I used to think that this thread had gotten way off the topic, but I realized this whole thread is a very good example of that aiming systems are overrated for any long term use in anyone's game.
That no matter what, you got to HAMB, there is no way around.
In Zen Buddhism there is the phrase "Great function clearly manifest knows no rules". Clearly manifest means that the Great Function of a man of Great Potential appears right before ones eyes. Know no rules means that a man of Great Potential and Great Function does not adhere to practice and drills. Rules means practice and drills and regulations. In all disciplines there is practice, drills and regulation but the man who has reached the deepest principle of his discipline can dispense with them as he pleases. This is the complete freedom, and a man of Great Potential and Great Function has a freedom beyond the rules.
In other words All vague notions must fall before a pupil can call himself master.
So just to make it clear you think that hitting a million balls is the only way to learn to play?
In other words, all one needs to play at world class level is a pool table and decent equipment? No instruction, no systematic methods, no mentoring? No training aids, no diagrams?
So your position is that a person doesn't need anyone or anything else, simply get on the table and play and the world class game will appear?
If this is your position then I would highly suggest that you save any money you had planned to spend on tournaments or had planned to put up for gambling matches. Theoretically you COULD get good by locking yourself in a basement with a pool table. At the end of the day if you have exhausted all possible ways to hit the cue ball and mastered them you should be good.
But to assume that no other man has anything to teach and that no other man is capable of discovering methods that are valuable and useful in actual play is frankly delusional. What I find funny is that you advocate HAMB as if those of us who promote aiming systems say that HAMB is not needed. None of us have said that.
To use your own logic one learns an aiming system that is good and solid and then hits enough balls with it to make it a natural flowing part of their game. You keep telling people not to mess with aiming systems (except your beloved Arrow-GB Trainer method) and just hit balls.
You keep saying that there is no way around working hard. In fact there is a way around working hard. While you are expending a lot of energy placing paper arrows on the table in order to attempt to train your mind to see imaginary ball I am using the very real balls to train my body to align properly and I am hitting many more balls than you are in the same amount of time. My energy efficiency is much higher and I honing a skill that serves me the same with any shot I have to face, including ones that I have practiced seldom or not at all.
So again using your statement, when I am in a game with the money ball slightly off the end rail and the cue ball all the way at the other end nine feet away with no where to duck facing a shot I have neither practiced or faced before in my life the solution APPEARS in the form of an aiming system prescription that allows me to line up properly. Thus I have at least a 50/50 shot at making that shot and probably a better chance than that if I am proficient and comfortable with the aiming method.
Aiming systems are UNDERRATED.
People like you seem to want to try very hard to influence others not to even try them. Why you would want to prevent someone from trying something that might help them is beyond me. Especially since your own personal path to improvement, using the arrow template and hitting balls has not resulted in any significant improvement since you first started sharing your views on how to get better.
Now maybe you are now approaching world class speed but I doubt it. I think that you aren't much better than you were two years ago. Of course you won't do or show us anything to prove otherwise.
Well, good luck in your quest. Seems to me that it's silly to spout Buddhist principles and then at the same time dismiss aiming systems as if they are also not part of the all. I suppose you didn't consider that perhaps these methods are one of the solutions that appear?