A long comment on "aiming systems" ...

[JB Cases]

Doesn't state the wide range of cut shots that you say cte doesn't work for. Please elaborate.

I would like to know this as well. I have found that it works consistently for 0 degrees all the way through about 80ish degrees. I'd say that's a pretty wide range. And I know that I don't even do it the right way.

Dave Segal says it works for all shots and I agree.

In fact I used Dave's method on this shot two days ago and sliced it in.

CueTable Help

When Dave Segal demonstrated this ON VIDEO in answer to yet another "proof" challenge posted by a naysayer he made something like 13 of 15 shots in a row and one he made but didn't count because he scratched at the same time.

Dave's shot was much easier than this nine ball but I did it exactly the same way he taught on the video and it went right in.

 

[Grilled Cheese]

But instead of doing the WORK to learn it the right way you prefer to not learn it at all and claim it doesn't work.

First, you assume you know what I have tried and what I have not, and whether or not I have worked toward it. That assumption implies the system is true and works, because the other implication is that if I worked on it, it would have worked and thus be true. Secondly, you use the phrase "learn it the right way" ...again injecting the fallacious argument that the system is true, it's just that others don't do it right.

Yes JB, the flying spaghetti monster is indeed real - YOU just can't see it. If you were doing it right, you'd be able to see it too. Meatballs included.

And yes you are being a smart ass. What sort of bullshit would you be "buying into" by spending a few hours working on something you get for free? The time you have spent in this thread could have been spent on the table working it out.

Another problem is that there's no diagram or real description of this "system" ...what the hell kind of system cannot be explained on paper? Maybe a bullshit one? Why even call it a system? Why even claim it's about aim. These are things, by their very nature, that should absolutely be describable on paper with no ambiguity or vagueness. Is there any vagueness to ghost ball? None. Zero.

The REAL difference between you and I is that when someone gives me some information on how to play better I take it to the table and work on it until I own it. Case in Point, I made a video trying to interpret an aiming system put out on a blog. Dave Segal who knows that aiming system inside and out crtiqued my approach and offered his information as to how I should do it. So after this post I am off to the pool room, Ipad in hand, to TRY what he is teaching.

Yes, exactly. This system is so precise and accurate and good for your game, that you've been working HOW LONG on it? Shouldn't aim be a done deal for you by now given this system? I asked that many pages ago, but you either didn't see it, or ignored the question.


What kind of aiming system requires so long to figure out, work on, or master? (perhaps not a real one?). Aiming is visual and mental. How long does it take to be able to see the line of aim an aiming system is suppose to provide? Months? Days? Years? Minutes?


I don't think you're working on any aiming system. I think you think it's the aiming system you're working on, and in reality, you're really coping with working through whatever stroke error or flaws you may have, intermittent or not.

The big problem is that, rather than accept that your aim is fine, and you need to perfect your stroke - you actually waste time and energy on this "short cut" of yours thinking it's aim all along.


It's better to know the problem, so that it can be addressed and solved. That is how these aiming systems, and people who "work on them" for months and years end up serving as the perfect example of my argument from the FIRST POST in this very thread. People waste their time on the wrong problem.


Thank you for proving me right with your own testimony.

 

[Grilled Cheese]

When Dave Segal demonstrated this ON VIDEO in answer to yet another "proof" challenge posted by a naysayer he made something like 13 of 15 shots in a row and one he made but didn't count because he scratched at the same time.

OMG! What great testimony to the truth of this system. 13 out of 15 shots! I saw a preacher on TV touch someone on the forehead and they fell back and spazzed out like they were having a seizure. He said was the power of God channeling through him.


You people put forth nothing but testimonials and other hype. No proof. We should start calling your "side" the CTE Taliban. Fanatics of religious aiming systems who terrorize non-believers.

 

[nick serdula]

Stroke is everything.

Shane's aiming system is very powerful. You just have to play good enough to use it. It takes advantage of the straight line you see. Not the straight line you percieve.
It also instantly adjusts for cueball throw into the pocket. And that is how most shots are missed. They are shot straight into the pocket. The problem is the weight of the cueball forces the object ball to twist as is rolls. So straight in is not always the way to pocket balls.
Nick

 

[cfrandy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zAFcV7zuUDA


Not much difference

LOL...very good analogy!

 

[cfrandy]

I own the cte pro1 dvd by stan shuffet. If you watch it, it talks all about the lateral movement and the pivoting in the first part of dvd.

It is not as clear as you think.

I bought and watched the DVD too. IMO it is a waste of money!

