Stroke vs. Aiming

[Straightpool_99]

there is no sense to teach anyone how to aim in any complicated way as a beginner. That's not the premise of these discussions. And without the basic ability to hit the ball in a straight line what good is having a straight line to shoot down.
OK, I agree so far.
If someone wants to try and "buy" a better game then let them. If they want to invest time into an aiming system, an LD shaft, a four inch thick book, dvds, whatever...let them do so in peace.
People come in here all the time asking for advice on things to buy. I'm going to give them my opinion on what products are good and which are bad. So will anyone else with even a shred of decency.
The table won't lie to them....either they will improve or they wont and that's on them. No one here can say with certainty what will help any individual to improve. They can't say that any one thing will be what helps a person reach their milestones. Just be happy that there are people to try whatever other people are spending time creating.
NO, it isn't "on them". The people who ask are usually naive and inexperienced. I'm not going to let them waste their time with bs books and contraptions "for the good of the cause". I'll tell them what I think works. They can judge my results and choose accordingly if they know me. I'm anonymous on here so my word doesn't carry a whole lot of weight (if any), so it will have to stand on it's own merits. If a better player recommends something else, then they might take his word over mine, and that is fine by me. At least I was honest.
This sport and this industry is tiny. A large percentage of the people working in it are doing it more for the passion of the sport than to build a solid money making career. They often spend their time and savings to create products that they really feel are beneficial to anyone who will give them a chance. They often will sponsor tournaments and players until they no longer can afford it. They spend money on advertising with billiard magazines and websites, they donate product.
They do that with a return on investment in mind. It's not all altruism, you know. I buy lots of stuff, but that's not a duty, either. Buy the things you want, slag off the things you think are stupid, thats capitalism and freedom.
Why should we shit on those people just because we INDIVIDUALLY don't agree with whatever they are selling? I mean if a person isn't scamming, they are genuinely promoting something they worked on and believe in, and that thing has good reviews then why dog them to the point that they get discouraged and driven away?
If people genuinly have a good product, then they'll eventually become successful. If a product is good, but underappreciated, I'll recommend it. But I (and others) have no duty to promote products I/we don't believe in or to keep silent about flaws in such products. I'm a player so my solidarity is first and foremost with my fellow players, not people doing their best to make a living off them.
I bought an ebook once that was horrible, essentially the lesson was "don't miss". To me that's a scam that deserves to be slammed. But when someone is genuine and sincere and has a product that is thoughtfully designed to help players get better we should just leave them alone to do their thing. If it turns out to be something really good then that will come through and if not it will wither and fade.
I have some basic respect for people trying to create things. It is very difficult to make something from the ground up. But a bad idea is a bad idea. No amount of shutting up will ever fix that.
We can give our opinions without being nasty and mean and rude. We can say things like "I think working on your stroke is more important than aiming" and leave it at that without having to attempt to discredit anyone's aiming system that they developed or refined.
What would be the point in that? Any such discussion would be completely hollow and without substance. You migth as well read ads, then.
And if you really want to "debunk" a method then get on the table and debate it. Let the creator defend himself ON THE TABLE to tackle the criticisms leveled. But that can also be done in a civil manner that is intended as a sincere exchange of ideas with the ultimate goal being to distill the information to the purest form so everyone can understand it.
Ok. If one were to do something like that, the creator would be up in arms about people "giving away" the system etc. So you'd have to remove all details...and we're back to pointless discussions again.
This is my point and will remain my point. All of who love pool generally love to play it more than we love to talk about it. And we like to think that we are on a journey to become the best players we can be and that we can always improve in some way. So be encouraging of anything that fosters more pool playing.

Stay in Stroke!

John

I'm happy to help anyone sincere about improving their game, if I feel I'm qualified to do so and if asked. I'd have nothing to say to an Orcollo or Hohmann for instance. But if some guy is flailing away and shooting into the cushions, I'd be happy to help in any way I can, including shutting up and letting him do whatever he wants. Some people don't want to work on their game. That's their perogative.

I have nothing really to gain from the advice I put out here. I tell nobody here my name. I get no respect, rather I get trolled and slagged off most of the time, and I've done things one here that took a lot of work. I did it because I wanted to help people do better and avoid my mistakes, not for any other reason. II'll never ask anyone for even a cent of their money. I don't think I'm unique in that regard. Most of us here are enthusiasts and we want to further the game. Even if I or others are misguided in some respects, I believe most have their heart in the right place. Most, not all.

You asked that I do not comment on your game, so I'll respect that. I also respect that you put it online for all to see, which IMO is a good thing. That way, people are free to reach their own conclusion based on evidence. I have a much harder time with doing that, because of privacy concerns. But I've never lied about what I am. I'm not a top player and never will be. I just dont' have the talent. But I've worked hard on my game, and I am competitive in my small pond, with plans of competing internationally soon (but with no hope of beating the best). I just want to be the best dead money I could be, lol. I feel my fundamentals are sound and based on correct ideas and I spent a lot of time learning and developing those ideas and putting them into practise. Those are my qualifications, nothing to brag about, but I worked hard for them and I'd be happy to let anyone read my notes if they wanted to avoid my mistakes and surpass my results.

If someone were to teach someone to get up off their shots, twist their cues etc online or at the pool hall, then I'll mostly shut up and observe. Sometimes I'll stand idly by while they teach their friends this rubbish, if I judge them to be non serious players and even if they are. One should know ones place in the pool hall. Do not give advice where it is not wanted.

This is a different medium and place. This is place of discussion. You have your Facebook where you can remove anyone who disagrees. That is fine by me. Really, that is a completely different medium. A medium for people who all agree with eachother and want to pat each other on the back. There is nothing wrong with that, if that is what you enjoy, you should do that.

This an open forum in principle, and if you follow the rules, that means you can give your opinions and advice. On here they stand on their own merits.

Also on the subject of stroking vs. aiming I've said all I can say in previous posts. A quick summary: I feel that the two are both aspects of the same whole. However I do feel that the largest potential for improvement is in improving ones stroke/fundamentals and that this is where one should start any serious effort of improving.

 

[JB Cases]

I'm happy to help anyone sincere about improving their game, if I feel I'm qualified to do so and if asked. I'd have nothing to say to an Orcollo or Hohmann for instance. But if some guy is flailing away and shooting into the cushions, I'd be happy to help in any way I can, including shutting up and letting him do whatever he wants. Some people don't want to work on their game. That's their perogative.

I have nothing really to gain from the advice I put out here. I tell nobody here my name. I get no respect, rather I get trolled and slagged off most of the time, and I've done things one here that took a lot of work. I did it because I wanted to help people do better and avoid my mistakes, not for any other reason. II'll never ask anyone for even a cent of their money. I don't think I'm unique in that regard. Most of us here are enthusiasts and we want to further the game. Even if I or others are misguided in some respects, I believe most have their heart in the right place. Most, not all.

You asked that I do not comment on your game, so I'll respect that. I also respect that you put it online for all to see, which IMO is a good thing. That way, people are free to reach their own conclusion based on evidence. I have a much harder time with doing that, because of privacy concerns. But I've never lied about what I am. I'm not a top player and never will be. I just dont' have the talent. But I've worked hard on my game, and I am competitive in my small pond, with plans of competing internationally soon (but with no hope of beating the best). I just want to be the best dead money I could be, lol. I feel my fundamentals are sound and based on correct ideas and I spent a lot of time learning and developing those ideas and putting them into practise. Those are my qualifications, nothing to brag about, but I worked hard for them and I'd be happy to let anyone read my notes if they wanted to avoid my mistakes and surpass my results.

If someone were to teach someone to get up off their shots, twist their cues etc online or at the pool hall, then I'll mostly shut up and observe. Sometimes I'll stand idly by while they teach their friends this rubbish, if I judge them to be non serious players and even if they are. One should know ones place in the pool hall. Do not give advice where it is not wanted.

This is a different medium and place. This is place of discussion. You have your Facebook where you can remove anyone who disagrees. That is fine by me. Really, that is a completely different medium. A medium for people who all agree with eachother and want to pat each other on the back. There is nothing wrong with that, if that is what you enjoy, you should do that.

This an open forum in principle, and if you follow the rules, that means you can give your opinions and advice. On here they stand on their own merits.

Also on the subject of stroking vs. aiming I've said all I can say in previous posts. A quick summary: I feel that the two are both aspects of the same whole. However I do feel that the largest potential for improvement is in improving ones stroke/fundamentals and that this is where one should start any serious effort of improving.

You can give your opinion. I said that. But if your opinion is tearing down someone else in the process then that is guaranteed to cause issues.

There is no need to cause animosity by labeling people as con artists, snake oil salesmen etc... simply because you individually don't think something works.

