TAR Podcast #8 - Shane - Fransisco - Shane Talks About His Aiming Method

Lenny started a nice thread, talking about the Podcast that TAR recorded with world champion Shane Van Boening.

What started out as a very positive thread was quickly turned into a cheek-slapping thread, PRIMARILY started by one individual, Lou Figueroa.

I made an attempt to put a positive light on the Podcast but Lou came with all of his gloom and doom crap, mixing in his constant mean-spirited comments toward members of this forum.

After that I made some references to Chicken Little about the sky is falling which didn't seem to create any problems for Lou, since I am on ignore. And so, I just said my piece and left the thread alone for practical purposes, hoping against hope that the thread wouldn't take a downturn like it has.

After reading the posts and seeing the angst that was being created, I went back and copied and posted most of Lou's posts in this thread. Keep in mind that this is only ONE THREAD. This is just ONE EXAMPLE of why the forum has turned to shit. Lou's pomposity can be condoned on occasion because he does have a degree of talent when it comes to playing pool, but his pomposity is over-shadowed by his constant mean-spirited comments that come into practically every thread that he posts in. I thought that he had been tamed but it seems that I have failed in my efforts of admonishing him for his attitude in the forum.

So for those who wonder why so many people get into arguments with Lou, please read Lou's name-calling, shit-stirring comments in this single thread to get an idea of why aiming threads become a free for all:

from Lou's first post in the thread.
A couple of thoughts:

First off, it's kind of interesting that he says he doesn't know what a "ghost ball" is. I think the fact that he taught this shaft system to himself is also important because what that tells me is that what he is deploying is a personal reference system, as opposed to a geometrically perfect aiming system. What I mean by that is that his reference system works for him, given the way he sets up, sees the balls, and strokes his cue. Others would most probably have to refine and redefine something like this for themselves to essentially create their own personal versions of the system and may find various levels of success with it because no one else sees nor strokes the balls like Shane.

Secondly, every good player, once past the actual true physics, eventually begins to develop their own personal reality about the game. IOW, regardless of the physics, you may have found that if you do one thing with a grip, or bridge, or stroke, something very specific will consistently happen on the pool table. Sort of like when an accomplished player tells you that if you relax your grip, or use a shorter stroke, the balls will behave differently, even though the science guys would say otherwise. So that is you personal system or reality and the physics be damned because it works, for you. Shane is an unbelievable player and the fact that he has developed his own system(s) tells you how far down the rabbit hole he has drilled to find a systematic approach to the game to achieve a super high level of performance.

Lastly, I don't think any of the aiming system non-believers have ever railed against *all* aiming systems -- just the particularly scurrilous claims made by the advocates of one or two systems. The "oil" is still out there :-)

Lou Figueroa

In his very first post in this thread, Lou takes one of his sideways swipes at Shane, saying that he finds it “interesting” that Shane doesn’t know what a “ghost ball” is. Then he takes another swipe in his last paragraph at advocates of one or two aiming systems and throws in his little poke in the eye with the “oil is still out there ;”, making sure not to mention which systems he is talking about and making sure not to name names. It’s just Lou’s style of shit-stirring and this is from the get-go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
lol............

You're the bumper pool champ who once wrote he had "a man crush on Efren," right?

So here's something from a few years ago at the US 1Pocket Open for you and all the other keyboard warrior pool players that don't have the cojones to step into the box with the champions but like to take anonymous shots at those of us who do.

That would be me on the left ;-)

Lou Figueroa

Before the thread has gone on much further, Lou immediately gets into some other ad hominem attacks on JMS and then takes another swipe at “keyboard warrior pool players” because “they don’t have the cojones to step into the box with the champions”. Just more of his condescending attitude toward the majority of the people on this forum.



01-14-2012, 09:59 AM
________________________________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleary
I love ya dave and I understand. but I dont want this to turn into a typical aiming system thread. I get it. lou likes to be lou... but I would like this to actually stick around. I think this could end good if we give it a shot. Let lou and patrick say what they want... I wanna hear thegood stuff.

Pat is back?

Yes, I like to be me, so sorry (not). As to your quote from the overgrown frat boy who is otherwise on my Ignore List along with Cookie, Petey, Champ, Murdock, Pablo, and I forget who else (God, how I miss the Super Ignore feature): no, it just means you have pair, unlike all the other passengers in the AZ Clown Car.

