How to Aim Pool Shots (HAPS) - new videos by Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett

[sfleinen]

Sean,
I never said I wanted the Aiming Section moved to the main forum.

What I said was that I didnt think Dr. Daves thread was in question but thats something that you obviously felt was and perhaps a few others chimed in and it seemed because the dreaded word Aim was used.

It also seemed that people were upset he didnt give proper credence to cte in his material according to the comments.

I was clear about what I said and you seem to want to expand my comments beyond.

What I am saying now is that its a shame that we cant discuss ways to shoot shots into rails and ways to aim shots that either involve hitting the rail first or the object ball first for a positional objective. Isnt that what you do on a pool forum?

In fact it seems to me that you are raising a stink about all of this more than anything else.

I just wanted to review some worthwhile pool material and discuss some cool topics. Who knows out of that conversation that happened another Aiming System might have been formed......Im thinking Robins Utopian Left of Ctel Shadowy, Thousand Points of Light System....hmm ...I like it. Its a New World Order you know!!....

Hardly, Robin. I'm not "raising a stink" about this at all. I'm just trying to explain to those who *are* complaining -- which appears to be you and Dr. Dave, btw -- why things are the way they are, and what led up to it.

It doesn't matter what you think related to utopian decisions. That's not here. If you get a chance, go check out what Hu (ShootingArts) wrote in the other thread on the Main forum that Dr. Dave created to let folks know about the move of this HAPS thread. Hu used to manage several forums. I myself used to be a Usenet administrator/moderator (collateral/side-job duty) back in the 1990s.

There's no such thing as gray in these things anymore. In order to avoid favoritism, somestimes -- as in this case -- you have to treat an entire topic as being controversial, and deal with it as an entire entity.

That's all I'm saying.

EDIT -- P.S.: another thing, by the way. You're here in the Aiming Conversation subforum, aren't you? You seem to have found this forum quickly upon its creation, and I see you posting here regularly. Feel free to discuss those topics you want to. Other than the in-fighting, I'm thinking you'd have even more freedom to discuss your material than if it were out on the Main forum, because you'd get attacked less. Do you agree?

-Sean

 

[336Robin]

To be or not to be a Product?

There's no such thing as gray in these things anymore. In order to avoid favoritism, somestimes -- as in this case -- you have to treat an entire topic as being controversial, and deal with it as an entire entity.

That's all I'm saying.

EDIT -- P.S.: another thing, by the way. You're here in the Aiming Conversation subforum, aren't you? You seem to have found this forum quickly upon its creation, and I see you posting here regularly. Feel free to discuss those topics you want to. Other than the in-fighting, I'm thinking you'd have even more freedom to discuss your material than if it were out on the Main forum, because you'd get attacked less. Do you agree?

-Sean

I dont post here regularly. I came back this time because of the HAPS thread. You will see some old posts here though. Perhaps all you say is true.

Perhaps Dave is wrong when you consider the events of the past but.

That is some messed up stuff. This is supposed to be Forum where people are free to discuss Pool and how to get better. I didnt see him selling an Aiming System although he is selling something like a lot of us. So it wasnt just free conversation of everything he had some of it you had to pay for to get the rest.

It may be what it is but its still quite messed up and its all over arguments about the validity of Aiming Systems, which obviously some people need and others do not.

I have no idea what will transpire as far as conversation when my book comes out. I did as much as I can to prevent having to do a lot of tech support, its very self explanatory. I'm sure there will be the usual comments.

Maybe a little tender applied to the right places will get a fire going now and again. From the looks of things this place could use some interesting conversation even if it is Aiming in full or in part. I think maybe Bob and he might have considered a title change to "How to Apply Pool Shots" or "How to Make Pool Shots." Aiming would be eliminated but yes its still a product.

One thing is for sure in Pool...it only survives if it pays for its self.

 

[sfleinen]

[...]
That is some messed up stuff. This is supposed to be Forum where people are free to discuss Pool and how to get better. I didnt see him selling an Aiming System although he is selling something like a lot of us. So it wasnt just free conversation of everything he had some of it you had to pay for to get the rest.

"Messed up" -- how so? I'm scratching my head at that. If you mean there's a DISTINCTION between giving/discussing free aiming information vs. selling an aiming system "product," then I say no, that is not messed up. There's a separate subforum dedicated to the advertising and sale of "products," and that's the Wanted / For Sale subforum.

As to the discussion of a "product" not related to its advertising / selling, there should be NO DIFFERENCE between it and the same non-advertising/-sale) of free information. If you're implying that there SHOULD be, I say THAT is messed up. Because that implies an "us vs. them" ("them" being the vendors of aiming system products) distinction, which was never the thought behind moving the entire topic of aiming to its own subforum. Reason: the entire topic -- whether it's free or paid-for information -- is CAUSTIC, and has proven so over years of existence here. All it takes is for one person to bring up the discussion of "free" information, and the packaged aiming system advocates will chime right in -- which means you can count on one hand how many more posts it will take before the thread nosedives. It's also vice-versa, btw -- if someone innocently wants to discuss a paid-for packaged aiming system product, it will be a matter of minutes before the "free" information guys will jump in, and you have the same airplane dipping its wing and spiraling into the ground.

Bruce (justadub) nailed it, in that if you knew the players here, that could never be. You have to put yellow police tape around the entire topic of aiming, and make a subforum out of it.

It may be what it is but its still quite messed up and its all over arguments about the validity of Aiming Systems, which obviously some people need and others do not.

I'm a firm believer in that, too, but that's not the point. The point is, the entire topic of aiming is caustic. Doesn't matter if there's product for sale or not.

I have no idea what will transpire as far as conversation when my book comes out. I did as much as I can to prevent having to do a lot of tech support, its very self explanatory. I'm sure there will be the usual comments.

Maybe a little tender applied to the right places will get a fire going now and again. From the looks of things this place could use some interesting conversation even if it is Aiming in full or in part. I think maybe Bob and he might have considered a title change to "How to Apply Pool Shots" or "How to Make Pool Shots." Aiming would be eliminated but yes its still a product.

One thing is for sure in Pool...it only survives if it pays for its self.

Not sure if you want to "stoke a fire" or some such, because that's exactly why Aiming was moved into its own. You'll just cause more in-fighting, which I'll admit, if done right, is really fun to stand back and watch.

Summary: while I know some of the aiming topics may raise some eyebrows (e.g. the "shadow"-ey stuff -- I caught that), even if you consider that stuff to not be serious, it still falls under the umbrella of aiming. It's not a good thing to start segregating things further.

I hope this helps (honest, I'm not trying to be difficult here),
-Sean

P.S.: as a serious student of the cueing arts, I, for one, would really look forward to the release of your book.

 

[336Robin]

Book

4862034P.S.: as a serious student of the cueing arts, I, for one, would really look forward to the release of your book[/B].

You will be able to find it on Amazon and other book sellers that encrypt copies. I wont be handling any sales of ebook material. I thank you for your interest. Im not sure just how much longer it will take to get it on Amazon but it shouldnt be so awfully long at this point.

 

[336Robin]

The Airplane has Crashed

You will be able to find it on Amazon and other book sellers that encrypt copies. I wont be handling any sales of ebook material. I thank you for your interest. Im not sure just how much longer it will take to get it on Amazon but it shouldnt be so awfully long at this point.

"Messed up" -- how so? I'm scratching my head at that. If you mean there's a DISTINCTION between giving/discussing free aiming information vs. selling an aiming system "product," then I say no, that is not messed up. There's a separate subforum dedicated to the advertising and sale of "products," and that's the Wanted / For Sale subforum.

As to the discussion of a "product" not related to its advertising / selling, there should be NO DIFFERENCE between it and the same non-advertising/-sale) of free information. If you're implying that there SHOULD be, I say THAT is messed up. Because that implies an "us vs. them" ("them" being the vendors of aiming system products) distinction, which was never the thought behind moving the entire topic of aiming to its own subforum. Reason: the entire topic -- whether it's free or paid-for information -- is CAUSTIC, and has proven so over years of existence here. All it takes is for one person to bring up the discussion of "free" information, and the packaged aiming system advocates will chime right in -- which means you can count on one hand how many more posts it will take before the thread nosedives. It's also vice-versa, btw -- if someone innocently wants to discuss a paid-for packaged aiming system product, it will be a matter of minutes before the "free" information guys will jump in, and you have the same airplane dipping its wing and spiraling into the ground.

