av84fun said:
Well, no, Jim - that's what I call foolishly responding to an internet drama queen. I should know better.
pj
chgo
Hal Houle
- Thread starter eze
- Start date
Well, no, Jim - that's what I call foolishly responding to an internet drama queen. I should know better.
pj
chgo
dr_dave said:
Dave, except for the fact that I assumed a 5-inch pocket and you assumed a 5.25-inch pocket, I believe our figures agree. I also agree with this statement from your page:
"All discrete systems have the same failing - they are not geometrically correct for all setups. If you claim that there are only a (small) discrete number of aimpoints required to hit any pocket from any setup, and disallow the subconscious correction factor, all such systems may be easily disproven. In practice, your ability to compensate overcomes the built-in flaws of the system."
The only quibble I have with that statement is the use of words like "failings" and "flaws" to describe a system's inherent limitations. Those sound like unnecessary value judgments for systems that are useful in spite of (or maybe because of) their limitations.
pj
chgo
This could be an interesting test then for the people who use the system to insure that no subconscious corrections are being made:
Line the up the shot pre-pivot, then have a friend put a piece of paper between the CB and the OB, then pivot to center ball and pull the trigger without seeing the OB at all. If the system works, the ball should be pocketed equally as often as when the OB can be seen.
Line the up the shot pre-pivot, then have a friend put a piece of paper between the CB and the OB, then pivot to center ball and pull the trigger without seeing the OB at all. If the system works, the ball should be pocketed equally as often as when the OB can be seen.
Or maybe better, hold something high enough so that the CB can pass under it, but still block the shooter's view of the OB. Then it could even be a piece of plywood.
Anyone who uses such a system willing to give this a shot? (no pun intended, well, ok, a little)
Anyone who uses such a system willing to give this a shot? (no pun intended, well, ok, a little)
Patrick Johnson said:
Well Patrick, the people to whom you were responding to were eze and Colin Colenso. Are they drama queens too in your opinion?
And is Scott Lee a drama queen?
Is everyone who disagrees with you a drama queen?
You seem incapable of understanding that posting negative criticism on subjects about which you are demonstrably ignorant is destined to draw criticism from people who DO know what they are talking about with respect to any given topic.
Jim
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Lee
Pat...You've been offered the opportunity to learn S.A.M., which is based around center-to-edge aiming. So far you've declined...yet you feel like you can badmouth it, without knowing about it.
T said:This thread is a total joke!
Hmmm...then a lot of quite reputable instructors are pretty stupid to produce videos as a teaching aid.
How many Driver Ed classes are you aware of where the students are given a written manual and the keys to the car to learn how to drive?
I don't know who said that aiming systems can ONLY be explained in person. If I did, I expressed myself poorly. What I meant so suggest (and think I did suggest) was that the systems are DIFFICULT to fully explain textually and are much more readily learned by demonstration.
Wow...you know some pretty highly compensated plumbers! Have you checked out the total incomes of Reyes or Hohman in the past few years?
Are you aware of reports in the press that Jeanette Lee is earning in the neighborood of $750k?
Somehow, I don't think she'll become a plumber any time soon.
In fact, do you have ANY IDEA what the total gross income of say, the top 10 pool players are? What did you do...hack the IRS computer system?
LOL.Get real!
Excellent suggestion!
Regards,
Jim
cigjonser said:
Adjustment can be made when positioning the bridge hand and when pivoting.
pj
chgo
cigjonser said:
Interesting concept but I think it is well accepted my many noted instructors that maintaining a sharp focus on the OB target is important in assisting the brain to deliver the stroke true to the intended course.
Your experiment would be flawed if the above is valid.
However a somewhat similar experiment is to block the POCKET from the shooter's view...even before he even sees the lay of the balls.
It is a core dynamic of Pro One that there are 6 pockets on the table and they are in fixed positions. The brilliance of the system is that, executed correctly, the OB is driven to a known space...i.e. the pocket opening.
I have on repeated occasions, had people place a CB and OB on the table with my back turned...and then, before I turn around, use a towel to block my view of the pocket opening.
Of course, you can guess where it is based on seeing the related cushions but still there is no pocket at which to aim which ought to be a significant handicap. However, if you watch Pro One players, they don't even LOOK at the pocket because it is irrelevant. What they pay attention to is the center to edge line and the positioning of their bridge hand.
But the better experiment IMHO would be to create an aparatus...Iron Willie...in which the player could place a cue and achieve the aim by use of the system and then have Iron Willie execute the shot...absent all human intervention.
Regards,
Jim
Joe T said:
Interesting question Joe. I have only seen your stroke trainer in the video on your website so I don't know exactly how the cue fits...but is seems to me that since the cue gets wider toward the joint, there must be some leeway side to side that the shooter could impose during the stroke.
The very last stroke you demonstrate on your Stroke Trainer video clip seems to show a lot of leeway.
I have watched many of the videos on your site and have been SUPER impressed. I have not yet ordered your commercial videos only out of forgetfulness but will TOMORROW!