Yes, stroking, aiming, speed, spin, are all parts of the same whole. That's why when the topic is aiming it should stay on aiming. When the topic is stroke it should stay on stroke.

When the topic is execution then it's perfectly fine to ask can you shoot straight down a line consistently at all speeds?

All I said is don't go out your way to be an asshole...goes for everyone. And no not everyone is naive who asks questions...sometimes they simply want to find out who else has had experience with a product/method/system/technique and they are not looking for a long drawn out major flamewar that is based on nitpicking the language used by those with the experience the questioner is looking for.

I know you know that there are lots of folks who do not have any experience with the things they criticize and they go well beyond just giving their opinion into actual defamation. That's where the line is crossed IMO.

 

[JB Cases]

Also, so that I am NOT misunderstood. If you think something is not "worth" the price state why and move on without making claims that you can't prove.

"Doesn't work" - if you can't prove it then don't say it.
"Will hurt your game" - no way you can know that.
"Doesn't work as advertised" - again if you can't prove it don't say it.
"Don't waste your money" - one man's trash is another man's treasure.
"xyz is more important to your game than abc" - you can't possibly know what will be the catalyst that improves any individual's game.
"He is a con-artist" - no, selling a product does not make one a con-artist simply because you don't like the product.
"anyone who buys that is a lemming/sheep/religious kook...." - this one is an active insult to the buyers insinuating that you are smarter than them and telling them if they don't want to be thought of negatively they will stay away from the product. doesn't matter to you if the previous buyers who gave good testimonials are doctors, engineers, process control professionals etc...

And so on.... people just live and let live here. Let people create what they create in peace and let those who want to buy it buy it in peace and let them post their reviews and thoughts. And please stop only giving negative reviews all the weight. At least be fair and accept that people are generally able to judge the stuff they try and buy with some degree of accuracy. If a hit piece is done let the creator defend it instead of taking the hit piece as gospel to bludgeon everyone with. If a negative review is done let the creator answer the points raised and defend them.

I know you all have seen me defend my product on here from the occasional negative comments. I do everything in my power to prove that my product works as it should and so I should be able to adequately defend it. But how much harm would happen if someone posted a negative review that was not accurate, either innocently or maliciously and even though I was able to post a credible defense folks started simply sharing the negative review without the rebuttal as if that were the truth?

That's what it's come to in other areas. People literally using things like that as weapons to bring out during arguments regardless of previous rebuttals. We should be better than that.

 

[JB Cases]

Really......so quoting out of context is not mean and nasty nor trying to discredit anyone?

Purest form huh........then 1/2 ball hits don't exist....I offered proof by way of pic.....now.....you debunk my proof.

Duckie, I quoted you IN CONTEXT because YOUR context has zero practical use.

We use the term to describe how the hit looks from the shooter's perspective. Snooker coaches use it extensively and we all know that snooker coaches are revered for their insistence on form and accuracy.

You are a prime example of my point here. All you do is some here to stir up shit and DETRACT from the conversation.

Make up your own thread about your thoughts on pool, half-ball hits don't exist, put the cueball where it needs to be, the Arrow is the only tool one needs, systems are bunk...whatever....and then defend your position IN THAT thread instead of poisoning every other discussion with it.

And I would hope that everyone else could debate you without namecalling and insults. I have found myself truly angry with you over the years for the amount of outright defamation you have perpetrated.

If you want to debate the 1/2 ball hit and you don't think I should quote you then start your own thread on it and I will paste a link to that thread in my signature and you can explain to the whole planet in a thread dedicated to the "non-existence" of the universally accepted half-ball hit why you think it doesn't exist and why that's relevant.

 

[JoeyInCali]

Also on the subject of stroking vs. aiming I've said all I can say in previous posts. A quick summary: I feel that the two are both aspects of the same whole. However I do feel that the largest potential for improvement is in improving ones stroke/fundamentals and that this is where one should start any serious effort of improving.

Agreed.
But aiming systems have more commercial value than stroking/fundamentals when selling, I think.
And there is no proof these "modern" aiming systems are much better than what's already popularly being done imo.
And I keep seeing some who swear by these aiming systems still bend over and look at the contact point.

 

[cookie man]

Agreed.
But aiming systems have more commercial value than stroking/fundamentals when selling, I think.
And there is no proof these "modern" aiming systems are much better than what's already popularly being done imo.
And I keep seeing some who swear by these aiming systems still bend over and look at the contact point.

