Playing Pool with Glasses
JAM
I can see just fine far away. It seems now, though, I am unable to read things
close up. I have always had 20/20 vision until now, 150 over 20.
My question is this. If I were to wear these same glasses playing pool, I can
see a close-up shot just fine, but being able to see clearly on those
lot-of-green shots is difficult and blurry.
Is there such a thing as glasses for pool players? When I wear these new
glasses I am now required to wear for reading and computer, I am unable to see
the pool balls clearly at the end of a pool table. I can see the cue-ball just
fine when I aim, though.
I just remember that line in "The Color of Money" after Fast Eddie got his new
glasses and later said, "I'm back." I think that one little scene would be a
great commercial for a place like Lenscrafters or another eyeglass store.
I'm getting used to these new glasses, but it sucks when you have to take them
off. Everything then looks blurry for a while. I don't know how any pool
player could play with glasses effectively, but I am hoping to be enlightened
by others who do wear them and play well.
JAM
William Lee
It gets worse from here on.
Here is a link to a website that offers large sport frames.
William Lee
"JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20040521080135...@mb-m01.aol.com...
JAM
here on.
Here is a link to a website that offers large sport frames
Great website and full of information. I noticed that many of the glasses are
tinted for outdoor sports, but they did mention "billiards" as one of their
targeted customers.
I am going to check this out and ask my doctor about getting pool glasses. I
am unable to wear these reading glasses and play pool. I need to have glasses
that allow me to see close up as well as at a distance. Wearing these things
is a distraction. I keep seeing the rim of the glasses and smudges, and
wearing them really sucks.
I wonder if there are any great pool players who wear glasses, and if there
are, I would like to know if the glasses improved their game or hindered it.
JAM
Jim
Jim
"JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20040521080135...@mb-m01.aol.com...
Donald Tees
They say the eyes are the second thing to go, but maybe that is just for
males.
Donald
JAM
>males.
I shudder to inquire, but what in the world is the first thing to go for males?
Mike Lebron won the U.S. Open when he was 54 years old.
Karen Corr wears glasses, but I am thinking she needs them for distance as
opposed to close up. I am currently unable to think of any male pro pool
player who wears glasses while playing.
I am now thinking that pool as a sport is better suited for younger players who
can see well, are agile enough to bend down and make those reach shots, and
break like a cannon.
JAM
David Malone
>Is there such a thing as glasses for pool players? When I wear these new
>glasses I am now required to wear for reading and computer, I am unable to see
>the pool balls clearly at the end of a pool table. I can see the cue-ball just
>fine when I aim, though.
I don't wear glasses to play pool but I have a pair of custom made
'cubicle' glasses that would work fine with a small modification. They
are seamless quad focals. Top center is focussed at 18" for the
computer. Bottom center is magnified for reading small print. The
sides are transparent (ie. just glass) so I can see people coming into
the cubicle without jumping out of my shorts. If I got a pair made for
pool, I'd focuss the top zone at around 4-5 feet and move the 18" to
the bottom zone.
Anyone tried anything similar?
David "The Hamster" Malone
William Lee
"JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote
> >They say the eyes are the second thing to go, but maybe that is just for
> >males.
>
> I shudder to inquire, but what in the world is the first thing to go for
males?
I can't remember.
William Lee
redspot
news:20040521080135...@mb-m01.aol.com...
It sounds to me like you got single-prescription lenses
for reading/computer use. When I passed 40, I got what
they call "progressive" lenses (as opposed to bifocals,
trifocals, etc.) where the lens goes from no prescription
at the top to a mild prescription starting about the middle
(for the computer) to a stronger prescription at the bottom
(for reading).
They work fine for pool, as you look at the distant balls
thru the top of the lens and the cue ball in the bottom half
when you are bent over addressing the cue ball.
Progressive lenses cost a lot more, but they are worth it.
They also look a lot better than bifocals (no line in the
middle) and the transition from top to bottom is easier.
And speaking of "transition", I also always get the
Transition lenses that darken automatically in the bright
light -- a lot less trouble than carrying some form of
sunglasses.
JAM
LOLOLOL.
JAM
JAM
would work fine with a small modification. They are seamless quad focals. Top
center is focussed at 18" for the computer. Bottom center is magnified for
pool, I'd focus the top zone at around 4-5 feet and move the 18" to the bottom
zone."
If I had read that a month or so ago, I would think it to be one of your
eloquent and fluently written tales, but I am able to follow that line of
thinking on the different layering of "zones."
Moving the eyes from one zone to the next, though, would produce a few seconds
of strain when focusing as well as cause one to not move their neck and body
when looking to the left and right. The eye movement of it all.
And how does one know the amount of inches or feet before one zone ends and
another one begins on a pool table? I like the idea of the zone glasses,
though.
The side-armed player has refused to accept the fact that he needs glasses, has
the same vision score as me, ironically.
Those glasses of Earl's are tinted to make balls appear clearer, but I think I
would rather see true colors.
Karen Corr's glasses look like they are made by Cartier, the gold ones.
JAM
Dan White
>
> I am now thinking that pool as a sport is better suited for younger
players who
> can see well, are agile enough to bend down and make those reach shots,
and
> break like a cannon.
>
Maybe 9 ball. The trick, of course, is never to have a long shot!
I used to wear glasses, but I kept looking over the rim, and worse yet, they
kept slipping down my nose. Make sure whatever glasses you get don't do
that when you bend down. I eventually ditched the glasses, but my eyes are
ok without them. Have you considered LASIK?
dwhite
Tom S.
JAM wrote:
you think you got problems ?? I am nearsighted and legally blind in one eye and
farsighted in the other and wear lined bi-focals to boot <g>
the poster formerly known as Ratchet
William Lee
see gun sights, target edges, and lines clearer. Ever look thru a pair of
BlueBlocker sunglasses?
I can see that tinted glasses might aid pool also but so far have not been
as popular among pool players as they are with shooters.
Jam, your optometrist should be able to recomend the correct lens for pool.
William Lee
"JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote
>
Tom S.
William Lee wrote:
ummm its right on the tip of my ..... damn I cant remember either <g>
Tom Seifert
JAM
lens goes from no prescription at the top to a mild prescription starting about
How much does something like that cost, the "progressive"? Those glasses sound
ideal for me, if I can get used to the smudges and seeing the outline of the
glasses in my peripheral vision.
I am interested in learning more about the zone coverage on lenses and am going
back to the eye doctor to inquire about getting "progressive" glasses for the
side-armed player. One benefit would be to actually be able to "read" the
Racing Forum.
I wonder, though, if there are other difficulties associated with wearing
glasses when playing pool. Charlie Williams wears glasses, but not when he's
playing. Now that I think about it, so does Buddy Hall.
JAM
JAM
I've got an astigmatism in my left eye, the bad one, I guess, 150 over 20, and
am not a candidate for it.
JAM
Frank Glenn
jama...@aol.comnojunk says...
:|:Is there such a thing as glasses for pool players?
:|:
Talk to Howard Vickery. HyWyde (spelling?) makes frames that are
adjustable in height. I cannot play with my glasses (Bifocal).
Good Luck
Frank
JAM
>adjustable in height.
Oh, yeah, Frank, I forgot about Howard. He does wear glasses and has for a
long time.
I'll check it out. I need light-weight frames, not like Howard's, and I saw
some titanium (sp) ones I like.
With the multi-level zoning or progressive lenses, it would seem that the glass
lens itself should be larger than the new trend of smaller glass frames for
playing pool.
I happen to like the rimless, but I can still see the edge of my glasses when
wearing them.
JAM
pltrgyst
>I wonder, though, if there are other difficulties associated with wearing
>glasses when playing pool.
Depending on the source of the lighting, glare off the *inside* of the lenses
can be a problem. For some shots on some tables, you might find it advantageous
to wear a visor or a ball cap.
Willee mentioned an optometrist. Someone with a condition like JAM's should be
seeing an opthalmologist, not an optometrist. After the opthalmologist does his
thing, IMO, you'd be most fortunate to find a good optometrist who is also an
optician to actually make and fit your glasses, but I haven't located such a
person around DC yet.
The most important point, I think, is finding a good optician who can reliably
implement the opthalmologist's prescriptions. When I get glasses, I get regular
glasses, reading glasses, computer glasses, and sometimes bi-focals. The
opthalmologist writes a prescription for regular glasses, with a reading glasses
offset. Even an opthalmologist may be off on the reading prescription (which is
why I still read best with two-prescription old reading glasses!) or a
computer/pool prescription -- you won't be certain until you get and try the
glasses. And the optician is a pure crapshoot with the big commercial eyeglass
providers.
For pool, I think what you want is a pair of glasses with a range slightly
longer than computer glasses. Most computer glasses are designed to work from 2
to 4 feet. For pool, you need a range of roughly 3 to 8 feet. I was able to get
such a pair because the optician screwed up and made some computer glasses at
the long end of the range. A really good optician should be able to hit them on
the mark.
