Simple aiming system

[T411]

If the line thru the 2 ball was accurate, the shot falls. Any player can see that line is off in that representation. Move it where my system says to and the cut is way thinner. Changes the contact point.
Try it on a table. Not a keyboard!! IDK what else to tell you. Debate it til the cows come home. Not gonna alter the fact that this works and is accurate if done properly.
This is simple and got the players struggling w degrees and Supernatural placings, etc. Works w English as well, taking for granted you know your cue and how much it deflects on shots. 2 lines. 2 points.
Put em together and make the ball. Period.

I’d does’t get any better than this… simple. I like how you don’t wast your time arguing Mensa… take it or leave it, dust of your shoulders with the naysayers or ones that already know it all. I tried this and it works.

I’ll add that if you can’t hit a spot shot consistently, like 10 in a row from both sides then no system will work for you.
Hitting a spot shot doest mean you know how to pocket balls from different angles but if you can hit it consistently from both sides it shows that you can hit the spots that you are aiming at.
Once you can consistently pocket spot shots then try pocketing spot shots from both sides with English.
Then with English at different speeds.
Then take all of that then use a system like this to learn how to pocket balls at different angles.

Otherwise if you are using a system and want to say it doesn’t work it’s probably because you can’t consistently hit spots that you are aiming at in the first place. Think you are saying all of this right here; “ Works w English as well, taking for granted you know your cue and how much it deflects on shots. 2 lines. 2 points.”

 

[Patrick Johnson]

… if you are using a system and want to say it doesn’t work it’s probably because you can’t consistently hit spots that you are aiming at

Or maybe because the system doesn’t work as advertised - like this one.

It’s simple (to most) geometry.

pj
chgo

 

[Mensabum]

I’d does’t get any better than this… simple. I like how you don’t wast your time arguing Mensa… take it or leave it, dust of your shoulders with the naysayers or ones that already know it all. I tried this and it works.

I’ll add that if you can’t hit a spot shot consistently, like 10 in a row from both sides then no system will work for you.
Hitting a spot shot doest mean you know how to pocket balls from different angles but if you can hit it consistently from both sides it shows that you can hit the spots that you are aiming at.
Once you can consistently pocket spot shots then try pocketing spot shots from both sides with English.
Then with English at different speeds.
Then take all of that then use a system like this to learn how to pocket balls at different angles.

Otherwise if you are using a system and want to say it doesn’t work it’s probably because you can’t consistently hit spots that you are aiming at in the first place. Think you are saying all of this right here; “ Works w English as well, taking for granted you know your cue and how much it deflects on shots. 2 lines. 2 points.”

I appreciate the support.
Knowing what I now know, that aiming systems have literally started wars on AZ and people have profited from said systems, I never would have put this out there. My sole naive goal was to offer a simple way for anyone struggling w degrees and clock faces and the myriad other systems a simple effective way to aim. I had no agendas or intentions other than that. Trying to be helpful.
I find it discouraging to see so much negativity here about all this and hope that one day AZ will be more tolerant of others ideas right or wrong as they may interpret them.
Unfortunately for the community at large, I won't be adding my 2¢ or any tips I may have bcuz of the way this one was handled. My own inexperience with online posting is to blame. I should have done my homework B4 putting my head on the chopping block. That being said, it's the communities' loss and I hope my opinion will change in due time. Until then, I'll just have me some fun. Thanks again to everyone who looked past the hair splitting and actually tried this on table.
I've used it successfully for over 40 years. Imo, the best one out there.
With that, I'm done with this disaster. Nuff said. Mensa out.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

My sole naive goal was to offer a simple way for anyone struggling w degrees and clock faces and the myriad other systems a simple effective way to aim.

And the goal of those who disagreed with you is to alert others that your "geometry" requires "user correction" to succeed. Even you might benefit by knowing that.

pj
chgo

 

[Oikawa]

For a previous thread on this subject, see

Nearest to farthest -- how bad is it?

