? Or is it that the grid doesn't apply to balls inside the 10-10 line? But looking at the diagram, I could easily move the 1-ball in the direction of the other side pocket until it sat directly on the 10-10 line, then I could move the cb so that the alignment value was again 14, and once again that would give me a nonsensical overlap of 14/10. I must be doing something wrong.

Curiously, the calculation works if I ignore the admonition on p. 83 and p.85 that states that for ob's on the center line, you should use the 10, 20, 30 grid lines. If instead I use the 40, 60, 80 grid lines, then the position value is 20 (see p. 84), and with an alignment value of 14, the overhang is 14/20, and the overlap is 6/20, which is approximately a 1/4 hit.