Bi-focals don't work well for pool for me -- very awkward for the neck if you're
a tall person already bent over double. And the problem with the graduated
(lineless) bifocals is that the closest focussing area is very, very small by
comparison.
Contacts are definitely the best solution if you can wear them. They avoid the
glare issue entirely, and because they're closer to the eye, the can provide a
wider useful range for any prescription. There are bi- and tri-focal contacts,
too, btw.
If your one eye is only 150/20, you have more latitude than those of us with
much stronger prescriptions, since the tolerances are much greater. The biggest
challenge will probably be getting used to wearing glasses at all.
-- Larry
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
rhncue
The lenses are very tall and rimless. They go an inch or so higher than your
eyebrows and the sweet spot is way up near the top so that when you are in
your normal shooting position you are looking thru the sweet spot. Your eyes
probably need correction for different distances. Most glasses are made for
correction for up close ( reading glasses ) or for distance or a combination
( bi-focal ). Glasses that are made for better distance vision are always a
compromise, meaning that they are only perfect for a particular distance
that can be anywhere from two feet to infinity. Shooting glasses are a
single purpose pair of glasses that usually aren't good for any other
purpose other than playing pool. The lenses are corrected so that you see
your best at around 4' which would be best for pool playing, when not
playing pool chances are you would need other glasses for everyday use.
The bad thing about these glasses are that they are heavier than other
glasses and since they are rimless they are much more fragile and prone to
breakage. Also they aren't cheap. I believe the company that makes them is
in Col. OH. There are a number of pro players who use them ( Grady Mathews,
Howard Vickery and Buckey Bell ) and I believe Buddy Hall was pushing them
for awhile.
Dick
--
Building and repairing of custom pool cues
for real pool players. Over 35 years exp.
Richard Neighbors 318 Linden st.
Cincinnati OH. 45216
PH# (513) 242-1700
e-mail di...@dickiecues.com
"Tom S." <rat...@littlegreenapple.com> wrote in message
news:40AE131A...@littlegreenapple.com...
David Malone
>Moving the eyes from one zone to the next, though, would produce a few seconds
>of strain when focusing as well as cause one to not move their neck and body
>when looking to the left and right. The eye movement of it all.
Not at all... because the transitions are graduated. To be honest, I
never have to think about which 'zone' I'm looking through. It all
works absolutely seamlessly.
>And how does one know the amount of inches or feet before one zone ends and
>another one begins on a pool table? I like the idea of the zone glasses,
>though.
You only have to know your practical maximum and minimum length.
Because of the graduation everything in-between appears to be in
focus.
I have better than 20/20 vision for distance viewing and really only
needed reading glasses, but I went to the 'Low Vision Centre' at a
local hospital on a recommendation and those guys are experts with all
kinds of vision problems and custom solutions.
David "The Hamster" Malone
JAM
>Because of the graduation everything in-between appears to be in
>focus.
I like this concept. I am going back to the doctor's this weekend and dragging
the side-armed player with me.
JAM
JAM
>much stronger prescriptions, since the tolerances are much greater. The
>biggest
>challenge will probably be getting used to wearing glasses at all.
These glasses suck. I am constantly aware of the weight of them on my nose.
I do appreciate the helpful info you so kindly provided about the choice of
doctors, and I intend to follow through and find out more.
JAM
JAM
>The lenses are very tall and rimless. They go an inch or so higher than your
I never knew there were these kinds of eyeglasses companies, but I am going to
pursue them.
The "sweet spot" may vary from player to player. For instance, Jose and Alex
lay down almost flat on the table when stroking, and the side-armed player, as
an example, seems to look down at the shot. They would definitely have to be
"fitted" for personal perference, I would think. This is all very interesting.
JAM
David Malone
wrote:
>I have better than 20/20 vision for distance viewing and really only
>needed reading glasses, but I went to the 'Low Vision Centre' at a
>local hospital on a recommendation and those guys are experts with all
>kinds of vision problems and custom solutions.
By the way, I did a little research. The condition I have in common
with JAM and most other people over 40 is called presbyopia - loss of
elasticity of the lens of the eye. It can't be helped by laser surgery
of any kind. And my 'graduated' lenses are called varifocals versus
bi-focals which have distinct lines/edges..
David "The Hamster" Malone
JAM
>with JAM and most other people over 40 is called presbyopia - loss of
>elasticity of the lens of the eye. It can't be helped by laser surgery
>of any kind. And my 'graduated' lenses are called varifocals versus
>bi-focals which have distinct lines/edges..
