I've seen Nob run a few racks personally.
Not approving CTE at all, but just saying I've seen em do it.
Personally to me... I don't care for aiming systems.
How beneficial is an aiming system?
- Thread starter nahog99
- Start date
I've seen Nob run a few racks personally.
Not approving CTE at all, but just saying I've seen em do it.
Personally to me... I don't care for aiming systems.
Just ribbing him a little .
Just wondering how well you play and what your approach to the system looks like.
This is not meant towards you but I think it's nice when people can post videos of their play. Gives a little more credibility . There's a lot a different levels of players here and to me that is the biggest problem of all when it comes to discussing certain topics here.
I don't think videos will help end this argument. Even if SVB put out a video saying he was using an aiming system. People would say it was bull because he is just a good player. Also that he is just more focused on the shot and subconsciously aiming the same way he always has. It's kinda like workout machines like soloflex. Guy does a commercial working out on a Sloflex showing his six pack abs. Now for most we know he already had six pack abs and not from using the Soloflex. However that doesn't mean you can't get six pack abs using the Soloflex. So if you had a friend that was out of shape. Bought a Soloflex and got into shape. Would you believe in the Soloflex or would you only believe that he got into shape because he was working out?
Youre right
I agree there is no definitive end to this argument. As in the bolded section above its might thought that even if good players..don't use a system they have something that tells them when the shot is on and that indescribeable or not, is their system albeit a reference system. It obviously speaks to them and is what they do.
I find it hard to believe any good player just goes out there and hits shots with English like he is at one with the universe without devoting some thought into what he does.
That thought, visualization or method is his system and I think to say that people who are more connected to their method aren't any less players than those who profess to just exist in the pool universe and are at one with their cue and just blindly strike at balls and they magically go in for them because the profess no system.
Something tells them how to adjust to correct, even if they make adjustments for squirt and curve and cue ball initiated throw.
Knowing that you need to make adjustments for all those things brings us back to a baseline. You first need to understand how to hit the shot with a center ball cueing position and you need to be able to direct it at a point in the pocket that will allow the cue ball initiated throw to take effect or you need to know how to cancel it.
People learn how to do that and some have done this but they know little about the fact they have done it.
So who is the better player? The guy who just does it or the guy who studies what he is doing and learns to do it? Who is the real player and who is the fake guy?
Neither both are players although they may be at entirely different places as to the depths of what they know about making a shot in reality. One may be better at getting position and he might actually be the guy who isn't making CIT adjustments. Now isn't that quite a conundrum? I think so, but how long did it take him to get to where he is today? Now how about the other guy?
So how beneficial is an aiming system if you don't understand where in the pocket you are aiming so you can make CIT allowances?
I agree there is no definitive end to this argument. As in the bolded section above its might thought that even if good players..don't use a system they have something that tells them when the shot is on and that indescribeable or not, is their system albeit a reference system. It obviously speaks to them and is what they do.
I find it hard to believe any good player just goes out there and hits shots with English like he is at one with the universe without devoting some thought into what he does.
That thought, visualization or method is his system and I think to say that people who are more connected to their method aren't any less players than those who profess to just exist in the pool universe and are at one with their cue and just blindly strike at balls and they magically go in for them because the profess no system.
Something tells them how to adjust to correct, even if they make adjustments for squirt and curve and cue ball initiated throw.
Knowing that you need to make adjustments for all those things brings us back to a baseline. You first need to understand how to hit the shot with a center ball cueing position and you need to be able to direct it at a point in the pocket that will allow the cue ball initiated throw to take effect or you need to know how to cancel it.
People learn how to do that and some have done this but they know little about the fact they have done it.
So who is the better player? The guy who just does it or the guy who studies what he is doing and learns to do it? Who is the real player and who is the fake guy?
Neither both are players although they may be at entirely different places as to the depths of what they know about making a shot in reality. One may be better at getting position and he might actually be the guy who isn't making CIT adjustments. Now isn't that quite a conundrum? I think so, but how long did it take him to get to where he is today? Now how about the other guy?
So how beneficial is an aiming system if you don't understand where in the pocket you are aiming so you can make CIT allowances?
Last edited:
TheThaiger
Banned
That's a very valid point, and permeates the entire site, from cues and equipment to the whole range of fundamentals. How poor players can get so much free airtime to try to convince the gullible to join their cult is beyond me. Even in the last few pages, we've seen a newbie that can't play try to out-shout someone of your ability and 30 years' playing experience. It's wrong. People think they are players because they've had a table in their basement for a couple of years and can run a rack or two every now and then. It's laughable.
My policy for some time has been to assume everyone cannot play until proven otherwise. This applies doubly to aiming system users, who, well, you know...
And since you want to talk about playing ability let's see yours?
Only one thing permeates the site and it is your snobbery.
So we should assume you not only cannot play but also that you know nothing of our games or our pool culture. We don't have to assume it you prove it in your writing.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
TheThaiger
Banned
The one thing that permeates this board is not my snobbery, it is your shilling. You're everywhere. You need your own sub forum, John.
I've had this before, and always find it baffling. Could you give me some specific examples of things I've said that indicate I can (or cannot) play, please? I generally steer clear of talking about my own proficiency levels and concentrate on proven, demonstrable best practice for cue sports instead. I think this is what upsets you so: I will not join your cult because I think it is too flawed to be taken seriously - neither has it delivered anything of note, as of yet. One day, aiming system types will have a player that actually wins something - one shudders to think of the reaction that will cause! The fact non aiming system users have won every single thing since year dot appears to have escaped your attention.
So, specific examples, B. Otherwise, it could be yet another case of poor players not understanding best practice. Who'd, er, athunk?
The one thing that permeates this board is not my snobbery, it is your shilling. You're everywhere. You need your own sub forum, John.
I've had this before, and always find it baffling. Could you give me some specific examples of things I've said that indicate I can (or cannot) play, please? I generally steer clear of talking about my own proficiency levels and concentrate on proven, demonstrable best practice for cue sports instead. I think this is what upsets you so: I will not join your cult because I think it is too flawed to be taken seriously - neither has it delivered anything of note, as of yet. One day, aiming system types will have a player that actually wins something - one shudders to think of the reaction that will cause! The fact non aiming system users have won every single thing since year dot appears to have escaped your attention.
So, specific examples, B. Otherwise, it could be yet another case of poor players not understanding best practice. Who'd, er, athunk?
LOL the fact that you dismiss all instruction that is not British. The fact that you dismiss examples of obvious skill and claim that you have hundreds of players of equal skill within 30 miles of you.
You are not the arbiter of best practices. No one is. People approach cue sports differently all over the world. Even snooker coaches have different methods to approach teaching. All this has been proven to you dozens of times and yet you persist in turning a blind eye to all evidence.
You are not intelligent enough to "join my cult". Of that I am fully certain. It's doubtful that you even play pool. And if you do it's almost certain that you play at a low level. You speak of being qualified to speak on the subject of pool instruction and yet you have provided nothing that suggests you are qualified in the least.
At least we have put ourselves out there with videos showing what level we are at. So therefore readers can read our words, see our demonstrations and make up their own minds as to whether they want to pursue the methods we testify to using.
What do you have against that?
Nothing.
and again, nothing.
Only your silly words that our methods don't work despite the fact that you don't even employ them, or even play pool as far as we know. On other forums such a person would be recognized as a pure troll and drummed off the forum by the moderators.
On my leather working forum any person who came in and did exactly as you are doing would be banned permanently. I can't even imagine that a person who PROBABLY doesn't work leather would show up on a leather working forum and disrespect those who teach leather working methods in the way that you do. With zero proof that they even know anything about leather working, no proof that they even work leather it would be preposterous that they would be allowed to put down those who teach and use leather working methods. Such a person would be barred from the discussions immediately after their first couple posts.
So consider yourself lucky that you are allowed to carry on your brand of disruption. Thankfully most people who even pay the tiniest bit of attention to your nonsense see it as just that, nonsense. If I had a cult you would not make the cut.
TheThaiger
Banned
Meanwhile, America remains the only major pool playing nation on earth that continues to tank.
Wake up and smell the coffee, man. Every single competent snooker player cues the same way. What does that tell you? It tells me the evolution of snooker has been successful: it has spawned beauty, elegance and grace, solidity and structure, great visuals and a killer instinct.
It has NOT produced John Barton playing pool. No, that has been man-made, misled and misguided, led up the wrong path, and twisted and distorted. So the question remains, can we rebuild John Barton? Is it actually possible? Evolution has no reverse gear, John. All we can do is ensure the next generation are not as poorly served as the last.
