Fast Improvement Training Method for Shot Making

[Dan White]

It seems like I have a failure to communicate. My fault. Please give this a second chance. Let me try again in text.

I propose a 3 part Method to improve shooting accuracy and refine aim.

Part 1: A version of dry practice either done on the rail (video clip in introductory video) or using a cue-stick laser aimer (video clips in both videos). Critically: work the mechanics one at a time and try to improve whatever is worst.

Part 2: A version of the cue ball up and back drill (known by nearly all). But put a ball ‘in the way’ such that pocketing it proves one’s accuracy; ignore the ball and just ‘shoot straight’ as you would normally in the out and back drill. Strive to integrate any changes from Part 1 and to develop consistency. The accuracy required depends on cut angle and distances. I have photos of 7 shot setups across the table and one down the length of the table in both videos and demonstrate shooting 3 of the across the table ones in the second video. Setup requires precision; and using appropriate tools and having data and training to facilitate reliable setup.

Part 3. Use the same setup you’ve mastered in Part 2, but switch to ‘aiming’ and adjust/change aiming techniques/perception until your pocketing percentage approaches that gained when doing it as a Part 2 drill. No demo clips, but they would look the same as Part 2, as all the changes are visual/mental.

Two videos: The first mostly has me speaking to describe the method and the story of its development and my lack of insight how to effectively deliver it to the pool community. The presumption is that this is significant and you might want to know the story/justification and that I don’t know how to deliver it. The second shows clips of my practice using Part 2 to further illustrate my words and demonstrate the degree of progress I’d made. It is intended to be convincing that the method was significant for me and is worth consideration by others.

I have not yet released anything about my personal results with Part 3 until now, but I’ve recently learned that I must change my aiming technique for quarter ball hits to get better consistency. I’ve found two much better alternatives I’m further evaluating.

Results: much improved accuracy; much reduced aim offset; improved quarter ball hit aiming technique. All in less than a month. Huge progress beyond any achieved by formal lessons, books, videos, training aids and LOTS of drills done over decades. I’m excited about it.

Please advise 1) which video or text you are referring to when commenting because I got confused; 2) exactly what’s unclear; 3) 'diagrams are needed' for what exactly? (when you already have pictures and videos). If you want setup, that’s next if you are convinced there’s merit and say that and I suggest a way for me to effectively deliver it. So far, I’ve yet to hear that I’ve convinced anyone nor has anyone proposed how I deliver it.

OK. I watched both videos in their entirety and read all of your posts. I have some questions:

The AimRight is integral to step 2. Without it there is no step 2. I think what you are doing is setting up, say, a 1/4 ball hit with the AimRight. There is a ghost ball outline on the AimRight that you need to pass the cue ball over exactly so that the ball will be pocketed when you do so. You have a very upright stance and can probably see that ghost ball circle when it is only 2 feet away. I don't think it will be visible to anybody with a low stance. Missing this target by even a fraction of an inch because you can't really see it makes it useless. 1. How do you know you are aiming the cue ball so that it will, in fact, cross the ghost circle perfectly if your stroke is perfect? 2. How can people with their chins near the cue use this method if they really can't see the ghost circle?

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Some honest feedback for you.....The OP is asking for feedback from instructors that may want to use (FIT) with their students....That is a sales pitch to get instructors to buy in.

Years ago I worked in the DR industry....I have seen a few creatives in my day....The two videos together are very similar to an attempt at an informercial......(they should be 1 video)

.One of the most important pieces of a creative is the ability to "GRAB" your attention and a lot of times you only have "SECONDS" before the person clicks off to the next video or channel.........Honestly this presentation does not grab you in any way.........It honestly is very hard to watch.....and never does anything to build a "buying" temperature in the viewer.

