A long comment on "aiming systems" ...
- Thread starter Grilled Cheese
- Start date
TheThaiger
Banned
Buddy, why is it those that can't shoot straight are the most desperate to see themselves on film?
Anyway...
TheThaiger
Banned
How were they misinterpreted or misrepresented? Didn't you admonish other people for doing exactly as you did?
(Again) anyway...
Well, as GC predicted, the thread got derailed, but John has gone to Redemption Island, so maybe we can get back on track. Setting Mr. Peabody's Wayback Machine for a few pages back, this might be a good place to resume:
Lou Figueroa
Lou Figueroa
TheThaiger
Banned
I didn't ask for or want your name. That was not the intention of my post.
I do like the name Bruce, though. :embarrassed2:
Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? (By War)
I love that song by the way
I still believe systems should be used as guidelines and it is the BEST way to teach the game. So kudos for Stan and people like him.
But like I said before. When you look at a shot and you know you will make the shot 10 out of 10, think about the very tough shot that you are lucky to make 2 out of 10.
Shane, Efren, Francisco, Earl and all the other greats will make it 10 out of 10 too.
Now go back to the shot that you make 10 out of 10. Did you aim? Did you check your stance? Did you try to deliver a straight stroke? I didn't think so.
I love that song by the way
I still believe systems should be used as guidelines and it is the BEST way to teach the game. So kudos for Stan and people like him.
But like I said before. When you look at a shot and you know you will make the shot 10 out of 10, think about the very tough shot that you are lucky to make 2 out of 10.
Shane, Efren, Francisco, Earl and all the other greats will make it 10 out of 10 too.
Now go back to the shot that you make 10 out of 10. Did you aim? Did you check your stance? Did you try to deliver a straight stroke? I didn't think so.
Buddy, why is it those that can't shoot straight are the most desperate to see themselves on film?
Anyway...
i like that you responded to this and it just proves the post i made above your post is correct, :thumbup: well, see before you were banished from the uk forums and you wondered the internet like a lost lonely puppy looking for a new home because nobody wants you, a lot of these same guys you are trying to be chummy with used to think also that cte system would not work on different sized table and i do suck at pool i don't think i could make 3 balls in a row. do you even play pool? i doubt it.
Last edited:
Thanks.Dr. Dave's Satire of certain aiming systems, their users, proponents and teachers from his website:
from the DAM resource page:
I have invented an amazing and new aiming system called DAM that will revolutionize pool playing all around the world. You won't find DAM in any books, because it has just been recently invented. But rest assured ... all future pool books will present DAM in its full glory. DAM is the best and most complete aiming system, that also contributes to correct body alignment, that has ever been devised. Most of the pros use it, especially the Filipino players ... that's why they are so good. DAM works on every shot, regardless of the distance between the balls, or the angle and distance to the pocket. The best thing about DAM is you don't even need to know or see where the pocket is. Just align and pivot, and the ball just goes in the hole. When a good player uses the system, it is impossible to tell ... it will just look like they are naturally pocketing balls. That's when you know they are using DAM!
Try to prove that DAM doesn't work ... you can't, because it does work. If you can't make it work, it is because you really don't understand it. If you ask a pro if he or she uses DAM, and he or she says he or she doesn't, it is because he or she doesn't want you to know his or her secrets. The DAM system will radically improve the shot-making abilities of those who spend the time to learn it. DAM will eventually become the "aiming standard" and will significantly accelerate your learning curve. There are those who will eventually learn the system, and there are those who will not, and be beaten by those who do. If you don't think DAM works, it is because you haven't had personalized lessons with somebody who truly understands it. I make almost every shot with this system ... I rarely miss. Isn't that proof of how good it is? Don't you want to be as good as me? If you want to master the DAM system, you must visit me in person and pay outrageous sums of money to learn all of the required intricacies.
It only takes two days to learn DAM, and if you practice it for two months, you will start winning tournaments. If you can't make it work, it is because you don't have enough "visual intelligence," in which case you are hopeless. Don't ask me to describe the system in words or with diagrams, because this can't be done; although, I do have lots of fancy words and phrases to describe various parts of the system ... aren't you impressed? If you don't believe in my system or if you doubt the validity of my approach, you will be banished by all of my followers.
Probably the most amazing fact about DAM is that it works for all types of shots, not just cut shots. It also gives you the correct line of aim for combos, caroms, and banks. And you don't need to adjust for speed, English, throw, or spin-transfer effects. All of the adjustment happen automatically with DAM.
If you want to learn the magic of DAM, I am currently offering exclusive private lessons. I know this might sound ridiculous, but I must be clear on this matter: My students are not allowed to share with anybody anything they learn. They are required to sign a special nondisclosure agreement that binds them for life. People are willing to openly discuss and share everything they learn from my VEPS series; but if and when I ever release the DAM-DVD, the information must not be disclosed by any viewers; otherwise, they risk exposing themselves to extreme wrath and persecution.
A little humor goes a long way in illustrating the absurdity of some of their arguments and the things they say.
Well done!
What is funny (or sad) is that many of the sentences are direct quotes or paraphrases from statements posted by "aiming system" proponents on pool Internet forums over the years.
I have never really had anything against aiming systems over the years, because many of them do offer realistic benefits. I just object to the way they are sometimes "marketed."
Regards,
Dave
Since he's now vacationing on scenic Redemption Island, I think that means I won "the bet"...for this thread anyways. Hopefully, we won't have to endure watching him attempt to run five racks on YouTube--with or without the Emperor's clothes on.
Apparently I missed about 22 pages of posts over that past few days, and just finished skimming through them. I wasn't going to even post, but I feel something needs to be said in defense of Stan.
Look, I have no idea financially or time-wise what it took Stan to film and produce his DVD, or how much money he made on the venture. As I posted in prior threads, I too thought some parts of the DVD were unclear, I actually watched it at home twice up to the half way point and didn't see how it was going to work. But I took just a little extra time to reach out to some people and received the help I needed to fully understand it.
I had no trouble reaching Stan, he posted his number here. We talked several times about CTE/Pro1, he was very vested in helping me with it, never once mentioning that I should come take a lesson in person or anything else self-serving. He just wanted me to "get it", like I do with my students. I continue to email him with questions even unrelated to CTE and he is gracious enough to respond with helpful advice, which I really appreciate, he certainly is under no obligation to do so.
Now if I watch the DVD back again it all makes perfect sense. I can see where maybe some concepts were just glossed over a little too quickly, or a little disjointed, or something was briefly mentioned that was pretty important to a newbie. Watching it at home and not at a table didn't help. I don't think any confusion was intentional at all - I think limitations on camera and production time as well as his deep understanding of the material contributed. It's like when I help my wife with math. it all makes sense to me but I have to remember to really break it down for her.
So it seems each one of these threads, pro or against CTE, Pro1, 90/90, etc., will just involve the same same 10 - 15 people taking up space bashing each other and name calling. Instead of all of these CTE-related threads, or critiques thereof, degenerating into this each time, there should be a standing thread in the NPR section for you guys to critique one another's games, tell yo momma jokes, etc.
No one who uses CTE is going to admit it doesn't work, because it does for them and others, regardless of how or why. And none of the detractors are going to become converts either, or accept what anyone else has to say on the subject. So what's the point of these threads again?
Scott
Look, I have no idea financially or time-wise what it took Stan to film and produce his DVD, or how much money he made on the venture. As I posted in prior threads, I too thought some parts of the DVD were unclear, I actually watched it at home twice up to the half way point and didn't see how it was going to work. But I took just a little extra time to reach out to some people and received the help I needed to fully understand it.
I had no trouble reaching Stan, he posted his number here. We talked several times about CTE/Pro1, he was very vested in helping me with it, never once mentioning that I should come take a lesson in person or anything else self-serving. He just wanted me to "get it", like I do with my students. I continue to email him with questions even unrelated to CTE and he is gracious enough to respond with helpful advice, which I really appreciate, he certainly is under no obligation to do so.
Now if I watch the DVD back again it all makes perfect sense. I can see where maybe some concepts were just glossed over a little too quickly, or a little disjointed, or something was briefly mentioned that was pretty important to a newbie. Watching it at home and not at a table didn't help. I don't think any confusion was intentional at all - I think limitations on camera and production time as well as his deep understanding of the material contributed. It's like when I help my wife with math. it all makes sense to me but I have to remember to really break it down for her.
So it seems each one of these threads, pro or against CTE, Pro1, 90/90, etc., will just involve the same same 10 - 15 people taking up space bashing each other and name calling. Instead of all of these CTE-related threads, or critiques thereof, degenerating into this each time, there should be a standing thread in the NPR section for you guys to critique one another's games, tell yo momma jokes, etc.
No one who uses CTE is going to admit it doesn't work, because it does for them and others, regardless of how or why. And none of the detractors are going to become converts either, or accept what anyone else has to say on the subject. So what's the point of these threads again?
Scott
JC
Coos Cues
There aren't more great players, they just are more easily brought to our consciousness by instant information. China? Couldn't find out anything about them 20 years ago. Who knew about them? It's much harder to hide these days. Can't hide your name, can't hide your face, can't hide your speed. So the game within the game has changed. If something happens today, we don't have to wait for the evening news to learn about it.