Just printed out your response and am taking it with me to the doctor, so I can
describe what I am seeking.
JAM
David Malone
<rat...@littlegreenapple.com> wrote:
>you think you got problems ?? I am nearsighted and legally blind in one eye and
>farsighted in the other and wear lined bi-focals to boot <g>
Actually, to be quite honest, I don't approve of glasses when playing
pool. I prefer to drink right out of the bottle...
David "The Hamster" Malone
Vader93490
>can see a close-up shot just fine, but being able to see clearly on those
> lot-of-green shots is difficult and blurry.
Jennie, have you asked your eye doctor about the possibility of being able to
wear contacts? If so, they might help out with your current vision problems.
Larry
>Actually, to be quite honest, I don't approve of glasses when playing
>pool. I prefer to drink right out of the bottle...
Hmmm... is that a 2), a 5), or both?
Karel
> I don't know how any pool
>player could play with glasses effectively, but I am hoping to be enlightened
>by others who do wear them and play well.
>
>JAM
Hi Jam,
I play with a pair of rimless spectacles where the uppre rim is
heightened. My optomotrist made them espescially with pool in mind
(he's a player himself). You might remember the one's Dennis Taylor
had made, like that. Frankly, they look ridiculous, are a tad heavy on
the nose and for that, they suck. Big time.
However, in the past year, since i started wearing them, i feel i have
improved remarkably. This may well be the 'new cue-factor' but amongst
other things, i feel that my improved sight has a lot to do with it.
Also, when you start wearing those, at first you will be laughed at by
your opponent, but when you clear the table in one swoop without so
much as breaking into a sweat, he will be awestruck, much more than
had you cleared the table without the glasses. All in all, i'd
recommend them.
Take care
Karel
Steve.
I swore off trying to communicate with you, but this topic seems
harmless enough (fingers crossed) and I can probably offer some
insight (unintentional pun). As you may or may not remember I wear
glasses and I shoot pool with them. I am near-sighted so my comments
are from a slightly different perspective (play on words, yuck-yuck),
but my advise to you would be to play without glasses. Your farsight
is good enough that you only need the glasses for reading and the
computer, you can probably see the close shots well enough, they are
still 3 or 4 feet away, a lot further than a computer. I have
prescriptions for reading, computer, and distance, plus I actually
read best without glasses; I just shoot with my distance prescription
and it works just fine. If I use my computer glasses the first 4 feet
or so are crystal clear, but like your situation the long shots are
somewhat blurry.
Furthermore, I don't think it is worth spending the money for
progressives even if you've got it (the money that is), they won't
help that much.
JMHO, from a guy who has been wearing glasses since his first license
exam at age 16 (was I ever that young?).
Good luck to Keith in Providence.
Steve. <== Ignore him if you must, but don't YELL at him.
jama...@aol.comnojunk (JAM) wrote in message news:<20040521080135...@mb-m01.aol.com>...
> Recently, I was informed that I need to wear glasses for reading and computer.
> I can see just fine far away. It seems now, though, I am unable to read things
> close up. I have always had 20/20 vision until now, 150 over 20.
>
> My question is this. If I were to wear these same glasses playing pool, I can
> see a close-up shot just fine, but being able to see clearly on those
> lot-of-green shots is difficult and blurry.
>
> Is there such a thing as glasses for pool players? When I wear these new
> glasses I am now required to wear for reading and computer, I am unable to see
> the pool balls clearly at the end of a pool table. I can see the cue-ball just
> fine when I aim, though.
>
> I just remember that line in "The Color of Money" after Fast Eddie got his new
> glasses and later said, "I'm back." I think that one little scene would be a
> great commercial for a place like Lenscrafters or another eyeglass store.
>
> I'm getting used to these new glasses, but it sucks when you have to take them
> off. Everything then looks blurry for a while. I don't know how any pool
JAM
>your opponent, but when you clear the table in one swoop without so
>much as breaking into a sweat, he will be awestruck, much more than
>had you cleared the table without the glasses. All in all, i'd
>recommend them.
Thanks, Karel, for sharing your experience with these glasses. I wish I had
posted this glasses thread before I went to the doctor, but I'm definitely
going back armed with new knowledge in an effort to get better glasses for me
and mine.
JAM
Frank Glenn
asp-g...@s-c-ellis.com says...
:|:Furthermore, I don't think it is worth spending the money for
:|:progressives even if you've got it (the money that is), they won't
:|:help that much.
:|:
I tried these, two different times. Made me sick to my stomach both
times (years apart). I gave them up for ever. YMMV some people like
them.
