Hal Houle

DTL said:
I think Champ's explanation is wrong. You aim the center of the cue ball to the edge of object ball on EVERY shot......no 1/4, no 1/8.
What you describe is the system Hal has explain to most of us, but from what he told me on the phone, he has invented a 1/2 dozen systems, you can believe that or not. The system Randy G. teaches with the 1/2, 1/4, etc. hits is an adaptation of several systems he was exposed to by Hal.
 
Maybe I Need Some Coffee Before Reading The Threads

catscradle said:
The system Randy G. teaches with the 1/2, 1/4, etc. hits is an adaptation of several systems he was exposed to by Hal.


What ? Hal exposed himself to Randy G. ? Oy-Vey !
What depressing news to wake up to on this fine beautiful Monday.... imo
Doug
 
Smorgass Bored said:
What ? Hal exposed himself to Randy G. ? Oy-Vey !
What depressing news to wake up to on this fine beautiful Monday.... imo
Doug
LOL. He's old, he might have and not even realized it.
Steve. <-- Is old, but not that old yet.
 
pdcue said:
Can you play AT ALL?
Who have you ever won against?

Dale<out of patience but not prudence>

I haven't played in many tournaments the last few years, too busy running my business. Made it a few rounds into the DCC banks last year, and top 20 in the PA State 9-ball in 2000 (back when it was more like a pro event...Efren, Hopkins, Bustamante, Fusco, Lebron, Garcia, Neptune, etc., all played in it). I think I tied with Bustamante that year. I've beaten a few pro players in bigger tourneys (not gonna name them, that would be faggish on my behalf). I'm not a total loser on the table. Who have you beaten?

The funny thing is I could prob spend 2 mins with you and change the way you look at the table and you'd prob come back here and post the praises of the pool gods and become a "Houligan" ... but like most 99.9% of every else around here, no one wants to learn. Everything is "voodoo" to people and they roll their eyes. It's entertaining how these aiming threads get so violent. I think the reason for that is no one cares to post the specifics because a lot of people on here don't deserve free info, and then those who don't know "go-off". Hal offers the info for a phone call and people would rather practice hitting the rails than swallow their pride.

Someone pass the popcorn... I love these aiming threads....
*crunch* *crunch*
 
Last edited:
housecue said:
Is it me or Hal's 3 angle system doesn't sound like it will work. I mean I had plenty of shots that isnt 15 30 or 45 degree angle. Is he implying you hit them at those 3 angles and let the ball bounce around the tables until it goes into a pocket?

Hal teaches over 20 systems. I don't think the "3 angle system" is one of them. He teaches ball to ball relations, usually starting with using the edge of the object ball as the reference aim. The cueball has its own reference aim. That would be the two angle approach: think and thick.

Hal also teaches a variety of stick aiming systems, plus a few systems that I wouldn't call aiming systems at all. More like, funny truths to shooting balls into the holes. Spend enough time talking to him, and you can develop your own "systems" based on everything he's talking about.

Fred
 
I called Hal on the phone. I was skeptical as well because it's just over the phone right? how much could I learn? Well I went to my table and had him on speaker phone and did what he said.

He's a smart guy.. and really nice to talk to as well. Love his stories and personality :)

Anyway after learning his aiming system, and getting my arm straightened out my game is jumping. On many shots I still just.. know how to hit them. But there are those shots where I cant see the angle at all. I'll go right back to what Hal told me and even though it looks wrong I'll trust what he said and fire it in anyway.

While talking to him on the phone he also taught me how to carom and people still have no idea how I see those angles. He also taught me some bank angles that also work wonders :D :D

He's a wealth of information, very smart, and just a good guy. To those who second guess about calling him... look at it this way.. what do you have to lose? Worst case is you still play the same as you did before the call and have a great conversation with Hal. Best (and most common) case you learn something new. Hal if you read this.. I'm the guy in Charlotte, NC you talked to a few months ago. Thanks a lot. It is actually pretty amazing to me what I learned simply over a phone.
 
...no one cares to post the specifics because a lot of people on here don't deserve free info

LOL. Nice try. You don't care to "post the specifics" because you know if you tried it would sound like drug-addled nonsense.

pj <- unworthy
chgo
 
Bert Kinister's $100 Video shows basically the same method. He shows that most balls can be pocketed with the center line (cl) of the CB to the edge of the OB. On a shallower angle you line up with the tip on your cue on the on the cl of the cb but line up with the edge of the tip inside the OB edge. On a wider angle the tip is outside the edge of the OB and on a real wide angle you see a little space between the tip and the edge. If you try this you will see that it is basically the same a shooting with the edge of the CB being aimed 1/8, 1/4 and center of the OB. Naturally a straight in shot is cl of cb to cl of ob.
 
