PDA

View Full Version : Eye dominance again


Bluewolf
04-20-2003, 04:31 PM
I have made this remarkeable discovery. I never really knew before pool that I was left eyed dominant.

I thought I was compensating by putting the cue under my chin. I realized I still was cocking my head to use my left eye.

Even though I was brought up to use my right hand, I am somewhat ambidextrous. And I thought it was kool that I could make shots with my left as long as they were short shots.

When I realized this, I decided I am just going to shift to my left. What the hey, I might play like a two, I mean a two that cant make long shots for awhile, but so what.

In the end, I think I will get better in pool. And, I guess it is good I shot for eight months rightie so will be able to use it in a pinch.

oh well...

Laura

Blackjack
04-20-2003, 09:44 PM
This is my response to the myth of the dominant eye theory:


I still contend that eye dominance means absolutely nothing unless you are shooting with only one eye open. When both eyes are open, you see what both eyes see. To prove my point, I suggest the following experiment:

Look at the text in this message with both eyes open at the same time. Now here's the tricky part, with both eyes open at the same time, tell me what your dominant eye is seeing. When you are finished with that, continue looking at this text with both eyes open at the same time, and tell me what your non-dominant eye is seeing. After you have completed this exercise, elaborate on the difference of what one eye saw compared to what the other eye saw.

This exercise might sound ridiculous, and along with being ridiculous, it is a complete waste of time. So is worrying about the dominant eye theory, unless you are shooting with only one eye open. There is nothing you can change in your stance, cue position, head postion, etc, that is going to change the optic nerve's communication with the brain. The first I had ever heard of this "theory" was just a few years ago. To me it sounds like a bunch of hogwash that distracts players away from what they should be working on, which are the fundamentals of the game.

I'm not picking on Laura (Bluewolf), as we have discussed this subject at length privately and she knows where I stand on this issue. I believe that this "theory" was started when Jim Rempe discussed it in a video a few years back. Before that, it was never discussed. Dominant eye is important in marksmanship, and archery, but in pool, I fail to see its significance.

Bluewolf
04-21-2003, 04:40 AM
I think that pool is and can be like markmanship. It requires accuracy to a large degree. We site down the cue like a marksman sights down the gun.

I took riflery before and could not use both eyes.

While you may not be picking on me, David, I believe that individuals are different.

The ability to use both eyes together is an individual thing. Perhaps it has much to do with my balance problems, the fact that I fall for no reason. I have had all of the tests in the world and noone can explain this.

People do not have the same perfect vision, nor the same ability to scan, see out of the side of their eyes, to gage distances, or to have accurate vision in low light. This even is the case where one has been thouroughly assessed by eye docs and neurologists.

We are all individuals. Who is to say what the impact of cross dominance (ie rt handed, left eyed or vise versa) is on an individual pool player. Being ambidextrous, I am one of the lucky ones, because I shoot fairly well with my left also. I keep getting better with my left and eventually will be able to hit those long shots too.

Just an interesting thought, although it cannot be proven. If you took a sample of rt vs left shooters, a higher percentage of left shooters shoot by feel. I have, in fact, noticed this in myself. When shooting right I am more analytical, on the left, more by feel and seeing the angles.

In terms of experiments, Fancher talks about independent, dependent variables, hypotheses. To do an experiment is easy. Just have a hypothesis (something you wish to prove), get the data which will back up your claim.

It is kind of like statistics. You can use statistics to 'prove' anything you want. If a person did not prove their experiment, all they have to do is to modify the hypothesis in such a way that it will be proven.

I have learned caution in reading about these experiments. I have found that experience is the best teacher.

Laura

Bluewolf
04-21-2003, 08:54 AM
In all of my statistics courses to get a degree in psychology and further stat courses through the math department, I became aware of one thing. Psychological experiments, for the most part, and all IQ tests that I am aware of are based on bogus statistics.

Without getting too technical, that is all folks.

