Hal Houle

Scott Lee said:
Pat...Actually, it is quite on topic...if you want to learn an aiming system that requires a VERY repeatable stroke...which you simply do not have.
Click to expand...

Scott, I understand the urge to retaliate with insults for what you think were insults aimed at you, but we both know the topic here is not how to learn these systems but why they're so little known and misunderstood.

Why do you think that is?

pj
chgo
 
PKM said:
See this page from an old thread (scroll down for the attached file).
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=57805&page=8

And a page from Dr. Dave, scroll all the way to the bottom for an explanation (from an instructor teaching it).
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html

The "strong" version of SAM (my terminology) claims that six aim points will always find a pocket (and the center of the pocket). The "weak" version is that these are reference aims that must be adjusted. Only the latter can possibly be justified it seems to me, and there is clearly nothing wrong with it if it helps you.
Click to expand...
Thanks PKM,
Below are those images of the SAM system supposedly explained. Resized for convenience. Still no detailed explanations found by SAM proponents or teachers. SAM is said to be based on one of Hal Houle's fractional aiming systems.
aaad0k.jpg

akj3h4.jpg

27h2s.jpg
 
Pat...If you're feeling insulted, I'm sorry. However, I expect people who hire me to at least follow directions, if they expect to achieve the desired results, that they are paying for. You plainly did not even have enough respect for what I spent time with you about, to even practice it AT ALL. You told me that clearly, the 2nd time we met, to finish the first lesson...wasting my time, and your money. The process works for 95%+ of the people who learn it, and apply it properly, by practicing correctly. You may take that to mean whatever you choose.

NO aiming system will work consistently, without a repeatable setup and delivery process. With a repeatable stroke, ANY system will give at least some success. Most players use a mixture of several systems, for the greatest consistency. SAM uses elements of four different aiming methods, to create, what we believe, to be the easiest to learn, and most consistent to utilize.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Patrick Johnson said:
Scott, I understand the urge to retaliate with insults for what you think were insults aimed at you, but we both know the topic here is not how to learn these systems but why they're so little known and misunderstood.

Why do you think that is?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
 
Pat...If you're feeling insulted, I'm sorry.
Click to expand...

I don't feel insulted, Scott, although I'm pretty sure that was your intent. But it's OK, because I expected some blowback after my blunt comments about your possible economic motivation for perpetuating aiming systems mystique.

But enough of that - how about my question? Why do you think these Houlish systems are so little known and so misunderstood? Why do you think discussions of them invariably get heated? They're just aiming systems, right? No other aiming systems generate this much heat.

pj
chgo
 
av84fun said:
I think that pool instructors should absolutely start giving away their advice and counsel for free...the MINUTE that doctors, lawyers, corporate executives and college professors do.
Click to expand...

I don't think that was what Patrick meant when he made the statement that Scott should freely share the SAM system online here. I think what he meant was, everyone participating in this forum should feel a responsibility to freely share information with everyone else. It's not meant to be such a thing as you take whatever you can (to benefit only yourself), and you never give anything back (because you view everyone else here as competitors). And for us instructors, we shouldn't be looking at people on this forum as potential clients, we should be looking at them as our partners in pool promotion.

Roger Long,
Certified Instructor
 
av84fun said:
I think that pool instructors should absolutely start giving away their advice and counsel for free...the MINUTE that [blah blah blah] and college professors do.
Click to expand...

Amazingly, MIT is undergoing a giant effort to make ALL their undergraduate and graduate course materials available for free to anybody anywhere anytime...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_OpenCourseWare

In many respects this newsgroup and RSB before it have been good examples of public sharing of information. For the most part many knowledgeable people have shared freely here to all our benefit.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
But enough of that - how about my question? Why do you think these Houlish systems are so little known and so misunderstood? Why do you think discussions of them invariably get heated? They're just aiming systems, right? No other aiming systems generate this much heat.
Click to expand...

I think I know the answer to that. Confusion surrounds the system because it works, but not as an aiming system. Rather, it's a routine that pierces straight through the cloudiness of thought to one's instinctive shot recognition inventory. It simply and quickly sweeps the inventory.

