Huh? He's BEEN the head CTEnista for 17 years along with Lou Figueroa. They're the longest lasting negative tag team attackers in history whether it's CTE, professional instructors, authors of books, or professional players.
John Schmidt's and Corey Deuel's comments on aiming systems
- Thread starter PoolSharkAllen
- Start date
Huh? He's BEEN the head CTEnista for 17 years along with Lou Figueroa. They're the longest lasting negative tag team attackers in history whether it's CTE, professional instructors, authors of books, or professional players.
Whether it was or not does not matter. I was referring to YOUR comment. Do you always need to respond negatively to CJ's posts...even when you are not the person he is talking with? That's what the CTEnistas do, please don't become like them. I have always respected your input but THEY are making you change. Ignore them as I do! It's actually more fun that way!
CJ's comment was, "Why would you compensate for these things?" in reference to squirt, swerve, and throw for that any particular shot. Frankly, I too would ask, Why?
I know Dave is an engineer and he likes to measure these things, but with no disrespect to Dave -- I do not see where these phenomena have anything to do with setting up for a shot. Of course, that is if you shoot by "feel". I look at it this way, the more elements you add to the execution of a shot only increases the likelihood of missing the shot!
Don't get me wrong, I know these things exist but I have learned to eliminate them from thought. Sure...right English throws the ball left and left English throw the ball right, but do YOU really need to "think" about it during the execution of a shot? I don't and I bet you don't! If we don't, then I'm sure CJ doesn't! Of course Dave does, but he is a engineer and needs to explain these things...we don't.
BTW thanks Dave and CJ for all you do for this sport!
There is an awful lot in this statement
cfrandy,
If you aren't making adjustments to your setup you've found your way in shotmaking with English from a ways back. To skip the tons of subject matter we could cover. People who are just starting out have to think about what they are doing and learning to deal with Parallel Applied English is usually the first thing you do. After that they start picking up on ways to cancel it altogether for the most part. I would say from your post is that you have figured that out. I don't see too many new players start out that way, although some do.
cfrandy,
If you aren't making adjustments to your setup you've found your way in shotmaking with English from a ways back. To skip the tons of subject matter we could cover. People who are just starting out have to think about what they are doing and learning to deal with Parallel Applied English is usually the first thing you do. After that they start picking up on ways to cancel it altogether for the most part. I would say from your post is that you have figured that out. I don't see too many new players start out that way, although some do.
And yet, you feel the need to always respond negatively to anything CTE even when you aren't addressed. But, you fail to see in yourself what you see as something bad in others.
You state that you don't see where adjusting for squirt and swerve have anything to do with setting up a shot. Yet fail to understand that the whole concept of TOI is based on doing just that.
But, typically, you are right there to support CJ and knock anyone that uses CTE even though you obviously have no concept of how either really work. Look in a mirror if you really want to see who the negative person is.
Compensating for it isn't synonymous with thinking about it. You can not think about it, but you can't not compensate for it.
CJ being clueless and misleading I can overlook - he doesn't have to be a dick about it.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
I do not think giving a "new" player more to "think" about when it is time to execute a shot will help him! Any and all aiming methods or systems are nothing more than a pathway to developing a "feel" for the shot. "Feel" is NOT something that can be taught, it is something that develops after practice and time spent executing shots. No one had to teach me how right English throws the ball left. It is not something I ever had to compensate for, it is something you simply learn and have a feel for in executing a shot.
Imagine telling someone new -- if you want the OB to go into the pocket and the cue ball end up here, you must first take into consideration..."throw" which of course is determined by the momentum of your cue, the porosity of the cue tip, the porosity of the cloth, the amount of dirt on the table, the amount of dirt on the balls, angle of decent, where your feet are on the floor, your ability to bridge properly, and your ability to stroke properly. I'm sure there are many other factors that can effect the path too, do we really need to make someone new to the game "think" about everything? If we do, maybe that is why less and less people are playing -- not to mention enjoying -- pool!
That's exactly the kind of unnecessary negative name calling and bashing crap the CTEnista's are famous for. Congratulations! You have become just like them!
Someone New...no
Someone new wouldnt be doing more than just trying to make a ball with center ball english. So you wouldnt talk to them about English at all.
When they are good shot makers and ready to start learning English then you can teach them something but hiding them from the reality of what happens doesnt help them. There are ways to have to cope with it less so you teach them those. If your position is that you dont make allowances I would be pretty certain you wouldnt make a good teacher for that part of the game.
Someone new wouldnt be doing more than just trying to make a ball with center ball english. So you wouldnt talk to them about English at all.
