Holding visual focus

[The_JV]

My CB is real, and a ghostball is similar, but it negates things like CIT, the effects of english and such. Ghost ball still requires feel. I don't want to imagine a ghostball because it doesn't have the "feel" that my CB does.

Maybe this is where I differ... I don't 'feel' shots, and I don't use a ghost ball in the typical "CIT doesn't exist" manner.

I play by the shear will of HAMB. If some want to consider subconcious HAMB, "feel" then that's their point of view. When I use a ghost ball to develop my aim line, it's only with all the necessary shot corrections in the equation, squirt/swerve/CIT. That's only possible when down on the ball imo.

 

[boogieman]

Maybe this is where I differ... I don't 'feel' shots, and I don't use a ghost ball in the typical "CIT doesn't exist" manner.

I figured as much. I think your method is 100% valid. I got the ghost ball out of the picture as I felt for me personally it was just another thing to think about. I'm definitely not saying my method is best or even good, just trying to describe what I think is going on when I aim and shoot and how it relates to holding visual focus. Good players who use some version of ghost ball know there are adjustments required, whether they do it with formulas and fractions, or HAMB know-how. I'm mainly a HAMB guy but I just see the backside of the OB instead. I could probably visualize ghost ball and do the same thing I'm doing now as far as stance/stroke etc. The more I think about it, the OB almost functions as my ghost ball. Heck, it might even be parallel aiming but I honestly can't explain it well. Whatever it is, it wouldn't work without HAMB. I usually have limited attention span so for me picking the back and hitting it just works.

I think our methods sound really similar just I don't visualize the ghost. I call it "feeling" the CB, but it's basically a soup of visualization, spatial awareness of CB, and hitting it how HAMB tells me to. The line between visual/sight based visualization and "feel" is somewhat blurry, at least for me. We take practice strokes to calibrate the shot. I'd call that getting a "feel" even if it's probably not technically what's going on. We're getting our body ready to hit how we know it needs hit through our experiences. To me it really seems like I'm feeling how to hit the ball. When I aim properly and keep visual focus on whatever it is I'm aiming at, stroke, stance, etc. falls in line. When I lose visual focus on where I'm aiming, my stance feels off, and usually ends in some body english, chicken winging, etc.

If some want to consider subconcious HAMB, "feel" then that's their point of view.

Fair enough! I don't really think we're saying anything incompatible, just different points of view and maybe some liberties with the language on my part.

I propose that when down on a shot and it feels off (stand up and re-chalk) the whole exercise of standing up is to regain the visual focus that was lost.

 

[Imac007]

What switching my focus early (2-3 feathers before shooting) has done, is instilled confidence in my mechanics and ability to set up the shot. I don't need to verify my faith. That "god I hope this works" transistion of focus is being minimized. Not gone, but doubt is taking a back seat.

Most of the realisations above seem to be born from a relatively weak minded player, but it's really just an honest disclosure of what's going on.

Part of the process of teaching players the mental part of the game while learning means pairing certainty with the shot.
Doubt resides on the scale of certainty.
Confidence lies on the same scale.
When we first learn to play, balls near the pocket are the ones we are most certain of making.
Part of learning is expanding the circle around the hole to which we attach absolute certa8nty.
Our stroke and whole process, is different, in that certainty circle.
That cue goes straight through, no hesitation, totally committed.
We know the ball is going in.
Developing players involves widening that circle of shots they can look at and simply pocket.
Teaching players to attach certainty to those shots is how that sense of confidence eventually spreads across the full range of shots.
One trick is to get your head in a place, on the sight line, where the certainty level is ratcheted up.
Or think about something of which you are absolutely certain.
Hold onto that feeling when you get down to deliver the cue.
Hippocrates advice seems appropriate here, it falls under the “do no harm” label.
Basically what can it hurt.
Try it, it may surprise you what it can do to your whole approach and stroke.

 

[duckie]

Playing 14.1 and your opponent freezes the CB to the rack of 14 balls.....describe how you determine where to place the CB.

Ball is hanging in the pocket but you can only go rail first to make it.......kick shot Describe how you determine where to hit the rail.

Ball is hanging in the pocket but only can be made by caroming the CB off another ball. Describe how you determine where to hit the carom ball.

