Eye Dominance, Sighting and the Cue

[Terry Davidson]

On here there are players who have the cue running under the non-dominant eye. I have found students who also do this and if it's something that I feel is hampering their ability then I will try and get them either to centre chin or else turn the head to bring the preferred eye more into line with the cue, but that would only be for a student who has poor vision in one eye.

I still believe determining the correct line of aim is the easiest part of the technique for any player who has a little experience and the really difficult part is delivering the cue consistently straight. Compromising the player's binocular vision I don't see as a correct solution.

Living in Canada and in the country I don't have access to the number of good players that you have and I've never coached a professional player although I have coached some good players and as far as I can remember the preferred eye theory never came up at all and they just naturally cued wherever the cue was, be it centre chin or to one side. I also found a number of good players who have the head turned one way or another and there was no relation to the preferred eye.

However, you would be able to get a much better sample than I can but be sure to use the check to see which eye actually gives them their line of aim and compare that to which eye they believe is their dominant eye and you might find that the two do not always align up.

Terry

[Manu147]

manu:

I mis-stated my original 'nonsense' quote. I tried to correct that mistake but here is what I meant to say originally.

'The idea that the snooker set-up should include having the cue on one side of the chin or the other or the head turned so the cue is aligned either right under or at least more under the preferred eye is nonsense unless the player is virtually blind in one eye, like Joe Davis'. If a player feels this leads to better confirmation of his cue aiming line then for that player it is the correct thing to do, however I don't believe it's necessary as it unbalances true binocular vision as it reduces the space between the eyes (in relation to the cue line) if the head is turned or else gives a slightly sideways binocular vision if the cue is to one side of the centre of the eyes (as for Jamie Jones).

Does that clarify it for you? Of course I believe EVERY person will have what I call a preferred eye which the brain will use for the primary image it sees. I used to use my right eye and then after eye surgery I had to switch to my left eye since I can only ever see a very blurry image out of my right eye and my brain (of course) prefers the left eye which (purposely with contact) is around 20/15.

When I look at photos of myself from the 80's and before the surgery I have my elbow actually hanging into my back slightly at the address position whereas nowadays my elbow hangs slightly outside the line of the cue. I believe this is me adapting my set-up to compensate for the change in preferred eye and also that I now turn my head slightly to the right to make my upper spine more comfortable. I'm not able to have the head square to the shot and be comfortable with the head twisted over to the left and turned upwards. So you could say I'm not getting the best binocular vision available to me.

I say it's not VITAL to have the cue running under the preferred eye but what I don't say (except in the mistake you pointed out) is that the idea of having a preferred eye is nonsense. In the same post I believe I did mention I use the image from my left eye for sighting and aiming when standing behind the shot and also when I get down into the shot to confirm my aim during the preliminary feathering and front pause. If I shut my left eye and just use my right eye, besides being pretty blurry, I cannot detect the line of aim at all.

I think virtually every professional player has the head turned slightly or else like Jamie Jones, the cue running on one side of the chin. The question is, do the pros and good amateurs do this to favour the preferred eye or is it done for other reasons, like having a set-up which allows them to deliver the cue consistently straighter? I doubt if a lot of the pros have every questioned the variances in their set-up and just use the set-up that is natural to them and what they have been doing since they were youngsters.

As a good amateur yourself have you adjusted your set-up so you can get the cue underneath your preferred eye and do you believe you are a more consistent player because of this?

Terry

All players i have spoke too that are using the cue more to one eye than other are seeing the shot straighter at this point, and in all those cases after i did a dominance test on them it coincided with which eye dominated sighting? so what examples or feedback have u found, im very curious?

[Terry Davidson]

I went back and edited my first post (page 2) to correct the mistake manu147 picked out. I ain't perfect I guess (although I always thought I was)

Terry

[Terry Davidson]

manu:

I mis-stated my original 'nonsense' quote. I tried to correct that mistake but here is what I meant to say originally.

'The idea that the snooker set-up should include having the cue on one side of the chin or the other or the head turned so the cue is aligned either right under or at least more under the preferred eye is nonsense unless the player is virtually blind in one eye, like Joe Davis'. If a player feels this leads to better confirmation of his cue aiming line then for that player it is the correct thing to do, however I don't believe it's necessary as it unbalances true binocular vision as it reduces the space between the eyes (in relation to the cue line) if the head is turned or else gives a slightly sideways binocular vision if the cue is to one side of the centre of the eyes (as for Jamie Jones).

Does that clarify it for you? Of course I believe EVERY person will have what I call a preferred eye which the brain will use for the primary image it sees. I used to use my right eye and then after eye surgery I had to switch to my left eye since I can only ever see a very blurry image out of my right eye and my brain (of course) prefers the left eye which (purposely with contact) is around 20/15.

When I look at photos of myself from the 80's and before the surgery I have my elbow actually hanging into my back slightly at the address position whereas nowadays my elbow hangs slightly outside the line of the cue. I believe this is me adapting my set-up to compensate for the change in preferred eye and also that I now turn my head slightly to the right to make my upper spine more comfortable. I'm not able to have the head square to the shot and be comfortable with the head twisted over to the left and turned upwards. So you could say I'm not getting the best binocular vision available to me.

I say it's not VITAL to have the cue running under the preferred eye but what I don't say (except in the mistake you pointed out) is that the idea of having a preferred eye is nonsense. In the same post I believe I did mention I use the image from my left eye for sighting and aiming when standing behind the shot and also when I get down into the shot to confirm my aim during the preliminary feathering and front pause. If I shut my left eye and just use my right eye, besides being pretty blurry, I cannot detect the line of aim at all.

I think virtually every professional player has the head turned slightly or else like Jamie Jones, the cue running on one side of the chin. The question is, do the pros and good amateurs do this to favour the preferred eye or is it done for other reasons, like having a set-up which allows them to deliver the cue consistently straighter? I doubt if a lot of the pros have every questioned the variances in their set-up and just use the set-up that is natural to them and what they have been doing since they were youngsters.

As a good amateur yourself have you adjusted your set-up so you can get the cue underneath your preferred eye and do you believe you are a more consistent player because of this?

Terry

[Izzyfcuk]

The problem with most here after reading "advice" is that they literally take it word for word.........

Sometimes a little common sense would do though....just saying............

[Manu147]

"Unless a person is virtually blind in one eye"..

Which Before surgery terry was NOT!

[nrage]

Nrage, terry uses roberston as his example, implying that HE believes roberston turns his head because of his setup and nothing to do what may be his dominant eye, yet terry confirms that until eye surgery was needed he himself sighted out of his right dominant eye (his own words), this is no reading between the lines, just contradiction.

"Unless a person is virtually blind in one eye"..

[Manu147]

You need to read between the lines a bit Manu. For example, what "theory" was Terry referring to in the initial post. If you re-read it with the idea that the "theory" is "that you should line the cue up under the dominant eye" then it all makes perfect sense.

Nrage, terry uses roberston as his example, implying that HE believes roberston turns his head because of his setup and nothing to do what may be his dominant eye, yet terry confirms that until eye surgery was needed he himself sighted out of his right dominant eye (his own words), this is no reading between the lines, just contradiction.

[nrage]

Terry your post on this thread on the 24th of july(2ND PAGE ON HERE), states "the idea of a preferred or dominant eye is complete and utter nonsense" totally contradicts what you are telling me in the above quotes, it doesnt make any sense to me.

You need to read between the lines a bit Manu. For example, what "theory" was Terry referring to in the initial post. If you re-read it with the idea that the "theory" is "that you should line the cue up under the dominant eye" then it all makes perfect sense.

[Manu147]

Manu147, PP and anyone else interested:

How did this discussion ever get so f*cked up for chr*st's sake? Particle...you have a lot of erroneous information and I'm praying that no one will follow your advice. It might be working for you but I believe you have very much over complicated the process of developing a good and stable snooker technique and I will further state I think you are improving through good practice rather than constant technique changes.

And for manu...I have never said I didn't believe in the 'preferred' or 'dominant' eye theory since I stated I myself use my left eye as I have to since my right eye is so messed up after retinal and cataract surgery they can't even fit a contact or glasses that work for me and I can't get LASIK (I have moisture behind the cornea and the vision changes not only day-by-day but also through one day it will change). The p*ss off is I learned to play snooker when my right eye was my stronger and dominant eye and I have had to switch to the left eye over the past 7 years, NOT an easy thing to do).

So here is my theory...take it or leave it everyone. It has been proven, even in people with no discernible 'dominant' eye, that every person's brain WILL SELECT THE PICTURE FROM ONE EYE OVER THE OTHER FOR PROCESSING, but that the other eye will contribute to giving the predator (us) binocular and spatial recognition vision and the brain will process the two images to develop a true picture of what we're hunting (in this case snooker potting angles).

Unless a person is virtually blind in one eye (like Joe Davis) the brain will select one eye over the other for it's primary aiming but still use both eyes to get the binocular view. My coaching theory is IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO HAVE THE CUE RUNNING UNDER THAT PREFERRED EYE OR EVEN MORE UNDER IT THAN THE OTHER EYE.

What is much more vital to every player out there is that they develop their own set-up and technique that allows them to deliver the cue straight and accelerate through the cueball. This 'ideal' set-up for every player will be unique to that player and it might entail having the cue on the centre of the chin or indeed it might have the cue to one side of the chin or the other AND NOT NECESSARILY UNDER THE PREFERRED EYE. All that is necessary is that the player gets the binocular vision so he can get the spatial recognition he requires (aiming) in order to make the pot.

I've also stated many times over on here...pots are missed in 99% of cases because the potter DID NOT DELIVER THE CUE STRAIGHT DOWN HIS INTENDED LINE OF AIM and has nothing to do with either selecting or confirming the line of aim.

To step out on the limb even further... I also believe IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER WHERE THE CUE IS IN RELATION TO EITHER EYE as long as the player uses the same set-up consistently so his brain can learn and experience the correct aiming point through EXPERIENCE. The MOST important thing is to get the cue aligned in a position where that individual player can drive the cue through straight contracting his inside upper arm muscle, his grip hand and latterly the shoulder socket muscle (not sure what these muscles are called).

For instance, if you're a 90-pound weakling and learn snooker and become a really good player and then decide to go lift weights and become a body builder as a hobby and become a buff 200 pounder you will likely require an alignment change to match your new physique. In the same way, if you decide (like particle physics) that your cue needs to be realigned on your chin then doesn't it follow that he might also need a small realignment in his set-up. (Or even better, perhaps moving the cue over underneath one eye or the other has corrected a slight mis-alignment that was there previously and now the cue is being delivered straighter?)

I'm afraid pottr has it EXACTLY CORRECT. I too advocate the 'KISS' principle with snooker technique and KISS means one of two things...KEEP IT STUPID SIMPLE or else KEEP IT SIMPLE...STUPID!!! The less moving parts you have to coordinate and ALSO the less technique things you have to think about is all about keeping it simple.

Terry

Terry your post on this thread on the 24th of july(2ND PAGE ON HERE), states "the idea of a preferred or dominant eye is complete and utter nonsense" totally contradicts what you are telling me in the above quotes, it doesnt make any sense to me.

[pottr]

How did this discussion ever get so f*cked up for chr*st's sake?

I was bored at work, fancied a pop.

Spot on as ever Terry (annoyingly)! I do know all of the words you use in your posts but for some reason I never seem to put them down in the same order as you do... Experience is the key it seems.

What did happen to Sidd?

[Izzyfcuk]

Particle

You should PM Sidd, im sure you two would become great mates!

[Manu147]

Particle,
I admire and commend you for the time and energy you have put into this thread but, I can't help feeling that you have grossly underestimated the power of the human brain.
For example I do not see cricketers running flat looking over their shoulder to catch a ball descending from the the sky at massive speed thinking F..k which side of my face should be be facing this ball. ditto tennis, baseball, F1 drivers,martial arts etc.

