I was the same 6 months ago. I would say it has been worth the effort. But that damn smoke plays hell with 'em! lol
Ken
Why Object Ball Last?
- Thread starter Okie
- Start date
I was the same 6 months ago. I would say it has been worth the effort. But that damn smoke plays hell with 'em! lol
Ken
Cue ball in practice
You've gotten some outstanding answers here already. I'd only add that it's OK to look at the cue ball when you're developing your stroke (in practice), to ensure that you're striking the CB where you think you are. Once you've got that you can focus one the OB target completely.
You've gotten some outstanding answers here already. I'd only add that it's OK to look at the cue ball when you're developing your stroke (in practice), to ensure that you're striking the CB where you think you are. Once you've got that you can focus one the OB target completely.
Steve Mizerak is one example of a great player who moved his eyes back and forth with each practice stroke he took. That's an extreme example of the opposite of the quiet eye. There is much in-between. But to say that less eye movement is better is a bit subjective, I think.
Here is an excerpt from Vickers book. If you have difficulty the billiards section is on page 104-105.
http://books.google.com/books?id=2iVyZNLnVxMC&pg=PR4&lpg=PR4&dq=quiet+eye+billiards&source=bl&ots=aG-RVOqqP3&sig=9TSLQ_zh5vHQNyaHyDJXkt9AIr4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1Zf-UIbmD5Oi8ASXiIAQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=quiet%20eye%20billiards&f=false
Not only do better players spend more time looking at the object ball, when the dwell time is experimentally controlled all players miss more often with decreasing dwell time on the OB.
In this latter condition different playing styles have been controlled and the decrease in accuracy can be attributed to less dwell time.
While you may not "buy it" the findings are strongly suggestive across many sports. BTW Joan Vickers has been studying this stuff for 25 years and is truly an expert on this topic and her work have been featured in Scientific American among other places.
Last edited:
Well, first, we know that most other sports are not like pool, where you are striking an object that is still, with more then one target ---being the cb and ob. Second, I think that timing is most important in obtaining success. Looking at the ball longer than what? Longer than a millisecond? Longer than a half second? Longer than 1 3/4 seconds? Longer than 2 seconds? At what point and how does it affect your motivation to stroke?
I'm sorry but I don't "buy it" as a complete study for billiards. Other sports may accept it as a study for their sport. I am not convinced as of yet based on random testing.
Here is a link to a PBS article where she answers questions about the Quiet Eye" and the complexities in different sports. Her comments about golf are interesting. She was not queried about billiards in this presentation.
http://www.pbs.org/saf/1206/hotline/hvickers.htm
Undoubtedly the Quiet Eye research is complicated with slightly different implications for different sports. However, from what I have read the science is top of the line and it can be safely concluded that longer dwell time on the object ball improves pocketing ability. That is not an instructor's conclusion it is a scientist's conclusion -- for what that is worth.
http://www.pbs.org/saf/1206/hotline/hvickers.htm
Undoubtedly the Quiet Eye research is complicated with slightly different implications for different sports. However, from what I have read the science is top of the line and it can be safely concluded that longer dwell time on the object ball improves pocketing ability. That is not an instructor's conclusion it is a scientist's conclusion -- for what that is worth.
Controlled testing when experienced and less experienced players are assigned to conditions is an excellent test in many ways. To be specific it allows for more heterogeneity in variance and is likely to find differences when they are present. It is a strong study. Further research is needed on this (and most other topics) but for now, as a scientist, her findings should hold sway until someone can show why it is not so for some reason. And of course the competing research would need to be of the same quality as prior research. The bar has been raised -- so to speak.
Before you quickly disregard her findings it would be better (as an instructor) to give serious consideration to her work. While one or another playing style may be more effective for some particular player, Vickars' has demonstrated that across all types of players the average Joe would be better off with a longer dwell time on the object ball.
