Would you rather know all the science that is involved in a pool shot or would you just rather know how to play top speed pool? Yes or no would be fine. Thanks,John B.
Would you rather know all the science that is involved in a pool shot or would you just rather know how to play top speed pool? Yes or no would be fine. Thanks,John B.
I don't need ALL the scientific information,
just enough to do the job and correct my mistakes.
Ya know, not every knows the science behind what makes
a toilet work, but we all know how to use one!![]()
John,
I have made my living in R&D amongst many other things in the past. I know enough to have a glimmering of what I don't know and others don't know either. None of us knows all of the science behind pool shots working or not working. Even if we knew the science it would be of little use since some of the variables change from table to table and even on the same table at different times.
Tell me how to bank balls hitting two adjacent rails and I won't care about the science, I just want the damned ball in the hole! There was a time when I was a decent one rail and three rail banker, three to six ball runs were common on a snooker table, but the two railers always seemed to have my number. It is even worse now that I don't shoot daily.
The science is fun to kill time discussing when I'm not on the table but I'll "black box" all the science and be just as happy as long as I am pocketing balls.
Hu
Personally, I don't like the "science" aspect of it. Tell me how to do it, and if I can replicate it, I'm good to go. I don't particularly care why I made it, as long as I can make it.
Same with taking a trip on an airplane, don't much care how they manage to get a 30 ton sardine can in the air, just KEEP it up there when I'm on it :thumbup:
Would you rather know all the science that is involved in a pool shot or would you just rather know how to play top speed pool? Yes or no would be fine. Thanks,John B.
If the technique is backed by science, (even if the student does not understand it) then just the technique is fine.
If the technique does not make sense from a scientific standpoint, then I don't care if Efren is preaching it. He's mistaken.
If the technique is backed by science, (even if the student does not understand it) then just the technique is fine.
If the technique does not make sense from a scientific standpoint, then I don't care if Efren is preaching it. He's mistaken.
From personal experience, the technical folks end up with
"paralysis by analysis". They need to know everything and
when a mistake occurs they have to reevaluate and re-analyze
everything they "know". Jmo, personal experiences may vary...