So, what I strongly suggest you do is to get in touch with Stan Shuffett at stanshuffett@justcueit.com.
I do NOT speak for Stan in any way, shape or form and have no financial involvement in anything he does but I think he is in the final stages of writing a Pro One manual and I have a feeling that he would be open to discussing the system with other highly respected instructors...like YOU!
I imagine that you have met Stan but if not, he's one of the world's nicest guys.
I think you would get the basics of Pro One in 15 minutes and most of the "finer points" in an hour. And you will, I think, reach the same conclusion that JoeyA reached and expressed so well when he said that Pro One is more than an aiming system...it is a SHOOTING system.
Part of its dynamic is that it almost forces correct alignment which, as you know as well or better than anyone, can make or break the shot.
I just don't feel comfortable getting into the details of the method partly because I don't think it is my place to do so and partly because I am still ramping up on it myself and don't want to be a party to "the blind leading the blind."
I think I'm at Level 2 now with the top Level 3 being able to use english all over the CB. I'm getting there in a hurry re: english on the horizontal center but I'm still pretty iffy on high and low side....especially low inside on cuts to the right which, at the moment, feels pretty weird.
But I'll get there. I am nothing if not a determined sonofa*****!
(-:
Do call or e-mail Stan. I'm sure he'd love to chat with you.
Regards,
Jim
Joe, although your laser trainer seems to be a very useful device, I think for this experiment, the laser should be on or in the center of the pivoting device. I don't think a cue is even necessary, just a laser or bright light attached to a stiff and straight rod which has a slideable pivoting mechanism. And balls shouldn't even be pocketed. Ghost ball centers should be made clear before the pivots and if the pivot works without adjustment, the laser or light should point directly to the ghost ball centers after the pivots.
I was going to eventually do this unless someone else wants to go ahead with it. Please!!
I was going to eventually do this unless someone else wants to go ahead with it. Please!!
FYI, that quote is from my aiming FAQ webpage, but it is not from me. It is from "Spiderman" on the BD CCB forum. I also agree with the sentiment of the quote and you comments concerning "unnecessary value judgments."Patrick Johnson said:
Regards,
Dave
dr_dave said:
Too bad though that when Patrick's other personality emerges, he becomes one of the most aggressive "value judges" on the forum, including specifically using the word "flawed" in knocking such systems.
as in...
and then ...
themselves are flawed or Hal wants them to be misrepresented. "
So, in Patrick's mind, Hal's system deserves flak because OTHER PEOPLE don't describe it properly????????????
And he criticized Hal for not posting the details of his system in spite of the fact that Patrick summarily refuses to post what HIS understanding of the system is.
Oh well.
(-:
Jim
Come on Jim, admit it. You harbor resentment because your undying love for Patrick remains unrequited. The time has come to finally let it all out. Tell him what you've been holding back for way way too long. From your posts I gather that you're a little shy, but this is a very supportive group of people with nothing but love to give.
Now Patrick, it's important for you to really hear Jim when he expresses his emotions. Listen to him, but don't just listen, try to really hear him. Your charm is beguiling, and with your gift comes great responsibility to the many who are captivated by it and can't escape it's hold.
Now Patrick, it's important for you to really hear Jim when he expresses his emotions. Listen to him, but don't just listen, try to really hear him. Your charm is beguiling, and with your gift comes great responsibility to the many who are captivated by it and can't escape it's hold.
Patrick Johnson said:
Stevie Moore uses the system
Bustamante uses the system
Bustamante says, to the best of his knowledge, ALL of the Filipinos aim with this system (it's what they're taught early on).
So my questions is....
Do you think there's a reason for this? If you consider the Filipinos to be the best in the world, and the HUGE majority use the system, do you think they might know something Patrick Johnson doesn't?
That's all I have to say. It is what it is. MAYBE, it's the best foundation of pool that's available, period. Why else would they torture us at nearly every game?
It's easy to say "because they stroke better" but if you're perfect-stroking to the wrong spot, they wouldn't be able to beat a baby seal.
Hmmmmmmmm.....
Maybe we should look to them for knowledge instead of the AZB billiard scientists who can't play 1/10000 of their speed.
Next time you run into Francisco, pull him aside for a chat... he'll talk to you about whatever you wanna know. He was very friendly with my friends and I. So was Stevie. Francisco aims center-to-edge on every single shot, according to him. I guess he's a moron?????????
Dave
Jesus, how many times do we have to stroke your brow and reassure you that we know these systems have value for those who use them? We're talking about how they work; not whether they work. Nobody's attacking; there's nothing to defend against; take a pill.
Walking on eggs...
pj
chgo
Patrick Johnson said:
More "patcrap." You have REPEATEDLY bashed the system and Hal Houle personally...as well as the "zealots" who advocte it. Now that credible people like Stan Shuffett, JoeyA, Spidey and others are chiming in with positive testimonials, you are trying to set the world land speed record in reverse by saying that "theses systems have value for those who use them."
Why don't you exercise some wisdom and FIND OUT how the system works and then improve your game significantly by adopting it?? I have. Wanna play some????
(-:
Jim