Because I once asked Stan about stroke accuracy and the fact that a true CCB hit is actually not common. Most players can't consistently hit dead center CB. Stan's reply was "CTE has nothing to do with stroke."
CTE Trumps CIT
- Thread starter mohrt
- Start date
Because I once asked Stan about stroke accuracy and the fact that a true CCB hit is actually not common. Most players can't consistently hit dead center CB. Stan's reply was "CTE has nothing to do with stroke."
What part of that do you not understand? CTE gives you the correct shot line for a ccb hit. Whether or not you can stroke to ccb is not a part of aiming.
So does that not answer your own question? How do you think that stroke is somehow not important?
This would hold true for any aiming system. Yes if you want to get real technical, a CCB hit with 0mm variance is probably rare. Good thing the pockets are twice as wide as the balls, else everyone would hate this game.
You are also familiar with backhand English yes? And how it affects any given shot? And you are aware that BHE is the proper way to adjust from CCB with CTE yes?
Last edited:
That's exactly what I say about my fractional method. The stroke determines consistency when sending the CB to a desired aim point. Except the aim point is actually in the distance, on or near the OB, like aiming a rifle at a target. With CTE the aim point is center CB, and I understand that stroke is very important.
I believe if Stan had hired a consultant to handle online CTE questions there would've been less ambiguity, more precise understanding. Most people simply read and take words on their face value without having to decipher what the writer's true intent or meaning really is. When a guy says "CTE has nothing to do with stroke", those words mean something, especially when he's referring to a system that requires a player to align their stroke to an "objective" CCB solution, or to an offset of a CCB solution then pivot or sweep to that CCB solution. What he really means is that determining exactly where to begin the pivot or sweep in order to arrive at a CCB solution is what's objective. Correct?
As far as Stan's answer to my question, in a vague read-between-the-lines manner, I guess he sort of answered the question in a riddle fashion that needed deciphered by a CTE user.
I use BHE, sometimes pivoting post-alignment, sometimes just dropping right down into an off-center alignment automatically. So it makes sense that once a CTE player decides he has found the proper CCB solution, any english can be applied with BHE from that CCB solution. That's never been an issue. Determining how to arrive at a "known CCB solution" is my problem with CTE, considering the fact that the solution is unknown until that final alignment following the sweep or pivot to CCB. That's a difficult concept to grasp.
1. Yes, stroke is very important. CTE gives you the correct shot line. The aim. But if you can't stroke down that line you will miss.
2. No consultant needed. The problems arise when people cherry-pick phrases and hen take them out of context.
3. Stroke and alignment are two different but related things. Stoke is the actual movement of the cue back and forth. Which is where many have a problem with staying on the proper alignment.
4. Once you have your shot line, aiming is over. The steps to give you that shot line are objective.
Not really. once you "get it", you then immediately say "it's exactly what they said and is simple, how did I not understand that?"
All one has to do is empty their cup, and just follow the directions at the table.
I hear you. Many great puzzles are like that, one key piece gets moved and the puzzle becomes solvable. I'm usually pretty quick at locating the key, but not with CTE. Maybe after the book comes out I'll give it a little more study.
CTE is not hard, its just different. Very different from traditional ball aiming. Although the steps are straight forward, its not simple for our eyes/body to adjust to it. It does take some effort to unbuckle ourselves from our old ways. It's kind of like switching from right hand to left hand when shooting a rifle, or writing our name. Although all the steps are easy, its extremely awkward until we put in the time to let our eyes/body adjust. And, I agree, the language hasn't always been crystal clear. But that is getting better as well.
Last edited:
Good post. It makes sense. And I can see how the steps (after a player determines which perception to use and how they have to hit the shot) can be viewed as objective. It's the process of determining the perception and any needed adjustments being called "objective" that make me cringe and wanna pick it apart. Lol. But I'm learning that objectivity seems to mean something different with CTE than it does with any other aiming system or any other technical matter. Instead of debating evolving definitions of words, I'll leave it at that.