Has anyone tried to test various systems using a robot? Seems fair on the surface to me, but I dont know if its practical. If they exist, I would be interested in seeing the results.
Has anyone tried to test various systems using a robot? Seems fair on the surface to me, but I dont know if its practical. If they exist, I would be interested in seeing the results.
I like the idea, and designing and building such a device would be fun. Although a University using government money might be the only way to get one built. What about setting up a test panel at one of the big tournaments to test the top five aiming systems.
.
You need to understand the whole picture and how the eyes naturally work......
The only thing a robot could test is whether or not a system is "exact" without user guidance - and we don't need a robot for that. Simple geometry and logic tells us that answer for any system within about a minute. The score so far? Same as it ever was: Ghost Ball, Double-the-Distance, Parallel Lines and Equal Opposite are the only "exact" systems.Has anyone tried to test various systems using a robot? Seems fair on the surface to me, but I dont know if its practical. If they exist, I would be interested in seeing the results.
What would be the point.A robot cannot adjust for the hit.A person who is controlling the robot can add this to the shot but other then that a robot would be useless.
If you could get a robot to hit the ghost ball perfect he still doesn't have to make the shot.
When I first started toting Perfect Aim I had some players say it was just an alignment system. Others would say it is an aiming system.
Bottom line is that they are both actually interwoven together.
One will not work well without the other.
With the biggest problem being the non dominant eye naturally tries to work as the dominant eye when we cut balls that direction. Once a player learns to prevent this from happening the aiming gets pretty simple because you can envision the shot correctly.
This is why all players cut balls to the right better or to the left better.
If anyone did a big study like you say, it would do no good unless they understood this totally.
This is why nobody else seems to be able to get a handle on this aiming thing.
You need to understand the whole picture and how the eyes naturally work......
I didnt envision the robot making adjustments, I thought that would be the whole point(that it couldnt). Only the player would be able to consciously adjust the robot. All the robot would do is shoot the ball accurately. True the robot could also miss via ghost ball, but thats a good thing. I want to see whats easier, at least from a mechanical perspective. With proper guidance, will a ghost baller be able to make tough shots using different methods? Maybe certain angles bode well for particular methods, but not for others.
Thats interesting Geno, thanks for your input. I think the reason players cut to one direction better than the other is stroke flaw. That is to say, most do not cue straight. Those that do, dont have a problem cutting in either direction. So unconsciously, players end up making more balls with outside spin as opposed to inside.