"Poolology", Maybe the best $10 ever spent!

[SpiderWebComm]

Haha. I would prefer Dave to keep his rude comments away from this thread. This is Poolology thread, which is none of his concern.

No trouble here until he came in. Besides, the same 2 or 3 threads have been at the top for weeks now. It's not like I resurrected a 10+yr old topic here.

And you don't travel to other threads to say your 2 cents worth?

I see you've been recruited, indoctrinated, brain washed, and pledged to allegiance by someone here.

Remember this Brian, I have NEVER knocked your aiming system one time. I've even said it has merits. Don't give me that crap about causing trouble. You're the one doing it right now. This thread is 11 pages long at this point and I didn't even make a post in it until page 9. There was more than enough prior to that which had it going off track with YOU bringing in your comments and misbeliefs about CTE which irritated Stan and made him come in to post.

That having been said, I'll stay out. You keep COMPLETELY away from any future CTE threads, new or resurrected. There is nothing you have to add that's beneficial.

Now for certain, ADIOS.

 

[Dan White]

No, you try again with some links debunking it. I don't care, you can throw some insults in for good measure. I can take it and am not a cry baby.

Funny, your sources are worthless and you don't seem to understand that. I clicked on one of them and checked footnote reference #13 to see where they got their information. The link took me to a Chinese website. LOL. Great research.

Here's the thing. You are a rebellious teenager trapped in a 40-something year old body. There, that's my insult. It was about your mind, BTW, not what you look like. Just look around at the people you are talking to in this thread. Isn't it strange that you are fighting with everybody, and just on the heels of Mike Howerton telling you in clear terms to knock it off? It almost seems like you are the one with the "in." Did you do some IT work for AZ or something? Odd.

Anyway, thanks again for reminding me why it is fruitless to carry on a conversation with you. You can have the last word, as usual.

 

[BC21]

It's none of MY business? Then why did you spend all of your time running your mouth in this post (I mean FINGERS) describing your business?

Btw, your wife and kids must love your pool playing on SATURDAYS from before noon to 2:00 am. (now that is none of my business but since you insisted on posting all of it, what the hell)

You are just so verbally charismatic that my fingers can't help but start typing in response to your comments. Lol. And my wife doesn't mind the one day per month I dip myself back into the game. Compared to the amount of time I used to invest in the game, between leagues and a retail shop and covering tables and playing tournaments....she's ok with it. Daughters are 17 and 19....they pretty much have their own schedules nowadays.

By the way, the "business" I was referring to is my book and the comments and reviews it's been receiving from satisfied buyers.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Funny, your sources are worthless and you don't seem to understand that. I clicked on one of them and checked footnote reference #13 to see where they got their information. The link took me to a Chinese website. LOL. Great research.

So where are your websites stating that Lassiter never said it?
I haven't seen on thing. There are plenty of websites debunking the fact that P.T. Barnum never said "There's a sucker born every minute.

Here's the thing. You are a rebellious teenager trapped in a 40-something year old body. There, that's my insult. It was about your mind, BTW, not what you look like.

No problem. LOL. Looks like that zinger got to you, didn't it?

Just look around at the people you are talking to in this thread. Isn't it strange that you are fighting with everybody, and just on the heels of Mike Howerton telling you in clear terms to knock it off?

He said the same thing to YOU...Both of us. But here you are goading and baiting as usual. Then you'll go crying with a report of my post. Heed his message yourself.

It almost seems like you are the one with the "in." Did you do some IT work for AZ or something? Odd.

And how would YOU know that if not for YOUR IN.

What I did was well in the past. You have a current ongoing relationship with Mike Howerton behind the scenes when you made this post on the main forum and he answered back:

DAN WHITE WROTE:
Could you clear your pm's? I need to send you a message.
Thank you,
Dan White


MIKE HOWERTON POSTED BACK:
06-11-2017, 09:17 PM

Done
Mike

Now if that doesn't sound palsy walsy, buddy-buddy to me, I don't know what does! It's right out in the open on the Main Forum. Mike and I certainly don't have a relationship like that today. I can see why you get away with the things you do along with 24hr. and 12hr. bans. It's unheard of! Even your good buddy Lou Figueroa was aghast at the short time period and couldn't believe it.

Anyway, thanks again for reminding me why it is fruitless to carry on a conversation with you. You can have the last word, as usual.

Thanks, pal.

 

[BC21]

And you don't travel to other threads to say your 2 cents worth?

