Possible Proof that Pivot Systems Need Adjustments

[Colin Colenso]

Colin, check my statements. I said 1/4 not 1.4. (-:

You mentioned 1/4 in another paragraph so I see what you mean. I copied and pasted that part, as I just saw you noted below.

Anyway, the 1/4 or 1.4 is not the main question, though it did confuse me a little.

The main point is that your description seems to suggest that on ALL shots, the required cue position pivot offset is 0.25 inch to the right of the CTE line. I ask you to try a few shots at different angles (thin cuts to full ball) and once you have your bridge set, look at the CTE line and your pivot offset from it. It cannot always be 0.25 inch to the right. Else you'd hit every ball at about the same angle.

Also, this 0.25 inch is how far your cue center is to the right of your bridge V, and this seems to be what determines your offset. That suggests that the cue middle position relative to bridge V (at the pivot point) is the actual systematization method that creates the required offsets.

Pro One level guys may be able to explain a systematic adjustment for side but I doubt it.

I doubt it too, because I have actually developed what I believe to be the first comprehensive side / english / throw adjustment system. That took a damn lot of work, testing, calculations and thinking. It's not simple, but it is practical and accurate. It compliments any method that can get a player aimed up accurately for a natural roll medium speed pot angle. (Pot angle changes with different speeds and rate of vertical spin of course).

Jim, it's great you're potting balls like never before and your's and other's testimony indicates that using this system definitely helps some players considerably. But these testimonials don't help myself or others to understand the system. Just pointing that out so you know I am not ignoring the testimony of your experiences. I just want to keep the discussion along the subject line that I think needs most attention.

Colin

 

[Koop]

You know I've seen players aim one place on the cue ball and hit it in another. Maybe this is what you mean by the "pivot system".

Jimmy Moore was famous for aiming at the very bottom of the cue ball (I mean right on the cloth) and then hitting it with all different kinds of english. Was he "pivoting"? I don't know.

I've also seen players aim to the left and hit the cue ball on the right side, and vice versa. Kind of weird but it worked for them.

Jay,

Bustamante does the exact same thing, with the tip also slightly off center. When speaking with Hal about this he mentioned Busty and said, "watch him." He can lay the stick down on the table, turn and talk to people and then come back around and smack the ball. He is already lined up and needs no further adjustment. What you wrote about above is definitely the pivot we are writing about.

Regards,
Koop

 

[stan shuffett]

Colin,

In PRO ONE there is an exact system for the application of spin. Using minimal spin is typically all a player needs and the system for that is quite simple.

Also, I have developed a system for more than minimal spin that works extremely well.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Colin Colenso]

Colin,

In PRO ONE there is an exact system for the application of spin. Using minimal spin is typically all a player needs and the system for that is quite simple.

Also, I have developed a system for more than minimal spin that works extremely well.

Stan Shuffett

Stan,

It would be interesting to compare systems at some stage.

Mine uses aim & pivot with effective pivot point guides to compensate for squirt and swerve. I use throw plots (a few have been posted here - they utilize the throw angle prediction formulas available to Dr. Dave.) to indicate the amount of throw for various angles, spins and speeds. This basically tells a player how they should aim compared to a medium speed natural roll shot, which usually has similar throw characteristics to a firm stun shot.

There are regions that will always be hard to compensate for accurately, such as slow stun and slow OE, and particularly on longer CB -OB seperations obviously, but many shots don't need much adjustment. Maybe 1/2 pocket of aim.

While you're here, any chance on getting some insights as to the nature of how the aim line differentiates from the CTE line, and how this is predicted or developed with your system?

Colin

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Colin,

In PRO ONE there is an exact system for the application of spin. Using minimal spin is typically all a player needs and the system for that is quite simple.

Also, I have developed a system for more than minimal spin that works extremely well.

Stan Shuffett

Stan,

Contrary to the impression you might get from some of these threads, most players don't think an element of "feel" is a bad thing in a system. Many (including myself) believe using some "feel" to make shots is necessary, and good systems help make its use easier and more effective.

Do you think "feel" plays a part in your Pro One system?

pj
chgo

P.S. I'm the guy who emailed asking for a written version of your system. Thanks for the reply.

 

[stan shuffett]

Patrick,

Phase 1 is a very specific 5 step phase that trains one to pivot correctly. Essentially, there are 4 shots per CB,OB relationship. 2 shots per each edge of the OB. Many of these shots go...many don't. Somewhat limiting.
Phase 2 is when one learns to blend the steps of phase 1 together into a very fluid-like movement to center CB using a proper pivot.
Phase 1 and 2 are comprised of outside and inside pivots.
Phase 3 or PRO ONE...A player learns to come in from one side or just from 1 pivot. The core of phase 1 shot making is maintained. In PRO ONE all shots can go. Adjustments are made CTE. Efren is not limited. No player is limited in PRO ONE.
PRO ONE is the ultimate phase.