I am curious to know what are the opinions of jay helfert, bob jewett on hal houle and then an opinion on this aiming system stuff? This Hal houle thing sounds real strange to me for some reason? Jay Helfert set the record straight on this, you of all people must know? Is Hal Houle for real or just some guy who is always looking for attention or something?
 
Last edited:
Patrick Johnson said:
LOL. Nice try. You don't care to "post the specifics" because you know if you tried it would sound like drug-addled nonsense.

pj <- unworthy
chgo

LOL. Nice try. It's cause if you learn it, it won't be from me. It'd make me sick to have you play better after all your aiming posts over the last year or so. You strike me as the type who would bash it online... and when I saw you in person, you'd be using it for every shot.
 
Instructors make less money agreeing that someone elses aiming system being given away freely on the phone actually works perfectly.
 
cubc said:
I called Hal on the phone. I was skeptical as well because it's just over the phone right? how much could I learn? Well I went to my table and had him on speaker phone and did what he said.

He's a smart guy.. and really nice to talk to as well. Love his stories and personality :)

Anyway after learning his aiming system, and getting my arm straightened out my game is jumping. On many shots I still just.. know how to hit them. But there are those shots where I cant see the angle at all. I'll go right back to what Hal told me and even though it looks wrong I'll trust what he said and fire it in anyway.

While talking to him on the phone he also taught me how to carom and people still have no idea how I see those angles. He also taught me some bank angles that also work wonders :D :D

He's a wealth of information, very smart, and just a good guy. To those who second guess about calling him... look at it this way.. what do you have to lose? Worst case is you still play the same as you did before the call and have a great conversation with Hal. Best (and most common) case you learn something new. Hal if you read this.. I'm the guy in Charlotte, NC you talked to a few months ago. Thanks a lot. It is actually pretty amazing to me what I learned simply over a phone.
---------------------------------

And all this time, I thought your Avatar was a picture of you. j/k

Hal is just as you described him. Hal is also a window of history, not just pool.

He knows lots of other stuff too. :)
When you call Hal, ask him about Indian Wrestling and who was the best at it and why. :D

Hal is a great guy to talk about pool or practically any other subject!

JoeyA
 
You strike me as the type who would bash it online...

I might, if it didn't make sense. Is that what you're afraid of?

It'd make me sick to have you play better after all your aiming posts over the last year or so.

I haven't been on here for a year or so, but if my aiming posts have helped somebody play better I'm glad, not "sick". Guess we're different that way.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
I might, if it didn't make sense. Is that what you're afraid of?

I haven't been on here for a year or so, but if my aiming posts have helped somebody play better I'm glad, not "sick". Guess we're different that way.

pj
chgo

The only way we're different is your posts come across as condescending and arrogant - like you know it all when it comes to aiming. I'm not going to flex my keyboard muscles and get into a post battle with you, just wanted to say you're far from humbling on the subject. For all I know you play as bad as DCP and couldn't get any aiming method to work - so why would anyone put themselves through your barrage of quotes and retorts? If you tally the number of people Hal helped vs. the number of people you helped with your aiming posts, it'd be like 1000 to 3 (Hal's side). So why are you so militant when people bring him up? Can't seem to figure that out.:confused: You remind me of that Syndrome character from the movie The Incredibles - always trying to kill Mr. Incredible (Hal).

Go ahead... quote/retort away...

*Crunch* *Crunch*
 
champ2107 said:
I am curious to know what are the opinions of jay helfert, bob jewett ...
I posted this before. It doesn't exactly answer your question, but I think it applies.

[In response to a poster who claimed that physics and geometry gave incontrovertible standards for aiming systems.....]

Well, yes, but.... My experience is that the majority of people
cannot make the connection between abstract geometry (such as a
half-ball hit) and what happens while they play pool. It may
be true that cut angle is a continuous function of the fullness
of hit, but most people have neither use for nor understanding of
a concept such as "function of".

For such people, I think it is not helpful to go into any more
detail in a system than is required to draw their attention to
the shot. It is not important what the system is as long as they
believe in it and it sort of gets them into the right ball park.
Their subconscious will do the rest, as it does for all players
who can play a lick, Iron Willie and Virtual Pool excepted.

Ask players what the cut angle is for a half-ball hit and the
majority (or a substantial minority) will say 45 degrees. This
is in spite of their having shot hundreds of half-ball hits and
hundreds of 45-degree cuts but never in the same shot. Many
people need an explanation of what a "right angle" is for the
kiss-line for position play -- people have even built special
fixtures for the pool table to illustrate two perpendicular
lines. Most people are not geometrians.

Aiming is as much psychology as it is physics. Arguing that the
physics of a system is wrong doesn't prevent the psychology from
working, one way or another. On the other hand, it's not clear
to my why people who know a system works for them psychologically
argue it to be valid physically. There's no point.
 
TheBook said:
Bert Kinister's $100 Video shows basically the same method. He shows that most balls can be pocketed with the center line (cl) of the CB to the edge of the OB. On a shallower angle you line up with the tip on your cue on the on the cl of the cb but line up with the edge of the tip inside the OB edge. On a wider angle the tip is outside the edge of the OB and on a real wide angle you see a little space between the tip and the edge. If you try this you will see that it is basically the same a shooting with the edge of the CB being aimed 1/8, 1/4 and center of the OB. Naturally a straight in shot is cl of cb to cl of ob.

In Bert's $100 video when he's demonstrating that aiming technique, did you notice he missed a large percentage of the shots? Probably more than half. It was an odd demonstration...

In the same video, he does something else that was very odd. During one of his demos (a few minutes long) he makes a comment about Johnny Archer. Rather than edit it out, or just re-filming that segment, he leaves it in. Then, he films himself clarifying/apologizing his statements about Archer. Considering his apology was filmed standing in front of the same table as the demo, he clearly could have just re-filmed the demo instead. Does anyone waste more time on film than Bert? (rhetorical question)
 
www.sfbilliards.com

Bob Jewett said:
I posted this before. It doesn't exactly answer your question, but I think it applies.

[In response to a poster who claimed that physics and geometry gave incontrovertible standards for aiming systems.....]

Well, yes, but.... My experience is that the majority of people
cannot make the connection between abstract geometry (such as a
half-ball hit) and what happens while they play pool. It may
be true that cut angle is a continuous function of the fullness
of hit, but most people have neither use for nor understanding of
a concept such as "function of".

For such people, I think it is not helpful to go into any more
detail in a system than is required to draw their attention to
the shot. It is not important what the system is as long as they
believe in it and it sort of gets them into the right ball park.
Their subconscious will do the rest, as it does for all players
who can play a lick, Iron Willie and Virtual Pool excepted.

Ask players what the cut angle is for a half-ball hit and the
majority (or a substantial minority) will say 45 degrees. This
is in spite of their having shot hundreds of half-ball hits and
hundreds of 45-degree cuts but never in the same shot. Many
people need an explanation of what a "right angle" is for the
kiss-line for position play -- people have even built special
fixtures for the pool table to illustrate two perpendicular
lines. Most people are not geometrians.

Aiming is as much psychology as it is physics. Arguing that the
physics of a system is wrong doesn't prevent the psychology from
working, one way or another. On the other hand, it's not clear
to my why people who know a system works for them psychologically
argue it to be valid physically. There's no point.

Go to Bob's website http://www.sfbilliards.com/ and view the articles that he has written. It will help your game.

There is the article on developing your own personal pre-shot routine and scores of other valuable articles on how to improve your game.

And you know what. IT'S FREE.

Oh sure, you can also spend a few bucks attending his billiard academy for quality cueing instruction but you can also get drills, clear no-nonsense, straight forward information as well as insightful scientific explanations of the action and reaction of the round balls, FREE OF CHARGE.

Bob Jewett supports pool. Check out his straight pool contest at the Derby City Classic.

Bob doesn't brag much (so we won't discuss his professional accomplishments other than pool here, for fear that some of you will want to compare him to Bill Braskey.) Bob is not only an accomplished pool player but he also runs a BCA CERTIFIED MASTER ACADEMY.

The www.sfbilliards.com offers many different clinics as well as programs for you to become a BCA instructor or simply a better pool player.

Did I say that he has lots of informative articles on his web site that can improve your game and it's FREE? :)

Good shooting,

JoeyA
 
Amazing how these threads about Hal turn into this...

Brandon, give him a call, you won't regret it. Even if you get nothing from his systems which I doubt, I can guarantee you will enjoy talking with him.
 
Back
Top