cleary said:
Actually, my drawing shows just the opposite: for bridge lengths of 10 inches or less, the 90-90 pivot only works for shots shorter than ~2 diamonds apart. If the CB and OB are farther apart the CB will miss the OB completely.
pj
chgo
Ron V aiming system video and diagrams
- Thread starter cleary
- Start date
Actually, my drawing shows just the opposite: for bridge lengths of 10 inches or less, the 90-90 pivot only works for shots shorter than ~2 diamonds apart. If the CB and OB are farther apart the CB will miss the OB completely.
pj
chgo
Patrick Johnson said:
I really appreciate drawing everything out like you did. As a graphic designer, I ALWAYS do this when someone put up some info that seems too good to be true.
But then I go out on the table and play with it. Find out how it can work and how it cant work. Then I use that info in my game.
I dont know, I think you should give it a try. A real good try.
cleary said:
I aim fine without any system, so I'm not interested in re-tooling. I'm just a curious guy who is interested in aiming systems from an academic point of view - I like to investigate how and why they work, and then I use that info in my game. Maybe along the way I'll help others understand something about them too.
I realize that for many of the users of these systems it doesn't matter how or why they work - the fact that they do for some players is enough information for them. In fact, I think many system users shouldn't learn too much about how they work because then they'll find out just how much feel is involved in using them, which might undermine their confidence in them. However, I don't think those system users have a feel for this kind of analysis anyway, so those who want this kind of info will get it and those who don't won't.
pj
chgo
P.S. I also appreciate your and Ron's effort and generosity in sharing this.
Last edited:
and this my friends...is as good as it gets.
Thank you Patrick for drawing what my mind was screaming at me during Ron V's video. I was doing my best to try and absorb what he was trying to convey. All I could think of is this only works at fixed distance band. Any closer and it's fails. Nice drawing which in my mind destroys this system at it's core.
Nick
Thank you Patrick for drawing what my mind was screaming at me during Ron V's video. I was doing my best to try and absorb what he was trying to convey. All I could think of is this only works at fixed distance band. Any closer and it's fails. Nice drawing which in my mind destroys this system at it's core.
Nick
Patrick Johnson said:
Nick B said:
I don't think it "destroys" the system at all. It illustrates what kind of system it is (I call them "approximation" systems) and gives some hints about how its users make practical use of it. The fact that you or I aren't the kind of players who benefit from this kind of system doesn't make it useless to everybody. I can imagine this system being used at a high level of play.
pj
chgo
P.S. And, by the way, my drawing only applies to the 90-90 part of this system, which is probably the most sensitive to CB-OB distance. Other parts of the system will be less sensitive and have a (somewhat) longer range of accuracy.
Last edited:
It illistrates that their is no magic bullet. All factors require adjustment. If it will helps a beginner/intermediate player find the zone...great. Systems are fine but most I believe hinders highest levels of understanding.
It kind of reminds me of my University days. We spend hours proving formulas that have been around for 400 years. Why not simply apply math? Well by looking at the root of all this math you were able to understand the basis of where it comes from. Now you really understood how the interplay of variables effected the results etc. Ohhh I'm starting to sound like a one of my old profs...shoot me now.
Nick
It kind of reminds me of my University days. We spend hours proving formulas that have been around for 400 years. Why not simply apply math? Well by looking at the root of all this math you were able to understand the basis of where it comes from. Now you really understood how the interplay of variables effected the results etc. Ohhh I'm starting to sound like a one of my old profs...shoot me now.
Nick
Last edited:
Nick B said:
Ive said this 4 times I believe, but maybe you didnt catch it.
YES, closer than 2 diamonds and 90/90 DOES NOT WORK. At which point, you need to go to "90/Center"... which hasnt been explained yet.
Like Ron says in the video, there are limits to what each part of the system can do. But with all of its parts together, there is no limit to the system.
You have only seen a sneak peek of what's to come.
Try what river city posted.dgem said:
Cleary
I thought Ron V's aiming system was something to do with aiming at the reflections on the object ball.
I was gonna give him a call a while back but I live in the U.K.
I thought Ron V's aiming system was something to do with aiming at the reflections on the object ball.
