Zero X System
- Thread starter david cooksey
- Start date
Did you guys notice the guy was shooting with a house cue? That's why no one heard of him.... he's been hustling off the wall for the past 30 years
I too thought his video (the free one) was fairly well done, at least on the higher standard of "pool" instructionals I've seen in the past 20 years.
A couple comments to what Neil said (for the free video):
1. He spent like 30 seconds on aiming. Didn't make a big deal at all about it, and basically showed the ghost ball graphic, for the benefit of beginners.
2. He then spent about another 30 seconds saying "aiming systems" don't work because there are tons of variables, and even the same shot at a different speed has to be aimed differently. Then basically said you have to just practice them. Obviously this is a HUGE debate on AZB, but its more like he said this in passing. He didn't make a big deal of it, so I don't think we should focus on that part of his video to discredit the rest. (we have enough believers and non-believers of aiming systems right here, lol)
3. The graphic of the line of the shot not lining up until he was down on the shot I noticed also. I think its due to parallax, but agree, it was a bit confusing.
4. I think he called it a "compact stroke" instead of a "pendulum stroke" because he adjusted his backswing length based on how much speed he wanted in the shot.
5. I personally find high center the most reliabale way to make a frozen cut shot. I even used to bet people that didn't know better (C players) to make a shallow angle cut and draw the cb a couple diamonds. For whatever reason, the draw would make the OB pull away from the rail and rattle the pocket.
I too thought his video (the free one) was fairly well done, at least on the higher standard of "pool" instructionals I've seen in the past 20 years.
A couple comments to what Neil said (for the free video):
1. He spent like 30 seconds on aiming. Didn't make a big deal at all about it, and basically showed the ghost ball graphic, for the benefit of beginners.
2. He then spent about another 30 seconds saying "aiming systems" don't work because there are tons of variables, and even the same shot at a different speed has to be aimed differently. Then basically said you have to just practice them. Obviously this is a HUGE debate on AZB, but its more like he said this in passing. He didn't make a big deal of it, so I don't think we should focus on that part of his video to discredit the rest. (we have enough believers and non-believers of aiming systems right here, lol)
3. The graphic of the line of the shot not lining up until he was down on the shot I noticed also. I think its due to parallax, but agree, it was a bit confusing.
4. I think he called it a "compact stroke" instead of a "pendulum stroke" because he adjusted his backswing length based on how much speed he wanted in the shot.
5. I personally find high center the most reliabale way to make a frozen cut shot. I even used to bet people that didn't know better (C players) to make a shallow angle cut and draw the cb a couple diamonds. For whatever reason, the draw would make the OB pull away from the rail and rattle the pocket.
This shot right here is stronger than dirt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=uOliM1fySNE#t=1913s
How many of you would miss position on this shot?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=uOliM1fySNE#t=1913s
How many of you would miss position on this shot?
John, I agree that is a good shot to learn, but it is just an application of the Wagon Wheel idea. What do you find special about it?
For you guys that want to get all over me for answering a question I was asked, before you go nitpicking, learn to read and put things in context. Both of you saw fit to take just parts of what I said, leave out the rest of what I said, and then nitpick the parts you wanted to. Especially you John. And John, why would I put up a video when there are plenty on the subjects already by Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett? Why don't you go watch theirs if you really want to learn something? Aw, forget it, there is no point in trying to explain anything to people that are just here to knock others and not actually learn anything. Go think what you want, I'm tired of this crap. I gave this place a second chance, and it's just not worth it.
Did you guys notice the guy was shooting with a house cue? That's why no one heard of him.... he's been hustling off the wall for the past 30 years
I too thought his video (the free one) was fairly well done, at least on the higher standard of "pool" instructionals I've seen in the past 20 years.
A couple comments to what Neil said (for the free video):
1. He spent like 30 seconds on aiming. Didn't make a big deal at all about it, and basically showed the ghost ball graphic, for the benefit of beginners.
2. He then spent about another 30 seconds saying "aiming systems" don't work because there are tons of variables, and even the same shot at a different speed has to be aimed differently. Then basically said you have to just practice them. Obviously this is a HUGE debate on AZB, but its more like he said this in passing. He didn't make a big deal of it, so I don't think we should focus on that part of his video to discredit the rest. (we have enough believers and non-believers of aiming systems right here, lol)
3. The graphic of the line of the shot not lining up until he was down on the shot I noticed also. I think its due to parallax, but agree, it was a bit confusing.
