Fixed that for you. Sorry to keep bringing up things you're unfamiliar with.
pj
chgo
Is "Feel" Essential for Successful Aiming?
- Thread starter Patrick Johnson
- Start date
pj
chgo
There is no simple logic involved unless you involve it, maybe that is all you have to work with, I dunno.
See what I did there,,,,,,,, "I DON'T KNOW".
Have you EVER said that about yourself?
One thing about the spheres....
''the balls NEVER lie''
Realizing, understanding and applying reason to outcomes will, inflict improvement & growth.......... physically, mentally and spiritually.
''the balls NEVER lie''
Realizing, understanding and applying reason to outcomes will, inflict improvement & growth.......... physically, mentally and spiritually.
We never said feel is eliminated. What I have said hundreds of times is that with an objective aiming method in regard to the actual aiming activity feel is reduced to the point where if it is present it is not felt. With CTE in particular the shooter is fully cognizant of each step and making deliberate and fully conscious articulable visual choices that lead to the adopting a shot line which is correct as long as the right starting input is correct and the steps followed properly. So a human who is making clear conscious choices with precise steps can accurately describe the experience as devoid of "feel" or guessing.
You are attempting to put in words that were never said by me and not by Stan as far as I know. Obviously, I can't speak for everyone who has spoken about CTE or other aiming systems but I can't recall anyone whom I would consider to be proficient at using CTE having said that feel is eliminated. Just that it is reduced to the point where it isn't consciously present. This is the point of the video I made so long ago in response to this exact same contention on your part. The video that you complained to YouTube about because I merely mentioned your name. I put the balls in a semi-circle around an object ball and went through the steps and explained in real-time that I wasn't FEELING my way to the shot line, I was applying deliberately and exact steps based on connecting the balls visually using the center, edges and quarters. I stated in the video that IF feel was somehow involved in the aiming process while using CTE it COULD NOT be consciously felt.
In contrast, if I just step to the shot and don't use any aiming system then I am using feel to aim. I am literally saying to myself this feels about right. With an aiming system the shooter often doesn't know if it's right and often the shot line obtained actually "feels" wrong. The reason it feels wrong in my opinion is when a player has been aiming wrong and using body english to throw the ball in then being placed on the correct shot line actually does feel incorrect.
But yes far far far far less "feel" is involved. So much less that the shooter doesn't feel any need to rely on feel.
They've been walked back inch by inch over recent years, but they were clearly said. I'm sure quotes can be found if anybody has the patience and obsessiveness to search the archives - I've posted a quote of Hal in the past giving his "there's only 3 angles" spiel.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
The feel I get when my game falls into place, is the cue balls release from the inflicted off center or below center cueing.
It's when whitey begins' to roll naturally.
When that moment occurs, the cue ball creates it's subtle/slight forward direction change, either left or Right.
It's when whitey begins' to roll naturally.
When that moment occurs, the cue ball creates it's subtle/slight forward direction change, either left or Right.
That doesn't mean Hal said that feel isn't part of aiming. He only said that if one uses three visual connections. He said that with only three angles (visual connections representing angles of approach to the cueball) that almost all shots could be made (with proper execution of course).
He referenced ones innate judgement by saying that one would be very close to the previously "guessed" shot line if one were to cover the line to the pocket and use the system to align to the shot. And he was in fact correct on that.
The difference being that the system derived shot line was always correct and the guessed line, however close, was often not correct.
And that really is the entire essence of objective aiming. To reduce the amount of estimation to the point where it is practically impossible to guess at the shot line.
The biggest variable is the soft tissue between our ears. As you have correctly noted thousands of times there is no way to know what a human is "seeing" when it comes to aiming. We can only infer from the results and self-reporting what the shooter is seeing and feeling. We can only look at a before set of results and an after set of results and determine that if there is clear improvement and the only known difference is the teaching of a technique/method/system then that newly adopted system is very likely responsible for the improvement.
We learn. We try, We keep or discard as we feel. I try not to dissuade anyone from learning about interesting methods that could help them.
Zerksies
Well-known member
I've been doing work and I have finally figured out a way to put side spin on the ball with an aiming point instead of "feel" that i have. I think i need a little work, I haven't tried this new system on extreme spin.
Think visualization of shot help gave. From point C/B is struck, strike O/B, and comes to stop.
3-C takes lot more visualization as some misses are thickness of business card.
3-C takes lot more visualization as some misses are thickness of business card.
Could you explain your system ?
PM me is ok
Does your system include the needed correction for speed of the shot?
Zerksies
Well-known member
Still doing research Bob.
My findings so far have been pretty good with this new technique.
I've been able to cut the pocket with low inside accurately and get a ton of action on the ball.
But this is something to look at is throwing a ball into the pocket.
Zerksies
Well-known member
Still working on it, I know what bullshit ridicule I will have to endue.
Then you may want to get Dr. Dave's DVD/video "System for Aiming With Sidespin" (SAWS) which allows you to calibrate shots for a mixture of front-hand and back-hand english according to all of the important factors.
Zerksies
Well-known member
I'm not paying for that
New/alternate title for the thread:
Last edited:
Well, in theory a robot could be programmed by relatively simple rules (see Virtual Pool) and play jam up. The problem is a human could not be as precise as a robot and would have a much harder time dealing with the rules numerically. But for all practical purposes, I agree with you.
As far as knowing that your body and cue are lined up correctly for a given shot, I agree. That is definitely something that involves feel.
However, determining or pinpointing where or how to aim any given shot can certainly be a systematic process with absolutley no "feel" involved. In other words, no guesswork or feel is needed to determine the proper aim line or aim point, but getting your body and stroke aligned for that known aim does require feel.
Applying english is a different story. There is definitely a learning curve that requires plenty of feel to adjust for spin and speed. But after enough table time, enough practice and repetition, that type of feel (guessing, estimating, rooting around for the proper aim) becomes knowledge. And at that point, I think the aiming process itself (determing how to aim a given shot with english) wouldn't necessarily rely on feel anymore, at least for a wide range of common shots.