So he's lying about a 10 dollar book,lol
How do you know you need an Aiming System?
- Thread starter Bobkitty
- Start date
So he's lying about a 10 dollar book,lol
My understanding from a couple of weeks ago is that Low500 had not purchased the book from Brian at that point yet was disparaging of it. His (assuming its a he) complaint that the math was so complicated tipped me off that this person didn't actually own a copy.
He could clear it up with a simple yes or no.
oh yeah. When traveling I have met up with numerous guys from the groups. I've also met up with several guys from RSB and AZ when they were passing through. Met a lot of great guys that way.
Lou Figueroa
I think we got it worked out via PM. Let's leave it at that.
And I really don't care how you play, I'm up for playing anyone cheap.
Lou Figueroa
I saw this happen once with Jim Mataya...he was drunk, of course.
He was in a pretty good size pool room running off his mouth like that.
A couple of ex-con types (with all those prison tattoos) were gambling pretty heavy and it finally got under their skin.
One went up to him and very loudly told him to shut the F. up or he would be going back to Detroit in a pine box.
Mataya became quiet as a mouse and that was the end of that.
Some people cannot be messed around with...they will hurt a loudmouth and they don't mind going back to prison over it too much either.
Just another indictment on the sorry state of many poolrooms, in my opinion.
All of it could have been avoided if the owner had sent Mataya on his way immediately instead of tolerating him as "troubled royalty".
I guess you didn't see my post so I'll ask again: Did you buy a copy of Poolology?
I've got plenty of heart but I am not stupid. Giving your money away to a better player over and over when you know he's better is stupid. You are welcome to do that however with zero criticism from me. Guess it's someone's duty to fund pool players. Here's an analogy; we are each members of Bushwood country club. I shoot 75 regularly, and you can't break 90. How many times will you play me straight up for $100 @ round? 1, 5, 10? If not 10, YOU HAVE NO HEART! It's the same thing on a pool table.
Last edited:
Now you sound like someone who likes their money
Anyone who stands there and gives their money away over and over in a bad bet is merely a simon pure fool or a born loser...or both.
Has nothing to do with lack of heart.............lack of brains is more like it.
I got to admit, even as dippy as you seem to be over that crackpot "poolology thing", you are absolutely spot on when it comes to this one. :thumbup:
Anyone who stands there and gives their money away over and over in a bad bet is merely a simon pure fool or a born loser...or both.
Has nothing to do with lack of heart.............lack of brains is more like it.
low 500
i will be another one to ask did you buy poololgy ??? yes /no
just curious
i have not read all the posts in this thread
and to answer the question of the thread
i think first you should work on propper mechanics to be able to hit the cue ball in the vertical axis aimed at a point you want to hit with soft medium and hard hits
all with no ununtentional spin
when you can do that and still cant make a ball an aiming system is reasonable to consider
jmho
icbw
i will be another one to ask did you buy poololgy ??? yes /no
just curious
i have not read all the posts in this thread
and to answer the question of the thread
i think first you should work on propper mechanics to be able to hit the cue ball in the vertical axis aimed at a point you want to hit with soft medium and hard hits
all with no ununtentional spin
when you can do that and still cant make a ball an aiming system is reasonable to consider
jmho
icbw
This is why you get called out for telling different stories to make you look good.
1 you say your talent is instantly recognizing someone better then you. How do you do that? sit in a chair and watch? oh he's too good can't play him. = no heart
2 "Giving your money away to a better player over and over when you know he's better is stupid". Except you post about giving your money to a pro on a regular basis.
3 Your analogy is stupid but I'll answer it. I'd play you every day and keep upping the bet. Why? Because i firmly believe you have no heart and would choke for the cash.
1. no, I would play for the going table stakes, as i watch him play, if i can detect he's better, I'll move on to another table or go home.
2. The pro I play is for $10 in a race to 7 ro 9 on a 9' tight Diamond table. I count it as a lesson watching him play. Plus I like him and don't mind contributing to a struggling pro.
3. You have no idea how I play. Your statement tells me you've probably left the pool room (or golf course) broke many times.
Last edited:
Why do you think so?
To answer the original question...
Aiming systems seem most likely to be of use if you are a combination of 1) nervous and 2) analytical. An aiming system is like a pre-shot routine on crack, which one could argue could be useful for people who are prone to psych themselves out on the table. The system can get the excitable player through to a successful shot by sheer distraction.
However it seems unlikely that anyone in the normal range of have trouble pulling the trigger vs. fast/loose, and feel player vs. analytical player, would be helped more by learning elaborate aiming/pivoting routines than by practice on fundamental stroke and position play.
And clearly anyone who has little trouble confidently addressing/playing the ball and tends to play by feel would be worse off using a rigid aiming system.
Aiming systems seem most likely to be of use if you are a combination of 1) nervous and 2) analytical. An aiming system is like a pre-shot routine on crack, which one could argue could be useful for people who are prone to psych themselves out on the table. The system can get the excitable player through to a successful shot by sheer distraction.
However it seems unlikely that anyone in the normal range of have trouble pulling the trigger vs. fast/loose, and feel player vs. analytical player, would be helped more by learning elaborate aiming/pivoting routines than by practice on fundamental stroke and position play.
And clearly anyone who has little trouble confidently addressing/playing the ball and tends to play by feel would be worse off using a rigid aiming system.
Last edited:
To answer the original question
The purpose of an aiming system is to select the CORRECT point to aim at. A correct point that pockets the ball and compensates for collision induced throw/cling...over and over and over.
Nothing more and nothing less.
The elimination of the guesswork used with invisible ghost balling, fractional aiming, and other marginal mathematical zone foolishness is a part of the goal.
Trying to keep it as simple as possible while at the same time producing an extremely high degree of efficiency....that is the ideal. Allowing the player's mind to be free of clutter...so he can 'float like a butterfly and sting like a bee'.
Whether or not the player will send the cueball to the point required is another matter indeed.
The purpose of an aiming system is to select the CORRECT point to aim at. A correct point that pockets the ball and compensates for collision induced throw/cling...over and over and over.
Nothing more and nothing less.
The elimination of the guesswork used with invisible ghost balling, fractional aiming, and other marginal mathematical zone foolishness is a part of the goal.
Trying to keep it as simple as possible while at the same time producing an extremely high degree of efficiency....that is the ideal. Allowing the player's mind to be free of clutter...so he can 'float like a butterfly and sting like a bee'.
Whether or not the player will send the cueball to the point required is another matter indeed.
Obviously this is yet another swipe at Brian and his work. How do you know Poolology is foolishness if you haven't purchased the book?
It is obvious you have never seen the Poolology book. You have no clue what you are talking about. There is no guesswork.
You are a CTE user. Tell me, how do you determine when to use A, B, or C? How exactly do you know when a shot is a little thin or little thick? How did you so quickly figure out that mysterious visual phenomena simply by watching the $40 DVDs, when most people have to pay for a private lesson to understand it? I'll tell you how..... You guess, based on experience.
The "foolish" Poolology method provides a known aim point, sending the cueball down a known aim line to the proper contact needed to pocket the ob, accounting for throw also. There is no mystery, no specific perceptions, and no guesswork. The solution is the aim point, no mystery. And it's known before you place your bridge hand on the table. It's that simple.
The more you belittle Poolology, and me personally, the more clueless you appear.
I have no idea who Low500 is or where he's coming from with his posts. But maybe, just maybe he was attempting to get you to say exactly what you did above.
For those involved with CTE and proficient with it, this is the identical response said by us for 20 years to the same individuals and their new recruits over and over because it's true. CLUELESS!
Maybe he is and maybe he isn't. Could be he's genius to use this tactic to show the correlation between poolology and CTE with the attacks. Or, could be he did buy the book, learned and used it, and thinks it's ca-ca. I have no idea.
If it continues and a large number of posters start chiming in the same way, you're in for a hard, bumpy ride you won't like very much and know what others have gone through with their system.
I hear you. And I'm not knocking CTE users. I'm comparing the two systems based on feedback I've read about those who have tried both. And based on my personal experience watching every single CTE video I can find on YouTube. Like I've said before, some people get it and done people don't. I realize that can also apply to Poolology.
Atta boy Dan, you tell him!! Makes 100% sense. While I'm thinking about it, why didn't you purchase any of the DVDs before going on a personal life long crusade to discredit CTE and belittle Stan and all of it's users?
Man I love the hypocrisy around here, don't you?
I wasn't even thinking about you so much when I made the post, I was thinking about all the other knockers of CTE. What if you had that many over the length of a decade or more? Wouldn't it at some point just get to the point of disgusting.
Best thing for you to do is stay totally out of comparisons personally. Let your own product do the talking and others for it. We try to do the talking for what we know works, and look what happens. WHY? It's DISGUSTIING with the attacks.
As far as comparisons go, I'm not going to make it between CTE and Poolology because there is none, especially as far as the entire process is applied to make balls.
But yours is very much like Joe Tucker's aiming system. The difference is between fractions to shoot at with yours vs. contact points with his. He was the first one to come up with a grid for all the possibilities of OB placement on the table and the CB placement on the table.
It can all be done without the grid by enough practice to learn it for yourself just to be able to see which number contact point on both balls should be used when shooting. Or it can be done by learning the ball placement on the grid.
That can be quite overwhelming to think it needs to be learned when first seen. If it is learned, the shot is almost automatically seen and known in a flash, but it is a biatch to put all of it into the memory bank. Same as yours.
Last edited: