???????????????
cut induced throw?
- Thread starter Redwing4114
- Start date
???????????????
??????????????????????????????????
How do you know? There are thousands of stories in the world about people who thought they had no natural talent who ended up in the top of their field.
never heard the expression that success is 99% perspiration and 1% inspriation?
Actual research that is cited in several books on world class poerfomance.
Or would that be an anecdote?[/QUOTE]
Actually my story about Sean is reporting on events happening now.
Sorry, I thought it was you that kept bringing up the 10,000 hour rule to repudiate the concept of natural talent.
For those who think the science is settled on this matter, think again:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3027564...t-10000-hours-of-practice-makes-you-an-expert
We may never find a specific "pool gene" that encodes for a protein that confers pool talent onto someone, but there are likely numerous inherited special abilities that, when taken in total, create a sort of "perfect storm" in certain individuals that enables them to learn and play this game at a very high level with little knowledge of the analytical reasoning that explains why things work the way they work.
The 10,000 hour rule was never a "rule" but instead a finding that MOST world class performers had an average of about 10,000 hours of dedicated practice/experience in their field. Of course this means that some will have 15,000 and some will have 5,000.
It was translated into a "rule" by people who read the books detailing the study.
I am perfectly clear that people don't need to understand the science to play high level pool. Some pool players who play jam up are truly stupid people and very hard to talk to about anything but pool. and of course someone can know the science and physics perfectly and still not be able to run three balls.
But the point of all this is that there is nothing wrong with having the science proof available, nothing wrong with having slow motion videos showing what's really happening when the balls collide. It can't possibly hurt to have this knowledge available for anyone to study and take to the table.
I think it would be really hard to argue that knowledge and improvements in technique have created higher performing athletes in every other sport. So why should pool be any different? I don't really care about the silly nature/nurture argument. The reason is because it honestly does not matter for any of us. If you're the type of person who is going to go for it in whatever endeavor you choose then no one should dissuade you from it. If there are bench marks that you must reach to qualify into the next levels then either you will reach them or you won't. No asshole will dissuade me from trying because they have the opinion that I don't have the requisite amount of "talent". My results will tell me soon enough whether I belong there or not.
Who said this?
"To be honest with you, I haven't really retired - yet. I keep up with the pool. Every once in a while, I go down in the basement and knock some balls around. Needless to say, I bet more on sports and more on poker online. I don't really feel that I have to go out there and bust my butt in the pool world anymore, especially when every Tom, Dick, and Harry don't miss a ball. As far as I'm concerned, if I don't feel that I can compete in a manner to where I can win, I don't want to go there, just to show face. I've never been that way. I want to go there to where I think I have a good chance to win."
"To be honest with you, I haven't really retired - yet. I keep up with the pool. Every once in a while, I go down in the basement and knock some balls around. Needless to say, I bet more on sports and more on poker online. I don't really feel that I have to go out there and bust my butt in the pool world anymore, especially when every Tom, Dick, and Harry don't miss a ball. As far as I'm concerned, if I don't feel that I can compete in a manner to where I can win, I don't want to go there, just to show face. I've never been that way. I want to go there to where I think I have a good chance to win."
Ron Swanson
Banned
You can tell barton is losing an argument when he tries to get help from his friends lol.
Oh the trolls, the trolls!
So you don't know?
I'd guess it's Keith McCready (who - outside of a cameo in a below average film - I've only ever heard of on this forum, by the way) but what's your point?
The point is that Keith speaks to the idea that there are far more runout players today than when he was playing competitively.
As for TCOM being below average....http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090863/awards
You can have your opinion but not your own facts.
Are you trying to say whether a film is good or not can ever be anything other than opinion???
Also, I think it's fairly widely acknowledged that Newman was thrown that best actor nod in lieu of the one he probably should have won for The Hustler (a far better film).
I am saying that the film won more accolades than simply a best actor oscar for Newman.
And yes, it's always opinion as to whether a film, i.e. a piece of art, is good or not. Even if it wins awards you can hold the opinion that it's not good even if everyone else thinks it is.
Just because it has won many awards and oscar nominations and people loved it doesn't mean you can't hold a contrary opinion.
Not saying you're wrong, just saying that most people don't agree with you.
What was all that rubbish about "having my own opinion but not my own facts", then?
Well, its a FACT that the movie was well received and did well in the awards that year.
So your opinion does not synch with the fact that the majority held a different opinion.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Ron Swanson
Banned
Much like Shakespearean actors only say 'the scottish play', i don't acknowledge the existance of the MacBeth's.
lol, there's no way I'm getting any further into this argument.
I thought it was a decent, if below average film (Keith McCready was pretty good in it, though, I have to say. I wouldn't have known he wasn't an actor).
The Hustler, on the other hand, is an excellent film (and has a far, far stronger performance from Newman).
Another thread going off tracks it seems.
To OP :
I have not been playing for long, but I have found that I only need to compensate for CIT when planning on doing a stun shot. It seems to be almost negligeable with follow/draw shots, but then again I think tend to overcut slightly my shots, so I might compensate without realizing.
What is definitely more of a concern (at least for me!) is english/sidespin induced throw, that thing is hell. But the fact it exists is very useful sometimes! I think you eventually learn to make it a friend rather than a foe.
Just the opinion of a new player to the game.
To OP :
I have not been playing for long, but I have found that I only need to compensate for CIT when planning on doing a stun shot. It seems to be almost negligeable with follow/draw shots, but then again I think tend to overcut slightly my shots, so I might compensate without realizing.
What is definitely more of a concern (at least for me!) is english/sidespin induced throw, that thing is hell. But the fact it exists is very useful sometimes! I think you eventually learn to make it a friend rather than a foe.
Just the opinion of a new player to the game.
Sam,
Sorry, but I don't remember. Do you have CJ's TOI dvd in you library?
Making CB squirt your friend is basically his philosophy.
Keep in mind that TOI is ultimately what he chose when it was shown to him by some of the old road players.
I shot with english on nearly every shot for 46 years & after CJ introduced his version here TOI is in my tool box & I use it probably 60% of the time or more unless I'm playung one pocket.
Best 2 Ya.
I don't, but I've been looking at his posts / website in the last few days. I might eventually give it a shot. It sure seemed to be working well for him and some others!