Want to improve your pool game next weekend?

[lfigueroa]

You seem to constantly lock horns with him. Or am reading things wrong. So Scotts positive reviews are not good enough for you to think he is a 1st class instructor. You obviously will never use him so why do you counter him. This thread is a solicitation for pool school. It turned into the usual HiJack.
Iv'e never used Randy G. Neither did you. He's not recommendation worthy right?
Would it be possible to support M.Finklestein. If not would it be possible for everyone to leave their .02 home if they have no questions of interest for Marks school. If it were around the corner from me and timing is there I'd like to attend sometime. To everyone signed up. Have a ball ...no pun.
In reference to" As to a recommendation or endorsement, I don't give those out unless I've personally tried and paid for a service or product.". Are you an official certified product tester. If you took a lesson from an instructor and liked him what makes him right for next guy. Please explain why I or anyone would use your referrals. I have no idea who you are.... Do you have any reviews.

I will take option A: you are reading things wrong.

The only tête-à-tête Scott and I have had in this thread is him politely suggesting I paused at the back of my stroke and moi politely saying that was more than unlikely.

As to the issue of a "recommendation or endorsement" I was responding to *your* questions which went like this: "Would you recommend Scott to a beginner or someone that needs/wants to learn. Would you recommend Scott to anyone having stroke flaws they can't work out on their own. Can you push the Scott button? Will you endorse him as fully qualified competent instructor?"

As to reviews, yes I have a few out there. One of them was for a DVD and if you scroll down the page a bit, it's rather prominently featured here : http://new2youq.ipower.com/cues/jbDVD.html There was another for a book, featured here: http://www.alftaylor.com/index.php?...duct_id=1&virtuemart_category_id=1&Itemid=119 There have been others for cue repair mechanics, an aiming system DVD, lessons, and whatnot. Now and then I also get requests to review stuff and the occasional proffer of free product (most recently a book) but don't accept those. Some folks respect my opinion (others not so much) but in either case they know I can't be bought so the review will at least be honest.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

He's not an instructor or certified critic. He tore the REVO cue apart. Another thread that a vendor is trying to advertise and make a living and was not asking for criticism. Simply support or don't reply is what I'm saying. I'm nobody and can't play... But I respect a thread that has to do with a man or ladies livelihood. I would give Lou the same courtesy if he offers anything. Fair enough

Certified critic?! Never heard of one of them before. Here, I believe the general thinking goes that we are all critics, whether it's a pool room we've visited, a tip we've tried, a lesson taken, a tournament, a book, DVD, or whatever.

Now on the Revo you're getting a little hysterical, lol. What I said -- clearly with tongue in cheek -- is that it was butt ugly. BTW, there were a few others that shared the same aesthetic sensibility in that thread.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

I did not read it. Was it simply a conversation or something being sold. I will take a look. Maybe the OP is full of soup. As far as open forums go sure everyone is invited to comment. But if it's something for sale like services or goods..... If you or anyone is selling a cue or service the people that write it sucks or blows or have no interest shouldn't they stand down. There is a difference between hijacking and a fair reply. But yes they are free to comment. Tom Wirth has a OnePocket book going. Some of the posts were... Too much, not that or that .... These were replies from people that did not read or have any desire to purchase it. Why do they feel they have to get involved. I don't need someone telling me the value of anything. Same as pool...no advice needed unless asked for.

What we do here is offer opinions on all things pool. If you don't need, don't want, or can't stand to hear those kinds of things you may be in the wrong joint.

Lou Figueroa
just sayin'

 

[GoldCrown]

BTW, there were a few others that shared the same aesthetic sensibility in that thread.

Lou Figueroa

The REVO is ugly.

What we do here
Lou Figueroa
just sayin'

I know what we do here. Actually I enjoyed the conversation and thank you for it. We were just having a friendly chat.

 

[SJDinPHX]

Wow....

What we do here is offer opinions on all things pool. If you don't need, don't want, or can't stand to hear those kinds of things you may be in the wrong joint.

Lou Figueroa
just sayin'

I can't believe this thread is still alive!..The bottom line is, the benefits (or lack thereof) of taking lessons from a [sic] 'certified' professional instructor, will always be up for debate!....However, most of the respondents in this thread, would not know good instruction, from bad!...Not their fault, as most are 'newbies' or below 'C' players..They only affirm the fact, that they needed a
lot of help with their game to begin with..Otherwise, they wouldn't be so supportive of the many instructors, peddling their wares, at often exorbitant prices, most of whom have no real history of gambling or tournament activity!

I'm sure they are all decent fellows, and I have nothing against the 'free enterprise system'..But I still maintain that an 'A' player, can derive very little (if any) constructive, helpful information, from a 'B' instructor!..Therefore, a 'C' player, (or below) are where all the praise and recommendations must come from!..Obviously, the 'C' player group, outnumber the 'A' group, by probably 500,000 to 1 ..Thus these debates will always be very 'pro-instructor' loaded! (and have you noticed, they love it? )

PS..Tell 'em Lou...:grin:

 

[ronscuba]

.....But I still maintain that an 'A' player, can derive very little (if any) constructive, helpful information, from a 'B' instructor!..Therefore, a 'C' player, (or below) are where all the praise and recommendations must come from!..Obviously, the 'C' player and below group, outnumber the 'A' group, by probably 500,000 to 1..Thus these debates will always be very 'pro-instructor'! (and they love it )

PS..Tell 'em Lou...:grin:

I agree, but I think the point is the D and C players can get to B level or higher, faster if they learn solid fundamentals and mechanics early on. If you took 2 total beginners, one hit a million balls on their own, the other hit a million balls after lessons on fundamentals and mechanics. Odds are the one who took the lessons would end of the better player.

I think part of the debate is who do you learn from ?

 

[Texas Carom Club]

Wow a top level player doesn't have much to learn
Nostradomian like

Was Mark marketing this class to a level players?

Do the balls give up their secrets when you in action?
Do you become aware of stroke flaws and how to correct them when the cash is up for grabs

seems like its been paying off to put you on ignore, I just curious on what you had to say, same as always though stirring shit up for no reason other than you got nothing better to

 

[SJDinPHX]

I agree, but I think the point is the D and C players can get to B level or higher, faster if they learn solid fundamentals and mechanics early on. If you took 2 total beginners, one hit a million balls on their own, the other hit a million balls after lessons on fundamentals and mechanics. Odds are the one who took the lessons would end of the better player.

I think part of the debate is who do you learn from ? The student needs to believe in the expertise of the person instructing them. Depending on the student, the requirement might be a better player, a high level tournament player, a pro or a certified instructor.

Very good points Ron..I certainly can't argue with your logic, regarding D or C players!..The gist of my assertions, were the claims many instructors have made, that they can help top players who are well above them in 'skill level'!..I really don't think that will occur very often, and I just feel it is a little presumptious of them to make such claims, to the inexperienced novice!

PS..Yes, a few minor imperfections can always be pointed out, to almost anyone..But a confident, repeatable stroke, (such as all top players possess)..is something that can never be taught!

 

[nine o nine]

I won't get into a back and forth with you SJD. Can you explain to me why athletes at the top of their games hire coaches/teachers. Doctors, nurses...all highly educated, take ongoing courses in order to not only stay up to date but to learn about techniques they may or may not know. From birth on up we never stop learning...but from whom? Parents to pro coaches and teachers. The teacher may not have or have had the physical or knowledge skills they impart. Top sports teams have cadres of PAID coaches to help their players improve. Why should we pool players at all levels not be able to use the knowledge of others to try to better our game? It's our choice who we pick and our choice to pay any teacher who demonstrates the skills to help us be better our game. Why to you bad mouth education?
I know that's a broad brushed statement but you seem to like that approach. MItch

 

[Dan White]

Very good points Ron..I certainly can't argue with your logic, regarding D or C players!..The gist of my assertions, were the claims many instructors have made, that they can help top players who are well above them in 'skill level'!..I really don't think that will occur very often, and I just feel it is a little presumptious of them to make such claims, to the inexperienced novice!

PS..Yes, a few minor imperfections can always be pointed out, to almost anyone..But a confident, repeatable stroke, (such as all top players possess)..is something that can never be taught!

I understand your point, and I think I agree with much (some?) of it, I guess. There is an inconsistency in your statement in bold. The gist of your point is that a B instructor can't help an A player, yet you also say that the B instructor can point out a "minor imperfections" to the A player. I'd say there are no minor imperfections at that level. Any imperfection noticed in a high level player may very well be a major improvement. As we know, every little tiny thing in a high level player's stroke or game can pay big dividends, even it it just means he pockets one extra ball that he might not otherwise have.

This reminds me of a Joe DiMaggio anecdote. DiMaggio was in one of the worst slumps of his career and he couldn't figure out what was wrong. His first wife came to every game and always sat in the same seat along the 3rd base line. So they are talking about his hitting problem, and his wife says something like, "You know, Joe, from where I sit I'm always able to see the number 5 on the back of your jersey. I haven't been able to see it lately." One flash of inspiration later, Joe was back on his way to leading the team to another pennant. So sometimes a D coach can help an A+ player!

 

[lfigueroa]

I understand your point, and I think I agree with much (some?) of it, I guess. There is an inconsistency in your statement in bold. The gist of your point is that a B instructor can't help an A player, yet you also say that the B instructor can point out a "minor imperfections" to the A player. I'd say there are no minor imperfections at that level. Any imperfection noticed in a high level player may very well be a major improvement. As we know, every little tiny thing in a high level player's stroke or game can pay big dividends, even it it just means he pockets one extra ball that he might not otherwise have.

This reminds me of a Joe DiMaggio anecdote. DiMaggio was in one of the worst slumps of his career and he couldn't figure out what was wrong. His first wife came to every game and always sat in the same seat along the 3rd base line. So they are talking about his hitting problem, and his wife says something like, "You know, Joe, from where I sit I'm always able to see the number 5 on the back of your jersey. I haven't been able to see it lately." One flash of inspiration later, Joe was back on his way to leading the team to another pennant. So sometimes a D coach can help an A+ player!

I think there are minor imperfections at the highest levels.

It's why the best players make mistakes. It is also why, even among the elite, there are varying shades of talent. I also think that, at the highest level, some players have learned to live with their idiosyncrasies and play around them or perhaps even found some kind of magic because of them. If you look at the available footage, of say, Ralph Greenleaf, he had a huge swarp in his stroke. Or how about the pump handle stroke of Bustamante or the side arm of McCready.

Not only would all those guys probably laugh at the concept of SPF, any of those guy's stroke would probably send the Digicue thingamajig into cardiac arrest.

Lou Figueroa

 

[ps611846]

I think there are minor imperfections at the highest levels.

It's why the best players make mistakes. It is also why, even among the elite, there are varying shades of talent. I also think that, at the highest level, some players have learned to live with their idiosyncrasies and play around them or perhaps even found some kind of magic because of them. If you look at the available footage, of say, Ralph Greenleaf, he had a huge swarp in his stroke. Or how about the pump handle stroke of Bustamante or the side arm of McCready.

Not only would all those guys probably laugh at the concept of SPF, any of those guy's stroke would probably send the Digicue thingamajig into cardiac arrest.

Lou Figueroa

Man, I can't give you more greens...... :thumbup:

 

[ronscuba]

Very good points Ron..I certainly can't argue with your logic, regarding D or C players!..The gist of my assertions, were the claims many instructors have made, that they can help top players who are well above them in 'skill level'!..I really don't think that will occur very often, and I just feel it is a little presumptious of them to make such claims, to the inexperienced novice!

PS..Yes, a few minor imperfections can always be pointed out, to almost anyone..But a confident, repeatable stroke, (such as all top players possess)..is something that can never be taught!

I also question how much a high level player can learn from a lower pool performing instructor.

Your last sentence "a repeatable stroke is something that can never be taught", is much more debatable.

 

[Neil]

I think there are minor imperfections at the highest levels.

It's why the best players make mistakes. It is also why, even among the elite, there are varying shades of talent. I also think that, at the highest level, some players have learned to live with their idiosyncrasies and play around them or perhaps even found some kind of magic because of them. If you look at the available footage, of say, Ralph Greenleaf, he had a huge swarp in his stroke. Or how about the pump handle stroke of Bustamante or the side arm of McCready.

Not only would all those guys probably laugh at the concept of SPF, any of those guy's stroke would probably send the Digicue thingamajig into cardiac arrest.

Lou Figueroa

So, to follow your line of reasoning- because there are always a few exceptions, (of which you admit that they have talent we don't have), then that by default means that the rest of us won't benefit from the available knowledge and tools.

Very faulty reasoning Lou. In fact, I will even say it is not only faulting reasoning, but nothing more than an excuse to not use what is available for learning. And, that excuse would be vanity. The faulty reasoning that because a few have attained greatness despite some obvious faults, that "I" can do it too. Not taking into account that "I" don't have their talent to start with.

And, an excuse for laziness. "I" don't want to actually work at the game, "I" just want to play the game. If "I" play long enough, eventually "I" will get to the level I want to be at.

 

[Neil]

I also question how much a high level player can learn from a lower pool performing instructor.

Your last sentence "a repeatable stroke is something that can never be taught", is much more debatable.

It's perfectly fair to question it. Just remember that just because you question it, does not equate to "they can't".

 

[BeiberLvr]

I think there are minor imperfections at the highest levels.

It's why the best players make mistakes. It is also why, even among the elite, there are varying shades of talent. I also think that, at the highest level, some players have learned to live with their idiosyncrasies and play around them or perhaps even found some kind of magic because of them. If you look at the available footage, of say, Ralph Greenleaf, he had a huge swarp in his stroke. Or how about the pump handle stroke of Bustamante or the side arm of McCready.

Not only would all those guys probably laugh at the concept of SPF, any of those guy's stroke would probably send the Digicue thingamajig into cardiac arrest.

Lou Figueroa

False.

The Digicue (and cueball) cares only about the stroke at contact (and possibly after), and those guys were/are all extremely accurate at striking the cueball correctly.

If they weren't. They wouldn't be pros.

 

[Straightpool_99]

Speaking strictly as a Non-pro, I think a pro would get better value from seeing a sports-psychologist, rather than a fundamentals instructor. Anyone that has reached the pro level has a repeatable, straight stroke, but sometimes they break down, just like the rest of us. It just happens way less frequently with them. If a pro twists his wrist or chicken-wings every 500 shots or so, I think it's pretty far fetched to blame this on shoddy fundamentals. I think it's much more likely that for some reason or other his head was not in the game at that moment. Everyone gets nervous and dogs it, no fundamentals ever devised are completely dog proof.

 

[lfigueroa]

Man, I can't give you more greens...... :thumbup:

OK, then. I'll just grab my computer screen and feel the love flowing through the electrons

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

So, to follow your line of reasoning- because there are always a few exceptions, (of which you admit that they have talent we don't have), then that by default means that the rest of us won't benefit from the available knowledge and tools.

Very faulty reasoning Lou. In fact, I will even say it is not only faulting reasoning, but nothing more than an excuse to not use what is available for learning. And, that excuse would be vanity. The faulty reasoning that because a few have attained greatness despite some obvious faults, that "I" can do it too. Not taking into account that "I" don't have their talent to start with.

And, an excuse for laziness. "I" don't want to actually work at the game, "I" just want to play the game. If "I" play long enough, eventually "I" will get to the level I want to be at.

Neil, I can't follow what you're trying to say (or perhaps I just can't follow the words you're trying to crowbar into my mouth

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

False.

The Digicue (and cueball) cares only about the stroke at contact (and possibly after), and those guys were/are all extremely accurate at striking the cueball correctly.

If they weren't. They wouldn't be pros.

It would not harm you to grow a sense of humor. THEN you might be able to detect when someone is funnin' around.

Lou Figueroa