PSR and Alignment

M

Mikjary

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
When you begin your PSR, do you use an aiming system? Or do you use an alignment that is comfortable and reliable? Both ways will establish a consistent visual starting point, but are they actually the same thing?

An aiming system user will verify certain points to put their self in the correct shot line. A player using an alignment system also picks out certain points, but does not use them specifically to aim the object ball to a pocket. They trust their alignment to be correct and either swing down into the shot or step into it, whichever the case may be. A loose description of this is the word,"feel" and although vague, we all know what it means.

So, if you don't use an aiming system, do you use an alignment system? This is not meant to split hairs, but possibly to open discussion on the merits of overlapping the two to improve ball pocketing. I have developed an alignment system I use after examining many aiming systems. I incorporated it into my PSR and it has become very comfortable.

I don't have to really aim so much as I have to align myself by picking out points between the cue ball and the object ball. My pool brain learned this by combining the info I gave it from the many systems. I trust my alignment even though I am not aiming or looking directly at an aiming line. It's not "feel", but it's becoming very natural and automatic.

I don't want to know your opinion, just your thoughts if this makes sense or not. :grin-square:

Best,
Mike
 
Last edited:
Mikjary said:
When you begin your PSR, do you use an aiming system? Or do you use an alignment that is comfortable and reliable? Both ways will establish a consistent visual starting point, but are they actually the same thing?

Mike. There are three PSRs that are needed. Aiming & Alignment are two different things.

An aiming system user will verify certain points to put their self in the correct shot line. A player using an alignment system also picks out certain points, but does not use them specifically to aim the object to a pocket. They trust their alignment to be correct and either swing down into the shot or step into it, whichever the case may be. A loose description of this is the word,"feel" and although vague, we all know what it means.

So, if you don't use an aiming system, do you use an alignment system? This is not meant to split hairs, but possibly to open discussion on the merits of overlapping the two to improve ball pocketing. I have developed an alignment system I use after examining many aiming systems. I incorporated it into my PSR and it has become very comfortable.

I don't have to really aim so much as I have to align myself by picking out points between the cue ball and the object ball. My pool brain learned this by combining the info I gave it from the many systems. I trust my alignment even though I am not aiming or looking directly at an aiming line. It's not "feel", but it's becoming very natural and automatic.

I don't want to know your opinion, just your thoughts if this makes sense or not. :grin-square:

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...



Wish I was closer to you so I could help.
randyg
 
Mike-

Are you asking whether an aiming method defines the body alignment, or does body alignment yield the actual aiming line.

When things click-the two seem to cooincide. Chicken and the egg?

The PSR may just be a repeatable familiar approach that occupies us while we confirm the validity of both aim and alignment, and actuates the beginning of a shot execution that has already passed inspection by the eyes and brain, eliminating the dreaded second guessing, thereby removing doubt and in effect adding confidence.



Mike-good post.

-when the steering wheel is locked down, better hope the car is pointed in the right direction, to get where you're going..
 
Last edited:
3RAILKICK said:
Mike-

Are you asking whether an aiming method defines the body alignment, or does body alignment yield the actual aiming line.

When things click-the two seem to cooincide. Chicken and the egg?

The PSR may just be a repeatable familiar approach that occupies us while we confirm the validity of both aim and alignment, and actuates the beginning of a shot execution that has already passed inspection by the eyes and brain, eliminating the dreaded second guessing, thereby removing doubt and in effect adding confidence.



Mike-good post.

-when the steering wheel is locked down, better hope the car is pointed in the right direction, to get where you're going..
Click to expand...

Hey, Bill.

After working with a lot of aiming systems, I've found many point you in the right direction. The gaps are filled in by the user. Some people never get their purpose and can't get them to work. Others need them to make consistent runs. I'm saying that probably the best aiming systems are really alignment systems that allow the user to gain a consistent look at each shot by their body positioning.

An example would be contact point (CP) to CP aiming. A lot of players rely on this knowing it is not possible to actually hit the CP for all angles. They give themselves a starting alignment and adjust as they move into the shot. The pivot systems are also good examples of setting up correctly aligned and making a small adjustment as they move into the shot.

I think this lets players that don't have a direct ability to play by sheer feel at a higher level, learn a process that in time will become an automatic ability. Moving from basic aiming systems to a more advanced form of alignment without mechanical steps (Pro One is a good example), will allow a lot of players a chance to develop the mental routes to achieve a fair amount of success with diligent practice.

Aiming systems shouldn't be thought of by the users and non users as shortcuts to advanced play. They require hard work and only kick start the brain to function at a higher playing ability. And yes, my steering wheel has been unlocked quite a few times! :grin-square:

Best,
Mike
 
Check out this alignment system for shots less than 30 degrees (half ball hit). It relies on the contact point, but doesn't really give an aiming line. Yet it works with a small adjustment which is individual to each player with a little practice.
Picture.jpg

The distance from the CP to the edge of the object ball is doubled and matched by the cue ball edge. It is fairly close to the ghost ball, but breaks down when the balls are close together. I compensate about a quarter ball for this or use spin.

It aligns the body, not the eyes. You move down into the shot using this alignment and pocket balls with a consistent yet changing perspective on each shot.

Best,
Mike
 
Last edited:
Mikjary said:
When you begin your PSR, do you use an aiming system? Or do you use an alignment that is comfortable and reliable? Both ways will establish a consistent visual starting point, but are they actually the same thing?

An aiming system user will verify certain points to put their self in the correct shot line. A player using an alignment system also picks out certain points, but does not use them specifically to aim the object ball to a pocket. They trust their alignment to be correct and either swing down into the shot or step into it, whichever the case may be. A loose description of this is the word,"feel" and although vague, we all know what it means.

So, if you don't use an aiming system, do you use an alignment system? This is not meant to split hairs, but possibly to open discussion on the merits of overlapping the two to improve ball pocketing. I have developed an alignment system I use after examining many aiming systems. I incorporated it into my PSR and it has become very comfortable.

I don't have to really aim so much as I have to align myself by picking out points between the cue ball and the object ball. My pool brain learned this by combining the info I gave it from the many systems. I trust my alignment even though I am not aiming or looking directly at an aiming line. It's not "feel", but it's becoming very natural and automatic.

I don't want to know your opinion, just your thoughts if this makes sense or not. :grin-square:

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

Mike i always aline myself according to where i need to be for the next shot.And this is always done before i go down on the shot.Not my body yet just the thought process .(I need to be here for the next shot so i must be thick or thin or on the right line.)
From that process i aline myself accordingly.Hopefully i don't have to many shots that require me to be thick or thin of the line.
Speed ,spin ,and distance are aiming systems killer.But one system that does really holds up under the line of fire is BOB.
Im not trying to turn this into a aiming systems thread,just giving you a little thought of what i do with some extra rambling..:D
 
What follows is probably a minority view:

I visualize the ghost ball (with some adjustment in the GB-OB aiming line to compensate for throw).

I line up the cue axis, the cue tip, the center of the cue ball and the center of the ghost ball on a single line.

In my practice strokes, I am carefully watching that my tip is moving back and forth in the same track like a piston in a machine.

Unlike many people, the last thing I look at is NOT the OB, but rather my cue tip following through the CB. Why?

1. After the initial alignment is "locked down," the OB and the GB are not going to move. Once I have a locked down alignment on the CB, I do not need to look at the object ball again.

2. I believe my stroke errors are more resonsible for my misses than my aiming errors. I want to focus focus focus on my stroke.

Many people have trouble "seeing the GB." It gets easier with practice. It helps if you stand more upright when finding the GB.
 
Mikjary said:
Check out this alignment system for shots less than 30 degrees (half ball hit). It relies on the contact point, but doesn't really give an aiming line. Yet it works with a small adjustment which is individual to each player with a little practice.
View attachment 216666

The distance from the CP to the edge of the object ball is doubled and matched by the cue ball edge. It is fairly close to the ghost ball, but breaks down when the balls are close together.
Click to expand...
That's the double-the-distance or double-the-overlap aiming method. For more illustrations and further explanation, see:

It can be applied for shots of any cut angle.

Regards,
Dave
 
I used to align myself naturally, just looking from behind the intended line of aim based on how thick I planned to hit the object ball. Then I would step into the shot and my eyes and body movement would just lead my bridge hand and everything else to come into alignment.

Since using CTE/Pro1, still very similar, I just align now in what I think is a more consistent manner, using the CTE line as a starting point on almost all shots, pick up the alignment lines and then moving into the shot. I still feel like the eyes lead the body movement automatically, as you said the pool brain is very good and making these types of things just happen through repetition and experience.

