Ron V aiming system video and diagrams

[shinigami]

I'm in Group E..."Everybody love Everybody" :thumbup:

FTR, these were shots that were at least 3 to 4 diamonds away.

It appears to me that one group of people want to make a point that aiming systems require adjustments in bridgehand placement, body placement etc.

Another group claims that aiming system XYZ is the greatest thing since slice bread.

If Group A is truly trying to figure out how these aiming systems work, you would think that they would go get a lesson from the source (keeping an open mind) and put it to the test on the pool table; you know, just for academics sake.

If Group B thinks that aiming systems XYZ is the greatest thing since slice bread, then what harm comes from it. They either play better with it or they don't.

There's another Group out there and I think I belong to it. It's Group C. We appreciate the people who put in the time to scientifically disect aiming systems and the other pool phenomena out there. The details of what's actually happening on the table is FUN. When using some of these aiming systems, we also delight in watching the balls, miraculously go in the hole time after time. Group C also believes that VERY TALENTED players use aiming systems as well as ball-bangers and enjoy the journey of learning about the aiming systems and APPLYING the things we learn to help us pocket more balls. This group while mildly interested in the details of what's going on are more concerned with the results obtained by using aiming systems.

There's another group called Group D. They could give a rat's azz about whether there is instinctive adjustment going on with their aiming system. They don't play enough to stay in stroke and their aiming system helps them get their alignment and aiming corrected fast and they pocket more balls with it. Maybe they won't ever be a superstar, but they simply don't care. They have fun playing pool and using aiming systems to pocket balls and they can't understand for the life of it why there is so much heated discussion about aiming systems.

Most everyone tires of the one upsmanship going on about aiming systems and to me it truly looks like each group is trying to prove themselves right.

There are people who are exclusive aiming system users who can play better pool than many non-aiming system users. There are people who have never used an aiming system and see no need for learning one because they can beat 98% of the people they come across. Then there are professional players who actually use aiming systems to enhance their already powerful game.

So Group A, all I'm saying is if you are so interested in learning how these aiming systems work, instead of blowing your dough on a gambling match that you are willing to do, invest it in a pool lesson from one of the aiming system specialists and keep an open mind. Learn WHY MANY PEOPLE are able to pocket balls more easily. Learn how to better your game and then come back and explain it to us why the aiming system works. You can throw in lots of why it doesn't work too and many of us will listen but go to the source of the systems, learn it from them, then come back and authenticate the system, debunk it or just chop it all to hell. Trying to learn these aiming systems ONLINE from those of us who are STILL struggling to improve our game is just plain silly.

I'm not trying to be mean-spirited or start an Internet Main Forum turf war. I just believe that aiming systems are GREAT for the vast majority of players even though the polls indicated that at least in this informed forum, aiming system users are in the minority. If Group A wants to provide the details of why aiming systems work then they should go to the source. Don't rely on a telephone call. Don't rely on some text printed on a computer screen. Don't rely on a youtube video. Be professional about it and go to the source. Pay for the lesson and then come back and give it all you've got. My only other piece of advice is if you go, go with the intent of learning how to improve your game using the inventor's aiming system. You can decide LATER, how or why it does or does not work.

OK, maybe group B and D are from the same clan..
Best Regards,
JoeyA

 

[JoeyA]

This is not much different than CTE and Center OB to Center CB. Same concept of aiming without aiming. The only drawback is it would not work severe cuts unless there is another aim point.

I don't like the idea of moving my hips after I am down tho...

I think you are right.

Oh hard cuts, I simply aim at the center of the object ball and then pivot to the center of the cue ball. It seemed to be working for me and while I only used this one night, I found moving the hips a little disconcerting and started simply making the normal pivot without moving the hips. I don't know if it is because I have a wide wingspan or if I am just able to adjust instinctively but it was working for me on hard cuts also (just normal pivoting).

I used it a little while on some banks with a little success.

Last night one of my young competitors who beat me out of a couple hundred a month ago came by and challenged me to a couple of sets of nine ball and I started off using the system but after getting beat on pretty severely, I reverted back to my old CTE and started winning. :embarrassed2: I got my cheese back in a nail-biter match after being down 6-2 and 8-5 in races to 9 for a hundred a set. :smile: This kid SELDOM ever plays, at least that's what he tells me. Others NEVER see him in the pool hall. Can you imagine how well he could play if he played everyday?

JoeyA

 

[Patrick Johnson]

If Group A wants to provide the details of why aiming systems work then they should go to the source. Don't rely on a telephone call. Don't rely on some text printed on a computer screen. Don't rely on a youtube video. Be professional about it and go to the source. Pay for the lesson and then come back and give it all you've got.

It sounds like you're saying "if you haven't had a lesson, shut up". If that's what you want, then to be fair I think we should add "if you can't describe the system, shut up".

A thread that only included those who have had a lesson and can describe the system would have zero posts.

pj
chgo

 

[Billiard Architect]

You all realize that 20 years from now we are all going to be walking around in a virtual chat room trying to explain these systems to the new generation of pool players and they will just be calling us crazy old men/women just looking for attention, saying that we are not the nicest people and asking WHY THE HELL ALL OF OUR TEXT IN OUR SPEECH BALLOONS IS IN CAPITAL LETTERS...

JV<-- Will have V'gans someday...

 

[JoeyA]

It sounds like you're saying "if you haven't had a lesson, shut up". If that's what you want, then to be fair I think we should add "if you can't describe the system, shut up".

A thread that only included those who have had a lesson and can describe the system would have zero posts.

pj
chgo

Patrick,
You're wrong about that.

It is sad if that's what you got out of my post.

JoeyA

 

[cuenut]

I am having a hard time visualizing some of this, although I understand the concept (I think). My skepticism is this:

A "ghost" ball system, CTE, 90-90, whatever does not give precise points of aim relative to the angle of the shot, and is different for every angle due to throw imparted on the object ball at various angles. This makes quite a bit of difference, particularly when playing on a triple shimmed table where the degree of precision of aim is critical. The systems mentioned don't seem to take that throw into consideration, nor have I ever heard mentioned the amount of side spin needed to throw a ball X distance off of, or onto a tangent line to the pocket depending upon the angle of the shot.

 

[Flex]

Flex, I understand what you're describing when you refer to the divisions of the object ball, but I can't seem to follow how you find the right angle with your cue. Can you try to describe that again? Thanks

I'll try.

First, figure out the line from the object ball to the pocket you want. Then walk over behind the cue ball and line the cue ball up with the object ball so you are looking at it straight on. Place your tip in the 90/90 position as shown in the drawing in the original post from the original poster. Now, compare the angle of the cue in the 90/90 position, to the angle of the object ball going into the pocket. There is an angle formed that between the two cue sticks. If you can just estimate what the angle is in degrees, that's quicker. If not, you need to try to calculate it roughly. Now, a 90 degree angle divided into 15 degree segments ( you could use other segments too, it's just a rough approximation) will give you equal 5 slices, or actually 6 aim lines. Once you find the angle you wish to use, say the third line, which would be equivalent approximately to a 30 degree cut, divide the object ball into 6 equidistant slices. Then point the tip of the cue from the 90 position on the cue ball straight at the 3rd line of 6, or just a bit less than the center of the object ball. Set up as if you were going to stroke through the 90 position on the cue ball straight at the 3rd line, but instead of shooting on that line, pivot the cue stick to dead center ball on the cue ball, aim a bit above center and roll the ball at say, lag speed, or maybe half that, and see where the object ball goes. For this to work reliably for you, you need to be able to reproduce an accurate, repeatable stroke. If you strike off the center, you'll be introducing english, either left or right, and that will definitely affect where the cue ball goes, and also impart a different kind of throw on the OB than you expect.

Sure wish I could draw this, but am WEI table challenged

Hope this helps.

Flex

 

[Flex]

I am having a hard time visualizing some of this, although I understand the concept (I think). My skepticism is this:

A "ghost" ball system, CTE, 90-90, whatever does not give precise points of aim relative to the angle of the shot, and is different for every angle due to throw imparted on the object ball at various angles. This makes quite a bit of difference, particularly when playing on a triple shimmed table where the degree of precision of aim is critical. The systems mentioned don't seem to take that throw into consideration, nor have I ever heard mentioned the amount of side spin needed to throw a ball X distance off of, or onto a tangent line to the pocket depending upon the angle of the shot.

When I tried to figure this thing out, I did so on the toughest 9 footer I've ever played on: Table 1 at First Break Cafe in Sterling, VA.

I got it to work pretty well on that table and then moved over to Table 2 at that place.

It worked plenty well for me...

I wasn't shooting with english or force follows on the shots I mention. If you are going to do that, you, and I, will need to add that to the mix. In the meantime, an awful lot can be done with pure center ball and normal speed shots. Like run out a rack quite often.

Flex

 

[softshot]

I have learned alot recently that has caused me to change many of my views on pool..

I learned a variation of one of Hals systems and it is very strong.. so I am sure the rest of them probably work too.

Rons system obviously works for a great many people..

MY issue with pivot systems is this.

I am on a quest for the simplest most efficient way to win. I want to remove as many variables from my game as possible..

and in my mind the pivot adds one more variable..I don't want to lose a game because my hip isn't moving well tonight...

 

[Flex]

I have learned alot recently that has caused me to change many of my views on pool..

I learned a variation of one of Hals systems and it is very strong.. so I am sure the rest of them probably work too.

Rons system obviously works for a great many people..

MY issue with pivot systems is this.

I am on a quest for the simplest most efficient way to win. I want to remove as many variables from my game as possible..

and in my mind the pivot adds one more variable..I don't want to lose a game because my hip isn't moving well tonight...

My suggestion is that you spend some real quality time with the system, and realize that it might just be better for some shots than what you are currently using. Once you reach that degree of confidence, IMHO, you'll really be sold on the system. For me, that realization came during the three hours of nine ball after the two hours of experimentation. It got me plenty excited.

As Stan Shuffett said in another thread, advanced players after having a couple of hours of experience with the system (from what I gather it is pretty similar to Ron's, maybe I'm mistaken) seem to have no problem making the slight adjustments that need to be made.

While I don't consider myself advanced, from time to time I have managed to win against some pretty strong players. This system is plenty good, and probably more consistent than another one I've been working on for quite a very long time.

Give it a chance to work for you; you just might be happy you did.

Flex

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Your bridge is not the pivot point

http://www.poolvids.com/view/62/bridge-pivot-vs-body-pivot/

Sorry, I said my earlier post was my last post... but it eats me up to know bad info was posted after I left. Now that I posted this video, you guys can fight it out. I just wanted to make this quick point and that's it. Have at it guys. This will help people realize diagrams aren't always correct.

Dave

 

[cleary]

http://www.poolvids.com/view/62/bridge-pivot-vs-body-pivot/

Sorry, I said my earlier post was my last post... but it eats me up to know bad info was posted after I left. Now that I posted this video, you guys can fight it out. I just wanted to make this quick point and that's it. Have at it guys. This will help people realize diagrams aren't always correct.

Dave

HAHA, how did I know this was coming?!

 

[Flex]

http://www.poolvids.com/view/62/bridge-pivot-vs-body-pivot/

Sorry, I said my earlier post was my last post... but it eats me up to know bad info was posted after I left. Now that I posted this video, you guys can fight it out. I just wanted to make this quick point and that's it. Have at it guys. This will help people realize diagrams aren't always correct.

Dave

Great video! Thanks!

Now I'll go back and relook at the way I was doing it and see how much easier your method is. Sure does look easier.

 

[cleary]

Just a note:

The original diagrams I created for my original post and for the video are to simply show you what's going on. They were not intended to be nit picked for their geometry. I was simply showing, what I thought, the simplest way to understand what's going on.

Clearly, a lot of people understood, due to my massive email/PM/Rep response.

Thank you all for your thanks, but the real thanks goes to RonV. Im just the messenger... so please, dont shoot the messenger.

If you have a better way of diagraming what's 'really going on'... by all means, knock yourself out. But Im simply trying to get this information to the people who WANT TO LEARN.