I would suggest re-doing the videos and seeking some professional advice.....The presentation needs to be flow charted, condensed....and in the first 10-20 seconds needs to see something impactful that grabs your attention......For example the beginning showing the presenter/player making shot after shot in the very beginning.....Something that makes the viewer say....."Hey!!! how is he doing that!!!....I need to watch this to see what he/she is doing!!"

I appreciate your feedback. I've managed YouTube channels and websites and other mass communications and media. I recently helped a friend start a new channel (some training in marketing, training in video prep and editing) that just passed the 1,500 subscriber mark.

So I appreciate your comments.

What I was writing to complain about was people saying "Boring video, couldn't [be bothered to] watch it [but want to complain]" instead of "I jumped to the instruction in the video and here are my comments regarding your pool instruction methods".

We literally have (the usual) folks complaining about style, not substance, in pool teaching. Your comments are helpful for the video producer, so I appreciate them.

 

[dendweller]

Some have taken a left turn on this suggesting the drill is focused on the wrong shot, whether angle or distance or general difficulty or frequency in game situations. This is NOT what the drill is about. It's about the very fundamentals of stroke accuracy and aiming. Let me try to further explain.

You would not challenge a drill of shooting a ball up and back to one's cue tip as unimportant because it is never a requirement in a game. NO! This is a drill designed to show one's accuracy or not regarding hitting where aiming and inadvertent sidespin (possibly from off-center eye and then stick alignment). Someone here says Ronnie O'Sullivan spends an hour a day on this. Clearly someone finds value in it. I've simply changed the nature of this drill to make it more fun and generally more progressive and revealing (but less revealing about sidespin). And then connected it to aiming as well.

This is a method, composed of several parts, that are designed to identify stroke (and eye alignment) flaws that need fixed to whatever degree is your standard for good enough. And it is setup for a specific cut angle -- either chosen for accuracy needs (in conjunction with distances) or to work on its aim. In part 3, you refine your aim for that particular cut. If your thing is a 30 degree cut, fine. But most don't need any help to aim a 30 degree cut; they need help identifying the 30 degree cut angle or aiming at other angles. Recognizing the cut angle of a shot is important for many. I've developed or reported on many different methods to identify the cut angle -- but that's a DIFFERENT skill than this Method is focusing on.

The degree of ridiculousness and rarity in a game of any shots I've shown in this drill are irrelevant from the perspective of the point of the entire Method. It's about 1) achieving the stroke accuracy improvements YOU need (thinner cuts and more distance requires more accuracy) and 2) refining aiming.

To refine aim, we don't need to practice 1,000,000 pool shots. Rather, learn to aim the spectrum of cut angles from straight in to about 77 degrees in both cut directions. I propose that 16 specific angles are sufficient for the average player on average tables; 32 for more expert play. So I propose the average player would use this 3-part method for aiming on as many as 16 cut angles if help learning to aim them is needed on each. I personally only want help in aiming angles over 30 degrees. If only working on accuracy, then many fewer angles are needed for the progressive practice.

Once one has sufficient accuracy and knows how to aim reliably for different cut angles (and has good judgement of when to use what aim -- or recognizes the cut angle), then I agree with everything said about practicing whatever you need that stops runs or is a problem area -- or is just fun. Personally, I was doing OK on those other areas but have been thwarted by inconsistency in stroke accuracy as well as aiming thin cuts. This Method seems to wonderfully address those issues. If Ronnie needs help with his accuracy, then most of us do as well -- depending on our needs and objectives.

So I'll take a stab at this. Every one of your posts is long. If you can cut it down a bit, both here and on youtube you might get better responses.

