Ron V aiming system video and diagrams

You'll hold your stick in normal shooting position with your bridge hand on the table as usual and, without moving your bridge hand or any part of it and without removing your stick from it, leaving everything in place as if you're going to shoot a normal shot, you'll pivot your stick around a point that's somewhere other than at your bridge hand.

Is that right?

pj
chgo

How can you guys use math and physic to address a real human function. You can't. Too many unknown elements that math and physic do not account for. Also..again, the fixed bridge hand have multiple pivot points..if this true which it is than you can have multiple line to the exact center of the ball.

BH movement in reality is different than Hip movement....how can it not be? Human..not robot!!! Bet was on a real situation...not based on geometry..or physic!! For proof..tape your bridge hand fixed on the table...now shoot the two shot with both technique...if this work...than guess who win? Physic and Geometry is great for explanation but there are elements in system such as Ron that you can't use physic or math because it's not an exact system that required feel. How does geometry, physic...account for "Feel"? How ironic ..LOL..LOL...PJ champion for "Feel" in system he say isn't exact but now he's fighting to proof that systems are exact with his math.

Regards,
Duc.
 
Last edited:
cookie man said:
At one time in setting up the shot, the stick is set along a particular line. Call that line 1. At a second time in setting up the shot (typically just before the final stroke is taken) the stick is along a different line, line 2. Those two lines meet in a point. That point is the pivot point in all the previous discussions.
So if this is the pivot point, and it is not at the bridge, and we all agree that the stick can move left to right without the bridge hand moving ( try it ) than I think it is pretty clear spidey won the bet. Can we move on to part 2 of the system?
Click to expand...
Do you know what a pivot point is?

If you pivot from anywhere that is not the bridge point, then every part of the cue moves from its original position. Hence, the cue cannot remain at the same location on the bridge when it is pivoted from elsewhere.

It is geometry 101.

How is it that so many people can't grasp this? I'm astounded.

Colin
 
For a physic or matheticatical explaination..you will need to Video Ron's technique to determine why one technique does work and why one doesn't.

Don't make assumption that the Pivot Point is the same by saving both moving of BH or Hip is the same and then try to use math to back it up. The mistake PJ make is that he's using an exact system without accounting for "Feel". The main point is there's a difference...I'm sure the cue has to move...but I'm not going to crack my head over scientific study of this technique...I'm just going to use it.

PJ..have you tried the demo Dave make in his video? did it work for you? Maybe you can tell us why one work and one doesn't. Maybe all the experts in this field can explain why it work.

Regards,
Duc.
 
Colin,

Isn't that the point?? there are multiple pivot points on the bridge point. Are you saying there only one "Exact" pivot point? There no such thing.

PJ assume in is with his bet that this pivot point is the same...but it's not. He assume that the cue doesn't move from this pivot point with the shift of the body but it does. How much clearer does this has to be. If the pivot point is the same..of course it the same shot...but the argument is that the point has to change and the pivot make the change. With the statement made by PJ...Dave win. Theory vs Reality.

Ron technique...changes the pivot points on the bridge point. There no exact pivot point on the bridge point..there are multiple..which account for the different shot. PJ said there's no change and assume shot can't be made. Bridge hand doesn't change...but the bridge pivot point can.

The assumption that BH and Body Movement is the same is BS. How can it be the same. Anyway....this need to be done at a real table...only way to settle. The real truth is that it can be done and that the proof. Just because you can't explain it doesn't mean it doesn't work. LOL

Regards,
Duc.

Colin Colenso said:
Do you know what a pivot point is?

If you pivot from anywhere that is not the bridge point, then every part of the cue moves from its original position. Hence, the cue cannot remain at the same location on the bridge when it is pivoted from elsewhere.

It is geometry 101.

How is it that so many people can't grasp this? I'm astounded.

Colin
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Colin Colenso said:
... Patrick is being berated for not paying up and calls are being made for his lopping from these forums. That doesn't seem just to me.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the thought, Colin, but I don't think anybody whose opinion I value takes all this gibbering from the peanut gallery seriously - I certainly don't.

I'm glad we got to hear the endless string of nonsensical "arguments" made here; they make my point more clearly than I could: while these systems are apparently helpful to many players, there doesn't seem to be a single one who knows why or really even understands the questions.

