Who is the BEST pool-playing INSTRUCTOR?

[sfleinen]

Learning how to actually play the game is very different from just learning how to hold the cue, stance, stroke, etc.

I'll be the first to say that all instructors are wonderful for the game but once you have solid basics where do you go from there? Back to the original instructor that has never performed under the pressure of live fire? Never exhibiting their competitive skills in actual combat on any kind of a regular basis?

No ... I think the alternative would be seeking a 'real player' instructor who has gone to war and thrives on the competition, a contender not a pretender. One who knows how to win

Since Joey is an advanced player I think he's looking to list the different species instructor that goes beyond ordinary

Envy may ruffle some feathers in this thread but that's just the way it is ...

The list? True, maybe only a few have real communicative skills, at this particular time :smile:, but one thing's for sure - they all know how to win

Some things just need to be said

Nice list Joey. Good job

billy:

I get what you're trying to say, but the way you say it is extremely flawed. For example, you say:

Learning how to actually play the game is very different from just learning how to hold the cue, stance, stroke, etc.

Let's address that one statement all by itself:

Honestly, what do you think instructors (whether they were former players or not) spend most of their time with students going over? Do you honestly think the lion's share of students going to an instructor do so with a request like, "I want to learn to play 8-ball better -- I lose far too often"? For one thing, I don't think they do. Most players (and I say "most," to specifically separate them from folks like, say, Lou Figueroa, who go to legends like Ray Martin and Dallas West to get some instruction in e.g. 14.1), when they go to an instructor, do so not because they are looking for pointed instruction in one particular game or "pool thinking," but rather because they have problems with basics. Most folks I know that went to an instructor, did so because they were honest with themselves, ponied up to the table to admit they have a problem with missing shots -- most likely at the most inopportune time. These folks *know* they're doing something wrong in their execution, and need an omniscient eye -- an overseer and studied analyst -- to point it out to them, with a methodical approach to correct it. Even aiming system instructor-advocates like Stan Shuffett, Ron Vitello, et al., have course syllabuses written specifically on the topic of building solid fundamentals. (And please note that Stan is on Joey's list as an instructor that also is a formidable player.) If you go to one of these guys for instruction, I *guarantee* you the first thing they look at are going to be your fundamentals!

You then say,

[...]
I'll be the first to say that all instructors are wonderful for the game but once you have solid basics where do you go from there? Back to the original instructor that has never performed under the pressure of live fire? Never exhibiting their competitive skills in actual combat on any kind of a regular basis?

This is a loaded assertion for a couple of reasons: 1.) we all like to "think" we have solid fundamentals, even when in actuality we don't, and 2.) I'll bet my hat that the populace of folks that go to an instructor that wind up really needing their fundamentals beefed up outnumber those who go to the same instructor that don't need their form/fundamentals tweaked and merely need game strategy and other aspects consulted upon. Those latter folks are actually rare in the student demographics. Sure, we here at AZB sure talk up a good game of how "we don't need no stinking fundamentals." But in the long run, almost *all* of us could use an outside studied eye to point out things we're doing in our form that are actually holding us back. You need only someone studied in how the human body works and is a great communicator to do this.

The best in any sport have coaches that either were never, or were very long ago, of the same caliber as the player they're coaching. Look at any sport, and see if those players' personal coaches were world beaters or even on the same level of the player they're coaching. I'll bet they aren't/weren't. Again, coaches are good *analysts* first and foremost.

Now, having said all that, can a player/coach like John Schmidt, or Dallas West, or Ray Martin be able to point out things about *the game* that perhaps a Scott Lee or Steve Jennings or Randy Goettlicher can't? Of course. I know if, like Lou, I want pointed instruction in 14.1, I'm not going to Scott or Randy -- I'm going to John/Dallas/Ray. But if my game suddenly fell apart one day, and for the life of me, I can't figure out why, I'm going to Scott/Steve/Randy.

