Re app improvements...
Digicue inventor is a member here and I bet he'd like to hear input on potential improvements.
@nataddrho
Shoot him a line. Good guy and likely highly motivated toward better!
Digicue Blue. Guys are Afraid to Know?
- Thread starter Bobkitty
- Start date
Digicue inventor is a member here and I bet he'd like to hear input on potential improvements.
@nataddrho
Shoot him a line. Good guy and likely highly motivated toward better!
Well now you're no longer demanding proof that the device improves gameplay. You've not so much moved the goalpost as switched to a different goalpost on a different field. But at least we're making forward progress, vs. you demanding proof of something that might as well be axiomatic.
So the device has an accelerometer that can measure how straight it's moving, and at what speed, with a useful degree of accuracy. Can we agree on that, or do you dispute e.g. the accuracy of the electronics?
So if we can assume that, then it follows that if you improve your stroke as measured by the device, then you've improved your stroke period.
Many people have reported that, within a short period of using the device, they improved their metrics according to the device. Which means they've improved their stroke.
So the only two ways to attack the device, logically, seem to be:
1) Disputing the accuracy of the electronics, or
2) Claiming that a straighter stroke with good straight follow-through isn't necessarily better than, well, a crooked jabby stroke I guess
Jeez, how did years-n-years of champions learn to play without gadgets? Golf is currently going down the same road. Too many players are addicted to launch-monitor data and not enough to actually playing the game. Hard work and competition works every time.
What do you mean, "currently going down the same road"? Do you think training gadgets are... new?
To begin to answer this, you need to first subscribe to the assumption that sports-learning isn't an atomic entity. In other words, one can practice parts of a sport in isolation of the whole. There are indeed some who flat out do not believe that any sort of improvement can occur if you remove any aspect of the experience... that you can only truly learn under pressure in a competitive environment with standard(ish) equipment executing full shots for the purpose of winning. This is a strict combination of high level mental sportsmanship and low level fundamentals.
In this case, then any type of divide-and-conquer approach is not for you.
Continuing... the next step is to make the further assumption that statistical cue tip accuracy is directly proportional to cue ball control consistency. Again, there are some who actually do not believe that cue tip precision is important, and instead cue ball control consistency is only dependent upon the entire experience of the shot. However this is a difficult argument to make since it has most definitely been shown both mathematically and scientifically (see Dr. Dave's videos) that the impact vector of the cue tip is the only thing you have control over. Empirical evidence of this can be considered proof.
So, what is the DigiCue? It is just a tool that has the sensitivity to quantify your cue tip accuracy. It does this by again, making another assumption... that your set point is pointing to where exactly you want to hit the cue ball. The DigiCue might fail those whom use a very dynamic stroke and have a set point in a weird place, like on the table under the ball, so it isn't perfect. But for the majority the set point is usually where they want to hit the ball. From here, a bunch of parameters are measured that all are related to things that show cue tip accuracy. You can think of it as similar to a Coke bottle, only virtual, and able to work for various types of spins or cue elevations. And it is much more convenient than a Coke bottle because you can play actual games with it.
Taking this concept a step further, the DigiBall will tell you exactly where the tip hit the cue ball without making any assumptions. So it is more accurate in that regard, but it won't tell you anything about how the tip arrived at the location it did.
Finally, no tool, or really anything you buy, will make you a better player BY ITSELF. It is a completely pre-conceived notion that people NEED a DigiCue. I've never made that claim. It is just a helper to make your practice more efficient. It won't inject knowledge into your head unless you use it as a tool. If anything it should make you work harder and be more uncomfortable than you are, because it will make aware things that maybe you aren't aware of. That is how learning happens.
Any proof will just have to come from reviews of many users over time. Since the launch of it 7 years ago, the reviews have been very positive.
So in conclusion, the DigiCue will help you learn how to stroke more consistently. A more consistent stroke helps you LEARN how to be a better player... but is YOU who makes you a better player.
