Visualizing OB Contact Areas

Patrick Johnson

Patrick Johnson

Fargo 1000 on VP4
Silver Member
Because pockets are bigger than the balls we shoot into them, our target on the OB is not a pinpoint but a small arc of the equator - the OB contact point is really the OB contact area - its size is the margin of error for that shot.

We hear the terms OB contact area and margin of error frequently on AzB, but what do they mean? How small are these contact areas - can they be seen by the naked eye? Does it matter?

I don't know if it matters, but I know a quick way to visualize how big the OB contact area is for any shot:

To visualize the OB contact area for the spot shot pictured below:

- Imagine the OB centered where it is but enlarged until its equator touches the pocket (the big hazy white disc below).

- Visualize the size of the small segment of the enlarged equator that's between the pocket points.

- Now imagine that enlarged OB is really the normal size OB on the spot and you've just zoomed in to get a close look at the size of the contact area - in fact that's exactly what you've done. The contact area's actual size is that same small fraction of a normal size OB.

pj
chgo

Contact Areas.jpg
 
Last edited:
Interesting. Notice how the angle (margin of error) is larger for a ball closer to the pocket. I like shooting at balls that are 6 inches from the pocket.
 
bdorman said:
Interesting. Notice how the angle (margin of error) is larger for a ball closer to the pocket. I like shooting at balls that are 6 inches from the pocket.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's a simple inverse linear relationship: a ball twice as far away has a contact area half the size.

pj
chgo
 
Really interesting graphic. THANKS! But I suggest that many people...probably the vast majority of players...are simply not capable of performing "CAD Graphics" operations (if you will) mentally.

If we could, then the Ghost Ball would be THE perfect aiming techinque...just shoot so that the CB occupies the Ghost Ball space +/- any variations required for spin/throw etc. and bingo...you never miss.

Trouble is, the Ghost Ball image cannot remain in place from the time we visualize it...then get down over the shot...pay some attention to our intended tip-to-CB point of contact etc.

Plus, once down on the shot, we obviously can no longer see the front of the CB...AT ALL...let alone that quite small portion of it that has to contact the OB Contact Area...so it's all just "by guess and by God."

Trust me....NO disprespect. Great graphic. I just don't see how to translate it to an "aiming technique" in actual play.

(-:
 
EagleMan said:
Really interesting graphic. THANKS! But I suggest that many people...probably the vast majority of players...are simply not capable of performing "CAD Graphics" operations (if you will) mentally.

If we could, then the Ghost Ball would be THE perfect aiming techinque...just shoot so that the CB occupies the Ghost Ball space +/- any variations required for spin/throw etc. and bingo...you never miss.

Trouble is, the Ghost Ball image cannot remain in place from the time we visualize it...then get down over the shot...pay some attention to our intended tip-to-CB point of contact etc.

Plus, once down on the shot, we obviously can no longer see the front of the CB...AT ALL...let alone that quite small portion of it that has to contact the OB Contact Area...so it's all just "by guess and by God."

Trust me....NO disprespect. Great graphic. I just don't see how to translate it to an "aiming technique" in actual play.

(-:
Click to expand...

EagleMan,

'by guess and by God'

I really, really, like that.

Is that your's or was it passed down or did you hear it somewhere?

Best Regards,
 
EagleMan:
I just don't see how to translate it to an "aiming technique" in actual play.
Click to expand...
I don't either. It's just to help visualize the size of OB contact areas for information. I have no idea if it's useful for anybody or anything.

pj <- never stopped me before
chgo
 
EagleMan said:
Really interesting graphic. THANKS! But I suggest that many people...probably the vast majority of players...are simply not capable of performing "CAD Graphics" operations (if you will) mentally.

If we could, then the Ghost Ball would be THE perfect aiming techinque...just shoot so that the CB occupies the Ghost Ball space +/- any variations required for spin/throw etc. and bingo...you never miss.

Trouble is, the Ghost Ball image cannot remain in place from the time we visualize it...then get down over the shot...pay some attention to our intended tip-to-CB point of contact etc.

Plus, once down on the shot, we obviously can no longer see the front of the CB...AT ALL...let alone that quite small portion of it that has to contact the OB Contact Area...so it's all just "by guess and by God."

Trust me....NO disprespect. Great graphic. I just don't see how to translate it to an "aiming technique" in actual play.

(-:
Click to expand...

You are exactly right - the ghostball - or the even, more precise
contact-point-to-contact-point method, is stupid and can never work.

Just like in basketball, where you can't see the front of the ball.
No one has ever made a free throw, or a jump shot, or even passed the ball to
a teamate.

Similarly, in tennis, it is equally immpossible to ever serve the ball where you want to.

The list of examples is so long I can't see the end of it because I'm
not in front of it any more.

Dale
 
Last edited:
TheThaiger said:
I do. It doesn't.

Snooker is a game where good aiming is imperative. You want to know how much attention it gets? Pretty much zero. 99% of the game is in how you cue a ball.

Concentrate on that and forget the rest.
Click to expand...

Well actually, it is one of the most important concepts in pool, or Snooker.

Imangine, me defending Patrick!!

But this isn't about aiming, it's about visualizing. The concept of
margin of error is one of many things that separates players from ball
bangers.

FWIW - aiming gets plenty of attention by Snooker players, they just
don't happen to obsess over geometric models like many AZBers do.

Dale
 
EagleMan said:
Really interesting graphic. THANKS! But I suggest that many people...probably the vast majority of players...are simply not capable of performing "CAD Graphics" operations (if you will) mentally.

If we could, then the Ghost Ball would be THE perfect aiming techinque...just shoot so that the CB occupies the Ghost Ball space +/- any variations required for spin/throw etc. and bingo...you never miss.

