Shot-Making: My Response to Drivemaker

[TheOne]

I'd figure that and the point-aim-shoot method.

Actually my "system" is feel, shake, aim, squirt...oh sorry getting confused, you where right, its just point, aim, shoot(although I prefer "release"

 

[pete lafond]

Im going to use this post as my hello to all who I have been reading posts from over the past several weeks. I work in front of a computer and when nothing is happening work wise, Im here, reading. I am 19, I have only been playing for 3-3 1/2 years solid. I am one of the better shots around my area, not the best by far, but the best are learning who I am. I have been referred to as a natural on a few different ocassions. Not claiming natural, just been referred to as one. For my take on the aiming system.

I look for any kind of edge I can get, thats why Im here reading all the time. But when Im playing Im not thinking about use this aiming system, or this is a feel shot. I just do it. Not to ripoff Nike there. Especially when Im focused. Maybe subconsciously I use an aiming system, but consciously I do not. I have read many posts and dont understand why there is something to argue about whose system is best. If Im way off base, let me know and my hello to you will be followed by a goodbye. just my small contribution. fwiw thanks your time.

Very well said. When you are shooting well, you do not need to think about a system; you have trained your subconscious well and it handles all that for you.

 

[Flex]

Aussies can win anything!

Actually, Mel was born in Peekskill, New York....

Biography:
Born January 03, 1956 - Despite a thick Australian accent in some of his earlier films, actor Mel Gibson was born in Peeksill, NY, to Irish Catholic parents. One of eleven children, Gibson didn't set foot in Australia until 1968, and only developed an Aussie accent after his classmates teased him for his American tongue. Mel Gibson's looks have certainly helped him develo... [More_>>]

http://www.starpulse.com/Actors/Gibson,_Mel/

 

[Fred Agnir]

Thank you for the scientific explanation of squirt. I've actually never seen that and I appreciate you sending it to me. However, how do you account for speed? You must admit that there is a "feel" element here that needs to be considered.

Absolutely. All of the systems I've talked of, if using english, these are only what I call "squirt dominant" shots. If I failed to convey that, I apologize as there are just too many aiming threads. So, I'm talking firm/fast and/or object ball and cueball relatively close together such that swerve is less of an effect.

For soft/slow english shots, or a english shots that have a distance such that they're not "squirt dominant," I don't have a finite system. It's "feel." That being said, I shoot english shots firmly.... or should I say, shooting firmly with english is well within my comfort zone mostly because I use a system. As far as speed goes, if I talk about squirt and squirt alone (little to no swerve), then I haven't seen anything on the table that suggests that speed affects the squirt angle. It could be, but I haven't been able to notice it on the table. Other people have reported a squirt difference wrt speed, but I've always assumed that the slower the shot, the more swerve is in effect making the "overall deflection" less.

BTW, I've never said that I'm not a feel player. I am as much as the next player (much to the dismay of Mr. Whitewolf). But the term "feel" isn't easily defined. As discussed before, when I'm grooved, I'm not aiming at all, just shooting. I think every decent shooter is like that. It's the shots that stop me and have me looking funny and not "feeling it," then I have to use an "aiming" system. Most of them are either blind back cuts, or the cueball and object ball are close together, or some obstacle (cushion or object ball) that plays with the look of the shot (like optical illusions). For those shots, I'm glad to have a finite system to look at.


Fred

 

[drivermaker]

It isn't terribly far-fetched to begin applying "feel" for other aspects of your game. Everyone has already allowed their sub-conscious to dictate their game to a certain extent. My point is to allow your sub-conscious to control more of it.

First off, I do agree with that statement 100%, but at what point in the learning curve should someone start doing that? How much of a knowledge base should they have? I guess you could say a total beginner plays everything by feel because he/she doesn't have one single thing in their brain to think about. They sure can't play worth a damn.

And, to get back to aiming for just a second (it could be any facet of the game) even though you're playing by "feel" should you ever STOP learning and introducing new things into your play which could improve it. If the answer is "NO" then it's going to take some thinking until it is ingrained.
Otherwise, you're playing by feel alright...but you're also in a state of arrested development.

