I'm really surprised people don't understand this.
John Schmidt's and Corey Deuel's comments on aiming systems
- Thread starter PoolSharkAllen
- Start date
I'm really surprised people don't understand this.
I'm really surprised people don't understand the part in blue is completely false.
pj <- people want to believe
chgo
to eliminate half of the course is something that many good players try to do
If I aim at the left side of the pocket, cutting a ball to the right OR the right side of the pocket cutting a ball to the left and use the "Touch of Inside" the ONLY way I can not MAKE the ball is to over cut it. I have effectively taken the undercut out of the equation. Jack Nicholas talks about it as well. Listen what they say about how it applies to golf and let the words tickle your imagination so you can absorb the delicious nectar of wisdom involving zones.
Just Kiddin..Check out this quote
"The ability to eliminate half of the course is something that many good players try to do. Bruce Leitzke and Sean Murphy are a couple of tour payers who play nothing but a fade, so as to avoid anything left. Likewise with Mark Calcavecchia. I was down at The Honda Classic a couple of days ago watching him. He simply aims down the left side of the fairway and works it back to the right with a hard fade. He never hits a draw."
"Even my old college golf coach had the same thinking. He knew that if he played a little cut on every shot and eliminated the left side of the course, the percentages would be that much more in his favor. And it worked. He was a very efficient ball striker".
This same concept of playing zones will make your pool game several notches better if you learn to apply it. This is something you can't just do "some of the time", or it will surely mess you up. You MUST commit to playing zones and developing a shot you can hit EVERY time you can. Instead of trying to hit several shots with many variations. The technique is simple, and generating the desire to make the changes is difficult. Such is life, change is usually desired, but seldom possible to achieve. 'The Game is the Teacher'
If I aim at the left side of the pocket, cutting a ball to the right OR the right side of the pocket cutting a ball to the left and use the "Touch of Inside" the ONLY way I can not MAKE the ball is to over cut it. I have effectively taken the undercut out of the equation. Jack Nicholas talks about it as well. Listen what they say about how it applies to golf and let the words tickle your imagination so you can absorb the delicious nectar of wisdom involving zones.
Just Kiddin..Check out this quote"The ability to eliminate half of the course is something that many good players try to do. Bruce Leitzke and Sean Murphy are a couple of tour payers who play nothing but a fade, so as to avoid anything left. Likewise with Mark Calcavecchia. I was down at The Honda Classic a couple of days ago watching him. He simply aims down the left side of the fairway and works it back to the right with a hard fade. He never hits a draw."
"Even my old college golf coach had the same thinking. He knew that if he played a little cut on every shot and eliminated the left side of the course, the percentages would be that much more in his favor. And it worked. He was a very efficient ball striker".
This same concept of playing zones will make your pool game several notches better if you learn to apply it. This is something you can't just do "some of the time", or it will surely mess you up. You MUST commit to playing zones and developing a shot you can hit EVERY time you can. Instead of trying to hit several shots with many variations. The technique is simple, and generating the desire to make the changes is difficult. Such is life, change is usually desired, but seldom possible to achieve. 'The Game is the Teacher'
It's fine Neil. Sometimes fish get smart and learn to eat the bait off the hook without swallowing it. And sometimes they even learn to walk on land and become the fishermen.
"Take what is useful and develop from there"-Bruce Lee-Tao of Jeet Kune Do
The above is in your signature.
What was Bruce Lee's high run?
And the followup question, what would Bruce Lee say about your quest to turn people away from any method you don't like?
Your stroke hasn't changed, so you will still miss your target on both sides with the same frequency as before. You haven't eliminated half the misses.
In fact, you haven't even really changed your target. "Aiming" at one side of the pocket and using squirt to send the OB to the middle of the pocket is the same thing as aiming at the center of the pocket with sidespin and adjusting your aim toward one side of the pocket to compensate for squirt. Using the words in different ways doesn't change what you're actually doing.
Your technique may have some benefits, but a bigger margin of error isn't one of them.
pj
chgo
The pocket opening is x. The ball size is y. X-y=z. Z is the area that is unused when a ball enters the pocket. No rocket science here.
Center pocket hit, z is equally dividend on each side of the ball as it enters the pocket.
Entering the pocket to one side of center pocket line, z is no longer equally dividend on each side of the ball. One side will have more area than the other side. The more off center pocket you go to one side, this moves more area from one side of the ball to the other until all of z is all on one side of the ball as it enters the pocket.
Theses are objects have sizes. There is no way to affect these sizes. None.
No way make the opening bigger, the ball size never changes and as such there is no way to increase the how much area in the pocket you have to work with.
Btw golf, shooting has nothing in common with pool. When people use these examples, I often wonder how much they really know about pool.
Center pocket hit, z is equally dividend on each side of the ball as it enters the pocket.
Entering the pocket to one side of center pocket line, z is no longer equally dividend on each side of the ball. One side will have more area than the other side. The more off center pocket you go to one side, this moves more area from one side of the ball to the other until all of z is all on one side of the ball as it enters the pocket.
Theses are objects have sizes. There is no way to affect these sizes. None.
No way make the opening bigger, the ball size never changes and as such there is no way to increase the how much area in the pocket you have to work with.
Btw golf, shooting has nothing in common with pool. When people use these examples, I often wonder how much they really know about pool.
Last edited:
CJ, correct me if I'm wrong.
