A translation into English would help.
Post #4:
And a translation of the video transcript too, please.
I agree with you about TOI - I wonder why you don't see anything similar going on with descriptions of CTE.
pj
chgo
Fear of Feel
- Thread starter Patrick Johnson
- Start date
Post #4:
And a translation of the video transcript too, please.
I agree with you about TOI - I wonder why you don't see anything similar going on with descriptions of CTE.
pj
chgo
Tony, you've always struck me as having an open mind.
Have you given Duckie's "arrow" method to find the "contact patch" a good try?
I find it useful along with other ghost ball aiming trainers for those new to the game. Beyond that you have to take the training wheels at some point. Jmho.
Banks
Banned
I've called cj out for his fluff plenty of times. He just ignores me and keeps right on exhaling his brand of nonsense. He can't even use the same word twice without coming up with a new meaning for it.
A scope has sightings, marking a target. There's nothing more on the table than what's already there and you're asking people to visualize lines and hold the visual, as well as other things. If i feel i can see something, that's having faith in my mind's eye, just like so many cte proponents have faith that the system is as it's sold to be.
I can't even have a discussion about cte tactics without them using the same responses that they vehemently rail against. Sloppy is right, it's a cult.
Good point.
Personally, I tried one and couldn't make a ball. Literally. I was like John Barton in the video where he shows it can't possibly work, but at least I tried it. My wife, however, (who can't play a lick) can get pretty fair results using it. Same placement of the arrow each time (by me), but it works for her and not for me, and I'm basically a ghost ball shooter. Go figure.
Most of us are...
I think for the most part, being a Ghost Ball player whether you are lining up edges, envisioning the entire ball as a white or clear orb, whether you stare intently for the contact patch I think most us are interested in a perfect delivery because without it what is the point really?
I think for the most part, being a Ghost Ball player whether you are lining up edges, envisioning the entire ball as a white or clear orb, whether you stare intently for the contact patch I think most us are interested in a perfect delivery because without it what is the point really?
Right. You can aim all day long, but if you can't hit the ball like you intended to you won't get too far. The stroke is most of the game to me. Too bad I don't have a great one, I'm positive I'd play a lot better if I did.
When you are sure of your target
I have a theory on that that emanates from my own game. When you are absolutely sure of your visual aim point and beyond that the path of the ball to the pocket, your stroke gets better because of your chances of being confident.
It worked that way for me and has made a huge difference in my game.
I have a theory on that that emanates from my own game. When you are absolutely sure of your visual aim point and beyond that the path of the ball to the pocket, your stroke gets better because of your chances of being confident.
It worked that way for me and has made a huge difference in my game.
I just wrote a very long post about how I actually aim, and I concluded with some remarks relating to what you are saying here. The whole post seemed too verbose and inappropriate, to I copied and dragged it into a folder full of stuff that will probably never see the light of day again. Lol
Here's the part I think you might agree with:
I like that and am living it today.
Notes are Great, Stroke is Great!
It's really awesome that you make notes, Something about putting thought down in writing that cement then into you mind always there in some way and never forgotten.
Recently I was conversing with One Pocket John on here and I asked him if he had a trick to cure of my left eye dominance. He told me to put my cue under my right eye anyway and just try it. I did it was hard at first but I told myself Right Eye, Right Eye and after the 3rd shot I was amazed at how strong it was and much easier the straight ins were...I could see perfectly, my alignment was reset and I put the in the hole like I was born for it. Any little thing can make a big difference in confidence. I agree with all of what you said.
Quote:
Now, as far as achieving that perfect delivery, well, that's what it's really all about, isn't it? I focus on my stroke more than any other aspect of the game, because it's a much weaker link in the chain than aiming is for me. One thing I've noticed is that one thing reinforces the other, so the better I am seeing the balls, the better my stroke gets, which helps me to see the shots better, and so on. Naturally, this is self-limiting at a certain point, but I never have had a good day at the table where my stroke feels poor.
It's really awesome that you make notes, Something about putting thought down in writing that cement then into you mind always there in some way and never forgotten.
Recently I was conversing with One Pocket John on here and I asked him if he had a trick to cure of my left eye dominance. He told me to put my cue under my right eye anyway and just try it. I did it was hard at first but I told myself Right Eye, Right Eye and after the 3rd shot I was amazed at how strong it was and much easier the straight ins were...I could see perfectly, my alignment was reset and I put the in the hole like I was born for it. Any little thing can make a big difference in confidence. I agree with all of what you said.
Quote:
Now, as far as achieving that perfect delivery, well, that's what it's really all about, isn't it? I focus on my stroke more than any other aspect of the game, because it's a much weaker link in the chain than aiming is for me. One thing I've noticed is that one thing reinforces the other, so the better I am seeing the balls, the better my stroke gets, which helps me to see the shots better, and so on. Naturally, this is self-limiting at a certain point, but I never have had a good day at the table where my stroke feels poor.
