03 Jul 2004 06:44:40
Jimbo Ct
Pool Lessons

Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
strategy, to me this is a great lesson.

Jim<---What do you think??



03 Jul 2004 07:32:23
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

The guy who taught me much of what I learned about billiards I beat since
day two. He was older and hadn't the execution needed to play very well.
Plus, there were lots of techniques I rather questioned that he showed me.
Trying to figure out why he would use the technique is what I think I
benefitted most from. However, he once had the execution possible and was a
good player in his day. I'm sort of with you on this because there are
plenty of know-it-alls who swear up and down about their way, but yet can't
play at any respectable level now or in the past. My biggest problem with
that is how do you know that you are getting the goods if the teacher can't
produce? The Tiger teacher thing is pretty interesting except that his
teacher, while not being Tiger...is still probably a pretty jam up player
compared to the rest of the golf world.

I don't doubt that there are people out there who can't play but who know
the game well and also the mechanics. However, I think they are few and far
between. We hear it all so much in this game that you need not play well to
know or teach something. But check the effectiveness of an English teacher
who can't speak, read, or write in English well. Or how about a math
teacher who isn't very good at math. Most other teachers in the world are
experts in their field. Only in pool do I see teachers who haven't proven
themselves as knowledgeable. I have always thought this- how does one even
know that he knows something about the game if he can't produce results? I
say that is blind faith and not necessarily knowledge. Does that mean it's
impossible? No, just highly unlikely.

This is the biggest problem I have with the whole BCA instructor thing.
There may be a few good ones, but I remember when they were trying to build
that network and if you had a pulse you could get in and be an instructor.
Their rules are slightly more strict now, but there are still soooo many of
them....

I don't think being a great player has to be a prerequisite for being a good
teacher. But to be a good teacher you need to a) be a good teacher type and
b) know what the heck you are talking about. And if you can't perform (and
never could), there is no way to know for sure if what you are teaching is
accurate...and if you can't know that, you can't be a good teacher in my
book. Being a great player and not knowing how to teach can also mean that
no matter how great you play, you can't translate anything to the student.

Deno



"Jimbo Ct" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much
better
> player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you
feel you
> can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always
point
> to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect
for
> the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the
person
> knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if
he
> can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone
from
> this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
> strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
>
> Jim<---What do you think??
>




03 Jul 2004 07:20:11
Frank Glenn
Re: Pool Lessons

In article <[email protected] >,
[email protected] says...
:|:Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
:|:player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
:|:can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
:|:to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
:|:the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
:|:knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
:|:can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
:|:this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
:|:strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
:|:
:|:

I don't think Lou Holtz was a great player. He was a great coach.
Having knowledge and being able to pass that knowledge to someone
else does not equate to execution (hand eye coordination), IMO. YMMV
Frank
www.frankglenn.com
my GC-I is for sale


03 Jul 2004 06:45:27
Pat Hall
Re: Pool Lessons

I think you can learn from anybody obviously certified instructors have
reached a certain level of expertise but you can pick up something from
almost anybody willing to share their knowledge.
I live in Madison, Wi and I can remember a number of touring pros
coming to town to take a lesson or two from Jerry Brieseth. They were
obviously better than him but often times came to him to get rid of a
bad habit or to just reinforce their basics. I think this is one of the
strengths of certified instructors. They can often see the little
glitches that have developed in your game and pull you out of a slump
that is stroke induced.

PatH

Jimbo Ct wrote:

> Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
> player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
> can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
> to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
> the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
> knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
> can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
> this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
> strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
>
> Jim<---What do you think??
>



04 Jul 2004 08:23:40
Barry
Re: Pool Lessons

I think execution and knowledge can be completely separate. You can have
one or the other and a lucky few have both. Although some can play, they may
not be able to verbalize how they do what they do....
But, yes, I would have to have a certain respect for the instructor, of
either his knowledge or capability of execution.

Barry C.
www.cameroncues.com

"Jimbo Ct" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much
better
> player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you
feel you
> can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always
point
> to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect
for
> the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the
person
> knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if
he
> can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone
from
> this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
> strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
>
> Jim<---What do you think??
>




03 Jul 2004 08:04:42
Bill
Re: Pool Lessons

There are guys out there who are very good players, but they don't talk and
they don't teach. Every now and then they will have a few too many beers or
feel talkative or whatever...

And then it comes...

One little tid bit of advice or they may show you how to shoot a certain
difficult shot. Write it down and practice it! It is best advice you'll
ever get. (You may only get these tips out of the person once every 3
months or so.)

I used one of these shots to beat the guy who told me about the shot. He
got pissed and said he was not going to give me any more tips!

Now there are other excellent players who *always* want to teach anyone and
everyone. Even if you don't ask for help, they will start telling you how
to shoot. But when people follow their advice, their game goes downhill
with a quickness. I don't know if this is deliberate on their part or it is
some subconscious thing they do to shark their opponents to mess up their
playing.

I do know one of these guys can't stand to lose even one game. I also have
learned that he "messes with people". I watched him "teaching" a player a
shot where the cue ball would curve around another ball in the way. The
"Teacher" was shooting down on the ball (slight masse') and it would curve,
then he would have his "student" try it and the student could never get the
cue ball to curve (student was shooting level). Yet this guy would keep
showing him how he could do it, and the student would keep trying and never
get it to work. The "teacher" never explained the most important part of
the shot - to shoot down on the ball! This of course destroyed the students
confidence. I think that is what he was really trying to do. Sick jerk.

I on the other hand want everyone I play (for practice) to play their best
game. I want them to beat me. So I build up their confidence, tell them
"good shot" every now and then, call them a shark when they get a difficult
shot, etc. I share everything I know with them [if they ask]. I've seen
some of these people become much better players. Then I'm playing better
players and that in turn makes me a better player.

So I guess the questions to ask yourself are if the person you are learning
from is helping your game, if you are improving, and if you are gaining
more confidence. If yes, then I would think that person is a good teacher.




03 Jul 2004 15:06:03
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

There are certified instructors out there who don't know how to hit the end
rail. It's like getting a cert of authenticity with a piece of art...not
worth the paper it's printed on.
Deno


"Pat Hall" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> I think you can learn from anybody obviously certified instructors have
> reached a certain level of expertise but you can pick up something from
> almost anybody willing to share their knowledge.
> I live in Madison, Wi and I can remember a number of touring pros
> coming to town to take a lesson or two from Jerry Brieseth. They were
> obviously better than him but often times came to him to get rid of a
> bad habit or to just reinforce their basics. I think this is one of the
> strengths of certified instructors. They can often see the little
> glitches that have developed in your game and pull you out of a slump
> that is stroke induced.
>
> PatH
>
> Jimbo Ct wrote:
>
> > Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much
better
> > player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you
feel you
> > can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people
always point
> > to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain
respect for
> > the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the
person
> > knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well,
if he
> > can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone
from
> > this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
> > strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
> >
> > Jim<---What do you think??
> >
>




03 Jul 2004 17:19:19
Steve Ellis
Re: Pool Lessons

On Sat, 3 Jul 2004 07:20:11 -0400, Frank Glenn <[email protected] > wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
>[email protected] says...
>:|:Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
>:|:player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
>:|:can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
>:|:to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
>:|:the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
>:|:knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
>:|:can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
>:|:this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
>:|:strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
>:|:
>:|:
>
>I don't think Lou Holtz was a great player. He was a great coach.

Ditto, Red Auerbach. On the other hand Bob Cousy was a great player, but really sucked as
a coach.


>Having knowledge and being able to pass that knowledge to someone
>else does not equate to execution (hand eye coordination), IMO. YMMV
>Frank
>www.frankglenn.com
>my GC-I is for sale



03 Jul 2004 19:04:05
Steve Ellis
Re: Pool Lessons

On 03 Jul 2004 06:44:40 GMT, [email protected] (Jimbo Ct) wrote:

>Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
>player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
>can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
>to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
>the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
>knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
>can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
>this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
>strategy, to me this is a great lesson.

Yeah, a friend of mine took a lesson from Earl Strickland when he was around on the Joss
Tour. He took 2 hrs. at 50 bucks an hour and said that those 2 hours did more for his game
than any other instructor he's had, especially for his safety game.

>
>Jim<---What do you think??

Well you know me Jim I don't think much :-). IMO an instructor doesn't have to be better
than you, but generally it helps. When you reach the elite level like Tiger, or the
touring pool pros, you probably don't have much choice, you're coach isn't going to be as
good as you. However, we regular people can probably expect to find somebody who is better
than us and can also teach. Teaching is much more effective when the instructor can
demonstrate, not just say "you know what I mean." An instructor being better than you
though guarantees nothing at all. I've tried instructors. They are all better than me, but
1 didn't help at all, 2 help a little, and 1 has been very helpful. Though with the one
who has been helpful I don't know if it is the hour of paid instruction, or the 2-3 hours
of pool he plays afterward for free because he loves to play.

Bottom line a coach doesn't have to be better than you, but sometimes it is the only guage
to judge by.
Steve.


03 Jul 2004 19:05:50
Steve Ellis
Re: Pool Lessons

On 03 Jul 2004 06:44:40 GMT, [email protected] (Jimbo Ct) wrote:

>Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
>player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
>can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
>to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
>the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
>knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
>can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
>this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
>strategy, to me this is a great lesson.

Yeah, a friend of mine took a lesson from Earl Strickland when he was around on the Joss
Tour. He took 2 hrs. at 50 bucks an hour and said that those 2 hours did more for his game
than any other instructor he's had, especially for his safety game.

>
>Jim<---What do you think??

