Quality Instructors
- Thread starter Prince H
- Start date
I would have voted but your poll is demeaning to those who might still be able to teach but still can 't play at a high level.
JoeyA
Butch Harmon won 1 event when all the pros where playing the British Open there's many many more more accomplished players , few if any has Butch's talent in teaching
The best instruction I ever had came from a guy who was a APA 5 level at best but he knew drills and could spot flaws in stace or stroke immediately he had a very keen eye
When he was where I was playing and watching my match he could spot a flaw walk over and tell me what it was and I'd correct it and many more times than not get the disered results
1
The best instruction I ever had came from a guy who was a APA 5 level at best but he knew drills and could spot flaws in stace or stroke immediately he had a very keen eye
When he was where I was playing and watching my match he could spot a flaw walk over and tell me what it was and I'd correct it and many more times than not get the disered results
1
Qualified Teachers
Three weeks ago I had a conversation with a pro player who employed a coach once and this player admitted that the coach wasnt a great player but was an excellent coach. I think that a coach needs to be able to acquire a certain level but that doesnt mean they have to be Johnny Archer, Shane level players. At a point a person who doesnt play for a living is going to max out their playing ability because they dont play for a living. There is also a lot of time devoted to the study of how to instruct which also takes up time and effort, not to mention design of lesson plans etc. I do believe a certain level of proficiency is expected from most students.
Three weeks ago I had a conversation with a pro player who employed a coach once and this player admitted that the coach wasnt a great player but was an excellent coach. I think that a coach needs to be able to acquire a certain level but that doesnt mean they have to be Johnny Archer, Shane level players. At a point a person who doesnt play for a living is going to max out their playing ability because they dont play for a living. There is also a lot of time devoted to the study of how to instruct which also takes up time and effort, not to mention design of lesson plans etc. I do believe a certain level of proficiency is expected from most students.
Thanks to Alma Mottey, Fargo and the International Billiards Society for compiling the graph below. Here is an all inclusive list of the industry's Master Instructor's Fargo Ratings. After viewing the thread title I thought I would share this information with anyone interested. I find it interesting that many of the instructors on the list haven't played in enough tournaments to have ratings or they have starter scores of 525. By the way 675 is considered to be around pro speed. The higher the score the greater the player's ability. I don't claim to be an expert on this, but it is good food for thought.
Last edited:
It is possible for a non top player to be a good teacher.
There is a risk that a player that has not played at a sufficiently high level, lacks understanding of certain aspects of technique, though.
Likewise, there is a chance that a top player does not know how an amateur can learn how to do what he does.
I prefer learning from people who actually know how to play. I will always have a slight mistrust of a person that cannot run 3 balls, yet claim to be able to teach pros. I'm not saying this is impossible, only that I don't think I'd trust such a person without some serious convincing. I'm also very sceptical of people who stick to a very rigid training paradigm, as I believe every technique will have to be at least somewhat tailored to the individual.
There is a risk that a player that has not played at a sufficiently high level, lacks understanding of certain aspects of technique, though.
Likewise, there is a chance that a top player does not know how an amateur can learn how to do what he does.
I prefer learning from people who actually know how to play. I will always have a slight mistrust of a person that cannot run 3 balls, yet claim to be able to teach pros. I'm not saying this is impossible, only that I don't think I'd trust such a person without some serious convincing. I'm also very sceptical of people who stick to a very rigid training paradigm, as I believe every technique will have to be at least somewhat tailored to the individual.
Last edited:
There is zero doubt in my mind a pro player can be aided by a coach of much lesser skill
I haven't done such to a high level pro but I've spotted flaws in high Am's and lower level pro's many of times one time I won't mention the player but he was playing way below his gear I told him something about his stance after he lost his first match I changed it and ran thru the losers bracket lost hill hill in a tour stop event
Another one who balked when I told him of a flaw I noticed in his stance he changed his stance won several tour stops after that I mentioned it he said he changed because of his eye alignment I laughed and said ok what ever works ,, he was shooting with a 90 degree left foot closed hip ,, he moved his left foot and opened up the hip to this day he doesn't see how it mattered lol
1
My instructor does not have to be a world class champ...just has to know what & how to communicate. Also is it fair to say different instructors for different aspects. I would not expect my stroke instructor to teach me 1Pocket. And same in reverse. If looking for a stroke instructor I'd like to hear real time reviews on what an how the lesson was. Would not be interested in how many balls they ran or can run. That's my vote.