I'm an information fan. I love DVDs, especially ones my friends bought that I can mooch.
Some of them are good, some not as good but almost all of them contain something of use. I have yet to view the DVD that can magically transform anyone into anything they are not unless they use the information. And sometimes even then we think we're doing just what it says, but we're not.
Again, CTE, or any aiming system, can be used to make every shot at the table if you know how to use the system effectively. However, if you follow the instructions for any of the CTE aiming system variations literally and precisely, there will be many shots at the table that won't go. Proof and illustrations of this fact can be found here:
and here:
But again, this doesn't mean you can't use CTE-based systems effectively. Examples of how CTE can be used to pocket every ball at the table are described and illustrated on the CTE evaluation and analysis page. Again, one doesn't need to know this stuff to use CTE effectively, but it does explain "how the system works" when it is used effectively.
I hope that helps,
Dave
JC
Coos Cues
That's not true. They will only make it 5 out of 10 times and they recognize it. So they play safe instead most of the time.
The problem with skimming all those pages is that there is actually some really good stuff in this thread. Maybe you could grab a beer (or three), or your favorite beverage of choice, and spend some time reading them?
Did John come in (with the rest of the CTE mafia in tow) and manage to derail the thread? Well, of course. But that doesn't mean that some good if not great insights weren't made and that some of us actually enjoy hashing some of this out. The other stuff is, unfortunamente, just part of the deal.
Lou Figueroa
Please allow me to humbly add that maybe sometimes there is an interest in promoting a system, but besides that arguments in anger between players are also made due to their genuine love for the game and the ego that comes with it. Not necessarily due to their character.
Usually "your play reflects yourself" but it doesn't always mean that a player is a bad guy when he stands by his opinion with passion, even if he is really wrong sometimes.
Having an open mind in pool is essential, looking into every info available won't hurt if you have a good "filter"..
My concern and I believe for many others here is to guide young players to the right direction, this would only be good for the game.
So our sceptisism of aiming systems was not expressed mailny for the nature of those systems but for the danger coming from focusing too much on them which is poor development in the other parts of the game.
This danger does exist, I've seen it many times during the 22 years I've been playing, people focusing too much on pocketing balls which is only part of the game, and darebly saying not the most important.
Good players loose in tournament against top players without missing a single shot most of the times..
I think that most advocates of the new aiming systems would agree with all this, perhaps it was the way those systems were presented that gave start to strong arguments, with not enough emphasis on the real function of those systems which is not providing an "ultimate truth"..
On the other hand perhaps the aiming methods were actually presented in a correct way, but others did not figure it out since they were too sceptical on new info about a game that is already analyzed a lot and played at top level for years now, without that new info circulating around..
The game certainly evolves costantly, but really how much?...
Anyway, there is absolutely no reason for personal conflict upon pool analysis, unfortunately it's natural human feature to do so but really not what we need.
Analyzing calmly with arguments in order is benefitial for everyone, that's what we should keep in mind..
Usually "your play reflects yourself" but it doesn't always mean that a player is a bad guy when he stands by his opinion with passion, even if he is really wrong sometimes.
Having an open mind in pool is essential, looking into every info available won't hurt if you have a good "filter"..
My concern and I believe for many others here is to guide young players to the right direction, this would only be good for the game.
So our sceptisism of aiming systems was not expressed mailny for the nature of those systems but for the danger coming from focusing too much on them which is poor development in the other parts of the game.
This danger does exist, I've seen it many times during the 22 years I've been playing, people focusing too much on pocketing balls which is only part of the game, and darebly saying not the most important.
Good players loose in tournament against top players without missing a single shot most of the times..
I think that most advocates of the new aiming systems would agree with all this, perhaps it was the way those systems were presented that gave start to strong arguments, with not enough emphasis on the real function of those systems which is not providing an "ultimate truth"..
On the other hand perhaps the aiming methods were actually presented in a correct way, but others did not figure it out since they were too sceptical on new info about a game that is already analyzed a lot and played at top level for years now, without that new info circulating around..
The game certainly evolves costantly, but really how much?...
Anyway, there is absolutely no reason for personal conflict upon pool analysis, unfortunately it's natural human feature to do so but really not what we need.
Analyzing calmly with arguments in order is benefitial for everyone, that's what we should keep in mind..
Petros, I think you make some great points. We're all passionate about the game here, and some here take in very personally when their beliefs are criticized. It is, as you say, human nature, and many of us here are all too human.
Lou Figueroa