PDA

View Full Version : How do you aim to make this shot?



Yuppie
05-29-2003, 03:34 PM
Ghost ball? Lines? WHat type of visualization?

START(
%AG9N4%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%UG5O5%VD2W5%W C4C3%XG8N4
)END

http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/pooltable2.html

Tom_In_Cincy
05-29-2003, 03:57 PM
I look at a spot on the table (ghost ball) for this shot.
I also aim to over cut the ball (very left side of corner pocket) if I want to hit it very hard.

Normally in a 14.1 match, I will just hit this shot hard enough to move the 3 corner balls (if I'm lucky maybe more) out to continue to have opportunities for more breakout shots.
Just my thoughts.

Qtec
05-29-2003, 04:18 PM
Draw a line through the middle of the 1 to the pocket.Place the 5 as shown.If you can get the Qball to where the 5 is you will pot the ball.Aim through the middle of the Qball and aim for the middle of the 5.You have to imagine a ball in front of the ball you want to pot,therefor the term,ghost. START(
%AG7M9%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EH2O0%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%R^4_0%UJ7J1%V D2W5%WC4C3
%XI1Q3%eB4a3
)END

HalSmith
05-29-2003, 04:19 PM
You know I shoot just by aiming at the intersects. I guess thats almost like a ghost ball, but I'll say this if your playing for money on this shot. You better make it or start digging for your money. LOL---Smitty

05-30-2003, 05:11 AM
this is a very easy but tricky shot, because depending on the table, using center ball could cause you to scratch, but using draw or low right may also cause you to scratch. So for me the safest way to shoot this shot is to use a very soft draw without english, this way the cb should squirt back a lil and then began to roll to the center of the table which is where i want it.
HTH

eg8r
05-30-2003, 05:21 AM
Well, with what little I know of Hal Houles method, I would use something between a 4 and 5 to the right of the object ball. Some of the more knowledgeable people can probably explain what the 4 or 5 are, but in short they are places to aim at on the object ball (or just off the object ball).

eg8r

Fred Agnir
05-30-2003, 06:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Yuppie:</font><hr> Ghost ball? Lines? WHat type of visualization?

START(
%AG9N4%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%UG5O5%VD2W5%W C4C3%XG8N4
)END

http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/pooltable2.html <hr /></blockquote>Ah, the dreaded short back cut. Left edge of cue stick to contact point of object ball.

Fred &lt;~~~ yikes

Qtec
05-31-2003, 08:48 AM
Now i know why you have so many cues! /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Fred Agnir
06-01-2003, 08:32 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Now i know why you have so many cues! /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif <hr /></blockquote>You have to try it to believe it.

Fred

Tom_In_Cincy
06-01-2003, 08:37 AM
Fred,
OK.. now I have to ask.. which one of those cue do you carry to the big matches?

Shuler? right?

Fred Agnir
06-01-2003, 08:41 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Tom_In_Cincy:</font><hr> Fred,
OK.. now I have to ask.. which one of those cue do you carry to the big matches?

Shuler? right? <hr /></blockquote>Schuler. Absolutely. In the new Instroke Saddle Series 2x4, which I haven't added to the photo.

All those cases... are empty. The travel case (12x24) has them all. In the "what's in your case" thread, I was going to write it all down, but my fingers were getting cramped just thinking about it.

Fred

Tom_In_Cincy
06-01-2003, 08:48 AM
Fred,
Sometimes "Life's too grand" for us mere mortals to appreciate.

12x24 cases are for cue dealers.. LOL

John G
06-01-2003, 10:58 AM
Personally I wouldn't shoot the shot if I was gambling. More bad then good can happen. I would just shoot the ball past the corner ball, freeze the cue ball to the stack and leave the ball between the stack and the rail. I agree with smitty if you miss it, you'll be digging into your wallet.

Qtec
06-01-2003, 12:09 PM
These are the kind of shots that separate the good players from the guys who just think they are good players.I would play this everytime.If you play a bad safety and the guy gets in, You be wishing you had went for it.Keep it positive /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Alfie
06-01-2003, 11:16 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Yuppie:</font><hr> Ghost ball? Lines? WHat type of visualization?

START(
%AG9N4%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%UG5O5%VD2W5%W C4C3%XG8N4
)END

http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/pooltable2.html <hr /></blockquote>Ah, the dreaded short back cut. Left edge of cue stick to contact point of object ball.<hr /></blockquote>In effect, are you saying to aim a ~.25" offset point at the OB's contact point (this assumes a straight taper stick as per the last 12-15" of a pro taper)?

