Dave's Aiming Method (DAM)
- Thread starter dr_dave
- Start date
You're not getting the message, are you?
What message would that be? I can NOT answer your question if I do not know to what message you are referring.
Perhaps you have been misinformed & are working under a false premise.
Can you please state the message, the in a concise totally logical manner.
Do you speak for every viewing member of these forums or do you speak for everyone that has bought it or is using it or do you speak for a few like individuals or do you speak merely for yourself?
What good is your post to suggest a message that I have not 'got' if you do not restate that message in a manner that I might 'get' it.
I'll just stop there on that subject...
other than to say that my question to Lou was to garner some information regarding Hal Houle of whom I am really not that familiar when it comes to how he was putting forth his ideas on aiming, whether they were his or he garnered them from another or others.
For all I know he may have never used the word objective & he was merely suggesting a method that he thought worked very well given one's own subjective interpretations of the actual shots & any subconscious tweaks that one might subconsciously implement...
or... he may not have had any idea what one's subconscious mind is or had any idea what objective vs subjective actually is.
This post is one of many my responsive posts to derogatory posts so please, everyone, do NOT count it in my post totals.
So... IF you are capable...
would you please state the message in a concise logical manner?
Thanks in advance if you are capable of doing that for me & everyone else that may have not gotten the message.
???
Schmidt never used CTE, so what you say makes no sense. Now that he's a bit older and past his prime, though, maybe CTE might help him regain his former abilities. Worth a try if I was in his shoes. I'm sure Stan would give him all the help he needed.
Stevie got into a slump and was ready to give up on pro pool before Stan took him in. Top players like SVB and Archer have come out and said Stevie is playing great again since he adopted CTE. I'll trust their assessment (as well as Stan and Stevie himself) before I trust yours.
I was playing one pocket yesterday against a gentleman a little older than me that was at semi pro speed in his hey day. He has many more years experience than I do playing one pocket as I have been playing it for less than 9 months.
I took the first game rather convincingly. 8 to 4.
He barely won the next 3 games by 2 balls, 1 ball, & 2 balls. I had chances to win each of those games but rattled what would have actually been the winner.
I changed cues & rather convincingly won what would be the final game because he quit, 8 to 5.
Sometimes a change, any change, can be a catalyst for a turn around.
CTE may be a better method & pre shot routine than what Stevie Morre was using prior.
The fact that he is playing better is not an indication that "it works" as 'advertised'.
It merely shows that it can be beneficial & I do not think that anyone that is not a die hard proponent has ever said otherwise.
When I determined that IT was not actually 'an objective aiming method' my interest in it, for me using it, basically died as I have no interest in learning a completely different subjective method of which I saw no benefit over my 45 years of subjectively learned shot pictures.
That said if one is new to the game or has a limited 'file cabinet' of shot picture from which to call upon then CTE may be fine for such individuals to implement.
Even if one has a significant amount of shot pictures in their data base they may still prefer CTE for a number of reasons,
but it should NOT be because of the description of it being 'an objective aiming system'.
That said, placebos have been found to work for some in rather many cases.
Psychology & the subconscious/conscious minds relationship is rather complex & quite interesting.
I took the first game rather convincingly. 8 to 4.
He barely won the next 3 games by 2 balls, 1 ball, & 2 balls. I had chances to win each of those games but rattled what would have actually been the winner.
I changed cues & rather convincingly won what would be the final game because he quit, 8 to 5.
Sometimes a change, any change, can be a catalyst for a turn around.
CTE may be a better method & pre shot routine than what Stevie Morre was using prior.
The fact that he is playing better is not an indication that "it works" as 'advertised'.
It merely shows that it can be beneficial & I do not think that anyone that is not a die hard proponent has ever said otherwise.
When I determined that IT was not actually 'an objective aiming method' my interest in it, for me using it, basically died as I have no interest in learning a completely different subjective method of which I saw no benefit over my 45 years of subjectively learned shot pictures.
That said if one is new to the game or has a limited 'file cabinet' of shot picture from which to call upon then CTE may be fine for such individuals to implement.
Even if one has a significant amount of shot pictures in their data base they may still prefer CTE for a number of reasons,
but it should NOT be because of the description of it being 'an objective aiming system'.
That said, placebos have been found to work for some in rather many cases.
Psychology & the subconscious/conscious minds relationship is rather complex & quite interesting.
Please point to where it is advertised, and to what part of that advertisement you object to.
Thank you in advance.
If you'll note I put the word 'advertised' in single quotes.
That is a means of indicating that the word in not necessarily being used in the its strict literal sense.
Is word of mouth "advertising"? Is an unpaid for endorsement "advertising"? Is a for free YouTube Video "advertising"? Are forum posts "advertising"?
It rather amazes me how some want to be very literal regarding something that they do not want to hold to the same standard.
I think you know quote well to what I am not in agreement regarding it.
So can you please tell me to what real purpose your post is relative to the topic?
This is another post of mine in "reply". So, please do not tally it against my post count?
Thanks in Advance if you can explain how your post is relative given what you already 'know' about what I am in disagreement.
PS1 I thought the self proclaimed "beagle puppy" was taking himself out of the fray because he does not have a taste for the juggler.
PS2
___________________________________VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Last edited:
300 words just to say you don't understand the message!!
Yeah sure. There's a clue in my above statement.
I'm not playing teeth pulling guessing games with those that only want to suggest personal disaragements.
If there is a message that I & perhaps others are not getting, then just state it.
Otherwise your posts are just what they are... personal disparagements with nothing to support those suggestions & nothing of ANY substantive nature.
This is a post in "reply". Please do not tally it to my post count?
Last edited:
It's not something I can easily put into words.
It's a feel thing.
It transcends subjectivity and objectivity.
If you can not put it into words, then it is not a message that I am not getting.
It's not a message at all.
We are now up to three(3) posts of basically nothing from you in those posts.
That was my point - you're not getting the message.
i had the pleasure of playing Moore 20+ yrs ago when he was known as "lil" Stevie Moore and his game continued to develop until it peaked when he was on our Mosconi Team, i'd be very surprised if he used cte when his game was at that level, so, i'll stand by my statement that he was a better player pre cte.
In closing let me emphasize that i could care the hell less who is right or wrong
No.
You're missing the "message".
If "it" is not communicated, then there is no message.
There are differences in missing the message & not getting the message & ignoring the message.
So... it appears that YOU are ignoring my attempt at communication.
Your last now four(4) posts remind me when I was at a party & someone came back from being outside & their breath smelled like a certain kind of smoke as they put their face right onto mine to TRY to make a coherent sentence into my ear.
Last edited:
But YOU can not put it into words.
Who can 'get it' if it can NOT be communicated?
We are up to 5 posts from you on this 'subject' with NOTHING substantive from you other than Bunkum & Balderdash.
The message is not any particular set of words but a culmination of words and feelings coming from this forum.
I just don't think you are trying hard enough.
Oh, I KNOW that I am hated by some.
My 'children' did not & still do not initially like it when I correct them & show them to be wrong about something, but they generally understand & do not long fight the reality & even thank me later.
Pride & the Truth are both rather often bitter pills to swallow for some, especially for arrogant, condescending, individuals with an over self inflated ego & opinion of themselves.
It's also difficult for some to see their hero being shown to have made a mistake & that they have been & are wrong.
So... both types of individuals take out that unpleasant reality on the one that is delivering the accurate "message".
I'll just stop there so as to comply with a request of management.
Last edited: