Another sighting/dominant eye question

[Terry Davidson]

vmax:

It's dangerous because a lot of the less skilled players on here believe they miss becasue they aren't sighting the ball properly and will read your posts and try and find their preferred eye and change their set-up to what you propose.

The reality is most of those players who believe they aren't sighting correctly can easily prove they are actually sighting accurately by simply pointing their cue at the edge of the leather on a top pocket from the baulkline. I'm going to try and find a laser which I can set up over the top pocket or rail and develop a method where I can aim the laser and then check and see if the player has his cue lined up along the laser. (After warning them not to look directly at the laser beam of course).

The other problem I have with your theory is you say we should aim with the preferred eye by turning the head so the preferred eye is on the line and this is before we get down. I've never seen a player do this as they all aim with both eyes and usually have them evenly spaced on the line of aim or in other words their nose points straight down the line of aim (unless they are 'bent-noses'). Then if they do cue on one side of the chin they do this when they get down to the address position which technically means they haven't dropped their eyes straight down when getting down.

These are all theories and that should be clearly stated and also there's nothing wrong with a player trying out different theories in solo practice although most of them will try it for a frame or two and give up on it or if they see immediate improvement will keep with it until they realize there has been no improvement and they just had a good day when they tried it out or else parked their mind in neutral and let their unconscious mind control things.

Terry

[RogiBear]

I'm going to try and find a laser which I can set up over the top pocket or rail and develop a method where I can aim the laser and then check and see if the player has his cue lined up along the laser. (After warning them not to look directly at the laser beam of course).

When I first started playing I used my old golf club laser attachments. Work quite well

[chrissmall147]

This is my one and only post on this subject. I cued centre chin all my life and had a left eye dominance but used both eyes for aiming the shot from standing position and both eyes for sighting the shot and thats it on this subject.

Cheers Chris small

[nrage]

Who is this third party, Stevie Wonder ? joking aside, how can a third party tell if your cue is an inch offline over the distance on a snooker table or did this happen on the pool table at work, which wouldn't be a good test btw, pool tables being so much smaller.

You know I had never noticed pool tables were smaller until now, thanks for that pointer

I've described before how to check your alignment using balls, chalk and getting a friend to verify it using those reference points - that's what I did, on a snooker table. I also took video and used software to analyse it for the same reasons - and because you can only ask a mate to repeat the same thing a few times and not the 10-20 times you need in order to confirm the theory.

You know I sometimes get the feeling that just because something doesn't come from Nic Barrow it doesn't get taken seriously.

No there is no irony because I'm not complaining that people aren't listening to me, which I stated and explained in length

The quote I was commenting on is shown above. That's you, complaining that people aren't listening to you, because you're not Nic Barrow. I don't see you explaining that comment at length anywhere..

.. but of course your bias once again edited that out and made it an issue between you and me

No.. I was just pointing out the irony, if you don't see it "you must not have a sense of humour" (sound familiar?)

BTW, there is no issue between you and me.. at least, not from my pov. This is me simply pointing out the inconsistencies, as I see them, that's it.

.. and the reasons why I believe that you, as a player who struggles to make a twenty break, is not in a position to give advice unless that advice has been proven to work for you on a consistant basis that you can prove by hiking up your high break.

"That old chestnut" is as false as the first time you uttered it. I had hoped you now realised that it's not the person giving the advice, but the advice itself which should be judged (and tested where it can be).. I mean, that's what you'd have us all do with this "theory" right?

Your 'lack of practise' excuse doesn't wash with me simply because you have had a child recently

That's not the only reason and I'm really not lying about this, why would I bother? That's about the most petty thing I can imagine, and not something I would (bother to) do.

Lay off the computer games and get on the table, the snooker table that is not the pool table at work. A 6 x 3 pool table is no test as the margins for error aren't as great.

Yeah, that's not going to happen. I love snooker, but it's one of many of my hobbies. I am well aware that a pool table is much easier to play on, but it's the only time/place I regularly get a chance to play - so I play on it. It's larger than a 6 x 3 btw, it's actually quite a nice table.

As for Nic Barrows high break being bigger than mine, well of course it is, but as a member of this forum he is quite capable of posting on this thread to tell me that I'm wrong and that he in fact also sights and puts his cue on the line of aim using both eyes like you do.

I don't think he visits the forum all that often, he likely has better things to do TBH.

So far he hasn't, and no other top players have either.

Chris doesn't count then.. or did you "edit him out"?

Over three thousand views this thread has had and not one top player so far has posted that he sights the shot and puts his cue on the line of aim using both eyes like you do

Pretty sure Terry and Chris both said that.