4. I think he called it a "compact stroke" instead of a "pendulum stroke" because he adjusted his backswing length based on how much speed he wanted in the shot.
5. I personally find high center the most reliabale way to make a frozen cut shot. I even used to bet people that didn't know better (C players) to make a shallow angle cut and draw the cb a couple diamonds. For whatever reason, the draw would make the OB pull away from the rail and rattle the pocket.
Its not a house cue.
Its not a house cue.
lol, fooled me. I thought I saw a Duffern clear round insert near the end. lol
Neil I was just playing with you. As I said you can link to Dr. Dave's videos and provide the extra information OR make your own. I said this in the SPIRIT of fostering discussion and LINKING which is what Tim Berners Lee intended when creating the World Wide Web and inventing hyperlinks. When you point out the things that are wrong with a video on a forum with no links to the contrary position, videos or articles that back your point then it's really not of much use in the grand scheme of things.
But when you add hyperlinks then suddenly the whole thing becomes much more dynamic and useful and informative. This goes for you, for Bob Jewett and anyone with a critique of the accuracy of the information.
And for your information I have probably watched most of Dr. Dave's videos and read most of the information on Bob Jewett's site as well as on Dave's. And I own the books and videos done by Dave. You assume that I don't know this information. Thing is that I do actually disagree - gasp - with some of the things that Dave has put out there and have made my OWN videos on those subjects to INVITE discussion.
Sorry my friend but I feel that you are being preachy instead of being willing to actually discuss things with links and good conversation. It would be sad to see you go because you are a great player and you have a lot of experience. But if you do then you do and lots of great players with lots of experience remain to talk pool.
Action trumps inaction. Tor, Dr. Dave, Mike Page and a BUNCH of other people have put out a lot of great FREE videos that help the viewer to play better pool. All this serves to get people to play more pool in my opinion. If you don't want to make videos then link to them. USE these discussions to link to all the free videos out there and foster more and more views and thus more discussion, more playing and more pool fans who in turn hopefully will one day be as passionate as you are.
Frankly even now I feel that watching these videos makes me a better player IF only just because they force me to go back to basics and think about my habits and assumptions.
I am not saying you shouldn't criticize Neil. You should. I just went to the table to see what you mean by Contact Induced Spin. Frankly I don't find that shooting into the ball at an angle causes cueball spin. The first couple shots I tried I did see spin on the cueball after contact when I though I was hitting it dead square. But then I set up some frozen balls and shot into those and saw no spin on the "cueball". So then I focused and shot the same shots with no spin on the CB at all and sure enough, no spin was on the cue ball.
I will say though that it is VERY EASY to add a tiny dash of spin when you think you are hitting center ball. VERY EASY.
Anyway, dude be a part of the discussion and don't take personal offense, at least not from my comments. I was only busting your balls a little in a friendly way while giving my observations of the content.
Because it's the type of shot which causes fear in most average players. They simply don't know what to do.
As for the Wagon Wheel what is that? My point being that with so many concepts out there who among us but the very few such as yourself knows them all? Edit: Someone sent me a link (thank you) to the Wagon Wheel drill. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b42018ceoE
Yes, Bob the drill you demonstrated would of course cover the shot BUT Tor demonstrated it in a game situation which makes it much more engaging than the very dry technical manner that Dr. Dave narrates in.
I mean plenty of material covers tangent lines and the effects of using stun plus top/bottom. Dr. Dave has some good material but it's seldom presented in a way that is engaging. This particular shot that Tor chose to show is strong because it shows what looks like a tough route to the 6 to actually be fairly easy if the player is well practiced in first looking at the tangent line and disciplined and practiced enough to hit the cue ball properly.
For the money I bet that most average players would dog position on this shot due to fear and lack of confidence in what should happen, and also perhaps a lack of basic knowledge that they once learned but didn't practice until it was ingrained. (me for example)
Last edited:
I am not the greatest pool player,so I found alot of the info in this video well worth what it costs and I know I have picked up at least 50 bux worth of knowledge,So,all I can say is>>>I'm glad he made it!
Maybe for him contact line is an easier way to describe the tangent line. Some people's eyes might glaze over at the word tangent.
Anyway I invited Tor to join the discussion, if he does I hope he gets a nice warm AZB welcome that encourages him to stick around a while.
doubt it, once johnsons finished with him, he'll slit his wrists
Mike Page and Rory Hendrickson have us shoot shot after shot from different distances and speeds hitting the cue ball with bottom where it stops spinning at the time it hits the object ball, ending in a stop shot. This technique is easier for me than trying to hit center cue ball.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
And where is your video?
I commend any person that posts a good free video posted up on the internet. Think I've reviewed just about every one of them 
His stuff is good and his $8.99 video which I purchased (oh and get another one on banks in 2 weeks for free according to the email he sent me) is fantastic for the price. Are there variables left out...of course.. but I've have spent WAY more money for videos from world players that aren't anywhere near as good.
His stuff is good and his $8.99 video which I purchased (oh and get another one on banks in 2 weeks for free according to the email he sent me) is fantastic for the price. Are there variables left out...of course.. but I've have spent WAY more money for videos from world players that aren't anywhere near as good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil
Let me re-iterate that he did a good job on the video. However, I strongly believe that if someone is going to do a video, they should at least take a look at what info is out there, and make sure that the info on their own video is factual and true and not just their own belief. If they want to put their own beliefs out there, that's fine as long as it is stated as such.
Quote by JohnTrue but I didn't see anything that he said that is not true.
Then either you didn't pay attention at all with the intent to actually learn something, but just wanted to be entertained, or with all your posts on here, and supposedly knowledge, you still don't know what a stun shot is supposed to do.
Quote:
In his free video, he refers to the pendulum stroke as the compact stroke. He apparently doesn't realize all the info out there about it.
Quote John:That is not apparent. What is clear is that he has a type of stroke that he says will cover about all situations. And in fact it does.
Yet, if I started referring to you as Bob, instead of John, you would say it is apparent that I don't know about you. hmmm... And, do I really need to search your posts for the times you were knocking the pendulum stroke as NOT doing all some of us claimed it would?
Quote:
When it comes to aiming, he advocates the ghost ball. That's all well and good, but very, very, few people actually do use the ghost ball to aim. It's great for illustration, but not much more than that for most.
quote John:For beginners GB is the best way to describe aiming in my opinion. And actually, GB does work and can be hugely effective IF one is capable of visualizing and holding onto an imaginary ball. Using graphics as Tor does is a great way to show it on video.
Sorry there weren't pictures in my post so you could understand it better, but that's the same thing I said. So, why even comment on it and say the same thing unless you are trying to start something instead of learn something?
Quote:
He then goes on to say that any other system won't work. Well, he is dead wrong on that one. There are quite a few aiming systems out there that do work just fine. He then states that they won't work because you have to use english sometimes. Well, ghost ball won't work then either for the same reason.
Quote John:I missed that part where he said this.
Then why even comment on what I said?
Quote:
He also doesn't seem to realize there is a thing called CIT, (collision induced throw), which means the ghost ball really doesn't work as he describes either. It also means that you can't make a rail shot the way he describes.
Quote John:That is certainly an omission but honestly most shots can be made without adjusting for CIT imo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...M1fySNE#t=745s
So, you agree with what I said, but still felt the need to comment against it. hmm... And, maybe you need to study up on CIT again, or are you only shooting shots a foot from the pocket? Whether you do it consciously or subconsciously, you do have to adjust for it.
Quote:
He says the way he applies english is a big secret. Well, it's not. It's called BHE or back hand english, and has been around for a long time. He also doesn't understand it by the way he describes it and uses it. He also stated there is a lot there you won't see anywhere else. Yet, I couldn't find a single item that isn't in almost any worthwhile book, or hasn't been talked about a lot on here. And, when showing how to get "on line", if you notice, he ISN'T on line with the cue. His cue doesn't get on line until he steers it there in the final stroke.
Quote John:I need to watch that section again. But as for BHE being a secret, it kind of was for a long time. Bob Jewett says that he saw it referenced in 1870 but I don't think he has ever published that reference for us to see. Since 1870 up until about ten years ago though it wasn't put in any books that I read and certainly not in Bob Byrne's Standard Book of Pool which is/was sort of a template for instruction books.
So you agree that it has been published for at least ten years now, but just felt like you just had to knock something I said.
Quote:
His explanation of how to get a stun shot was a little lacking. Rarely are you going to actually hit dead center cb. And, he doesn't seem to be familiar with the term tangent line. A number of times in his pattern play, he stated that a stun shot will go here, yet, in reality, a stun shot would not go where he thinks it would. Prime example is when he has an ob a little off the rail and is hitting it at an angle. He states that the stun shot will bring it straight across table. It doesn't unless the ob is on the rail.
Quote John:Dude, this is a free video and it's not the be all end all of pool instruction. If someone were to diligently apply the lessons contained they would become a decent enough player. The positives here far far far outweigh the negatives.
So, because it's free, no one is allowed to comment on it unless they say "Kumbaya, another freebie!", is that right? No comment was made on any omissions of pool instruction, so why make the comment you did? Oh, yeah, you just want to bust my balls. Did I not say that it was good overall, or did you not read that either? Is this free video not a lead in to show some of his instruction so you will buy his other material? And, does being free mean that we allowed to put up any old thing we want, whether right or wrong, and not get comments on it? Did I merely point out a few errors to others could actually have a little incentive to check out the material before they took it as gospel, or.... are you just being defensive because your videos that you put up on
CTE caught a lot of flack about being wrong? (which, by the way, you eventually had to go back and admit how wrong you were with them.But, I do give you credit for trying to help. At least what I have said here is correct, yet you still feel the need to "chastise" me for pointing out errors. Guess you and others would rather not care about whether the info you are getting is correct or not.)
Quote John:Also I don't understand where he shot any shots that don't go where he said they will go. On the video he demonstrated them. Do you think that he is intentionally misleading folks to make his point?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...M1fySNE#t=745s
John, really? This is exactly what I talked about with taking things out of context, and not actually reading what is written. I'm talking about stun shots, and you post a link to aiming. Really?? I even explained what I was talking about with his errors in the stun shots in the pattern section, and you still only read what you wanted to read, and not what was actually written. I even said "pattern play", so why would you even go to the aiming part of his video? I clearly pointed out where, and what I was referring to, and even said the "why". That you missed it completely, is on you, not me. You want me to supply links, here you go-http://www.learningrx.com/reading-comprehension-skills.htm
Originally Posted by Neil
Let me re-iterate that he did a good job on the video. However, I strongly believe that if someone is going to do a video, they should at least take a look at what info is out there, and make sure that the info on their own video is factual and true and not just their own belief. If they want to put their own beliefs out there, that's fine as long as it is stated as such.
Quote by JohnTrue but I didn't see anything that he said that is not true.
Then either you didn't pay attention at all with the intent to actually learn something, but just wanted to be entertained, or with all your posts on here, and supposedly knowledge, you still don't know what a stun shot is supposed to do.
Quote:
In his free video, he refers to the pendulum stroke as the compact stroke. He apparently doesn't realize all the info out there about it.
Quote John:That is not apparent. What is clear is that he has a type of stroke that he says will cover about all situations. And in fact it does.
Yet, if I started referring to you as Bob, instead of John, you would say it is apparent that I don't know about you. hmmm... And, do I really need to search your posts for the times you were knocking the pendulum stroke as NOT doing all some of us claimed it would?
Quote:
When it comes to aiming, he advocates the ghost ball. That's all well and good, but very, very, few people actually do use the ghost ball to aim. It's great for illustration, but not much more than that for most.
quote John:For beginners GB is the best way to describe aiming in my opinion. And actually, GB does work and can be hugely effective IF one is capable of visualizing and holding onto an imaginary ball. Using graphics as Tor does is a great way to show it on video.
Sorry there weren't pictures in my post so you could understand it better, but that's the same thing I said. So, why even comment on it and say the same thing unless you are trying to start something instead of learn something?
Quote:
He then goes on to say that any other system won't work. Well, he is dead wrong on that one. There are quite a few aiming systems out there that do work just fine. He then states that they won't work because you have to use english sometimes. Well, ghost ball won't work then either for the same reason.
Quote John:I missed that part where he said this.
Then why even comment on what I said?