I calculated the amount of contact point offset in inches from the natural aiming line for cut angles 0-90.
.cut.....CP
angle..offset
...0....0.000
...1....0.020
...2....0.039
...3....0.059
...4....0.078
...5....0.098
...6....0.118
...7....0.137
...8....0.157
...9....0.176
..10....0.195
..11....0.215
..12....0.234
..13....0.253
..14....0.272
..15....0.291
..16....0.310
..17....0.329
..18....0.348
..19....0.366
..20....0.385
..21....0.403
..22....0.421
..23....0.440
..24....0.458
..25....0.475
..26....0.493
..27....0.511
..28....0.528
..29....0.545
..30....0.563
..31....0.579
..32....0.596
..33....0.613
..34....0.629
..35....0.645
..36....0.661
..37....0.677
..38....0.693
..39....0.708
..40....0.723
..41....0.738
..42....0.753
..43....0.767
..44....0.781
..45....0.795
..46....0.809
..47....0.823
..48....0.836
..49....0.849
..50....0.862
..51....0.874
..52....0.887
..53....0.898
..54....0.910
..55....0.922
..56....0.933
..57....0.944
..58....0.954
..59....0.964
..60....0.974
..61....0.984
..62....0.993
..63....1.002
..64....1.011
..65....1.020
..66....1.028
..67....1.036
..68....1.043
..69....1.050
..70....1.057
..71....1.064
..72....1.070
..73....1.076
..74....1.081
..75....1.087
..76....1.092
..77....1.096
..78....1.100
..79....1.104
..80....1.108
..81....1.111
..82....1.114
..83....1.117
..84....1.119
..85....1.121
..86....1.122
..87....1.123
..88....1.124
..89....1.125
..90....1.125

Of course, other considerations are the pocket mouth size, the OB distance from it, and throw.

Popcorn
06-02-2003, 12:05 AM
With all due respect, would you shoot this?
START(
%AM6T5%BL8P7%CJ7O4%DL8N2%EM7P1%FK7P1%GK7N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK8M6
%KJ7P7%LJ7N2%MK7Q3%NJ7Q9%OJ7M0%PZ6V0
)END

I have to tell you, If you won't shoot shots like those, what are you going to shoot.

Scott Lee
06-02-2003, 12:28 AM
Ed...That shot is a 3, not a 4 or 5. It is the same angle as a spot shot, which is 30 degrees. Fred knew it right away! LOL

1 - Straight in shot
2 - 15 degree cut angle
3 - 30 degree cut angle
4 - 45 degree cut angle
5 - 60 degree cut angle
THIN- 75+ degree cut angle

BTW, the name we now have for this system is S.A.M., which stands for Supplemental Aiming Mechanism! This is being incorporated into Cue Tech's instruction, as well as my own.

Scott

06-02-2003, 12:30 AM
[ QUOTE ]
These are the kind of shots that separate the good players from the guys who just think they are good players.I would play this everytime. <hr /></blockquote>

I agree fully, play with confidence and shoot fearless.

dont be scarrred.

06-02-2003, 12:34 AM
popcorn, i see this shot damn near everyday when am playing straight pool or watching someone play, and i have to say that it's one of thee best break shot positions that can spread the rack so wide open a 10yr could run out. so to answer your question, HELL YEA I'D SHOOT THAT SHOT. and would'nt think twice about it.

Qtec
06-02-2003, 05:54 AM
AMEN!!!!!I guess you know Wim Bram,Alex Leley among others.Im based in Rotterdam. Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Qtec
06-02-2003, 06:03 AM
Now i know why i keep missing.! I play with a one piece snooker cue out the rack, tips ranging from 9.5 to 11 mm .,and my left leg is 37mm shorter than the other.Do i have to allow for side winds.? /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Fred Agnir
06-02-2003, 06:33 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote John G:</font><hr> Personally I wouldn't shoot the shot if I was gambling. More bad then good can happen. I would just shoot the ball past the corner ball, freeze the cue ball to the stack and leave the ball between the stack and the rail. I agree with smitty if you miss it, you'll be digging into your wallet. <hr /></blockquote>I'm having a hard time understanding the logic. If you miss it, yes you will be digging in your pocket. But, what's the difference between this and the standard break shot? They're both the same 30 degreeish back-cut, with the cueball going into the stack.

Fred

Alfie
06-02-2003, 06:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Do i have to allow for side winds.?<hr /></blockquote> depends on who you play with and what they had for lunch

Alfie
06-02-2003, 06:47 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr>
.
.
.
..10....0.195
..11....0.215
..12....0.234
..13....0.253
..14....0.272
..15....0.291
..16....0.310
.
.
.
<hr /></blockquote>... in other words, a 13 degree cut (give or take) like this
http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/9egg/
START(
%CE0N3%PC9[2%WE1P3%XD2Z3%[D3D6%\D9M4
)END

HalSmith
06-02-2003, 08:19 AM
Fred , I'm not saying not to shoot the shot but in MHO you can make the object ball with no problem , however what the cue ball will do and will it leave you a decent shot to continue the run is another question. I agree with everyone the shot is not hard, it's just a question of is it worth it.---Smitty

eg8r
06-02-2003, 08:36 AM
LOL, Scott, I knew I would have it wrong. I guess that is why the system does not work as well for me just yet. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Did Hal say you could change the name (or was it always called that)? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif I always heard it as Hal Houle Method.

eg8r

Fred Agnir
06-02-2003, 08:50 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> LOL, Scott, I knew I would have it wrong. I guess that is why the system does not work as well for me just yet. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Did Hal say you could change the name (or was it always called that)? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif I always heard it as Hal Houle Method.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>Hal's methods are based on the same idea (ball-to-ball relation aiming), but Hal approaches and teaches them differently. So, it would be tough for anyone to say that what Randy and Scott are teaching are "Hal's Method."

