PDA

View Full Version : predicting CB direction with all types of shots

dr_dave
09-26-2007, 02:37 PM
I've posted information like this in the past; but since this topic has come up a lot recently, I thought I would post it again (with current links and new information).

"Where will the cue ball go after it hits an object ball?"

For a stun shot, most people know the right answer: in the tangent line direction, perpendicular to the OB direction. This is the 90-degree rule (see my Jan '04 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2004/jan04.pdf)). If you want a more precise answer that accounts for various effects (e.g., friction and English), see my March-June '05 articles (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/index.html). FYI, here is a convenient one-page summary of the 90-degree rule (http://billiards.colostate.edu/resources/90_degree_rule_summary.pdf).

For a rolling CB, the cue ball changes direction by about 30 degrees for a wide range of cut shots (1/4 to 3/4 ball hit). This is the 30 degree rule (see my April '04 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2004/april04.pdf)). If you want to be more precise, the angle is a little more (about 34 degrees) closer to a 1/2-ball hit and a little less (about 27 degrees) closer to a 1/4-ball or 3/4-ball hit. If you want to know how to account for speed effects, see my June '05 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2005/june05.pdf). If you want an easy way to use your hand to accurately visualize the cue ball direction, use the Dr. Dave peace-sign technique (see NV 3.8 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/NV3-8.htm)). If you want to know how to precisely calibrate your hand for the 30 degree (or any other) angle, see the posting concerning Billy_Bob's finger technique (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=227266&amp;page =0&amp;view=&amp;sb=&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=). Also, see my 30-degree-rule angle templates (http://billiards.colostate.edu/resources/30-degree-rule_angle_templates.pdf). FYI, here is a convenient one-page summary of the 30-degree rule (http://billiards.colostate.edu/resources/30_degree_rule_summary.pdf).

For a draw shot with good draw action, the trisect system is your answer (see my March '06 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2006/march06.pdf)). You can use a modified version of the peace-sign technique to predict the cue ball direction (see the article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2006/march06.pdf) for illustrations and examples).

For shots "in between" all of these different cases, the cue ball will go somewhere in between the indicated directions. The only way to get a feel for how much "in between" the cue ball will go is to practice ... a lot!

Regards,
Dave

wolfdancer
09-26-2007, 10:07 PM
I won't scare anybody at a pool table, but my pocketing skills jumped up a couple of notches, when I began visualizing angles.
I read somewhere that you can't teach people to pocket balls, as we see the shot differently?
I began with Marvin Chen's "double the distance" method, then C.J. Wiley's "edge or the center", then Hal Houle, and a little second hand S.A.M.
I now can run 3 balls...HALLAJULAH !!

1Time
09-27-2007, 08:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> I've posted information like this in the past; but since this topic has come up a lot recently, I thought I would post it again (with current links and new information).

"Where will the cue ball go after it hits an object ball?"

For a stun shot, most people know the right answer: in the tangent line direction, perpendicular to the OB direction. This is the 90-degree rule (see my Jan '04 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2004/jan04.pdf)). If you want a more precise answer that accounts for various effects (e.g., friction and English), see my March-June '05 articles (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/index.html). FYI, here is a convenient one-page summary of the 90-degree rule (http://billiards.colostate.edu/resources/90_degree_rule_summary.pdf).

For a rolling CB, the cue ball changes direction by about 30 degrees for a wide range of cut shots (1/4 to 3/4 ball hit). This is the 30 degree rule (see my April '04 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2004/april04.pdf)). If you want to be more precise, the angle is a little more (about 34 degrees) closer to a 1/2-ball hit and a little less (about 27 degrees) closer to a 1/4-ball or 3/4-ball hit. If you want to know how to account for speed effects, see my June '05 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2005/june05.pdf). If you want an easy way to use your hand to accurately visualize the cue ball direction, use the Dr. Dave peace-sign technique (see NV 3.8 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/NV3-8.htm)). If you want to know how to precisely calibrate your hand for the 30 degree (or any other) angle, see the posting concerning Billy_Bob's finger technique (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=227266&amp;page =0&amp;view=&amp;sb=&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=). Also, see my 30-degree-rule angle templates (http://billiards.colostate.edu/resources/30-degree-rule_angle_templates.pdf). FYI, here is a convenient one-page summary of the 30-degree rule (http://billiards.colostate.edu/resources/30_degree_rule_summary.pdf).

For a draw shot with good draw action, the trisect system is your answer (see my March '06 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2006/march06.pdf)). You can use a modified version of the peace-sign technique to predict the cue ball direction (see the article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2006/march06.pdf) for illustrations and examples).

For shots "in between" all of these different cases, the cue ball will go somewhere in between the indicated directions. The only way to get a feel for how much "in between" the cue ball will go is to practice ... a lot!

Regards,
Dave

PS: More info and discussion concerning all of these principles can be found in the thread summary section of my website (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html). <hr /></blockquote>

This is some really useful info. I like "rule of thumb" pointers like these, but never knew of any for CB movement before reading dr_dave's posts. Hard to imagine how I ever learned to move the CB around so well without having read them.

dr_dave
09-28-2007, 09:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 1Time:</font><hr>This is some really useful info. I like "rule of thumb" pointers like these, but never knew of any for CB movement before reading dr_dave's posts. Hard to imagine how I ever learned to move the CB around so well without having read them.<hr /></blockquote>Thank you. I'm glad at least a few people out there think the info and resource links I post are not just "pontificating, self-promoting commercialism." /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Regards,
Dave

1Time
09-28-2007, 10:12 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote 1Time:</font><hr>This is some really useful info. I like "rule of thumb" pointers like these, but never knew of any for CB movement before reading dr_dave's posts. Hard to imagine how I ever learned to move the CB around so well without having read them.<hr /></blockquote>Thank you. I'm glad at least a few people out there think the info and resource links I post are not just "pontificating, self-promoting commercialism." /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

You're welcome. And I'm sure the many visitors of this board appreciate the info you provide as well.

bsmutz
09-28-2007, 11:13 AM
Fortunately there are only a couple of Chicken Little's that visit here regularly that think some sort of catastrophic misinformation dissemination is going to occur which will bring the future of pool worldwide to its knees. At least in one person's case, they're really harboring deep seated resentment towards someone else (besides Dr. Dave) that told them to look left before they crossed the street and only after they had been run over a few times did they finally figure out that it was a two way street. It wasn't Dr. Dave's fault, but apparently this person thinks that by dunning him at every turn, (s)he will be able to prevent this from happening to countless other dupes. Don't worry, Dave. Anyone with any sense can see that what you have accomplished required years of hard work and dedication. It may not be perfect, but neither is anyone else's work, and pool isn't perfect either.
I've participated in many online bulletin boards in my time. I've always been dismayed at the wealth of information that gets squandered into the ether. I have also at one time tried to capture the best posts and categorize them into a collection that would be easier to search and find the particular information that one might be looking for. It is not an easy task, and as it turned out, one that I did not have the time and energy for. You are to be commended on your efforts in that regard for this board, not to mention all the other contributions. Next time I'm hoisting a cold one (probably tonight), I'm going to drink a toast to Dr. Dave for putting up with all the non-constructive criticism. I think I would have given up a long time ago.

wolfdancer
09-28-2007, 11:46 AM
"pontificating, self-promoting commercialism."
If I was to offer for sale here, a one-eyed, arthritic, hunting dog, with a poor sense of smell...that would be commercialism...(I might get a few replies from them Alabama boys,theys always looking for a bargain)
"Pontificating, self-promoting" them's just insults, and cheap shots at that.
If I had any problem with your posts...I'd direct them to you, in private....or I'd take it up with the admin here....who makes and enforces the rules.
As to being linked back to your site...there has to be someplace to store that info......and 99.9% is free.
I have your latest DVD, by the way....had to outbid 100 rabid fans over on Ebay for it. Some of the losers then bid on Barry Bonds baseball.
There have been many links posted here, CB, Joe Tucker,RandyG, Steve, even the Deeman....what I believe BD wants to stop...is direct sales promotions.
I've purchased from CB, and Joe....and when Dee comes out with the Deeman Bobble Head doll....I'll be buying from him.
Final note...it's like that old Doctor joke..."Doc, it hurts when I do this" and the Doc replies "Don't do that"

wolfdancer
09-28-2007, 11:54 AM
Bill, Bravo !!! well written.
your "look before crossing" post reminded me of my first visit to Australia...Brisbane was our first stop. I looked one way, stepped off the curb, and was narrowly missed being hit by a car, driven the wrong way.....turns out that they all drive the wrong way over there....

cushioncrawler
09-28-2007, 03:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Bill, Bravo !!! well written.
your "look before crossing" post reminded me of my first visit to Australia...Brisbane was our first stop. I looked one way, stepped off the curb, and was narrowly missed being hit by a car, driven the wrong way.....turns out that they all drive the wrong way over there....<hr /></blockquote>Yank cars havtahav a sign on the back saying "left hand drive". I reckon that yank (and canadian) pedestrianz shood have a similar sign. I remember that a canadian lady woz hit and killed in ballarat in 1967, and fatal head'onz are frequent on our "tourist roads". madMac.

Caromsoft
09-30-2007, 11:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Bill, Bravo !!! well written.
your "look before crossing" post reminded me of my first visit to Australia...Brisbane was our first stop. I looked one way, stepped off the curb, and was narrowly missed being hit by a car, driven the wrong way.....turns out that they all drive the wrong way over there.... <hr /></blockquote>That brings back memories of my trip to Australia. In Sydney they actually have painted on the roads at crosswalks "Look Right" /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Eric.
10-01-2007, 12:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Thank you. I'm glad at least a few people out there think the info and resource links I post are not just "pontificating, self-promoting commercialism." /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I guess you weren't "done with it" afterall. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Dave, perhaps you and your nuthugger bsmutz should get a room /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Like I said, you are entitled to your opinions, just as I am.
I could care less if you market your material to suckers, but if you don't think constant, non stop promotion of your book and DVD isn't "self-promoting commercialism", then you need to pass out more Kool Aid for the followers.

Eric &gt;jes calls it like it is

wolfdancer
10-01-2007, 12:23 PM
Seems like you want to make a name here, by trying to put Dr. Dave down. Also seems like you have made your point...you don't like him, nor his material. What more is there to add?
Will you now be stalking Dr. Dave, adding some negative comment to anything he posts?
Dr. Dave's research.

SKennedy
10-01-2007, 01:10 PM
I was shooting pool long before I ever heard of Dr. Dave. Does that mean he has nothing to offer me to improve my game? Of course not. If I felt that way about him or anyone else, then you can rest assured my game will not improve and has become stagnant. I have not been reading or posting here for long, but I have not found Dr. Dave to be guilty of anything other than possessing the following: a love for the game, the ability and resources to study the physics of the game, and a willingness to share that information with others.
For those of you who have reached the pinnacle of your game and don't need any help from anyone, congratulations! As for the rest of us, we will continue to work on our game. I've never met a pro yet who believed he/she had reached the top of their game...no matter the game or sport.

1Time
10-01-2007, 01:29 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> I've never met a pro yet who believed he/she had reached the top of their game...no matter the game or sport. <hr /></blockquote>

Pros reach there peak whether anyone recognizes it or not, and then their skills and abilities deteriorate. That's why pros retire and there are senior tours.

SKennedy
10-01-2007, 02:09 PM
I'm not talking about our own personal peak based upon experience, knowledge, aging, etc. I'm talking about our potential. No matter how well I shoot, which I grant is not that great, I feel like I can always play better and more consistently. At my age, my potential will never be what it was at 19. However, I make up for that loss by utilizing experience and knowledge I did not possess at 19. But I sure wish I knew as much at 19 as I do now....and that is my point. Your game is always changing. It is, or should be, dynamic. As we change, the way we play the game also changes. The changes may not be drastic. When I first started playing I could not beat anyone. Therefore, I learned to play defensively. I did manage to win a few more games, but mainly it prolonged the inevitable loss and only helped my ego. As my game improved, substantially so, I was still playing too defensively. Some good players schooled me about playing more aggressively, which took my game to a new level. After a 20 year lay off and now playing league on the little bar box tables, I've had to re-invent my defense again. This session we will be playing on 9 fters and suspect I will be much more aggressive again. Regardless, I may be getting at the age where the deterioration of my game is at a faster pace than I can overcome. When that happened to my grandfather, he quit playing. I always thought it was a shame he quit, even though he was still better than most. Nothing is more frustrating than losing to some cocky 20 y/o who could never have beat you in your "prime."

wolfdancer
10-01-2007, 02:42 PM
I've written about this before...but we have a 70 yr old that's a threat to win any tournament that he plays in. He also won the Western BCA 8 and 9 ball events ...about 500 entries in each...then a week later won the regional ACS 8 ball, and did well in the 9 ball event...about 250 entries there.
I don't play as good as I thought I did back then, but play better then I actually played.....
Jon's my hero, and when I grows up, I want to be just like him

SKennedy
10-01-2007, 07:53 PM
I have a t-shirt that reads, "The older I get, the better I was." My problem is that I've been wearing it for a long time.....

bsmutz
10-02-2007, 12:13 PM
Doesn't it seem odd to you, Eric., that the ONLY post in this entire thread that mentions anything about Dr. Dave's book or DVD is YOURS (and now, by association, this one)? Now YOU are advertising for Dr. Dave. How does that feel? Just for the record, I've noticed in the past that people who have difficulty discussing issues intelligently and without childish name calling, are usually the first to resort to homosexual references in an effort to demean those that they cannot hope to carry on a reasonable discourse with. I've been happily married for 24 years and strongly resent your insinuation and lack of civility.

As far as Dave is concerned, I've never met him nor do I imagine that I ever will. It is just my opinion that he is doing more good than harm by being here. I also do not think that he is doing anything wrong by posting the links to the FREE information that he has on his web site (which contains more than just his learnings/teachings). It appears to me to be a ready reference with information most anyone can use to broaden their knowledge about multiple facets of the game. Apparently I feel just as strongly about this as you do about the "harm" that it does and your feeling that he is a "constant, non-stop" self-promoter. I'm pretty sure that there are a few people that post here that feel the same way you do. I'm also sure that there are others who feel the same as I do.

My main concern is that Dave doesn't feel that he should leave this board because he is constantly under attack. I want him to know that others appreciate his work by backing him up when he is attacked. We had a very similar situation with Billy Bob about a year ago where you attacked him constantly. At that time, you stated that you didn't want BB to quit posting, but guess what, Eric.? There's no need for this. Make your point and move on. Let's make people feel welcome instead of driving them away. It's not going to be perfect and it doesn't have to be. Let the moderators do their job and let us do ours. Look at the big picture and don't sweat the small stuff.

Eric.
10-02-2007, 02:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bsmutz:</font><hr> We had a very similar situation with Billy Bob about a year ago where you attacked him constantly. At that time, you stated that you didn't want BB to quit posting, but guess what, Eric.? <hr /></blockquote>

Okay. Now, it seems like we have the real reason why you "have it in" for me, why you seem to follow my posts and post an antagonistic reply; you felt that I hurt your little buddies feelings, so now you have a grudge.

You're something else, Smutz.

Eric

Deeman3
10-02-2007, 02:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> I've written about this before...but we have a 70 yr old that's a threat to win any tournament that he plays in. He also won the Western BCA 8 and 9 ball events ...about 500 entries in each...then a week later won the regional ACS 8 ball, and did well in the 9 ball event...about 250 entries there.
I don't play as good as I thought I did back then, but play better then I actually played.....
Jon's my hero, and when I grows up, I want to be just like him <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Wolf,

As you and I have discussed before, I've been beat by more old men hitting the ball 175 yards up the center of the fairway, then the next next to the green and then chipping next to the hole, while I blasted a 260 yarder into the woods, swung from the heels to get out, hit one over the green and three putted. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

About the same in pool. Don't let those old blind guys play you some "friendly" one pocket for more than you can afford to lose. In Nashville in the 1980's, I used to have an old player named John McChesney who kept putting me out of tournaments week after week, almost never making a position mistake but also never making a powerful shot. I asked him after a particularily bad whipping, "I know you can't see anymore! How do you make all those shots?" He says, "I can't see worth a crap but I've been playing so long I remember where they're at."

There are a few Johns (Jons) left out there. Gives us something to look forward to. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif Of course, you're closer than me, by a small bit. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif</font color> <font color="red">

One more person jumps on Dr. Dave and I'm starting him a fan club in Alabama, damn, ease up. /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif</font color>

bsmutz
10-02-2007, 02:34 PM
Oh yeah, I really have it in for you. I'm sure it's never occurred to you before, but maybe, just maybe if you quit being a JERK to other people, they wouldn't take offense at your ridiculous posts...

Eric.
10-02-2007, 03:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bsmutz:</font><hr> Oh yeah, I really have it in for you. I'm sure it's never occurred to you before, but maybe, just maybe if you quit being a JERK to other people, they wouldn't take offense at your ridiculous posts... <hr /></blockquote>

Look Smutz, perhaps you should take this advice:

"How does that feel? Just for the record, I've noticed in the past that people who have difficulty discussing issues intelligently and without childish name calling,..."

Originally, I asked a few questions. I had opinions based on those questions. You show me where I attacked someone. Show me where I made some "ridiculous posts". Show me where I was "being a jerk". A jerk? Cuz I had an unpopular view point or opinion that rubbed a few people wrong?

If I'm guilty of making a "JERK" post, it prolly came on the heals of YOUR post antagonizing me. BTW, were any of my posts addressing you in the first place? How d'hell did you wind up so upset that you need to repeatedly address me on this issue?

Eric &gt;thinks mutz should take my original advice

SKennedy
10-02-2007, 05:12 PM
I've started Dr. Dave's fan club here in Texas. However, I was in Durango last week and he was too afraid to show up! I was playing well too! I thought about driving to Ft. Collins but knew by the time I got there my game would be off!

bsmutz
10-02-2007, 05:20 PM
Your post: "To me, it's like telling someone to look left before crossing the street, but not telling them it's a two way street..." is ridiculous. How can you compare a life threatening situation to the possible omission of all the possible outcomes of using the 30 degree rule? (By the way, all of the threads I've read on the 30 degree rule mentioned the fact that it wasn't perfect, and I also knew from experience that it couldn't be.) When I tried to point out how ridiculous this analogy was with my post, you told me to "go play in traffic".
Forget it, Eric, go ahead and post what you want. You won't get anymore grief from me. It ain't worth it.

dr_dave
10-02-2007, 05:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr>I've started Dr. Dave's fan club here in Texas. However, I was in Durango last week and he was too afraid to show up!<hr /></blockquote>Those is fightin' words. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr>I thought about driving to Ft. Collins but knew by the time I got there my game would be off!<hr /></blockquote>Let me know if you make it to our wonderful state again so I'll have another chance to "show up."

Dave

Scott Lee
10-02-2007, 10:48 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>
Dr. Dave's research.
<hr /></blockquote>

Ummm...no offense Jack, but Randyg does NOT buy into dr. dave's "research". /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Scott

dr_dave
10-03-2007, 08:50 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>
Dr. Dave's research.
<hr /></blockquote>

Ummm...no offense Jack, but Randyg does NOT buy into dr. dave's "research". /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif<hr /></blockquote>Scott,

I think it is unfortunate (and inappropriate) that both you and Jack are speaking for Randy. I think he is quite capable of speaking for himself. If Randy disagrees with anything in any of my posts or articles, I would hope he would express his opinion. Disagreements and debate on content (rather than personal attacks) are what make this forum so great (more so in the past than lately).

If Randy or anybody else disagrees with any of the information and resources I provided in this thread concerning CB motion, I would like to hear the specific complaints or disagreements so there could be some productive debate and discussion.

Regards,
Dave

SKennedy
10-03-2007, 09:35 AM
Will do Doc! I get up there annually.

dr_dave
10-03-2007, 09:40 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> Will do Doc! I get up there annually.<hr /></blockquote>
You are lucky. Durango is a gorgeous place, especially if you like to hike, mountain bike, ski, hunt, and/or fish.

Dave

SKennedy
10-03-2007, 12:18 PM
Hiking, fly-fishing, and jeep-trail riding.

Vagabond
10-03-2007, 09:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> I've posted information like this in the past; but since this topic has come up a lot recently, I thought I would post it again (with current links and new information.Regaeds
Dave

Hi dave,
You have a 7 foot table in front of the fire place in one of those ski lodges in Durango.I hit the cue ball at 6 `0 clock position with but end of the cue stick 10 degrees lower than the tip end of the cue. I scoop the cue ball aiming at the girl I want to pick up for that night to have fun.The cue ball lands in her lap between her legs.I then go to her and apolozize to her ,tell her that I am not a pool player and I am a farmer from Farmington, NM came to do some skiing. I then use my regular tricks to take her to my room.You have to have some skills how to direct the cue ball to the girl u like. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

PS: More info and discussion concerning all of these principles can be found in the thread summary section of my website (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html). <hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
10-04-2007, 08:16 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vagabond:</font><hr>You have a 7 foot table in front of the fire place in one of those ski lodges in Durango.I hit the cue ball at 6 `0 clock position with but end of the cue stick 10 degrees lower than the tip end of the cue. I scoop the cue ball aiming at the girl I want to pick up for that night to have fun.The cue ball lands in her lap between her legs.I then go to her and apolozize to her ,tell her that I am not a pool player and I am a farmer from Farmington, NM came to do some skiing. I then use my regular tricks to take her to my room.You have to have some skills how to direct the cue ball to the girl u like. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif<hr /></blockquote>I call this the scoop and score method. You're right ... this should have been on my list also. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Dave

SKennedy
10-04-2007, 08:16 AM
Does the line about being a farmer from Farmington really work?

Scott Lee
10-05-2007, 02:04 AM
dave...Did you, or did you not, bring your "book" to pool school in Dallas, to have the Cue Tech staff 'preview' it for possible errors? Do you remember what the consensus was? It was your choice not to make any of the changes that were suggested. It is not a personal attack...merely stating what happened.

Scott Lee

dr_dave
10-05-2007, 10:21 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> dave...Did you, or did you not, bring your "book" to pool school in Dallas<hr /></blockquote>I did bring several copies of my book to give to the instructors there as small thanks for letting me sit in on their course.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>to have the Cue Tech staff 'preview' it for possible errors?<hr /></blockquote>Actually, the book was already published, so it was a little late for a "preview." However, I did ask for their honest feedback. Unfortunately, I can't make major changes in my book. It is published by Barnes &amp; Noble through Sterling Publishing, and they let me make only small changes between printings (the book is currently in its 4th printing). I have been allowed to fix errors (there were a few typos and diagram errors in the 1st printing) and make some small improvements, but the book hasn't changed much since it was released in the summer of 2004. Although, if you have a 4th printing copy and compare it to a 1st printing copy, you will see a few subtle changes.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>Do you remember what the consensus was?<hr /></blockquote>Randy and Leslie didn't give me much feedback, other than pointing out a few things they disagreed with in the first two chapters. Carl gave me lots of great detailed feedback on the entire book and was quite favorable with his overall evaluation (see Carl's review (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=200632&amp;page =0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=)).

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>It was your choice not to make any of the changes that were suggested.<hr /></blockquote>As I said, the book was already published before I even met Randy, Leslie, or Carl.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>It is not a personal attack...merely stating what happened.<hr /></blockquote>Scott, I think you are way out of line here. You obviously don't have your facts straight, and you certainly weren't there! I think it is very irresponsible of you to publicly and wrongly accuse me of things and use Randy's name in this way. Shame on you. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Sincerely,
Dave

wolfdancer
10-05-2007, 10:59 AM
Scott, I wasn't implying that Randy bought into the whole package...BUT he did mention that he also learned (something) from Dr. Dave.
I apologize for misstating what I meant to write.
I'd say that the "ton" of good info there, outweighs the errata.
I'm also sorry I fueled another controversy here.

dr_dave
10-05-2007, 01:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>Scott, I wasn't implying that Randy bought into the whole package...BUT he did mention that he also learned (something) from Dr. Dave.<hr /></blockquote>I also learned a lot from Randy and his staff (and all of the other instructors I've met and communicated with); although, like Randy, I also take everything I read from books or hear from instructors with a grain of salt. Nobody is perfect, but I think all people and resources have something to offer ... as long as the "student" has an open mind and good perspective.

Regards,
Dave

BigRigTom
10-05-2007, 02:34 PM
I have to weigh in on this thread though I was trying not too.
I have stated many times how I think that Dr. Dave's book is the best one I have read and so far that still holds true.
Until I read his book there were many discrepancies in the instructions in other books that were at best difficult to run down an explanation too, while many of the examples simply did not work in real life and IF you could find someone willing to demonstrate the technique it was usually difficult to understand the trick to the shot because everyone has a slightly different way of making it work.
It seems that it is hard for some really good pool players to just share openly the information and techniques that make them so good. It is also obvious, when you watch the pros play, there are many ways to accomplish the same result making it pretty confusing to us less talented ones.
Dr. Dave has condensed many of the necessary skills and techniques down into a reasonably understandable text then went to the trouble of providing visual demonstration of most of what he says in the book.
Many people will not spend the time and effort to learn from the amazing detailed and great quanity of information provided by Dr. Dave on his web site and many people will just look for flaws in the content but Dr. Dave has done and continues to do a service to the pool playing community in his own unique way.
I for one applaud you Dr. Dave for your durability in absorbing the attacks from the ungrateful and misinformed while you continue to lift the wizards curtain to expose the old man's tricks in the Land of Pool and Billiards.

