Using Ghost Ball Contact Patch to understand aiming geometry
- Thread starter duckie
- Start date
This is essentially what I've always used for aiming, except that you have to fudge things slightly to deal with english and speed. In an ideal world the CB to OB contact would be only for an instant, in the real world there is a measurable amount of time when they stay in contact. The actual line the OB takes is determined by the end of the contact period, not the beginning. When the CB is hit softly or with follow english it contacts for a longer period. When hit sharply or with reverse english the contact period is shorter. Similarly when applying english spinning toward the center of the OB (left english when hitting the right side of the OB) the contact time is increased and applying english away from the center of the OB the contact time is decreased.
Its all well and good, but I would challenge anyone on the planet to accurately predict the precise centre of the ghost ball 15 times in a row. Ghost ball is perfect in theory if you can judge throw well enough, but it is massively flawed in that following it by your diagram is very very complicated to do.
The problems I have with contact point and ghost ball aiming is that I cannot see them. They are subjective in that they are imagined points based on an imagined OB and CB path. I wanted to be consistent at aiming, and I realized that I needed objectivity. CTE is the only aiming system that I know that depends solely on objectivity. I use CTE aiming because I don't like having to guess, or imagine where the CP or GB is, or trying to make an adjustment for throw. I do still use the CP/GB method at times for general reference. But I use CTE exlusively for aiming and as well for my preshot routine. I think that as players become more proficient at aiming, regardless of the method used, they will tell you that they don't aim, but rather feel the shot. What I think is that they don't realize that they are judging a shot by how much they need to cut it and then making a final pivot, or rotation to thicken or thin the shot based on their perception, or feel. Stan discovered this by watching professional players move into the shot and none of them could explain to him how they were aiming. He used his knowledge of CTE and coupled that with the physical rotation he witnessed the pro's doing and CTE PRO 1 was born. It's an evolution and progression in playing pool that will eventually become the norm just as CP/OB aiming was. I appreciate that you are passionate about the system you use and that you try to share it with the AZ community. I just hope that you come to realize, sooner rather than later that there is a better way.
What you're pointing out is basically true... The fudge part is exactly what duckies drawing doesn't take into account.
I can see the contact point and ghost ball position very easily. I suspect Duckie and other ghost ball aimers do also. Nothing to do with pool playing ability. Compensations for throw and english ? Position the ghost ball to cheat the pocket and aim accordingly.
Glad you have found a better way that fits you.
People see and think differently. For some ghost ball and it's variations work great. For others, CTE and it's variations work better.
Difficult shots are difficult because the margin for error is very small. Did I miss that difficult shot because my aim was off a fraction of an inch or because my stroke was off a fraction of an inch ?
In my opinion, establishing the correct aim line is the easy part. Stroking perfectly straight is the hard part.
This is another reason why CP/GB aiming is inconsistent. Trying to hit the contact point, or hit the center of the ghost ball on difficult shots is pure guesswork. With CTE you approach each shot the same, as if it were straight in. Once you have your CTE aim lines and pivot down, all you need to concentrate on is delivering the cue.
Inconsistent ? Pure guesswork ? Maybe for you.
Delete CTE and pivot from your last 2 sentences and replace with aiming method X. There are different ways to establish the line the CB has to roll. Whatever your method, that line is invisible. You have to visualize it in your head.
CTE works best for you. For others, ghost ball works best for them. It is possible that both systems work equally well, it just depends on the person.
Last edited:
Its in how you arrive.
That's a great post. There is a lot of good content in it albeit you make case for CTE and I can understand why you chose it and why many people do. I think a lot of players adjust to a final resting place when they shoot whether that be a parallel adjustment or a pivot because we all know that final adjustments are made. I myself am not much of Contact Patch Person but I manage just fine with the visuals I look for. The whole business of aiming has been somewhat of a conundrum for many because a point people started asking the question of pros as to how they aim.
I read posts here and wonder sometime what the point really is and I think the overall point is that wouldn't it be great if more people played pool?
That is the one thing I would like to see come out of all of this discussion about aiming. It bothers me when I see someone show up at the pool room all fired up to learn and then get discouraged and quit because pool seems too hard for them to grasp. That's my issue pool needs to be more encouraging and self creating. If it were I don't think we would be having as much of a problem with attrition.
That's a great post. There is a lot of good content in it albeit you make case for CTE and I can understand why you chose it and why many people do. I think a lot of players adjust to a final resting place when they shoot whether that be a parallel adjustment or a pivot because we all know that final adjustments are made. I myself am not much of Contact Patch Person but I manage just fine with the visuals I look for. The whole business of aiming has been somewhat of a conundrum for many because a point people started asking the question of pros as to how they aim.
I read posts here and wonder sometime what the point really is and I think the overall point is that wouldn't it be great if more people played pool?
That is the one thing I would like to see come out of all of this discussion about aiming. It bothers me when I see someone show up at the pool room all fired up to learn and then get discouraged and quit because pool seems too hard for them to grasp. That's my issue pool needs to be more encouraging and self creating. If it were I don't think we would be having as much of a problem with attrition.
What might help non ghost ball users visualize, is to get a 2nd CB or substitute the 1 ball for the CB. Precisely place the CB in the ghost ball position. Leave it there and go back to the shooting view. Do this for all kinds of shots. You will develop an eye for it to the point you no longer need to have ball there. You can visualize it in your mind.