I want to add that people who don't even try these methods have ZERO experience as to how beneficial they are. NONE.
I could list a hundred examples but the fact is that until you try something you can't very well expound factually on what benefit or lack of benefit exists. You really can't.
You could POSSIBLY cite others who have tried them and pick the ones who agree with you and USE them as examples but you yourself having no firsthand experience cannot truthfully or factually say with certainty that there is no benefit.
And if you decide that you are going to go and find someone who has tried them and who says that they were of no benefit then you have to weigh that against the amount of people who tried them and found them to be of benefit to their games.
And if you ever say that someone who tried them's experience doesn't count because they are not a good enough player in your opinion then you have to account for the experience of players who are good enough. In other words you don't get the luxury of cherry picking your examples.
You don't get to say CTE is of no value because John Barton sucks while at the same time ignoring Phil Burford's skill level or Landon Shuffett's or Gerry Williams.
You don't get to make silly claims that you have hundreds of players around you who are at Gerry's level because those claims are simply not true. Displays of skill at Gerry's level are rare, not common.
Otherwise we would have videos of those players demonstrating that skill and we don't. Not on the GB9 tour and not on any tour. Players of that caliber are rare and therefore if you want to use a bad player like me as a justification for not trying a method then you MUST use the testimonial of a good player like Gerry as a justification for trying a method. You can't have it both ways.
I challenge everyone on this forum who thinks aiming systems are bullshit to show their own playing ability. Let's see where you at. Show us how good or bad you play and let the readers make their own judgments as to what weight your words should be given.
If you're not willing to that then I suggest to the readers that you be ignored.
I could list a hundred examples but the fact is that until you try something you can't very well expound factually on what benefit or lack of benefit exists. You really can't.
You could POSSIBLY cite others who have tried them and pick the ones who agree with you and USE them as examples but you yourself having no firsthand experience cannot truthfully or factually say with certainty that there is no benefit.
And if you decide that you are going to go and find someone who has tried them and who says that they were of no benefit then you have to weigh that against the amount of people who tried them and found them to be of benefit to their games.
And if you ever say that someone who tried them's experience doesn't count because they are not a good enough player in your opinion then you have to account for the experience of players who are good enough. In other words you don't get the luxury of cherry picking your examples.
You don't get to say CTE is of no value because John Barton sucks while at the same time ignoring Phil Burford's skill level or Landon Shuffett's or Gerry Williams.
You don't get to make silly claims that you have hundreds of players around you who are at Gerry's level because those claims are simply not true. Displays of skill at Gerry's level are rare, not common.
Otherwise we would have videos of those players demonstrating that skill and we don't. Not on the GB9 tour and not on any tour. Players of that caliber are rare and therefore if you want to use a bad player like me as a justification for not trying a method then you MUST use the testimonial of a good player like Gerry as a justification for trying a method. You can't have it both ways.
I challenge everyone on this forum who thinks aiming systems are bullshit to show their own playing ability. Let's see where you at. Show us how good or bad you play and let the readers make their own judgments as to what weight your words should be given.
If you're not willing to that then I suggest to the readers that you be ignored.
Meanwhile, America remains the only major pool playing nation on earth that continues to tank.
Wake up and smell the coffee, man. Every single competent snooker player cues the same way. What does that tell you? It tells me the evolution of snooker has been successful: it has spawned beauty, elegance and grace, solidity and structure, great visuals and a killer instinct.
It has NOT produced John Barton playing pool. No, that has been man-made, misled and misguided, led up the wrong path, and twisted and distorted. So the question remains, can we rebuild John Barton? Is it actually possible? Evolution has no reverse gear, John. All we can do is ensure the next generation are not as poorly served as the last.
Oh boy. Continues to tank? How so? Because our players don't travel outside the USA much and have little incentive to train as hard as those in Asia?
Funny that Americans do just fine on American soil. Gee, when they have no jet lag, understand the culture, are comfortable with the food and have unlimited backing they seem to flourish. Go overseas and face tough competition in an unfamiliar place on unfamiliar equipment and they don't flourish, where they have to finish in the top four just to eke out expenses....I guess none of that has any bearing on it.
Let's do a little experiment, because you are obviously a billionaire right....like the Dutch and the Chinese let's take the best players in the USA and pay them a salary so that they can train for two years. Let's hire them some coaches and treat pool like a sport and see what the results are. You up for that? Didn't think so.
