Thoughts on coaching

[DandyA]

I am a good guy.

If you can give me an example of a top level coach in snooker who isn't a century break player, I will be happy to admit there may be exceptions.

yes, indeed you are a good guy, I enjoy your postings to this forum ...

coaches and 100 breaks ... I have no idea but let's run with this ... Terry Davidson, Nigel Bond, Joe Swail, Terry Griffiths and I'd guess Del Hill are all century makers ... nrage doesn't count cos he's not a top coach (sorry mate) ... so I'm pinning my hopes on CoachGavin and Frank Sandell - don't be shy Gavin and Frank, tell us what your high breaks are ...

[pottr]

If Gavin is the chap I think he is (Barratts)? then he's certainly a century break player.

I don't know who the other gent is although I do recognise the name.

[DandyA]

If you can give me an example of a top level coach in snooker who isn't a century break player, I will be happy to admit there may be exceptions.

ha! I've thought of one ... Dr Steve Peters ... see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_P...trist)#Snooker

according to that web page, he is credited with coaching Ronnie O'Sullivan to his World Championship win in 2012 ... the article doesn't say what Dr Peters high break is but somehow I doubt it's 100 ...

[pottr]

Nice try, but his coaching credentials are not founded in nor exclusive to cuesports.

I applaud the effort though. Thinking outside the box

[DandyA]

Nice try, but his coaching credentials are not founded in nor exclusive to cuesports.

I applaud the effort though. Thinking outside the box

yeah ok, I've reread your original question and I was pushing my luck ... still hoping my bet on Frank Sandell comes in though although I doubt it, I have a feeling in my water he's hit at least 130 ...

[throtts]

Its a tiny bit like a fitness coach, would you go for a fit trim one or a fat one..I would say most would go for a trim one just from the inspiration factor.

Myself never been coached fyi, would I, yes probably. I would have a hit with one that has a good reputation just to see how bad or good my game is. As said above, you cannot see your stance and cue action from the rear.

[throtts]

yeah ok, I've reread your original question and I was pushing my luck ... still hoping my bet on Frank Sandell comes in though although I doubt it, I have a feeling in my water he's hit at least 130 ...

But Frank going to tell you to look at the OB contact point,, hahaha...

[franksandellsnooker]

Well well Dandy thanks for your remarks. I have never before got involved in any depth of discussion on forums on actual coaching methods or my ability or otherwise as a coach. My website ( a bit out of date now) www.franksandellcuesport.co.uk tells my story after semi retirement and there are also some recent remarks on the blog section of a club I am consultant to. www.thecastlecub.com
As to high breaks my highest snooker is 117 and most importantly because it illustrates maybe a wider breadth of knowledge regarding the strokes of our games my highest billiard break is 156.
I must say after being one of very few people whose has made a full time living from the game for well over thirty years I am seriously underwhelmed by the coaching courses currently qualifying coaches in 2 days.
I have devised my own method of presenting both group and One to one coaching sessions and nearly always tell my pupils that intensive coaching is a waste of money and should they want to consult me again wait at least three months - probably six in order that they may practise what is preached and also throw out the bits that don't work. :snooker:

[CoachGavin]

Yes I have made centuries and I do believe the fact I have comes in useful when explaining shot selection. However I'm not sure del is a century maker and pj nolan was also never a top player and they are both known for being excellant coaches. Also if the coach is only working with beginners then his ability matters less perhaps and his job is more about getting people taking up the game and getting them doing the basics etc. Having done a number of courses id agree that I wouldnt choose a coach purely by that as I do know of a few qualified coaches I would not trust. At the same time a coach needs different skills to a player so good players don't always make good coaches. As long as the coach has the player's respect and can motivate, inspire and help the player with his game then thats the important thing.

[Maxsys]

Yes I have made centuries and I do believe the fact I have comes in useful when explaining shot selection. However I'm not sure del is a century maker and pj nolan was also never a top player and they are both known for being excellant coaches. Also if the coach is only working with beginners then his ability matters less perhaps and his job is more about getting people taking up the game and getting them doing the basics etc. Having done a number of courses id agree that I wouldnt choose a coach purely by that as I do know of a few qualified coaches I would not trust. At the same time a coach needs different skills to a player so good players don't always make good coaches. As long as the coach has the player's respect and can motivate, inspire and help the player with his game then thats the important thing.

Bit like football really, Alex Ferguson was not a great player

Mark Hughes is not a great coach. (based on his record to date and not my opinion)

Simples.

I have had two coaching sessions, 1 month apart no where near a ton yet, highest break is 32, but then I only play once a week, maybe twice if I am lucky, my reason for employing the coach was simple, I want more consistency, I did not want the opinions of an unqualified person about my technique, and I wanted a totally honest review of my game. I got all of this and more in the two sessions and some minor adjustments to stance, grip and cue power. These small details have made a great difference, some frames I feel I can pot anything, and sometimes do. Shot selection is not always the best, and is usually what lets me down, position and understanding where the cue ball will end up drives me crazy, but at the same time the technical detail of the game is one that intrigues me.

I want to be able to play to a reasonable standard as I enjoy the game very much, TBH if I could get to a level where I could consistently achieve 30-50 breaks I would be ecstatic, but the reality is, I don't play or practice enough to make that happen, life just gets in the way. I know this and it does not put me off, it wilol just take me a bit longer to get there.

Snooker funny game, its about Potting & Position, and there are only mm's involved to make a break or sit back down.

To me the coaching at my level is invaluable, without it I would never have known the tiny things that make a big difference, and i would still be listening to the guy at the club who has played for 30 years, never made a ton, and thinks that side is the answer to everything.

[nrage]

nrage doesn't count cos he's not a top coach (sorry mate)

I'm not (nor have I ever claimed to be) a coach, so I'm not bothered in the slightest by this remark

I've helped a few friends and I like to share what I've personally found helpful or interesting on here, that's it. I know there is a risk that my advice may come across as if I were a coach but I have in the past added a disclaimer (when I remembered) and my high-break is shown on my profile - so that people who are of the opinion that such things are important can feel free to ignore me.

Personally, I think information is information and can be imparted with/without ability to do the things described. In fact, some people are better at explaining things than others and this ability has nothing to do with the ability to do the thing they're describing.

I will concede that there may be some things that you can't truly "know" unless you've done them personally, but if that's the case and they cannot be explained to another person then what difference does it make if the coach has/hasn't done them? If they can be explained, then cannot a person who has done them explain it to another, and cannot that person explain it to others?

I will also concede that if you haven't "done" something you cannot "know" for certain that it's true/correct, so you risk spreading misinformation. Which is why I'm careful to share only things which seem to have helped me, or are ideas shared by actual coaches (whose opinions I personally respect), or make it clear my idea or theory is just that. Sometimes an idea or theory can get someone thinking or trying something different and that's useful in itself.

I agree that an actual coach should be able to do the things they're describing, not because they cannot describe them without doing it, but because an example is better than a description and because the player needs to have confidence in everything that the coach is telling them.

Snooker is itself not a complicated subject, the physics of it can be but you don't need to know those in order to play the game - just like you don't need to know the physics of walking in order to walk. Playing snooker isn't even that complicated, the basic ideas are just that, basic. You want to cue in a straight line, it's simple to explain and hard to actually do. The doing simply takes practice - something a coach can't do for you in any case.

[tedisbill]

hee hee ... asking the obvious questions ... why does the opinion of a 30/50 break player count for less than that of a 100 break player ... and why is the opinion of a 100 break player more important than a 30/50 break player ...

I'm not trying to be argumentative ... I simply do not understand why you think the opinion of a 100 break player is better than the opinion of a 30/50
break player ...

Right, so my highest break is 25 and I want to improve my game, so I decide to see a coach.

If I see a coach, and their highest break is 30, how could that person possible understand how to improve my game? Surely if they knew how to improve my game, their highest break wouldn't be 30 would it?

If I see a guy, and their highest break is 132, they surely understand how to do it a lot better than I do?

That's not to say that all 100+ break players will make good coaches, of course they won't, not everyone is a good teacher. But I would say that all 30 break players wouldn't make a good coach, because even if they are superb teachers, they don't know actually know what it is they need to teach do they? Or as I said, they wouldn't be 30 break standard in the first place.

[nrage]

Right, so my highest break is 25 and I want to improve my game, so I decide to see a coach.

If I see a coach, and their highest break is 30, how could that person possible understand how to improve my game? Surely if they knew how to improve my game, their highest break wouldn't be 30 would it?

If I see a guy, and their highest break is 132, they surely understand how to do it a lot better than I do?

No. They can definitely do it a lot better but they may be doing a lot of things unconsciously. For example, some people just pick up a cue and without thinking have more or less correct technique or superb control and timing. A lot of people have some odd quirk of technique that they have learned to compensate for. All it takes is hours of practice.

That's not to say that all 100+ break players will make good coaches, of course they won't, not everyone is a good teacher. But I would say that all 30 break players wouldn't make a good coach, because even if they are superb teachers, they don't know actually know what it is they need to teach do they? Or as I said, they wouldn't be 30 break standard in the first place.

Or maybe they're lacking the practice. Seriously, practice is everything. You can read books, forums, and theorise all you like but unless you actually put in the hours of practice you'll get exactly nowhere - believe me, I know first hand.

[Gerry Armstrong]

I see the Alex Ferguson example has cropped up again - in snooker terms Alex Ferguson was a century break player i.e. he was good enough to have a career as a professional footballer, although by no means a Lionel Messi.

Jose Mourinho is another popular example - he too would be classed as a century break player in snooker terms i.e. he was a top amateur footballer but didn't quite make the grade for the jump to professional football, instead moving into learning his trade as a coach at a young age.

Same story with all the top golf coaches - sure, they're by no means all multiple major winners, some in fact struggled to make a living as a profesional but you don't see many golf coaches playing off a 24 handicap.

[nrage]

As long as the coach has the player's respect and can motivate, inspire and help the player with his game then thats the important thing.

I agree that an actual coach should be able to do the things they're describing, not because they cannot describe them without doing it, but because an example is better than a description and because the player needs to have confidence in everything that the coach is telling them.

.. but you don't see many golf coaches playing off a 24 handicap.

No, and I think that makes perfect sense for the reasons both Gavin and I have mentioned above. A player needs confidence in the coach, it wouldn't work without it.