But looking at the contact point doesn't discount anything the system does. CTE still gets me to that exact point much more consistently. Your way, whatever that is, probably gets you to that point more consistently. The "way" that does that for the individual player is the way that's right for that person.

 

[cookie man]

Agreed.
But aiming systems have more commercial value than stroking/fundamentals when selling, I think.
And there is no proof these "modern" aiming systems are much better than what's already popularly being done imo.
And I keep seeing some who swear by these aiming systems still bend over and look at the contact point.

There have been a lot of stroke trainers sold throughout the years. No different then the different aiming systems. Most teachers will teach both, stroke and aiming.

 

[JB Cases]

Exactly. I have yet to see a single aiming system critic post anything negative about any stroke training device, most of which cost far more than any aiming system books or DVDs.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

 

[JoeyInCali]

Exactly. I have yet to see a single aiming system critic post anything negative about any stroke training device, most of which cost far more than any aiming system books or DVDs.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

How many did you buy?
Most just use plastic bottle.
Lined up hole reinforcers are better.
And the one asking for $100 was made fun of here.

 

[stan shuffett]

Agreed.
But aiming systems have more commercial value than stroking/fundamentals when selling, I think.
And there is no proof these "modern" aiming systems are much better than what's already popularly being done imo.
And I keep seeing some who swear by these aiming systems still bend over and look at the contact point.

Real CTE has about as much to do with contact points as a newspaper does with swatting flies. CTE is NOT for contact points in any way. When one's vision is used correctly contact points do not even enter the picture. They are about as useless as a smashed up watch. I can't remember the last time that I tried to engage a contact point.

Stan Shuffett

 

[JoeyInCali]

Real CTE has about as much to do with contact points as a newspaper does with swatting flies. CTE is NOT for contact points in any way. When one's vision is used correctly contact points do not even enter the picture. They are about as useless as a smashed up watch. I can't remember the last time that I tried to engage a contact point.

Stan Shuffett

Then those people aren't using CTE.
Like Cookie Man .

 

[stan shuffett]

Then those people aren't using CTE.
Like Cookie Man .

Of course, Cookie uses CTE just like I used CTE at the U S OPEN in 2011.

Having said that, my knowledge is many times stronger now because of my untold thousands of hours of work with my eyes at a table for unraveling every last layer.

Contact points could be used with CTE but it would rank 4th out of the four approaches that I know that are based off of the same foundation. CTE is not really for contact points.

I will be explaining all of this for free for everyone to take a gander at once my book is completed.

Stan Shuffett

 

[JB Cases]

How many did you buy?
Most just use plastic bottle.
Lined up hole reinforcers are better.
And the one asking for $100 was made fun of here.

The point is that "stroke" trainers are given a pass (as they should be) while aiming systems are panned (as they shouldn't be).

why is a plastic bottle useful? What type of bottle? what height and diameter of the opening? is there anything better? Could anything better be discovered or invented?

how would you know if something is better for stroke training or not?

This all goes back to my original points....it's not a question of stroke vs. aiming, they are both important components of a complete game and whatever people create to help with either aspect is done primarily to help people improve those aspects not to cheat them out of money and get nothing in return.

 

[JB Cases]

Agreed.
But aiming systems have more commercial value than stroking/fundamentals when selling, I think.
And there is no proof these "modern" aiming systems are much better than what's already popularly being done imo.
And I keep seeing some who swear by these aiming systems still bend over and look at the contact point.

How would you know what any person is looking at?

What would you accept as proof?

What is proof to you that any method of learning to stroke is better than any other method?

The thing is that if someone says that they did xyz and got better then the only way to PROVE that they got better is to either know what their level was before XYZ or have some kind of test results before and after xyz or see a definite record of higher finishes or see a jump in objective ratings.

in many human endeavors the effectiveness of any method is measured through results following adoption of the method.

So in the absence of any formal study and formal measurement all we have to prove effectiveness is anecdotal testimonial and historical data. I.e. Someone does xyz and says that they are better and then gets results that show a higher level of skill. If we don't think that there is some other reason for the improvement then we are left with xyz.

My point is that in the absence of rigorous study why bother to drive those away who only seek to help people get better? Those people spend their time and money creating things that they feel will help pool players raise their skill level, why drive them away.

