Aiming Systems - The End Justifies the Means

Status
Not open for further replies.

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
Here's ENGLISH!'s rephrased question, to avoid going back to find it:

PJ,

Just for clarification purposes with no ill intent:

A) the cue is delivered to the center of CB with no rotation on the cue stick axis

B) the cue is delivered to the center of CB while turning 3 degrees on the cue stick axis while in contact with the CB

Is the outcome of those two(2) functions exactly the same?

Sincerely,
RJ​
Yes, unless we're getting silly with the definition of "exactly" (you may turn the CB an inconsequential, and likely invisible, amount).

More importantly, even if you could get a significant amount of spin this way, why on Earth would you trade the lost stroke accuracy for something you can do more simply and reliably with a normal stroke? This kind of bad tradeoff is part of the deal with all of these gimmick techniques: they don't really add anything and even if they did the cost is too high.

Another recent example is the myth that squirting the CB can increase the margin of error in the pocket. In that case the positive effect of more precise aiming might complicate the equation - until you realize that you can just do that without the need for gimmicks. As usual, the straightforward answer is the right one. Pool's easy like that.

pj
chgo

P.S. This also points out the fallacy of the title of this thread. The end doesn't always justify the means, because the end is often freighted with the hidden costs of gimmicky means. (Not to mention that the expected end itself may not be realistic in the first place.)
 
Last edited:

CJ Wiley

ESPN WORLD OPEN CHAMPION
Gold Member
Silver Member
Watch Earl Stickland demonstrate his superior Aiming System

Watch Earl Stickland demonstrate his superior Aiming System against Efren Reyes. EARL's AIMING SYSTEM

560737_118081241677068_943790655_n.jpg
 

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
Here you go, all one needs to know in order to play top level pool - science always wins :)

http://library.thinkquest.org/TQ0013321/thescience.html

And if that's a little bit much to absorb then here is a helpful WikiHow article with a little tip to avoid getting hustled at the end:

http://www.wikihow.com/Play-Pool-Like-a-Mathematician

Always remember this and you will have no problem aiming:

"Figure out exactly where you need to hit the target ball to make it go in a certain direction. The equation is: vtarget=(n*vcue)n, where n is the unit normal vector between the centers of the balls when they touch (n = Ptarget-Pcue)/||Ptarget-Pcue||) and '*' is the vector dot product. Note that v and n are vector quantities."
 

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
More importantly, even if you could get a significant amount of spin this way, why on Earth would you trade the lost stroke accuracy for something you can do more simply and reliably with a normal stroke? This kind of bad tradeoff is part of the deal with all of these gimmick techniques: they don't really add anything and even if they did the cost is too high.

The cost is too high? You mean like winning major events? I don't really understand the statement here when a top level pro is saying that he does x-method and it works for him consistently how can you claim that it's a gimmick with no added benefit?

I agree that there is such a thing as textbook stroke and form. But I also KNOW from experience that there are plenty of high level players out there who don't exhibit text book form. Some of those player have techniques that they developed or were taught by other players that they use consistently. And there are high level players that have what we would call textbook perfect form.

You say the cost is too high and I say it's worth trying. I see zero harm to any living human to try anything that any other living human comes up on the pool table. And especially if the person doing the instruction is a champion. So many people here LOVE to say that the only way to greatness is to hit a million balls but they don't want to truly listen to the very few players who have actually and truly hit a million balls.

I don't understand that and in reply I would say that the cost of NOT listening to them and not trying their methods is too high IF you aspire yourself to become a better than average player or even a great player.
 

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
Total red herring post. You are assuming that someone is telling CJ not to do what he is doing. You couldn't be farther from the truth. What CJ does obviously works for him, and he shouldn't change it. That does NOT mean that it will work for a single person other than himself.

What a number of you are totally missing, is that some of these "secrets" are not actually secrets, but are idiosyncrasies to ONES individual game. Look at it this way- you are starting a new job. You haven't done this kind of work before. Now, they offer training to do it, or, you can go it on your own. Of course, you would be an idiot not to take the training. The training, as usual, consist of the requirements of the basics. How to achieve the desired results in the least amount of effort.

Now, does anyone expect you to be a master because you took some training? NO. But, with that training, you now know what basically to do, and why. With that training, you can now add little idiosyncrasies unique to you to make that training more efficient for YOU.

If someone with many years of experience on the job tells you on your first day to do some idiosyncrasy of his, it may or may not work for you. Odds are it won't work for you, because you aren't doing the underlying things that he is that make it work for him.

The only reason the wrist twist works for CJ is because he is doing something else different that the wrist twist makes up for, or counters. If YOU aren't doing that something else different the same way he is, twisting your wrist will only make you go off line, and you will have to figure out something else to correct for it. When and if you ever figure that out, then someday you can pass on your little secret also.

It's MUCH easier to learn why and how things react, what actually is going on, THEN come up with your own little idiosyncrasies to counter YOUR failure in being able to accomplish exactly what you want to do. We are human, not a single one of us can precisely duplicate a perfect stroke everytime. Just can't be done. However, with much practice, and a solid correct foundation, we can come up with what to us is a repeatable idiosyncrasy that does get the job done.

CJ thinks that these little secrets of his are what made him a phenomenal player. They are, but at the same time, they aren't. They are little idiosyncrasies that evolved for HIM. And, by his own testimony, took him a while while getting back into the game to figure out just what he had been doing before that he wasn't now.

He thinks the idiosyncrasies were the key, but he is missing what actually did make him and others great. It's not the "form", as much as it is the "mind". I have stated on here many times, that practice is to learn how to do something. Game time is when you apply what you have learned to do with the conscious mind, and use only the subconscious mind to perform.

What separates the elites from the rest of us? One thing- how the subconscious mind is used. For the vast majority of us, we cannot get the proper access to the subconscious mind that a few do naturally. The extreme of this would be your savants. They can see or hear something, and duplicate it almost flawlessly. Their minds are wired a little bit differently than the rest of us, and their subconscious plays a huge role in their savant ability. We all have that ability, but few ever learn how to tap into it, and fewer still to tap into it almost without effort on their part.

Recent studies have shown that savants, and those highly skilled in an endeavor utilize the subconscious mind much more than others do. Science has found a way to "jump start" the subconscious with proper electrical stimuli. Studies have shown that when one has proper training, they can perform a task better than without the training. No big surprise there. However, they still make a number of mistakes. However, when the subconscious is electrically stimulated for just 20 minutes, and then they are given the training, they then perform the required task almost without fail. AND, it sticks with them after the stimuli is removed!

In other words, science has now come up with a way to make us a savant in whatever endeavor we choose. You will see big changes happening in the not to distant future!

What this shows, is that our brains have the capacity to "figure things out". For a few of us, that will be a short journey. In pool, some only a few years.(those that naturally have better access to their subconsious) For most of us, it can be a lifetime of never achieving the same results, simply because we normally use a different part of our brain. However, with proper training in HOW things actually work, and copious amounts of time at the practice table, most of us can achieve a very high level of play compared to the "norm" of play level. Taking someones else's idiosyncrasies as our own may work, but odds are will not, and will only set one back. Much better to go with the basics of what is known to work, and come up with your own idiosyncrasies to make it easier for YOU to perform.

If you are one of the many that don't naturally use the full spectrum of your subconscious to play pool, then you are much better off learning how and why things work on a table, and going from there. It actually is the only other way to learn to play the game at a higher level. Without your subconscious playing a huge part, and without the knowledge, then you are just floundering around out in a sea of green felt with no wind at your back, and nothing to guide you. Which is exactly why there are so many mediocre players that have been playing for decades.

For those wondering, yes, there are ways to "stimulate" your subconscious without having to go through a form of electro-shock treatment. But, this is long enough for now. It's already long enough that probably half on here won't even bother to read it, but that is their loss.:wink:

Just so you know I read it and if there is a quiz I am ready for it.

I agree that neuroscience is making incredible discoveries that will have practical applications in the coming years. Where our fathers and grandfathers saw tremendous leaps in transportation and communication we will see incredible applications in biochemistry and neuroscience.

Where we disagree is that the idiosyncrasies displayed by successful people "might" not work for others. I contend that it's precisely those techniques developed by very experienced people which in fact will work for others and furthermore will work for most given equal conditions. Now that doesn't mean that this is the best way or the only way to get the same results.

The thing with saying that something MIGHT not work for someone else is that without trying one never knows. Many graphic artists come to me and even though they have had four years of college they can and do still learn certain tricks that I have developed through 15 years of practical experience. I might not be up to speed on a lot of what they know but I have little methods that generally only come from doing the work. I can only show them and if they adopt it then great and if not then fine as long as the result is what I want.

While most of us don't "use" all of the computational capacity in our brains we can still form new synaptic connections even later in life. How do we train our brain? Simple, by continuing to learn and try and practice. Social condition aside neuroscience also has discovered that proficiency and even mastery is not out of reach for people as long as they are willing and able to try to learn.

This is why I hold the opinion that instead of using our current abilities to tear down the experiences and techniques of the pros we should TRY imitating them in order to attempt to see and do things from their perspective. Once ingested and understood we can then either choose to use those methods, improve on them, or discard them.

But never trying means that you will never really know. Now, having said that if you are able to get the right results all the time efficiently then you don't NEED anyone else's methods. In that case just don't mess with them. But don't go around tearing them down either without a damn good reason in my opinion.
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Total red herring post. You are assuming that someone is telling CJ not to do what he is doing. You couldn't be farther from the truth. What CJ does obviously works for him, and he shouldn't change it. That does NOT mean that it will work for a single person other than himself. (snip lots of other good stuff)


This is very true -- some techniques are peculiar to an individual player.

Take for instance a couple of the old-time players like Greenleaf and Hoppe. Both those guys had huge honking swarps in their strokes. So, should they be teaching everyone that to become a great player "the secret" to pool is to have a big sideways motion to your stroke? Of course not. These guys were naturals that learned to do it that way from an early age and became world champions in spite of their technique, not because of it.

Lou Figueroa
 

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Concerning the"wrist twist".
The movement is often subtle produced by the fingers resulting in the slightest change in the angle of one's wrist. This technique is nothing more than a precisely timed tip movement on the surface of the cue ball.
This is about cue ball control more so than just getting spin and more spin.

Any time a tip contacts the cue ball, as you all know, you get direction, speed and spin.

The techniqie allows for a thicker aim which is friendly to the aim or angle. Rather than just arming the ball for cue ball control, the technique allows the shooter to engage his fingers and related muscles to pinpoint a cue ball for position. This touch or finesse is certainly a big part of this rolling of the fingers that may result in a the slightest wrist turn.

And, yes, it's tied in with spin. This technique primarliy results in a finessing of the cue ball maximizing one's touch by engaging specific muscles to do so.

It's a weapon that can be developed or not.

I chose to develop the technique and I am a better player because of it.

Stan Shuffett
 

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I must add that I use this technique as needed which might be 1 time a game or 3/4 times during a set.
I do not use this technique every time I put spin on the cue ball.

Stan Shuffett
 

Mikjary

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Concerning the"wrist twist".
The movement is often subtle produced by the fingers resulting in the slightest change in the angle of one's wrist. This technique is nothing more than a precisely timed tip movement on the surface of the cue ball.
This is about cue ball control more so than just getting spin and more spin.

Any time a tip contacts the cue ball, as you all know, you get direction, speed and spin.

The techniqie allows for a thicker aim which is friendly to the aim or angle. Rather than just arming the ball for cue ball control, the technique allows the shooter to engage his fingers and related muscles to pinpoint a cue ball for position. This touch or finesse is certainly a big part of this rolling of the fingers that may result in a the slightest wrist turn.

And, yes, it's tied in with spin. This technique primarliy results in a finessing of the cue ball maximizing one's touch by engaging specific muscles to do so.

It's a weapon that can be developed or not.

I chose to develop the technique and I am a better player because of it.

Stan Shuffett

Thank you, Stan. I use this method occasionally, too. Purists to follow. Now putting on tin foil hat for protection.

Best,
Mike
 

Neil

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Just so you know I read it and if there is a quiz I am ready for it.

I agree that neuroscience is making incredible discoveries that will have practical applications in the coming years. Where our fathers and grandfathers saw tremendous leaps in transportation and communication we will see incredible applications in biochemistry and neuroscience.

Where we disagree is that the idiosyncrasies displayed by successful people "might" not work for others. I contend that it's precisely those techniques developed by very experienced people which in fact will work for others and furthermore will work for most given equal conditions. Now that doesn't mean that this is the best way or the only way to get the same results.

The thing with saying that something MIGHT not work for someone else is that without trying one never knows. Many graphic artists come to me and even though they have had four years of college they can and do still learn certain tricks that I have developed through 15 years of practical experience. I might not be up to speed on a lot of what they know but I have little methods that generally only come from doing the work. I can only show them and if they adopt it then great and if not then fine as long as the result is what I want.

While most of us don't "use" all of the computational capacity in our brains we can still form new synaptic connections even later in life. How do we train our brain? Simple, by continuing to learn and try and practice. Social condition aside neuroscience also has discovered that proficiency and even mastery is not out of reach for people as long as they are willing and able to try to learn.

This is why I hold the opinion that instead of using our current abilities to tear down the experiences and techniques of the pros we should TRY imitating them in order to attempt to see and do things from their perspective. Once ingested and understood we can then either choose to use those methods, improve on them, or discard them.

But never trying means that you will never really know. Now, having said that if you are able to get the right results all the time efficiently then you don't NEED anyone else's methods. In that case just don't mess with them. But don't go around tearing them down either without a damn good reason in my opinion.

You made some good points, but here's the problem John- and I'm talking about THIS case (the twisting of the wrist) I have proven, and I thought beyond a shadow of a doubt, that twisting the wrist CANNOT put any spin on the cb. The closest any one came was Stan in his description, and even that can be done much, much easier with a slight masse' stroke to kill the forward action of the cb.

So, what one is trying to accomplish with the wrist stroke is an impossibility. Now, I'm all for trying idiosyncrasies of someone else to possibly learn a shortcut to doing something easier. I have been a very strong supporter of most of the aiming systems and "unconventional" ways of stroking. However, when something is wrong, well, it's just wrong. And in this case, it's just wrong. Sorry if that offends some on here, but facts are facts.

As to the 3 part pocket system of CJ's, that does have some merit, especially with a high deflection cue. I believe there are easier ways to do it, but it does have merit for some.

Science has shown that the reason champions are champions while someone that spent an equal amount of time aren't, is all in the brain. Yes, we all can "train" our brain to "rewire" to use the subconscious more. Very, very, very, few will. I believe Shane to be one that has. The rest of us just aren't concerned enough about being an elite to do what it takes. So, we are looking for something to make the game a little easier to play at a higher level than we do. Correct principles are the easiest way to do that. Taking someone elses "mistakes" is not the way to go.

Twisting the wrist does nothing more than add a touch of BHE. Why go to the inaccuracy of twisting to do that? CJ said it's so tough to hit center ball, hence the whole foundation of his 3 part pocket system. If that were to be true, how in the world is anyone, including him, going to accurately hit the cb by twisting when they can't do it by going straight?

I have yet to see a shot that a pro can perform that an intermediate player cannot perform. What does that say? It's all about consistency. The pro can do it almost everytime, the amateur some of the time. What controls that consistency? The subconscious. Extensive training can change the outcome and make it much closer. However, in this game, one mistake is all it takes to go from an elite to an almost was.

In this game, if you are not an elite after 5-10 years, you aren't going to be one. That does not mean that you cannot train to become good enough to beat them in a tournament. But, don't try getting on the money table with them unless you have spent the majority of your life in training.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
Thank you, Stan. I use this method occasionally, too. Purists to follow. Now putting on tin foil hat for protection.

Best,
Mike
Stan says his technique is a subtle movement of the fingers with little wrist movement and he uses it to get more precise CB position. Sounds to me like a way to engage the finer muscle control of the fingers for more refined speed control.

I could see the occasional benefit of this, particularly at slow speeds, if sideways wrist movement is minimized (ideally, avoided altogether). But I think it's easily overdone.

pj
chgo
 

Neil

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Concerning the"wrist twist".
The movement is often subtle produced by the fingers resulting in the slightest change in the angle of one's wrist. This technique is nothing more than a precisely timed tip movement on the surface of the cue ball.
This is about cue ball control more so than just getting spin and more spin.

Any time a tip contacts the cue ball, as you all know, you get direction, speed and spin.

The techniqie allows for a thicker aim which is friendly to the aim or angle. Rather than just arming the ball for cue ball control, the technique allows the shooter to engage his fingers and related muscles to pinpoint a cue ball for position. This touch or finesse is certainly a big part of this rolling of the fingers that may result in a the slightest wrist turn.

And, yes, it's tied in with spin. This technique primarliy results in a finessing of the cue ball maximizing one's touch by engaging specific muscles to do so.

It's a weapon that can be developed or not.

I chose to develop the technique and I am a better player because of it.

Stan Shuffett

I get what you are saying Stan, and it is different than what I thought you were describing earlier. But, here's the thing- the wrist twist CANNOT add any spin to the ball. That has been proven. So, all you get is back hand english by applying a little twist with your fingers. You get the exact same result by aiming center ball, then just using BHE to apply the english. And, using BHE, you would be more accurate in exactly where you hit the cb.

So, while it works for you, CJ, and others, that does NOT mean that it will work for anyone else. Hence, not something that any instructor should be teaching in an open forum. As you said, it is akin to Hoppe's stroke. Something that worked for him, but not something you teach as "general knowledge, or super tips". Teaching something like that on here, one should be clear that it is something extra that works for him, and may or may not work for you too. Not saying that it is a "secret" to great pool, when it clearly isn't and can't be. A champion or instructor saying it is then taken by many as "gospel", and it clearly can be just as detrimental to many more than it can be beneficial.
 

CJ Wiley

ESPN WORLD OPEN CHAMPION
Gold Member
Silver Member
This neil character is way out in left field and delusional

Mike,

Perhaps a clarification of 'twist' & 'twisting' is in order. I have seen several uses of the term here with what I deem to be different meanings. Also, the timing of the 'twist', before or during (at impact).

CJ has said clockwise & counter CW at impact.

Someone said twisting before the stroke, I do not understand how that imparts 'twisting' spin unless it is used as a form of backhand english which would be different to what CJ is referring, I believe.

I'm just trying to point out that this 'twisting' discussion has hit a fork in the road & appears to have perhaps gone in different directions of two(2) different concepts.

Just trying to clarify,
RJ aka Rick

Yeah, I was just talking about using a "corkscrew" method, or "drill" type method of going through the center of the ball ...then you can cue it off center without spinning it.....or spin it more (which I DO NOT recommend). It's a "slight of cue" method is what we always called it....old timers call it "wrist rolling" I hear.


Wow, do these guys take people out of context or what? I've said OVER AND OVER that I go Straight Through the Ball a HAIR INSIDE THE CUE BALL.

When I was referring to doing that "CORKSCREW" shot it was to prove a point and I referred to it as looking like "Magic" because it created an optical illusion. Twisting the cue through impact IS NOT SOMETHING I DO. I have said the key to my "Touch of Inside" is NO SPIN....AND I LOCK MY WRIST (in a Tennis Grip) TO MAKE SURE IT GOES COMPLETELY STRAIGHT.

Somehow Neil jumped to the conclusion that I use this to play, but I've been clear time and time again I GO STRAIGHT THROUGH THE BALL....the wrist twisting is something that you can use to counter act spin, ADD SPIN or make it APPEAR to go the other way.

Anyone can look back through my hundreds of posts and I say EVERY TIME that I DO NOT SPIN THE CUE BALL.....I CUE IT SLIGHTLY TO THE INSIDE, but I DO NOT SPIN IT. I do this to create the 3 Part Pocket System which is a ZONE for the pocket. The Touch of Inside DEFELECTS the Cue Ball SLIGHTLY so I can throw in into the CENTER OF THE POCKET....and if I Dont' Hit the Center, I have TWO OTHER SIDES TO HIT...ie: 3 Part Pocket



 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
CJ:
Twisting the cue through impact IS NOT SOMETHING I DO. I have said the key to my "Touch of Inside" is NO SPIN....AND I LOCK MY WRIST (in a Tennis Grip) TO MAKE SURE IT GOES COMPLETELY STRAIGHT.
Others have described or asked about twisting through impact, CJ. I think the comments are about the technique and not necessarily directed at you. With several people talking about the same thing, who said what can get lost in the shuffle.

pj
chgo
 

Neil

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yeah, I was just talking about using a "corkscrew" method, or "drill" type method of going through the center of the ball ...then you can cue it off center without spinning it.....or spin it more (which I DO NOT recommend). It's a "slight of cue" method is what we always called it....old timers call it "wrist rolling" I hear.