Fred

TonyM
06-02-2003, 09:05 AM
Back cuts cause a lot of people trouble. I think that the lack of a nearby rail makes it hard to visualize the actual angle of the cut.

Notice that this shot is basically the same shot:

START(
%Ap7N5%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pg8U5%Up2N8%Vh0U2%W s2D5%Xp7N3
)END

It's the same cut angle. But note how the presence of the rail makes it much easier to visualize?

So one way to visualize your shot is to imagine a rail located nearly parallel to the object ball line adjacent to it. Sort of like this:

START(
%AG9N4%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%QM5Y5%UG5O5%V D2W5%WC4C3
%XG8N4%YE4D9%ZM8Y3
)END

Line "A" is the imaginary rail.

I find that it helps to visualize this shot from the standing position while behind the cueball. You get a much better sense of the actual angle between the cueball/objectball/pocket from the upright position.

Then, from behind the cueball, determine the correct point of aim for the shot. I basically memorize the various angles and relate them to ball fractions. So this shot is just a bit thicker than a 1/4 ball cut (the aim line is off the right edge of the object ball.

Once I determine my point of aim, then I get down on the shot and sight down the cue.

So my method can be summed up as :

"aim from above, and shoot from below".

Some people will also use a contact point method to find the correct aim point, while others use ghost ball, or even the 1 1/8" method (find a point along the object ball line that is 1/2 a ball diameter, or 1 1/8" from the farthest point away from the pocket line and aim the cue at that).

Regardless of the method used, the idea is to first determine the correct point of aim, and then lay the cue down along that line.

I like to get students to memorize the common angles and judge from there, as it avoids the multi step find the contact point methods.

But by all means, don't just get down and guess wildly!

Tony



START(
%Ap7N5%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pg8U5%Up2N8%Vh0U2%W s2D5%Xp7N3
)ENDSTART(
%Ap7N5%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pg8U5%Up2N8%Vh0U2%W s2D5%Xp7N3
)END

Popcorn
06-02-2003, 09:32 AM
That is the real nuts and bolts of straight pool. What you see as a scary unknown, is in fact very predictable. When I hit a rack, I have a good idea what is going to happen, it is not a complete mystery. The fear comes from the unknown, there are variables, but still a pretty predictable out come, I can tell you all the bad things that could happen on that shot, trapped behind the rack and so on, but it doesn't matter, because I not going to let it happen. You can't run a 100 balls, busting up racks without a clue to what will happen. I think a lot of players that don't play straight pool, may not even realize this, they think a break shot is a crap shoot, the same with breaking up clusters, it is not. I know what ball I want to come off of and what the balls will do. Although there are no guarantees, they are not scary at all if you know what you are doing. This actually applies to all pool games. Most of what takes place on a pool table is predictable. You are not playing on the moving deck of a ship, it is a precision pool table. There are bad rolls, but not as many as you may think. Most bad rolls are self inflected, too straight in, stuck on a rail, half hid by a ball and so on. I would say for even the average player, were they allowed to shoot the shot over, they could have avoided the trouble. The idea is to do it right the first time. It is one of the biggest differences between average players and much better players. The better players can foresee the bad stuff and avoid it. It is not good or bad luck.

mickey2
06-02-2003, 10:33 AM
START( %AG9N3%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5 %KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%QV2P3%RT6J4%U G5O5%VD2W5 %WU7Q5%XO9Z2%YF9D9%ZI2N2%[D0P4%\F2D3%]O0Z3%^D2R2%_b9^8%`j2_0 %bS7K0%cI8C6%dI1N1 )END

How to you judge if you go 3 (A) or 1 rail (B) after the break?

I tend to decide this by feeling only, do you have a sort of rule?

Fred Agnir
06-02-2003, 10:57 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mickey2:</font><hr> START( %AG9N3%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5 %KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%QV2P3%RT6J4%U G5O5%VD2W5 %WU7Q5%XO9Z2%YF9D9%ZI2N2%[D0P4%\F2D3%]O0Z3%^D2R2%_b9^8%`j2_0 %bS7K0%cI8C6%dI1N1 )END

How to you judge if you go 3 (A) or 1 rail (B) after the break?

I tend to decide this by feeling only, do you have a sort of rule?
<hr /></blockquote>I don't know about anyone else, but breaking from below, I don't know how many times I'd be going 1 rail to B. Maybe never, unless I was just clipping the corner ball. I'd either do a plow-through follow, or the inside three-railer, depending on how much of the ball (in the pack) I was going to hit.

Fred

Rod
06-02-2003, 11:07 AM
Well I'll put my 2 bits in. LOL The shot is about a 1/4 ball hit which is roughly 45 degrees. I'm not particularly fond of this shot but I would'nt pass it up either. I'd rather have about 15 degrees and follow three rails with top left. In this rough drawing line A is 90 degrees and line B is roughly 45 degrees.