Lou Figueroa


Then here he goes again with the mean-spirited comments like “overgrown frat boy” and he has to also stick Cookie, Petey, Champ, Murdock and Pablo in the eye with his sly ad hominem attack by mentioning that they are on HIS ignore list. Why even mention that anyone is on your ignore list? And he always loves to mention the AZ Clown Car, like that is supposed to funny. Lou's humor sucks.

more from lou:
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


And here Lou then takes another shot at CTE with his eye-poking comments: “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 :-)” This is just the consistent pattern of Lou’s posts that illustrate why these threads go down the tube.

Another nice quote by Lou:
Playing champions doesn't mean anything, unless it is in comparison to the keyboard pool champions who can't even get up and do that ;-)

Lou Figueroa


More innuendos from the ever so sly Lou:
Previously on General Hospital... yes, the physical aiming aid would definitely be a plus. Once again, one of the reasons something this like this might help some folks just not for the advertised reasons.
Lou Figueroa

And his response to JB cases:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JB Cases
What are the advertised reasons?

Nice try, but not goin' there :-)

Lou Figueroa
again


And more of Lou inciting further disharmony in the forum:pvc lou, I don't know if you remember the movie "Beetlejuice" where you weren't suppose to say the name "Betelgeuse" three times or you'd get Michael Keaton in white face, but around here try saying the words "aiming system" and "snake oil" in the same sentence and you get pretty much the same effect, lol.

Lou Figueroa


and a little additional name-calling from Lou to throw a little more gasoline on the fire calling forum members “numnuts”--- REAL CLASSY. :
Where did I assume anything about "aiming system advocates" in that post? I specifically said at the beginning of that post that I was talking about the numnuts who only shoot a great game of pool from behind their keyboards.

Lou Figueroa

Unfortunately, I have come to realize that Lou is in the same class as Pat Johnson. He makes valuable contributions to the forum on occasion but he cannot control himself and always finds a way to disturb even the most interesting threads about aiming systems. It is a very similar pattern. Pat, too, had difficulty controlling himself on the forums, creating strife just about wherever he posted.

Lou's regular use of mean-spirited comments are causing the forum great angst even in the most benign threads like this one.

If you ever wondered why I admonish Lou from time to time, you only have to look at his posts in this single thread to get an idea of why I out him from time to time.

This shit-stirring was started by Lou and others jumped on him for it and so it continues. I realize that I am a part of it (by posting these type of posts) but I can't innocently and silently stand by and see the forum be demonized by a couple of mean-spirited people like Lou.

Maybe it would be better that Lou take a self-imposed hiatus and come back with a better attitude or just leave permanently.

I didn't "report" his posts that break all forum rules and hope that he will get control of himself and cease the name-calling, the innuendos, the mean-spirited comments and the negative comments about members of this forum.

I most likely won't respond to criticism for my post. I know it's not a nice post and I'm sorry I had to write it but I just couldn't remain silent when the problem is so clear. Some of you may not agree with me and some of you may agree with me. It doesn't matter. I had to say what was on my heart. The forum's going to shit because of the negativity that Lou is bestowing on the forum.
 
greyghost said:
... You can adjust the shaft up or down closer and farther to your eyes (all done standing up) untill both edges of the shaft ON ANY PART OF THE SHAFT line up with the CB edges, then the shaft on which ever particular side is called for lines up with the edge of the OB.

You drop in on this alignment..........

And you make the ball..........

If your doing that while down on the shot, then YES shaft diameter would matter.......if you do it standing up as part of preshot then the optical illusion of the invisible shaft does the work for you. ...
Click to expand...

greyghost, I like your videos and the way you teach, and I enjoy the different perspective you bring to some discussions (including this one).

But it seems to me that you are introducing something here that was not part of what Shane described or demonstrated. He simply said (for a reasonably thin cut to the left, for example), aim the left edge of the shaft at the right edge of the OB. There was nothing about raising the shaft in front of your eyes and moving it in and out until a shaft edge lines up with an OB edge. There was nothing about optical illusions.

To me, he was simply saying to point the line down the left side of the shaft at the right edge of the OB. And what he said is what we are analyzing/discussing. And if you do what he said, the width of the shaft determines how far the center of the shaft is pointing to the right of the OB. And the farther to the right the center of the shaft is pointing, the farther to the right the CB is hit (I've been talking solely about center-of-CB hits).
 
Joey,

Firstly, I will say that I have respect for you as a person and a player. I think you have a genuine and good nature. I can tell from your posts and from meeting you in person (and from watching your game) that you have integrity.

