Maybe he needed the poolology book..?
How else would you aim this ?
- Thread starter JoeyInCali
- Start date
Make sure you take all this good advice, from the pro's at AZ, about what Mike should have shot back to him on your next uber ride
And so far, nobody has answered the question.
But, the person who claims he has people on ignore, keeps stalking them.
But, the person who claims he has people on ignore, keeps stalking them.
He aimed it just fine. Made the ball.
I don't claim to have anyone on ignore, so why bring that up
I didn't know you were stalking people.
It's the other dude who claimed he has people on ignore.
What is funny is, Mike claimed you can't throw balls.
But, on that shot, it appears to me he aimed to over cut the first ball because the throw would make the second ball short of the pocket.
Yes, he took a chance there. The problem with stunning is that you'll be close to the rack and you can end up frozen or without a shot. Mike figured he wanted clear of the pack, but that opens up the possibility of a scratch. Nothing is free in this game. For the record, I'd have lined it up just like Mike. Contact points rules for combinations.
I think that illustrates a fundamental truth about aiming in pool: we learn to aim by rote memorization - we recognize the successful alignment not because we can see that it's geometrically correct, but because it's what worked before. Any belief about how it works can fit that.
pj
chgo
I have heard this repeated for years on this forum.
When and where did he ever say this?
The reason I ask, I got this video in 1987ish.
And on the tape, Sigel explains he shoots most cut shots with a little outside to counteract friction induced throw. So he clearly knew it was possible in the 80s. But it seems like one of those things that gets repeated to make a point that one of the best players of all time didnt know shit from shinola.
I have heard this repeated for years on this forum.
When and where did he ever say this?
The reason I ask, I got this video in 1987ish.
And on the tape, Sigel explains he shoots most cut shots with a little outside to counteract friction induced throw. So he clearly knew it was possible in the 80s. But it seems like one of those things that gets repeated to make a point that one of the best players of all time didnt know shit from shinola.
In his BD instructional article.
Possibly a context issue?
Again, he knows and knew then that balls throw.
Anybody have a link to or copy of the article?
An extremely young John Schmidt as the opponent looked just as rattled as Mike. The was a smart decision for John to call time out there and settle down with the score being so close.
Great video, thanks for the link.
Was he playing a young John Schmidt?
I might aim it in a similar manner but using CTE to get the contact point down on the first ball. I definitely would not break my cue on a fluke scratch though. At that angle he was going to hit the object ball ball thin and the cueball with some pace and thus anything can happen with that many balls flying around.
CTE does not involve contact points.
Stan himself said here he has not looked at contact in a long while.
Now you've gone and $hit in the Easter Basket.