START(
%AG8N4%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%QQ0S9%RJ4V1%U O2D1%VD2W5
%WC4C3%XK2V7%YC2K4%ZQ0T3
)END

wei (http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/9egg/)

Rod

Qtec
06-02-2003, 11:56 AM
I would do the same. The chances of getting to B are slim,the pack breaks open ,so you are bound to hit something. Q

Steve Lipsky
06-02-2003, 02:44 PM
Hi Fred. You have found my favorite break shot, give or take an inch:

START(
%AH1M8%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PG7S9%QZ7\1%RV8Q2%S _8[7%UH4O4
%VG8R7%YJ8D7%ZI5M5%[V6P6%\K2C7%eC5`3%_b9^8%`j2_0
)END

I moved the 1-ball just slightly more to the outside of the rack, and gave the shot less angle. With a medium speed/stroke, and a lot of outside english, the cueball follows the path to B-C. The only risk is scratching in side pocket A, but I find it does not happen often enough to be truly concerned.

If I don't see any perfect balls to the side of the incoming rack, here is where I look next. Anyone else like this break shot as much as I do?

- Steve

Joe T
06-02-2003, 07:51 PM
Steve I'm with you, this is also my favorite break shot. The one thing I hate is that the balls spread great but they go up and away, so rarely do I get this break shot two racks in a row.
As far as the aiming goes, it use to be one of my worst shots but now that I've numbered all the contact points on both the object ball and the cue ball. This is usually a
7-7 or at most a 6-6.

Joe T See ya @ Masters

Alfie
06-03-2003, 09:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr>Ah, the dreaded short back cut. Left edge of cue stick to contact point of object ball. <hr /></blockquote>The proposed shot is about a 47 degree cut. Aiming the side of the stick at the OB contact point will get you to around here. (3-ball ghost ball)

http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/9egg/
START(
%AG9N4%BL7P8%CG9O6%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%UI0M6%VC9X3%W G8D4%XH0P7
)END

Please, enlighten me if you think I am misinterpreting or not understanding something.

Fred Agnir
06-03-2003, 10:01 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr>Ah, the dreaded short back cut. Left edge of cue stick to contact point of object ball. <hr /></blockquote>The proposed shot is about a 47 degree cut. Aiming the side of the stick at the OB contact point will get you to around here. (3-ball ghost ball)

http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/9egg/
START(
%AG9N4%BL7P8%CG9O6%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%UI0M6%VC9X3%W G8D4%XH0P7
)END

Please, enlighten me if you think I am misinterpreting or not understanding something. <hr /></blockquote> Shoot it.

Fred

Alfie
06-03-2003, 10:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Joe T:</font><hr> As far as the aiming goes, it use to be one of my worst shots but now that I've numbered all the contact points on both the object ball and the cue ball. This is usually a 7-7 or at most a 6-6.<hr /></blockquote>Joe T, would you explain this method, s'il vous plait.

eg8r
06-03-2003, 10:13 AM
I might be wrong. From what I understand, Randy went and spent time with Hal and learned it. Then Randy showed Scott. Scott showed me, and i am horrible at using it. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif I do not judge those angles very well.

Correct me if I am wrong.

eg8r

Fred Agnir
06-03-2003, 10:34 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> I might be wrong. From what I understand, Randy went and spent time with Hal and learned it. Then Randy showed Scott. Scott showed me, and i am horrible at using it. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif I do not judge those angles very well.

Correct me if I am wrong.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>That very well may be, but Hal approaches it differently. The idea of ball/ball relational aiming has been around for over 100 years.

Hal has over 20 different methods. Each one ends up pointing to the same ball/ball relation. But the approach is different for each. So, the question is, "is this Hal's approach?" Judging from how Scott and Randy are presenting it, I'd say, "no."

Fred

Joe T
06-03-2003, 12:34 PM
sure Alfie,
If you number the object ball from 9-0 and 0-9 so the equator of the front side of the object ball is covered like this 9876543210123456789 with 9's being the points that ALWAYS points to the side rails and 0 ALWAYS points straight up and down the table. Then have the same exact numbers on your cue ball with it's 9's also pointing to the side rails but have it's zero pointing to the left end rail all you have to do is match up the numbered contact points. What ever number sends the object ball to the hole is the same exact number on the cue ball. You can use it on every shot on the table. It breaks the game down to ten shots that keep coming up over and over.10 Aiming lines out of each pocket that match up with the contact point help you to train and identify what # each shot is.
I recently patended this method and Aramith is coming out with the product(2 aiming balls) at the BCA trade show in July.
Bet ya got more than you bargained for with that question.
Joe T

Alfie
06-03-2003, 04:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Joe T:</font><hr> It breaks the game down to ten shots that keep coming up over and over.10 Aiming lines out of each pocket that match up with the contact point help you to train and identify what # each shot is.<hr /></blockquote>Thanks, Joe.

Alfie
06-04-2003, 10:35 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> Shoot it. <hr /></blockquote>I carefully set up the shot as diagrammed. The shot was carefully aimed and stroked several times. However, instead of aiming the left edge of the stick, I aimed the center of the stick at a point in space 1/4" to the right of the OB contact point. To me, this was easier and more reliable. The results pretty much agreed with what I had figured on paper and posted yesterday, i.e.,
http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/9egg/
START(
%AG9N4%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%UI0M6%VC9X3%W G8D4%XH0P7
)END
which is about a 22 degree miss

When you refer to the contact point, do you mean the point that, if struck, will send the OB to the hole? Or is it one of those Hal Houle aiming points? I was using the first meaning.

