Advise to Dr. DAVE From Ron V.

[Cornerman]

Maybe that's a measure of one's intellectual laziness.

Colin

Yes, that's one way of saying it. The other is that I'm pretty much challenging everyone who is actually going to write something as rebuttal to take the painstaking time to read and digest as much as they can before spouting out.

But what about the rest, Colin? What about the links? You're going to sit there and try to tell me you link and relink and re-read everything? After all, when someone puts a link, it's with the hopes that the reader follows and reads it, too.

Be that as it may, if by some miracle you read everything, then I get to be wrong for one of you. What about the other 99.99%? They should go ahead and prove me wrong as well. If they did, the forum would be a hell a lot more productive. I won't hold my breath.

Fred

 

[Cornerman]

{about having to have some faith in the system} I can understand this. Especially if the "aim" the system gets you to looks wrong to you. As it would if you normally miss the shot. For instance if you normally overcut a particular shot, and a system gets you to the right aim, it will look to you like you're hitting too thick. You have to put some trust in the new aim to use it effectively.

and

{about having to be at the table with a qualified instructor} I am struggling with this idea. Again if anyone could help with detailed explanation of a small example of the kind of thing people mean by this, I would appreciate it.

For one small example, I think you've given one in the first quoted paragraph. If you're by yourself already as a skeptic, then you might come up on a shot that 2D diagrams tell you that the shot in question won't work, or per your quoted paragraph above, your eyes will tell you a certain shot won't work. Standing with a qualified instructor or another "believer" could at the very least get you to shoot the ball to get you past the "I don't believe this shot will go" mindset and shoot.

Also, to both yours and Spidey's point, someone else observing your pivot could at the very least tell you what's different between what they're describing and how you are pivoting.

Another is that after all these years of trying to explain how to aim the two points of aim for Hal Houle's very basic beginner's/intro system, I still get people who had no idea that that's what he's been saying (that you shouldn't have any aim outside the cueball's edge like you would in, say, Ghost Ball). Showing them on a table made it very clear.

And then what about the Colin Colenso back-hand english video? You and I have written or read about aim and pivot and Backhand English for 10 years on these forums, but after Colin put up his video recently, the response back proved that the discussion on these boards wasn't enough. Many people saw Coliln's video as if that was the first treatment of the subject!!! And, though many people had that "aha" moment, still not everyone understood it. Do you think that sitting right next to a person who can show backhand english would even be a better method of desribing it? I certainly do.

Fred <~~~ because it's impossible to read everything

 

[cookie man]

Colin, why would you be stuck on Ron apoligizing?. It's clear to all who know Ron and his system Dave took a real shot at him in print. It is also clear he used PJ's drawing which we all have said is not correct. Dave is the one who should apoligize.It's a shame really, this is all good free info, and I personally benifitted from it in the last year. I feel sorry for those who haven't given Ron or Hal or CTE by Stan a chance. I laugh when I play now because it's so easy.

 

[Koop]

I feel sorry for those who haven't given Ron or Hal or CTE by Stan a chance. I laugh when I play now because it's so easy.

Not to mention that some of Hal's systems are even easier than CTE. I've said it before, I watched someone on my APA team go from a good 4 to a high 5 / low 6 in months within teaching it to him. I guess simplifying parts of the game isn't for everyone.

 

[dr_dave]

Well, sure, not only can we go back to the discussion, but we can also discuss the meaning of 'reading.' You just posted praise to JoeW on his post, and hope that everyone "reads it." I have to ask: did you read it???

Yes; and I thought it was quite good, in all respects.

His post not only said the same thing that JoeyA and I wrote in this same thread (and others. Sorry, I didn't read everything. I skimmed), but it points out the very problem that some of us have with, say, your articles that may imply the attempt to disprove these systems as well as many of your posts on these aiming systems of the same language. Surely, you "read" that from Joe's post.

The purpose of my articles was not to disprove any particular system. The purpose was to debunk the sometimes-outrageous statements we often here about some of the systems. Another purpose was to provide some additional illustrations for discussion.

