Fear of Feel

I don't think that there is a "fear of feel", but I also believe that once you are off of center cue ball that "feel" cannot be avoided. Throwing a ball, spinning a ball, it all takes a certain amount of feel. Using contact point to contact point is basic aiming, until you get off of center cue ball, then "feel" comes into play. The more shots you shoot, the more "feel" you obtain.

Just my thoughts.

Feel lets a lot of people, especially beginner to intermediate players down. I assume its due to them not being able to understand and learn from their mistakes. I watch a lot of feel players, and their PSR is all over the place. Its never consistent. This is because they don't understand what they're doing, they just do what feels right.

Systems on the other hand get players to follow strict guidelines and because of this develop a solid PSR and makes them more consistent. Hence why so many rave about them.

Its not so much people fearing feel, its just that feel has caused them to fluctuate in their level of performance, and thus go on the search for the holy grail of pool.... The Aiming System.

In CTE there is no feel for shot pictures. In real CTE, the system takes one's aim to center cue ball. Center cue is the target and shot pictures are not felt for.....in CTE it is go to CCB and shoot.....

What puts REAL CTE on a different plane or in another dimension of aiming are the perceptions that can be learned that have absolute connections to the right angles of a regulation table.

Stan Shuffett

Hi Patrick,

To me, those that have developed 'feel' have no fear of it & indeed know what it is.

For those that have not been successful in the 'feel' area, a pertinent question might be why not.

I'm rather glad & thankful that I started playing at 13 years old before I had any education in physics AND I'm also glad & thankful that I obtained the physics education.

That said, would I like to have a 'feel' free method? Sure. But like you, I realize that that is not going to happen.

Perhaps you should define what you interpret 'feel' to actually be.

I sort of interpret 'feel' to be the subconscious decision based on the huge data base from which it has to pull that tells our conscious self, yes or no.

So...to me, 'feel', our subconscious, needs good hard 'data' from which to base its decision to tell us yes or no.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

There are various aspects of feel and objectivity that are used in playing.

There is:

Visual objectivity
Visual subjectivity
Feel for speed
Feel for spin
Feel for shot pictures
Feel for proper hold or gripping of one's cue.

All of these can at times be a part of what occurs at the table even in CTE.

CTE PRO ONE is based on visual objectivity that is acquired knowledge on how to see CB OB relationships. The perceptions that occur in CTE are different than ANY other type aiming. That is what sets CTE apart.....

Stan Shuffett

Patrick Johnson said:

Yes, we've all heard your advertising claims, Stan - how could we miss them? And I understand you thinking that all threads in the Aiming Conversation forum exist only as vehicles for you to sell your system - after all the implicit encouragement given to you by the mods. But to keep peace in the valley this thread is non-system specific - can we restrain ourselves that much?

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

I am merely sharing and speaking the truth. I am not advertising as you claim. I have worked for a decade to gain important knowledge about CTE and I have shared it freely. Check out YouTube!

You do not see links to my site here.....you see no form of ads from this person...just the truth based on years of work at a table.

Stan Shuffett

Patrick Johnson said:

Guess not...

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

In your opening thread you indicated ALL AIMING.

Your idea is to lump CTE in with feel systems. The premise of your thread IMO allowed for my clarification.

What you should have done was excluded REAL CTE.....but truth of the matter is is that your thread is just a backdoor for lobbying that CTE is feel based.

Stan Shuffett

"Fear of" feel exists for players that constantly fidget around feeling for the right picture.
I believe my system avoids that because it gives you the exact guidelines to look,which create the right picture, over and over creating simplicity. I'm glad i took FEEL out of my game.

Do feel players steer the cue more?

I cant take cte seriously because of Stan's belligerent posts. How can someone with such an attitude be taken seriously as a legitimate instructor? Really, shouldn't the chip on shoulder be toned down for public consumption? I'm truly afraid to ask an honest question for the response I might get. Not to mention, I can't even get a sample of what I'm getting into without first spending $80. No thank you.

Mitchxout said:

I cant take cte seriously because of Stan's belligerent posts. How can someone with such an attitude be taken seriously as a legitimate instructor? Really, shouldn't the chip on shoulder be toned down for public consumption? I'm truly afraid to ask an honest question for the response I might get. Not to mention, I can't even get a sample of what I'm getting into without first spending $80. No thank you.

Click to expand...

I am sorry that you can not take my attitude. One thing is fairly obvious, with the attitude you possess, you would not likely learn CTE given a lifetime. Thanks for the attack! I really do not buy into the idea that you are interested in CTE in the least......just a little hate coming from you, that's all.

Stan Shuffett

stan shuffett said:

I am sorry that you can not take my attitude. One thing is fairly obvious, with the attitude you possess, you would not likely learn CTE given a lifetime. Thanks for the attack! I really do not buy into the idea that you are interested in CTE in the least......just a little hate coming from you, that's all.

Stan Shuffett

Click to expand...

You just don't get it. You call other posters stupid and losers. The average person thinks you are less professional because of this. Do you ever see Scott, Randy, or any other instructor call people names and talk trash because someone disagrees with them?