Hope that might help clarify a few things related to some of the postings you're seeing here,
-Sean

 

[sfleinen]

And your take on aiming systems is....

Lou Figueroa

hey mr one pocket, that has no nuts to play 8,9 or 10 ball because it will expose how much you suck. aiming systems work and give it a rest already! I challenge you to put a current video on here playing 2 games in a row of 8,9 or 10 ball and i will do the same and i will even explain every shot! let me shut your trap once and for all, old school.

Champster:

Careful with that one! For one thing, I think Lou's known more for straight pool than one pocket. And, Lou can turn that challenge back around on you, and ask you to post a video of you playing 14.1 -- or even challenge you to "put up" your high runs to compare with his. (And my money would be on Lou in this regard.) Rotation games are not "better demonstrations of skill" than strategy games like 14.1 or one pocket.

About that "posting videos" thing, I'd be careful about that, too. The videos you'd previously posted weren't exactly convincing -- at least the one I remember, where you were playing solely on the bottom half of a snooker table, trying to demonstrate an aiming system, and missed a good 30-40% of your shots. Not saying that aiming systems "don't work," but before getting on a horse about how "convincing" your contribution to this area is, I'd be careful.

Just a friendly reminder,
-Sean

 

[champ2107]

Champster:

Careful with that one! For one thing, I think Lou's known more for straight pool than one pocket. And, Lou can turn that challenge back around on you, and ask you to post a video of you playing 14.1 -- or even challenge you to "put up" your high runs to compare with his. (And my money would be on Lou in this regard.) Rotation games are not "better demonstrations of skill" than strategy games like 14.1 or one pocket.

About that "posting videos" thing, I'd be careful about that, too. The videos you'd previously posted weren't exactly convincing -- at least the one I remember, where you were playing solely on the bottom half of a snooker table, trying to demonstrate an aiming system, and missed a good 30-40% of your shots. Not saying that aiming systems "don't work," but before getting on a horse about how "convincing" your contribution to this area is, I'd be careful.

Just a friendly reminder,
-Sean

haha, well you know those were my first ever shots trying out 2 aiming systems i have never ever tried before, shanes and daves. I just did it on cam for the @#$% of it and did not try and prove anything. I was not demonstrating anything. That was the first time i played on a snooker table in about 15 years and first time trying a cte system on one.
Your true skill level can be hidden playing those 14-1 and one pocket is how I see it. I understand there is a lot strategy involved in those games too. I have attempted to play 14-1 once and if he wants to add that in, I would accept that too! Sean honestly you know pretty much zip about cte aiming systems from the posts I have read coming from you, sorry man. Im curious if you have a video up on the net?

 

[sfleinen]

haha, well you know those were my first ever shots trying out 2 aiming systems i have never ever tried before, shanes and daves. I just did it on cam for the @#$% of it and did not try and prove anything. I was not demonstrating anything. That was the first time i played on a snooker table in about 15 years and first time trying a cte system on one.
Your true skill level can be hidden playing those 14-1 and one pocket is how I see it. I understand there is a lot strategy involved in those games too. I have attempted to play 14-1 once and if he wants to add that in, I would accept that too! Sean honestly you know pretty much zip about cte aiming systems from the post I have read coming from you, sorry man. Im curious if you have a video up on the net?

Champ:

In a phrase, I don't care about aiming systems. Honestly, I don't. I've always viewed this as, "You use what you need to, whatever works for you, to be successful." I've always said that. The only issue I've *EVER* had with aiming systems are the wild and unsubstantiated marketing claims. (And, while on that topic, you say "...from the posts I have read coming from you" -- so you already knew that about both of those assertions from me, right?)

And, concerning the "hiding the skill level" thing when playing one pocket or 14.1, I disagree. While in one pocket you can get away with this by bunting your life away, you definitely CAN'T do that in 14.1. I dare you to play a little 14.1 against a decent player, and see if you don't find yourself sitting in your seat for the majority of your table time? I think that when all's said and done, you'll come away with your pad and pen, and vigorously striking a line through 14.1 as "a game that hides your skill level."

Honest question for you -- what's your reason, your purpose, for being on these boards? Solely and 100% aiming systems? I don't know about you, but I'm here for our *sport* -- all facets, all games. Just about every post I see from you seems to revolve around aiming systems. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Oh, and btw, no, I don't have any videos up. I'm not equipped for video. (Yes, go ahead and make all the wise cracks you want about how an I.T. guy like myself isn't equipped for video. Not all of us like to take our jobs home with us, or to the pool hall with us. The last thing I want to look at when I get home from work is *yet another* piece of computer equipment.) Perhaps one day I'll correct that, however.

-Sean

 

[champ2107]

Champ:

In a phrase, I don't care about aiming systems. Honestly, I don't. I've always viewed this as, "You use what you need to, whatever works for you, to be successful." I've always said that. The only issue I've *EVER* had with aiming systems are the wild and unsubstantiated marketing claims. (And, while on that topic, you say "...from the posts I have read coming from you" -- so you already knew that about both of those assertions from me, right?)

And, concerning the "hiding the skill level" thing when playing one pocket or 14.1, I disagree. While in one pocket you can get away with this by bunting your life away, you definitely CAN'T do that in 14.1. I dare you to play a little 14.1 against a decent player, and see if you don't find yourself sitting in your seat for the majority of your table time? I think that when all's said and done, you'll come away with your pad and pen, and vigorously striking a line through 14.1 as "a game that hides your skill level."

Honest question for you -- what's your reason, your purpose, for being on these boards? Solely and 100% aiming systems? I don't know about you, but I'm here for our *sport* -- all facets, all games. Just about every post I see from you seems to revolve around aiming systems. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Oh, and btw, no, I don't have any videos up. I'm not equipped for video. (Yes, go ahead and make all the wise cracks you want about how an I.T. guy like myself isn't equipped for video. Not all of us like to take our jobs home with us, or to the pool hall with us. The last thing I want to look at when I get home from work is *yet another* piece of computer equipment.) Perhaps one day I'll correct that, however.

-Sean

Im curious, I keep hearing about these “wild and unsubstantiated marketing claims” can someone actually tell me what they are and who is making them? I am sure I would take a loss from a decent 14-1 player, but that would not scare me away from taking on such a player and with a little practice, I to would become decent. A player with the better skill and execution can lose to the better strategist in those games.


I just post and follow threads that interest me and listen and learn more than I talk if you can believe that. You know the whole 2 ears and 1 mouth thing, right?

 

[sfleinen]

Im curious, I keep hearing about these “wild and unsubstantiated marketing claims” can someone actually tell me what they are and who is making them?

No, we're not going there. This is Joey's thread, about pool-playing instructors, and I'm not going to be a part of you nose-diving this thread into an aiming systems foodfight, as per usual.

I am sure I would take a loss from a decent 14-1 player, but that would not scare me away from taking on such a player and with a little practice, I to would become decent.

That's great, and that's why we're here, right? If that's the case, I would encourage you to visit the 14.1 forums.

A player with the better skill and execution can lose to the better strategist in those games.

That's only sometimes true. Many a 14.1 match has been won by the superior shooter. And, what's your point in this, anyway? Why posture yourself with a challenge in rotation games -- or even 14.1 -- if there's a chance you could lose to a better strategist even though you think you are the superior shot? What would you prove?

I just post and follow threads that interest me and listen and learn more than I talk if you can believe that. You know the whole 2 ears and 1 mouth thing, right?

As we all do. But methinks my point was that your two ears and one mouth only seem to input and output (respectively) that which only has to do with aiming systems. You seem to spin almost everything into an aiming system discussion. Not that it's wrong -- it is what you're solely interested in -- but it is my point.

Let's break out of our aiming systems death-spiral, and get back to the topic at hand, which are pool-playing instructors, ok? (Yes yes, I know what you're going to say -- "Lou started this with his aiming systems reply to John Schmidt." Let's right the ship anyway.)

-Sean

 

[billy]

Man, this is some cold shit to spread around. What makes you think the rest of us are pretenders who have never performed under pressure? You make it seem like all we can do is communicate and teach people how to hold the cue the right way. May as well say we are all a bunch of bangers, we have no idea how to win. But in reality, how many instructors have you really seen play? I'd like to know who they are.

don't get so upset Bambu. I was just trying to say, in 10 words or less :smile:, that often there's a huge disparity (sp?) in playing abilities amongst todays instructors

if indeed you are an instructor that will go to war, get down and dirty, test the waters of fierce competition then you are a step ahead of others

... and if you're referring to the list already compiled by Joey, I have seen most of them play and I have competed with quite a large number on that list as well

again no offense Bambu and certainly all the best with your instruction

 

[champ2107]

No, we're not going there. This is Joey's thread, about pool-playing instructors, and I'm not going to be a part of you nose-diving this thread into an aiming systems foodfight, as per usual. Right sean, that was my point for my initial post directed at Lou, put up for once or sdfu already about aiming systems and I see you very close to him on the fact you can’t leave aiming systems alone.



That's great, and that's why we're here, right? If that's the case, I would encourage you to visit the 14.1 forums. I do follow that section and i see you post in the ask the instructor section also



That's only sometimes true. Many a 14.1 match has been won by the superior shooter. And, what's your point in this, anyway? Why posture yourself with a challenge in rotation games -- or even 14.1 -- if there's a chance you could lose to a better strategist even though you think you are the superior shot? What would you prove? You and lou feel the need to tell everyone how aiming systems don’t work ( im not even sure what you guys mean by this?) I have made every possible challenge to counter the negativity certain people spread.



As we all do. But methinks my point was that your two ears and one mouth only seem to input and output (respectively) that which only has to do with aiming systems. You seem to spin almost everything into an aiming system discussion. Not that it's wrong -- it is what you're solely interested in -- but it is my point. I don’t turn everything into aiming systems, but you guys do! I just retaliate at ignorance. I read when I was banned how you said it was because I was defending an aiming system brother, something like that in a unrelated thread.

Let's break out of our aiming systems death-spiral, and get back to the topic at hand, which are pool-playing instructors, ok? (Yes yes, I know what you're going to say -- "Lou started this with his aiming systems reply to John Schmidt." Let's right the ship anyway.) Like I said, you guys have to find some way to throw your aiming system diggs in always, I just happen to call you guys on it.

-Sean

go through this thread post by post and you tell me who brings in the aiming system stuff. You maybe be surprised at the results.

 

[Cornerman]

To those who feel like I have besmirched their reputation and good name; that was not my intent nor is it now.

I am besmirched beyond besmirchery. Just because I don't teach and can't play worth a lick doesn't mean I shouldn't be on the list.

In all seriousness, there is definitely confusion to what you're asking. For example, Allison Fisher has regular teaching sessions and now looks to be partnering with Charlie Williams on a teaching gig. Do both of them go on your list?

And then there's Marty Hermann...

Freddie <~~~ not smirched

 

[billy]

.

Now, having said all that, can a player/coach like John Schmidt, or Dallas West, or Ray Martin be able to point out things about *the game* that perhaps a Scott Lee or Steve Jennings or Randy Goettlicher can't? Of course. I know if, like Lou, I want pointed instruction in 14.1, I'm not going to Scott or Randy -- I'm going to John/Dallas/Ray. But if my game suddenly fell apart one day, and for the life of me, I can't figure out why, I'm going to Scott/Steve/Randy.

Hope that might help clarify a few things related to some of the postings you're seeing here,
-Sean

I don't have the time to go into like you just did Sean but it was well said, thanks

I'm just trying to summarize the differences in playing abilities of some instructors

but like you say ... 'if my game suddenly fell apart one day, and for the life of me, I can't figure out why' ... then maybe just maybe you never got it in the first place. why would you not at least consider going to the upper echelon (sp?) of the instructors for basic fundamental reviews

just sayin' and thanks for not being overly critical of my few words

 

[sfleinen]

go through this thread post by post and you tell me who brings in the aiming system stuff. You maybe be surprised at the results.

No, I'm not surprised -- and even I told you with the "yeah yeah, I know" thing in the previous post, didn't I?

What I find funny, champ, is how you manage to spin even my reply to you, into aiming systems banter, when my point was precisely that -- to show you how you spin things into aiming systems banter. Sort of "Exhibit A" if you will -- and I thank you for doing my work for me.

You can try to spin me as an "anti aiming systems" guy all you want -- it ain't gonna work. Different people have different ways of viewing things, and if it works, great -- I've always said that. I tried to point out to you the flaw in your approach to Lou (and more of a defense to the games of one pocket and 14.1) -- that 1.) your assertion of rotation games being an indicator of better skill is baloney, and 2.) that your continued assertion of "showing people up" through your own personal video contributions is also flawed. But no, you have to spin this into an aiming systems discussion!

Nice try, though.

I'll ask again -- let's get off the aiming systems stuff, and back on to the topic of this thread.

-Sean

 

[sfleinen]

I don't have the time to go into like you just did Sean but it was well said, thanks

I'm just trying to summarize the differences in playing abilities of some instructors

but like you say ... 'if my game suddenly fell apart one day, and for the life of me, I can't figure out why' ... then maybe just maybe you never got it in the first place. why would you not at least consider going to the upper echelon (sp?) of the instructors for basic fundamental reviews

just sayin' and thanks for not being overly critical of my few words

billy:

No, I indeed got that, but you didn't get my point -- that those instructors are SPECIALIZED in analyzing that stuff, which they do for a LIVING. While I do expect those instructors that are also players (I don't consider them "higher echelon" as you do) to have, as you say, the ability to review *basic* fundamentals, I think you're confusing those two terms. Fundamentals are not necessarily "basic." I would offer there are times when the problems with someone's fundamentals are NOT "basic," but rather a very obscure or complex flaw that the untrained eye ("untrained" = not making a living reviewing this stuff day-in and day-out) would not see.

Anyway, I hope my reply wasn't disrespectful or overly critical. I just wanted to reply to what I see is a reasoning flaw.

Hope this finds you hitting 'em well,
-Sean

 

[champ2107]

No, I'm not surprised -- and even I told you with the "yeah yeah, I know" thing in the previous post, didn't I?

What I find funny, champ, is how you manage to spin even my reply to you, into aiming systems banter, when my point was precisely that -- to show you how you spin things into aiming systems banter. Sort of "Exhibit A" if you will -- and I thank you for doing my work for me.

You can try to spin me as an "anti aiming systems" guy all you want -- it ain't gonna work. Different people have different ways of viewing things, and if it works, great -- I've always said that. I tried to point out to you the flaw in your approach to Lou (and more of a defense to the games of one pocket and 14.1) -- that 1.) your assertion of rotation games being an indicator of better skill is baloney, and 2.) that your continued assertion of "showing people up" through your own personal video contributions is also flawed. But no, you have to spin this into an aiming systems discussion!

Nice try, though.

I'll ask again -- let's get off the aiming systems stuff, and back on to the topic of this thread.

-Sean

I thought the exchange "you started with me" had to do with aiming system,sorry. I was talking about potting skills because thats what aiming systems are pretty much for? I believe you can turn a intelligent player into a decent 14-1 or one pocket player a lot quicker than into a 10 ball player, my opinion, is that what you want to discuss now? The flaw in my approach to Lou? There is no decent way to approach him because he is FLAWED! I not showing anyone up, I am just putting my money where my mouth is! Keep trying to spin your web Sean and when you finally decide on what you want to discuss with me since I see you are jumping, I will be here. So continue on with your long winded posts sean and "your word is the last word posting approach" and i will do my own thing, good luck i would how ever like to hear who and what " wild and unsubstantiated marketing claims" that bothers you, maybe you could start a thread on it and you know i will be there

 

[sfleinen]

I thought the exchange "you started with me" had to do with aiming system,sorry. I believe you can turn a intelligent player into a decent 14-1 or one pocket player a lot quicker than into a 10 ball player, my opinion, is that what you want to discuss now? The flaw in my approach to Lou? There is no decent way to approach him because he is FLAWED! I not showing anyone up, I am just putting my money where my mouth is! Keep trying to spin your web Sean and when you finally decide on what you want to discuss with me since I see you are jumping, I will be here. So continue on with your long winded posts sean and "your word is the last word posting approach" and i will do my own thing, good luck i would how ever like to hear who and what " wild and unsubstantiated marketing claims" that bothers you, maybe you could start a thread on it and you know i will be there

Champ:

Good grief. And you wonder why you got banned? I'm trying to have a polite (but pointed!) discussion with you about what -- not only me, but others -- see in the way you interact in these threads. I'm not interested in pursuing an aiming systems discussion with you, because -- get ready for it -- I don't care. I honestly don't care. But you seem spin-locked in thinking I care about aiming systems, or that somehow because I won't discuss aiming systems with you, "that I must be a disbeliever in aiming systems" or something. No matter. You go on thinking like that. I don't care.

I do apologize to Joey, though, that I got involved in this nosedive with you. It won't happen again.

-Sean

 

[champ2107]

Champ:

Good grief. And you wonder why you got banned? I'm trying to have a polite (but pointed!) discussion with you about what -- not only me, but others -- see in the way you interact in these threads. I'm not interested in pursuing an aiming systems discussion with you, because -- get ready for it -- I don't care. I honestly don't care. But you seem spin-locked in thinking I care about aiming systems, or that somehow because I won't discuss aiming systems with you, "that I must be a disbeliever in aiming systems" or something. No matter. You go on thinking like that. I don't care.

I do apologize to Joey, though, that I got involved in this nosedive with you. It won't happen again.

-Sean

what ever sean, my initial post had nothing to do with you and you felt the need to post this and yet you dont have the nuts to put yourself out here.

"About that "posting videos" thing, I'd be careful about that, too. The videos you'd previously posted weren't exactly convincing -- at least the one I remember, where you were playing solely on the bottom half of a snooker table, trying to demonstrate an aiming system, and missed a good 30-40% of your shots. Not saying that aiming systems "don't work," but before getting on a horse about how "convincing" your contribution to this area is, I'd be careful"

I like how you are try to pass yourself off as a victim here! i find it very amusing and a good look into your character! but you do care because you always put yourself in that position and always have something to say and good luck again on the ego build! :thumbup: as for me its just about time for me to pack away my cue and bring out my baseball stuff and i wont be seen here until the fall and i dont really care if i get a life time ban from here, no big deal in my eye's because you and a lot of other needs this site to survive

 

[sfleinen]

what ever sean, my initial post had nothing to do with you and you felt the need to post this.

"About that "posting videos" thing, I'd be careful about that, too. The videos you'd previously posted weren't exactly convincing -- at least the one I remember, where you were playing solely on the bottom half of a snooker table, trying to demonstrate an aiming system, and missed a good 30-40% of your shots. Not saying that aiming systems "don't work," but before getting on a horse about how "convincing" your contribution to this area is, I'd be careful"

Yes, I stand by that. And I would write it again, too. You're not seeing the point here about what I was trying to say, re: 1.) your mischaracterization of one pocket and 14.1 (that somehow rotation games are better able to illustrate skill level), and 2.) your mischaracterization of yourself -- i.e. your video contributions.

It was just a friendly, "hey, you might want to know how this appears, and you might want to be careful."

I like how you are try to pass yourself off as a victim here! i find it very amusing and a good look into your character! but you do care because you always put yourself in that position and always have something to say and good luck again on the ego build! :thumbup:

Keep 'em coming if it makes you feel good. I love the usage of the words "pass," "victim," "character," "always," "putting yourself," "ego build," etc. Hmm... a very funny pot/kettle situation for sure!

I'm done here, Champ. Have fun!
-Sean

 

[champ2107]

Yes, I stand by that. And I would write it again, too. You're not seeing the point here about what I was trying to say, re: 1.) your mischaracterization of one pocket and 14.1 (that somehow rotation games are better able to illustrate skill level), and 2.) your mischaracterization of yourself -- i.e. your video contributions.

It was just a friendly, "hey, you might want to know how this appears, and you might want to be careful."



Keep 'em coming if it makes you feel good. I love the usage of the words "pass," "victim," "character," "always," "putting yourself," "ego build," etc. Hmm... a very funny pot/kettle situation for sure!

I'm done here, Champ. Have fun!
-Sean

again i was originally talking about aiming skills and potting not strategic shots,positions,safeties,break outs,banks,etc that you dragged into this. I have watched a lot of 14-1 and one pocket videos and i see what is involved in winning at them. If it makes you feel better you can red rep me its ok maybe these posts will cool off all the cry babies in this thread that are mad at joey because they did not get an automatic pass on to the list and there ego's are hurt too.

 

[Ratta]

T, I hear what your saying but let me ask this: Bear Bryant played End for Alabama 1933-1935 but what pro team did he play for? Given his record as a coach, I'd say he could inspire players just fine.

I believe it's often the synergy of many skills that makes a great coach.

*hugs* big boy ^^
well choosen words,

lg
Ingo

 

[JoeyA]

Tony Robles- teaching for probably 20 years and still competes in many events
John Schmidt- expert teacher of 14.1 and one pocket
Charlie Williams - trained top pros Yu Ram Cha,Allison Fisher,Rodney Morris,Erica Park
Allison Fisher - has done numerous schools and academies
Ralph Eckert - author of books and PAT system endorsed by WPA and former Euro champ

The only one not on this list is Charlie Williams. Does Charlie REGULARLY provide pool lessons for profit?

Thanks,
Joey

 

[JoeyA]

Learning how to actually play the game is very different from just learning how to hold the cue, stance, stroke, etc.

I'll be the first to say that all instructors are wonderful for the game but once you have solid basics where do you go from there? Back to the original instructor that has never performed under the pressure of live fire? Never exhibiting their competitive skills in actual combat on any kind of a regular basis?

No ... I think the alternative would be seeking a 'real player' instructor who has gone to war and thrives on the competition, a contender not a pretender. One who knows how to win

Since Joey is an advanced player I think he's looking to list the different species instructor that goes beyond ordinary

Envy may ruffle some feathers in this thread but that's just the way it is ...

The list? True, maybe only a few have real communicative skills, at this particular time :smile:, but one thing's for sure - they all know how to win

Some things just need to be said

Nice list Joey. Good job

Thanks Billy. My intent was not to ruffle and feathers and to accept input from posters in this forum who have some history of posting correct information.

I didn't want to see individuals nominating themselves in the thread. I wouldn't mind receiving a PM privately from individual instructors who have been overlooked who REGULARLY instruct for a profit AND who play at a VERY HIGH LEVEL. It looks bad on the instructors if they come to this thread whining that they aren't included. Also, as I previously mentioned, I didn't want this to become a popularity voting type thing. I wanted to corroborate suggestions with my own experience and that of others.

Thanks again for the support.