 

[The_JV]

When we first learn to play, balls near the pocket are the ones we are most certain of making.
Part of learning is expanding the circle around the hole to which we attach absolute certa8nty.

Developing players involves widening that circle of shots they can look at and simply pocket.

One trick is to get your head in a place, on the sight line, where the certainty level is ratcheted up.
Or think about something of which you are absolutely certain.
Hold onto that feeling when you get down to deliver the cue.

I was hoping that my disclosure of honesty wouldn't lead to some comments on my perceived lack of confidence. You're going to have to trust me when I say the one thing I'm not lacking in, is confidence in my ability to do what I choose to on a pool table. The comment I made about the "god I hope this works" transistion from aim to shot, is the merely the leap of faith we all take when shooting. I'm not actively thinking that.

Yesterday for shits and giggles I took some shots blind. Typical PSR and fine tuning of aim. ...but instead of closing my eyes just before pulling the trigger, I opted to the feather the cue a handful more times. Went 6 for 6 with various shot types. Big whoop really. Solid mechanics makes the whole thing pedestrian. However it's another good way to build faith in one's ability to sight shots and hold with their fundamentals. Also sheds light on how little the finishing focus really means if you're locked in once determining aim.

To the bolded comment above...:
If I you mean to minimize a long shot by focusing instead on a shorter section of the aim line (sight line?). Then yes, this is something I already do when the OB isn't in full view. This is a throw back from my snooker days for me. Same approach when jacked up for whatever reason. I think they may have been mentioned earlier in the thread. It may go without saying but the longer you can make this 'shortened' aim line the more you can count on it's accuracy.

 

[Imac007]

To the bolded comment above...:
If I you mean to minimize a long shot by focusing instead on a shorter section of the aim line (sight line?). Then yes, this is something I already do when the OB isn't in full view. This is a throw back from my snooker days for me. Same approach when jacked up for whatever reason. I think they may have been mentioned earlier in the thread. It may go without saying but the longer you can make this 'shortened' aim line the more you can count on it's accuracy.

You got my drift, on the bolded part.
The bit about your confidence was noted in the first reading.
My comment was based on a reminder, to me once, that there are typically hundreds of views of these threads.
Players of lesser talent, at the moment, may wonder how to get to the level you mentioned.
That was my target audience.
There are other ways to ratchet up confidence, not mentioned.
Reference lines can also be used.
An adaptation of an idea I got from golfer Jack Nicklaus is one.
To find an angle, start from a known angle.
If that angle is an overcut or undercut, choose a second known angle on the opposite side of the pocket.
Now start a process of altering the angle slightly from both perspectives, inching the new freshly calculated reference lines ever closer to the desired angle.
Once found compare that to your normal aim line using your normal methods.
Having two different ways that arrive at the same line, raises certainty and with it confidence.
I felt like your "god I hope this works" comment found a larger empathic audience than what you may have thought

During my reading of the comments a picture of snooker player, Mark Williams came to mind.
He was playing a table length, very thin skim off the rack, for safety.
A replay showed he played the shot perfectly, one handed, with his eyes closed.
Once aligned, there is no need to look at either ball, and as a lot of what has been written here has said, trusting in a measured straight stroke is all that is needed.

 

[The_JV]

Players of lesser talent, at the moment, may wonder how to get to the level you mentioned.
That was my target audience.

Understood... I guess it's a little self centered of me, but I don't consider the viewing masses when conversing with someone specifically.

Once aligned, there is no need to look at either ball, and as a lot of what has been written here has said, trusting in a measured straight stroke is all that is needed.

Exactly... However it still seems to be a battle to realize and adhere to this trust when at the table.

 

[BC21]

Maybe this is where I differ... I don't 'feel' shots, and I don't use a ghost ball in the typical "CIT doesn't exist" manner.

I play by the shear will of HAMB. If some want to consider subconcious HAMB, "feel" then that's their point of view. When I use a ghost ball to develop my aim line, it's only with all the necessary shot corrections in the equation, squirt/swerve/CIT. That's only possible when down on the ball imo.

I believe "feel" can simply be described as recognizing the proper aim. I mean, when you're facing any shot you absolutely must be able to know or to recognize whether or not you "feel" like you are aligned properly to pocket the ball.

That's the only definition of "feel" that makes sense to me when it comes to aiming.

