Ron V aiming system video and diagrams

geometry or pool forum?

Colin,

The pivot point is an artificial sticking point that has been created by a few people. Almost everyone reading this is aware of the basics of pivot points so most understand there is more to the story.

Lets ignore your field of expertise and move into mine for a minute and look at a variable pivot point. Consider a two foot roller fixed into position. Now add a 4"x4"x16' beam laying across the rounded surface of the roller. Where is the fixed pivot point when the beam is rocked across the roller. Damn! Look at that, a continuously variable pivot point. I thought we all knew there could only be one pivot point on a fixed line and I think we all agree that the beam is as much of a fixed line as the cue stick is. Of course rocking a cue stick over a drinking glass gives the same result. Seems that we can be wrong when we take theory out into the real world.

We may or may not be wrong concerning CTE pivoting, we have yet to get enough information to know. Bogging down over this geometry issue in a pool thread is off topic and a waste of time. Once the technique is understood I suspect all of the arguing over a fixed pivot point will turn out to have been a false trail. I have watched more than one design meeting get bogged down in a meaningless technical argument over how something worked that was totally fringe to the matter at hand. I think we are doing the same here.

I want to know how to make Ron V's system work. I already understand fixed and floating pivot points, years in mechanical design will do that for you.

Hu





Colin Colenso said:
Chuck,
For those of us who have spent quite a bit of time studying the nature of the geometry of pivoting we all pretty much agree that if the bridge doesn't move then it is THE pivot point.

So until we get past that sticking point, whether there are any adjustments and how they are implemented is a bit like asking which way we are driving while still looking for the car keys.

In all the posts here, from those familiar with 90/90, I don't recall anyone mentioning adjustments. Seems Ron and others are pretty firm on the idea that all you need to do is align 90/90, then hip pivot to center of the cue. It was suggested that the system does not work well under 2 feet of separation.

I could suggest a table of adjustments that would make this work, but that is jumping in front of where most of the audience of this thread is at. Let's wait for the video to see if anyone can make these shots aligning 90/90 without moving the bridge for shots over 50 inches.

I suspect close up video will show us bridge movements which will be pretty close to exactly what amounts that PJ's math suggested. That would mean we are seeing a shifting pivot point.

If people agreed that a shifting pivot point was the mechanism, then we could suggest a systematic approach to how this pivot shift changes with shot distance, bridge length and pot angle. Personally I think it would be too complex to be particularly useful, but it might be used as a guide for 'feeling' new line to the center CB.

Hope my response is along the lines of your query.

Colin
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
ShootingArts said:
Colin,

The pivot point is an artificial sticking point that has been created by a few people. Almost everyone reading this is aware of the basics of pivot points so most understand there is more to the story.

Lets ignore your field of expertise and move into mine for a minute and look at a variable pivot point. Consider a two foot roller fixed into position. Now add a 4"x4"x16' beam laying across the rounded surface of the roller. Where is the fixed pivot point when the beam is rocked across the roller. Damn! Look at that, a continuously variable pivot point. I thought we all knew there could only be one pivot point on a fixed line and I think we all agree that the beam is as much of a fixed line as the cue stick is. Of course rocking a cue stick over a drinking glass gives the same result. Seems that we can be wrong when we take theory out into the real world.

We may or may not be wrong concerning CTE pivoting, we have yet to get enough information to know. Bogging down over this geometry issue in a pool thread is off topic and a waste of time. Once the technique is understood I suspect all of the arguing over a fixed pivot point will turn out to have been a false trail. I have watched more than one design meeting get bogged down in a meaningless technical argument over how something worked that was totally fringe to the matter at hand. I think we are doing the same here.

I want to know how to make Ron V's system work. I already understand fixed and floating pivot points, years in mechanical design will do that for you.

Hu
Click to expand...


Of course, this whole 90/90 or CTE thing is a bunch of hooey. Everybody knows that.

Which explains why I'm running out more than I ever have before.