Well you know me Jim I don't think much :-). IMO an instructor doesn't have to be better
than you, but generally it helps. When you reach the elite level like Tiger, or the
touring pool pros, you probably don't have much choice, you're coach isn't going to be as
good as you. However, we regular people can probably expect to find somebody who is better
than us and can also teach. Teaching is much more effective when the instructor can
demonstrate, not just say "you know what I mean." An instructor being better than you
though guarantees nothing at all. I've tried instructors. They are all better than me, but
1 didn't help at all, 2 help a little, and 1 has been very helpful. Though with the one
who has been helpful I don't know if it is the hour of paid instruction, or the 2-3 hours
of pool he plays afterward for free because he loves to play.

Bottom line a coach doesn't have to be better than you, but sometimes it is the only guage
to judge by.
Steve.


03 Jul 2004 21:23:48
Steve Ellis
Re: Pool Lessons

On 03 Jul 2004 06:44:40 GMT, [email protected] (Jimbo Ct) wrote:

>Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
>player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
>can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
>to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
>the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
>knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
>can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
>this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
>strategy, to me this is a great lesson.

Yeah, a friend of mine took a lesson from Earl Strickland when he was around on the Joss
Tour. He took 2 hrs. at 50 bucks an hour and said that those 2 hours did more for his game
than any other instructor he's had, especially for his safety game.

>
>Jim<---What do you think??

Well you know me Jim I don't think much :-). IMO an instructor doesn't have to be better
than you, but generally it helps. When you reach the elite level like Tiger, or the
touring pool pros, you probably don't have much choice, you're coach isn't going to be as
good as you. However, we regular people can probably expect to find somebody who is better
than us and can also teach. Teaching is much more effective when the instructor can
demonstrate, not just say "you know what I mean." An instructor being better than you
though guarantees nothing at all. I've tried instructors. They are all better than me, but
1 didn't help at all, 2 help a little, and 1 has been very helpful. Though with the one
who has been helpful I don't know if it is the hour of paid instruction, or the 2-3 hours
of pool he plays afterward for free because he loves to play.

Bottom line a coach doesn't have to be better than you, but sometimes it is the only guage
to judge by.
Steve.


03 Jul 2004 22:29:20
Dan White
Re: Pool Lessons


"Jimbo Ct" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much
better
> player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you
feel you
> can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always
point
> to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect
for
> the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the
person
> knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if
he
> can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I??

I think he definitely has to be able to execute the drills he recommends.
Purely speaking, I guess he doesn't have to know how to shoot at all, but
realistically I have more confidence that he knows what he's doing if he has
gone through all the trials and tribulations necessary to have a good
stroke. I took a lesson some years ago from a BCA Master instructor. He
didn't shoot at all in 2 hours, so I have no idea whether he can play. I
did all the shooting and he made comments. I think this is where a legit
certification process is important, and so is reputation.

I also think for most people it doesn't matter that much. There are usually
enough flaws in stroke or game strategy for any decent instructor to pick up
on.

> I know of someone from
> this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
> strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
>

Hey, I think I know that guy!

dwhite




04 Jul 2004 03:21:32
Jim Wyant
Re: Pool Lessons

And there are students out there that refuse to learn and practice
fundamentals, but expect a teacher to impart run-out skills.

A teacher doesn't need to be able to hit the end rail.....as long as they
can get the student to do it. Teaching is about communicating information
in a way that the student can best make use of it.



On 7/3/04 11:06 AM, in article
[email protected], "Deno J. Andrews"
<[email protected] > wrote:

> There are certified instructors out there who don't know how to hit the end
> rail. It's like getting a cert of authenticity with a piece of art...not
> worth the paper it's printed on.
> Deno
>
>
> "Pat Hall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> I think you can learn from anybody obviously certified instructors have
>> reached a certain level of expertise but you can pick up something from
>> almost anybody willing to share their knowledge.
>> I live in Madison, Wi and I can remember a number of touring pros
>> coming to town to take a lesson or two from Jerry Brieseth. They were
>> obviously better than him but often times came to him to get rid of a
>> bad habit or to just reinforce their basics. I think this is one of the
>> strengths of certified instructors. They can often see the little
>> glitches that have developed in your game and pull you out of a slump
>> that is stroke induced.
>>
>> PatH
>>
>> Jimbo Ct wrote:
>>
>>> Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much
> better
>>> player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you
> feel you
>>> can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people
> always point
>>> to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain
> respect for
>>> the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the
> person
>>> knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well,
> if he
>>> can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone
> from
>>> this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
>>> strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
>>>
>>> Jim<---What do you think??
>>>
>>
>
>




03 Jul 2004 23:25:20
Patrick Johnson
Re: Pool Lessons

Deno:
>>There are certified instructors out there who don't know how to hit
>>the end rail. It's like getting a cert of authenticity with a piece
>>of art...not worth the paper it's printed on.

Jim:
> And there are students out there that refuse to learn and practice
> fundamentals, but expect a teacher to impart run-out skills.

I assume you're disagreeing with Deno, but this is a non-sequitor. The
fact that there are poor students has nothing to do with whether or not
a teacher needs playing skills.

> A teacher doesn't need to be able to hit the end rail.....as long as they
> can get the student to do it.

Yeah, "as long as they can". The question is "can they?"

> Teaching is about communicating information
> in a way that the student can best make use of it.

Well, of course, but once again you haven't addressed the question: can
a teacher do this without mastering the subject himself? I think a
teacher needs to know not only the facts of a subject but how the're put
into practice, which probably means he has to have done that himself.

I don't think this means the teacher has to necessarily be better at it
than the student, but I do think it means he has to be pretty good at
it. A good teacher has to know the learning path that leads to success
AND the ways that a student can lose his way. I think this most
valuable kind of knowledge can only come from having been there. The
student may go farther than the teacher but still need the teacher to
point the way and help avoid detours.

Pat Johnson
Chicago



04 Jul 2004 05:30:56
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

"Patrick Johnson" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Well, of course, but once again you haven't addressed the question: can
> a teacher do this without mastering the subject himself? I think a
> teacher needs to know not only the facts of a subject but how the're put
> into practice, which probably means he has to have done that himself.

Thanks Pat for wording it how I would have liked to :)

> I don't think this means the teacher has to necessarily be better at it
> than the student, but I do think it means he has to be pretty good at
> it. A good teacher has to know the learning path that leads to success
> AND the ways that a student can lose his way.

I agree completely. I think it is so much easier in billiards to track this
sort of stuff because of averages. I see it all the time...student A taking
lessons from someone who might be able to get them to average .45 in a quick
way, which is respectable for a room player...but many times the methodology
used and the "game" the student learns from that teacher...while getting
them to average level in a quick way...may ultimately be detrimental to them
playing well. If the next step for that Player A to learn to play better is
to have to forget the game they learned from the teacher, was it worth the
time, effort and money poured into the first experience? I don't think so.
Learning billiards from someone who hasn't a track record of averaging
somewhere in the B+ and above range means never knowing if what you are
learning is really the goods. And since it takes several years to come up
to a .75 and above average, one can easily waste five years with a bad
teacher and never really know that they are holding themselves back. So to
be a good teacher, I think that one not only has to be able to communicate
well with the student, but one must also know and have a track record of
being able to perform that which is being taught at a respectable level.
That doesn't have to mean being a champion, but rather at least being a
threat to win games from great players. Nobody can learn to solve equations
from someone who can't do it themselves.

> I think this most valuable kind of knowledge can only come from having
been there. The student may go farther than the teacher but still need the
teacher to
> point the way and help avoid detours.

I agree again. I even think that the student should go farther than the
teacher if the student is determined and able...but if the teacher is at
such a low level himself, the student bypassing him doesn't say much about
the teacher or the student's accomplishment, IMO. In billiards, there are
very few teachers who can't play themselves at a decent level. In pool,
these teachers seem to be ubiquitous. Maybe it's because in billiard you
can more easily be found out as a fraud because the average speaks volumes.
Whereas in pool there isn't that tracking mechanism.

Deno J. Andrews




04 Jul 2004 05:38:49
Jim Wyant
Re: Pool Lessons

On 7/4/04 12:25 AM, in article [email protected], "Patrick
Johnson" <[email protected] > wrote:

> Deno:
>>> There are certified instructors out there who don't know how to hit
>>> the end rail. It's like getting a cert of authenticity with a piece
>>> of art...not worth the paper it's printed on.
>
> Jim:
>> And there are students out there that refuse to learn and practice
>> fundamentals, but expect a teacher to impart run-out skills.
>
> I assume you're disagreeing with Deno, but this is a non-sequitor. The
> fact that there are poor students has nothing to do with whether or not
> a teacher needs playing skills.
>
>> A teacher doesn't need to be able to hit the end rail.....as long as they
>> can get the student to do it.
>
> Yeah, "as long as they can". The question is "can they?"
>
>> Teaching is about communicating information
>> in a way that the student can best make use of it.
>
> Well, of course, but once again you haven't addressed the question: can
> a teacher do this without mastering the subject himself? I think a
> teacher needs to know not only the facts of a subject but how the're put
> into practice, which probably means he has to have done that himself.
>
> I don't think this means the teacher has to necessarily be better at it
> than the student, but I do think it means he has to be pretty good at
> it. A good teacher has to know the learning path that leads to success
> AND the ways that a student can lose his way. I think this most
> valuable kind of knowledge can only come from having been there. The
> student may go farther than the teacher but still need the teacher to
> point the way and help avoid detours.
>
> Pat Johnson
> Chicago

I'm disagreeing with the point that a teacher needs to be a great player.

Knowing all the details of how to impart cueball control and communicate the
physical realities does not mean that the teacher has the touch or intuitive
ability to read the speed of the cloth.

Knowing all the details of great shotmaking does not mean that the teacher
is necessarily making great choices themselves.

Not all instructors are emotionally capable of playing tournaments or money
games of any note.

Not all have the incredible eyesight and hand-eye coordination that is
necessary.

This does not mean they are not capable of teaching, observing and coaching.

Competitive pool is the most difficult game on the planet. Instructors can
help develop many of the execution aspects of the game. A few may be able
to help on the mental side. Some can help on strategy. How many can really
help on handling pressure, learning how to shoot effectively in 20 hour
matches, learning to set up good matches.

And conversely, I doubt if there are many pros that can adequately convey,
in a well sequenced and structured format, the mechanics and physical
reality of the game. In many cases, their mind has so integrated that info
so long ago they don't even know how communicate it in reasonable practice
chunks anymore.

--Jim



04 Jul 2004 06:29:09
Jim Wyant
Re: Pool Lessons

On 7/4/04 1:30 AM, in article
[email protected], "Deno J. Andrews"
<[email protected] > wrote:

> "Patrick Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> Well, of course, but once again you haven't addressed the question: can
>> a teacher do this without mastering the subject himself? I think a
>> teacher needs to know not only the facts of a subject but how the're put
>> into practice, which probably means he has to have done that himself.
>
> Thanks Pat for wording it how I would have liked to :)

It's all perspective, Deno.

EG - How big is a cue ball? 2.25"? 6oz? 7.08"? How about in cubic
centimeters?

It's how you read the question and what your initial reaction is to what
they answer should be that allows you to spin it one way while someone else
takes a different tack. Same question, different ways of interpreting what
is being asked.

--Jim


>> I don't think this means the teacher has to necessarily be better at it
>> than the student, but I do think it means he has to be pretty good at
>> it. A good teacher has to know the learning path that leads to success
>> AND the ways that a student can lose his way.
>
> I agree completely. I think it is so much easier in billiards to track this
> sort of stuff because of averages. I see it all the time...student A taking
> lessons from someone who might be able to get them to average .45 in a quick
> way, which is respectable for a room player...but many times the methodology
> used and the "game" the student learns from that teacher...while getting
> them to average level in a quick way...may ultimately be detrimental to them
> playing well. If the next step for that Player A to learn to play better is
> to have to forget the game they learned from the teacher, was it worth the
> time, effort and money poured into the first experience? I don't think so.
> Learning billiards from someone who hasn't a track record of averaging
> somewhere in the B+ and above range means never knowing if what you are
> learning is really the goods. And since it takes several years to come up
> to a .75 and above average, one can easily waste five years with a bad
> teacher and never really know that they are holding themselves back. So to
> be a good teacher, I think that one not only has to be able to communicate
> well with the student, but one must also know and have a track record of
> being able to perform that which is being taught at a respectable level.
> That doesn't have to mean being a champion, but rather at least being a
> threat to win games from great players. Nobody can learn to solve equations
> from someone who can't do it themselves.
>
>> I think this most valuable kind of knowledge can only come from having
> been there. The student may go farther than the teacher but still need the
> teacher to
>> point the way and help avoid detours.
>
> I agree again. I even think that the student should go farther than the
> teacher if the student is determined and able...but if the teacher is at
> such a low level himself, the student bypassing him doesn't say much about
> the teacher or the student's accomplishment, IMO. In billiards, there are
> very few teachers who can't play themselves at a decent level. In pool,
> these teachers seem to be ubiquitous. Maybe it's because in billiard you
> can more easily be found out as a fraud because the average speaks volumes.
> Whereas in pool there isn't that tracking mechanism.
>
> Deno J. Andrews
>
>




04 Jul 2004 07:10:56
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

"Jim Wyant" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:BD0D1028.320AB%[email protected]
> I'm disagreeing with the point that a teacher needs to be a great player.

Nobody is saying one needs to be a great player, but rather a good player-
one who actually possesses the skills that need to be taught.

> Knowing all the details of how to impart cueball control and communicate
the
> physical realities does not mean that the teacher has the touch or
intuitive
> ability to read the speed of the cloth.

I don't know anything about laying brick. I have never tried it...have
never worked with mortar, etc. Let's say that I spend the next two years of
my life studying every text on brick laying. Let's say that I know more
book knowledge of brick laying, mortar recipies, read about the best
techniques, interview the top brick layers in the world, and really learn
the info inside and out. Let's also say that during this time I still never
once lay a brick. Do you think that I would be qualified to teach someone
how to lay brick? I don't. I think that someone may be able to learn a lot
about the game, its mechanics, strategy, etc...but never doing any of it at
a respectable level means that all that can be transferred is the book
knowledge. That is only a part of the big picture. If a teacher doesn't
actually possess the hard skills that are needed, it is nearly impossible to
teach those skills to someone else...just like laying brick. I can be an
expert in my own mind on brick laying, but how can I teach someone to lay a
brick with any certainty? I can't.

So again I go back to the point that it is nearly impossible for a teacher
to teach skills that he himself does not possess. You can exchange all the
theory you want that you learn in books or from teachers that don't do...but
to be a good teacher, that teacher must possess the skills that need to be
taught. He doesn't need to be a champion, but he has to possess skills that
champions possess in order to articulate them to their students. You can't
articulate that which you do not know.

> Not all instructors are emotionally capable of playing tournaments or
money
> games of any note.

I know a lot of guys who play well in practice. They possess skills,
knowledge, and are good players in general. I wouldn't go to them to learn
how to play in tournaments...but I wouldn't hesitate to learn from them the
skills which they actually possess or possessed in the past.

> Competitive pool is the most difficult game on the planet.

I'd say there are some golfers who would strongly disagree.

> Instructors can help develop many of the execution aspects of the game.

Especially those skills that they have themselves mastered. Maybe they
don't have a complete game, but maybe they are experts at a specialty. I
have helped some good pool players improve upon their mechanics but wouldn't
ever consider talking strategy, theory, or anything else about the game of
pool because I don't know it well and don't possess those skills.

> And conversely, I doubt if there are many pros that can adequately convey,
> in a well sequenced and structured format, the mechanics and physical
> reality of the game.

I agree. Most don't even know what they themselves do. To be a good
teacher, you need to be able to "do," (at a respectable level) and "teach."

Deno




04 Jul 2004 07:21:07
Donald Tees
Re: Pool Lessons

Patrick Johnson wrote:
> I don't think this means the teacher has to necessarily be better at it
> than the student, but I do think it means he has to be pretty good at
> it. A good teacher has to know the learning path that leads to success
> AND the ways that a student can lose his way. I think this most
> valuable kind of knowledge can only come from having been there. The
> student may go farther than the teacher but still need the teacher to
> point the way and help avoid detours.
>
> Pat Johnson
> Chicago
>

I agree. It is one thing to argue that Tiger Williams has a teacher not
as good as him, and quite another to argue that a teacher does not have
to be a master at what they teach.

Being able to teach anything implies that the teacher has mastered the
basics of the subject mattter themselves.

Donald



04 Jul 2004 08:16:07
Sherm Adamson
Re: Pool Lessons



"Donald Tees" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Patrick Johnson wrote:
> > I don't think this means the teacher has to necessarily be better at it
> > than the student, but I do think it means he has to be pretty good at
> > it. A good teacher has to know the learning path that leads to success
> > AND the ways that a student can lose his way. I think this most
> > valuable kind of knowledge can only come from having been there. The
> > student may go farther than the teacher but still need the teacher to
> > point the way and help avoid detours.
> >
> > Pat Johnson
> > Chicago
> >
>
> I agree. It is one thing to argue that Tiger Williams has a teacher not
> as good as him, and quite another to argue that a teacher does not have
> to be a master at what they teach.
>
> Being able to teach anything implies that the teacher has mastered the
> basics of the subject mattter themselves.
>
> Donald

I don't believe that a teacher has to be a "world class player". There are a
lot of people who are good teachers but may not even be able to beat their
students. Knowlege and execution are often 2 different things. Lots of
people, myself included, have plenty of knowlege about pool but do not
either have the time to practice or the will to dedicate the necessary time
to practice. At this point in my life I'd rather practice "cuemaking" and
"lovemaking" than "drawshots", but I can still explain how to draw the ball!
Very few top players are worth a damn at teaching. Of course some are better
than others, but I think it takes different skills to express to someone
what to do, than it does, to do it yourself.

--
just more hot air! 8^)

Sherm
aka "cuesmith" in yahoo
Sherm Custom Billiard Cues by,
Sherman Adamson
3352 Nine Mile Rd., Cincinnati Ohio 45255
Shop (513)553-2172, Cell (513)509-9152
http://www.shermcue.com Over 20 years experience
almost a decade in "The American Cuemakers Association"

Sending unsolicited commercial email (spam) to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.






04 Jul 2004 09:10:28
Donald Tees
Re: Pool Lessons

Sherm Adamson wrote:
>>
>>I agree. It is one thing to argue that Tiger Williams has a teacher not
>>as good as him, and quite another to argue that a teacher does not have
>>to be a master at what they teach.
>>
>>Being able to teach anything implies that the teacher has mastered the
>>basics of the subject mattter themselves.
>>
>>Donald
>
>
> I don't believe that a teacher has to be a "world class player". There are a
> lot of people who are good teachers but may not even be able to beat their
> students. Knowlege and execution are often 2 different things. Lots of
> people, myself included, have plenty of knowlege about pool but do not
> either have the time to practice or the will to dedicate the necessary time
> to practice. At this point in my life I'd rather practice "cuemaking" and
> "lovemaking" than "drawshots", but I can still explain how to draw the ball!
> Very few top players are worth a damn at teaching. Of course some are better
> than others, but I think it takes different skills to express to someone
> what to do, than it does, to do it yourself.
>

Oh I agree with that ... there is a huge difference though, between
being a master of the game, and being a world class player. What I do
not agree with is that there is somehow an ability to "teach" that
trancends ability ... that somehow expertise in pedagogy endows the
teacher with the ability to teach anything, regardless of skillset.

You not only have to have the ability to teach, but also the knowledge
and expertise on *what* to teach. You will notice that I said "master
the basics", not "be a world class player". There is a huge difference
between the two.

What "master the basics" means, exactly, is up for arguement, of course.
I certainly think it more than being an average barbox player,
regardless of teaching ability.

There are also specialty areas ... a person may be extremely good at one
particular aspect of something, and be able to teach that apsect by
itself, while still sucking wind on other things ... the socker players
that teach field goal kicking to NFL types come to mind.

Doanld



04 Jul 2004 07:31:13
Mike Gralnick
Re: Pool Lessons

Sherm Wrote:

>At this point in my life I'd rather practice "cuemaking" and "lovemaking"

Just don't get the two mixed up. I don't want to be reading about a "Lathe
Accident" in Cincinnati. Ouch.

Mike G. ~~~ Keeps dangling articles away from the chuck.




04 Jul 2004 12:35:20
Sherm Adamson
Re: Pool Lessons



"Mike Gralnick" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Sherm Wrote:
>
> >At this point in my life I'd rather practice "cuemaking" and "lovemaking"
>
> Just don't get the two mixed up. I don't want to be reading about a
"Lathe
> Accident" in Cincinnati. Ouch.
>
> Mike G. ~~~ Keeps dangling articles away from the chuck.
>
Yeah, I'm REAL careful about that! Had some digits bump the chuck before
but fortunately they were fingers! lol
--
just more hot air! 8^)

Sherm
aka "cuesmith" in yahoo
Sherm Custom Billiard Cues by,
Sherman Adamson
3352 Nine Mile Rd., Cincinnati Ohio 45255
Shop (513)553-2172, Cell (513)509-9152
http://www.shermcue.com Over 20 years experience
almost a decade in "The American Cuemakers Association"

Sending unsolicited commercial email (spam) to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.




04 Jul 2004 14:00:10
Ed Chauvin IV
Re: Pool Lessons

Mere moments before death, Bill hastily scrawled:
>
>I used one of these shots to beat the guy who told me about the shot. He
>got pissed and said he was not going to give me any more tips!

Here's the only tip you'll ever get from me: DON'T EVER DO THAT!

At least, not until they've had time to forget they taught you the
shot.



Ed Chauvin IV

--
DISCLAIMER : WARNING: RULE # 196 is X-rated in that to calculate L,
use X = [(C2/10)^2], and RULE # 193 which is NOT meant to be read by
kids, since RULE # 187 EXPLAINS homosexuality mathematically, using
modifier G @ 11.

"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
--Terry Austin


04 Jul 2004 14:10:21
Mark0
Re: Pool Lessons

Tiger Williams?????!!!! Don't bogart that joint, my friend.

Mark0 <--does enjoys Ted Woods' books though


=
"Donald Tees" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Patrick Johnson wrote:
> > I don't think this means the teacher has to necessarily be better at it
> > than the student, but I do think it means he has to be pretty good at
> > it. A good teacher has to know the learning path that leads to success
> > AND the ways that a student can lose his way. I think this most
> > valuable kind of knowledge can only come from having been there. The
> > student may go farther than the teacher but still need the teacher to
> > point the way and help avoid detours.
> >
> > Pat Johnson
> > Chicago
> >
>
> I agree. It is one thing to argue that Tiger Williams has a teacher not
> as good as him, and quite another to argue that a teacher does not have
> to be a master at what they teach.
>
> Being able to teach anything implies that the teacher has mastered the
> basics of the subject mattter themselves.
>
> Donald
>




05 Jul 2004 01:23:17
Jim Wyant
Re: Pool Lessons

On 7/4/04 3:10 AM, in article
[email protected], "Deno J. Andrews"
<[email protected] > wrote:

> "Jim Wyant" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:BD0D1028.320AB%[email protected]
>> I'm disagreeing with the point that a teacher needs to be a great player.
>
> Nobody is saying one needs to be a great player, but rather a good player-
> one who actually possesses the skills that need to be taught.
>
>> Knowing all the details of how to impart cueball control and communicate
> the
>> physical realities does not mean that the teacher has the touch or
> intuitive
>> ability to read the speed of the cloth.
>
> I don't know anything about laying brick. I have never tried it...have
> never worked with mortar, etc. Let's say that I spend the next two years of
> my life studying every text on brick laying. Let's say that I know more
> book knowledge of brick laying, mortar recipies, read about the best
> techniques, interview the top brick layers in the world, and really learn
> the info inside and out. Let's also say that during this time I still never
> once lay a brick. Do you think that I would be qualified to teach someone
> how to lay brick? I don't. I think that someone may be able to learn a lot
> about the game, its mechanics, strategy, etc...but never doing any of it at
> a respectable level means that all that can be transferred is the book
> knowledge. That is only a part of the big picture. If a teacher doesn't
> actually possess the hard skills that are needed, it is nearly impossible to
> teach those skills to someone else...just like laying brick. I can be an
> expert in my own mind on brick laying, but how can I teach someone to lay a
> brick with any certainty? I can't.

Gosh, there are few hundred people at NASA who've really been deceived, but
then again, that's not rock science, it's rocket science. I'd argue that
almost all of their instructors have never been into outer space.

Generally Deno, I like your posts, but in this one I think you've opted to
go two steps beyond stupid. No one even remotely related that pool
instructors don't touch cues. But it does seem that those lessons in being
a jerk are starting to pay off.

> So again I go back to the point that it is nearly impossible for a teacher
> to teach skills that he himself does not possess. You can exchange all the
> theory you want that you learn in books or from teachers that don't do...but
> to be a good teacher, that teacher must possess the skills that need to be
> taught. He doesn't need to be a champion, but he has to possess skills that
> champions possess in order to articulate them to their students. You can't
> articulate that which you do not know.

So, assuming that the teacher does have all the skills, and many of those
skills require a finely honed sense of touch, exactly how does a teacher
impart sensory perception? In my book, it is by analytical communication,
cause and effect discussions, instructing on what to attempt to perceive. I
can't "lay hands" on you and have you sense what I feel.

>> Not all instructors are emotionally capable of playing tournaments or
> money
>> games of any note.
>
> I know a lot of guys who play well in practice. They possess skills,
> knowledge, and are good players in general. I wouldn't go to them to learn
> how to play in tournaments...but I wouldn't hesitate to learn from them the
> skills which they actually possess or possessed in the past.
>
>> Competitive pool is the most difficult game on the planet.
>
> I'd say there are some golfers who would strongly disagree.

I used to be scratch golfer. I went from never before playing to scratch in
about 5 years and a couple of million balls. The biggest difference in golf
is, you're playing yourself. No one puts you into an impossible safety.
You can navigate your way through the safest parts of a course. And in
golf, it a games of decreasing misses - no one ever says "I'm going to stop
the ball 18' left of the sprinkler head 152.25 yards from the flagstick.

>> Instructors can help develop many of the execution aspects of the game.
>
> Especially those skills that they have themselves mastered. Maybe they
> don't have a complete game, but maybe they are experts at a specialty. I
> have helped some good pool players improve upon their mechanics but wouldn't
> ever consider talking strategy, theory, or anything else about the game of
> pool because I don't know it well and don't possess those skills.
>
>> And conversely, I doubt if there are many pros that can adequately convey,
>> in a well sequenced and structured format, the mechanics and physical
>> reality of the game.
>
> I agree. Most don't even know what they themselves do. To be a good
> teacher, you need to be able to "do," (at a respectable level) and "teach."
>
> Deno

You don't get to be an instructor because you suck.....or because you're
good. You become an instructor when you take your love of the game to the
next level and choose to refine an educational understanding of things and
learn how to convey it. Granted, many instructors have the capacity to
suck, I can only remember about 7 good teachers from all the years of
primary and secondary education. Good instruction is a relationship, a
willingness to communicate and capacity to learn. My instructor and I play
pretty much even now - does he suck or did he teach me all he could?

--Jim



05 Jul 2004 04:20:58
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

"Jim Wyant" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:BD0E267B.320DE%[email protected]
> Gosh, there are few hundred people at NASA who've really been deceived,
but
> then again, that's not rock science, it's rocket science. I'd argue that
> almost all of their instructors have never been into outer space.

That maybe true, but the actual flying in space is a small part of the big
picture. There are experts in electronics, computing, jet propulsion,
aviation, the list goes on and on and on...all of who are experts in their
field who teach those things that they themselves are experts at. Can you
learn to fly...you know, taxi, take off, land, etc. from someone who has
never flown an aircraft and get into a jet and actually do it? Can you
learn to program a computer from someone who can't do it himself? The
reason there are probably hundreds of instructors is because there are most
likely none who have the big picture experience. But be assured, astronauts
learn how to fly the shuttles not from those who know it by a book or by
observation or conversation, but instead from people who could fly in their
sleep. Do you think flight instructors at major airlines are people who
don't have the experience under their belts, or those pilots who have flown
through it all?

> Generally Deno, I like your posts, but in this one I think you've opted to
> go two steps beyond stupid.

Must have slept through the stupid exit on the subway...

> You don't get to be an instructor because you suck.....or because you're
> good. You become an instructor when you take your love of the game to the
> next level and choose to refine an educational understanding of things and
> learn how to convey it.

And if you don't know it, how can you convey it? I don't know about you,
but the people I like to learn from are people who actually know the skills
they teach...not the weekend warriors who think they know the game and want
the whole world to think they know the game. I don't care how much someone
loves the game and wants to educate the world about what they love. I want
someone who knows what they are talking about, even if they hate the game.

> Good instruction is a relationship, a willingness to communicate and
capacity to learn.

This is sort of too flowery for my taste. Good instruction to me is passing
good credible time tested information to the student and helping him or her
achieve the result by building their skill set. The two may hate each other
but still be able to transfer info and build skills. But you can't teach
skills you don't have. I can't teach someone to shoot a bow and arrow. I
shoot bow and arrow, and I don't stink at it, but I can't even begin to tell
someone how to stand properly because I don't know for sure if I am doing it
right or wrong. But there are plenty of pool and billiard instructors who
are also in that boat who won't hesitate to tell you how they think you
should stand, but who aren't really qualified. The whole point of this is
that having a BCA teaching cert., or any recognition by an organization
today, means absolutely nothing. That is not to say that there aren't
really good BCA instructors because there are. But take a random BCA
instructor name and you are flipping a coin with regard to whether or not
you are going to learn from someone who knows what he is talking about, IMO.

> My instructor and I play pretty much even now - does he suck or did he
teach me all he could?

Only time will tell. I don't know how well you play. If you play badly and
play even with your instructor, I would be willing to go out on a limb and
say that you have learned a game that you will later have to forget in order
to be a good player. But if you play really well and you play even with
your instructor, that says he is a good player and supports my point. If he
is average and you play even with him now, and if he is a good instructor,
you should be able to dominate him in no time because you have more ability.
That will be the measure. I bet that if he is average and you the same,
that if you take no lessons from anyone else and work on only what he has
you work on, that you will never dominate him. This is because all he has
to teach you is are the skills he possesses now or in the past. In order to
dominate him you will have to learn skills from elsewhere- those which he
doesn't possess. He can't teach you the skills he himself never had...the
info is just not there for him to communicate. A guy doesn't have to be a
champion, but he does have to know the game and the skills to be a good
instructor.

You can have a coach who is an expert in strategy...let's say someone who
has studied all the best players and compiled lesson plans of strategies,
etc. But if that is all he knows, are you going to ask him to diagnose your
draw stroke? And if that guy claims to be able to teach you to draw, you
start lessons...and you still can't draw the ball, are you not going to ask
him to demonstrate because you need not be able to "do" to "know" and then
teach? I bet you are going to want to see him do it once if you can't get
it right, so that you can determine if he knows what the heck he is talking
about.

Deno




05 Jul 2004 05:29:41
Jim Wyant
Re: Pool Lessons

Do you actually know BCA Recognized, Certified, Advanced or Master
Instructors? I know some of each (except Master, those are pretty hard to
find). I find your descriptions akin to caricatures, some bearing in
reality but distorted. Why would anybody bother to take the time and effort
to become a BCA Certified Instructor if all they were was a weekend casual
shooter?

Typically, I think "Certifications" are tedious. And I can see why
Recognized and even Certified can be dubious distinctions, they really don't
take much to attain. But attaining them is required to become and Advanced
or Master.

At least the BCA has taken the steps to try to equate levels of competence
for the consumers by assigning levels for instructors to attain. What is
curious is why you feel it necessary to demean those that have chosen that
path to "give back" something to the sport.

--Jim



On 7/5/04 12:20 AM, in article
[email protected], "Deno J. Andrews"
<[email protected] > wrote:

> "Jim Wyant" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:BD0E267B.320DE%[email protected]
>> Gosh, there are few hundred people at NASA who've really been deceived,
> but
>> then again, that's not rock science, it's rocket science. I'd argue that
>> almost all of their instructors have never been into outer space.
>
> That maybe true, but the actual flying in space is a small part of the big
> picture. There are experts in electronics, computing, jet propulsion,
> aviation, the list goes on and on and on...all of who are experts in their
> field who teach those things that they themselves are experts at. Can you
> learn to fly...you know, taxi, take off, land, etc. from someone who has
> never flown an aircraft and get into a jet and actually do it? Can you
> learn to program a computer from someone who can't do it himself? The
> reason there are probably hundreds of instructors is because there are most
> likely none who have the big picture experience. But be assured, astronauts
> learn how to fly the shuttles not from those who know it by a book or by
> observation or conversation, but instead from people who could fly in their
> sleep. Do you think flight instructors at major airlines are people who
> don't have the experience under their belts, or those pilots who have flown
> through it all?
>
>> Generally Deno, I like your posts, but in this one I think you've opted to
>> go two steps beyond stupid.
>
> Must have slept through the stupid exit on the subway...
>
>> You don't get to be an instructor because you suck.....or because you're
>> good. You become an instructor when you take your love of the game to the
>> next level and choose to refine an educational understanding of things and
>> learn how to convey it.
>
> And if you don't know it, how can you convey it? I don't know about you,
> but the people I like to learn from are people who actually know the skills
> they teach...not the weekend warriors who think they know the game and want
> the whole world to think they know the game. I don't care how much someone
> loves the game and wants to educate the world about what they love. I want
> someone who knows what they are talking about, even if they hate the game.
>
>> Good instruction is a relationship, a willingness to communicate and
> capacity to learn.
>
> This is sort of too flowery for my taste. Good instruction to me is passing
> good credible time tested information to the student and helping him or her
> achieve the result by building their skill set. The two may hate each other
> but still be able to transfer info and build skills. But you can't teach
> skills you don't have. I can't teach someone to shoot a bow and arrow. I
> shoot bow and arrow, and I don't stink at it, but I can't even begin to tell
> someone how to stand properly because I don't know for sure if I am doing it
> right or wrong. But there are plenty of pool and billiard instructors who
> are also in that boat who won't hesitate to tell you how they think you
> should stand, but who aren't really qualified. The whole point of this is
> that having a BCA teaching cert., or any recognition by an organization
> today, means absolutely nothing. That is not to say that there aren't
> really good BCA instructors because there are. But take a random BCA
> instructor name and you are flipping a coin with regard to whether or not
> you are going to learn from someone who knows what he is talking about, IMO.
>
>> My instructor and I play pretty much even now - does he suck or did he
> teach me all he could?
>
> Only time will tell. I don't know how well you play. If you play badly and
> play even with your instructor, I would be willing to go out on a limb and
> say that you have learned a game that you will later have to forget in order
> to be a good player. But if you play really well and you play even with
> your instructor, that says he is a good player and supports my point. If he
> is average and you play even with him now, and if he is a good instructor,
> you should be able to dominate him in no time because you have more ability.
> That will be the measure. I bet that if he is average and you the same,
> that if you take no lessons from anyone else and work on only what he has
> you work on, that you will never dominate him. This is because all he has
> to teach you is are the skills he possesses now or in the past. In order to
> dominate him you will have to learn skills from elsewhere- those which he
> doesn't possess. He can't teach you the skills he himself never had...the
> info is just not there for him to communicate. A guy doesn't have to be a
> champion, but he does have to know the game and the skills to be a good
> instructor.
>
> You can have a coach who is an expert in strategy...let's say someone who
> has studied all the best players and compiled lesson plans of strategies,
> etc. But if that is all he knows, are you going to ask him to diagnose your
> draw stroke? And if that guy claims to be able to teach you to draw, you
> start lessons...and you still can't draw the ball, are you not going to ask
> him to demonstrate because you need not be able to "do" to "know" and then
> teach? I bet you are going to want to see him do it once if you can't get
> it right, so that you can determine if he knows what the heck he is talking
> about.
>
> Deno
>
>




05 Jul 2004 14:20:23
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

"Jim Wyant" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:BD0E5F82.320E6%[email protected]
> Do you actually know BCA Recognized, Certified, Advanced or Master
> Instructors?

Yes.

> I know some of each (except Master, those are pretty hard to
> find). I find your descriptions akin to caricatures, some bearing in
> reality but distorted.

We are talking in general.

> Why would anybody bother to take the time and effort to become a BCA
Certified Instructor if all they were was a weekend casual shooter?

Because not all of them are, many are really good teachers who believe that
a cert gives them credibility. Have you ever inquired about what it takes
to become an BCA instructor? Not much skill, and a little money.

> Typically, I think "Certifications" are tedious. And I can see why
> Recognized and even Certified can be dubious distinctions, they really
don't
> take much to attain. But attaining them is required to become and
Advanced
> or Master.

It's a ladder sort of thing, and that is good because there are fewer yahoos
who bother to jump through the hoops.

> At least the BCA has taken the steps to try to equate levels of competence
> for the consumers by assigning levels for instructors to attain.

Partly as a result of the lack of credibility of BCA instructors who can't
make four or five balls. I think that is a good measure too by the BCA
because it at least addresses the issue of competence and ability.

> What is curious is why you feel it necessary to demean those that have
chosen that path to "give back" something to the sport.

This is not to demean anyone but rather to express my concern that someone
thinking they are taking lessons from someone who really knows what they are
doing, just because they have a certification, may in fact be taking lessons
from someone who doesn't know what they are teaching. That hurts the BCAs
credibility, the credibility of other teachers, and it turns people off from
the process of taking lessons. I applaud people who give back to the game.
But make no mistake, BCA instructors are getting paid for their time. That
is commerce, not charity.
Deno




05 Jul 2004 14:06:31
David Malone
Re: Pool Lessons

On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 09:10:28 -0400, Donald Tees
<[email protected] > wrote:

>There are also specialty areas ... a person may be extremely good at one
>particular aspect of something, and be able to teach that apsect by
>itself, while still sucking wind on other things ... the socker players
>that teach field goal kicking to NFL types come to mind.

Socker players? As an old soccer player myself, I have been pressed
into service by some of the Ontario provincial junior team coaches in
the past and found I was a pretty useless teacher when it came to
teaching the basics. I don't have the patience. Some of the best
junior coaches had never played the game but took all of the coaching
certifications and knew all the drills, etc.