1Time
10-05-2007, 02:54 PM
I'm not that familiar with dr_dave's material and really don't have much interest in learning from it or other sources since I'm already accomplished to my satisfaction with my game. No great aspirations here of turning pro. However, of what I have read of dr_dave's material, I consider it valuable and helpful for those wanting to learn. And what makes this even better is dr_dave is so open to receive and use constructive criticism. The only potential beef to be made with dr_dave is he uses this site as his virtual store front. However, if this site is okay with that and that seems to be the case, then no problem. That just means others should be welcome to do so as well.

dr_dave
10-05-2007, 02:55 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BigRigTom:</font><hr> I have to weigh in on this thread though I was trying not too.
I have stated many times how I think that Dr. Dave's book is the best one I have read and so far that still holds true.
Until I read his book there were many discrepancies in the instructions in other books that were at best difficult to run down an explanation too, while many of the examples simply did not work in real life and IF you could find someone willing to demonstrate the technique it was usually difficult to understand the trick to the shot because everyone has a slightly different way of making it work.
It seems that it is hard for some really good pool players to just share openly the information and techniques that make them so good. It is also obvious, when you watch the pros play, there are many ways to accomplish the same result making it pretty confusing to us less talented ones.
Dr. Dave has condensed many of the necessary skills and techniques down into a reasonably understandable text then went to the trouble of providing visual demonstration of most of what he says in the book.
Many people will not spend the time and effort to learn from the amazing detailed and great quanity of information provided by Dr. Dave on his web site and many people will just look for flaws in the content but Dr. Dave has done and continues to do a service to the pool playing community in his own unique way.
I for one applaud you Dr. Dave for your durability in absorbing the attacks from the ungrateful and misinformed while you continue to lift the wizards curtain to expose the old man's tricks in the Land of Pool and Billiards.<hr /></blockquote>
BigRigTom,

Thank you so much for your post. It's messages like these that help give me the motivation and inspiration to continue to work hard.

Regards,
Dave

wolfdancer
10-05-2007, 03:03 PM
I asked Robert Byrne to sign my copy of his book....and he wrote "to (me) a fellow student of the game"
I think we are all "fellow students...." and sometimes, fellow instructors...go into any pool room, and you'll see somebody trying to help a newer player out....not that we're giving them the right info though.
I've also heard it said that you can learn something from even the worst player. For me, that was some of their misses that ended up as good safeties....or seeing them do something obviously wrong...and realize I'm guilty of that myself at times.

wolfdancer
10-05-2007, 03:17 PM
I don't think BD minds a link back to one's site...there are a few links here from other posters. what they object to, rightly so, is direct selling...reserved for their advertisers.
There have several here who have pointed out to BD. Dr. Dave's
Even once you get to his site...you have the option of all the material available online...free, or buy the book, or CD. Doesn't exactly sound like Billy May hawking products?

1Time
10-05-2007, 03:39 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> I don't think BD minds a link back to one's site...there are a few links here from other posters. what they object to, rightly so, is direct selling...reserved for their advertisers.
<hr /></blockquote>

I agree; BD does not seem to mind. dr_dave has thousands of posts and frequently links to his site (and in doing so uses this site as his virtual store front). However, direct selling should be reserved for their advertisers, as I'm sure dr_dave is well aware.

SKennedy
10-05-2007, 03:47 PM
It's the guy who misses and his CB bounces off 4 rails and comes behind a ball to hook me and he acts like he meant to do it that irritates me. I learn from him too. I learn that I never want to be that guy and I learn to really focus cause I'm just not going to let him beat me. A pleyer I know has done this repeatedly to me. We all know he's full of crap. We started playing the other day and he won the first 3 games and started bragging to others how well he was playing and he could feel it was going to be a good money night...blah, blah.... Well, it wasn't so much his ability that won him those 3 games as my lack of ability. I never said a word to him as I racked the 3rd game. However, 10 games later I failed to have to rack and the swagger was gone. I seem to recall he left the establishment kinda early that night. By the way, he doesn't ask me to play for money, just poorer players and I would never take his money anyway. He just irritates all of us that way, but he means no harm.

wolfdancer
10-05-2007, 03:52 PM
I think I know that guy, or his twin brothers....one seems to show up at every room and every tournament I play in/at.

SKennedy
10-05-2007, 03:57 PM
We even hate the way he racks. It takes him 5 minutes and everything is so precise....all of his sticks (allegedly) are at least worth \$1,500 each, etc., etc. The last tournament I entered in the place I was shooting very poorly. I came up against him. I'd have died if I lost. I did manage to win and to be honest, that became my one and only goal...to knock him out of the tourn. Again though, he's a nice guy, just can't help himself...insecure? Hey, that's me too at times.

dr_dave
10-05-2007, 05:14 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 1Time:</font><hr>... of what I have read of dr_dave's material, I consider it valuable and helpful for those wanting to learn. And what makes this even better is dr_dave is so open to receive and use constructive criticism.<hr /></blockquote>Thank you.
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 1Time:</font><hr>The only potential beef to be made with dr_dave is he uses this site as his virtual store front. However, if this site is okay with that and that seems to be the case, then no problem. That just means others should be welcome to do so as well.<hr /></blockquote>This topic has come up time and again on this forum. Here are the bottom lines of past communication among the forum and BD staff:

- It is not appropriate to include commercial URLs in one's signature (as many veteran users do on this board). I used to, but I don't anymore.

- It is not appropriate to market, advertise, or try to sell one's products on the forum. I don't think I have ever done this, but I do link to free resources on my site. My site does offer my book and DVDs for sale, but the links I provide are directly to the free instructional resources.

- It is appropriate to provide links to free web resources (e.g., articles, videos, drills, templates, etc.) that help create and support discussion and debate. This is what I do.

Regards,
Dave

PS: FYI, I'm an instructional columnist for BD. That's why I decided to post here, and only here ... because people associate me with BD.

1Time
10-05-2007, 05:24 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>This is what I do.<hr /></blockquote>

Just as I suspected.

Scott Lee
10-06-2007, 02:10 AM
LMAO...Inappropriate? Out of line? I think not Dave...
Perhaps you should reread what Carl said..."regardless of content"...that speaks volumes about how we felt about the presentation of certain concepts as "facts" deemed true by you. If you want to get down and dirty here, we certainly can. Want to talk about what you did in your "video" on spin transfer? By that I mean what you admitted to Randy about putting chalk on the OB (to provide greater friction between the CB &amp; OB), because you couldn't make do what you wanted to in the video (which is what I've been saying all along). No mention of that anywhere in any of your posts.
Shame on YOU!

Scott Lee

1Time
10-06-2007, 07:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>
- It is not appropriate to include commercial URLs in one's signature (as many veteran users do on this board). I used to, but I don't anymore.
<hr /></blockquote>

You mean like the one in Scott Lee's signature? &gt;&gt;&gt; http://www.poolknowledge.com/

Randall53
10-07-2007, 06:23 AM
I'll say this....The game of pool is very complex and requires more than just knowledge to excell at the game. It also requires much skill and practice. Dr. Daves free material on his website has helped my game a great deal and I do appreciate his work on the subject and especially the way he is unselfish about sharing it. I actually found this forum through his website.

I feel it's a shame, since NO ONE, even here on this forum, has all the anwers on the subject, that people would rather attack him and his work rather than just move on to another thread. He is simply sharing HIS findings and beliefs about the game of Pool with others willing to listen and try his ideas and doing a lot of it FREE of charge! No one has to accept anything.

There's sure not anything free here of value to a beginning player.
http://www.poolknowledge.com

dr_dave
10-07-2007, 09:29 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>Perhaps you should reread what Carl said..."regardless of content"...that speaks volumes about how we felt about the presentation of certain concepts as "facts" deemed true by you.<hr /></blockquote>Scott,

If you, Randy, Carl, or others have specific disagreements with any statements in my book, I would be happy to discuss them. Have you ever read my book? If you haven't, I would be happy to send a copy to you for your feedback and criticism. Send me a PM with your address if you want a copy.

I am not aware of any errors or inappropriate statements in the latest printing of the book; but I would certainly be interested to know if people think otherwise. All I ask is that you or others be specific and open to respectful discussion and debate.

I had several long conversations with Carl about my book. He had lots of good constructive criticism, and we also had some disagreements. I also disagreed with how a few things were presented a CueTech, but I never once publicly criticized them or made any false accusations. On the contrary, I have referred many customers to them over the years.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
10-07-2007, 10:13 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>Want to talk about what you did in your "video" on spin transfer? By that I mean what you admitted to Randy about putting chalk on the OB (to provide greater friction between the CB &amp; OB), because you couldn't make do what you wanted to in the video (which is what I've been saying all along). No mention of that anywhere in any of your posts.<hr /></blockquote>Scott,

Again, you are way out of line here. Either Randy lied to you, or you are lying on your own. Either way, I think this reflects badly on you, Randy, and CueTech.