Yesterday when warming up for a 9 ball tournament at Chris's in Chicago, on the only tight pocketed table in the tournament room, when practicing my break, on the first one that pocketed a ball, I freakin' ran the table.

Was it the 90/90 or CTE thing? Not exactly, of course. But I did pot three balls that would have been iffy without it.

FWIW, I use the 90/90 system on some shots, but with 6 aiming points before swiveling, works just fine.

Flex
 
SpiderWebComm said:
There are different aim, Colin. 90/90 doesn't make every ball on the table. This has been discussed a lot. Cleary was going to post the rest but became frustrated and quit the thread, as I have a few times.

I know the system inside and out, but I'm not posting anything until I can convince you that the bridge doesn't move and I can hip-pivot a shot in from a distance so far away your head would spin.

I was working with PJ in the post above because in my mind..."IT IS WHAT IT IS." Might as well figure out why it DOES work, because it does. Like I said a million times. I could have 10 people watch me and measure my cue to ensure I'm not cheating and ensure my tip is at the 90/90 position and you'll watch me hip pivot that shot in from the farthest reaches of the table (on top of the rail at one corner pocket to just outside the opposite corner pocket).

Everyone would scratch their head and wonder why. For me, it doesn't matter why--- because it "just is."

We're obviously missing something here, mathematically. Per PJ's diagrams, I miss that ball by a MILE....but....I don't. Not even close. AND, mind you...I'm not cheating the setup.

Obviously, I've tested the hell out of this system with different lengths of shots (to the mega-extreme) using string and a laser pointer and the ball goes (and the bridge isn't moving a hair). Since I was about to hop in a car with a G in my pocket and drive 6 hours to OH, I'm 100% positive on everything I just said-- it's not feel and I'm not doing something sub-consciously. I've heavily tested this....to death.

Anyways, I hope we can work together to show why it really does work. If not, I'll just bow out like Cleary and let you guys have at it.

Dave
Click to expand...
Dave,
I realize that this system is recommended for a limited range of angles and distances. I was just suggesting, that bridge adjustments would make it possible to make any shot, though that would not likely be practical.

I agree the next step, unless someone can diagram, or animate the procedure is to get the pivot and bridge position shown clearly on video, so we can determine how the pivot to center CB is working, or at least to see what is moving where so we can make more sense of it.

It's not us against them here, imo, just an investigation into how this system is actually being applied in a way that works.

Cheers,
Colin
 
ShootingArts said:
Colin,

The pivot point is an artificial sticking point that has been created by a few people. Almost everyone reading this is aware of the basics of pivot points so most understand there is more to the story.

Lets ignore your field of expertise and move into mine for a minute and look at a variable pivot point. Consider a two foot roller fixed into position. Now add a 4"x4"x16' beam laying across the rounded surface of the roller. Where is the fixed pivot point when the beam is rocked across the roller. Damn! Look at that, a continuously variable pivot point. I thought we all knew there could only be one pivot point on a fixed line and I think we all agree that the beam is as much of a fixed line as the cue stick is. Of course rocking a cue stick over a drinking glass gives the same result. Seems that we can be wrong when we take theory out into the real world.

We may or may not be wrong concerning CTE pivoting, we have yet to get enough information to know. Bogging down over this geometry issue in a pool thread is off topic and a waste of time. Once the technique is understood I suspect all of the arguing over a fixed pivot point will turn out to have been a false trail. I have watched more than one design meeting get bogged down in a meaningless technical argument over how something worked that was totally fringe to the matter at hand. I think we are doing the same here.

I want to know how to make Ron V's system work. I already understand fixed and floating pivot points, years in mechanical design will do that for you.

Hu
Click to expand...
Hu,

Your pivot moves in space, the bridge, or actual pivot axis is basically fixed.

The pivot point is, surprise a POINT, that doesn't move. The core of the CB is a fixed point. The line from a fixed point to a fixed point cannot change.

So if a bridge is fixed, there should be only 1 line of aim, through the center of the CB.