On the other hand, give me advanced players and I was able to help
them with the subtleties of the game. (I taught the Greeks everything
they know).

>Doanld

Still smoking that stuff, Donald?

David "The Hamster" Malone


05 Jul 2004 21:09:52
Jim Wyant
Re: Pool Lessons

On 7/5/04 10:20 AM, in article
[email protected], "Deno J. Andrews"
<[email protected] > wrote:

> "Jim Wyant" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:BD0E5F82.320E6%[email protected]
>> Do you actually know BCA Recognized, Certified, Advanced or Master
>> Instructors?
>
> Yes.
>
>> I know some of each (except Master, those are pretty hard to
>> find). I find your descriptions akin to caricatures, some bearing in
>> reality but distorted.
>
> We are talking in general.
>
>> Why would anybody bother to take the time and effort to become a BCA
> Certified Instructor if all they were was a weekend casual shooter?
>
> Because not all of them are, many are really good teachers who believe that
> a cert gives them credibility. Have you ever inquired about what it takes
> to become an BCA instructor? Not much skill, and a little money.

And a modicum of time, and a perception of a need that is not being
fulfilled by the "skill" players.

But what you are really talking about is Recognized or Certified. To become
an Advanced does take a reasonable amount of skill, not necessarily
competitive hutzpah, but a reasonable amount of skill.



>
>> Typically, I think "Certifications" are tedious. And I can see why
>> Recognized and even Certified can be dubious distinctions, they really
> don't
>> take much to attain. But attaining them is required to become and
> Advanced
>> or Master.
>
> It's a ladder sort of thing, and that is good because there are fewer yahoos
> who bother to jump through the hoops.
>
>> At least the BCA has taken the steps to try to equate levels of competence
>> for the consumers by assigning levels for instructors to attain.
>
> Partly as a result of the lack of credibility of BCA instructors who can't
> make four or five balls. I think that is a good measure too by the BCA
> because it at least addresses the issue of competence and ability.
>
>> What is curious is why you feel it necessary to demean those that have
> chosen that path to "give back" something to the sport.
>
> This is not to demean anyone but rather to express my concern that someone
> thinking they are taking lessons from someone who really knows what they are
> doing, just because they have a certification, may in fact be taking lessons
> from someone who doesn't know what they are teaching. That hurts the BCAs
> credibility, the credibility of other teachers, and it turns people off from
> the process of taking lessons. I applaud people who give back to the game.
> But make no mistake, BCA instructors are getting paid for their time. That
> is commerce, not charity.
> Deno

The same could be said for Medical Boards, who wants a surgeon who graduated
with a C+ average. But as long as they passed the boards set down by the
governing body, they're free to operate.

Would you rather have no forum for making these distinctions? Or should we
just leave it to the people who rather take $100 gambling with you rather
than give you $100 worth of knowledge?

And realistically, how can you judge the value and capability of an
instructor until you've been through the program? I used to teach golf. I
turned away more people than I tough because their goals were not
commensurate with what I was able to teach them. NO pool instructor gets
into it to cause harm, and only a very few can actually make a full time
living at it.

The horse is dead, Deno. Quit beating it.

--Jim



06 Jul 2004 01:10:45
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

"Jim Wyant" <[email protected] > wrote in message
> But what you are really talking about is Recognized or Certified. To
become
> an Advanced does take a reasonable amount of skill, not necessarily
> competitive hutzpah, but a reasonable amount of skill.

I think you are arguing my point...that to be good, you actually need skills
at the table. It does get harder as you go up the ladder and it should. It
should also be harder at the beginning though.

> The same could be said for Medical Boards, who wants a surgeon who
graduated
> with a C+ average. But as long as they passed the boards set down by the
> governing body, they're free to operate.

Believe me, I know. I run a small medical clinic, and we see far too many
patients who have gone previously untreated for standard endocrine disorders
because their other doctors weren't so good. Again, this seems to reinforce
my point. Would I rather see those doctors teaching fellows, or the doctors
who have the skills and know how to actually do the right thing. You have
to wonder who they learned from if they are not so good.

> Would you rather have no forum for making these distinctions?

A forum is good, but if you are going to do it...do it, and do it right.
Don't make it so easy that any yahoo who can pick up a cue can study a
little and become an instructor.

Deno




06 Jul 2004 01:22:53
Dan White
Re: Pool Lessons

"Deno J. Andrews" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> Believe me, I know. I run a small medical clinic, and we see far too many
> patients who have gone previously untreated for standard endocrine
disorders
> because their other doctors weren't so good. Again, this seems to
reinforce
> my point. Would I rather see those doctors teaching fellows, or the
doctors
> who have the skills and know how to actually do the right thing. You have
> to wonder who they learned from if they are not so good.
>

How's that saying go? Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach
become guidance counselors.

dwhite




06 Jul 2004 03:04:35
Jim Wyant
Re: Pool Lessons

On 7/5/04 9:10 PM, in article
[email protected], "Deno J. Andrews"
<[email protected] > wrote:

>> Would you rather have no forum for making these distinctions?
>
> A forum is good, but if you are going to do it...do it, and do it right.
> Don't make it so easy that any yahoo who can pick up a cue can study a
> little and become an instructor.
>
> Deno

So, you think that the BCA is aware that they are not doing it "right"? By
who's definition? When did you invest such that you are the one to make
that decision?

You seem to be disdaining the work of Bob Jewett, RandyG and others who have
endeavored to create the best possible instructional environment given the
poor economic development of the sport.

I don't see a line of pro's lining up to be taught how to deliver quality
instruction. And if you're so good, why aren't you at the head of that
line?

--Jim



06 Jul 2004 03:08:52
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

"Dan White" <[email protected] > wrote:
> How's that saying go? Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach
> become guidance counselors.

Something like that! I fear that those who can't do and end up teaching
teach others to not be able to do as well. How many pool players are there
who have become great players while going the route of taking lessons from
certified teachers? And, how many players, who were/are protoges of great
players, end up being good to great players themselves? I think much of
this debate lies in the answers to these two questions. The answer seems
obvious...the real players have more skills to pass along.

Deno




06 Jul 2004 04:59:22
Kirk Douglass
Re: Pool Lessons


"Jim Wyant" wrote
> So, assuming that the teacher does have all the skills, and many of those
> skills require a finely honed sense of touch, exactly how does a teacher
> impart sensory perception? In my book, it is by analytical communication,
> cause and effect discussions, instructing on what to attempt to perceive.
I
> can't "lay hands" on you and have you sense what I feel.

You're right an instructor can't "impart sensory perception", he must first
explain the theory behind what is happening during the shot and then let the
student "feel" how to stroke the shot. Here is an example of the problem
with some instructors though; A friend came to me a few years ago and asked
if I would help him play better one-pocket, I obliged. I knew he had been
under "professional" instruction for two or so years and had the kwowledge
to competently play the game at a decent speed. During our first session I
was amazed at how many "easy" balls he would miss, his mechanics were okay
(a little tight, but okay) and I could tell he knew the right way to produce
the desired result of the shots, and I inquired as to why he thought he
missed. The answer was a doctorate thesis on the physics of everything that
was happening during each shot he had missed. His "professional" instructor
had filled his head with so much detailed physics and preached that he study
the physics of each shot before shooting. The student had become so consumed
with the complex physics he would dog simple shots worrying about the
physics. ****This was the exact moment I lost much respect for the
"professional" instructors ability to teach**** AND PLAY**** Pool is indeed
a very complex game and there is much knowledge needed to play at higher
levels but knowledge is worthless if it "clouds" your execution. If the said
instructor was a truly good at his profession he would know and preach this.
My advice to the student;
You know what it takes to make the ball and get shape on the next right?

Yes. He replied.

I said, " Good, now get down on the shot, GO BRAINDEAD AND SWING THE F***ING
CLUB!!!

That's the same advice I had been given by the absolute best teacher I ever
had period... My first golf instructor. He would explain the theory, in
laymens terms, of every shot or strategy he would teach and demonstrate it
himself, then tell you go braindead and execute. He as the teacher would
then watch you execute and offer subtle advice on how to refine your
execution. The result of a "great" teacher? Beginner to 4 handicap in less
than a year and a half. As was the case with all of the junior players at my
country club. He taught the same principles as every other instructor in
town but he was the only one that preached execution. The point is simple,
it takes knowledge to understand but it takes execution to produce skill.
What good is a teacher that doesn't produce skill?!?!?!

Now that I'm off that tangent, back to the results of my story. The student
took my advice to heart and within six months was beating the professional
teacher at all games. Something he had only dreamed of six months prior.
Don't get me wrong, I like the instructor personally and the instructor is a
good teacher... Of knowledge... For beginner to low speed novice players.
But his "advanced" credentials are a bit much. Does he posess "advanced"
knowledge? Definitely. Does he posess "advanced" skill? No. IMO, the BCA
needs to re-evaluate how their instructors are acreditted. They currently
ensure that they have knowledge and have the capability to teach but IMO
don't ensure they have the skill to execute effectively what they preach.

> >> Not all instructors are emotionally capable of playing tournaments or
> > money
> >> games of any note.

They should, if they are dedicated and learned enough to read and learn
everything about the the principles of the game, they should take the time
to learn and teach about the mental side of it too. There are far more books
written about sports psychology than the physics and principles of pool and
billiards!

> I used to be scratch golfer. I went from never before playing to scratch
in
> about 5 years and a couple of million balls. The biggest difference in
golf
> is, you're playing yourself. No one puts you into an impossible safety.
> You can navigate your way through the safest parts of a course. And in
> golf, it a games of decreasing misses - no one ever says "I'm going to
stop
> the ball 18' left of the sprinkler head 152.25 yards from the flagstick.