Here is an aiming system. Like all aiming systems, it is not perfect. My question is: How bad is it? In particular what is the worst error you will have on common shots? What situations really cause it to break down? The system is this: There...

forums.azbilliards.com

And here is a diagram that illustrates the problem with what I call the "nearest to farthest" system. For both shots, the same "nearest" point on the cue ball is used. It is perfect for the straight-in one ball. For the two ball, it causes much too full a hit.

View attachment 762625

Did you ever address this, Mensabum? If Bob understood your explanation of the system correctly, the image should clearly demonstrate why it doesn't work geometrically. So, is the image not accurate to what you are claiming, or is the system geometrically incorrect? It's one or the other.

As others have already said, I believe using the method can be successful in practice, if it is used as a masquerade that allows your subconscious to do the proper adjustments by memory/feel/intuition/whatever you want to call it, instead of the conscious mind getting in the way. But that is far from saying that the geometrical premise of the system works at all, and in that case what should be discussed is how to utilize the subconscious in a less self-deceptive way, because as someone mentioned earlier, sometimes you might apply the method more meticulously than usual, skipping over the feel-based adjustment, resulting in a miss.

 

[BRKNRUN]

On paper....the geometry shows that parallell lines is more accurate than Mensabums approach....You can clearly see the difference in contact points.

However.......at the table it is very difficult to see a difference between the two variations of method....and Mensabum's variation is way easier to use....on paper it is easy to draw a line...but at the table.....seeing a parallell line is not always easy as it seems it should be......I think the rest of the table geometry and triangles being formed plays a role in eyesight distortion.

That being said...the difference in contact point on the CB is so minor that it is hard to tell and then line up that point.....and then as you move into the shot the "edge" seems to change and (at least I) lose my reference.

I have never been able to make these types of "overlap" methods or contact point of CB methods work.

I need a center CB reference point aimed throught the center GB to a spot on the OB.....(or off the OB where the edge of the cue comes into play).

HH said it best years ago...."Whatever method you use that pockets balls is the right method for you to use".......I will add........even if "on paper" it should not work.

This thread just proves "again" that feel is probably the biggest component to any aiming method.

 

[Mensabum]

And the goal of those who disagreed with you is to alert others that your "geometry" requires "user correction" to succeed. Even you might benefit by knowing that.

pj
chgo

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, erroneous as it may be. Thank goodness there's those concerned citizens out there able to judge something they've never tried to keep people like me from misleading the masses and corrupting our young players with something simple. I must be the devil's advocate.
This system is geometrically sound and I still haven't had an invite from anyone to come disprove it in a table with me.

 

[Mensabum]

Id

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, erroneous as it may be. Thank goodness there's those concerned citizens out there able to judge something they've never tried to keep people like me from misleading the masses and corrupting our young players with something simple. I must be the devil's advocate.
This system is geometrically sound and I still haven't had an invite from anyone to come disprove it in a table with me.

IDK how anyone can call an equilateral triangle non geometrical!!

 

[Patrick Johnson]

i do not know if this is what @Mensabum is describing

In case there's anybody left wondering what this is all about, here's a (maybe) simpler version of your diagram.

The yellow object ball is only shown to establish the needed direction (solid yellow line).

The result is seen by focusing on the cue ball, comparing:
- the parallel "needed" direction/contact point (dashed yellow line)
- the non-parallel "Mensa" direction/contact point (solid blue line)
- the probable actual direction/contact point (dashed white line)

A small difference in CB contact point makes a dramatic difference in OB direction, especially at greater cut angles.

pj
chgo

 

[Mensabum]

In case there's anybody left wondering what this is all about, here's a (maybe) simpler version of your diagram.

The yellow object ball is only shown to establish the needed direction (solid yellow line).

The result is seen by focusing on the cue ball, comparing:
- the parallel "needed" direction/contact point (dashed yellow line)
- the non-parallel "Mensa" direction/contact point (solid blue line)
- the probable actual direction/contact point (dashed white line)

A small difference in CB contact point makes a dramatic difference in OB direction, especially at greater cut angles.

pj
chgo

View attachment 802080

This shows me you don't understand what I'm talking about. Where do you come up w this stuff?? Splitting hairs until bald, or what. I've explained it in detail. If you can't figure that out by now, I'm sorry, you're just shit out of luck.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Where do you come up w this stuff??