If that isn't so, then it would revolutionize how the 'so called' experts examine pivoting and aiming. I hardly think investigating such a revolutionary theory is off topic. Many of us believe this is the key issue to examine in explaining this 90/90 and similar systems.

You're welcome to take your own approach, but unless you can explain how a fixed bridge can lead to a moving pivot point, I doubt you'll get far.

Colin
 
short and sweet

Colin,

If something works and none of us can understand why we don't have adequate information. Over 600 posts of doing things your way hasn't aided our understanding in any significant way. That would seem like defacto proof we need to try another approach.

Hu



Colin Colenso said:
Hu,

Your pivot moves in space, the bridge, or actual pivot axis is basically fixed.

The pivot point is, surprise a POINT, that doesn't move. The core of the CB is a fixed point. The line from a fixed point to a fixed point cannot change.

So if a bridge is fixed, there should be only 1 line of aim, through the center of the CB.

If that isn't so, then it would revolutionize how the 'so called' experts examine pivoting and aiming. I hardly think investigating such a revolutionary theory is off topic. Many of us believe this is the key issue to examine in explaining this 90/90 and similar systems.

You're welcome to take your own approach, but unless you can explain how a fixed bridge can lead to a moving pivot point, I doubt you'll get far.

Colin
Click to expand...
 
OK..I just posted this on the other thread and though I might as well post it here:

I think I already mentioned this in many of my posts in the other thread.....you guys will not have an answer. You are trying to proving something geometrically perfect in theory when the geometric system doesn't work in real life. Theory vs Reality....PJ and Yourself are basing your assumptions that your geometric model work in real life..but it doesn't so how are you guy ever going to answer your own questions when you can't even acknowledge this fact.

Here's an answer for your guys...the hand bridge is fixed but the pivot on your closed or open bridge changes. If this mean to you that the bridge hand moved....well news for you...it never going to be stationary or perfectly still like in your theory. Technically, your bridge is never stationary especially when you are shooting...it move very slightly. However, for us guys in this real realm it's fixed. In your perfect realm...maybe it's a different story. . Man, how can you guys account for all these unknown elements (force, pressure of your hand on table, cue variables, sweat, mindset, etc,etc, that are not factored in your perfect little geometric explanation.

It's really hard and next to impossible to use theorize system or concept to account for human activities (real situation)....scientific explanation has it place in this world and it amazing but for pool I think we should just stick with the real world because what your geometric formula is telling you is that everything needs to be perfect for your formula to be correct. A perfect system based on derived formulas will not work in real life for a number of reason. I remember learning the clock system from little Joe but than an old hustler tells me to is good to know the system but you have to account for variable that a perfect system can not foresee.

An example is with diamond system: If you shoot the three rails shot to the corner pocket...depending on the table or condition (humind, etc)..each table will have two different set of results. The formula and diagram for this shot is perfect...but in real life it's not. That's why...PLAYERS..who play for money always has to check if the table play short or long...so they will know how to adjust for the condition of the table. This is a real gem..for those who play for money. LOL!! Paul Thornley ...for those who don't know him (Alex P. mentor)..is out of Toronto,Canada and is also one of most knowledgeable trainer and player in Canada tells me this.

There is a definite different in the two pivot techniques? But somehow, you guys just can seem to acknowledge the different. I think the best thing for us to move on with this boring and tired argument is that your right in your world and we're right in the real world and just leave it at that.

If you did try this technique and it doesn't work...than it's time to consult with Ron on why and what you are guys are doing wrong. One other thing..the main reason for the hip pivot is because the BH movement will hit your body so you can't make some shots if you do not move your body. This is also the reason why some technique ask the player to move their bridge hand to compensate for this fact. Ron technique keep your bridge hand in place and give your the correct alignment for the line of aim. If you are not moving your body properly...then your alignment will be off and it won't work. After the body shift, you should be comfortable if done right...not awkward. Hope this help guys.

Regards,
Duc.