In golf you do have an opponent, a couple of them, the course and mother
nature. And one of the two will occasionally play you safe, like it or not.
Golf just like pool is a game of playing percentages on every single shot,
in both games I was taught to play percentages, if I've got a 70-80% or
better chance of successfully hitting the shot with the desired result I
play agressive. If the percentage is less than 70% or so I make a safe play.
How many times have you seen a champion 9-ball player or even a hack like me
make a ball on the break and proceed to run out in a preconceived pattern to
play specific shape for a safety on lets say a 7-ball that has no pocket to
guarantee a win? The point? You're playing the obstacles the course or table
has dealt you and the fate mother nature (or pool gods) has bestowed upon
you. Golf and pool... Same game.. Different playing surface.

> You don't get to be an instructor because you suck.....or because you're
> good. You become an instructor when you take your love of the game to the
> next level and choose to refine an educational understanding of things and
> learn how to convey it. Granted, many instructors have the capacity to
> suck, I can only remember about 7 good teachers from all the years of
> primary and secondary education. Good instruction is a relationship, a
> willingness to communicate and capacity to learn. My instructor and I
play
> pretty much even now - does he suck or did he teach me all he could?
>
> --Jim

In my god's honest opinion, your professional teacher is a good one but it
would better serve his time and especially that of his students, if he were
to spend more time LEARNING how to play better and re-evaluating his
curriculum rather than attaining self-centered "Master" credentials. If he
truly "loves" the sport and "loves" teaching it he wouldn't much care about
credentials beyond the minimum classification. BTW, don't sell yourself
short you definitely play better than your instructor. Why? Because you are
willing to play others in tournament or action play and have the
desire/drive to learn new things to better your skills.

Kirk




06 Jul 2004 14:25:18
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

"Jim Wyant" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:BD0F8F01.3212C%[email protected]
> So, you think that the BCA is aware that they are not doing it "right"?
By
> who's definition? When did you invest such that you are the one to make
> that decision?

I'm not making any decisions, rather sharing my opinion. And yes, I think
the BCA has been aware in the past that their certification had little
credibility which is why in the last several years they have made decisions
to make it a little tougher and competency based as well for the higher
level. Although they would probably never admit it, it has been an issue.
They would do better to make it tough enough to regain some credibility, but
they are probably worried that people wouldn't join the program or pass.

> You seem to be disdaining the work of Bob Jewett, RandyG and others who
have
> endeavored to create the best possible instructional environment given the
> poor economic development of the sport.

Poor economic development? Have you seen the BCA annual budget? By what
they put into teaching, it is clear they don't value their program. Pool is
one of the most played games in the country, and cue sports one of the most
widely played games in the world. There are rooms everywhere, businesses
that supply tables and stuff in almost every city. If the BCA were serious
about their program, they would be puring money into a campaign promoting
taking lessons by certified instructors. They don't. They put your name on
their web site and think that they are doing you a favor by doing so, even
though it costs the instructor money to get certified. Oh, they do do
something else...they give you a sticker.

Want to be a coach for the BCA? A coach! Coaches are supposed to be
knowledgeable, able, and credible. Here is what it takes to be a coach for
the BCA, right off their web site:

"BCA COACH PROGRAM
Become part of the BCA teaching program without attending a BCA Instructor
Academy. Just fill out a Coach Application and send in your $100 annual
dues. You will receive a valuable instructional How to Play Pool Right video
and Beginning Pool pamphlet, plus additional support materials to help you
get started coaching."

So for $100 you can be a BCA coach. For $100 you can know absolutely
nothing whatsoever about the sport...watch a $3 video and a $0.30 pamphlet
and some "addition support materials," and start advertising the fact that
you are a BCA coach. What a joke IMO. That just goes to show the lack of
credibility the BCA has.

> I don't see a line of pro's lining up to be taught how to deliver quality
instruction. And if you're so good, why aren't you at the head of that
line?

Most pros I know do really well teaching. They don't need some
certification because they have their own credibility, and their students
progress. Just look at how much people pay to learn from pros versus what
they pay BCA instructors. Do you know what it costs to learn at a pool
school with real players? A BCA instructor in his wildest dreams couldn't
charge near what people pay per hour for the pool schools. As far as me, I
do have students. I don't have many because I don't have the time. Do I
need the BCA to tell me how to tell my students how to stand? No. What
little I know about teaching I have learned on my own, and I guarantee that
info is far more in depth than what the BCA binder says on the topic.

How many BCA taught players have you heard of that play well? Then ask
yourself how many player protoges have went on to be great players...and ask
yourself why that is.

Deno




06 Jul 2004 14:30:16
Deno J. Andrews
Re: Pool Lessons

"Kirk Douglass" <[email protected] > wrote in message
> country club. He taught the same principles as every other instructor in
> town but he was the only one that preached execution. The point is simple,
> it takes knowledge to understand but it takes execution to produce skill.
> What good is a teacher that doesn't produce skill?!?!?!

> knowledge? Definitely. Does he posess "advanced" skill? No. IMO, the BCA
> needs to re-evaluate how their instructors are acreditted. They currently
> ensure that they have knowledge and have the capability to teach but IMO
> don't ensure they have the skill to execute effectively what they preach.

Very well said, and good points.

Deno




07 Jul 2004 02:50:28
Jim Wyant
Re: Pool Lessons

I'm don't need to be thumped over the head to be reminded. And, you are
only 1 of two people that I actually seek out and take instruction from (the
other lives in Hayward, CA). And I agree with everything you said....

...save one point. How do people seek out and find someone that they feel
comfortable taking input from in any reasonable time frame? When pool
players decide they need help, unless they have already developed a
relationship, it's a bit late to start developing one. If you have the good
fortune of being friends with someone who is adept at sorting through this
stuff, that is great.

The best thing BCA Instructors provide is a structured environment in which
people can locate and purchase, in their time frame, information in specific
chunks. They have put a product up for sale. Purchasing is at the
discretion of the buyer.

--Jim





On 7/6/04 12:59 AM, in article
[email protected], "Kirk Douglass"
<[email protected] > wrote:

>
> "Jim Wyant" wrote
>> So, assuming that the teacher does have all the skills, and many of those
>> skills require a finely honed sense of touch, exactly how does a teacher
>> impart sensory perception? In my book, it is by analytical communication,
>> cause and effect discussions, instructing on what to attempt to perceive.
> I
>> can't "lay hands" on you and have you sense what I feel.
>
> You're right an instructor can't "impart sensory perception", he must first
> explain the theory behind what is happening during the shot and then let the
> student "feel" how to stroke the shot. Here is an example of the problem
> with some instructors though; A friend came to me a few years ago and asked
> if I would help him play better one-pocket, I obliged. I knew he had been
> under "professional" instruction for two or so years and had the kwowledge
> to competently play the game at a decent speed. During our first session I
> was amazed at how many "easy" balls he would miss, his mechanics were okay
> (a little tight, but okay) and I could tell he knew the right way to produce
> the desired result of the shots, and I inquired as to why he thought he
> missed. The answer was a doctorate thesis on the physics of everything that
> was happening during each shot he had missed. His "professional" instructor
> had filled his head with so much detailed physics and preached that he study
> the physics of each shot before shooting. The student had become so consumed
> with the complex physics he would dog simple shots worrying about the
> physics. ****This was the exact moment I lost much respect for the
> "professional" instructors ability to teach**** AND PLAY**** Pool is indeed
> a very complex game and there is much knowledge needed to play at higher
> levels but knowledge is worthless if it "clouds" your execution. If the said
> instructor was a truly good at his profession he would know and preach this.
> My advice to the student;
> You know what it takes to make the ball and get shape on the next right?
>
> Yes. He replied.
>
> I said, " Good, now get down on the shot, GO BRAINDEAD AND SWING THE F***ING
> CLUB!!!
>
> That's the same advice I had been given by the absolute best teacher I ever
> had period... My first golf instructor. He would explain the theory, in
> laymens terms, of every shot or strategy he would teach and demonstrate it
> himself, then tell you go braindead and execute. He as the teacher would
> then watch you execute and offer subtle advice on how to refine your
> execution. The result of a "great" teacher? Beginner to 4 handicap in less
> than a year and a half. As was the case with all of the junior players at my
> country club. He taught the same principles as every other instructor in
> town but he was the only one that preached execution. The point is simple,
> it takes knowledge to understand but it takes execution to produce skill.
> What good is a teacher that doesn't produce skill?!?!?!
>
> Now that I'm off that tangent, back to the results of my story. The student
> took my advice to heart and within six months was beating the professional
> teacher at all games. Something he had only dreamed of six months prior.
> Don't get me wrong, I like the instructor personally and the instructor is a
> good teacher... Of knowledge... For beginner to low speed novice players.
> But his "advanced" credentials are a bit much. Does he posess "advanced"
> knowledge? Definitely. Does he posess "advanced" skill? No. IMO, the BCA
> needs to re-evaluate how their instructors are acreditted. They currently
> ensure that they have knowledge and have the capability to teach but IMO
> don't ensure they have the skill to execute effectively what they preach.
>
>>>> Not all instructors are emotionally capable of playing tournaments or
>>> money
>>>> games of any note.
>
> They should, if they are dedicated and learned enough to read and learn
> everything about the the principles of the game, they should take the time
> to learn and teach about the mental side of it too. There are far more books
> written about sports psychology than the physics and principles of pool and
> billiards!
>
>> I used to be scratch golfer. I went from never before playing to scratch
> in
>> about 5 years and a couple of million balls. The biggest difference in
> golf
>> is, you're playing yourself. No one puts you into an impossible safety.
>> You can navigate your way through the safest parts of a course. And in
>> golf, it a games of decreasing misses - no one ever says "I'm going to
> stop
>> the ball 18' left of the sprinkler head 152.25 yards from the flagstick.
>
> In golf you do have an opponent, a couple of them, the course and mother
> nature. And one of the two will occasionally play you safe, like it or not.
> Golf just like pool is a game of playing percentages on every single shot,
> in both games I was taught to play percentages, if I've got a 70-80% or
> better chance of successfully hitting the shot with the desired result I
> play agressive. If the percentage is less than 70% or so I make a safe play.
> How many times have you seen a champion 9-ball player or even a hack like me
> make a ball on the break and proceed to run out in a preconceived pattern to
> play specific shape for a safety on lets say a 7-ball that has no pocket to
> guarantee a win? The point? You're playing the obstacles the course or table
> has dealt you and the fate mother nature (or pool gods) has bestowed upon
> you. Golf and pool... Same game.. Different playing surface.
>
>> You don't get to be an instructor because you suck.....or because you're
>> good. You become an instructor when you take your love of the game to the
>> next level and choose to refine an educational understanding of things and
>> learn how to convey it. Granted, many instructors have the capacity to
>> suck, I can only remember about 7 good teachers from all the years of
>> primary and secondary education. Good instruction is a relationship, a
>> willingness to communicate and capacity to learn. My instructor and I
> play
>> pretty much even now - does he suck or did he teach me all he could?
>>
>> --Jim
>
> In my god's honest opinion, your professional teacher is a good one but it
> would better serve his time and especially that of his students, if he were
> to spend more time LEARNING how to play better and re-evaluating his
> curriculum rather than attaining self-centered "Master" credentials. If he
> truly "loves" the sport and "loves" teaching it he wouldn't much care about
> credentials beyond the minimum classification. BTW, don't sell yourself
> short you definitely play better than your instructor. Why? Because you are
> willing to play others in tournament or action play and have the
> desire/drive to learn new things to better your skills.
>
> Kirk
>
>




