WRISTS - The "hidden power catalyst" of a great stroke or "just along for the ride"?

Pay Up Sucker said:
lol@ the bold? right Neil :) This post may make sense to you and everyone else but it does not to me and we should leave this alone now.
Click to expand...

Neil, attempting to have this intellectual debate with Pay Up Sucker would be like trying to teach Einstein's Theory of Relativity to a 1st Grader. Waste of time. And if Pay Up Sucker "believes" these methods work for him, who gives a shit?

I don't think CJ is purposefully blowing smoke up people's arses, I think he believes this stuff as well. I think the separation between his belief and feel vs reality is why it is so difficult for him to describe the technique for accomplishing these things step by step. I think sometimes that CJ confuses what he believes is technique and feel with his incredible natural God given talent to play the game.

Regardless, the people I know you want to do a favor for obviously aren't appreciating it. So let them go to their tables, hit a touch of inside, follow through by hitting below center and whatever the hell else CJ tells them. If they all think it works and it helps them play better, or more importantly, have more fun, then it is good for pool. I'd be willing to bet good money that if there were a way to video tape their strokes while attempting these shots, 3 months from now, they wouldn't be actually/factually doing any of this. And frankly, I don't care in the least.









/
 
Neil said:
Back it up? It already is, many times over on the forums, going back many years. The fact that you didn't bother to learn from them before doesn't change the fact that it is backed up. Why should I or anyone else bother to re-quote all those back posts when they weren't read the first dozen times around? You want to push me aside, I really don't care. It's obvious that's nothing new for you with me and the others that provide accurate info on here. You want to see it, go search Scott Lee posts. Not too long ago this was talked about in reference to Earl doing it. And, as usual, when it was explained how it is done, and that is not something mystical, the instructors were dismissed there too.
Click to expand...

I think the problem forks-off into several root causes:

1. Instructors, for some reason, are scoffed at by the "I learned pool on my own, and I play at [what I perceive to be] a high level" crowd.

2. A large part of the readership may be of the demographic, "Unless you can beat the pants off of me, or otherwise show me your 'brass' (i.e. pro ranking, tournament hardware, etc.), you're just another pool enthusiast. I don't care about your instructor certifications. I want to hear from the pros -- that's the only skill level that 'impresses' me to the point that I'd even think of absorbing material from or revamping my ways of doing things."

3. Let's be honest here -- and I know I'm going to catch flack for using this term -- nut-hugging. It's not often that the "commoner" gets to rub elbows with the pros of the sport he/she (the commoner) enjoys. So when the opportunity comes up to do so -- as in this forum -- *you bet* the commoner will sidle-up and cheerlead the pro's viewpoints. And they will staunchly defend the pro's viewpoints from any critics, even if the pro's viewpoints are being debated in a civil manner. Fanaticism breeds emotion, and things escalate quickly. In some way, it's human nature to do this. It's one of the many tributaries of idolatry.

4. If an instructor has been beating a drum about a certain topic, methodology, practice, or just in general "way of doing things," his/her information may get written off per bullets 1 and 2 above. However, if a pro comes along and says the same thing, suddenly that information is "new and ground-breaking." It's like my "fire" analogy -- you know -- the pro grabs a book of matches out of his/her pocket, pulls a match from the book, strikes it, holds the lit match up in the air for all to see, and exclaims, "Look, world! Look what I have here -- this is called Fire!"

5. Some pros, fortunately or unfortunately, are on a marketing blitzkrieg to make whatever money they can in the anemic pool industry, and this turns many people off. The problem with AZB is that, although CJ went the correct route and purchased an ad banner / ad space on AZB to support the venue in which he's doing his marketing, previous offenders of blitzkrieg marketing had NOT, and now a lot of us view any kind of marketing with a jaundiced eye.

If you take these things out of the equation, and treat the pro as another human being -- a lot of folks forget that pros are human beings just like themselves -- the pro him/herself (unless he/she are a megalomaniac) appreciate it more. Conversations all of a sudden become more realistic, more real-life. Things are more respectful.

Humbly, I think those are the issues here.

-Sean
 
Pay Up Sucker said:
Are you mad because i didn't like your picture describing the top of the tip technique, I think you mistakenly uploaded your jump shot picture there :grin: This guy is going to go into a rage now :)
Click to expand...

Dude, you've caught me. LMAO Funny guy, thanks for the good humor.
 
JoeW said:
Keep it up guys and you will be able to drive away another person who could contribute much to the board.

Tolerance would go a long way here. If you don’t like some one’s idea, teaching methods or whatever, leave them alone and go your own way to create your own following if that is what you seek.

