Proposed TAR - TOI VS NO AIMING SYSTEM

Quit back-pedaling John. You stated any poster on here. You made no stipulations such as "any hack, no real players allowed".

Second, who is arguing with any pros about how to play?? Why do you find it so difficult to read what is actually said and just comment on that without having to add a bunch of stuff that was never stated, and then argue why the stuff you added is wrong? Sheesh, I thought English! was gone. You filling in for him now, or what??

No one, myself included, have argued with him on how to play other than stating that he does not use TOI on 80% of his shots as he has stated many times. This has been proven by several posters. Then yet, it's pretty much a mute point now because there is now TOI version 1,2,and 3. All different from each other on key points.

What HAS been argued, and I feel it should be no matter who the poster is, is some statements he has made about how the balls react. In a few areas, he has since corrected himself, as he should, other areas, still waiting....

Just because someone is good at something, does not give them carteblanche' (sp??) to say any old thing and expect everyone to swallow it hook line and sinker.

Ok you're right. Now ASIDE from the registered users who are professional players who else among the PARTICIPATING non-pros, and specifically among those who make it a habit to criticize the pros as you do, can match the accomplishments of the pros? My apologies for not being specific enough and relying on context.

Of course simply BEING a professional does not give one the power to make statements that should not be challenged. You miss the point entirely.

When one questions a master tooler on technique then it's not in an aggressive 'you're wrong' tone but instead in a deferential discussion tone that respects the master's position and experience. Of course the master CAN be wrong or can be unaware of newer and better methods but to shove it in his face in public is disrespectful and dishonorable in my opinion.

Of course I am certain that you don't see your behavior in that manner which again is a matter of perspective from my point of view. There is a very good reason that the majority of professionals you have named and far more do not choose to participate here. That reason is a lack of basic respect from a minority of posters, not always the same ones, which translates into hurtful and sometimes slanderous statements.
 
The "right shot" depends on many factors, especially confidence....it's better to shoot the "wrong" shot with confidence and control than to shoot the "right" shot with apprehension and poor technique.

'The Game is the Teacher'

I have lost many times by being too tentative against a confident but weaker opponent.
 
Lets see it

CJ -

I love all pool games, including Bonus Ball.

Before I can really make an honest opinion on the game I would have to see it played.

I have never seen it played.

I will check on youtube to see I can see it.

Im 50 years old and I have never seen it played.

Ken
 
One of the things I like about 2-shot push out is that you can play to your opponent's weaknesses, just like CJ says.

I bang around on Sundays with a buddy of mine and I KNOW and HE KNOWS that "long, power draws" are BEYOND his capabilities 99% of the time. However, I've been able to do those shots with ease since I was a teenager. As long as the ball is away from the table rail enough to give me a good bridge, I can draw the ball from end to end with no problem.

SO WHAT DO I DO?

I push to leave him LONG STRAIGHT INS...TABLE LENGTH...where the ONLY possibility he has is to get position on the next ball is to POWER DRAW the length of the table. Since he CAN'T do that reliably, he is limited to trying to pocket the ball and playing from whatever position he ends up in or he can try to play a safety of some sort. Just that one tactic alone puts him off-guard, because he knows if he passes the shot back to me, I have a WAY BETTER chance of getting position and possibly getting out (assuming I don't screw myself on a subsequent shot). If he shoots at a safety and then screws up, he may actually leave me a better shot that the one he chose to take. That messes with your mind a bit.

The same strategy applies if you think you can bank better than your opponent...push to banks. Earl Strickland used to push to full-ball jumps back when he was the only person who could reliably jump with a normal cue. I think somebody said Toby Sweet did something similar.
 
We are so lucky to have yourself defending the Truth .....

bkd422pt6d.jpg

Too bad you being the pro won't do it.:rolleyes: And, too bad for you that some have "real eyes". Also too bad that you are so arrogant that whenever someone tries to help you, you call them names. Like you just did calling 8 pack ignorant. Too bad you set yourself so high up on that pedestal that you think anything you say is gospel and no one should dare question it.

Oh yeah, I guess this is where I'm supposed to follow your great example and add the dictionary definition to my post just in case you don't know what arrogance means.


arrogant  
Use Arrogant in a sentence
ar·ro·gant [ar-uh-guhnt] Show IPA
adjective
1.
making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud: an arrogant public official.
2.
characterized by or proceeding from arrogance, or a sense of superiority, self-importance, or entitlement: arrogant claims.
Origin:
1350–1400; Middle English < Latin arrogant- (stem of arrogāns ) presuming, present participle of arrogāre. See arrogate, -ant

Related forms
ar·ro·gant·ly, adverb
su·per·ar·ro·gant, adjective
su·per·ar·ro·gant·ly, adverb
un·ar·ro·gant, adjective
un·ar·ro·gant·ly, adverb

Synonyms
1. presumptuous, haughty, imperious, brazen. See proud.

Antonyms
1. meek. 2. modest, humble.

There, now John should be happy, I'm following your posting style.:rolleyes: And with that, I'm done with this nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Neil you post what you want and how you want to. Just like you feel compelled to challenge people so do I when I think its warranted. Life rolls on.
 
1 rack is proving difficult. I have tried for an hour and made 10 about 6 times.

I WILL run an entire rack - likely not tonight but I will :)
 
How about I give you 100 tries to do either one? You can bet whatever you can carry down here. :D

Now CJ, you are dealing with internet champions, not quiet the same thing as actually having to play. These guys are experts and you could learn so much about swerve and deflection and all the other bs people talk about that can't play.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ Wiley

In 'Two Shot Shoot Out' you can NEVER win on a safety because there's no ball in hand and the opponent can always roll out.....this leads to thousands of variables that "one foul" doesn't have except in isolated instances.

This explanation is slightly different than how I used to play roll out. You could get BIH but only after two consecutive fouls.

So if I accidentally hooked my opponent, he rolls out. I then give him the shot because I can't make it.....he shoots it in or misses but in the process, scratches...then I would get BIH anywhere on the table.
 

T The truth will set you free, but first it will make you miserable.:wink:
Not sure of the ignorant thing but I'm sure some catch it just like the cold.
Hopefully they can just wait it out...maybe not though.

How legit was the run's on your toi video's???

Anthony
 
Two Consecutive Fouls is ball in hand..

This explanation is slightly different than how I used to play roll out. You could get BIH but only after two consecutive fouls.

So if I accidentally hooked my opponent, he rolls out. I then give him the shot because I can't make it.....he shoots it in or misses but in the process, scratches...then I would get BIH anywhere on the table.

Two Consecutive Fouls is ball in hand......I said you can't get "ball in hand" playing a safety....the reason is the opponent will roll out, so it doesn't win you the game to play safe.
 
This explanation is slightly different than how I used to play roll out. You could get BIH but only after two consecutive fouls.

So if I accidentally hooked my opponent, he rolls out. I then give him the shot because I can't make it.....he shoots it in or misses but in the process, scratches...then I would get BIH anywhere on the table.

If I am the shooter and I make the FIRST push, that is "foul" #1, but there is "no" penalty at that time...you decide you don't want to shoot and pass it back to me, then I am the ORIGINATOR of the first push so I am required to make a "legal" shot (hit the object ball and make it or the cueball touch a rail afterward) or I receive "foul" #2 which gives you BIH. The same would apply if I made a "legal" hit on the second shot but scratched.

Then ANOTHER factor comes into play. If the object ball is behind the headstring, it must be spotted and the shooter must shoot at it from behind the headstring. This is another strategy...making an intentional foul in order to make your opponent shoot at a spot shot.
 
Last edited:
It's simple at the surface level, but the deep level of the game is very complex.

CJ -

I love all pool games, including Bonus Ball.

Before I can really make an honest opinion on the game I would have to see it played.

I have never seen it played.

I will check on youtube to see I can see it.

Im 50 years old and I have never seen it played.

Ken

Yes, the "New World Order" took it off the market and destroyed all evidence. You may see some of it on a bar table, but that won't help you understand how it's played. It's simple at the surface level, but the deep level of the game is very complex.

If it's "meant to be" I will re introduce it to the "pool world" one of these days after my pool room is open. We are designing the outdoor patio tonight.....I'm psyched about getting back into the business again, and the investors are looking forward to the TV components.
 
Yes "any two fouls" is ball in hand

If I am the shooter and I make the FIRST push, that is "foul" #1, but there is "no" penalty at that time...you decide you don't want to shoot and pass it back to me, then I am the ORIGINATOR of the first push so I am required to make a "legal" shot (hit the object ball and make it or the cueball touch a rail afterward) or I receive "foul" #2 which gives you BIH. The same would apply if I made a "legal" hit on the second shot but scratched.

Yes "any two fouls" is ball in hand....you can play "two fouls by the same player," but that brings in some other elements that aren't really necessary. imho
 
to get to the filet.

Now CJ, you are dealing with internet champions, not quiet the same thing as actually having to play. These guys are experts and you could learn so much about swerve and deflection and all the other bs people talk about that can't play.

Yes, it's pretty obvious they don't know how to play by their responses and the positions they try to take. I guess you always have to cut through the waste to get to the filet.

th
 
it's about your creativity and commitment

I have lost many times by being too tentative against a confident but weaker opponent.

Yes, the key is to always play your shot with authority, and don't get caught up trying to decide what "the best shot" is (sometimes there is one, but other times it's about your creativity and commitment).....they're all potentially great shots. 'The Game is the Teacher'
 
If I am the shooter and I make the FIRST push, that is "foul" #1, but there is "no" penalty at that time...you decide you don't want to shoot and pass it back to me, then I am the ORIGINATOR of the first push so I am required to make a "legal" shot (hit the object ball and make it or the cueball touch a rail afterward) or I receive "foul" #2 which gives you BIH. The same would apply if I made a "legal" hit on the second shot but scratched.

Then ANOTHER factor comes into play. If the object ball is behind the headstring, it must be spotted and the shooter must shoot at it from behind the headstring. This is another strategy...making an intentional foul in order to make your opponent shoot at a spot shot.

LOL. Thanks for the explanation, but I grew up playing the game. :smile:
 
It's ok, as in most things the tiniest shift in perspective changes things. I see a guy who ran 29 balls in one pocket in two frames. I can turn the sound off and don't have to look for ways to discredit the accomplishment. It's a FREE demonstration not only of prowess but choices and ball control. If you choose to listen then it's also a running commentary of thought process.

But the larger point is here is a champion player who not only shares his thoughts on one pocket vs. nine ball but also backs up those thoughts with a display of one pocket skill that is difficult to match for all but the best players. On top of that he shared stories of playing the top players and either breaking even or winning.

So to me, this shows legitimate qualifications to be the one at the lecturn to discuss/debate this. For yourself and a few others it seems to me, from my perspective, that you are constantly looking for any way to argue and denigrate him.

Maybe this is inevitable. Maybe there is only one way for the professional to exist on a forum such as this an that would be to be ONLY deferential all the time. My forum history shows that I am a huge proponent of everyone having a voice. Some of you though use that voice as a weapon aimed in the wrong direction in my opinion.

On my facebook feeds I see Corey, Rodney, Johnny, Stevie, Jayson, Darren, talking pool and life. They are engaging and answer questions and most of all they don't tolerate disrespect because they can simply cut the critics out. On the internet every person can be a critic and many take it on like it's a part time job or a hobby.

I would NEVER, not once in a million years think to argue or nitpick with any of the top masters in leatherworking on any public forum until such time as I became a top master myself. (which will be never at my going rate of progress). For me it's a blessing that they are willing to give up their time and experience helping others on the public forums. Most of them are selling something alongside their participation but no one has to buy anything to get the free high quality advice and lessons.

In other words let giants debate the sky for they are the only ones who can touch it.


You make some Good point's.
I for one enjoy these guy's here but there will be times when people just don't agree.
Doesn't make the champ rite and us wrong.

Anthony
 
1 rack is proving difficult. I have tried for an hour and made 10 about 6 times.

I WILL run an entire rack - likely not tonight but I will :)

Yeah I tried it too for a bit. Quite a bit harder than I thought. I got 11 once but it was sloppy. Figured out the key is the break. I found you're better off taking the same pocket as the side you break from.

I could do this for the rest of my life and never run two racks in a row.
 
Back
Top