07 Jul 2004 16:22:13
Kirk Douglass
Re: Pool Lessons


"Jim Wyant" wrote ...
> I'm don't need to be thumped over the head to be reminded. And, you are
> only 1 of two people that I actually seek out and take instruction from
(the
> other lives in Hayward, CA). And I agree with everything you said....

Thank you sir, like the company I'm in (Hal Houle) <G >

> ...save one point. How do people seek out and find someone that they feel
> comfortable taking input from in any reasonable time frame? When pool
> players decide they need help, unless they have already developed a
> relationship, it's a bit late to start developing one. If you have the
good
> fortune of being friends with someone who is adept at sorting through this
> stuff, that is great.

For quick fixes you're right it's tough. Long term, tell good players what
you're having trouble with and ask their advice on who to go to.

> The best thing BCA Instructors provide is a structured environment in
which
> people can locate and purchase, in their time frame, information in
specific
> chunks. They have put a product up for sale. Purchasing is at the
> discretion of the buyer.

IMO, the BCA needs to adopt a stringent skill requirement much the same as
the PGA of America.

Kirk




10 Jul 2004 13:19:37
Bluewolf
Re: Pool Lessons

<< Subject: Pool Lessons
Path: lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!audrey-m2.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
Lines: 12
X-Admin: [email protected]
From: [email protected] (Jimbo Ct)

Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
strategy, to me this is a great lesson.

Jim<---What do you think??

Good question. Being a great player does not make one a great teacher. OTOH, I
think that it depends on what you are wanting to learn from the teacher. I
think that the teacher will have to be able to demonstrate proficiency in what
skill you are trying to learn so that they can show you how to do it.

i think that whether you can learn from someone who is less of a player vs a
better player, depends on what you need to learn.

For instance, it is posible for anyone, even a great player to get off on
stroke or have a problem relating to their mental game. In that case, I believe
it would be posssible for an A player to learn from a B teacher who can
diagnose and demonstrate those things.

If the skill one wants to learn is above the B player's skill level in that
particular aspect, though, then the A cannot learn that from them.

But, afterall, once you get to the top like Tiger, it would be impossible to
find a coach who is better at golf, but it would be posible to find a coach who
is not quite as good but is good in diagnosing basics that may have gone awry.

bw






>><BR><BR>

Save a starving dog, he will not bite you. That is the principle difference
betweeen a dog and a man


10 Jul 2004 14:53:01
Sandy Lyle
Re: Pool Lessons

[email protected] (Bluewolf) wrote in message news:<[email protected] >...
> << Subject: Pool Lessons
> Path: lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!audrey-m2.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
> Lines: 12
> X-Admin: [email protected]
> From: [email protected] (Jimbo Ct)
>
> Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
> player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
> can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
> to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
> the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
> knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
> can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
> this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
> strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
>
> Jim<---What do you think??
>
> Good question. Being a great player does not make one a great teacher. OTOH, I
> think that it depends on what you are wanting to learn from the teacher. I
> think that the teacher will have to be able to demonstrate proficiency in what
> skill you are trying to learn so that they can show you how to do it.
>
> i think that whether you can learn from someone who is less of a player vs a
> better player, depends on what you need to learn.
>
> For instance, it is posible for anyone, even a great player to get off on
> stroke or have a problem relating to their mental game. In that case, I believe
> it would be posssible for an A player to learn from a B teacher who can
> diagnose and demonstrate those things.
>
> If the skill one wants to learn is above the B player's skill level in that
> particular aspect, though, then the A cannot learn that from them.
>
> But, afterall, once you get to the top like Tiger, it would be impossible to
> find a coach who is better at golf, but it would be posible to find a coach who
> is not quite as good but is good in diagnosing basics that may have gone awry.
>
> bw
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >><BR><BR>
>
> Save a starving dog, he will not bite you. That is the principle difference
> betweeen a dog and a man


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I TOOK LESSONS FROM A TOUR PRO AND ALL HE DID WAS TALK STRADEGY AND IT
WAS A GREAT LESSON, BULL SHEYET IT WAS. YOU TOOK LESSONS FROM A POOL
BUM WHO DID NOT HAVE A CLUE WHAT HE WAS DOING. You have to be taught
how to teach and these so called part time 9 ball hustler gambler pros
have no such teachings. If any pool or golf instructor is not
teaching using a camera or does not offer one, you have a bum, not a
pro on your hands. BCA certifications are for sale, walk in with a
pulse and cash, they would graduate a monkey. Upper level graduation
is for sale also for $750, that is all it takes, no talent, no skills,
$750....

In a lesson, the pro should look you over head to toe like your doctor
does to find any flaws, then correct them. He should review all of
your basics and attack and solve any of your weaknesses. That is what
Fl does to everyone he sees no matter what their skill levels are.

FL charges $50 an hour which is resonable for a master level
instructor. What did you learn out of this monster thread, nothing.
You want to actually learn something, this is all you now need to
know. www.fastlarrypool.com


11 Jul 2004 11:18:35
Sandy Lyle
Re: Pool Lessons

[email protected] (Bluewolf) wrote in message news:<[email protected] >...
> << Subject: Pool Lessons
> Path: lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!audrey-m2.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
> Lines: 12
> X-Admin: [email protected]
> From: [email protected] (Jimbo Ct)
>
> Do you guys feel you need to take lessons from someone who is a much better
> player then you are, I mean just for the respect part of it? Or do you feel you
> can learn from someone who shoots worse then you do? I know people always point
> to Tiger Woods teacher, but do you feel you need to have a certain respect for
> the guy telling you what to do?? I'm a fool, but to me I think if the person
> knows how to execute what he's teaching he must be able to shoot well, if he
> can't follow his own instructions how the hell can I?? I know of someone from
> this group who took lessons from a touring pro and all they did was talk
> strategy, to me this is a great lesson.
>
> Jim<---What do you think??
>
> Good question. Being a great player does not make one a great teacher. OTOH, I
> think that it depends on what you are wanting to learn from the teacher. I
> think that the teacher will have to be able to demonstrate proficiency in what
> skill you are trying to learn so that they can show you how to do it.
>
> i think that whether you can learn from someone who is less of a player vs a
> better player, depends on what you need to learn.
>
> For instance, it is posible for anyone, even a great player to get off on
> stroke or have a problem relating to their mental game. In that case, I believe
> it would be posssible for an A player to learn from a B teacher who can
> diagnose and demonstrate those things.
>
> If the skill one wants to learn is above the B player's skill level in that
> particular aspect, though, then the A cannot learn that from them.
>
> But, afterall, once you get to the top like Tiger, it would be impossible to
> find a coach who is better at golf, but it would be posible to find a coach who
> is not quite as good but is good in diagnosing basics that may have gone awry.
>
> bw
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >><BR><BR>
>
> Save a starving dog, he will not bite you. That is the principle difference
> betweeen a dog and a man

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=

AH SO, MY DAILY EXCURSION INTO BOZOLAND, RSB, WHERE I PONTIFICATE,
EDUCATE AND TEACH BOZOS WHO ARE TO F***IN DUMB TO KNOW WHAT I am
talking about. In golf, none of the great teachers and I have had
lessons from all of them are players, they are teachers. Most of them
can't break 80 any more, but that does not matter if they can teach
you to shoot in the 60's. The same should apply to pool but it does
not. I see you bozos running to these pool schools ran by 9 ball
gambler pros like archer who are not teachers but players who just
want some of the gravy off of the top. You blow $600 for a giant
group lesson when for that same amount of money you could have two
full days of all day private lessons with FL, one on one. The
teaching and what you would learn would be 5 to 10 fold what you get
in your cattle car group lesson with 16 others bozos who want to brag
about hanging with pro's. dumb dumb dumb de dumb dumb. Here is all
you need to know, here, all of your question and answers taken care
of, all of your problems solved. www.fastlarrypool.com

Go forth my son, take lessons, graduate out of bozo land and become a
player and no longer a board bozo.