dominant eye what is the best way to test it????

[tetricky]

Sure, I didn't take it too personally.

Have you thought that if you consider discussion about technique, from less than accomplished players, to be pointless that you might be better steering yourself away from the coaching section?

I rather enjoy the complexity of the game, the attraction to me is that there is a lot involved, and it's difficult. I don't expect it to be easy, or to do everything correctly. I do think that I will one day hit a century, and be capable of a clearance....it's a long way from here, but developing the techique, and practising it, is a major component to my aim!

[itsnoteasy]

Good luck with it, I will leave you to your inner torment.

[Shockerz]

Sure, I didn't take it too personally.

I rather enjoy the complexity of the game, the attraction to me is that there is a lot involved, and it's difficult. I don't expect it to be easy, or to do everything correctly. I do think that I will one day hit a century, and be capable of a clearance....it's a long way from here, but developing the techique, and practising it, is a major component to my aim!

This sounds like me! I think people fall into categories, some 'just do it' people accept where they're at and practice to varying levels and get what they get good or bad and that's fine. I've always had to understand how things work so I practice the right stuff when I commit time, I have committed a fair amount of time.

My playing partner doesn't know and doesn't want to know anything more technical than just push the tip through the ball and he has a high break of 126. Hitting ball after ball without understanding what you're trying to work toward must be like hitting 500 balls at a driving range practicing your slice.

I just don't want to keep committing practice time to something that may be wrong. If everything (and every coach) agrees this is important then I would rather establish the right way and then spend 000's of hours learning how to clear the table.

I thought that made sense but we're all different.

[Nic Barrow]

Eye Alignment

Started playing again about 4 years ago (11 year break) and didn't know anything about the dominant eye issue. When I played years ago I just picked the cue up and played (18 years), cannot remember where the cue was positioned and didn't even know coaching existed.

My right eye is stronger as proved by the optician and is also my dominant eye as proved with the usual look through a small circle etc.

I saw a coach at the beginning as struggled to pot anything (he was great) and sorted many things out, long straight potting has continually been a problem since returning but breaks are fine as the balls are generally closer (stacks of 50's, 60's, a few 70's an 86 and a 100); my safety and long potting has found me out on many occasions.

I hit some balls down the lines initially with a coach and decided the cue should be 1 inch to the right of chin centre and did this for 1 and a half years, ball striking still average to poor. I saw a video from nick with a German fellow who then switched to centre of chin and started knocking lots of blues in.

rightly or wrongly the message I received was to put the cue in the centre of the chin and the brain would work the rest out, still the same for me after another 18 months of doing this.

A have experimented lots of different stances positions and everything I can think of and have also just forgot the lot and just got down and played....still the same.

A little while ago I stuck the cue directly under my right eye miles from the centre and started to pot long balls, you would think that would be great?

Under my right eye I now miss short balls as I think I have trained my brain for the other 2 positions!

After reading all the dominant eye stuff I think I am faced with taking some time off and just putting it under the right eye and hoping to re-learn the short game which will cause me no end of issues (and risk).

I lost 3 league games on the bounce (never happened before) and lost a crucial frame last night in a Div 1 cup final (3 long shots) so find myself at a crossroads.

I don't think I'm alone in this issue and i'm sure the sheer mention of dominant eye has confused and wrongly steered many snooker players.

After spending a crazy amount of time trying to prove and sort the best cue position I'm sure I have confused whatever in the brain is used to bring all the information together!

Gotta love this game.........

Well the eyes can relearn once forced to be in a suboptimal position.
But far better to find one's correct eye alignment.
Everyone is unique and I NEVER tell anyone to cue under either eye or centre chin or anywhere in between.
I simply let them find out where is best for them with a simple preferred eye test.
Get this right, and straight pots will follow, and angles shots become pottable.
Without being face to face, a very simplistic way of doing this is setting up straight middle distance pots you feel you should get 6-8/10.
Then play 5 each in 5 different chin positions.
As long as your delivery is fairly straight (and you dont play with too much speed!) you should get closer to where your optimum is.
There is will be one position which is easy and natural and we should follow that path of least resistance.

[tetricky]

Try having a read here. Have a go on a table, starting with your cue under your dominant eye, and trying more towards the centre of your chin, over to the other eye, and even outside the eyes. Hit a straight shot (blue off the spot into the centre pocket, screw back into the opposite centre pocket) for each head position (make sure you do normal prep, and walk into each shot). See what position you see the shot best from.

What I can tell you is that the dominant eye is responsible for the line of aim to an object. how much other factors come in to play is dependent on the circumstances of the shot, and maybe its in these circumstances when peripheral vision is more of a factor, that compromise position changes.

Having hit the ball straight, now try a half ball cut on the blue, into the middle bag......you might find that changes...because you now need peripheral vision more.

For me it's very close to the dominant eye position....but sometimes it does shift a little. never far away, but sometimes a little nearer to the centre.

I can't really tell you why.

I do best (on average) having cue, dominant eye, and bridge and grip hand all in line. i used to cue centre of the eyes. I hit a glass ceiling that i couldn't get past. I am now starting to improve again.

YMMV

[Nic Barrow]

The correct term is not a problem, just explain what it means. There is no reason that dominant eye should be any more or less complicated than preferred eye. It's just a term with a specific meaning. The dominant eye is the eye that your brain frames the line of sight with, in a specific set of circumstances, and is not related to the strength of vision in the eye. That's pretty simple in my view.



Telling someone to cue in a particular way, without a specific reason individual to them, is of course a bad idea. I very much agree that there is no dogma, only individual preference...because any position you take is in some regard a compromise position (you are not looking truly down the line of the cue...it's impossible...the cue is in the way). The trick is to find that position that provides the spatial information, but also allows a good line of sight down the cue, and then practice it. You WILL get better with practice. Your brain WILL learn to compensate for your position.

I understand what you say about the vision centre....but here's a thing. you can identify that vision centre, and look at where that puts the cue position in relation to your stance....but you still have to practice and learn this position and alignment. For most of us, we don't naturally align the cue with this position. What we try to do is find a predictable repeatable method to get down 'in line' and practice bringing the cue along this line. We train the brain to do this through practice.

It is possible to do this, to a greater or lesser extent, from any head position. However there may be an optimal head position. This depends on a number of factors...comfort of the stance, stereoscopic vision and spatial information, aiming line of the cue. Within any one individual the balance of these factors and compromise will have a position that is better for the individual as it will provide the optimal balance of these factors.

What wont change is that the dominant eye in the situation will provide the aiming line for the shot. By definition, that's what it does. How far off the actual line of the cue that is for an individual will depend on other factors....which we agree on. head position is about finding a balanced position that is repeatable, comfortable, and provides all the visual information required....and can be practised and learned to work.

Agreed that we need the best eye position for us as an individual - which the brain decides.
And that we need to find the line of the shot before we approach.
We then need a stance that makes that head position sustainable and comfortable.
I disagree that the 'dominant' eye will provide the aiming line for the shot.
Sometimes the dominant eye is weaker than the other eye - and a player will favour the stronger eye (stronger being a totally different concept than 'dominant')
Stronger means you can read small text from a greater distance according to the Snellen wall chart test.
A player does not need to know what their 'dominant' eye OR their 'stronger' eye is to know their vision centre.
They just need to do a reliable vision centre test to establish this.
Then keep their head in that position on the cue forevermore!

[Nic Barrow]

Let's be honest here snooker really doesn't have to be that complicated,but if people still insist on getting caught up in rhetoric of dominant eye then go ahead but be prepared to hang your stick up early

90% of players naturally find their vision centre without needing to know any of this stuff.
In my experience, the clients who come to me completely messed up with their aiming have followed some dogma about 'cueing under the dominant eye', 'cueing in the centre of the chin', 'cueing where ronnie cues' etc etc without having had a clue that they probably would have found it with no advice at all - and if they didnt they must go through a vision centre test that finds their own individual vision centre.

[Nic Barrow]

I get where you're coming from and no sport needs to be that complicated, you just get on and do what comes natural and accept that's your ability and enjoy it.

I would love to be like that and just accept it but I've managed to improve most things I've done in life by understanding the intricacies of things and then made choices on what I have learned, good or bad.

I'm personally caught up in it as the few coaches I have read or discussed it with have given me opposing information so this has left me personally in a quandary as to what to do.

It certainly makes a difference where I put the cue, just would like to decide with knowledge so I can get on with it (and I have tried just getting on with it and forgetting the techy stuff but still unsure which coach is right as I still have an issue!).

Your situation is so familiar to me - the number of players who have come to me in exactly your situation has probably paid for my car.
It is SOOOOOO easy to get confused with all the conflicting advice and dogmas because they all seem to make sense.
So how to evaluate??
Without finding vision centre, little progress can be made so that is your solution.
Here is a video that may help explain things a little...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXEzWmhm5z0
and a little more info here if you want to go a bit deeper.
www.thesnookergym.com/aim-frame-page

[Shockerz]

Thank you both for the responses and I will certainly try the drills.

I saw Nic's video on tetricky's link which looked interesting. The pool players head movement and missing from the same side of the pocket rung a bell; I always miss to the right on long pots (that don't go in of course).

I will try the half ball's as well to give me an idea of peripheral vision.

It's certainly a more complicated subject than first thought about.

[Nic Barrow]

I have come to the view that it's a bit self-selecting. Good players will often tell you that it's simple, just get down, practice, and it will all fall into place.

Of course for many people that's very much not the case. Of those for whom it doesn't work like that, it's only relatively few that really stick at it, try to learn, and get better. The belligerent sods. Like me.

Agreed 100%
Most good players have self selected which is one reason why they are good players!
The one's who self selected incorrectly or through wrong advice can never progress and that is so sad because they are locked out of improvement in their game.