Quote:
He also doesn't seem to realize there is a thing called CIT, (collision induced throw), which means the ghost ball really doesn't work as he describes either. It also means that you can't make a rail shot the way he describes.
Quote John:That is certainly an omission but honestly most shots can be made without adjusting for CIT imo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...M1fySNE#t=745s
So, you agree with what I said, but still felt the need to comment against it. hmm... And, maybe you need to study up on CIT again, or are you only shooting shots a foot from the pocket? Whether you do it consciously or subconsciously, you do have to adjust for it.
Quote:
He says the way he applies english is a big secret. Well, it's not. It's called BHE or back hand english, and has been around for a long time. He also doesn't understand it by the way he describes it and uses it. He also stated there is a lot there you won't see anywhere else. Yet, I couldn't find a single item that isn't in almost any worthwhile book, or hasn't been talked about a lot on here. And, when showing how to get "on line", if you notice, he ISN'T on line with the cue. His cue doesn't get on line until he steers it there in the final stroke.
Quote John:I need to watch that section again. But as for BHE being a secret, it kind of was for a long time. Bob Jewett says that he saw it referenced in 1870 but I don't think he has ever published that reference for us to see. Since 1870 up until about ten years ago though it wasn't put in any books that I read and certainly not in Bob Byrne's Standard Book of Pool which is/was sort of a template for instruction books.
So you agree that it has been published for at least ten years now, but just felt like you just had to knock something I said.
Quote:
His explanation of how to get a stun shot was a little lacking. Rarely are you going to actually hit dead center cb. And, he doesn't seem to be familiar with the term tangent line. A number of times in his pattern play, he stated that a stun shot will go here, yet, in reality, a stun shot would not go where he thinks it would. Prime example is when he has an ob a little off the rail and is hitting it at an angle. He states that the stun shot will bring it straight across table. It doesn't unless the ob is on the rail.
Quote John:Dude, this is a free video and it's not the be all end all of pool instruction. If someone were to diligently apply the lessons contained they would become a decent enough player. The positives here far far far outweigh the negatives.
So, because it's free, no one is allowed to comment on it unless they say "Kumbaya, another freebie!", is that right? No comment was made on any omissions of pool instruction, so why make the comment you did? Oh, yeah, you just want to bust my balls. Did I not say that it was good overall, or did you not read that either? Is this free video not a lead in to show some of his instruction so you will buy his other material? And, does being free mean that we allowed to put up any old thing we want, whether right or wrong, and not get comments on it? Did I merely point out a few errors to others could actually have a little incentive to check out the material before they took it as gospel, or.... are you just being defensive because your videos that you put up on
CTE caught a lot of flack about being wrong? (which, by the way, you eventually had to go back and admit how wrong you were with them.But, I do give you credit for trying to help. At least what I have said here is correct, yet you still feel the need to "chastise" me for pointing out errors. Guess you and others would rather not care about whether the info you are getting is correct or not.)
Quote John:Also I don't understand where he shot any shots that don't go where he said they will go. On the video he demonstrated them. Do you think that he is intentionally misleading folks to make his point?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...M1fySNE#t=745s
John, really? This is exactly what I talked about with taking things out of context, and not actually reading what is written. I'm talking about stun shots, and you post a link to aiming. Really?? I even explained what I was talking about with his errors in the stun shots in the pattern section, and you still only read what you wanted to read, and not what was actually written. I even said "pattern play", so why would you even go to the aiming part of his video? I clearly pointed out where, and what I was referring to, and even said the "why". That you missed it completely, is on you, not me. You want me to supply links, here you go-http://www.learningrx.com/reading-comprehension-skills.htm
Quote:
He also does not seem to know about collision induced spin on the cb. He shows cutting a ball in the side, and the stun shot would make the cb go straight up table, and then straight back down the same line. It won't do that. Cutting a ball puts spin on the cb. So, when you stun it up table, when it hits the rail, it will have spin on it and come off the rail on an angle. If you want it to come back down the same line, you either have to slow roll with some distance or put a little inside english on it to counter the outside from the shot induced spin.
Quote John:You're already way over my head because I didn't know about CIS on the cue ball either. From what I saw the balls did exactly what he said they would do according to how he was describing the way he was hitting them.
