Very Good Post.:thumbup2:
Why?
- Thread starter (((Satori)))
- Start date
Very Good Post.:thumbup2:
Good Post & True.
But...when it comes down to do or die, it's usually one or the other that makes the decision as to how to proceed & they are usually not held in a 50/50 percentage by the individual.
I've done much coaching in sports & I'll take the player with more 'Heart' everytime given that the differential of other aspects is not TOO wide.
I believe CJ has said, that when he is teaching or is making an instructional DVD his playing level falls.
TOO much thinking is sometimes not a good thing.
We don't say let's think about it or let's study it.. We say 'Let's Play'. Children Play & they usually perform well when playing & without knowing all of the information regarding what they are doing.
Satorie said it well. There needs to be fine balance between helpful & hurtful 'facts'.
I have often stopped myself from saying something when coaching because the info I was about to give may do more harm than good. Sometimes it's all about the timing & also sometimes it's simply better for a player to 'learn' something on their own.
Best 2 You & All,
Rick
CJ bangs hotter chicks??
CJ is simply a FAR superior talent and sees the game in a way that many of us never will.
Any other answer and we're NOT being honest with ourselves.
After a few hours, my thoughts on TOI changed, too. I started out with expectations of what inside spin was going to do after using it for years.
I refined the stroke and stopped spinning the cue ball. Then I noticed the change in the movement of the cue ball. Unlike center stun, the cue ball had less movement and I could control it more off of the rails.
I admit, I arm chaired the idea for awhile before I tried it out. I had my doubts and decided to try it with an open mind. How could something so simple change anything?
You have to give it a concerted effort. I realized I had nothing to lose if I didn't like it and I could always go back to my old game. Instead, I gained a new way of playing and am still learning what I can do with it...when to use it and when not. I like the idea of adding a new segment to my game and being able to cinch more shots. Lots of pluses.
Best,
Mike
I think you are mistaken. I don't think anybody should play the game from their head anymore than a great musician should play from his or her head. The technique should be learned until it is automatic and you no longer need to think, but merely execute.
Charlie Parker was asked about how to learn to play jazz. He said you should take the time to learn all the scales, chords, harmonies, etc. and practice them until you have mastered the technique. When it comes time to actually play, however, you should forget everything you learned and just blow. That is what I mean by playing from the heart.
Of course. But learning and knowledge aren't the same as thinking too much at the table. All good players know a lot about the "science" of the game whether they realize it or not. Better players know more, also often without realizing it. Our subconscious ability to execute on the table is helped by knowledge, not hindered by it.
pj
chgo
One can be taught the 'science' of a game, etc.
One can not really be taught Heart, one either has it or one doesn't.
That is why it is such a valued 'commodity'....by coaches of team sports....& coaches of individuals too, I guess.
Here's a link related to this post...https://www.youtube.com/watch?featu...lk8&x-yt-ts=1421914688&x-yt-cl=84503534#t=103
Best,
Mike
Good post, thanks!
We can by choice, will connect to different parts - we do it all the time. Example - when you fall in love where was the biggest feeling of connection?
What do we say about Family? We are connected by blood which is connected to ?
The similarities is everywhere if you Open up and see them.
Feel the tingle, the focus. To take hold of something you need to open up and then close.
Literally, if you want to drink water from a glas, how do you do? open, close, open, close, tension, relax, tension, relax.
Everybody knows, everybody can
Regards
Chrippa
Ps what you are connected to shows in writing, words, posts, threads. And the responses that we all give (or not) is a result of something, a feeling, a tingling. Do I show emotions like angry - kind, patronising (looking down etc) - uplifting, pushing - or pulling.
The pushing we do when we stroke is a result of what we have made a choice of to do when we are pulled by something.
We favour (combining of feelings, emotions) certain looks in the opposite (man - female) and we look for that (open up to let that pulls us, relax) and when we see it we push forward (walk - motion, closing the gap, - tension) and a marriage is the result (a connection).
Play pool we want the ob fall into the pocket, when we have everything in line - it does, when the "chain" is "broken" we take hold of the miss,- mistake.
If we want to catch a fish, do we use a bait that pulls the fish to the hook or do we put a bait that pushes the fish away?
You can't back up that statement. How can you say for sure that our ability to execute is not hindered by knowledge?
Certainly, Pat, basic knowledge of the fundamentals and rules of the games are essential, but does one really need to know the physics behind speed-to-spin ratios, coefficients of friction of ball surfaces, margins for error at each distance in degrees, minutes, and seconds, and so on ad nauseam?
I think this stuff not only can get in your way, it can actually ruin your game. Do you think CJ possessed any off this arcane knowledge when he arrived upon our shores some three years ago? Has the efforts of several persistent members to educate him in these matters made one iota of difference in his game?
CJ is the type of player who learned the basics years ago and has arrived at a point where he breaks the balls, looks at the layout he is stuck with, says to the balls, "OB... you go there, CB... you go here", and is surprised as heck when they don't obey his whims. That's what I mean by playing from the heart instead of the head. It's the way into the zone, AKA dead stroke.
Last night I was thinking about this while watching the Klatt/Bautista Bigfoot match. Klatt came out of the gate with some mistakes that quickly led to him getting behind. I can't remember the score, but I think it was 4-2 Bautista, and the normally slow and methodical Klatt got even slower and more tentative.
I thought he was out of it, but he made a decent runout and you could see him pick up his pace beyond anything I ever saw him play at. His game got sharper the quicker he played, and he ended up running out most of the rest of the set, giving up just one more game (I think, I was tired and a bit tipsy Lol).
I've watched Klatt play a lot, both on TV and in real life, and have never seen him play that way. He is usually so deliberate, thinking of every possibility before finally settling on the (obvious) shot. Last night he wasn't playing like that at the end. He was in dead punch. He was playing from the heart instead of the head.
You're still confusing knowledge with overthinking at the table.
But believe what you want - avoid learning; it's OK with me.
pj
chgo
Good post, thanks!
We can by choice, will connect to different parts - we do it all the time. Example - when you fall in love where was the biggest feeling of connection?
What do we say about Family? We are connected by blood which is connected to ?
The similarities is everywhere if you Open up and see them.
Feel the tingle, the focus. To take hold of something you need to open up and then close.
Literally, if you want to drink water from a glas, how do you do? open, close, open, close, tension, relax, tension, relax.
Everybody knows, everybody can
Regards
Chrippa
Ps what you are connected to shows in writing, words, posts, threads. And the responses that we all give (or not) is a result of something, a feeling, a tingling. Do I show emotions like angry - kind, patronising (looking down etc) - uplifting, pushing - or pulling.
The pushing we do when we stroke is a result of what we have made a choice of to do when we are pulled by something.
We favour (combining of feelings, emotions) certain looks in the opposite (man - female) and we look for that (open up to let that pulls us, relax) and when we see it we push forward (walk - motion, closing the gap, - tension) and a marriage is the result (a connection).
Play pool we want the ob fall into the pocket, when we have everything in line - it does, when the "chain" is "broken" we take hold of the miss,- mistake.
If we want to catch a fish, do we use a bait that pulls the fish to the hook or do we put a bait that pushes the fish away?
Good Post.:thumbup2:
Good Post. :thumbup2:
Jason Klatt uses CTE....he made a good study of Landon's game and he liked what he saw.
So, I personally taught Jason Pro One.
I did not hear much out him about his progress for many months after that....which can be very normal.
A couple of years later I sat with Sarah Rousey st an event and she detailed out how Jason attributed his much improved game to his hard work with CTE.
He has continued to develop his game and CTE Is part of it.
Stan Shuffett
So, I personally taught Jason Pro One.
I did not hear much out him about his progress for many months after that....which can be very normal.
A couple of years later I sat with Sarah Rousey st an event and she detailed out how Jason attributed his much improved game to his hard work with CTE.
He has continued to develop his game and CTE Is part of it.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
Vernacular?
What good is knowledge if one never accesses it because one never needs it.
Also there is 'useless' knowledge as it is either not needed or 'inapplicable' to a given situation & if one is sifting through it then one is wasting time & focus.
One can simply have two choices and over think the options or one can have a complete library of knowledged & quickly only access that which is applicable & needed. That which is 'inapplicable' for that situation is not needed. So...do not even consider it.
Now we could get into a war over my use of the terms 'inapplicable', needed, & not needed.
That is why 'inapplicable' is in single quotes but can be easily be overlooked or avoided if one so chooses & if one wishes to engage in a word war.
Some study the 'science' that the game exhibits while others play the game with virtually no consideration to said science.
To say that one knows something just because it exists in an activity that they perform or cause is incorrect in my opinion.
That is, I guess depending on how one defines the word 'know' or the phrase 'to know'.
Does it mean consciously or does one consider subconscious projections as knowing.
Perhaps the mixing of subconscious & conscious is the root cause of many a AZB heated 'discussion'.
Einstein's Theory of Relativity.
Relative to what? That's a good question.
Best 2 All,
Rick
What good is knowledge if one never accesses it because one never needs it.
Also there is 'useless' knowledge as it is either not needed or 'inapplicable' to a given situation & if one is sifting through it then one is wasting time & focus.
One can simply have two choices and over think the options or one can have a complete library of knowledged & quickly only access that which is applicable & needed. That which is 'inapplicable' for that situation is not needed. So...do not even consider it.
Now we could get into a war over my use of the terms 'inapplicable', needed, & not needed.
That is why 'inapplicable' is in single quotes but can be easily be overlooked or avoided if one so chooses & if one wishes to engage in a word war.
Some study the 'science' that the game exhibits while others play the game with virtually no consideration to said science.
To say that one knows something just because it exists in an activity that they perform or cause is incorrect in my opinion.
That is, I guess depending on how one defines the word 'know' or the phrase 'to know'.
Does it mean consciously or does one consider subconscious projections as knowing.
Perhaps the mixing of subconscious & conscious is the root cause of many a AZB heated 'discussion'.
Einstein's Theory of Relativity.
Relative to what? That's a good question.
Best 2 All,
Rick
I'm not confusing anything. I love to learn, and I've actually learned a lot from you. Glad to see you out of the pokey and back here where you belong.
What I am addressing is the question posed by the OP regarding your play vs. CJ's. I strongly suspect (but cannot prove) that CJ thinks at the table less than you do, and relies more on instinct than on logic to get through a rack, and the fact that you understand way more about the science of the game than he does (and likely more than most pros understand) wouldn't help you at all in a contest against top players who have learned how to completely let go and let the game play through them.
Last edited:
It helps me a lot, all the time. But it doesn't help me enough to beat top players who have spent their lives at the game (duh). A better question is would CJ-with-knowledge beat CJ-without-it?
You equate lack of knowledge with the ability to do that?
pj
chgo
Good Post.
One does not have to not have knowledge to not access the knowledge that one has. That's 3 'nots' in that statement.
The knowledge can be filed away in cabinet D & one never opens file cabinet D.
I have the 3 years of physics but I 'never' think physics when playing. I play by feel more than anything else.
Maybe that's because I started playing before I had the physics.
This conversation would get more interaction if it were in CJ's thread, I think.
Last edited:
Do you know of any top player ever who knows or knew more factual scientific info about the game than you do?
I don't know much - only some of what makes stuff happen on a pool table. And I don't know what top players know or don't know. I do know some very good players who know more than I do - some of them post here.
Is your point "knowing more than top players must be bad for your game"? If it isn't obvious to you that's not logically sound, I can't help you.
pj
chgo