PS. Yeah Ron..got too much info in his head. He wish he could play like me though LOL...well I probably won't play back pocket nine ball with this man..(some of the shots he makes are sick!!) Heck of a nice fella...a great trainer. His lessons are definitely worth the money..plus some.
 
Last edited:
Cuemaster98 said:
[Reality is imperfect, so geometry can't represent it accurately.]
Click to expand...

You don't have to keep saying this. Believe it or not we already know it.

We don't misunderstand geometry's limitations; you misunderstand geometry's role. It's not supposed to tell us exactly what happens; it's supposed to tell us what's possible or impossible - the limits of what can happen. It does this very well.

pj
chgo
 
The problem is you keep saying it can't work, but we keep firing in balls center pocket so we know it works. I wish PJ or Colin could get it to work so we could have a valid WHY as to why it works. GOOD LUCK!!
 
The sooner everyone realizes the bridge isn't the pivot point the faster everything will be figured out.

The cue pivots through the bridge, but it's not the pivot point...the pivot point for the 10000x is behind the bridge. When this is eventually proven....just remember where you heard it first, ladies.

This is possible because of the rigid upper body of the hip pivot.
 
Last edited:
cookie man said:
The problem is you keep saying it can't work, but we keep firing in balls center pocket so we know it works. I wish PJ or Colin could get it to work so we could have a valid WHY as to why it works. GOOD LUCK!!
Click to expand...
It works the same way as the laying on of hands cures the blues, various aches and pains, or a gimpy stride - it's a direct miracle from God. Enjoy it while it lasts, for someday the laws of geometry may just be restored to their rightful place.

I know, it seems crazy that they would have been rescinded in the first place, just for the sake of a few pool players, but I think it would be very prudent not to look this particular gift horse in the mouth.

Hallelujah!
Jim
 
Who says there is one?

Patrick Johnson said:
Where is the roller in your bridge?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

There could indeed be a roller in the bridge or even basically a bar that moves the cue over. I don't think that is the solution to this debate however we have dozens of posts that insist there can be but one pivot point on a line and associating the physical cue with the theoretical line. I have described how a pivot point can be constantly changing in relation to both the line and the fulcrum in the real world so the absolute that you and others have been bogged down on for over five hundred posts is no longer an absolute unless you care to argue that the pivot point doesn't move on both the roller and the beam, cue stick and glass.

I actually think that the whole pivot point discussion will turn out to have been a useless distraction. The pivot point issue isn't relevant from my point of view. What I want to know is how to make the ball go in the hole. The standard answer for something someone can't explain in design is that the original designer made errors that happened to make his idea work or there is an undefined fudge factor. Those are basically the same claims those that don't understand an aiming system make about the aiming system. My problem with this is that the claims are usually false in a mechanical design environment and I strongly suspect are false here also, especially when I read the same explanation for each and every aiming system.

I want to see an aiming system laid on the table start to finish then we can see if and how it works. When we only see pieces we fill in the gaps with our own assumptions and assumptions are often in error.

I don't think that these guys have rewritten geometry or physics so what are they doing that we don't understand?

Hu
 
spider, why dont you just get a builders transit & show that you pivot the scope on the tripod instead of rotating the tripod to adjust angle, i've never seen a builder pick up yhe whole tripod to shoot another grade
 
8&snap said:
spider, why dont you just get a builders transit & show that you pivot the scope on the tripod instead of rotating the tripod to adjust angle, i've never seen a builder pick up yhe whole tripod to shoot another grade
Click to expand...


I have no clue what you just said... but you just gave me a GREAT idea for another video. Thanks, sir. (RUNNING DOWNSTAIRS TO MAKE A VIDEO)
 
SpiderWebComm said:
Is it? Stand by for the video.... T-Minus 5 mins for another pivotal moment.
Click to expand...

Just when I was ready for bed... Well I guess we made it 40 something pages lets keep em' coming!
 
SpiderWebComm said:
It's only 10:30EST... did all the pool players go to sleep?????????
Click to expand...

zzzz... I can only get the first min and a half to play. Not that I'm the one disagreeing with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top