Dominant Eye/Opposite Hand

[tetricky]

Right. So how are you defining a 'sighting eye' then?...because I presume that you are aware, that wherever you position your eyes, your brain will use your 'dominant eye' for 'sighting' the balls - because that's what a dominant eye is. It's the eye the brain uses to gain positional information from your vision, and the eye that does not have a parallax error. So, if anything other than your dominant eye is looking down the cue, you will be 'sighting' sub-optimally - by definition.

Not everyone has a dominant eye, some people are more eye dominant than others. Nevertheless, if someone has a dominant eye, that's what is actually gaining the line and position information from your vision. The non-dominant eye subordinate to that (which is why the apparent position of something jumps when you close your dominant eye).

You cannot 'train your other eye for sighting'. Your dominant eye is the one that is sighting (that's what it does, by definition), you are just learning to adjust for the parralax error that you are creating by incorrect alignment. If you shut your dominant eye, then your brain you would use only your non-dominant eye, but you would lose other information (like depth/distance perception which is determined by the brain as a result of that very parralax error between the two eyes perspective). I am not aware of any cases of a dominant eye changing as a result of trained/learned behaviour.

There may be benefits to a more comfortable stance, and some people with a lower level of eye dominance (or even sight - ie no dominant eye) may naturally just get down even over a cue and there be no more advantageous eye alignment, but in the case of a strong and defined dominant eye I believe that you are wrong in what you are saying. Frank Callan does (or at least did) recommend what I am saying when it comes to the stance in relation to dominant eye - and more so it was one of his fundamental basic principles.

[Ramon]

Right. So how are you defining a 'sighting eye' then?...because I presume that you are aware, that wherever you position your eyes, your brain will use your 'dominant eye' for 'sighting' the balls - because that's what a dominant eye is. It's the eye the brain uses to gain positional information from your vision, and the eye that does not have a parallax error. So, if anything other than your dominant eye is looking down the cue, you will be 'sighting' sub-optimally - by definition.

Not everyone has a dominant eye, some people are more eye dominant than others. Nevertheless, if someone has a dominant eye, that's what is actually gaining the line and position information from your vision. The non-dominant eye subordinate to that (which is why the apparent position of something jumps when you close your dominant eye).

You cannot 'train your other eye for sighting'. Your dominant eye is the one that is sighting (that's what it does, by definition), you are just learning to adjust for the parralax error that you are creating by incorrect alignment. If you shut your dominant eye, then your brain you would use only your non-dominant eye, but you would lose other information (like depth/distance perception which is determined by the brain as a result of that very parralax error between the two eyes perspective). I am not aware of any cases of a dominant eye changing as a result of trained/learned behaviour.

There may be benefits to a more comfortable stance, and some people with a lower level of eye dominance (or even sight - ie no dominant eye) may naturally just get down even over a cue and there be no more advantageous eye alignment, but in the case of a strong and defined dominant eye I believe that you are wrong in what you are saying. Frank Callan does (or at least did) recommend what I am saying when it comes to the stance in relation to dominant eye - and more so it was one of his fundamental basic principles.

Good post , and yes that's the scientific explanation for the dominant eye !!! However, I believe the dominant eye in the game of snooker is the eye That dominates your cue action and consistentcy of ur sighting !!! as long as you have a good view with that eye, does'nt matter which one !! The right one or the left one !!
In other words, The eye That you use for sighting in your cue action can be considered as ur dominant eye in the game of snooker !! Which is a bit diff statement compared with a scientific explanation of dominant eye !!

[culraven]

I play snooker with my left hand and i'm right eye dominant but i'd been playing for twenty years before i new one eye was better? than the other.
Another thing is snooker is the only thing i do left handed everything else i do right handed

Exactly the same for me, can play the odd shot right handed, usually when I'm too far gone to get the long tackle out! Lol

[vmax4steve]

You cannot 'train your other eye for sighting'.

Yes you can, it all depends on where you place the cue. I am right handed, left eye dominant and use the left eye for sighting with a boxer stance to get the cue under my left eye, this is natural BTW not something that I force myself to do, but I can also force myself to play with a square stance with the cue under my right eye. It all seems a bit different but the fact that I'm using just one eye for sighting means that my brain receives just one image of the cue to place on the line of aim, from my right eye instead of my usual left eye.

This is why one eye is used for sighting, as the brain gets an image of the cue from each eye, and only one line of aim, it will choose one eye and therefore one cue to place on that line, it cannot place two cues on one line. This centre chin sighting is bollocks, there is always a major or slight preference of alignment of the cue closer to one eye than the other. This is done mainly by stance and sometimes by a turning or tilt of the head.

The brain doesn't always choose the dominant eye and this is obvious in many pros. Take a look at some pictures of Stephen Hendry, he plays right handed, square stance sighting with his right eye, but when he closes one eye to see if a ball will just pass another he keeps his left eye open, so which is the dominant one ??

[tetricky]

A couple of points. Eye dominance bears no relation to hand dominance. Different parts of the brain are in play, and they don't work the same way. There are more right eye dominant people than left eye dominant. In most cases a right handed person, getting down 'naturally' into a shot will put the right eye over the cue held in the right hand (the cue is on that side of your body, as is your dominant eye). This is (statistically) the most normal combination. This will happen without any form of conscious thought involved. The situation only becomes more complex for those unfortunate people who are right hand, left eye dominant, or vica versa (of whom I am one). In my case adjusting the stance so that my head is further over the cue arm (my left), and aligning my dominant right eye with the line of the cue, stepped my game up a level. No contortions necessary, just a slightly different stance (standing slightly more closed, bridge arm bent, and pulled towards my right side to draw the line of the cue under my right eye). You can learn to play without looking down the line of the cue, or without having your dominant eye in 'pole position', but is it optimal? Nobody looks absolutely directly on the line of the cue. It's impossible, the cue is in the way. It is entirely possible to pot balls and gain position with your head in all sorts of positions...but I've yet to see a pro who doesn't get as close to looking down the line of the cue as possible. The closer to that you are, the less parallax error.

As for your question regarding Stephen Hendry, he is right eye dominant, right handed. So why does he keep his left eye open when looking at a line? Probably his vision is clearer in his left eye (eye vision is not directly related to eye dominance), so he 'sees better' with his left eye, but has to close his dominant right eye to prevent that one taking charge and having his brain use the right eye for the line. With only one eye open, the left eye in this case, that eye becomes the dominant one with the brain in that scenario, because it's the only one providing information. I myselfam right eye dominant, but have better vision in my left eye. I do the same as Hendry in this....but that's where the comparison ends.

A dominant eye, is a dominant eye. There are things that you can do to sight with the other eye, but if they don't involve occluding (partially or completely) the dominant eye, then it the brain will use the dominant eye to line up. That's what it does!

[Terry Davidson]

A couple of points. Eye dominance bears no relation to hand dominance. Different parts of the brain are in play, and they don't work the same way. There are more right eye dominant people than left eye dominant. In most cases a right handed person, getting down 'naturally' into a shot will put the right eye over the cue held in the right hand (the cue is on that side of your body, as is your dominant eye). This is (statistically) the most normal combination. This will happen without any form of conscious thought involved. The situation only becomes more complex for those unfortunate people who are right hand, left eye dominant, or vica versa (of whom I am one). In my case adjusting the stance so that my head is further over the cue arm (my left), and aligning my dominant right eye with the line of the cue, stepped my game up a level. No contortions necessary, just a slightly different stance (standing slightly more closed, bridge arm bent, and pulled towards my right side to draw the line of the cue under my right eye). You can learn to play without looking down the line of the cue, or without having your dominant eye in 'pole position', but is it optimal? Nobody looks absolutely directly on the line of the cue. It's impossible, the cue is in the way. It is entirely possible to pot balls and gain position with your head in all sorts of positions...but I've yet to see a pro who doesn't get as close to looking down the line of the cue as possible. The closer to that you are, the less parallax error.

As for your question regarding Stephen Hendry, he is right eye dominant, right handed. So why does he keep his left eye open when looking at a line? Probably his vision is clearer in his left eye (eye vision is not directly related to eye dominance), so he 'sees better' with his left eye, but has to close his dominant right eye to prevent that one taking charge and having his brain use the right eye for the line. With only one eye open, the left eye in this case, that eye becomes the dominant one with the brain in that scenario, because it's the only one providing information. I myselfam right eye dominant, but have better vision in my left eye. I do the same as Hendry in this....but that's where the comparison ends.

A dominant eye, is a dominant eye. There are things that you can do to sight with the other eye, but if they don't involve occluding (partially or completely) the dominant eye, then it the brain will use the dominant eye to line up. That's what it does!

Then how do you explain those sports I outlined where the 70% of right eye dominance goes out the window because the right dominant eye cannot see the ball coming in from the pitcher or bowler. Yes, we could use the vision from our dominant eye in everyday life, like driving for instance but in snooker and probably a few more sports a player will train his non-dominant eye to sight by repetitive practice.

I just don't agree with dominant eye theory in sports but if you do then carry on because we've discussed this to death on here with no real resolution. Different players will believe different things regarding the dominant eye theory so more power to them. I think the brain can be trained to sight with the non-dominant eye and in cases where a player has chosen to use his opposite eye for sighting (or if it happens to be dominant) he gets the benefit of a more compact set-up.

Maybe you're right but then again maybe what's right for you may not be right for every other player and in fact as vmax stated above there are many very good players using their opposite eyes for sighting and they can't all be opposite eye dominant as the studies show 70% of right-handed men are right eye dominant. The study also says 70% of men have a dominant eye so therefore 30% are even sighted. The percentage with woman with dominant eye is a lot less.

