Where are the Ladies in professional Snooker?

[PatBlock]

My definition and those shown match, to my mind. fine control = small movements. The movements which determine where we hit the white are small up/down/left/right movements using the small muscles in the arm, so FMC. The forward motion of the cue may be a large movement with one or more larger muscles (and thus GMC) but that's not what determines where we hit the white, which is the most important aspect of the shot, hit the white in the wrong place, by as much as a few mm and you miss the pot, and/or the position.

These small left right up down movements whicch you talk about involved in the aiming process, do you mean while you're feathering, or while the cue is actually being delivered?

-

[nrage]

These small left right up down movements whicch you talk about involved in the aiming process, do you mean while you're feathering, or while the cue is actually being delivered?

They're involved at all stages. You are continually adjusting to keep the cue going where you want it.

As an example, hold your hand out in front of you and keep it as steady as possible. To do this, you make tiny adjustments continuously. There is a constant process of detection and adjustment going on where the eyes and nerves detect motion and the nerves and muscles counter that motion, however there is essentially the equivalent of oversteer and understeer (like in a car) going on where you adjust back and forth. I have a friend who has a nervous condition which means that the best he can do is a very visible shake to his hands. Likewise as we get older our nerves deteriorate and we develop a shake.

The same thing happens when you move your hand from that position to another, the brain needs to decide which muscles to use, and how much to use them, then it needs to detect and react to the hand reaching it's destination. This may mean moving back because it's gone too far for example, and then moving forward because it moved back to far, and so on until it's happy it's in the 'correct' position. All of this happens automatically and in a very short space of time/distance.

However, increasing the speed of the action decreases the time/space the brain has to detect and react, and increases the force required to counteract motion, resulting in a greater amount of error.

Someone with good muscle control and fast reflexes will perform well, their process of detection and adjustment is very quick and accurate. Their hand appears steady to the naked eye while stationary and appears to move straight to it's target without deviation. Someone with bad control, or any significant delay between detection and adjustment will have a hand which appears to shake when stationary and which visibly misses the target slightly before adjusting.

The same process occurs in snooker. When you aim where you detect and adjust the initial position of the cue using both your eyes and proprioception (internal perception of the position of your hand, arm, etc). Then, during feathering the same thing happens, except the cue also has forward/backward motion which makes it harder. Then the final delivery is harder still because of the speed of the motion and the fact that more power is used, making it harder to counteract unwanted motion, resulting in greater error on correction.

[PatBlock]

This is an interesting examination of the finer detail of the cue action, and in that context I'd say that your above description points to the fact that the ideal cue action would be one where there was little or no correction necessary.

But once again we digress, and it isn't really pertinent to the main point of our discussion because this fine manipulation of large muscles is not what is meant by the definition of FMC, well, none of the definitions I've read anyway. So as long as we keep coming back to this particulate bone of contention, I don't really see how the topic can move on.

-

[nrage]

This is an interesting examination of the finer detail of the cue action, and in that context I'd say that your above description points to the fact that the ideal cue action would be one where there was little or no correction necessary.

True, and if you have good FMC then you will do less correction because any correction you do will be more accurate. Likewise, the more you practice the better you get at activating just those muscles required, in just the direction required, introducing less off line motion which needs to be corrected in the first place.

But once again we digress, and it isn't really pertinent to the main point of our discussion because this fine manipulation of large muscles is not what is meant by the definition of FMC, well, none of the definitions I've read anyway. So as long as we keep coming back to this particulate bone of contention, I don't really see how the topic can move on.

There is no fine manipulation of large muscles, I never meant to say there was. What I tried to say was that in every action there is a combination of FMC and GMC, and by that I meant that in every action we perform we use some combination of large and small muscle groups. In every case, all the 'fine' adjustment is made with small muscle groups, and the large muscle groups provide the power in the primary direction of motion. FMC is the measure of our accuracy with the small muscle groups, the ones which control 'fine' adjustment, aka accuracy.

[vmax4steve]

nrage is the only person on this forum who refuses to accept that hand and eye co-ordination is something natural, and believes that anyone can can play any sport or game simply by coaching or practise. Everyone else can see that the women who dominate, who are the best at sports and games are a little on the masculine side which gives them an advantage over feminine women.
This argument is nothing more than a desperate attempt by nrage to justify his lack of progress, in a game that he obviously loves, due to him having very little natural ability. To put in hours and hours of practise and recieve coaching from Terry and still not be able to make a break higher than 26 must be pretty hard to take, but take it he must and stop this constant ridiculous petty analysis into something that he can't do.
No sense of humour required for this post nrage.

[the_paz]

women should stick to what their best at, and thats cooking and cleaning, with the occacional bit of sewing thrown in for good measure.

ta

[PatBlock]

every case, all the 'fine' adjustment is made with small muscle groups, and the large muscle groups provide the power in the primary direction of motion. FMC is the measure of our accuracy with the small muscle groups, the ones which control 'fine' adjustment, aka accuracy.

I'm sorry mate, but once again you're altering the definition to suit your own needs. Here is definition number six that I've quoted, which once again clearly describes something completely different from that posited by you.

"Fine motor skills are the coordination of small muscle movements which occur e.g., in the fingers, usually in coordination with the eyes. In application to motor skills of hands (and fingers) the term dexterity is commonly used. When applied to the theory of human aptitude this is called manual dexterity."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_motor_skills

Look at your definition, look at that definition, chalk and cheese.

-

[PatBlock]

nrage is the only person on this forum who refuses to accept that hand and eye co-ordination is something natural, and believes that anyone can can play any sport or game simply by coaching or practise.

Is this really what you believe nrage?

-

[tommygunner1309]

women should stick to what their best at, and thats cooking and cleaning, with the occacional bit of sewing thrown in for good measure.

ta

Oh but of course - this is a joke!!!!! If it isn't you are living in the wrong country and the wrong century

[nrage]

Is this really what you believe nrage?

Nope. This would be "Straw Man"..
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

vmax likes to use many different logical fallacies in his "arguments", his most recent was..
http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...al-attack.html

This is why I have blocked all his posts and don't even see them unless someone else re-posts them, as you've done here.

[nrage]

I'm sorry mate, but once again you're altering the definition to suit your own needs. Here is definition number six that I've quoted, which once again clearly describes something completely different from that posited by you.

"Fine motor skills are the coordination of small muscle movements which occur e.g., in the fingers, usually in coordination with the eyes. In application to motor skills of hands (and fingers) the term dexterity is commonly used. When applied to the theory of human aptitude this is called manual dexterity."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_motor_skills

Look at your definition, look at that definition, chalk and cheese.

This particular definition has picked one or more specific small muscle groups in one area of the body as an example, it is not saying FMC is limited to the fingers only. The general definition(s) include all small muscle groups, in all areas of the body. In our particular case, of a cue action, we have the Brachialis in the elbow, the deltoid and rotator cuff in the shoulder, and all the small muscle groups in the hand and wrist. All of these muscles are involved, and our accuracy with them is determined by our FMC.

[nrage]

I've found that most disagreements are caused by a difference in definition. That seems to be the root cause here too, our internal definition of "fine motor control" differs and because of that we don't agree that snooker falls into that category, so here are the top results from a google search of "fine motor control in sport":

.. these both mention snooker specifically. I suspect the 2nd was answered by someone who had read the 1st.
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/continuum.htm
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_...e_motor_skills

.. these are more general
http://www.answers.com/topic/fine-motor-skills
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_skill

http://www.ehow.com/about_6702289_fi...teenagers.html
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/915251-overview
http://learningdisabilities.about.co...motorskill.htm

In all of these it talks about fine motor skills being responsible for co-ordination, accuracy, precision etc. Where it talks about gross motor skills it talks about muscle tone and strength, bone density, and "not very precise".

By these, and other definitions I have read I believe snooker comes under FMC, not GMC. So, any advantage women have with FMC would apply to snooker.

That is not to say that women might have other disadvantages which might outweigh this, like it seems they do in chess where men's brains are better at the tactics involved, or as you've suggested a lack of power in certain situations. My opinion is that whatever these physical and mental advantages and disadvantages are they're probably roughly balanced, and if not they're so slight as to make very little difference ..but, don't be confused into thinking what vmax suggested earlier.

We're talking about averages here, not individuals, I am saying that an average man and an average women will have roughly the same physical/mental balance of natural ability, and the real determining factor between them is training and practice. I am not saying that anyone regardless of natural ability can achieve high levels with practice, this is a miss representation of the argument either due to lack of understanding or disingenuousness.

[PatBlock]

This particular definition has picked one or more specific small muscle groups in one area of the body

"Motor skills are actions that involve the movement of muscles in the body. They are divided into two groups: gross motor skills, which include the larger movements of arms, legs, feet, or the entire body (crawling, running, and jumping); and fine motor skills, which are smaller actions, such as grasping an object between the thumb and a finger or using the lips and tongue to taste objects"

----------------------------------------

"Fine motor skills are movements mainly produced by the body's small muscle groups. They are used in tasks such as:

* sewing
* sculpting
* drawing
* playing most musical instruments"

--------------------------------------------------

"Definition: Fine motor skills are tasks that utilize the small muscles of the body like those in the fingers. "

-----------------------------------------------

"Fine motor control is the coordination of muscles, bones, and nerves to produce small, precise movements. An example of fine motor control is picking up a small item with the index finger and thumb."

---------------------------------------------------

" motor skills
Part of Speech: n
Definition: the ability to perform complex muscle-and-nerve acts that produce movement; fine motor skills are small movements like writing and tying shoes, gross motor skills are large movements like walking and kicking "

Sorry for the repetition, but so do all of those, so I'd say that's what is meant by the term, rather your interpretation.

-

[nrage]

The repetition does not bother me, don't worry.

None of the definitions you've given there exclude snooker from being FMC. An accurate cue action requires small movements, small muscle groups, co-ordination, and small precise movements all of which are mentioned in the various definitions above.

Two of the definitions I linked in post #72 also specifically mention "snooker" as being FMC.

Perhaps more importantly, one of the links in post #72 describes gross motor co-ordination and that description clearly (IMO) does not include snooker.

So, I'm still going with snooker = FMC, but if you're not convinced no worries, we can just disagree.

[vmax4steve]

nrage is a perfect example of someone with very little experience or knowledge but has access to information via the internet. Nothing that he posts is his, it's either paraphrased or directly accessed from a website. He has blocked all my posts because he thinks I have attacked him personally whereas the reality is that he just can't take it when he's wrong, has no sense of humour and is so far up his own arse that he doesn't know whether he speaks or farts.
Argueing with him is like pushing an elephant up the stairs. I'm glad he has blocked my posts.

nrage (pre internet) talking football with Des Lynam and Jimmy Hill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bwk38srACrA