aiming technique

[kwt]

I hear from lot of people they use the aim at point of contact method to pot balls. But in the book of Steve Davis is mentioned that when you aim at the point of contact on the object ball, the cue ball will always hit the object ball a fraction earlier which will send the object ball to the wrong direction unless it is a straight shot. How I need to correct it, do I have to aim just a slightly left or right from the POC or is the ghost ball theory a better method?

[bonoman1970]

Why does the cue ball always hit the object ball a fraction early?
Dont understand kwt?

[kwt]

When you are aiming at the point of contact the cue ball is actually hit the OB a slightly next to that point, so actually not the point you were aiming for. This is especially for thin cut shot. If you know what I mean

[bonoman1970]

But why arent you hitting where you aim ..I dont understand,explain to me ? maybe thats where I have been going wrong all these years

[kwt]

First of all I am a newby in snooker just play for 4 months. But if you have read the book from Steve Davis he doesnt recommend to use the point of contact technique for aiming. And I agree with him cause I found out it doesnt work so well to me either.
So you use this technique as well? how is your snooker skills?

[DandyA]

I hear from lot of people they use the aim at point of contact method to pot balls. But in the book of Steve Davis is mentioned that when you aim at the point of contact on the object ball, the cue ball will always hit the object ball a fraction earlier which will send the object ball to the wrong direction unless it is a straight shot. How I need to correct it, do I have to aim just a slightly left or right from the POC or is the ghost ball theory a better method?

I haven't read Steve's book but if you are talking about "champion's way", I have watched the videos (available on YouTube) ... which I think are great - best coaching videos ever IMO ...

and he does mention what you've said in those videos ... but I think you misunderstood - what he said is (I think) when you hit the cue ball onto the object ball at any cut angle, the object ball will always go slightly thicker than the laws of physics suggest ...

obviously the likes of Newton and Einstein aren't wrong about the laws of physics but there again (as far as I know) they didn't play snooker so their laws don't take into account the forward roll of the cue ball, the friction of the cloth and so on ...

but I do believe Steve is right ... the object ball does always play minutely "thicker" than you think - which simply means you need to aim minutely "thinner" than you think ...

on an aside, if you are referring to "champion's way" which he made in the 80's he is completely wrong (I think in current thinking) about "turning over the object ball" and he has said so ... what he said was correct regarding the balls they used then ... I think he admits it's not true anymore ...

[RocketRoy1983]

If you hit the object ball and cue ball correctly then there should be no problems....simple yet effective!

[kwt]

This is what is wriiten in his book succesful snooker

The one thing you mustn't do is to think in terms
of aiming at a spot on the object ball. Although it is
roughly true to say the actual contact point on the
object ball will be directly in line with the pocket and
the centre of the object ball, it is impossible to aim for
this point with any degree of accuracy. In fact, for
angled shots the point of contact on the object ball
will not be on the same line as that of the cue. If you
were to aim for this point with the cue you would hit
the object ball fractionally earlier — that is, closer to
you – than expected and not achieve the required
direction.

So this is untrue anymore?

[DandyA]

This is what is wriiten in his book succesful snooker

The one thing you mustn't do is to think in terms
of aiming at a spot on the object ball. Although it is
roughly true to say the actual contact point on the
object ball will be directly in line with the pocket and
the centre of the object ball, it is impossible to aim for
this point with any degree of accuracy. In fact, for
angled shots the point of contact on the object ball
will not be on the same line as that of the cue. If you
were to aim for this point with the cue you would hit
the object ball fractionally earlier — that is, closer to
you – than expected and not achieve the required
direction.

So this is untrue anymore?

good thread kwt! thanks for starting it ...

I haven't read "successful snooker" but from your quote above, I'm wondering if it was written by a ghost writer rather than Steve himself because this quote seems to be from someone who has never picked up a cue ...

In fact, for angled shots the point of contact on the object ball will not be on the same line as that of the cue.

of course, surely that's obvious ... take a 1/2 ball pot for instance ... you want to hit the object ball 1/2 ball but you must allow for the width of the cue ball so the line of the cue should be the edge of the object ball ... if you line up the cue at the 1/2 way point on the object ball, you'll hit it way too thick - 3/4 ball in fact ...

that's surely a lesson for 10 year olds? but surely not a sensible discussion of aiming techniques of which I think there are 3 main types ... (a) the contact point on the object ball (b) the ghost ball and (c) the quarters (full, 3/4/ 1/2, 1/4 or thin) ...

I personally tend to make an initial assessment using (c) and then refine it using (a) allowing for the width of the cue ball ...

in his 80's book/video "champion's way", Steve made it clear he used (c) type aiming although that's not to say he does now ...

BTW - no rudeness to 10 year olds intended - I'm sure there's loads of you out there who would give me an absoluite thrashing ...