It's not about methods it's about opportunities. If you think that guys like Johnny Archer and Rodney Morris are not AS GOOD as any other player on the planet you are mistaken. They are that good. What they are not is mentally motivated to maintain that level because the reward is not close to the effort required. How you can boil this down to methods is ridiculous.
At one time American's dominated pool around the world. Why, because they were simply better players. Until the rest of the world caught up to them in overall skills the Americans won almost everywhere they went. The best American players INSPIRED the new generations of players around the world.
Nick Varner went to the Philippines and beat Efren in front of his home crowd.
No one was talking about these methods being better than those methods - it was simply a matter of the players not being as skilled. But for those in other countries the rewards outweighed the efforts and they devoted themselves to getting better and they did.
Now, in 2014 the rewards for being a top United States player are not that great. You have to be at the very top like Shane is to see a decent level of financial gain. And at the very top there are a dozen other players from around the world who are also at that level who want to get their share of the pie.
As I said you do not understand our pool culture. You simply don't. So stop acting as if it's all about certain methods (snooker) being "better" than pool and that being the reason that Americans don't fare well in events outside the United States. That's rubbish and shows again your lack of understanding.
Anytime you want to pit ANY breathing human against Shane Van Boening in a race to 100 for as much as you want over $10,000 go for it. Pick the best snooker player and offer to play Shane for $100,000. Surely Ronnie can easily afford to put up 100k and test himself against Shane. Should be a walk in the park for Ronnie since he clearly is the superior cueist due to the amazing methods he learned.
As Steve Davis said, a champion is a champion and would likely have been a champion in whatever discipline he grew up with. That statement has NOTHING to with methods and everything to do with attitude.
TheThaiger
Banned
Players of Gerry's abilities are not rare in the UK. You must be joking. There are truly great cueists EVERYWHERE here. Players of your ability are unheard of. I mean that genuinely. Nobody that has been on a '30 year cue sports journey' plays like you. Nobody. Everyone peaks and plateaus at some stage, no matter what you think, but there is no one that has devoted as much time to the game as you have and yet still plays so badly. The difference is, we start out right. You start out wrong.
GW was a fine player before he'd even heard of aiming systems. That's a fact, I'm sure. He's a fine player today because - pay attention now - he hits the CB sweetly. This is not rocket science: hit the CB good, you'll hit the OB good. It's what every single snooker player knows and understands. But anyway, it's impossible to judge GW's true speed when he's playing on that table. If you think he'd waltz through the ranks on a GB9 table, you are very much mistaken. There is no comparison to be made on how those tables play. Karen Corr was humbled by amateurs and afterwards said the tables were unplayable. You think the table you played on with Lou spat balls out, you should try these, especially once they stop sliding-in due to newness. You need touch and timing, the importance of which seems to pass you by.
The game has changed and you haven't noticed.
Prove it. Show us the videos of all these great players. I think once you get past the first ten or so on the GB9 tour the quality of play drops off. Based on the videos I have seen.
Gerry Just finished third behind two pro level players at the recent Joss Tour event. Not bad for a working man.
Playing on unplayable tables doesn't mean that it's a good thing. You can't say your equipment is super tough therefore our players are better. If "your" players are so good and to be sure you speaking for British players is itself a joke in my opinion because no one even knows if you can run three balls, then show us the proof of them beating the ghost like Gerry has multiple times.
TheThaiger
Banned
Good grief. So, you just jump over the bar and it doesn't matter how - the champion is a champion is a champion. Mr Fosbury would beg to differ, as technique is all. Steve Davis revolutionised snooker and would, no doubt, be bemused by your interpretation of his words, as his methods now are as ubiquitous as Fosbury's. Whether you like it or not, pool in America needs the great leap forward, and the faster the better. The more you entrench, the further adrift you'll be cast. You can ra-ra-ra it from the rooftops all you like but it'll do you no good.
And you realise Ronnie is a snooker player, right? 200-300 American pool players in the UK produces the same number of genuinely world class players as 20-30 MILLION US American pool players, and you say there's no problem?
Good and, indeed, grief. You yourself are symptonatic of all that is wrong with pool in the US. You have TERRIBLE cueing and you CONTINUE to go on about aiming. That is a bridge that cannot be crossed, you're a hopeless case, but there are those of us that will fight the good fight over the next generation, those that are able to be saved.