As much as you are on here, and post, yet you somehow missed all those posts about it? Yet, that really doesn't surprise me, I guess. Think about it for a minute, John. If you hit an ob full with a stop shot, what happens? The cb stops dead in it's tracks and goes nowhere. Now, hit the ob at an angle with the same stroke on the cb and you get a stun shot. The cb goes off on the tangent line. For a near full hit, the cb may still stop before going down the line. Now, take a thinner hit, less than a 1/4 ball hit on the ob. Do you really think that hitting that little of the ob that there will be enough counter momentum from it to actually stop the cb for any period of time? The answer is no. So, since the cb does not stop, what actually is happening? The cb wants to stop, but has too much momentum for it to stop. So, the part of the cb that makes contact with the ob actually does slow down, it hit an obstruction. But, there is no obstruction for the rest of the cb. That energy has to go somewhere. So, either the cb splits in two from the force, or one side of the cb slows down while the other side continues on it's merry way. That means, that force is now transferred to sideways rotation on the cb. It's not a lot, but it is there. Which is why when you stun a thin cut to the side, the cb comes off the end rail at an angle and not straight back. It will only come straight back when you hit a slow stun shot and the cb has a slow roll on it after contact giving the cloth friction enough time to cancel the spin on the ob before it hits the rail.
Quote:
Some of this may seem nitpicky to some on here. Sorry, but I don't. If you are going to make a video, make sure that you do a little research first, and know that what info you are putting out there is factual.
Otherwise, you will get people citing you as a source and perpetuating myths. If I really wanted to get nitpicky, there are a number of little things, but I don't see the need to go there.
Quote John:You should be able to review the material and the material should be accurate. As far as being cited as a source.....Neil, this is the internet, all things are sources now and as such all things are up for discussion.
Since you agree that it should be accurate and up for discussion, why bust my balls for doing just that?
Quote John:My opinion is that if someone goes through this entire hour and twenty minutes and takes every single lesson to the table then they will probably be a better player for it. Any principles such as CIT and CIS will be found out pretty quickly by anyone diligent enough to practice. And as much as I personally dislike ghost ball as a method of aiming the fact is that it does work well enough for millions of players to get the concept of aiming in pool.
Again, did I not say it was good overall? And, are you now saying that you aren't diligent enough to practice? (since you had no clue about CIS) And, did I also not say that ghost ball is great for illustrations, but not practical for most in actual play? So, why the comments by you?
Quote John:I wouldn't have called this video "Advanced Pool Lessons" but I can forgive the title because the information contained in it is accurate enough in my opinion and well presented maybe if enough people see it they will be inspired to play more.
Well, I guess your definition of "accurate enough" is a far cry from mine. If I see someone explaining something, and showing something, I expect to get the same results when I try it exactly the same way. If someone says the cb will go down the tangent line, which is very close to 90 degrees from the shot line, on a stun shot, then I expect that to actually happen. Not go somewhere else like a number of shots in the video do. As I previously stated, if the ob is off the rail, the tangent line in NOT 90 degrees to the rail. It is 90 degrees to the shot line. Which means the cb will come off the rail at a little angle, not straight off the rail. If that is not important to you, then don't look for your game to ever get any better than it is, and don't bother with the rest of his lesson because it won't mean anything in reality to you. The tangent line is the tangent line, period. It is NOT just something close and call it accurate enough.
Quote John:Lastly, nothing is stopping you from making your own response video to address the things you pointed out. The nature of YouTube is social networking, you can make comments on the video with links to other videos that support your assertiions, you can pick apart the content and make your own response videos.
Your comment, and the same comment from others is absurd. I am on a forum. I was asked a question on the forum. I stated my answer on the forum. Yet, you feel a forum is not the correct place to answer a forum question, but I should instead go out an buy a camera so I can put my answer on you tube, and then post on the forum a link to somewhere else to answer the question. But, since I was wrong in not making a video, why are you right in picking apart my comments on here without just making a video of your own and commenting on you tube about my comments? In case you hadn't noticed, I'm on AZB, not you tube, and am discussing things on a discussion forum, not a video forum.
Quote John:Wouldn't it be much more helpful to have you and anyone else augmenting the effort that Tor has made with your own supplemental information?