Once again I state that this theory isn't mine but I do champion it as I believe it to correct and if Nic Barrow or anyone else can give me something different that works for me and makes me a better player I would disown this theory altogether and admit to being wrong about it.

Which "theory" isn't yours? No-one is questioning the theory that people have a dominant eye, that's a given. The questioning comes in when you assert that you must alter your setup or turn your head. You even tried to ram this advice down my throat and I don't have and sighting issues.

You might say "Champion" but I would say "Proselytise". Your theory lacks any substantial evidence and sounds more like the doctrine of a religion, to me. Much like a religion you have conveniently ignored any/all statements in contradiction to your ideas.

I have no problem with you saying "here try this it might work for you" but you're not doing that, you're implying your "theory" is the cure for all that ails you in the sighting department - no matter who you are - I'm pretty sure you have expressed a distaste for miracle cures in the past..

[DandyA]

I'm enjoying reading this thread, full marks to the patience of nrage, Terry and others ... although I'm also slightly losing the will to live by simply trying to read it all ...

Would it be a fair summary to say, there are three different views on sighting ...

(a) some believe you have to sight with your dominant eye ... either by placing the cue underneath it (ala Jamie Jones for instance) or more likely, by placing the cue centre chin (or nearly centre chin) and then rotating your head so that it is more over the cue ...

(b) some believe you can sight with both eyes - their brain is seeing a muddled mess of a picture but that's what brains see all the time, it's no big deal ...

(c) some believe it's pretty irrelevant, they just know how to hit the little darlings into the holes and don't worry about how they do it ...

I am probably wrong with my summary but discussing it in those terms, surely it is a matter of preference, whichever you prefer ... I don't see anything wrong with any of those techniques ...

[Manu147]

I would say in short, if u get down on the shot and feel everything looks straight and lined up, then forget about it and don't worry, you have subconsciously picked the right sighting line for you, but if you get down and it keeps looking wrong, then turn your head position on the cue until it does look right for you, otherwise tomorrow its still going to look wrong!

[SouthPaw]

Another sighting/dominant eye question

To be fair to Steve some coaches do teach to turn the head slightly to your dominant eye if you have one. Ken Williams is one "know the game" dedicates two pages of it in his book, whether it's wrong or not is not for me to judge as I believe I'm pretty even sighted...

[nrage]

To be fair to Steve some coaches do teach to turn the head slightly to your dominant eye if you have one. Ken Williams is one "know the game" dedicates two pages of it in his book, whether it's wrong or not is not for me to judge as I believe I'm pretty even sighted...

I don't think anyone is denying that this idea might work for some people, in fact there are at least 2 people who believe it has worked for them - which is great. What is troubling is the insistence that it will work for everyone and that anyone not doing this has a problem to solve.

It makes sense to me that if someone has an issue with eye dominance, because their eyes like to take turns driving the bus, that they might need to suggest to their eyes that they not do that just now please and thank you very much. Turning your head probably makes the image from one eye worse and this could prevent it taking control, thus solving the dominance issue, much like someone using a rifle will squint or use a blind to cover an eye.

[laverda]

What is troubling is the insistence that it will work for everyone and that anyone not doing this has a problem to solve.

What insistence? I have read every single post in this thread and most multiple times as I try to understand the obvious undertones and thinly veiled hostilities and at no point has Steve or myself or any other advocate insisted that everyone should do this. In fact quite the opposite has been said repeatedly. It has been said that it is something to consider especially if a player may be struggling to find consistent form.

To use that kind of excessive label does nothing but stir the pot which you seem intent on doing.

I'm also somewhat surprised at Terry's assertion that this may be 'dangerous' due to a player somehow becoming I entangled in some issue that they won't be able to find their way out of... Maybe I am just uniquely mentally strong but had I tried Steve's advice and not found it beneficial within a few practise routines and frames then I would have easily let it go and continued to explore other possible clues to improvement.

The definition of insanity is 'to do the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result' which may be fine for some who just believe that with enough practise their brain will magically work it all out but I'm of a school that would rather explore whatever avenues there are and be proactive without the fear of trying something and immediately suffering some form of amnesia and losing whatever form I already had...

Here's to continued exploration,
Cheers
Mick

[j6uk]

Yes but I think this person would be of some help to a beginner who is struggling to make a ten break, someone who aspires to pot two reds and two blacks. He could take them to were he's at.

and the reasons why I believe that you, as a player who struggles to make a twenty break, is not in a position to give advice unless that advice has been proven to work for you on a consistant basis that you can prove by hiking up your high break.

[j6uk]

Well said good post.

