using the Joe Tucker/contact point aiming system

[Patrick Johnson]

Patrick, regarding your two diagrams, the idea is that the numbers never change for a given object ball position, regardless of cue ball position.

Yes, the way the system is taught the numerical "lineup" describes the OB's position in relation to the pocket (for instance, if the OB is 45 degrees from the pocket, the "shot number" is 4.5 no matter what the cut angle is between the CB and OB).

My alternate way the numerical lineup describes the CB/OB alignment for the shot (for instance, a 45 degree cut is always shot number 4.5 no matter what angle the OB is from the pocket).

Joe's way works fine; I wonder if my way might be more intuitive for some players. Maybe Joe could expand the usefulness (and market) for his system by describing both.

As for using the numbers on the closer side of the CB, I'm not sure that makes it any easier since it doesn't change the fact that you're connecting the contact point on the other side of the CB. Think about the position of the two balls at contact, essentially you're sending that opposite position on the CB to its position in the ghost ball.

[EDIT:] I'm not sure exactly what you said there, but after thinking it over I can see that reversing the numbers would only work with my alternative method (orienting the numbers so the zeroes point toward each other). But in that case the number on the visible side of the CB would line up with the actual CB contact point and the OB contact point, so it would work theoretically and might be a useful visual aid. I guess this is a potential benefit of my alternative idea.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Patrick, cool diagramming tool. Where can I get one?

It's a basic drawing tool called SmartDraw. I drew a pool table some time ago and and use it for different purposes like this. It took awhile to draw it the first time.

I thought about the suggestion I made reversing the cueball contact points to the close side, and something tells me it wouldn't work. At least not the way Joe has the balls set up aligned to the table. Maybe the way they are aligned in your second diagram, facing each other might work, but I can't seem to visualize it well enough to tell.

You're right - it would only work my way. I guess that's another potential benefit of my alternative.

pj
chgo

 

[Flex]

I'm not sure what you said there, but the number on the visible side of the CB would be on the same physical line as the actual CB contact point and the OB contact point. It would definitely be useful if you positioned your head so you sighted directly along that line, and maybe useful even if you didn't.

I agree, wholeheartedly.

However, I don't use the numbers, just look for that point on the object ball that would correspond with a number, and visualize the counterpart on the cue ball...

After that, I figure in the way I'll shoot the cue ball and what (hopefully) will occur when contact is made with the object ball.

Flex

 

[PKM]

[EDIT:] I'm not sure exactly what you said there, but after thinking it over I can see that reversing the numbers would only work with my alternative method (orienting the numbers so the zeroes point toward each other). But in that case the number on the visible side of the CB would line up with the actual CB contact point and the OB contact point, so it would work theoretically and might be a useful visual aid. I guess this is a potential benefit of my alternative idea.

pj
chgo

Hard to explain without drawing. The straight-line from the number on the visible side of the CB to its position at contact would be parallel to your aiming line. So whether that is helpful would seem to depend on how well you can visualize that.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Originally Posted by Patrick Johnson

I'm not sure what you said there, but the number on the visible side of the CB would be on the same physical line as the actual CB contact point and the OB contact point. It would definitely be useful if you positioned your head so you sighted directly along that line, and maybe useful even if you didn't.

I agree, wholeheartedly.

However, I don't use the numbers, just look for that point on the object ball that would correspond with a number, and visualize the counterpart on the cue ball...

After that, I figure in the way I'll shoot the cue ball and what (hopefully) will occur when contact is made with the object ball.

Flex

Actually, Flex, I think I was a little hasty with that conclusion - after rethinking it I edited my reply to say it would only work with my alternate oriention (with the zeroes toward each other). But then reversing the CB numbers works as I described.

pj
chgo

 

[Flex]

Actually, Flex, I think I was a little hasty with that conclusion - after rethinking it I edited my reply to say it would only work with my alternate oriention (with the zeroes toward each other). But then reversing the CB numbers works as I described.

pj
chgo

Pat,

Sounds like we need to shoot some pool at Chris's sometime soon, and compare notes!

Flex

 

[CueAndMe]

Actually, Flex, I think I was a little hasty with that conclusion - after rethinking it I edited my reply to say it would only work with my alternate oriention (with the zeroes toward each other). But then reversing the CB numbers works as I described.

pj
chgo

Patrick, although I thought that it might work with the numbers aligned your way, I now don't feel that it would, at least not exactly. Imagine a line drawn from the OB contact point through the CB contact point to the other side of the CB. Except for a straight in shot and a 90 degree cut, I believe the CB near side point that ends this line would be further from center CB than the near side points we've been discussing that are drawn by flipping Joe's ball around.
Again, this is hard for me to visualize perfectly.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Hard to explain without drawing.

Here you go. You can see that the numbers would be the same on both sides of the CB and in line with the OB contact point. It could be helpful, especially if you positioned your head so you're sighting down that line, but maybe helpful even without that. But, as I said, this only works with the numbers oriented so the zeroes are facing directly at each other.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Patrick, although I thought that it might work with the numbers aligned your way, I now don't feel that it would, at least not exactly. Imagine a line drawn from the OB contact point through the CB contact point to the other side of the CB. Except for a straight in shot and a 90 degree cut, I believe the CB near side point that ends this line would be further from center CB than the near side points we've been discussing that are drawn by flipping Joe's ball around.
Again, this is hard for me to visualize perfectly.

You bring up something that I wasn't going to bother mentioning to keep this simple, but now that you have...

My alternate method (orienting the balls so the zeroes face each other) doesn't really work exactly as I described it. To be perfectly accurate you'd have to align the zeroes so they're pointed at the centers of the ghost balls (CB and OB ghost ball, if you know what I mean). I don't think this matters much at distances of a few feet or more, and maybe not at all since it's all guesstimated anyway, but your observation is correct. Maybe this is why Joe uses his oriented-with-the-table method...?

pj
chgo

 

[CueAndMe]

You bring up something that I wasn't going to bother mentioning to keep this simple, but now that you have...

My alternate method (orienting the balls so the zeroes face each other) doesn't really work exactly as I described it. To be perfectly accurate you'd have to align the zeroes so they're pointed at the centers of the ghost balls. I don't think this matters much at distances of a few feet or more, and maybe not at all since it's all guesstimated anyway, but your observation is correct. Maybe this is why Joe uses his oriented-with-the-table method...?

pj
chgo

Yes. So you noticed this as well. Maybe for practical purposes it would still work. Here's a diagram I just worked out as well as I could on the cuetable to illustrate this point.

CueTable Help