Just out of curiousity where is Hal now anyway? A few years back he was talking about moving east again.
My day with Hal Houle and his aiming system
- Thread starter Subsonic2u
- Start date
Smorgass Bored said:Lou Figueroa sez:
I just closed my eyes and then, after a pause, shot the ball.
That's the exact same way that I play Poker.....
Doug
( I'm ALL IN )
Smorg, if you're gonna play that way, you need someone to whisper in your ear.
Lou Figueroa
always happy to play
Smorg's straight man
SpiderWebComm said:
Perhaps some people are overeager to bash the system. But there are also legitimate questions. First of all, if it is geometrically sound, why can't anyone explain it in a mathematically coherent way? It seems that the only way to learn the system is to visit a charming 83 year old man, who apparently can teach it in 20 or so minutes, yet nobody is able to offer a logical account of how it works (or else is sworn to secrecy). If you don't understand it well enough to explain it, how do you know it's geometrically precise?
In my opinion, "Houligans" get defensive awful quick whenever someone even suggests the use of logic or mathematics to analyze the aiming system. As if they are trying to place the system outside the realm of rational scientific inquiry. If I was told that Hal invented a time machine, or can travel faster than the speed of light, I would similarly respond with a healthy amount of skepticism. If you said Hal ran 20 racks of 9-ball shooting with a 2x4, I would say you are wrong. But here we have a mysterious aiming system which defies explanation and also appears to defy logic and physics, and suddenly legitimate questions and doubts are labeled "bashing".
For example, I have no idea whether this link is actually written by Hal. But if it is, I have to say, the system described above is clearly not going to work. As others have pointed out, it requires banking any shot that is not at exactly 15, 30, or 45 degrees.
Similarly, you say it's not just half ball hits, but another poster on this thread says the aim point is the same on every shot (and many others have said the same). Which is not going to work either -- I mean, do you even have to choose which pocket you're shooting for, or does the system pick it for you?
I've also read that you adjust the half-ball hit by hitting the cueball on the left or right sometimes (e.g. on Archer's website). Well, that's also silly, do you really want to use unnecessary English as part of the aiming system? What if the system says left English, but you need right English to get shape?
I understand that none of the above are the "real" Hal aiming system. And my objections to the three pseudo-explanations sound pretty dumb, but that's because the explanations are equally dumb: if you propose a system where you aim every ball the same way, then the question of how do you pick a pocket becomes legitimate, after all, wouldn't you aim the same for a cut in the side versus the corner?
The point being, nobody can actually explain what the real system is so we can't get past this inane level of discussion. It can't be that hard to explain. If you can get it in 20 minutes (or even in a single week), it's not as complicated as quantum field theory, or algebraic geometry, or any number of other scientific topics, which means it's explainable.
Also, the whole secrecy thing is kind of weird. IMO knowledge about the game should be shared openly -- that's part of what this forum is for -- and not protected like trade secrets in medieval guilds. On Archer's website, Hal himself (or maybe an impersonator) says:
"Get honest for a change. These recreational players are no threat. Tell them the truth."
I couldn't agree more, Hal. So let's have it. Someone explain the system in all it's glory, so we can get over the mystery and have a rational discussion about it.
Scott Lee said:...and people wonder why the instructors and pros don't post more...
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Well, without trying to imply we all shoot the same, or know the same stuff, or have the same level of experience, this type of discussion is as close as we can get to "peer review." Instructors and pros who don't like to be questioned need not apply -- and I think that is preferable to everyone here just being sycophants.
Lou Figueroa
John Barton said:And I have done the same thing without knowing aiming system and also using an aiming system.
The point is Lou is that you have developed the ability to get on the right line when you line up. And your mechanics are good enough so that your aren't doing anything to throw the shot off.
But, John, how is any system going to work if the player is not at least that far along?
A lot of folks learn to play pool without consciously using a system. The have a greater ability to see the right line naturally. Some folks, like myself aren't able to consistently find the right line and a system helps us.
I played for 15 years without a system and in that time I ran five racks of nine ball twice, ran 98 balls in straight pool, ran out 5 racks of 8 ball once, and had many 8 and outs in one pocket. But I still missed a lot more than I made overall.
