So are you saying that long cut shots would probably require a different aim adjustment than shorter cut shots at the same angle?
solidifying vision fundamentals/the eyes
- Thread starter evergruven
- Start date
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
I'm not 100% sure that it isn't an illusion, but yes, long cut shots could need to be cut even thinner. This could just be an illusion because the object ball starts out travelling moving more to the side than moving away, as the ball travels and I turn to watch, the path becomes more directly away from me. You shoot better than I do, if you haven't noticed it then it's either an illusion or some anomaly.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
I just tried to capture it on my phone, and could not see it happening. It looked like it did when I was shooting, but recording from the line of the object ball to the pocket showed nothing, so it is an illusion. If it did ever happen, it may have been debris on the cloth or the table was not level.
Well, there's a little channel that sometimes forms under the cushion that can sometimes extend a little farther out at certain places along the cushion, so it might have caught the channel at that part of the table, which may have drawn it out and then back in. I've seen that happen.
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
Impossible. While it is true that the same angle of cut will produce the same amount of throw in degrees, the distance between the line of centres at contact and the true roll of the OB will steadily increase the longer the shot is. I'm sure math guys can work out the exact distances, but an object ball one diamond away from the pocket will be aimed damn near centre pocket while a ball cut all the way down table may need to be aimed entirely outside the pocket, esp with dirty balls. Again, both deviate from the line of centres by the same number of degrees, but the two lines (line of centres vs true roll of OB) if diagrammed will form what looks like a wedge with the lines moving progressively farther away from one another as distance of OB roll increases.
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
Ah, so we are in agreement. Just approaching aiming differently. I like the diagram you included--a very clear depiction of what my word salad was trying to convey.
Where we differ is in terms of how we view adjustments. I don't think most people adjust in terms of the degree of difference but rather in terms of the final destination of the ball. So in my view, it appears as tho there is more of an adjustment for OB's farther away from pockets because the resulting distance off line is greater--it's more about the point you are heading at rather than the number of degrees that point is off the line of centres.
That's kinda like saying if I turn right at this corner it's a 90-degree turn, but if I turn at the next corner it's something else. I make the same "steering adjustment" at either corner.
pj
chgo
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
Not at all. I'm just focusing on the difference in aim point for the destination of the ball which will be farther off the line of centres as the OB has to move a greater distance. You are focusing on the difference in aim on the OB itself.
The difference on the OB won't change, we are in agreement here. I'm just saying that the way in which I think most people arrive at this point on the OB is by picturing a final destination aim point (i.e. part of a pocket or pocket point or whatever) and this point moves farther off line proportional to the distance travelled.
tell me if i have both of you interpreted correctly
for purpose of this discussion
the object ball throws 3 degrees with my example cut
so to correct that i have to adjust my contact point 3 mm(arbitrary number for discussion only )
from the "true " contact point
this corrected contact point
will work regardless of distance?
that i think is PJ
wobblystroke
i know at distance X i need to aim at the facing to get center pocket and at distance Y i have to aim at the pocket point
you will be hitting that 3 mm offset both times but dont realize it (or better said ...dont think of it that way)
yes?
no?
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
Yes that is essentially what I'm saying... the adjusted point on the OB will not change as long as the cut angle is the same. However the final destination point we 'aim' at as the other end of the line we imagine that connects to the contact point will change depending on the distance OB has to travel. So yes, from 2 feet away you may be aiming at the left side of the pocket in order to split the pocket, but from 6 feet away you may need to 'aim' at the point of the pocket.
I think that we need to recognize that this applies only to stun shots. As the cue ball starts to achieve forward or backward turn the amount of force changes the actual angle for each specific shot. The harder the shot speed, the less throw is experienced.
At the bottom of the page here, I have a good summary of 10 useful things to know about throw in your game:
If you instead want to see details for how throw varies with angle, speed, and spin, see the graphs here:
Great. Now that you have accumumlated all of that information then maybe you can create a bottom-line chart to help players to adjust their aim incrementally by X amount, based on angle and speed. Looking forward to seeing it.
...and sidespin and vertical spin and cloth condition and humidity and ball age and cleanliness and...
Piece o' cake.
pj
chgo
Well yes, of course. But you need a reference point first. Angle and speed are enough to get you a decent reference point.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
I like knowing what's going on scientifically to help clarify what I'm experiencing on the table but I can't imagine trying to compensate for all those factors in real time.
You also need "reference" specs for the other variables in order to have single references for angle and speed. When one changes others do too.
pj
chgo
I think it's possible to have a memorized "reference" shot that includes specific amounts of all the variables - that may be what Fran means too...
pj
chgo