Last edited:
Read my post above. I keep trying to explain over and over again, to you in particular. Sports-learning is not atomic. There are just way too many examples of this to even list.
Please finally figure out a way to understand this and stop tagging every thread with the same monotonous comment.
I'm not usually a fan of gizmos such as this. But here I think you yourself need to clarify what would constitute proof, to you?
High runs etc are contigent on many factors, such as mental acuity, vision, aiming, understanding of the game (pattern play, risk management) as well as the stroke. Also we all have cyclic performance swings to varying degrees, caused by numerous physiological and psychological factors. It would be pretty hard to isolate not only the effect of (possible improvement of) the stroke from those other factors, but also any kind of placebo or nocebo effect the device might introduce.
Personally I think a valid test would be a battery of shots with position as well as pocketing requirements. Like shot number one from Bert Kinisters first tape and other such stroke tests. Admittedly it would be difficult to get it to scientific level, if not impossible, but you'd get a good enough idea, I'd think. A number of trials over a period of time would be needed, with no specific practise of the test battery inbetween.
I believe in coaching and self analysis (video assisted) myself, but the above is how I'd test it.
If I claimed that a worse stroke would make a person worse at pool, nobody would bat an eyelash, much less demand proof.
Yet we have people on this thread honestly doubting that a better stroke might make a person better at pool.
WTF is going on here.
A better stroke is key to better pool. Repeatability is of the utmost importance. The cue needs to arrive at the place it needs to be, every time, as long as it does, it matters not how it gets there. Some styles are more reliable and easy to use than others, but some may not be able to use an orthodox stroke, yet still be awesome players.
The question is: Will this device improve your stroke, specifically as far as shot outcomes? And how do you measure it, if it did? I also think some "established" players are scared of messing with their strokes and believe that doing so may decrease performance, even if the stroke looks better to the device. They may have incorporated their stroke flaws into their mental picture and muscle memory, and it may be difficult to relearn how to play again. These, I think, are legitimate concerns.
Pool performance is complicated. I have put most of my practise into my stroke, due to playing snooker and tight pocket games. I has helped my pool, but I might have practised differently if pool was my only game.
Agreed. But if a person is in a situation where they're considering buying a gadget to help improve their stroke, I have to assume they'd be willing to unlearn some bad habits (and accept any temporary setback that might involve) in exchange for having a better stroke.
I have said this before
the digi cue can give a pretty picture of your wonky stroke
but it doesnt tell you how to fix it
if you find a way (perhaps with an instructor)
it will show you A pretty picture of your “new and improved stroke”
but how badly or goodly you hit a perfect stop shot
or
follow a ball straight in to the pocket
will also let you how much your wonky stroke has improved
JMHO
ICBW
the digi cue can give a pretty picture of your wonky stroke
but it doesnt tell you how to fix it
if you find a way (perhaps with an instructor)
it will show you A pretty picture of your “new and improved stroke”
but how badly or goodly you hit a perfect stop shot
or
follow a ball straight in to the pocket
will also let you how much your wonky stroke has improved
JMHO
ICBW
I dont see you saying the digicue is the solution
just sayin
Stroke only takes you to what you wish to do with pool. Pool is a sorting problem. If you aren't inspired by sorting balls for hours on end, the only thing that will help is letting a better player, do it for you.
If your stroke is perfect and you want to improve your pool game, then buying a device to improve your stroke isn't going to help you.
But if your stroke is perfect, you probably already know that.
Naturals who can reach "THERE" probably only care about getting action but as is obvious, the "less talented" may just be curious and make good use of such precise feedback.
Nuther thing just occurred to me. Most players are intently focused on the object ball as they pull the trigger. The drone ball will plug right into that system.
You are making sssumptions.
And where are “many people” reporting they’ve improved their metrics and that that has led to improved play?
Lou Figueroa
If you think I've made an assumption that's unwarranted, let me know. Isn't that kind of the point of these discussions?
Also, I never claimed that anybody's play was improved. Read my post again.