Aiming by feel: The rest of the story

[ShootingArts]

aiming by feel, back to the beginning

Joe,

You haven't been talking about a pure feel system. You are incorrect that someone even has to consciously determine an angle to begin with. Start with an object ball two inches from the pocket and the cue ball a foot from the object ball. No thought of angle or anything else is needed to make this sitting duck of a shot. As a feel shooter progresses more and more shots become these sitting ducks that don't require conscious thought. It is really as simple as that.

There are always some shots that a "feel" shooter has to stop and think about just like there are shots that people using any system have to give greater thought to or perhaps try a different approach. However true feel is not a joint operation, it is simply see the balls, make the object ball. No doubt a lot going on below the level the player is conscious of but nothing at the conscious level.

I have played for close to ten hours without ever really thinking how I was going to shoot a shot. I held an eight foot challenge table that entire time and was constantly being challenged. In fact I was like a side show attraction with people lined up to play me. I thought I had played for two or three hours and the sun was starting to come up when I left, still undefeated.

Hu

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Well Dr Dave, excuse me for jumping in here, but you are being guilty of hijacking this thread to AGAIN insist that somebody, anybody, explain to yoiur satisfaction how this or that aiming system works.

How about you either give it a rest or start another thread, or go to Stan's place and learn his system first hand?

Thanks.

Dave is politely asking questions about the use of "feel" in an aiming system, which is the topic of this thread. I'm interested and I'm sure others are too. If you're not there are other threads.

pj
chgo

 

[dr_dave]

I'm done

Well Dr Dave, excuse me for jumping in here, but you are being guilty of hijacking this thread to AGAIN insist that somebody, anybody, explain to yoiur satisfaction how this or that aiming system works.

Guilty as charged. I didn't start the CTE stuff, but I have pushed it. I apologize to Dr. Joe if he feels this was inappropriate in his thread. Don't worry ... I'm done.

After reading many hundreds of postings and e-mails concerning CTE, after talking with Stan, Hal, and others on the phone, and after trying (at my table) everything people have suggested, I still don't know how and why CTE works for the examples I have suggested (if it does). Maybe it is just too complicated for dunce-heads like me to understand. :frown:

I was going to start another thread and even write an article about CTE for BD, but I've decided not too because, after all of this effort, I still don't know how to describe or illustrate CTE in any way that makes real sense.

How about you either give it a rest or start another thread, or go to Stan's place and learn his system first hand?

As I said, I am done. But I still hope to meet Stan in person one day, because I always learn new things when I meet with different instructors.

Regards,
Dave

 

[CueAndMe]

The pocket is never taken into consideration, other than if the path to it is blocked. I never look at the pocket--it honestly doesn't matter. Look at any of my 14.1 videos....see if you ever see me looking at pockets ever.
.

Dave, you may not be consciously taking the pocket into consideration, but I think it's impossible to avoid sensing its location. I think the only way to prove that it isn't being considered is to shrink you down to 1/20 your size, put you on the table with a circle of curtains drawn around you, and spin you around a few times.
Let's try to set that up.

 

[unknownpro]

Would you explain what you mean by "aim their tip" on all shots, even when using english. Aim the tip at?? Or do you mean that they pay attention to the tip contact point on the ob while standing and get down that way? Or?

I really appreciate your help here. Jim

You can't be looking at the object ball contact point unless the shot is straight with no side english and be aiming your stick. If it is a cut with no side english you need to aim through the center of the ghost ball and not look at the object ball contact point. If you are using english you need to know your intended deflection distance relative to the center of the ghost ball before you get down.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Dave, you may not be consciously taking the pocket into consideration, but I think it's impossible to avoid sensing its location. I think the only way to prove that it isn't being considered is to shrink you down to 1/20 your size, put you on the table with a circle of curtains drawn around you, and spin you around a few times.
Let's try to set that up.

The only input I get from the pocket is if the shot is thick or thin. If I know about where the OB and CB are in relation to the table, I don't care if curtains surround me. Whatever.

 

[JimS]

Guilty as charged. I didn't start the CTE stuff, but I have pushed it. I apologize to Dr. Joe if he feels this was inappropriate in his thread. Don't worry ... I'm done.

