:thumbup2::thumbup2::thumbup2:
Some are athletes & do.
Some are 'bookworms' & think & don't really do.
Some are both & know when to not think too much & just do.
Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?
- Thread starter SamLambert
- Start date
:thumbup2::thumbup2::thumbup2:
Some are athletes & do.
Some are 'bookworms' & think & don't really do.
Some are both & know when to not think too much & just do.
I've taught, in middle school, young man that went on to be a very successful H.S. & College pitcher that was drafted by the Houston organization, to actually turn his head & look at 3rd. base during his windup because he was 'aiming' too much.
The better results were immediate.
Best 2 Ya.
Well we can disagree about that as well. Of course we all want to be in the mythical zone, it's romantic. But in fact if you watch the pros they make VERY conscious choices, measuring shots, checking angles, walking to the place they want to leave the cueball etc...
In fact some say that the highest state of consciousness that can be achieved is to be fully and totally in the moment focused only on what is right in front of you and nothing else. That is probably the zone but it doesn't mean subconscious thought but instead fully conscious focus.
Efren in fact said when asked what single piece of advice he had for aspiring players was to focus.
An aiming system is a tool. When you first use a hammer you are awkward then you get better the more you use it. Eventually you swing a hammer without much thought o the steps involved but you remain focused BECAUSE a mistake can cost you a thumb.
People teach various methods of aiming in baseball, football, golf etc...they are like certainly a mixture of the subjective and objective. Perhaps they don't have formal fancy names but no one is just taught to throw without some advice on how to aim their throws.
Of course it is. People with no "talent" can learn to memorize multiple decks of cards, random strings of numbers and much more in incredibly short times. CTE is not complex. A car mechanic has to hold more "data" in his head about his job than is required for a CTE user to play pool with. You all are equating different with complicated.
Number one you are accepting this man's word without considering context nor seeing the exact conversation. Number two I have had death threats and more directed my way dozens of times on here by both known and unknown posters.
Number three, I speak for myself and the other CTE users on here when I say our message is consistent and clear.
The explanations were given, Stan has said many times that some feel is there. But the majority of us who use CTE and other similar system think that it is so objective as to have little to no feel in it. Thus we may say it's TOTALLY objective. What we really mean is that it's 99.9% objective.
Instead of being a pain why don't you OFFER to write Stan's copy since you claim that you were an ad man. Why not be part of the solution?
But that's not really your only issue is it?
I used a system when I learned to drive. It was the same system used by my dad.
- Put your right foot on the brake and push the clutch pedal in with your left foot
- Put the gear shift lever into neutral
- Put the key in the ignition and turn it away from you until the car starts
- Push the gear shift lever up to the upper left
- Take your right foot off the brake and slowly step on the gas pedal while simultaneously slowly letting out the clutch pedal until the car starts to move forward
- When the car lurches to a grinding halt and the engine stops, do it all over again.. and again... and again...
Sure was a lot to think about IIRC. And I hope I described it all accurately, I haven't actually thought about it for almost 50 years now. Been driving on autopilot since those first few lessons way back then.
J.B.
I would like to see one of the aiming systems that you say people teach in baseball.
A youtube video, an article, whatever, just post what you can find.
I would like to see one of the aiming systems that you say people teach in baseball.
A youtube video, an article, whatever, just post what you can find.
Baseball is about mechanics and mental techniques.
Last edited:
I said methods, not formal "systems".
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130617190920AAmkjDZ
http://kbandstraining.com/how-to-throw-a-baseball-kbands-throwing-progression-drill/
http://probaseballinsider.com/separators-2-throwing-accuracy/
But anyway, it doesn't matter.....each activity has it's own methods. Pool is on where you use a tiny tip to hit a round ball into another round ball to send that second ball to a fixed target. As such it is a more difficult task than any sport involving one ball.
So your point seems to be that if there is no formal "aiming system" in baseball then there is no need for one in pool. That's not even logical.
Look up Fosbury Flop to understand what a paradigm shift is in a sport. I don't understand why you campaign so hard to stop people from trying these aiming systems.
That is your intent right?
Exactly you learned to do a set of unnatural motions and pilot a 4000lb machine effortlessly through training. You were taught a specific set of instructions and with practice you made those instructions into second nature movements that don't need to be thought about.
Same with CTE aiming or any other aiming method. Starts out awkwardly with specific instructions that are not familiar. Then with practice comes the smooth transition to just seeing the right alignment as the player steps to the table. It starts to look very natural and a CTE user that has mastered the technique is often called a "natural" or a very talented shotmaker.
When I was coming up pitching I was always told "don't aim just throw"
As for pool. You forgot the BEST TIME TESTED system EVER!
I've included a video. You will learn this system in no time flat!
Works every time! 5 easy steps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_q4jEPmHFa8
As for pool. You forgot the BEST TIME TESTED system EVER!
I've included a video. You will learn this system in no time flat!
Works every time! 5 easy steps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_q4jEPmHFa8
You didn't find a system that automatically takes the pitcher to the target?
Did you also overly focus or "aim" the car to not cross over the line into oncoming traffic as well as staying in the middle of your lane without weaving?
