Aiming systems: Why the problems?

JoeyA

JoeyA

Efren's Mini-Tourn BACKER
Silver Member
The purpose of this thread is for each person to acknowledge ONE perspective from the opposing person's point of view.

It is NOT OK to make this your agenda thread. The purpose is to give acknowledgment to opposing points of view.

Any person who uses this thread to incite others, push buttons, or to needle another poster INCLUDING Travis Trotter or Cocabolo Cowboy will be re-repped by me. I haven't ever given any rep rep to any poster ever, so while it may be a temptation to be first, please don't make me do it. :grin:

I'll start off by extending this olive branch:

I know that some of the aiming system proponents use hyperbole on occasion (myself included) and this angers some of the people who prefer a more accurate and literal statement about such things.

Some proponents of aiming systems have claimed that their aiming system is better than anything out there and that surely infuriates some people. It's a really difficult thing to prove and we all know that aiming is only a small but important part to the art of pocket billiards.

Perhaps in the future, out of consideration for others not sharing the same perspectives, proponents of aiming systems can be more literal and try to contain their enthusiasm for their perspectives and choose their words more carefully.

If you want to be more specific, it could add to the fun of this thread.

Hopefully, this thread might bandage a forum rocked by each of our idiosyncracies, myself included.

Don't forget that this thread is for you to offer a conciliatory statement to opposing perspectives.

The Red Rep Baron is standing by. :wink2:
 
Best of luck, Joey.

Great idea.

I think that I try to stay in the middle in these threads, trying to keep an open mind about the possibilities of learning something new. If I stray from that occasionally, I'm truly sorry. I hope that more folks can come to the table with the thought of trying to figure out something that might help them, as opposed to tearing down anothers ideas.
 
Last edited:
I don't get it either. Theres more then one way to skin a cat. Whatever your system is if it makes balls go in the hole then its the right system for you. I use c to e and I like it. I wont call you names for not liking it so leave me alone for liking it lol I only get agitated when people say it doesn't work. It does work. Its obvious it works.. It may not be comfortable to you to use or something else may work better for you but it absolutely makes balls go in the hole.
 
In addition to not always taking the high road in the aiming threads, I didn't follow the spirit of this thread.

Apologies.

I've corrected it, and hope this goes as well as it should, for everyones benefit.
 
trob said:
I don't get it either. Theres more then one way to skin a cat. Whatever your system is if it makes balls go in the hole then its the right system for you. I use c to e and I like it. I wont call you names for not liking it so leave me alone for liking it lol I only get agitated when people say it doesn't work. It does work. Its obvious it works.. It may not be comfortable to you to use or something else may work better for you but it absolutely makes balls go in the hole.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody who was thinking logically would say "it doesn't work," but may say that systems are not fundamentally sound, or physically possible-- but hell yeah you can still pocket every shot with them. So that is my sentiment, a human can pocket every ball and never miss with a system.

I want to address the title question in an analogous manner. Creationists try to teach young American kids that the earth is some odd 3000 years old. In a generation this would make our scientists a laughing stock. I think there are problems because people are propagating certain systems that may in fact work for them, yet they are inherently flawed.
 
Diff'rent strokes fer diff'rent folks.

One or two ongoing threads is one thing, but when I feel bombarded by something that is coming off as a be-all, end-all, then I start firing back.

What may work for some, may not work for others.

And when people are gushing about something all of the time, it just makes me want to puke. :p

Same thing with the league-bashing threads.. now where's that picture with the dead horse..
....
Joey, you rep'd me for a different post.. I tried to reply regarding something about that post and relevant to this post, too, so I'm just going to copy it since your inbox is full..

I just have a thing about outspoken ignorance.. he fired on the guy for having bad spelling. Bleh. I've known enough dropouts, wastoids, millionaires and so on that I've found everybody knows something about something and the way they convey the message usually doesn't have anything to do with the information contained. I've met quite a few people that are better teachers than doers and vice versa. I'd like to see the response of him blasting Fatboy's claims of adding money (Fatboy Challenge) based on his posts!

I apologize if I've come off as an ass, especially in regards to CTE, but I feel like it's constantly being poked at me when I log on and see 3 different threads on the first page about it. I understand that some people benefit greatly from it, some a little and some not so much. I, myself, have recently figured out an aiming that helps me with awkward shots. I basically aim opposite on the OB of what I'm doing on the CB. So, if I'm using low-left on the CB, I'll move my aiming point to high-right on the OB. It works for most shots (not slow shots that can wear off the english or close shots), which makes it easy for me to make awkward shots. I tried showing my friends and none of them caught on.. go figure.

