Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

  • I always go by feel

    Votes: 153 53.5%
  • Usually by feel, with aiming systems for hard shots

    Votes: 68 23.8%
  • Usually with aiming systems, by feel for easy shots

    Votes: 24 8.4%
  • I always use aiming systems

    Votes: 26 9.1%
  • I just hit balls very hard and hope they sink

    Votes: 15 5.2%

  • Total voters
    286
Has anybody heard of this guy?


https://youtu.be/8tNfRTW4LZ4


He has a book out called the unknown secrets of snooker. You can get it on Kindle. It is an aiming system for snooker that, I swear I'm not making this up, it combines CTE, TOI,& the theory on 20 minute practice sessions all in one system... for snooker. He also tries to get into the technical aspects of adjusting for throw and deflection, etc when using english but he totally screws that up.

Aiming system for snooker? It was only a matter of time.

Someone needs to send the link to Alex maybe he can then snap off a qualifier :rolleyes:

1

Here is the basics of his system.

1) You pivot onto the shot line
2) You have 5 points of aim on the object ball... 1= left edge, 2= left quarter, 3=center, 4= right quarter, 5= right edge... then there are 2 more aiming targets 1" outside of both edges for thin cuts.
3) You aim your shaft (I forgot to mention it uses Shanes shaft method also) at the target that gets you closest to the pocket.
4) If one of the aim targets does not take you to the pocket... but just close... you simply use a little bit of outside or inside english to create the angle with deflection.
5) Practice for 20 minutes a day, 20 minutes because that is the average persons attention span. Practice using this system and aiming will become a natural process that you do not need to think about.


LOL

I SWEAR TO GOD I'M NOT JOKING ABOUT THIS. I'M AS SERIOUS AS I CAN BE.

Like I said he also talks about adjusting for throw and stuff also. It's a fascinating read.:thumbup:
 
Just pull up any cte thread, they're usually full of them. I'm not going to do your work for you. :rolleyes: Sound familiar?

Why doesn't it work for everybody? I mean, it's a center ball, center pocket "system", right? Unless it's not.

It is indeed a center pocket system.
Why doesn't it work for everybody? Good question. If you are talking in general i would say that's life, everything doesn't work for everybody. If you are talking about poster's on AZ, well for the most part they haven't even worked with it, they just formed an opinion by looking at it.
Have you worked with it?
 
Here is the basics of his system.

1) You pivot onto the shot line
2) You have 5 points of aim on the object ball... 1= left edge, 2= left quarter, 3=center, 4= right quarter, 5= right edge... then there are 2 more aiming targets 1" outside of both edges for thin cuts.
3) You aim your shaft (I forgot to mention it uses Shanes shaft method also) at the target that gets you closest to the pocket.
4) If one of the aim targets does not take you to the pocket... but just close... you simply use a little bit of outside or inside english to create the angle with deflection.
5) Practice for 20 minutes a day, 20 minutes because that is the average persons attention span. Practice using this system and aiming will become a natural process that you do not need to think about.


LOL

I SWEAR TO GOD I'M NOT JOKING ABOUT THIS. I'M AS SERIOUS AS I CAN BE.

Like I said he also talks about adjusting for throw and stuff also. It's a fascinating read.:thumbup:

Then he can pocket balls look into the camera and say see it works
:thumbup:

1
 
RJ,

Saying something does not work for the reason that is asserted that it works is not saying that it does not work.

Well, Like Bill Clinton once said, 'That depends on what the definition of IT is.'. If IT is not working for the reason that is asserted that IT does, is IT really IT? :wink:

Best Wishes.

WTF kind of jibber jabber is this Rick ? So, in your hypothesis, you are NOT saying the system does not work, but in fact does work, but not in the manner as described by the founding developers ?

Of course, more internet experts who have not experienced stuff up close and personal but have the most vocal opinions as possible on the matter. Seems odd to me. Again, if it does NOT work, where are the folks who got "robbed"? Where are the folks who did NOT improve?

Please start a list if you like, but they don't seem to be out there. Rather, it's the same handful of posters saying something does not work without even taking it for a ride. I mean, even Ralph Nader actually drove a Corvair first.
 
Then he can pocket balls look into the camera and say see it works
:thumbup:

1

I read it... then instantly called amazon and told them I wanted my money back. That is the first time I have ever asked for a refund on a book.:)

It is accompanied with links to videos on youtube also where he does pretty much what you said.
 
It is indeed a center pocket system.
Why doesn't it work for everybody? Good question. If you are talking in general i would say that's life, everything doesn't work for everybody. If you are talking about poster's on AZ, well for the most part they haven't even worked with it, they just formed an opinion by looking at it.
Have you worked with it?

Some have and get blown off.

I'm asking for proof of the ridiculous claims(read:lies) that you folks keeping putting out there. Now, address that and we can move on. Until then, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck. Not saying he's ripping people off, but..

I'm going to go play with weed for a few hours. Enjoy not responding to the actual issues.
 
