Olympiad Geometry Video 2: Angle Chasing

II
epicbird08
10 July 2026

Be sure to follow along with my YouTube video at this link: [Link]

hlpBxkLzPFQ

§1 Directed Angles
Recall from last time that we ran into lots of issues with normal angles:

• When proving the inscribed angle theorem, we relied on the fact that the center of
the circle was contained in the triangle.

• In our cyclic quadrilateral identification theorem, there were two different identities
for adjacent angles and opposite angles (∠ABC + ∠ADC = 180◦ and ∠ACB =
∠ADB).

• In the orthocenter configuration, I said how H is incenter of △DEF in the case

where the triangle is acute. But what if the triangle is obtuse? Then it turns out
that this is no longer the case, and instead H is what is known as an excenter of
the triangle DEF .

So it really seems like geometry is very configuration-dependent, right? Well, kind of,
but not really. For example, the relation ∠BAD = ∠CAO we proved last time still holds
true with obtuse triangles, as does the orthocenter reflection lemma. So do we actually
have to deal with every single possible case when solving such geometry problems?
It turns out that we do not need to, and the way to get around this is with directed
angles. We begin the definition:
Definition 1.1. Let points A, B, and C be given in the plane, and let θ be the positive
convex angle measure of ∠ABC. The directed angle ∡ABC is defined as follows: if the
points A, B, and C are in clockwise order (that is, when we go from A to B to C, we
go in a clockwise fashion), then ∡ABC = θ. Otherwise, ∡ABC = −θ. We take directed
angles modulo 180◦ , so ∡ABC = 180◦ − θ.
That’s a lot to digest! Let’s give an example to showcase what is happening. Suppose
that we have points A, B, and C in the plane such that ∠ABC = 60◦ . These points are
shown below:

1
epicbird08 — 10 July 2026 Olympiad Geometry Video 2: Angle Chasing II

As we see, the points A, B, and C are in clockwise order. Thus ∡ABC = 60◦ . However,
the points C, B, A are in counterclockwise order, so ∡CBA = −60◦ . This is also equal to
120◦ .
This seems even more complicated than normal angles, why use them? The main thing
about them is that the condition for cyclic quadrilaterals is now described very simply:

Theorem 1.2
The noncollinear points A, B, C, and D are concyclic if and only if ∡ABC = ∡ADC.

Notice that the order of the points does not matter at all!

Proof. There are 2 cases we must consider. The first is where B and D lie on the
same side of line AC. Then A, B, C has the same order as A, D, C. As shown in the last
video, A, B, D, and C are concyclic if and only if ∠ABC = ∠ADC in this case, which is
equivalent to ∡ABC = ∡ADC because of the same order.
The second case is where B and D lie on opposite sides of line AC. Then A, B, C
has the opposite order as A, D, C. Let ∡ABC = ∠ABC = θ, so that A, B, C, and D
are concyclic if and only if ∠ADC = 180◦ − θ. Since A, D, C has the opposite order of
A, B, C, we must negate this to get the directed angle ∡ADC = θ − 180◦ = θ = ∡ABC
since directed angles are taken mod 180◦ . This finishes the proof.

This technique is thus obviously overpowered, so we wish to further explore properties.

I will outline the proof of each of these properties in the video.

2
epicbird08 — 10 July 2026 Olympiad Geometry Video 2: Angle Chasing II

Theorem 1.3
Here are the main properties of directed angles. Let A, B, C, and D be arbitrary
points in the plane.

1. ∡ABA = 0.

2. ∡ABC = −∡CBA.

3. ∡ABC = ∡ABD if and only if B, C, and D are collinear (not necessarily in

that order!).

4. ∡ABD = ∡ABC + ∡CBD.

5. ∡ABC + ∡BCD = 0 if and only if AB ∥ CD.

6. ∡ABC + ∡BCA + ∡CAB = 0.

7. ∡ABC = ∡BCA if and only if AB = AC.

8. In a circle with center O and points A, B, and C on the circle, we have

∡AOB = 2∡ACB. Furthermore, ∡OBA = ∡BAO = 90◦ − ∡ACB.

9. If AB ⊥ BC, then ∡ABC = ∡CBA = 90◦ .

One last note: if we have to take halves of angles, then directed angles won’t work. For
instance, there are 2 ways for 2∡ABC = 0. (What are they?) Thus one must be on the
lookout for whether or not directed angles can even work, although in most cases they
should. This is why we provided the specification in item 8.

Remark 1.4. In a way, directed angles address the configuration issues for you in advance,
instead of you having to do it yourself in practice. For example, there are two scenarios
for ABCD being cyclic, but by analyzing the different cases, directed angles deems them
equivalent. Just be careful that you can use directed angles at all. (The most common
pitfall is in the incenter configuration.)

Here is an example showcasing our new power that should look familiar from the last
handout:

Example 1.5
Let ABC be a triangle with orthocenter H. Prove that the reflection of H over BC
lies on the circumcircle of ω.

The first thing we must do is create a diagram. However, unlike in the last handout, I
won’t provide the diagram here, and instead request for you to make it on your own. (I’ll
still put a diagram in the video, but be sure to make your own diagram to follow along.)

Solution. Let the reflection be H ′ , so that A, H, H ′ are collinear. Thus by construction

∡HBC = ∡CBH ′ . We wish to show that this is equal to ∡CAH ′ = ∡CAH since A, H, H ′
are collinear. But now if we let D and E be the feet of the altitudes from H to BC and
AC, respectively, then ∡HBC = ∡EBC = ∡EBD. and ∡CAH = ∡CAD = ∡EAD.
But now recall that EDBA is cyclic, so these two are equal.

See the end of the handout for harder examples.

3
epicbird08 — 10 July 2026 Olympiad Geometry Video 2: Angle Chasing II

§2 Phantom points
Remember how we proved the cyclic quadrilateral property by creating another point
that satisfied the condition? It turns out that we can elaborate more on this idea. The
trick is called phantom points.
The main idea behind using phantom point is as follows: suppose that you want to
prove that a point A satisfies a certain condition given in the problem. We can then
construct another point A′ that satisfies the condition given in the problem, then reverse
construct to show that A = A′ . Indeed, a common tactic used for proving that three lines
are concurrent is showing that the intersection of two of them lies on the third; this is
also an example of phantom points.
Here is an example showcasing this:

Example 2.1
In a triangle ABC, prove that the angle bisector of ∠BAC meets the perpendicular
bisector of BC on the circumcircle of ABC.

Again I’m not putting the diagram here and am instead asking for you to make it on
your own, but this one shouldn’t be too hard to make either.

Solution. Let the angle bisector meet the circumcircle at a point M. We wish to show
that BM = M C. However, since ∠BAM = ∠M AC, we have that these angles span
equal arcs of the circle, implying the result.

To show the power of phantom points, try proving it directly. That is, show that if Z
is the intersection of the perpendicular bisector and the angle bisector, then ABZC is
cyclic. (Spoiler: you can’t.)

§3 Tangent lines to circles

We know that if ABCD is a cyclic quadrilateral, then ∡ABC = ∡ADC. Thus if K is a
point on line AB, then ∡KAD = ∡BAD = ∡BCD. But what if B is very close to A?
Then two things happen: one is that KA starts becoming tangent to the circumcircle of
ABCD, and the second is that ∡BCD ≈ ∡ACD. Getting B extremely close to A, we
discover the following:

Theorem 3.1
Let ω be a circle with points A, B, and C on it. Let K be a point outside of the
circle. Then KA is tangent to ω if and only if ∡KAB = ∡ACB.