[tetricky]

I'm speaking as a scientist first, and as a snooker player second. What I am saying about eye dominance it technically correct....the level to which it is influential in different players, of different abilities, will be a spectrum (most likely a bell curve, they normally are!). In the most frequently occurring cases, statistically speaking, eye dominance and handedness align naturally. 'Natural' snooker ability is also a spectrum. I see absolutely no reason that vision and alignment should not play a part in that. I have always had a nice stance and cue action, but I always missed balls. for me this was a significant piece in the jigsaw of my improvement. YMMV. As I say, it is something Frank Callan has taught. We all know there are lots of different components of a cue action, that make everyone different. I'm not telling you this is an absolute must but I am saying that looking down the cue, as much as one can, is a good idea.

As for your first assertion, recent studies have shown that not to be the case - despite many people believing as you do. The wikipedia page on Ocular Dominance provides this text, with accompanying references to some relevant studies:

In normal binocular vision there is an effect of parallax, and therefore the dominant eye is the one that is primarily relied on for precise positional information. This may be extremely important in sports which require aim, such as archery, darts or shooting sports. Ocular dominance and dominant hand should be ideally the same.
It has been asserted that cross-dominance (in which the dominant eye is on one side and the dominant hand is on the other) is advantageous in sports requiring side-on stances (e.g. baseball, cricket, golf);^[15] however, studies within the last 20 years have shown this not to be the case. In a 1998 study of professional baseball players, hand–ocular dominance patterns did not show an effect on batting average or ERA.^[16] Similarly, in 2005, a South African study found that "cricketers were not more likely to have crossed dominance" than the normal population.^[17]

I think the discussion is valid. I'm not seeking to undermine you, in any way. I hold a different view to yours, but am completely in agreement with you that this does not have to be 'how' you do it....but it may be something that helps some people, and the individual should make up their own mind. There are lots of little things that I've done, that have improved my game....but this is undoubtedly a significant one, for me at least. It is, in my view, contributory to there being no one single way to take up a stance and play well. We are all constrained or informed by our physical limitations and strengths....the important thing is to find a way that works for you. For some people this comes relatively naturally (and the prevalence of right-handed, right-eye dominant people may be a part of that), for some of us some non-obvious things can actually have a significant effect.

[Terry Davidson]

All I'm saying is 'it doesn't matter'. I think a snooker player will select the eye that gives him the better acuity in order to SIGHT. However, the AIMING process when standing behind the shot will most likely take the view from the dominant (or 'Master' from Frank Callan) eye but when that player gets into the sighting position he will use the eye with the best acuity.

I think a lot of the time a younger player maay have the same acuity from both eyes while still having one of them dominant however as they age the eyes will degrade in a lot of cases and according to the Wikipedia reference you gave it appear the degradation is most common in the dominant eye for some reason.

What I was really saying is not only does it not matter which eye is used for sighting it makes a lot more sense to me if a player uses the opposite eye to sight as that places him in a more compact set-up which is more comfortable. Comfort in the set-up is the most important aspect and supersedes all other consideration whereas having a more compact set-up is also a very good goal. You cannot have a compact set-up if you are using the same side eye and grip.

In addition most pots are missed not because the player selected the wrong line of aim but because he didn't deliver the cue straight. The only time selecting the wrong line of aim is when playing to a closed pocket where there is no room for error and the object ball must hit the inside of the far jaw and not touch the horn of the near jaw. For instance the shot most frequently missed by almost every player is the thin 1/4-ball cut-back black from its spot where touching the near jaw means the pot is missed. I think unless a player practices this shot and get comfortable with it they will select the wrong line of aim and miss even if they do deliver straight.

[tetricky]

As I said before...I agree that you can do it differently, and other factors come into play. Also the relevance to individuals will vary......however, getting down on the line (having walked into the shot) isn't all we do in terms of aim. We look from cue ball to object ball when down, and that helps us bring the cue through on the line of the shot. We can certainly get used to different sighting...but there may be better ways, and less good ways. For me, having the dominant eye over the cue definitely helps.

[Terry Davidson]

As I said before...I agree that you can do it differently, and other factors come into play. Also the relevance to individuals will vary......however, getting down on the line (having walked into the shot) isn't all we do in terms of aim. We look from cue ball to object ball when down, and that helps us bring the cue through on the line of the shot. We can certainly get used to different sighting...but there may be better ways, and less good ways. For me, having the dominant eye over the cue definitely helps.

Just to clarify...AIMING is done when standing up and behind the shot and a player would normally use both eyes (binocular vision) whilst using the image from his dominant eye.

