TOI's "Margin of Error" Myth Explained
- Thread starter Patrick Johnson
- Start date
Any shot hit off center has side spin (which is necessary for squirt, by the way). Whether the player thinks of it as "a spin shot" or not doesn't change that. Even if the intent is only to squirt the CB (for aim) or only to counter contact spin from the OB (for shape), hitting off center still spins the CB. It's a simple physical fact - trying to hedge it with semantics simply confuses the matter.
And, again, this has nothing to do with TOI's unfounded "increased margin of error" claim.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
Well I can't help it if you can't understand how it applies to the 'debate', especially when you take a small portion out of context & the bigger picture & I'm not inclined to explain it to you.
You have a nice day.:smile:
Last edited:
From your apparent viewpoint your entire post here has NOTHING to do with the original point of your thread as you elected yourself judge & are not looking for a logical discussion.
However, when put into complete context what you quoted there is relative to the subject.
What CJ (& I) have said about TOI is all here on AZB & anyone interested can look it up for themselves & make their own determinations.
I'm not going feed you, but I'd hazard a guess that that will not stop you from trying.
It's your thread. Enjoy it.
Last edited:
Increased Margin of Error
I see your point Patrick there is only so much room between the pocket points however one difference does exist. When you aim at the side of the pocket barely missing the point with whatever method you use there is more effective space left if you over squirt the ball in the opposite direction but there is no more room in the pocket.
I think one can use an aiming method to assist ball pocketing percentages and if one does this successfully over and over again without hitting the pocket point of the side you are aiming at, what would one call that?
Increased directional margin of error due to applied sidespin? or just a great way to aim inside English shot irrespective of the TOI? Ive been using this method for years as a way of aim adjusting for squirt and I don't own any of CJ's material. I just like the methodology because of the results.
I see your point Patrick there is only so much room between the pocket points however one difference does exist. When you aim at the side of the pocket barely missing the point with whatever method you use there is more effective space left if you over squirt the ball in the opposite direction but there is no more room in the pocket.
I think one can use an aiming method to assist ball pocketing percentages and if one does this successfully over and over again without hitting the pocket point of the side you are aiming at, what would one call that?
Increased directional margin of error due to applied sidespin? or just a great way to aim inside English shot irrespective of the TOI? Ive been using this method for years as a way of aim adjusting for squirt and I don't own any of CJ's material. I just like the methodology because of the results.
This is exactly what isn't true about it. There is no more room, "effective" or otherwise. The shot is aimed and hit exactly like any normal shot with a little sidespin, and it has exactly the same chances of missing to either side. It's just described differently.
The practice encourages you to focus more on exactly where you hit the CB and on "aiming small" at specific parts of the pocket. These are good practices that of course produce improvement. But they're not new, not special to TOI and definitely not a revolutionary new way to increase the shooting margin of error (even though you'll miss less).
More importantly, I think it encourages over-using inside English for no real reason or benefit (well, it benefits CJ). I say teach the fundamentals that are the real reasons TOI seems to "work" - things like aiming and tip/ball precision and attention to results - and leave the sparkly packaging (and misdirection) off.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
That's when it should be used, like any other kind of hit. Sometimes extreme low outside spin is the way. Sometimes centerball is, etc. None of them have any special status or effect on shotmaking. All that is marketing word play.
pj
chgo
For anyone interested, I'm going to give this example again.
If a shot is aimed just inside the right pocket point & the plan is for a center hit on the CB & the tip placement is missed on the right side with a firm hit the ball does not pocket.
If a shot is aimed just inside the right pocket point & the plan is for a TOI hit on the CB & the tip placement is missed on the right side (which would then be center) with a firm hit the ball still pockets.
In that scenario, for the center planned hit, only it & a miss to one side (the left) will pocket the ball.
In that scenario, for the planned TOI hit, it, a miss farther to the left side, & a miss to the right side (which would then be center) will still pocket the ball.
That is 2 vs. 3.