Man you must have been playing on soft equipment
As I stated on RSB way back when which began a huge Flame War, was that AFTER learning Hal's system my pocketing went up by two balls. Before meeting Hal I NEVER, not once, opened a single thread discussing his aiming systems so I had no clue why he wanted to talk to me.
RSB Flame War? I don't remember any RSB Flame War (he said rubbing his still singed eyebrows).
And frankly I thought at first that what he had to say was bunk. I didn't understand it. But after I locked into it I started making balls that previously I had lots of problems with. Balls that I had practiced shooting using the "million shot" method and still was inconsistent with.
This is my personal experience.
Then I went on to show other people the systems - c-players at best. And they then started pocketing balls that were pretty much impossible for them to do before learning the system. So to me, that showed that it worked to force the shooter to line up correctly. Now these people could certainly learn to line up on these shots by feel with enough repetition. But they had a shortcut - a different way to line up that put them on the correct line. So perhaps they could go on from there and focus more on the other aspects of the game.
So are you saying this mythical system is an alignment system or an aiming system?
The thing is that for an advanced player like yourself Lou an aiming system might not be anything you need since you already know how to find the right line. For a learning player or someone that just doesn't "get" it - like me, an aiming system is like a new world opening up and renews my love of playing.
It's funny that we have such incredible debates on this. The goal is to pocket more balls and all the teachers of these various systems are only trying to help players get better. I guess perhaps that some might feel that some of these aiming systems hinder a player's progress rather than help. I can see a debate along these lines.
As I posted somewhere further up in this thread, I'm all for it if it helps. But then, having someone whisper "May the Force be with you" could end up helping some players too
Lou Figueroa
Bob Jewett said:
Is there independent confirmation that Hal met or interacted with Greenleaf?
Maybe Mike Shamos would know. A decade ago someone from Hayward or wherever Hal's home room was who seemed to know Hal and his stories pretty well was pretty surprised to hear that Hal was telling people this. Apparently the people in his home room had not heard the Greenleaf claims.
Where did the "25 years as physics professor at Berkeley" info come from? I've met Hal face-to-face on three occasions, listened to him all afternoon coaching two enthusiastic students, covering up the pocket and such, telling them what to do and so forth, and I've talked to him on the phone several times. I've never heard this physics professor stuff. I must agree it would be pretty hard to believe he has any technical background or any background communicating technical ideas.
McCumber, in Playing Off the Rail, describes him briefly (as a presence in 14-year-old Tony Annigoni's life) if I recall correctly as an average player and a former tennis instructor who liked to teach pool stuff to the kids at the pool hall.
I like Hal. He is fun to talk to.
If you meet him and talk to him for at least five minutes, I predict you will hear about how the pros have a secret cult-like fraternity--like a cross between Opus Dei and Scull & Bones--through which they hold and guard tightly the secrets that make them pros and the rest of us wanabees.
It's intriguing--if you're intrigued by that sort of thing ;-)
mikepage said:
Ralph Greenleaf died in 1950. But it would take a really old dude to remember Ralph Greenleaf from those days (no offense Hal).
Squirrel Carpenter is the only pool player that I know that might be in that age bracket who might recollect playing Ralph Greenleaf or Hal Houle.
So you don't believe that the pros have this secret society and that they hold their secrets to their death beds? Some of them want tens of thousands of dollars to divulge "the secret" and you still don't believe?
JoeyA likes Hal, too. Glad to hear Randy Goettlicher gives him credit for the basis of their SAM aiming system.
JoeyA (waiting for a pro to email me "the secret" from their death bed)
George Rood. I don't remember him talking about playing Greenleaf, but he was certainly playing close to Greenleaf's level during the latter part of Greenleaf's career.JoeyA said:
So you don't believe that the pros have this secret society and that they hold their secrets to their death beds? Some of them want tens of thousands of dollars to divulge "the secret" and you still don't believe?
The "secret" to this game is controlling whitey.
The "secret" to this game is controlling whitey.
John Barton
New member
lfigueroa said:John Barton said:And I have done the same thing without knowing aiming system and also using an aiming system.
The point is Lou is that you have developed the ability to get on the right line when you line up. And your mechanics are good enough so that your aren't doing anything to throw the shot off.
