Aiming Systems - The End Justifies the Means

Status
Not open for further replies.
cjssecrets4u2 said:
You do it "pre shot", and it emphasizes the body's connection to the Game through relationships. I show an easy, reliable way to sychronize this consistently in your "pre shot routine".

I call this the "Systematic Alignment Routine". Feet, legs, hips, for the lower body foundation and chest, shoulders, arms and wrist for upper body synchronization. The result is your full body synchronized to the cue, which transfers to Cue Ball, which is reflected into your Game. Hitting the Cue Ball accuratly every time is a result of a chain reaction of positive habits....physical and mental. 'The Game is the Teacher'
Click to expand...

CJ:

I call *all of that* part of the "pre-shot routine." The fact that's it's systematic, is part of the "routine" part. Alignment should *always* be part of the PSR, and it is taught this way in more-regimented cueing disciplines, like snooker. Only in pool -- with its loosey-goosey "learn fundamentals as you go" historic nature -- do we see folks pulling what-should-be-part of the fundamentals out, and giving them special names.

But if the result is that pool's "mongrel" teaching/training/learning nature would get fixed -- and not a marketing move to make a buck -- I'm all for it.

-Sean
 
cjssecrets4u2 said:
You do it "pre shot", and it emphasizes the body's connection to the Game through relationships. I show an easy, reliable way to sychronize this consistently in your "pre shot routine".

I call this the "Systematic Alignment Routine". Feet, legs, hips, for the lower body foundation and chest, shoulders, arms and wrist for upper body synchronization. The result is your full body synchronized to the cue, which transfers to Cue Ball, which is reflected into your Game. Hitting the Cue Ball accuratly every time is a result of a chain reaction of positive habits....physical and mental. 'The Game is the Teacher'
Click to expand...

CJ, nowdays it's called a "pre-shot routine", and every instructor teaches it. It is a requirement to playing your best, but is unique to each individual. There are, of course, certain parameters common among all, but it still has to be modified to each individual. You can re-name the wheel if you want to because you don't know the name of it, but it is still a wheel to everyone else. If one were to do a search on here, they would find 1,000 "hits" on the term.
 
Neil said:
CJ, nowdays it's called a "pre-shot routine", and every instructor teaches it. It is a requirement to playing your best, but is unique to each individual. There are, of course, certain parameters common among all, but it still has to be modified to each individual. You can re-name the wheel if you want to because you don't know the name of it, but it is still a wheel to everyone else. If one were to do a search on here, they would find 1,000 "hits" on the term.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I purposeful and consistent pre-shot routine is an extremely important "fundamental" of pool. And both visual alignment and consistent sighting are certainly important parts of the pre-shot routine.

Regards,
Dave
 
The fundamentals must CONNECT the body/eyes/cue in a reliable, repeatable way.

sfleinen said:
CJ:

I call *all of that* part of the "pre-shot routine." The fact that's it's systematic, is part of the "routine" part. Alignment should *always* be part of the PSR, and it is taught this way in more-regimented cueing disciplines, like snooker. Only in pool -- with its loosey-goosey "learn fundamentals as you go" historic nature -- do we see folks pulling what-should-be-part of the fundamentals out, and giving them special names.

But if the result is that pool's "mongrel" teaching/training/learning nature would get fixed -- and not a marketing move to make a buck -- I'm all for it.

-Sean
Click to expand...

You are right Sean, I'm surprised this isn't taught in a more "regimented" way. I learned a lot from a few snooker instructors many years ago and this ended up being one of the keys to playing Championship caliber.

My experience with Hank Haney (Tiger Wood's 6 year Swing Coach), as well as high level martial artists verified what the snooker instructors teach. The fundamentals must CONNECT the body/eyes/cue in a reliable, repeatable way. I have made a point to learn this in a "Specific Physical Model" in the past two years so I can teach people precisely how to connect to the "Line of the Shot". I feel this is the foundation of consistency.
what-quantum-level-800x800.jpg
 
Tap! Tap! Tap!

Tap! Tap! Tap! for John Barton's post #431

I too, fully appreciate CJ's participation, politeness, & 'proof in the pudding'.

Thanks again CJ Wiley. You are being most helpful to those willing to venture on a path less traveled.

I, for one, & I'm fairly sure many others, truely appreciate your efforts here on AZB.

"Don't Give Up.... Don't Ever Give Up"
Jimmy Vilvano
 
cjssecrets4u2 said:
You do it "pre shot", and it emphasizes the body's connection to the Game through relationships. I show an easy, reliable way to sychronize this consistently in your "pre shot routine".

I call this the "Systematic Alignment Routine". Feet, legs, hips, for the lower body foundation and chest, shoulders, arms and wrist for upper body synchronization. The result is your full body synchronized to the cue, which transfers to Cue Ball, which is reflected into your Game. Hitting the Cue Ball accuratly every time is a result of a chain reaction of positive habits....physical and mental. 'The Game is the Teacher'
Click to expand...


