anyone have experience with this device??

Hi Larry,

What purpose could it possibly serve...

other than irritation if not placed perfectly in alignment with the elbow hinge...

& even then what purpose could it serve?

Why don't all pool players just have their arm amputated & replaced with a robotic arm?

If man, any man, thinks that they can design & build a better arm/hand, then they are delusional.

How about instead of that device, someone design one that locks the elbow, wrist, & hand/fingers & the whole mechanism 'pivots' at the shoulder.

That way... once the set up is 'perfect'... nothing can go wrong...

unless the shoulder pivot point moves... as it might naturally WANT to do.

We are human beings & it's just natural to want to move when DOING something...

like moving a straight stick...straight.

Sorry, Larry.

I think I am just venting based on another post in another thread & yours here just sort of coincides with it.

Best 2 Ya & Shoot Well,
Rick

PS Greg Norman came out with a wrist 'device' that 'locked' that right wrist into a cupped position. That basically forced the player to lead with the grip end of the club to hit the ball & kept them from releasing before the hit & scooping the ball. It was a very good aid to practice with as it immediately associated a visual difference in ball flight with a difference in bio-mechanical movements. I'm NOT against all 'aids', but they should serve a suitable purpose. I don't see a suitable purpose with this device, unless I missed something.
 
I'm not sure what benefits it has, but judging by the way the apparatus looks, I think a player can still easily shoot with a chicken wing arm position with it --- Because with a chicken wing, the problem pivot point is where the shoulder meets the arm, not at the elbow joint.
 
Last edited:
For a real guffaw you should read the product description. It provides "consistency" like you couldn't imagine.
 
hi guys
i am not advocating or the inventor of the device
i have no dog in the hunt
just your opinions on it
usefull or not
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME
 
hi guys
i am not advocating or the inventor of the device
i have no dog in the hunt
just your opinions on it
usefull or not
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME

Ok... I'm not an instructor but I think it's worthless. For me there is no substitute for an instructor and realtime video.
 
I've already posted regarding this device.

To say that there is no substitute for personal instruction & video is very misleading IMO.

There have been very many great players that never received a lesson from an instructor nor saw any video.

A statement like that is a very personal one.

Given the history of the game... it would perhaps be more accurate to say that lessons from an instructor & video are attempts at substitutes for the tried & true methods of the past.

I had a long post typed up but decided to go with this instead because I am NOT against instruction or instructors as some try to frame me.

I'll just add that there needs to be much better true communication between instructors & students during the booking process to try to make sure that there is a good fit regarding expectations & what can & will be delivered.

Since I have been 'vocal' on some matters, I have received rather many PMs voicing bad experiences.

No one wants that, not the student, not the instructor, & not those like me that care about others.

I just think that there needs to be a good fit so that I stop getting those PMs voicing bad experiences.

What is a good fit for some & leaves them as happy & satisfied customers is not a good fit for others & leaves them as unhappy & unsatisfied & with feelings of having wasted both time & money.

That 2nd. experience is NOT a good thing for the instructor industry & should be avoided at all cost. Blaming the student is the wrong response.

I think better true communication to try to assure a good fit would go a long way to perhaps decrease the number of those bad experiences.

Over exuberant testimonials without qualifying statements can contribute to those bad experiences.

One size does not fit all & players at different levels need & want different things.

A 3 ton A/C unit may be fine for a 1500 sq. ft. house but is rather insufficient for a 3500 sq. ft. house.

I have walked away rather than to let someone buy something from me that they were not completely comfortable in making the purchase or if my product was not what they really needed or wanted & I would recommend what they really needed or where they might get what they really wanted.

Communication, better communication is the answer & the solution along with sincere concern for others.

I hope this post will be seen as having the good intentions for what it was truly intended.

Best Wishes for ALL,
Rick
 
Ok... I'm not an instructor but I think it's worthless. For me there is no substitute for an instructor and realtime video.

To say that there is no substitute for personal instruction & video is very misleading IMO.
As opposed top that device
Totally ridiculous. The elbow is already a hinge, and it's easy not to involve the shoulder joint in swinging the cue.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
Scott or the gizmo. Tough choice.
 
Last edited:
I never said that the gizmo was of any value. I basically said just the opposite.

As to whether or not a lesson from any particular instructor would be of any value to an individual would depend on whether or not the lesson would be a fit for that individual.

When one is already of enough substance so as to exceed the limits of a cookie cutter then a cookie cutter is rather useless in trying to shape that amount of substance that has surpassed the capabilities of the cookie cutter.

On the other hand, if one has no shape, then a cookie cutter can certainly give some form to that limited amount of substance until the cookie cutter is filled & then if when one develops more substance one would need to look past that cookie cutter for any guidance of that substance that exceeds the capabilities of that cookie cutter.

Each individual is different & there is no one 'right' way or best way that fits every individual.

To think that is just irrational & illogical thinking.

Look at all of the past champions & see how uniquely different each was & is.

It's only when one leaves the structured norm that one becomes exceptional.

Like the rather famous golf instructor Butch Harmon has said about himself, 'I may not know how to build a Championship Golf Swing...
but if I am not very careful, I know that I can ruin one.'.

No two individuals are exactly the same & hence no two individuals should have the exact same golf swing or pool cue 'swing' or pool cue stroke.

IF a certain cookie cutter method fits 85% of the population, teaching it to 100% of the population would be a crime against the other 15%.

I think there is good chance that the numbers would be more like 50/50.

That's why I think 'endorsements' should be qualified. Just because something or someone helped a particular individual does not mean that that thing or person would be an aid or an asset to all others.

Comparing any instructor to a useless gizmo is a ridiculous comparison.

Almost any advice from anyone in any pool hall would be of more value than that of a useless gizmo.

So comparing an instructor to a useless gizmo really says nothing about that instructor.

There are reasons why top golf pros have sought out Butch Harmon & it is not because he teaches any single type of golf swing. It's because he does NOT have a single ideology. He does not teach the same forward press set, pause at the top, & then swing to the same finish position for every student. He realizes that what is easy for him to teach is NOT the best for every student. Tiger Woods' swing is NOT Phil Mickleson's swing...

& they should NOT be the same. It's about getting each individuals own particular body parts to function in harmony with one another & that means that usually nothing is the same from one individual to the next... except the moment of truth when the ball is struck.

One can go to a driving range pro that teaches one ideology or one can seek out a Butch Harmon type that has no single ideology but will work with an individual to create harmony within the individual.

Each individual is at choice to do as they choose. They can seek out & find THEIR best or they can do as everyone else is being taught to do.

It's up to the individual. Some individuals are happy breaking 100 or 95 or 90 when playing golf while others want to shoot in the 80s or 70s or perhaps par golf.

Most golf instructors can get one to break 100 or 95 & perhaps 90 but it will take a different type of golf instructor to get one to shoot in the 70s because that is where the single ideology can not take one. That is where the norm must be left & one's individuality comes into play.

Just some food for thought.
 
Roscue in another forum asked this question about this device
http://www.aliexpress.com/item/Free...Orthotics-Appliance-Billiard/32610123701.html
,,,,
,,,,
how usefull do you think it would be
thanks for your opinions

I think it probably does nothing useful, but I'm not clear on exactly what it does. Does it lock the angle of the elbow? Or is that joint free to rotate as usual?

If it is locked, all the motion must come from rotation at the shoulder. If that is what it does, it teaches very bad habits.
 
Rick...You continue to show your ignorance of what and how we teach. There is nothing "cookie cutter" about our teaching theory or practical application. Of course you'll never understand that because you're way too busy putting in your two cents about everything under the sun...and then some. You have an extremely closed mind. :rolleyes:

The second statement you made here is absolutely true, and something we have been championing for more than 3 decades.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

When one is already of enough substance so as to exceed the limits of a cookie cutter then a cookie cutter is rather useless in trying to shape that amount of substance that has surpassed the capabilities of the cookie cutter.


Each individual is different & there is no one 'right' way or best way that fits every individual.
 
Rick...You continue to show your ignorance of what and how we teach. There is nothing "cookie cutter" about our teaching theory or practical application. Of course you'll never understand that because you're way too busy putting in your two cents about everything under the sun...and then some. You have an extremely closed mind. :rolleyes:

The second statement you made here is absolutely true, and something we have been championing for more than 3 decades.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

I thought he was barred? WTH??
 
ENGLISH. Your repeated use of the term cookie cutter is not only offensive, but ignorant. I have taught SPF to hundreds of students, and even when applied correctly, each of them has a different looking stroke. What we do is apply tried and true principles that our students incorporate into their own individual game. I can assure you that both Scott and myself use SPF, but nobody with any knowledge of the game would mistake his stroke for mine. So while we may add the same ingredients to the dough, the cookies don't all look the same!
Steve
 
ENGLISH ...are you a certified instructor. Certified meaning a proven successful Instructor. Why do you debate the people that have repeatedly proven they know what they are doing and how to teach. As for myself I had no stroke, no eye pattern and no idea where to start to improve. Scott's lesson gave me everything to work with and we did a few more lessons in the years to follow covering different aspects of pool. At this point I can play a respectable game. ENGLISH...your statements are a bar room argument only. You are entitled to state them but what are you trying to accomplish going again Scott and the other qualified authorities here.
 
Last edited:
"Ignorant"

I had not intended to make another post, but since the personal insult of "ignorant" has been slung, I feel inclined to respond.

I was speaking to the unqualified testimonials being thrown out & how one size does not fit all & that there needs to be a proper fit for a satisfactory & happy outcome & how better communication might reduce the number of the not so few bad unsatisfactory & unhappy experiences that I've been told about.

I'm not the one that has placed certain 'franchise' tags on so many instructors. The instructors themselves have chosen to do that. You can't want to be part of a 'franchise' & then expect to be seen as different & special. If one is a member of a certain 'franchise' then they are of the cookie cutter type because franchises are of the cookie cutter type.
I think RandyG (who I have noticed has been removed as chairman of the BCA Instructors Committee) recently said that 220 of the 260 PBIA instructors were of the SPF 'franchise'. The SPF is not just to designate the Set Pause Finish "principle", but the whole line of instruction.

I did not create the stigma that goes along with being a part of a 'franchise'. Being a part of a 'franchise' is a double edged sword.

If the same curriculum is taught to a number of individuals, then those individuals will ALL have been taught the same 'franchise' "principles".
Any, every, & all lines of thinking or methods will have their own set of "principles". The ones forming those "principles" should not be the ones to judge & declared those "principles" to be true regarding anything but that line of thinking or method. Physics has universally true principles & concepts. Methods of performing a physical activity do not.
There once was a set of supposed "tried & true principles" that existed for many centuries as to how to best jump over a high bar. Then a man named Fosbury came along & those supposed "tried & true principles" were replaced by the Fosbury Flop.

If a group of individuals are teaching the same 'franchise' "principles" all of the time to all, then that is of a cookie cutter mentality.

If those are not for what one is looking, then it will not be a good & proper fit & will result in an unsatisfied & unhappy experience like those that I have been told about. I think better communication from & by both sides would probably cut down on those bad unsatisfied & unhappy experiences.

That would certainly be a good thing.

That was & is the intention of my posts. Awareness.

Those seeking lessons should know that there is more than one 'franchise' method & should do their research, ask questions, communicate exactly for what they are looking & make an as informed decision as they can.

Just because Mr. X says that Mr. Y is great does NOT mean that Mr. Y will provide what Mr. or Mrs. Z is looking. Perhaps Nick Varner or Lee Brett might be a better fit for what Mr. or Mrs. Z is looking.

I'm saying what I am because I have been told about those unsatisfied unhappy experiences regarding more than just one instructor. Some of those individuals found that for what they were looking from other instructors.

And that is the point. One size does not fit all.

As I said before, I am not against instruction or instructors as some have tried to make me appear to be.

I just know that it is about a proper fit if the customer is going to be satisfied & happy... and one size does not fit all.

So... just because so & so says that Mr. Y is great does not mean that Mr. Y will be great for me or you or a number of individuals. Mr. Varner or Mr. Brett may not be a good fit either... depending on for what the student is looking.

Better communication on both sides should result in better match ups & less unsatisfied unhappy experiences.
 
ENGLISH ...are you a certified instructor. Certified meaning a proven successful Instructor. Why do you debate the people that have repeatedly proven they know what they are doing and how to teach. As for myself I had no stroke, no eye pattern and no idea where to start to improve. Scott's lesson gave me everything to work with and we did a few more lessons in the years to follow covering different aspects of pool. At this point I can play a respectable game. ENGLISH...your statements are a bar room argument only. You are entitled to state them but what are you trying to accomplish going again Scott and the other qualified authorities here.

Firstly, 'certified' does not mean a proven successful instructor. I could tell you a story that was told to me but I do not think it would serve any good purpose. If one pays the fee & takes the course & passes & gets 'certified' as "recognized"... that could all have taken place last week & a lesson have never yet been given. Hence my statement about what it does not mean.

If you had originally made this type of 'testimonial' in your post, I probably would not have made my posts other than my initial one about the "gizmo".

You qualified here where you were & what you lacked & what was provided. Hence the instructor student relationship was a good fit.

That is not always the case.

I think my post before this gives the explanation for which you ask.
 
Firstly, 'certified' does not mean a proven successful instructor.

Let's change the wording from "certified" to "fully qualified".
Are your comments/replies those of a teacher or student or neither..... simply your opinion.
You did state your case by why keep repeating it. Just curious.
What is your playing level? Pro...Shortstop. Are you well known? Are you are student of the game or just like to debate. How many Tournaments have you won? Do you gamble for decent wagers?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top