The Mathematical Theorem Behind Poolology

Boxcar

Banned
There was no fancy dance in my first reply. :wink:

Almost every shot is a shot that can and has been missed, even by the best players out there.

There really isn't a single "secret" that explains how a simple straight in shot can be missed. Lack of practice fits most players. But for those who have already developed excellent ball pocketing skills, those who've already put in the practice time needed to develop and tune those skills, it could be a combination of one or more other "secrets" as to why they might miss an easy shot.

I'm talking about focus, confidence, emotional control, stress, etc... I don't care who it is, if the player doesn't have a solid handle on these things, it's likely they'll find themselves missing that occasional easy shot every once in a while, or stringing a bunch of misses together. I've been there. If the mind isn't right, pool is extra tough.

So lack of practice isn't why a good player might miss an easy straight in. That little secret is for less experienced players that haven't quite developed consistent mechanics and aiming skills yet. More often than not, and this is no secret, the reason better players miss easy shots sometimes has more to do with what's cluttering their mind than it has to do with mechanics or specific aiming/ball-pocketing abilities. This game requires focus on every shot, regardless of difficulty. So if there is any secret at all...that's it.

You are right!

Skinner understood the function of "shaping." Our humanity becomes the obvious explanation for failing at anything. One doesn't need to be a wordsmith to grasp the concept of failure.

When Skinner talked about creating an environment where he could "reward successive approximations of the desired behavior," he wasn't talking about rewarding just the target. So, how do we, as both the teacher and the student, first learn how to reward that which we know to be good, and then learn to receive the blessing of the reward and use the reinforcement to continually improve. Hit a million balls...be Tiger Woods...be Beethoven...commit to excellence? Or just allow nature to take its course?

What if the act of missing a simple shot is more complicated than the myriad excuses we use to explain it. "We are not robots" is a good excuse. I'm talking about reverse engineering failure to reduce frequency. It's a straight in shot.
 
Last edited:

Dan White

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What if the act of missing a simple shot is more complicated than the myriad excuses we use to explain it. "We are not robots" is a good excuse. I'm talking about reverse engineering failure to reduce frequency. It's a straight in shot.

Interesting concept, yet still a bit cryptic. Can you give some examples of reverse engineering failure?
 

Boxcar

Banned
Interesting concept, yet still a bit cryptic. Can you give some examples of reverse engineering failure?

Dan,

I appreciate your faith in me, but I'm not a teacher, just a student.

I love the phrase "reverse engineering." I like to toss it around and make it work in places where I want it to work. For now, I'll think it means learning how and understanding how something works so I can replicate or reproduce it.

"The Straight-In Shot." You have the patience of a teacher. How would you teach a student to always make a straight in shot?
 

straightline

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
We the mungkeez of the planet learn by copying. I can't understand how you can teach a performance genre; an analog of consequences, with descriptive language.
 

Boxcar

Banned
I am remiss. Brian, thank you for posting the excellent video in your first post in this thread. I admire your work!

Dan, thank you for assembling your excellent video on the use of laser lighting to instruct alignment.

When Brian identified "lack of practice" and Dan identified "improper alignment" as explanations for missing straight-in shots, it would seem that the "case" might well be closed. Practice and improved alignment, when properly exercised, will almost invariably reduce failure. Both explanations, however, are still restatements of our humanity.

It's best to just leave it there. Maybe our humanity is the lowest common denominator.

I think I'm still trying to find that infinitesimal particle that explains infinity. Thanks for humoring me. I'll be 75 in a month or so. It's getting harder and harder to shoot my age.
 

BC21

Poolology
Gold Member
Silver Member
I am remiss. Brian, thank you for posting the excellent video in your first post in this thread. I admire your work!

Dan, thank you for assembling your excellent video on the use of laser lighting to instruct alignment.

When Brian identified "lack of practice" and Dan identified "improper alignment" as explanations for missing straight-in shots, it would seem that the "case" might well be closed. Practice and improved alignment, when properly exercised, will almost invariably reduce failure. Both explanations, however, are still restatements of our humanity.

It's best to just leave it there. Maybe our humanity is the lowest common denominator.

I think I'm still trying to find that infinitesimal particle that explains infinity. Thanks for humoring me. I'll be 75 in a month or so. It's getting harder and harder to shoot my age.

I hope I'm still playing pool at 75! Keep it up Mr Boxcar.
 

Dan White

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I am remiss. Brian, thank you for posting the excellent video in your first post in this thread. I admire your work!

Dan, thank you for assembling your excellent video on the use of laser lighting to instruct alignment.

When Brian identified "lack of practice" and Dan identified "improper alignment" as explanations for missing straight-in shots, it would seem that the "case" might well be closed. Practice and improved alignment, when properly exercised, will almost invariably reduce failure. Both explanations, however, are still restatements of our humanity.

It's best to just leave it there. Maybe our humanity is the lowest common denominator.

I think I'm still trying to find that infinitesimal particle that explains infinity. Thanks for humoring me. I'll be 75 in a month or so. It's getting harder and harder to shoot my age.

I don't think you can ever guarantee success 100% of the time even when you do everything "right." I'm 55 and I think in recent years I've developed a small case of the yips. Putting in golf becomes more difficult for older pro's because of this. My pool hasn't really suffered because I'm not at a pro level, but my point is that sometimes the brain will misfire and throw the cue off line a bit. Maybe the yips isn't it exactly, but more like getting your arm warmed up? So you can have perfect mechanics yet misfire due to "humanity" including the pressure of competition, yips, stress and so on.

OTOH, if that is the only thing causing a miss then you're doing pretty well!
 

Leigh

Registered
I love poolology. It gave me confidence (as a newbie)to commit to the shot and now aiming is getting automatic. I still double-check with the Poolology system on the tough shots. I am grateful this book was written, and I am grateful I wasn't turned off by that initial diagram of the zones. I thought it was going to be complicated - it's easy. I really only use poolology for zones A and B as that is what works best for me. I have already written the author a private thank you, but I wanted to give him some public support.
Thanks, Brian!
-Leigh
 

Big C

Deep in the heart of TX.
Silver Member
I've read and heard some ignorant comments over the last 3 years concerning the "complicated" math with Poolology. Here's a video showing how the system was created, or at least showing the mathematical theorem that lead to the creation of the system.

A combination of math and physical experimentation was used to design and analyze system numbers, but when it comes to using the system there is no complicated math to perform, unless dividing double digit numbers in half is considered "complicated" for you.

Anyway, for those interested in how a simple mathematical approach was used to create a more advanced fractional aiming system, here it is....

Poolology and the Inscribed Angle Theorem
Thanks for you contributions. This is one of those things i wish I knew 40 years ago. I just ordered your book. Looking forward to it.
 

BC21

Poolology
Gold Member
Silver Member
I love poolology. It gave me confidence (as a newbie)to commit to the shot and now aiming is getting automatic. I still double-check with the Poolology system on the tough shots. I am grateful this book was written, and I am grateful I wasn't turned off by that initial diagram of the zones. I thought it was going to be complicated - it's easy. I really only use poolology for zones A and B as that is what works best for me. I have already written the author a private thank you, but I wanted to give him some public support.
Thanks, Brian!
-Leigh
Thank you!šŸ˜Š
 
Top