The "systems" obviously work for many people, because we have read numerous testimonials. To me and many others, we want to understand why the systems work for these people. The articles, illustrations, animations, and videos we have seen lately show that for the systems to work for a wide range of shots, "adjustments" are required. For Spidey, the "adjustment" is a slight shift in the bridge during the pivot. For others, the adjustment might be in where they place their bridge hand during the initial alignment step. For others, it might be where they place their head during the alignment or pivot step. I don't know how the systems work for everybody that uses them successfully; but I and others truly want to know, as evidenced by much of the participation in this thread. If we can figure out and explain/illustrate/demonstrate exactly how the systems work, then the systems might be more useful to even more people and we won't need to have threads like this any more.

For some people, it is enough to say: the system works if you have faith and trust in the system, if you visit and work with an instructor who really knows the system, and if you practice a lot. For other people (e.g., me), we want to know what various people are actually doing during the alignment and pivot steps to create the required lines of aim for a wide range of shots. All I want is a more complete and realistic description of how the systems work, because they don't always work as advertised (e.g., "Just pivot and the ball goes in the hole, regardless of the distance between the balls, regardless of your bridge length, and regardless of the angle to the pocket"). The diagrams in my articles show how angle to the pocket, ball distance, and bridge length (and/or effective pivot length) are important. If the system proponents don't explain how these effects are accounted for in their systems, then I think the descriptions of the systems are incomplete. To explain or illustrate "how a system works" we need to know what people are actually doing to make the system work. I think I know what Spidey does, but I'm not sure what other people do.

And even though JoeW says that you've already said that no one particular system is or was under attack, it is still a general belief and understanding that your writings do indeed mean to attempt to disprove these systems in general. So, please, read Joe's post again. For all of our sakes. But, remember that his statements aren't new. Surely you've read them before.

I doubt that anything in this thread or my articles is really new, but it does seem that we are making more progress in the discussion than we have in the past. I think it helps when people like JoeW step back and try to bring all sides of the various arguments together in a fair and respectful manner.

Respectfully,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

I am a keen user of the CTE reference guide nowadays.

I'm also very keen on the CTE reference. The 1/2-ball hit reference line (between the center of the CB and the edge of the OB) is very useful because it can be visualized clearly and accurately (for most people). If a cut is 30 degrees, then the CTE reference line is the exact required line of aim for the shot. If the cut is more than 30 degrees, then you need to adjust to aim thinner; and if it is less than 30 degrees, you need to adjust to aim fuller. I sometime use my well-calibrated 30-degree peace-sign hand to check a cut angle when my aim for a close-to-1/2-ball-hit shot doesn't look quite right to me. Maybe I can call this the "DAM-CTE" system. :wink:

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Are you trying to cryptically antagonize me Ron?

By the way, where is your apology to Dave for the many errors in your abusive first post? You ought to be banned for not apologizing for that post in my opinion.

I feel sorry for those who think you are some fountain of knowledge. You have not put together 3 cognizant words in your entire contribution to this forum. You refuse to answer questions because you know you don't know the answers. You're an artist of bovine excrement.

If your original post was directed at yourself it would have been almost entirely accurate. What ironies ignorance unfolds.

Colin

Wow! You Aussies can be quite poetic at times. I'm impressed.

Regards,
Dave

PS: I also thought Ron's initial post was inappropriate, and I have also been disappointed by his lack of participation is constructive debate, but I wouldn't go near as far as you did in this message. The list of people who need to make up and kiss continues to grow longer: PJ&Spidey, MP&Fred, me&Fred, Colin&Ron, Ron&me, me&"everybody else who hated my articles," etc.

 

[dr_dave]

Colin,

Excellent summary! I agree with your list of positives and your description of "why the systems work." I look forward to reading what the system proponents and believers think about your summary.

Regards,
Dave

Before Ron jumped in to stir me up I was preparing this post.

As there seems to be a common theme that us knuckleheaded critics are anti-90/90, CTE etc type systems, I wanted to make a post listing what I perceive to be the strongest advantages of these systems.

I think these advantages are the main reason players often find great success aiming and shooting this way.

1. Sighting point to point helps one to percieve an exact line and to take in the positions of the two balls relative to this line. In other words, they use a repeatable fixed method to visualize the ball positions.

2. These systems put you either right on line to begin with or in the ball park when used for appropriate shots.

3. In the pivot phase they move from this fixed line to another visual line that they perceive through the center of the CB. This finding of an aim line forces the mind to be decisive and exact. I believe forcing this decisiveness trains the mind not to wander and to make better decisions than just feeling around back and forth hoping to feel a ghost ball or contact point angle.

4. I suspect this one is the most powerful factor in these aiming methods. They force a player to commit to a pot line and then strike the cue dead straight through that line, rather than to swoop sideways on the shot as almost all beginners do. Because they focus hard on their pre-stroke alignment, they trust this line and stroke straight. If they do miss certain shots they will soon compensate with their aim until they learn to see the correct line.

The normal player very often aims thick on their cut angles and swoops a little to make the cuts. When they try to bring speed or english into those shots they meet with many difficulties. So using any system that forces a player to adopt strict and accurate pre-alignment, followed by a straight stroke, should meet with considerable success and consistancy after intensive practice.

5. Because players learn to trust their pre-alignment they begin to be able to relax during the actual stroke. This takes tension out of their arms and body and they can begin to execute with better speed and a more satisfactory feeling during execution. This may explain the feeling that they feel like they just pivot, bang and the ball goes in.

This is quite different to the normal play experience where there is a tendency to ride the ball into the hole. This occurs when players don't trust their alignment and tend to swoop a little to ride the cue ball to the correct point. This method of playing tends to make one have to work physically and mentally during the stroke. When pre-aligned well, the stroke is simply a matter of swinging the cue.

The only thing I don't agree with regarding these systems is that the systems find the aim line. I think it is the players that align themselves (via slight intuitive adjustments) to the correct aim line when need be. It will take them a little while to develop this ability for a wide range of shots.

Colin

 

[dr_dave]

... I tried to do a video today and got lost trying to look up everyone's various tests.

So if you have THE TEST then please post it using Cue Table and I will recreate on the pool table in our office. ...

Here are the diagrams from my November '08 article:

Diagram 1:

Diagram 2:

​

For each diagram, set up shot "A" and pocket the OB in the corner pocket, then shift everything a little toward shot "B" and repeat until you reach shot "B," showing and explaining what changes on each shot. Do at least 5 shots between setups "A" and "B."

I look forward to seeing videos from you and others (hopefully Spidey and Ron).

Regards,
Dave

 

[Pii]

"The only thing I don't agree with regarding these systems is that the systems find the aim line. I think it is the players that align themselves (via slight intuitive adjustments) to the correct aim line when need be. It will take them a little while to develop this ability for a wide range of shots.

Colin"

BINGO!!!

 

[dr_dave]

It's clear to all who know Ron and his system Dave took a real shot at him in print.

My articles and diagrams show only that the some systems are not fully described. For a system to work, it must address the effects in the diagrams. Obviously, the people who use the systems successfully do make adjustments to account for the effects. My articles just point out basic principles and effects concerning all cut-shot systems, and debunks some of the outrageous claims sometimes made about some systems. I admit I was "taking a shot" at the outrageous claims, but I certainly was not taking a shot at any individual or any specific system. People who have systems that work should not feel threatened by my articles. On the contrary, they should consider the diagrams as an opportunity to explain how their systems deal with the examples illustrated. I still hope we can get to that point.

It is also clear he used PJ's drawing which we all have said is not correct. Dave is the one who should apoligize.

When PJ posted his diagram, the draft of my article was already written. I think I mentioned this when PJ posted his diagram. But this is immaterial. Diagram 1 in my November '08 article (which is similar to what PJ posted) illustrates a basic fundamental principle. Nobody owns this concept. I don't think PJ thinks he invented the concept. I also wouldn't think he would be upset that I published a diagram similar to his in my article, even if I did create it after seeing his (which I didn't). If he is upset, he can let me know.