I don't understand, however, why Lou F. gets under your skin. I think his posts are rational, thoughtful, and also genuine. He does sometimes bite with his words. But, from what I see, his jabs are not made from pure meanness. He's just saying what he thinks (re. "snake oil", "beetlejuice", etc.)

Also, I think the things he says get such a strong reaction because his style might come off as a little dismissive. When he says something, you can tell he doesn't care what anyone else thinks about it. He owns his ideas. And I respect that. And I suspect some of the forum members don't take well to that.

In the spirit of lessening (unnecessary) discord, perhaps you can try to read his posts from this perspective. Let us state our opinions and ideas without regard to others' (dis)agreement. So long as no one tries to silence, censor, or otherwise influence another's comments, I think the conversation can be productive....even if it costs us perfect collective harmony.

Vive la difference...

i think.

-pvc lou
 
Last edited:
AtLarge said:
greyghost, I like your videos and the way you teach, and I enjoy the different perspective you bring to some discussions (including this one).

But it seems to me that you are introducing something here that was not part of what Shane described or demonstrated. He simply said (for a reasonably thin cut to the left, for example), aim the left edge of the shaft at the right edge of the OB. There was nothing about raising the shaft in front of your eyes and moving it in and out until a shaft edge lines up with an OB edge. There was nothing about optical illusions.

To me, he was simply saying to point the line down the left side of the shaft at the right edge of the OB. And what he said is what we are analyzing/discussing. And if you do what he said, the width of the shaft determines how far the center of the shaft is pointing to the right of the OB. And the farther to the right the center of the shaft is pointing, the farther to the right the CB is hit (I've been talking solely about center-of-CB hits).
Click to expand...

If your in proper alignment with the shot a good players back hand knows where it needs to be because the player sees the line without the shaft. Many many midwestern players use the technique. I dont have to raise my shaft every time as i know where I am, but its a great visual aid....

As for the optics, the illusions are there 100% wether shane says so or not.....because every player on the planet has experienced this no matter if they know it or not. The tight trick cut i mentioned in previous post demonstrates one of these occurences.

Are you saying in your last paragraph that when shane cuts a ball he has to add english to make the shot? (thats what it sounds like you just said" to me?) So the tighter the cut the more english? This doesn't sound right.

I did develop a system for super tight cut shots that worked like that when your cutting a ball on the rail say close to 90 degrees. The tighter the cut the more inside you put on the ball and aim the edge of the cb and shaft edge line to the point on the rail where the ball looks like its touching (which is not at the real contact touching point of the rail/ball)

that works it even works for outside with wide angle shots.........but its a gaff because you can only move the CB one way or 180 degrees, i want to hit the shot left or right with any english I please.

If i am incorrect in your explanation of what you meant please explain further and talk with an accent lol.

-Greyghost
 
Now typically you dont see him do a raise, but I have seen him do it especially on a long clincher typically if he does it. The systems are basically the same, shane just has the skill to leave out a step because he sees it and puts his cue on it.

Like Jb said you can reverse engineer alot of the methods as to what is really related to what and the links b'/t some systems. Its in the CTE family which imop comes from using the shadows as I've described before here(haphazardly)as a reference point with a B.O.B. (back of ball) aim point that is DISTINCTIVE and on the edge of a feild of a Matching color, as opposed to having to aim at a contact point thats invisible in a field of matching color.......this laps over into some of Genos work as well.

Its the description of things and real understanding that we are always trying to discover....its a fun process progression is. Singularly and as a group.

Some people talk in circles, I talk in a triangle and find the associoations between seemingly differing subject matter....they are everywhere its creepy.

i see dead people,
-Greyghost
 
greyghost said:
... Are you saying in your last paragraph that when shane cuts a ball he has to add english to make the shot? (thats what it sounds like you just said" to me?) So the tighter the cut the more english? This doesn't sound right. ...

If i am incorrect in your explanation of what you meant please explain further and talk with an accent lol.

-Greyghost
Click to expand...

It seems I must be writing with an accent!:)

No, all I'm saying about english is that all my posts in this thread assume NO english. In other words, the center of the shaft is pointing through the core of the CB, or at least at the vertical axis through the core of the CB. But for the fairly sharp cut to the left that I used as an example, Shane's method would have us simultaneously pointing the left edge of the shaft at the right edge of the OB.

To say it yet another way, we could point the left edge of the shaft at the right edge of the OB with the shaft located anywhere behind the CB. The particular position of the shaft I am talking about, however, is the one where it applies no english to the CB because the center of the shaft is pointing through the center of the CB.

Often in aiming discussions, we just discuss where the particular aiming method would have us point the stick without using english.
 
