He does it without mentioning cut angles...
Shaun Murphy discusses fractional ball aiming
- Thread starter Bob Jewett
- Start date
Yeah, some UKers seem to have a real hard time with that concept.
The best player in my 14.1 league didn't understand throw and would overlook dead shots out of the rack. He could also run hundreds. He was a snooker player from Bristol.
why did you emphasize "He does it without mentioning cut angles..." ?
Another thing that looks off is the positions of the cue balls for fractional cut angles. In the pic below the "1/4" CB is close to correct, but the "1/2" and "3/4" CBs are out of place (black markers = correct positions).
Although he describes things more or less correctly, he doesn't really demonstrate those fractional cuts - if he thinks he does, he must be making unconscious aim adjustments.
I didn't watch the whole video; not trying to criticize it - just mentioning what I noticed.
pj
chgo
Although he describes things more or less correctly, he doesn't really demonstrate those fractional cuts - if he thinks he does, he must be making unconscious aim adjustments.
I didn't watch the whole video; not trying to criticize it - just mentioning what I noticed.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
I think it would have been better to set up shots that give the correct fractions that the viewer could duplicate, such as the pink from the blue spot for 1/4 ball.
For instance, this setup is easy, repeatable and could be a good exercise to familiarize yourself with the major fractional overlaps. The OB on the rail gives easily seen feedback about the slight overcuts needed for throw.
CB positions are 2 diamonds this side of the OB and 1/2, 1 1/8 and 2 1/4 diamonds from the end cushion (3/4, 1/2 and 1/4 CB/OB overlap).
pj
chgo
Last edited:
In Murphy's case, he is mostly dealing with viewers who have never seen those spots on the rail. For his audience, he might show the pink from the blue spot for quarter-ball and maybe green from the middle pocket for 3/4. Black from a top pocket might be a half-ball shot.
It may confuse some people a little, but I like to start the fractions by showing them via parallel-shifting the cue ball first, and then translating to the 'attack angle' positions. We've all made/seen the 2-dimensional, overlap diagrams, so I assume that I'm not alone in that?
He is simply showing the visual overlaps for the basic quarters. The angles are irrelevant. It's more about recognizing the fractional overlaps, not identifying angles. In other words, no one needs to know the cut angle if they can just look at a shot and recognize the cb-ob relationship/overlap needed to pocket the ball. That's what his video is about, and it's a good video, even without describing or explaining CIT.
Your line to the ghostball is a few degrees off, too high. The ghostball, being farther away, is much smaller than the closer cb's, almost a third smaller. His angles aren't nearly as far off as your lines show.
When watching the video, one can see that when he changes the camera angle to get directly behind each cb, the aim lines are exactly as he describes.
When watching the video, one can see that when he changes the camera angle to get directly behind each cb, the aim lines are exactly as he describes.
CB positions representing fractional cut angles can't be evenly spaced like that no matter where the OB is.
pj
chgo
You're right... the CB's would all have to be equal distance from the GB to be so equally-spaced like he shows in his setup.
Still, his main focus is showing what the basic quarter overlaps look like from the cb's perspective, and he does a good job with that. The fact that the setup isn't quite right is apparent to those in the know, but it doesn't have a negative impact on the overall lesson. Maybe I should send him a copy of Poolology! Lol