Why would you think the diagram (I assume you mean Diagram 1 in my November '08 article) is "not correct?" It might not explain how a particular system works, but that wasn't the intent. The diagram shows what would happen if you used the same alignment and pivot for every shot in the diagram. Again, my purpose wasn't to show how any particular system worked, it was to show one of the various effects that must be addressed by any aiming system. The diagram is "correct," even if it doesn't show how any particular system works.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Terry Erdman]

Dr. Dave,
You say you want to learn and understand all the in and outs of "the systems" and you want it explained in print. It is difficult, as explained many times before, as each person's aim and alignment is different, which is why face to face instruction is necessary. If you really want to get to the bottom of this, what is your problem with flying to NY and getting it straight from Ron? Whatever level of pool player you are he will be able to improve you shot making and then you can disect his system firsthand. What is your problem with that? You are an investigative journalist and you need to get the information that you are asking for in person and live! Ron will blow you away with his knowlege of pool shots and his system. It is more than you can imagine! Are you going to take him up on his offer or are you going to "whine like a little school girl."?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

The only thing I don't agree with regarding these systems is that the systems find the aim line. I think it is the players that align themselves (via slight intuitive adjustments) to the correct aim line when need be. It will take them a little while to develop this ability for a wide range of shots.

Colin

I know you didn't mean it this way, but just to be clear: neither the system nor the player find the aim line alone - they supplement each other in that task.

I think this is true for all aiming systems (and probably for all aiming), and I think that's the issue at the heart of the "controversial" systems. The "division of responsibility" between the system and the user is unclear (unacknowledged by some), so pinning it down naturally becomes the central topic, which is interpreted as "questioning the validity" of the system.

Of course, validity was never the question. It's well established and obvious that these systems work for their users. As they often say, you can't deny all the happy customers - I don't think anybody is denying it.

Even though I know these systems probably aren't for me and I don't want to spend money or more time to learn them, I still want to know how they work just for the knowledge. I'm not trying to attack the systems, but I won't stop asking questions to prove it.

pj
chgo

 

[dr_dave]

Dr. Dave,
You say you want to learn and understand all the in and outs of "the systems" and you want it explained in print. It is difficult, as explained many times before, as each person's aim and alignment is different, which is why face to face instruction is necessary. If you really want to get to the bottom of this, what is your problem with flying to NY and getting it straight from Ron? Whatever level of pool player you are he will be able to improve you shot making and then you can disect his system firsthand. What is your problem with that? You are an investigative journalist and you need to get the information that you are asking for in person and live! Ron will blow you away with his knowlege of pool shots and his system. It is more than you can imagine! Are you going to take him up on his offer or are you going to "whine like a little school girl."?

Thank you for the advice. I do hope to work with Ron one day, and we actually tried to plan something. He was going to fly out to Colorado, I was going to "put him up" in my place and feed him, and we were going to shoot some video together. I still hope we can make this happen in the future. If not, I hope I can make it out to NY. However, I just moved into a new house, just got married, will have major shoulder surgery next month, have a sometimes-very-demanding "day job" (university professor), and have many other interests and commitments, so it is not as easy as you make it sound to get together.

Regards,
Dave

 

[shinigami]

Well, I'm on my way to Ron this afternoon for a lesson. Let us all hope that I can digest his material and that I can give an unbiased review once I get back.

It is my hope that everyone on this forum get along because I appreciate everybody's feedback in AZ.

 

[Joe T]

Man I wish I had been the one to write this, it's pretty much how I've felt the whole time. Thanks Colin.

Before Ron jumped in to stir me up I was preparing this post.

As there seems to be a common theme that us knuckleheaded critics are anti-90/90, CTE etc type systems, I wanted to make a post listing what I perceive to be the strongest advantages of these systems.

I think these advantages are the main reason players often find great success aiming and shooting this way.

1. Sighting point to point helps one to percieve an exact line and to take in the positions of the two balls relative to this line. In other words, they use a repeatable fixed method to visualize the ball positions.