Bruce (justadub) nailed it, in that if you knew the players here, that could never be. You have to put yellow police tape around the entire topic of aiming, and make a subforum out of it.



I'm a firm believer in that, too, but that's not the point. The point is, the entire topic of aiming is caustic. Doesn't matter if there's product for sale or not.



Not sure if you want to "stoke a fire" or some such, because that's exactly why Aiming was moved into its own. You'll just cause more in-fighting, which I'll admit, if done right, is really fun to stand back and watch.

Summary: while I know some of the aiming topics may raise some eyebrows (e.g. the "shadow"-ey stuff -- I caught that), even if you consider that stuff to not be serious, it still falls under the umbrella of aiming. It's not a good thing to start segregating things further.

I hope this helps (honest, I'm not trying to be difficult here),
-Sean

P.S.: as a serious student of the cueing arts, I, for one, would really look forward to the release of your book.

Be it as it may. It appears the airplane has indeed crashed and landed this thread in the Aiming Section as well.

I feel that its the direct result of the animosity held here between the two camps and thats a shame indeed. I do realize the moderators have a job and I have no issue with them.

Before I expound I would like to apologize to Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett. I feel responsible for the landing of this thread into the land of Mordor. Now that Ive at least attempted to make ammends:

I'm not sure about the complete content of the argument between the camps but it seems to me.....correct me if Im wrong......that the CTE camp spent most of their time justifying their method/system to Dr. Dave if not Bob Jewett as well and numerous threads were dedicated to providing answers of the perfection of CTE.

So where do you stand with it as a serious artisan of the cueing arts?

Are you a proponnent of CTE or are you a naturalist?

 

[sfleinen]

Be it as it may. It appears the airplane has indeed crashed and landed this thread in the Aiming Section as well.

I feel that its the direct result of the animosity held here between the two camps and thats a shame indeed. I do realize the moderators have a job and I have no issue with them.

Before I expound I would like to apologize to Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett. I feel responsible for the landing of this thread into the land of Mordor. Now that Ive at least attempted to make ammends:

I'm not sure about the complete content of the argument between the camps but it seems to me.....correct me if Im wrong......that the CTE camp spent most of their time justifying their method/system to Dr. Dave if not Bob Jewett as well and numerous threads were dedicated to providing answers of the perfection of CTE.

So where do you stand with it as a serious artisan of the cueing arts?

Are you a proponnent of CTE or are you a naturalist?

Robin:

I don't know why you're bringing CTE into this. I have been asking you this whole time to think larger picture, please. Has little to do with CTE or any single aiming system or technique. The whole topic of aiming -- again, think larger picture please, instead of fixating on a single point-purpose aiming system -- is yellow-police-tape-wrapped.

I'm not going to comment any further on this. I thought I explained things quite well, and any further discussion on this topic goes against the very notion of an "apology" to Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett you purport to offer.

-Sean <-- supports CTE and any aiming system that helps someone's game -- as long as it doesn't become a religion

 

[nine_ball6970]

Robin:

I don't know why you're bringing CTE into this. I have been asking you this whole time to think larger picture, please. Has little to do with CTE or any single aiming system or technique. The whole topic of aiming -- again, think larger picture please, instead of fixating on a single point-purpose aiming system -- is yellow-police-tape-wrapped.

I'm not going to comment any further on this. I thought I explained things quite well, and any further discussion on this topic goes against the very notion of an "apology" to Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett you purport to offer.

-Sean <-- supports CTE and any aiming system that helps someone's game -- as long as it doesn't become a religion

If you look at the first couple pages of the Aiming Forum, almost all of the threads are about CTE. If anyone brings up something other than CTE in a thread, that turns into a CTE thread as well. I really noticed this yesterday while trying to look up some information on a different aiming system. The wars here are terrible. It seems like it is CTE vs all other systems and the CTE users try to force their views on anyone who posts. It is sad in my opinion.

 

[336Robin]

Robin:

I don't know why you're bringing CTE into this. I have been asking you this whole time to think larger picture, please. Has little to do with CTE or any single aiming system or technique. The whole topic of aiming -- again, think larger picture please, instead of fixating on a single point-purpose aiming system -- is yellow-police-tape-wrapped.

I'm not going to comment any further on this. I thought I explained things quite well, and any further discussion on this topic goes against the very notion of an "apology" to Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett you purport to offer.

-Sean <-- supports CTE and any aiming system that helps someone's game -- as long as it doesn't become a religion

Just checking Sean,

Thats the reason I asked.

Just for the record I have no problem with CTE or any aiming method or system but I do believe that simplicity is the key to understanding and Understanding is the Key to application of all the best practices of the game.

Evidence proves that there is more than one way to get the job done. Its whatever speaks to you and connects you to the game.

 

[336Robin]

Exactly

If you look at the first couple pages of the Aiming Forum, almost all of the threads are about CTE. If anyone brings up something other than CTE in a thread, that turns into a CTE thread as well. I really noticed this yesterday while trying to look up some information on a different aiming system. The wars here are terrible. It seems like it is CTE vs all other systems and the CTE users try to force their views on anyone who posts. It is sad in my opinion.

That was kind of my point when I put Sean on the spot with a direct question.

I wasnt attacking anyone, I was just asking. I just dont think that the Aiming Section was created because of Dr. Dave. Although the presentation of Academic Information that is neutral gets sucked up into the fight by the mere mention of the word Aim.

Its a shame we cant discuss aiming to spots on the rail without a trainwreck.

 

[sfleinen]

If you look at the first couple pages of the Aiming Forum, almost all of the threads are about CTE. If anyone brings up something other than CTE in a thread, that turns into a CTE thread as well. I really noticed this yesterday while trying to look up some information on a different aiming system. The wars here are terrible. It seems like it is CTE vs all other systems and the CTE users try to force their views on anyone who posts. It is sad in my opinion.

I know what you mean -- but as part of the larger picture, that's why we have an Aiming Conversation subforum. Once the topic of aim is brought up or even alluded to -- no matter the system used -- the "opposing" side jumps in, and it becomes a dogpile. But yes, it does seem to lean in a certain direction, and even the in-fighting within the CTE camp itself can leave you in a state of awe. It was once said by a CTE advocate that initially, he was against the idea of moving aiming to its own subforum because aiming is part and parcel to good pool (and I agree!). But now that it's here, people who want to discuss aiming systems can be left alone in peace. "Discuss," of course, is a misnomer, because it really means argue -- no help is needed from the outside in this regard.

Anyway, this thread has really been sidelined, and is an example of how things take a life of their own when they land here.

-Sean

 

[sfleinen]

That was kind of my point when I put Sean on the spot with a direct question.

I wasnt attacking anyone, I was just asking. I just dont think that the Aiming Section was created because of Dr. Dave. Although the presentation of Academic Information that is neutral gets sucked up into the fight by the mere mention of the word Aim.

Its a shame we cant discuss aiming to spots on the rail without a trainwreck.

Umm, hold on. I said that I wouldn't comment on this any further, but I have to correct you here (re: the bolded part above). You are wrong. Dr. Dave is one of the reasons why we have an Aiming Conversation subforum. He even admitted to such a few posts above. He was one of the most active participants in the "CTE wars" of a few years ago. He is definitely NOT neutral party as you paint him to be.

That's why I made the comment that you, Robin, haven't been here long enough to know the back-channel story.

-Sean

 

[336Robin]

Its not always aiming systems.

I know what you mean -- but as part of the larger picture, that's why we have an Aiming Conversation subforum. Once the topic of aim is brought up or even alluded to -- no matter the system used -- the "opposing" side jumps in, and it becomes a dogpile. But yes, it does seem to lean in a certain direction, and even the in-fighting within the CTE camp itself can leave you in a state of awe. It was once said by a CTE advocate that initially, he was against the idea of moving aiming to its own subforum because aiming is part and parcel to good pool (and I agree!). But now that it's here, people who want to discuss aiming systems can be left alone in peace. "Discuss," of course, is a misnomer, because it really means argue -- no help is needed from the outside in this regard.