 

[cfrandy]

OMG! What great testimony to the truth of this system. 13 out of 15 shots! I saw a preacher on TV touch someone on the forehead and they fell back and spazzed out like they were having a seizure. He said was the power of God channeling through him.


You people put forth nothing but testimonials and other hype. No proof. We should start calling your "side" the CTE Taliban. Fanatics of religious aiming systems who terrorize non-believers.

Very funny! And unfortunately very true!

 

[JB Cases]

OMG! What great testimony to the truth of this system. 13 out of 15 shots! I saw a preacher on TV touch someone on the forehead and they fell back and spazzed out like they were having a seizure. He said was the power of God channeling through him.


You people put forth nothing but testimonials and other hype. No proof. We should start calling your "side" the CTE Taliban. Fanatics of religious aiming systems who terrorize non-believers.

Well, here is the difference. Dave took the challenge that someone posted, which was to show how a ball frozen to the rail with the cue ball sitting at about 88 degrees. He did and explained clearly and precisely how to shoot the shot using a system. So anyone could duplicate his set up and follow his instructions and see for themselves if it worked or not. Which I did and found that it does. Now I know it and when a shot like that comes up then I have about a 80% chance to make it.

But your attempt to compare Dave's demonstration to a fraudulent preacher shows the pathetic depths you will go to in order to denigrate anything connected to these systems.

Essentially you are calling Dave a liar who would somehow fake a result (as if he could) in order to trick people.

Ok Mr logic, l am sure you are a closet economist as well so explain where the motivation is for Dave to do this?

Presumably if it was a trick then any of you could have duplicated the setup and exposed the trick.

But you didn't.


www.jbcases.com

 

[JB Cases]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zAFcV7zuUDA


Not much difference

I am not sure what your point is for posting this but I want to say thanks. I have a pair of shoes where the laces would not stay tied. And in fact all my shoes with laces wouldn't stay tied.

So this morning I see your post and watch the video and I learn a better way to tie my laces. I use it and go out with my family and now I just got home 9 hours later and took my shoes off and the laces stayed perfect all day.

But if we extend this out to the current conversation then my anecdotal evidence is not acceptable. The video you showed is not proof of a better way to tie shoelaces.

Anyone who advocates this "non-standard" way of tying shoelaces is going to be labeled a shoelacian sucker by those who won't even try the method given away for free i the video. And so on........

 

[JB Cases]

I bought and watched the DVD too. IMO it is a waste of money!

It's a total waste of money if all you do is watch it. I would NEVER in my entire life buy an instructional DVD on pool if I did not intend to take the instruction to the table.

And of all the DVDs I bought this one is one that needs table time quite a bit. It seems to me that the only ones expecting a miracle shortcut are the very people who claim there are no shortcuts in pool. You buy a DVD which features a non-standard aiming system where the instructor says clearly in the first five minutes that it will require a lot of work to get it down and yet you claim it's a waste of money because you don't want to do the work.

That is kind of strange thinking to me.

All you guys talk about how hard you work to get good and then when all of us talk about the work we put in to get our aiming situated you put us down as if we are retarded. We say clearly that it takes a while to really get it down and yet you claim we said it's a miracle cure that happens in minutes. We didn't say that and when you get the DVD you somehow are STILL expecting some miracle cure in minutes.........

Very weird.

Well, one man's junk is another man's treasure so put it up for sale and I am sure someone will take it off your hands.

 

[JB Cases]

OMG! What great testimony to the truth of this system. 13 out of 15 shots! I saw a preacher on TV touch someone on the forehead and they fell back and spazzed out like they were having a seizure. He said was the power of God channeling through him.


You people put forth nothing but testimonials and other hype. No proof. We should start calling your "side" the CTE Taliban. Fanatics of religious aiming systems who terrorize non-believers.

We don't terrorize non-believers. It's not about belief. You and your ilk are the ONLY ones bringing religion into it.

We bristle at people like you who continue to dog it without saying WHY?

You won't learn it. You won't try it. You won't practice it despite harping about how anyone who wants to really learn must practice.

In fact you WILL NOT apply your own standards to any of these systems. System users on the other hand do. We take the idea of practice seriously and we practice what we know a lot. Then if new information comes along or someone figures out some tweak that works for them we share it and everyone practices that.

What do you do?

You KNOCK.

And everybody knows that the worst guy in the pool room is the KNOCKER.

You should apply your labels to yourself. There is more than one way to tie a shoe and maybe the way you have always done it isn't the best way.

