That's cool then I missed it. I will go back to watch.
TAR Podcast Johnny Archer: "It's feel what we're doing"
- Thread starter ChrisBanks
- Start date
That's cool then I missed it. I will go back to watch.
Two Minds - Two Ways
I always find these conversations regarding the scientific approach to pool very interesting. As an artist, I enjoy watching and studying how and why people do things, and in this modern era, everyone is always eager to find a formula--if you will--on how great people do great things. I understand the quest. We all want to learn the A,B, C steps to shoot and aim just like Johnny, Stevie, or Earl. And a lot of very educated people, many on this AZ Forum, have made great strides in providing this information. But as an analogy, please briefly consider a great sculptor approaching a slab of marble and taking that first chip from the rough stone. A book can tell you to chip away everything that does not look like the subject you are carving, and the book would be correct. But we all know it's not that easy. A great sculptor doesn't have analytical diagrams and measurements in his head like some super computer. His work is from inspiration and talent (be it hard-earned or God given). Yes, the sculptor will use some measuring devices to guide his direction as he proceeds, but most of the finished work will come from special insight within his mind, an innate sense that guides him and miraculously flows complex information from his mind to subtle movements of his hands. Many times, an artist will finish a great masterpiece and wonder how he could have accomplished the work. It is as if someone else worked from within their body to manipulate the chisel.
A great pool player is the same as a great artist. In the beginning, he probably found boundaries through experience or reading systems such as those described. With time and talent, a player will eventually stop the mechanical aspect of applying these systems to every shot and allow his mind to free-flow. Any exceptional player knows the feeling when a billiard shot is locked in. It just is. You can't explain why. It doesn't matter what English you are using or what step one's motion is at. The unconscious mind is powerful enough to account for all of those variables and execute the shot perfectly. It is called being in stroke. Some minds adapt to this more easily than others. That is why we have professional players in every sport. It is their gift.
No one will ever write a book or a system that will teach you to aim a tennis ball, a basketball, or a billiard ball with the same consistency and skill as a pro. That comes with talent, hard work, or a combination of the two. These systems can give a player a head start at an early stage in their development. Teaching them to aim at clearly defined points and noting the effect of throw and squirt are all advanced concepts that would take an average player years to develop on his own.
So, yes. I have no doubt Johnny aims by feel. I think Machine Gun Luc Salvas also does. That's why he shoots so fast to keep from thinking about the shot too much and losing the flow. This skill comes to these two like raising a fork to their mouth at dinner. But they likely started with sound fundamentals at some point. Then they worked and learned. They just learn much quicker than the average pool-playing bear, and they didn't take any wrong turns early on. Both are men of remarkable skill, talent, and intellect. You could say the same for Salvador Dali, Rembrandt, or Quentin Tarantino. You can try to science out the genius in these folks forever, but you won't succeed. God hooked those noggins up to be very very special. To reach their level, you will have to find and develop your own synapse connections. How long this takes will depend on a lot of things, not the least of which is choosing the right sport to go along with your natural skill and abilities.
Okay, it's out to the pool room to line up point X with tangent line B for a planned trajectory to pocket A4 with side spin of 37 clockwise revolutions per second. Silly huh?
www.KryptoArt.com
I always find these conversations regarding the scientific approach to pool very interesting. As an artist, I enjoy watching and studying how and why people do things, and in this modern era, everyone is always eager to find a formula--if you will--on how great people do great things. I understand the quest. We all want to learn the A,B, C steps to shoot and aim just like Johnny, Stevie, or Earl. And a lot of very educated people, many on this AZ Forum, have made great strides in providing this information. But as an analogy, please briefly consider a great sculptor approaching a slab of marble and taking that first chip from the rough stone. A book can tell you to chip away everything that does not look like the subject you are carving, and the book would be correct. But we all know it's not that easy. A great sculptor doesn't have analytical diagrams and measurements in his head like some super computer. His work is from inspiration and talent (be it hard-earned or God given). Yes, the sculptor will use some measuring devices to guide his direction as he proceeds, but most of the finished work will come from special insight within his mind, an innate sense that guides him and miraculously flows complex information from his mind to subtle movements of his hands. Many times, an artist will finish a great masterpiece and wonder how he could have accomplished the work. It is as if someone else worked from within their body to manipulate the chisel.
A great pool player is the same as a great artist. In the beginning, he probably found boundaries through experience or reading systems such as those described. With time and talent, a player will eventually stop the mechanical aspect of applying these systems to every shot and allow his mind to free-flow. Any exceptional player knows the feeling when a billiard shot is locked in. It just is. You can't explain why. It doesn't matter what English you are using or what step one's motion is at. The unconscious mind is powerful enough to account for all of those variables and execute the shot perfectly. It is called being in stroke. Some minds adapt to this more easily than others. That is why we have professional players in every sport. It is their gift.
No one will ever write a book or a system that will teach you to aim a tennis ball, a basketball, or a billiard ball with the same consistency and skill as a pro. That comes with talent, hard work, or a combination of the two. These systems can give a player a head start at an early stage in their development. Teaching them to aim at clearly defined points and noting the effect of throw and squirt are all advanced concepts that would take an average player years to develop on his own.
So, yes. I have no doubt Johnny aims by feel. I think Machine Gun Luc Salvas also does. That's why he shoots so fast to keep from thinking about the shot too much and losing the flow. This skill comes to these two like raising a fork to their mouth at dinner. But they likely started with sound fundamentals at some point. Then they worked and learned. They just learn much quicker than the average pool-playing bear, and they didn't take any wrong turns early on. Both are men of remarkable skill, talent, and intellect. You could say the same for Salvador Dali, Rembrandt, or Quentin Tarantino. You can try to science out the genius in these folks forever, but you won't succeed. God hooked those noggins up to be very very special. To reach their level, you will have to find and develop your own synapse connections. How long this takes will depend on a lot of things, not the least of which is choosing the right sport to go along with your natural skill and abilities.
Okay, it's out to the pool room to line up point X with tangent line B for a planned trajectory to pocket A4 with side spin of 37 clockwise revolutions per second. Silly huh?
www.KryptoArt.com
Nice post and well written....but few paragraph separations.:wink:
I started shooting pool at a bowling alley where there was no age limit while your parents were bowling. There were no instructors just hustlers who didn't feed the fish. There were no spots given so you had to pay your dues - bets and table time. To reduce your losses, you had to learn on your own as soon as possible or quit broke. In time, I started winning at that bowling alley pool room.
Fortunately, there were other bowling alley pool rooms to make money at. Unfortunately, there were also a few bowling alleys like Tropicana and pool halls with better shooters that took your money. Like playing poker, you will eventually have to play better players.
I learned the geometry and physics envolved in shooting pool on my own and by watching the better players. No one asked to learn what I knew, even when I tried to explain things to my friends...they didn't want learn or could not understand.
I took my spacial comprehension talent and knowledge of geometry and became an electro mechanical engineer, got married and started a family. I will retire next year.
20 years ago, I started to play pool again and met an old hustler named Buttermilk. Buttermilk told me that, "You are lucky to be unlucky that you aren't good at pool". In retrospect...he was absolutely right...I am fortunate to have had the choice/skills to become a successful electro mechanical engineer and not suffer as a pool player.
"...Silly, huh?"
"Not for me".:smile:
Last edited:
Just last week I was teaching my daughter how to hold a knife and fork and cut her french toast. I am not sure how long it would take her to figure this out without my instruction. Surely she would get it just by observation and imitation. If she didn't have that and no instruction then who knows if she would ever learn to cut her toast. I am sure that wouldn't stop her from eating it though.
Actually "god" didn't hook up anyone's noggins to be very special other than giving them more drive than other folks. You say it's not possible for science to understand genius but you're wrong because that exactly what science is doing.
Today we have a tool called FMRI or Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. With it we can see how the brain lights up when asked to do tasks. So you can measure the brain activity of "geniuses" and the brains of "common" folk and compare them. Thus we now know that what people want to call natural talent or retardation is often a function of brain chemistry.
Someday it will surely be possible to turn on and turn off traits by direct manipulation of the brain and the chemicals in it. Of course this isn't at all romantic. Absolute buzzkill for the "god given talent" people. But for the common folks who are told all their life that they aren't as good as that famous person it's good news to know that they weren't left behind by god to be a worker bee drone.
So where do systems fit into all this. Well, we have a commonly accepted set of motions for cutting using a knife and fork. With just few variations the systematic approach is what we teach our kids, the one that works every time, without fail. Then those kids eventually either keep the regular way or they develop a slight variation that also works. But they had the developed, tried-and-true method to start with.
