who should check and test a new training method and report to the public?
- Thread starter theUBC
- Start date
I think this is a great idea, and i wish you luck. From the little i have seen of your system it looks quite impressive. You will get negative comments from the usual suspects, dont let that put you off, once again good luck.
I'm with you Mr John...........
A mind is a terrible thing to waste by closing it. What's even worse is to encourage others to close theirs.
I guess I could never quite figure that out.
It's like, I have the answer, THERE IS NO ANSWER.
How rediculous..............
Oh Oh. another advertisement.............for an open mind.......
Better stop this one before it catches on.
:grin:
A mind is a terrible thing to waste by closing it. What's even worse is to encourage others to close theirs.
I guess I could never quite figure that out.
It's like, I have the answer, THERE IS NO ANSWER.
How rediculous..............
Oh Oh. another advertisement.............for an open mind.......
Better stop this one before it catches on.
:grin:
I would like to give it a shot too. I primarily use the ghost ball method as that was what I was when I first started playing 12 years ago. I'm a decent player (APA 7 and 8), but I still struggle to cash in regional tournaments. Any system that can improve my aiming would be welcomed.
Agreed...This is a 100% (JoeyA type) grandiose 'Aiming System' promotion...The A.S.S. forum was WISELY created for just such interloper's..Look what happened to poor Neil, he tried to buck the system, and went berserk..:wink:
Puhleeeeeeeze do not interlope, with those "Flaming Systems"...nobody cares...:boring2: :boring2: :boring2: :boring2: (well, maybe 3 out of 52,000)
Last edited:
Dear Mr. WBC
I mean no disrespect...But, if you've been playing for 12 yrs., and have only progessed to an APA 7 or 8, I have a message for you..NO AIMING SYSTEM on earth, will make you a competent, complete player..I would suggest you try Golf, Tennis or Bowling..They also sell "How To Method's" for those games. (hunerts of 'em)..
Dear Mr. WBC
I mean no disrespect...But, if you've been playing for 12 yrs., and have only progessed to an APA 7 or 8, I have a message for you..NO AIMING SYSTEM on earth, will make you a competent, complete player..I would suggest you try Golf, Tennis or Bowling..They also sell "How To Method's" for those games. (hunerts of 'em)..
Stay classy....
I agree 100%
no aiming system will make you a complete player!
What I cover with my training program includes aligning/aiming but a lot more.
Table time will still be needed!!!!
Difference might be that table time with ny method might be more effectiv
E!
It's no magic pill that transforms you into a great player over night but it will cut down your needed training time to become a decent player/great player and will give you knowledge tHat helps. Instead of 15 years to master the most important parts of the game
You will be able to master them within 2 or 5 years
( depEnding how dedicated you are to your training.
Most important it will give you concrete references for aligning, position play, banking and conc
Rete step by step instruction for training from somebody who teaches and plays at professional level.
no aiming system will make you a complete player!
What I cover with my training program includes aligning/aiming but a lot more.
Table time will still be needed!!!!
Difference might be that table time with ny method might be more effectiv
E!
It's no magic pill that transforms you into a great player over night but it will cut down your needed training time to become a decent player/great player and will give you knowledge tHat helps. Instead of 15 years to master the most important parts of the game
You will be able to master them within 2 or 5 years
( depEnding how dedicated you are to your training.
Most important it will give you concrete references for aligning, position play, banking and conc
Rete step by step instruction for training from somebody who teaches and plays at professional level.
Dear Mr. WBC
I mean no disrespect...But, if you've been playing for 12 yrs., and have only progessed to an APA 7 or 8, I have a message for you..NO AIMING SYSTEM on earth, will make you a competent, complete player..I would suggest you try Golf, Tennis or Bowling..They also sell "How To Method's" for those games. (hunerts of 'em)..
No disrespect taken, but considering I only play one hour a week, I couldn't care less what you think about my play. Just like how you being a douchebag is your hobby, pool is mine. You however are closer to becoming a pro than I am...
I would like to throw myself into the ring as a non-believer. Not that I don't believe cte, pro-one & 90/90 have some merit, but I have not seen that they are worth the effort. I once went to Dr. Dave's house to try 90/90-cte aiming using a laser pointer and could not get the consistent answers I was hoping for once I saw where the laser was pointing after the swivel. But I would like to try out your see system.
About me: I used to play 3-cushion at a fairly high level and have had some nice successes nationally. I played mostly by feel although I know plenty of systems for 3-cushion. What was great is that if I wasn't feeling it, I would have the systems to fall back on until I got the feel back, the math never lies, you just have to count correctly and deliver a good stroke.
Playing pool I have always used the ghost ball or point to point when aiming, but again, mostly feel. I have been searching for a system that I could fall back on when I am unable to see the ghost ball or lost my feel (as I had available while playing 3-cushion), but have been unable to find the right system that I could confidently use when I'm not feeling it. Maybe yours is it?
I am not a full time pool player but I have had some successes in pool as well as 3-cushion. I don't play enough to want to put in the time to learn all the nuances of a new system that needs a lot of adjustments, whether conscious or unconscious, but I have 2 weeks to give it a try. It could be fun.
Thanks for the opportunity to try it out.
Dave
About me: I used to play 3-cushion at a fairly high level and have had some nice successes nationally. I played mostly by feel although I know plenty of systems for 3-cushion. What was great is that if I wasn't feeling it, I would have the systems to fall back on until I got the feel back, the math never lies, you just have to count correctly and deliver a good stroke.
Playing pool I have always used the ghost ball or point to point when aiming, but again, mostly feel. I have been searching for a system that I could fall back on when I am unable to see the ghost ball or lost my feel (as I had available while playing 3-cushion), but have been unable to find the right system that I could confidently use when I'm not feeling it. Maybe yours is it?
I am not a full time pool player but I have had some successes in pool as well as 3-cushion. I don't play enough to want to put in the time to learn all the nuances of a new system that needs a lot of adjustments, whether conscious or unconscious, but I have 2 weeks to give it a try. It could be fun.
Thanks for the opportunity to try it out.
Dave
Last edited:
KABOOM. I like your style sir
well said. The crikcets keep chirping and cannot help themselves from criticizing anyone on playing better pool, meanwhile, they have helped NOBODY.....I fixed it and said what I just read.Dear Mr. WBC
I Really mean nothing but disrespect...But, if you've been playing for 12 yrs., and have only progessed to an APA 7 or 8, I have a message for you..NO AIMING SYSTEM on earth, will make you a competent, complete player..I would suggest you try Golf, Tennis or Bowling..They also sell "How To Method's" for those games. (hunerts of 'em)..
I'm trying too!
fixed again
KABOOM. I like your style sir
True this!:thumbup2: jmo.
Ding, ding, ding....we have a winner!
Hi Ekkes my friend,
would have been a pleasure to *shout also HERE*- but how i told you already i wouldn t have really the time to handle something like that.
Talked meanwhile to some guys who used the see-system and they seem to be happy.
I am really looking forward to this *showdown* and i am very curious what the results will be.
And furthermore: I don t think any instructor should have a bad feeling here- this is an interesting idea and usualy just winners can come out at least. The most bad thing would could happen is, that they practiced structured so it just can be good :grin-square:
@Ekkes keep up with the good work- i ll have an eye on you :grin:
lg from germany,
Ingo
would have been a pleasure to *shout also HERE*- but how i told you already i wouldn t have really the time to handle something like that.
Talked meanwhile to some guys who used the see-system and they seem to be happy.
I am really looking forward to this *showdown* and i am very curious what the results will be.
And furthermore: I don t think any instructor should have a bad feeling here- this is an interesting idea and usualy just winners can come out at least. The most bad thing would could happen is, that they practiced structured
so it just can be good :grin-square:@Ekkes keep up with the good work- i ll have an eye on you :grin:
lg from germany,
Ingo
Hi Dave,
just my opinion: you would be (from my point of view) for sure a great example. You re knowledged, you expirienced - so this would be fun for you- i could really imagine that you would be a perfect student
In my opinion, Pro-1 or See-System is damn hard to learn *new*, if you re already expirienced-but it also can help as kind of a 2nd *double check* system. If you really want something, you can learn almost everything. The willing is important and the desire
lg
Ingo, who isn t a yaysayera and also not a *pure* naysayer
Once i ll find the time i ll for sure try to meet Ekkes or Stan Shuffett to let both try to *give an old guy* a *knowledge-injection*
I think a good evaluation system could be designed for various pool playing teaching systems. All evaluation systems have strengths and weakness and here is one that appears to be suited to the pool playing world.
There are some unique aspects in pocket billiards such as the reliability and stability of measurements (scores don’t change easily) and the ability to measure unique aspects of the systems presented. In the rough draft outlined below any system can be evaluated or any component of a system of instruction.
You probably need a little help from a professor at your local university to refine the study. Talk with someone who has experience in multivariate analysis. They do not have to have knowledge of pool playing and can begin from what is outlined here. See a Prof in the Stat or Psych Department. Many will not charge any fees especially if they think there could be a publication that came from the results. In a well-designed study the results would be of interest to any respected sports psychology journal. This means you would have to work closely with the professor and follow the recommended protocol. Here is a rough outline.
Use what is called pre and post testing design: Test a person before the training and then test again after the training. It makes no difference if the person has prior experience with pool playing. In fact, a variety of types of players would help in identifying which types of players benefit most from a particular training regime.
This is called a change score analysis and there are several problems with this very powerful method of detecting differences in before and after groups. Because measurements in pool playing ability are reliable and stable (resistant to change) large groups are not required to detect differences. When differences are found in small groups (15 – 20 people) the difference are probably real and merit further study.
Establish a baseline ability using something such as Bob Jewett’s training methods. Next, one half of the group is randomly assigned to the new teaching method while the other half is given a placebo treatment. There are more complicated studies but this is the basic idea. A statistical analysis can identify any significant differences and any real differences. From what I have seen there are real differences here.
Change score analysis has many requirements if it is to identify real differences. The requirements begin with a highly reliable measurement system (rtt should be in the 90s). I suspect that Bob Jewett’s training / evaluation system redesigned for a study would meet this requirement. Incidentally there is also a need for a standardized assessment of pool playing ability and your local friendly Prof might be interested in building such an instrument.
At most universities there will be a young professor who would be more than happy to help someone design such studies for free with the limited information provided here. Tell them the basic design came from a retired distinguished professor of research who has played pool for many years. This may help get them interested. BTW if the first Prof you approach is not interested ask him or her for a referral. People with expertise in multivariate statitics are a small group and most of them know each other. These kinds of studies are fun and often a diversion from their other work when you have good colleagues who are seriously interested and willing to collect the data. A win - win situation.
There are some unique aspects in pocket billiards such as the reliability and stability of measurements (scores don’t change easily) and the ability to measure unique aspects of the systems presented. In the rough draft outlined below any system can be evaluated or any component of a system of instruction.
You probably need a little help from a professor at your local university to refine the study. Talk with someone who has experience in multivariate analysis. They do not have to have knowledge of pool playing and can begin from what is outlined here. See a Prof in the Stat or Psych Department. Many will not charge any fees especially if they think there could be a publication that came from the results. In a well-designed study the results would be of interest to any respected sports psychology journal. This means you would have to work closely with the professor and follow the recommended protocol. Here is a rough outline.
Use what is called pre and post testing design: Test a person before the training and then test again after the training. It makes no difference if the person has prior experience with pool playing. In fact, a variety of types of players would help in identifying which types of players benefit most from a particular training regime.
This is called a change score analysis and there are several problems with this very powerful method of detecting differences in before and after groups. Because measurements in pool playing ability are reliable and stable (resistant to change) large groups are not required to detect differences. When differences are found in small groups (15 – 20 people) the difference are probably real and merit further study.
Establish a baseline ability using something such as Bob Jewett’s training methods. Next, one half of the group is randomly assigned to the new teaching method while the other half is given a placebo treatment. There are more complicated studies but this is the basic idea. A statistical analysis can identify any significant differences and any real differences. From what I have seen there are real differences here.
Change score analysis has many requirements if it is to identify real differences. The requirements begin with a highly reliable measurement system (rtt should be in the 90s). I suspect that Bob Jewett’s training / evaluation system redesigned for a study would meet this requirement. Incidentally there is also a need for a standardized assessment of pool playing ability and your local friendly Prof might be interested in building such an instrument.
At most universities there will be a young professor who would be more than happy to help someone design such studies for free with the limited information provided here. Tell them the basic design came from a retired distinguished professor of research who has played pool for many years. This may help get them interested. BTW if the first Prof you approach is not interested ask him or her for a referral. People with expertise in multivariate statitics are a small group and most of them know each other. These kinds of studies are fun and often a diversion from their other work when you have good colleagues who are seriously interested and willing to collect the data. A win - win situation.
Last edited:
good picks
Those are two good picks, and for instructors I would pick Mr. Jewett. He has amazing knowledge, and will give a fair assesment.
Those are two good picks, and for instructors I would pick Mr. Jewett. He has amazing knowledge, and will give a fair assesment.