Fred Agnir
06-04-2003, 10:56 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> Shoot it. <hr /></blockquote>I carefully set up the shot as diagrammed. The shot was carefully aimed and stroked several times. However, instead of aiming the left edge of the stick, I aimed the center of the stick at a point in space 1/4" to the right of the OB contact point. To me, this was easier and more reliable<hr /></blockquote>If you don't shoot it the way I described, then no conclusion can be properly made. Left edge of ferrule to contact point of object ball.



[ QUOTE ]
When you refer to the contact point, do you mean the point that, if struck, will send the OB to the hole? Or is it one of those Hal Houle aiming points? I was using the first meaning. <hr /></blockquote>Yes, aim the left edge of the ferrule to the contact point of the object ball. The contact point would be the point exactly opposite the hole.

This, as far as I know, is not a Houle method, although Hal and I briefly discussed the merits of this "system."

If you are looking for a theory, don't look to Geometry. That'll confuse the issue. In fact, don't look for a theory at all.

Fred

Qtec
06-04-2003, 11:56 AM
Alfie,use the GB method everytime.Dont listen to Fred on this one. You cant play pool by numbers either. Qtec

Fred Agnir
06-04-2003, 12:16 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Alfie,use the GB method everytime.Dont listen to Fred on this one. You cant play pool by numbers either. Qtec <hr /></blockquote>I take it you didn't bother shooting this either. Nice.

Fred &lt;~~~ wonders why anyone would say "don't listen to him"

Alfie
06-04-2003, 12:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> However, instead of aiming the left edge of the stick, I aimed the center of the stick at a point in space 1/4" to the right of the OB contact point. To me, this was easier and more reliable<hr /></blockquote>If you don't shoot it the way I described, then no conclusion can be properly made. Left edge of ferrule to contact point of object ball.<hr /></blockquote>It's the same thing. When the 1/2" diameter stick's center line is aimed at a point in space 1/4" to the right of the contact point, the left edge is aimed at the contact point.


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> If you are looking for a theory, don't look to Geometry. That'll confuse the issue. In fact, don't look for a theory at all.<hr /></blockquote> I did it both on paper *and* the table. They agreed. BTW, what do you have against geometry? I think it works pretty good. :-)

You and I are supposedly shooting the same shot, yet we are ~22 degrees off. I just want to know what's up?

eg8r
06-04-2003, 12:28 PM
Hey Fast is that you. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

eg8r

Fred Agnir
06-04-2003, 12:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> You and I are supposedly shooting the same shot, yet we are ~22 degrees off. I just want to know what's up? <hr /></blockquote>Alfie, please, I don't care if you miss the shot and then ask me what's up. But please, shoot the shot as I described. I don't mean this as any insult, but how can there be any discussion if you didn't shoot it the same way? How can I say, "well then try this" if you don't bother shooting this shot the way I suggested?

What do I have against Geometry? Everything. Pool isn't about geometry. That's where people get screwed up.
There are at least two other science studies that well supercedes geometry. Drawing little diagrams and pointing to them saying "this is why that won't work" makes little sense since you're not going to bother writing down coefficient of friction force vectors or other factors that can't be written on little pieces of paper.

Fred &lt;~~~ shoot the shot

Alfie
06-04-2003, 12:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr>I take it you didn't bother shooting this either. <hr /></blockquote>Either? I shot the damn shot, Fred!
/ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Alfie
06-04-2003, 12:50 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> You and I are supposedly shooting the same shot, yet we are ~22 degrees off. I just want to know what's up? <hr /></blockquote>Alfie, please, I don't care if you miss the shot and then ask me what's up. But please, shoot the shot as I described. I don't mean this as any insult, but how can there be any discussion if you didn't shoot it the same way? How can I say, "well then try this" if you don't bother shooting this shot the way I suggested?

What do I have against Geometry? Everything. Pool isn't about geometry. That's where people get screwed up.
There are at least two other science studies that well supercedes geometry. Drawing little diagrams and pointing to them saying "this is why that won't work" makes little sense since you're not going to bother writing down coefficient of friction force vectors or other factors that can't be written on little pieces of paper.

Fred &lt;~~~ shoot the shot
<hr /></blockquote>This is all one big cop out.

Fred Agnir
06-04-2003, 12:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> This is all one big cop out. <hr /></blockquote>What, the part where you don't want to shoot the shot as described?

Fred

Alfie
06-04-2003, 02:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> This is all one big cop out. <hr /></blockquote>What, the part where you don't want to shoot the shot as described?<hr /></blockquote>I am shooting the shot exactly as you described. I believe that it is you who are not, because, if you did, you would miss by a large margin.

This pertains only to the shot setup described in the thread starter.