[checkSide]

This is what is wriiten in his book succesful snooker

The one thing you mustn't do is to think in terms
of aiming at a spot on the object ball. Although it is
roughly true to say the actual contact point on the
object ball will be directly in line with the pocket and
the centre of the object ball, it is impossible to aim for
this point with any degree of accuracy. In fact, for
angled shots the point of contact on the object ball
will not be on the same line as that of the cue. If you
were to aim for this point with the cue you would hit
the object ball fractionally earlier — that is, closer to
you – than expected and not achieve the required
direction.

So this is untrue anymore?

Actually this quote from the book is correct!

What Steve Davis is actually saying is you don't aim your cue at the contact point. The only shot where this is possible is the dead straight pot. For any other cut, if you aim your cue at the contact point, you will catch the object ball thick due to the spherical nature of the balls.

Once you have ascertained the contact point, you need to make a judgement that will allow the cue ball the make contact with that point. This is always done by aiming the cue outside the contact point by varying degrees.

If you have a play around with this handy aiming calculator, it will show you difference between contact points and aiming points for all cut shots.

Hope this helps someone.

[steveflanuk]

Personally, I find the ghost ball method easiest for me - with my main problem on missed pots being one of thinking about the next ball and, therefore, not concentrating solely on the pot, or concentrating on getting a correct pause and again, not concentrating on the pot - hence not aiming properly.

A good tip I was given once was that once you have looked at your shot and know where you want your cue ball to finish - then just get down and play the shot. Don't think about speed or spin or technique as this will clutter up your mind. Focus purely on putting the cue ball where you've added your ghost ball - your muscle memory should then kick in and give you the correct(ish) speed etc.

This was especially true of a shot I did the other night (only green to black left). The cue ball was just to the left of the green spot, with the green to the right of the pink spot (looking up the table from baulk to black spot), with the other colours on their spots.

From looking at the shot I knew where I wanted to finish on the brown, and that I would need top spin to get the cue ball back up the table. I focused purely on where I had mentally placed the ghost ball, played the shot and finished exactly where I wanted to.

I then missed the brown because I was thinking of where I wanted to finish on the blue - hence not concentrating on the pot - hence not aiming properly.

[kwt]

Actually this quote from the book is correct!

If you have a play around with this handy aiming calculator, it will show you difference between contact points and aiming points for all cut shots.

Hope this helps someone.

So you think I should not use this method in my game? I wonder if this is also usefull in snooker since the balls and pockets are smaller

[uuuyuuu]

The spot

I am playing snooker for 7 monthes now
and I am using a very simple technique that someone from this forum showed me (Asi thanks).
i just looking at the angle for a straight put taking 2.5 cm from the object ball (on the table) and deliver
the cue ball to that spot.
If the middle of the cue ball is on that spot its a pot and thats it.
I found it a very usefull technique I dont need to imagine anything i just need to aim to that spoot.
some times i even put my tip gently on the cloth to mark it.

[Watford]

I'm no expert but have palyed a little with a coach and been playing cue sports for over 20 years.
I think you might be worrying about all this too much.

I'd say practice knoking in blacks from the spot from different angles. Look object ball to pocket that get down and play it. If you miss look why you missed (think/thin) then do it till you pot 3 in a row. Keep doing this and the angles will just stick without some special method.
Otherwise I'd say looking in a shot was full, 3/4, 1/2 or 1/4 ball is better than these other ones. Size of white I think might cock up ghost ball in pool!

[kevy62]

A simple method to test ball potting theory & practice, is to place the black on its spot, now place a red touching the black,directly half ball accross it, in line with the corner pocket,(making a plant using red/black) next place the cueball about 12 inches away from the red, (in a straight line away from the red) now cue up on the cueball to contact full ball on the red...now just before final delivery of the cue , keep your point of aim & remove the red & pot the black, easy ! You can use this coaching method to teach/learn the angles to pot all five potting angles from any position on the table.
Then all you have to do is commit them to memory!
This can take years.
In some cases, some players, just never get it, but good luck

You need to focus all of your attention on the red/object ball, when you deliver the cue.

The cueball shouldn't be relevant to you, as you should not be looking at it as you deliver the cue, this is because the cueball becomes like an extension of your cue. also , although there may seem to be unlimited potting angles, there are really only 5...yes five! potting angles.

(1.full ball 2.three quater ball 3.half ball 4.quater ball 5.fine cut)

Of course some shots are between two positions, so could either be a thin 3/4 ball or a thick 1/2 ball shot & so on.These shots will be spotted by you in time & until they almost become automatic. I will say it takes a lot of practice to become consistant, but one day it will either just happen, or it won't.

One final thought, I'm thinking perhaps the use of a training ball might help? aramith do a good one. if you do a search you should be able to find it cheaper than the link below, but this should help to get you on the right track good luck.


http://www.snookerstuff.com/accessories.html