If you really want to get into an intellectual sparring match, I can promise you that you've made a grave mistake. But because you want to insult people's intelligence solely based off your own illogical replies, (and you sent the offer,) I have no problem :wink:
Feel aiming is the same as seeing with your minds eye. As in shooting guns or darts, you must be able to see through the shot with your minds understanding of physics.
Well I was. I played last night a bit. Im playing tonight a few hours. I really wanted to go to that Bank tournament in Fairfield Ohio but my friend is tied up and didnt want to drive all day its 7 hrs.
Im definitely going to focus more on playing thats for sure.
Never thought much about any of this terminology. Many years ago when starting to play pool at a very young age, the teachers were mostly older gents who learned the hard way and were determined to make us chippies pay our dues. After paying a lot of dues, one kind ol gent finally told me to (back when the lighting was incadecent) aim at the reflection of the bulb light from above on the object ball and things would be much better for my pocket book. I guess it worked' or some natural relationship to it in my mind worked. I became an excellent player eventually with no aiming problems whatsoever. Eventually the lighting became flourescent and I believe causes problems for natural instinctive shooters. Anyway, To this day, my way is to hold my head up about 12 +/- inches above the cue which gives me a natural image of the relationship between the balls and pocket. AT some point my mind / eyes lock on and I shoot. Seldom is there a miss !! Any one else like this ? I always thought this was the way everyone saw it !
Feel IMO is instinctive shooting from many years of playing. It's why we sometimes fall into dead stroke. Sort of a no thinking foggy place we arrive at not knowing how we got there and wondering how can we put ourself there again at will. Think long think wrong. I read everything and watch everything but I know I play best when I just let myself freewheel. It's visualization, trusting yourself and shooting with conviction and confidence. Don't worry, be happy, shoot the ball!
IMBO about feel aiming ....is a cognitive imagination of geometrical application of aiming. Becoz of years in playing pool like what i've seen on some best players ....Reyes n Strickland see how they aim, no need to look for its angular spot where to hit the ball going to the pocket just a feel and aim:thumbup:...
For a shot, any shot, all I want to know about the pot is the contact point on the object ball that I have to make the cueball hit.
If I am getting down on this shot on a table with center ball I generally know where to aim for the shot. It does not matter how hard I hit this shot or if I put follow or draw on the ball, the aim line is the same.
Now if I am playing left hand siding on the shot things change. Where I aim with left hand siding depends on alot of factors, how much spin, how hard am I hitting the shot, what cue am I using and how much does it deflect? If I put follow or draw on this shot with the left hand siding this now also alters the aiming path, and that alteration depends on all of the stuff above and now depends on how much follow, how much draw? A half a tip, 1 and a half tips? Hard enough to come back to the center of the table? Hard enough to come back to the headrail? It all changes the aim.
But what is the different aim for all those different variables? I don't have a clue TBH how to even answer that, I can make that shot with any spin with any speed consistently. When I step into the shot I have a very close sense of where to aim based on the siding, the speed, the deflection of the cue I use, I can sense if the shot is on, or if the aim is off.
How do I aim it? You are forced to hit the cueball with alot of right hand siding, I tend to use a fair bit of bottoms as well to get the cueball to bite into the rail more, this bottoms reduces the deflection and slightly increases the swerve. I know I have to aim a significant portion of the cueball at the actual object ball, the right hand siding is going to cause the cueball to deflect to the left, and then the spin on the cueball is going to cause a very slight masse effect that swerves it back towards the 9-ball. But as to where I actually aim?
The answer is it depends. It depends on the cue I am using, I will make that shot fairly consistently with my current shooter by simpy aiming where I can sense the proper point it to make the cueball deflect outward and curve that slight bit back in. Put a predator cue in my hands and I honestly don't know where to aim, but I will guarentee you it is NOT the same place as I aim with my Mikkelson. I will miss that shot quite alot, my visualization of this shot is very ingrained into a sense of "feel" of what is the proper aiming point based on experience, and with the predator that experience based learning of the proper aim is completely gone.
That to me is "feel". There is no system for me to figure out how to cut that ball with a predator, I will have to shoot it dozens of times to get an idea, a "feel" for how much the cue deflects, how much swerve is taking place, and slowly as I alter the aim I start to get that sense, that "feel" for the new cue and what it requires me to do in order to make the 90 degree angle cut.
I know systems that claim to answer the above issue, but I don't feel like debating them. I don't use them, what I do is above, I need to know from a subconcious instinctive knowledge how to shoot the shot, or I am probably gonna miss. After 2 decades of playing like this, I don't miss much if I am practicing.
It is a lot of practice combined with eye hand coordination. It is the same as a craftsman that can look at something and determine if it is straight, level, and etc. by just eyeing it.
It can also be so called instinct such as where to locate something you put away in the house or being able to drive somewhere but you really cant give the directions but you recognize the places to turn.
Quieting the chatter is probably the Holy Grail of all athletic processes, and not limited to athletics. Not all minds operate similarly and finding this correct mixture of focus , concentration, and a rational mind that stays out of the way to allow automatic function is fleeting for almost all.
David Foster Wallace argued in his essay, How Tracy Austin Broke My Heart, that the greatest athletes might be just those who have born with a brain that has the least internal chatter. I don't know if it's true, but it's an appealing argument at least. (At least for those of us who aren't top athletes.)
For me, "feel aiming" is simply sighting a line through the object ball to the pocket and then aiming for the spot on the object ball that will send it down that line. The "feel" comes in to play when using different english - aiming to under-cut with outside english or over-cut with inside english, etc. I don't use any "system" for any of these shots. I just go with my feel.
Learning or memorization by repetition, often without an understanding of the reasoning or relationships involved in the material that is learned.
This works for me.
Don
Squirt, swerve, throw and even table and ball conditions requires "estimating" or feel.
I'm just looking for additional ways to describe "feel aiming". Keep them coming.
I would love to hear people describe what it is that they are looking at (and when they are looking at it) when they are feel aiming. This isn't easy to do. I've tried before and it isn't an exact science, or something easy to describe at least not for me.
Squirt, swerve, throw and even table and ball conditions requires "estimating" or feel.
I'm just looking for additional ways to describe "feel aiming". Keep them coming.
I would love to hear people describe what it is that they are looking at (and when they are looking at it) when they are feel aiming. This isn't easy to do. I've tried before and it isn't an exact science, or something easy to describe at least not for me.
JoeyA,
I know exactly what you mean. I had a good many years between pool stints at a point and when I came back to it I thought , "Now how is it I do this again?" I was able to get out of the rack when centerball was ok but I just couldnt deal with spin. So I took the chance to start all over again and break it down in workable pieces on step at a time. Thats what you find in my book in the first half. The second half of it is common sense easy to use aiming methods through visualization techniques that work. These techniques sharpen your perception and lead you to the point where you are able to glance at the shot and know how to play the shot by a defined method and how the feel interacts with the completion of the shot. English is give a place within the methods and you are given a way to begin learning how to allow for spin. All I can say is a statement given to me by a guy I took a lesson from back in 2005 when I came out of pool retirement is certainly true in that we spend a lot of time over complicating the issue for the most part. If you can solve the shot equation by a simple method, even a method of your own contriving as long as youre consistent and make the shots, What does it matter?
Since you are talking about aiming methods or what people use to base their feel on you are basically talking about their visual clues which can be different. How different can they be? Why cannot they seem to be able to say much about it? I think that is truly interesting that a guy who can run 100 balls couldnt tell you how to aim and thats what set on point to find in my book and I think I found it. Judging from my game, I did. Although all the shotmaking in the world will not beat positional prowess. So its how you use it much more than anything else. You being an accomplished player Im sure you have your own intuitions that tell you if youre right on a shot. Try diagramming that, then describing that, then discussing what to look for, take the subject of natural aim apart a piece at a time and put it back together again and bingo you just wrote my book. As you become familiar with the material you instantly begin to recognize the shot solutions with and without spin so what do we call that now? Instinct
Perhaps feel aiming can be explained in a way that applies to nearly everyone. Nearly all of us learned to ride a bicycle and I think we would agree that it is a skill that is learned by feel. There simply are not a set of instructions for learning how to ride. I can show you, but you have to get on the bike and learn from experience. Remember the new kid on the bike. We told him to “relax” and while he held the handlebars in a death grip and held his body rigid he said, “I am relaxed.” Eventually we all learned to “trust” our brain and its ability to balance on the bike. I can’t explain what my brain does but it does know what to do and I have learned, through experience, to trust its calculations that I cannot begin to verbalize.
Pretty soon we were speeding around curves and cutting through fences with a few inches to spare. After simply watching our friend we too were able to stand on the seat, crouched over and negotiate a curve. Well some of could. Others might have learned to let go of the handle bars and ride “Look Ma, no hands.”
The strange thing is that with all this experience, we cannot tell the newest kid on the block how to ride a bike and now we are adults who are inarticulate about the brain’s ability to make amazing calculations that result in some pretty wonderful things. But you know there were always kids who simply could not learn to trust their bodies and their minds. They were always looking for an alternative “system” that would get them to the same place. Sure they could get the bike moving and could even take a trip with the other guys but they never would trust themselves to go off a four foot ramp, stand on the seat, or even trade bikes with another rider at speed. I think that “feel” is all about knowing your body’s ability and your own ability to trust what it does. For some of us there is a lot of enjoyment in that.
As we got older someone came out with new toys, additions or ways to “see” a problem. These additions were just that, things that added to our basic skills and abilities. Skinny tires on my bike will make it go faster and I am glad to learn about the mechanics, the physics of why, and especially the nuances of how you use these new tools. But it still comes down to my ability to trust my brain’s calculations – and I don’t know how it does that, I only know it does a great job. Let me watch you use that new tool and I’ll bet I can do it too.
All aiming is done, in some manner, based on memory and experience.
"Feel aiming" is a false dichotomy created to somehow assert a difference between some aforementioned definable discrete system and one in which the user believes is non-discrete. It is described as being done 'by feel' to denote the user cannot adequately describe the methodology discretely.
One possible theory on brain function would assert that brain activity is natively a set of discrete operations, operating much closer to a digital circuit than once thought. It therefore is possible, under such a theory, that the 'feel' described as estimation is nothing more than a set of discrete activities occurring in the brain, but of which the user does not understand as being as such.
Because the brain is not completely understood, the belief by many is to create a false dichotomy whereby the only 'other option' to a discrete set of operations would be "how the brain works" or another natively human quality associated with it to differentiate it from natively non-human qualities (i.e. brain vs digital computer as a common contrast). Henceforth, because the user cannot verbally distinguish discrete steps for determining how to aim with complex variables, then it must be differentiated from those systems which it believes can do so. This is a false dichotomy in that it assumes that there are two, and only two, aspects. It could be that there is only one system at play, but simply not yet understood as operating in that fashion, or a far larger set of aspects that cannot be defined as a dichotomy.
Perhaps feel aiming can be explained in a way that applies to nearly everyone. Nearly all of us learned to ride a bicycle and I think we would agree that it is a skill that is learned by feel. There simply are not a set of instructions for learning how to ride. I can show you, but you have to get on the bike and learn from experience. Remember the new kid on the bike. We told him to “relax” and while he held the handlebars in a death grip and held his body rigid he said, “I am relaxed.” Eventually we all learned to “trust” our brain and its ability to balance on the bike. I can’t explain what my brain does but it does know what to do and I have learned, through experience, to trust its calculations that I cannot begin to verbalize.
Pretty soon we were speeding around curves and cutting through fences with a few inches to spare. After simply watching our friend we too were able to stand on the seat, crouched over and negotiate a curve. Well some of could. Others might have learned to let go of the handle bars and ride “Look Ma, no hands.”
The strange thing is that with all this experience, we cannot tell the newest kid on the block how to ride a bike and now we are adults who are inarticulate about the brain’s ability to make amazing calculations that result in some pretty wonderful things. But you know there were always kids who simply could not learn to trust their bodies and their minds. They were always looking for an alternative “system” that would get them to the same place. Sure they could get the bike moving and could even take a trip with the other guys but they never would trust themselves to go off a four foot ramp, stand on the seat, or even trade bikes with another rider at speed. I think that “feel” is all about knowing your body’s ability and your own ability to trust what it does. For some of us there is a lot of enjoyment in that.
As we got older someone came out with new toys, additions or ways to “see” a problem. These additions were just that, things that added to our basic skills and abilities. Skinny tires on my bike will make it go faster and I am glad to learn about the mechanics, the physics of why, and especially the nuances of how you use these new tools. But it still comes down to my ability to trust my brain’s calculations – and I don’t know how it does that, I only know it does a great job. Let me watch you use that new tool and I’ll bet I can do it too.
Joe,
I find your post dead on, some surely dont. My book was my attempt at giving them that gift, whether or not they will put in the work to obtain it I do not know, just like the guy who could not trust in intuitive skills to ride a bike but I do have a recorded path as a step method to obtain the elusive cup. I was able to get there within these methods and I believe someone else could too. When you get to the jumping off point you will know and it will be much plainer and simpler and you just have trust that what you know is right and using the clues I gave you and it just is and gets better and better and better at least is has for me.