We've been talking about all those body parts being an integral part of a sound Pre-Shot Routine going back to RSB. Everyone knows it as a PSR -- no need for another name.

Lou Figueroa
unless you're just trying to
repackage it for sales purposes
I guess :-)
 
Psr

Mr. Lou,

What's the beef?

Every golfer's pre shot routine is not the same & I doubt that every instructor, golf or pool, teaches the exact same thing. Also, in golf, & perhaps should be in pool as well, the PSR can be different from shot to shot depending on the shot at hand.

You may be correct. It may be a marketing 'method'. But so what?
 
ENGLISH! said:
Tap! Tap! Tap! for John Barton's post #431

I too, fully appreciate CJ's participation, politeness, & 'proof in the pudding'.

Thanks again CJ Wiley. You are being most helpful to those willing to venture on a path less traveled.

I, for one, & I'm fairly sure many others, truely appreciate your efforts here on AZB.

"Don't Give Up.... Don't Ever Give Up"
Jimmy Vilvano
Click to expand...

Unlike what you and a few others keep trying to imply, no one here wants CJ or any other pro to leave. All you are doing with posts like the above, is causing divisions, or at least implying that there are divisions.

Yes, we all would like to "hear" things from a top pros perspective. But, as has often been stated on here, all the "basics", or rather "techniques" of what it takes to physically play the game at a high level are already out there. In fact, they are all on here. So far, nothing "new" has been presented. Not even the "3 part pocket system". That has been presented a number of times, just not stated as so.

So, some are still waiting for that "something extra" from a pros perspective. However, that also has been stated numerous times, but people don't want to "hear" it. Too many are still looking for "that magic pill". There is no magic pill, there are a number of pills one must "take".

So, while we appreciate hearing from the pros, please stop getting so butt hurt when others question the pros on their use of terminology, and methods. No one is above questioning. As to his "politeness", he hasn't been any more polite on here than anyone else has.
 
Teaching anything is more than an objective undertaking. A lesson plan can be followed and all the available knowledge known to man on a subject can be revealed. Pool has a lot of teacher/instructors waist deep in what they believe make for a solid PSR, stroke and mental approach.

When a new approach is presented, it is usually met with quite a bit of resistance as are most academic theories. If it is proven to be successful the critics go away awaiting the next new idea to seize upon.

As I've said before, I believe most everything is a recap of existing knowledge in our pool world. We've labeled the physical properties of the stroke, the spin imparted on the balls, the different aiming systems, and a multitude of ways to approach each shot. What separates one instructor's teaching from another's?

To each his own. One person's subjective take on a detail about a stroke, etc. is different and may hold a better mental picture than a different method that is taught. We should never dismiss the possibility that just because another technique has been shown to work previously and the subject has been breached countless times, that more examination of the new method is unwarranted. A door may open with closer scrutiny and a new understanding may appear.

Like CJ, my martial arts training is long and extensive. When I teach, I listen to the questions of my students and gain knowledge from their concerns. A simple query forces me to look at something in a new light and broadens my base of knowledge. I understand that with an open mind, the student can become the teacher. I, and many others, would like to hear about CJ's interpretations of connecting to the shot line. Whether it is called that or not, I'm sure a fresh point of view from a top player may turn a few tumblers as we unlock new mental and physical doors.

Best,
Mike
 
Last edited:
Neil said:
Unlike what you and a few others keep trying to imply, no one here wants CJ or any other pro to leave. All you are doing with posts like the above, is causing divisions, or at least implying that there are divisions.

Yes, we all would like to "hear" things from a top pros perspective. But, as has often been stated on here, all the "basics", or rather "techniques" of what it takes to physically play the game at a high level are already out there. In fact, they are all on here. So far, nothing "new" has been presented. Not even the "3 part pocket system". That has been presented a number of times, just not stated as so.

So, some are still waiting for that "something extra" from a pros perspective. However, that also has been stated numerous times, but people don't want to "hear" it. Too many are still looking for "that magic pill". There is no magic pill, there are a number of pills one must "take".

So, while we appreciate hearing from the pros, please stop getting so butt hurt when others question the pros on their use of terminology, and methods. No one is above questioning. As to his "politeness", he hasn't been any more polite on here than anyone else has.
Click to expand...

Minimum number of characters!
 
Mikjary said:
Teaching anything is more than an objective undertaking. A lesson plan can be followed and all the available knowledge known to man on a subject can be revealed. Pool has a lot of teacher/instructors waist deep in what they believe make for a solid PSR, stroke and mental approach.

When a new approach is presented, it is usually met with quite a bit of resistance as are most academic theories. If it is proven to be successful the critics go away awaiting the next new idea to seize upon.

As I said before, I believe most everything is a recap of existing knowledge in our pool world. We have labeled the physical properties of the stroke, the spin imparted on the balls, the different aiming systems, and a multitude of ways to approach each shot. What separates one instructor's teaching from another's?

