Hal Houle

[SpiderWebComm]

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

It's cool. I don't need to take a pill either. One thing I really took to heart this week was HOW many top, top, top players in the world use center-to-edge.

All I know is I run through the system, the ball goes in the hole. I bet if you asked any of the Filipinos.... NONE of them would be able to say why it works... Busty CERTAINLY doesn't give a shit. All they know is the ball goes in the hole........ which SHOULD be the only thing we care about too.

If you wanna make a big deal about why... log into some geometry forum and figure it out there. Center-to-edge = ball goes in the hole (FACT). If you don't think so, flag me down when you see me in person or pull aside Francisco, Orcullo, or Stevie. Someone will show you.

I fear someone who doesn't have the proper knowledge or mechanics will say it doesn't work when it does. A face-to-face meeting with any doubter will iron that out quick. It's easy when you can look and me and vice-versa, if you know what I mean.

 

[av84fun]

It's cool. I don't need to take a pill either. One thing I really took to heart this week was HOW many top, top, top players in the world use center-to-edge.

All I know is I run through the system, the ball goes in the hole. I bet if you asked any of the Filipinos.... NONE of them would be able to say why it works... Busty CERTAINLY doesn't give a shit. All they know is the ball goes in the hole........ which SHOULD be the only thing we care about too.

If you wanna make a big deal about why... log into some geometry forum and figure it out there. Center-to-edge = ball goes in the hole (FACT). If you don't think so, flag me down when you see me in person or pull aside Francisco, Orcullo, or Stevie. Someone will show you.

I fear someone who doesn't have the proper knowledge or mechanics will say it doesn't work when it does. A face-to-face meeting with any doubter will iron that out quick. It's easy when you can look and me and vice-versa, if you know what I mean.

Right..and because they are so advanced at it, they don't even use a "mechanical pivot" anymore so it's hard for the uninitiated to even detect that they are using cte.

Check you PM in a few minutes. I have a comment on the above.

Regards,
Jim

 

[JimS]

Where is this method described so I can try it?

 

[CueAndMe]

Once we discover why it works as well as it does, it might be able to be improved. I've seen the pros who pivot miss shots. The reason for this may be human error, but it may also be the system. Once we figure it out, there's a good chance that there will be fixes.

 

[CueAndMe]

Where is this method described so I can try it?

It's deeply embedded in this thread I believe. I think I described it in one of my early posts.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Wanna play some????

LOL. Wouldn't it be easier to just post pictures of our "endowments"? (Now where'd I put that superwide angle lens?)

"Woof" isn't an argument, Jim.

More importantly, you still don't know what you're arguing about. My only complaint about these systems has been that people like you can't seem to handle the truth about how they really work. Not whether they work; how they work. Specifically, you can't seem to tolerate the suggestion that they involve substantial feel. I don't know why - it's not an insult to the systems - but it just makes you go up in flames.

But these "arguments from authority" are completely off the mark. Who uses this kind of system and how well they play using it is irrelevant to how it works. Whether you play better than me or vice verse is irrelevant to how it works. Your whining persecution complex is way irrelevant.

I've played lots of people I met over the internet, some of them "grudge matches" like your challenge. I won some and lost some, but nothing was "settled" by any of them - they were fun, though, and both players were always pleasantly surprised by how we got along in person. But frankly, Jim, I don't think either of us would enjoy meeting.

Since who plays better seems to be important to you, I'll concede that you do. Jim plays better than Pat. There, I've said it. Whew, that's a load off my chest.

Now can we discuss how these systems work without all the whining?

pj
chgo

 

[Pushout]

It's cool. I don't need to take a pill either. One thing I really took to heart this week was HOW many top, top, top players in the world use center-to-edge.

All I know is I run through the system, the ball goes in the hole. I bet if you asked any of the Filipinos.... NONE of them would be able to say why it works... Busty CERTAINLY doesn't give a shit. All they know is the ball goes in the hole........ which SHOULD be the only thing we care about too.

If you wanna make a big deal about why... log into some geometry forum and figure it out there. Center-to-edge = ball goes in the hole (FACT). If you don't think so, flag me down when you see me in person or pull aside Francisco, Orcullo, or Stevie. Someone will show you.

I fear someone who doesn't have the proper knowledge or mechanics will say it doesn't work when it does. A face-to-face meeting with any doubter will iron that out quick. It's easy when you can look and me and vice-versa, if you know what I mean.

Right on!! It works and some of us don't even give a damn why it works.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

If you wanna make a big deal about why... log into some geometry forum and figure it out there.

Dude, you're the one making the "big deal" about it. Chill. It's just conversation. What do you think you're defending?

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Right on!! It works and some of us don't even give a damn why it works.