It's called "geometry" - maybe you've heard of it?

Geometry is a branch of mathematics concerned with properties of space such as the distance, shape, size, and relative position of figures.

pj <- not as "ignored" as advertised
chgo

 

[SeniorTom]

As far as aiming systems go, I roll on instict for my shots. They may help some other people, but it seems like the more info I have flowing through my mind for a particular shot the more apt I am to miss it. I like a lot of the books on mental preparation that try to clear your conscious mind out and ride on the idea that you've made this particular shot a thousand times before and you will make it this time as well. It's like I already know how to make this shot, just do it! Some conscious thinking has to go on before shots, like cue ball control, what types of spin on the cue ball, and what ball you are thinking next, etc, but then I just ride on what my subconscious already knows how to do, and that is potting the ball. If I start thinking about systems and this and that during my shot, imagining lines here or there, I take away from my ability to pot balls. I see systems could be valuable to more of beginners and people getting back into Billiards, but beyond that, I don't try to think too much when potting a ball.

 

[bbb]

As far as aiming systems go, I roll on instict for my shots. They may help some other people, but it seems like the more info I have flowing through my mind for a particular shot the more apt I am to miss it. I like a lot of the books on mental preparation that try to clear your conscious mind out and ride on the idea that you've made this particular shot a thousand times before and you will make it this time as well. It's like I already know how to make this shot, just do it! Some conscious thinking has to go on before shots, like cue ball control, what types of spin on the cue ball, and what ball you are thinking next, etc, but then I just ride on what my subconscious already knows how to do, and that is potting the ball. If I start thinking about systems and this and that during my shot, imagining lines here or there, I take away from my ability to pot balls. I see systems could be valuable to more of beginners and people getting back into Billiards, but beyond that, I don't try to think too much when potting a ball.

how well can you as you say .....pot balls?

 

[Mensabum]

It's called "geometry" - maybe you've heard of it?



pj <- not as "ignored" as advertised
chgo

It's called "geometry" - maybe you've heard of it?



pj <- not as "ignored" as advertised
chgo

Never heard of it. My tips are simple. Kiss.

 

[BRKNRUN]

Never heard of it. My tips are simple. Kiss.

A lot to be said of that.....

Many a top player can't even tell you why they are such good shot makers.....Likely because they don't overthink it and just go with what works for them....(I wish I had that ability to not overthink stuff)

Overthinking can be the demise of greatness.......In Golf...If you wan't to potentially mess up a guys putting stroke.....just ask him...."Do you push or pull the putter"?

 

[SeniorTom]

how well can you as you say .....pot balls?

I have many higher-ups compliment my shooting skills, and I do play very well. My biggest issue is, like most, cue ball control. I do know when I shoot my best there isn't a lot of calculating going on about ghost balls and lines drawn to pockets, just pocketing the ball that I've done so many times before.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Overthinking can be the demise of greatness...

Technical discussions on a pool forum aren't "overthinking". Their purpose is to give an understanding of why we do things a certain way, not to encourage thinking while competing.

pj
chgo

 

[Mensabum]

A lot to be said of that.....

Many a top player can't even tell you why they are such good shot makers.....Likely because they don't overthink it and just go with what works for them....(I wish I had that ability to not overthink stuff)

Overthinking can be the demise of greatness.......In Golf...If you wan't to potentially mess up a guys putting stroke.....just ask him...."Do you push or pull the putter"?

Keep it simple stupid.
2 contact points. Put em together. Donesville.
All these examples of someones prowess w graphics software just confuse the shit out of people. I don't understand their blatant insecurities.
It works. Period.
I'm still waiting for anyone to come on a table and prove to me it doesn't... Bcuz they can't. Simple as that.
Most league players have enuf on their plates without trying to figure out Euclid b4 making a shot.
Easy Peasy. Try it b4 you knock it.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

2 contact points. Put em together. Donesville.

Unless, of course, they can't physically go together.

If only there was a way to know that in advance...

pj
chgo

 

[Mensabum]

Unless, of course, they can't physically go together.

If only there was a way to know that in advance...

pj
chgo

Why would you want them to?? Take all the fun out of it.