So thank you RonV for the information you gave ME and everyone else. And thank you Dave for the help in explaining and fighting off these aim system killers.

I really hope everyone at least gives this an honest shot. Its worth it.

 

[eezbank]

http://www.poolvids.com/view/62/bridge-pivot-vs-body-pivot/

Sorry, I said my earlier post was my last post... but it eats me up to know bad info was posted after I left. Now that I posted this video, you guys can fight it out. I just wanted to make this quick point and that's it. Have at it guys. This will help people realize diagrams aren't always correct.

Dave

well done Dave. i'm sure you noticed in the diagrams the obvious errors such as there was no compensation for collision induced throw or cling. it was painfully obvious when i saw it that the balls wouldn't react like that without outside english. the guy hasn't even posted all the videos to show how to make the needed adjustments and you get bad info from someone who hasn't got a clue what's really going on here. i'm sure when he realizes he was in the wrong he will apologize....well, maybe not

 

[LAMas]

Great vid Spider'.
Can you film an over head so that we can see the deistint difference about the bridge hand?

 

[stan shuffett]

PRO ONE...is a different system. Stan

My suggestion is that you spend some real quality time with the system, and realize that it might just be better for some shots than what you are currently using. Once you reach that degree of confidence, IMHO, you'll really be sold on the system. For me, that realization came during the three hours of nine ball after the two hours of experimentation. It got me plenty excited.

As Stan Shuffett said in another thread, advanced players after having a couple of hours of experience with the system (from what I gather it is pretty similar to Ron's, maybe I'm mistaken) seem to have no problem making the slight adjustments that need to be made.
While I don't consider myself advanced, from time to time I have managed to win against some pretty strong players. This system is plenty good, and probably more consistent than another one I've been working on for quite a very long time.

Give it a chance to work for you; you just might be happy you did.

Flex

 

[Patrick Johnson]

http://www.poolvids.com/view/62/bridge-pivot-vs-body-pivot/

Sorry, I said my earlier post was my last post... but it eats me up to know bad info was posted after I left. Now that I posted this video, you guys can fight it out. I just wanted to make this quick point and that's it. Have at it guys. This will help people realize diagrams aren't always correct.

Dave

It looked to me like you did the same thing both times.

For the second shot did you move your bridge during the pivot? If not, then you did do the same thing both times and adjusted somehow we can't see to make the shot.

More to the point, it's obvious in RonV's video and his description of it that he does not move his bridge hand and does move his back hand, which means he pivots at the bridge.

Maybe this is an elaborate prank. Either way I'm shaking my head in wonderment.

pj
chgo

 

[Flex]

PRO ONE...is a different system. Stan

Thanks, Stan.

I imagine you don't post info about it, for you teach it, right?

How much are lessons? How many lesson hours are needed to learn it completely?

Best regards,

Flex

 

[SpiderWebComm]

It looked to me like you did the same thing both times.

For the second shot did you move your bridge during the pivot? If not, then you did do the same thing both times and adjusted somehow we can't see to make the shot.

More to the point, it's obvious in RonV's video and his description of it that he does not move his bridge hand and does move his back hand, which means he pivots at the bridge.

Maybe this is an elaborate prank. Either way I'm shaking my head in wonderment.

pj
chgo

My bridge NEVER moved. I was NOT doing the same thing either time. Nit, go to a table, stop being cocky like you know stuff and try it yourself.

Elaborate prank? You simply do not understand that a cue can pivot differently through a bridge because, well, you're not that type of player. If you would walk to a table, try it for a day, and THEN post instead of cocking like you know.... I wouldn't be forced to waste 30 mins of my day posting a video--- just to keep the other non-knowers from absorbing bad info.

Like I said... you and Dr. Dave can meet me ANYTIME in front of a large group of people and we'll chalk up the table with lines and run another live demo. We'll post some cash so my time isn't wasted and we'll run a science project for the Ph.D and Mr. Know-it-all.

I'm not David Copperfield and you're not a know-it-all. I wonder who would win??????????????????