Is that not what I did on here? Sorry it wasn't in pictures for you. Again, look back. I was asked a question of my thoughts on it, and I gave those thoughts. That you or anyone else wants to find fault with that is pure crap. Since when are only your thoughts allowed to be posted on here? Or only thoughts that you want to agree with? This used to be the "to go to" place for correct info. Now, it seems that anytime correct info is posted, some of you seem to find the need to chastise those giving it. You don't really care about correct info, you just want to be entertained with bullshit posts and video clips that show pool whether right or wrong.You say to augment it. It IS. MANY TIMES OVER. I guess you just want a plethora of videos to choose from, not having any real interest in correct info, since you don't pay attention to it anyways.
I say that John, and to others also, because how could that not be true if you also did not have some things in the video in question just jump out at you with you saying "That's not right!" With the volumes written and all the videos made, on stun and stop shots, and how it is the first shot you should learn and MASTER, how can you NOT see that on some shots what he is saying is the tanget line is not the tangent line at all? If that didn't stand out to you, then shame on you! And, if you try and duplicate what he shows, it will mess you up? Or is it just that you don't care if it messes someone else up, it's "close enough" to accurate? Is that why those posting correct info on here get lambasted, and those posting nonsense, bad info, and just plain crap get left alone? Is that why Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett can spend thousands to do slow mo video to show what really happens just to have a bunch of hackers tell them they are wrong because they can "feel" it?
Sorry John, to me info is important, and has to be accurate. I only have one life with so much time, and I don't like it wasted with incorrect info that to you is close enough. And, I take great offense at anyone that wants to knock me, make fun of me, ect. for doing my best to only give correct info, state when it is only an opinion, and for taking the time to correct bad info on here. That you and others find "sport" in it, is sickening, and shows you are only here for entertainment and not knowledge. And, if you are here for knowledge, and don't care if it is accurate, then what use is that knowledge?
He also does not seem to know about collision induced spin on the cb. He shows cutting a ball in the side, and the stun shot would make the cb go straight up table, and then straight back down the same line. It won't do that. Cutting a ball puts spin on the cb. So, when you stun it up table, when it hits the rail, it will have spin on it and come off the rail on an angle. If you want it to come back down the same line, you either have to slow roll with some distance or put a little inside english on it to counter the outside from the shot induced spin.
Quote John:You're already way over my head because I didn't know about CIS on the cue ball either. From what I saw the balls did exactly what he said they would do according to how he was describing the way he was hitting them.
As much as you are on here, and post, yet you somehow missed all those posts about it? Yet, that really doesn't surprise me, I guess. Think about it for a minute, John. If you hit an ob full with a stop shot, what happens? The cb stops dead in it's tracks and goes nowhere. Now, hit the ob at an angle with the same stroke on the cb and you get a stun shot. The cb goes off on the tangent line. For a near full hit, the cb may still stop before going down the line. Now, take a thinner hit, less than a 1/4 ball hit on the ob. Do you really think that hitting that little of the ob that there will be enough counter momentum from it to actually stop the cb for any period of time? The answer is no. So, since the cb does not stop, what actually is happening? The cb wants to stop, but has too much momentum for it to stop. So, the part of the cb that makes contact with the ob actually does slow down, it hit an obstruction. But, there is no obstruction for the rest of the cb. That energy has to go somewhere. So, either the cb splits in two from the force, or one side of the cb slows down while the other side continues on it's merry way. That means, that force is now transferred to sideways rotation on the cb. It's not a lot, but it is there. Which is why when you stun a thin cut to the side, the cb comes off the end rail at an angle and not straight back. It will only come straight back when you hit a slow stun shot and the cb has a slow roll on it after contact giving the cloth friction enough time to cancel the spin on the ob before it hits the rail.
Quote:
Some of this may seem nitpicky to some on here. Sorry, but I don't. If you are going to make a video, make sure that you do a little research first, and know that what info you are putting out there is factual.
Otherwise, you will get people citing you as a source and perpetuating myths. If I really wanted to get nitpicky, there are a number of little things, but I don't see the need to go there.
Quote John:You should be able to review the material and the material should be accurate. As far as being cited as a source.....Neil, this is the internet, all things are sources now and as such all things are up for discussion.
Since you agree that it should be accurate and up for discussion, why bust my balls for doing just that?
Quote John:My opinion is that if someone goes through this entire hour and twenty minutes and takes every single lesson to the table then they will probably be a better player for it. Any principles such as CIT and CIS will be found out pretty quickly by anyone diligent enough to practice. And as much as I personally dislike ghost ball as a method of aiming the fact is that it does work well enough for millions of players to get the concept of aiming in pool.
Again, did I not say it was good overall? And, are you now saying that you aren't diligent enough to practice? (since you had no clue about CIS) And, did I also not say that ghost ball is great for illustrations, but not practical for most in actual play? So, why the comments by you?
Quote John:I wouldn't have called this video "Advanced Pool Lessons" but I can forgive the title because the information contained in it is accurate enough in my opinion and well presented maybe if enough people see it they will be inspired to play more.
Well, I guess your definition of "accurate enough" is a far cry from mine. If I see someone explaining something, and showing something, I expect to get the same results when I try it exactly the same way. If someone says the cb will go down the tangent line, which is very close to 90 degrees from the shot line, on a stun shot, then I expect that to actually happen. Not go somewhere else like a number of shots in the video do. As I previously stated, if the ob is off the rail, the tangent line in NOT 90 degrees to the rail. It is 90 degrees to the shot line. Which means the cb will come off the rail at a little angle, not straight off the rail. If that is not important to you, then don't look for your game to ever get any better than it is, and don't bother with the rest of his lesson because it won't mean anything in reality to you. The tangent line is the tangent line, period. It is NOT just something close and call it accurate enough.
Quote John:Lastly, nothing is stopping you from making your own response video to address the things you pointed out. The nature of YouTube is social networking, you can make comments on the video with links to other videos that support your assertiions, you can pick apart the content and make your own response videos.
Your comment, and the same comment from others is absurd. I am on a forum. I was asked a question on the forum. I stated my answer on the forum. Yet, you feel a forum is not the correct place to answer a forum question, but I should instead go out an buy a camera so I can put my answer on you tube, and then post on the forum a link to somewhere else to answer the question. But, since I was wrong in not making a video, why are you right in picking apart my comments on here without just making a video of your own and commenting on you tube about my comments? In case you hadn't noticed, I'm on AZB, not you tube, and am discussing things on a discussion forum, not a video forum.
Quote John:Wouldn't it be much more helpful to have you and anyone else augmenting the effort that Tor has made with your own supplemental information?
Is that not what I did on here? Sorry it wasn't in pictures for you. Again, look back. I was asked a question of my thoughts on it, and I gave those thoughts. That you or anyone else wants to find fault with that is pure crap. Since when are only your thoughts allowed to be posted on here? Or only thoughts that you want to agree with? This used to be the "to go to" place for correct info. Now, it seems that anytime correct info is posted, some of you seem to find the need to chastise those giving it. You don't really care about correct info, you just want to be entertained with bullshit posts and video clips that show pool whether right or wrong.You say to augment it. It IS. MANY TIMES OVER. I guess you just want a plethora of videos to choose from, not having any real interest in correct info, since you don't pay attention to it anyways.
I say that John, and to others also, because how could that not be true if you also did not have some things in the video in question just jump out at you with you saying "That's not right!" With the volumes written and all the videos made, on stun and stop shots, and how it is the first shot you should learn and MASTER, how can you NOT see that on some shots what he is saying is the tanget line is not the tangent line at all? If that didn't stand out to you, then shame on you! And, if you try and duplicate what he shows, it will mess you up? Or is it just that you don't care if it messes someone else up, it's "close enough" to accurate? Is that why those posting correct info on here get lambasted, and those posting nonsense, bad info, and just plain crap get left alone? Is that why Dr. Dave and Bob Jewett can spend thousands to do slow mo video to show what really happens just to have a bunch of hackers tell them they are wrong because they can "feel" it?
Sorry John, to me info is important, and has to be accurate. I only have one life with so much time, and I don't like it wasted with incorrect info that to you is close enough. And, I take great offense at anyone that wants to knock me, make fun of me, ect. for doing my best to only give correct info, state when it is only an opinion, and for taking the time to correct bad info on here. That you and others find "sport" in it, is sickening, and shows you are only here for entertainment and not knowledge. And, if you are here for knowledge, and don't care if it is accurate, then what use is that knowledge?