Depends on the school. I learned (basic) computer design from instructors who went on to make a lot of money designing.
And are you saying that I can't play?
Why do lower level players make instructional videos for you tube????
- Thread starter judochoke
- Start date
And are you saying that I can't play?
This is Abraham Lincoln.
I've been accused of too much talk before action in some of my early videos. At the most I think it was about 3min of talking in one video before I shot the shot. That video has over 240k views and 85% positive feedback. And for every negative comment like, "Just shoot the shot already!", there are close to10 comments praising the concise, detailed explanation, the how's and why's of what is going on. Still yet, I appreciate all feedback and have since then worked on limiting the chatter in newer videos.
I think much of society has become addicted to immediate satisfaction. This is reflected in movies, tv shows, video games, youtube clips, tiktok, books, etc... We have been conditioned to be impatient, to want entertainment or reward without delay, without any backstory or setup or explanation that might eliminate any ambiguity and provide a little context for understanding.
And all too often, whenever a video is stripped of "blah blah blah", the info gets misinterpreted or misunderstood. And the same people who complain about too much talking then complain about the lack of details or intention or context. It's a difficult catch 22 situation to navigate. Well, not really, because I've noticed that only about 1 or 2 in 10 viewers are too impatient to wait 3 minutes or so for a little setup or explanation of what the video is about. So catering more toward the other 80-90% or so makes more sense.
Last edited:
The Blah blah blah I was referring to is usually chatter about something that has absolutely nothing to do with why the video was made in the first place. That's what bugs me.
Example... Let's just say I was going to make a video on how to make a bank shot. Before I even get to it, I start discussing the history of pool. If I want to watch the history of pool, I'll watch a video that is called "The History of Pool." That's the blah, blah, blah, I was talking about.
Short and concise is generally better for people to digest. YouTube doesn’t have much to do with it, rather it’s because people can only take in so much information at once. Remember that learning styles video where the presenter at the end demonstrated that a multi-media approach (combining visual, auditor, reading and hands on) was most effective. Four minutes of preamble is effectively only using that one mode instruction.
I think instead what we see is there are more outlets that cater to this preferred teaching style and people have less patience for videos that don’t. You can still provide the same information, but you can instead start by demonstrating what you are trying to accomplish, do some preamble and show what happens if it’s not done well, and then explain what should be done to successfully complete the task, demonstrate successful task. Breaking up the instruction and combining the visual with the talking will broaden your audience without alienating people who like more information and context.
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
Of course you're right, but it's up to the player to have a mind able to parse bullshit if they aren't going to watch or pay for professional instruction. I feel that a strong BS meter should belong to all accomplished billiards players.
i have hope drdave is popular but not that popular with all demographics.
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
When I was a lower level player, I found several things in books that didn't work. As I've advanced some, those things either work and make some sense, or they are still junk. You have to separate the two and not waste time on things WAY above your current skill level. If you can't hold a stick straight, it's not much use learning 2 rail kicks for example. Learning billiards on your own requires you to be able to truthfully (and often brutally) examine yourself.
Given the 1200 computer design teachers at colleges and universities, there are 2 dozen that are excellent, I was not referring to them but to the rest.
But From my 40 years of playing that game, I can tell you that none of these 24 professors are as good as the ~100 designers who dominated the period from 1980 through today. Not David Patterson, not John Hennessy, not Yale Patt, not Gordon Bell, not James Smith but only by a smidgeon, ....... The Guri Shoi, Arvnd, Newsome, and a few others were significantly better at exploration and leading grad students, but not so much about getting the darned thing done.