am I practicing correctly and efficiently?

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
...a long discussion will go on at AZ for multiple pages, like "What was Pro X doing at 3:56 in this video?" and I'll look at it and say, "He was doing secret Y."

I suppose I could change to "pro skill-level techniques" or so, since the semantics are upsetting.
How about a few examples of some of these "pro skill-level techniques"?

pj
chgo
 

BilliardsAbout

BondFanEvents.com
Silver Member
How about a few examples of some of these "pro skill-level techniques"?

pj
chgo

Have you read the whole thread? As noted above, I've posted some here, in part or in full, to learn the hard way I'll get "No! Impossible!" before the person tests on the table or even thinks carefully about the proposed concept. Their loss.

Others have posted here, too, and part of the fun of the sport for me is tinkering with new ideas. Aim systems are a good example, there's a lot of dross but some silver and gold about!

In contrast to forum folks--and to be fair, people tend to be a little quick from the hip on any web forum, Tom Simpson and pro friends would instead discuss with me, try stuff out on the table, etc.

There are things I've taught dozens to hundreds of students in person that make for quick fixes and great gains. My free lesson/try me in person door remains open.

In my world, no one ever has to hear from me, "Great start! Just do X for the next six months, two hours a day, to improve!" My free lesson door remains open.
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
When I first bought a table at home last year, I did what many did: spread and ran balls. I spent (and arguably wasted) a bit of time doing that for a couple months. However, even without any structured practice sessions, I improved a lot and raised my Fargo to 570 with over 1000 recorded games. I naively thought to myself, "at this rate, I'll be playing SVB speed soon." Then I hit my first plateau. No matter how much time I spent running balls, I didn't seem to improve anymore.

A few months later, I hosted Bustamante for a week, who taught me a few things. I started spending quarter of my session practice on breaking. In addition to learning troubled angles and drills, I incorporated 15-ball rotation and 14.1 in my practice routines. I raised my Fargo to 600.

Then I hosted Efren and Rolando, who told me not to practice too much. "Quality over quantity," they said.

Now I spend roughly 8 hours/week on the table at home and spend the rest of the time competing. I believe muscle memory will obtain any information, good or bad, so if I'm not playing well during practice, I stop and just walk away from the table.

It's counter-intuitive to think that I spend less time practicing and yet my game seems to improve, slowly but surely. I'm at 615 now and hopefully I'll break the 625 goal soon and 650 by end of 2019.

How did you manage to host Bustamante, Efren and Rolando?
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Have you read the whole thread? As noted above, I've posted some here, in part or in full, to learn the hard way I'll get "No! Impossible!" before the person tests on the table or even thinks carefully about the proposed concept. Their loss.

Others have posted here, too, and part of the fun of the sport for me is tinkering with new ideas. Aim systems are a good example, there's a lot of dross but some silver and gold about!

In contrast to forum folks--and to be fair, people tend to be a little quick from the hip on any web forum, Tom Simpson and pro friends would instead discuss with me, try stuff out on the table, etc.

There are things I've taught dozens to hundreds of students in person that make for quick fixes and great gains. My free lesson/try me in person door remains open.

In my world, no one ever has to hear from me, "Great start! Just do X for the next six months, two hours a day, to improve!" My free lesson door remains open.

I hope that when you do share these 'secrets' with your paying customers, that you give credit to their originators.
 

Scott Lee

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It is not appropriate, as I understand it, to say at AZ that one has a "secret aim system" for pay.

I suppose I could change to "pro skill-level techniques" or so, since the semantics are upsetting.

Matt...If you want to market your "pro skill techniques", the least you could do is stick a crowbar in your wallet and buy a Gold Membership here! Whether you wish to admit it or not, there are no secret aiming systems.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
 

goettlicher

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
And let's not lose my main point. I've dreamed of hosting or facilitating an instructor's conference where everyone can freely share ideas over pool tables, live, learn, love and grow--and change this game forever for everyone, for the better. But I felt I had to step in and reprove an otherwise respected instructor for saying mean things about me and a friend gone on... I would share more freely my techniques at AZ if they weren't blindly insulted when I post.

However, I relish thoughtful, intelligent criticism, too. We all know who are the thinking, careful instructors here...

We share that dream once a year.
Instructors from all over the Country stitting around a
pool table sharing ideas with each other.
You should join us.

randyg
 

BilliardsAbout

BondFanEvents.com
Silver Member
Matt...If you want to market your "pro skill techniques", the least you could do is stick a crowbar in your wallet and buy a Gold Membership here! Whether you wish to admit it or not, there are no secret aiming systems.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

I didn't say "secret aim systems" on this thread.

But you will recall Tom Simpson was officially teaching Houle systems in his seminars. Do you teach them? If not, they would be a secret to your students until they went to Tom's clinic, right?

There are also quite a few instructors and pros who teach no aim systems, because it makes them uncomfortable, in part because they aim by instinct and have no systems they advocate.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... There are also quite a few instructors and pros who teach no aim systems, because it makes them uncomfortable, in part because they aim by instinct and have no systems they advocate.
Which instructors are those?
 

BilliardsAbout

BondFanEvents.com
Silver Member
Which instructors are those?

I know a number of teachers and pros who teach an aim rubric (of course) but not what is defined at AZ as an aim system, who demonstrate ghost ball, but when asked, told me they don't go past that in lessons, because they aim instinctively.

I believe an aim rubric but not a system is found in all official teaching manuals (PBIA, BCA, etc.) also?
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I know a number of teachers and pros who teach an aim rubric (of course) but not what is defined at AZ as an aim system, who demonstrate ghost ball, but when asked, told me they don't go past that in lessons, because they aim instinctively.

I believe an aim rubric but not a system is found in all official teaching manuals (PBIA, BCA, etc.) also?

Some of your beliefs are not correct.
 

goettlicher

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I understand the difference. Tom was the sole licensed Houle teacher, for example, and he would teach these systems for pay, not for free, making them secret.

Man, were you ever fed a bunch of crap.

I have taught Hal's systems since 1985
long before Tom came on the scene!

Hal never charged me once for a lesson or asked for a rebate.

randyg
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
If showing an aim line and shot line only is an "aim system", I'm incorrect. I'm sure there's some threads somewhere here where AZ defined what an aim system is?
I know of no such definition on AZB. Perhaps someone has posted something useful in the aiming subforum or perhaps no one has ever posted anything useful there.

But here is a working definition for now:

A "valid" aiming system is a set of instructions for setting up the line of a cue stick so that the cue ball will drive the object ball towards the pocket. The instructions must be complete enough that a computer could be programmed to execute the shot given that the computer has perfect vision, perfect knowledge of the positions of the balls, and perfect control of the cue stick.​

A valid system is a good system if it satisfies the above and also will drive all object balls it's applied to into the center of the pocket when followed perfectly. There are lots of valid systems (they have clear instructions) that are very poor at pocketing balls.

For me, "move the stick around until it feels like the shot will go" is not a system. It is also the way most people play because they are people and not computers.

Very few systems include throw accurately enough to to be considered good. Ghost ball is mediocre unless you correct for throw. The amount of throw you get depends on whether you have draw/stun/follow on the cue ball. How many self-styled "systems" tell you to aim thinner for a stun shot? And how many include the fact that throw varies with speed?

A good example of a valid but bad system is the one Hal Mix describes in his book. The instructions are clear and the results (if the instructions are followed) are pitiful beyond belief. That system does get you to hit the ball on the correct side, but that's about it. Mix played well. He did not apply his system.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
A "valid" aiming system is a set of instructions for setting up the line of a cue stick so that the cue ball will drive the object ball towards the pocket. The instructions must be complete enough that a computer could be programmed to execute the shot given that the computer has perfect vision, perfect knowledge of the positions of the balls, and perfect control of the cue stick.​
Isn't there a robot that does this? I remember seeing it online, but can't remember where.

I like your definition (robot-capable has come up in some conversations here) - I'd add that the instructions must be simple enough for a human player to use at the table without aids.

pj
chgo
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Isn't there a robot that does this? I remember seeing it online, but can't remember where.

I like your definition (robot-capable has come up in some conversations here) - I'd add that the instructions must be simple enough for a human player to use at the table without aids.

pj
chgo
I think people can do pretty complicated and precise things with practice. See some of Titanic Thompson's remarkable feats for examples. Also, before transistors, slot machines had mechanical "randomizers". People were trained to cheat them by timing their handle releases within 1/20th of a second. They could, for example, walk the cherries around the reels to the middle and gradually drain the machine. Or so I'm told by a pretty reliable source.

And then there is Yo Yo Ma who plays the six Bach cello suites from memory in a single performance. Or maybe he makes it up as he goes along.:D

And more pool-related -- a friend of mine who breaks fullness of hit down into 64ths of a ball, knows the actual angle for each of those cuts and knows the angles the two ball paths make versus the rails by measuring sine and cosine components with the diamonds. Most people would probably not be able to do that, but apparently he could. He also tries 100% on every shot and you see very few people do that, even among top players.
 
Top