90 90 aiming sucks

Cornerman said:
... Is it worth the $54 to try to learn his system from him? Of course it is. Why wouldn’t it be? You haven’t actually tried it yet.
Click to expand...
There are lots of aiming systems that are just plain wrong. If the student actually follows them they may work but only as long as the student gives enough control to his subconscious to let it make the ball.

I think the real question is what is the best way for judochoke to learn how to aim. I doubt that it is 90/90.
 
Bob Jewett said:
There are lots of aiming systems that are just plain wrong. If the student actually follows them they may work but only as long as the student gives enough control to his subconscious to let it make the ball.

I think the real question is what is the best way for judochoke to learn how to aim. I doubt that it is 90/90.
Click to expand...

You said that right. I was asked to review 90/90 for Tom Simpson one time as
he was considering teaching it in his academy. Fun to play around with and was very
similar to how I play BHE when using Side Spin with it but I didn't find enough clear
references that the player could hang onto in order to get much good out of it for future
growth. It was fun and has some uses but did not represent complete stability to me.
 
336Robin said:
You said that right. I was asked to review 90/90 for Tom Simpson one time as
he was considering teaching it in his academy. Fun to play around with and was very
similar to how I play BHE when using Side Spin with it but I didn't find enough clear
references that the player could hang onto in order to get much good out of it for future
growth. It was fun and has some uses but did not represent complete stability to me.
Click to expand...
Seriously? I find it to be dead on and simple as all get out. Its either edge-to-edge or edge-to-center with a pivot to cueball center. I probably use it 70-80% of the time. People i've showed it to get it within about five/ten shots. I have no clue what is meant by "complete stability". BTW, i have your book and along with the 90/90 deal i always visualize that outside perimeter line when sizing-up a shot.
 
garczar said:
Seriously? I find it to be dead on and simple as all get out. Its either edge-to-edge or edge-to-center with a pivot to cueball center. I probably use it 70-80% of the time. People i've showed it to get it within about five/ten shots. I have no clue what is meant by "complete stability". BTW, i have your book and along with the 90/90 deal i always visualize that outside perimeter line when sizing-up a shot.
Click to expand...

When Tom asked me I was still working on my material as I got deeper into it I found more stability off of the references I use but it took some time to find the references I use as I needed to apply those references in a way to learn Side Spin and that was an ongoing project for a number of years. As anyone else who learns this game sometimes you look at something and know there is something better beyond it so you try and look for it. So to answer your question about the stability part is the last versions of my material updated this past spring represent those changes.

At the time I was searching for a reference and it took me awhile to find it. I didn't find anything visual I liked within 90/90 that I could latch onto for Side Spin however I got a great feeling from it and still think about it on a few shots right off I remember I think the stick position for a 45 angle shot. Its almost burned into my brain. I still seek my core references but the action provided by tinkering with 90/90 is some reassurrance if that makes sense.

Most of my angled shots I find that Outer perimeter line, the internal quarter ball reference for the contact point based on my unique set of perceptions and then I get down on the shot and play it.As long as I don't over figure a position or worry about selling out if I miss I don't have any problems but as anyone long distance shots can be problematic for accurate cue ball delivery and your stance and stroke really get involved.

I do think 90/90 offered more than what they teach now. I recently saw what they teach now and I don't like it. If I'd known what they were teaching I'd have opened that conversation up before Tom died in 2016.

I do think if you're going to learn 90/90 you should buy the material and learn it right. I have a lot of things I look for in a system and 90/90 had a lot of them but not all of them. In comparison to others I've looked at 90/90 was above many in fact the majority of them. 90/90 definitely doesn't suck imo but it deserves a fair shot at learning it. What is $54 when you compare it to a lifetime of blissful joy?
 
Last edited:
If I recall, SpiderwebComm here on AZB worked with Ron quite a bit with 90/90, you might reach out to him and ask him, as well...
 
Last edited:
justadub said:
If I recall, Spiderweb.com here on AZB worked with Ron quite a bit with 90/90, you might reach out to him and ask him, as well...
Click to expand...

I visited Spiderman in MD, and he went over 90/90 at the table with me, talking quite a bit about Ron V.

I was unable to find anything of value beyond the (for many substantial) value of adding consistency to your approach and perhaps scaring off your usual demons and bad habits because of it. THAT is a potential benefit of any "aiming system" that is sufficiently vague and undefined. That is, to realize this value, you must be sufficiently fuzzed out about what is going on that your disbelief remains suspended...
 
mikepage said:
I visited Spiderman in MD, and he went over 90/90 at the table with me, talking quite a bit about Ron V.