 

[JB Cases]

Shane's aiming system is very powerful. You just have to play good enough to use it. It takes advantage of the straight line you see. Not the straight line you percieve.
It also instantly adjusts for cueball throw into the pocket. And that is how most shots are missed. They are shot straight into the pocket. The problem is the weight of the cueball forces the object ball to twist as is rolls. So straight in is not always the way to pocket balls.
Nick

I just spent an hour working out on a table with 4" pockets. I was using Shane's method as best I understood it. Worked very very well for me. Had a few nice run outs in 8 ball on this brutal table.

 

[cfrandy]

Start from 19:00 to the 21:00 and more on that DVD..

They call it manual pivoting. and they move the cue to the left or to the right AFTER they bend down.

Sorry I was out and couldn't answer to you promptly.

Again, nothing against the system. It just doesn't work for me because of this reason. It might work for you and other people.

You ARE exactly right! Dan does indeed move his cue laterally after going DOWN on the shot at exactly 13:00 on the video! Now some may think going "down" on the shot is something other than moving from the stance to actually placing the bridge hand on the table...but "going down on the shot" means exactly that! Stan goes down from his stance, placing his bridge hand on the table, then pivots the cue laterally, practice strokes one time, and shoots!

 

[Cornerman]

I am not sure what your point is for posting this but I want to say thanks. I have a pair of shoes where the laces would not stay tied. And in fact all my shoes with laces wouldn't stay tied.

So this morning I see your post and watch the video and I learn a better way to tie my laces. I use it and go out with my family and now I just got home 9 hours later and took my shoes off and the laces stayed perfect all day.

I learned to tie my shoes in Cub Scouts. The right way. The way shown in the video.

I also teach (taught) students how tie shoes with an added instruction on how to really tighten the not for those leather or nylon laces that keep getting untied. Maybe I'll make a video!!!!

That's neither here nor there. Someone has a method ,if it works better or helps... great. If it doesn't help, people should just move on.

 

[naji]

Been a lot of talk about aiming systems lately, thought I'd add my $0.02 and felt it would be a better idea to put it in its own thread rather than derail an existing one on aiming. It's more polite this way. Especially since I'm going to shatter some people's delusions below....

Hope this reply does not throw a wrench at other replies. What if we aim always straight at same point for every shot, such that if you hit OB with center CB the OB will go 100% straight, from that spot adjust elevation and english such that CB curves the right amount and make the OB any where you want, could this be perfected??? for sure might be helpful for very thin cuts..

 

[JB Cases]

First, you assume you know what I have tried and what I have not, and whether or not I have worked toward it. That assumption implies the system is true and works, because the other implication is that if I worked on it, it would have worked and thus be true. Secondly, you use the phrase "learn it the right way" ...again injecting the fallacious argument that the system is true, it's just that others don't do it right.

Yes JB, the flying spaghetti monster is indeed real - YOU just can't see it. If you were doing it right, you'd be able to see it too. Meatballs included.





Another problem is that there's no diagram or real description of this "system" ...what the hell kind of system cannot be explained on paper? Maybe a bullshit one? Why even call it a system? Why even claim it's about aim. These are things, by their very nature, that should absolutely be describable on paper with no ambiguity or vagueness. Is there any vagueness to ghost ball? None. Zero.




Yes, exactly. This system is so precise and accurate and good for your game, that you've been working HOW LONG on it? Shouldn't aim be a done deal for you by now given this system? I asked that many pages ago, but you either didn't see it, or ignored the question.


What kind of aiming system requires so long to figure out, work on, or master? (perhaps not a real one?). Aiming is visual and mental. How long does it take to be able to see the line of aim an aiming system is suppose to provide? Months? Days? Years? Minutes?


I don't think you're working on any aiming system. I think you think it's the aiming system you're working on, and in reality, you're really coping with working through whatever stroke error or flaws you may have, intermittent or not.

The big problem is that, rather than accept that your aim is fine, and you need to perfect your stroke - you actually waste time and energy on this "short cut" of yours thinking it's aim all along.


It's better to know the problem, so that it can be addressed and solved. That is how these aiming systems, and people who "work on them" for months and years end up serving as the perfect example of my argument from the FIRST POST in this very thread. People waste their time on the wrong problem.


Thank you for proving me right with your own testimony.

God you're amazingly dense. Number one I don't play pool every day. I don't have time every day to devote to practicing intently so I do it when I can. Thus it's going to take me longer to get something down than another person who does have the time.

You make a lot of generalizations with ZERO support? You cite the scientific method well where is your proof?

Please? Studies? Experiments?

Anything? Bueller? Buuuuellllller???? Buellllllllllllelrrrrrrrrrr?

Seems like a lot of CONJECTURE on your part since YOU don't know the history of ANY person here who talks a lot about aiming systems.

