That's good, because it will be refreshing to argue something besides CTE
Lou Figueroa
Why argue? can't we have a civil discussion. Lets analyze what Shane is doing and before posting our thoughts try it at the table so we really understand.
TAR Podcast #8 - Shane - Fransisco - Shane Talks About His Aiming Method
- Thread starter Fast Lenny
- Start date
Why argue? can't we have a civil discussion. Lets analyze what Shane is doing and before posting our thoughts try it at the table so we really understand.
im going to hold this spot for now because i dont have time to get into this but will later on today and i will leave this for Lou figawhatever "does shane use center of cb, sides of ferrule, edges of ob in his aiming, does he use imaginary lines from the cb to the edge of ob for aiming" does this sound familiar and if not there is a pretty detail dvd on the market right now that can teach the everyday average player how to use a system similar to shanes, its called cte/pro1.
i must say you do have balls and im impressed that you came into this thread to take your lumps or you think you will be able to squirm out of the corner you painted yourself in with your many,many past post! The guy with with the big fro in the picture to the left wont let that happen :thumbup:
i must say you do have balls and im impressed that you came into this thread to take your lumps or you think you will be able to squirm out of the corner you painted yourself in with your many,many past post! The guy with with the big fro in the picture to the left wont let that happen :thumbup:
Yes. And as others have alluded, Naji -- he has hit a million balls.
The thing is: he gave an off the cuff description of how he aims. But chances are he didn't go into everything he utilizes to aim, especially for different types of shots. The danger, for some, is believing this is the whole enchilada and believing that what works for Shane will work for everyone. Some guys, no doubt, would get benefits out of using Shane's approach. But that would be for the very same reasons people get benefits from other aiming systems, as outlined on Dr. Dave's web site -- primarily because it introduces elements of consistency, focus, and identifiable parameters.
Chances are no one else out there sets up like Shane, or sees the balls like Shane does, or has Shane's footwork, bridges, grip, stroke, and motions. Few, if any, have his focus, concentration, insight, work ethic, and pure experience with the game. Nor do they have the infinite number of balls Shane has hit under their belt. But, all of a sudden, everyone is trying this and, woo wee, "It works!" That's good, because it will be refreshing to argue something besides CTE
Lou Figueroa
He has hit a million balls but yet still uses a form of cte in his aiming :thumbup: lol
Last edited:
No, dorabelle, the two methods both use the edge of the stick (or ferrule), but they are different methods.
Shane's method is to align one of three things with the outside edge (the one farther from the target) of the object ball -- the left edge of the stick, the center of the stick, or the right edge of the stick -- with the choice depending on how thin the cut is.
The video you cited is the Mullen Method, named in earlier threads for the man (Dave Mullen) in that video. That method is to align the inside edge of the stick (left edge of stick for a cut to the left, e.g.) with the intended contact point on the object ball.
Neither method is geometrically sound for all shots if carried out with robotic precision. But both methods will "get you in the ballpark" for a certain range of shots and then experience and feel can do any fine tuning needed for shots that the robot would miss.
Incidentally, neither of these methods is a variation of Stan's or Hal's CTE. They are wholly different.
Yes. And as others have alluded, Naji -- he has hit a million balls.
The thing is: he gave an off the cuff description of how he aims. But chances are he didn't go into everything he utilizes to aim, especially for different types of shots. The danger, for some, is believing this is the whole enchilada and believing that what works for Shane will work for everyone. Some guys, no doubt, would get benefits out of using Shane's approach. But that would be for the very same reasons people get benefits from other aiming systems, as outlined on Dr. Dave's web site -- primarily because it introduces elements of consistency, focus, and identifiable parameters.
Chances are no one else out there sets up like Shane, or sees the balls like Shane does, or has Shane's footwork, bridges, grip, stroke, and motions. Few, if any, have his focus, concentration, insight, work ethic, and pure experience with the game. Nor do they have the infinite number of balls Shane has hit under their belt. But, all of a sudden, everyone is trying this and, woo wee, "It works!" That's good, because it will be refreshing to argue something besides CTE
Lou Figueroa
Believe me i hit million balls or more in my last nearly 30 years of pool, did not get better until i learned where to aim, in last few months my potting skill improved by at least 40%, better yet i know exactly why i miss if i miss. It is amazing how much pool silence/secret there is, that is not easily found for casual player or even experienced players.
Would this stick aiming system of Shane's be approximately the same as the shaft-edge aiming system described on Dr. Dave's web site (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#shaft)? If yes, then this web link may be of interest to people in learning out more about shaft-edge aiming systems.
Per Dr. Dave, Bob Jewett did make the following comment about shaft-edge aiming:
"In the video, the system is described as always aiming the edge of the shaft at the contact point on the object ball. According to the system, if the edge of the shaft were aimed at the edge of the object ball, you would get a 90-degree cut. That's clearly very, very wrong. The system has large errors for nearly all cut angles, but the errors for thin cuts are enormous. This is pretty simple geometry.
But the system is not based on geometry. The system gets you to pay attention to the contact point -- which is good -- and makes you pay attention to stick alignment -- which is good. With practice, the system will give you some kind of aiming framework. The system might be described as a perceptual or psychological system, but it is not a geometrically accurate system.
Whether the system will be helpful to any particular person depends on that person and how they apply it. Personally, because I can see the gross geometric errors in the system, I could never trust it."
Last edited:
No, they are different. See my post #64 in this thread.
Thanks for the clarification. I have been playing around with the Mullen method and its seemed to have helped my game. From now on maybe we can refer to it as the Mullet method.
Dude, you are crazy if you think Shane uses some form of CTE from the description he gave in that video, or from watching him play.
The video is dangerous to the system vs non system viewers. Here is why...
1. If you stop the video before he gets to the table and demonstrates, he only mentions edge of ferrule with edge of OB. That might lead you to believe that's his whole system.
2. Then, when he goes to the table, he expands on that and mentions the opposite side of the ferrule, and the center of the ferrule. Thats where he stops.
And this is where we are left here. I think its more likely than not that there is even further divisions or adjustments in his system, than what he described there.
What I personally got out of his description, is he recognizes an angle from experience, and by memory recalls what visual combination of ferrule and OB sighting that angle represents. Then he uses that ferrule and OB combination to line up for the shot.
I feel if he talked further, and there was an angle lets say 1 ball width difference than a shot he just demonstrated, he'd probably say something like: "well this angle is just slightly different than the last one, which was left edge of ferrule to left edge of OB. Therefore, I'm going to set up like the last one, and then make a tiny adjustment from that starting point to account for the difference in the two shots"
really? that shot he showed, tell me how he described shooting it and then describe how you would shoot it using pro1. Then tell me how they are so far different and if you have trouble maybe someone else here can help you out.
Last edited:
i will help you and i have watched that tar pod once.
shane - using with left side of ferrule
pro1 - using with right side of ferrule
shane - using right side of ob ball
pro1 - using right side of ob ball
shane - does an adjustment to get on contact point
pro1 - does an adjustment to get on contact point using a reference point
shane - shoots
pro1 - shoots
kind of similar don't you think, Dude
before cte/pro1 came out i shot in a similar way as shane only i did not use the center of the ferrule and i pivoted.
shane - using with left side of ferrule
pro1 - using with right side of ferrule
shane - using right side of ob ball
pro1 - using right side of ob ball
shane - does an adjustment to get on contact point
pro1 - does an adjustment to get on contact point using a reference point
shane - shoots
pro1 - shoots
kind of similar don't you think, Dude
before cte/pro1 came out i shot in a similar way as shane only i did not use the center of the ferrule and i pivoted.
Last edited:
Wouldn't double the distance be simpler ?
Just asking.
Just asking.
Spot on!!
When the CB and the OB are close together you may use some/more outside english or CP to CP aiming.:thumbup:
..........
Last edited:
Similar only on paper.
Shane: One of the best pool players in the world.
Champ2107: AZB keyboard bumper pool champion
only on paper? lol why the hater and i doubt i am even good enough to be a pro bumper pool player
Last edited:
Just teasing you. On the Internet, we're all champions.only on paper? lol why the hater and i doubt i am even good enough to be a pro bumper pool player
Is double the distance giving you an imaginary point to look at or something real to look at?
your even uglier than I thought. Just because you played in a tournament and played a champion, it doesn't mean you are one. What is your point? That you paid an entry fee to get your a$$ handed to you???
Last edited:
Look at me! Look at me!! I'm playing Effy!! I'm playing in a $75 tournament, race to 3, playing Effy!!! I got lucky and drew EffY!!!!! Can you believe it!!!!?!?!!? LOOK HOW BIG MY HEART IS!!!!!! HOLY SH!T-FCK!!!!! My heart is the size of the Empire State Building cause I got Effy on a random draw!!!!!!
Me and Tony Crosby
Me and Evgeny Stalev
WOW! I played two champions in one year too! That must mean my heart is the size of Jupiter!!! My nuts are so big I can't walk!! I need a Hover-round or a Segway to tote my mega nuts around because I drew two champions in a $75 open event.
I'm coooooool.... just like Lou Figawhatever. ;-)
Dave,
I'm always puzzled by players who think competing in tourneys with pros, or even defeating them in short races has ANYTHING IN THE WORLD to do with credibility or skill level. Now if the player is staking himself, and playing for something significant that is a whole different deal. Like Grady said in his book (paraphrased), "for 10 years I was playing against the best players in the world on my own dollar, and if there was any spot involved, I was the motherf$#ker giving it." In my view, THAT is credibility.
Now I need to give you some advice; in the Stalev photo, you are shooting the blue ball. HIT THE WHITE ONE FIRST!!!
By the way, is it possible that different shaft diameters could affect this system??? I'm supposing Shane is scared s&$tless to sand his shaft.
I'll look for the Hover-round at DCC; just don't run me down.
Yes, it could have an effect. Just think of the difference it could make if the shaft was extremely wide (ignore the rules for this image) versus extremely thin. The cue would be pointing in different directions in those two cases if you aimed its edge at the outside edge on the OB.
But for most of us, shafts are within a fairly small range of diameters. The player using this approximation method would, in time, learn the adjustments needed for his shaft.