 

[bbb]

So I'll take a stab at this. Every one of your posts is long. If you can cut it down a bit, both here and on youtube you might get better responses.

but to give him kudos
he makes paragraphs

 

[AimPro Billiards]

OK. I watched both videos in their entirety and read all of your posts. I have some questions:

The AimRight is integral to step 2. Without it there is no step 2. I think what you are doing is setting up, say, a 1/4 ball hit with the AimRight. There is a ghost ball outline on the AimRight that you need to pass the cue ball over exactly so that the ball will be pocketed when you do so. You have a very upright stance and can probably see that ghost ball circle when it is only 2 feet away. I don't think it will be visible to anybody with a low stance. Missing this target by even a fraction of an inch because you can't really see it makes it useless. 1. How do you know you are aiming the cue ball so that it will, in fact, cross the ghost circle perfectly if your stroke is perfect? 2. How can people with their chins near the cue use this method if they really can't see the ghost circle?

The AimRight makes the setup much easier and repeatable and match specific cuts, but it is not essential. There are many ways to figure out how to setup a ball to do this. For example, put a cue ball on the out and back line and then touch an object ball to it, such that it's appropriately aimed. I'd use a laser level there to mark the line; then a donut on the CB spot; then a donut on the OB spot and then remove the CB donut You won't know the angle value or the fraction, but it's possible to setup and most deny any merit in knowing those values.

If you see the Accuracy Levels 1 - 7, they progress from 1/2 ball hit to 1/16 ball hit. I shoot from 1/4 ball to 1/16 ball. The length of the table shot is a 1/4 ball hit.

I don't use the AimRight here for anything except setting up the shot; I require no visibility of any of its markings. I'll turn the questrion around: How do you sight or what do you aim at when doing the out and back drill? That's your answer.

BUT THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE SETUP!!! Who cares??? No one cares unless they see value in doing the drill. I've yet to get ANY response from anyone about whether, assuming it can be setup, there is value in the approach.

 

[AimPro Billiards]

but to give him kudos
he makes paragraphs

OK.
Tell me what you think of the Method and its potential value to you or others.

Short enough?

 

[AimPro Billiards]

Some honest feedback for you.....The OP is asking for feedback from instructors that may want to use (FIT) with their students....That is a sales pitch to get instructors to buy in.

Years ago I worked in the DR industry....I have seen a few creatives in my day....The two videos together are very similar to an attempt at an informercial......(they should be 1 video)

.One of the most important pieces of a creative is the ability to "GRAB" your attention and a lot of times you only have "SECONDS" before the person clicks off to the next video or channel.........Honestly this presentation does not grab you in any way.........It honestly is very hard to watch.....and never does anything to build a "buying" temperature in the viewer.

I would suggest re-doing the videos and seeking some professional advice.....The presentation needs to be flow charted, condensed....and in the first 10-20 seconds needs to see something impactful that grabs your attention......For example the beginning showing the presenter/player making shot after shot in the very beginning.....Something that makes the viewer say....."Hey!!! how is he doing that!!!....I need to watch this to see what he/she is doing!!"

I agree -- and I won't do it.

Real infomercials will get me in trouble with the viewers here and on youtube You are describing something that sounds like an AD on youtube. That's not what I'm doing. I'm trying to achieve the goals you say, but without going full commercial. I'm also trying to share information. Could it be done better? Sure. But I'm an old guy and don't have the time and energy to both create this Method, train with it; film it; make the videos and have a nice retired life AND do a professional job on the video. As you should know, it's relatively fast and easy to do something long. It takes much more time to tighten it up and add appeal as you suggest. It just doesn't match my situation.

Creative fun:

OK. I'll start a corporation and be the CEO. I'll staff the board of directors and be sure to have a generous bonus plan. So, I'll incorporate in either Texas or Nevada (definitely NOT Delaware). I'll hire the creative PR staff. Since my doing the drills doesn't impress anyone (they don't understand what they are seeing and dismiss it as irrelevant to real pool), I'll have to get some professionals for the ad to run in the Super Bowl, 2026. I'm thinking maybe a Scotch doubles match with Efren Reyes, Shane Van Boening, Ewa Lawrence (striking Viking) and Jeannet Lee (the Black Widow). We'll figure out some scenes the guys will want to watch (over and over).

I'll need an IPO to raise the funds to support all of this.

Oh, WAIT!! There's no money in pool training aids! Damm -- I should switch to golf, where there's money to be made.

 

[BC21]

.......

BUT THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE SETUP!!! Who cares??? No one cares unless they see value in doing the drill. I've yet to get ANY response from anyone about whether, assuming it can be setup, there is value in the approach.

Of course there is value. But I don't believe the value is in the specific setup or method. The value is in repetition.

Repetition is a key element for developing consistency. Repeating the up and back drill, repeating any particular cut angle, position play, or whatever... it all goes toward skill development and consistency when it comes to stroke, aiming, speed, visualization, etc....

You like placing a ball in the path of the cb instead of simply shooting the old up and back drill from tip to tip. The pocketing of the ball is then used as a gage for determining accuracy and consistency. Sure, that method has value, but the same thing can be done by setting up any specific shot angle and shooting it over and over until you hit 10 or 15 perfectly as intended. Do that for about 30min, 2 or 3 times per day, always trying to push the goal a little higher....within a week you'll see great improvements.

I really don't see any special benefit or advantage in doing what you're doing. Repetition leads to consistency - no mystery or major discovery there.

 

[Dan White]

The AimRight makes the setup much easier and repeatable and match specific cuts, but it is not essential. There are many ways to figure out how to setup a ball to do this. For example, put a cue ball on the out and back line and then touch an object ball to it, such that it's appropriately aimed. I'd use a laser level there to mark the line; then a donut on the CB spot; then a donut on the OB spot and then remove the CB donut You won't know the angle value or the fraction, but it's possible to setup and most deny any merit in knowing those values.

If you see the Accuracy Levels 1 - 7, they progress from 1/2 ball hit to 1/16 ball hit. I shoot from 1/4 ball to 1/16 ball. The length of the table shot is a 1/4 ball hit.

I don't use the AimRight here for anything except setting up the shot; I require no visibility of any of its markings. I'll turn the questrion around: How do you sight or what do you aim at when doing the out and back drill? That's your answer.

BUT THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE SETUP!!! Who cares??? No one cares unless they see value in doing the drill. I've yet to get ANY response from anyone about whether, assuming it can be setup, there is value in the approach.

I guess I don't understand what you are doing. How is your method any different from setting up any random shot and hitting it over and over until you make it consistently?

 

[dquarasr]

I found your videos on YouTube. (The links in this thread show as "Video Unavailable".)

Disclaimer: I AM NOT AN INSTRUCTOR.

I applaud your dedication. Would you allow me some observations?

1) When you were shooting many of the shots, even if you made many shots your follow through was in the direction of the cut. (If you were cutting to the right your cue tip followed through to the right; left vice versa). It is possible that on your misses where you hit too thick, this movement is occurring prior to striking the cue ball.

2) You mentioned that your are "not married to any PSR" (or something like that). In your step in to shots, you don't seem to have addressed the shots with your feet and body position. It seems you get down, then your back hand moves around (a lot) as you "aim" (or adjust or whatever you want to call it). From pretty much everything I have ever heard about best techniques, we should aim while standing and get down on the shot with the cue already aligned, such that only very, very small (micro?) adjustments are required.

Perhaps your may want to consider addressing these two items.

I will refrain from commenting on the system you describe. I personally think the straight up and back drill and long "Mighty X" stop shots are highly instructive for grooving one's stroke, so I'll stick with those methods. Good luck with promoting your system (and no, there is no sarcasm there, I wish you good luck.)

 

[Dan White]

I found your videos on YouTube. (The links in this thread show as "Video Unavailable".)

FYI you can simply click on "watch on youtube" below where it says "'video unavailable" and it will take you to it.

 

[BC21]

I guess I don't understand what you are doing. How is your method any different from setting up any random shot and hitting it over and over until you make it consistently?