 

[The_JV]

I believe "feel" can simply be described as recognizing the proper aim. I mean, when you're facing any shot you absolutely must be able to know or to recognize whether or not you "feel" like you are aligned properly to pocket the ball.

That's the only definition of "feel" that makes sense to me when it comes to aiming.

I have given more thought to what I would consider 'feel'. The only time I play by 'feel' (if you will), is when I'm really doing something that defies my HAMB database...lol.

Case in point would be a masse shot. Which I consider the last hope to the fully bewildered. Sure there's tiny swerves that can be responsibly played, but a masse shot really begs for a bad outcome. Literally everything that's out of your control is in play. Cloth, balls, humidity, residual CB spin inducing OB throw, etc... When I play a masse shot, I have a decent guess at the amount of squirt I can expect, the amount of return swerve and the distance before it will take is all guess work (aka:feel). Aim....?..., forget about it.

 

[boogieman]

My personal definition of that wouldn't be feel, it would be a guess or hope if you will to get the desired outcome. You're extrapolating data and applying it to a situation you're not comfortable/certain with. When I have these shots, I say I don't have the feel, though I'm intently observing the results to add it to my HAMB database. I guess feel could be described as following the correct prescription for making the shot and you know it is going in. It's not "feel" as in touching stuff or hoping, but feel as in you're confident enough you could shoot it with your eyes closed. It's going in 100% without a doubt. The shot is calibrated and you know or feel that it is going in with certainty.

Feel doesn't mean you're not aiming, it's not meaning by rote, it means the shot is going in and you know it. Some might apply fractions to get this effect, some just use HAMB know-how, basically whatever aiming system you use can be plugged into what I mean. When you have the feel for the shot it's going in.

 

[The_JV]

My personal definition of that wouldn't be feel, it would be a guess or hope if you will to get the desired outcome.....
When you have the feel for the shot it's going in.

See that's why I don't by into the whole 'feel' thing. Easiest way to put it is I'm cold an calculatted when I shoot. I do the math, apply the variables, adjust accordingly and pull the trigger. When I'm playing my best these things are still conciously done. The 'zone' / 'feel' part of my game, isn't my best, just auto-pilot.

When I use 'feel' to equate my masse attempts it's exactly that. No real math, guess work at the variables, shooting based on how I think the table/balls are going to react. I'm sure my take on 'feel' would be different than anyone that subscribes to it as a good/ideal way to play. Who am I to judge though.

 

[BC21]

I have given more thought to what I would consider 'feel'. The only time I play by 'feel' (if you will), is when I'm really doing something that defies my HAMB database...lol.

Case in point would be a masse shot. Which I consider the last hope to the fully bewildered. Sure there's tiny swerves that can be responsibly played, but a masse shot really begs for a bad outcome. Literally everything that's out of your control is in play. Cloth, balls, humidity, residual CB spin inducing OB throw, etc... When I play a masse shot, I have a decent guess at the amount of squirt I can expect, the amount of return swerve and the distance before it will take is all guess work (aka:feel). Aim....?..., forget about it.

That's understandable.

Consider this.... Let's say you're driving along a scenic mountain highway in a convertible car, or on a motorcycle, and it's your first trip on this particular stretch of road. There are plenty of dips and rises and curves and switchbacks. Up ahead in the distance, you see a shimmering light.
No....stop....that's Hotel California, by the Eagles.

Ok, so you don't see a shimmering light. You see that the road curves to the left and disappears beneath the treeline. You're an experienced driver (or rider) and have maneuvered thousands of curvy roads over the years. It's what you do for enjoyment or for the rush of it. Anyway, as soon as you start into the curve you realize it's sharper than you initially thought, so you slow down a little to keep from running off the road and sliding sideways over the hillside. For a brief second you probably feel pretty tense, or experience a good shot of adrenaline. And you like it. Then a second later you're coming out of the curve perfectly, completely under control.

Food for thought: FEEL gets you through the curve.

The conscious mind is always monitoring the subconscious neural networks we've hardwired to memory. And when real-time inputs don't quite match up to the neural network that our subconscious fires up, it gets rejected and the subconscious immediately fires up another network. The neural network gets approved for action only when the conscious mind says, "Ok, that looks right" or "that feels right".