We each learn our own way and it is nice that Stan's information has helped people, but that's not the way I am comfortable learning.

And I know you're a nice guy, so again I apologize if I'm come off as an ass towards yourself, not just towards the topic.
 
Last edited:
I have been teaching students for just about 40 years.

One of the first things an Instructor learns is: No two students are exactly alike.

Next that Instructor must understand that there are several effective teaching methods.

Also that Instructor then realizes that: we can't see through our students eyes.

The last official Billiard Survey reports that there are about 49 million pool players. To me that would mean about the same amount of stances & aiming systems, 49 million.

The reason that I elected to learn/teach several systems is very clear. Not every students sees & feels what I'm trying to teach.

Just because I use SAME AIM (CTE) as my main aiming tool, should not be a reason for me to push it at other students. I have to find the system that they can understand. In doing this I may have to cover several systems before something clicks.

No matter what you use, if it works for every shot, it's good. KEEP IT!

Thanks Joey
randyg
 
just my thoughts

First let me say I am going to order the Pro One video in the next two weeks ,basically to get in a good review .Also I have things to a good level in my work and social life right now and can take a little time to "really practice" for a change. That being said I took Stan's two day course about 3-4 yrs ago when Pro One was just becoming a system Stan was teaching.I have to say I really liked it and got SOOOO much out of what Stan taught me .I took what I was taught those two days and worked very hard to incorporate it all into my game.After about 6-8 months what I found was that Pro One helped me work out ALOT of problems I had with initial line up on a given shot. However , and this was probably more "Matt" related than system related , I found myself thinking way too much before every shot about CTE and the like.So now I find myself only using CTE/ProOne when I am in the air just to make sure I have my feet in the right position and will only stop to do this if I feel I am off or start missing alot of shots I normally make.Systems to me in general are great for practice and if you are good ,really good,maybe you can work them into your natural game.However if you are like me and may be too much of a "thinker" at times , these systems can mean doom for you ,esepecially in the middle of a match . My hope is to get the DVD soon and see if there is something I am missing ,it has been a long time since my trip to Kentucky .My advice about systems is simply this learn everything you can , take what you need for your game and leave the rest and for God's sake please don't over think it !! :banghead:
 
Well, I would like to think that it comes from a sense of altruism that people think they know the answer and are trying to help people improve their game. But it seems, if only recently, most of the animosity is directed towards CTElike systems mainly due to the hyperbole that proponents use to promote it. Whether anyone actually claims to never miss, one does get the feeling that it is implied. This typically draws out the debaters in the group and before you know it we have 50 pages.

Aiming has turned into a sort of religion, which is odd, but some are less fanatical than others. I don't generally see the contact point aimers, or fractional ball aimers out with the pitch forks.

But mostly it's people stirring the pot. In defense of CTE proponents, any time they attempt to discuss the system they are told by someone somewhere it can't work and doesn't work. Which can't be entirely true. Too many people have seen improvements, so there has to be something to it. Even if it does rely on unconscious adjustments, it still manages to help get their cue on the line of the shot.

I personally sit in neither camp. I learned to aim using initially ghost ball aiming (which I thought that I came up with until visiting this forum hahaha), and honed my game using fractional ball aiming and eventually dropped it all and aim by feel ocassionally use contact points when I'm nervous.

But I don't think you can possibly state one approach is better than another. Every person's brain works differently and some are able to visualize better than others and others need something more concrete. There are people who absolutely do not do well with step by step instructions and others who need it. It's up to the developing player to discover how they best function. Not knowing any one individual here personally I could not under any circumstances tell them how they should approach the game.

But this is not a phenomenon that is exclusive to aiming, fundamentals can get the same treatment. And I think the reasoning is similar between the two. I think it's important for proponents on both sides to attempt the others approach before categorically denying it's usefulness.

Anyways, just thinking out loud. Hope I've stayed within the boundries of the rules.
 
I for one have always tried to stay out of the middle on aiming system wars.

I've been really lucky over the past 5-8 years. I've been to Texas and had lessons with Randy G, been to phily and had lessons with Hal Houle and Ron V, and I've also spent a weekend at Stan S's house.

And you want to know which aiming system works the best?

Well... The answer is the same for each on of us, visual perception!

Visual perception is different for everyone one of us. How far you stand over the cue, how far right or left the cue is under your head, what is your dominate eye, etc. They all make use see things slightly different.

Here is a perfect example. A lot of players can look at a spot and shoot the cue ball right on that path, however I'm not one of those people. When I get down on a shot I'm a little right of my line. My eyes says I'm dead straight, but everyone in the room can see that I'll cut the ball Nast a bit to the left. I have to adjust.

When I tool lessons from people and they say look right at x and then shift, pivot, jump, or whatever I had to adjust a small bit. I listened to the theory of the system. I shot the ball and listened to what the object was saying to me. Did I miss it to the left, right?

If it wasn't for me taking c to e lessions I would have never found this out. It made me focus, made me ask how or why I'm missing the ball. Then I finally understood when I want to aim at the left edge of the object ball I really need to aim just off the ball and aiming for the right edge I need to aim a little thick.

Also, visual perception most likely will mean you might need to know more then one aiming system!

For what ever reason there are a couple shots that my main system I just can't see, however is I use system #2 I make it.

So why do I stay away from this system vs. that system, because I probably use them all during a 4 hour night of pool.

Open your minds up, it maybe how you see the ball and not system x as your issue.

In the end each system can help you with this or that shot. When it's hill hill for the cash and you just can't see the shot it's awesome to know two or three different ways to line up, one just might jump out and say bingo!

FYI, longest post I've ever written, have to get back to work now.

Keeping that in mind will help everyone understand that one system does not fit all.
 
Cameron Smith said:
Well, I would like to think that it comes from a sense of altruism that people think they know the answer and are trying to help people improve their game. But it seems, if only recently, most of the animosity is directed towards CTElike systems mainly due to the hyperbole that proponents use to promote it. Whether anyone actually claims to never miss, one does get the feeling that it is implied. This typically draws out the debaters in the group and before you know it we have 50 pages.

Aiming has turned into a sort of religion, which is odd, but some are less fanatical than others. I don't generally see the contact point aimers, or fractional ball aimers out with the pitch forks.

But mostly it's people stirring the pot. In defense of CTE proponents, any time they attempt to discuss the system they are told by someone somewhere it can't work and doesn't work. Which can't be entirely true. Too many people have seen improvements, so there has to be something to it. Even if it does rely on unconscious adjustments, it still manages to help get their cue on the line of the shot.

I personally sit in neither camp. I learned to aim using initially ghost ball aiming (which I thought that I came up with until visiting this forum hahaha), and honed my game using fractional ball aiming and eventually dropped it all and aim by feel ocassionally use contact points when I'm nervous.

But I don't think you can possibly state one approach is better than another. Every person's brain works differently and some are able to visualize better than others and others need something more concrete. There are people who absolutely do not do well with step by step instructions and others who need it. It's up to the developing player to discover how they best function. Not knowing any one individual here personally I could not under any circumstances tell them how they should approach the game.

But this is not a phenomenon that is exclusive to aiming, fundamentals can get the same treatment. And I think the reasoning is similar between the two. I think it's important for proponents on both sides to attempt the others approach before categorically denying it's usefulness.

Anyways, just thinking out loud. Hope I've stayed within the boundries of the rules.
Click to expand...
Who invented ghost-ball aiming?
 
cookie man said:
Who invented ghost-ball aiming?
Click to expand...

lol no idea. I just remember being in the car on the way to school thinking "what if I imagined the cue ball at contact and then aimed at that spot!". It's a simple concept, I'm sure it goes back as far as aiming itself.
 
Uhmmmmm....I guess the first thing I need to figure out is....who's point of view do I oppose???

I don't limit myself to one aiming method....I take parts of multiple methods and put them to use in a super mongo bass ackwards method of my own.

I say....thanks to all methods...for even if I don't use some or all of the components...each one gives me a broader knowledge foundation to build upon my own method. :smile:
 
Cameron Smith said:
lol no idea. I just remember being in the car on the way to school thinking "what if I imagined the cue ball at contact and then aimed at that spot!". It's a simple concept, I'm sure it goes back as far as aiming itself.
Click to expand...

I'm curious how it was talked about when it initially came about.
 
cookie man said:
I'm curious how it was talked about when it initially came about.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean, I've only been around pool for about 6 going on 7 years. And only 5 of that has been on the forums.

The first time I heard about ghost ball was players mentioning it by name on these forums. I figured out pretty quickly what it referred to, no one was antagonistic about it though if that's what you mean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top