It probably wont end the arguing but it will have a more positive vibe to it.
I agree with your example...it is easier to attach something to somebody who can represent it and give it believability. While this may help with the sales of the product,there are know guarantee's with ones own results.
On this forum we have a perfect example of this happening.
People keep attaching players who were already establish as a good player to a certain method.Not saying this certain method hasn't helped them but lets be truthful,better players will beat us with any type of method if they wanted to.
I think there are certain growing steps in the early stages of playing that cannot be bypassed.Better players have already establish this.The players that haven't are heading for a big head ache trying to figure things out.
Looks like average players to me, nothing special, about what you see in any regional and local event here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJfcS11u19Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEXwB5GUY8M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTUesqmHGxw&list=UUFqVEw4Lv2BVNP-5R-NGhow
Here is the finals of one event TB9 series.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzuBif0zlYU&list=UUFqVEw4Lv2BVNP-5R-NGhow
Fact is Thaiger, you're full of shit. The pool players in England are like the pool players here. MOSTLY bangers who enjoy the game. They aren't all Gerry's level or better. They are more like my level, enthusiasts who don't put a lot of effort into the game.
They don't all use the snooker method of playing, they don't all set up on the ball the same way, they don't all stroke the ball the same way. Skill levels are average with them mostly making amateur mistakes and showing amateur form.
I could go on but all the proof I need is right here:
https://www.youtube.com/user/wwwPro9CoUk/videos
Gotta love youtube.
I could send Gerry over and within the year he would be a top ten player on the GB9 tour right up there with the names we all know.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJfcS11u19Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEXwB5GUY8M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTUesqmHGxw&list=UUFqVEw4Lv2BVNP-5R-NGhow
Here is the finals of one event TB9 series.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzuBif0zlYU&list=UUFqVEw4Lv2BVNP-5R-NGhow
Fact is Thaiger, you're full of shit. The pool players in England are like the pool players here. MOSTLY bangers who enjoy the game. They aren't all Gerry's level or better. They are more like my level, enthusiasts who don't put a lot of effort into the game.
They don't all use the snooker method of playing, they don't all set up on the ball the same way, they don't all stroke the ball the same way. Skill levels are average with them mostly making amateur mistakes and showing amateur form.
I could go on but all the proof I need is right here:
https://www.youtube.com/user/wwwPro9CoUk/videos
Gotta love youtube.
I could send Gerry over and within the year he would be a top ten player on the GB9 tour right up there with the names we all know.
Good grief. So, you just jump over the bar and it doesn't matter how - the champion is a champion is a champion. Mr Fosbury would beg to differ, as technique is all. Steve Davis revolutionised snooker and would, no doubt, be bemused by your interpretation of his words, as his methods now are as ubiquitous as Fosbury's. Whether you like it or not, pool in America needs the great leap forward, and the faster the better. The more you entrench, the further adrift you'll be cast. You can ra-ra-ra it from the rooftops all you like but it'll do you no good.
And you realise Ronnie is a snooker player, right? 200-300 American pool players in the UK produces the same number of genuinely world class players as 20-30 MILLION US American pool players, and you say there's no problem?
Good and, indeed, grief. You yourself are symptonatic of all that is wrong with pool in the US. You have TERRIBLE cueing and you CONTINUE to go on about aiming. That is a bridge that cannot be crossed, you're a hopeless case, but there are those of us that will fight the good fight over the next generation, those that are able to be saved.
Seriously? You are going to use the Fosbury flop as your example? Funny that that is the exact example of WHY people should be willing to try CTE.
Again gotta love YouTube, here is the Steve Davis interview so anyone can listen to exactly what he said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dWeaeXfwcY
Among them, "I am not sure there is a right or wrong way to play within certain parameters."
Guess you know more than Steve Davis.
TheThaiger
Banned
GB9 is largely comprised of amateurs, and anyone can enter. There are probably about 10 pro class players (depending on how you define pro) and a sliding scale from there to the 80th and lowest ranked.
But, like I say, there are very few American pool players in the UK, so it is meaningless to draw any conclusions from it per se - but I'd still say our top 20 are a match for your top 20, which is ridiculous given the numbers involved and the absence of tables to play on. I'd say it's not too much of a reach to say it's the equivalent of the US mustering enough decent snooker players to match our own.
Mass makes class, yeah?