I see you've been recruited, indoctrinated, brain washed, and pledged to allegiance by someone here.

Remember this Brian, I have NEVER knocked your aiming system one time. I've even said it has merits. Don't give me that crap about causing trouble. You're the one doing it right now. This thread is 11 pages long at this point and I didn't even make a post in it until page 9. There was more than enough prior to that which had it going off track with YOU bringing in your comments and misbeliefs about CTE which irritated Stan and made him come in to post.

That having been said, I'll stay out. You keep COMPLETELY away from any future CTE threads, new or resurrected. There is nothing you have to add that's beneficial.

Now for certain, ADIOS.

I know you've never knocked my book. I appreciate that. This thread became hostile and side tracked when the OP mentioned having trouble with a pivot system. That's when the pivot users came stomping in. I didn't initiate any of that drama. Stan came in to respond about my reply to AtLarge's comments on the book, which had nothing to do with CTE.

It took me a while to realize that any comment concerning one particular aiming system by a non-user of that system is automatically considered a stab at the system and it's owner. Since learning that, I have refrained from posting in any thread concerning that system because it's none of my concern and I don't want to be accused of knocking another aiming system.

I don't care if you or anyone else posts about Poolology, as long as the comments or questions are legit and not just an attempt to stir pointless controversy.

Anyway, take care Dave.

 

[ballbanger]

hahaha now i remember why i'm not active on here

 

[ballbanger]

But anyhow i'm working on it Brian i haven't put many hours yet. I do think it is helping so far for some reason 5/8 seems to be hard for my to recognize for me, I need 1/2 ball for everything lol. I did have a break n run in 8 ball with it :smile: i don't get alot of them i seem to hook myself on last ball or one before you know donkey syndrome stuff. So i'm hoping for a little more consistency. I mean for just over 12 bucks Canadian how can ya go wrong. I may be going in small tourney on Sat see how that goes. One thing i did notice is it really makes me pay attention to my aim and not willy nillying it. But to me Aim is Aim if i'm not seeing the spot well it don't matter (for me) and who knows maybe this will come in play for me to snap out of maybe more reliable. Cheers

 

[BC21]

But anyhow i'm working on it Brian i haven't put many hours yet. I do think it is helping so far for some reason 5/8 seems to be hard for my to recognize for me, I need 1/2 ball for everything lol. I did have a break n run in 8 ball with it :smile: i don't get alot of them i seem to hook myself on last ball or one before you know donkey syndrome stuff. So i'm hoping for a little more consistency. I mean for just over 12 bucks Canadian how can ya go wrong. I may be going in small tourney on Sat see how that goes. One thing i did notice is it really makes me pay attention to my aim and not willy nillying it. But to me Aim is Aim if i'm not seeing the spot well it don't matter (for me) and who knows maybe this will come in play for me to snap out of maybe more reliable. Cheers

Try using your shaft/tip as a guide. If you're nailing the 1/2 ball aim (imagining the outer suface/edge of the OB splitting your tip down the middle), a 5/8 can be looked at like this: Imagine the edge of the OB being flush with the outer edge of your tip. The 5/8 ball aim is a 1/2 tip more toward the OB than a 1/2 ball aim. A 3/8 ball aim is a 1/2 tip farther away from the OB edge. It's an accurate way to judge the aim points if you're playing with a normal shaft between 12 mm and 13.5 mm or so at the tip.

Here's what a 5/8 shot looks like on the table:

Here's a 1/2 ball shot:

And here's a 3/8 shot:

 

[paultex]

What are you looking at last Brian before pulling the trigger? Does it matter?

 

[BC21]

What are you looking at last Brian before pulling the trigger? Does it matter?

That's a huge debate. Most players say they look at the ob last. I look at the ob last. I've tried looking at the CB last but it doesn't feel right, because I'm not used to it I guess. In Willie Hoppe's book, "Billiards as it Should be Played", he says he looks at the CB last. But that could be due to years of carom Billiards, where the exact hit on the CB is equally as important, if not more important, than the exact hit on the ob. In pocket billiards it seems you need to be more exact on the ob end. If you put a touch too much or too little of left or right english, you can still pocket the ob but your position on the next shot may be off. In carom billiards if you hit a touch off of the exact english you intend to use, you're very likely not going to score.

 

[AtLarge]

... a 5/8 can be looked at like this: Imagine the edge of the OB being flush with the outer edge of your tip. The 5/8 ball aim is a 1/2 tip more toward the OB than a 1/2 ball aim. A 3/8 ball aim is a 1/2 tip farther away from the OB edge. It's an accurate way to judge the aim points if you're playing with a normal shaft between 12 mm and 13.5 mm or so at the tip. ...