I guarantee that I never once told Randy anything like this. The reason why I can say this with confidence is because your statement is totally untrue! I promise no chalk was ever used on the ball surfaces in any of my throw and spin transfer videos:

NV 4.15 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/NV4-15.htm), NV 4.16 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/NV4-16.htm), NV 7.5 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/NV7-5.htm), NV 7.6 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/NV7-6.htm), NV A.21 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/normal_videos/new/NVA-21.htm), HSV 4.6 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV4-6.htm), HSV 4.7 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV4-7.htm), HSV 7.1 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV7-1.htm), HSV 7.2 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV7-2.htm), HSV 7.3 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV7-3.htm), HSV 7.4 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV7-4.htm), HSV 7.5 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV7-5.htm), HSV A.82 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-82.htm), HSV A.83 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-83.htm), HSV A.84 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-84.htm), HSV A.85 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-85.htm), HSV A.86 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-86.htm), and HSV A.87 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-87.htm)

The only videos where I ever used chalk to exaggerate the effects of throw and spin transfer are:

HSV A.142 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-142.htm), HSV A.144 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-144.htm), and HSV A.146 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-146.htm)

but these videos have always been clearly labeled (see "with chalk on the object ball" in the titles) and openly discussed on this forum. In HSV A.142 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-142.htm), the chalk smudge is even clearly visible at the end of the clip. The point of adding chalk in these clips was specifically to show how strong the effect of cling can be. In the case of the Vernon Elliot shot, it also shows how some people might cheat with such a shot.

I have sensed from your past posts that you honestly don't believe throw and spin transfer exist or are significant enough to be considered. I apologize if my sense is wrong, and maybe your views have changed over the years. Please let us know.

I you still don't believe throw and spin transfer can be important effects, please read my August '06 through April '07 articles (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/index.html) (specifically my March '07 and April '07 articles on spin transfer) and let me know where you have specific disagreements.

If you still doubt throw and/or spin transfer are not important effects after viewing all of the videos and reading all of the articles, please let us know.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
10-07-2007, 10:41 AM
Scott,

I don't think I have ever met you, and I can't understand why you are judging me so harshly and making false accusations.

I know we have had disagreements in the past concerning throw and spin transfer, but I can't imagine that's the source of your reaction.

I also find it hard to believe that Randy would have spoken so wrongly about me to you. I thought Randy and I got along quite well when I visited him in Dallas. I enjoyed meeting all of his staff, and I was very respectful during my entire visit.

I think your postings and accusations reflect very badly on you, Randy, and Cuetech, and I hope Randy responds to these issues. I talked to Randy on the phone briefly yesterday, and I plan to speak to him again soon at length.

I hope you and Randy discuss this and both decide an apology is appropriate. If you don't, I think this whole episode says a lot about your professionalism.

I don't think I have ever once written or said anything disparaging about you, Randy, or CueTech. If I have, please let me know. I certainly have never falsely accused either of you of anything. On the contrary, I have recommended Randy and CueTech to many people. I even wrote favorably about my experience at CueTech in one of my articles (see the last paragraph on page 3 of my May '06 article (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2006/may06.pdf)).

If you would like to talk about these issues privately, please feel free to give me a call or let me know (via PM) how to reach you. I bet if we knew each other a little better, this sort of thing wouldn't happen.

Sincerely,
Dave

dr_dave
10-07-2007, 10:48 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 1Time:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>
- It is not appropriate to include commercial URLs in one's signature (as many veteran users do on this board). I used to, but I don't anymore.<hr /></blockquote>You mean like the one in Scott Lee's signature? &gt;&gt;&gt; http://www.poolknowledge.com/ <hr /></blockquote>
I personally don't have an issue with people including links to their businesses in their BD signatures. I actually like being able to easily access a contributor's website. The CCB administrator asked me to remove my URL from my signature after receiving a complaint. Even though I didn't necessarily agree with the decision, I happily complied.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
10-07-2007, 11:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Randall53:</font><hr> I'll say this....The game of pool is very complex and requires more than just knowledge to excell at the game. It also requires much skill and practice.<hr /></blockquote>Well stated. I don't think anybody would disagree with you here.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Randall53:</font><hr>Dr. Daves free material on his website has helped my game a great deal and I do appreciate his work on the subject and especially the way he is unselfish about sharing it. I actually found this forum through his website.

I feel it's a shame, since NO ONE, even here on this forum, has all the anwers on the subject, that people would rather attack him and his work rather than just move on to another thread. He is simply sharing HIS findings and beliefs about the game of Pool with others willing to listen and try his ideas and doing a lot of it FREE of charge! No one has to accept anything.<hr /></blockquote>Thank you for your nice comments.

Regards,
Dave

SKennedy
10-07-2007, 12:38 PM
See what happens when a group of competitive people get together?

1Time
10-07-2007, 01:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> See what happens when a group of competitive people get together? <hr /></blockquote>

What - the sport of pool is advanced? Or, are you suggesting it would be better if competitive people did not get together?

dr_dave
10-07-2007, 05:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> See what happens when a group of competitive people get together?<hr /></blockquote>I've been around competitive people most of my life, and I can be quite competitive myself, but I've never had to defend myself in any other life setting as much as I've had to on the CCB lately. I don't think this is a "competition" thing, I think it is a "pool world" thing.

However, the "interaction" does keep life interesting, so I can't complain.

Dave

Scott Lee
10-08-2007, 01:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> See what happens when a group of competitive people get together? <hr /></blockquote>

Dave is not a competitor to me in any manner. He teaches college-level engineering, not pool. I applaud dave for his opportunity to provide free links to SOME good information, for beginning players. However, there are things in there that simply do not happen in real world pool, and those are the things that I disagree with. All of us are entitled to our individual opinions. As a professional pocket billiard instructor, I provide a valuable service that people choose to pay for, because it works to improve your pool game...whether you're a beginner or a pro. What I teach people has real world application, not something that may work some of the time, for some players, on some tables. I don't twist anyone's arm to seek me out.

Scott Lee

dr_dave
10-08-2007, 08:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr>I applaud dave for his opportunity to provide free links to SOME good information, for beginning players. However, there are things in there that simply do not happen in real world pool, and those are the things that I disagree with.<hr /></blockquote>Scott,

If you choose to make statements like this, I think you have the responsibility to be specific concerning the things with which you disagree. If you, or anybody else, disagrees with anything on my website, I want to know so the issues can be discussed and debated. We all might learn some things in that process.

Thanks,
Dave

Deeman3
10-08-2007, 08:35 AM
I would like to hear some of the specifics as well. It would make it easier to know what differences there are in theory and how and why we disagree.

For instance, I still feel transferred spin has practical application and value in games. Does it? I disagree with Dave on a couple of points but find it better to discuss them.

SKennedy
10-08-2007, 10:20 AM
What - the sport of pool is advanced? Or, are you suggesting it would be better if competitive people did not get together? <hr /></blockquote>

Absolutely not. I would never suggest that. I was not complaining, just making an observation. I am one of the most competitive people out there...regardless. It is one of the things I like about this site.

Eric.
10-08-2007, 10:23 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Randall53:</font><hr> I'll say this....The game of pool is very complex and requires more than just knowledge to excell at the game. It also requires much skill and practice.

<font color="green">I agree wholeheartedly. IMO, you have to play well enough to teach. Now, I'm not saying that you have to play at the "pro" level, but I feel you have to be an accomplished player, first. To use an analogy, Butch Harmon (Tiger Wodds former coach) was no threat on tour, but he is a scratch golfer. I don't think he would be as effective if he only played in the 90's. </font color>

Dr. Daves free material on his website has helped my game a great deal and I do appreciate his work on the subject and especially the way he is unselfish about sharing it. I actually found this forum through his website.

<font color="green">I think most of the material would be best served by beginners or people that have been playing below the intermediate level, so there is value to some people. </font color>

I feel it's a shame, since NO ONE, even here on this forum, has all the anwers on the subject, that people would rather attack him and his work rather than just move on to another thread. He is simply sharing HIS findings and beliefs about the game of Pool with others willing to listen and try his ideas and doing a lot of it FREE of charge! No one has to accept anything.

<font color="green">The material is shared, but let's not kid ourselves either. Dr. Dave's website is also commercial. I'm not saying that is bad, just callin it like it is. </font color>

There's sure not anything free here of value to a beginning player.
http://www.poolknowledge.com
<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="green">I haven't seen anyone "attacking" Dr. Dave. While some may feel that he is being questioned unfairly due to personal allegiances, I don't see any "attacks". I don't think anyone dislikes Dr. Dave as a person.