[Nic Barrow]

I think people want to be good at something in five minutes or pack it in or have a hissy fit and say they can't do it. Good players say it's simple because it is for them, they have put the hard work in. What is it they say it's 10,000 hours you have to put in to get to the best you can be, well that's a far cry from 20 hours on here talking about the minutiae of it and a couple of sessions down the club.
You want snooker to be a simple game, go and put some work in.

Exactly right. It is no different from getting rich. A few do it in months. Most take 20-40 years to do it and then it is easy!

[Nic Barrow]

Well, with respect, that's a bit patronising.

Firstly I've played for over thirty years, and put thousands of hours in. Secondly, I don't have the luxury of endless hours to spend playing snooker as it is logistically an effort for me to even get to a table. Thirdly I'm not moaning about how good (or otherwise in my case), just trying to be the best that I can be.

Part of that can be establishing a working technique. Practice of itself has proved to not be the answer for me, but practising a more viable technique might be. I am not alone in wanting to learn well, not just take pot luck with my 'natural' ability.

I made little progress with trial and error. I have improved with some analysis of technique, and trialing and practicing that.

I do not believe that it's one or the other. In some cases both is better.

Plus it's a discussion forum. It's an appropriate place for discussion.

The 10,000 hours concept is so interesting.
That X thousand hours ALSO has to be with CORRECT PRACTICE, plenty of MATCHPLAY, lots of STUDY of top players and a huge willingness to smash through the pant wetting frustration barrier.
Not everyone is able to do that with their lifestyle.
It took me ten years of largely frustration to get to 147 level and another 7 to get nowhere of note in the pro game.
So effort is not the only factor - like Martina Navratilova said in her book: She knew she was the most talented player in the world - she wanted to see what happened if she matched that with being the hardest working

[Nic Barrow]

Sorry tetricky it wasn't aimed at you, it was more a general statement. I would have quoted your post if it was directed at you.

Nice reply - enjoying the respectful chatter.

[Nic Barrow]

This sounds like me! I think people fall into categories, some 'just do it' people accept where they're at and practice to varying levels and get what they get good or bad and that's fine. I've always had to understand how things work so I practice the right stuff when I commit time, I have committed a fair amount of time.

My playing partner doesn't know and doesn't want to know anything more technical than just push the tip through the ball and he has a high break of 126. Hitting ball after ball without understanding what you're trying to work toward must be like hitting 500 balls at a driving range practicing your slice.

I just don't want to keep committing practice time to something that may be wrong. If everything (and every coach) agrees this is important then I would rather establish the right way and then spend 000's of hours learning how to clear the table.

I thought that made sense but we're all different.

Yes it is so frustrating for players to hear players say ' I dont know how i pot - I just kinda do it, yunnow?'. But what if you don't know?! I was like that in my own game when learning - and it was a very slow chiselling process to reduce my variables and get the fundamentals automatic.
Ronnie himself said I think in his book that he just focuses on the fundamentals in his game - the rest falls into place.

[Nic Barrow]

Try having a read here. Have a go on a table, starting with your cue under your dominant eye, and trying more towards the centre of your chin, over to the other eye, and even outside the eyes. Hit a straight shot (blue off the spot into the centre pocket, screw back into the opposite centre pocket) for each head position (make sure you do normal prep, and walk into each shot). See what position you see the shot best from.

What I can tell you is that the dominant eye is responsible for the line of aim to an object. how much other factors come in to play is dependent on the circumstances of the shot, and maybe its in these circumstances when peripheral vision is more of a factor, that compromise position changes.

Having hit the ball straight, now try a half ball cut on the blue, into the middle bag......you might find that changes...because you now need peripheral vision more.

For me it's very close to the dominant eye position....but sometimes it does shift a little. never far away, but sometimes a little nearer to the centre.

I can't really tell you why.

I do best (on average) having cue, dominant eye, and bridge and grip hand all in line. i used to cue centre of the eyes. I hit a glass ceiling that i couldn't get past. I am now starting to improve again.

YMMV

That may be the case for you, and if so you must stay loyal to that - well done for finding that.
Once you have found vision centre, there is not need to change it for certain angled shots and no pro does this - as that would cause confusion, inconsistent repeatability, and a slightly negative mindset ('I can't aim a thing black in my normal head position so should shift it a bit').... and when would you know the exact angle at which you have to switch? And would you even remember it under pressure?
BUT it is very dangerous in my opinion to indicate to players that they should cue under their dominant eye just because it works for you (you seem to be suggesting that - or having made it completely clear to me at any rate that you are NOT suggesting that?)
The dominant eye is not responsible for the line of aim to an object - because in that case centre chin sighters would not survive on the pro circuit.
Everyone has on all encompassing optimum vision centre right for them - and knowing our 'dominant' (or stronger - and both are distinct) is irrelevant.
All you need is a reliable vision centre test, and stick to the best head position for you on every shot you play.