Pocketing the ob is not his goal. Delivering a consistent stroke along a known/predetermined line is the goal. It just happens to be that if everything is lined up accurately, and he delivers an accurate stroke, the ob goes into the pocket. That's what he's using as a gage, or as evidence, as to whether or not he stroked accurately.

 

[Dan White]

Pocketing the ob is not his goal. Delivering a consistent stroke along a known/predetermined line is the goal. It just happens to be that if everything is lined up accurately, and he delivers an accurate stroke, the ob goes into the pocket. That's what he's using as a gage, or as evidence, as to whether or not he stroked accurately.

I'm not disagreeing with you exactly but you said pocketing the ob is not his goal but if the ball goes into the pocket that "gage" means success. That seems contradictory.

The problem is there are too many uncontrolled variables. In the down and back drill, aiming at a spot on the cushion or hitting into an ob full in the face pretty much eliminates the aiming variable. If you hit some very soft "tap" shots you can confirm if the cue ball does in fact hit that spot without too much concern that a bad stroke altered the path. For AimPro's set up he cannot be sure whether he adjusted the aim or if he made a better stroke. The mind plays tricks and if you missed your first three shots fat then guess what, you are going to start aiming a little thinner when that might not be the problem.

I really don't see this any differently than setting up a random shot. He's not using the AimRight other than to set up an 1/8 overlap cut shot, for example, but he also said it doesn't matter what the angle is and he doesn't look at any target on the table to send the cb to that spot. What is the point of setting up precise cuts if you are not going to use that knowledge in some way?

 

[BC21]

I'm not disagreeing with you exactly but you said pocketing the ob is not his goal but if the ball goes into the pocket that "gage" means success. That seems contradictory.

The problem is there are too many uncontrolled variables. In the down and back drill, aiming at a spot on the cushion or hitting into an ob full in the face pretty much eliminates the aiming variable. If you hit some very soft "tap" shots you can confirm if the cue ball does in fact hit that spot without too much concern that a bad stroke altered the path. For AimPro's set up he cannot be sure whether he adjusted the aim or if he made a better stroke. The mind plays tricks and if you missed your first three shots fat then guess what, you are going to start aiming a little thinner when that might not be the problem.

I really don't see this any differently than setting up a random shot. He's not using the AimRight other than to set up an 1/8 overlap cut shot, for example, but he also said it doesn't matter what the angle is and he doesn't look at any target on the table to send the cb to that spot. What is the point of setting up precise cuts if you are not going to use that knowledge in some way?

I agree.

 

[AimPro Billiards]

I found your videos on YouTube. (The links in this thread show as "Video Unavailable".)

Disclaimer: I AM NOT AN INSTRUCTOR.

I applaud your dedication. Would you allow me some observations?

1) When you were shooting many of the shots, even if you made many shots your follow through was in the direction of the cut. (If you were cutting to the right your cue tip followed through to the right; left vice versa). It is possible that on your misses where you hit too thick, this movement is occurring prior to striking the cue ball.

2) You mentioned that your are "not married to any PSR" (or something like that). In your step in to shots, you don't seem to have addressed the shots with your feet and body position. It seems you get down, then your back hand moves around (a lot) as you "aim" (or adjust or whatever you want to call it). From pretty much everything I have ever heard about best techniques, we should aim while standing and get down on the shot with the cue already aligned, such that only very, very small (micro?) adjustments are required.

Perhaps your may want to consider addressing these two items.

I will refrain from commenting on the system you describe. I personally think the straight up and back drill and long "Mighty X" stop shots are highly instructive for grooving one's stroke, so I'll stick with those methods. Good luck with promoting your system (and no, there is no sarcasm there, I wish you good luck.)

Thanks for your best wishes and your observations; I think it's amazing that despite my best efforts to just be shooting straight, that there's so much bias to somehow swerve the stroke to make the cut. Since the video clips were recorded, I've been changing stance, etc. and really working on a straight follow through. There's power in using video to review one's performance. I'm always surprised at how it looks (I'm usually horrified, but release the videos to the world anyways!) compared to what I thought I had done.