Wow, do these guys take people out of context or what? I've said OVER AND OVER that I go Straight Through the Ball a HAIR INSIDE THE CUE BALL.

When I was referring to doing that "CORKSCREW" shot it was to prove a point and I referred to it as looking like "Magic" because it created an optical illusion. Twisting the cue through impact IS NOT SOMETHING I DO. I have said the key to my "Touch of Inside" is NO SPIN....AND I LOCK MY WRIST (in a Tennis Grip) TO MAKE SURE IT GOES COMPLETELY STRAIGHT.

Somehow Neil jumped to the conclusion that I use this to play, but I've been clear time and time again I GO STRAIGHT THROUGH THE BALL....the wrist twisting is something that you can use to counter act spin, ADD SPIN or make it APPEAR to go the other way.

Anyone can look back through my hundreds of posts and I say EVERY TIME that I DO NOT SPIN THE CUE BALL.....I CUE IT SLIGHTLY TO THE INSIDE, but I DO NOT SPIN IT. I do this to create the 3 Part Pocket System which is a ZONE for the pocket. The Touch of Inside DEFELECTS the Cue Ball SLIGHTLY so I can throw in into the CENTER OF THE POCKET....and if I Dont' Hit the Center, I have TWO OTHER SIDES TO HIT...ie: 3 Part Pocket




Maybe you should try reading what I wrote without the chip on your shoulder of thinking you are the only one that knows anything. Delusional?? In your dreams. :rolleyes:
 

CJ Wiley

ESPN WORLD OPEN CHAMPION
Gold Member
Silver Member
.It's about control and if you haven't tried it YOU CAN NOT POSSIBLY UNDERSTAND.

Others have described or asked about twisting through impact, CJ. I think the comments are about the technique and not necessarily directed at you. With several people talking about the same thing, who said what can get lost in the shuffle.

pj
chgo

He's clearly saying that I twist the cue and I use the touch of inside because I think it's diffictult to hit the center.........My Touch of Inside IS NOT because it's hard to hit the center....it's to PREVENT hitting the WRONG SIDE OF CENTER....It's about control and if you haven't tried it YOU CAN NOT POSSIBLY UNDERSTAND.
 

CJ Wiley

ESPN WORLD OPEN CHAMPION
Gold Member
Silver Member
I do not use this method, but I can if I want to to generate extreme english..

I get what you are saying Stan, and it is different than what I thought you were describing earlier. But, here's the thing- the wrist twist CANNOT add any spin to the ball. That has been proven. So, all you get is back hand english by applying a little twist with your fingers. You get the exact same result by aiming center ball, then just using BHE to apply the english. And, using BHE, you would be more accurate in exactly where you hit the cb.

So, while it works for you, CJ, and others, that does NOT mean that it will work for anyone else. Hence, not something that any instructor should be teaching in an open forum. As you said, it is akin to Hoppe's stroke. Something that worked for him, but not something you teach as "general knowledge, or super tips". Teaching something like that on here, one should be clear that it is something extra that works for him, and may or may not work for you too. Not saying that it is a "secret" to great pool, when it clearly isn't and can't be. A champion or instructor saying it is then taken by many as "gospel", and it clearly can be just as detrimental to many more than it can be beneficial.

I do not use this method, but I can if I want to to generate extreme english.....but since I VERY RARELY use english it's a mute point
 

Neil

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
He's clearly saying that I twist the cue and I use the touch of inside because I think it's diffictult to hit the center.........My Touch of Inside IS NOT because it's hard to hit the center....it's to PREVENT hitting the WRONG SIDE OF CENTER....It's about control and if you haven't tried it YOU CAN NOT POSSIBLY UNDERSTAND.

Uh, I get your point. But, if it's not hard to hit center, why would you be hitting the wrong side of center? Either you can reliably hit center, or you can't. As I have stated, it does have merit, and if it works for you, great. I guess that makes me delusional. :wink:
 

CJ Wiley

ESPN WORLD OPEN CHAMPION
Gold Member
Silver Member
Uh, I get your point. But, if it's not hard to hit center, why would you be hitting the wrong side of center? Either you can reliably hit center, or you can't. As I have stated, it does have merit, and if it works for you, great. I guess that makes me delusional. :wink:

I guess so...sorry you can't play
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top