The truth speaks for itself and when people try different methods they will quickly learn the truth of what helps them play better.

Taking on some role of arbiter, rule enforcer or pretending to be the person with the only or the right answers is divisive and arrogant.

I think that what is being done to CJ is very unfortunate. I cringe when I see a person with good intent attempting to help and having to read the ugly comments some of you are making. I know that I am much less likely to be around the board anymore because of this sad state of affairs. In fact it is CJ’s attempts to be helpful that bring me back to this thread. The ugly stuff by intolerant and rigid people drives me away.

You know sometimes you have to wade through a lot of useless stuff to get to one nugget of gold. And it is often worthwhile.

Some people have more difficulty than others expressing an idea or a concept that is subtle and yet it is often worthwhile to struggle with their thought patterns to learn a little more than you knew before.
Click to expand...

Mr. Joe,

Tap! Tap! Tap! Well Said!

Regards,
 
Hawk said:
Great post and so true. CJ has shown more patience in this thread than anyone should have to. CJ is simply explaining what he does, he is always careful to mention that his methods might not work for everyone, if it doesn't work for you put the info on the shelf. What is so wrong with that? How many times must we hear from a couple of posters that they don't care what "we" learn as long as THEY deem it correct, yet they refer to CJ as arrogant and condescending lmao. I stopped coming to AZ after all the clutter of the BS aiming threads, now there is a poster that gives an interesting perspective from a pro's point of view and the same old suspects are doing their best to derail his threads.
Click to expand...

Hawk,

With that handle, you must have very good eye sight & can 'real eyes' the prey from the predators.:wink:

Regards,
 
Pay Up Sucker said:
I don't argue the physics of pool and if i want to know about anything involving the physics of pool, the first person i would ask would be PJ. I also just got involved into this discussing the top of tip technique and that is where the "hit the cue ball at center to create follow" i believe. It was pulled out of the technique and discussed i think.
Click to expand...

Thank you, also.
 
justadub said:
The voice of reason.....likely to go unheard.

Nicely stated, Joe.
Click to expand...

I agree. Nicely done, JoeW. None of us want to see CJ or any other knowledgeable resource "run off." Tone-down the marketing blitzkrieg, maybe, but definitely not run off.

I, for one, have enjoyed civilly-debating things with CJ, during the few times I've had the opportunity to do so. (With hurricane Sandy, and now with the nor'easter, I'd been kind of out of the loop.) I hope CJ thinks the same. I know if CJ were to meet many of us in person, the old phrase "getting along famously" would definitely apply.

Now, CJ, pull the reigns a bit on your marketing horses, dammit! :D ;)

-Sean
 
I remember being in a pool school with Robin Dodson several years ago. She was really there to learn how to become an instructor, she already knew how to shoot pool (:wink:).

As the days went by, to her credit, she kept saying things like, "Oh, so that's why this works that way", or "I never knew why this happened"...

Hers was a perfect example of why most professionals aren't automatically good teachers.
 
CJ --- thanks for posting and most importantly contributing.

Some people argue just to win the arguement. Others argue to gain more insight.
 
And the, inescapable, bottom line about this 'follow with center ball striking' stuff is that:

If the CB has an angular momentum greater than zero (in the direction it is rolling) when it strikes the OB, it is going to continue to roll forward after that contact. "Whitey never lies, Jerry Briesath".

It does not matter how the CB acquired that angular momentum: Either by friction with the cloth causing it to achieve normal, or near normal, roll (even though the cue tip struck the OB below the COP (Center of Percussion, c.f. earlier in this thread)); or by the cue tip striking above the COP to start it off with normal or greater than normal roll...

Anything more, explanation-wise, is redundant.

There is no mystery about this.
 
sfleinen said:
I agree. Nicely done, JoeW. None of us want to see CJ or any other knowledgeable resource "run off." Tone-down the marketing blitzkrieg, maybe, but definitely not run off.

I, for one, have enjoyed civilly-debating things with CJ, during the few times I've had the opportunity to do so. (With hurricane Sandy, and now with the nor'easter, I'd been kind of out of the loop.) I hope CJ thinks the same. I know if CJ were to meet many of us in person, the old phrase "getting along famously" would definitely apply.

Now, CJ, pull the reigns a bit on your marketing horses, dammit! :D ;)

-Sean
Click to expand...

I wasn't gonna "go there", but I can't help myself....

Another factor to consider in all this drama is the faction of very knowledgeable and (usually) helpful veterans of this forum sometimes seem to become very protective of "their turf".

I understand that most of these subjects have been discussed before, and that there is probably very little that is truly "new". But just because some of you folks have been discussing this back to the RSB days, well.... I wasn't around pool then. I expect that many, many more of us haven't been discussing pool theories and techniques on a forum for an extended period of time, either. So when someone starts talking about something here and you've discussed it before, doesn't mean that it isn't fresh and new to a bunch of people.

Similarly, just because someone phrases things differently than you folks have been doing here for so long, doesn't mean the message is bad. And yes, while it could be less confusing if most people used the same terminology, it doesn't have to be a flash point.

Having different ways to describe the same thing is not bad, either. While the specific example escapes me at the moment, something CJ was referencing clicked for me, where it hadnt before, simply because it was described differently.

I think that debate is healthy. I don't think that sniping, and continuously nit picking points of discussion is helpful at all, and takes away from the message.
 
justadub said:
I wasn't gonna "go there", but I can't help myself....

Another factor to consider in all this drama is the faction of very knowledgeable and (usually) helpful veterans of this forum sometimes seem to become very protective of "their turf".

I understand that most of these subjects have been discussed before, and that there is probably very little that is truly "new". But just because some of you folks have been discussing this back to the RSB days, well.... I wasn't around pool then. I expect that many, many more of us haven't been discussing pool theories and techniques on a forum for an extended period of time, either. So when someone starts talking about something here and you've discussed it before, doesn't mean that it isn't fresh and new to a bunch of people.

Similarly, just because someone phrases things differently than you folks have been doing here for so long, doesn't mean the message is bad. And yes, while it could be less confusing if most people used the same terminology, it doesn't have to be a flash point.

Having different ways to describe the same thing is not bad, either. While the specific example escapes me at the moment, something CJ was referencing clicked for me, where it hadnt before, simply because it was described differently.

I think that debate is healthy. I don't think that sniping, and continuously nit picking points of discussion is helpful at all, and takes away from the message.
Click to expand...

Bruce:

Well, I guess it's good that I helped you "uncork" something you had on your chest. ;)

I hadn't been following this thread closely, but do you have examples of what you're referring to when you say, "Similarly, just because someone phrases things differently than you folks have been doing here for so long, doesn't mean the message is bad"? (I want to make sure if *I* am an offender, that I modify my approach.)

Let me know,
-Sean
 
sfleinen said:
Bruce:

Well, I guess it's good that I helped you "uncork" something you had on your chest. ;)

I hadn't been following this thread closely, but do you have examples of what you're referring to when you say, "Similarly, just because someone phrases things differently than you folks have been doing here for so long, doesn't mean the message is bad"? (I want to make sure if *I* am an offender, that I modify my approach.)

Let me know,
-Sean
Click to expand...

Sean, there isn't a specific example that comes to mind. But I do recall that sentiment being expressed towards CJ at differing times, in various threads. To come up with specific examples would require more time than I have right now, and to be in front of a computer, versus this phone that I'm using now. Specifics aren't critical, its the general feeling that it has generated...

I doubt that you are any more "guilty" than any others that go back that far (and probably less of a contributer) but this rant isn't about guilt. Its about tolerance, and the lack thereof.
 
justadub said:
Sean, there isn't a specific example that comes to mind. But I do recall that sentiment being expressed towards CJ at differing times, in various threads. To come up with specific examples would require more time than I have right now, and to be in front of a computer, versus this phone that I'm using now. Specifics aren't critical, its the general feeling that it has generated...

I doubt that you are any more "guilty" than any others that go back that far (and probably less of a contributer) but this rant isn't about guilt. Its about tolerance, and the lack thereof.
Click to expand...

Ok, it sounds like a general observation. Keeping in mind past experience on these boards, and the content of this thread, I documented what I think happened / is-happening in post #725 above.

You're right -- tolerance is at an all-time low on these boards. I know I find myself getting caught up in frustration at times, but it's more to do with certain posters than anything else. Picking myself up by the bootstraps, I hope to be a better netizen going forward -- even if my fellow netizens are misbehavin'. ;)

-Sean
 
justadub:
...just because someone phrases things differently than you folks have been doing here for so long, doesn't mean the message is bad.
Click to expand...
I don't have anything against unconventional descriptions, especially if they resonate with players in a helpful way. But "unconventional" can also be factually incorrect, which can be "bad" for those who get more from conventional descriptions - lots more people read here than those who love CJ's style of teaching, and they deserve some consideration (and translation) too.

And, by the way, CJ brings some of the "opposition" on himself with his "I'm a pro with elite knowledge and anybody who doesn't get it is doomed to mediocrity" arrogance. He'd have more of my respect if he didn't think so much of himself and his "special" techniques.

pj
chgo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top