My point was that no aiming system is going to fix inconsistent flaws in fundamentals, and it wasn't directed toward you. I was just agreeing with JC about how players get "stuck" and wonder why they can't improve. It doesn't matter what aiming method they use, if they struggle with faulty mechanics and an inconsistent stroke, no aiming system will magically fix that and get them unstuck.
It's like that kid with the guitar lesson... He wanted to know how to play certain songs, but he didn't want to spend any time learning fundamentals and developing the skills needed to really play those songs.
Sometimes pool players are like this guitar kid -- we want to be great players, but many of us simply don't do the things that we should do in order to get better. We think aiming systems and $500 shafts and the hottest tips will get us there, but the problem isn't in the tools we use. It's in way we use them.
And then there are the players that were once very good, but due to the often conflicting choices and responsibilities that comes with life, they quit playing as often, which sounds like you, JB. They might even start developing a few bad habits when they do happen to play, because they just aren't into anymore. I have friends like this. One guy was a top notch player 25 years ago and then just disappeared. I hadn't seen him in 20yrs, then a couple of years ago he started coming around and I didn't recognize him. The fat man had gone slim. And along with losing all that weight, he lost his game too.
I understood you. But you were also agreeing with his premise which is that players with less than perfect form should not bother with aiming systems, which he derisively calls magic pills.
The guitar kid didn't want to be a great player. He wanted to play one song and thought he could learn enough to play that song without learning how to fundamentally play the guitar. People who WANT to become great players do what it takes to become great players. People who want some improvement in some aspects of their game will look for ways to improve those aspects.
Before I learned about objective aiming from Hal directly I would try to improve my aiming on a shot by shot basis. Literally the week before Hal sought me out I spent several hours on the table with my friend Chris McDaniel working on a specific shot that I had been having trouble with. In practice I got to the point where I could make it 70-80% of the time. Just brute force trial and error adjustments. But in game situations where I had an elevated tension, i.e. where missing hurt me then my success percentage dropped considerably. The variable there was not lack of practice. The variable was pressure.
Then, after learning that first system from Hal, that shot became way way way less stressful for me. My confidence with it in game situations improved tremendously. The reason my confidence went way up is because my success percentage in game situations went up. I no longer dreaded or avoided that shot and instead embraced it, played position for it even. And when my opponents started to see that that shot and similarly looking "hard" shots didn't produce anxiety and that I was making them more often it changed how they played me. When such shots were no longer somewhat of a safety because of the high chance of badly missing them they were forced to start playing actual safeties. I tried to explain this in near real time as it was unfolding and got nothing but ridicule from many of the same people giving out the ridicule today.
That whole dynamic, being told I was self-deluded, told that I was now a cult-member and a religious zealot, caused me to have more stress at a time when I just wanted to enjoy the benefits I was experiencing ON THE TABLE and share those experiences with others. And this same dynamic continues to this day on this forum. It doesn't happen this way on Facebook and Reddit and other discussion forums where the antagonists from 20 years ago are still doing the exact same thing that they were doing back then. JC's initial post has some merit to it but is built on the WRONG premise. You agreeing with that premise and agreeing with him that I am somehow deluded is exactly the type of sentiment that produces resentment and drama.
Have you ever seen me knock your poolology system? Ever seen me tell someone not to waste their time with it unless they have a perfect stroke? Would you ever require a customer to send you a video of them doing a specific test to determine whether their fundamentals are good enough to be allowed to purchase your book? I doubt that you would do that. And I think it is because you fundamentally understand that regardless of what a person's form is like having a way to calculate the right shot line is beneficial and that the better their form gets the more benefit they will get from your method.
JC could have made a post called the importance of form and made his point without denigrating a single person. Instead he deliberately chose to denigrate YOU and Stan and every aiming system teacher along with every aiming system student who does not possess the arbitrary level of form that he thinks is sufficient.
Let's go back to your example of showing someone a shot that their form is not ready to produce consistent results on. The fact is that by them experiencing it in real life they now know what's possible. And by having you explain to them that although you have shown them WHAT to do they need to improve their form to be able to to do it consistently you have opened a door for them. Whether they step through it is on them but that knowledge of the possible doesn't go away. They will either stay where they are and talk about the guy they met who could do this shot every time or they will become the guy that can do it every time. Either way your effort in taking the time to show an interested person the right way to do it was not wasted, nor was their interest misplaced.
Jose Parica gave me a lesson and he asked me to tell him what I wanted to learn. I said I wanted to learn how to feather a ball. He demonstrated it and I butchered it. Rinse and repeat. It wasn't until I was able to take the time to practice by myself and spend a good bit of time absorbing his advice that I finally got much better at that part of my game. I had tried to figure it out on my own and not been able to get consistent results. But his example and advice PLUS my dedicated practice was what I needed to figure it out.
I think you and JC have the wrong impression of what players think. I have never heard a single person say that a CF shaft, or a LD shaft, would turn them into a champion. I have heard them say that they noticed that they are performing better with better equipment. I once made a comment that I felt that I was three balls better after learning Hal's aiming system. Maybe three balls was just the exuberance talking but the feeling was genuine. And the improved results I was getting on the table were genuine. I am positive that when you discovered how to calculate the shot line you had a HOLY F moment where you thought you might never miss again. You clearly think that your method works accurately and is worth the asking price if not more.
I am certain that you don't see your system as a magic pill but JC does. JC thinks that I am a self-deluded hack who is chasing "magic pill" aiming systems which includes yours. So can I get my money back from you because I bought your book?
Kidding. Your information is part of my library and I don't see it as not worth the money or had any expectation that it would be a magic pill to improve my game substantially. When I tried it I found that it works but that I personally didn't find it as comfortable as other methods I know. However given that it works I am positive that some users are getting great benefit regardless of their stroke technique. Do you agree or disagree?