The procedure of standing behind the OB and precisely placing the ghost ball gets replaced by standing behind the OB and visualizing where the ghost ball goes.
This may or may not help, but worth the 5 minute experiment if you are curious.
The procedure of standing behind the OB and precisely placing the ghost ball gets replaced by standing behind the OB and visualizing where the ghost ball goes.
This may or may not help, but worth the 5 minute experiment if you are curious.
I think most people that claim to use ghost ball eventually end up using more of a fractional overlap as the severity of the cut increases, even though they are probably unaware that they are doing this.
With enough practice the shots just "look right", you see the angle required, you see the aiming line as one leg of that angle, and you try to stroke straight down that line. Folks who claim they can see a fully-formed ghost ball into which space they try to occupy with the CB are hallucinating by definition, because they are seeing something that simply is not there in the physical world. Same with seeing a "contact patch" on unmarked cloth.
Please pass the 'schrooms. Lol
FWIW I think Duckie's little diagram is an excellent way to explain to a beginner about the very useful ghost ball concept and all that it implies, but it would be a terrible way to actually try to shoot with. IMO aiming directly at any of an infinite number of points along an arc just adds another source of potential error no matter how good you get at it.
A good test of how well you can do this from the shooting position is to have a partner use a tailor's pencil to place a tiny mark where you guide him to and then measure both the distance from the OB contact point and the line of centers leading to the intended target. I'm not a gambling man, but I'd say the odds of anybody getting that dot consistently inside a 1/4" radius on various long, thin cuts are pretty slim.
This is a very common way to teach beginners ghost ball, and it does work. After the student gets the location of the GB fixed in their mind, they shoot into it and the teacher lifts the actual ball at the last minute and the results are noted. After several successful shots the teacher sets up the same shot but without an actual ball in the GB position and the student then tries to pocket the ball.
Ha, ha! Me, too. Only I always called it "feel" until I heard about ghost ball.
Yeah. I never heard of ghost ball. I always just saw the lines. Line the ob rolls into the pocket and the line the cb rolls. Found out later its a variation on ghost ball aiming.
I would bet a lot that just about every player on this forum started out with ghost ball. I would further bet that many of them have used many of the available ghost ball trainers out there.
The forum's players who even care about other aiming methods than feel or GB can be divided into two classes in my opinion.
Those who have graduated from GB/Feel and those who have not. Now we can argue the effectiveness of non GB/feel methods until infinity and it seems no amount of demonstration is sufficient for die hard GB aimers to accept that those methods do in fact produce more accurate shooters (assuming that the mechanics are in order).
So for me it really goes all the way back to the fact that other aiming methods require nothing more than the cue ball and object ball to be used effectively. They can be learned and practiced with no additional props and devices and guides. They work the same all the time and take the optical illusions out of the game.
I agree that all these training aids, including placing an extra ball, are helpful to develop a feel for the fullness of the hit. I think though that this is a waste of time when there are better methods out there.
This was my personal answer to another Duckie challenge many months ago. It is my personal opinion of why GB is an inferior way to aim in pool. Yes it can work well for some people and they can enjoy a lifetime of playing pool with nothing more than GB/feel as their way to aim. But it is not right to assume that those on here who don't use GB have never used or don't know how to use it. Many of us have certainly grown up with GB/Feel as our only method of aiming and I would say that we know as much or more about it than anyone else on this forum.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMNs82JOumU
Sorry if my post came across as condescending. That was not my intention. It was just a response to the poster who stated he could not see the contact point or ghost ball.
I came into this and other aiming threads out of curiosity about CTE because there are so many discussions about it.
I came into this and other aiming threads out of curiosity about CTE because there are so many discussions about it.
Last edited:
I didn't take it as condescending. I jsut wanted to point out that it's highly unlikely that there are any "non GB users" here who haven't learned to play pool using GB.
I hate to bring CTE into this but some people cast this as a GB vs CTE debate constantly. It isn't that in my opinion. GB exists it's not ever going away and is the easiest possible method of teaching the basic principle of where to aim the cue stick.
It's great for diagramming, easy to explain, and thus will be eternal. But it's not the only way to aim. People tend to forget or maybe don't even know that there have been other ways to aim created and taught long before the internet came about. Alternatives to GB have been around, they just weren't being discussed at length and dissected and argued over in worldwide public debate.
To me it's like this....there are many ways to aim, many ways to stand, many ways to stroke, many bridge lengths, many head positions, but the one thing that must be the same is where your cue points because for every shot there is a very narrow sliver where the cue can be pointing to make the shot and an even narrower sliver where the cue can be pointing to make the shot AND get position for the next shot.
So regardless of how you aim, either you land on that sliver consistently or you don't. And now, thanks to the hard efforts of many people, players have choices of how they want to approach aiming. From the very common Ghost Ball approach, with it's easy diagrams and dozens of training aids, to the less common (but more accurate imo) CTE approach and everything in between.
Aiming geometry isn't hard, especially with the GB diagramming. Pretty simple, line to the pocket, line to GB center, two lines. The lines to the pocket back through the ob is easy to pick out. The line to the GB center is easy to estimate. But getting it just slightly wrong is often a miss.
The table doesn't lie to you. When you are playing you are either running out or missing. So if you choose GB or feel and you are missing and you choose another method and you are making more balls then it's obvious to you which one works better. I think playing on pure feel and never missing would be the best way possible. But if I am not able to do that then I want to learn whatever methods will help me to miss less.
And everyone starts with GB as their first step in that direction. (for now)
