Fear of Feel
- Thread starter Patrick Johnson
- Start date
Seriously Pat?? You want me to describe how I use objective aim points, but I can't use actual objective aim points to describe it because you don't think they are objective. Sorry Pat, but that is just as silly as someone asking to prove the Bible, but they can't use the Bible to do it because the other one doesn't believe in the Bible.
To me, that would be just as silly as trying to argue that blue is blue to a person that is color blind. If you can't see what is there as being there, what's the point?
Let's say that I claimed that the Bible is 'true'. And you said, 'Prove it'. And I said, "Just look at all the positive influences that people who have read it say it has had on them. That is all the proof I need. Therefore, the Bible is true."
Would that be a valid proof?
You totally missed the point.
They're objective enough for our purposes - they're specifically definable points on the two balls that we can easily describe and align with each other. What are the specific points and their specific alignments that define any cut angle between the fractional alignments?
You're saying one has to believe before the "proof" can be seen? And you think that demonstrates objectivity?
pj
chgo
Last edited:
You totally missed the point.
One of the best bank pool players listens for the sound the bank makes
The only "aiming system" I ever heard about back in the 80s and 90s was something called 'Kentucky Windage'.......and yes, it has a visual component, the target in pool is the cue ball.....you will never hit the object ball directly, it's the cue ball that requires the attention.......through feel, sight, and even sound.
I personally use my visual sense as the dominant channel ABOVE the shot, then when my hand contacts the table I switch more to the sense of touch/feel.....when we diminish one of our sense it will sharpen the others....this offers great advantages when applied intentionally to different phases of your pre-shot routine.
One of the best bank pool players listens for the sound the bank makes on contact, and when they contact the pocket - this is how he "tunes in" the angles...... using his auditory sense. We experience the world, and form our perceptions through our senses.....it's wise to learn how to maximize them at times systematically. imho
The only "aiming system" I ever heard about back in the 80s and 90s was something called 'Kentucky Windage'.......and yes, it has a visual component, the target in pool is the cue ball.....you will never hit the object ball directly, it's the cue ball that requires the attention.......through feel, sight, and even sound.
I personally use my visual sense as the dominant channel ABOVE the shot, then when my hand contacts the table I switch more to the sense of touch/feel.....when we diminish one of our sense it will sharpen the others....this offers great advantages when applied intentionally to different phases of your pre-shot routine.
One of the best bank pool players listens for the sound the bank makes on contact, and when they contact the pocket - this is how he "tunes in" the angles...... using his auditory sense. We experience the world, and form our perceptions through our senses.....it's wise to learn how to maximize them at times systematically. imho
It's true that most players steer the stroke by feel. I think it's mostly because they don't trust their pre-alignment or the system they use to get there.
Does fear of feel exist? Yes, but I wouldn't say it is common. It occurs when some are convinced they are purely following a system, be it BHE, shadows, fraction and so on. Perhaps a fear of taking power away from their belief in the power of the system they are using, because it gives them confidence.
In terms of traditional aiming, I think it's pretty hard to be successful without feel. For example, I could set up a dead straight shot on a snooker table CB 5 feet from OB and OB 5 feet from pocket. I know center to center makes the pot, but my eyes are not machines, I still have to feel like I am aligned to this, and that takes a lot of practice to build that perception and can be lost pretty quickly with a week or so away from the table.
In some instances, players may go backwards after they realize their perceived system or method is not the bees knees as they'd thought, but in the interest of long term improvement, I think it's much better to filter what works and what doesn't.
Having played since I was 7, I've had about 2,537 aha moments when I thought I'd discovered a secret to this or that. There are probably about 10 of those concepts that I've held on to, and most of them are basic fundamentals.
The rest were mostly illusory and worked much in the same way as how telling someone to relax their little finger can make them start hitting in a shot twice as well. By having something to focus on, it puts them in a more focused state of mind... perhaps other psychological factors involved, but such silly things will often get a student excited for a while.
Colin <- Tearing down my own systems since 1972.
Colin,
I have to agree with you to a point. On the acquisition of feel. Pool is simple yet can be made an abstract concept. For many of us question askers we need something to focus on in order to discover the feel. So what you decide that is, is entirely subjective.