That is, as intended for the center hit & a miss to one side vs as intended for the TOI hit & a miss to either, both, sides. 2 to 3.
To be clear, I am talking about the same quantitative size miss of the tip placement on the CB. & the same firmness of hit.
Naturally, if one misses the intended tip placement TOO far the ball will not pocket for either method.
The above is much like CJ explained TOI initially to show how it would work.
After that, CJ explained that he only aligns CTC & CTE. That being the case almost all shots would miss the pocket & it is the dynamic differing amounts of squirt obtained that 'creates the angle' as CJ referred to it.
Some are stuck on TOI introductory level & it seems that they will never get off of that level just as they probably will never use more than 1/2 tip of english.
If a shot is aimed just inside the right pocket point & the plan is for a center hit on the CB & the tip placement is missed on the right side with a firm hit the ball does not pocket.
If a shot is aimed just inside the right pocket point & the plan is for a TOI hit on the CB & the tip placement is missed on the right side (which would then be center) with a firm hit the ball still pockets.
In that scenario, for the center planned hit, only it & a miss to one side (the left) will pocket the ball.
In that scenario, for the planned TOI hit, it, a miss farther to the left side, & a miss to the right side (which would then be center) will still pocket the ball.
That is 2 vs. 3.
That is, as intended for the center hit & a miss to one side vs as intended for the TOI hit & a miss to either, both, sides. 2 to 3.
To be clear, I am talking about the same quantitative size miss of the tip placement on the CB. & the same firmness of hit.
Naturally, if one misses the intended tip placement TOO far the ball will not pocket for either method.
The above is much like CJ explained TOI initially to show how it would work.
After that, CJ explained that he only aligns CTC & CTE. That being the case almost all shots would miss the pocket & it is the dynamic differing amounts of squirt obtained that 'creates the angle' as CJ referred to it.
Some are stuck on TOI introductory level & it seems that they will never get off of that level just as they probably will never use more than 1/2 tip of english.
Last edited:
This is based on a false assumption - that you aim a center ball shot at one side of the pocket like a sidespin shot. But of course you don't - you aim it at the center of the pocket (since you're not compensating for squirt) and can therefore be off on either side and make the shot, like all normal shots.
This mistake in the central idea of the TOI "extra margin of error" myth has been explained many times before.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
It is not a mistake.
If a pocket is blocked by another ball & only one side or less is available the shot would have to be aligned/aimed as in my premise.
As I've said before, with TOI & English a ball could actually be aligned/aimed to miss the pocket & still be pocketed due to the dynamic methods while it can not be pocketed by a center hit.
If a pocket is blocked, or you want to cheat the pocket for positional purposes.
This can be done with center ball.
I feel like you're saying it can't. Carry on if that's not what you're saying.
Then again, neither method would have an advantage - the margin of error would be smaller for both. I'm frankly surprised that this isn't clear to you.
pj
chgo
It is a mistake, and a rather large one. One you apparently refuse to see or admit no matter how many times it is explained.
If a pocket is blocked and only has one ball width to go, any mishit on the cb will cause it to miss, period.
Who said that it ONLY has one ball width to go?
The subject is margin for error & when tighten up, a miss can be made on both sides of the intended hit with TOI while for an intended center hit the miss can only be to one side.
Aim for the outside corner of the plate with the intention to tail the ball to the inside & if you get no tailing to the inside because the finger stayed more inside than intended & stayed behind the ball you still have a strike. If you get more tailing to the inside than intended because the finger went more to the outside of the ball than intended then you still have a strike. Do it has intended & you still have a strike.
Throw a straight pitch for the outside corner & have the finger go that bit to the inside & you have a missed strike & get a ball.
Margin for error is increased because of the plan to fit the intention.
Like CJ said, athletes that play other sports understand.
That's not what I'm saying at all.
You seem to be looking at things only from the OB to the pocket & that is NOT where the margin for error would be defined when comparing these methods.
Naturally if the available pocket is smaller, the margin for error of each is reduced... but that does NOT mean that the margin is the same for both methods.