Frank <- plays without glasses like Steve
Carter Adams
JAM,
I was very near-sighted (about 20/650 in both eyes) and had
astigmatism in both eyes. I had the LASIK procedure a little over 2
years ago, and it fixed everything!
Have you checked at the real good LASIK places - places that charge
$2,000 or more per eye? I would not trust the 2 for $599 places... I
had mine done at the Emory Vision Center (www.emoryvision.com) here in
Atlanta - they were one of the places that performed the clinical
trials for the procedure. It is the BEST thing I have ever done for
myself!!!
~Carter (remove NOSPAM to reply)
hemicudas
Take care girl,,,,,,$Bill
"Frank Glenn" <nob...@quick-clean.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b1813a6...@news.comcast.giganews.com...
John W. Pierce
to get contact lenses for playing pool and other general use, and then use
drugstore 2-pair-for-$10 reading glasses over them for reading and computer
work.
-- jwp
Erik Jørgensen
> I wonder if there are any great pool players who wear glasses, and if
> there are, I would like to know if the glasses improved their game or
> hindered it.
Don't be discouraged, I don't know about pool, but there has been some
great snooker players who wore glasses. Fred Davis suffered from myopia,
Dennis Taylor also wore glasses. I know there are more, just can't think of
they're names right now. If they could see those long pots with glasses I'm
sure you'll be able to find something that works for you.
Regarding smudges, I'm not sure how you can help that except to try and
keep 'em clean, but regarding the frame, you might wanna look into goggle
type glasses. Dutch footballer Edgar Davids for one uses them (it seems
that basketball players also use these, but as a European Davids is the
most famous guy). A quick google turned up with these pictures:
http://www.soccertimes.com/oped/2003/mar07.htm
http://www.football-rumours.com/edgardavids.html
--
Erik «Macint0sh» Jørgensen * Web: <URL:http://killervampire.com>
==========================================================================
Hvorfor bør du quote riktig?
Les mer her: <URL:http://home.online.no/~vidaandr/news/OBSquoting.html>
Wendy & John
Frank Glenn wrote:
I tried (progressive lenses) ..... Made me sick to my stomach ......
=============================================
I tried some too, with unpleasant results.
Progressive lenses are ground for accurate progressive optical
correction from top to bottom as long as you are looking forward.
When the eyes are turned, correction is lost. With progressive
lens glasses you must learn to turn your head instead of turning
your eyes to see something to the side, and there is a feeling
of nausea in either case.
The most difficult thing about progressive lenses is learning is to
drive with them. As you drive, cars, objects, and buildings to
either side undergo continuous disturbing visual smearing distortion.
And if you turn your head to see your rear-view mirror, it seems
like nearby cars suddenly swoop toward you. It is like being
on an acid trip (from what I have read.)
My old mentor, Frank Lively (R.I.P.) refused to wear glasses and
he had cataracts in both eyes. I asked him how he could see
the balls to shoot so well, and he said, ''I just walk to the end of
the table and look closely at the object ball, then go back and
fire the cueball at the spot I remember the object ball was''
John E. Ardans Bothell Washington
________________________________________________
Donald Tees
> "JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote
>
>
>>>They say the eyes are the second thing to go, but maybe that is just for
>>>males.
>>
>>I shudder to inquire, but what in the world is the first thing to go for
>
> males?
>
>
>
> I can't remember.
>
> William Lee
>
>
Thats it ... memory. Memory. gotta remember that.
Donald
Dan White
news:20040521105637...@mb-m01.aol.com...
Are you absolutely sure? Have you checked lately? The new "no blade" LASIK
can treat astigmatism much better than in the past, I understand.
dwhite
Larry
>My old mentor, Frank Lively (R.I.P.) refused to wear glasses and
>he had cataracts in both eyes. I asked him how he could see
>the balls to shoot so well, and he said, ''I just walk to the end of
>the table and look closely at the object ball, then go back and
>fire the cueball at the spot I remember the object ball was''
Nice quote!
I'll put that one away with the old Big Daddy Lipscomb quote it
brought to mind: "I just grab everybody in a different colored jersey,
then throw them away one at a time until I've got the one with the
ball. Him I keep."
ridewiththewind
corrective lenses sine about the third grade.
I opted for contacts for awhile....the down side to contacts is if
the poolhall or bar you are playing at is either smoke-filled or it's
just dry inside, the contacts begin to dry out, and are more of a
hinderance than if you just took the darn things out. Ditched those
pretty quickly.