(denigrating geometry- shame on you, Fred Agnir /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif)

Qtec
06-04-2003, 02:52 PM
Sorry Fred, nothing personal, i guess i could have put it another way. Didnt mean to put you down.I was pushed for time .Just used your post as a start point.OK!
Still dont agree though. The beauty with the GB method is that you are always aiming at the same point,the vertical middle of the GB. START(
%A[3O0%BL7P8%CJ5O4%D[3M5%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%IL7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%P[5V2%QZ5W3%Ra7T6%SS2R9%Tc4P7
%W[2B8%X[5V2%YQ5F5%Zb4U1%[L3J8%\c7Q2%]e6H8%^U1R8
)END If the Qball is placed at points A,B,C,D, the intersection{mid.GB] is the aiming point always. If you can imagine the GB you dont have to know the angle. As i have said earlier, this works on all tables and with any size of balls .[ or cues] Pool is NOT complicated, its people that make it that way.
Qtec

Qtec
06-04-2003, 03:22 PM
LOL /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
Qtec

Fred Agnir
06-04-2003, 05:38 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> I am shooting the shot exactly as you described. I believe that it is you who are not, because, if you did, you would miss by a large margin.<hr /></blockquote>Unbelievable. You admit you aren't shooting it the same way, and now you're saying I'm not shooting it the way I described?

[ QUOTE ]
(denigrating geometry- shame on you, Fred Agnir /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif) <hr /></blockquote>Only beginners think that pool is about geometry. Angle in angle out crap. Theoretical ghost ball. Both of those ideas are clearly incorrect to all but beginners.

Humor me and shoot the shot as I described, not as you described.

Fred &lt;~~~ echo

Fred Agnir
06-04-2003, 05:56 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> snip explanation of Ghost Ball Method


Pool is NOT complicated, its people that make it that way.
Qtec <hr /></blockquote>If it were so easy, nobody would ever ask how to make shots like this. The reality is that this is a shot that is relatively difficult to visualize. That's for anyone. That's one reason I favor a ball/ball relation aim on this. Whether or not you have trouble visualizing this shot is not the issue. Someone is asking, therefore, it seems pretty obvious that he's looking for different opinions and different methods. Suggesting the Ghost Ball is pretty shallow thinking. You'd think they'd already know that concept, wouldn't you?

If you had asked RandyG or Scott Lee, two of our greatest instructors, just two years ago whether there was any merit in studying or teaching ball/ball relation methods, I'm sure neither of them would have given them much more than glancing look. Today, they both on this board rave their worth. Why? Because someone (a couple of someones) on this board pounded the idea, they found out more about the methods, *tried them*, and both seem very hooked on their merit. That should say something to everyone on this board. Veterans and newbies alike.

Fred &lt;~~~ not my first paper route

Alfie
06-05-2003, 12:29 AM
Unbelievable. You admit you aren't shooting it the same way, and now you're saying I'm not shooting it the way I described?

<font color="blue"> I shot the shot fulfilling your requirements. Quit weaseling. </font color>

Only beginners think that pool is about geometry.

<font color="blue">strawman </font color>

Angle in angle out crap.

<font color="blue">strawman </font color>

Theoretical ghost ball.

<font color="blue">strawman </font color>

Both of those ideas are clearly incorrect to all but beginners.

<font color="blue">strawman </font color>

Humor me and shoot the shot as I described, not as you described.

<font color="blue">I shot it the same way we both described it. It's the same shot.

I suggest you do it. It's plain you haven't yet. </font color>

JayCee
06-05-2003, 01:17 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, aim the left edge of the ferrule to the contact point of the object ball. The contact point would be the point exactly opposite the hole. <hr /></blockquote>

Fred, so are you saying to first find the O/B contact point, which will be directly across from pocket and then aim the left edge of the ferrule to the contact point of the object ball? If so, does this mean that you'd be using inside english on the C/B? If not, I guess I'm having problems visualizing how to aim the left side of my ferrule at the OB contact point while keeping the cue tip on the vertical axis of the C/B.

Qtec
06-05-2003, 01:30 AM
Before Allison, the general thinking was ""what do snooker players know about pool"". There are different ways of teaching but in snooker there is only one way to play, the right way.The only reason that male snooker players are not dominating pool is that there is not enough money in it.
The first prize at the Embassy World Championship was something like $350,000, I didnt see any pool players there.
As for the instructors,i think this shows intelligence and character.I am sure they wouldnt have changed their methods if they were not totally convinced.
As they say "" the proof of the pudding is in the eating""
Ronnie O,Sullivan has made a maximum [147,all reds with blacks] in under 6 minutes.Do you think this is possible if you have to calculate every angle ?


Qtec


Qtec

Fred Agnir
06-05-2003, 06:46 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JayCee:</font><hr>

Fred, so are you saying to first find the O/B contact point, which will be directly across from pocket and then aim the left edge of the ferrule to the contact point of the object ball? <hr /></blockquote> Slight overcut, I suppose. Contact-induced throw tosses the "geometrically correct" Ghost Ball out the window.

[ QUOTE ]
If so, does this mean that you'd be using inside english on the C/B? If not, I guess I'm having problems visualizing how to aim the left side of my ferrule at the OB contact point while keeping the cue tip on the vertical axis of the C/B. <hr /></blockquote> No english. This is a centerball shot alignment. I can't tell you how to aim the ferrule edge to the contact point. That's really the crux of this "system" I think. You can't take a straight edge and align this to that. As you stand above the ferrule and line the edge with the contact point, your view is skewed. The easiest analogy is the fact that most of us think we see centerball as centerball, but a video would show that we don't. Imagine how far off your "aim" must be if you are over the center of your stick but your trying to aim the edge of the ferrule to a point on the object ball. What it gives you is two finite reference points with which to aim.

Anyway, there's much more (okay a little more) to this particular system, but as I've said numerous times, you have to shoot it. Then can you go to the next idea (related ideas). Don't make the mistake of assuming some other shot is equivalent. They're not.

Fred

Fred Agnir
06-05-2003, 06:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> Unbelievable. You admit you aren't shooting it the same way, and now you're saying I'm not shooting it the way I described?

<font color="blue"> I shot the shot fulfilling your requirements. Quit weaseling. </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

I've asked repeatedly for you to shoot the shot as I've described. You in your own words haven't done that. You keep insisting it's the same. It's not. You've accused me of copping out and weasling. You've read my posts long enough to know that's not what I do.

Fred

SPetty
06-05-2003, 11:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> <font color="blue">strawman </font color>

...

<font color="blue">strawman </font color>

...

<font color="blue">strawman </font color>

...

<font color="blue">strawman </font color> <hr /></blockquote>With all sincerity, what's "strawman" mean?

SPetty
06-05-2003, 05:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> <font color="blue">strawman</font color>
...
<font color="blue">strawman </font color>
...
<font color="blue">strawman </font color>
...
<font color="blue">strawman </font color> <hr /></blockquote>With all sincerity, what's "strawman" mean? <hr /></blockquote>Wally_in_Cincy chose to open a new thread to answer this...

http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=82162&amp;page=0&amp;vi ew=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=2&amp;fpart=1

Thanks Wally!

Alfie
06-08-2003, 10:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> Is the statement "angle in, angle out crap" a strawman? I don't see it. It's a related opinion, which itself could be debated. <hr /></blockquote> Well, maybe I meant red herring, or .... ad hominem, or .... or one of those other fallacies. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif Itís just that I tried very hard to keep the ghost ball out of this, and you come along and BOOM- ghost balls, geometry, little diagrams, angle out crap, only beginners believe this, and little pieces of paper. I specifically did not want to get into the ball-to-ball vs. ghost ball thing, and still donít. I only wanted to discuss this one specific example. (Ghost ball was mentioned once previously by me in passing only to explain why a 3-ball was added to the original diagram (it helped me locate the vertex of the cut angle). The CB to OB arrow was also moved by me because it was pointed straight at the OB by the original questioner, clearly a mistake. It should have been pointing at the ... well, never mind.)

But you are right, geometry can (and should, IMO) be debated.

When the left edge of the cue stick lines up with the contact point of the object ball, thatís geometry. When the stick center line is .25Ē from the edge of the stick, thatís geometry. When the left edge of the cue stick lines up with the contact point of the object ball, the center of the cue is lined up with a point in space .25Ē to the right of the OB contact point and vice versa, and thatís geometry. Of course, this is for a stick with a pro taper. A conical taper canít be lined up the same way, but a conical taper left edge lined up with the OB contact point would yield an even greater miss with the shot in question.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> What do I have against Geometry? Everything. Pool isn't about geometry. That's where people get screwed up. <hr /></blockquote>Someone needs to tell Donald in Mathmagicland.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> There are at least two other science studies that well supercedes geometry. Drawing little diagrams and pointing to them saying "this is why that won't work" makes little sense since you're not going to bother writing down coefficient of friction force vectors or other factors that can't be written on little pieces of paper. <hr /></blockquote> Well, when you describe how to line up a shot, you are using geometry. IMO, if the line up will merely ďget you close,Ē that should be stated at some point in the process (though 22 degrees isnít very close). Yes, I didnít bother writing down coefficient of friction force vectors. I figured the three degrees or so of unaccounted for throw that you get by using an unadjusted ... (well, nevermind) wasnít going to make that 22 degree miss look much better.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> You can't take a straight edge and align this to that. As you stand above the ferrule and line the edge with the contact point, your view is skewed. The easiest analogy is the fact that most of us think we see centerball as centerball, but a video would show that we don't. Imagine how far off your "aim" must be if you are over the center of your stick but your trying to aim the edge of the ferrule to a point on the object ball. What it gives you is two finite reference points with which to aim. <hr /></blockquote> So what are you saying?
The shooter should get over the stick edge to aim the stick edge? (Did that the first couple of times. Same results. Did the equivalent thereafter.) Or this shot must be lined up with skewed vision (shifted a whole quarter inch away from stick edge), but that it wonít work if you happen to be accurate enough to get the stickís left edge pointing directly at the OB contact point as per the original instructions? Youíre grasping, Fred.

I have no idea what you are doing on this shot, but it isnít what you say to do.

Has anyone else shot this? What were your results.
http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/9egg/
Turn on labels to help locate the balls.
START(
%AG9N4%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%PD4W2%UG5O5%VD2W5%W C4C3%XG8N4
)END
Center ball hit. Left edge of cue stick to contact point of object ball. The contact point would be the point exactly opposite the hole.

Fran Crimi
06-08-2003, 11:38 AM
You must feel very strongly about this, Alfie. This is the most you've written in the 46 years you've been posting here. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

OK, my 2 cents. I think aiming systems are like reading notes in music. It's all theoretical. Between the two of you, you can come up with the exact theoretical answer, after serious debate of course, on the correct geometrics and physics of aiming this particular shot. However, I believe it's the human element...the feel... that makes a piece of music come to life for a musician.