I think this says volumes about how such systems work, and while my "opponents" in this thread won't know what that means, others will. I think we've actually clarified quite a bit.

pj
chgo
 
Cuemaster98 said:
... There no exact pivot point on the bridge point..there are multiple..which account for the different shot. ...
Click to expand...
By the definition I gave above, the pivot point is necessarily at the bridge unless you move the bridge while pivoting. Of course you are free to define a pivot point any way you please, but the standard definition which I gave has come out of years of previous discussions and it is useful and clear. Your definition, in my opinion, is not useful, and is certainly not clear. It has certainly muddied this discussion, so I would also characterize it as destructive. I think to use it is a mistake.
 
Cuemaster98 said:
Colin,

Isn't that the point?? there are multiple pivot points on the bridge point. Are you saying there only one pivot point? The bet is not about whether the pivot point is exact or not...PJ assume it is with his bet...but it's not. He assume that the cue doesn't move from this pivot point with the shift of the body but it does. How much clearer does this has to be. If the pivot point is the same..of course it the same shot...but the argument is that point has to change and the pivot make the change. With the statement made by PJ...Dave win.

Ron technique...changes the pivot points on the bridge point. There no exact pivot point on the bridge point..there are multiple..which account for the different shot. PJ said there's no change and assume shot can't be made. Bridge hand doesn't change...but the bridge pivot point can.

Regards,
Duc.
Click to expand...
Sorry Duc,
but your physics comes from a different dimension to mine. The world where cues can pivot at multiple points at the same time I have not visited. I guess my BSc won't get me a visa to travel there either.

No wonder you don't trust our version of physics. I'd inform Gustav Coriolis that he's wasting time on his masse theory, which he developed without actually playing any masses, but unfortunately he died a couple of hundred years ago.

Perhaps you could, from the realm where time and space differ to ours, let him know that there are new lines that can bend at multiple points such that he can fine tune his theories.

I'm sorry, it's not my nature to be derogatory, but your post was directed at me and I don't know any other way to respond at this long hour of the night. I do hope you'll re-read the thread and come up with a reply that doesn't just repeat what has already been stated and refuted.

I'm off to bed now. I'm sure you're a nice guy Duc, just trying to work this out, as are most here. I wish you good luck and hope you don't abuse me too vigorously for my arrogance:smile:

Colin
 
PJ as long as they work who really cares why. we know your diagram doesn't work and if you actually played pool you would know too and the world would be better off.
 
cookie man said:
PJ as long as they work who really cares why. we know your diagram doesn't work and if you actually played pool you would know too and the world would be better off.
Click to expand...

He knows it doesn't work. It is others that can't seem to understand.
 
I'm astounded too

Colin Colenso said:
Do you know what a pivot point is?

If you pivot from anywhere that is not the bridge point, then every part of the cue moves from its original position. Hence, the cue cannot remain at the same location on the bridge when it is pivoted from elsewhere.

It is geometry 101.

How is it that so many people can't grasp this? I'm astounded.

Colin
Click to expand...

Colin,

I'm astounded that you bolded a false statement. This just shows the danger of fighting over every word in every post.

If the pivot point is anywhere on the cue, then that point of the cue doesn't move. That's the geometry I was taught in school. This is a deliberate nitpicking just to illustrate what is happening with every post by some being picked to pieces. I do know what you were trying to say.

Hu
 
Patrick,
Good for you on not going nuclear when a bunch of people who should know better raised the volume. I too believe your correct but the aforementioned is not based on your correctness...just your ability to keep it civil.

Thx Dave, Bob & Collin for the insight. I now understand why I left Physics for Elect Engineering. Nobody fights over electron theory anymore...we have all become software dudes.

Nick
 
jasonlaus said:
Problem is dave said the pivot point isn't anywhere near the bridge.
Click to expand...

In fact he stated from the beginning that his pivot point was at the butt of the cue. I think this has been forgotten with all of this wrangling.

I'll throw in my 2 bits, wanted or not (and no bet challenges please). Patrick wins. The pivot point is the bridge, not the moving cue and even if you say it's the cue the pivot is still not anywhere near the butt of the cue.

Ed
 
Koop said:
Yeah, I guess so.

So, was that you or not? You claimed not to be a P.O. but then, in your words, were a P.O. in Chicago? You made the bet so I think you should at least give an honest response.
Click to expand...

You need to read the context of the posts surrounding the one you quoted. At one time (about 1999-2000) there was a running joke from some of Pat's detractors that labelled him the RSB cop. They called him officer Pat as a joke because he was always "policing" the group when it got off topic etc.