But, John, how is any system going to work if the player is not at least that far along?
Well, as I said the systems that work, in my opinion, put people on the right line and so they can pocket balls easier. I saw this with the C-players I showed it too. That was proof to me.
A lot of folks learn to play pool without consciously using a system. The have a greater ability to see the right line naturally. Some folks, like myself aren't able to consistently find the right line and a system helps us.
I played for 15 years without a system and in that time I ran five racks of nine ball twice, ran 98 balls in straight pool, ran out 5 racks of 8 ball once, and had many 8 and outs in one pocket. But I still missed a lot more than I made overall.
Man you must have been playing on soft equipment
Of course
As I stated on RSB way back when which began a huge Flame War, was that AFTER learning Hal's system my pocketing went up by two balls. Before meeting Hal I NEVER, not once, opened a single thread discussing his aiming systems so I had no clue why he wanted to talk to me.
RSB Flame War? I don't remember any RSB Flame War (he said rubbing his still singed eyebrows).
And frankly I thought at first that what he had to say was bunk. I didn't understand it. But after I locked into it I started making balls that previously I had lots of problems with. Balls that I had practiced shooting using the "million shot" method and still was inconsistent with.
This is my personal experience.
Then I went on to show other people the systems - c-players at best. And they then started pocketing balls that were pretty much impossible for them to do before learning the system. So to me, that showed that it worked to force the shooter to line up correctly. Now these people could certainly learn to line up on these shots by feel with enough repetition. But they had a shortcut - a different way to line up that put them on the correct line. So perhaps they could go on from there and focus more on the other aspects of the game.
So are you saying this mythical system is an alignment system or an aiming system?
Well it's not a myth. When someone says imagine a ball in this space and shoot into it or see the contact point created by this imaginary ball and the real ball and don't take your eyes off it - that's a method for aiming that works for some and not so well for others. I can however do that and still line up wrong. I think with Hal's method and others the idea is that you line up on the correct aim line by virtue of using the method. Thus I would say that possibly alignment system might be more descriptive of what is happening than aiming system. And being on the right line allows for the balls to made with much greater consistentcy, at least in my own experience. You mentioned soft equipment above and I have to agree with you. On soft equipment players can get away with a lot more and tend not see how off they really are. Tight pockets bring out the dog in a lot of players because their alignment/aim isn't what it should be.
Shortly after meeting Hal and practicing with what he showed me I went to Taiwan. I spent several days out of the three weeks I was there practicing with his system on 4.25 inch pockets and was still able to pocket balls with ease. In fact, I still couldn't believe it. My brain was telling me that the shots didn't go but they were hitting the back of the pocket. The reason my brain was telling me that the shot was off is because that part of me wanted to line up the way I had done it for years, the wrong way.
Now when I play, I just automatically step in on the right line and make more balls. If I am not "feeling" it then I double check my aim/alignment against Hal's system and adjust. After a few games I am all good and pocketing balls with no problem.
The thing is that for an advanced player like yourself Lou an aiming system might not be anything you need since you already know how to find the right line. For a learning player or someone that just doesn't "get" it - like me, an aiming system is like a new world opening up and renews my love of playing.
It's funny that we have such incredible debates on this. The goal is to pocket more balls and all the teachers of these various systems are only trying to help players get better. I guess perhaps that some might feel that some of these aiming systems hinder a player's progress rather than help. I can see a debate along these lines.
As I posted somewhere further up in this thread, I'm all for it if it helps. But then, having someone whisper "May the Force be with you" could end up helping some players too
Lou Figueroa
Yes it could. And there has certainly been no shortage of "mystery" surrounding these systems. From the people like me who do not have a readily available and easy explanation of why they work, to Hal's admonishment not to publish his systems, and also from the Hallelujah aspect of the results people get. I can't deny my own experience however and am enough of a player to know when I get better. When I say that learning this has made me a better then it's true. Nothing I read in a book or saw on a tape has had such an impact on my game. So even though I can't break it down and explain exactly why it works, I have to stick with it just does.
