The Best Advice You're Ever Likely To Get
- Thread starter jjohnson
- Start date
So you always do whats best for yourself and disregard what effect it could have on others..?Mymy...
Of course it reads like a statement.
It is the original post that got the thread started.
Sounds good.
Yes. "sending a message to serious players."
Smug? How so?
A serious player by definition is serious.
This is serious advice.
This is serious advice for serious players.
This is serious advice for serious players who want to get even more serious.
Seriously.
Can't argue with that.
You still giving advice? Incidentally, you mention Cole Dickson a lot. Are you relaying some Cole Dickson wisdom or just an un-credited distillation?
You probably noticed that the OP does not mention anything about shape/position play.
That is because it is specifically talking about potting balls.
Now, position is an advanced topic.
Position determines the shot: what object ball, pocket, path, and the final spot position.
It is inclusive: the entire event from stepping up to the table to releasing the cue ball.
Just because you make the ball doesn't mean you made the shot.
That is because it is specifically talking about potting balls.
Now, position is an advanced topic.
Position determines the shot: what object ball, pocket, path, and the final spot position.
It is inclusive: the entire event from stepping up to the table to releasing the cue ball.
Just because you make the ball doesn't mean you made the shot.
Hence CPG. Alignment established. Focus on CBControl.
Cole told me face to face, just me: "I like beating guys who use lots of english."
Let us know if you have any insight as to what he meant.
If you never saw him shoot in his prime, around 1969, you are at a disadvantage.
And if he never confided in you, you are in even less of a position.
If you have no clue of his personality on and off the table, even less still.
I can't claim to read his mind.
But I have a mind of my own.
And I can offer a reasonable assessment of any conclusion I may arrive at.
You can take it or leave it.
There has got to be a few in this forum that have and can offer insight to Cole's personality and intelligence.
Unfortunately, I haven't seen Earl, Alex, Jason, etc. and their ilk on this forum so we can't hear about what they
may think about how important their own position skills are. But we have seen it. And we know that over time,
sooner or later, they will grind down most opponents with their superior position play. And they won't tell you or say anything but
they will be happy to take your cash and enjoy every minute doing so. But maybe I'm just a stupid BSer to think I have an insight into
the minds of champions. You know, the guys with all your money sticking out of their pockets. And certainly, of course, hating every minute of it.
You seem very defensive for an "authority".
Used to knock 'em around with a guy called himself Vince. Home girl (I had no reason to mistrust the bunch) said he was her brother. Anyway he'd come and go and show up again and one of the last times he ran out a couple racks of 8 ball I recall. He played minimal movement - looked like just natural stuff, long shots etc... He mentioned he won some tournament. There was always some tournament going on so I never gave it a second thought. He faded into memory as Vince. Anyway last year or so, somebody posted Johnston City photos ( I can't recall the name - he won the thing sorry) The pics looked like photoshops but the Cole Dickson guy looked like Vince as stand in. Anyway, a year and couple more pictures later, the Cole guy looks even more like Vince. So does Greg Cantrall for that matter so that and there it stands. Don't really care. Learned actual pool since then. //
Let me explain why perfecting these 5 steps listed in the OP are so important by example.
You may not be able to perfect each one, but maybe you can rely on your abilities to get close, say,
90%. That's pretty good. So if we multiply each step at 90% each: .9 x .9 x .9 x .9 x .9 = 0.59.
So the odds of you making the shot is 59%. If we use only 80% the odds drop to 33%. Let's
go the other way. 95% -> 77%. Iffy. Even if you can reduce your degrees of freedom by a mere
.01% to .99% on each requisite task, near perfect, the odds of you making the shot is still only 95%.
I'd make that even money bet. If I am consistent on every shot, I can probably beat most opponents.
So this is the reality you are faced with. So, will shooting a million balls get you there? It's a lot of
work just to find out.
But I can minimize, not eliminate, this effort through efficiency. Here are two relatively difficult shots.
I will come up with a couple more later. My approach is to perfect a step by step technique to accomplish
these 5 requisite tasks not on only these two shots, but perfecting this technique so it can be used on all
shots. Keep in mind: the ultimate goal is to go from this "digital" step by step process to an "analog"
flowing technique. Then finally from this "cerebral" technique to a "feel" technique.
What is the fundamental difficulty of making a shot with this technique? It is learning the step by step technique.
Even though there are only 5 requisite tasks to this process, each one has one or more boxes that have to be
checked off before you can go on to the next step. It is manageable but it is like anything else, you have to
want to learn it: intent. Pay attention: focus on the task. Don't accept close enough or second best: judgement.
Fight for it, suck it up: discipline.
These 2 shots are not extreme. They are just tough. And all the more so to make 6 times in a row to demonstrate
a certain mastery of the technique. And to make every time? Well, let's just take first things first. The 1-ball is in
the middle of the rail and off the rail by 2.25 inches. The cue ball is at the second diamond about 6 inches off the
cushion. The 2-ball is on the rail at the second diamond and the cue ball is at the first diamond from the left pocket
and 1 inch off the rail. Both are center cue ball hit cut shots. The table is a 9 footer.
Again, I am not teaching the technique. I don't intend to. At least not as of now. I just intend to demonstrate it.
Here are the two photos. I will post a video you can go to very soon to watch the shots being made. And I intend
to follow up demonstrating making these two shots 6 times or more in a row. I don't doubt that some of you can
already make these two shots. And if you can make them six times in a row then wait for the rest of us to catch up.
Great!
By the way, I can make these shots frequently but not anywhere consistently. I only practiced the 1-ball shot today
and made it in the pocket 12 times out of 80 attempts. And it is because I have not mastered the 5-step process.
But when I do correctly complete the precise process I make the shot every time. So 12 out of 80 is only 15% of the
time. It's like dancing. It takes time to learn the steps but once you do you can dance!
Later...
You may not be able to perfect each one, but maybe you can rely on your abilities to get close, say,
90%. That's pretty good. So if we multiply each step at 90% each: .9 x .9 x .9 x .9 x .9 = 0.59.
So the odds of you making the shot is 59%. If we use only 80% the odds drop to 33%. Let's
go the other way. 95% -> 77%. Iffy. Even if you can reduce your degrees of freedom by a mere
.01% to .99% on each requisite task, near perfect, the odds of you making the shot is still only 95%.
I'd make that even money bet. If I am consistent on every shot, I can probably beat most opponents.
So this is the reality you are faced with. So, will shooting a million balls get you there? It's a lot of
work just to find out.
But I can minimize, not eliminate, this effort through efficiency. Here are two relatively difficult shots.
I will come up with a couple more later. My approach is to perfect a step by step technique to accomplish
these 5 requisite tasks not on only these two shots, but perfecting this technique so it can be used on all
shots. Keep in mind: the ultimate goal is to go from this "digital" step by step process to an "analog"
flowing technique. Then finally from this "cerebral" technique to a "feel" technique.
What is the fundamental difficulty of making a shot with this technique? It is learning the step by step technique.
Even though there are only 5 requisite tasks to this process, each one has one or more boxes that have to be
checked off before you can go on to the next step. It is manageable but it is like anything else, you have to
want to learn it: intent. Pay attention: focus on the task. Don't accept close enough or second best: judgement.
Fight for it, suck it up: discipline.
These 2 shots are not extreme. They are just tough. And all the more so to make 6 times in a row to demonstrate
a certain mastery of the technique. And to make every time? Well, let's just take first things first. The 1-ball is in
the middle of the rail and off the rail by 2.25 inches. The cue ball is at the second diamond about 6 inches off the
cushion. The 2-ball is on the rail at the second diamond and the cue ball is at the first diamond from the left pocket
and 1 inch off the rail. Both are center cue ball hit cut shots. The table is a 9 footer.
Again, I am not teaching the technique. I don't intend to. At least not as of now. I just intend to demonstrate it.
Here are the two photos. I will post a video you can go to very soon to watch the shots being made. And I intend
to follow up demonstrating making these two shots 6 times or more in a row. I don't doubt that some of you can
already make these two shots. And if you can make them six times in a row then wait for the rest of us to catch up.
Great!
By the way, I can make these shots frequently but not anywhere consistently. I only practiced the 1-ball shot today
and made it in the pocket 12 times out of 80 attempts. And it is because I have not mastered the 5-step process.
But when I do correctly complete the precise process I make the shot every time. So 12 out of 80 is only 15% of the
time. It's like dancing. It takes time to learn the steps but once you do you can dance!
Later...
Attachments
Pic 1
This shot is best served shooting the tangent line as if running the CB for a billiard.
Pic 2
This one is extremely table dependent. Cloth condition, rail groove, rail boing etc...
If it comes up with good cover, have at it. Otherwise avoid and practice with closer CB and/or pocket.
Looking forward to the viddy.
This shot is best served shooting the tangent line as if running the CB for a billiard.
Pic 2
This one is extremely table dependent. Cloth condition, rail groove, rail boing etc...
If it comes up with good cover, have at it. Otherwise avoid and practice with closer CB and/or pocket.
Looking forward to the viddy.
L.S. Dennis
Well-known member
Yeah I knew Sax and Evelyn she was a pretty good woman player for the times but was no match for Dorothy. I remember going out for breakfast with Sax at about 2 in the morning after he closed the pool hall one night. As luck would have it a fight broke out all around us while we were eating that night/morning.
Attachments
L.S. Dennis
Well-known member
Lou, the room in Redwood City that Dee Hulse ran was called 'Executive Billiards' I used to see Nick Varner hanging out there when he and his wife were in town to visit her parents.
Right!
I rarely made it up thataway. My ant trail included Billiard Palacade, Town & Country, Van's, Familly Billiards, the USF Student Union, a small place that existed for just a while out in the Sunset District, and of course the Palace and Cochran's. There were also a couple of nice billiard rooms at Castle Lanes and Downtown Bowl.
As I recall Annagoni hung out at the Carousel across the Bay. My crew would occassionally venture out that way but not tooo often.
Lou Figueroa