It's a feel enhancer. It also breaks up one's shot inventory into at least 2 subcategories for easier recognition.
 
av84fun said:
I think that pool instructors should absolutely start giving away their advice and counsel for free...the MINUTE that doctors, lawyers, corporate executives and college professors do.
Click to expand...

Jim, I actually side more with Patrick than you on this issue.

I believe that if Instructors are going to regularly use this medium (The Main Forum) as their recruitment grounds for their clients, that they have an obligation to provide some very detailed and accurate information about anything that they discuss here, FREE OF CHARGE. If their prospective customers ask questions about certain things they should answer them to the fullest without suggesting that they attend a class to find out that one "secret".

I have seen VERY limited amounts of detailed information except from a few qualified pool instructors. I side with Patrick's view in that some instructors have an agenda to entice people into their program for them to learn the un-sung mystical secrets of pool. If I were in business to make money from instructing I doubt that I would be much different.

It is my opinion that this forum has been infinitely helpful to me and others when it comes to deciphering the "secrets" :smile: of pool.

It is a public forum and even though a certain civility with one another is expected from all who participate here, there are no rules that govern forcing members to provide DETAILED AND ACCURATE INFORMATION about anything from anyone.

Billiard instructors, billiard manufacturers and companies of all types who make a profit selling to the forum members should pay to advertise their products and services IMO on this forum and anywhere else on AZBilliards. There are costs to operating this forum and while it started as a small entity, it is growing and morphing into something better everyday despite petty squabbling and disgruntled posters, myself included. Some people pay for advertising here and others try to fly under the radar.

Some of us on the forum, simply offer a free helping hand to the best of our ability. That doesn't make us better, it just makes our information free and you know what they say about getting something for nothing. :grin:

JoeyA
 
I like the idea of paying after receiving the information. Open up a PayPal account and ask for donations based on how much the information was worth to you, according to your means.
Then no one gets swindled. It's an honor system.
A more complex system would be something like the reputation system here. You deposit money in an account and distribute it as you see fit, based on the help you get.
 
bluepepper said:
I think both sides are right. The system works, but not as an aiming system. It simply provides 2 great starting points from which to begin your alignment process, which includes minute adjustments made by feel. You feel the right alignment when you hit it. It's not a system that works under the scutiny of scientific measurement.

YES IT DOES.

The two half ball aims that Hal gives cover all shots, but not the way I, Patrick, Colin or a few others here would expect them to. They are only jumping off points to wake up your senses. Hal may not claim that, but if pressed I could easily prove it. Please don't make me. I'm lazy.
Click to expand...

The method only produces half ball hits when half ball hits would correctly direct the OB into the pocket.

DONE CORRECTLY BY THOSE WHO ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND THE METHOD, it produces an infinite number of OB departure angles.

You are correct in that ALL aiming systems are a point of departure except for center ball hits. ALL aiming systems must be adjusted for spin/sqwerve issues.

BUT...it is vastly superior to start from an accurate baseline than not to do so.

Finally, any and all aiming techniques including pure feel (which is a myth) can be ruined by improper cueing. So, MANY players who argue that a given system is "inconsistent" are almost certainly ruining the system with stroke/alignment errors which is not the system's fault.

Regards,
Jim
 
SAM and center-to-edge described and illustrated

PKM said:
See this page from an old thread (scroll down for the attached file).
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=57805&page=8

And a page from Dr. Dave, scroll all the way to the bottom for an explanation (from an instructor teaching it).
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html

The "strong" version of SAM (my terminology) claims that six aim points will always find a pocket (and the center of the pocket). The "weak" version is that these are reference aims that must be adjusted. Only the latter can possibly be justified it seems to me, and there is clearly nothing wrong with it if it helps you.
Click to expand...
FYI, I also have a detailed description of the center-to-edge fractional-ball aiming method, with illustrations, examples, and analysis, here:

Regards,
Dave
 
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one my friend. There is nothing wrong in a free market society for people to advertise and market their products/services on public forums.

There are those of us who are willing to share some of what we know on these forums and that is fine.

There are others who MAKE A LIVING from providing their instructional services who would be pure fools to just give it away...just like my doctor/lawyer analogy.

Stan Shuffett in particular, has made relatively few posts in total and fewer still for the purpose of acquiring students. I have probably recommended him more often in the past month than he has EVER recommended himself.

Personally, I am very glad that instructors identify themselves on the forums. Otherwise, I would not have known about Scott Lee who I have learned a great deal from.

And while I have met Stan on a few occasions in the past, until fairly recently, I had no idea he is a BCA instructor. I thougt he was "just" Landon's Dad!

I think it is unrealistic to place a duty on professional instructors to share any substantial amount of their knowledge for free on the forums. We should not impose upon people a duty to put themselves out of business by their own generosity.

Doing so would be JUST LIKE cuemakers offering to build cues for the cost of the materials or, in the case of professional service providers, having CPAs offer to provide crucial tax advice for free.

In addition, there are very few active pros who post here and virtually none that have gotten into any lengthly detail about their techniques.


And yet the members of this and other forums directly provide income to those pros in the form of buying tickets to the events...playing in the opens that we know we are only "donating to" and being a part of the TV audience without which there would be even LESS prize money for them.

So if any group OWES anything to the members here, it is the pros and not the instructors who don't profit a dime except from members, like me, who become their students.

We have tended to agree on most things and I RESPECT everything you post. But we do have an honest difference of opinion on this matter.

Regards,
Jim

JoeyA said:
Jim, I actually side more with Patrick than you on this issue.

I believe that if Instructors are going to regularly use this medium (The Main Forum) as their recruitment grounds for their clients, that they have an obligation to provide some very detailed and accurate information about anything that they discuss here, FREE OF CHARGE. If their prospective customers ask questions about certain things they should answer them to the fullest without suggesting that they attend a class to find out that one "secret".

I have seen VERY limited amounts of detailed information except from a few qualified pool instructors. I side with Patrick's view in that some instructors have an agenda to entice people into their program for them to learn the un-sung mystical secrets of pool. If I were in business to make money from instructing I doubt that I would be much different.

It is my opinion that this forum has been infinitely helpful to me and others when it comes to deciphering the "secrets" :smile: of pool.

It is a public forum and even though a certain civility with one another is expected from all who participate here, there are no rules that govern forcing members to provide DETAILED AND ACCURATE INFORMATION about anything from anyone.

Billiard instructors, billiard manufacturers and companies of all types who make a profit selling to the forum members should pay to advertise their products and services IMO on this forum and anywhere else on AZBilliards. There are costs to operating this forum and while it started as a small entity, it is growing and morphing into something better everyday despite petty squabbling and disgruntled posters, myself included. Some people pay for advertising here and others try to fly under the radar.

Some of us on the forum, simply offer a free helping hand to the best of our ability. That doesn't make us better, it just makes our information free and you know what they say about getting something for nothing. :grin:

JoeyA
Click to expand...
 
Jimmy M. said:
I'm not being sarcastic when I ask this. I am genuinely curious. Are there any professional players who use Hal's systems and who would openly give credit to Hal for teaching them how to aim?
Click to expand...


Does Ralph Greenleaf qualify?

Actually I think it would be Hal that gives credit to Ralph
 
av84fun said:
The method only produces half ball hits when half ball hits would correctly direct the OB into the pocket.

DONE CORRECTLY BY THOSE WHO ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND THE METHOD, it produces an infinite number of OB departure angles.

You are correct in that ALL aiming systems are a point of departure except for center ball hits. ALL aiming systems must be adjusted for spin/sqwerve issues.

BUT...it is vastly superior to start from an accurate baseline than not to do so.

Finally, any and all aiming techniques including pure feel (which is a myth) can be ruined by improper cueing. So, MANY players who argue that a given system is "inconsistent" are almost certainly ruining the system with stroke/alignment errors which is not the system's fault.

Regards,
Jim
Click to expand...

Jim, I understand the system. I like the system. I learned the system from Hal face to face. Forget about throw and sqwerve for a moment. I know they are relevant to all systems, but please put them aside for this discussion. They don't have to be taken into consideration here.

Shuffet's technique, if for different shot angles and different CB-to-OB distances, changes the distance from center CB to the side that you place the stick before pivoting, or if it changes the orientation of the stick before pivoting may work without other adjustment. Hal's requires adjustment whether it's subconscious or conscious.
 
dr_dave said:
FYI, I also have a detailed description of the center-to-edge fractional-ball aiming method, with illustrations, examples, and analysis, here:

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

Dave...your above link points here in reference to Hal's center to edge system....http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#fractional

But that is a post from some anonymous poster and it IS NOT the center to edge system but rather one of his older FRACTIONAL sytems.

Center to Edge IS NOT A FRACTIONAL SYSTEM....PERIOD.

Furthermore, you say in your article that you don't use any aiming method but shoot by "feel" which...with GREAT respect...is a total myth.

You ARE aiming at SOMETHING in spite of the fact that you may have, with massive practice, succeeded in internalizing your METHOD so that it is somewhat subconscious.

I have often used the analogy of how we come to the decision to proceed through an amber traffic light or stop. In FACT, your brain performs rather massive calculations based upon closing speeds, distances, road conditions etc. and then not only makes the decision but causes the foot to hit the accelerator or brake pedals and with a given amount of force.

It feels like "feel" because you don't even think about it on a conscious level but nevertheless, the calculations are being made...with amazing precision actually.

For all those who think they shoot by "feel" alone, let's just play some but the "feel player" has to close his eyes before executing the final stroke...which, if they are not aiming at anything in particular, shouldn't make any difference.

(-:

Finally Dave, I haven't had time to delve into all the descriptions and diagrams contained in your link but WILL for sure. In the meantime, I am just pointing out that what your link suggested is the Houle center to edge system is NOT that system but rather a DIFFERENT fractional system.

Regards,
Jim
 
dr_dave said:
They didn't "admit to it" in the How The Pros Aim article. :confused:

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

The only guy on that list who had the capability to admit anything was Efren and he sent out a lemon for the readers. Dr. Dave, if you believe what he was quoted as saying, you have a mouth full of Sour Patch Kids... no offense, brother :) I'm here trying to shed some light into a dark, dark place.

I'll leave this thread with this thought. Watch this (or any) video of Bustamante and explain why he pivots left-right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBez5X7HpXI

19:50 3 Ball: center-to-left-edge bank, outside pivoting to CB center (center-hole-joel)

20:50 7 Ball: center-to-left edge, outside pivot to CB center (center-hole-joel). Next 8-Ball: Busty pivots from the LEFT side of the CB, even though it's a bottom right shot.

24:05 5 Ball. if you can't see it here, you never will ladies. Perfect perspective. pay very close attention to where the tip of his cue STARTS and where it ends up before he pulls the trigger.

As a matter of fact, watch everything he shoots--- he does the same thing on every single shot (with VERY few exceptions). This man is "locked" to the center-to-edge line on everything --- his tip gives it away like a joke.

You can talk about what "pros" do and then you can talk about what top Filipinos pros who spot the quoted pros the 7 ball do.

I'm not downing anyone's info or what they teach or what they post. You have SUPER good info posted. I'm trying to show you in a sincere way that doesn't hurt your Ph.D. ego that your aiming information is very "incomplete" and not used at the highest level of the game.

I'll stick my head out and say that unlike a few others who might be shy. Invest some moolah and take a university sabbatical to Manila and re-learn what you think you know. There's a WHOOOOLE 'nother world out there brother :)

Dave
 
SpiderWebComm said:
I'll stick my head out and say that unlike a few others who might be shy. Invest some moolah and take a university sabbatical to Manila and re-learn what you think you know. There's a WHOOOOLE 'nother world out there brother :)

Dave
Click to expand...
Or you can drive to Rancho Cucamonga and get lessons from Alex, the owner of Stix.
The man whom Efren has taken two cues from and plays pretty sporty too.
Knows how Efren aims and plays.
The " there are only 3 shots in pool ..." quote from Efren has been used and abused by those who don't speak Tagalog and/or Kapampangan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top