Trouble is, the Ghost Ball image cannot remain in place from the time we visualize it...then get down over the shot...pay some attention to our intended tip-to-CB point of contact etc.

Plus, once down on the shot, we obviously can no longer see the front of the CB...AT ALL...let alone that quite small portion of it that has to contact the OB Contact Area...so it's all just "by guess and by God."

Trust me....NO disprespect. Great graphic. I just don't see how to translate it to an "aiming technique" in actual play.

(-:
Click to expand...

Bet you don't use ghost ball and as such can't use it. It the only method that works on all shots.

Shoot making is all about visualization. All aiming methods require you to visualize something. Aiming is more about what you see in your minds eye then what you see in the real world.

Bet you don't know about ghost ball contact patch aiming, like Babe Cranfield shows in is books.

What this nice drawing is not showing is how the angle into the pocket effects not only the size of the contact area but the shape, nor how the size of the pocket effects the contact area. Larger pocket, larger contact area.

In addition the CB/OB angle controls how much of the contact area you can use.

For a straight in shot you can use any part of the contact area. As the CB to OB grows, less and less of the contact area can be used.

This is why always having a end point, in your mind, for the OB is important in order to gauge how well you are hitting them. If you just go on accepting just putting the OB in the pocket, you will never develop pinpoint control.

It's use is more of a gauge of how well you are hitting them. Why because you can "miss" and still make the shot. By miss I mean that you wanted center pocket, but because of the contact area the ball still goes in the pocket, but not in center pocket like you wanted.

I know these are not nice CAD drawings, but they show better detail of the contact area.

Oh hell, I'll throw in my drawing that represents what Babe Cranfield shows and discusses in his books although mine is a little more detailed.
 
Last edited:
Could it be that all aiming systems exhibit a certain amount of self delusion on the part of the proponent?

Dave Nelson
 
I've been cheating pockets for many, many years. The difference in contact point is extremely small to pocket a ball from one side of the pocket to the other & the difference between a make or a mis is only very slightly 'less small'.

I'm not looking for an area to make contact with. I'm looking for one point. How many points are there on the object ball to contact & still make the ball, 2pts., 3, 4? How large is a point? One(1) mm? Less?

All that being said, we can hit the cue ball in any of 360 x what? 3, 5, or 7 distances out from center. For discussuion purposes, lets just say 6. So that would be 2160 different points that we can hit the cue ball & still make the shot. Actually there are more but we can't even intellectually differentiate 2160 so we have to reduce it down to say what 24 x 6 = 144 & even that may be too many to actually 'think' about. We quickly reduce that down to one quardrant, which leaves us, what, say 36 + 6 on the vertical axis for 42 choices. Thank a decision & division for that.:wink:

I think it is fairly amazing that 'we' can hit, with a 'stick', all those different options with different levels of force to produce different amounts of spin on different axis, resulting in different amounts of 'throw' & still pocket balls on a relatively consistent basis? It's simply amazing, especially when some people can make it look so easy.

All things considered, it is, because of the innate 'tools' & abilities provided to the human body & mind, like EagleMan said, 'by luck or by God'.

Regards to All,
 
Last edited:
ENGLISH! said:
EagleMan,

'by guess and by God'

I really, really, like that.

Is that your's or was it passed down or did you hear it somewhere?

Best Regards,
Click to expand...

That came from the toughest...best coal mining Granddaddy any kid ever had. He lived to 96...and his favorite saying was..."I've had five wives...they're all livin' and they're all BEAUTIFUL!!!!

(-:
 
ENGLISH! said:
I've been cheating pockets for many, many years. The difference in contact point is extremely small to pocket a ball from one side of the pocket to the other & the difference between a make or a mis is only very slightly 'less small'.

I'm not looking for an area to make contact with. I'm looking for one point. How many points are there on the object ball to contact & still make the ball, 2pts., 3, 4? How large is a point? One(1) mm? Less?

All that being said, we can hit the cue ball in any of 360 x what? 3, 5, or 7 distances out from center. For discussuion purposes, lets just say 6. So that would be 2160 different points that we can hit the cue ball & still make the shot. Actually there are more but we can't even intellectually differentiate 2160 so we have to reduce it down to say what 24 x 6 = 144 & even that may be too many to actually 'think' about. We quickly reduce that down to one quardrant, which leaves us, what, say 36 + 6 on the vertical axis for 42 choices. Thank a decision & division for that.:wink:

I think it is fairly amazing that 'we' can hit, with a 'stick', all those different options with different levels of force to produce different amounts of spin on different axis, resulting in different amounts of 'throw' & still pocket balls on a relatively consistent basis? It's simply amazing, especially when some people can make it look so easy.

All things considered, it is, because of the innate 'tools' & abilities provided to the human body & mind, like EagleMan said, 'by luck or by God'.

Regards to All,
Click to expand...

Hello Rick,
The problem is not the static aiming point of which Pat is referring to, it is the dynamic aim (the best guess aim offset due to the many variables) is a challenge, getting the CB to contact the guessed aim at the correct condition of CB is another challenge, and the biggest challenge of all the ability to focus while trying to shoot the shot and find the aim. That is what differentiate players levels. I always said pool requires to learn how to shoot all 4000 possible shots on table, without it there will be a lot of inconsistencies which make us loose a game or match.
 
A question for PJ or others:

In addition to distance-to-pocket, does cut angle effect the margin of error?

It seems to me that a thin 70-degree cut shot has a smaller margin of error than a 15-degree cut shot.

If so, then total-margin-of-error is distance-to-pocket times cut angle, if you're so inclined. Again, useless information but so is 99% anything having to do with numbers. But it's fun to think about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top