D Appleton is against pivoting for spin ?

[BC21]

I also believe the road to HAMB has a fast lane but destination can never be avoided. Eventually, repetition and subscious memory will replace the system used to gain HAMB experience.

Yes, I agree 100%. Repetition and memory are the primary factors in skill development. It's not the countless misses or bad guesswork involved in HAMB that eventually leads to consistency. It's the repeition of successful shots, over and over again, that leads us there.

 

[The_JV]

Yes, I agree 100%. Repetition and memory are the primary factors in skill development. It's not the countless misses or bad guesswork involved in HAMB that eventually leads to consistency. It's the repeition of successful shots, over and over again, that leads us there.

Oh no... I'm going to have to disagree at least a little now.... The countless misses and initial "bad" guesswork develops a foundation of failure that provides a greater understanding of the physics of the game.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

How would you feel if you woke up every day and were still him?

pj
chgo

I feel fantastic when I wake up every day as me. IF I ever woke up as you, I'd shoot myself or live in fear that a whole bunch of
other people wanted to shoot me. Which you more than likely do going all the way back to RSB days and all the years here.
You spread it around on top of it all. The main forum, aiming forum, and NPR or whatever it's called now. People all over the
world would like to get their hands on you.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Why you always so angry? You should try deep breathing and try being constructive rather than consistently devolving your disagreements to ad hominem attacks.

You have no clue how I feel. I've been on this forum for 16 years and behind the computer I'm laughing my ass off, especially
at hapless clowns with vivid imaginations like you. Now look what you made me do. Another ad hominem attack on poor little you.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Exactly. But I believe HAMB can be side-stepped in favor of more efficient learning methods. Maybe not. But maybe so.

I think hitting 100,000 balls the correct way and knowing exactly what you're doing is far better than HAMB with guess work or mostly wrong.

What I can't figure out is why do so few pool players not even consider taking lessons from a qualified, certified well known instructor regularly? Cheap or is there some kind of stigma attached to it? Sure doesn't work that way in other sports.

 

[BC21]

I think hitting 100,000 balls the correct way and knowing exactly what you're doing is far better than HAMB with guess work or mostly wrong.

What I can't figure out is why do so few pool players not even consider taking lessons from a qualified, certified well known instructor regularly? Cheap or is there some kind of stigma attached to it? Sure doesn't work that way in other sports.

Big on this! I agree 100% about hamb.

In my area, private pro lessons cost much more than whatever the lesson costs. There are no instructors around here, so a player has to take a road trip to get a lesson. Cost of gas and possibly a hotel room...I understand why most say screw that.

 

[cookie man]

How would you feel if you woke up every day and were still him?

pj
chgo

Knowing him as I do ABSOLUTELY FREAKING WONDERFUL

 

[cookie man]

I also believe the road to HAMB has a fast lane but destination can never be avoided. Eventually, repetition and subscious memory will replace the system used to gain HAMB experience.

If using a system to gain HAMB experience for your subconscious then why would your subconscious then replace the system. Wouldn’t your subconscious still use the system without even thinking about it

 

[BC21]

Oh no... I'm going to have to disagree at least a little now.... The countless misses and initial "bad" guesswork develops a foundation of failure that provides a greater understanding of the physics of the game.

Possibly. Failure yes. But I don't believe bad guesswork is necessary when developing skills.

In other words, let's say you're trying to learn how to play a guitar. One instructor tells you there are 7 major chords to learn, and you have to figure them out on your own by watching and listening to other guitarists while they play. It's gonna take you a while to figure out the finger positioning for each of those chords. It'll involve a lot of guesswork and a lot of failure.

Another instructor gives you a book that has diagrams of the chords so that you know where to position your fingers for each chord. There is no guesswork, but there will be some occassional failure, like misplacing your fingers on the wrong strings or whatever.

So, which method do you suppose will be more efficient and effective at helping you develop the ability to consistently play the chords correctly?

 

[BilliardsAbout]

Seems his objection is all about swooping the stroke to apply side spin, which of course everybody advises against. Does he know BHE can be done without that?

pj
chgo

Respectfully, not everyone advises against it, and some pro friends do it.

If those on this thread can keep civil, I can tell you about pro friends who "return all strokes to the center" even with english--and give interesting details.

We can start with pros who apply english on the final stroke while always cueing at the base of the ball and practice stroking there first. They have to swoop to hit the cue ball off the vertical axis.

 

[The_JV]

If using a system to gain HAMB experience for your subconscious then why would your subconscious then replace the system. Wouldn’t your subconscious still use the system without even thinking about it

Had to read this a couple of times. I think I have a handle on what you're saying.

This has whispers of a chicken/egg conundrum to me. Are you actually using a system if you're not consciously working through the steps..? I know I can't answer that. My knee jerk response would be no, but I have zero tangible evidence to back that up.

My take on it is this. The whole idea is to perform a task (in this case potting a ball) flawlessly everytime. Lets pretend there's two ways to get to the point of efficiency with this task. Trial and error, or adherence to rigid instruction (system). Either one will eventually engrain the correct way to hit an OB with a CB for a given shot (HAMB). If we want to subscribe to the notion that HAMB built on rigid instruction produces a player that subconsciously still uses that system. That's cool with me. However would we then have to extend that to a player with trial/error HAMB, running through every possible bad reiteration of the shot before locking in on the correct one...?

I prefer to think, that the human mind will trim the fat so to speak. When we first approach a shot and it's subconsciously recognized. Why would the subconscious mind then run through the steps to conclude the end result it already knows..? Much like it burning time regurgitating all the misses throughout the player's history before locking in on the correct shot picture.

