Texas Staff working deligently to prove Squirt has NO EFFECT on the Cue Ball!!!

[CJ Wiley]

The Game is Already Perfect, it's up to you to uncover that Perfection

Pocketing the balls is one thing, but staying in line and getting a feel for speed is also just as big a factor. How does this aiming system allow for using inside or outside english at different speeds when needed?

It's amazing how well you can play with very little english and I, personally don't adjust for spin, just the point of the pocket I'm connected to, unless I'm hitting the ball super firm or with extreme, almost masse' type english.....you see the game is perfect at some level and to help explain why I believe this, allow me share a real life story with you, a story that instilled 'The Game is the Teacher' in my heart or hearts. This was a week before my first Pro Tournament in Toronto Canada where I had wins against four of the top players in the country. This is the story -

I was hanging out at my pool room "CJ's" behind the bar of all places....I really didn't spend a lot of time back there, but this day was the exception. An older man came in, sat down and ordered a soda...I knew how to "mix" that one so I got it for him and set it down.......he said "you are the professional pool player CJ aren't you?"....I replied "yes, that's me, unless I owe you money:smile: LoL"....he laughed, took a drink and said, "no, you don't owe me money, but I would like to ask you a question"......I suddenly felt him get serous and wondered what this older man was up to "sure, you can ask me whatever you want" I said, leaning against the cooler.....the man pointed at the pool table and ask "what are you trying to achieve playing that Game?"....I hesitated, thought and replied "I'm trying to be the best player I can be, maybe even the best in the world, at least once".....the man place his napkin between us, looked into my eyes and said firmly "you know this Game you play is already PERFECT....it's up to you to uncover it" and immediately turned over the napkin and looked under it....."Do You Understand" he said firmly again "The Game is ALREADY PERFECT, it's just up to you to uncover that Perfection", again he lifted up the napkin, looked under it and then quickly back into my now defocused stare......His eyes by now felt like they were probing my very soul and I squirmed a bit, suddenly feeling very warm and answered "I think I understand.....it's not me that has to be perfect, it's the game, so I don't need to try to be perfect, I just need to Uncover the Perfection that's already been placed there...in the Game.....by...uhhhh".....he smiled at my hesitation and finished "by the Breath of the Universe or The Breath of GOD, right now that's not as important as YOU having Faith that it's TRUE!.....He then told me to hold on for a minute and went to his car and brought back a book called 'A Parenthesis in Eternity', that I read and still have to this day.....this was one of those occasions that influenced me so much I find myself wondering if this old man was really an old man.....or.....angel....no, that would be silly now wouldn't it?.....hmmm, I still can't help but wonder........:grin-angelic: 'The Game is the Teacher'

 

[JB Cases]

Very true! One of the things that has improved my game the most is when a much better player (John Dudley) told me I needed to stop using english on every shot. He made me play the rest of the week using only center ball hits.

Obviously I missed a few here and there and got bad position once in a while by doing this but I learned how to manipulate the cue ball with better accuracy and less english. Now I have better command over both techniques.

That was about 20 years ago and I still find myself coming back to that basic truth.

I have beaten a couple people using no sidespin whatsoever. They didn't believe it is possible to play runout pool with no sidespin. I used to practice a lot using no side spin and just speed - you learn a lot about moving the cue ball around this way. And the best part is that you get much more in touch with what amounts of side spin are needed when you really need it.

Jimmy Reid used to have me playing 15 min with nothing but center ball, then 15 min with left, 15 min with right, etc.... he said that this is a good way to shoot a lot of shots while getting a really good feel for what the table is doing.

 

[JB Cases]

Mr. Wooten also had something interesting to say about John Schmidt:



So-ooooo...

Was I mistaken when I heard John say in the TAR podcast that low-deflection shafts ruined his game for a couple years, or is Mr. Wooten full of baloney?

Actually, Mark G. brought up the fact that John ran 400 with the OB shaft, but JS was quick to differentiate between the amount of squirt in high-speed spinners vs. low-speed shots. It is now (apparently) a well known fact that stroke speed had no effect on the amount of angular deflection experienced by the cue ball, and that only the amount of tip offset has any bearing on this.

Personally, I think the erroneous belief that stroke speed increased CB squirt messed with JS' head and made him miss the high-speed spin shots.

Your thoughts?

It would be worthwhile to consider that the article was probably written with search engines in mind which means the idea is to surround brand names with keywords that the search engines associate together. Not to say that what the author wrote is untrue or that he believes it to be true. Just saying that the idea was to put a lot of "information" together for the purpose of selling shafts.

Also when playing 14.1 the idea is to play mostly around center ball so it's entirely possible that John would have a high run out of the gate with one but not be totally comfortable with the shaft when playing rotation games.

Just speculating, John does read the forums and you can PM him and get the story directly from the subject.

 

[JB Cases]

There comes a point where the unconcious takes over for deep concentration. So even on hard pots, the top players can see exactly what needs to be done and a combination of muscle-memory and unconcious thought come together and makes the shot. In this case, a hard pot is not a hard pot - for someone like them. For a poor sap like me, I need to gather my concentration and focus to make the same shot.

It is said that Willie Hoppe developed a whole book on the Diamond System ... but never used it himself. I'm sure Bugs Rucker could've done the same thing with a banking system. These fellas relied on mostly unconcious experience and judgement for their success.

Back in the day a lot of the top players didn't actually write the books that had their name on them. So a lot of things get associated with this or that old-time pro when in fact they probably never used it. I am sure the hard-core historians among us can shed more light on who actually wrote what.

That said it's not entirely right to assume that they played entirely on "feel" either. I personally believe that a fairer assumption would be that they thought about their game as much as anyone and that many of them probably did mess around with various techniques that they may or may not have shared with others. Luther Lassiter for example was reported to have a number of peculiar things he did that he felt helped him to play better.

I bought a Cog from Joe Salazar that had belonged to Jimmy Reid. Jimmy had marked the ferrules with a dot so that he could orient the cue the same way each time. He felt that this allowed him to know that the cue would hit the same way each time. I think a lot of top players are more systematic than they get credit for.

I drove cross country with David Matlock once and he explained several systems he uses. Romantically we would all like to think that people just spring out the womb able to run racks but the truth is that great players work extremely hard to develop what looks like natural ability and even harder to maintain it. They are always looking for an edge or a way to save energy and simply their game to reduce errors and get the cash.

Just because players of yesteryear didn't open up with their secret recipes doesn't mean that they didn't have them. Sadly we will never know and the pool of people who might know is dwindling rapidly. The upside is that we have the benefit today to communicate broadly and immediately and more top players are willing to share the personal approaches rather than relying on ghost writers.

We just need to be willing to listen and absorb the information before arguing about it.

 

[dr_dave]

I would like to bring the aim to the felt in front of me, instead of finding the pinpoint on a object ball, and trusting my stroke,lol.

That's easy. Put your cue tip on the cloth in the center of the ghost ball and over the cue ball. Note a spot a convenient distance away on the cloth. Shoot the cue ball over the chosen spot.

poorod,

Here's a video demonstration of how you can establish the required line of the shot:

NV 3.2 - Using the cue to help visualize the required aiming line for a shot​

Sorry, but I thought you were joking about the squares and triangles before.

Good luck,
Dave

 

[Neil]

Hi Dave, the breakdown of two perfect squares, and where the triangles lay. I play on hitting a point on the object ball, I would rather play by aiming at a triangle maybe. I don't know how to aim Dave,lol. Maybe this two squares and triangles would help.k:

As CJ mentioned, there is a correlation between the squares and triangles on a table. They can be either the squares of half table, the triangles of center table to pocket of a half table, or , and this is something I figured out on my own and have never seen it in print- the correlation of the line of the cb to the ob being one side of the square or triangle, and using either 22 1/2º, 45º, 67 1/2º, or 90º off that line for certain shots.

 

[chefjeff]

poorod,

Here's a video demonstration of how you can establish the required line of the shot:

NV 3.2 - Using the cue to help visualize the required aiming line for a shot​

Sorry, but I thought you were joking about the squares and triangles before.

Good luck,
Dave

Dave, here's an addition to that technique that you may already know or might like to know....

When you place the cuestick behind the ball (OB or CB) with the tip behind the ball and all lined up, as you show in your video, take a moment to run your eyes up and down the shaft a few times. Then, look up quickly at the ball's path and you'll "see" a dark line on the cloth, a negative, if you will. This is much like what a flash camera does to your eyes when you see the dark spot floating in the air after having your photo taken.

You can "see" the exact line of whatever ball's path. This can be really helpful when having problems "locking in" the aim or "seeing" the shot.