LAMas said:
Yup. He says that you want to spin the ball. then it is said that at contact he uses stun and acceleration - probably to the outside.

He doesn't know that (swiping) doesn't work for the contact time to the OB is only one millisecond and no gearing can take place.:wink:

We won't argue the point.:thumbup:

Be well.:)
Click to expand...

Actually, Lou F. to his credit, mentioned how a small physical change can work in an individual's game, despite the scientific proof to the contrary. We need to expand the knowledge base and quit resting on our laurels.

When an idea is brought forth and found to have some merit, we start a flame war. Though the pro players are giving us anecdotal evidence, something is working for them. Shane is giving us his impression of what he sees and does. He doesn't have a degree in Physics or Kinesiology, but he's got the answers. A simple discussion may open a door or two and shed some light on his info.

Best,
Mike
 
Mikjary said:
Actually, Lou F. to his credit, mentioned how a small physical change can work in an individual's game, despite the scientific proof to the contrary. We need to expand the knowledge base and quit resting on our laurels.

When an idea is brought forth and found to have some merit, we start a flame war. Though the pro players are giving us anecdotal evidence, something is working for them. Shane is giving us his impression of what he sees and does. He doesn't have a degree in Physics or Kinesiology, but he's got the answers. A simple discussion may open a door or two and shed some light on his info.

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

I tried to expand on Shane's terse example in post #192 in this thread but unlike CTE, there was no feedback...just hijacking the intent of this thread...Shane's example.

I tried the side/s of the ferrule at the center and side of the OB and found it to be very easy (parsimounious) to effect...even fractions of the ferrule is the nuts.

Alas, who want's to learn anything here anyway ...save how to flame?

Thanks Mike

Be well.:thumbup:
 
LAMas said:
I tried to expand on Shane's terse example in post #192 in this thread but unlike CTE, there was no feedback. ...
Click to expand...

I had a question when I saw your #192, but I forgot to ask it at the time.

Question: You produced cut angles of 23 and 37 degrees aiming the two stick edges at the OB right edge. What diameter stick did you use to produce those results?

Observation: It's a long way from 37 degrees to a maximum-angle cut. I wonder whether Shane uses any additional reference alignments for the thinner cuts (before you get to edge of ball to edge of ball).
 
AtLarge said:
I had a question when I saw your #192, but I forgot to ask it at the time.

Question: You produced cut angles of 23 and 37 degrees aiming the two stick edges at the OB right edge. What diameter stick did you use to produce those results?

Observation: It's a long way from 37 degrees to a maximum-angle cut. I wonder whether Shane uses any additional reference alignments for the thinner cuts (before you get to edge of ball to edge of ball).
Click to expand...

I converted 13mm to .511" for the most popular ferrule diameter in my Autocad examples.

You are correct and I wish that Shane would have attemped a 90 degree cut and told us where he aims the side of the ferrule for that.

At the table, I moved my sight line from the edge of the ferrule off of the edge of the OB - it was closer to the edge of the OB than the center of the ferrule - it will take time to know how far off of the OB the edge of the ferrule must be for those cut angles greater than 37 degrees...for now I will use double distance aiming for far shots and CP to CP for close ones.

Be well.:thumbup:
 
LAMas said:
I converted 13mm to .511" for the most popular ferrule diameter in my Autocad examples. ...
Click to expand...

Thanks. Can you easily re-do your Autocad using a 12mm shaft (.472")? Then we'd have a notion of the sensitivity. Or maybe a 14mm and a 12mm.
 
Last edited:
AtLarge said:
Thanks. Can you easily re-do your Autocad using a 12mm shaft (.472")? Then we'd have a notion of the sensitivity. Or maybe a 14mm and a 12mm.
Click to expand...

You will have to wait for me to go to work to access Acad on my smoking breaks and lunch hour when I don't get invited to go out to smoke or for lunch.

Perhaps I can create an Excel spread sheet and graph the results - I usually get a new engineer to do that type of work, but this task doesn't come with an AZ program charge number to give them.:wink::thumbup:
 
LAMas said:
I converted 13mm to .511" for the most popular ferrule diameter in my Autocad examples.

You are correct and I wish that Shane would have attemped a 90 degree cut and told us where he aims the side of the ferrule for that.

At the table, I moved my sight line from the edge of the ferrule off of the edge of the OB - it was closer to the edge of the OB than the center of the ferrule - it will take time to know how far off of the OB the edge of the ferrule must be for those cut angles greater than 37 degrees...for now I will use double distance aiming for far shots and CP to CP for close ones.

