S.A.M. Anyone use it? Does it really work?
- Thread starter cuekev
- Start date
In that case, I guess you can't tell me about it, since I will never agree to keep it secret. Oh well.randyg said:
Bob Jewett said:
Bob, it's not a secret. I've been teaching it for the past two years since Randy showed it to me. If you take Randy up on his offer, you might find it is something you would like to add to your offerings for your students. You also might find it is beneficial in your own game. I sure did!
Steve
Then please explain it here so those of us not familiar with it can benefit.pooltchr said:
I took some lessons with Scott Lee and learned it but was not totally commited to using it full time. I played around with it, dropped it, but it slowly began to assimilate into my way of seeing the shot. I still drop it from time to time thinking I can play by feel jusy as well, but I eventually come back to it. It becomes easier each time. It's just to easy!!!. But it's like magic sometimes.
TommyT
TommyT
SAMs kinda hard to explain, and since i had to pay to learn it you should too lol, believe me the stuff randy will teach you is worth 3 times what you pay for his advanced class without SAM, so its a frickin bargain. I played by feel for years, and i was a decent shotmaker, but my shotmaking is at least 30% better using sam. SAMs also unbelievably helpful in shots where you cant see the pocket youre shooting at, like the object ball and cueball are about a foot apart and your cutting it up into a far corner pocket, and the pocket isnt in line of site while you are in your stance. Ill drill those shots all day long now using sam.
know it but don't use it.
Bob Jewett said:
I disagree becuase from personal experince I've seen some of Hal Houle's aiming systems hit perfectly, everytime, if done correctly. Don't get me wrong, I prefer to learn to naturally find aim and practice shots with no system but there is a system Hal created that hits dead center pocket every single time if done correctly.
thrasher789 said:
Are you kidding? Let's just call it a hunch, but I'd bet ANY system or even memory recall will hit dead center pocket every single time IF DONE CORRECTLY.
It's always this aiming system or that aiming system, give me a break. If you're missing balls; news flash everybody, it's probably not an aiming problem. (the exception being an absolute beginner)
A question that would apply to any fractional aiming system, and as I understand it, SAM would fall under this category.
Imagine changing the angle of a shot by small increments, at some point you're going to change from one fractional hit to the next. If you're right on the border, doesn't that mean you're going to have to hit between those two aim points? Or is the argument that the margin of error is high enough so it won't matter for those shots?
Imagine changing the angle of a shot by small increments, at some point you're going to change from one fractional hit to the next. If you're right on the border, doesn't that mean you're going to have to hit between those two aim points? Or is the argument that the margin of error is high enough so it won't matter for those shots?
cuekev said:. I thought I would hook Scott Lee too.
QUOTE]
I'm here too Kevin. I just have been working so much, that I haven't had time to post or read much. S.A.M. is difficult for skeptics. It will work well, when you clearly understand that there are only 5 angles that go to a pocket. Of those, three are most common, and one is the most frequent to appear on the table (30 degree angle/spot shot angle). For those that cannot accept this, S.A.M. will always be a mystery. Remember, neither Randyg, myself, or Hal Houle came up with this concept. Albert Einstein figured it out almost a hundred years ago.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
SAM method
I normally avoid these threads but I'm now intrigued.
Who is actually teaching this? Does the BCA license you guys or approve your methods?
I had a friend who took a class in the Dallas area try to explain the method to me...unsuccessfully.
You have made claims of 5 principal shots and underlying authoritative literature by Albert Einstein.
I'm officially throwing the bullshit flag!
Please cite the Article and/or location of the Einstein authored proof or theory that you claim supports your claims. Does ScottyCoyote teach this? That was a terrible answer to a legitimate question if you have any financial connection to the class.
Do you have any financial connection to the class or method or the BCA?
Do you think your method is a secret? Bob gave you a perfect chance to get a little free advertising and promotion but you came out of it with enough egg on your face to cause me to throw the bullshit flag.
Do you believe in your product or are you simply selling it to folks who don't know any better? Why won't you air out a few of the details. I'm providing you a perfect second chance to bounce back with legitimacy and gain a few supporters.
I own a fairly expensive solid modeler (Solidworks) that can plot the geometry of the interactions of spheres on a plane the size of a pool table to as many digits of accurary as you could possibly use.
I'm not in the habit of arguing with the likes of Albert E. but the euclidean geometry invisioned here has been elevated above theory...let's test it.
Normally my by-line is just my opinion...you be the judge...but here we aren't talking opinion. Either it works or it does not work.
Andy Bruce
"Hittman"
Hitt Cues
Research Robotics
Uncertified Instructor
Pool player
I normally avoid these threads but I'm now intrigued.
Who is actually teaching this? Does the BCA license you guys or approve your methods?
I had a friend who took a class in the Dallas area try to explain the method to me...unsuccessfully.
You have made claims of 5 principal shots and underlying authoritative literature by Albert Einstein.
I'm officially throwing the bullshit flag!
Please cite the Article and/or location of the Einstein authored proof or theory that you claim supports your claims. Does ScottyCoyote teach this? That was a terrible answer to a legitimate question if you have any financial connection to the class.
Do you have any financial connection to the class or method or the BCA?
Do you think your method is a secret? Bob gave you a perfect chance to get a little free advertising and promotion but you came out of it with enough egg on your face to cause me to throw the bullshit flag.
Do you believe in your product or are you simply selling it to folks who don't know any better? Why won't you air out a few of the details. I'm providing you a perfect second chance to bounce back with legitimacy and gain a few supporters.
I own a fairly expensive solid modeler (Solidworks) that can plot the geometry of the interactions of spheres on a plane the size of a pool table to as many digits of accurary as you could possibly use.
I'm not in the habit of arguing with the likes of Albert E. but the euclidean geometry invisioned here has been elevated above theory...let's test it.
Normally my by-line is just my opinion...you be the judge...but here we aren't talking opinion. Either it works or it does not work.
Andy Bruce
"Hittman"
Hitt Cues
Research Robotics
Uncertified Instructor
Pool player
On the face of it, this statement is ludicrous. Sorry, Thrasher, but it really is. If there were any system that put the ball in the middle of the pocket every time, and you knew it, you would be a fool not to use it.thrasher789 said:
Perhaps you were using a circular definition: If the ball goes in the center of the pocket, you are using the system correctly. That's true for any system, and is a totally worthless definition.
The golden system that all other systems can be judged against is the "corrected ghost ball system." It has two problems: determining the correction and landing the cue ball at the corrected ghost ball. But if you can do that, it really is perfect.