Last edited:
Thanks to Alma Mottey, Fargo and the International Billiards Society for compiling the graph below. Here is an all inclusive list of the industry's Master Instructor's Fargo Ratings. After viewing the thread title I thought I would share this information with anyone interested. I find it interesting that many of the instructors on the list haven't played in enough tournaments to have ratings or they have starter scores of 525. By the way 675 is considered to be around pro speed. The higher the score the greater the player's ability. I don't claim to be an expert on this but it is good food for though.
The higher the score the greater the player's ability.......Jerry B. with "0" is absolutely worthless as his ability to teach. He might be the most sought after instructor right now. Scott L with a "0" has nothing to do with anything. Scott's reviews are just about 100% positive. Anyone that did not care for his lesson did not practice and had no drive to improve. That's on the student and not a reflection on the instructor.
Last edited:
Do you guys think, After a certain level of skill is achieved from that point forward you need more gaming knowledge than spf "type" training. Personally I don't miss many balls, I lose my games because I read the table differently. Sometimes after I play a great player they ask me why I didn't shoot this order or this shape route. My answer is honestly because I didn't see it! For me this requires a better player that can teach multiple table routes. I look at like driving a car, sure I can drive from Newyork to LA as good as anyone but the guy that can read a map has all the options if the roads are blocked and will get to LA sooner!
There are multiple examples of the coaches who were high level players and couldn't coach a lick
1
Last edited:
I understand the theory behind Fargorate and that is different from other types of ratings. That being said, since there is no Fargorate where I play, how does a 525 rating compare to old style playing ratings, approximately? Would you say 525 is a mediocre "B" player, a "C" player, or what?
The way players are ranked in my area I would say that the 400 Range is a C, the 500 range is B, the 600 range is an A, and the 700 and above is AA (pro-level) and beyond.
Exactly, I don't think a teacher can instruct beyond their own understanding of the game. How can you teach someone something you can't do yourself? Sure most all of the top instructors can teach basic concepts, but I guess it depends on your own level of skill. Learning basic mechanics will only get you so far. After that you need someone who can guide you beyond fundamental soundness. Mechanics/Fundamental soundness only makes up a percentage of one's total game.
Last edited:
It means nothing when it's a starter rating. When you are established, it DOES mean something.
You do not need to be a pro to be a qualified instructor, but you should be at least good enough to demonstrate all the concepts that you are teaching. An instructor would also need to understand proper shot selection which usually goes with being a fairly good player.
You can be a good coach without being a good player so long as you have the knowledge, the ability to convey it and an understanding of how to develop players through the different skill levels. But I think having a certain pedigree is part of developing trust
On the other hand, a top player may not fully understand how they became as good as they are since most pros have been at a pro level since their teens. It brings to mind Judd Trump who made a 147 in competition at the of 14. I doubt he even remembers what it's like to not be able to hit a century.
So I would say being a great player isn't a must. You just need the ability to demonstrate and communicate the right info. But I do think that an excellent player who is also an excellent coach would be a great combination .
You can be a good coach without being a good player so long as you have the knowledge, the ability to convey it and an understanding of how to develop players through the different skill levels. But I think having a certain pedigree is part of developing trust
On the other hand, a top player may not fully understand how they became as good as they are since most pros have been at a pro level since their teens. It brings to mind Judd Trump who made a 147 in competition at the of 14. I doubt he even remembers what it's like to not be able to hit a century.
So I would say being a great player isn't a must. You just need the ability to demonstrate and communicate the right info. But I do think that an excellent player who is also an excellent coach would be a great combination .
Last edited:
It means something if a player has an established 525. Fargo places people in the range they estimate the player would fall into. Some players have starter ratings of 675, some 525, and some 425. It in large part depends on a player's known ability. However, once a player has an established rating the result should be roughly the same no matter where they started out at. Many players fit into what I call the almost established category (over halfway there) which is also pretty accurate. I don't think you have to truly be established to have an accurate rating. Let's face it, after 100 or 150 games of play you can get a pretty good idea of a player's speed and 199 games isn't an established rating as far as FARGO is concerned.
The bottom line is that if the players are rated 525 or don't have a ranking it's a pretty good indication that either they never have competed, or don't compete or have retired from competition. A lot of the players are from the ages of 30 to their late 50s and are still ranked near 525 and which is a good indicator that they probably never reached a high level of play or just don't play anymore. I guess you would have to talk to each instructor, find out their playing history and judge for yourself.
Last edited: