Eyes Wide Shut

[RGCirencester]

I was trying like crazy watching Higgins yesterday trying to work out where he is looking. Look at a Higgins break off for instance he looks up down up down up then before he his the white his gaze goes down, hits the white ball then back up afterwards. To me he is looking at the White and I have always thought that.
I have picked the break off shot in particular here because I know vmax will say the player doesn't know what he's doing, it's looking at the object ball entering the pocket etc. But on the break off shot if he starts looking at the pack you do not need to move your head to see where the object ball went, your already looking at it and are far more interested in where the white goes.

[CoachGavin]

Like I said before I have seen slow motion of hendry and on long pots he is looking at the white on cue delivery. No mistake. Also if you look at golf and darts, where snooker is similar, the player looks at what he strikes which would be the cue ball. Looking at the object ball is like looking at the hole in golf. Just a few thoughts. Interesting discussion.

[armstm]

blaming the messy table is not a brilliant excuse imho.

have you tried videoing urself? i am 37 top break player (ie crap for the amount of time i practice). i recently starting videoing myself using iphone and then downloading kinovea software (thanks terry). imho its really easy to not be aware of your faults and if u r 27/31 top break standard then u should be able to spot major differences in ur set up to the pros.

in my case - too close to shot, elbow in wrong place (which still happens even though totally aware of how i'm doing it), cue not being delivered with authority (hard to define but i tried to be too smooth and rather than giving it more of a definite hit - think john higgins), scooping on some shots, bridge arm not extended enough, the list goes on.

on some shot you could actually see cue nowhere near coming thru straight. so my misses were nothing at all to do with where my eyes were focused.

i'm not saying ur point is invalid i'm just saying make sure you rule out more obvious things which u will be able to see from a video replay.

[Terry Davidson]

I still believe we have a misconception here. A lot of the pros will drop their eyes to the cueball at the very START of the delivery and then switch them to the OB just before the cue strikes the CB.

Terry

[RGCirencester]

Higgins gaze didn't budge until the ball was hallway down the table.
I have great respect for the advice of terry and vmax and others on here but honestly I do not understand why you absolutely refuse to believe you cannot look at the White on delivery. Every other piece of advice goes with the addition that you do what works for you, but this one point has been declared absolutely wrong.
I would never have thought a pro could play with both legs bent hunched over the table until Ricky Walden came along.

Can I just ask one thing Terry... of the cue follows the eye, and correct me if I'm wrong but haven't you said the slow straight backswing mirrors the delivery... Why do you not have to look at the object ball for the backswing?

[nrage]

hi nrage I'm glad to have you join the discussion but I think you misunderstand me ... from the above, I think you think I do not look at the object ball when I'm down on the shot ... not true at all! may be I explained incorrectly ...

No, it's my fault for leaping in 1/2 way through a discussion

the difference now is at the front pause, prior to the final backswing and delivery, I now focus on the contact point on the cue ball rather than the object ball ...

Ah, ok, so that's the only difference really between what you're doing and vmax is suggesting. I reckon I'm going to have to film myself and see what I'm doing, but I think I'm looking at the object ball.

I don't believe there is a right or wrong way to do it ...

True, if you're stating there is no single way which is "right" for everyone. But, that's not really interesting to you personally, unless you're a coach. Personally you want to find the one "right" way for you.

There may be one or more "right" ways for you personally, where "right" is defined as being the best at achieving your goal. Where "best" is defined as best on balance taking into account all factors. For example I can imagine a technique might be more accurate but also more limiting and might therefore not be "better" than another which is very slightly less accurate but gives you more options.

So, it's hardly as simple as right or wrong.. and this isn't even taking into account the fact that you will change over time. For example you might need to look at the white now to ensure you strike it where you want, but later when your action is more consistent you may no longer need that guide and could look at the object ball gaining some other advantage there.

So, yes, your original statement is basically correct. There isn't necessarily a "right" way for everyone, just like the "right" shot isn't always the same for everyone (in the exact same situation). Because, people are all different.

.. all I'm saying is, and it was quite surprising when I first tried it, I do not lose any accuracy at all, indeed I'm probably more accurate but let's say just as accurate ... but what I do gain is a much more accurate strike on the cue ball cos that's what I'm looking at ...

So, it might be the "right" way for you. But, if you wanted to know for certain you'd have to perform a few tests in a scientific fashion. Isolate and account for all the variables, measure the results, etc.

I personally don't like a chest contact point ... my cue is certainly close to my chest but if I feel a contact (and I notice it) I'll twist my hips a bit more to remove it ... I've got 3 hopefully rock steady contact points - bridge, chin and grip, my grip delivers the cue hopefully straight using my chin and bridge as a guide ... I don't see the need personally for a fourth especially as the chest contact point is always exerting a sideways pressure ...

Ideally the chest should not exert any pressure on the cue. Think of it like firing a gun through a doorway and using the door frame as a guide. The guide doesn't move, and doesn't exert pressure on the gun. The chest contact point should be the same. It should be on the line of aim and not move. The cue should be able to run along it for 6 inches and remain on the line of aim the entire time. That's the theory anyway.

whilst I accept broadly your pistol vs rifle argument ... I would consider a snooker cue a rifle especially if you do get your bridge "v" 9 inches or maybe slightly more from the cue ball ... I'm 6ft 1in using a 57.5in cue ... at front address with the cue tip nice and close to the white, my chin is not far away from the 3/4 split at 16in from the butt ... sp I've got about 40in of sighting ... that's a rifle not a pistol! plenty of sighting

so you're going to have to explain to me why say a 12ft incorrect sighting line works better than a 40in correct sighting line that sounds a bit argumentative but that's the crux of what I'm saying

After further thought I'm not sure my analogy as I imagined it initially really holds

In my original analogy the cue wasn't the rifle, rather the rifle was an imaginary thing between the 2 reference points which were furthest apart, so bridge to white (pistol) vs bridge to object ball (rifle). I imagined these reference points being analogous to the dot on the end and U on the stock of a rifle and (as I hope we all agree) the further apart these points are, the more accurate you can be.

But, I think it falls down because the object ball is more like the target and the rifle, which you have control over and are in fact aiming at the target, is the rifle.

So, here's another line of thought..

Assuming that on the stroke we're all unconsciously making micro adjustments to the cue to keep it on target, which I think everyone does to some degree.

Then, you're using the bridge and white as reference points. So, assuming that you've found the correct line of aim (using the object ball etc) and placed the bridge hand on that line of aim, then all you have to do is strike the middle of the white and it should go to the right place.

So, would you gain some advantage by looking at the object ball instead? I think it boils down to this.. If you were looking at the object ball then theoretically your brain should notice the cue deviating earlier, because a small error makes more difference at distance. If you're looking at the white you may not notice the deviation till it gets much larger. The sooner you notice, the sooner the brain compensates, the better. This is the idea my initial analogy was trying to describe.

So, if my assumptions are valid, then there is some advantage to looking at the object ball. However, perhaps we're not micro adjusting, or perhaps we cannot detect any deviation until it gets to a size where it's obvious even using the white as a reference, or perhaps we're using other senses (proprioception/touch) to detect deviation and not our eyes.

Basically, all wild speculation but interesting to me nonetheless.

[Terry Davidson]

RGCirencester:

I do not say looking at the OB is the only way since after all I use the closed eye potting exercise to get the student to concentrate on the grip hand as a point of reference.

That said, I advocate looking at the OB at time of strike for a couple of reasons:
1. In order to get a player to accelerate through the cueball I try and teach them to try and hit the OB with the tip (where possible) and this is much easier if they are actually looking at the OB at time of strike; and,
2. The cueball should be regarded as about as substantial as a soap bubble, offering zero resistance to the cue (not possible, but it is a good concept to try) and if a player is looking at the cueball at the time of strike then there's a chance his brain will say (unconsciously) 'OK, I've hit my target and my job is done' and he immediately starts to decelerate the cue.

Using the closed eye exercise I've found players will quickly learn to pot a set shot better with their eyes closed than with them open. I believe the reason is the brain doesn't really know exactly where the cueball is and so the player just keeps on accelerating which will achieve greater accuracy.

Another point on this is it therefore follows when using the closed eye exercise that it doesn't matter what the player is looking at as long as he stays absolutely still during the backswing and delivery and also has gotten down on the line of aim correctly.

However, I believe the best results can be achieved by looking at the object ball when striking the cueball, but if a player (like yourself) insists he will play better with his eyes locked on the cueball at time of strike it follows that for this player he should do this as he derives confidence from that eye rhythm.

If I had a student who insisted he achieves better results looking at the CB then I would inform him he is likely losing out on achieving even better results by looking at the OB at time of strike and then I would carry on with the lesson but I would try an exercise where I allow him to feather a shot and then place a piece of paper in front of the object ball so he can't look at it when striking. The results of this exercise would likely be very interesting as I think a lot of players will raise their eyes somewhere during the delivery.

Terry

[frazz]

if you look at the white during delivery and on contact with white you can easily lose the line of the shot, especially on long balls or tricky cuts, makes it so much easier to miss. personally i had a period of play while i was on the challenge tour in which i lost the timing of the flick of my eyes which resulted in me looking at the white on striking it which made me about 30points worse off as a player and done my nut in.

[Sidd]

Guys I think terry, Nrage and Frazz have explained it properly now... All that could be said has been said.

Sixofclubs and Dandy: you are both right yes indeed you are both right in CB sighting at the point of impact during the delivery. It isnt wrong and you can carry on with that if you feel comfortable that way. Even i used to do that as an amateur (still am an amateur though) and then when I started learning object ball sighting while playing the stroke; it took me 3 months to get it done perfectly fine and during that timeframe my game went to an almost zero- but i sacrificed that time for being a better player... we all do in way, don't we?

Now here is the real deal. You can carry on looking at the CB and be better players no issues... however i can bet on these two things 1. you will not be able to achieve century break standard and 2. even if you do the odds are you wont ever be able to maintain that... if you want to accept this and are happy with it then go on and enjoy the game. Now you will argue that if the CB sighting is correct then why would this happen given that the line of aim has been chosen and while looking at CB without head shoulder movement you can still make it .. well to that argument there can be only two possible explanations: 1. unfortunately we are all humans yes it would have been better had we been robots but aren't so... 2. this game requires concentration and focus and by focus I mean FOCUS yes absolute discipline and focus boosts concentration and without that you can't even achieve 80 break standard and so now we are all eager to achieve this FOCUS that im talking about and that focus comes once the rhythm is smooth and the flow is great ... now what helps in maintaining this focus? my friends believe it or not it is OB sighting at impact that helps this focus trust me trust me ... you have to have that spot fixed in mind while striking all the time and hence if your eyes are focused on that spot you can switch the rest of the thoughts off easily and only focus on that and hence it helps not having anything else in mind at that very moment and only focus on the pot.. nothing else helps that better than this.

Coaches guide closed eye exercise only to get the student to feel the grip pressure and correct it and its a good check for straight cueing no doubt (Terry explained that in detail above) however no coach will teach potting a very fine cut with check side stun having the eyes closed ... why? my dears it is also because you need full focus on that very fine spot cuz even a milimietre difference will allow you to miss.. why doesn't a hockey player take a penalty stroke with closed eyes or eyes on the hockey ball ? the goal post is much bigger larger and wider than the snooker pocket ...

you must have seen the commentators exclaim whenever a pro misses a baby black when he has to go in to the pack "oh this is very common- he took his eyes off the pot" and this gave me another explanation idea, as under:

You theory is correct and I accept that.. then if you have the correct line of aim and there isnt any body movement etc then looking at cb or OB wont make any difference all right agreed.. this means even having eyes closed wouldnt make a difference ... agreed... now test this to confirm your theory and i can put a blind bet you wont be able to; pot a half ball black or a quarter ball black in corner when you need to go in the bunch and focus your eyes on the bunch where you want the CB to reach ... if the theory is correct and eyes on OB CB or closed dont make a difference then eyes on the reds would be the same thing right? try that and see what happens... also pot any ball but keep eye on the spot where you want the Cb to reach after the shot i.e. positioning im sure it will help your positioning a lot ... then see what can you pot... !!!

Even if you keep looking at the CB you can pot no doubt but carrying on is the question. dont you think any spot or chalk mark etc on CB will catch the eye and your focus may drift for a second putting side on playing stun and looking at that spot hmmm yes it will improve one thing that you will be able to strike the exact point on CB you wish to but then hitting the exact spot is not guaranteed in this process. We are humans guys and we think random thoughts ... and also since we are humans we move we cant remain 100% still all the time if we could we would make centuries with having our eyes closed !!

Having said all that i would once again conclude that eyes on OB is how it has to be .. no one achieves a Maxi with CB sighting no one achieve regular 100 breaks with eyes on CB- Joe, Steve, even Alex Higgins (a genius of his time) didnt do it ROS and others dont do it steve white griffiths have the OB sighting in their coaching books all coaches agree to it old players commentators everyone says so and not only in this game but in all cue sports including billiards and pool etc have the same concept... even though your theory is correct ... then why? the only answer is that it helps concentration and improves focus and helps in keeping all other thoughts away from mind.. drifting away in thoughts is an easy easy thing in snooker ....!

Best of luck!

[vmax4steve]

errrr ... do you want to re-read that vmax? I've highlighted some of your comments in bold but wouldn't you think you are being a wee bit condescending towards me? that's why I say you take cheap shots - your high break may be higher than mine but that does not make you superior to me - better at snooker yes, superior no ...

you are speculating here vmax ... it seems to me, in order to justify the "OB sighting is the only way" argument, you are speculating that players miss because they didn't hold focus on the object ball ... it's possibly true but I'd suspect head or body movement, incorrect stance or poor delivery account for many more misses ...

I am not superior to you and your editing of my post picking out what you believe to be condescending remarks says more about you than it does about me. You are clearly on the defensive here because you believe you have found a better way to play but the evidence you have provided, a four point (equal to one ball) increase in your high break proves nothing has changed.

I highlighted in bold all the important points. if I wanted to shout I would have increased the size of the text and added emoticons for emphasis, once again you are on the defensive.

Your point that there are other reasons why a player may miss a shot rather than take their eyes of the contact point of the object ball, I would counter by saying that the reason these other things happen is because the player takes their eyes of the contact point of the object ball.
It's keeping the eyes on the contact point of the object ball that keeps the cue in line, keeps the head and body still, is essential to the timing and is the reason why long pots are harder than close pots. It's harder to focus on this contact point when at distance, which is why all the great players have fantastic eyesight and lose this as they get older.
By your reasoning all long shots would be as easy to make through cue ball sighting as close shots are, yet they are not.
Think about it DandyA, I'm trying to help you here. It's not simply about looking at the object ball, it's about looking at the contact point on the object ball at the exact moment of the strike.
Which is something that all poor players do not do and those players will never get any better until they do this basic thing. It's not easy, it's very, very difficult to do, I fail to do it 50% of the time which makes me a very inconsistant player and it's incredibly frustrating and makes me extremely angry at times because I feel that I am doing it but on reflection I always realise that I haven't been doing it.
My problem with this lies in my natural timing which is very, very fast. I simply point the cue at the cue ball. look up at the object ball and shoot. I have to shoot as soon as my eyes focus on the contact point of the object ball, if I don't then my eyes leave this point and I miss. If I shoot a fraction of a second too soon or too late then I miss because I'm looking elsewhere. I've tried deliberately focussing on this contact point for longer but I end up staring into space at nothing in particular and play even worse. It's simple anxiety in my inconsistancy that causes me to take my eyes off the contact point and to deliberately think about it makes me a poor player.

The only time it all comes together and I play great is when I'm thinking about nothing and then it just happens and it just flows, and then as soon as that happens I think, 'hey I'm playing great here, I must be...........' and then it disappears again. If I can steer someone like yourself away from the snooker madness that I inhabit then I will try no matter how condescending you think my comments are. I know what you are going through and I know the way out.

It's the number one reason why shots are missed, you hear the commentators saying all the time when a pro misses an easy ball that he simply took his eye off the pot. What they really mean is that he took his eye off the contact point of the object ball at the exact moment of the strike.

You have to acknowledge to yourself that you are wrong, mistaken, taken a wrong path whatever you want to call it and trust in those who know better than you do, who know better than I do.

[armstm]

vmax u sight the ball standing up. what u look at down on the shot is irrelevent as long as u deliver the cue correctly. its possible looking at the object helps u deliver the cue straight but i am not sure on this point and the evidence seems to be against this as it is possible to pot the ball with ur eyes closed. obviously u r way better than me as a snooker player but i would guess this is due to the way u set urself up and cue the ball and has zero to do with wot ur eyes do once down on the shot.

[RocketRoy1983]

Eyes shut? I think your just showing off with this one!

[throtts]

Jmo,

I focus on the contact point on the object ball and thats what I believe is correct, its what we are aiming at to achieve the pot.

In darts you do not look at the dart when it leaves your hand, you look at what your aiming at.

Its all so clear for me anyway.

[CoachGavin]

No you don't look at the dart just as you don't look at the cue. However in darts you look at what you are aiming to strike which in snooker would be the white. Golf is the same. You look at what you are striking not where you want it to go as golfers would look at the greens. There are definately some good ideas with looking at the white although I still think the ob is the way to go for now.

[Csmith]

I looked at the white at the beginning of my development as a player. I did so in order to ensure I hit the ball where I wanted to every time. Eventually I succumbed to peer pressure and began focusing on the object ball. Although there was some initial discomfort as I was so used to seeing exactly where I was cueing, I experienced an almost immediate improvement in my pocketing ability. I don't know why, and I suspect the cause of my improvement could very well have been a placebo effect.

Ultimately I think the important thing is that our hands tend to want to go towards where we are looking. Whether that is the object ball or where we are aiming on the Cue ball.