To be fair, there is a video of him. Was he 12? He certainly was young.
What do you think the best shotmakers have in common?
- Thread starter Oikawa
- Start date
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
def possible. even at the highest levels you hear guys say things like "i didnt fully commit to the shot". golfers utter this phrase all the time. great ones included.
I think the best shot makers commit to shots every time. their unbelievable belief that they will make THIS shot regardless of overall percentages is at the heart of this imo.
How many times have us normies said "i knew i was going to miss" as we walk to the chair? These guys KNOW they will make the shot. It is their sole expectation. If not, they refuse to shoot until that is the case ala Corey's comment on the matter I posted earlier.
Earl having a box of cueballs by his table and refusing to blame himself for anything could def be a learned mechanism for keeping that insane level of belief in his ability to make the next shot bulletproof.
The best shot makers see the cue ball object ball and pocket simultaneously. And those few shots they can't physically see they know exactly where they are in their mental image. Then, just like shooting baskets the brain uses this information to let eye hand coordination do it's thing.
Then the only limiting factor assuming sufficient practice is how much eye hand coordination you are born with. We all have different ceilings.
We all know what it feels like when we are over a shot and "know" it's going in. The best players have this feeling with a much wider range of shots than the average player.
Then the only limiting factor assuming sufficient practice is how much eye hand coordination you are born with. We all have different ceilings.
We all know what it feels like when we are over a shot and "know" it's going in. The best players have this feeling with a much wider range of shots than the average player.
Obviously they've spent countless hours in the AZB Aiming Forum. 
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
Ye after hitting a million balls, you just see the shot. I'm in the mere hundreds of thousands and have forgotten long ago how I aim. I see the shot or I don't. And unfortunately, after an extended absence from the game, there are some shots I just don't 'see' so I'm going to have to hit them a few hundred times if not more before my whatever-it-is 'system' is calibrated for them. Ghost ball and sidespin adjustment guessing till then. But many shots, I just know. For these top guys, for any shot, they just know.
Just to note, I read all the answers so far.
If I could break it down to just 1 word, it would be EXECUTION.
The general ability to correctly do whatever it is you do in order to keep playing.
I played a friend the other day and we both have different styles. I no longer question them as to WHY they made a certain shot selection. I have grown to understand that "It works for them."
Another I have played against didn't understand that. I simply told them that what works for you does not necessarily work for me. I said bluntly, "you play the pattern, I play the table." Neither of us was wrong, it was all about who executed their strategy better would shoot better.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
I think the majority of shots and position can be played with a modest amount of spin. There will certainly be shots and position that require a player to go full Earl and spin the rock, but with smart patterns this is lessened greatly. And a tiny bit of sidespin can usually improve position more than it will compromise the shot.
maybe. There was a post about Yogi Berra blaming the bat for similar reasons. Personally, I have to believe that the table, balls, and my cue will perform as long as I execute properly. If I don't believe the equipment will do its part, how can I possibly overcome that? Then again, Earl has won more US Opens than me, so maybe he's onto something.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
In one of @Tinman's podcasts he talks about how we can't control whether or not we make a shot. If we could, we'd never miss. What we can control is finding a process that works and executing that process correctly. He's also mentioned "accepting" the loss and how this removes all pressure. If we demand ourselves to make a shot or win, all we can do is break even or fail. If we "accept" the miss or loss, we either break even or win. I still can't think like that when I need to, though.
Your reply may have been a joke but in all seriousness, I really do think they have found an aiming system that works for them, combined with solid fundamentals and a consistently repeatable stroke.Obviously they've spent countless hours in the AZB Aiming Forum.
Just a clarification if you don't mind. I don't necessarily see a difference between the two.
Tinman is a sharp guy. However, I don't think accepting the loss is the route to go. Thinking about this thread since it has started I really think that a quiet conscious mind is a very big part of the equation. However, once a decision is made and a plan formed, a pro should have a quiet mind regardless of how a person gets to that state.
Detouring to other things as I admittedly often do, I started shooting a series of pistol matches. Each week was different from the week before but all matches had the same maximum possible score, 600 points. The matches had been going on for fifteen years and quite a few shooters that were capable of winning national level events had shot in them and one genuine Efren level freak had cut his teeth in these matches, shot them many times, still did a few times a year.
Much easier to define performance when there is a score assigned to each shot. In the last fifteen years there had been literally dozens of 598's and 599's shot, by over a dozen, maybe around two dozen different shooters. Never a six hundred. The race for six hundred was real, all of the top class shooters wanted to be the first. It placed a pressure on the shooters preventing a quiet mind. Once they dropped a point or two, the pressure was off. No possibility of a record that week.
Without the possibility of a record it was much easier to have a quiet mind and it was fairly common that the top few shooters would only drop any points on one stage shooting the rest of the event clean.
Getting back to pool, since we don't have hard numbers to work with, we can have a quiet mind in multiple different ways including accepting the loss, accepting that we expect to win, or just committing to the process and letting the chips fall where they may. As long as we get to the quiet mind before starting shooting I don't think it matters how we get there.
We can see some players regroup and refocus between every shot. Their quiet mind time is probably measured in only a few seconds. Others flow from shot to shot and unless something untoward happens their quiet time probably lasts from when they drop down into their first shot until the end of their inning.
I would think that the typical "B" level player is fully able to work out a pattern and generally execute it pretty well. What they don't have is the quiet mind. As a result, just for an example, a break and run for the typical "B" player is going to burn a lot more mental energy than the top player who is not wasting energy thinking and rethinking when the situation on the table shouldn't require it.
It may be that the big difference is a quiet mind and much less mental fatigue as the top player goes deep into a match or tournament.
Hu
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
I've heard of this apptoach in psychology for poker as well. expect to get sucked out on and dont expect yo hit ur draws. u can only be pleasantly surprised....
I HATE IT. lol. Give me Earl's willful self delusion all day over this approach.
But I am fully on board withTinmans focus on process. Its just that if results come to mind...I prefer to only expect good things. Just need a bit of mental gymnastics after the inevitable miss. Thats where I remind myself of percentages and realistic outcomes so I dont get emotionally affected. but before pulling the trigger...."I have a pure af stroke so Ima make this shot cuz I make all shots I can see" lol
Michael Jordan addressed your exact question. He said what separates the good pro's from the great ones is solid fundamentals. You can get away with winging it and having tons of talent but to get to the elite level you need the fundamentals. Maybe this is why you often see the great ones putting in more time than the others.
Just a clarification if you don't mind. I don't necessarily see a difference between the two.
Hu, For your clarification.....
I said that to the second player while playing straight pool. Refer to what I said prior to that.
They were playing the pattern at the bottom of the table. When it came time for a safety, instead of pushing whitey into the pack, I skimmed a loose OB and hid whitey behind the pack while the skim went to the top rail.
They weren't happy, so i did it often.
Last edited:
Michael Jordan knows exactly how many games he has won at the buzzer, and how many he has lost. The number lost is huge too. However, if it comes down to one shot to win or lose the game he wants to be the one taking it. I think there is something to be learned there.
Another interesting shot, Earl's combo that he thought was for a million dollars. Without his next break and run on video they probably would have beat him out of the million on a technicality. However, the point is he thought he was shooting for a million. That wasn't a combo I think he would have normally shot in a routine game. That makes me think his heart was in his throat, blood pounding in his ears, and he didn't think he could hold together for the runout, or he thought the odds were better to shoot one shot for the million than to try to run out the table.
I have to think that he recognized if not from the first game from very early in that run that he was going for the million. The pressure building with every game won. He held it together. That too separates the great from the good. Think about olympic champions. No matter how uninteresting an activity might be to me, I find everything a gold medal can be won in exciting. The olympians know that it is very possible this is a once in a lifetime shot. They may be injured, retired, or just past their career peak before another four years pass. Somehow the best manage to hold things together for a few seconds, a few minutes, sometimes a few hours. What is commonly called grace under pressure might be a big part of what separates the best.
While we are trying to isolate one thing, it is very possible, almost a certainty, that it takes a combination of things. Physical skills, and grace under pressure. When grace under pressure fails and they have the all too human heart in throat feeling, they still execute.
Some people seem to always find a way to lose, some always find a way to win. These people don't settle for less than the best. They may make gracious noises after a loss but don't stretch the interview too long, the fires of hell are burning just below the surface.
Hu
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
I have no idea what was going on in his head for the combo but he was going for the million for a month before he got in his car to go to the tournament. I don't know that he was exactly under a lot of pressure, I think the million was going to be there until someone won it and I'm sure Earl knew he was the one to do it. He definitely had a great opportunity in that match but I think it was a question of when not if. Hearing some of his road stories, it may not have been the most pressure he had been under.
Yeah, part of what drives these people to the highest level is their absolute intolerance for losing. As Vince Lombardi said, "Show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser!"
This is one of your BEST posts!
CaptainBly
Registered
For everyone who says Aiming system don't work and the only way to get good is hit a million balls, how do you explain the greats at young ages? They haven't had the time to hit a million yet. Filler at 12, Justin Bergman and Justin Hall as teenagers, Earl at 16, Etc. Maybe some are just born with an ability to make balls. They may not know the game at first but they rarely miss. They are clearly seeing something the rest aren't. I have been around the game for almost 40years, you can see that some players can just flat out pocket balls.
Oikawa
Well-known member
Extremely reliable fundamentals are a big factor. When you are able to get the outcome to happen that you see with your eyes beforehand 99%+ of the time instead of 50-90%, the brain learns cut angles much faster. Every technique related miss is another mixed signal to the intuitive aiming process. Exceptionally strong hand-eye coordination or spatial awareness (The parts that many call talent) helps ones fundamentals to be even more accurate.
So someone like Josh at 12, surely very talented and motivated, and put lots of hours in, but more importantly than anything else, also had extremely solid fundamentals that worked for him and allowed his instinctual aiming to shine through.
Aiming systems do help lots of people, especially as they are learning. Everyone is different. However, there are reasons why almost all top pros aim instinctively. The simplest one being that the human subconscious is immensely powerful at tasks where it has a large set of past experiences to work from.
Last edited:
I agree with many hours off practice but there's one thing thats more important which you will find is a common thing with shotmakers.
They are all ONE EYE DOMINENT players. i.e. they either shoot right handed and their cue under their right eye. Or they shoot left handed and their cue under their left eye..........OR the other awkward thing but they are born with it which is opposed eye dominants meaning, they are right handed but their cue is under their left eye or vice versa.
Example.
Earl Strickland - right eye (right handed)
Jayson Shaw - right eye (left handed)
Albin - left eye (right handed)
Jushua filler - cant remember but his cue is directly under his eye,, I think its left eye and he's left handed.
SVB - although its not very clear but if you notice and focus in his line-up when he's straight toward the camera, the cue is under his right eye.
Efren Reyes - same to shane van boening if you are straight on the camera to him his cue is not in the middle of his chin, its more directed to the right a little bit and he's right handed.
There are many more but I don't want to list all of them, all off these players are one eye dominant's and never put their cue in the center of their chin like most of the schools are telling people to do which is very wrong in my opinion, its like a rifle shooting. If you shoot a rifle you want to aim with one eye, not in the center of your face cause thats ridiculous.
They are all ONE EYE DOMINENT players. i.e. they either shoot right handed and their cue under their right eye. Or they shoot left handed and their cue under their left eye..........OR the other awkward thing but they are born with it which is opposed eye dominants meaning, they are right handed but their cue is under their left eye or vice versa.
Example.
Earl Strickland - right eye (right handed)
Jayson Shaw - right eye (left handed)
Albin - left eye (right handed)
Jushua filler - cant remember but his cue is directly under his eye,, I think its left eye and he's left handed.
SVB - although its not very clear but if you notice and focus in his line-up when he's straight toward the camera, the cue is under his right eye.
Efren Reyes - same to shane van boening if you are straight on the camera to him his cue is not in the middle of his chin, its more directed to the right a little bit and he's right handed.
There are many more but I don't want to list all of them, all off these players are one eye dominant's and never put their cue in the center of their chin like most of the schools are telling people to do which is very wrong in my opinion, its like a rifle shooting. If you shoot a rifle you want to aim with one eye, not in the center of your face cause thats ridiculous.