Anyway, this thread has really been sidelined, and is an example of how things take a life of their own when they land here.

-Sean

Well I wish the controversy were confined to just aiming systems but hairsplitting tends to put everything right here if you dare discuss how to apply a cue ball to an object ball a certain way for position or to a bank shot. I know the arguments are there but wow...sure seems silly we cant discuss pool on the Pool Forum. How do you make progress for other people to see and learn from, if you cant post a diagram of a shot on the Main Forum?

Someone has to step up and declare Aiming is being used...to the dungeon!

 

[336Robin]

ok then how far back?

Umm, hold on. I said that I wouldn't comment on this any further, but I have to correct you here (re: the bolded part above). You are wrong. Dr. Dave is one of the reasons why we have an Aiming Conversation subforum. He even admitted to such a few posts above. He was one of the most active participants in the "CTE wars" of a few years ago. He is definitely NOT neutral party as you paint him to be.

That's why I made the comment that you, Robin, haven't been here long enough to know the back-channel story.

-Sean

Ok if its so far back, before I joined in 2007 perhaps you will regale us. Yes Dr. Dave admitted not being fond of the approach. If something happened before 2007 I would guess that it really didnt have anything to do with the banishment of Aim to the Subforum regardless of what he said prior to that point. So when exactly were these atrocities committed?

 

[Se7en6ix]

Not healthy

Why is it that most of the time when I look for a healthy aiming conversation or thread it ends up a debate? Well not actually a debate but flame wars, and it always involves aiming systems (especially CTE) versus traditional look/feel/experience type of aiming.

Is this some kind of marketing style? I hope not but it looks like it, especially when a member de-justify aiming system yet he himself has his own instructional materials. (Sorry no disrespect)

I guess the problem is PRIDE and being close-minded or just a misunderstanding on both sides.

The bottom line is…. Aiming system helps shorten the learning curve in pocketing balls consistently.

It can be compared to a single math problem with multiple possible solution yet it all gives one single answer. It’s like they have a 3 page solution (throw/angle/speed) in pocketing balls yet I as a Pro One user have a single page of solution (perception with pivots/sweeps). Both yields a single constant answer, a pocketed ball.

I honestly believe Dr. Dave’s material are good/perfect when it comes to pool literature. Nobody can deny that. But an aiming system like CTE/SEE/9090 deals with perception.

Honestly speaking a normal pool player or a hobbyist does not care about analytical data, he may have an understanding of it but all he wants is a pocketed ball regardless of what approach he uses.

I really don’t believe in any aiming system until last year (2013). Now that I know CTE pro One and a little of SEE System. I can switch back n forth with an aiming system and non-aiming system like (Feel and experience). But there is only one thing that is true:
“One can never understand any aiming system, unless they lessen their PRIDE or set aside their ''critique' mind”.


===============
Again Sorry, no disrespect meant. :thumbup:

 

[sfleinen]

Ok if its so far back, before I joined in 2007 perhaps you will regale us. Yes Dr. Dave admitted not being fond of the approach. If something happened before 2007 I would guess that it really didnt have anything to do with the banishment of Aim to the Subforum regardless of what he said prior to that point. So when exactly were these atrocities committed?

<...insert facepalm pic here...>

Sorry, Robin. I truly am done here. Not my job to do your research.

-Sean <-- over and out

 

[336Robin]

Ditto on that!

Why is it that most of the time when I look for a healthy aiming conversation or thread it ends up a debate? Well not actually a debate but flame wars, and it always involves aiming systems (especially CTE) versus traditional look/feel/experience type of aiming.

Is this some kind of marketing style? I hope not but it looks like it, especially when a member de-justify aiming system yet he himself has his own instructional materials. (Sorry no disrespect)

I guess the problem is PRIDE and being close-minded or just a misunderstanding on both sides.

The bottom line is…. Aiming system helps shorten the learning curve in pocketing balls consistently.

