Dumb people sometimes make the best players

[fxskater]

I do not think that intelligence can be accurately measured. There are too many types of 'intelligence' that are not tested on the supposedly good IQ tests. Some types of intelligence cannot be measured as well. And the statistics used to develop the tests are flawed, anyway.

Laura

I agree 100%. I think if a test was created by someone that was 100% in every mental attribute, everyone should and would attain the exact same score. Thats kinda what I've been trying to get at.

 

[fxskater]

Whether a person entertains analytical reasoning based on science or math has very little to do with how he actually plays the game. To assume that an "intelligent person" has a tendency to become overwhelmed by a greater number of possibilities in the pool world in my humble opinion has no basis.

Should it be a surprise to anyone but a few that most here are pool players first and foremost? And that how we arrived at our current skill level had very little do with degrees or IQ's but rather an insane love of the game, the sounds, the smells, the stories, and the history?

Fred

I agree with this as well. Intelligence vs Stupid likely has almost nothing to do with how good we can become.

 

[drivermaker]

Whether a person entertains analytical reasoning based on science or math has very little to do with how he actually plays the game. To assume that an "intelligent person" has a tendency to become overwhelmed by a greater number of possibilities in the pool world in my humble opinion has no basis.

Fred

That all depends on whether the "intelligent person" or the "not so intelligent person" alike have the 'intelligence' NOT to get involved in some of the superfluous gobbledegook that can come into the pool learning process, especially on forums. I think an "intelligent" person is more apt to get involved with higher learning through brain stretching activities...and a "not so intelligent" person will say "f*#k it....let's just play pool". In the end, making the "not so intelligent" player the "intelligent" one.

 

[Fred Agnir]

Okay then. Does a dumb person who "loves the game" have a better chance of succeeding that a smart person who "love the game"? Please stay on the subject

Based solely on how you wrote your initial post, I'm one of the few who actually did stay specifically on the subject, without twisting in 180 degrees. Is that a surprise?

To your currrent question, there's no reason to believe that one will take to the game any better than the other based only on "smarts." The world is replete with crappy players that cover the spectrum of smarts. Spacial visualization and coordination would be the early keys that seem to separate beginners' skills. The game's focus will always be the physical execution in a player's early stages, not the mental game nor the analytical ability.

As someone else already said, in your scenario, it's most likely that the weak players would have trouble and that over-analyzing just exacerbates the situation. Likewise, so does under-analyzing.

Fred

 

[Fred Agnir]

I think an "intelligent" person is more apt to get involved with higher learning through brain stretching activities....

This seems to be one of your biggest bugaboos, though I'll never understand how you make the connection that those that do the brain stretching activities do so for any other reason than to do it for entertainment value and self-pleasure.

As I said, player are players. Whether they do or don't enjoy the analytics has zippo to do with how they actually play. How they play is how they play. Pretty profound, but nothing is more true.

Fred

 

[drivermaker]

This seems to be one of your biggest bugaboos, though I'll never understand how you make the connection that those that do the brain stretching activities do so for any other reason than to do it for entertainment value and self-pleasure.

As I said, player are players. Whether they do or don't enjoy the analytics has zippo to do with how they actually play. How they play is how they play. Pretty profound, but nothing is more true.

Fred

Well Fred...that's about the furthest thing from the truth that you could have written. Total crap. If you go back to the Jan. 2003 article in BD that I referred to, (I think it was in this thread) you'll see that the rocket scientists in the article, including Ron Shepard, all openly admit that it can and does get in their way and they do in fact think at the table in complex ways.
Do you have the issue or access to it?

 

[Fred Agnir]

this game isn't rocket science. you could argue that smarter people have the potential to learn the game faster

I don't mean to pick on your post specifically, but this is what I mean about people twisting it 180 degrees. The initial post was specifically asking whether the higher intellect makes the learning process slower not faster, due to over-analysis.

Someone immediately turned this into a "you don't have to be smart or know physics to play this game." Too bad.

Fred

 

[BigLip]

Smart people talk about pool and what happens on the pool table...

"Dumb" people just go play and see what happens and dont think anything about it...

"Dumb Smart" people just go play and see what happens and REMEMBER IT!


my wrestling coach back in hs told me the funniest thing one time...i would do whatever he told me to do...one time he told me to go upstairs and run until he came and got me...2 hours later i was still upstairs running...

he said..."what are you still doing up here!?" i said "you told me to do this until you came and got me" THEN he said "you are going to be GREAT b/c you are so dumb...you just do what you are told!" at first i was a little hurt...3 yrs later i was 6th in the COUNTRY hahaha...