I bought your DVD and tried to figure it out. I have asked questions on here and nobody has answered them. I watched the youtube videos as well. If the system was so easy to understand, then why are there so many supplemental videos on youtube? I have said there is merit to the system but ran into some stumbling blocks. That is what questions are for........

For whatever reason you think when someone has a question it is a personal attack on you and your work. Quit being so defensive and try to help people.

The Fear of Feel

Patrick Johnson said:

My belief (in case you hadn't noticed) is that all aiming necessarily involves learning to recognize the correct "shot picture" or "visual" based on repetitive trial and error - otherwise known as learning to do it "by feel". Obviously learning this way can be aided by a system or method, but I believe it can't be eliminated or replaced as the central aiming requirement.

Some players seem to want (need?) to believe otherwise, unwilling to consider evidence to the contrary. Maybe they lack confidence in their ability to do it - and that's understandable; it amazes me we can do it. And maybe, since confidence is such a big part of successful play, they start with a strong desire to believe "feel" can be avoided.

Do you agree "fear of feel" exists? If so, why do you think it does? And should we try to educate players about the unavoidability of learning by feel, or simply leave them to form their own beliefs? Can it be bad for some players' development to recognize this (assumed) fact?

Thanks,

pj
chgo

P.S. I hope this doesn't become focused on any particular aiming method. Please let's keep it generic if we can.

And if it's just too "volatile" a subject, feel free to ignore it (like you need my permission for that ).

Click to expand...

Before I comment on your post I want to know if my avatar is a problem. I do have an aiming system that I have worked on a long time that I finally am selling. Can I comment to this thread, if you would rather me not,..its ok I'm fine with it.

stan shuffett said:

I am sorry that you can not take my attitude. One thing is fairly obvious, with the attitude you possess, you would not likely learn CTE given a lifetime. Thanks for the attack! I really do not buy into the idea that you are interested in CTE in the least......just a little hate coming from you, that's all.

Stan Shuffett

Click to expand...

Thank you for proving my point. It wasn't meant as an attack at all, this how I honestly perceive your posts. I might see you at a tournament, like I did at the Smoky Mountain Shootout one year, and there's no way I would approach you because of your posts on this site. Same reason I couldn't buy a case from John Barton.

Patrick Johnson said:

My belief (in case you hadn't noticed) is that all aiming necessarily involves learning to recognize the correct "shot picture" or "visual" based on repetitive trial and error - otherwise known as learning to do it "by feel". Obviously learning this way can be aided by a system or method, but I believe it can't be eliminated or replaced as the central aiming requirement.

Some players seem to want (need?) to believe otherwise, unwilling to consider evidence to the contrary. Maybe they lack confidence in their ability to do it - and that's understandable; it amazes me we can do it. And maybe, since confidence is such a big part of successful play, they start with a strong desire to believe "feel" can be avoided.

Do you agree "fear of feel" exists? If so, why do you think it does? And should we try to educate players about the unavoidability of learning by feel, or simply leave them to form their own beliefs? Can it be bad for some players' development to recognize this (assumed) fact?

Thanks,

pj
chgo

P.S. I hope this doesn't become focused on any particular aiming method. Please let's keep it generic if we can.

And if it's just too "volatile" a subject, feel free to ignore it (like you need my permission for that ).

Click to expand...

I don't think people are "afraid" of feel at all. I think they are afraid that they will fail because their genetics and practice methods will be inadequate, that they will never develop their feel to a pros level. If they are allready at a high level they fear loosing the feel. Every time you have a slump of some kind there is panic that you might never get out of it, and this fear is not unfounded, as I know of no older pool player of pro standard that played his best into old age.

Feel is such a volatile thing, onte day it's there, the next day it's gone and you have no idea what happened. I've never met any pool player that didn't have "off" days, and the only way to minimize them is to play pool 365, 12+/7. Most people don't have time for that, and you certainly would have to depend on others to provide for you in todays world (unless you are filthy rich and for some reason hate your money).

That's why the "solution" to the volatility is so enticing. "Buy this and you will always hit the center of the pocket". It's rubbish. You might have some success with an aiming system, but it certainly isn't the end solution to all billiard problems. "Buy this and you might get more consistent if you practice as much as now, or preferably: more" doesn't sell quite as well. The clever marketers know that to sell their system it must be a total solution. All criticisms must be silenced and ridiculed and a special language invented to avoid any objective criticism. The victory is achieved when the system can only be debated on it's own terms (in it's own special language, if you will). This is straight out of a propaganda handbook, and is a method honed by priests and huxters through milennia.

The people trying to evaluate the claim keeps running in circles, because they never question the legitimacy of the basic concepts underlying the terms, and any attempt to do so is always met with a ferocity that is both frightening and ludicrous. If you try to analyse a concept you might be better off taking no such term for granted, but build your argument up phenomenologically. You will then get the aiming/religious/propaganda people screaming at you for using a language that is not "precise", while the truth is that you are eliminating the inherent circularity of the aimers terms, and attacking the core of the problem.