I like the proof of concept you did on the 30 degree rule. Adding it to my awareness henceforth. lol...
10 Reasons Why the HALF-BALL HIT is so Important
- Thread starter dr_dave
- Start date
I’m glad you liked it enough to become more “self aware” (like “Skynet” in “Terminator”).
Pretty decent video but here's a question regarding using CTE beyond center of CB to OB edge and CBE to COB as illustrated in all of the shots. (I didn't watch the entire video).
Use your imagination now. Would it also be possible to use the edges of the CB to start at the quarter ball position which would then place the CCB at the quarters of the OB in both directions? Would it also be possible to use both cue ball edges, right and left, to be placed or float from one edge to the other all across the diameter of the OB to cover all cut angles that are possible from 0 degrees to about 87 degrees and be clearly visible?
0 degrees straight in would be center to center/edge to edge on both sides. Any and all cut angles would then have the edges moving horizontally across the equator of the OB with a corresponding moving of center cue ball. Obviously, it will get to a certain point that CCB will be off the edge of the OB, but the edge is always visible on the overlay. From what I've heard, there are ways to handle the situation when CCB is beyond the edge of the OB when using them simultaneously.
Head and eyes position over the cue...tip position on the CB meaning edges of the tip and center of it with a reset...and some other visual positions. I don't know all of the ins and outs of it but am just wondering. Btw, this is just some visuals to pocket the balls.
Logical or not logical?
It sounds a little complicated and unnecessary, but lines and edges can certainly be used to visualize cuts at certain angles, as illustrated in this diagram from the fractional ball aiming resource page:
... and you could try to "interpolate" to aim shots at angles between these references (maybe by "feel"). However, wouldn't it be better to just learn to aim like all DAM top players aim:
The first time you posted anything about DAM on here was back in 2012 and it did nothing for me.It sounds a little complicated and unnecessary, but lines and edges can certainly be used to visualize cuts at certain angles, as illustrated in this diagram from the fractional ball aiming resource page:
... and you could try to "interpolate" to aim shots at angles between these references (maybe by "feel"). However, wouldn't it be better to just learn to aim like all DAM top players aim:
Just make the DAM ball!
Besides, DAM was a mockery of all other aiming systems and you even said so:
"I first came up with Dr. Dave’s Aiming Method (DAM) as a joke to mock some people who try to promote “aiming systems” with outrageous claims and snake-oil-salesman type statements."
Who were YOU back in 2012 to mock anything or anyone about pool or aiming systems? You posted it again most recently and the thread eventually got locked. It was done again to purposely MOCK. You still think that you sit on a throne ruling to everyone. Grow up!
PAGE 2 BELOW:
How did Ralph Greenleaf "Aim"?
It's a useless question, no one knows. Pro's try to explain how they "Aim". What's this fixation with aiming? It's a personal thing. There are many Great's with completely different strokes and "aiming" methods. It's like DNA, do what comes natural. Try to copycat someone else...ain't gonna...
forums.azbilliards.com
Believe it or not, there's another individual who has been a Master Level designation instructor on the PBIA that has in fact
figured it out as far as using nothing but the center and edges for every shot on the table which I've switched to a number of years back and it's a very simple way to see the two balls for every shot that can be pocketed on the table. The center and edge visuals jump right out at you as clear as clear can be. And they are NOT in 2D drawings.
You obviously don't know all the ins and outs while ON the table. More like unwilling to admit it and give credit where credit is due.
The fact you had to throw "feel" into the entire process shows that your knowledge is very lacking. There are different ways to "SEE" it with head angle and eye positions or a manual way with very small pivots to change the cue angle for other angles.
You are NOT the final word on everything pool. The "D" after Ph. is for mechanical engineering. Not everything pool and certainly not as a competitive player. The other PBIA member was in fact a pro player who participated in pro tournaments and won. He has also worked with a number of top lady pro players who WILL be in the HOF and men pro players. All multiple winners on tour with known reputations. Could it be possible, just possible, that he knows something you don't know as well as the ability to put it into action under the highest pressure levels?
Last edited:
Did Dr. Dave sleep with your wife or something?
I want to ask you a question on your word choice of the amplifying term “very” in front of the term lacking.
What makes inclusion of the word “feel” a statement worthy of the comment “VERY lacking” of pool knowledge, especially when you look at Dr. Dave’s entire body of work?
Wouldn’t that be at worst “slightly” lacking?
You've been a member here for 3 short years and have under 200 posts. All of this started back in the 1990's before this forum was even thought about.