Or do you? Do you have documentation of how much they worked on their stroke and stance and speed control and with whom?????

Yeah, I didn't THINK so. You don't know how good any of these guys other than what they TELL you or SHOW you.

So please stop the nonsense about how rational and logical you are and how you are busting our delusions.

I would LOVE to see you tell Stevie Moore to his face that he is delusional.

I bet you would be a groveling fanboy begging for his autograph instead.

 

[JB Cases]

You ARE exactly right! Dan does indeed move his cue laterally after going DOWN on the shot at exactly 13:00 on the video! Now some may think going "down" on the shot is something other than moving from the stance to actually placing the bridge hand on the table...but "going down on the shot" means exactly that! Stan goes down from his stance, placing his bridge hand on the table, then pivots the cue laterally, practice strokes one time, and shoots!

And the reason that the other person claimed STAN not "Dan" was doing it is 100% wrong.

Going down on the shot is placing the bridge hand and settling into shooting position. You ARE NOT in shooting position UNTIL you are addressing the cue ball.

Unbelievable.

Dave posted several videos where Jimmy Moore pivots his cue into shooting position. Are you going to be like Lou and tell dead champions that they are wrong as well?

 

[cfrandy]

Hope this reply does not throw a wrench at other replies. What if we aim always straight at same point for every shot, such that if you hit OB with center CB the OB will go 100% straight, from that spot adjust elevation and english such that CB curves the right amount and make the OB any where you want, could this be perfected??? for sure might be helpful for very thin cuts..

The "Naji System of Aiming"...market it and it will sell. :thumbup:

 

[SJDinPHX]

Puhleeze...

Well, here is the difference. Dave took the challenge that someone posted, which was to show how a ball frozen to the rail with the cue ball sitting at about 88 degrees. He did and explained clearly and precisely how to shoot the shot using a system. So anyone could duplicate his set up and follow his instructions and see for themselves if it worked or not. Which I did and found that it does. Now I know it and when a shot like that comes up then I have about a 80% chance to make it.

But your attempt to compare Dave's demonstration to a fraudulent preacher shows the pathetic depths you will go to in order to denigrate anything connected to these systems.

Essentially you are calling Dave a liar who would somehow fake a result (as if he could) in order to trick people.

Ok Mr logic, l am sure you are a closet economist as well so explain where the motivation is for Dave to do this?

Presumably if it was a trick then any of you could have duplicated the setup and exposed the trick.

But you didn't.


www.jbcases.com

Well John, I have come to the conclusion that you, (a) enjoy controversy (b) will not tolerate being told you are wrong. (even if you are wrong) (c) You have a very high threshhold, for pain. (d) Would rather fight, than switch. (e) You will never be truely happy, until you can beat Efren or SVB (which obviously, ain't ever gonna happen)...and finally, (f) You may be the only intelligent person on the planet, who has chosen to air his views, and to argue his various points, endlessly...on any given subject..on a stinking pool forum,...where NOBODY else cares whose right or wrong..(and most of the people you are arguing with, don't even know what color the eight ball is !)

You may have noticed, (or not) that you are a 'moving target', and quite frankly, you do not move too fast..(think snail)...Only JoeyA, may be a little slower than you..:embarrassed2: JK, JK Joey, its a toss-up.

I offer this, as a bit of friendly advice..Take care of your successful business, go home to your lovely wife, and child, and stop trying to change the pool world to your way of thinking...You are wasting a valuable time in your life, which could be much better spent smelling the flowers, (or even pissing on them)...Because, in case you haven't figured it out yet..nobody gives a shit about what you think...and its doubtful, they ever will...

PS.. Although, that could be why you enjoy jumping into these conflicts...Does that make you "smarter" than your dozens of detractors ? If thats the case...Go for it. (one must wonder)..

 

[JB Cases]

The "Naji System of Aiming"...market it and it will sell. :thumbup:

Maybe. If it works. Guaranteed some of us would buy it and try it before we criticize it. We certainly aren't going to dismiss this man out of hand. He might very well have discovered something worthwhile that helps people play better.

If it holds up then we will say so. If not then we can say WHY NOT because we tried it fairly and honestly with no bias.

Some people will remember IMMSHARMA or something like that. He/she was a person who came on RSB claiming to invented the mother of all aiming systems and it would be on sale soon........and then he disappeared. So either the Aiming System Mafia put him with Jimmy Hoffa or he figured out that whatever he had wasn't marketable.

(there is an Aiming System Mafia by the way and we are really happy with all the free publicity you all are providing, on our own the threads about aiming would die quickly but with the naysayer tribe they live forever, it's appreciated)