 

[chefjeff]

First off, I do agree with that statement 100%, but at what point in the learning curve should someone start doing that? How much of a knowledge base should they have? I guess you could say a total beginner plays everything by feel because he/she doesn't have one single thing in their brain to think about. They sure can't play worth a damn.

And, to get back to aiming for just a second (it could be any facet of the game) even though you're playing by "feel" should you ever STOP learning and introducing new things into your play which could improve it. If the answer is "NO" then it's going to take some thinking until it is ingrained.
Otherwise, you're playing by feel alright...but you're also in a state of arrested development.

Cripes, now I've got to agree with DM.

I, just recently, started learning aiming techniques different from my previous learnings. Why? To improve. I could play subconsciously pretty well, but not as good as I knew I could. So, I consciously decided to integrate new information into my shot. I decided that if it did not work, I was only out a little time, and probably ahead in terms of confidence, etc.

It could be, Jude, similar to medical stories I've heard over the years. Someone has a disease, goes to the doctor, gets treatment but no relief. Then they take a vitamin or something and get better. They seem to attribute getting better to the vitamin and ignore the treatment from the doctor, when that was probably the real reason for their improvement.

Couldn't it be that the aiming techniques finally became part of your "feel" game and it is them overlearned consciously, not the feel, per se, that resulted in your improvements?

Jeff Livingston

 

[sonia]

Just my $.02. I've been reading most of the discussion on aiming for the past few days and it seems like there are two opposing sides. On one side is the 'feel' shooters and on the other is the 'aiming system' shooters. Which side am I on? I think both sides are right and here's why.

There are basically two game situations, practice and competition. When I practice, I am consciously aware of everything I am doing. I focus on my stance, my stroke, where I'm hitting the ball, etc... During practice, I also use different aiming systems. Why? To speed up the learning process. When I first started shooting, I bought a bunch of different books and read anything I could on shot making. I would then go to the pool hall and practice what I read. My friend on the other hand decided to learn by just shooting around and feeling where he should hit the ball. We both started at around the same level (he was a little better than me), but now I'm about 10 steps ahead of him. By consciously using an aiming system during my practice routines I was training my subconscious mind how to shot the shot.

Competition is a whole different story. When I'm shooting my best, I simply 'feel' the shot. My subconscious mind knows how to shoot because I've consciously practiced similar shots in the past. I let my subconscious mind deal with all the physical stuff such as stance, stroke, etc... while my conscious mind is free to think of strategy. However, there are always going to be times when, just as Jude said, "you have no gut-feeling on a shot, it's always best to resort to a system you know". This is when I rely on an aiming system as a backup.

AND THAT AIMING SYSTEM IS????

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

Cripes, now I've got to agree with DM.

I, just recently, started learning aiming techniques different from my previous learnings. Why? To improve. I could play subconsciously pretty well, but not as good as I knew I could. So, I consciously decided to integrate new information into my shot. I decided that if it did not work, I was only out a little time, and probably ahead in terms of confidence, etc.

It could be, Jude, similar to medical stories I've heard over the years. Someone has a disease, goes to the doctor, gets treatment but no relief. Then they take a vitamin or something and get better. They seem to attribute getting better to the vitamin and ignore the treatment from the doctor, when that was probably the real reason for their improvement.

Couldn't it be that the aiming techniques finally became part of your "feel" game and it is them overlearned consciously, not the feel, per se, that resulted in your improvements?

Jeff Livingston

Jeff, I have to give you some credit. I had thought of that and considered this "placebo" as a possibility until I started conducting some research with students of mine that hadn't yet learned any form of an aiming system. From my teaching experiences, I've seen students find the correct point of contact without any knowledge of throw. I mean, think about that for one moment. The vast majority of the students I encountered consistently aimed for an overcut when placing a ball in the "ghost-ball" spot. Is that a mere coincidence or have their brains adjusted for a consistent occurance? It does lead one to raise an eyebrow after a time. Perhaps the best aiming-system is our own intuition.

I know that when I was a child, learning how to throw a baseball consisted of pure volition. You looked at your target and threw the ball. Some people got so good at it, they were capable of hitting a can from 60 feet away consistently. If you asked them what their secret was, they'd simply say "practice". The fact is, this routine is common among any athlete. Rarely do you find a systemized approach to a physical activity.

That isn't to say that athletes are unaware of exactly what they're doing. On the contrary, they're completely aware of everything that is going on. However, the best athletes don't allow this useful knowledge to bog them while they're in the midst of competition.


Ironically, I had the good grace of playing Frankie Hernandez in a tournament this past weekend. For those that don't know him, he happens to be one of the best players in the Northeast. He spent the entire tournament (including my match) one stroking everything in. He made some of the most remarkable shots I had ever seen without looking at the ball twice (he beat me 9-3). There really was no time for a system. Think what you will. You're entitled to your opinion and honestly, I respect that. However, I don't think this is a placebo. The evidence I've encountered contradicts that over and over again. That isn't to say that fundamentals aren't important. I find it's critical that I stand still prior to getting down on a shot. However, I do not think you need to train your mind to process visual information. Your mind has already been equipped with far superior software.

 

[drivermaker]

Ironically, I had the good grace of playing Frankie Hernandez in a tournament this past weekend. For those that don't know him, he happens to be one of the best players in the Northeast. He spent the entire tournament (including my match) one stroking everything in. He made some of the most remarkable shots I had ever seen without looking at the ball twice (he beat me 9-3). There really was no time for a system.

Jude, this is where your total lack of understanding regarding various aiming systems causes these kinds of disagreements. In your mind and way of thinking, aiming systems are complex which in turn cause the brain to go into overdrive when lining up a shot. That is the FURTHEST thing from the truth!
A couple of aiming systems that I know and use (as well as many others) allow you to do exactly what Frankie was doing, which is to step up and one stroke everything in...without even looking at the pocket! This does not apply to ALL aiming systems however.

I said it in my earlier post and I'll say it again...I would venture to say in 5-10 years (hopefully a lot less) you'll be at a different place in your thinking and execution than you are currently. If not...then you've entered into a state of arrested development which is right where you currently are now. That would be very unfortunate to not grow.

 

[pete lafond]

When I am in total stroke, I generally only stroke once. My aiming system, point of OB ball to the pocket (line), is in automatic. I see that line very clearly and my stroke is just trusted. I will fall out of the zone if that line starts to become less exacting. In which case I then make a more conscious effort to my aiming system in order to keep things going.

 

[cheesemouse]

Jude my boy, tell it like you see it. That is one of the most intelligent, articulate and thouthful articles I have read. Brings back my youth. Thanks...randyg

Jude,

Very nice...I'm with Randy G...your post may go over the heads of the 'left/right/lefters' , we all have to learn to walk before we run. We have all made one of those miraculous catches; my most memorable was catching my upper plate after sneezing them out the window of my car speeding down the highway. I don't think I used a system, at the very least not one that I practiced.
Your post is one of the reasons why I continue to lurk and sometimes post...thanks for the thoughtful effort.

 

[drivermaker]

Jude,

Very nice...I'm with Randy G...your post may go over the heads of the 'left/right/lefters' , we all have to learn to walk before we run. We have all made one of those miraculous catches; my most memorable was catching my upper plate after sneezing them out the window of my car speeding down the highway. I don't think I used a system, at the very least not one that I practiced.
Your post is one of the reasons why I continue to lurk and sometimes post...thanks for the thoughtful effort.

I think you make a MUCH BETTER lurker than a poster. You do a superb job. Keep up the good work. Btw...Randy G teaches some great aiming systems, did you know that?