Scott
 
Mikjary said:
I have developed an alignment system I use after examining many aiming systems. I incorporated it into my PSR and it has become very comfortable.

I don't have to really aim so much as I have to align myself by picking out points between the cue ball and the object ball. My pool brain learned this by combining the info I gave it from the many systems. I trust my alignment even though I am not aiming or looking directly at an aiming line. It's not "feel", but it's becoming very natural and automatic.
Click to expand...

Wow, you put into words almost EXACTLY what I feel is going on with my own personal PSR and alignment/aiming at the table.

I too have looked at/used various aiming techniques over the years and have found that through years of experience all those techniques and systems have kind of melted into the pot together so to speak and now I just trust my brain to blend it all together and am now really starting to trust it completely and find myself pocketing more balls with more consistency w/o having to think about it much at all anymore.

Good post. :thumbup:
 
dr_dave said:
That's the double-the-distance or double-the-overlap aiming method. For more illustrations and further explanation, see:

It can be applied for shots of any cut angle.

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply, but look again at my diagram. It is a different method of aligning and not really an aiming technique per se. I have been using this method for cuts less than half ball hit and have been pretty successful with it.

Best,
Mike
 
I'm wondering if anybody gave this alignment a try? It's not the traditional double the distance aiming system. I've had some good results and I think it may help others to line up properly.

Picture.jpg

After you find the contact point, double the distance off of the object ball. Match the distance off of the object ball on the cue ball. You will be lined up to pocket the ball. Again, this is for shots up to half ball hits.

Best,
Mike
 
Mikjary said:
I'm wondering if anybody gave this alignment a try? It's not the traditional double the distance aiming system. I've had some good results and I think it may help others to line up properly.

View attachment 216812

After you find the contact point, double the distance off of the object ball. Match the distance off of the object ball on the cue ball. You will be lined up to pocket the ball. Again, this is for shots up to half ball hits.
Click to expand...
FYI, I just got the following e-mail from an anonymous observer:
Dave,

Although it sounds a lot like it, I don't think Mike's describing double-overlap. Double-overlap doubles the edge-to-CP distance toward the OB's center and aims the CB's inside edge at that, whereas Mike doubles that distance in the other direction (past the outside edge of the OB) and aims the CB's outside edge at that.

Mike's method only works when the OB CP is 1/3 dia from OB edge. For anything but that his method becomes quickly unworkable, aiming thinner when it should aim fatter and fatter when it should aim thinner.

Somebody should tell him to use double-overlap instead - it's not only accurate, but easier to visualize.

Anonymous​

Mike, now that I look at your diagram and post more carefully, I see that it is very different from the traditional double-the-distance or double-the-overlap aiming method.

Regards,
Dave
 
The overlap works between about 5 degrees and a half ball hit. "Anonymous" is correct, but for thinner cuts (less than a half ball hit). I use a different alignment shown to me from a seasoned pro for cuts over 30 degrees.

This alignment looks unusual, but it ties in well with a PSR that lets my subconscious mind come to the forefront. This is actually the reason for this thread, but it hasn't generated much interest.

Well, try the alignment method...it works with a little practice. If I follow it correctly, I split the jaws. You may even stumble on to a hidden benefit after using it for a while.

Best,
Mike
 
Last edited:
I line up straight on the object ball to start. I don't use an aiming system other than my own personal one. The reason initially line up straight on the ob is because I can visualize the cut and shot from that point. It also helps me get myself straight and my aim straight if that make sense.

After I visualize the shot I will step into my shot at that point. If something doesn't "feel" right I will stand up and start over. Once I am down though I stay down. If i need to make a minor aim adjustment I will stand up and make the adjustment and get back down on the shot.

While I am standing behind the cb visualizing the shot I will stroke the cue in my hands. I do this for 2 reasons.
1) it helps me relax and loosen up my arm.
2) i will use it to "feel" the shot. I found that helps when I am behind the cb and can see the whole table and the shot.

This helps me ad I am fairly consistent doing it. I don't know how to describe how I aim but it isn't entirely by feel. When I have myself in my perfect position I can see the shot to the pocket. I doesn't matter if it is straight or any cut shot and know where it's going or not. I just wish I could find the position more often than not.:(

I do have certain shots I use as a litmus test so to speak. By using these shots I am able to tell what is and is not working.
 
The parallel contact points method is a sure keeper for me. I've been using it for years all over the table. It's the easiest and most quickly adaptable method I've ever used.
 
stumpie71 said:
I line up straight on the object ball to start. I don't use an aiming system other than my own personal one. The reason initially line up straight on the ob is because I can visualize the cut and shot from that point. It also helps me get myself straight and my aim straight if that make sense.

After I visualize the shot I will step into my shot at that point. If something doesn't "feel" right I will stand up and start over. Once I am down though I stay down. If i need to make a minor aim adjustment I will stand up and make the adjustment and get back down on the shot.

While I am standing behind the cb visualizing the shot I will stroke the cue in my hands. I do this for 2 reasons.
1) it helps me relax and loosen up my arm.
2) i will use it to "feel" the shot. I found that helps when I am behind the cb and can see the whole table and the shot.

This helps me ad I am fairly consistent doing it. I don't know how to describe how I aim but it isn't entirely by feel. When I have myself in my perfect position I can see the shot to the pocket. I doesn't matter if it is straight or any cut shot and know where it's going or not. I just wish I could find the position more often than not.:(

I do have certain shots I use as a litmus test so to speak. By using these shots I am able to tell what is and is not working.
Click to expand...

I know what you're saying here. I played like that for years. I lined up where I thought the shot looked good and fired away. My game got to a level that allowed me to run out a good percentage of the time. Some days were better than others and like everyone does, I would slump.

I realized there was a reason my game was up and down. On the dead stroke nights, I took notes. I figured out what I was looking at and how I did things. This didn't happen over night. It took months of observation to pick up on what I needed to do to get out of the way, so my automatic pilot could take over. The key was a consistent starting point...a foundation for my eyes to start seeing the shot. This baseline gives my conscious mind something to do and then trust the following body adjustments to swing down into the shot. This sounds like something that every player does, but is it? On every shot, do they start out with an exact visual alignment?

By rigidly making myself line up without deviation every time, my controlling mind goes away and lets things happen...most of the time. :grin: That's my 3 cents.

Best,
Mike
 
Last edited:
Drawback said:
The parallel contact points method is a sure keeper for me. I've been using it for years all over the table. It's the easiest and most quickly adaptable method I've ever used.
Click to expand...

Please explain this system to me. I'm only half way through The Book Of Wit. :wink:

Best,
Mike
 
Perspective…for me is both visual and mental. The challenge of hitting the contact point (CC) on the OB with the CB - ignore for the moment the other variables like english, squirt and skid etc., on cut angles, the visual is the distance away from the center of the OB to the contact point that sends the OB to the pocket/target and finding that same offset on the larger appearing CB away from it’s center ala 90/90 that I first learned about from Mikjary.

The rub is that your cue tip is away from the center of the CB and in order to hit CP to CP one must parallel shift back to the center of the CB. Although it sounds simple, parallel shifting isn’t that easy especially if the CP on the OB is at 9:00 and the CP on the CB is at 3:00 (90 degree cut).

I am an advocate of double distance aiming and of stick aiming. Getting back to the thread…what I do is stick aim the center of my cue to the double distance point on the OB, I leave the cue on the table in that position and adjust my stance so when I drop down on the shot, my stick is in my natural stroking position – my PSR.

I then apply back hand english (BHE) and required to get shape.

I have found that there are certain things that do not vary and are less influenced by a parallax view and they are the center of the cue, the center and edge of the OB and the center of the CB. More recently I have found that the side of the ferrule does not vary, and have started to use it more on shots where the OB and CB are close together – I aim the edge or fractions thereof of the ferrule at the double distance on and off of the OB to compensate for the failings of double distance aiming when the OB and CB are close together or compensate with outside english.

After adjusting my stroke to align with my visual perception with respect to my dominant eye by shooting a series of straight in shots, I then aim at the edge of the OB (30 degree cut) and shoot a series of those. I then start aiming DD at various cut angles.

When I am successful at most of my shots, I become less deliberate in my aiming but still disciplined and I find that I progressively achieve the zone/dead stroke or whatever it’s called, but it is never unconscious “feel”.

Thanks for the tread. :):thumbup:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top