Brian -- Repeating something I wrote back in post #36 of this thread:

"I believe that the recommendations for 5/8 and 3/8 hits, using the edge of the tip or shaft, are fine for most cue sticks when the OB and CB are fairly close to each other (and appear approximately the same size) but not when they are far apart and the OB appears much smaller in relation to the tip. At long distances between the balls, the 5/8 recommendation will result in an undercut and the 3/8 recommendation will result in an overcut."

 

[paultex]

That's a huge debate. Most players say they look at the ob last. I look at the ob last. I've tried looking at the CB last but it doesn't feel right, because I'm not used to it I guess. In Willie Hoppe's book, "Billiards as it Should be Played", he says he looks at the CB last. But that could be due to years of carom Billiards, where the exact hit on the CB is equally as important, if not more important, than the exact hit on the ob. In pocket billiards it seems you need to be more exact on the ob end. If you put a touch too much or too little of left or right english, you can still pocket the ob but your position on the next shot may be off. In carom billiards if you hit a touch off of the exact english you intend to use, you're very likely not going to score.

Its a debate because a player should learn to do both.

Thanks for your informative response.

I have another question if I may, can you tell me why Davis missed this hanger at 1:22:55?

Thanks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvGGFMTHgi4

 

[BC21]

Brian -- Repeating something I wrote back in post #36 of this thread:

"I believe that the recommendations for 5/8 and 3/8 hits, using the edge of the tip or shaft, are fine for most cue sticks when the OB and CB are fairly close to each other (and appear approximately the same size) but not when they are far apart and the OB appears much smaller in relation to the tip. At long distances between the balls, the 5/8 recommendation will result in an undercut and the 3/8 recommendation will result in an overcut."

Yes, I remember. It's really not a problem with shots thicker than a 1/4 aim. The distance between the balls changes the perspective of the shot slighty, shifting the cut angle by a small degree, not much. The shift difference on a 5/8 shot between a CB that's 2 feet from the OB and a CB 5 feet from the OB (both CBs on the same center-to-center line to the OB) is less than 1°. This means the shot angle (22.5°) shifts across the mouth of the pocket as the distance increases, but the shift is insignificant (less than 1°).

As the CB position gets closer to the OB (on the same center-to-center line), the change in perspective, which is measured in degrees, dramatically begins to increase and the shot angle shifts too far away from the pocket, causing the particular fractional aim point to be too thick of a hit. All shot angles have different shifts, called "offset angles" in the book. Thin cuts have larger offsets than thick cuts, but if the CB is more than a foot from the OB on thinner cuts (or 6 to 8" on thicker cuts) the offset angles are not a factor when it comes to pocketing the ball. This info is in the book.

 

[BC21]

Its a debate because a player should learn to do both.

Thanks for your informative response.

I have another question if I may, can you tell me why Davis missed this hanger at 1:22:55?

Thanks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvGGFMTHgi4

Wow. I bet he wondered how/why he missed it also!

 

[paultex]

Wow. I bet he wondered how/why he missed it also!

Come on give it a shot. Why did he miss?

I can't say definitively why but I can definitively say I have a starting point to conduct a examination that may in fact conclude why he missed in a mechanical sense.

It's important and it overrides any aiming system because if delivery is not consistent, then either compensatory motion has to take effect to rescue the objective and then that opens up a whole new set of definate proplems that compound on itself.

If anything, he missed good by at least staying down and disciplined. I admire that.

 

[BC21]

Come on give it a shot. Why did he miss?

I can't say definitively why but I can definitively say I have a starting point to conduct a examination that may in fact conclude why he missed in a mechanical sense.

It's important and it overrides any aiming system because if delivery is not consistent, then either compensatory motion has to take effect to rescue the objective and then that opens up a whole new set of definate proplems that compound on itself.

If anything, he missed good by at least staying down and disciplined. I admire that.

Lol. You're asking the wrong guy because I don't see it. It looks like everything was spot on until he over-cut the ball. Nerves, slighty off on alignment, maybe pulled his grip hand in and slighty applied outside spin without meaning to.....it"s speculation on part. Why do you think he missed?

 

[8pack]

Come on give it a shot. Why did he miss?

I can't say definitively why but I can definitively say I have a starting point to conduct a examination that may in fact conclude why he missed in a mechanical sense.