Be well.:thumbup:
Click to expand...

Big E,

Grey Ghost and Neil said, there is an eye "trick" or optical illusion and this holds true for very thin cuts. I'm right eye dominant and head placement changes the perspective along the cue. Left edge for left cuts, right edge for right cuts.

For extreme thin cuts to the right, I sight an eighth of an inch off of the edge of the object ball for long cuts. Close up I aim a quarter of an inch off of the object ball. For cuts to the left I aim at the edge of the object ball, close or far.

Gerry Kanov and I have discussed this for twenty plus years. He understands very well what we talk about with these systems and occasionally reads them. He's been talking about what we have just started to talk about here for many years. Before that I went over these systems with Don Feeney. I can say that your diagrams have helped further my understanding of them more than anything. :thumbup:

Best,
Mike
 
Mikjary said:
Big E,

Grey Ghost and Neil said, there is an eye "trick" or optical illusion and this holds true for very thin cuts. I'm right eye dominant and head placement changes the perspective along the cue. Left edge for left cuts, right edge for right cuts.

For extreme thin cuts to the right, I sight an eighth of an inch off of the edge of the object ball for long cuts. Close up I aim a quarter of an inch off of the object ball. For cuts to the left I aim at the edge of the object ball, close or far.

Gerry Kanov and I have discussed this for twenty plus years. He understands very well what we talk about with these systems and occasionally reads them. He's been talking about what we have just started to talk about here for many years. Before that I went over these systems with Don Feeney. I can say that your diagrams have helped further my understanding of them more than anything. :thumbup:

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

The diameter of the ferrule may be academic for the results attained for a given shooter will vary depending on many factors..like dominant eye, distance between and english...etc..

Cuts to the left may yield different angles than cuts to the right...etc...depending on the dominant eye.

One must have a good memory to recognize what the cut angle is in order to aim at the correct spot in this and many or other aiming systems...save CTE.

One must adjust the geometrically correct angles to the english that needs to be compensated for to achieve these angles or to apply english to get shape.

Pool is not easy, but aiming systems like this one will save on table time...or pay for... the Hit a Million Balls system.

Thanks and be well.:thumbup:
 
Last edited:
LAMas said:
The diameter of the ferrule may be academic for the results attained for a given shooter will vary depending on many factors..like dominant eye, distance between and english...etc..

Cuts to the left may yield different angles than cuts to the right...etc...depending on the dominant eye.

One must have a good memory to recognize what the cut angle is in order to aim at the correct spot in this and many or other aiming systems...save CTE.

One must adjust the geometrically correct angles to the english that needs to be compensated for to achieve these angles or to apply english to get shape.

Pool is not easy, but aiming systems like this one will save on table time...or pay for... the Hit a Million Balls system.

Thanks and be well.:thumbup:
Click to expand...

Granted all that, I still think it's useful and/or interesting to know what any particular aiming method would produce if it could be performed robotically in accord with its basic prescription.
 
Honestly, watching the other video where Shane is talking more in depth about it, I think Shane sees the angle from experience and dials in with the cue stick as the guide to keep him focused. I would bet that he doesn't really think in steps at this point and it all flows from doing it so much.

If he were to pick up another cue with a different ferrule size then he would adjust to it pretty quickly. The method he uses works but it's not intended to be millimeter precisely calibrated with the cue in my opinion.
 
JB Cases said:
Honestly, watching the other video where Shane is talking more in depth about it, I think Shane sees the angle from experience and dials in with the cue stick as the guide to keep him focused. I would bet that he doesn't really think in steps at this point and it all flows from doing it so much.

If he were to pick up another cue with a different ferrule size then he would adjust to it pretty quickly. The method he uses works but it's not intended to be millimeter precisely calibrated with the cue in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I concur. Champions adjust to all conditions i.e. cloth, humidity etc., or lose.

The student is wanting a primer to get them there. I thank you and Shane for sharing.:thumbup:
 
JB Cases said:
Honestly, watching the other video where Shane is talking more in depth about it, I think Shane sees the angle from experience and dials in with the cue stick as the guide to keep him focused. I would bet that he doesn't really think in steps at this point and it all flows from doing it so much.

If he were to pick up another cue with a different ferrule size then he would adjust to it pretty quickly. The method he uses works but it's not intended to be millimeter precisely calibrated with the cue in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree, John. As Shane said, it's "automatic" to him. And I also agree that he would adapt quickly to any different ferrule size within the fairly narrow range of sizes that most of us use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top