After reading many hundreds of postings and e-mails concerning CTE, after talking with Stan, Hal, and others on the phone, and after trying (at my table) everything people have suggested, I still don't know how and why CTE works for the examples I have suggested (if it does). Maybe it is just too complicated for dunce-heads like me to understand. :frown:

I was going to start another thread and even write an article about CTE for BD, but I've decided not too because, after all of this effort, I still don't know how to describe or illustrate CTE in any way that makes real sense.

As I said, I am done. But I still hope to meet Stan in person one day, because I always learn new things when I meet with different instructors.

Regards,
Dave

I was rude in my response to your post(s) about CTE. At that particular moment I was tired and just the letters "CTE" pushed me over the edge to being sick and tired of hearing about CTE and everything associated with it. Sorry I was rude Dave. You contribute a lot to the game in general but at the moment I was posting my emotions were in control. I do have a problem in that regard.

 

[dr_dave]

The DAM system most of the pros use

I was rude in my response to your post(s) about CTE. At that particular moment I was tired and just the letters "CTE" pushed me over the edge to being sick and tired of hearing about CTE and everything associated with it. Sorry I was rude Dave. You contribute a lot to the game in general but at the moment I was posting my emotions were in control. I do have a problem in that regard.

Jim,

Thank you for the message. I understand. I also get frustrated by the frequent invocation of the magical CTE system along with what I consider are sometimes-outrageous claims (e.g., "there is only one aim for every shot, and most of the pros use it"). I agree the center-to-edge 1/2-ball hit line is a great reference and excellent "point of departure," because many pool shots are close to a 1/2-ball hit and because the CTE line is very easy to visualize and focus on. However, I don't think there is any "system" that can help a person accurately achieve every line of aim required for a wide range of pool shots. I and others have already written a lot about this (see http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#aiming).

Any great player can aim well and make shots, regardless what "system" they might claim to be using. If a great player uses CTE for alignment and initial aim, and then he or she pivots and/or shifts their bridge hand just the right amount, based on where the OB and pocket are (e.g., because they "intuitively see" the angle of the shot), they will make the shot. In this regard, CTE is a great method.

I know I said I was done, but I had to summarize my closing statements. This time I am really done.

Regards,
Dave

PS: I have invented a new aiming system called DAM ("Dave's Aiming Method"). All of the pros use it and it works every time. The basics of the system are: you visualize the required "angle of the shot" and required line of aim, you then align your cue and vision with the line of aim as you drop into your stance, you then follow all of the recommended stroke "best practices," you maintain "quiet eyes" both at the "set" aiming position (checking the CB tip contact point and your aiming line) and when focusing on your OB target during the final forward stroke. Believe or not, the ball goes in every time, as long as you are a good shooter and you maintain focus and don't do anything wrong during the entire DAM process. If people want to master the DAM system, they must visit me in person and learn all of the required intricacies. If you don't believe me, you will be banished by all of my followers.

 

[JimS]

:groucho: I'll try it!! What do you charge for me to come visit? :thumbup:

Gotta love it Dave! WOW!! Thanks Dave.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Jim,

Thank you for the message. I understand. I also get frustrated by the frequent invocation of the magical CTE system along with what I consider are sometimes-outrageous claims (e.g., "there is only one aim for every shot, and most of the pros use it"). I agree the center-to-edge 1/2-ball hit line is a great reference and excellent "point of departure," because many pool shots are close to a 1/2-ball hit and because the CTE line is very easy to visualize and focus on. However, I don't think there is any "system" that can help a person accurately achieve every line of aim required for a wide range of pool shots. I and others have already written a lot about this (see http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#aiming).

Any great player can aim well and make shots, regardless what "system" they claim to be using. If a great player uses CTE for alignment and initial aim, and then he or she pivots and/or shifts their bridge hand just the right amount, based on where the OB and pocket are (e.g., because they "intuitively see" the angle of the shot), they will make the shot. In this regard, CTE is a great method.

I know I said I was done, but I had to summarize my closing statements. This time I am really done.

Regards,
Dave

PS: I have invented a new aiming system called DAM ("Dave's Aiming Method"). All of the pros use it and it works every time. The basics of the system are: you visualize the required "angle of the shot" and required line of aim, you then align your cue and vision with the line of aim as you drop into your stance, you then follow all of the recommended stroke "best practices," you maintain "quiet eyes" both at the "set" aiming position (checking the CB tip contact point and your aiming line) and when focusing on your OB target during the final forward stroke. Believe or not, the ball goes in every time, as long as you are a good shooter and you maintain focus and don't do anything wrong during the entire DAM process. If people want to master the DAM system, they must visit me in person and learn all of the required intricacies. If you don't believe me, you will be banished by all of my followers.