Imagine if there was a group of people who decided they were going to hang out in the cuemaker's forum and say that no one needs a custom cue, any cue from walmart for $39 is enough to play high level pool with. They were adamant about this no matter how much anecdotal evidence was provided, no matter how much technical evidence was provided, no matter how much data on quality and durability was provided. Instead they simply said a cue is a cue is a cue and would literally interject that assertion into every conversation until the amount of cuemakers willing to argue the point dwindled and the participation in the cuemaker's group fell off considerably. Would that not be detrimental to the art of cuemaking if such people made it a sort of mission to disrupt every discussion about cues that had the purpose of creating higher level precision instruments to play the game with?

 

[JB Cases]

And Joey I am not trying to be confrontational. I want peace and a live and let live attitude here.

 

[JoeyInCali]

The point is that "stroke" trainers are given a pass (as they should be) while aiming systems are panned (as they shouldn't be).

why is a plastic bottle useful? What type of bottle? what height and diameter of the opening? is there anything better? Could anything better be discovered or invented?

how would you know if something is better for stroke training or not?

This all goes back to my original points....it's not a question of stroke vs. aiming, they are both important components of a complete game and whatever people create to help with either aspect is done primarily to help people improve those aspects not to cheat them out of money and get nothing in return.

You didn't buy one. I didn't buy one.
And nobody is hyping them.
So, nobody is really criticizing them.

The natural stroke has a dip at the end. So, you can pretty much throw away all those tube trainers.

Not arguing aim vs stroke.
Just saying aiming systems are more sellable than stroking/fundamentals .
Heck, there is no stroking or PSR section here is there?

 

[Straightpool_99]

The point is that "stroke" trainers are given a pass (as they should be) while aiming systems are panned (as they shouldn't be).

why is a plastic bottle useful? What type of bottle? what height and diameter of the opening? is there anything better? Could anything better be discovered or invented?

how would you know if something is better for stroke training or not?

This all goes back to my original points....it's not a question of stroke vs. aiming, they are both important components of a complete game and whatever people create to help with either aspect is done primarily to help people improve those aspects not to cheat them out of money and get nothing in return.

I've yet to try a pool training/performance gadget that isn't complete crap or unnecessary, with one exception.

Joe Tuckers third eye trainer = crap, broke the second day
Buddy Halls cue guide = crap, effect can be duplicated with the simplest of means. Can hurt your game if used incorrectly.
Practise Pro pocket reducers= way to tight of a pocket, can be used for certain shots, but will ruin your stroke if you play extensively. Also mine lauch themselves out of the pocket at random times and also block you from shooting out of the pocket when they stay in place. They get in the way a lot. I have used these a lot, so I guess I got my money's worth out of them, and the build quality is ok. I'm working on modifying mine to be better. I don't really recommend them as is, but they're not crap.
Limbsaver= crap
That spring cue thingy= absolute crap
Aim trainer= crap (it'st the ting with an arrow that is supposed to point at the cueball and it shows you the fractional hit)
Every snooker gadget ever made= complete rubbish
So, no, they don't get any sort of pass from me. I hate the idea of gadgets, actually, for serious training. They are crutches designed to make you do things a certain way, but that way may not be the way forward for you, also you have to know exactly how to use it to get any effect. Cue trainers like Buddy Halls' will get your stroke sort of straight, but if you're doing something wrong in your stroke to begin with, you risk grooving that into your technique and it gets harder to remove. If you have to put something on your cue or your person, then that thing is a distraction and a crutch that very possibly could hurt your game in the long run. I would recommend against them, unless you have a very specific training purpose for them that you have thought through in advance.

 

[JB Cases]

Lol...And yet others have given glowing testimonials of these products so who is right?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

 

[Straightpool_99]

Lol...And yet others have given glowing testimonials of these products so who is right?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

It's a discussion, not a math problem. Also mine and others opinions change after we've used items for a certain amount of time. Some of these items I was initially positive about, but after using them my opinion changed.

 

[Dan White]

I've yet to try a pool training/performance gadget that isn't complete crap or unnecessary, with one exception.

I don't know if you consider this one a gadget, but I have one that's quality and works. It's the Jim Rempe training ball. Chalk marks stick lightly to the ball as they should, yet generally wipe off easily. Ball rolls true and seems like a quality product. I don't use mine often, but when I do it has been very helpful. It gives you insights that using a regular cue ball or an object ball just can't do.

Now, having said that, I can say that the "instruction manual" for the ball is complete crap. Get this one: they advertise something like a "51 page instruction manual!" What they don't tell you is that the manual is in three languages of 17 pages each! I laughed out loud after scratching my head when I realized that.