 

[Egg McDogit]

Fred, here is my response to the original post. Seeing different alternatives shouldn't overwhelm a smarter player and make a difference. A smart or "dumb" experienced player will pick out the best shot/line/safety that they can, commit to it, and execute.

Why would a player be overwhelmed by a greater number of possibilities? The most common reason I hear is "I didn't commit to the shot...I was kind of thinking about playing it another way." In that case, the player identified equally viable alternatives, but didn't commit to one of them. To me, that is not smart. A smart person would understand the importance of commiting to a shot before shooting it.

I don't think seeing more possibilities would have any significant effect on a person's ability to play, so long as they do a good job of identifying a good shot (which a smart person can presumably do as well as a "dumb" person) and commit to it.

peace
-egg

This observation was made by a famous trick shot artist whom we have all come to love and admire. I will not memtion his name here in order not to take anything away from this thread. His reasoning was that a very intelligent person has a tendency to become overwhelmed by a greater number of possibilities.

 

[DaveK]

Back to my team of engineers. After 4 years of trying to train them how to play 8 ball, my conclusion is that they are so left brained that they will never learn. In other words, they have zero creativeness. All they can do is crunch numbers. They can play, to answer one poster's comments. They range from SL 3s to SL 5s. In tournament play they all play/think like SL2s. They tell you they understand about getting trouble balls out, blocking pockets, not running most of their balls and handing over control of the table to the opponent. But when it comes crunch time, they are complete idiots. And after the match, they come tell me that they should have listened to me because the SL3 girl beat their butts doing to them exactly what I had told them to do to the opponent. Maybe I am wrong and they just can't play under pressure. After breaking up the team for various reasons, we are going to get back together because friendship is what pool is all about to me.

You were likely on a team of Civil Engineers. Sorry for your pain of them not listening to you and getting beat by girls. That is just so typical of those uncivilized civils !

Dave

 

[ceebee]

Well, seeing as only a handful went on to college, Varner and the Miz, and the rest barely made it through high school, you got a point there .

Just for the record, Steve Mizerak graduated from college & was a teacher for many years

 

[DaveK]

Well, per chance, you are correct. They are civil engineers! And they always got beat by the girls. Maybe they could not concentrate?!

Or they have different priorities ... ya know once those guys get into the dirt they just can't escape !

Sparky Dave

 

[Purdman]

My Point

Anyone who refers to a less knowledgable pool player as dumb is ignorant. I am sorry everybody wasn't born with a superior IQ like WW and FL, his hero. They pretty much have the same attitude towards anyone who disagrees with them. WW, I am dumb. You want to play some buddy. You shouldn't have any problem with me, I can't play a lick. Oh yeah, almost forgot. You come play where I play, do yourself a favor and do not refer to anybody as dumb! Bring Laura with you, this should be fun.
Purdman

 

[Travis Bickle]

Instead of "dumb" or "smart" maybe we're really talking about the value of formal education here?

There's no way a truly dumb person could be much good at pool. A dumb person is usually thought of as one who can't learn from his mistakes and just keeps doing the same, er, dumb things over and over again.

Any decent pool player makes thousands of mistakes as he learns to aim, learns speed control, englishes, etc. And if he gets any better, he has to be smart enough to remember the correct way to execute a given shot, in fact, a pretty large repertoire of shots.

Formal education, though, doesn't look like it helps any!

 

[bruin70]

i don't like the word "intelligence".........i prefer "aptitude".

bobby fisher had an aptitude for chess. but was he intelligent?,,,,,,,,,,,,,,he was a lame-o when it came to handling his daily affairs, a virtual nincompoop.

just because you go to college to study engineering, doesn't mean you're "intelligent" or can balance your checkbook. you had an aptitude for engineering, which is why you studied it in college in the first place!

in fact, some people have an aptitude for college, but can't apply a single thing they learned to real life. they're called professional students. how "smart are they? maybe good party guests.... these people are intelligent about things(like critics), but they don't have an aptitude for it(the pros, the do'ers)

 

[Jimmy M.]

And if he gets any better, he has to be smart enough to remember the correct way to execute a given shot, in fact, a pretty large repertoire of shots.

Many different animals, with far less mental capacity than human beings, are capable of learning through trial and error. I would love nothing more than to pat myself on the back for being smart enough to play decent pool but, the truth is, it isn't all that intellectually demanding. If you keep doing 'X' and it continually produces 'Y' as a result, you'd *really* have to be slow not to notice it and only slightly quicker not to do something about it.

 

[Purdman]

Okay then. Does a dumb person who "loves the game" have a better chance of succeeding that a smart person who "love the game"? Please stay on the subject

Ask your wife WW.
Don