I've shot the up and back drill and the long diagonal straight in shot for years and years and the net has been no improvement. And my doing part 2 of my method had me stuck as well at first. I tried many many changes in mechanics, preshot, etc. and benefits last 1 hour to 4 days and then are gone. Part 1 of my method has helped me break out of that and make more substantive and long-lasting results. There, I've shown dry stroking on the rail and using a laser aimed across. But now I'm favoring using a mirror training aid, which has better shown me many of my specific mechanical errors (especially alignment) instead of having to do detective work on why the laser dot/line is moving around. Similarly, videoing yourself can also directly show mechanical flaws -- or timing/jerking, etc. and jumping and swerving etc. that one may overlook in the passion for pocketing. The latest version of the mirror training tool also allows for a smart phone to video your mechanics in action.

But note that your up and back and X drill are not cut shots. As you observed in my cut shot practice, I introduce swerving that would be less present on a straight in shot. That's one reason I recommend cut shots for developing a better stroke. And you won't learn aiming cut shots from those two drills. My Method is to develop both accuracy and then test/verify one's aiming method for cut shots. So, it's purpose includes what you are doing and goes another step past that. And I wonder what you do to improve. I've not improved, as I said. I just grooved in various compensations for a bad setup and poor mechanics. Those compensations fail me when I've not practiced them enough or just simply when I shoot at a different shot speed than I've tuned my muscles to coordinate.

Good for you that you can do the up and back drill and get value.

 

[AimPro Billiards]

I'm not disagreeing with you exactly but you said pocketing the ob is not his goal but if the ball goes into the pocket that "gage" means success. That seems contradictory.

The problem is there are too many uncontrolled variables. In the down and back drill, aiming at a spot on the cushion or hitting into an ob full in the face pretty much eliminates the aiming variable. If you hit some very soft "tap" shots you can confirm if the cue ball does in fact hit that spot without too much concern that a bad stroke altered the path. For AimPro's set up he cannot be sure whether he adjusted the aim or if he made a better stroke. The mind plays tricks and if you missed your first three shots fat then guess what, you are going to start aiming a little thinner when that might not be the problem.

I really don't see this any differently than setting up a random shot. He's not using the AimRight other than to set up an 1/8 overlap cut shot, for example, but he also said it doesn't matter what the angle is and he doesn't look at any target on the table to send the cb to that spot. What is the point of setting up precise cuts if you are not going to use that knowledge in some way?

In part 2 of the method, the FOCUS is on shooting straight and pocketing the ball indicates success. Now, the ball can be pocketed as a result of luck or a combination of stroke flaws that counter each other just right. But that usually won't hold up with both cuts to the left and to the right and at different shot speeds. And one has to also watch and feel what happens. So, I need to recognize if I'm finishing straight or not. And I have to FOCUS on shooting straight and not adjusting to compensate for past misses -- it is a mental challenge.

The angles and distances together determine the accuracy needed to be successful at some percentage. So, if working parts 1 and 2 for accuracy, you adjust angle and distance to increase the challenge as one improves. Then when one has sufficient accuracy for a given cut angle, then move to part 3 and change your approach to the shot and just aim as you would normally and compare your results to what you had when just shooting straight. If your performance degrades, then you have some flaw in your aiming that you can address. At that point, you might consider using the AimRight sighting aids. I understand they are not easily visible when you are down on the shot and at distance, but aiming is ideally done when standing and you should see them from there. Or just practice aiming when the CB-OB distances are closer and the aids are visible.