What insistence? I have read every single post in this thread and most multiple times as I try to understand the obvious undertones and thinly veiled hostilities and at no point has Steve or myself or any other advocate insisted that everyone should do this. In fact quite the opposite has been said repeatedly. It has been said that it is something to consider especially if a player may be struggling to find consistent form.

To use that kind of excessive label does nothing but stir the pot which you seem intent on doing.

I'm also somewhat surprised at Terry's assertion that this may be 'dangerous' due to a player somehow becoming I entangled in some issue that they won't be able to find their way out of... Maybe I am just uniquely mentally strong but had I tried Steve's advice and not found it beneficial within a few practise routines and frames then I would have easily let it go and continued to explore other possible clues to improvement.

The definition of insanity is 'to do the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result' which may be fine for some who just believe that with enough practise their brain will magically work it all out but I'm of a school that would rather explore whatever avenues there are and be proactive without the fear of trying something and immediately suffering some form of amnesia and losing whatever form I already had...

Here's to continued exploration,
Cheers
Mick

[nrage]

What insistence? I have read every single post in this thread and most multiple times as I try to understand the obvious undertones and thinly veiled hostilities and at no point has Steve or myself or any other advocate insisted that everyone should do this. In fact quite the opposite has been said repeatedly. It has been said that it is something to consider especially if a player may be struggling to find consistent form.

Ah, my apologies.

What I meant to say here was that Steve has been making statement of opinion as if they were fact. Things like the "fact" that you cannot use both eyes to place the cue on the line of aim, or the "fact" that all the pros place the cue under/toward their dominant eye, and so on.

Perhaps he didn't mean it to come across that way, perhaps I read it wrong, who knows..

The other related side issue is his assumption of "facts" about others based on sketchy/no evidence. It's all very well for one of us to share a "fact" about ourselves but for someone else to assert one is just plain wrong, it distracts from the issues at hand and is a counter productive.

To use that kind of excessive label does nothing but stir the pot which you seem intent on doing.

You'll have to take me at my word (as I have no further evidence to bring to bear) but this is not my intention.

Edit: I'm going to call it a day on this thread, I think all I can usefully say has been said. Adieu!

[j6uk]

It is a good ides to play snooker. Join a league, try to play more tournaments.
People who really play this game, who're around snooker people, get to know that they are a type of people, with etiquette and even a language of sorts, some of the nicest people you'll meet, no matter if there an executive or a chippy, there's something about being around a snooker table that is a real leveler..
I have lots of fond memories having grown up around these people most of my life, and I know that this this kind of rhetoric don't wash.

Ah...statement of opinion as if they were fact...assumption of "facts"...based on sketchy/no evidence...someone else to assert one is just plain wrong..counter productive...(as I have no further evidence to bring to bear)...this is not my intention... Adieu!

[itsnoteasy]

Sometimes the minutiae of the argument on this forum loses what the actual point is, VMax said try this if you are struggling with aiming and sighting or have a conflict between the two, I don't see any harm in that at all, if it works great if not,try something else.
I also don't see whats wrong in saying your brain will use your dominant eye more to put your cue online, it will use this eye more in everyday life so why not doing this(I don't know what the percentages will be probably depends on your eyesight.)
I think because its natural your brain uses your dominant eye, it's also natural it will place your head and eyes and cue in the right place for it to see what it wants, that's why I think centre chin and your head in a natural place your eyes and brain puts it, for me that's why I don't think most folk need to deliberately turn their heads, but as is the nature of the human being there will be some that could get help from it.
Narge I don't quite get what you are saying,when you look down the cue and shut one eye then the other, is the cue bang online with both? Or does it look like its coming in from the side with both and your brain is mixing the two together? When I get down I put cue centre chin but when I close my right eye, cue looks bang online, but when I close my left eye, it seems to be coming in on a diagonal from left to right, which proves Vmaxes point to me, are you even sighted? As I am left eye dominant.
Here is ,the only fact I have, we use two eyes to play snooker , we don't close one like rifle shooting, so it's obvious we use both eyes to aim and sight, I think it's the percentages we are discussing here.

[vmax4steve]

This is my one and only post on this subject. I cued centre chin all my life and had a left eye dominance but used both eyes for aiming the shot from standing position and both eyes for sighting the shot and thats it on this subject.

Cheers Chris small

This is exactly my point Chris, even though both eyes are open and are obviously being used to sight the shot, the brain subconsciously uses the dominant eye to put the cue on the line of aim. How else would you know that you were left eye dominant if this were not the case ?

So now we have Terry stating that he is left eye dominant, though he believes his reasons for this are purely for comfort, and now Chris Small also stating that he is left eye dominant but refusing to go into any details,
why ?