I'm not dissing aiming systems, but in the end, it all comes down to feel. For me, the tougher the shot, the more blank I try to get. Emptiness. No thoughts. Just feel.

Fran

socrates
06-08-2003, 12:57 PM
Fran - your response on feel brought these thoughts to mind.

Aiming systems are somewhat like a zen saying regarding enlightenment.

Before enlightenment trees are trees and mountains are mountains. After enlightenment trees are trees and mountains are mountains.

Its that time in the middle that gives us trouble. I may be wrong, as I often am, but aiming systems to me are a means to help us move to seeing, sensing, hearing, feeling the shot. It appears to me that aiming systems eventually give way from thought and doubt to feel and do and the system is no longer a system.

Again to use a scene from the movie "Searching for Bobby Fischer."

The young prodigy is told there is check mate in five moves and instructed "Don't move until you see it." Unable to find the solution the instructor says - "here I will make it easier for you" and wipes ALL of the pieces off of the board and says "NOW Don't move until you see it." The prodigy contemplates and studies the empty board and eventually finds the solution - Knight to c3.

The point related to pool "Don't shoot until you see (feel) it."

"Let the nothingness into your swing." (stroke)
Shivas Irons in Golf in the Kingdom

Cheers,

Fred Agnir
06-08-2003, 01:50 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr>
You&amp;#8217;re grasping, Fred. <hr /></blockquote>Another uncalled for accusation.

[ QUOTE ]
I have no idea what you are doing on this shot, but it isn&amp;#8217;t what you say to do.<hr /></blockquote> You're right. You have no idea what I'm doing on this shot. Stick to the geometric methods. This isn't one of them. Go back to the original question. But stop accusing me of bogus things. You're being an [censored]. I don't know why.

[ QUOTE ]
Has anyone else shot this? <hr /></blockquote> Else? Right.

Fred

Fred Agnir
06-08-2003, 01:58 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> OK, my 2 cents. I think aiming systems are like reading notes in music. It's all theoretical. <hr /></blockquote>Absolutely. And this particular system (ferrule edge) doesn't even know the difference between a musical note and sticky note.

Something odd happens on this shot in question (the short distance back-cut). People have trouble visualizing where to hit it (hence the original question) and they tend to... miss it. Most people will miss it the same way over and over and over. People have a few choices. One of them is to try to visualize the ghost ball as they always have, and struggle with the visualizing, or they could try something else that might work. Something that might point to a easier guide/point/reference to make that visualization easier to grasp.

I have to wonder, is it better to "aim correctly" and miss every time, or "aim not correctly (by geometry), but make the shot"?

Fred

Fran Crimi
06-08-2003, 08:20 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr>
I have to wonder, is it better to "aim correctly" and miss every time, or "aim not correctly (by geometry), but make the shot"?

Fred <hr /></blockquote>


Either way you're stroking crooked so I think you might as well aim incorrectly and make the shot. At least you get to stay at the table.

I think maybe you guys are a couple of steps ahead of where you should be here. Before you can make suggestions on how to solve the problem, you have to assess what is actually causing the problem.

I think there are two main reasons why players tend to miss shots like that. It's either because they're inexperienced or because they're lacking trust.

If they're inexperienced they probably need to come across the shot a gazillion more times before they can get the feel for it. Setting it up and shooting it over and over again isn't a bad idea.

The experienced player occasionally falls out of trust with a particular type of shot and often finds himself suddenly missing. He starts to look for answers and usually wind up going full circle before finding the solution, starting with the complex and ending with the simple.

Beginners don't usually integrate aiming systems into their games unless someone teaches them that way. It's the more advanced players, searching for answers to why they're now missing shots they used to make who start thinking about aiming systems. I think that for those players, aiming systems help them get their trust back. Then eventually, they stop thinking and analyzing the shot and begin to trust and feel, and the aiming system is no longer a part of their game...until the next tragedy sets in.

So my answer to the original question would be if you're a fairly new player, then shoot the shot a hundred times in a row and then determine if you need to ask the question again.

If you're an experienced player, don't hold back your stroke. Let it go and trust your judgement.

Fran

Qtec
06-08-2003, 09:22 PM
Fred, just two questions;
1. I play with a 9.5mm tip ,so my ferule is smaller than yours. Do i still aim at the same point?
2. If i play on a table where the balls are smaller or larger, where do i aim?

Qtec

Fred Agnir
06-09-2003, 07:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Fred, just two questions;
1. I play with a 9.5mm tip ,so my ferule is smaller than yours. Do i still aim at the same point?
2. If i play on a table where the balls are smaller or larger, where do i aim?

Qtec <hr /></blockquote>Good questions. I can't answer them because I have no experience in shooting this particular type shot with anything but a pool cue on a pool table. Since it isn't a "geometrically-correct" system, I can already tell you that if you draw up the lines and angles, it won't line up.

Fred

Fred Agnir
06-09-2003, 07:03 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>
I think maybe you guys are a couple of steps ahead of where you should be here. Before you can make suggestions on how to solve the problem, you have to assess what is actually causing the problem. <hr /></blockquote> You're absolutely correct. That's probably why I gave a short answer to the question "what do I do" which was never meant as teaching advice. You simply cannot demo esoteric systems (voodoo witchcraft hypnosis) by words or by WEI.

Fred