Ha cute. It's not really 1 aim for every shot, it's one "sight" for every shot - there's a difference. The actual final aim line is different every time. You sound frustrated, but it's not my information to pass on - I've said it a million times. As for the pros that use it, it is what it is.

Just as you're frustrated I won't write an instructional manual on AZB, I'm frustrated you won't take a 3 week sabbatical from Colorado State, track down the people who might know something and educate yourself....which is what I did.

Good luck with DAM. I'm looking forward to seeing the video.

 

[Koop]

PS: I have invented a new aiming system called DAM ("Dave's Aiming Method"). All of the pros use it and it works every time. The basics of the system are: you visualize the required "angle of the shot" and required line of aim, you then align your cue and vision with the line of aim as you drop into your stance, you then follow all of the recommended stroke "best practices," you maintain "quiet eyes" both at the "set" aiming position (checking the CB tip contact point and your aiming line) and when focusing on your OB target during the final forward stroke. Believe or not, the ball goes in every time, as long as you are a good shooter and you maintain focus and don't do anything wrong during the entire DAM process. If people want to master the DAM system, they must visit me in person and learn all of the required intricacies. If you don't believe me, you will be banished by all of my followers.

This is actually pretty lame. Maybe I shouldn't, but I expect more from someone who has Dr. before his name.

Like Dave said, seek and you shall find.

 

[Koop]

I will also add that I still have problems with CTE. Although I know the basic gist I am still seeking out Stan for an eventual lesson. I will also continue to visit with Hal until I get it.
To me, this is the ONLY way to REALLY get it.

 

[whitewolf]

poor estimation of the contact point.

QUOTE]

Joe, IMHO, you are concentrating to much on the 'contact point'. The ghost ball theory goes beyond the contact point.

Consider that most pros use English on 90% of their shots. Now how in the heck can you concentrate on a 'contact point' when throw comes into the picture?

If you really want to experience 'feel', then try this:

Put the object ball 1 inch off the head rail and the cueball half way between the head spot and the side rail. Then, with right or left hand english, keep shooting the ball into the corner pocket using the same English. If you do this about 100 times, then it will become obvious to you what 'feel' is.

If you want to really learn how to shoot by feel, then do what I do:

Shoot 15 balls with all top right English, then 15 balls with all side right English, etc. etc. You will find it impossible to use this stupid contact point method, and you will learn to shoot the balls into the pocket by 'feeling' where to aim. Not only this, you will progress beyond the 'beginner stage', which you seem to be stuck in.

I have suggested this in many of my posts, but Joe, I have yet to hear that you have tried this.

Also Joe, have you ever played on a 7 foot bar table with the BIGGER heavier ball? The only way you can adjust to this is by using the ghost ball aiming method.

I defy the Dr. Daves of the world to explain how one goes from the 9 footer with the same size object ball to the bar table with the larger ball. I can just see his equations eating up 4 pages in Billiards Digest trying to explain this LOL.

Left brained people don't have a clue

 

[dr_dave]

This is actually pretty lame. Maybe I shouldn't, but I expect more from someone who has Dr. before his name.

Like Dave said, seek and you shall find.

I know I probably should not have poked fun at something as emotional (and religious) as aiming systems, but I have put a lot and time and effort into to this and I have been quite frustrated by the lack of simple answers to simple questions.

Sorry,
Dave (without the "Dr." prefix)

PS: I do hope to spend time with Stan in the future.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I know I probably should not have poked fun at something as emotional (and religious) as aiming systems, but I have put a lot and time and effort into to this and I have been quite frustrated by the lack of simple answers to simple questions.

Sorry,
Dave (without the "Dr." prefix)

PS: I do hope to spend time with Stan in the future.

It's nothing emotional or religious. I have a good research project. Find me a small stipend and I'll teach a billiard 101 class to 5 random Colorado State University students and you do the same. After a semester, we should match our sections up to see whose students would give weight versus whose would need weight. It could be a measurable result and could be published. I'm spotting you a website, I won't need one.

- Dr. Spider

 

[JoeW]

Whitewolf, I have tried your idea and have concluded that one learns to visually adjust the position of the contact point because the throw is increased. What you suggest is the inclusion of additional variables to the base system.