I was gonna give him a call a while back but I live in the U.K.
cleary said:
Farther than 2 diamonds and 90/90 does not work. The CB misses the OB when it's that far away. Here's my drawing again showing how that happens:
This means that for longer shots you're not really doing an exact 90/90 pivot - you're doing something else (and the 90/90 pivot concept somehow helps you do it).
pj
chgo
Last edited:
PJ do actually shoot these shots on a pool table before saying they do not work !!
Patrick Johnson said:
I'm sure I don't pivot my cue around a point at the bridge like you demonstrate. Your diagram makes sense, I just think the pivot point is incorrect. Although it seems like the pivot is from the bridge, the cue doesn't rotate at that point. It seems when I pivot, the actual pivot point is near the center of the cue. With Ron's system, you pivot at the hip, not the bridge.
Months ago, someone called my cell saying they kept missing the ball with CTE after a pivot (which I thought was impossible, based on my experience). Your diagram really clears it up for me. Can you redo this diagram and assume a back-cue pivot? That seems closer to our techniques.
Good job- we're getting closer.
Cookie is right though, let's not say it doesn't work until you try it. The technique doesn't match your diagram.
Last edited:
how wide is a tip?
Ron refers to his aim line as 90-90 but he also says it is one tip in from the edge of the ball. Taking a line 10% in from the edge of the balls and calling it 90-90 is probably a mistake in itself. Once the first error is made any proof based on that error is invalid.
Does anyone feel that there are ten tips across a cue ball?
Start with an invalid set-up to begin with and anything that is proven or disproven will be highly unlikely to be relevant to the actual question at hand.
Hu
Ron refers to his aim line as 90-90 but he also says it is one tip in from the edge of the ball. Taking a line 10% in from the edge of the balls and calling it 90-90 is probably a mistake in itself. Once the first error is made any proof based on that error is invalid.
Does anyone feel that there are ten tips across a cue ball?
Start with an invalid set-up to begin with and anything that is proven or disproven will be highly unlikely to be relevant to the actual question at hand.
Hu
The 90 term means that your cue tip is exactly 1-tip within the edge (the outside edge of your tip touches the outside edge of the CB at the equator).
He calls it 90 because your tip will start at this position pre-pivot for 90% of your shots in pool.
I went to my table downstairs to experiment. When I pivot, my cue doesn't rotate around my bridge--- that's incorrect. PJ's diagram is correct based on that--- but nobody does that.
I'm pivoting a NUMBER of feet back - nearly the length of my cue. It's off my right hip-- that's the cue pivot point. It'd be interesting to see the diagram re-figured from 50" behind the CB.
I'm all for diagrams--- let's make sure they're accurate.
He calls it 90 because your tip will start at this position pre-pivot for 90% of your shots in pool.
I went to my table downstairs to experiment. When I pivot, my cue doesn't rotate around my bridge--- that's incorrect. PJ's diagram is correct based on that--- but nobody does that.
I'm pivoting a NUMBER of feet back - nearly the length of my cue. It's off my right hip-- that's the cue pivot point. It'd be interesting to see the diagram re-figured from 50" behind the CB.
I'm all for diagrams--- let's make sure they're accurate.
cookie man said:
I don't have to shoot this shot on a table to know that, if I do it the way it's described, it can't work beyond a couple of diamonds of CB-OB distance. That's why drawings can be valuable - they're able to reveal when the aiming technique you describe can't work in the real world exactly as described.
Maybe the way 90/90 pivoting has been described is just an approximation, or maybe the description is inaccurate in some way. But the drawing reflects the way it's been described here.
I'm not criticizing it; just trying to get a clear understanding of it.
pj
chgo
Patrick Johnson said:
PJ - the bridge isn't the pivot point. It never was--- nor is it the pivot point with CTE/Pro1. Ron said you pivot from the hip numerous times--- not sure where you got the bridge from. I actually think I pivot from the very back of the cue.
EDIT: Please experiment with this stuff. Don't say you don't have to. You do have to because real technique (cue actions) vs. what you read about are not the same. If you're going to debunk this, no prob--- just act like a real detective instead of inspector gadget. If you think you're doing a service for the AZB readers.... do the right thing and look at all angles and go through the appropriate steps and motions.
Last edited: