Calling All Pool Scientists

[Patrick Johnson]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I already explained that I am not convinced that it doesn't change the outcome.

The comment I responded to, you said size of change alone makes it significant. Again, it doesn't.

You choose one stupid thing that you can argue to make yourself feel good and try to debase people who admit they are simply unconvinced.

It was an innocuous correction of your misunderstanding. Take a pill or something.

Just like the theory thing.

Well, your reaction is similar anyway.

Nothing against Dr. Dave, he has done amazing work. The fact is, tho, that all of that work is based off of scientific laws and theories and all of it is therefore theory.

I explained this. There are facts and theories on Dave's website. I'm sure he knows the difference better than you (very sure now) and was referring to some of the facts.

This is why I have a very hard time taking you seriously.

You seem to have a hard time understanding me.

pj
chgo

 

[Ron Swanson]

I could be off on the year, but if memory serves it was the 1975 ACUII National Straight Pool Championships. Puts him on a short list that includes Nick Varner, David Uwate (from the forum), Dan Louie etc.

Impressive. What is ACUII, and was this a pro title?

 

[RiverCity]

Impressive. What is ACUII, and was this a pro title?

I was off on the letters, ACUI. Its a college program, and back in those days it was highly competitive. It still is to a degree, but with it being 9 ball now, it has a different feel to it.

https://www.acui.org/billiards/

 

[Cornerman]

Bob jewett is a national champion? In what?

Anyway, the point here is the science guys are essentially enthusiasts and hobbyists. Nobody is denying their contribution but let's not overlook that.

Hobbyist at what? Bob is a professional at both his engineering job and as a billiard instructor and billiard writer. Jim Buss is/was a professional at both aerospace engineering and curmaking. What possible reason could you want to diminish that?

Mike Page made a life change for pool to own one of the top pool halls in our country, is spreading the Fargo ratings, and is a great pool instructor. What part of "hobby" is that?

And do we even have to say how much professional effort Dr Dave has put into the science of Billiards? What he's done is the equivalent of doctorate thesis on the topic.

 

[Petros Andrikop]

It's always a matter of approach and interpretation. From one side you have scientific facts (and limits in scientific tests), and from the other you have a functional significance of subtle details regarding feel and perception (and misperception).

Relatively short tip-CB contact time has been included in arguing against any significant effect it might produce in the outcome of a shot (please have a look at the approx. 546526456 threads regarding elbow drop.. ), at the same time we should not forget that contact time is relatively short for CB-OB collisions too, where spin transfer does occur...

So do these subtle differences "affect" anything? Mainly feeling, something which is not possible to "measure", at least with scientific tools and methods up to now.

It's similar to estimating playing levels using drill measurements. Although there is a proven methodology behind it, it doesn't - and couldn't - include another variable which is also impossible to measure: "responsibility of the shot", meaning the affect competitive pressure has on one's concentration and execution. One might say that the "competitive field" is the ultimate method of judging (regular tournaments or possibly "drill tournaments"?..), but then again no tournament system may be considered a "perfect" one..

So things are not easy to estimate, regardless of facts and/or one's perception..

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Cor! All that from asking what he is a champion in? Every day's an education...

Oh, you weren't being a dick as usual?

My bad.

pj <- should give a warning when you go out of character
chgo