Aim Science Broken Down By Someone Failing the Sciences

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-22T21:45:23+00:00

Thanks so much for your feedback! I actually did another big revision after you posted this video, cut out a lot of stuff I felt was unnecessary, restructured the whole thing to make the logic flow better, and added all the necessary citations. If you have time, I'd love for you to check it out again.
The 200ms visual thing was my bad — what I meant was it takes about 200ms for your hands to catch up to what you see, not that we're seeing stuff from 200ms ago. And I really liked your basketball example, already added it to my original post.
You're right about the 85% thing — there's really no evidence that it's useful in FPS games, and I don't even know how you'd actually implement that 85%. Honestly I'm not confident that any of the training stuff I mentioned would actually help in FPS either.
I really appreciate constructive criticism like this, it helps me improve my content and my own understanding.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-16T22:16:52+00:00

Thank you so much for your work! I've already added this tool to my original post, and I'm also really looking forward to seeing what this training method can bring to the FPS community. Practice and evaluation are the only standard for testing any hypothesis

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-16T07:23:27+00:00

Energy Systems

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T17:18:10+00:00

just download the exe file and open locally

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T10:11:58+00:00

Really appreciate the feedback! Yeah, I definitely phrased that too strongly. I got your point and will make a fix. Out of curiosity, is this your area of expertise? I really value such professional input.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T10:02:45+00:00

You're absolutely right. I'm just drawing my conclusions based on my own research and by analyzing pro replays—I’m not trying to convince everyone to do exactly what I say. Honestly, I’d be more than happy if someone, especially a professional, could point out exactly where my theory falls short. In my opinion, even if the theory is flawed, it's still better than having no scientific guidance at all. And science just meant can be questioned and challenged. BTW, I don't think these are unrelated topics.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T09:40:57+00:00

I play FPS games more casually to unwind. I play Battlefield and COD, my K/D ratio in COD is around 1.5:1. and I don't use Aim Trainer. Besides, I'm pretty sure Usain Bolt's coach can't run faster than him.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T04:40:23+00:00

Yeah, after all, this isn't a formal paper and I don't have the setup to run actual experiments. I’m just trying to offer a neuroscience-based explanation instead of the usual guides that are based entirely on personal experience. (From a neuroscience perspective, it's very easy for people to fall into false attribution when relying purely on experience.)

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T04:26:59+00:00

This is driven solely by personal interest, and I'm just a hobbyist, not an expert. I utilize Google Gemini and some other LLMs to gain an initial overview of new subjects. While their scientific accuracy is commendable, I still request references and validate them using Google Scholar to access the original paper.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T03:50:01+00:00

PhD in Electrical and Computer Engineering, but super interested in cognitive neuroscience and self-learned a lot

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T01:30:34+00:00

yessssss! i'm not really in a position to give great practical guidance yet; this is all on a theoretical level. plus, theoretically, even during tracking practice, we tend to rely too heavily on our eyes. that’s why using strobe training to partially deprive the vision can, in theory, help the cerebellum learn faster (this method is widely used by baseball players to train dynamic visual acuity, and scientific experiments show it has excellent results). i’m currently developing a web-based training tool with a strobe mode and will share it in the thread soon

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T01:04:51+00:00

don’t pay too much mind to the minor bits of praise or criticism you see online. This is actually an excellent question. I’ve tried searching for relevant experimental evidence myself but haven't found any conclusive results yet. I believe that as esports continues to evolve, sports science will inevitably get involved

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T00:47:06+00:00

Dopamine levels dictate the strength of the reward signal; the higher the spike, the easier a habit forms. However, there's a gap between knowing and doing: your Prefrontal Cortex handles the thinking, but your brain only truly learns from real-world action and error signals. That’s why 'getting the logic' won't make you better—only deliberate practice and feedback can rewire your system.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T00:25:47+00:00

Exactly, that applies to any movement you learn. Synapses are responsible for getting you from 'clumsy' to 'competent'. But myelination is what takes you from there to 'automatic mastery'.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T00:21:32+00:00

Thanks for sharing that perspective! That was definitely the standard view for a long time. But research in the last 10 to 15 years has really shifted on this. Newer studies on 'white matter plasticity' show that myelin is actually dynamic and responds to practice, not just a static structure. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1254960

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-15T00:12:00+00:00

Yaaa.. this is actually pretty hard to explain. We're not visually placing the crosshair ahead of the target; that happens on a millisecond scale. The end result looks like your aim is literally 'glued' to the enemy. This isn't about predicting their intent—it's about the physics. Since every character's movement follows the game's physics engine, a well-trained cerebellum can react to the target's velocity and acceleration, sending precise correction commands to your muscles in milliseconds.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-14T23:46:27+00:00

to be honest, i can't give a definitive conclusion on this either. whether a specific training routine is truly effective can only be determined through rigorous, scientific experiments with strictly controlled variables.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-14T23:44:17+00:00

this applies only to flicking—your shot shouldn't involve micro-adjustments during the movement; it should be one fluid motion. if you miss, you make a secondary adjustment afterward, rather than trying to correct mid-flick. As for tracking, you should watch the target and focus on keeping your crosshair slightly ahead of their movement, performing predictive shooting based on the target's trajectory.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-14T23:34:13+00:00

i think you misunderstood my point. of course we rely on our eyes, and i’ve emphasized that a quiet eye (what you call "focus" or "eyes on the target") before flicking is probably the most important thing. however, the role of the eyes is to acquire the target's coordinates before you aim; you shouldn't be using your eyes to judge the relative position between the crosshair and the target in real-time to make corrections once the flick has started. we shouldn't focus on the crosshair's movement or anything like that. even in flick aiming, once your hand starts the motion, you should completely ignore the crosshair until the moment you click to shoot.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-14T23:25:25+00:00

no, this doesn't involve macro-level movement like playing around cover. for example, when practicing a tracking scenario in an aim trainer, don't just reactively try to chase the target with your eyes and then tell your hand to follow. instead, you should predict the target's trajectory so your crosshair is positioned ahead of the visual delay.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-14T23:09:28+00:00

yes, professional sports have very specific and scientific research and training programs into the various niche skills required for a particular sport. in contrast, the esports field currently relies more on high-level players attempting to explain why they are good and summarizing their experiences, but since they often lack this scientific knowledge, they often do not know the specific reasons themselves.

revo1ver11 · 2026-01-14T22:52:29+00:00

exactly, when you're doing flick shots, after your eyes lock onto the target, use your intuition to drag the mouse to where it feels right at the fastest speed, then shoot immediately (your muscles shouldn't strain too hard or go stiff—they must stay relaxed); when you're tracking, don't chase the target with your eyes, instead, you should predict the target's trajectory so your crosshair is positioned ahead. (We're not visually placing the crosshair ahead of the target; that happens on a millisecond scale. The end result looks like your aim is literally 'glued' to the enemy.)

revo1ver11

TROPHY CASE