Laura

Joseph Cues
04-21-2003, 09:32 AM
Laura, shooting a rifle or a handgun is different than shooting pool. In rifle and hangunshooting, you are taught to keep your focus on the front sight and your peripheral vision takes care of the target. Try doing that in pool.
I agree with BJ. Determining your dominant eye is a waste of time.
When we get down on the table, we align our site instinctively/naturally. Unless your tilting your head, you eyes are set right because you went down and sighted the shot to your best eye view.

Blackjack
04-21-2003, 09:50 AM
I don't understand where you are coming from with the ambidextrous statement. Even if you are ambidextrous, you do not see with your arms or your hand. You see with your eyes. When both eyes are open, the eyes work in concert with each other, no matter which hand you shoot with. The purpose of my experiment was to show you that you cannot separate left/right vision with both eyes open. On the CCB at Billiard Digest, Dr. Fancher also tried to explain this, and dispel criticism by professional player Fran Crimi. Fran contended that there was something wrong with Dr. Fancher's experiment, but gave examples, and thse examples (Both to me, and to Dr. Fancher) seemed to point out that there was something wrong with the Dominant eye "theory", not Dr. Fancher's experiment. Instead of saying something was wrong with the theory, Fran pointed a finger at the experiment, go back and read what she said carefully, and Bob's response will start to make more and more sense. I would also direct you to my article on the dominant eye theory that is located at

www.8ball.org/blackjack.htm

In that article, I make reference to what is now infamously known as the "walking analogy". A lot of people disagreed with my "analogy" in relation to eye domnance, but it is very similar to what Dr. Fancher makes reference to at the end of his article that is available on this web site. My walking analogy says that you do not consciously worry about the mechanics of walking, mainly because your body adapts to the mechanics of walking (balance, placing feet forward, traction to the floor, moving the other foot forward as well and pushing off). Now if you were to worry about all of those intricacies, the movements would be choppy, and not fluid. If I were to say one foot is stronger than the other, and that you needed to place more weight on one foot, you would start to limp, therefore hindering your natural movement. If we were to do this with the eyes, (which with both eyes open is quite impossible and my experiment brings that to the surface) you would be limping visually. Try that sometime. You have no control over what is absorbed visually and fed to the brain. Dr. Fancher pointed that out.

Now, may I also tell you, that my Dominant Eye Challenge is not new. I started using this about 3-4 years ago, and it pretty much throws water on the fire of the domnant eye theory and its significance when both eyes are working in concert and feeding information to the brain simultaneously. You are the only person in the history of this experiment that has been able to to tell me that they see a difference, and that they can separate visual images (left eye/ right eye) while both eyes are open, focusing on a fixed image. It is physically impossible. Go back and try the challenge again. There is no way to separate it, and there is nothing you can do to change that. I do not think you have to be an eye doctor or psychologist to understand that, it just is, and my experiment proves that the dominant eye theory, is just that, a theory, and not a fact. Bob Fancher calls it a myth. There is no scientific evidence that says that it matters, no matter what you call it.

Work on your fundamentals, and stop worrying about this. As I pointed out, it's a waste of time. Anyone that tells you otherwise (no matter who it is) is pulling your chain and wasting your time. Playing the game of pool well relies on perfect application of the basic fundamentals. Work on strengthening your fundamentals, and you will other areas within your game improve as well. Worrying about eye dominance will not help you shoot better, it will not help your stroke, or your stance, grip, OR your sighting. If there is some evidence out there that this helps you play better, I have not seen it, and what has been presented to me has not convinced me.

jjinfla
04-21-2003, 09:50 AM
Laura, When you say you are ambidextrous I take it by that you mean that you miss shots equally well with either the left or right hand. Sorry, couldn't resist. You left yourself wide open for that one. And as far as I know left or right handedness has nothing to do with eye dominance. As far as eye dominance I agree with Blackjack that it really is an irrelevent observation/occurence in individuals. Probably just means that one eye is sending stronger signals to the brain. I sure wouldn't encourage someone to try and change their eye dominance. That makes no sense to me at all. Jake

Bluewolf
04-21-2003, 12:19 PM
I am ambidextrous in terms of legs and arms. I play pool quite well with my left. I just do not have experience with it. No, I do not know how to change eye dominance.

Laura

Bluewolf
04-21-2003, 12:26 PM
No one told me I was left eyed dominant.I know this to be true. I can tell a difference.

I have said what I have said, I will agree to disagree.

I have been called a heritic before or just plain wrong or whatever. It is not the first time. It will not be the last.

Laura

Ruby
04-21-2003, 01:25 PM
To this day, I still don't really know what a dominant eye really means. If it the same as handedness, then it would be my right eye, but I have better vision in my left eye. People have asked me which one is my dominant eye but I can't tell which one it is. I wear contact lenses and my right eye is significantly worse than left eye. I wonder if it's because I rely on it more?? Anyway, I personally don't think it applies to pool.

However, I played against a girl who lined up her cue under her left eye (she's right handed). I asked her if she does that because it's her dominant eye, and her response was that she doesn't know why she does it (!?!?!?). She said she didn't even know she was doing this untill people started asking.

This seems like what you and Dr. Fancher was pointing out, but his "experiment" is flawed because he already knows the outcome...but this girl had no clue what I was talking about. She claims that she just naturally did it. Makes me wonder if there really is such a thing. Could be just a really bad stance...???

Jimmy M.
04-21-2003, 02:36 PM
I think there is such thing as a dominant eye, and it can help knowing what that is when learning to play pool. I also think that a person can get used to aiming using whatever "eye" (either the dominant, weak, or both) they want. Through repitition, a player will start to develop a sense of knowing when they are lined up correctly, or incorrectly, on a shot regardless of whether or not they are aiming primarily through their dominant eye.

However, I wouldn't be so quick to discount any credibility to the "dominant eye" theory since so many great players align their cue under one eye more than another. Earl Strickland, Shannon Daulton, and Scott Frost all have their cues practically rubbing their cheek as opposed to being under their chin, so it is obvious they are aiming primarily with their right eye (Scott with his left). Efren also has his cue lined up more under his right eye than the center of his chin. Buddy has the cue more under his left eye, even though he is right handed (he isn't as low on the cue as the other players I just mentioned, so it isn't as obvious). The list goes on of great players who all play with the cue aligned under one eye more than the other. With that list of "endorsers", it's hard to argue against there being something to the "dominant eye theory". If the argument against that would be, "that is because they were all taught to aim using the dominant eye", then it would lend even more credibility to the theory because those guys all play so well (Efren, Earl, and Buddy are all names that must be mentioned when someone talks about who the best 9-ball player ever was/is).

Bluewolf
04-21-2003, 03:06 PM
I was brought up to be a right hander. I always thought that it was strange that my left side was slightly better, stronger, more coordinated in karate, but did not give this much thought.

This past year, I tried writing left handed, even though I had always written with the right. My right is faster but the writing of my left hand is neater.

I have always known I was left eyed dominant and did not give it much thought until pool.

So now I have realized I was supposed to be left all the way, but because I was brought up right, I guess it was kind of confusing.

My husband watched me and said my stroke stance and everything is much better when I shoot left. So I am going left. I guess having shot for 8 months with my right will be a good thing since I wont have to use a bridge.

Laura

1-P
04-21-2003, 03:14 PM
If your left hand and left eye really produce superior results, why would not use a mechanical bridge and shoot lefty. Are the shots on the right-hand side of the table not important?

1-P

Bluewolf
04-21-2003, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by 1-P
If your left hand and left eye really produce superior results, why would not use a mechanical bridge and shoot lefty. Are the shots on the right-hand side of the table not important?

1-P

Most of those are rail shots. I can hit those fine.

Laura

Pop And Slop
04-21-2003, 10:47 PM
Why use a bridge when you can do it naturally.

Bluewolf
04-22-2003, 07:38 AM
Agreed. there is this real good pool player who says he never uses a bridge. He shoots off handed and does very good shape so that he rarely gets in a position where he has to use a bridge.

Pop And Slop
04-22-2003, 03:33 PM
The only time I use the bridge is when the cb is in the middle of the table and I can't reach it. I've only just started playing switch but I find I have much better feel for speed and my accuracy is about the same as using a bridge. I just take a little more time stroking and getting as comfortable as I can before I actually take the shot.

Jay

Bluewolf
04-23-2003, 03:53 AM
I was brought up right handed but always wondered because the coordination seemed about equal. At first, in pool, I was okay left, but my bridge was not too hot, so just used left on certain shots.

Overtime, they are equal in coordination. My left eye is stronger though and the balls go into the center of the pocket and banks go in when I shoot left. When I shoot right, they just flop in.

My husband is right all the way but has learned to shoot some left.

I think that from what I have heard, being able to switch is an advantage.

Laura

Pop And Slop
04-23-2003, 02:43 PM
Just like your husband, I will have to learn to shoot left. I am 100% right handed and can't even throw a ball with my left. And yes, it is a great advantage.
when I play left it reminds me of the movie "The Princess Bride" where there is a sword fight and the hero is just barely holding his own and his opponant asks him why he is still smiling, his reply is that he is not left handed and switches his sword to his right hand and wins the fight.

Jay

Bluewolf
04-24-2003, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by Pop And Slop
Just like your husband, I will have to learn to shoot left. I am 100% right handed and can't even throw a ball with my left. And yes, it is a great advantage.
when I play left it reminds me of the movie "The Princess Bride" where there is a sword fight and the hero is just barely holding his own and his opponant asks him why he is still smiling, his reply is that he is not left handed and switches his sword to his right hand and wins the fight.

Jay

Kool. Sounds like a great way to hustle. LOL That is, if you dont mind getting beat up;)

Laura

Pop And Slop
04-24-2003, 02:33 PM
I never hustle, I tell people straight up that they will lose.
resistance is futile ;)

Jay

des1mone
04-24-2003, 06:08 PM
I have battled with the dominant eye for a while. I have gone back and forth from shooting with my cue directly under my chin and under my right eye.

When shooting with cue directly under chin, it seems to me that you can not see the exact point of aim. Your brain just puts the image together from both of your eyes. You know the direction the ball will travel and therefore can aim.

When shooting with the cue under a dominant eye, it is easier to see exactly where the ghost ball is or the point of contact. (It might take a while for your brain to cancal out the jumble seen from the left eye.) I believe it is ok to use dominant eye when you are over the shot, then coming down on the shot.(Keeping your dominant eye focused on the shot and putting your cue right under it.) But it won't be as easy if you get down on a shot and aim with your dominant eye.

When using the dominant eye, it is like a rifle. But who shoots pool like a rifle. You don't aim the ball at a certain spot, you see where the ball needs to be. In pool you have nothing to aim at. I believe either system could work, just be consistant in what you do. If you can visualize the shot, it doesn't matter if you are using one eye, or both together.


A comment on Blackjack's Text Test. If you read text, you won't be able to tell which eye is seeing what, but if you close your non-dominant eye, you will see the text shift, that is because that eye was not really focusing on the text. Non-dominant eye is used for demension.

Blackjack
04-24-2003, 07:19 PM
Quote Des1Mone:
A comment on Blackjack's Text Test. If you read text, you won't be able to tell which eye is seeing what, but if you close your non-dominant eye, you will see the text shift, that is because that eye was not really focusing on the text. Non-dominant eye is used for demension.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wrong. Non dominant eye/dominant eye would not factor into this either. (What you are speaking of is depth perception, not dimension, and that is also achieved with both eyes, not one independaent eye) I would challenge anyone to provide any proof of the contrary. Dominant eye will only be a factor with one eye shut, and it doesn't matter if you're ambidextrous. With both eyes open, dominant eye and non dominant eye work together and send the signal to form ONE VIEW, not two. If you are seeing two separate images, you are:

A) Experiencing positional horizontal nystagmus
B) Inebriated, which causes involunatry nystagmus
C) Cross eyed


So unless you just got off a rollercoaster, or you're drunk, or you are cross eyed, pretty much you fall into the other category, which is that normally when your eyes are open (both of them) you see ONE Image. Admittedly in my obnoxious test, we are looking at a screen, and it is one dimensional. Doesn't change the fact that if you were to place an object (like a steno pad) on the bridge of your nose to act as a wll between the left and the right eyes, you would still be able to read this text normally, as if it was not there. Close one eye, and it is a different story.

You mention that the non-dominant eye is used for dimension. That is incorrect. Both eyes must work in unison to create depth perception (not dimension), and normally the dominant eye will serve that purpose, not the non dominant eye. Also, with the binding of the steno pad used as a wall between both eyes, close either eye, and the text moves. Open both eyes, and tell me which eye is seeing the center of the text. Answer: Trick question. Both eyes do. This is the problem with dominant eye theories in relation to shooting pool, a task normally performed with the assistance of both eyes, not one. When assited with the other eye, they compensate for each other and DO NOT WORK INDEPENDENTLY FROM EACH OTHER. Newsflash. . . you cannot help this either, and it is ridiculous to say otherwise.

Laura says she is ambidextrous, and she can toss away the mechanical bridge. Great. That still won't change what she sees out of either eye, nor will it change the fact that she'll have to learn the game all over again shooting with the opposite hand. Fran Crimi says dominant eye has a lot to do with head alignment. I agree head alignment is important, while at the same time I contend that it is all about alignment, and nothing to do with eye dominance. Eye dominance and head alignment (with both eyes open) have nothing to do with each other anyway. I am a strong believer in equilibrium, when the ears are centered with the shoulders (head not drooping forward) amazing things happen in shotmaking (due to stability, mechanics, and balance - not eye dominance).

Then we have the folks that say that my test proves nothing. My answer is, that the dominant eye "theory" is your "theory" and not a fact. When eye dominance becomes a factor in shooting pool, and the theory is proved, come back to the table and discuss it. It is a fact that when both eyes are open, they work in unison, transmitting signals to the brain that are interpreted into one image. Which eye is dominant and non dominant does not matter as what each eye is viewing is blended to fit one image. If your eyes do not do this, then I hope you do not drive, and if you do, I'm staying away from you.

des1mone
04-24-2003, 07:42 PM
Quote Des1Mone:
A comment on Blackjack's Text Test. If you read text, you won't be able to tell which eye is seeing what, but if you close your non-dominant eye, you will see the text shift, that is because that eye was not really focusing on the text. Non-dominant eye is used for demension.


Sorry, I made a mistake. I meant to say. If you close your dominant eye, leaving your non-dominant open, the text will shift. Showing that one eye does most of the focusing. But you are correct, that really doesnt deal much with pool. Having two eyes is much easier than having one in pool. And I do find it easier with the cue directly in between my eyes.

Alistair
04-24-2003, 09:31 PM
When I close one eye or the other the text shifts about the same amount in either direction from the "center" (both eyes open), depending upon which eye I close. Maybe this is not the case with everyone and my eyes are just particularly well balanced.

The dominant eye argument would make more sense to me if we were talking about people who, for instance, have one eye that sees considerably better than the other one. Otherwise, I really don't see how "dominant eye" can make much difference if a person has both eyes open. In archery for instance, I don't believe people worry about dominant eye at all, rather they usually choose which side to hold the bow according to dominant HAND. At the end of the day, though, I guess it comes down to whatever works best for the individual.
--Alistair

Bluewolf
04-25-2003, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by Blackjack
Quote Des1Mone:
A comment on Blackjack's Text Test. If you read text, you won't be able to tell which eye is seeing what, but if you close your non-dominant eye, you will see the text shift, that is because that eye was not really focusing on the text. Non-dominant eye is used for demension.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



David,

My father went blind from glaucome.For a long time one eye was less affected and he had great problems with depth perception. I think that this is definately true for someone who is blinded in one eye.

Two eyes working together help with depth perception as well as peripheral vision.

Perhaps dominant eye is a poor choice of word for whose who do not relate to that word. I do think that most people have one eye that they do better at for anything involved with aiming or they are more comfortable with using that eye when aiming,with the exception of folks that do well with the cue under the chin, using both eyes equally.

This is my personal opinion only. I think that folks who are right handed, but hve a preference for their left eye do best with the cue under their chin.

btw, i do have some nystagmus, although this has gotten better with sezure meds and I have astigmatism, which is sometimes worse than at other times.



Laura