Also about the issue of grooving one's stroke on any shot. I showed in the video that I had grooved myself to make the 1/4 ball hit shot when shooting normally (whereas when doing the Part 2 drill, I missed constantly). That's because I developed a system of compensations for bad mechanics; as you say, the mind plays tricks to help for success. Part 2 is designed to try to overcome that and reveal problems; it's not perfect. It can still be cheated. Augmenting it with an instructor watching or videoing yourself or using a mirror all can help. And for me, it's just way more interesting that shooting a ball out and back. I've spent more hours now on part 2 of the method in just the last few weeks than I've spent my entire life on the out and back drill. To each his own, as they say. But remember: the out and back drill gives no help at helping you with your cut shot aiming or whether you introduce stroke swerving when faced with a cut shot. And the out and back drill has its limitations. Spin can compensate for off angle hit; so there you need to shoot a striped ball with no wobble). There's not a good progression on it nor a fine measure of results (like percentage of shots made at Level 5).

You also asked how this is different from just shooting any random shot over and over. HUGE differences. The only thing I'd recommend doing over and over is repeating parts 1 and 2 of the Method to refine accuracy. I only shoot enough shots at part 2 to MEASURE my effectiveness at the chosen difficulty level. If good, I'll consider raising the difficulty. And I will shoot it enough to try to be integrating in whatever I learned in part 1. But after a relatively short bit, if I'm not improving with each set of shots, I revert to part 1 to see what else needs to be changed. Just repeating a drill over and over has worked for me for some things, like speed control, but rarely helped me with accuracy -- usually I just learned how to adjust for my flaws at some given shot speed. This Method is intended to force one to find and fix flaws, not learn to compensate for them.

And shooting one shot over and over mixes up accuracy and aiming. I separate them and that makes is much easier to figure out where the problems are and address them. And if you learn to be accurate and then to properly aim a given cut angle, that generalizes to many shots because you don't need to master that many cut angles.

 

[Dan White]

In part 2 of the method, the FOCUS is on shooting straight and pocketing the ball indicates success. Now, the ball can be pocketed as a result of luck or a combination of stroke flaws that counter each other just right. But that usually won't hold up with both cuts to the left and to the right and at different shot speeds. And one has to also watch and feel what happens. So, I need to recognize if I'm finishing straight or not. And I have to FOCUS on shooting straight and not adjusting to compensate for past misses -- it is a mental challenge.

The angles and distances together determine the accuracy needed to be successful at some percentage. So, if working parts 1 and 2 for accuracy, you adjust angle and distance to increase the challenge as one improves. Then when one has sufficient accuracy for a given cut angle, then move to part 3 and change your approach to the shot and just aim as you would normally and compare your results to what you had when just shooting straight. If your performance degrades, then you have some flaw in your aiming that you can address. At that point, you might consider using the AimRight sighting aids. I understand they are not easily visible when you are down on the shot and at distance, but aiming is ideally done when standing and you should see them from there. Or just practice aiming when the CB-OB distances are closer and the aids are visible.

Also about the issue of grooving one's stroke on any shot. I showed in the video that I had grooved myself to make the 1/4 ball hit shot when shooting normally (whereas when doing the Part 2 drill, I missed constantly). That's because I developed a system of compensations for bad mechanics; as you say, the mind plays tricks to help for success. Part 2 is designed to try to overcome that and reveal problems; it's not perfect. It can still be cheated. Augmenting it with an instructor watching or videoing yourself or using a mirror all can help. And for me, it's just way more interesting that shooting a ball out and back. I've spent more hours now on part 2 of the method in just the last few weeks than I've spent my entire life on the out and back drill. To each his own, as they say. But remember: the out and back drill gives no help at helping you with your cut shot aiming or whether you introduce stroke swerving when faced with a cut shot. And the out and back drill has its limitations. Spin can compensate for off angle hit; so there you need to shoot a striped ball with no wobble). There's not a good progression on it nor a fine measure of results (like percentage of shots made at Level 5).

You are right that shooting at angles introduces other issues compared to shooting straight down and back. The down and back is just one drill and, frankly, not one I've done all that much. You can put an ob in the center of the table and that is a 1/2 hit to the left and right corner. You can also hit shots where the cue ball rebounds one rail. If you shoot left and right cuts the cue ball rebound will tell you if you are consistent.