Back to my glasses now. However, I too am beginning to suffer the
'old eyes syndrome'. And will need to move to some sort of bi-focal
soon, I am sure. However, I have been very lucky in that so far, it
has not affected my play. I can actually see the balls and table
quite well. Now when I go to fill in the score sheet, that's a whole
different issue....gotta take the glasses off to see what the heck I'm
writing!!
My glasses have the UV protection, as well as an anti-glare coating
which seems to work quite well, as I have experienced no glare from
the lights over the tables whatsoever.
This probably doesn't help much...but I did try :-)
Lisa
Stoney
You have received some good information in this thread from several RSB'rs
but the key here is the dispensing optician. Whether you opt for bi-focal
or tri-focal correction or the "no-lines" variety it is the mid distance
adjustment placement that is critical.
If I recall the numbers correctly reading vision correction is made to focus
out to about 18" or so. Mid distance is from that point out to about 96"
and far distance is anything beyond that. What normally happens is that the
optician places the mid distance correction at the approximate center of the
lens in relation to the pupil. What a pool player needs is for the mid
distance focal area to be raised slightly so that when you are down on a
shot and looking at the OB you do not have to strain your neck to get the
proper perspective.
As far as frames go, choose whatever suits your fancy. I went through about
two or three 'big frame' glasses before my wife and dispensing optician
refused to allow me to have them. They were out of style and were not
particularly complimentary but I thought I need all the extra glass. I now
sport a more yuppie looking pair of glasses with rims and although I am
aware of the rims they in no way hinder my shooting ability. In fact, the
long and short of it is if you are 'seeing' the frames you are not focused
on the shot. Of course, the normal caveats of proper fit and prescription
placement apply.
As far as color enhancement goes, it works. Whether or not it is necessary
or would be helpfull in your particular case is trial and error type thing.
My driving glasses are color enhanced as my eyes no longer adjust to
alternating shade and sunshine (twisty-turny forest roads) like they used to
and the color enhncement helps with this. YMMV.
Regards,
Stoney
JAM
several RSB'rs...."
I agree, Stoney, and I have printed out the informative posts and am going to
re-read them again before I make an appointment with the correct doctor to get
a review.
My eyes hurt wearing these glasses, and I need to find an alternative. The
side-armed player needs glasses as well. Hoping all this "new" info will help
persuade him to give them a try.
JAM
George Starcher
"JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message > My eyes hurt wearing these
glasses, and I need to find an alternative. The
> side-armed player needs glasses as well. Hoping all this "new" info will
help
> persuade him to give them a try.
>
> JAM
JAM, I haven't really followed the entire thread but will offer what worked
for me. At my last visit to the opthamologist, we took care of my regular
glasses first (bifocals - large frame - largest available reading segment to
accomodate my speed reading).
Then I got down over his work bench with cue in hand at ball address
position. I explained that I wanted a pair of single vision glasses ground
to a compromise "middle-distance" prescription so everything would be in
best focus from the middle of my left wrist (bridge hand) out to about ten
feet.
I also got him to stand in front of me and mark the optical centers of the
lenses with my head in normal shooting position. This put them in the upper
third of the lenses just about even with the top of the nose pads.
The results were outstanding.
Hope you find something that works for you and KM.
George
Bob Johnson
for one of the eyeglass suppliers. Even though he wears contacts most of
the time, I've seen Varner playing in glasses before too.
--
Bob "4 Eyes" Johnson, Denver, Co.
bo...@cris.com
"JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20040521093515...@mb-m01.aol.com...
> >They say the eyes are the second thing to go, but maybe that is just for
> >males.
>
> I shudder to inquire, but what in the world is the first thing to go for
males?
>
> Mike Lebron won the U.S. Open when he was 54 years old.
>
> Karen Corr wears glasses, but I am thinking she needs them for distance as
> opposed to close up. I am currently unable to think of any male pro pool
> player who wears glasses while playing.
>
> I am now thinking that pool as a sport is better suited for younger
players who
> can see well, are agile enough to bend down and make those reach shots,
and
> break like a cannon.
>
> JAM
Nick Pesce
Nick
"David Malone" <mal...@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:40ae2e5c....@ausnews.austin.ibm.com...
JAM
works for you and KM...."
Thanks so much for your helpful info. All of the info on this thread was very
interesting and useful. I hope others got something out of it, too.
JAM
JAM
Vickery, who is a player rep for one of the eyeglass suppliers..."
I didn't know Howard was a player rep for glasses, but there is an untapped
market here for a potential sponsor, maybe. Pool glasses.
Just reading this thread, it seems a lot of folks who play pool wear glasses.
Some wear glasses when they play, and some do not.
I always thought I would have 20/20 vision all my life, but age has a funny way
of creeping up on one, and now I have joined the brethren of the Four Eyes
Club! ;>)
I wonder if any boxers wear glasses and how they handle failing eyesight in the
ring. Of course, most of the boxers, with the exception of my main man George,
are under the age of 40.
JAM
JAM
This sounds like it was custom-made for my vision problem:
"NearVision CK is the first procedure developed specifically for baby boomers
who have had clear vision all their life, but now struggle with reading
glasses. NearVision CK is a safe, minimally invasive alternative to laser
procedures for people over 40 and takes an average of just 3 minutes in your
doctor's office. This revolutionary procedure is performed using the
ViewPoint™ CK System, the only technology approved by the FDA for improving
near vision in baby boomer patients."
Thanks for sharing that link. That is really enlightening and gives one food
for thought.
JAM
Jack Stein
JAM wrote:
> I happen to like the rimless, but I can still see the edge of my glasses when
> wearing them.
It takes a long time, took me well over a year to not be bothered from
wearing glasses and seeing the rim and all that rot. I thought of
contacts, then LASIC, and eventually, got used to it. I can even play
with them semi-transparent from finger prints and bar scum... I've been
wearing glasses for distance for almost 40 years, and in fact quit
shooting pool when I got glasses because I could stand to shoot with
them on. Now they only bother me when looking for an excuse, and they
are great for that purpose.
I still only need them for distance, I can't read with my glasses on, so
I guess me wearing glasses would be like you not wearing them. I do
have a little trouble on occasion with unexpected english, probably
because I can't see clearly close up with the glasses on, I always blame
it on a bad stroke...
--
Jack
http://jbstein.com
JAM
from
wearing glasses and seeing the rim and all that rot."
I've got an appointment next week with the eye doctor, a good one recommended
to me by a colleague of mine. The size of the lens is important. These new
trendy glasses with John Lennon-looking frames are too small for my eyes. I
guess I'm leaning more towards an Elton John kind of frames, without all the
glitz.
I'm going over to Costco today to look at their frames. They have quite a few
designer frames, rimless and the rest, at very reasonable prices.
My brother, who has 400-over-something vision, is like you. He can see great
close up, but not so good far away and needs them for driving and the like. He
got a pair at Costco, rimless, scratch resistant, non-glare, and the kind that
changes tint when you go outside. He loves them, all for under $200.
BTW, they have excellent prices on designer sunglasses, Revo, RayBan,
Serengeti, and titanium Maui Jims. The $375 titanium Maui Jims are only $149
at Costco.
After I get my prescription redone for my eyes, I may head there to get the
actual frames if the price is right.
You'd think there would be some sort of eye exercises or something that one
could do to improve eye vision.
JAM
Jack Stein
> Jack posts: "It takes a long time, took me well over a year to not be bothered
> from wearing glasses and seeing the rim and all that rot."
JAM wrote:
> I've got an appointment next week with the eye doctor, a good one recommended
> to me by a colleague of mine. The size of the lens is important. These new
> trendy glasses with John Lennon-looking frames are too small for my eyes. I
> guess I'm leaning more towards an Elton John kind of frames, without all the
> glitz.
Most of the guys I know that wear specialty eye wear seem to have very
large frameless lenses tinted yellow. They look much like those sold here:
> I'm going over to Costco today to look at their frames. They have quite a few
> designer frames, rimless and the rest, at very reasonable prices.
It's been a LONG time since I had my eyes checked, probably around 8-10
years. The last time I went to some rip off place that had a big "sale"
going on and I ended up spending twice as much as I thought I would
from the adds. I'd rather get screwed right up front than beat around
the bush. This time, I'm looking for the add that says, buy one pair,
pay for two pair....
We don't have a Cosco in Pgh that I know of.
> You'd think there would be some sort of eye exercises or something that one
> could do to improve eye vision.
Of course there is, here is a site a stumbled on once, but never really
did more than a cursory read.
I think if you can get away without wearing them, you are better off.
I don't think you need to see all that good to shoot pool anyway. The
power went out the other night from a big storm, and I got up just at
dawn. There of course was nothing to do because when electric goes,
EVERYTHING is not working.
Well, I went in my pool room to just look around, and I could just
barely make out the balls, but only the high balls cause they had white
on them, and the cue ball. I threw out all the highs and ran them, did
it again, and again. Three times without seeing much of anything. My
stroke was smooth, position damn near scary. I was IN THE ZONE, and it
was barely light enough to see anything, and no glasses on either.
I decided there is a good possibility the eyes are not all that
important, and may even be sending TOO MUCH info to my pea brain when
the lights are on. I quit after running 21 balls w/o a miss. It's not
much fun shooting that well with no one watching, not even your self:-)
--
Jack
http://jbstein.com
pltrgyst
>I don't think you need to see all that good to shoot pool anyway....
>I decided there is a good possibility the eyes are not all that
>important, and may even be sending TOO MUCH info to my pea brain when
>the lights are on.
Well, it's possible that sharpness may not be all tha critical except on the
thinnest cuts, but believe me -- seeing the balls double is definitely a
disadvantage.
schwank
I only wear them ocasionally, and ALLWAYS when im shooting pool. Part of
the reason for that is because my glasses have small frames, and when Im
in my stance the top of the frame is right on the edge of my object
ball, and I end up with 2 of em.
Im looking into laser corrective surgery soon.
Tom S.
Jack Stein wrote:
Jack while in the Navy I learned from standing many night watches that your eyes will
adjust to darkness to a point almost as acute as daytime visibility enabling you to
pick out almost any object you focus on , but I really like that phosphorous algae
(sp) that on on a long dark watch can resemble a torpedo coming toward
you <G>
Ratchet .... err Tom S. ( I am so confused ) hehehe
Jtiche
could do to improve eye vision.
JAM
J-- there is, do a search on the 'see clearly method.' I really don't know
anything about it but I've heard their advertisements on the radio and it
sounds like what you're talking about. I agree, you can do exercises to build
muscle, slim down, improve your cardiovascular health etc. Logically it
follows you should be able to work on your eyes also. Good luck.
Frank Glenn
rat...@littlegreenapple.com says...
:|:Jack while in the Navy I learned from standing many night watches that your eyes will
:|:adjust to darkness to a point almost as acute as daytime visibility enabling you to
:|:pick out almost any object you focus on , but I really like that phosphorous algae
:|:(sp) that on on a long dark watch can resemble a torpedo coming toward
:|:you <G>
We used to wear red glass lenses before going up to the "darker" room
for watches. This seemed to help you adjust to the darkness sooner. I
would tell you more, but the I would have to kill you. :)
Frank
Donald Tees
Do they have a set that will make me young again?
Donald :<(>
Tom S.
Frank Glenn wrote:
LOL !! Same here my friend
Tom Seifert
Jack Stein
> Jack while in the Navy I learned from standing many night watches that your eyes will
> adjust to darkness to a point almost as acute as daytime visibility enabling you to
> pick out almost any object you focus on , but I really like that phosphorous algae
> (sp) that on on a long dark watch can resemble a torpedo coming toward
> you <G>
I've played under, actually over those black light tables, which isn't
as bad as one would think. The 8 ball was WHITE though, imagine that!
I'd much rather see a white 8 ball bouncing back at me than a damned
torpedo...
> Ratchet .... err Tom S. ( I am so confused ) hehehe
Don't be confused, be Ratchet.
--
Jack
http://jbstein.com
David Malone
<donal...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>Do they have a set that will make me young again?
Lol... I think you and me are a lost cause already, Donald...
David "The Hamster" Malone
David Malone
wrote:
>> Ratchet .... err Tom S. ( I am so confused ) hehehe
>
>Don't be confused, be Ratchet.
Yeah... please revert back, Tom. Whever I see Tom S. I think (thank
god for memory association training), "Rat shit? Oh, that's right...
Ratchet."
David "The Hamster" Malone
Tom S.
David Malone wrote:
Oh Lord ...' we cant be having that on our conscience now can we <G>
Me .... hehehe
Bethowmuch
Before I got XM radio and had to settle for plain old AM/FM all I heard was ads
touting call 800 ------- for stuff to make me lose weight, grow hair and have
immense erections. Sounded like they have something for everything.
Frank Glenn
betho...@aol.com says...
:|:>Do they have a set that will make me young again?
:|:
:|:Before I got XM radio and had to settle for plain old AM/FM all I heard was ads
:|:touting call 800 ------- for stuff to make me lose weight, grow hair and have
:|:immense erections. Sounded like they have something for everything.
I love my XM. 50's 60's and Hank's Place. YMMV
Frank
David Malone
<nickpes...@snet.net> wrote:
>Did you check this?
>
>http://www.ckforme.com
Wow... that's interesting... but... radio waves? I'll do some more
looking around.
Thanks, Nick.
David "The Hamster" Malone