When they are good shot makers and ready to start learning English then you can teach them something but hiding them from the reality of what happens doesnt help them. There are ways to have to cope with it less so you teach them those. If your position is that you dont make allowances I would be pretty certain you wouldnt make a good teacher for that part of the game.
Yet you see no problem calling CTE users and supporters "CTEnista's". I guess name calling is only fine when you do it.
Feelnista or CJnista?
I also remember a day when cfrandy, English and few others were also feelnistas or cjnistas, in that they poo pooed anyone that used any other method than what the deemed feel.
Im sure I stopped using it immediately as I knew I just wasn't pure enough for them because I get a little closer to right and then I apply mine. For some reason I like knowing a little more about what Im doing to help me see what to do but its all good. Making balls is what counts in pool.
Yet you see no problem calling CTE users and supporters "CTEnista's". I guess name calling is only fine when you do it.
I also remember a day when cfrandy, English and few others were also feelnistas or cjnistas, in that they poo pooed anyone that used any other method than what the deemed feel.
Im sure I stopped using it immediately as I knew I just wasn't pure enough for them because I get a little closer to right and then I apply mine. For some reason I like knowing a little more about what Im doing to help me see what to do but its all good. Making balls is what counts in pool.
IMO, you seem to becoming like another that distorts & puts your slant on matters.
Just because there is not complete agreement on a subject & a discussion is being had does not mean that one is 'poo pooing' the other individuals.
I've said several times now that it appears to me that some play the game like athletes & some play the game like bookworms. No offense to either designation. I think I am a bit of both, but, I know when to keep one from getting in the other's way.
Best 2 All,
Rick
Last edited:
Calling someone out for name calling while you are yourself name calling. PRICELESS
the willingness to believe it's possible to perform better than we currently do
You're welcome, I enjoy showing players new and effective ways to play the game. In the long run it adds years to their enjoyment and the fulfillment of breaking through personal hurdles. I've broken through hundreds of them in my career and still do on a weekly basis.
This game can be improved for a lifetime IF someone has the willingness to believe it's possible to perform better than they currently do ........ by developing new ideas, and attitudes. The GAME is our teacher'
You're welcome, I enjoy showing players new and effective ways to play the game. In the long run it adds years to their enjoyment and the fulfillment of breaking through personal hurdles. I've broken through hundreds of them in my career and still do on a weekly basis.
This game can be improved for a lifetime IF someone has the willingness to believe it's possible to perform better than they currently do ........ by developing new ideas, and attitudes. The GAME is our teacher'
Your memory must not be too good. I have never poo pooed anyone for any method they "used"! I may poo pooed the method itself or the way it is being marketed, but I never poo pooed the person for using it. You see, I believe all aiming methods can work for some of the people some of the time. Unlike the CTEnistas, I just do not believe one method will work for everyone all of the time! As I said before, all methods of aiming are pathways to learning. When you find one that works for you, you can then begin to learn and how to get a "feel" for EVERY shot you might encounter. With that said, yes...I am a proponent of TOI. Simply because I believe it is the easiest to learn; it does not complicate the task of aiming with a lot of variables; it immediately teaches the role of using side spin; and it is marketed as a pathway to developing a "feel" for shotmaking. However, I would not describe my method of aiming as TOI, I shoot by "feel". TOI is only the method that "led" me to the way I shoot. Likewise, I believe most advanced shotmakers in this game have found a method that has "led" them to the way THEY shoot!
As for namecalling -- The word CTEnista's is used to described a group of individuals who jump into every aiming thread simply to disrupt it because they believe CTE is the only aiming method on the planet. It's not personal. Of course, if you are a person who disrupts aiming threads because you believe CTE is the only aiming method on the planet, you might take it that way! If I'm mistaken, should I use CTEtrolls? Again it would not apply to you personally...unless you are a troll! Then you would be applying it to yourself personally, not me!
When CJ asked "Why do you need to compensate for throw, swerve, and squirt" I believe he was saying -- when you simplified all your shotmaking to just one target, one stroke, one speed...you do not need to compensate for any variables. You will have a "feel" for the shot that eliminates the variables. When CJ says, "The Game Is Our Teacher" he is so RIGHT! I like to put it another way -- the shot you NEED to make now, is a shot you have made a hundred times before so there is no doubt you will make it now! There is no greater margin of error, than when there is no doubt!
Last edited:
You might be right in one respect
You might be right in one respect cfrandy. Perhaps I grouped you in with someone else that was agreeing with you.
After reading this post I don't completely disagree with the result you seek to get as I understand what you mean but I don't think it happens that way automatically as fast as it should.
The Parallax on the shot provides for some interesting views along with the fact that your mind has to learn to deal with cling and the resulting throw. So you end up hitting balls many times thinner than they line up straight into the pocket.
Your mind learns from repetition of what it takes to make the shot hit the pocket and what makes the shot hit the pocket is the reality of the type application you are playing it with. There is a difference in how you play the Center Ball shot and how you play it with English. If you aren't making any adjustments, then you are just making balls from the aspect that you....just know....by repetition how to do it. A new player has a ways to go to get to that point. So telling him the true information is a good way to advise him, so he will know what is going on then one day he will reach the pinnacle that you have.
I would guess you have been playing what...20/30 yrs? You cant expect the way you look at a shot to be the same way someone who has been playing a year to be.
Your eyes are tuned into different things than a new player would be. Cue Ball Induced Throw is an issue, how to negate some of the effects by choosing a different target point in the pocket is a way to cope with it, using Outside English is a way to cope with it. Choosing to hit the shot with Inside and letting the squirt cut the shot back towards the Center of the Pocket is another way to cope with it.
What you do might make it easier for you but again aiming is not a one size fits all type of thing and its transitional as well. Ive had this conversation with some of the top instructors in the country. If a person just doesn't respond to a methodology, they will do better with another usually. Aiming is kind of like religion or politics. We are all wanting to get to the same place but we disagree on the mode of getting there.
So just as you say one type of aiming doesn't work for all, just remember that denying of the laws of physics..... doesn't work for all either. I disagree with the mode of billiard education that would have one ignore the truth and just go out there and play, hitting the balls until your hands bleed hoping that something rubs off and creates a shot maker. That might take awhile without a concrete clue system to dial it in. I believe the player is better armed to justify what he might have to learn to do by information. Knowledge is power.
So statements like that while they may have worked for people who used them I find particularly long in getting someone to the place they need to be. Therefore I see them as counter productive statements. CJ makes a lot of statements that are almost CJisms that some people respond to. They are vague but do speak to a point most of us recognize. I'm actually not sure whether or not its productive for a pool teacher to teach someone how to make shots with surety and regularity. If that gets accomplished then that lessens the need for the teacher, does it not? So making things simple might not be in the teachers best interest. What a conundrum of opposites? Were it to be this way the teacher would have to work harder to justify the expense of instruction tweaking the game in ways besides aiming and that can he a little harder to sell. To coin a phrase, The game is the teacher is it not? Well you have to make shots to learn anything so why would you withhold information? You are a thinking human not a 3 celled amoeba. Perhaps there is a time when it becomes automatic but it does not start out that way.
You might be right in one respect cfrandy. Perhaps I grouped you in with someone else that was agreeing with you.
After reading this post I don't completely disagree with the result you seek to get as I understand what you mean but I don't think it happens that way automatically as fast as it should.
The Parallax on the shot provides for some interesting views along with the fact that your mind has to learn to deal with cling and the resulting throw. So you end up hitting balls many times thinner than they line up straight into the pocket.
Your mind learns from repetition of what it takes to make the shot hit the pocket and what makes the shot hit the pocket is the reality of the type application you are playing it with. There is a difference in how you play the Center Ball shot and how you play it with English. If you aren't making any adjustments, then you are just making balls from the aspect that you....just know....by repetition how to do it. A new player has a ways to go to get to that point. So telling him the true information is a good way to advise him, so he will know what is going on then one day he will reach the pinnacle that you have.
I would guess you have been playing what...20/30 yrs? You cant expect the way you look at a shot to be the same way someone who has been playing a year to be.
Your eyes are tuned into different things than a new player would be. Cue Ball Induced Throw is an issue, how to negate some of the effects by choosing a different target point in the pocket is a way to cope with it, using Outside English is a way to cope with it. Choosing to hit the shot with Inside and letting the squirt cut the shot back towards the Center of the Pocket is another way to cope with it.
What you do might make it easier for you but again aiming is not a one size fits all type of thing and its transitional as well. Ive had this conversation with some of the top instructors in the country. If a person just doesn't respond to a methodology, they will do better with another usually. Aiming is kind of like religion or politics. We are all wanting to get to the same place but we disagree on the mode of getting there.
So just as you say one type of aiming doesn't work for all, just remember that denying of the laws of physics..... doesn't work for all either. I disagree with the mode of billiard education that would have one ignore the truth and just go out there and play, hitting the balls until your hands bleed hoping that something rubs off and creates a shot maker. That might take awhile without a concrete clue system to dial it in. I believe the player is better armed to justify what he might have to learn to do by information. Knowledge is power.
So statements like that while they may have worked for people who used them I find particularly long in getting someone to the place they need to be. Therefore I see them as counter productive statements. CJ makes a lot of statements that are almost CJisms that some people respond to. They are vague but do speak to a point most of us recognize. I'm actually not sure whether or not its productive for a pool teacher to teach someone how to make shots with surety and regularity. If that gets accomplished then that lessens the need for the teacher, does it not? So making things simple might not be in the teachers best interest. What a conundrum of opposites? Were it to be this way the teacher would have to work harder to justify the expense of instruction tweaking the game in ways besides aiming and that can he a little harder to sell. To coin a phrase, The game is the teacher is it not? Well you have to make shots to learn anything so why would you withhold information? You are a thinking human not a 3 celled amoeba. Perhaps there is a time when it becomes automatic but it does not start out that way.
Everyone has a different learning curve, some people learn quicker than others!
Teaching the fundamentals is what all teachers of the game must do. Burdening a new player with too much information will only slow his progress. Sometimes it is best that he 1st develop a "feel" for making a shot. This comes from practicing what you have learned (fundamentals). I can't think of a single pro that became a proficient shotmaker because of knowledge!
I'm 66, I started playing the game when I was 6! My teacher was Booie The Trench - A South-side of Chicago hustler. He taught me to use ghostball with a touch of inside English. Frankly, he never explained why.
How many targets do you have or need? I have only one...it sure makes shooting easier!
I'm pretty sure if the OB is only a foot away from the CB, there will be no squirt. However, I will still use TOI because I want every shot to be executed the same way!
Aiming is nothing! We can all do it by one way or another. It is the ability to repeat one's motions in a consistent manner, time after time again, that is most important in shotmaking. After all, making a ball go into a pocket requires a series of physical motions. You are more likely to complete these motions consistently when you have LESS to think about! In your quest for knowledge, I might suggest you read the book, "The Pleasures of Small Motions"
I do not have to be a physicist or even know why -- when I throw a ball up in the air, it falls back to the ground -- all I need to know is that it happens that way! However, I have read every article by Shepard, Jewett, and Dr. Dave. Don't you find it strange that when they contribute to these forums they are vilified by certain individuals? That's where knowledge will get you here on AZ!
The fact that CJ is willing to share what he has learn is a miracle! I am grateful, and so should anyone here who cares anything about this sport. The way he is greeted here is probably the reason he is the only professional contributing to this forum! I appreciate his input and would not care if he was right or wrong. I'm smart enough to figure out a few things for myself!
No one needs to know "why" the ball went into the pocket, we only need to know it did!
Fairly good post, Randy.
I started using outside & inside english before I turned 14 & I started playing when I was past 13 & 1/2. So it was merely a matter of a couple or a short few months.
I've said it before. I am rather glad that I started playing before I was introduced to physics. I am also glad that I ultimately got an education in physics.
I would not have wanted it the other way around. I was quickly pocketing balls with english because I did not know or understand all of the variable components involved & hence had no fear. I saw the older gentleman using english & pocketing balls with great success & with great cue ball control. So...I emulated him. human beings & especial the male gender are very much visual beings. Show us what to do & we can do it after a lil bit of practice with it. Explain it to us with words & it will take us much longer to get it, that is IF we ever do.
I think there are rather many here on AZB that make english & TOI sound too complicated & hence scare many off from using them or sort of like you say, instill them with doubt & doubt breeds fear.
I too like TOI because of the mental simplicity of it, that is, because I, like you, do not think about all of the physics stuff involved. TOI is executed with FEEL just the way I executed the 'oh so difficult' outside & inside english shots years before I ever knew about or understood deflection, squirt, swerve, cling, CIT, etc.
I would rather be a feel player than one trying to play through the application of knowledge.
If a 13 yr. boy can do it, I would think an adult of any age should be able to do it. That is, if they do not have a fear of what is involved nor a fear of just letting their 'Feel' do the job.
Again, Fairly Good Post & Best 2 You, Sir (& All)
Rick
PS I'd rather rely on my 'feel' & subconscious way more than I would my conscious mental intelligence & 'knowledge.
PPS All it takes is pocketing a ball with either english or TOI & one is on the way to using them with 'feel'.
Last edited:
Hi Randy,
I should of just waited a bit & would not have made MY post.
Another Good One, Sir.
Best 2 Ya,
Rick