5) Practice for 20 minutes a day, 20 minutes because that is the average persons attention span. Practice using this system and aiming will become a natural process that you do not need to think about.

The attention span stuff is often misunderstood and the idea that 20 minutes a day of practice is all you need as far as I can tell isn't supported by any research of high achieving individuals. I used to prescribe 30 minutes of practice a day to my guitar students, but only because anything more than that would demotivate all but the most avid learner. It certainly wasn't geared towards making them the next Eddie VanHalen.

Our attention span vary's from person to person. It can be 5-20 minutes depending on the individual and their interest in the topic. I think it can be expanded somewhat if they are particularily keen.

The take away however is not to practice for 30 minutes and then pack up for the day. In an ideal world it's best to take a 5-10 minute break and split your practice up into several 30 minute sessions as opposed to a 3-4 (or longer) marathon.
 
The attention span stuff is often misunderstood and the idea that 20 minutes a day of practice is all you need as far as I can tell isn't supported by any research of high achieving individuals. I used to prescribe 30 minutes of practice a day to my guitar students, but only because anything more than that would demotivate all but the most avid learner. It certainly wasn't geared towards making them the next Eddie VanHalen.

Our attention span vary's from person to person. It can be 5-20 minutes depending on the individual and their interest in the topic. I think it can be expanded somewhat if they are particularily keen.

The take away however is not to practice for 30 minutes and then pack up for the day. In an ideal world it's best to take a 5-10 minute break and split your practice up into several 30 minute sessions as opposed to a 3-4 (or longer) marathon.

The instructors here teach something like the 20 minute practice thing too. Whoever this dude is. It seems as though he took bits and pieces from a little bit of everything and threw it together to market to snooker players.
 
WTF kind of jibber jabber is this Rick ? So, in your hypothesis, you are NOT saying the system does not work, but in fact does work, but not in the manner as described by the founding developers ?

Of course, more internet experts who have not experienced stuff up close and personal but have the most vocal opinions as possible on the matter. Seems odd to me. Again, if it does NOT work, where are the folks who got "robbed"? Where are the folks who did NOT improve?

Please start a list if you like, but they don't seem to be out there. Rather, it's the same handful of posters saying something does not work without even taking it for a ride. I mean, even Ralph Nader actually drove a Corvair first.

Well, it seems that you did not understand my meaning.

TonyTheTiger has worked with it for over a year with no real success & has all but begged for a specific instruction on how to get to see the proper perception for the shot other than, 'just move or rotate until you see it'. Others HAVE said similar things but I can not recall all of their names.

It's not the nature of most to complain in public when they have buyer's remorse. They basically just accept the fact that THEY made a mistake with the purchase.

I took what was a significant enough of a test ride for me to make my own determinations. I'm not going to waste any more of my time & certainly not a year on something that did not nor does not encourage to me to do so.

If I put sour milk in my mouth, I spit it out, I don't drink the whole gallon to make my decision on whether or not it's sour.

Best 2 You, RJ.
 
Last edited:
Well, it seems that you did not understand my meaning.

TonyTheTiger has been working with it for over a year with no real success & has all but begged for a specific instruction on how to get to see the proper perception for the shot other than, 'just move or rotate until you see it'. Others HAVE said similar things but I can not recall all of their names.

It's not the nature of most to complain in public when they have buyer's remorse. They basically just accept the fact that THEY made a mistake with the purchase.

I took what was a significant enough of a test ride for me to make my own determinations. I'm not going to waste any more of my time & certainly not a year on something that did not nor does not encourage to me to do so.

If I put sour milk in my mouth, I spit it out, I don't drink the whole gallon to make my decision on whether or not it's sour.

Best 2 You, RJ.

Ok, great Rick. So there is ONE, and his name is Tony. And yes, I do expect folks to complain. If you sell them a bad cue, they will be over that crap. To say there are more in the wings but are too bashful is ridiculous. Why do you care how someone wants to teach, why would you make it a point to bash it when it does NOT affect you one bit ? That just seems weird too me. Just like the folks that bash LD shafts, why would they care what other folks want to play with ?

And you took a test ride ? Not sure what that means. But sounds like it was NOT for you. Great. Did anyone ever say that every product on the market will have a 100% success rate? I mean, besides internet porn ;)

It still appears MORE folks like it and how it helps them than do not. You can't really dispute that, can you?
 
The instructors here teach something like the 20 minute practice thing too. Whoever this dude is. It seems as though he took bits and pieces from a little bit of everything and threw it together to market to snooker players.

Yes I've seen that here as well. Nic Barrow has a pretty cool app out called PracticeGuru. It has a bunch of different practice routines geared at different skill sets. It also groups different routines into premade practice sessions, with each routine allotted 10-20 minutes before moving on to the next. Any session longer than an hour has a built in 5 minute break. I think this is the best use of the attention span research.

It doesn't appear aiming systems get much traction in snooker communities. I've seen aiming discussed on thesnookerforum before, but never in such detail and it often evolves into a discussion of alignment. The snooker players obsession appears to be fundamentals.
 
Last edited:
Ok, great Rick. So there is ONE, and his name is Tony. There are more than one. And yes, I do expect folks to complain. Some do, many do not. If you sell them a bad cue, they will be over that crap. To say there are more in the wings but are too bashful is ridiculous. NO, it is not. Why do you care how someone wants to teach, why would you make it a point to bash it when it does NOT affect you one bit ? Because I care about others & the truth & whether one is enticed to invest time (& money) by false assertions that have not & basically can not be proven. That just seems weird too me. Just like the folks that bash LD shafts, why would they care what other folks want to play with ?

And you took a test ride ? Not sure what that means. But sounds like it was NOT for you. Great. Did anyone ever say that every product on the market will have a 100% success rate? That is the implication when one asserts that it is totally objective. I mean, besides internet porn ;)

It still appears MORE folks like it and how it helps them than do not. Do you have anything to support that 'appearance' that YOU see? You can't really dispute that, can you? Can you support what you say with facts?

RJ,

It seems, to me, that you either really do not understand the issue or you are just being disingenuous.

Best Wishes.
 
Last edited:
John,

Butch Harmon has said, 'I may not be able to build a Championship Swing... but if I'm not very careful, I know I can ruin one.'.

Best Wishes.

Good point. So WHO is the arbiter here? You? Lou? Pat?

OR

Maybe a guy who did build a championship swing in his son's game. A guy who has two perfect tables in his house and who has trained dozens of players. A guy who is himself a champion and has finished higher in the US Open than any of his critics on here?

I don't know, if it was up to me then I would certainly not want to listen to pool advice from a guy who can't win more than a house tournament, a guy whose claim to fame is winning one state tournament in a state with four people, a couple anons who probably don't even play pool over recognized master instructors.
 
I was right! You do angle your cue. Your vision drives your cue angling. Your cue is likely across your vision ever so slightly, a characteristic of solid players........congrats, you are CTE user and you do not even know it........well, you are not alone.....most all good players do not realize it....
Just like Hal eluded to the idea that top players use CTE.....you are using CTE subconsciously on some shots and I could lesson you right through it.......so you would understand the nature of it......
Anyway, good shooting!
Stan Shuffett


Not even close. Frankly, I have no idea how you could possibly say you know what I'm seeing or using when Im looking at a pool shot, much less claim it's CTE. You've gotta admit that that's a little bizarro.

And thanks for the compliment on the run.

Lou Figueroa
 
Yes I've seen that here as well. Nic Barrow has a pretty cool app out called PracticeGuru. It has a bunch of different practice routines geared at different skill sets. It also groups different routines into premade practice sessions, with each routine allotted 10-20 minutes before moving on to the next. Any session longer than an hour has a built in 5 minute break. I think this is the best use of the attention span research.

It doesn't appear aiming systems get much traction in snooker communities. I've seen aiming discussed on thesnookerforum before, but never in such detail and it often evolves into a discussion of alignment. The snooker players obsession appears to be fundamentals.

Yes snooker players have the idea that it's all about "the line of the shot" and that you just see it and should step in on it correctly.

But Steve Davis has made several videos that address aiming and also addresses dominant eye and has a device to show people how to find their dominant eye so as to be able to easier find the line of the shot accurately.

No one here can argue that snooker players are superior shotmakers to pool players in general. But simply making the shot isn't what pool is all about. This is part of the reason no snooker player has ever won the world 9 ball championships during the years when they were granted spots by Barry Hearn in the Matchroom years.

Steve Davis, unlike some here, has tremendous respect for pool and pool players. He seems like a guy with an open mind who would certainly entertain a discussion on alternative methods to sight a shot.
 
Well, it seems that you did not understand my meaning.

TonyTheTiger has worked with it for over a year with no real success & has all but begged for a specific instruction on how to get to see the proper perception for the shot other than, 'just move or rotate until you see it'. Others HAVE said similar things but I can not recall all of their names.

It's not the nature of most to complain in public when they have buyer's remorse. They basically just accept the fact that THEY made a mistake with the purchase.

I took what was a significant enough of a test ride for me to make my own determinations. I'm not going to waste any more of my time & certainly not a year on something that did not nor does not encourage to me to do so.

If I put sour milk in my mouth, I spit it out, I don't drink the whole gallon to make my decision on whether or not it's sour.

Best 2 You, RJ.


I only know of one guy in the greater St. Louis area who said he studied the DVD, sort of got it to work, but in the end decided it wasn't reliable enough so he stopped trying to use it. The funny part is that he said it messed with his normal aiming so much he said it took him two weeks to get "un-CTEd" lol.

Lou Figueroa
 
wow, never seen that table before. After a few beers... might be fun :-)

Lou Figueroa

I imagine there would be a lot of crazy two rail banks needed when the object balls get stuck in the corners.

I had never seen one either. I just did a google search to find a table that didnt fit the 2x1 dimensions and that was one that popped up.
 
Back
Top