So why all the heat about others' interest in how it works?

pj
chgo

 

[Colin Colenso]

I bet if you asked any of the Filipinos.... NONE of them would be able to say why it works... Busty CERTAINLY doesn't give a shit. All they know is the ball goes in the hole........ which SHOULD be the only thing we care about too.

Hi Dave,
What interests me, and some others who are trying to understand this system is the apparent gap between CB-2edge aiming and he subsequent adjustment (i.e. How to get to the aim line or final bridge placement), which I don't think has ever been presented systematically.

If we ask snooker players how their contact point line or ghost ball line system works they'll probably reply with something similar to what Busta said. They don't know and they don't care, the balls just go.

I can't see how anyone could argue that snooker players are not more accurate potters (at the pro level) than pro pool players, and it is even arguable that the Taiwanese are better potters than the Filipinos and I am all but certain they follow snooker basics as their basic aiming systems, as do the Mainland Chinese.

We know that some great players can use this system and that it seems to help many players move up some levels, but these threads certainly have not come to any consensus about how the system is actually used.

Consensus may never come, but in the interest of learning the system, its strengths and weaknesses, I think public discussion is very useful.

I don't think any smart user of this system would say it is a magical pill, but may suggest it is a very useful tool that has helped them a lot, and that helps them in proportion to their efforts to train it.

In my short trials, I have found CB to Edge aiming a powerful reference point in sighting. I may not use a trained pivot system, though I usually air pivot when using it. Maybe because I am used to pivoting I can do this relatively easily. I get the impression that I'm not the only one doing it this way, though I expect others are doing the pivot differently.

I hope we can all discuss our insights without the US v THEM attitude that seems to dominate these discussions.

To Jim,

You mentioned some things about bridge hand placements relative to the Cb - OB edge line, using the Pro One System. I wonder how the calculations of offset compare to the adjustment chart I explained in this thread a couple of years ago. This would be relative to the stage 2 method, not the stage 3 air pivot as I understand it. Something like what Busta seems to be doing:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=21113

You'll need to read through to about the 20th post.

Of course it won't be expressed the same, but I wonder if the basic analytical system is similar.

Colin

 

[PKM]

I can't see how anyone could argue that snooker players are not more accurate potters (at the pro level) than pro pool players, and it is even arguable that the Taiwanese are better potters than the Filipinos and I am all but certain they follow snooker basics as their basic aiming systems, as do the Mainland Chinese.

What are the snooker basics?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I bet if you asked any of the Filipinos.... NONE of them would be able to say why it works... Busty CERTAINLY doesn't give a shit. All they know is the ball goes in the hole........ which SHOULD be the only thing we care about too.

Who are you to say what "we" should be interested in? Are you saying nobody should be interested in how these systems work because really, really good players don't care? What's it to you what I'm interested in? Why do you object to a discussion of how systems work?

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

In my short trials, I have found CB to Edge aiming a powerful reference point in sighting. I may not use a trained pivot system, though I usually air pivot when using it. Maybe because I am used to pivoting I can do this relatively easily. I get the impression that I'm not the only one doing it this way, though I expect others are doing the pivot differently.

Colin, can you explain in detail how you aimed with your version of center-to-edge? In particular, how did you place your bridge hand and how did you pivot? How much of it was "mechanical" and how much of it was "by feel"?

pj
chgo

 

[Pushout]

Hi Dave,
What interests me, and some others who are trying to understand this system is the apparent gap between CB-2edge aiming and he subsequent adjustment (i.e. How to get to the aim line or final bridge placement), which I don't think has ever been presented systematically.


Consensus may never come, but in the interest of learning the system, its strengths and weaknesses, I think public discussion is very useful.


Colin

If you're really that puzzled by it, call Hal and talk to him about it. Why not? I can't understand why you're so hot to get this information without calling him. What do you have to lose??? I also don't understand why you seem to want to make it so complicated when it isn't.

 

[Colin Colenso]

What are the snooker basics?

I think the great majority say they focus on the contact point.

Obviously aiming at the contact point won't work for cut angles accurately, so they must be using this as a reference point, albeit intuitively.

Colin

 

[Colin Colenso]

Colin, can you explain in detail how you aimed with your version of center-to-edge? In particular, how did you place your bridge hand and how did you pivot? How much of it was "mechanical" and how much of it was "by feel"?

pj
chgo

Patrick,
My simplistic method is to sight the line through CB center to OB edge with cue pointing way left, so as not to disturb my vision. Then I basically pivot (approximately around the center of the cue) toward a line that feels right for making the pot. During this my peripheral vision is on the relationship of this line to the OB edge and I also check to make sure the cue is aligned through the center of the CB.

I use the OB edge much like a player uses a contact point, as a reference. I don't aim at it, but reference the line of shot according to it.

I've found it is quite useful for most shots from 10 to 50 degrees cut. For straighter shots it works ok, but I tend to think referencing the OB top or bottom is often a better reference point.

OB edge provides a strong and definite reference point. Stronger than OB top visually. Hence I wonder if that is not one of the crucial advantages in OB edge type aiming.

Alternatives such as ghost ball or contact point are hard to see. Even center of OB is not easy to see precisely. I think having a reference point, which is clearly visible can be a very useful guide.

Colin

 

[av84fun]

It's deeply embedded in this thread I believe. I think I described it in one of my early posts.

The CORRECT and most CURRENT version has never been described in the forum AFAIK.

Regards,
Jim

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Who are you to say what "we" should be interested in? Are you saying nobody should be interested in how these systems work because really, really good players don't care? What's it to you what I'm interested in? Why do you object to a discussion of how systems work?

pj
chgo

as u like to say...take a chill pill. I was just sayin' who cares. there must be 75 threads of bad info as to why it doesn't work... and top players use it, so it obviously works better than some would think.

I think the reason why some, including me, don't post everything is because ur a hater.

 

[Colin Colenso]

If you're really that puzzled by it, call Hal and talk to him about it. Why not? I can't understand why you're so hot to get this information without calling him. What do you have to lose??? I also don't understand why you seem to want to make it so complicated when it isn't.

I could ring Hal, maybe I will one day, though I'm in Australia and my table isn't in my home. Timing is not so easy.

But we have 50+ people who have talked to HAL here. I've talked to many of them over the years and they can't express how it works clearly in language or in diagrams.

In fact, some who have talked to him have told me that it is very hard to get explanations from him on tough questions. Not to mention every post I've ever seen by him indicates to me that he is not the kind of guy I would want to be stuck on the phone with.

If I thought Hal could answer my questions I'd call him. Maybe I'll learn some more from those who have learned from him and then know better which questions I should ask.

Note: Some very smart authors who have studied various systems have all but given up on the Hal route. I tend to think some of those who have studied his, and similar systems can offer better insights.

Colin

 

[av84fun]

LOL. Wouldn't it be easier to just post pictures of our "endowments"? (Now where'd I put that superwide angle lens?)

"Woof" isn't an argument, Jim.

I WASN'T ARGUING. JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF YOU WANTED TO PLAY SOME.
More importantly, you still don't know what you're arguing about.

YES I DO. I AM ARGUING OVER THE FACT THAT YOU ARE DEMEANING THE MERITS OF A SYSTEM THAT YOU DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND....AND THEN ACCUSING PEOPLE WHO DO UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEM...OF NOT UNDERSTANDING THE SYSTEM. L...O...F'ing...L

My only complaint about these systems has been that people like you can't seem to handle the truth about how they really work.

RE-READ THE ABOVE!!!!!!!

Not whether they work; how they work. Specifically, you can't seem to tolerate the suggestion that they involve substantial feel.

YOU ARE CORRECT PATRICK...BECAUSE FEEL HAS NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH THE SYSTEM....ZERO....ZIP...NADA...NUTTIN'.

I don't know why - it's not an insult to the systems - but it just makes you go up in flames.

I'M NOT UP IN FLAMES OL' PAL. COOL AND RELAXES...FAST AND LOOSE. YOU LIKE TO THINK I'M IN FLAMES BUT....NOPE...WRONG AGAIN. (-:

But these "arguments from authority" are completely off the mark. Who uses this kind of system and how well they play using it is irrelevant to how it works.

YOU INVENT SPECIOUS ARGUMENTS IN ORDER TO "WIN" THEM. THE ARGUMENTS FROM AUTHORIY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS BUT RATHER THAT IT DOES.

Whether you play better than me or vice verse is irrelevant to how it works. Your whining persecution complex is way irrelevant.

I've played lots of people I met over the internet, some of them "grudge matches" like your challenge. I won some and lost some, but nothing was "settled" by any of them - they were fun, though, and both players were always pleasantly surprised by how we got along in person. But frankly, Jim, I don't think either of us would enjoy meeting.

Since who plays better seems to be important to you, I'll concede that you do. Jim plays better than Pat. There, I've said it. Whew, that's a load off my chest.

Now can we discuss how these systems work without all the whining?

OF COURSE. PLEASE POST YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE SYSTEM AND I WILL BE PLEASED TO CORRECT ANY OF YOUR MISCONCEPTIONS.

WHY DO YOU REFUSE TO DO THAT PATRICK?
pj
chgo

You are the one who is "whining" and DUCKING by adamantly refusing to post what you think the method involves. And yet, quite comically, you dump on the system(s) and the people who do understand them.

Really quite funny...with a tinge of sadness because closed-mindedness always saddens me.

(-:
Jim