My suggestion is: Your delivery mechanism will let you down every time and not your eye sight.

Trust your Brain to controll your eye sight.

Distrust your delivery

Thats the whole point, most players instinctively are seeing a straight line because of placing that sighting line over the shot directly. Think this thread is becoming tedious now.

[narl]

If it was easy to deliver the cue in a stright line consistantly and stay perfectly still on the shot thats half the battle won right away.

Easy on paper though

[Terry Davidson]

Manu147, PP and anyone else interested:

How did this discussion ever get so f*cked up for chr*st's sake? Particle...you have a lot of erroneous information and I'm praying that no one will follow your advice. It might be working for you but I believe you have very much over complicated the process of developing a good and stable snooker technique and I will further state I think you are improving through good practice rather than constant technique changes.

And for manu...I have never said I didn't believe in the 'preferred' or 'dominant' eye theory since I stated I myself use my left eye as I have to since my right eye is so messed up after retinal and cataract surgery they can't even fit a contact or glasses that work for me and I can't get LASIK (I have moisture behind the cornea and the vision changes not only day-by-day but also through one day it will change). The p*ss off is I learned to play snooker when my right eye was my stronger and dominant eye and I have had to switch to the left eye over the past 7 years, NOT an easy thing to do).

So here is my theory...take it or leave it everyone. It has been proven, even in people with no discernible 'dominant' eye, that every person's brain WILL SELECT THE PICTURE FROM ONE EYE OVER THE OTHER FOR PROCESSING, but that the other eye will contribute to giving the predator (us) binocular and spatial recognition vision and the brain will process the two images to develop a true picture of what we're hunting (in this case snooker potting angles).

Unless a person is virtually blind in one eye (like Joe Davis) the brain will select one eye over the other for it's primary aiming but still use both eyes to get the binocular view. My coaching theory is IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO HAVE THE CUE RUNNING UNDER THAT PREFERRED EYE OR EVEN MORE UNDER IT THAN THE OTHER EYE.

What is much more vital to every player out there is that they develop their own set-up and technique that allows them to deliver the cue straight and accelerate through the cueball. This 'ideal' set-up for every player will be unique to that player and it might entail having the cue on the centre of the chin or indeed it might have the cue to one side of the chin or the other AND NOT NECESSARILY UNDER THE PREFERRED EYE. All that is necessary is that the player gets the binocular vision so he can get the spatial recognition he requires (aiming) in order to make the pot.

I've also stated many times over on here...pots are missed in 99% of cases because the potter DID NOT DELIVER THE CUE STRAIGHT DOWN HIS INTENDED LINE OF AIM and has nothing to do with either selecting or confirming the line of aim.

To step out on the limb even further... I also believe IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER WHERE THE CUE IS IN RELATION TO EITHER EYE as long as the player uses the same set-up consistently so his brain can learn and experience the correct aiming point through EXPERIENCE. The MOST important thing is to get the cue aligned in a position where that individual player can drive the cue through straight contracting his inside upper arm muscle, his grip hand and latterly the shoulder socket muscle (not sure what these muscles are called).

For instance, if you're a 90-pound weakling and learn snooker and become a really good player and then decide to go lift weights and become a body builder as a hobby and become a buff 200 pounder you will likely require an alignment change to match your new physique. In the same way, if you decide (like particle physics) that your cue needs to be realigned on your chin then doesn't it follow that he might also need a small realignment in his set-up. (Or even better, perhaps moving the cue over underneath one eye or the other has corrected a slight mis-alignment that was there previously and now the cue is being delivered straighter?)

I'm afraid pottr has it EXACTLY CORRECT. I too advocate the 'KISS' principle with snooker technique and KISS means one of two things...KEEP IT STUPID SIMPLE or else KEEP IT SIMPLE...STUPID!!! The less moving parts you have to coordinate and ALSO the less technique things you have to think about is all about keeping it simple.

Terry