You probably know of another way to deal with tangent lines; that KA is tangent to a
circle containing A with center O if and only if ∡KAO = 90◦ .
Exercise 3.2. Prove this with phantom points. In particular, for one direction, suppose
that AK intersects ω at another point B; use isosceles triangles to show B = A and thus
KA is tangent to ω. (The other direction follows by a continuity argument with isosceles
triangles similar to what was used above.)

4
epicbird08 — 10 July 2026 Olympiad Geometry Video 2: Angle Chasing II

§4 How do we generalize similarity?

Suppose we have two triangles ABC and DEF . We know how to tell whether they are
similar or not: just compare the angles. But how does this generalize to directed angles,
if it does at all?
Before we state the generalization, let us add to the notion of similarity:
Definition 4.1. Let ABC and DEF be similar triangles. We say that they are directly
similar, denoted △ABC ∼+ △DEF , if one can obtain DEF by rotating, translating, and
scaling ABC. (Equivalently, the order of A, B, C (counterclockwise or clockwise) is the
same as the order of D, E, F ). They are oppositely similar, denoted △ABC ∼− △DEF
if we have to use a reflection to obtain DEF from ABC.
I’ll give some examples of directed and opposite similarity in the video.
Why does this matter? Because the following more general theorem holds:

Theorem 4.2
Let ABC and DEF be triangles. They are directly similar if and only if ∡ABC =
∡DEF , etc. They are oppositely similar if and only if ∡ABC = −∡DEF , etc.

Again, the proof is just checking lots of cases, so I’ll not include it.
So not only did we find a way to incorporate directed angles into similar triangles, but
we also found a way to further classify these similar triangles using these directed angles!
There won’t be problems involving directed similarity on this handout, but be on the
lookout for them, especially when we start discussing homothety in a few videos.

5
epicbird08 — 10 July 2026 Olympiad Geometry Video 2: Angle Chasing II

§5 Examples
Try this problem on your own first, using directed angles. I’ll provide a solution in
the video.
Problem 5.1 (Miquel point). In a triangle ABC, let D, E, F be points on lines (not
segments) BC, CA, AB, respectively, Show that the circumcircles of AEF, BF D, CDE
meet at a common point. This point is called the Miquel point.

§6 Exercises
First, here’s a problem demonstrating how configuration issues can be annoying:
Problem 6.1. Recall our first example in the last video; that if D is the foot of the
altitude from A to BC in an acute triangle ABC and O is the circumcenter, then
∠BAD = ∠CAO. Prove this in the case where △ABC is obtuse. (Hint: you have to
consider two cases!)
Now, for the rest of these problems, I highly advise you to use directed angles on every
one of these problems. Like in the last handout, the first three problems are important
configurations you should know, and you should prove them yourself.
Problem 6.2 (Three Tangents, part 1). Let ABC be a triangle, and let E and F be
the feet of the altitudes from B, C to AC, AB, respectively. If M is the midpoint of BC,
show that M F and M E are tangent to the circumcircle of AEF. These are two of the
three tangents to the circumcircle of AEF which appear frequently.
Problem 6.3 (Three Tangents, part 2). In the notation of Problem 3.2, show that the
line through A parallel to BC is also tangent to the circumcircle of AEF. This is the
third tangent to the circumcircle of AEF .
Problem 6.4 (Simson’s line). Let A, B, C, and D be given points in the plane. Let P
be the foot of the altitude from D to BC, let Q be the foot from D to CA, and R be
the foot from D to AB. Show that P, Q, and R are collinear if and only if the points
A, B, C, and D are concyclic. If the points are concyclic, then the line containing P, Q, R
is called Simson’s line.
And now for a problem that actually appeared on an Olympiad:
Problem 6.5 (2011 JMO Problem 5). Points A, B, C, D, and E lie on a circle ω and
point P lies outside the circle. The given points are such that (i) lines P B and P D are
tangent to ω, (ii) P, A, and C are collinear, and (iii) DE ∥ AC. Show that BE bisects
AC.