there is no sense to teach anyone how to aim in any complicated way as a beginner. That's not the premise of these discussions. And without the basic ability to hit the ball in a straight line what good is having a straight line to shoot down.
If someone wants to try and "buy" a better game then let them. If they want to invest time into an aiming system, an LD shaft, a four inch thick book, dvds, whatever...let them do so in peace.
The table won't lie to them....either they will improve or they wont and that's on them. No one here can say with certainty what will help any individual to improve. They can't say that any one thing will be what helps a person reach their milestones. Just be happy that there are people to try whatever other people are spending time creating.
This sport and this industry is tiny. A large percentage of the people working in it are doing it more for the passion of the sport than to build a solid money making career. They often spend their time and savings to create products that they really feel are beneficial to anyone who will give them a chance. They often will sponsor tournaments and players until they no longer can afford it. They spend money on advertising with billiard magazines and websites, they donate product.
Why should we shit on those people just because we INDIVIDUALLY don't agree with whatever they are selling? I mean if a person isn't scamming, they are genuinely promoting something they worked on and believe in, and that thing has good reviews then why dog them to the point that they get discouraged and driven away?
I bought an ebook once that was horrible, essentially the lesson was "don't miss". To me that's a scam that deserves to be slammed. But when someone is genuine and sincere and has a product that is thoughtfully designed to help players get better we should just leave them alone to do their thing. If it turns out to be something really good then that will come through and if not it will wither and fade.
We can give our opinions without being nasty and mean and rude. We can say things like "I think working on your stroke is more important than aiming" and leave it at that without having to attempt to discredit anyone's aiming system that they developed or refined.
And if you really want to "debunk" a method then get on the table and debate it. Let the creator defend himself ON THE TABLE to tackle the criticisms leveled. But that can also be done in a civil manner that is intended as a sincere exchange of ideas with the ultimate goal being to distill the information to the purest form so everyone can understand it.
This is my point and will remain my point. All of who love pool generally love to play it more than we love to talk about it. And we like to think that we are on a journey to become the best players we can be and that we can always improve in some way. So be encouraging of anything that fosters more pool playing.
Stay in Stroke!
John
I'm trying to comprehend the combative nature of your response when in actuality I've been generally supportive of what you have said here. Just the same, I'll comment on your responses to me.
there is no sense to teach anyone how to aim in any complicated way as a beginner. That's not the premise of these discussions. And without the basic ability to hit the ball in a straight line what good is having a straight line to shoot down.
Who said that? And what constitutes "complicated aiming?" I made no reference to aiming other than our agreement that aiming and stroke are not mutually exclusive.
If someone wants to try and "buy" a better game then let them. If they want to invest time into an aiming system, an LD shaft, a four inch thick book, dvds, whatever...let them do so in peace.
I never said they couldn't do that either. Just the same, if someone asks for an opinion on something, I nudge them in the direction I believe in. People are going to buy what they want to buy regardless. And while you may think that's for the betterment of the sport, it ends up turning into resentment when those purchases do not bear the improvements they seek. In fact, in the Broken Revo thread, I was the one defending Predator and their product, when everyone else was dogging them. There was a lot of misinformation about how the CF shaft was made, and why they used foam in the core (which I was right about) that it made my skin crawl.
The table won't lie to them....either they will improve or they wont and that's on them. No one here can say with certainty what will help any individual to improve. They can't say that any one thing will be what helps a person reach their milestones. Just be happy that there are people to try whatever other people are spending time creating.
There's no argument here for the most part. I'm indifferent to people tyring different things, regardless of what my personal opinions are. At the same time, it takes as much of an open mind to 'not' buy something as it does 'to' buy something.
This sport and this industry is tiny. A large percentage of the people working in it are doing it more for the passion of the sport than to build a solid money making career. They often spend their time and savings to create products that they really feel are beneficial to anyone who will give them a chance. They often will sponsor tournaments and players until they no longer can afford it. They spend money on advertising with billiard magazines and websites, they donate product.
