A top quality cue or some top quality coaching?

[bonoman1970]

Cueman you are 100% right!

[trevs1]

QUOTE=tallguy;345043]I am not sure I totally agree with you cueman.

Being a good player doesn't imply you can be a good coach and you can be a great coach without necessarily being a great player.

I agree that no coach can "make you talented" but a good coach can correct your mistakes and enable you to raise your game. All said and done, I guess the most important limiting factor will be your own natural talent.[/QUOTE




Ah, the last three words above.....the single most important aspect of the lot.

'ALL' the very good, to great players I've EVER known, played with or against, have ALL had the raw ability to work with in the first place.

Of these players, the ones who have played at a professional level, got there not because of coaching, but becuase of natural progression of their skills/experience.

There are many many people who play snooker who will never become particularly proficient at the game, even if they lived for 500 years.

Still, if coaching gives them 'some' further knowledge and understanding to enhance what they are capable of, and, if it also enhances their enjoyment of the sport, then that is surely reason enough to use it.

So in my view anyway, while either coaching or a cue can't 'always' in itself make dramatic improvements in someone's game, it can possibly help to some degree, and, can also offer an increased sense of enjoyment.

[potted]

Theres no substitute for table time thats a certainty and maybe correcting my stance will be all I ever gain from coaching but it'll do no harm to try the things mentioned in a number of coaching tips i've already found on the nett. The proof in the pudding will be there if i impove without seriously upping my table time I guess and if I do then lessons ae definately on the cards.

As i said jokingly to Dell as i got my cue out..

"You've got your work cut out here with me I've 40 years of bad habits"

Maybe I have maybe it's just that one.

BTW Check your pm box Trev please

[thinsy]

Nice thread, but it's a bit of a chicken/egg thing really.........

There is no right or wrong answer....

Give Ronnie/Hendry/Higgins etc etc any cue and although they would not play to their normal high standard they would quite easily beat most of us TSF members.....

Give someone who has very little 'talent' who is unable to digest a coaches knowledge, or can't be bothered to put things into practice, isn't going to benefit.

I remember seeing John Spencer come to our club and play a few frames, he took three cues off the rack rolled them across the table, laughed when all of them looked like they where on a Big Dipper ride, but still picked one and had a 99 break in his second frame!!!!!

[miscuehamburg]

[/B]


Neither is coaching.

No, of course not. But a qualified coach is likely to improve your game, whereas a cue does not tell you anything about your technique:snooker:

[trevs1]

No, of course not. But a qualified coach is likely to improve your game, whereas a cue does not tell you anything about your technique:snooker:

I can see where you're coming from, but all is not what it seems with 'qualified' coaches.

Being a qualified coach is not enough to ensure anyone is getting a quality service, that's for sure. Some of the best coaches I know are not qualified, and conversely, some of the worst I've ever heard about are qualified.

Where does that leave people???

Honestly, some of the stuff I've personally seen and heard from 'some' qualified coaches is nothing short of insanity.

[cueman]

Gotta agree with Trevor on this. I didn't want to get into any arguments as I know there is a member on this site who has gone down the route of being a qualified coach however it seems to me the only reason these people go into coaching is because they know they can make some very easy money out of people who know no better.

I've seen a few coaches as Trevor mentioned and some of the things they were saying and doing just smacked of taking the urine to put it bluntly. I'm also totally against the fact that to be officially recognised as a coach you have to go through certain channels who are again doing it solely to make money.

Tell you what I don't think any coach could teach a player technique or more importantly understanding shot selection, break building any better than I can. Willie Thorne talks more sense from a techinical point of view on commentary than I've ever heard from any professional coach and the guy that is down Telford doing the coaching this week is one of the worst I've seen. He's okay demonstrating simple stance and grip and how to aim but talk to him about playing more advanced shots and he's lost.

[miscuehamburg]

I see. I may have a wrong assumption then about 'qualified' coaches. Anyway, when I advocate a coach instead of an expensive cue, I mean a good, reasonable one. To find him is another matter...

[April madness]

Tell you what I don't think any coach could teach a player technique or more importantly understanding shot selection, break building any better than I can. Willie Thorne talks more sense from a techinical point of view on commentary than I've ever heard from any professional coach and the guy that is down Telford doing the coaching this week is one of the worst I've seen. He's okay demonstrating simple stance and grip and how to aim but talk to him about playing more advanced shots and he's lost.

Just to make it clear, are you talking about Del Hill there?

And about Willie Thorne - I don't have much experience in snooker at all, but I have to agree to you about him, and that is why I find his commentary interesting.

[trevs1]

I see. I may have a wrong assumption then about 'qualified' coaches. Anyway, when I advocate a coach instead of an expensive cue, I mean a good, reasonable one. To find him is another matter...

Yes, that's exactly the problem for many, finding someone who has the knowledge and ability to convey what's necessary for the player they are dealing with, and, to put it across in a way that person can understand clearly.

To my mind and experience, it's definitely the case that there ARE 'qualified' coaches who are unable to provide that.

Playing snooker is not that different to many other skills we might learn, from driving a car, skiing or baking a cake. While many of us can learn to do these things to a basic level of proficiency from following a set 'method', it takes a little more natural ability and feel, along with a lot of practise to get much further beyond that basic standard.

[cueman]

Just to make it clear, are you talking about Del Hill there?

And about Willie Thorne - I don't have much experience in snooker at all, but I have to agree to you about him, and that is why I find his commentary interesting.

No not Del though I think he is over rated, its the other guy I can't remember his name that has been there most sessions and you see him on the TV sometimes in the background. Steve Davis was using his cue today during the mid session interval.

[potted]

The other guy i saw there was http://www.adamduffy.co.uk/
although later i was talking to the guy wh sat next to me watching ding v davies and he said the other coach with Del was a mate of his who coaches out of goldencue in bilston about a mile away from me. Never did clock his nam though.


Could it have been this guy? http://delcoachessnooker.com/delcoachesnsnooker.aspx

Cant say i saw him there and doubt a guy from brum would be playing out of bilston though.

[ADR147]

personally i would take the cue - but then i can play the game!

[April madness]

personally i would take the cue - but then i can play the game!

ranked number xxx on Main Tour?

[ADR147]

ranked number xxx on Main Tour?

not enough money in it for me to play on the main tour!