BTW it is not a matter of milliseconds. I think the recommended dwell time is substantially longer. It would be worth your time to read her research with an eye to its usefulness.
Last edited:
I will study her work. I think that what's interesting about players like Mizerak is that his eye movements were not quiet by any means, but they were coordinated and not random. That's where I think that the quiet eye theory falls short. It may address the difference between random eye movement vs. eye stillness. But what about coordinated eye movement?
Hand-eye coordination is a term that comes to my mind.
I very much agree that there is some sort of pre-shot routine that should be implemented for hand eye coordination. I have found (n of 1) that the following procedure improved my ability to pocket balls.
Stare at the contact point as I step into and bend over the shot to fix the target in my brain until I am all the way down. The appearance of the target changes as one bends over and the final target is seen from the shooting position.
Place the cue stick on the table to locate the vertical center on the cue ball and sight through the dead center of the cue ball to the intended target.
Adjust for English as needed.
Check for a straight stroke through the cue ball to the target. Three strokes are needed.
Shift focus to the target during the third stroke and hold the object ball target for three (or more) seconds while stroking about two more times. The first few strokes are to check cue stick alignment. The last few strokes are to check stick - target alignment.
Pause on the back stroke and then let it go.
As can be seen I shift focus from object ball to cue ball (and stroke) to final focus on the object ball.
I think these shifts are needed to place the target in the hand - eye - brain coordinating system. The brain needs time to place everything in line and that is why I stare at the contact point last and for enough time that my brain has the time to coordinate everything. Vickars is right, in my thinking. The brain needs time to adjust for the final target.
Sounds like a complicated process, and it required much training. It is a sequential process and to someone standing beside me it might look like it was all going on at the same time. It takes longer to state what I do than it does to actually do it.
Last edited:
ATI forum looked a little slow today so I thought I would bug ya'll.
It seems to me that most players and instructors advocate looking at the object ball before starting the backstroke aka last. But why? What do we gain by doing this?
Thank you!
Ken
Find something to do with your time.
If you have to deep think every shot.......... you will miss.
When I shoot.......
do I hold my breath?
is my elbow at 90 deg?
how is my stance?
where is the ghost ball?
should I use a closed bridge?
which eye is dominant?
do I look at the cue tip?
what the hell is CTE?
is my opponent watching?
the girl on table 3 has really big tits.......
she's looking at me..
is my fly down?
Kim
Agreed, but one can practice their pre-shot routine until it become automatic and they no longer have to think each step. Their focus is then on the shot in front of them.
Fran:
On the hand eye coordination thing. Here is why I think that three strokes are needed when the player first gets down on the shot.
The first stroke lets the brain see / feel what it has done.
During the second stroke the brain makes adjustments as needed.
The third stroke is used to check that adjustments were made as intended.
Players with less experience may need more strokes for adjustment purposes.
In my thinking this is the essence of coordination.
However, it is not often discussed that hand eye coordination requires attention, adjustments, and then checking the adjustments. This is one definition of how to coordinate something. And of course we could discuss what is needed to coordinate one's eyes with the stroke and the contact point.
I think that Vickars primary contribution is to the definition of coordination and the idea that it takes the brain time and a few efforts to get everything ready.
It all has to be placed on auto-pilot for a high level of shooting.
I have to run some errands, catch you all later.
On the hand eye coordination thing. Here is why I think that three strokes are needed when the player first gets down on the shot.
The first stroke lets the brain see / feel what it has done.
During the second stroke the brain makes adjustments as needed.
The third stroke is used to check that adjustments were made as intended.
Players with less experience may need more strokes for adjustment purposes.
In my thinking this is the essence of coordination.
However, it is not often discussed that hand eye coordination requires attention, adjustments, and then checking the adjustments. This is one definition of how to coordinate something. And of course we could discuss what is needed to coordinate one's eyes with the stroke and the contact point.
I think that Vickars primary contribution is to the definition of coordination and the idea that it takes the brain time and a few efforts to get everything ready.