It's important and it overrides any aiming system because if delivery is not consistent, then either compensatory motion has to take effect to rescue the objective and then that opens up a whole new set of definate proplems that compound on itself.

If anything, he missed good by at least staying down and disciplined. I admire that.

Why did he miss?? He hit it bad, it happens. You ever heard of pressure??:wink:

 

[paultex]

Lol. You're asking the wrong guy because I don't see it. It looks like everything was spot on until he over-cut the ball. Nerves, slighty off on alignment, maybe pulled his grip hand in and slighty applied outside spin without meaning to.....it"s speculation on part. Why do you think he missed?

Well, I admit without further analysis of what Davis usually does after taking the stick back, pause........and then *shift his back arm in*, is a recipe for a few things to happen and a "make" is virtually impossible from there unless he "tucks" his grip from there to possibly entertain a redirect and hopefully save the day.

I can't imagine that shift inward is part of his delivery method. I don't see how pressure could do that because it's such a distinctive move.

If for some strange reason I did that, I know im not pulling the trigger.

I will investigate it with watching more of his matches and see if that is a standard move for him which I honestly doubt.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Regarding what ball you look at last and maintain the focus on until impact with the tip of the cue, if it's the CB you damn well better have a perfected aiming system of some kind that's deadly and can be trusted 100% because it has to be preset and right on the money before stroking back on the line of the shaft as straight as possible.

Any glitch, hitch, or deviation in the stroke more than likely means a miss. And since none of our strokes are perfect and only get worse under extreme pressure and nerves just like the pros, I think there are more chances of missing shots. Although, I do think it forces you to focus more on the stroke being as straight as possible to return it along the line to the alignment spot on the CB.

As far as player who has been playing for a long time with a super sound game who can run consecutive racks, there's more sense of feel and other things going on like backhand English, tuck and roll, or pivoting. It doesn't negate the use of a strong aiming system in the slightest, but there are more things going on with the hand, feel, and eyes so if the player is looking at the OB and can tell by feel the stroke is off by design or by error, he can make a mid stroke adjustment to bring it back to where it should be, kind of like a WING SHOT, except the OB would be stationary in normal shooting.

With a true wing shot, you MUST be looking at the OB and make the stroke, aiming, and timing on the fly in a second.

If all of it sounds convoluted and screwy, that's because it probably is. Since I fall in the latter example of playing, my choice is OB, but either would be very effective based on the person's style of play, stroke, and preference. It's only my view.

 

[BC21]

Regarding what ball you look at last and maintain the focus on until impact with the tip of the cue, if it's the CB you damn well better have a perfected aiming system of some kind that's deadly and can be trusted 100% because it has to be preset and right on the money before stroking back on the line of the shaft as straight as possible.

Any glitch, hitch, or deviation in the stroke more than likely means a miss. And since none of our strokes are perfect and only get worse under extreme pressure and nerves just like the pros, I think there are more chances of missing shots. Although, I do think it forces you to focus more on the stroke being as straight as possible to return it along the line to the alignment spot on the CB.

As far as player who has been playing for a long time with a super sound game who can run consecutive racks, there's more sense of feel and other things going on like backhand English, tuck and roll, or pivoting. It doesn't negate the use of a strong aiming system in the slightest, but there are more things going on with the hand, feel, and eyes so if the player is looking at the OB and can tell by feel the stroke is off by design or by error, he can make a mid stroke adjustment to bring it back to where it should be, kind of like a WING SHOT, except the OB would be stationary in normal shooting.

With a true wing shot, you MUST be looking at the OB and make the stroke, aiming, and timing on the fly in a second.

If all of it sounds convoluted and screwy, that's because it probably is. Since I fall in the latter example of playing, my choice is OB, but either would be very effective based on the person's style of play, stroke, and preference. It's only my view.

Good wordage. I've tried to look at the CB last and find it very inconsistent for me. I guess I only focus on my exact tip to CB hit when shooting a jump shot or when breaking the balls very hard. On nornal shots it's just like you describe, a preset shot line for the stroke to follow, and the CB just happens to be on that line, so you stroke right through it. On a jump shot the preset shot line is there, but the most important aspect of the shot is clearing the blocker ball, so I feel I better make sure my tip is coming down in the right place on the CB.

If I were pocketing every jump shot like an easy cut or a straight in shot, I'd consider spending more time trying to glance at the CB last on every shot. It's a weird feeling though, as I'm sure for those who already do it would find it equally as odd to glance at the OB last.