Systems to aim, kick, bank, measure tangents, etc... are not any different. They are the basis to start with so that players can leave the cutting-toast functions to the subconscious at some point and focus on the what-do-I-need to do task at hand.
I find that using a system, be that in tooling leather or aiming pool balls is the bedrock that I can always rely on and be creative from. I stand in complete awe of the created works of those who come out with amazing things. But I don't think that those people were born to become brilliant artists or athletes or surgeons. I think that what they were born with is the right brain chemistry that draws them more to the arts or science or both - but that it's opportunity and drive that decides whether they become great or not.
The nature/nurture argument can go on forever and ever and ever. The god/genetics argument even so. Personally I don't think that there is a "god" and if so then not one that exists in any way that we think we understand it. And as one who is NOT a world class pool player I am naturally self-comforted by the thought that I could have been a world class player if I had chosen to go that way and had the drive to really be dedicated to it. I do not at all believe that any able-bodied person of average intelligence is biologically unable to become world class at a sport like pool.
Mass makes class my friend used to say. Meaning simply that the more people doing something means that there will more people who are world class at it. This applies to pool as well and every other sport. Today every little league coach has more knowledge and skill to impart to his 8 year olds about how to play baseball than professional coaches did in the 20s. Consequently average high school players today would have been hailed as amazingly gifted if they were transported back to 1920.
What's the reason for this?
Systems and transfer of knowledge. More people doing it means more people working on how to do it, figuring out all possible methods and techniques, inventing and discovering new ones. Constant improvement.
Taking what was once magical and dissecting it into techniques that anyone can start with so that they can overlay their own "magic" on top of it is what it's all about. It's not about any system making anyone into a champion because by itself a system is merely one of the tools that a person needs on the path to becoming a champion. Without the drive and dedication no one becomes a champion even if they have the best coaches and the best techniques at their disposal.
One could then argue that "god" or nature is the one that gives some people drive while others don't have it. Perhaps, but I think it's more like a birth defect. People have no problem assuming that a birth defect is genetic or biochemical in origin. But when you say that a talent is also genetic or biochemical then oh no, that's god given.
And lastly, the good news is that signs point to our being able to program ourselves or reprogram ourselves. So we aren't stick with whatever talent god supposedly gave us and can pursue and eventually become world class in other fields. Provided we work hard and internalize the systems and methods in those fields of course.
The Fork and Cue Dilemma
Great response JB. And I love your work by the way.
You remind me of a very good friend, a rocket scientist for NASA. He too takes science as his faith, and I respect his choice as he does mine.
I also believe, as you do, that many people can learn and develop into great players. None of us would play if this were not true. The huge field of young stars that has emerged since the advent of the internet is also a testament to this theory.
But back to the essential point. I agree that learning basic parameters from someone else will advance your skill set much faster than trying to learn on your own. I disagree with you that anyone can become a Johnny Archer caliber player. No matter how hard someone works, most will never be able to approach this level of play. It is only natural.
If the word "God" upsets you, or the ideal of creationism is ridiculous to you, that is fine. Again, I respect your right to believe what you wish. But please consider natural evolution theory. Species evolve based on their needs within the natural environment. That is why some of us are naturally faster than others, stronger than others, taller or shorter. Even Einstein has recently been shown to have possessed an extra fold or two in the area of the brain that controls his creative contributions. No matter how much one works or trains, one will never change their "Natural" composition to the extent that someone naturally "Gifted" can. Johnny Archer and other greats in the sport of pool have a special mix of gifts that allow them to excel above all others. No amount of training can take an average man--one without the natural necessary components--and bring him to that level.
Aiming and other skills in pool can be taught--to a point. Then one's natural abilities and unconscious mind will take over. You could probably break everything down into a formula of some kind, but a great mind doesn't usually see it like that. Their approach is more savant like. They see things differently because their "noggins" are wired and connected in a way that makes it easier for them to process the information.
Someone is probably more efficient with a fork than you JB. Their Dad probably taught them the same way you were taught, but their brain and body is set up just a little different than you--a setup that is ideal for fork handling. And no matter what you do, or how hard you work, you will never be the fork handler that they are. And they will never make the beautiful cue cases that you can.
It just is. Science is a ***** or a blessing, depending on your perspective.
Great response JB. And I love your work by the way.
You remind me of a very good friend, a rocket scientist for NASA. He too takes science as his faith, and I respect his choice as he does mine.
I also believe, as you do, that many people can learn and develop into great players. None of us would play if this were not true. The huge field of young stars that has emerged since the advent of the internet is also a testament to this theory.
But back to the essential point. I agree that learning basic parameters from someone else will advance your skill set much faster than trying to learn on your own. I disagree with you that anyone can become a Johnny Archer caliber player. No matter how hard someone works, most will never be able to approach this level of play. It is only natural.
If the word "God" upsets you, or the ideal of creationism is ridiculous to you, that is fine. Again, I respect your right to believe what you wish. But please consider natural evolution theory. Species evolve based on their needs within the natural environment. That is why some of us are naturally faster than others, stronger than others, taller or shorter. Even Einstein has recently been shown to have possessed an extra fold or two in the area of the brain that controls his creative contributions. No matter how much one works or trains, one will never change their "Natural" composition to the extent that someone naturally "Gifted" can. Johnny Archer and other greats in the sport of pool have a special mix of gifts that allow them to excel above all others. No amount of training can take an average man--one without the natural necessary components--and bring him to that level.
Aiming and other skills in pool can be taught--to a point. Then one's natural abilities and unconscious mind will take over. You could probably break everything down into a formula of some kind, but a great mind doesn't usually see it like that. Their approach is more savant like. They see things differently because their "noggins" are wired and connected in a way that makes it easier for them to process the information.
Someone is probably more efficient with a fork than you JB. Their Dad probably taught them the same way you were taught, but their brain and body is set up just a little different than you--a setup that is ideal for fork handling. And no matter what you do, or how hard you work, you will never be the fork handler that they are. And they will never make the beautiful cue cases that you can.
It just is. Science is a ***** or a blessing, depending on your perspective.
Do you know why I, or better said I and my team, make pretty cases?
Not because I was born to be a case maker. I started making cue cases when I was 22 years old with no formal training and that lack of training cost me quite a bit of time but it also put me on a path of discovery that has led me to figure out new ways to do things. Although I didn't formally apprentice with anyone I have and continue to study leather working and sewing techniques. I am sure that I study them much deeper and harder than most of my colleagues I think. I study cases of all kinds and containers of all kinds looking for methods that I can adapt to our work.
This isn't because I was born to be a cue case maker, it's because I am applying my drive to learn everything I can about what I am working on. If I had gone on to become an attorney as I planned to do then I am sure I would have been a successful one.
I was a springboard diver in school and a professional high diver after high school. I was never great because I preferred to play pool while my teammates worked out and ran laps and stretched. Oh I loved to show off and do the impressive dive tricks and motivated myself enough to learn them - but they weren't pretty or graceful - just enough to impress the people at the local pool and enough to get me work with high diving shows. I enjoyed the work but it wasn't my passion. In fact I don't even know what my passion is really but I do know this, the more I train the better I get.
Pool, diving, case making, it's all about training and not talent. People have said Greg Louganis was the greatest diver ever. Do you know the difference between Greg Louganis and every other diver of his era?
Greg Louganis was a dancer, trained in ballet. He also did gymnastics since he was three. People often either don't know or conveniently forget this about him when they describe him as the most naturally gifted diver ever. Tiger Woods began golf when he was three. Mozart began music lessons when he was four, the son of a famous music teacher and composer.
The word "God" doesn't upset me. The idea that God bestows talent does. The idea that God "makes" some people smart, some stupid, some handicapped, and some into pro pool players is silly to me. If there is a God and he is handing out talents then I guess it's all prearranged and why bother. The way I understand the Christian god's instructions is that we have freedom to choose our own destinies and that includes what we pursue.
To bring this back to the thread on one of the TAR podcasts the question was is is talent or training. Bustamante said it's training and desire. Archer said it's talent and that he can't train his way to hitting balls like Tiger Woods. But to that I say did you ever try? What if Johnny had started out with golf at age three?
I know from a personal standpoint that the more I train the better I get. I like to gamble at pool and play in tournaments. Last year I started going to a coach to fix my stroke which had gotten horrible. I worked on it for several hours a week developing muscles that hadn't been used consistently in a long time. The result was more wins gambling and better tournament results.
To the people who say you can't train your way to the pros if you don't have the talent I say show me where you tried. Show me anyone who quit their job at 35 and spent all their time training to become a pro pool player who stuck with it for five years or more who didn't reach world class level. You can't.
But I can show you people who took up sports late in life and became world class in their disciplines. I can show you academics who took up entirely new fields who became world class. Artists who became world class after having had successful careers in other fields. Are these people simply more gifted or do they simply have more drive?
Now, I will certainly agree with you that if one person is born with the brain chemistry that makes them lackluster and lazy and another person is industrious and clever then it's possibly evolution at work although you can't really see evolution generationally in humans. But I will say that of course some people ARE better at sports than others. Absolutely some people have better hand-eye coordination out of the gate.
That gives those people a head start when both start from zero. But a head start is not a lead forever.
The proof here is an educational tool called the Khan Academy. This is a new way to educate where children learn at their own pace by doing tasks that move them to each level. What they found out was that kids who were seen as "gifted" in the regular school system often raced ahead on the easy material and then faltered on the tougher material while kids who weren't perceived to be as smart went slower on the easy material and then went faster on the tougher material because they had more deeply absorbed the foundations needed for the harder material. So the "dumb" kids not only caught up to the "smart" ones they actually passed them. And in traditional one-size-fits-all educational settings the quicker kids were lavished with praise for being gifted and talented while the slower kids were not.
And THIS is my fundamental problem with the natural talent argument and the idea that "most" people could never become professional pool players because they lack the talent for it. I disagree with this for two reasons, the science backs me up so far and because of the game show that took ordinary people and trained them in a profession for a month and then tested them in front of a panel of experts to see if the experts believed that the person was really a professional or not. Almost every contestant was able to learn a new trade in one month's time convincingly enough to fool the experts.
I sincerely believe that humans are intelligent organisms who are highly adaptable to our environment. What makes us special is that we shape our environment as much as we are shaped by it. I don't believe that God or nature puts us into boxes that we are forever bound to. Other than our skin color and sex we are not born with anything that we can't change. And now even changing your sex is possible.
I talked with Johhny in China. I specifically asked him about how he aims and he told me. It's not feel. BUT he doesn't think about it overtly when he is playing he simply does it as an automatic motion now. When he approaches the table he is following a routine that he has done a million times. Where feel comes in for him is simply making sure that his bridge is solid and that he is comfortable enough to pull the trigger.
But more importantly Johnny is a student of the game and open to other techniques. He understands that not everyone does things the same way to get to the same result. In other words everyone is doing what feels right for them.
True that.
I was never interested in and therefore not good at the math that is behind physics, chemistry, calculus and philosophy, so I quit those subjects and took up art that I could ace...until I found out that it doesn't pay unless you are the best. I did however understand the concepts and relationships behind these studies but as I said...not the math that proves them.
As I said, I can see things in 3D in my mind and can convert 2D engineering drawings into 3D and assemble the detail parts into assemblies and visa versa in my mind. During peer reviews of my product designs, I observed that many of my peers and managers couldn't visualize these parts as assemblies unless I offered isometric views of the parts and assemblies. Even still, some would just shake theeir heads and walk away.
When we create products for sale, we must convince our customers that what we offer is viable. We now use Pro-E a 3D CAD tool to create the detail models and assemble them kinematically and spin them 360 degrees to accelerate the appreciation of our product concept. I learned how to articulate the supporting data that we were offering while studying art...where you must defend your artwork with convincing discriptive words.
I have mentored many young engineers how to create the detail drawings and assemble them into assemblies in Pro-E. The young engineers learn this CAD tool in college, but lack the the knowledge to design a product...my job is to teach them the elements of good design. Some have excelled and others can not even after years of mentoring be me and others. It'sl not about their desire to learn, but more that they lack the ability to visualize, accept, study, retain and apply design elements. For those that can't design, we give them other tasks like documenting change papers, manufacturing support etc., or make them managers.:wink:
This is analogous to playing and excelling at pool or not.
Back to the math behind my physical designs, I have the best structural and thermal experts validate them with the underlying math and present that with CAD tool outputs like NASTRAN and CINDA. Most engineers can't compete with these tools on paper (what I didn't like in College).
There is math and equations that describes the many elements of pool, but most shooters don't or can't think about them while shooting...even the best...nor is it necessary. What is necessary is to visualize, retain and recall the physics....shot after shot.:thumbup:
Unless your stroke and speed control and...and...gets in the way.
Thanks for posting.:thumbup:
God vs Evolution
Chuck Wepner(the Real 'Rocky') vs Muhammad Ali
Krypto & John, you both have some good points. However I think that different secondary subject matters have come up. The point of my bringing up Wepner / Ali is that on certain points one of you is quite possibly correct & on other points the other one of you is quite possibly correct. God & science can co-exist. If God does exist & I believe that he does, then it is He that created what the science is explainig. Mathematics is a man made science. It is the science that we use to 'explain' the physics, etc.
I think everyone would agree that Ali by far is the more genetically 'naturally' talented athlete & boxer when compared to Chuch Wepner. But Ali could not overcome 'something', an 'immesurable' that Wepner had, at least on that day.
Perhaps we all start out at different levels, natural talent wise, but there are 'immesurabales' that can allow one to catch up & perhaps even surpass the more naturally talented individual. (Maybe they too are gifts even bestowed later in life)
The world is full of naturally talented failures & also full of over achieving success stories.
Even Charles Darwin prescribed to Chrstianity toward the end of his life & it has been said, although disputed by some, that he said, 'To suppose that the human eye in all of its' iminitable contrivances...could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. It is his wife that says that he said this. He said other things to other people & he feared for his salvation for having denied the existence of God.
For me, I would rather believe in God & be wrong, rather than deny the existence of God & be wrong.
My pool related point is that while some have a better aptitude for what it takes to play pool very well others with less aptitude can certainly get to the level of being competetive with that individual & once to that point, anything is possible in any given match.
I believe that the human body when connected to the human brain & mind & 'heart' is an amazing complexity with amazing potential, regardless of whether it has evolved or was created & the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Just my 7 cent cost nickel's worth.
Best Wishes to All,
Chuck Wepner(the Real 'Rocky') vs Muhammad Ali
Krypto & John, you both have some good points. However I think that different secondary subject matters have come up. The point of my bringing up Wepner / Ali is that on certain points one of you is quite possibly correct & on other points the other one of you is quite possibly correct. God & science can co-exist. If God does exist & I believe that he does, then it is He that created what the science is explainig. Mathematics is a man made science. It is the science that we use to 'explain' the physics, etc.
I think everyone would agree that Ali by far is the more genetically 'naturally' talented athlete & boxer when compared to Chuch Wepner. But Ali could not overcome 'something', an 'immesurable' that Wepner had, at least on that day.
Perhaps we all start out at different levels, natural talent wise, but there are 'immesurabales' that can allow one to catch up & perhaps even surpass the more naturally talented individual. (Maybe they too are gifts even bestowed later in life)
The world is full of naturally talented failures & also full of over achieving success stories.
Even Charles Darwin prescribed to Chrstianity toward the end of his life & it has been said, although disputed by some, that he said, 'To suppose that the human eye in all of its' iminitable contrivances...could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. It is his wife that says that he said this. He said other things to other people & he feared for his salvation for having denied the existence of God.
For me, I would rather believe in God & be wrong, rather than deny the existence of God & be wrong.
My pool related point is that while some have a better aptitude for what it takes to play pool very well others with less aptitude can certainly get to the level of being competetive with that individual & once to that point, anything is possible in any given match.
I believe that the human body when connected to the human brain & mind & 'heart' is an amazing complexity with amazing potential, regardless of whether it has evolved or was created & the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Just my 7 cent cost nickel's worth.
Best Wishes to All,
Last edited:
The inability to do a required task can be either a physical limitation or a lack of desire even if desire is outwardly expressed. Just because someone tells you that they really want to learn something does not mean that they really do. People often say that they want something to please others, to keep a job, for social acceptance, not to appear stupid, etc...but inside they don't really want it and so they actually have no drive to learn it.
When I used to tell me my mom I couldn't do something she would fire back "can't or won't?". Moms know what science is just now able to explain.
"What would happen if you could?"
I was taught when you hear or say the word "can't" there's two constuctive questions - "What would happen if you could?" {do what you say you can't}, and "What's preventing you from doing it?" {what you say you can't do}
This has been valuable information in helping myself and others get though the dreaded "can't syndrome", which is what is often referred to as "the victim mode." :thumbup:
I was taught when you hear or say the word "can't" there's two constuctive questions - "What would happen if you could?" {do what you say you can't}, and "What's preventing you from doing it?" {what you say you can't do}
This has been valuable information in helping myself and others get though the dreaded "can't syndrome", which is what is often referred to as "the victim mode." :thumbup: