In the first couple posts of this thread the argument of "grade' was already brought up. Call it a proficiency level.
Sure with grade 9 and practical experience he probably would certainly been above the "proficiency level".
He obviously honed his skills through practical ways just as millions of youth do.
You don't think that there wouldn't be practical experience attached to somebody proficient enough to pass a mandatory requirement level?
That would be one very drab child if all they had was knowledge without experience and wisdom.
You can't play pool without geometry and both have to calculate in their noggin the angle/spin/rebound/deflection of the shot.
One would be guessing the outcome the other would have foresight of the outcome and far faster in choosing the shot.
you obviously haven't been blessed with excellent hand eye co ordination and an athletic ability to
adabt quickly to most games, 'it is not guessing'.
And,you still don't understand that 'after' measuring and determining the exact
shot that has to be taken,'one must execute the shot', his geometry expertice
didn't give him those skills, that is where the person with the built in talent
to 'see' what has to be done, quickly, and can execute, will have the upper hand.
BUT, if the geometry expert, also has 'those' other skills, then he will be on
even ground with 'my' person, and his geometry skills are not needed at all, just
wastes valuable time, the measurements will be in his head.