System .v.s. Experience

The_JV

Local_Pro
Either player. I wouldn't presume the "proficient" aiming system player would be any better or worse than the million ball swatter.
However you're not assessing another player. You're assessing yourself under two separate sets of circumstances. The only unknowns is what you're not willing to admit to yourself.

At this point I just have to assume you're trying to be argumentative. Even cookie man managed a direct response...lol
 

BC21

Poolology
Gold Member
Silver Member
However you're not assessing another player. You're assessing yourself under two separate sets of circumstances. The only unknowns is what you're not willing to admit to yourself.

At this point I just have to assume you're trying to be argumentative. Even cookie man managed a direct response...lol

Ah....myself. Well that discounts me entirely because I am not a 100% system player. A good system is nothing but a tool that gets added to your experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbb

The_JV

Local_Pro
Ah....myself. Well that discounts me entirely because I am not a 100% system player. A good system is nothing but a tool that gets added to your experience.
lol... You don't need to be.

All you need is to have an honest assessment of your own game. ...and the willingness to consider how well you would play with zero system exposure and wealth of experience, as compared to using a system and only enough experience to become proficient at said system.
 
Last edited:

JoeyInCali

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Mister Cookieman, sir.
Being an old man as I am, I've tried many of them. Fractions (ala Mosconi and his "math" stuff in his mediocre books), ghost ball (the biggest lie and failure of all time...NOBODY can see an invisible ball)….and contact points.
Luther Lassiter's line drawn on the ferrule was the best, but it would lead to inconsistencies when rotating the line slightly to apply English.
It doesn't matter which system is employed, a player is still going to need experience to be effective. Nobody is going to pick up a cue for the first time, start using my favorite (CTE) and become a threat in a few weeks or months......gotta' have that experience.
The naysayers around this place never consider that aspect of playing the game with the CTE system. All they know how to do is bitch, whine, and gripe about "how CTE won't make you a better player no matter what you do because it is illogical"....it isn't "scientific".....it doesn't conform to "what Mister so and so says". Dumb closed minded thinking, in my opinion.
I don't like Brian Crist's Poolology thing one bit...the arithmetic is something I don't like to fool with, but it works.
I've sat 10 feet away from Crist and watched him play under some pressure and he isn't a complete dummy. He can make a ball and execute some good position and patterns and he will beat you, if you get careless...(his ego is something to behold, but that is beside the point). His system absolutely does work for him....but I still think you gotta' have some experience to make it work consistently, just like with ALL systems.
The whiners and gripers around this joint have never ever listened to any of us CTE users when we say...."YOU GOTTA' HAVE A CONSISTENT STROKE"....."YOU GOTTA' HAVE A CONSISTENT STROKE". They can't seem to get that through their bigoted, biased heads. And that consistent stroke comes from experience at PRACTICING a consistent stroke.
Those who've studied under Stan Shuffett know , (being the exacting taskmaster he is), that he won't let you get away with studying under him and not listening to what he teaches about stroke.
Having said all of that...the bottom line is that it takes a combination of experience AND a deadly aiming system to move that playing level up a notch or two and allow natural talent to take over. The bigots here will never buy into that, however.
Just watch what the usual crew has to say about what I've just posted here.
Right. And your systemers bend over to look at the contact point when shooting combos or tough shots.
 

Dan White

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Short experience with the aid of an aiming system, or no aiming system and just HAMB. Which of those two options would you opt for if the match you were about to walk into really mattered. (<--- what matters to you is subjective and relative, so let you imagination set your personal bar)
I haven't been reading the other replies but my answer is that it doesn't matter if you are using an aiming system or not. An aiming system is nothing more than a PSR in my opinion because the real aiming is done through experience, or HAMB. I believe some people learn quickly through HAMB because they have a consistent PSR. For others who wing it on every shot an aiming system might slow them down and force them do do something, ANYTHING consistently from shot to shot, which might help them. I guess my answer is that my money is on the player with a better PSR.

I should add that Poolology is a system that does have potential to shorten the learning curve for beginners. It is also handy on shots that fall in certain positions because you know, for example, that it will be a half ball hit.
 

The_JV

Local_Pro
I guess my answer is that my money is on the player with a better PSR.
Oh I like that thought....

So now it's:
  • Short experience & aiming system
  • HAMB no aiming system
  • Best PSR regardless of the rest
I think I'd have to put myself in the PSR catagory. Certainly the only thing I've ever tried to maintain throughout my years.
 

BC21

Poolology
Gold Member
Silver Member
lol... You don't need to be.

All you need is to have an honest assessment of your own game. ...and the willingness to consider how well you would play with zero system exposure and wealth of experience, as compared to using a system and only enough experience to become proficient at said system.

Lol... maybe I'm overthinking this.

I have a good and honest assessment of my game, my limitations. That's what helps me make the right decision when choosing certain shots, weighing my options. I'm not the type of player that thinks I can pocket every single shot that comes up.

That said, I can't answer your question because on one hand you're asking me to assess my own game and on the other your asking me to imagine how well I would play if I had a "wealth of experience". But all I have is my experience. Compared to a lot of players, that might certainly be a wealth of experience. Compared to Earl Strickland or Efren Reyes it's not.

If I walked into a poolhall and you came up to me and said, "I have two players over here and we're going to do a shot making contest. One player has a wealth of experience, learned the old school way of hitting a million balls.
He's been playing 30 years!
The other player uses an aiming system and has very little experience. In fact, he's only played long enough to become proficient with the system.
So, which player do you wanna bet on?"

I'm going say, "The dude with the system."

Lol. I'd pick the system player because you're telling me he's become proficient with it. That means he pockets balls with proficiency. All I know about the other player is that he's got tons of experience hitting balls. But when it comes to pocketing balls from all over the table, how proficient is he?

Do you see my dilemma? I would bet on known proficiency.
 

bbb

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
i would put my money on the person with the best mechanics
the hamb player would know where to hit the ball to make it
if his mechanics werent rock solid he could miss under pressure
the system player would know where to hit the object ball to make the ball because of his system
if his mechanics were rock solid he would deliver the cue /cueball to the target
as far as winning a game
i would go for the one with the most experience
 

BC21

Poolology
Gold Member
Silver Member
I haven't been reading the other replies but my answer is that it doesn't matter if you are using an aiming system or not. An aiming system is nothing more than a PSR in my opinion because the real aiming is done through experience, or HAMB. I believe some people learn quickly through HAMB because they have a consistent PSR. For others who wing it on every shot an aiming system might slow them down and force them do do something, ANYTHING consistently from shot to shot, which might help them. I guess my answer is that my money is on the player with a better PSR.

I should add that Poolology is a system that does have potential to shorten the learning curve for beginners. It is also handy on shots that fall in certain positions because you know, for example, that it will be a half ball hit.

Experience. Quality experience. There's the key. Regardless of what method or system you use, quality experience is the path to proficiency. Anybody can smack a million balls around and call it experience, but quality experience involves paying attention and learning what's going on.
 

The_JV

Local_Pro
Lol. I'd pick the system player because you're telling me he's become proficient with it. That means he pockets balls with proficiency. All I know about the other player is that he's got tons of experience hitting balls. But when it comes to pocketing balls from all over the table, how proficient is he?

Do you see my dilemma? I would bet on known proficiency.
Aha... but you're assuming the choosen system actually works... ;)

Might as well crack the egg to provide an example. I could in theory be extremely proficient in performing the steps of the CTE method, (for example) but still miss ton. How can that be you say...? Well, we have a countless number of threads that already scramble that yolk.
 

The_JV

Local_Pro
Experience. Quality experience. There's the key. Regardless of what method or system you use, quality experience is the path to proficiency. Anybody can smack a million balls around and call it experience, but quality experience involves paying attention and learning what's going on.
...and by definition HAMB is just hitting a million balls. Of course anyone that puts any effort into the game isn't just hitting the million into the rail. Although they may have a focused method for improvement. There will still be improvement based on trial/error
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Since my 20's, as my "sea of experience" has grown, I've merely been riding the occassional ripple of aiming proficiency I once had in my youth. Most times when I'm between ripples, I'm still good enough to not look bad.
So are you now curious to see if a good aiming system will smooth out some of those ripples?
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Right. And your systemers bend over to look at the contact point when shooting combos or tough shots.
And what would your point be? Should a player not use every tool in his shed? Do you know that looking at the contact point would help out in just about any aiming system that one would use? There i asked you 3 questions, anyone want to bet he doesn't answer any of them
 

Dan White

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
...and by definition HAMB is just hitting a million balls. Of course anyone that puts any effort into the game isn't just hitting the million into the rail. Although they may have a focused method for improvement. There will still be improvement based on trial/error
I think with HAMB it is implied that you are not simply a weekend banger. It means you are learning from trial and error. I also think it is a mistake to assume you can't get good at pocketing balls quickly with this method. Actually, now that I think about it, I believe HAMB is really the ghost ball system or fractional hits. Nobody just whacks the ball and hopes it goes in. I think most learned by figuring out where the ghost ball needs to be and then HAMB to make it second nature.
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Ever hear of lifetime 3's and lifetime 4's in the APA? Wouldn't matter what you taught them about aiming, they are what they are. Ball bangers who aren't getting any better. They are happy just to be there. The only hope with them is that they play the right safe at the right time
 

BC21

Poolology
Gold Member
Silver Member
I think with HAMB it is implied that you are not simply a weekend banger. It means you are learning from trial and error. I also think it is a mistake to assume you can't get good at pocketing balls quickly with this method. Actually, now that I think about it, I believe HAMB is really the ghost ball system or fractional hits. Nobody just whacks the ball and hopes it goes in. I think most learned by figuring out where the ghost ball needs to be and then HAMB to make it second nature.

I agree. But I also figure that many small town weekend bangers and league players probably hit a million balls or more within 20 years of playing pool two or three nights a week. Not sure how long it takes before they start making 80 to 90 percent of the shots they shoot, if ever, but I'm sure they could reach that point much quicker if they had a system that let them know where to aim without relying on trial and error.
 
Last edited:

BC21

Poolology
Gold Member
Silver Member
Ever hear of lifetime 3's and lifetime 4's in the APA? Wouldn't matter what you taught them about aiming, they are what they are. Ball bangers who aren't getting any better. They are happy just to be there. The only hope with them is that they play the right safe at the right time

Exactly. I would bet on a proficient system user with less than 2 years experience before I would bet on any other player simply because they've hit a million balls over several years. Learning is subjective. Actually, it's so subjective that I wouldn't bet a dime on either player without seeing both players play first. Lol
 

The_JV

Local_Pro
So are you now curious to see if a good aiming system will smooth out some of those ripples?
Nah... I was just curious how much faith system users had in their systems. I'm not incredibly old, but old enough not to bother attempting new tricks. Best thing I could do to increase my play, is table time. That said, I enjoy the ripples. It's the valleys between them I would prefer to fill in ;)

I had Geno offer me a free skype 'lesson' a while back. During it he definitively proved my eye dominance, and brought to my attention small subconscious head movements I was making to correct for it. He then showed me exactly what to do to correct for it during my PSR. His suggestions worked perfectly, but it took me out of my rhythm I spent decades playing to, so I don't bother putting it into practice. For me, it's enough to have an understanding of why sometimes things seem 'off'. I don't see value in reconstructing my game for miniscule gains.
 

The_JV

Local_Pro
Exactly. I would bet on a proficient system user with less than 2 years experience before I would bet on any other player simply because they've hit a million balls over several years. Learning is subjective. Actually, it's so subjective that I wouldn't bet a dime on either player without seeing both players play first. Lol
So we are focusing on polar opposites here.

To be fair to the system user player, I said they had been playing long enough to become proficient in the system. Whether that be 2yrs, 3 yrs, 6mths...., I don't know. I personally believe you can a proficient system user but still be a <500 fargo. I don't think the use of a system, even if you're really good at the application, makes you a strong player.

Now the assumption everyone seems to be focusing on is that the HAMB guy could potentially be a banger. No argument there. However that HAMB'er could be ~680 fargo. That's where I am at least. Am I an average HAMB'er...?..., I have no clue. I'd like to think not...lol

My point... lets try to keep it apples to apples, and not stretch one side into an orange. There's no guarentees in life. We also need to stay on point with who we're discussing. This wasn't meant to be an assessment of other players. ...but a reflection on your own game.
 

BC21

Poolology
Gold Member
Silver Member
...and by definition HAMB is just hitting a million balls. Of course anyone that puts any effort into the game isn't just hitting the million into the rail. Although they may have a focused method for improvement. There will still be improvement based on trial/error

I agree completely.

Learning is subjective, which means experience is subjective when it comes to what a player learns through his or her own experience.

Let's take two beginner players as an example. We give each player some thorough lessons on the fundamentals of stroke, stance, etc... Once the players develop their fundamentals they move onto aiming. (I realize this is not typically how we learn to play pool. Usually we learn everything at the same time, working on our fundamentals while also trying to learn how to aim. And that's probably why it takes so long to smooth it all out into a well-rounded game. But for this example it's neccessary to start each player off with everything equal as far as the physical mechanics of playing pool.)

Aiming: One player decides to use a system that allows him/her to know where to aim. The other player elects to use the traditional HAMB method of estimating ghostballs or contact points or fractional aim lines.

The system player spends 6 months hitting 100 shots per day (aiming where they know to aim based on the system), and they build excellent aiming skills through countless hours of repetition during that 6 months.

The non-system player also hits 100 balls per day (aiming where they think they need to aim based on a beginner's estimations or guesswork).
It will likely take a much longer time period before this player reaches the same shot-making skill level as the system player. It's because the system player starts building positive shot experiences and repetition almost immediately, while the non-system player has to gain enough experience to sort through the trial and error of first missing more balls than they're making. And finally, after they've gained some experience, they start making better estimations.

A couple of years down the road, if both players continue to practice, they will probably be pretty equal when it comes to pocketing balls. The only difference is the amount of time each invested in developing that element of their game.
 
Top