Like has been said, I think you are just doing what we all do... finding methods that help you solve your weaknesses.

 

[bbb]

OK.
Tell me what you think of the Method and its potential value to you or others.

Short enough?

check your pm

 

[AimPro Billiards]

You are right that shooting at angles introduces other issues compared to shooting straight down and back. The down and back is just one drill and, frankly, not one I've done all that much. You can put an ob in the center of the table and that is a 1/2 hit to the left and right corner. You can also hit shots where the cue ball rebounds one rail. If you shoot left and right cuts the cue ball rebound will tell you if you are consistent.

Like has been said, I think you are just doing what we all do... finding methods that help you solve your weaknesses.

I agree that finding methods to help solve weaknesses is what we all do; for example: find something to help with speed control or position play, etc. But if you mean for accuracy and shot making, I think we disagree (which is OK); I don't think it's the same.

I think what I'm proposing is very different and unique due to a combination of factors. It attempts to be a general solution that applies to a broad set of shots; thus it's far more powerful and faster than any ordinary shot repetition.

It starts with fundamentals of accuracy, separated from traditional aiming and then goes on to check aiming, once accuracy is sufficient. And the accuracy portion is incremental. The iteration between the AimRight Straight-Cut Drill and the Dry Practice is frequent, looking for the source(s) of error and then testing the result. And the Dry Practice can use any and all tools and tricks including the following: dry stroking on the rail/cushion junction; using various mechanical stroke trainers; using a mirror; videoing your stroke and looking for issues; having someone watch your stroke and share their observations. Accuracy improvements gained here apply to most shots, not just the particular one being practiced. Then if you learn a reliable way to aim that particular cut angle (including at various distances), that can be generalized to all shots with similar angles. Again, in my view, the power is the generalization that can happen from this approach.

Ordinary shot practice can lead to improvement that does generalize to some degree. I'm claiming this approach should both lead to faster improvement and broader generalization.

 

[Dan White]

I agree that finding methods to help solve weaknesses is what we all do; for example: find something to help with speed control or position play, etc. But if you mean for accuracy and shot making, I think we disagree (which is OK); I don't think it's the same.

I think what I'm proposing is very different and unique due to a combination of factors. It attempts to be a general solution that applies to a broad set of shots; thus it's far more powerful and faster than any ordinary shot repetition.

It starts with fundamentals of accuracy, separated from traditional aiming and then goes on to check aiming, once accuracy is sufficient. And the accuracy portion is incremental. The iteration between the AimRight Straight-Cut Drill and the Dry Practice is frequent, looking for the source(s) of error and then testing the result. And the Dry Practice can use any and all tools and tricks including the following: dry stroking on the rail/cushion junction; using various mechanical stroke trainers; using a mirror; videoing your stroke and looking for issues; having someone watch your stroke and share their observations. Accuracy improvements gained here apply to most shots, not just the particular one being practiced. Then if you learn a reliable way to aim that particular cut angle (including at various distances), that can be generalized to all shots with similar angles. Again, in my view, the power is the generalization that can happen from this approach.

Ordinary shot practice can lead to improvement that does generalize to some degree. I'm claiming this approach should both lead to faster improvement and broader generalization.

What you are saying is that step 1 is to practice really hard on getting a straight stroke. Then step 2 is pocketing balls with that straight stroke. How do you know you are doing the same stroke in step 2 as you are in step 1? You said yourself that cutting balls is different from full shots or "dry" practice. You also said you were swerving your stroke without even knowing it until you saw it on video. My point is that you have two basic variables, aim and stroke, and you are not controlling for either in step 2. I thought you were trying to control aim in step 2 by aiming at the ghost ball circle on the AimRight. If not, I still don't understand the point. This makes it no different than just hitting balls over and over. What am I missing?