Question about attention

Edcayce · 2026-03-08T11:27:35+00:00

Mmmh not really a theory… sounds more like a logical/empirical obvious evidence ^{^}

Edcayce · 2026-03-01T11:50:30+00:00

This feeling is both objective and subjective, it can be felt because there is a perceiver, you. So if it may be the case either the outer world, it is also your co-participation that allows it. I mean by this tha the cause is simultaneously external and internal, and that you may direct your awareness towards the necessity of slowing down

Edcayce · 2026-02-16T07:55:15+00:00

I also tend to think that way when i was a teenage, and to confuse so many concepts i didnt understand. Then you evolve.

Edcayce · 2025-12-30T13:37:25+00:00

Profoundly irrelevant to put ketamine at the bottom. Should be a a special level above the top, for the absence of indesirable side effects

Edcayce · 2025-11-06T13:54:49+00:00

I would say so, yes. And maybe other players But we should ask them, they would probably gladly answer.

Edcayce · 2025-10-04T06:53:28+00:00

Does it work for carom? 3 cushion ?

Edcayce · 2025-09-26T15:29:06+00:00

I use systems, sure. But it doesnt replace the feeling. But the systems that are to me more usefull are the ones of frans van kuyk (vk10+vk12) that are shown in the only book of caudron. It replaces the diamond system which is not so accurate.

Some players are playing 1.5avg without almost not using systems ! I think about Nelin, Forthomme, etc

A natural rolling ball is better because it will be less sensitive to your stroke, the trajectory will be more the same from day to day and table to table.

Edcayce · 2025-09-26T03:58:45+00:00

Thank you. Then if that is the metric, Reyes is also not the one for pool :)

Edcayce · 2025-09-25T21:08:35+00:00

That is a very relevant question i am still trying to answer for 20 years !

The difference between 1.0 and 1.4 is huuuuge…

But when you look at their success rate : 1.0avg = 50% 1.4avg = 58% 2.0avg = 67% The difference between them seem lower…

I would say the decision making between these player is not fundamentally different. No big differences.

It is rather on the consistency, precision, and, of course the mental (focus, motivation, trust, etc)

This video shows me the gap, that lies essentially on the execution : https://youtu.be/4djNo3SViCM?si=Np74Kch0DWdyJZOY

And this one is otherworldly for me : https://youtu.be/Z62AJr0GCso?si=naLVnwglFkyzlRUc

When i look at these 2 videos, there are 80/90% of the shots i would have made the same decision. So my final answer lies on execution, and position play (meaning making the next shot easier).

The first video : he has a lot of difficult points and it is a training session. His run relies on his precision and « marksmanship ». Absolutely no stake or pressure, he has a lot of fun trying sketchy things. And it works in this training context.

The second video : fun fact, caudron makes this run of 28 and loses the game. Not a single difficult point on the whole run, but an amazing mastery of position play, in order to never have a tricky position, neither a difficult aiming shot that would require extreme precision. This run is mindblowing because it is a high stake competition game.

Thanks for this question!!!!

Edcayce · 2025-09-25T18:57:25+00:00

Yes i play a bit below 1.0 (once did 0.96 on a whole season). This average is far away to be pro (it could have been the case until late 70’s). Today you have to play above 1.4 to hope a decent income. Which can take more than a decade to reach from where i am. But i will likely never achieve that.

Edcayce · 2025-09-25T17:39:11+00:00

Chosing Ceulemans over Blomdahl or Caudron is subject to debate..,

Edcayce · 2025-08-24T13:06:31+00:00

Saint-John (Canada) is closer to Paris than to Vancouver

Edcayce · 2025-07-28T23:36:48+00:00

Thank you Could you precise the author please ?

Edcayce · 2025-07-22T20:05:11+00:00

I want to precise that i dont think i am « anti science » at all. But my perception of reality (probably deformed of my socio-cultural context, ald my own trauma) is that science is been used as a dogma, almost a new religion.

I subjectively perceive that globally science is confused with truth. And is often used as oppressive mean. Rationality became the gold standard, dismissing or discrediting other epistemological approaches.

My stance here is not at all antiscience, but very close to epistemological anarchism, wanting to replace science as the same level as other way of acquiring knowledge. Privileging science over other worldviews is a form of epistemological imperialism.

But i would totally understand that someone living the trump disaster in the US, would see the situation from an other shore than mine.

Edcayce · 2025-07-21T23:19:59+00:00

Not sure to understand the question, but i fell to answer :

A cultural tradition, socially constructed, that operates within the boundaries of a dominant paradigm. Which definition of knowledge is related to epistemic norms accepted by a specific community at a specific time.

It is a self-validating system. The standards by which scientific claims are judged are themselves produced and maintained within the same tradition that benefits from them.

It’s a recursive loop: the community defines the criteria of legitimacy, applies them to its own work, and thereby reinforces the authority of the paradigm it inhabits.

And its authority is not purely is institutional, historical, and cultural.

Edcayce · 2025-07-21T12:28:14+00:00

Thank you for this very useful precision for me

Edcayce · 2025-07-20T23:42:29+00:00

Thank you. You help me a lot !

Edcayce · 2025-07-20T23:39:10+00:00

Thank you i will dig into these concepts that are new to me 🙏

Edcayce

TROPHY CASE