No, and it doesn't matter. Some people in baseball are all "feel" - don't aim just throw....and others are aim with you finger, aim at the chest......
Nothing done in baseball, football, hockey, golf etc...invalidates methods that work in pool.
Again I ask you, your intention is to stop people from trying aiming systems right?
My intention is to follow conversations and make posts about what I believe to be true.
This nonsense about a system that automatically takes you to the shot line everytime from one of only a few visuals and either a left or right pivot that is equal to 1/2 tip is not my belief to be true.
Did I mention the claim that it only works on a 2x1 surface? ROFLMAO
Last edited:
I mean what is the purpose of all this argument from people like Pat Johnson, Satori, Thaiger, Joeywhatever, Lou and others?
Some person comes on the forum and says, hey folks I have a method that can improve your aiming and accuracy when playing pool do you want to try it?
And when he explains that method some people try it and report great results, some people try it and report mixed results, some people never try and it and claim it just can't work.
My point is that any person who comes on here does so with the INTENTION of trying to help others get better. Why shoot them down?
Why is there a small group of people who seem to be highly focused on destroying the whole concept of aiming systems in pool? What do these people have to offer to inspire people to play pool?
My answer is nothing. Nothing at all.
As a player who loves the game and doesn't use a system I can be at whatever level I am at and plugging away at my million balls and I don't necessarily get excited but I really love to play. If a new method comes along and I try it and I have good results then I get excited and want to play even more and practice even more and share even more. And if I don't have good results then I am in no worse position than when I started.
Why would anyone work so hard to stop this from happening? Why do they work so hard to kill the joy in learning pool?
Some person comes on the forum and says, hey folks I have a method that can improve your aiming and accuracy when playing pool do you want to try it?
And when he explains that method some people try it and report great results, some people try it and report mixed results, some people never try and it and claim it just can't work.
My point is that any person who comes on here does so with the INTENTION of trying to help others get better. Why shoot them down?
Why is there a small group of people who seem to be highly focused on destroying the whole concept of aiming systems in pool? What do these people have to offer to inspire people to play pool?
My answer is nothing. Nothing at all.
As a player who loves the game and doesn't use a system I can be at whatever level I am at and plugging away at my million balls and I don't necessarily get excited but I really love to play. If a new method comes along and I try it and I have good results then I get excited and want to play even more and practice even more and share even more. And if I don't have good results then I am in no worse position than when I started.
Why would anyone work so hard to stop this from happening? Why do they work so hard to kill the joy in learning pool?
(((Satori))) said:
You need to read about his aiming system in context. "Advanced Snooker"
Joe Davis was teaching a student and observed that after potting the black time after time he suddenly missed it.
He examined his students mechanics and could find no fault. He asked what his student was aiming at and his student didn't have a clear explanation.
He went on to say that he must be an odd duck indeed because he always had a definite target. He goes on to explain his method.
It involves placement of a ghost ball but that is NOT the target. The target is actually the AREA of the object ball eclipsed by the ghost ball.
I read this explanation when I was about 16 and still use it today.
I pocket balls better than 99.9% of players alive today as a result.
It is obvious from the fact that JB just ignored my post that he knows nothing about playing pool.
Bill S.
No, any person can try out any method they want and make whatever determination they want to. They can decide to accept it as is and enjoy the results or dig deeper for answers as to why it works.
The difference is that I encourage people to try it first without overanalyzing. You don't.
Understood. Yet you cannot prove otherwise. You can not and will not take the system to the table and make a video where you prove it's not true. So your actively work hard to prevent people from trying it.
I didn't ignore your post. I quoted it and said that there are many methods of aiming taught in snooker including Joe Davis' fractional overlap method.
You don't pocket balls better than Stan Shuffett. You can bet $1000 a shot on that and you have a standing invitation any time you want to go to Stan's studio and have that shotmaking contest on live stream.
You were a good road player back in the day. Everyone agrees on that. And Joe Davis' method is a good method. But it's not necessarily the best method now for aiming in pool.
As for knowing nothing about pool....well I certainly don't know everything but you know full well that I know my way around a pool table. I have never insulted you once on any topic Bill and I wouldn't expect you to start insulting me.
Please. Stop with the idiotic games. I can certainly go through my threads and pull out what I think is relevant. I could go back through this one and read through your million words AGAIN and attempt to pull out whatever your single burning question is OR you could simply restate it simply in one sentence.
Advertisement below.
It's not about aiming systems it's about CTE and its derivatives and the fact that there is no prima facia case to support those that say CTE works. No math, no geometry, no physics. It's non-sensical videos and the mumbled testimonials of a few fanatics who point and say, "See! The ball went in! It must work!"
If someone is intent on trying it, no one can stop them. If someone wants to waste their time studying it and trying to make it work, no one can stop them.
OTOH, they can listen to the arguments on both sides and make up their minds as to whether they want to press forward. And in this case, *what you don't like* is that those that find fault with your system make far more sense that those who advocate for it.
So keep banging the drum but don't try to stifle the debate, because those pointing out the truth and the problems with CTE will still be here and people will go on to make up their own minds.
Lou Figueroa