What is nearly impossible in the minds of novices who perhaps don't have the time to give the game traditionally is to "hamb" away a lot of time searching.
Part of that time is developing a straight stroke, a solid stance etc so it does eventually work out the way its supposed to provided the novice stays with it.
The shame is that many don't have the patience to wait until the shot making fairy sprinkles dust on them and all is right with the world and they create a void in the game with their absence...hopefully that is filled by another player who will stick with it.
But this conversation is about the feel itself.
The feel is findable. If you know how to put someone on it.
I love to hear a good instructor talk to his students, that is what he is trying to do the whole time is direct them in how to best position ones self to be able to do the things the student wants to do based on........What?
Some of the instruction that is offered by Instructors is so vague that its a wonder that the student ever gets it so they get it on their own in time and depending on how deep the students pockets are or they finally, hit a million balls.......and understand.
I think there is a thing such as "fear of feel" and its for several reasons that answers have been sought for.
It seems we are stuck in "the land of the lost" so to speak with two sides both with points to be made.
Its obvious with the current state of affairs that only certain ones are finding the answers when it should be a more open to everyone.
What it comes down to is desire. Unless a person is determined the method of application doesn't matter as much. In the existence of an easier method/system for the imparting of the feel, the subjectivity is still the issue and the source of the argument it would seem.
In other words I think its a lot of fun to understand why this argument exists, but until people are open to new ways of looking at things, and that is both sides, little will change.
Last edited:
The only "aiming system" I ever heard about back in the 80s and 90s was something called 'Kentucky Windage'.......and yes, it has a visual component, the target in pool is the cue ball.....you will never hit the object ball directly, it's the cue ball that requires the attention.......through feel, sight, and even sound.
I personally use my visual sense as the dominant channel ABOVE the shot, then when my hand contacts the table I switch more to the sense of touch/feel.....when we diminish one of our sense it will sharpen the others....this offers great advantages when applied intentionally to different phases of your pre-shot routine.
One of the best bank pool players listens for the sound the bank makes on contact, and when they contact the pocket - this is how he "tunes in" the angles...... using his auditory sense. We experience the world, and form our perceptions through our senses.....it's wise to learn how to maximize them at times systematically. imho
CJ,
Its obvious that you have a high level of skill and from the things in your past and what you write. Its obvious that you can find ways to connect to the game on the ground, from a passing plane.
While you may see the perfect parallels of life and geometry I would have to say that many novices don't and they stand in awe of some of the statements you make and really don't know what to do with them.
I hope you do really well when it comes to imparting what you know to your students.
I would hope that you have the magical description that gets students to understanding the core of what makes us all love pool. I do think you have a lot to offer but a few of your analogies are priceless indeed.
Almost like reruns of Kung Fu. Do you remember the one where he jumps off a building head first, rolls up on his feet and whips everyone ass? Well I'm pretty sure he saw the line to the pocket on that one and just created the angle with his cue tip.
Last edited:
I believe there is a fear of feel out there, sometimes, yes. But I'm not thinking of "objective" and "subjective" aiming system fanatics (and I'm a fanatic). I'm thinking of students who have aimed at the wrong point(s) of pockets for years and/or are not familiar with CIT and SIT and how to try to overcome them. Their feel tells them that the geometric aim points aren't quite working... so they struggle with letting their subconscious adjust. More specifically, imagine knowing "I hit that ball RIGHT where I aimed it" and not knowing CIT or whatever made for the miss... that would fight against feel...
I hope re: the rest there can be peace made. Dr. Dave and others have demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that aim systems can do a lot but at some point there has to be some feel as well.
I hope re: the rest there can be peace made. Dr. Dave and others have demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that aim systems can do a lot but at some point there has to be some feel as well.
"Demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt"
Please reference the evidence and its specific location or how about just summarizing what was demonstrated, especially the part about "feel".....more clarification would be appreciated.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
Neil, you hit the nail on the head. Nothing could be more true.
PJ's seemingly innocuous questions are used by police detectives and trial attorneys every single day while questioning suspects or witnesses in court. They keep doing it over and over with many variations in an attempt to trip up those being questioned to gain an opening so they can ratchet up the heat to discredit what they previously stated or get them to admit their guilt.
PJ's innocence act about only wanting to grasp CTE with his "inquisitive" questions
and responses have nothing to do with learning it himself since he's done this for almost two decades.
It's his attempt to stay within forum rules but at the same time look for the little slip ups which allow him to gain a foothold so Stan or those involved with CTE can be further discredited. His wordsmithing questioning technique is used to continue the ongoing assault on CTE and elevate himself as "King on the Mountain" keyboard wizard who knows everything about pool and belittle those who really do know how to play the game and teach like Stan and CJ.
It may fool some but not everybody especially if you know his long history at this type of activity from the archives of RSB and AZ. The only ones who would say it isn't true are those in PJ's camp regarding the aiming issue or one of his rabid fans who get off on his act.
It's his life mission to be on a pool forum just to be a "put down artist" and it's hard to determine why.
Just think if a man with his intelligence and perseverance rechanneled the time and energy which he applies on a pool forum toward something positive in the real world what a better place it would be for those who are in need.
Absolutely Matt,
Just recently I was playing with a lady that kept hitting the near side pocket point going in. I told her what was happening and she knew she was doing right but needed to aim wide or use a bit of outside and the rest of the time she was right on it.
Im not so sure that the argument will be let rest. Its going to take a lot to manage that. It will take a change in the collective consciousness at this point and that is going to take awhile.
I've been a 'feel player' my whole playing life as I've had no formal instruction & used no system other than what I devised myself & sort of changed often & have gone back to 'abandoned' methods. I was rather successful basically on my own along with some very basic basics taught to me by my Dad & what I 'stole' from an old gentleman that knew it 'all' but would not teach me anything.
When one's feel is on, it really is a bit amazing what can be done given we're hitting a ball with the end of a stick to make it hit other balls & the game requires precise angles, speeds, & spin.
CJ Wiley has commented that when a champion is interview he most often says something like, 'I was feeling good today'. He almost never says 'I saw well today' or 'I was seeing well today". I think that is due to a couple of reasons. One is that our sight does not change quickly unless there is an injury, illness or some abnormality. However, the second is that our feel, our ability to focus & connect with & not interfere with our subconscious & not override it, is not so consistent.
So...for those reasons, I & others would like to either increase our level of feel & increase the frequency of that increased level. IMO that is a focus of what CJ tries to do... or... we would like to have a system or method that works so we do not have to rely on that ever changing level of feel.
Hence my interest in what CJ has to say & hence my intrigue with a method that would be totally objective & not rely on feel.
So... I would say some have a fear of losing the high level of accurate feel that they rely on while others fear feel messy up there method.
imagine a solid method with a high level of accurate feel.
Best 2 Everyone,
Rick
PS I also tend to agree with Colin & Robin & the need for knowledge to which Matt referred.
When one's feel is on, it really is a bit amazing what can be done given we're hitting a ball with the end of a stick to make it hit other balls & the game requires precise angles, speeds, & spin.
CJ Wiley has commented that when a champion is interview he most often says something like, 'I was feeling good today'. He almost never says 'I saw well today' or 'I was seeing well today". I think that is due to a couple of reasons. One is that our sight does not change quickly unless there is an injury, illness or some abnormality. However, the second is that our feel, our ability to focus & connect with & not interfere with our subconscious & not override it, is not so consistent.
So...for those reasons, I & others would like to either increase our level of feel & increase the frequency of that increased level. IMO that is a focus of what CJ tries to do... or... we would like to have a system or method that works so we do not have to rely on that ever changing level of feel.
Hence my interest in what CJ has to say & hence my intrigue with a method that would be totally objective & not rely on feel.
So... I would say some have a fear of losing the high level of accurate feel that they rely on while others fear feel messy up there method.
imagine a solid method with a high level of accurate feel.
Best 2 Everyone,
Rick
PS I also tend to agree with Colin & Robin & the need for knowledge to which Matt referred.
Last edited:
Hi Robin,
I know one of your focuses is to try to grow the game so to speak.
It what area do you feel the game needs growth? I'm asking because I am starting to be of the opinion that league play has grown to a point where it may actually to have started to hurt The Game.
Thanks & Best 2 You & All,
Rick