This became a running joke and was not meant to be taken literally.

Even if it was who cares? Are you guys implying there is something wrong with cops? Or that they aren't smart enough to have logical opinions?

Ed
 
ShootingArts said:
Colin,

I'm astounded that you bolded a false statement. This just shows the danger of fighting over every word in every post.

If the pivot point is anywhere on the cue, then that point of the cue doesn't move. That's the geometry I was taught in school. This is a deliberate nitpicking just to illustrate what is happening with every post by some being picked to pieces. I do know what you were trying to say.

Hu
Click to expand...
If I said 'every other point' rather than 'every point', meaning every point other than the pivot point, the statement is correct. Right?

A little sloppy, but still pretty clear I would have thought.

I don't think this debate has been about semantics or precise definitions, I think it is over a very fundamental issue regarding the nature of aiming and the role of the bridge point in pivoting.

I think a clear understanding of that is fundamental to any aiming or BHE pivoting system. Not to mention just understanding the variables when aligning and stroking through more common methods.

Colin
 
Colin..I'm sure you guys are right in theory but have you guys try the setup that Dave has shown in the video for yourself? Why does this work when you telling us it doesn't? Bet was that this can't be done on a fixed bridge and that both shot is the same with both technique....forgot pivoting..etc..etc..etc. Pivoting or how you guys would want to define it...has no use in this argument for who won the bet...it was use to try and explain why the 2 technique was different. Can you guys tell us why Dave is able to make one shot with one technique vs another? PJ said its the same shot...with both techniques? Do you agree with this?

IF you do Patrick win...if you don't Dave win. As simple as that!!

Regards,
Duc.



Colin Colenso said:
If I said 'every other point' rather than 'every point', meaning every point other than the pivot point, the statement is correct. Right?

A little sloppy, but still pretty clear I would have thought.

I don't think this debate has been about semantics or precise definitions, I think it is over a very fundamental issue regarding the nature of aiming and the role of the bridge point in pivoting.

I think a clear understanding of that is fundamental to any aiming or BHE pivoting system. Not to mention just understanding the variables when aligning and stroking through more common methods.

Colin
Click to expand...
 
exactly my point

Colin,

You are one of the clearer writers on the forum but a single word missing or out of place can make a statement incorrect, heaven forbid that someone actually type in the wrong word! That was my point exactly. I only used your post for an example to show how easy it is to pick a post apart. As I said, it was very deliberate nitpicking to prove a point. this thread could have been so much better without the useless nitpicking.

Hu


Colin Colenso said:
If I said 'every other point' rather than 'every point', meaning every point other than the pivot point, the statement is correct. Right?

A little sloppy, but still pretty clear I would have thought.

I don't think this debate has been about semantics or precise definitions, I think it is over a very fundamental issue regarding the nature of aiming and the role of the bridge point in pivoting.

I think a clear understanding of that is fundamental to any aiming or BHE pivoting system. Not to mention just understanding the variables when aligning and stroking through more common methods.

Colin
Click to expand...
 
PJ as long as they work who really cares why.
Click to expand...

Lots of people, obviously.

Here's a question for you: as long as they work why don't the people who use them want others to learn why? For that matter, why don't they want to know themselves? Why all the complaining when somebody starts asking questions?

pj
chgo
 
emccune said:
You need to read the context of the posts surrounding the one you quoted. At one time (about 1999-2000) there was a running joke from some of Pat's detractors that labelled him the RSB cop. They called him officer Pat as a joke because he was always "policing" the group when it got off topic etc.

This became a running joke and was not meant to be taken literally.

Even if it was who cares? Are you guys implying there is something wrong with cops? Or that they aren't smart enough to have logical opinions?

Ed
Click to expand...

I had detractors?

pj
chgo
 
emccune said:
You need to read the context of the posts surrounding the one you quoted. At one time (about 1999-2000) there was a running joke from some of Pat's detractors that labelled him the RSB cop. They called him officer Pat as a joke because he was always "policing" the group when it got off topic etc.

This became a running joke and was not meant to be taken literally.

Even if it was who cares? Are you guys implying there is something wrong with cops? Or that they aren't smart enough to have logical opinions?

Ed
Click to expand...

My bad Ed. You're right and I owe Patrick an apology for that one. I did not read it in its entirity, my bad.

Koop - has nothing against the police.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top