So, basically, everything is feel. Not physical feel, but mental feel. Every memory we store has an element of emotion/feel attached to it. And when recalling a memory for the purpose of associating a current situation with a past situation, it either feels right or it doesn't.

 

[boogieman]

See that's why I don't by into the whole 'feel' thing. Easiest way to put it is I'm cold an calculatted when I shoot. I do the math, apply the variables, adjust accordingly and pull the trigger. When I'm playing my best these things are still conciously done. The 'zone' / 'feel' part of my game, isn't my best, just auto-pilot.

When I use 'feel' to equate my masse attempts it's exactly that. No real math, guess work at the variables, shooting based on how I think the table/balls are going to react. I'm sure my take on 'feel' would be different than anyone that subscribes to it as a good/ideal way to play. Who am I to judge though.

Yep, if 10 different people explain what they are doing and you'll likely get 10 different answers, even if all 10 use the same method. I'm loving the discussion in this thread. I enjoy hearing different ideas and testing them, even if it's just a mental exercise. If you have 10 different instructors telling you things, much will be dismissed as BS, not necessarily because they don't work for the instructor, just they don't relate to what makes us individually tick on the table. Out of those 10 people, you never know what you might pick up that can actually be useful and added to improve your game.

 

[The_JV]

Anyway, as soon as you start into the curve you realize it's sharper than you initially thought, so you slow down a little to keep from running off the road and sliding sideways over the hillside. For a brief second you probably feel pretty tense, or experience a good shot of adrenaline. And you like it. Then a second later you're coming out of the curve perfectly, completely under control.

Food for thought: FEEL gets you through the curve.

Interesting analogy, and I am an experienced rider that also graduated preliminary race school. Here's my take on your analogy based on my riding experience...

Prior to race school I would have entered the corner from where the license handbook tells me to be in the lane. I would have shit my pants and attempted to slow down as you said. That would have stood up the bike and I would have squeezed out a little more shit. What I wouldn't have known is what my bike could actually do phyiscally.

Post race school, I would have entered the blind corner wide and crossed over my lane to square it off. I would have then see how much sharper it is, and dropped my knee. Gotten out of the corner on the throttle, pissed off that I wasn't aware of how much more aggressively I could have taken it....

Sheer fortunate happenstance gets me through the corner in example one, (I've been behind buddies who weren't so fortunate). HAMC (corners) rips me through the same corner with example two. The difference isn't feel, although I'm sure we can split the hair further. It's experience and knowledge.

I understand what some people consider feel. I just dont equate a part of my game to that definition.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

... I don't by into the whole 'feel' thing. Easiest way to put it is I'm cold an calculatted when I shoot. I do the math, apply the variables, adjust accordingly and pull the trigger.

And after you've done all your calculations you finally know to pull the trigger when the alignment "looks right".

That experience-based recognition is what's meant by "feel". The system steps and/or calculations can get you pretty close to there, but you only finally know you're there by feel.

pj
chgo

 

[The_JV]

And after you've done all your calculations you finally know to pull the trigger when the alignment "looks right".

That experience-based recognition is what's meant by "feel". The system steps and/or calculations can get you pretty close to there, but you only finally know you're there by feel.

pj
chgo

So when you add 2+2, does the answer of 4 feel right...?..., or do you just straight up know it is....?

Much like I don't feel 4=2+2. I don't feel shots are correct before I pull the trigger. You can think of my mind set like the dog fight scenes from Top Gun (hopefully not dating myself too badly there). Targeting system scanning for the bogey, until finally they get tone. Either it's right or not. There's no room for 'feel' in my binary world.

There's no dictionary definition of the word "feel" that equates to the way I play the game.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

There's no dictionary definition of the word "feel" that equates to the way I play the game.

"Feel" in this context doesn't mean you actually feel anything. It's a figure of speech for subconscious recognition - like "I feel it's this, not that."

pj
chgo

 

[BC21]

So when you add 2+2, does the answer of 4 feel right...?..., or do you just straight up know it is....?

Much like I don't feel 4=2+2. I don't feel shots are correct before I pull the trigger. You can think of my mind set like the dog fight scenes from Top Gun (hopefully not dating myself too badly there). Targeting system scanning for the bogey, until finally they get tone. Either it's right or not. There's no room for 'feel' in my binary world.

There's no dictionary definition of the word "feel" that equates to the way I play the game.

The top gun analogy is cool, but that's a computer system that is programmed to know 100% when the target is locked in. The human mind doesn't operate like that, not even with something as simple as 2+2=4.

Numbers are stored in the mind as explicit memories. Explicit memories are facts and figures and all the acquired knowledge we have, as well as memories of events and experiences we've had. It's stuff that can be recalled by conscious thought.

The actual task of performing math is done by use of implicit memories, the networks that we've developed which allow us to perform skills and talents.

When we see or hear "2+2=", the conscious mind pulls the numbers and the mathematical signs from explicit memory and into the working area of the brain (our short term memory).
This triggers the subconscious to fire up the required math skill, which resides in our implicit memory, and the calculation is done and the subconscious provides 4 as the answer.

The conscious mind then recalls (from explicit memory) it's knowledge of the number 4. And it can then accept or reject 4 as the correct answer. The conscious mind can easily perform the task of 2+2 on its own. After all, that's how the subconscious math skill was developed in the first place, through repetitive conscious effort.

So the conscious mind can doublecheck the solution provided by the subconscious, and whether or not this is done is a matter of how we consciously feel about the answer 4. Just because the subconscious came up with 4 doesn't mean it's correct.

Look at 2 + 3 × 3.... If you have poorly developed math skills, your subconscious might give 15 as the answer. And when your conscious mind pulls 15 into the working area it can accept or reject that answer, based on whether or not it feels like it's correct. Your knowledge of math and numbers and your logical thinking process kicks in. If you've acquired adequate mathematical knowledge, you'll realize 15 is wrong. If you lack adequate mathematical knowledge your conscious thought might be...."fifteen....yes. It's fifteen." You'll feel like you're correct, but the answer is really 11.

Feel is always being used, but it's only as accurate as your skills and knowledge make it. And when your skills and knowledge are excellent, it can seem like feel is no longer involved. But the conscious mind is always doublechecking the subconscious process, though if there's too much going on in the working area of the brain, the conscious might slip up occassionally and let the subconscious perform totally unchecked. Sometimes this works out well, and other times, like with 2 + 3 × 3, it doesn't turn out well.

Damn....this was long. Sorry.

 

[Imac007]

So when you add 2+2, does the answer of 4 feel right...?..., or do you just straight up know it is....?

Much like I don't feel 4=2+2. I don't feel shots are correct before I pull the trigger. You can think of my mind set like the dog fight scenes from Top Gun (hopefully not dating myself too badly there). Targeting system scanning for the bogey, until finally they get tone. Either it's right or not. There's no room for 'feel' in my binary world.

There's no dictionary definition of the word "feel" that equates to the way I play the game.

Each of us have a consciousness profile, just as we have a handedness and dominant eye preference.
The hand and eye dominance are binary in nature while consciousness is tertiary.
There is a sense dominant in each level.
My profile is AVK
K stands for kinesthetic, the feel component in play here.
Since my feel component resides in my unconscious, I can relate to this.
I can bring elements of feel into consciousness but not in a way that contributes to the whole and the unconscious is the home of wholes.
I can, in an observer role, experience my stroke, but it needs to happen, in play, on the trust non-interference level in order for execution to flow.
There are 6 such consciousness profiles, each with implications for individual players.

 

[The_JV]

"Feel" in this context doesn't mean you actually feel anything. It's a figure of speech for subconscious recognition - like "I feel it's this, not that."

Yes I understand, and once again on this forum I forced to point out that I choose to use the actual definition of words when either using or reading them. I don't have the AZB decoder ring. I'm not trying to be difficult, just concise.

As far as your figure of speech goes. Yes I also agree that that's most likely what people think of on AZB when considering feel. When I'm playing at my best (which is what we are discusssing at the moment), I do not actively rely on the subconcious recognition of a successful shot. Now seeing as this is a subconcious activity it could easily be said that I'm simply not aware of it, and I wouldn't be able to argue against that point. What I can tell you, is when I am playing my best, every step is called, calculated, performed. There's no grey area in which some task just happens.

What I am comparing it to, is my game when I'm simply free wheeling. I, like I would assume people on this forum, have a mode of game wherein I just walk around the table drop down to the next shot and fire everything in the pocket. This auto-pilot is what I would consider playing by "feel". No real effort put into PSR, aim, variable adjustments, etc....