I can't argue my stance on it. It just seems to make more sense to me. That doesn't make it right, just my uneducated opinion.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I prefer to think, that the human mind will trim the fat so to speak. When we first approach a shot and it's subconsciously recognized.

OK, so you recognize the shot. What's the next step visually and physically?

Why would the subconscious mind then run through the steps to conclude the end result it already knows..?

That's overkill. It's all VISUAL for everyone and can be done in a second or two.

Much like it burning time regurgitating all the misses throughout the player's history before locking in on the correct shot picture.

If there's a cut shot, any angle, wouldn't the solution or end result be the same for both players assuming both players used the SAME aiming method linking CB to OB to pocket? It could be a different aiming method but that's neither here nor there.
It's all VISUAL.

Both players still have to SEE whatever they've learned to SEE to accurately link the shot together unless it's a speed shooting contest. One does it by hitting a million balls to figure things out and another does it by hitting a couple thousand balls when told exactly what to see and do by a pro player or pro instructor who has already hit the million balls.

 

[The_JV]

Possibly. Failure yes. But I don't believe bad guesswork is necessary when developing skills.

Neither do I. However I do think in terms of pool, failure born of "bad guesswork" as you call it, is a viable data point and not just a waste of time in the grand scheme. There is no math or system that will tell me what to expect from old vs new cloth and varying humidity for example. Adjusting to these conditions will always be guesswork. good vs bad is subjective I suppose

In other words, let's say you're trying to learn how to play a guitar. One instructor tells you there are 7 major chords to learn, and you have to figure them out on your own by watching and listening to other guitarists while they play. It's gonna take you a while to figure out the finger positioning for each of those chords. It'll involve a lot of guesswork and a lot of failure.

Another instructor gives you a book that has diagrams of the chords so that you know where to position your fingers for each chord. There is no guesswork, but there will be some occassional failure, like misplacing your fingers on the wrong strings or whatever.

So, which method do you suppose will be more efficient and effective at helping you develop the ability to consistently play the chords correctly?

Sorry, bad analogy...

A chord can only be played correctly. Playing one incorrectly does not provide the player insight into how that incorrectly played cord could be useful.

For example...: If a miss an inside cut with inside english. I can based on the CB path determine how the squirt/swerve threw my shot off line. Two things happen with this information. It provides me a baseline from which to I can correct from for the same shot, and a point of reference for all shots of similar requirement. You could argue that a successful pot provides the same intel. However a successful shot doesn't trigger the "what happened there?" analysis.

Another less direct example...: If you're playing on a foreign table for the first time and you're hitting some shots to adjust. Do you shoot shots directly into the corner pockets along the rail, or do you play them into the rail to see how forgiving the cloth/pockets are..? You gleen more from misses then you do successful shots.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Respectfully, not everyone advises against it, and some pro friends do it.

If those on this thread can keep civil, I can tell you about pro friends who "return all strokes to the center" even with english--and give interesting details.

We can start with pros who apply english on the final stroke while always cueing at the base of the ball and practice stroking there first. They have to swoop to hit the cue ball off the vertical axis.

I’m not interested in which pros do it. All I’d like to hear is how the tip arcing into the contact point rather than moving into it along a straight line isn’t less reliable.

pj
chgo

 

[cookie man]

I’m not interested in which pros do it. All I’d like to hear is how the tip arcing into the contact point rather than moving into it along a straight line isn’t less reliable.

pj
chgo

By HAMB that way.

 

[JoeyInCali]

I’m not interested in which pros do it. All I’d like to hear is how the tip arcing into the contact point rather than moving into it along a straight line isn’t less reliable.

pj
chgo

It isn't when your grip hand ,elbow and shoulder are lined up to the center of the cue ball.
Heavy forbid if you addressed that ball half a tip to the side, then pivot to the center, then pivot again for the spin when already down.
Or you can make it simpler, line up the shot while upright then align your body on the perceived angle then go down.

 

[The_JV]

By HAMB that way.

definitely... There's one especially "swoopy" player at my local room. When he is in gear it's entertaining to watch. When his timing is off, it's a gong show.

Nothing wrong trying to be the Jim Furyk of the pool world. You just need to keep that timing on point or expect the worst.

 

[cookie man]

It isn't when your grip hand ,elbow and shoulder are lined up to the center of the cue ball.
Heavy forbid if you addressed that ball half a tip to the side, then pivot to the center, then pivot again for the spin when already down.
Or you can make it simpler, line up the shot while upright then align your body on the perceived angle then go

Joey, just stop. There has been plenty of video posted on here of your idols pivoting. Your constant denial just makes you look silly.

 

[JoeyInCali]

Joey, just stop. There has been plenty of video posted on here of your idols pivoting. Your constant denial just makes you look silly.

Err, what denial?
Them doing them does not make it textbook.
And you still won't accept the FACT that.Busti developed that as a gimmick.
Nobody practice strokes at the left edge of the ball outside of him and Chico here.
I heard Cicero did it.too and according to Wayne Link ( late sparring partner of Mosconi ) he missed a straight in shot for the world title because of that bad habit.

 

[cookie man]

Err, what denial?
Them doing them does not make it textbook.
And you still won't accept the FACT that.Busti developed that as a gimmick.
Nobody practice strokes at the left edge of the ball outside of him and Chico here.
I heard Cicero did it.too and according to Wayne Link ( late sparring partner of Mosconi ) he missed a straight in shot for the world title because of that bad habit.

Gimmick my ass lol. Did Wayne ever shoot a ball like that again. Busti didn’t shoot shots worth thousands of dollars in a gimmick sort of way. He PIVOTS. No denying that.
Oh and Robb Saez shoots the same way. He never said anything about it being a gimmick.