Accurate cue placement-Is it technique or is it talent

SFC9ball

JimBaker PBIA Instructor
Silver Member
Is the ability to give your full attention to what you're doing a talent?

Maybe "talent" is the wrong word. There are many qualities that a person may have more or less of than another person. Each of us is different. Some of those differences have an effect on how quickly a person will learn and on the highest level they may achieve.

"Anyone could win an Olympic gold medal in any event they wanted to if they just applied themselves," may make for a fine motivational speech, but it's false.

I have to agree with you there.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
But it's not a yes/no black/white situation. Attention-paying has a range from "hardly any, ever" to "so intense it is scary". Some people are ready to struggle with mastering a shot for hours and others will never put in more than a few minutes on a shot.

Actually, focus is a yes/no or black/white situation for most people. The wide "range" is due to lack of experience and lack of skill development when it comes to focusing. But anyone, short of mental illness, can learn and develop good focus habits.

In bold above.... this is because some people have a more natural ability to focus and some people don't. It's no different than throwing a baseball or learning to play a musical instrument. People aren't born equally when it comes to genetics, any predisposition that may give them advantages when it comes to acquiring and mastering certain skills. But that doesn't mean they are destined to become worldclass pool players or baseball players or violinists or whatever. And it certainly doesn't mean that someone not born with what seems like natural ability can't develop worldclass skills themselves.

So yes, focus is a skill that can be developed and mastered, unless of course the person has a mental illness like adhd that makes it very difficult to focus their attention on anything. But as with any skill, some people will always be better at it than others, and some people won't have to work as hard on it as others.
 

FranCrimi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It was written by the editor of a business magazine. He is selling boxes of books to CEOs. They are going to require their employees to read them. Among other things in the sales blurb:

Three things don’t appear to drive great performance. They are experience, specific inborn abilities, and general abilities such as intelligence and memory. Now we look for what does.
What a remarkable statement. I now understand that a side-rail-side-rail around the table position shot with reverse on the first cushion does not require experience to play accurately.

I noticed that too about the three things that don't appear to drive great performance. My jaw dropped. Are they kidding?
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I noticed that too about the three things that don't appear to drive great performance. My jaw dropped. Are they kidding?
What I find astounding is that all of the apparent fans of Colvin's ideas were not bothered by that part.

Perhaps one of them would like to explain what he really meant.
 

straightline

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
most top players do it instinctively without much of an effort while the lower amateur players are very inconsistent with this and it's where most of their misses come from .

so if you are inconsistent with this and you place the cue slightly across the line of aim sometimes to the left and other times to the right or the cue aims with a quarter of a mm of unintentional side when you intend to hit center ball you have two choices : either you commit , cue straight and most likely miss the shot or you start steering the cue to make the balls to compensate for the faulty alignment which will make you an inconsistent player . there is no way around this.

so having tried many , many things without being able to fix this and be consistent with it , i want to ask what are all possible reasons for this cue alignment issue and if a player does all the steps needed in his technique to be consistent with this yet still struggles and is inconsistent , doesn't this mean that he just doesn't have the talent and ability to do this and become a great player?

The pro model is only what the pro does. The pro can go on long sequences because the pro has minimal concerns about the object ball falling into the pocket. The focus and priorities move onto cue ball speed and direction. The object ball drops, the cue ball lands safely.

The person in your complaint probably doesn't have a grasp on basic ball pocketing. To compare his struggles to a pro's successes is futile and prolly a little vain too.
 

BilliardsAbout

BondFanEvents.com
Silver Member
In the past year I changed, can't think of what you call it. Basically my chin was at least 6 inches or more above the cue. I had to change my stance and some other things to get my chin on the cue. The biggest challenge for me was retraining my feet where to go.

When I got my stubborn feet finally trained where to go everything else fell into place. You know if your shooting straight or not, like you already mentioned. It took me maybe 4 weeks to change everything, but I put many hours into those 4 weeks.

It doesn't take years to learn to shoot straight, unless you take a lot of breaks after practicing for only 20 minuets. lol

You always start from the ground up when building something. Start with the feet.

(I'm not an instructor)

Usually, moving the head vertically also moves it laterally. Perhaps the OP can adjust his height and thus adjust his eyes. Video is welcome also. I think I can fix this for him quickly.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
I noticed that too about the three things that don't appear to drive great performance. My jaw dropped. Are they kidding?


What I find astounding is that all of the apparent fans of Colvin's ideas were not bothered by that part.

Perhaps one of them would like to explain what he really meant.

These aren't necessarily Colvin's ideas. It's all based on research provided by much more qualified people. All Colvin has done is assemble and present the research in his own style or format.

If you believe great performance is the direct result of experience or innate talent or intelligence, then every person with experience, talent, and intelligence should be a great performer. But that's not the case -- not even close. So, as Colvin writes, it doesn't appear that these things are what drives great performance.

There are plenty of very experienced people in every field of study, but experience is subjective. Experience is certainly not proof of or indicative of great performance.
You can spend years doing something over and over again and never be great at it. So it's true -- experience does not seem to be a driver of exceptional performance. Instead, it's something in addition to experience that drives greatness. That's what Colvin is saying.

Here's a real life example: I once told a pulmonologist that the peak value was set too high on a ventilator. He asked how I would know that, if I was in the medical field, and I told him I had read the operating manual for the machine and calculated the correct value based on the patient's body mass. He said, "Well, I've been doing this for over twenty years...." I asked him to at least look at it, told him this specific machine was only a year old and asked if he knew the difference between it and the older machines. Doing something for 20 years only means a person has been doing the same thing for 20 years. It's not a validation that they've improved or expanded their skills or knowledge during that time. Anyway, he grabbed the operating manual from my hand and walked out. Naturally he did not like being challenged or questioned. Afterall, he was the doctor and I was a nobody.

About an hour later he came back into the room and lowered the peak value to the appropriate setting. He apologized to me, but also told me it wouldn't make much of a difference. The setting was twice as high as it should've been, so I doubt he was being completely honest with me about it not making much difference.

As far as intelligence (IQ), it is also not a driving factor when it comes to great performance. It has been shown that a person's emotional intelligence (EQ), how you deal with stress and other emotional challenges, is more of a determining factor when it comes to success and quality performance.

So I don't see anything wrong with what Colvin has written. These things alone, based on plenty of research, don't appear to be as important as deliberate practice. Quality, deliberate practice drives great performance. He's not saying experience, talent and intelligence aren't important. He's just saying these things are not enough to drive greatness. Something else is needed, something deeper within us that sets us apart from everyone else that has experience, talent, and intelligence.
 
Last edited:

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... If you believe great performance is the direct result of experience or innate talent or intelligence, then every person with experience, talent, and intelligence should be a great performer. But that's not the case -- not even close. So, as Colvin writes, it doesn't appear that these things are what drives great performance. ...
Do you have an example of any great performance that is not preceded by "experience, specific inborn abilities, and general abilities such as intelligence and memory"?

And, by the way, I consider directed practice to be part of experience at pool.

Perhaps the problem is the way Colvin expressed himself. If he meant to say, "experience, specific inborn abilities, and general abilities such as intelligence and memory do not guarantee that an individual will have great performances", then he should have said that. The word "drive" is nebulous and imprecise in this context.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Do you have an example of any great performance that is not preceded by "experience, specific inborn abilities, and general abilities such as intelligence and memory"?

And, by the way, I consider directed practice to be part of experience at pool.

Perhaps the problem is the way Colvin expressed himself. If he meant to say, "experience, specific inborn abilities, and general abilities such as intelligence and memory do not guarantee that an individual will have great performances", then he should have said that. The word "drive" is nebulous and imprecise in this context.

I thought using the words "doesn't appear to drive great performance" was simple enough to understand. He didn't say these things absolutely have nothing to do with performance, only that they "appear" to not be the drive that leads us to great performances.

Thousands (or millions) of people have experience, inborn abilities, and intelligence, yet only a small percentage become worldclass/great performers. So it certainly does "appear" that those factors alone do not drive great performance.

There is a new guy playing in our local BCA league. He is on a good team, and he's only been playing pool for 5 months. He already plays better than many "experienced" players I know. He seems smart, probably has some natural skill/coordination too. But there is something else that sets him apart from every other smart and naturally coordinated aspiring player out there. It certainly isn't his abundant experience.

We shouldn't get experience and repetition confused, just as we shouldn't get experience and acquired knowledge confused. Sure, repetition and knowledge can be tied to experience. But experience isn't needed to acquire knowledge. A person could very well have years of experience repeating the same flaws over and over again (repetition), or years of acquiring inaccurate or inadequate knowledge, and their "experience" would not be very useful toward great performance. This describes most people, which is why most people aren't great performers and why experience is not necessarily a driver of great performance.

I don't understand the point of arguing any of this stuff. The research is available in many books. More people should read up on this stuff if they really want to have a better understanding of why some folks become great performers and others don't. I don't have Colvin's book, so I won't make any judgements on how he presents the material, other than to say his little blurps pretty much correspond to everything I've read in other books that talk about talent, success, and performance.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... I don't understand the point of arguing any of this stuff....
Probably true.

What are the main points that a student or instructor should take away from books such as Colvin's? What is actually useful in them for people who want to play pool better?
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
BC21 said:
... I don't understand the point of arguing any of this stuff....

Probably true.

What are the main points that a student or instructor should take away from books such as Colvin's? What is actually useful in them for people who want to play pool better?


Haha. Actually I think the point is the fact that some people are so used to doing things their own way that they argue against anything that doesn't fit in their own little box. Probably true.

The main thing that any student or instructor can get from such books is a better insight on how people can learn and develop skills more efficiently, a better understanding of effective practice sessions when it comes to learning without wasting a lot of time. And it's very beneficial to a student to understand that they can still become a great pool player or whatever even if they lack natural talent/ability or intelligence, and that it doesn't take 10 hours of practice or daily experience to accomplish it.

Believe it or not, learning how to learn is a very useful skill when it comes to bettering yourself.
 
Last edited:

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
...
The main thing that any student or instructor can get from such books is a better insight on how people can learn and develop skills more efficiently, a better understanding of effective practice sessions when it comes to learning without wasting a lot of time. ...
Do you have any specific examples?
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Do you have any specific examples?

Absolutely...

The progressive drills (with a goal) that you and Dr Dave teach is good example of quality and efficient practice time.

Practicing beyond boredom is a good example of poor quality and inefficient practice time.

Most skills involve the development of a neural network/program along with the development of muscle memory/coordination. We create all the synaptic pathways needed to make it all happen. And some of these pathways don't rely on actual experience in order to be created.

When it comes to creating neural networks/programs, studies have shown that beginning students (let's say piano players) can create the neural networks needed for playing the piano without physically playing the piano. In other words, they can imagine the keyboard and finger movements and create the same piano playing program in their mind as students who physically sit down at the piano and practice. Of course, even though this method has been proven effective as far as creating the neural network, piano players must also develop muscle memory and finger dexterity. But learning where and how to move the fingers is something that can be learned entirely away from the piano.

For pool, this non-physical learning can be done by watching pool, by looking at images in books, by playing games like 8ball Pool on a PC or tablet or phone. All of this stuff helps the brain develop the neural network needed to play pool - to recognize cb-ob relationships, angles, etc... And it doesn't require actual table time/experience to develop this network. Of course the physical fundamentals of stroke and stance and alignment will require table time, but the neural part of learning to play pool doesn't.
 
Last edited:

evergruven

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Absolutely...

The progressive drills (with a goal) that you and Dr Dave teach is good example of quality and efficient practice time.

Practicing beyond boredom is a good example of poor quality and inefficient practice time.

Most skills involve the development of a neural network/program along with the development of muscle memory/coordination. We create all the synaptic pathways needed to make it all happen. And some of these pathways don't rely on actual experience in order to be created.

When it comes to creating neural networks/programs, studies have shown that beginning students (let's say piano players) can create the neural networks needed for playing the piano without physically playing the piano. In other words, they can imagine the keyboard and finger movements and create the same piano playing program in their mind as students who physically sit down at the piano and practice. Of course, even though this method has been proven effective as far as creating the neural network, piano players must also develop muscle memory and finger dexterity. But learning where and how to move the fingers is something that can be learned entirely away from the piano.

For pool, this non-physical learning can be done by watching pool, by looking at images in books, by playing games like 8ball Pool on a PC or tablet or phone. All of this stuff helps the brain develop the neural network needed to play pool - to recognize cb-ob relationships, angles, etc... And it doesn't require actual table time/experience to develop this network. Of course the physical fundamentals of stroke and stance and alignment will require table time, but the neural part of learning to play pool doesn't.

hey brian, just to butt in real quick
I'm glad you mentioned this
sure sure I'm not the only one
but I'm excited to get back to table
to play of course, and also just to see
how things look and how I respond
after been away for so long
still having cared about
and thought about, pool
 

Scott Lee

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Sports psychologists agree that focused practice beyond about 20 minutes at the same activity, starts to see a decline in performance. This is why we structure our progressive skill set (Mother Drills) so that the student is focused solely on the task at hand...whatever part of the routine that is. Small bits...high focus...short repetition! Keys to a better process!

Scott Lee
2019 PBIA Instructor of the Year
Director, SPF National Pool School Tour

Practicing beyond boredom is a good example of poor quality and inefficient practice time.

.
 

KenRobbins

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Sports psychologists agree that focused practice beyond about 20 minutes at the same activity, starts to see a decline in performance. This is why we structure our progressive skill set (Mother Drills) so that the student is focused solely on the task at hand...whatever part of the routine that is. Small bits...high focus...short repetition! Keys to a better process!

Scott Lee
2019 PBIA Instructor of the Year
Director, SPF National Pool School Tour

Hi Scott, your a master instructor for a reason and I don't doubt you. But if a person can't focus more than 20 minutes on something they want to master, maybe that deep desire isn't there like they thought. I'd have to set a timer for 20 minutes to get me to stop. When I often look at the time I'm usually on the table a couple more hours than I thought.
 

z0nt0n3r

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
hi everyone , i have an update , about a month ago when i started this thread , i was placing the cue across the line on the majority of the shots so i had to steer the cue to make the shots .more precisely, the cue was aiming somewhere around the pocket jaw on many of my shots .

when i was down on the shot sometimes both my vision center and the cue were offline, other times the vision center was online but the cue was offline and other times the cue was online but the vision center was offline .so i had a big inconsistency in my set up.

2-3 weeks ago in practice i was focusing on aligning my head/dominant eye to the shot from the standing position and trying to keep it on the line until i was down on the shot and now i'm successfully keeping my vision center online when i'm getting down on the shot and the cue ends up on the correct part of my chin on most shots but the cue is still ending up across the line but at least now i think the cue is usually aiming closer the pocket area but not the intended part of the pocket which may cause the pocket to spit the ball out if the shot is struck hard and again this causes inconsistency.things have improved a bit because now i'm at least viewing the shot more accurately and i also now think the cue is usually aiming closer to the intended line of aim.

but still i think that 'bang online' accurate cue placement on most shots is mostly due to natural talent .
 
Last edited:

KenRobbins

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
hi everyone , i have an update , about a month ago when i started this thread , i was placing the cue across the line on the majority of the shots so i had to steer the cue to make the shots .more precisely, the cue was aiming somewhere around the pocket jaw on many of my shots .

when i was down on the shot sometimes both my vision center and the cue were offline, other times the vision center was online but the cue was offline and other times the cue was online but the vision center was offline .so i had a big inconsistency in my set up.

2-3 weeks ago in practice i was focusing on aligning my head/dominant eye to the shot from the standing position and trying to keep it on the line until i was down on the shot and now i'm successfully keeping my vision center online when i'm getting down on the shot and the cue ends up on the correct part of my chin on most shots but the cue is still ending up across the line but at least now i think the cue is usually aiming closer the pocket area but not the intended part of the pocket which may cause the pocket to spit the ball out if the shot is struck hard and again this causes inconsistency.things have improved a bit because now i'm at least viewing the shot more accurately and i also now think the cue is usually aiming closer to the intended line of aim.

but still i think that 'bang online' accurate cue placement is mostly due to natural talent .

Good to hear your figuring it out. You improved in just a couple weeks of work and on your own. Just keep working on it and give it a chance to become natural for you.
 

KenRobbins

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Sports psychologists agree that focused practice beyond about 20 minutes at the same activity, starts to see a decline in performance.

I spent a couple hours researching this online and nothing really popped up with this. The closest I got was with this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_span

The most thing that popped up with pro athlete practice sessions was long intense practice sessions. I figured I'd find something posted from a psychologist. lol https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-power-prime/200910/sports-what-motivates-athletes

If your training someone with a little interest and looking for something handed to them on a silver platter, I get the 20 minute practice times.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20201018-211214_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20201018-211214_Chrome.jpg
    136.9 KB · Views: 122

KenRobbins

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I finally ran into an article that makes some sense. When I played little league baseball and played the all stars, some players spent most of their time sitting on the bench waiting to be needed. I was always the main pitcher. When they had us running, most of these guys struggled and couldn't keep up. That was with most of the activities that they participated in, including gym class in school.
http://www.sportpsychologytoday.com/youth-sports-psychology/challenge-your-athletes-during-practice/

This explains why my old buddy that taught would tell the majority of his students to get out and not come back. lol
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20201019-150836_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20201019-150836_Chrome.jpg
    86.4 KB · Views: 108
Last edited:
Top