Ratta and others know that some things beyond our control make a shot harder on paper,
like distance and thinness etc. He's a smart guy and an accomplished player.
I think he's simply stating that by mentally labelling some shots as difficult,
you are actually decreasing your chance to make the ball. There is some strange stuff
happening with your subsconscious when you shoot. It's well known that people shoot better
when confident, and worse when scared. His experiment shows how simply "labelling" a shot
differently in your head can actually help you sink it.
So there is no practical value in thinking "that shot is hard" or "this specific shot always
bothers me and causes problems". It is MUCH more constructive to think "this shot is
basically the same as this other shot I've mastered" or "this shot is no biggie, I did it before."
Insisting that one shot is harder than others might be 'technically correct' on paper,
but for practical purposes it's a useless mindset. Your actual mechanics and approach
is the same every time, and you want to train your mental approach to be as strong
and consistent as the physical one.
Ratta can play, dont worry about him. English isnt his first language. something must have been lost in translation. simple as that.![]()
And if it's harder to locate or maintain "the spot on the OB that makes it go into the pocket" when down on the shot, wouldn't that make the shot harder?Rule number one:
master the art of pocketing any and all shots by learning how to hit
the spot on the OB that makes it go into the pocket.
If it helps you maintain the OB contact point location while down on the shot, how are they "crutches" that will "hold you back"?Rule number two:
Don't rely on visual clues like the rail, a point halfway to the pocket,
the outside point of the pockett, etc
These are crutches that will hold you back in ther long run.
Lol.What you are saying is just exactly like saying " I only miss jump shots
when someone from the mothership blinds me with a death ray".
Oh please. My point is to clarify what you mean because what you say can be interpreted different ways.Who said anything about being lax? Or hangers?jsp said:I wouldn't say this is false, but you have to think about it in the proper orientation. There is more more value thinking that all shots are difficult and require the same amount of focus/concentration (even hangers) as opposed to thinking that all shots are hangers and require the same amount of {lax} focus/concentration (even difficult shots).
Don't exaggerate or twist it just to help your argument. That's cheap sir!
And thanks for clarifying it.I'm saying players should mentally label the shot as "no biggie",
As in "I don't need to get stressed out about this".
That's nothing like saying "it's a hanger" which has the implication that you can
just screw around and make it with your eyes closed.
Here's an excerpt from the back cut resource page (for more info, check out the page):I often hear pool players talk about back cuts, and how they are harder than other shots. I'm skeptical. Yes, thinner cuts are usually harder than straighter shots, and shots in the middle of the table can be harder because the visual of the rail is missing. But back cuts? I don't think the average pool player even really has a clear definition of what they are.
Is this just one of those pool myths that bangers talk about, or is there there there?
I still feel the "no biggie" attitude is precisely the reason why I miss the vast majority of easy shots.