It's clear that it works for some, and it's refreshing to hear from somebody who doesn't think they're being personally attacked when its details are explored. If those who like it would lose their defensiveness about that we might be able to have an actual productive discussion about HOW it works - and maybe learn something.
Maybe the usefulness of a system that helps "feel" players would give us clues about how to find "the zone" more easily or how to get out of slumps. Resisting that kind of exploration isn't helping anybody (except maybe those who think they can profit from the "mystery").
pj
chgo
Patrick Johnson said:
Pat...Your comments make you out to be a nit!
I've already come on here and expressed my ideas on how to get out of a slump...and I've detailed everything else I teach, including SAM. If you're too lazy to find it, and too cheap to find out more one-on-one, then to heck with you! Why don't you stick a crowbar in your wallet, and take a lesson. Then you can come on here and tell EVERYONE all the secrets! LOLScott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee said:
Scott,
I'm in agreement, I've always been a bit frustrated by "critics" here on the forum. Often the criticism is based on faulty assumptions, caused by an apparent inability to use the search feature that can be extremely useful to those so inclined. In addition it shows a classless lack of appreciation of the history of the forum.
To suggest that you and RandyG (and even Grady in a previous thread) have not contributed is LUDICROUS. You guys have gone out of your way to share with members of the forum; and the TRUE STUDENTS OF THE GAME APPRECIATE IT!!!!!
There is much that just can't be conveyed in such a forum; even the simplest concepts can be extremely long and tedious to describe verbally; and reasonable forum members do NOT expect exhaustive analysis from you of each and every question. We are happy to pick up the nuggets as they fall; and WE REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS AT THE AZB GETTOGETHERS (of which the critics seem blissfully unaware).
I ask the newer critics to contribute their knowledge and efforts (not their criticism) to improving the forum; so far they have not contributed even a fraction of your input. I'm sure we all look forward to seeing what kind of clinics and events these critics will contribute at the 2008 DCC.....it's time to step up to the plate guys.
ineedaspot said:
This is a great post - I am in for an intelligent and even heated discussion on the pros/cons and validity of the system - but we have first got to know the system in its essence and how it is supposed to work! Part of this fuss and debate and resulting skepticism is simply due to a lack of relevant, hard and applicable info.
Anyone genuinely interested in the game and who is open-minded enough to accept that a method, way, system (or whatever you wanna call it) might just help to raise your game would be all ears. I know I am.
And I don't think many of us are looking for a quick-fix cure-all either, but simply to obtain a better understanding and grasp of the game that means a lot to us.
Well, what does it take to get you to say so? Maybe somebody who feels helpful will tell me how to find it...
pj
chgo
Patrick Johnson said:
Patrick a quick search turned up this thread:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=57805&page=4&highlight=aiming+system
I got to post #36 and found Scott Lee's name. Some of the other posts insinuated that Randy wanted Bob Jewett to come to his school to learn the system while Bob wanted to have the system spelled out here on the forum for discussion.
I scanned most of the first 36 posts for information about the system which various students of the system admitted that they use the system on occasion but do not use it exclusively.
If I find some more relative posts, I will post them in this thread.
FTR, you can use the SEARCH Tab right next to the Links tab . Click on that and you can search particular forums or all forums for information relative to what you are looking. I went tothe Advance Search button and filled in Scott Lee as the User Name and SAM aiming system as the relative KEY WORDS.
It pulled up numerous threads and I waded through them like a marine. Put your boots on and wade on in.
I look forward to hearing your opinion of the aiming system and now that this is the latest Hot Topic, I am also interested in learning more about the SAM system but have a tournament to play in this weekend so I will just have to wait to see if you and others find more details about the SAM aiming system.
Regards,
JoeyA
JoeyA said:
I'm now up to post # 89 and my eyes are going blood shot. Scott says that he has described the Supplemental Aiming system previously, apparently not in that thread. It got kind of nasty with people calling BS and such. Maybe the Cue-Tech organization should simply post a thread called SAM. I'll go and make another search using the words Supplemental Aiming System and see if it brings up Scott's details on the system.
I'm working, doing my due diligence. Let me know if anyone else finds out where the system is explained because all of this searching is getting old.
JoeyA
For SAM, see post #113
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=57805&page=8
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=57805&page=8