I was unable to find anything of value beyond the (for many substantial) value of adding consistency to your approach and perhaps scaring off your usual demons and bad habits because of it. THAT is a potential benefit of any "aiming system" that is sufficiently vague and undefined. That is, to realize this value, you must be sufficiently fuzzed out about what is going on that your disbelief remains suspended...
Click to expand...


Some aiming "systems" are just about selling product, whether that be lessons, books, or DVDs -- there's no money to be made in telling someone, "Hit 10,000 balls and you'll aim better."

Lou Figueroa
 
lfigueroa said:
some aiming "systems" are just about selling product, whether that be lessons, books, or dvds -- there's no money to be made in telling someone, "hit 10,000 balls and you'll aim better."

lou figueroa
Click to expand...

thats right ..if you cant come up with new themes your out of business..these days there is experts coming out of the woodwork everywhere just like preachers with each one having their own handle on God..
 
Last edited:
lfigueroa said:
Some aiming "systems" are just about selling product, whether that be lessons, books, or DVDs -- there's no money to be made in telling someone, "Hit 10,000 balls and you'll aim better."

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

Weird, how those low level players who have been playing for a decade are still low level players. I guess they only hit 9,999 balls. But, man, next week at league will be different after that first shot, they'll be running racks for the first time ever ;)
 
ChicagoRJ said:
Weird, how those low level players who have been playing for a decade are still low level players. I guess they only hit 9,999 balls. But, man, next week at league will be different after that first shot, they'll be running racks for the first time ever ;)
Click to expand...


And here I thought everyone reading this forum was smart enough not to take the 10,000 ball thing literally.

Lou Figueroa
silly me
 
lfigueroa said:
And here I thought everyone reading this forum was smart enough not to take the 10,000 ball thing literally.

Lou Figueroa
silly me
Click to expand...

and I thought everyone reading this forum was smart enough to understand sarcasm.

ChicagoRJ
silly me
 
lfigueroa said:
And here I thought everyone reading this forum was smart enough not to take the 10,000 ball thing literally.

Lou Figueroa
silly me
Click to expand...
In fact the guy who wrote the 10,000 hour book (Malcolm Gladwell) took the 10,000 number far too literally. See the book "The Sports Gene" or read the rebuttal of the guy who did the original elite performer research.

But some overlook a main part of the 10,000 hour idea. It has to be organized, coached (or directed) practice. It's not 10,000 hours on a pool table. There are lots of 60-year-old players who have gone far beyond that many hours and have never run two racks. And as far as the exact amount of time required, "The Sports Gene" gives some excellent examples of some of the extremes.
 
mikepage said:
Yeah, sheesh... It's 10,000 HOURS, which is 1,000,000 balls......
Click to expand...


I think you may have missed my point, which was 10,000 balls = aiming better.

10,000 hours = getting *really* good at something, which is not what I was saying.

Lou Figueroa
 
Bob Jewett said:
In fact the guy who wrote the 10,000 hour book (Malcolm Gladwell) took the 10,000 number far too literally. See the book "The Sports Gene" or read the rebuttal of the guy who did the original elite performer research.

But some overlook a main part of the 10,000 hour idea. It has to be organized, coached (or directed) practice. It's not 10,000 hours on a pool table. There are lots of 60-year-old players who have gone far beyond that many hours and have never run two racks. And as far as the exact amount of time required, "The Sports Gene" gives some excellent examples of some of the extremes.
Click to expand...


I haven't read the "Sports Gene" but have read, "Talent is Overrated," "The Talent Code," and "Mozart's Brain and the Fighter Pilot" so I get what you're saying about focused, directed practice. And sure, we all know guys who have been playing for decades and are not favorites to get out of a single rack of 9ball.

My own opinion is that not only do you have to be focused in your practice, I also believe there is particular value in extended practice sessions, during which -- if you are focused -- the game opens itself up a bit and gives you the opportunity for insights you won't get just by banging them around for an hour.

Lou Figueroa
 
lfigueroa said:
My own opinion is that not only do you have to be focused in your practice, I also believethere is particular value in extended practice sessions, during which -- if you are focused -- the game opens itself up a bit and gives you the opportunity for insights you won't get just by banging them around for an hour.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

I agree 100%
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top