At this time I think that UnknownPro has the best experiential method to learn what feel is all about. His one stroke practice method clearly leads to the conclusion that when little conscious thought is involved in the stroke, the stroke actually improves.

I think that this is a very difficult discussion because of the terms that are used. In the sciences we usually agree to the definition of a term so that we are all on the same page, so to speak. When it comes to aiming many players have different definitions and then interpret someone else?s remarks in the context of their own definition. This leads to straw man arguments in which people are talking past each other to make a point not intended by the original poster.

In this context I too try to use the weakly defined terms that others use to further the discussion. However, it makes for very sloppy discourse and much acrimony.

In our current state of ignorance we use poorly defined terms to communicate something about what we know. The word feel is one of these terms. Some people want to take the term literally, some have an expanded idea. In my opinion most weakly defined but useful ideas have some substance to them that can be better defined and reduced to the types of information that can be passed on to others.

While we use the term feel there is some real process underlying this term that can be elucidated. There are of course people who think that this cannot be done. The history of civilization shows that while we have not gotten to the absolute essence of many issues, the attempts have been useful.

 

[Koop]

I know I probably should not have poked fun at something as emotional (and religious) as aiming systems, but I have put a lot and time and effort into to this and I have been quite frustrated by the lack of simple answers to simple questions.

Sorry,
Dave (without the "Dr." prefix)

PS: I do hope to spend time with Stan in the future.

No problem Dave(without the Dr.).

Problem is, while you may think they are easy questions, they are only easy while at the table. Over the phone adds another level of complexity and the written word is even tougher.

My advice, take it or leave it, is to talk to Hal, Stan, and Dave. Then, if at all possible, visit with one or all.

 

[dr_dave]

Fort Collins thrilla

It's nothing emotional or religious. I have a good research project. Find me a small stipend and I'll teach a billiard 101 class to 5 random Colorado State University students and you do the same. After a semester, we should match our sections up to see whose students would give weight versus whose would need weight. It could be a measurable result and could be published. I'm spotting you a website, I won't need one.

- Dr. Spider

If somebody were willing to fund such a project, I would be more than willing to participate. CTE vs. DAM ... a thrilla in Fort Collins.

Dave

 

[Patrick Johnson]

It's nothing emotional or religious.

Its believers (including you) react emotionally when it's questioned and apparently can't explain it rationally. It has a prophet and apostles. You have to travel to The Mount and receive The Sermon to be admitted to the Congregation. Its followers believe they're saved and others are blind to The Truth.

Sounds familiar to me...

pj
chgo

 

[unknownpro]

I just finished running a few racks using UnknownPro's one stroke shooting. It may be the ultimate feel technique. After the first two racks, which were uncomfortable, my ball pocket percentage nearly doubled. Here is why.

If you know you only get one stroke you really concentrate on the aim lines while standing up. As you bend over all you are watching is the aim lines. There is no time to think about the stroke so all you can do is check to be sure your tip is where it should be. One stroke lets you verify the tip placement and then it is all over.

There is no time to think about the stroke. All of your attention is on the contact point. In this way the subconscious is in control of the stroke. The resulting position was much better than when I use my usual approach.

All I can say is give it a try for a few racks and you may be as amazed as I was at how well you do and how easy it is to turn the shot makng over to the subconscious. A great technique. Now I have to figure out how to use this in a match.

I know there is a part of me that will want more control in a critical situation but it may be that more conscious control leads to more misses -- Hmmmmm

I can see from the brief description given by UnknownPro that he has taught me to aim, really aim, while I am standing up. This was great advice.

I'm glad you are getting good results. But you should be aware that the contact point from cueball to object ball is almost always a bad place to look. I look where my tip is going. If you are looking at the contact point you normally must "feel" where to shoot because you just can't shoot at that point and make balls consistently with different cut angles or english. If you look where your tip is going you don't have to feel the aim, you can aim where you are stroking toward and hit it with your tip, which with a good plan will cause the correct path of the cueball to make the object ball. These are separate events and separate aim lines, both rarely ever going through the contact point.

Once you really understand what is going on, and use it to your advantage it becomes much more obvious what type of errors you are getting. Curve is my enemy, consistent deflection is my friend. Attempting to play by limiting deflection and spin will greatly limit accuracy and control on many shots, resulting in being drilled repeatedly by Filipinos.