He's not trying to send the OB to center pocket. He's saying that if he doesn't hit it perfectly, it will go to center pocket or the other side of the pocket. So that's two parts of the pocket he's using. However, if he does hit perfectly, it will go in the side of the pocket he aimed at. That's three.
Wow. You wonder how much CJ Wiley knows about pool?
Aren't you the same person who uses towing cars and driving boats and racing to make comparisons to pool?
Maybe you should spend some time watching Efren play some. He "increases" the pocket a lot. I hope that you can understand how he does this by studying his shots.
Sometimes the things you say Greg are flat out amazing, in a flabbergasting way.
Says you. Actually, after giving it some earnest practice, when I miss it's for one of two reasons. I didn't accelerate or pull the trigger with a commitment to pocket the ball or I over cut the ball. Rarely have I under cut my shots when using this way of thinking. Usually as a result of poor speed control in my stroke.
You made this statement with no backup, so obviously you're trying to generate a debate. Please enlighten the nescient lurkers. What have your results been in your 3+ hours of practice with it?
Best,
Mike
My replies are not for those that are participating in any threads. I wrte for those that just read not post.
That there are other ways to think about pool, other options than what is always being hyped on here. That even pros have mis conceptions about pool and are not the voice of authority many think they are.
Some don't even know how the elbows works and gives out false info as such.
Maybe growing up I was fooled once to often by the experts, the pros and as such learned to think on my own and not be a sheep following flock.
I'm engineers worst nightmare, I can think.
That there are other ways to think about pool, other options than what is always being hyped on here. That even pros have mis conceptions about pool and are not the voice of authority many think they are.
Some don't even know how the elbows works and gives out false info as such.
Maybe growing up I was fooled once to often by the experts, the pros and as such learned to think on my own and not be a sheep following flock.
I'm engineers worst nightmare, I can think.
the "Touch of Inside" gives you that Touch/Connection
Yeah, Most people are still using two parts, even in describing my 3 Part Pocket System...if you aim at the center (which is virtually impossible anyway) you will miss a lot of balls....if you play one side and throw the ball in you will discover more than just a bigger pocket, you will discover how we Pros also play zones in our position play. It's all connected, you're either connected to the Game or you're just hitting round balls around a rectangle. LoL ... To play the game at a high level you must be "part of it", you must be connected, and the "Touch of Inside" gives you that Touch/Connection. It's a lot deeper than just "margin for error"....Yes Indeed.:wink:
Yeah, Most people are still using two parts, even in describing my 3 Part Pocket System...if you aim at the center (which is virtually impossible anyway) you will miss a lot of balls....if you play one side and throw the ball in you will discover more than just a bigger pocket, you will discover how we Pros also play zones in our position play. It's all connected, you're either connected to the Game or you're just hitting round balls around a rectangle. LoL ... To play the game at a high level you must be "part of it", you must be connected, and the "Touch of Inside" gives you that Touch/Connection. It's a lot deeper than just "margin for error"....Yes Indeed.:wink:
pocket isn't always the same size
If you are to place the object ball 6 one diamond away for the side pocket along the long rail and 6 inches out it the available pocket the same if you moved the ball out 12 inches?
If you are to place the object ball 6 one diamond away for the side pocket along the long rail and 6 inches out it the available pocket the same if you moved the ball out 12 inches?
Telling yourself that undercuts happened because "I didn't accelerate or pull the trigger with commitment" (or whatever language you choose to use) doesn't change the fact that undercuts happened.
pj
chgo
You missed the entire basis for consistency in this method. You are effectively eliminating missing in one direction. You deliberately cue in a position that guarantees that you will send the cue ball in one direction. A miss hit slightly will put your cue at center cue ball and still pocket the ball at the edge of the pocket.
The cue ball is squirting in one direction only as opposed to squirting in two directions if you aim center ball and miss hit the cue ball. Aiming at the center of the pocket and misjudging speed or squirt only gives you one third of the pocket as a margin for error. CJ's method gives you two thirds. If you do miss hit the cue ball and get center ball, you make it in the edge of the pocket you aimed for.
I don't like the idea of my cue ball squirting left and right. One direction only is a worthwhile improvement.
Best,
Mike
Disclaimer: I don't advocate anybody using this mental improvent to their game. Just keep doing what you're doing and don't listen to the champion.
Well that's good to know because you are certainly confusing a lot of us who are reading and posting.
Hmmm, so why do you constantly knock the other ways that you haven't advocated?
Well ok, but apparently they know enough to bring home the hardware and the cash. So for that alone they are worth listening to. Where I come from we were taught to respect our elders and to me a proven champion in pool is my elder when it comes to playing pool.
???????
I see. You were often fooled by experts? So now you distrust them and don't listen to them at all? Do you know how sheep get fed? They follow the other sheep who know where the food is or the sheep herder who knows where the food and shelter is. Seems like for survival sometimes it's ok to follow someone who knows what he is doing. I ask you would you march off into the Amazon jungle by yourself and learn by doing or would you want a guide to help you?
I can agree that you might be an engineer's worst nightmare. But not particularly for the reason you give. That's about like me saying I am a lawyer's worst nightmare because I can argue.
So, your answer is to psychoanalyze rather than substantiate your mental process? A more pertinent question would be along the lines of what was my miss percentage under cutting versus over cutting and pocketing balls for the initial trial period of using this technique? Do you work for a political campaign? Of course, I expected the innuendo of stupidity to rationalize your arguement.
A keen grasp of the obvious has been noted and please continue with the less than objective comments...one line at a time.
Best,
Mike