It can be compared to a single math problem with multiple possible solution yet it all gives one single answer. It’s like they have a 3 page solution (throw/angle/speed) in pocketing balls yet I as a Pro One user have a single page of solution (perception with pivots/sweeps). Both yields a single constant answer, a pocketed ball.

I honestly believe Dr. Dave’s material are good/perfect when it comes to pool literature. Nobody can deny that. But an aiming system like CTE/SEE/9090 deals with perception.

Honestly speaking a normal pool player or a hobbyist does not care about analytical data, he may have an understanding of it but all he wants is a pocketed ball regardless of what approach he uses.

I really don’t believe in any aiming system until last year (2013). Now that I know CTE pro One and a little of SEE System. I can switch back n forth with an aiming system and non-aiming system like (Feel and experience). But there is only one thing that is true:
“One can never understand any aiming system, unless they lessen their PRIDE or set aside their ''critique' mind”.


===============
Again Sorry, no disrespect meant. :thumbup:

Absolutely no offense taken, not one iota.

This is not a marketing style in fact how much of a market is really here on Az? yes there are 40k plus members and some of them will buy my new ebook and some not. If it were a perfect world I would want new players to buy my book and I would want people to become excited about playing pool, I would want equipment to get sold, pool time to get sold and pool rooms stay open through the creation of new players.

Im not trying to hone in on a market only commenting on what happened to the thread amid its being moved to the Aiming section.

It is duly noted that Sean and JBcases were on it like white on rice. Fancy that to me it sort of looks just like what has been mentioned about the CTE camp jumping feet first on anything that smacks of the word Aim. So the rest of us who want to discuss cant have a normal conversation here if we discuss how thick or thin to hit a shot from a certain angle in order to get correct position?

Im just glad there werent rules moderators have to follow and Aiming wars when Robert Byrne wrote his books because all of them would be shoved in the index.

 

[336Robin]

<...insert facepalm pic here...>

Sorry, Robin. I truly am done here. Not my job to do your research.

-Sean <-- over and out

Yes I see.
Well thats an educational opportunity I will just have to pass on. I really dont care about the past, its in the past.

I just want to freely talk about pool. I will welcome that opportunity.

 

[Ralph Kramden]

Unfortunately, this thread is probably now dead since it was moved to the dreaded "Aiming Conversations" forum.

Catch you later,
Dave

The thread IS called..... How to Aim Pool Shots (HAPS)..... I don't really think it's dead.

Does it belong here or on the Main Forum? I'd say both. Lots'a folks look at the Aiming
Forum for advice. HAPS might get more exposure on the Main forum.. but I think most
folks there would rather read about... Show us your piece... or the... Funny GIF thread.

2 or 3 individuals would never argue amongst themselves on the Aiming Forum.. or ??
.

 

[Se7en6ix]

Absolutely no offense taken, not one iota.
It is duly noted that Sean and JBcases were on it like white on rice. Fancy that to me it sort of looks just like what has been mentioned about the CTE camp jumping feet first on anything that smacks of the word Aim. So the rest of us who want to discuss cant have a normal conversation here if we discuss how thick or thin to hit a shot from a certain angle in order to get correct position?

:thumbup:

Well the truth is CTE or any aiming system can't have and never will have a proper discussion with thos who are not fond of CTE. Its like oil and water but it can be both in one container.

I think it's just pride and misunderstanding that causes flame wars, i even grew tired of reading it...

all in all all we want is a healthy and informative aiming threads

 

[336Robin]

:thumbup:

Well the truth is CTE or any aiming system can't have and never will have a proper discussion with thos who are not fond of CTE.

Its like oil and water but it can be both in one container.

I think it's just pride and misunderstanding that causes flame wars, i even grew tired of reading it...

all in all all we want is a healthy and informative aiming threads

I have a friend who has said to me that he just cant see the shots and he uses CTE and has for awhile. He is a systems nut and works on a system for practically anything.

Interesting note I saw him last week and he says: You know Im really working on my aiming and Im playing the best Ive ever played in my life the other day I was practicing and it was hard to miss a ball. You know what Im doing?

Im trying not to aim!!! lmao....of course I said...I can help you with that!!