2. These systems put you either right on line to begin with or in the ball park when used for appropriate shots.

3. In the pivot phase they move from this fixed line to another visual line that they perceive through the center of the CB. This finding of an aim line forces the mind to be decisive and exact. I believe forcing this decisiveness trains the mind not to wander and to make better decisions than just feeling around back and forth hoping to feel a ghost ball or contact point angle.

4. I suspect this one is the most powerful factor in these aiming methods. They force a player to commit to a pot line and then strike the cue dead straight through that line, rather than to swoop sideways on the shot as almost all beginners do. Because they focus hard on their pre-stroke alignment, they trust this line and stroke straight. If they do miss certain shots they will soon compensate with their aim until they learn to see the correct line.

The normal player very often aims thick on their cut angles and swoops a little to make the cuts. When they try to bring speed or english into those shots they meet with many difficulties. So using any system that forces a player to adopt strict and accurate pre-alignment, followed by a straight stroke, should meet with considerable success and consistancy after intensive practice.

5. Because players learn to trust their pre-alignment they begin to be able to relax during the actual stroke. This takes tension out of their arms and body and they can begin to execute with better speed and a more satisfactory feeling during execution. This may explain the feeling that they feel like they just pivot, bang and the ball goes in.

This is quite different to the normal play experience where there is a tendency to ride the ball into the hole. This occurs when players don't trust their alignment and tend to swoop a little to ride the cue ball to the correct point. This method of playing tends to make one have to work physically and mentally during the stroke. When pre-aligned well, the stroke is simply a matter of swinging the cue.

The only thing I don't agree with regarding these systems is that the systems find the aim line. I think it is the players that align themselves (via slight intuitive adjustments) to the correct aim line when need be. It will take them a little while to develop this ability for a wide range of shots.

Colin

 

[SJDinPHX]

Well, I'm on my way to Ron this afternoon for a lesson. Let us all hope that I can digest his material and that I can give an unbiased review once I get back.

It is my hope that everyone on this forum get along because I appreciate everybody's feedback in AZ.

My input is.... Aiming systems will only confuse bangers and C players in their never ending search for the holy grail of pool. They may be fooled into thinking they are improving, but little if any major strides will be made.
I have yet to know ONE top player who subscribes to any of the engineering principles touted by many so-called experts in that field.
I'm sorry, but I would compare it with trying to teach someone how to hit a curve ball. There has to be some inbred hand eye coordination or it would be an exercise in futility.
I say to the guru's who expound on these "foolproof" theories...."Show me the money." The past greats of the game would laugh at these outlandish claims.
Good qualified instructors, can definately help a novice to learn correct stance, bridge, mechanics, etc., maybe even speed control to some extent.
But those who think they have developed a consistent, workable "aiming method" in my humble opinion, are snake oil salesman.

Dick Mc Morran

PS Let me say this, some aiming systems may work...if theres only ONE ball left on the table. Heaven forbid if the player should have to squirt, swerve, pivot or use BHE, or some other move to obtain position on the next ball.

 

[JoeyA]

Before Ron jumped in to stir me up I was preparing this post.

As there seems to be a common theme that us knuckleheaded critics are anti-90/90, CTE etc type systems, I wanted to make a post listing what I perceive to be the strongest advantages of these systems.

I think these advantages are the main reason players often find great success aiming and shooting this way.

1. Sighting point to point helps one to percieve an exact line and to take in the positions of the two balls relative to this line. In other words, they use a repeatable fixed method to visualize the ball positions.

2. These systems put you either right on line to begin with or in the ball park when used for appropriate shots.

3. In the pivot phase they move from this fixed line to another visual line that they perceive through the center of the CB. This finding of an aim line forces the mind to be decisive and exact. I believe forcing this decisiveness trains the mind not to wander and to make better decisions than just feeling around back and forth hoping to feel a ghost ball or contact point angle.

4. I suspect this one is the most powerful factor in these aiming methods. They force a player to commit to a pot line and then strike the cue dead straight through that line, rather than to swoop sideways on the shot as almost all beginners do. Because they focus hard on their pre-stroke alignment, they trust this line and stroke straight. If they do miss certain shots they will soon compensate with their aim until they learn to see the correct line.