Get your history lesson by starting from the first posts made until now to figure it out. I was a part of the history but I don't and won't teach it.
Oikawa
Well-known member
Feel is the most common aiming style for pros. Sure, the nuances of the pre-shot routine can be very different, but the common factor is that they don't consciously put effort into analyzing what they see to deduce the right aiming line. There are exceptions, but that is the most common style after playing long enough. It's the natural end result of how humans aim things after enough repetitions.
Now, if you get better results with a system instead of feel, that's absolutely fine. All I'm saying is that, it's at least worth being aware of the fact that after playing long enough, your subconscious would most likely outperform any aiming system, if given a chance to do so.
Sure, if you aim with a system for years and you are satisfied with your level of play, it's probably not worth the change. But in my opinion, Dr. Dave and many others are right in saying that new players and those looking to improve should at least give feel a chance. It might be clumsy when you haven't used it much, but it will get better over time.
It's common for new players to assume their feel sucks, when in fact what sucks is their fundamentals causing so much variance in the execution, that no matter how well they might find the correct shot line with feel, they keep missing randomly. The better your fundamentals, the better feedback your subconscious gets from your shots and your instinctual aiming improves even more.
Last edited:
Aiming makes up 2 pages of 40 in the Foundations Course material I just posted in another thread (other than content that is part of shot routine). I think that's about the right importance. Here is what I say about the "inbetween" overlaps.
DAM started out as a joke, but it has become a real thing, and it has been expanded and improved a lot over the last 12 years. But it really isn't an "aiming system." It is just a summary of all the important things pros and top players do to aim so accurately and consistently. DAM!
Well stated. Cut shot "aiming systems" can help novice players at first, but I thing it slows and limits their development and aiming effectiveness over time. It is best to develop and train the aiming parts of your brain with a consistent and purposeful pre-shot routine and smart practice (observing mistakes and making corrections). DAM is the best approach for doing this.
These fractional aiming points have been helpful to me as a crummy player in “aiming small.” Instead of picking a single spot on the entire hemisphere of the object ball, it’s nice to have a small range of spots to focus on for selection (a smidge thinner then a half ball aiming point for example). “Aim small, miss small” is a common theme in lots of precision applications.
Hail, Hail, the Ph.D's are here to back each other up. This is all well and fine. But it still DOES NOT go into what is seen, how it is seen, and executed with CTE Pro1,or CTE with pivots. The ONLY similarity is the quarter ball "visuals" but they are NOT
necessarily the TARGETS to be STRUCK by the CB. Let me say it again so it sinks in...they are NOT necessarily the TARGETS to be STRUCK by the CB. And especially by an equal and opposite spot on the CB.
If you want to show that you really know what you're talking about, explain what is done with CTE Aiming in Pro1 (all visual),
or CTE Hal Houle style with pivots. Or, better yet, get on the table and explain what you're seeing and doing in a video.
Last edited:
I don't give a DAM what pros do. PRO PLAYERS, male and female, are in fact USING CTE which isn't what you have written about in DAM. And you still are using your bullshit backhanded creation as a put down. Your innocence can fool many on here but you and I both know what you're doing and where you're going with it.
You're the expert on making videos for everything. Make a video for CTE with you explaining what you're seeing, what you're lining up with the two balls and where the tip of cue is pointing whether preset or pivoted. The ONLY way it's going to be right is if you GET IT right. The way it's going to be wrong, is if you get it wrong.
I don't give a damn about novice players. This isn't for them. You are a good person to teach beginners or middle of the road players in skill level. CTE is NOT...let me say it again...IS NOT for beginners or middle of the road players. They also need to have a developed straight STROKE. Who you teach and who you appeal to based on your info is a good thing.
Last edited:
Oikawa
Well-known member
I know that there are some pros who use CTE. But what proportion of pros use it? I'd guess pretty low, probably below 5%. What about the large majority that don't use CTE, are they doing it wrong? Or are you suggesting that most pros do infact use CTE, but perhaps don't reveal it? Or do you not care what pros use, and think that it is irrelevant to observe their trends to find improvements in your game as a non-pro, and that CTE is the best for non-pros who aren't super talented?
Do you know who W. C. Fields was? He had a saying: "Go away kid, you bother me".
Oikawa
Well-known member
Why? What about my questions bothers you? I am trying to understand your position better.
The same reason W.C. had. It's you. And it's enough for me to put you on Ignore. Bye-bye. Won't see anything you post.