No argument from me, though I never brought up a point to the contrary so I don't understand why you'd reiterate the obvious to me.
Why should we shit on those people just because we INDIVIDUALLY don't agree with whatever they are selling? I mean if a person isn't scamming, they are genuinely promoting something they worked on and believe in, and that thing has good reviews then why dog them to the point that they get discouraged and driven away?
I'm not shitting on on anyone constructive. In the case of Stan (who I think you're referring to), I've been generally supportive in the midst of some of the negativity. In fact I have conversed with him privately on the matter, because I did not want to broach some subjects in the open out of respect for the man. Have even been in the process of figuring out an excuse to visit Kentucky so I can meet Stan personally, but it's busy season at work so I'll have to wait till June at least. You may be confusing me with someone else. I don't understand how CTE works, using all my knowledge of CAD/CAM, mathematics and physics. I tried to figure it out when Hal posted his fractional system 20 years ago. And it's the same exact people from then arguing for two decades that bicker about this. Pretty humorous if you ask me; akin to the old men at the coffee shop arguing the same argument ad nauseum. But you have it completely wrong what I think of Stan and his work.
We can give our opinions without being nasty and mean and rude. We can say things like "I think working on your stroke is more important than aiming" and leave it at that without having to attempt to discredit anyone's aiming system that they developed or refined
Again, point me where I have dismissed Stan's work whosesale and I'll gladly retract and apologize. But I won't, because I would never do that, regardless of whether I agree with it or not. What I DO dismiss are teh legions of foot soldiers who'll blindly defend something. Which is why I'm glad that Stan is here himself to discuss the truths and fallacies of his findings, and not third-hand. There's some great testimonials, and that's what they are - not 'proof' as the foot soldiers claim. We see the how, but the why is more complicated than most would like to admit. And I'm fine with that. I'd have even stumbled upon my own version which divides the OB into sixths (or each side into 3) with some pretty good results.
And if you really want to "debunk" a method then get on the table and debate it. Let the creator defend himself ON THE TABLE to tackle the criticisms leveled. But that can also be done in a civil manner that is intended as a sincere exchange of ideas with the ultimate goal being to distill the information to the purest form so everyone can understand it.
The work I had done on and off was in my quest to "prove" Hal's original post. To this day, I can't; that doesn't mean it can't be. Stan has even said so himself that the ultimate proof may not come in his time. Yet he has a decade of understanding it and perfecting his methods and is willing to share it, and I'm down with that. I don't use much CTE when I do shoot, as I more-or-less visualize each shot as if it already happened, using only 2 lines. Which was sort of an extension of what I learned from George Fels and Bob Byrne. Works really well, but nowadays I'm lucky if I shoot 3 hours a week. Met a fellow forum member who has all but convinced me to join the Tri State Tour. But, regardless my opinin, I gather as much information as I can, as I feel that in a game where both players have equal physical abilities, it's the one with more knowledge that ends up ahead in the end.
This is my point and will remain my point. All of who love pool generally love to play it more than we love to talk about it. And we like to think that we are on a journey to become the best players we can be and that we can always improve in some way. So be encouraging of anything that fosters more pool playing.
I think that anyone who thinks of this game as more than just a pastime is always looking to improve. I still believe, however, that the more people see improvement, the more they will continue to practice and play. I commented on your past match more as observation and encouragement. I don't see how it could be construed as "dogging" a system, when in fact I mentioned it was probably your lack of trust in it by steering the cue that lead to many of those misses. As someone who sees the exact same problems going on in bowling and golf (and their related forums and related arguments are almost exactly the same as pool, just substitute the sport names) and with pool being my first love, I'd like to see the sport have another revival. But it won't if the participants erroneously feel they were fleeced. It may not be the sellers' intention, but that does not matter. The other thing is that we see an ever growing rise of star caliber players from Europe and Asia. And I'd guess that part of that is due to the fact that their bringing up and training their young talent in a way we don't do here.
John, best of luck in all your future endeavors... hope to meet you someday....