Dr. Dave has positioned himself as an "instructor" and "someone having the facts" regarding a lot of aspects of the game of Pool. Anyone in that position is gonna be the subject of scrutiny. It's natural to question anyone in this position, not just Dr. Dave. Credentials mean quite a bit when we are talking about anyone who tries to be an authority on a subject. Is it wrong to question one's credentials? I don't think so. Especially when one positions one's self as an "authority".

I'm curious what others think. I'd love to hear opinions for, against, or even more ad hominum attacks /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Eric </font color>

New2Pool
10-08-2007, 11:14 AM
As someone who is new to all this my main reaction is WTH? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Reading the thread it seems like Dr. Dave has gone out of his way to ask for specific complaints or areas of disagreement. At one point he even asked that both Jack (who was making a pro-Dr. Dave remark) and Scott (who was making a con-Dr. Dave remark) not quote Randy because it is not fair to Randy to put words in his mouth.

My impression from reading the board has been that if I wanted pool lessons then Scott Lee is great person to call. If I want to discuss physics then Dr. Dave (and Rich) is the person to call. Now once again this is just a newbies uninformed opinion, but I have been to Dr. Dave's website to look at the free stuff a bunch of times and I have never really noticed his DVD and book offering. Not saying I didn't see it and ignore it because I might have but I don't remember seeing anything there because I am not really looking for a book or a DVD right now.

I don't see anything wrong with anyone saying that Dr. Dave's research is not applicable to the real world but somehow this thread has spiraled downward so that the impression I am left with is that there are some on here who feel that Dr. Dave is a charlatan who is seeking to enrich himself by preying on the gullible. From my perspective, I just don't see it that way. I have never even read anywhere where Dr. Dave has made grandiose claims. For that matter, I have not even noticed him making any reference to his book or DVD except in response to people who said they enjoyed it.

Eric.
10-08-2007, 11:52 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote New2Pool:</font><hr>For that matter, I have not even noticed him making any reference to his book or DVD except in response to people who said they enjoyed it. <hr /></blockquote>

You need to double check that.

Personally, I don't care either way if the DVD and book is being marketed. I'm not a competitor, nor do I own this website. I only made this reply because of the statement you made.

Thanks for the input, though.

Eric

Fran Crimi
10-08-2007, 11:59 AM
[ QUOTE ]
IMO, you have to play well enough to teach. Now, I'm not saying that you have to play at the "pro" level, but I feel you have to be an accomplished player, first. To use an analogy, Butch Harmon (Tiger Wodds former coach) was no threat on tour, but he is a scratch golfer. I don't think he would be as effective if he only played in the 90's.
<hr /></blockquote>

I agree. So much of teaching pool is in the demonstrating. Not only that, but it takes years and years of playing experience to step up to a table, observe the layout and analyze your options well enough to be able to help someone. Also, many of the 'theoretical' things being taught don't really hold up well under pressure. Pool is a competitive game, and you had better know what works and what doesn't work under pressure or you will be doing your students more harm than good.

Fran

wolfdancer
10-08-2007, 09:09 PM
In defense of my comment that inadvertenly triggered this
exchange:
In reply to my writing that Dr. Dave as a student at Cue Tech, must have learned something down there, Randy wrote:

"How true this is.

There are Authors, Players, Pretenders and Certified Instructors. It's our job to understand their background and what each are trying to give us.

Sure, Dr Dave is a student of ours, but no more than I'm a student of Dave. I read everyone's articles, what I do with them is my choice. I agree, Dave's done a great job"

dr_dave
10-09-2007, 08:36 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> In defense of my comment that inadvertenly triggered this exchange:
In reply to my writing that Dr. Dave as a student at Cue Tech, must have learned something down there, Randy wrote:

"How true this is.

There are Authors, Players, Pretenders and Certified Instructors. It's our job to understand their background and what each are trying to give us.

Sure, Dr Dave is a student of ours, but no more than I'm a student of Dave. I read everyone's articles, what I do with them is my choice. I agree, Dave's done a great job"<hr /></blockquote>Randy is definitely a great instructor. He is open-minded, professional, a great communicator, a complete gentleman, great with people, and always willing to learn.

I definitely did learn a lot at CueTech, mostly about how good instructors teach pool. I have also learned a tremendous amount on this forum over the years from Bob, Fran, Rod, Jal, Mac, Spiderman, Fred, Deeman, Billy_Bob, and many, many others (even you). Isn't that why we are all here ... to learn from each other and share?

Concerning what makes a good instructor, I have met several "instructors" that were great pool players but terrible teachers. I have also met countless great players who would make terrible instructors. An instructor obviously must be knowledgeable and understand all of the intricacies of the game, and certainly have enough experience to appreciate those intricacies. An instructor must also be a good teacher and communicator and know how to connect with various types of people. Also, a great instructor should be a total "student of the game" (i.e., read everything, discuss and debate stuff on forums, communicate professionally and open-mindedly with other instructors and players, etc). I think great instructors have too many things on their plate to be great players. To be a great player, one must have sharp eyes, a near-flawless stroke, and near-perfect speed control. That takes hours and hours of practice and play ... youth can also help. Only people completely dedicated to playing pool can put in the amount of time necessary to be great.

Regards,
Dave

Eric.
10-09-2007, 11:02 AM
I agree completely that great players dont always make good instructors.

How do you feel about mediocre (C player or lower/APA 5-6 or lower) players being instructors? Personally, I feel that unless the instructor is teaching rank novices, s/he should be reasonably proficient at playing. I feel that if the instructor isn't at least playing B/ low A speed pool, they don't have enough experience to teach.

All theory and little ability to execute teh theory is no good either. Just to use an analogy; scientists can give you many reasons why a bumblebee can't fly (wings too small, etc) but that doesn't stop the bee from flying.

Eric

Deeman3
10-09-2007, 12:17 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr> Just to use an analogy; scientists can give you many reasons why a bumblebee can't fly (wings too small, etc) but that doesn't stop the bee from flying.

Eric <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Actually, scientists can tell you exactly how Bumble Bees fly.</font color>

Bob_Jewett
10-09-2007, 12:48 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr> ... How do you feel about mediocre (C player or lower/APA 5-6 or lower) players being instructors? Personally, I feel that unless the instructor is teaching rank novices, s/he should be reasonably proficient at playing. I feel that if the instructor isn't at least playing B/ low A speed pool, they don't have enough experience to teach. ... <hr /></blockquote>
I think that an instructor should be able to demonstrate the point being made. For much of the mechanics stuff, this is fairly easy, but it is the rare C player who has the mechanics down well enough to be an example of good form. If they worked on form and got it to a point where they could demo it, they would probably be B or better.

For working on position shots, it's a little harder to do the demos when you start to teach how to spin the cue ball. Most of the time, it's supposed to be the student who is shooting the shots. I usually only try the shot -- say, use low outside to come three rails to the other end of the table -- if the student is not having much success. This often happens when the student has chosen an impossible path for the cue ball. In those cases, a C trying to teach a B will not work very well, no matter how knowledgeable the C is.

dr_dave
10-09-2007, 01:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>I agree completely that great players dont always make good instructors.<hr /></blockquote>Hallelujah! We finally agree on something. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>How do you feel about mediocre (C player or lower/APA 5-6 or lower) players being instructors?<hr /></blockquote>I think it is possible, but very unlikely, for a "C" player to be a good instructor. However, it depends what the reasons are for their "C" rating. For example, is somebody used to be a great player, but he or she is now much older or has some sort of disability, or maybe he or she just doesn't play very much anymore, but he or she has good knowledge, experience, communication skills, and teaching ability, he or she still might make a good instructor, even if he or she now might play only at the "B/C" level.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>Personally, I feel that unless the instructor is teaching rank novices, s/he should be reasonably proficient at playing. I feel that if the instructor isn't at least playing B/ low A speed pool, they don't have enough experience to teach.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed. If an instructor does not appreciate and understand the intricacies of the game at an A level or higher, he or she will probably not be a good instructor for higher-level players. A true understanding of the intricacies of the game requires experience with those intricacies.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>All theory and little ability to execute teh theory is no good either.<hr /></blockquote>I think we actually agree on something again! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>Just to use an analogy; scientists can give you many reasons why a bumblebee can't fly (wings too small, etc) but that doesn't stop the bee from flying.<hr /></blockquote>Actually, I think a scientist with complete knowledge and solid understanding (and maybe a high-speed camera) would be able to explain why a bumblebee can fly. After all, the bumblebee is not violating any laws of physics by flying!

Regards,
Dave

Jal
10-09-2007, 01:17 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr> I agree completely that great players dont always make good instructors.

How do you feel about mediocre (C player or lower/APA 5-6 or lower) players being instructors? Personally, I feel that unless the instructor is teaching rank novices, s/he should be reasonably proficient at playing. I feel that if the instructor isn't at least playing B/ low A speed pool, they don't have enough experience to teach.

All theory and little ability to execute teh theory is no good either. Just to use an analogy; scientists can give you many reasons why a bumblebee can't fly (wings too small, etc) but that doesn't stop the bee from flying.

Eric <hr /></blockquote>I'd like to know just what things you think a good/great player can convey that a mediocre one who understands the basic physics cannot.

Strategy would absolutely fall into this category, along with profitable ways to practice, and perhaps some sort of psychological conditioning? At least the first two of these are relevant and definitely separate the accomplished player/instructor from the "theoretician".

The former also have earned and enjoy an air of authority. That, along with their fees, tends to put the student in a receptive state of mind, so that they might be motivated to actually do the sorely needed practice.

Anything else?

Jim

Eric.
10-09-2007, 02:16 PM

Deeman, you sure know how to rain on my parade /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Bob J-I fully agree. I've always respected your opinion because you have put in the work to "prove" your Pool theories.

JAL- One example of what a good player can convey that a mediocre one cannot is "what isa practical use of theory in real life". A quick example is; outside E can be used to help spin a cut shot in. The probelm is that in reality, there are limits to when that would work well. You have to know the limits, the example of a thin cut comes to mind.

Eric

Eric.
10-09-2007, 02:37 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>How do you feel about mediocre (C player or lower/APA 5-6 or lower) players being instructors?<hr /></blockquote>I think it is possible, but very unlikely, for a "C" player to be a good instructor. However, it depends what the reasons are for their "C" rating. For example, is somebody used to be a great player, but he or she is now much older or has some sort of disability, or maybe he or she just doesn't play very much anymore, but he or she has good knowledge, experience, communication skills, and teaching ability, he or she still might make a good instructor, even if he or she now might play only at the "B/C" level.

<font color="green"> The former "good" player that has diminished abilities is a niche example of what i was talking about. Specifically, i wsa refering to "instructors" that have never been there, skill-wise. For example, your vid demos show that you are likely a novice poolplayer, skill-wise. While you might have good knowledge based on reading info from others, you have never "proof'd" the theories or done the work to discover the way to make your body execute what your mind knows. Here's a quick example; knowing a shot is possible vs. knowing whether it's worth perfecting is where experience can come in. There are many examples, but for the sake of brevity, I'll leave it at that.</font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>Personally, I feel that unless the instructor is teaching rank novices, s/he should be reasonably proficient at playing. I feel that if the instructor isn't at least playing B/ low A speed pool, they don't have enough experience to teach.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed. If an instructor does not appreciate and understand the intricacies of the game at an A level or higher, he or she will probably not be a good instructor for higher-level players. A true understanding of the intricacies of the game requires experience with those intricacies.

<font color="green">Just for clarity, what level do you play at, Dave? Maybe you can use two different rating scales for comparison i.e. A/B/C/D or APA ratings. </font color>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>Just to use an analogy; scientists can give you many reasons why a bumblebee can't fly (wings too small, etc) but that doesn't stop the bee from flying.<hr /></blockquote>Actually, I think a scientist with complete knowledge and solid understanding (and maybe a high-speed camera) would be able to explain why a bumblebee can fly. After all, the bumblebee is not violating any laws of physics by flying!

Regards,
Dave

<font color="green">Actually, what I was trying to convey is that people can give many reasons why the bumblebee can't fly i.e. wing surface area is too small in relation to the thorax/boddy mass, etc. Despite all those reasons, the bee does fly. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>
<hr /></blockquote>

Eric

Deeman3
10-09-2007, 02:59 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>
Deeman, you sure know how to rain on my parade /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Eric <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Sorry, Eric, but while I might rain on this part, I will give you that no scientist can explain how one person can a draw ball with ease while many simply can't. Even the best will put it off on "he /she is not stroking the ball properly or the tip is not chalked" or some other reason. For whatever reason, the motion of a stroke that imparts superior spin is not well defined by science. We all know, for instance, that it is how well the tip is adhered to the cue ball, how low it is struck and whatever motion of the cue separates the average, from the really good from the Mike Masseys. I don't believe any instructor or scientist can translate that for us. I will listen as they try, however. I submit a few guys who never chalk, who have a tip that looks like a bald guy's head who can spin the cue ball like an NHRA tire.</font color>

dr_dave
10-09-2007, 05:46 PM
Eric,

I would prefer to be judged based on the quality of my website resources (articles, instructional resources, physics stuff, etc.). This is where I put most of my efforts. I know you don't like some of my online NV videos, but please realize they are geared towards novice players. Also, the NVs are there primarily to help people visualize some things in my book. I think the NVs do a good job with their intended purpose.

I have played in leagues before, but that was many years ago. I was in a BCA league about 8 years ago and I think I was a 5 or 6 on the scale of 8 (I think that's how the scale worked back then). I just asked an experienced player about my current level, and he thinks I'm probably a "B" player. I have played against "A" players before, and I certainly don't feel totally out-classed. When playing 8-ball, I usually expect to break-and-run at least 1 rack out of 10 or so.

Now, I think if I put lots of dedicated time into practicing for a few months, I could be much better. My "day job" and other interests just don't allow that sort of singular dedication. I do think I have excellent aiming and visualization skills, and I have solid knowledge about all aspect of the game, and I have excellent judgment as to what shots are appropriate or inappropriate in different situations. Whenever I play with or talk to top players, we usually seem to be on the same wavelength with strategy, shot selection, safety creativity, and run-out planning. What I don't have, because I don't play enough, is precise speed control and perfect stroke consistency. I think that comes only with lots of practice (for me anyway). Even though I have a table at my house, I don't play that often. If I'm lucky, I play only about once a week for a couple of hours. But watch out if I ever decide to quit my "day job." /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

I know there are many people in the pool world who don't listen to anybody who can't play better than they do. I think that is unfortunate, because they could probably learn a lot more if they were more open-minded. I personally try to learn from everything I read and from everybody I watch or talk to. Some of these people play better than me and some don't.

Regards,
Dave

pooltchr
10-09-2007, 05:53 PM
Bob, I agree that a good instructor must be able to demonstrate the particular concepts being taught. And if they know enough to demonstrate the things we teach our students, unless they totally ignore them in their own game, they are most likely going to be reletively good players.

But the other part of being an instructor has very little to do with table skills. Being able to observe and identify problems, and offer solutions that will work for a student is critical to being a good instructor. And the communication skills needed to connect with each student has little to do with playing skills.

Yes, you need to be a fairly accomplished player to be a good instructor, but a good instructor should be able to work with any player. I think a good instructor can have something to offer, even to players with a much higher skill level. I'm sure that many of us have been able to help players who would give us a spot in a match. I know I have.

Still, my overall thought is that an instructor does need to be a strong player in order to be an effective instructor.

Steve

HALHOULE
10-09-2007, 06:54 PM
SO HOW WOULD YOU SUDDENLY BECOME A STRONG PLAYER AND ALSO CONTEND WITH A STRONG PLAYER. THIS IS A NO NO.

HALHOULE
10-09-2007, 06:58 PM
I DO NOT BUY THAT FOR A MINUTE

HALHOULE
10-09-2007, 07:23 PM
THAT IS FOLLY

Vagabond
10-09-2007, 09:53 PM
understood and enjoyed the humor

Qtec
10-10-2007, 04:48 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr>

But the other part of being an instructor has very little to do with table skills. Being able to observe and identify problems, and offer solutions that will work for a student is critical to being a good instructor.

Steve <hr /></blockquote>

Exactly. There are many who have read the books, studied the graphs and know the exact deflection for a HB stun shot . If a player wants tech info he/she can easily search the web and know everything there is to know but does that help them play better?
A good instuctor should be able to look at a player and know what's wrong and more importantly, where know how to correct the problem/problems, according to that specific players possibilities.
As anyone who has instucted will tell you, becoming a good instructor takes time and is a learning experience.
Good players who are not instructors tend to teach others to play like they do, not like real instructors who try to get the most out of the player according to that players potential.

Q

dr_dave
10-10-2007, 08:10 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>JAL- One example of what a good player can convey that a mediocre one cannot is "what isa practical use of theory in real life". A quick example is; outside E can be used to help spin a cut shot in. The probelm is that in reality, there are limits to when that would work well. You have to know the limits, the example of a thin cut comes to mind.<hr /></blockquote>Eric,

I hope you aren't implying that Jal or me might not understand or appreciate the problems associated with trying to use English on a thin-cut shot. If you are not implying this, you have my apology. If you are implying this, you obviously haven't read any of our past posts (or my articles) on this topic. For example, see my previous post directly related to this (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=245996&amp;page =0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=&amp;PHPSESSID=) (under "English" - "outside English" here (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html)) and my January '07 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2007/jan07.pdf) and February '07 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2007/feb07.pdf) articles (specifically, the paragraph at the top of page 2 in the February article).

Now, one thing is probably true: true "students of the game" will learn this type of thing much sooner than "trial-and-error hackers" that consider themselves good "players."

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
10-10-2007, 08:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr>But the other part of being an instructor has very little to do with table skills. Being able to observe and identify problems, and offer solutions that will work for a student is critical to being a good instructor.<hr /></blockquote>Exactly. There are many who have read the books, studied the graphs and know the exact deflection for a HB stun shot . If a player wants tech info he/she can easily search the web and know everything there is to know but does that help them play better?
A good instuctor should be able to look at a player and know what's wrong and more importantly, where know how to correct the problem/problems, according to that specific players possibilities.
As anyone who has instucted will tell you, becoming a good instructor takes time and is a learning experience.
Good players who are not instructors tend to teach others to play like they do, not like real instructors who try to get the most out of the player according to that players potential.<hr /></blockquote>Excellent posts!!! I agree whole-heartedly!

Regards,
Dave

Eric.
10-10-2007, 09:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Eric,

I would prefer to be judged based on the quality of my website resources (articles, instructional resources, physics stuff, etc.). This is where I put most of my efforts. I know you don't like some of my online NV videos, but please realize they are geared towards novice players. Also, the NVs are there primarily to help people visualize some things in my book. I think the NVs do a good job with their intended purpose.

<font color="green">Whether you agree or not, your level of play or skill at this game does come into the equation. If you want to position yourself as an "instructor" you need to be able to demonstrate your knowledge. Notice, I didn't say you need to be a "pro", just accomplished enough to fully understand what you are teaching. </font color>

I have played in leagues before, but that was many years ago. I was in a BCA league about 8 years ago and I think I was a 5 or 6 on the scale of 8 (I think that's how the scale worked back then). I just asked an experienced player about my current level, and he thinks I'm probably a "B" player. I have played against "A" players before, and I certainly don't feel totally out-classed. When playing 8-ball, I usually expect to break-and-run at least 1 rack out of 10 or so.

<font color="green">"Expect" to b&amp;r 1 outta 10 or actually do? I've got news for you, if you are not B&amp;R 1 outta 5-6 racks of 8 ball, you are not close to being a "B" player, let alone "A", regardless of whether someone "thinks you're probably.." (very vague and undecisive opinion) or whether you "don't feel" you are outclassed playing "A" players. Dave, the reason I bourght it up is that based on your vids and opinions of those that have seen you shoot, the opinion is THAT YOU CAN'T PLAY A LICK. Usually, how well someone plays doesn't reeally mean that much, unless we're talking about one's credentials as an instructor. Lemme ask this; how can someone be an "expert" when they are barely an "intermediate level" player? </font color>

Now, I think if I put lots of dedicated time into practicing for a few months, I could be much better. My "day job" and other interests just don't allow that sort of singular dedication. I do think I have excellent aiming and visualization skills, and I have solid knowledge about all aspect of the game, and I have excellent judgment as to what shots are appropriate or inappropriate in different situations. Whenever I play with or talk to top players, we usually seem to be on the same wavelength with strategy, shot selection, safety creativity, and run-out planning. What I don't have, because I don't play enough, is precise speed control and perfect stroke consistency. I think that comes only with lots of practice (for me anyway). Even though I have a table at my house, I don't play that often. If I'm lucky, I play only about once a week for a couple of hours. But watch out if I ever decide to quit my "day job." /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

<font color="green">Excuses. I would venture to say jsut about all of us have busy careers and Pool is not our main focus. Saying "if i could" or "I might" is all hypothetical. I hypothetically could be as rich as Bill Gates is I wanted to be. Then again, until I have accomplished that, it means nothing. On your other point, kowing strategy and other points of knowledge is a part of the game and kudos to you for being a student of the game. But, BUT, you have to be able to "put it on the table". If you can't execute it reliably, you shouldn't be "teaching it. Not having mastered what you are teaching leaves out the subtleties of the shot that cannot be learned just by reading. To use someones example, on the draw shot, you can tell someone to aim low, follow thru with a level stroke and stroke smoothly. Ya know what? You might be able to get them to draw the CB some, but there is a lot more to it that doesn't meet the eye. Things like whats going on in the grip, stroke timing, etc. If you can't execute it well, you won't be a good teacher of that technique. Bank on it. </font color>

I know there are many people in the pool world who don't listen to anybody who can't play better than they do. I think that is unfortunate, because they could probably learn a lot more if they were more open-minded. I personally try to learn from everything I read and from everybody I watch or talk to. Some of these people play better than me and some don't.

<font color="green">This is ludicrous. Nobody (at least not me) said that you have to play better than me to teach me. The key is not whether you play better, it's WHETHER YOU'VE ATTAINED TEH SKILL LEVEL TO TEACH. Again, one doesn't have to be a "pro", but I surely wouldn't respect a "D" to "C" level player (your level of play, Dr. Dave) to teach anything other than stuff that has been mastered at that skill level. </font color>

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="green">I hope this doesn't degenerate into a pissing match. It really shouldn't.

I'm of the opinion that an instructor should only be teaching stuff that he/she has mastered. Based on what I've seen and heard from those that have seen you play, you are not an advanced player, Dr. Dave. If you have the inclination to prove me wrong, and if I am, I will shout me apoligies from the rooftops. Otherwise, I stand by my opinion.

Eric </font color>

Eric.
10-10-2007, 10:04 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>JAL- One example of what a good player can convey that a mediocre one cannot is "what isa practical use of theory in real life". A quick example is; outside E can be used to help spin a cut shot in. The probelm is that in reality, there are limits to when that would work well. You have to know the limits, the example of a thin cut comes to mind.<hr /></blockquote>Eric,

I hope you aren't implying that Jal or me might not understand or appreciate the problems associated with trying to use English on a thin-cut shot. If you are not implying this, you have my apology. If you are implying this, you obviously haven't read any of our past posts (or my articles) on this topic. For example, see my previous post directly related to this (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=245996&amp;page =0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=&amp;PHPSESSID=) (under "English" - "outside English" here (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html)) and my January '07 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2007/jan07.pdf) and February '07 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2007/feb07.pdf) articles (specifically, the paragraph at the top of page 2 in the February article).

Now, one thing is probably true: true "students of the game" will learn this type of thing much sooner than "trial-and-error hackers" that consider themselves good "players."

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

Dave, i gave a general example. Nothing more. Please dont attempt to turn that into a "JAL and Dr. Dave" vs. Eric.

Eric

dr_dave
10-10-2007, 10:08 AM

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
10-10-2007, 10:10 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Eric.:</font><hr>JAL- One example of what a good player can convey that a mediocre one cannot is "what isa practical use of theory in real life". A quick example is; outside E can be used to help spin a cut shot in. The probelm is that in reality, there are limits to when that would work well. You have to know the limits, the example of a thin cut comes to mind.<hr /></blockquote>Eric,

I hope you aren't implying that Jal or me might not understand or appreciate the problems associated with trying to use English on a thin-cut shot. If you are not implying this, you have my apology. If you are implying this, you obviously haven't read any of our past posts (or my articles) on this topic. For example, see my previous post directly related to this (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=245996&amp;page =0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=&amp;vc=&amp;PHPSESSID=) (under "English" - "outside English" here (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html)) and my January '07 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2007/jan07.pdf) and February '07 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2007/feb07.pdf) articles (specifically, the paragraph at the top of page 2 in the February article).

Now, one thing is probably true: true "students of the game" will learn this type of thing much sooner than "trial-and-error hackers" that consider themselves good "players."

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

Dave, i gave a general example. Nothing more. Please dont attempt to turn that into a "JAL and Dr. Dave" vs. Eric.<hr /></blockquote>You have my apology. I thought you were citing this as an example of some of the reasons why you think we don't play pool very well. Apparently, I was wrong.

Regards,
Dave

Scott Lee
10-10-2007, 08:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
A good instuctor should be able to look at a player and know what's wrong and more importantly, where know how to correct the problem/problems, according to that specific players possibilities.
As anyone who has instucted will tell you, becoming a good instructor takes time and is a learning experience.
Good players who are not instructors tend to teach others to play like they do, not like real instructors who try to get the most out of the player according to that players potential.

Q <hr /></blockquote>

tap, tap, tap!

Scott Lee

HALHOULE
10-10-2007, 10:14 PM
NO THEY DO NOT. THEY CERTAINLY DO NOT. EXAMPLE. ONE AIM POINT FOR ANY AND ALL SHOTS. NO GHOST BALL, NO CONTACT POINTS.

HALHOULE
10-11-2007, 04:15 AM
for instance, he has no clue about an aiming system
secondly he has no way to make one
any real instructor can make one