To each his own. One person's subjective take on a detail about a stroke, etc. is different and may hold a better mental picture than a different method that is taught. We should never dismiss the possibility that just because another technique has been shown to work previously and the subject has been breached countless times, that more examination of the new method is unwarranted. A door may open with closer scrutiny and a new understanding may appear.

Like CJ, my martial arts training is long and extensive. When I teach, I listen to the questions of my students and gain knowledge from their concerns. A simple query forces me to look at something in a new light and broadens my base of knowledge. I understand that with an open mind, the student can become the teacher. I, and many others, would like to hear about your interpretations of connecting to the shot line. Whether it is called that or not, I'm sure a fresh point of view from a top player may turn a few tumblers as we unlock new mental and physical doors.

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

Tap! Tap! Tap! for you Mike!
 
ENGLISH! said:
Tap! Tap! Tap! for John Barton's post #431

I too, fully appreciate CJ's participation, politeness, & 'proof in the pudding'.

Thanks again CJ Wiley. You are being most helpful to those willing to venture on a path less traveled.

I, for one, & I'm fairly sure many others, truely appreciate your efforts here on AZB.

"Don't Give Up.... Don't Ever Give Up"
Jimmy Vilvano
Click to expand...

John's post was a positive boost, for sure. Why can't more posters be gracious enough to let a discussion move forward without challenging every single detail in an effort to derail it?

Best,
Mike
 
Mikjary said:
Teaching anything is more than an objective undertaking. A lesson plan can be followed and all the available knowledge known to man on a subject can be revealed. Pool has a lot of teacher/instructors waist deep in what they believe make for a solid PSR, stroke and mental approach.

When a new approach is presented, it is usually met with quite a bit of resistance as are most academic theories. If it is proven to be successful the critics go away awaiting the next new idea to seize upon.

As I've said before, I believe most everything is a recap of existing knowledge in our pool world. We've labeled the physical properties of the stroke, the spin imparted on the balls, the different aiming systems, and a multitude of ways to approach each shot. What separates one instructor's teaching from another's?

To each his own. One person's subjective take on a detail about a stroke, etc. is different and may hold a better mental picture than a different method that is taught. We should never dismiss the possibility that just because another technique has been shown to work previously and the subject has been breached countless times, that more examination of the new method is unwarranted. A door may open with closer scrutiny and a new understanding may appear.

Like CJ, my martial arts training is long and extensive. When I teach, I listen to the questions of my students and gain knowledge from their concerns. A simple query forces me to look at something in a new light and broadens my base of knowledge. I understand that with an open mind, the student can become the teacher. I, and many others, would like to hear about CJ's interpretations of connecting to the shot line. Whether it is called that or not, I'm sure a fresh point of view from a top player may turn a few tumblers as we unlock new mental and physical doors.

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

Mike, I totally agree with what you have said here. Likewise, one should NOT state they are releasing 'new' information that only the top few have even known about.
 
Mikjary said:
John's post was a positive boost, for sure. Why can't more posters be gracious enough to let a discussion move forward without challenging every single detail in an effort to derail it?

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

As you so nicely put it, some need things said a different way to learn. So....why is it that any time someone questions something, they are the labeled as "derailing"it??
 
Neil said:
As you so nicely put it, some need things said a different way to learn. So....why is it that any time someone questions something, they are the labeled as "derailing"it??
Click to expand...

The point I was trying to make was not to chastise anyone for disagreeing with another poster's claims. The idea is to let that other poster fully express their intentions and knowledge without reserve. Kinda like hecklers at a speech, or a certain politician who recently acted like a clown while his opponent made a dissenting point of view. :smile:

We absolutely should all not agree on everything, but let's at least let the findings of a certain someone flow freely and openly without that poster having to defend even his nomenclature for terms. Nit picking should be left to a minimum. Even this post I'm doing is a waste of discussion space and not fair to all the people earnestly reading these threads for guidance.

That's my view. If you disagree, great! But think about my point. I'm not alone and I'm prolly in the vast majority when I say these things.

Best,
Mike
 
Neil said:
As you so nicely put it, some need things said a different way to learn. So....why is it that any time someone questions something, they are the labeled as "derailing"it??
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with polite debate and questioning someone's technique.

However, there are some people whose posting style is very far from polite. BTW, I don't mean you.
 
--m--o--v--i--n--g--p--a--r--t--s--

cookie man said:
..................
Click to expand...

--m--o--v--i--n--g--p--a--r--t--s--

As human beings we want to reduce "moving parts", and systematically put ourselves in a position to perform consistently. Hitting the primary target in pool {The Cue Ball} on the same side achieves this and enables us to stroke with more confidence. The "Touch" of INside accomplishes this and more.

This confidence adds somthing to our pocket billiard games that is essential (in my opinion), A SENSE OF WELL BEING. This "sense" far outweighs any simple "margin of error" because it effects your whole Persona* and makes The Game MUCH more rewarding to the player. 'The Game is the Teacher'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top