Turning Stone no longer a ranking event.

nathandumoulin said:
So the only thing that makes Efren the best player to ever wield a cue is the fact that he's hit more balls than everyone else? What about Keith? Also the product of only practice?

If that's the case, than try explaining the phenomenon that is Alex Pagulayan. He plays a few times a year now, and yet still shows up to the occasional event and destroys everyone with ease.

Come on Jam....:eek:

I agree with most of what you say, but this statement is completely disrespectful to the professional players. It's actually part of why our game struggles. The league players refuse to respect the pros simply because they have that bullshit "I could be just as good if I tried harder" mentality.

Again, no disrespect intended. :)
Click to expand...
Good book out on that "Talent is Overrated".... well worth the read.

It is about the amount of quality practice not "born with it talent" or "absolute number of repetitions "
 
joelpope said:
Good book out on that "Talent is Overrated".... well worth the read.

It is about the amount of quality practice not "born with it talent" or "absolute number of repetitions "
Click to expand...

Clearly practice factors into the equation. Dedication goes a long way, but saying any average joe can be a world champion is just....

Even having the mental strength to endure the necessary amount of practice and training is something that requires talent in itself.
 
nathandumoulin said:
So the only thing that makes Efren the best player to ever wield a cue is the fact that he's hit more balls than everyone else? What about Keith? Also the product of only practice?

If that's the case, than try explaining the phenomenon that is Alex Pagulayan. He plays a few times a year now, and yet still shows up to the occasional event and destroys everyone with ease.

Come on Jam....:eek:

I agree with most of what you say, but this statement is completely disrespectful to the professional players. It's actually part of why our game struggles. The league players refuse to respect the pros simply because they have that bullshit "I could be just as good if I tried harder" mentality.

Again, no disrespect intended. :)
Click to expand...

No disrespect received on my end. Thanks for your kind reply. :smile:

Let me elaborate for you in case my previous post was unclear. :o

Efren, Keith, Alex, and every single pro player I know who has achieved success in pool hit MILLIONS and MILLIONS of balls before they realized mastery of pocket billiards. It's how long they held their streaks that separates the lions from the lambs.

Keith, as an example, hadn't hit a ball in over a month when he came in third place at the 2003 U.S. Open. Alex might not hit a ball in a year and still run racks. I'd imagine if Efren didn't pick up a cue in a year, he'd have no problem competing in any tournament he stepped foot in.

The league players are league players because they don't place pool high on their priority list. Rather, they enjoy pool recreationally as a game. They don't hit thousands of balls every day like pro players do.

Pro players place pool high on their priority list, which is why they do hit balls on a daily basis.

After you get 10 million balls under your belt, well, I don't think you'd have much trouble remembering how to shoot pool.

And, yes, Keith, Efren, Alex, Earl, Rodney, Johnny, Mika, Allen Hopkins, Nick Varner, Mike Sigel, Shannon Daulton, Grady Mathews, Weenie Beenie, Bugs, Billy Incardona, Ginky, John Schmidt, Freddy the Beard, Buddy Hall, Jose Parica, Dave Matlock, James Walden, Shane Van Boening, Dennis Hatch, just to name a few, got there because of practicing over and over and over and over again, hitting ball after ball after ball after ball. Practice, in fact, is exactly how they rose in the pool ranks.

Every serious-minded player I've ever seen practices. Before their tournament matches, you can usually see them practicing by themselves, hoping to get acclimated to the equipment and loosen up.

League players do not put in this kind of effort; thus, the reason for my post. I hope this explains it better. I'm not sure why you feel I was being disrespectful, but I hope this post provides more clarity in what I was trying to say. :)
 
Last edited:
nathandumoulin said:
Clearly practice factors into the equation. Dedication goes a long way, but saying any average joe can be a world champion is just....

Even having the mental strength to endure the necessary amount of practice and training is something that requires talent in itself.
Click to expand...

I think I'd boil it down to the power of positive thinking. If you want something -- ANYTHING -- bad enough, you can get it. Talent is one thing, but ambition, desire, and drive is another.

Talent is not the only prerequisite for playing pool. Some may learn faster than others.

But you do need the dedication and mental strength, as you so rightly point out, in order to practice the same shots a thousand times before you master it. :wink:
 
JAM said:
After you get 10 million balls under your belt, well, I don't think you'd have much trouble remembering how to shoot pool.

And, yes, Keith, Efren, Alex, Earl, Rodney, Johnny, Mika, Allen Hopkins, Nick Varner, Mike Sigel, Shannon Daulton, Grady Mathews, Weenie Beenie, Bugs, Billy Incardona, Ginky, John Schmidt, Freddy the Beard, Buddy Hall, Jose Parica, Dave Matlock, James Walden, Shane Van Boening, Dennis Hatch, just to name a few, got there because of practicing over and over and over and over again, hitting ball after ball after ball after ball. Practice, in fact, is exactly how they rose in the pool ranks.
Click to expand...

So what about Wu? He won a WPC at the age of 16. I guarantee there are millions of amateurs out there who had hit more balls than he had when he won the title.

Anyway, I do see what you're saying, and you make a valid point. I simply disagree. Talent is crucial, and even if it weren't, very few average joe's have the mental conditioning necessary to put in the hours and dedication necessary to achieve a world class level of play.

That's my 2 cents. I'll let this thread get back on topic now. :p
 
nathandumoulin said:
So what about Wu? He won a WPC at the age of 16. I guarantee there are millions of amateurs out there who had hit more balls than he had when he won the title.

Anyway, I do see what you're saying, and you make a valid point. I simply disagree. Talent is crucial, and even if it weren't, very few average joe's have the mental conditioning necessary to put in the hours and dedication necessary to achieve a world class level of play.

That's my 2 cents. I'll let this thread get back on topic now. :p
Click to expand...

I see Nathans point and felt exactly as he does until I read the book.. Not to say that talent does not help but the book points out some very specific studies of athletes, chess champions, musical phenoms etc.. and one thing they all had in common was a ton of hard work and very strong instruction from a very, very early age.

Unless you have taken the time to read the book, you just are not going to understand.. I was in the exact same boat until I read it myself, it really enlightened me.. YMMV

Peace, JoeyK
 
MOJOE said:
I see Nathans point and felt exactly as he does until I read the book.. Not to say that talent does not help but the book points out some very specific studies of athletes, chess champions, musical phenoms etc.. and one thing they all had in common was a ton of hard work and very strong instruction from a very, very early age.

Unless you have taken the time to read the book, you just are not going to understand.. I was in the exact same boat until I read it myself, it really enlightened me.. YMMV

Peace, JoeyK
Click to expand...

What book is that? I don't remember covering that in Pool Wars. :)
 
Nathan and Jam have just about got it covered now. Practice and natural talent are the things that will get you to the top. They both go a long way. One without the other maybe enough to get you by but you will not reach your full potenial.

I have know some with fantastic natural ability. They realized there is a better way before the bug got to bite them. One in paticular has been a music teacher at Berkley School Of Music in Boston for 35 years now. He started there after he graduated from that same school. We grew up in the same small city here in upstate NY and played pool at the local room. He was a natch ! :cool:
 
nathandumoulin said:
Clearly practice factors into the equation. Dedication goes a long way, but saying any average joe can be a world champion is just....

Even having the mental strength to endure the necessary amount of practice and training is something that requires talent in itself.
Click to expand...
I know, you would think so.... read the book... a lot of scientific research indicates otherwise

book also teaches you about practice to improve versus practice to stay the same
 
nathandumoulin said:
I posted the following in another thread. I received a request to start a dedicated thread regarding to the topic in hopes of generating an answer to the question. My post read as follows:



Jason Robichaud suggested that it could be a result of Johhny's players association demanding that prize money be put in holding prior to the event. Can anyone confirm this suspicion?

UPDATE: Az's own Jerry & Mike have both confirmed that future Turning Stone events have NOT been removed from the BCA rankings.
Click to expand...


I looked at some of the responses but couldn't find a clear answer to your questions.

Are some of the players giving Zuglan a hard time or is it just a rumor? I do know there are sour grapes from some of the men because of the women getting the ESPN deal. Negotiating from a position of weakness rarely produces good results.
 
"Talent is Overrated" (a book)

another interesting finding in the research referenced in the book is that doing it "a lot" can actually lead to worse performance....

hitting 10,000,000 balls won't make you Reyes...


another is that "good practice" is hard to do for more than an hour or an hour and a half at a time
 
joelpope said:
I know, you would think so.... read the book... a lot of scientific research indicates otherwise

book also teaches you about practice to improve versus practice to stay the same
Click to expand...

So if one talented person trains the same as a person without talent, both will achieve the same level of skill. I just can't see how this could be true, regardless of statistics.

It sounds like its saying that proper training without talent can out perform poor training with talent....which is a useless argument in my books.

Statistics can be shifted and interpreted in different ways. Talent however continues to prove itself to me in my own life on a daily basis. I see it everywhere.

Can you attempt to summarize, as I'm guessing that the book somehow steps around this logic. Clearly I need to read this book to understand, but I'd like to get a good general idea of how the author came to this conclusion....
 
Pool is like anything else you want to be good at/make money at/be the best at. People that want to be actors go to acting school and hang with the best actors they can. Want to be a doctor...go to the best med school you can, then intern at the best Hospital you can. Just about every top US pool player started young, had good players around them, practiced for hour and hours a day, most had free table time in some way, watch and play players better than you until you can't find anyone better than you in your city, then go on the road. You have to want something bad and make a lot of sacrefices to be the best at anything. Ask the ten top pros in the US and I bet that was their road map to the top. Johnnyt
 
nathandumoulin said:
So if one talented person trains the same as a person without talent, both will achieve the same level of skill. I just can't see how this could be true, regardless of statistics.

It sounds like its saying that proper training without talent can out perform poor training with talent....which is a useless argument in my books.

Statistics can be shifted and interpreted in different ways. Talent however continues to prove itself to me in my own life on a daily basis. I see it everywhere.

Can you attempt to summarize, as I'm guessing that the book somehow steps around this logic. Clearly I need to read this book to understand, but I'd like to get a good general idea of how the author came to this conclusion....
Click to expand...
What is talent?

Someone is born with an innate knowledge of how to hit a 3 rail kick?

That is the concept of the book, a person is no more born with a talent for pool that they are born with the ability to do math or speak... all are learned
 
Tiger Woods...

Tiger is one of the studies in the book.... nurture versus nature

His father was a professional teacher, had Tiger late in life when he was eaten up by the golf bug and retired... Tiger was his project & dad was teaching him golf strokes before he could speak

again, good read, well worth the investment in your time
 
alstl said:
Are some of the players giving Zuglan a hard time or is it just a rumor?
Click to expand...

I also have the same question. Did the ABP talk to Zuglan about payment issues, even for future events, or was this just a rumor?
 
joelpope said:
What is talent?

Someone is born with an innate knowledge of how to hit a 3 rail kick?

That is the concept of the book, a person is no more born with a talent for pool that they are born with the ability to do math or speak... all are learned
Click to expand...

In pool, talent is the ability to see the shots, patterns, and make the right offensive and defensive choices. It's the ability to execute the shots, to push oneself towards the goal through practice and dedication, and to persevere against adversity.

In my life I have always been the kind of person who does everything with relative ease. Art, math, English, sports, etc. I have spent very little time at any of these, and yet excel at all. I've been exempt from college and university courses in subjects that I knew nothing about, simply because I possessed natural talent. I am no mastermind, but natural talent has allowed me to coast through life with very little effort or dedication.

Sure, if someone studied or practiced vigorously, than they could certainly score better, perform better, or outmatch me. However if I were to invest that same amount of time and effort, I have no doubt that I would easily surpass them. Unless of course, they posses more natural talent than I.

If the book argues that talent is only the bi product of knowledge, than I am rather disappointed. I feel that's a very weak hypothesis. All the supposed scientific data in the world would not sway my opinion on this, as every aspect of my own life proves otherwise.

Someone like Alex or Wu, these are people who are infinitely more capable than I am. My little glimpse of talent is echoed many times over in their presence.

Anyway, thanks for the information and your perspective. Even though I disagree, I may still opt to read this book. It's hard to disagree with a book that I've never read, and it's possible that I could change my opinion. Doubtful, but possible.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top