Why can’t system and HAMB coexist?

[PGHteacher]

I am fairly new to the forum but I do have a serious question for the “aiming system naysayers”; why is it that when the aiming system advocates start to talk there is always someone who says “you don’t need an aiming system you need to HAMB” or “there is no substitute for practice” or something like that.

Why is it that when someone talks about an aiming system do some automatically assume that the person is trying to find a substitute for practice time or trying to play better with the specific idea that “aiming system=less table time needed”. In my mind it works the other way around. When you learn a new way of doing something (no matter what it is) you need MORE practice time with it not less.

 

[sfleinen]

I am fairly new to the forum but I do have a serious question for the “aiming system naysayers”; why is it that when the aiming system advocates start to talk there is always someone who says “you don’t need an aiming system you need to HAMB” or “there is no substitute for practice” or something like that.

Why is it that when someone talks about an aiming system do some automatically assume that the person is trying to find a substitute for practice time or trying to play better with the specific idea that “aiming system=less table time needed”. In my mind it works the other way around. When you learn a new way of doing something (no matter what it is) you need MORE practice time with it not less.

John:

Come on, the answer to your question is self evident, isn't it? *Everyone* is looking for a shortcut to doing things. It's human nature, and is the process known as "innovation." Down through history, man has engaged in the endeavor to make things easier in all aspects of life. I'm sure I don't have to give you examples of things that, in the past, were considered "crazy shortcuts" but are considered no-brainer standard methods of doing things now. I'll leave that as a reader exercise.

Concerning the point about no substitute for practice, it is generally in response to the over indulgence in enthusiasm (read: over zealous marketing) to the aiming system. In fact, it's been outright stated by some in the aiming system camp, that learning an aiming system is supposed to "get you there quicker" (probably not in those exact words, but the gist is the same).

Now, concerning the point about, "Why is it that when someone talks about an aiming system do some automatically assume that the person is trying to find a substitute for practice time or trying to play better with the specific idea that “aiming system=less table time needed”" -- that's a valid (and unfortunate) point. You are right in that the HAMB camp make this assumption. The problem may be it's a "learned" response -- sort of Pavlovian, in a way, because of the overzealous marketing in the past.

Yes, learning anything new means practice time to "get it down." However, if you ask any aiming system advocate, the reason for learning an aiming system is not to "have" to hit a million balls to "get it." Rather, hit half a million, or a quarter million, ...etc.

Thoughts?
-Sean

 

[Roadie]

Hitting a Million Balls is simply a euphemism for table time. We have seen players reach professional level in 3 years or so after first picking up a cue and we have seen others not reach that level after ten years of play. I think we can all agree that it's quality over quantity that really counts.

A dedicated amateur who is mentored by a champion will progress much farther than a dedicated amateur who hits the same amount of balls in the same amount of time. So it's obvious that knowledge and technique are indeed shortcuts.

I do agree that a lot of people are looking for magic bullets. But certainly not all of them and especially not the dedicated system aimers. Those folks have most defintely put in a lot of table time to get proficient with the techniques they use.

I absolutely believe that aiming systems and hamb not only can coexist but that there isn't any way around it. If you are a decent player and you decide to make a major change to how you approach shots then you are going to spend a lot of time rebuilding your habits unless you happen to be one of the lucky ones who snaps to it very quickly.

But once you have the aiming method down then comes the sweet part. You can then spend the table time working on so much more interesting aspects of the game. At least that is how it's worked for me personally. I have tremendous amount of fun with my table time now. Still hitting a million balls but in a much more efficient way.

 

[Ratta]

Every pool-player ever lived and ever shot a single ball used an aiming system.
And every of the champions has hit a million balls.

that s fact.
So co-existence is confirmed.

 

[PGHteacher]

Come on, the answer to your question is self evident, isn't it? *Everyone* is looking for a shortcut to doing things. It's human nature, and is the process known as "innovation." Down through history, man has engaged in the endeavor to make things easier in all aspects of life.

I will go ½ way with you there yes the lazy and people that are the lower 50% as far as intelligence goes want to make it “easier” but I think the upper 50% as far as intelligence goes and the highly motivated want to do it “better and more efficiently”. And the latter have done more for mankind’s advancement more so than the former by leaps and bounds.

I'm sure I don't have to give you examples of things that, in the past, were considered "crazy shortcuts" but are considered no-brainer standard methods of doing things now. I'll leave that as a reader exercise.

Well those people that considered them “crazy shortcuts” weren’t very forward thinking were they? That is considering that those “crazy shortcuts” are common place now.

Concerning the point about no substitute for practice, it is generally in response to the over indulgence in enthusiasm (read: over zealous marketing) to the aiming system.

People can get overly enthusiastic about ANYTHING check this guy out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lutNECOZFw&feature=player_embedded

In fact, it's been outright stated by some in the aiming system camp, that learning an aiming system is supposed to "get you there quicker" (probably not in those exact words, but the gist is the same).

Yea that’s my point why are “get you there quicker” and “less table time” synonymous in some peoples minds? I think it’s the “quicker” part. I think some people think that the system advocates think that because they have the system they don’t need the table time. As I say there are lazy and/or stupid people everywhere especially in the workplace, but I know from experience that those people rarely get very far. And to assume that is true of everyone is erroneous.

Now, concerning the point about, "Why is it that when someone talks about an aiming system do some automatically assume that the person is trying to find a substitute for practice time or trying to play better with the specific idea that “aiming system=less table time needed”" -- that's a valid (and unfortunate) point. You are right in that the HAMB camp make this assumption. The problem may be it's a "learned" response -- sort of Pavlovian, in a way, because of the overzealous marketing in the past.

Yes this is my point it’s a knee jerk reaction; I am asking why this is so, why don’t the “system naysayers” think it out a little further.

Yes, learning anything new means practice time to "get it down."

Exactly

However, if you ask any aiming system advocate,

We have a fundamental disagreement about people; whenever you use “any”, “always”, “everyone”, “no one”, “never” in reference to people and how they feel, what they do __ for or the like you will ALWAYS be incorrect; there will be someone out there that doesn’t fit the mold.

the reason for learning an aiming system is not to "have" to hit a million balls to "get it." Rather, hit half a million, or a quarter million, ...etc.

I have to go ½ way with you here again; this is probably true for a certain portion of the population but it sure isn’t true of people like me, to imply that this is true of everyone is shortsighted IMHO. I take the fact that someone needs to HAMB as a given; I take that whether or not someone can “get there” with HAMB+system or just HAMB as a question that can best be answered on an individual basis.

 

[duckie]

The long term goal is to reach a level of skill where a "system" is not used. Where the action is automatic; see shot, do shot, no need to find any type of aim line. There is nothing between seeing the shot and doing the shot.

There is only one way to do this-HAMB. It doesn't matter what the system is used because you still have to hit alot of balls to get away from being dependent on needing to use that system.

The biggest issue is trying to imply one system is better than another.

 

[Okie]

Neither yaysayer nor naysayer can allow facts and logic to get in the way of their quest of winning "The Argument"!

Ken

 

[sfleinen]

John:

You haven't been here (on the AZB forums) long, so obvious you have no history of why we are here (i.e. that aiming topics had to be moved to a separate forum).

Your point about "all," "nothing," etc. is absolutely understood by me -- I hope you gather that from your experience with my posts here and other parts of the AZB forum. My biggest beef here at the AZB forums are the sheer number of outright EXTREMISTS we have here. In another thread (Main forum), I lamented how few people seem to know the meaning of the word MODERATION, as well as how few can accurately select a position in the gray scale *between* the black and white polar ends. So your point is not lost on me.

What I am trying to give you, is information that your new-ish membership to the AZB forums wasn't privy to -- and that is the history I'm alluding to above.

The issue is that this has gone up and down like a sine wave in the past. The overzealous marketing creeps in, it's smacked down, things are on a level for a little while (like they are now), but then the overzealous marketing creeps in again and has to be smacked down again. This has gone on for DECADES on this aiming system topic.

You and I are in the same boat with the MODERATION thing. However, your question/post/thread is a rhetorical one, and if you do some searches on this topic here, you'll see.

Try it -- go back in time and read some of the aiming threads. You'll see that your question, from a moderate standpoint (i.e. you and I), is a rhetorical one.

-Sean

I will go ½ way with you there yes the lazy and people that are the lower 50% as far as intelligence goes want to make it “easier” but I think the upper 50% as far as intelligence goes and the highly motivated want to do it “better and more efficiently”. And the latter have done more for mankind’s advancement more so than the former by leaps and bounds.



Well those people that considered them “crazy shortcuts” weren’t very forward thinking were they? That is considering that those “crazy shortcuts” are common place now.



People can get overly enthusiastic about ANYTHING check this guy out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lutNECOZFw&feature=player_embedded




Yea that’s my point why are “get you there quicker” and “less table time” synonymous in some peoples minds? I think it’s the “quicker” part. I think some people think that the system advocates think that because they have the system they don’t need the table time. As I say there are lazy and/or stupid people everywhere especially in the workplace, but I know from experience that those people rarely get very far. And to assume that is true of everyone is erroneous.



Yes this is my point it’s a knee jerk reaction; I am asking why this is so, why don’t the “system naysayers” think it out a little further.



Exactly



We have a fundamental disagreement about people; whenever you use “any”, “always”, “everyone”, “no one”, “never” in reference to people and how they feel, what they do __ for or the like you will ALWAYS be incorrect; there will be someone out there that doesn’t fit the mold.





I have to go ½ way with you here again; this is probably true for a certain portion of the population but it sure isn’t true of people like me, to imply that this is true of everyone is shortsighted IMHO. I take the fact that someone needs to HAMB as a given; I take that whether or not someone can “get there” with HAMB+system or just HAMB as a question that can best be answered on an individual basis.

 

[Okie]

....................

 

[PGHteacher]

John:

You haven't been here (on the AZB forums) long, so obvious you have no history of why we are here (i.e. that aiming topics had to be moved to a separate forum).

Yea I said “I know I am new”

Your point about "all," "nothing," etc. is absolutely understood by me -- I hope you gather that from your experience with my posts here and other parts of the AZB forum. My biggest beef here at the AZB forums are the sheer number of outright EXTREMISTS we have here. In another thread (Main forum), I lamented how few people seem to know the meaning of the word MODERATION, as well as how few can accurately select a position in the gray scale *between* the black and white polar ends. So your point is not lost on me.

What I am trying to give you, is information that your new-ish membership to the AZB forums wasn't privy to -- and that is the history I'm alluding to above.

The issue is that this has gone up and down like a sine wave in the past. The overzealous marketing creeps in, it's smacked down, things are on a level for a little while (like they are now), but then the overzealous marketing creeps in again and has to be smacked down again. This has gone on for DECADES on this aiming system topic.

You and I are in the same boat with the MODERATION thing. However, your question/post/thread is a rhetorical one, and if you do some searches on this topic here, you'll see.

Try it -- go back in time and read some of the aiming threads. You'll see that your question, from a moderate standpoint (i.e. you and I), is a rhetorical one.

-Sean

I will do that but the whole reason for my post was that I found that all those that say “you just need practice” to be the most repeated thing on here, right up there with disapproval of jump cues, I just think to say that over and over again is just silly.

 

[One Pocket John]

In my mind the reason for practicing your pre shot routine and shooting a million balls is to train the sub-conscious to do it automatically without thought when in a game.

Heck it took me a year to learn how to walk, then I learned how to run. What an exciting time. There were no short cuts, I just had to be observent and keep practicing. :smile:

John

 

[justadub]

Neither yaysayer nor naysayer can allow facts and logic to get in the way of their quest of winning "The Argument"!

Ken

This is the correct answer.

 

[BilliardsAbout]

I am fairly new to the forum but I do have a serious question for the “aiming system naysayers”; why is it that when the aiming system advocates start to talk there is always someone who says “you don’t need an aiming system you need to HAMB” or “there is no substitute for practice” or something like that.

Why is it that when someone talks about an aiming system do some automatically assume that the person is trying to find a substitute for practice time or trying to play better with the specific idea that “aiming system=less table time needed”. In my mind it works the other way around. When you learn a new way of doing something (no matter what it is) you need MORE practice time with it not less.

Hi, John:

I think you raise an interesting concept. My own answer is contextual. I don't push aim systems on someone who can run racks, unless they need something unique for banking or kicking, etc.

But I've asked myself this question:

If I meet a beginner who has been playing for a week and asks me, "Matt, I heard I am to drive the cue ball to make it and the object ball align on the line-of-centers for cut shots, is that true?"

I could reply:

"Yes."

or I could reply:

"Yes, and let's also discuss contact-induced throw and its adjustments."

or I could say:

"Push that all from your mind. If you visualize that for each shot, it's an aiming system, and I want you to use table time and feel. I could tell you about contact-induced throw and adjustments, too, but that would hamper your natural abilities and opportunities."

The silliness of the last response above is the logical limit of anyone who denies that everyone uses some kind of aim system--at least on some shots.

I agree with you regarding the aim system naysayers.

 

[Okie]

In my mind the reason for practicing your pre shot routine and shooting a million balls is to train the sub-conscious to do it automatically without thought when in a game.

Heck it took me a year to learn how to walk, then I learned how to run. What an exciting time. There were no short cuts, I just had to be observent and keep practicing. :smile:

John

Agreed. All natural. No thought needed. However...

We learn to run. Then we start sports and are taught that we can improve on our stride to attain higher speeds. So we set upon the task of ingraining our newly learned stride into our natural way of running.

When I gave golf lessons, I used the analogy of putting a fork in your mouth to demonstrate this point. Something along the lines of elbow position, proper grip, proper grip pressure, eye movement, smoothness of the stroke while entering the mouth, limiting stroke length as not to jab the back of our mouth with the fork, etc etc. Sounds pretty silly when applied to eating with a fork. But in fact we did have to be trained how to use a fork and today we do it mindlessly and with perfect rhythm and accuracy. When was the last time you stabbed yourself with your fork?

Apply this to the OP question. HAMB and system do coexist. They are inseparable. We learn a new system then apply HAMB to ingrain it into our "way".

Ken

p.s. John, I also disagree on another point. You are most definitely an instructor. If you ever get to OKC we must sit down for a chat and a game or three.

 

[Ghosst]

People can get overly enthusiastic about ANYTHING check this guy out: Excited Train Guy, New York

Oh WOW !!!

Actually, those were nice engines.

Oh man, I just posted in the aiming forum. Crap.

Umm ... Ghost Ball!!!!! WOOHOOO!!!!

NAY!!

YAY!!

 

[Ratta]

Agreed. All natural. No thought needed. However...

We learn to run. Then we start sports and are taught that we can improve on our stride to attain higher speeds. So we set upon the task of ingraining our newly learned stride into our natural way of running.

When I gave golf lessons, I used the analogy of putting a fork in your mouth to demonstrate this point. Something along the lines of elbow position, proper grip, proper grip pressure, eye movement, smoothness of the stroke while entering the mouth, limiting stroke length as not to jab the back of our mouth with the fork, etc etc. Sounds pretty silly when applied to eating with a fork. But in fact we did have to be trained how to use a fork and today we do it mindlessly and with perfect rhythm and accuracy. When was the last time you stabbed yourself with your fork?

Apply this to the OP question. HAMB and system do coexist. They are inseparable. We learn a new system then apply HAMB to ingrain it into our "way".

Ken

p.s. John, I also disagree on another point. You are most definitely an instructor. If you ever get to OKC we must sit down for a chat and a game or three.

Amen !!!

:thumbup:

lg

Ingo

 

[LAMas]

Once you have a method of aiming that gives you consistent results, there are several in the Aiming Catagory, then HAMB will elevate your game.

HAMB alone can be like driving at 100 miles/hour in the wrong direction which is not progress. With table time at $10.00/hour, HAMB is a serious investment.

I wish I had a room or a back yard large enough to put a table in and then HAMB.:smile:

 

[Shaky1]

Once you have a method of aiming that gives you consistent results, there are several in the Aiming Catagory, then HAMB will elevate your game.

HAMB alone can be like driving at 100 miles/hour in the wrong direction which is not progress. With table time at $10.00/hour, HAMB is a serious investment.

I wish I had a room or a back yard large enough to put a table in and then HAMB.:smile:

I agree! I am willing and able to put in the table time. In fact, I have put in the time already! I'm not afraid to start over and have started. Right now I'm working hard on my stroke.
I seem to have some sort of mental block when it comes to pocketing balls.
It comes from not trusting my aim.
What I'm hoping for is going with a new system that takes my mind off of where my stick is aimed down table and puts my thinking elsewhere. I think I'm running on information overload. I need something a little more simple than CTE.
I'm over thinking everything now and nothing is simple.
I need to look at something different that takes my mind off of ball, pocket, and, contact point on the object ball (or at least looking at them in a different way), and hope for the best.
That and hit another million balls. :wink:
Right now is the perfect time for me to try out the SEE system. I'm supposed to try it out for 2 weeks and report on it.
I have exactly 2 weeks before the next league session starts.
I will give it a fair shot. I have nothing to lose.
Frank

 

[duckie]

The reason you don't trust your aim is that you haven't enough balls.

Improving is more about focusing your practiceing on your weaknessess until they become strengths. No matter what system you pick, the arrow will give you a real world point for aiming. Since the arrow remains on the table, you can set up the same shot over and over again. Since the point of the arrow represents where the cb needs to be for center pocket, it can be used for a reference point for making adjustments for spin and cheating the pockets.

Better practice will do more than any system used.

 

[Shaky1]

The reason you don't trust your aim is that you haven't enough balls.
Improving is more about focusing your practiceing on your weaknessess until they become strengths. No matter what system you pick, the arrow will give you a real world point for aiming. Since the arrow remains on the table, you can set up the same shot over and over again. Since the point of the arrow represents where the cb needs to be for center pocket, it can be used for a reference point for making adjustments for spin and cheating the pockets.

Better practice will do more than any system used.

:grin: You might be right!
I gave my word that I will try the SEE system and I will do that come what may!
Frank