On the other hand SIGHTING is the term used when down in the address position and a player is sighting along the cue. This is normally done with either eye but only ever done with one eye, not both and it doesn't have to be the dominant eye but I submit it will be the eye with the best acuity or if both eyes are the same then whatever eye the player PREFERS (thus called the 'preferred eye' for sighting).

I would say this is not an important consideration when compared to all the other considerations in the set-up. I just don't think it's worth bothering about however if a player is using opposite eye and hand he may have an advantage over a player who is using the same side for both because he will automatically have a more compact set-up.

In Frank Callan's book there are some nice action shots of the pros from the 80's. I noticed Steve Davis and Fred Davis have their cue more under their left eyes (both right-handed players) whereas Hendry has his dead centre with his nose pointing straight down the cue. Steve Davis is exactly centre-chin but his nose points about 20* to the right.

Now John Virgo on the other hand has his cue under his right ear (right handed) and there is just no way he is very compact. Very similar to lefty Mark Allen who looks the same from the other side. Could this be why Virgo was never on top of the rankings and only won one ranking title...who knows? There's something to be said for having the 4 points of contact between the body and the cue and that is a bit difficult when using the same eye and hand (in the case of Joe Davis you can add his tie for a 5th point of contact so his cue could never go sideways during delivery). He also cued under his left eye but that was because his vision was bad in his right eye and I don't know which of his eyes was dominant.

[tetricky]

....On the other hand SIGHTING is the term used when down in the address position and a player is sighting along the cue. This is normally done with either eye but only ever done with one eye, not both and it doesn't have to be the dominant eye but I submit it will be the eye with the best acuity or if both eyes are the same then whatever eye the player PREFERS (thus called the 'preferred eye' for sighting).....

This is the area of contention between us. It's only done with one eye if the eye over the cue is dominant, or if the non-dominant eye is over the cue and the dominant eye is occluded....because whatever you intend, the dominant eye will be used by the brain to form the position of the objects. That's what a dominant eye does, it's what makes the eye dominant, and it happens in your brain irrespective of head position. If your dominant eye can see the line, your brain will predominantly use the positional information from that eye.

How much it matters depends on the individual, and is probably as personal as a stance - in the sense that personal metrics determine what works for each individual. There isn't an agreed terminology, and it can be confusing. You can see from the Frank Callan coaching notes that he is very much talking about when you are down on the shot, not aiming and walking in to it.

[golferson123]

try and walk into the shot at the crucible! or my local club where my arse touches the next table,too many theories, I've said it before if you are playing well you can make anything work! you drop in and out of stroke all the time and no amount of prancing about will change it

[GeordieDS]

Exactly the same for me, can play the odd shot right handed, usually when I'm too far gone to get the long tackle out! Lol

I can barely hold the cue with my right hand it just feels wrong

[Terry Davidson]

This is the area of contention between us. It's only done with one eye if the eye over the cue is dominant, or if the non-dominant eye is over the cue and the dominant eye is occluded....because whatever you intend, the dominant eye will be used by the brain to form the position of the objects. That's what a dominant eye does, it's what makes the eye dominant, and it happens in your brain irrespective of head position. If your dominant eye can see the line, your brain will predominantly use the positional information from that eye.

How much it matters depends on the individual, and is probably as personal as a stance - in the sense that personal metrics determine what works for each individual. There isn't an agreed terminology, and it can be confusing. You can see from the Frank Callan coaching notes that he is very much talking about when you are down on the shot, not aiming and walking in to it.

I have been right eye dominant all my life however I sight with only my left eye and my dominant right eye is only supplying spatial reference or depth perception. My vision, without correction, is much better in my left eye due to eye surgery. I turn my head slightly to the right which brings the cue more towards my left (non-dominant) eye. From my own persoanl experience it's not necessary to have the cue underneath or nearer my dominant eye.

Even the Wikipedia article you used as a reference says either eye can be used for sighting especially in those sports with a sideways stance so there is proof either eye can be used and there is NO proof it's necessary to have a player's dominant eye over the cue.

Just play the way you like to and don't worry about it as whatever way you sight as long as you do it consistently you'll train your brain to use that with maximum efficiency. In other words it just doesn't matter but you advocating other players to try and use their dominant eye could lead to those players having to change their set-up from what they've developed naturally and that could lead them down a very slippery slope.

In Frank Callan's book even he states he knew a lot of players who tried to copy the set-up and technique of Joe Davis (who always said 'it's my way or the highway' when it came to technique) and they ended up giving up the game because they couldn't copy Joe. We have much the same thing these days with TV coverage and a lot of players trying to copy Ronnie or Trump or even Hendry when they should be developing their own technique and sticking to it.

[sharkster63]

[QUOTE=GeordieDS;849636]I can barely hold the cue with my right hand it just feels wrong[/QUOTE

Changing hands is not an option for me either eyes over cue possibly, going to give it a try. Cheers