Did Mark Wilson finally kill "aiming systems" ?

A friend of mine recently suggested that I watch the Mark Wilson tutorials on YouTube. He said something in one of those videos that really stood out to me. Basically he said that there are only 2 differences between an average player and a pro player:

1. A pro player has a straighter, more fluid stroke
2. A pro player has a better and more repeatable stance

He also pointed out that if you are an experienced pool player, you very rarely miss shots because of your aim. You miss shots because of a breakdown in your stance or stroke.


If all those things are true, especially the last one, doesn't that pretty much put the final nail in the coffin of aiming systems? If an aiming system only works if your stance and stroke are good, and no aiming system can salvage a bad stroke or stance, why worry about aiming systems?

Aiming systems sell, but they don't fix anything. The only way to make more shots is to improve your fundamentals; your aim is fine, my friends.
 

alphadog

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I feel Mark is 100% correct.

As to your extrapolated idea about no need for aiming systems, I am not sure you are correct. They must serve some purpose or there wouldn't be such strong proponents of them.
 
I feel Mark is 100% correct.

As to your extrapolated idea about no need for aiming systems, I am not sure you are correct. They must serve some purpose or there wouldn't be such strong proponents of them.
This is just a personal interpretation of what Mark said, but if it's true that an experienced players aim is rarely wrong, do we really need a system for aiming?

I have seen several aiming systems in practice, can't say one was more effective than another, guess it just depends on what the player is comfortable with. But if it's true that the vast majority of missed shots are due to a failure in stance or stroke, does an aiming system actually contribute to making more balls? I think not.
 

jalapus logan

be all. and supports it to
Silver Member
My "aiming system" is oriented around perception and stance. It's debatable that the term "aiming system" is exactly descriptive, but I don't care. It gets my eyes on the correct line, encourages correct approach to the shot and also body alignment and is both easy and repeatable. System? Eh? Works? Sure.
 

GoldCrown

Pool players have more balls
Silver Member
. But if it's true that the vast majority of missed shots are due to a failure in stance or stroke, does an aiming system actually contribute to making more balls? I think not.
Both combine for me. I have a horrible wrist twist. Aside from that I tend to over/uncut sometimes. I’m not always sure where I fault
 
There are pros who might not agree with Mark, one person’s ideas should not be the Final Nail in anything.
I doubt that there are many pros that would deny Mark's logic that almost all missed shots are from stroke or stance issues. I think a good amount of pros are into aiming systems because they sell, not because they actually are super into them.

Something doesn't really add up with aiming systems. If multiple aiming systems work but only with good stance and stroke, and none of them work without good stance and stroke....... the emphasis needs to be on stance and stroke and not any given aiming system. If there was an infallible aiming system, wouldn't we just all adopt it and be better players?
 

Samiel

Sea Player
Silver Member
I feel rarely do people not know where to aim but rather have trouble hitting the spot on the object ball that they want to. I think if you asked a bunch of pros why they missed a certain shot, they'll say it's because they didn't hit where they were aiming rather than them not knowing where to aim.
 

sixpack

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I feel rarely do people not know where to aim but rather have trouble hitting the spot on the object ball that they want to. I think if you asked a bunch of pros why they missed a certain shot, they'll say it's because they didn't hit where they were aiming rather than them not knowing where to aim.
Then why are people more likely to miss back cuts into the pocket?
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
It's odd a man as knowledgeable as Mark was never a top pro
He did play on the tour. I think he figured out that he couldn't afford it. Here is a clip about him from 1987 in the Accu-Stats Newsletter. A TPA of 0.947 is pretty good.

1719428387334.png
 

JolietJames

Boot Party Coordinator
Silver Member
Perhaps playing and teaching are different skill sets. I know pro and really good players who can't verbalize what to do and I know average players who are wonderful teachers. I've taken several lessons from Mark. He knows what he's talking about, IMO.
Tiger Woods had Hank Haney as a coach for years. I don't recall Haney on the pro tour.
 
Last edited:

Coos Cues

Coos Cues
Perhaps playing and teaching are different skill sets. I know pro and really good players who can't verbalize what to do and I know average players who are wonderful teachers. I've taken several lessons from Mark. He knows what he's talking about, IMO.
I have nothing but respect for Mark his teaching is awesome. I think Bob is right it's just too hard a row to hoe trying to play for a living so he diversified.
 

Samiel

Sea Player
Silver Member
Then why are people more likely to miss back cuts into the pocket?
I'm sure there's an argument for both, but then why do people miss straight in shots? Is it because they don't know where to aim or because they don't hit where they are aiming? I feel when I miss, it's mainly because I don't hit the object ball where I'm aiming. Do you feel most of your misses are because you don't know where to aim?
 
Top