 

[HittMan]

too good to pass

I've really enjoyed this one!!!!!!!!!!
So here's my little piece of wisdom (or whatever).
It seems to me Jude is saying that when he is "in stroke" his unconscious mind works better than his conscious mind. No doubt it does, however Jude seems willing to accept a substantial amount of slippage (he calls them slumps) and appears to be willing to wait for the slumps to get so short that the "in stroke" condition is all that remains.
Drivermaker holds that he (and many others) employs several systems and remains open to new information because he contends that change is constant if improvement is desired. A product of his more lengthy struggle.
Fred (after working thru terms) contends that knowledge of the affective factors will increase his ability to compensate accurately...therefore on less obvious shots a finite system is appropriate.
Then there's some assorted chatter about natural ability, love of the game, australians, learning curve and the placebo effect.
So it seems to me we all agree that when we are "in stroke", we can beat each other. So, where's the the discussion of how to get "in stroke". We've all felt the goodness flow over us...where does it go when we are driving them into the rails (commonly called a case of the goodyears...can't hit nothing but rubber)...because to be considered (internally or externally) a really good pool player requires us to turn in a stellar performance every time we play a match...you can't afford to wait on the elusive "in-stroke" to find you...you must bring it...rain or shine. This is the difference between a pro and a hacker.
I tend to fall in the Agnir camp...for me, I need to understand the possible effects first, then compensate. I use feel, when it works, and try to expand the range of it's working. When it doesn't work, I fall back on systems. I have trained myself to become proficient with several systems that "may" act as a proxy for feel while I struggle to adjust my intuitive powers. This is one of the many reasons I have such respect for he "home table" advantage...one of the competitors will be pre-adjusted. I also match-up differently for longer sets...say 8 ahead as opposed to a race to 8...because the bet should more accurately reflect the ultimate ability of the players due to the increased adjustment time. Match play is a function of measuring breakdowns...short matches penalize smaller breakdowns more heavily.
In the end, we all have different objectives. I don't understand how someone whose objective is excellence could refuse to see the value of either side. And for those of you who come to this/these forums in an effort to play more effectively, the best advice I can offer is to pay close attention to what you are doing when you are "in-stroke" and try to replicate that performance each time you go to the table. Because I belong to the Agnir camp in this discussion, try to utilize repeatable methods so you may have a chance to diagnose problems, on the fly (mid match), and make the appropriate correction. This will likely bear more fruit than waiting on stroke to find you.
Just my opinion, you be the judge.
Andy

 

[Mungtor]

Ironically, I had the good grace of playing Frankie Hernandez in a tournament this past weekend. For those that don't know him, he happens to be one of the best players in the Northeast. He spent the entire tournament (including my match) one stroking everything in. He made some of the most remarkable shots I had ever seen without looking at the ball twice (he beat me 9-3). There really was no time for a system. Think what you will. You're entitled to your opinion and honestly, I respect that. However, I don't think this is a placebo. The evidence I've encountered contradicts that over and over again. That isn't to say that fundamentals aren't important. I find it's critical that I stand still prior to getting down on a shot. However, I do not think you need to train your mind to process visual information. Your mind has already been equipped with far superior software.

Just to throw in my $0.02, I have to agree with Drivermaker on this one. I know a few aiming systems (*way* less than Hal H.) and there really isn't one that I can't apply while walking around the table to the next shot. In particular, ghost ball and Joe T's system are easy for me to visualize from just about anywhere. However, I can't 1-stroke anything in because my stroke sucks. If I get tight, I curl my wrist. If I try to play loose, I drop my shoulder. When I take my practice strokes I already know where the cue ball has to go, I just have to get in a groove that will make sure that it actually gets there.

I do agree with some of what you're saying about not cluttering your mind tho. That may be why Drivermaker shot a 69 and a 67 the first two times he played golf. Because his mind was clear with no preconceived notions of how he "should" be doing things. He was just doing them. In pool you can't be worried about all the little things individually as aim, english, stroke, stance, speed, etc.... You need to synthesize all that into "If I do *this* it will all work out". It doesn't mean that those things aren't important, it just means that the process has to be looked at as a whole.

 

[drivermaker]

Drivermaker holds that he (and many others) employs several systems and remains open to new information because he contends that change is constant if improvement is desired. A product of his more lengthy struggle.
Andy

I can't say that I've struggled since my teen years. Fact is, Fred and I are on the same wavelength and bandwagon. I did beat him to the punch in this particular area though Oh yeh...I also did that in the Predator area too. (too bad Freddy)

What I'm referring to when it comes to knowledge and learning is you ALWAYS have to be open minded and look at new things, even if you end up discarding them. When your mind remains green, you grow...when it starts drying up, you rot.

If ANYBODY that plays this game regularly, top pro or otherwise, thinks that they've finally figured it all out, they now have the definitive answers, and there's nothing new to learn or could be better, they will struggle.

Now Jude...you may be reading this and saying, "Hey DM, why the hell don't you follow your own advice then and just aim without thought and let your wonderous mind take over". And the answer is, I have and I also play that way. Aiming that way doesn't work, or I should say DOES work, only when you know a hell of a lot more about the various methods of aiming and how to use them.

When YOU know every aiming system out there backwards and forwards and do them all proficiently, then there will be something to discuss where heads won't be butting. As of right now, you've closed your mind off to them and think they're invalid or harmful. That won't change until you change your views.

 

[drivermaker]

Just to throw in my $0.02, I have to agree with Drivermaker on this one.

I That may be why Drivermaker shot a 69 and a 67 the first two times he played golf. Because his mind was clear with no preconceived notions of how he "should" be doing things. He was just doing them.

HALLELUJAH...HALLELUJAH...HALLELUJAH....this is a first, we finally agree.

I think I did forget to mention something...it very well could have been important...that was for 9 holes.

 

[chefjeff]

Jeff, I have to give you some credit. (snip)

Just put it into my vcash.

Having recently changed (added some things to) my aiming, I am beginning to think that all sides of this argument are right. It has become apparent to me from reading these posts, that the human mind is an amazing operating system and can definitely accommodate various "programs" for aiming. The problem I see here is that some use their minds more for defending their chosen aiming techniques than for learning new, valuable stuff.

Another thing I'm discovering with my recent changes in my aiming techniques, is shots that were less than 50/50 for me have become more than 50/50...not sure of percentages, yet, but definitely an improvement. This has increased my options for running out and has definitely increased my confidence on those, formerly, troubled shots. But for, oh, I'd say, maybe 75% of my shots, not too much has changed as far as percentage made.

Over and out,

Jeff Livingston

Clinging to what seems certain means never progressing beyond the past. -----Socrates

 

[cheesemouse]

I'll be darned...LOL

I think you make a MUCH BETTER lurker than a poster. You do a superb job. Keep up the good work. Btw...Randy G teaches some great aiming systems, did you know that?

Drivermaker jumps on another poster who has stepped on his delicate toes....I'll be darned!
You are correct DM...NOW THAT WAS HARD TO TYPE....LOL....I do make a better lurker and I worked hard for that state of grace If I edited your contributions down to useful pool information posts you too would be a lurker. Even you will fizzle out in time when you find something better to do with your time...I suggest hitting balls!
I have the up most respect for Randy G. I was a card carrying member of his Texas Express Tour and an early subscriber to his(I think) "On the Snap" pool rag. I even played and luckily won a match against him....I hit a couple total FEEL shots against him to get out. I was pleased I didn't stop and figure the odds but rather just bent and pulled the tigger...lucky for me I just couldn't stop the FLOW.....
As far as Randy teaching systems, more power to him. Every business has to have a produce to sell. There is a reason Randy acknownledged Judes excellent post. Even NIKE sells shoes but their corprate bottom line is JUST DO IT.......
I suspect anything I have to say will glance of your slopped forehead...be that as it may, it won't ripple my pond....later

 

[drivermaker]

Drivermaker jumps on another poster who has stepped on his delicate toes....I'll be darned!

I suspect anything I have to say will glance of your slopped forehead...be that as it may, it won't ripple my pond....later

I guess if it was the first time between the two of us it would be jumping on a poster. But since YOU'VE done it in the past with your wise ass mouth know it all mouth, it's not the case.

I do know what will ripple your pond though...that's YOU hacking golf shots into a number of ponds at one of your local championship courses. I'm sure you've already been on phone with the GC Super. this morning...what's the stimp reading today? LMFAO

Please tell me that you're also a +2....LMFAO even harder than ever.
(All of this in a 4 month golf season...amazing, friggin' amazing)!!

 

[drivermaker]

I was going to write something in response to Fred's remark, but what the heck. Now all I have to do is:

TAP TAP TAP TAP TAP.

I have news for you...Boro Nut didn't do it and neither did you!