It all has to be placed on auto-pilot for a high level of shooting.
I have to run some errands, catch you all later.
Excellent point! I would imagine it varies from individual to individual. Of course I am guessing...
Ken
If I am competing I agree 100%. When I taught golf I always used the analogy of putting a fork in your mouth. I would ask the student something like what pace, position, grip, where are they looking, etc when they put a fork in their mouth. Then I give them my answer...who cares! I just wanna eat!
But as I practice I think it is important to build the fundamentals so I can rely on them when the heat goes on. And if you are not blessed with natural fundamentals then ya gotta build them.
Very good point Kim! Thank you!
Ken
I guess i differ with most people on this. To me you have one target and one target only. Thats the spot on the CB that you want to hit with the tip your cue. To look at something other than that during the shot seems totally illogical to me.
I dont really know why this topic keeps being debated. Perhaps during the cold winter months alot of people/posters need something to occupy their time. It has always been and will always be personal preference.
DCP
I dont really know why this topic keeps being debated. Perhaps during the cold winter months alot of people/posters need something to occupy their time. It has always been and will always be personal preference.
DCP
Mr. Protege,
A little food for thought,
What about after a study of 100 pool players of all skill levels that looked at the CB is done where they changed to looking at the OB last & there was a 60% increase in accuracy by 99% of the players? Will it still be personal preference then?
That is purely a hypothetical. I agree with you that many aspects of doing individual tasks can be attributed to personal preference, but once that personal preference is hindering performance it's time to consider a change.
Mr. Cantrall is doing a personal experiment where he has changed to looking at the OB last & it appears to be improving his pocketing. Is it a placebo effect? Only time will tell. Is it age or eyesight specific? I don't know.
It is an interesting topic for open mind individuals. Is the Miz's way a better way that maybe some can do & some will have trouble? If it worked so well for him, perhaps it should be tested for consideration.
Jack Nicklaus was certainly one of the best 'pressure' putters of all time & he has said that as he walked a putt his eyes were looking all over the place at everything he could so as to give his 'mind' as much info as he could regarding the task at hand & he never pulled the trigger until he 'felt' nearly certain that he would make the putt. Even he missed, as putting a golf ball into a hole from 8 feet may be more difficult than hitting a 95 mph fast ball.
Just food for thought.
Regards to You &
Mike...It is not really being debated. Fran, it would appear, does not understand the dynamics of the Quiet Eye Study, even though JoeW and Mark have given her significant data and research to back up the "claims" of the studies. Even English came up with the correct info from the study. In fact, they were not 'random' testing, and the skills of the participants were directly related to the data received from the study. Not only that, but a year after the study was done in FL, it was repeated, with all variables being duplicated, at the U. of Quebec, in which they got the exact same results (less pingponging and longer dwell times resulted in better results...pocketing the shots at hand). There is no doubt that this practice results in more confidence and greater pocketing percentages for all skill levels of players, including pros. It is, without doubt, the second most important thing we teach. The fact that you routinely dismiss instructional advice, that has worked wonders for 1000's of players, is one of the reasons why you find it so difficult to improve. You should talk more to your brother. He, at least, is willing to put in the proportionate disciplined practice time, in order to make a rational choice on what works for him (and as a result, has improved dramatically in the past 9 months).
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Quiet Eyes work best as a last second or two on the OB with all at rest, body and mind, before the final stroke. QEs make a nice checkoff point before the final stroke.
There are times to look at the CB directly or via peripheral vision for aim purposes--to see if the cue ball/stick aim line relationship is correct--and times to look at the CB to confirm accuracy of hit on the CB.
I'm so pleased QE pool research was done at my alma mater.
There are times to look at the CB directly or via peripheral vision for aim purposes--to see if the cue ball/stick aim line relationship is correct--and times to look at the CB to confirm accuracy of hit on the CB.
I'm so pleased QE pool research was done at my alma mater.