The normal player very often aims thick on their cut angles and swoops a little to make the cuts. When they try to bring speed or english into those shots they meet with many difficulties. So using any system that forces a player to adopt strict and accurate pre-alignment, followed by a straight stroke, should meet with considerable success and consistancy after intensive practice.

5. Because players learn to trust their pre-alignment they begin to be able to relax during the actual stroke. This takes tension out of their arms and body and they can begin to execute with better speed and a more satisfactory feeling during execution. This may explain the feeling that they feel like they just pivot, bang and the ball goes in.

This is quite different to the normal play experience where there is a tendency to ride the ball into the hole. This occurs when players don't trust their alignment and tend to swoop a little to ride the cue ball to the correct point. This method of playing tends to make one have to work physically and mentally during the stroke. When pre-aligned well, the stroke is simply a matter of swinging the cue.

The only thing I don't agree with regarding these systems is that the systems find the aim line. I think it is the players that align themselves (via slight intuitive adjustments) to the correct aim line when need be. It will take them a little while to develop this ability for a wide range of shots.

Colin

Some VERY positive things about aiming systems. I don't think anyone can argue that.
Thanks,
JoeyA

 

[dr_dave]

Colin,

I knew your post was "excellent," but now I want to change my appraisal to "freakin' awesome!" I think you may have helped settle the seemingly endless debates about "aiming systems." I think it is now more clear than ever "how these systems work." Anytime I hear or read outrageous claims about "aiming systems" in the future, I think I will just refer people to your reasonable and clear summary.

Again, great job!

Regards,
Dave

Before Ron jumped in to stir me up I was preparing this post.

As there seems to be a common theme that us knuckleheaded critics are anti-90/90, CTE etc type systems, I wanted to make a post listing what I perceive to be the strongest advantages of these systems.

I think these advantages are the main reason players often find great success aiming and shooting this way.

1. Sighting point to point helps one to percieve an exact line and to take in the positions of the two balls relative to this line. In other words, they use a repeatable fixed method to visualize the ball positions.

2. These systems put you either right on line to begin with or in the ball park when used for appropriate shots.

3. In the pivot phase they move from this fixed line to another visual line that they perceive through the center of the CB. This finding of an aim line forces the mind to be decisive and exact. I believe forcing this decisiveness trains the mind not to wander and to make better decisions than just feeling around back and forth hoping to feel a ghost ball or contact point angle.

4. I suspect this one is the most powerful factor in these aiming methods. They force a player to commit to a pot line and then strike the cue dead straight through that line, rather than to swoop sideways on the shot as almost all beginners do. Because they focus hard on their pre-stroke alignment, they trust this line and stroke straight. If they do miss certain shots they will soon compensate with their aim until they learn to see the correct line.

The normal player very often aims thick on their cut angles and swoops a little to make the cuts. When they try to bring speed or english into those shots they meet with many difficulties. So using any system that forces a player to adopt strict and accurate pre-alignment, followed by a straight stroke, should meet with considerable success and consistancy after intensive practice.

5. Because players learn to trust their pre-alignment they begin to be able to relax during the actual stroke. This takes tension out of their arms and body and they can begin to execute with better speed and a more satisfactory feeling during execution. This may explain the feeling that they feel like they just pivot, bang and the ball goes in.

This is quite different to the normal play experience where there is a tendency to ride the ball into the hole. This occurs when players don't trust their alignment and tend to swoop a little to ride the cue ball to the correct point. This method of playing tends to make one have to work physically and mentally during the stroke. When pre-aligned well, the stroke is simply a matter of swinging the cue.

The only thing I don't agree with regarding these systems is that the systems find the aim line. I think it is the players that align themselves (via slight intuitive adjustments) to the correct aim line when need be. It will take them a little while to develop this ability for a wide range of shots.

Colin

 

[BlowFish]

After reading/skimming through all the post, my head is spinning. I better shot some pool to aline my head.