Ok. You can imagine whatever you want. I know who I am and what I have done in my life.
You are trying to be cruel. But that aside your premise is wrong. You wrap it in mock concern because you recently glommed into Niels magic pill comment and think he is right and that Stan is wrong.
I was playing in the Netherlands and better than Niels in the early 90s. I have a fifth place trophy from an all-around, 14.1, 9 ball and 8 ball event. My traveling buddy for that event, the German national 8 ball champion at the time, took second.
So don't presume to tell me about my own history. Now you're pissing me off. You don't have the slightest freaking clue what my life was like back in the day other than what I choose to share.
I am pretty sure that I have played more pool in more places for more money than most people at my level. I took fourth in a national level 14.1 tournament one month after deciding to start practicing straight pool.
I played in the oberliga in Germany which is two levels below the Bundesliga, which is the national league. I was paid to play pool by the teams that recruited me. In Germany you don't get to be in the top teams unless your can play at the expected level. And you have to defend your spot because players are constantly training and looking to replace you. We trained all the time and pushed each other.
I owned a pool room in Crailsheim and we regularly had clinics and training with top pros. So don't tell me about my history. All that you know about me is only what you see here and your assumptions about anything else are wrong.
You might think that in me you have found the perfect patsy to advance your vendetta against aiming systems but in fact you have found someone who has very likely had more high level pool experience than you have possibly dared to wish for.
You people just totally don't get it and you never will. Hal Houle, Stan Shuffett, Brian Crist, Ekkes Schneider-Lombardo, Ron Vitello, and many others who have created/refined/discovered alternative ways to aim are not interested in holding anyone back. They have taken one part of the game and invested their time and effort trying to help people improve that aspect of their game.
You and others like you revel in knocking that. It's terrible. As you can clearly see I have no issue with showing myself and my thoughts and my current form to further the discussion.
But you're completely on the wrong track if you think that you get to use me to claim that you have proven your incorrect assertions.
What my video actually shows is that even a F*****ing idiot with a terrible stroke can make a lot of shots when using a good aiming system. And this idiot would do even better when the form gets back to or better than previous levels.
That's the reality you need to accept.
Excuse me but you don't serve yourself well at all in regards to whatever and whenever you profess, when your acumen by admission is on display for what is making a shot as a binary proposition vs what truly is a shot and that MEANS pocketing with a successful end result of ie; cue ball position for the next shot intention etc.
For the record.. and I myself do not have to be an authority or for God's sake an accredited player of now or days gone by...when I say:
1) A aiming system should always be productively considered more so as a reference point somewhere in the sequence from stance and then finally down to address and... whatever adjustments etc if any from there, even if mostly mental and or physical etc...
A SYSTEM is all encompassing.
A REFERENCE is all reminding.
There is no way a visual perception of any kind, can also allow for the physical platform and all it's variables because obviously the relationship itself is limited. There is no argument in which, ideal physical alignment constitutes some sort of non sequitur belief in which there is no question.
We obviously know in physical and certain terms...what is ideal vs not.
It is silly for me to point it out but it needs to be said... because:
IN REFERRING TO WHAT IS A SHOT vs simply pocketing a shot, we can prove a tremendous difference and therefore it is the business of physical delivery that no visual system first of all exists and second of all, a visual reference doesn't get us there any better when the fact remains:
2) POSITION can and will put STRESS...on the easiest of shots.
Why don't you just leave it at that instead of finding ways to say I am cruel when the fact of the matter is... YOU are being cruel.
Any youngster will be best suited listening to what I plainly said rather than your belabored points that spell out voodoo type dogmas of belief vs fact.
Belief can go all the way in this endeavor but it has an impossible task of explaining why there seems to be always a handful of pros and a legion on the outside looking in.
If it were a question of systematic aiming, then it would be obvious.
If it were a question of belief or heart...I would be a world champion...
Stop worrying about yourself or cordialities etc etc and at least for God sakes think about the kids who for all practical purposes even today...are doomed to fail before they get started on and down the proverbial wrong road.
I know your road is wack ultimately because it offers no actual remedy in order to resolve. Making balls in of itself is a mugs game...it proves nothing and if anything,
IM NOT A AUTHORITY OR TEACHER,
but I certainly offer earth and water when I tell anyone that I know for a fact, NEVER just shoot a ball, ALWAYS put a destination on it no matter what.
It by itself won't get you there but at least it is productive and certainly cannot knock you off the correct path because in of itself....it is correct.
Correct in obvious terms applicable to game theory which in of itself, an argument can be made that these known disciplines of 9 ball etc etc are fundamentally flawed etc...
Have you ever seen a 9 ball practitioner all of a sudden play one pocket and now become totally lost in "alignment blindness"?...now why is that?
I have a few valid reasons as to why and for the record it doesn't have anything to do with knocking aiming systems ie; etc etc..as if aiming system as a label is conducive to voodoo or failure etc.
It is stupid to ignore what is visually there in finer detail or reference because in pool, IT ALL STARTS WITH THE EYES...there is no escaping that.
I would say just for the hell of it, it is best to FIRST understand the eyes in relation to proximity and binocular and TRIANGULATION etc etc because they are relevant points pertaining to distance and therefore WHAT IS perception etc...
Of course it matters until something of value can supplant it... obviously.
In other words, the eyes are all important but certainly in terms also being your worst enemy as well...
Like one person said perfectly about a problematic power draw from a long distance...."you are probably not looking at it correctly"
If that isn't productive genius I don't know what is....that is a more than likely bullseye if ever there could be one.
Even if incorrect, it is productively compelling....in other words, proving it to not be the problem therefore means an undeniable aspect for solution that has residual value and not just some sort of ONE OFF conclusion....ie; (I sure hope not, god help us all)