I think that's just wordplay. Feeling confident isn't the same as objective certainty - no method has that. I doubt that any method has an advantage in confidence either.
I think the only differences between aiming methods are incidental, and every method is ultimately, where the rubber hits the road, the same thing with different names and cosmetics. The only real difference is how we see them and which ones suit us best.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
Yeah, I never claim to be a great player, but what I write has a lot of value to my learning process. A lot more than what I read at times. It's a lot easier to discover if you really believe in things when you express them as articulately as you can and have them sitting there staring you in the face.
A ton of stuff I've written over the last 50 years is archived in one way or another. With all the things I've done in life, what I always wanted to be and never was is a professional writer. Writing is like pool - you have to WAMW if you want to get good at it. Alas, writing is slowly becoming an obsolete art form now, with the coming generation texting and tweeting their way through life. I envy guys like you who have published and plan to continue publishing.
With text files taking up so little storage, and with the 1TB hard drives being the norm, it makes perfect sense to save what you spent valuable life energy producing. It is also a good safeguard from posting in haste when you get riled up about something. Between FB, this forum, and a few others, I sometimes have numerous text files dragged onto my desktop, giving me a chance to re-think whether or not I really feel like posting them. This practice has saved my arse more times than I can count.
I just found this excerpt that expresses my feelings on objectivity fairly well:
What was quoted was all about subjectively.
One can discuss in subjective and objective terms.
Take putting a motorcycle on a dyno. After the base run, you can look at the graphs and talk objectively about what is needed to do to improve the graph.
Then, after the mods, you can discuss objectively the differences of the graphs.
But when it comes to how those changes feel in the riders seat is all subjective.
Terms like grunty, torquey, crisper are all subjective terms to what was discussed objectively when comparing the graphs.
"feel/touch" part of the game is done after the left hand touches the table
Yes, I can certainly explain in detail how I play, from the pre shot routine, how I rehearse every aspect of the upcoming shot and even the subconscious components of the aiming process.
The actual "feel/touch" part of the game is done after the left hand touches the table. imho
Yes, I can certainly explain in detail how I play, from the pre shot routine, how I rehearse every aspect of the upcoming shot and even the subconscious components of the aiming process.
The actual "feel/touch" part of the game is done after the left hand touches the table. imho
Subjectivity/Objectivity
In this chapter we first will examine several case studies that demonstrate ways in which perception is much less objective than most people believe. Our primary means of scientific perception is visual: 70% of our sense receptors are in the eyes. Thus our considerations of perception will focus particularly on visual perception. We then will examine theories of how perception operates, theories that further undermine the fantasy of objectivity. These perspectives allow us to recognize the many potential pitfalls of subjectivity and bias, and how we can avoid them. Finally, we will address a critical question: can a group of subjective scientists achieve objective scientific knowledge?"
Nice Post and for the part in Red...I highly doubt it as it would apply to Science, Politics, Religion, Aiming etc.
Subjectivity being underscored in any way including being influenced by visual information might rule out the objectivity of facts. There might be the factual yet there is the perception that the visual is the key to application. In this way what you see might not be what you get.
In this chapter we first will examine several case studies that demonstrate ways in which perception is much less objective than most people believe. Our primary means of scientific perception is visual: 70% of our sense receptors are in the eyes. Thus our considerations of perception will focus particularly on visual perception. We then will examine theories of how perception operates, theories that further undermine the fantasy of objectivity. These perspectives allow us to recognize the many potential pitfalls of subjectivity and bias, and how we can avoid them. Finally, we will address a critical question: can a group of subjective scientists achieve objective scientific knowledge?"
Nice Post and for the part in Red...I highly doubt it as it would apply to Science, Politics, Religion, Aiming etc.
Subjectivity being underscored in any way including being influenced by visual information might rule out the objectivity of facts. There might be the factual yet there is the perception that the visual is the key to application. In this way what you see might not be what you get.
How on earth did this all get perverted into thinking that some of us use any sort of kinesthetic sense to aim the shot? We all use our eyes to aim. Otherwise Stevie Wonder would be able to learn to shoot better than Stevie Moore. The use of the word "feel" is being deliberately twisted here, and has turned out to be an unfortunate choice of terminology.
Feel in the sense it is being used by the OP is simply using judgment based upon experience to determine if the shot picture looks correct or not.
BTW I have all your material, and your simple system is no more objective than any other system out there. When you have cross-hairs installed in your cornea and a laser beam installed in your back hand, I'll start to believe your are using anything more than a few reference lines coupled with vast experience to aim with.
Yes, and it happens to be one of the most frustrating conundrums in quantum physics.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/02/980227055013.htm
Thankfully, as Patrick has pointed out, pool is not quantum physics. The difficulty in achieving true objectivity, however, remains a major problem in all of science.