Give it a try... I think you'll like it. It's almost like someone has diagrammed the shot right on the cloth or put masking tape on the table.

Jeff Livingston

 

[dr_dave]

Dave, here's an addition to that technique that you may already know or might like to know....

When you place the cuestick behind the ball (OB or CB) with the tip behind the ball and all lined up, as you show in your video, take a moment to run your eyes up and down the shaft a few times. Then, look up quickly at the ball's path and you'll "see" a dark line on the cloth, a negative, if you will. This is much like what a flash camera does to your eyes when you see the dark spot floating in the air after having your photo taken.

You can "see" the exact line of whatever ball's path. This can be really helpful when having problems "locking in" the aim or "seeing" the shot.

Give it a try... I think you'll like it. It's almost like someone has diagrammed the shot right on the cloth or put masking tape on the table.

Jeff Livingston

You must have really bright lights where you play. I just tried it out and it didn't work for me. Thanks for the suggestion though.

Regards,
Dave

 

[chefjeff]

You must have really bright lights where you play. I just tried it out and it didn't work for me. Thanks for the suggestion though.

Regards,
Dave

It works for plain wood shafts, not dark ones. It does work for dark ones, but the line shows up as lighter, not darker.

It has worked for everyone I've shown it to before. I'm not sure why it doesn't work for you now.

Be sure to allow your eyes to stay on the shaft for 5-10 seconds (maybe more for your eyes?) at least before looking up at the ball's path. Run your eyes up and down the shaft (not the butt, the shaft only) as you look at it. Then, quickly, jump your eyes up to the intended path.

Jeff Livingston

PS I intentionally keep the lights above my table on the dark side so those match the lights at the crappy bars I usually play in.:frown:

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

It would be worthwhile to consider that the article was probably written with search engines in mind which means the idea is to surround brand names with keywords that the search engines associate together. Not to say that what the author wrote is untrue or that he believes it to be true. Just saying that the idea was to put a lot of "information" together for the purpose of selling shafts.

Also when playing 14.1 the idea is to play mostly around center ball so it's entirely possible that John would have a high run out of the gate with one but not be totally comfortable with the shaft when playing rotation games.

I wasn't referring to an article, I was referring to TAR Podcast #24 and an off-the-cuff response to a comment Mark made about his 400 ball run.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=u8KsVm9ePlk#t=1775s


Mark: Yeah, but you ran 400 balls with that thing originally.

John: Yeah, but that's shooting... see, the misconception about straight pool is, I'm not shooting high-speed spinners, I'm shooting slow-speed spinners. The deflection was very little. Playing 9-ball where I had to pound the white ball around... I had no chance.


John clearly distinguishes between the effects of high speed and low speed spinners. Low speed spinners, he claims, deflect the CB less. This used to be universally observed to be true until the advent of high-speed film analysis of billiard shots proved this to be incorrect. John either is unaware of this physical phenomenon, or he is aware of it but chooses to ignore it. If so, he wouldn't be the first world-class player to have difficulty accepting emerging scientific fact while still playing lights out.

Our preconceptions can lead us to do and say very strange things, and the cognitive dissonance created by the internal conflict between what we already "know" and what we don't want to accept because it doesn't fit into our current paradigm can often lead us to actually alter our performance, even in familiar tasks.

 

[Jdale]

Maybe this old numerology ramble from Hal Houle is what you're looking for. Let's hope CJ's ideas make more sense...

pj
chgo

All tables have a 2 to 1 ratio; 3 1/2 x 7, 4 x 8, 4 ½ x 9, 5 x 10, 6 x
12. Always twice as long as it is wide. Table corners are 90 degree
angles. Laying a cue from side pocket to corner pocket forms a 45
degree angle. Laying a cue from side pocket to middle diamond on same
end rail, forms a 30 degree angle. Laying a cue from side pocket to
first diamond on the same end rail forms a 45 degree angle. 3 angles
total 90 degrees, the same angles formed by table corners.

I'm not the brightest star in the sky but I think I can do simple math. The three angles 45, 30 & 45 do not total 90.
If your laying the cue from the right side pocket to the left corner pocket on the foot rail and that forms a 45 degree angle and from the side pocket to the middle diamond on the same end rail forms a 30 degree angle. Laying the cue stick from the side pocket to the first diamond on the same end rail ALSO forms a 45 degree angle, how can that be. JDale

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Pocketing the balls is one thing, but staying in line and getting a feel for speed is also just as big a factor. How does this aiming system allow for using inside or outside english at different speeds when needed?

If you're asking me, I don't use this system; I just posted it for info purposes.

But generally, aiming systems never include adjustments for sidespin - that has to be added by the player in whatever way he normally adjusts for those effects.

pj
chgo

 

[JoeyA]

I wasn't referring to an article, I was referring to TAR Podcast #24 and an off-the-cuff response to a comment Mark made about his 400 ball run.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=u8KsVm9ePlk#t=1775s


Mark: Yeah, but you ran 400 balls with that thing originally.

John: Yeah, but that's shooting... see, the misconception about straight pool is, I'm not shooting high-speed spinners, I'm shooting slow-speed spinners. The deflection was very little. Playing 9-ball where I had to pound the white ball around... I had no chance.


John clearly distinguishes between the effects of high speed and low speed spinners. Low speed spinners, he claims, deflect the CB less. This used to be universally observed to be true until the advent of high-speed film analysis of billiard shots proved this to be incorrect. John either is unaware of this physical phenomenon, or he is aware of it but chooses to ignore it. If so, he wouldn't be the first world-class player to have difficulty accepting emerging scientific fact while still playing lights out.

Our preconceptions can lead us to do and say very strange things, and the cognitive dissonance created by the internal conflict between what we already "know" and what we don't want to accept because it doesn't fit into our current paradigm can often lead us to actually alter our performance, even in familiar tasks.

Perhaps you underestimate John and he is thinking that with the slower speeds, the "effective" cueball squirt/deflection is not as much as with faster speeds because the swerve factor is greater on slower speed shots than on faster speed shots. Most top players do not differeniate between squirt and effective squirt and are primarily concerned with the bottom line.

 

[dr_dave]

Most top players do not differentiate between squirt and effective squirt and are primarily concerned with the bottom line.

Well stated. One doesn't need to understand or be aware of the separate effects (squirt and swerve) to be able to adjust for the combined effects ("squirve" or "effective squirt" or "net cue ball deflection").

Regards,
Dave

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Perhaps you underestimate John and he is thinking that with the slower speeds, the "effective" cueball squirt/deflection is not as much as with faster speeds because the swerve factor is greater on slower speed shots than on faster speed shots. Most top players do not differeniate between squirt and effective squirt and are primarily concerned with the bottom line.

You make a very good point, but he still was able to make a 400 ball run with the new shaft. Any small positional changes that occurred would likely have ended his run early. Even if the new LD shaft happened to cause a perfect cancellation of swerve at slow speeds, he would still have to make intuitive aiming adjustments since the old shaft wouldn't have done that. Or am I totally out to lunch?

Top athletes are often the most susceptible to mental effects on their game. I remember a sneaky experiment that a famous canoe designer did with some top marathon athletes. He took identical canoes but painted them different colors. He then got several of the best racers in the country to try out his "new" design, which he painted red.

Every top paddler chose the red canoe as the fastest. And it was. They actually paddled the red one several minutes faster over the same course, even though it came from the same mold as the other boat. To this day there are recurring jokes in the racing community about red being the fastest color to paint a boat.

FWIW I would never underestimate JS or his abilities. He is one of my favorite players to watch and I have seen most or all of his high runs and matches that were put up on YouTube. If he says the LD shaft almost ruined his career, I'll believe him.

 

[CJ Wiley]

.just a word to the wise.

Maybe this old numerology ramble from Hal Houle is what you're looking for. Let's hope CJ's ideas make more sense...

pj
chgo

My name is Hal Houle. Started playing in 1934. Began instructing pool in
1945. Still doing it. Teach professionals, very advanced players, and
road money players.

3 angles for all shots, on any size pool table, including snooker & bar
tables. Includes; pocketing, caroms, single rail banks, double rail
banks, 2, 3, and 4 rail banks, and double kiss banks.

All tables have a 2 to 1 ratio; 3 1/2 x 7, 4 x 8, 4 ½ x 9, 5 x 10, 6 x
12. Always twice as long as it is wide. Table corners are 90 degree
angles. Laying a cue from side pocket to corner pocket forms a 45
degree angle. Laying a cue from side pocket to middle diamond on same
end rail, forms a 30 degree angle. Laying a cue from side pocket to
first diamond on the same end rail forms a 45 degree angle. 3 angles
total 90 degrees, the same angles formed by table corners.

CB relation, to OB relation, to POCKET relation is always 15, 30, or 45
degrees. Simple solution. 2 places on CB to aim with; always in same
places. 3 places on OB to aim at, always in same places. 2 places on
CB, 3 places on OB; 2 x 3 = 6 pockets. Depending upon how CB and OB and
pocket lie in relation to one another, can pocket OB directly into
pocket or bank into any one of remaining 5 pockets. Reverse is true. If
relationship of CB to OB to POCKET can only be a bank, so be it.

No need to look at pocket or cushion while lining up place on CB at
place on OB. 3 angles. Only requirement is to recognize shot is 15, 30,
or 45 degree angle. Recognizing 3 angles can be done instantly by
aiming one of 2 CB places at one of 3 OB places. Will be obvious which
OB place is correct. Any time one of 2 places on CB is aimed at one of
3 places on OB, OB must go to pocket. Choose correctly and OB will go
to chosen pocket. Professionals know this aiming system, but are a
closed fraternity; you are the enemy. Interested in where those places
are?

CB 2 places ; left edge, right edge.

OB 3 places ; center of left half, center of 0B, center of right half.
Halves and center face straight at edges of CB, not facing toward
pocket. If working on a work bench at home, there wouldn't be a pocket.
You'd line up edge of CB at target on OB without pocket influence.

Cutting left 15 degrees, aim CB left edge at center of OB left half.
Cutting left 30 degrees, aim CB left edge at OB center. Cutting left 45
degrees, aim CB left edge at center of OB right half.

Cutting right 15 degrees, aim CB right edge at center of OB right half.
Cutting right 30 degrees, aim CB right edge at OB center. Cutting right
45 degrees, aim CB right edge at center of OB left half.

Get down and aim your old way, you will be close to where you should be
aiming. Look to see (without changing your head or eye position) where
CB edge is aiming at OB. On every shot, the CB edge is always aiming at
those OB places.

System is for any shot; pocketing, single banks, double banks, double
kiss banks, multiple banks, caroms, combinations. The shot remaining is
extreme cut for any shots over 45 degrees. Aim CB edge at center of
half of the half of 0B (¼). Don't let pocket influence you. Have a
friend hold ball tray between OB and pocket, so you can't see pocket.
You would've chosen 15, 30, or 45 degree angle before friend put ball
tray in place. Have fun, don't tell friend how you pocket OB without
seeing pocket.

I hope everyone knows we are joking about this having relevance to playing better pool... our unconscious loves perfect geometric squares, pyramids, etc. and this is unconscious, not conscious.....to explain how these things work would be impossible...you can't effectively bring conscous attention to a subconscious activity and make it much better....if so we could make our breathing or heartbeat better just by thinking about it...which you are free to try, but I wouldn't advise spending too much time on it...better to exercise, meditate, eat better and/or take supplements than try to "think yourself better"..it's the same in your pool game.......just a word to the wise.:wink:

 

[Fatboy]

I saw CJ play Mark Tadd at Cue Club in Vegas 2 8 ahead sets and CJ played perfect pool. He won both sets in less than 2 hours $10,000/set.this was in 91-92


That night nobody in the world could beat him. He made 4 of 4 jump shots and got shape on all 4, and those 4 times he needed to jump was damn near the only time he wasnt in perfect line. I wish that match could have been taped, there was 200+ people there, JA and I have talked about it. JA was there too, Cardone, and probably lots of other people from AZB. It was probably the strongest session of 9 ball I ever seen to this day.


So my point is this, CJ sees pool a certain way, anyone who has a nuclear gear like that-I cant argue with, I wishI could see what he sees. It aint "Luck". Its genius and I'll listen.


In the financial world there is a axiom "Never take financial advice from someone doing worse off than your doing". I dont take financial advice from people making very little money, i listen to people who make more than me. Now some of those people make so much more than me "I just dont understand what the hell they are talking about, derivatives, puts, calls and other stock market jargon".

Same for pool players, I'll listen to anyone who plays better than me, I seen what CJ can do. I sure as hell aint going to argue with him, even if I dont understand him cause its clear he knows piles more about pool than me. that aint luck.


And I hardly know him, i met him 2-3 times for 30 seconds in the past 20 something years. Why in the world anyone would come on here and argue with him is beyond me, telling him it's luck. yeah right he got lucky, so did efren (who would have needed the 5 that night and still got beat, yeah he played that good)


all I see here is CJ getting pissed off and stop posting like all the champions do, cant blame him for that. here is a guy trying to help out, and sure make a buck with his knowledge and he gets knocked, nice.


so goes azb so goes pool, its very sad.

best
eric

 

[Cdryden]

John Dudley....that name brings back memories, we played in Quincy Ill. one time and then had a long, grueling match in Hannibal Mo. (where Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn were featured in the Mark Twain Classics), for 18 Hours Straight on a Bar Table with a Big Cue Ball.....he was going down to St. Louis playing Louie Roberts during that time too.....he certainly had his "moments" at the table and did play a consistent style.

LOL Hannibal, Thats my town CJ! Your talking about River City Billiards pool hall. And back the a guy by the name of Pat Travathen owned it.

John and I played hundreds of games back then, or should I say I racked often for him! I was 17 or 18 at the time and I would play for 12 to 13 hours on Saturdays. John would come in and get on the table with me and I would warm him up until he got a game with someone.

He wasn't the most generous givers of knowledge, but I watched everything he did and stole what bits of knowledge I could from him. The best thing he taught me was how to keep grinding away and never give up. I bet I played him for months before I started to win a few.

Last I heard he was having a few problems, but like Louie Roberts, that was just his way.

How did you end up against John? Did you have to give him any weight? John's biggest problem was that he wasn't a very good gambler, (imo) he would give up crazy spots just to get a game. But I liked his pluck.

 

[Eric.]

Did I miss something? Cue ball path?

I think the smart people call that post a "non sequitur" :wink:


Eric

 

[JB Cases]

You make a very good point, but he still was able to make a 400 ball run with the new shaft. Any small positional changes that occurred would likely have ended his run early. Even if the new LD shaft happened to cause a perfect cancellation of swerve at slow speeds, he would still have to make intuitive aiming adjustments since the old shaft wouldn't have done that. Or am I totally out to lunch?

Top athletes are often the most susceptible to mental effects on their game. I remember a sneaky experiment that a famous canoe designer did with some top marathon athletes. He took identical canoes but painted them different colors. He then got several of the best racers in the country to try out his "new" design, which he painted red.

Every top paddler chose the red canoe as the fastest. And it was. They actually paddled the red one several minutes faster over the same course, even though it came from the same mold as the other boat. To this day there are recurring jokes in the racing community about red being the fastest color to paint a boat.

FWIW I would never underestimate JS or his abilities. He is one of my favorite players to watch and I have seen most or all of his high runs and matches that were put up on YouTube. If he says the LD shaft almost ruined his career, I'll believe him.

In Germany there is a saying that goes a new broom sweeps better. Meaning that whether or not the new broom is really better people feel that it performs better just because it's new.

John McChesney, one of the three founders of the Texas Express tour, once described an experiment they did wherin they taped over the identifying markings and joints of about 50 cues and asked the players to rank them as to hit and to say what the joint was made of. Most players couldn't even recognize their own cue by feel. Nor did most know what the joint was made of based on the hit.

It is my sincere belief that professional players lock into how a cue plays with phenomenal speed. When they are playing loose then the cue doesn't much matter in my opinion. Maybe CJ will tell us how this is from his perspective. I think that it's hard for a player to jump up and play top gear against another top player with a cue or shaft that is completely unfamiliar to them. But if that player is loose with no pressure then they can come with the A-game because they are just freewheeling and in-tune with the equipment.

I remember a TED talk which was about self-driving race cars. The guy developing them said that his program could calculate the optimal lines to get around the track the fastest. They hired an older race car driver to run laps and plotted the course he chose and within minutes he had chosen the identical line that the software predicted. In all of life the more experience you have with an area the easier it is to move through that space.

Another quick story along these lines. Buddy Hall once stopped by the booth to try a jump cue. He shoots several shots and declares that he knows how it deflects now. After that statement he proceeds to make some shots with the jump cue that were flat out astounding, not because the shots were so difficult to jump but because he jumped and moved the cueball around the table at will as if he wasn't jumping at all. When Allen Hopkins first tried on our our jump cues he jumped the cue ball clear off the table. But within minutes he was jumping better than me and I had been giving demonstrations on how to use the jump cue for a week.

You can take any of that for whatever value you find in it.