aiming systems r like a weight loss plan

[BasementDweller]

No, a good coach sends the team home rather than allow them be sloppy in practice. I have been sent home for not being focused.

You really don't give an inch do you???

Anybody that has ever played a sport has had a practice cut short for being "sloppy in practice". However, I promise you nobody has ever been sent home for not being "perfectly focused". Unless, they are in training to be Zen Masters. Coaches understand that they can only get so much out of their players. Since 100% focus is not possible, it is the coaches job to determine how out-of-focus he can allow the player or team to get before he calls it a day.

At some point the "perfect practice" concept has to break down. I guess the theory goes if you can only maintain "perfect practice" (whatever that means) on the pool table for 10 minutes than that is all you should do. I say - THANKS, BUT NO THANKS to that and I press on until I feel that my practice is no longer beneficial. I promise you that I (and a lot of people) can still learn things on a pool table without being perfect. This is usually when I work on my kick shots. Now I know I could get better at kicking if I was more focused while working on it but my kicking has definitely improved even while I was unfocused during my practice.

The key is the diminishing returns.

I did say I might be the only person on AZ to think this way

:deadhorse:

 

[scrappy]

some people use cte and like it and that's just fine

others argue differently and that's fine also

my philosophy is develop strong fundamentals then develop you're own style, i have incorporated many things that i've seen and heard over the years and shoot just fine without using it but that's the point that is what works for me

 

[JB Cases]

You really don't give an inch do you???

Anybody that has ever played a sport has had a practice cut short for being "sloppy in practice". However, I promise you nobody has ever been sent home for not being "perfectly focused". Unless, they are in training to be Zen Masters. Coaches understand that they can only get so much out of their players. Since 100% focus is not possible, it is the coaches job to determine how out-of-focus he can allow the player or team to get before he calls it a day.

At some point the "perfect practice" concept has to break down. I guess the theory goes if you can only maintain "perfect practice" (whatever that means) on the pool table for 10 minutes than that is all you should do. I say - THANKS, BUT NO THANKS to that and I press on until I feel that my practice is no longer beneficial. I promise you that I (and a lot of people) can still learn things on a pool table without being perfect. This is usually when I work on my kick shots. Now I know I could get better at kicking if I was more focused while working on it but my kicking has definitely improved even while I was unfocused during my practice.

The key is the diminishing returns.

I did say I might be the only person on AZ to think this way

:deadhorse:

LOL, I am perfectly focused on the discussion. I understand your point but I think that you are harping on the "perfect" in the saying a little too much.

it's really just a play on words. As you know the original is "practice makes perfect" - someone twisted it around to say perfect practice makes perfect.

And conceptually what they mean is structured practice as opposed to unstructured practice, in general. They don't mean that if you have a day of unstructured practice or some unfocused practice that you won't get there. They only mean that to truly achieve the highest levels it takes practicing the right way and practicing the right things.

I agree with that and think that anyone who reaches the top without doing it that way is the exception rather than the rule.

 

[swest]

I have an observation and question.

If the discussion about aiming 'systems' in general, and CTE specifically, revolves around pure aim then I would think that it would be a topic widely discussed by snooker devotees, since pure aim would be more important on a snooker table, where the margin of error is smaller. Yet, I don't see this discussion taking place.

Why is that?

I found a lot of discussion about aiming on snooker forums when I looked several months ago. Not as much as here because here 3/4 of the discussions here are not really about aiming but instead are about people arguing about whether aiming should be talked about.

Discussion of aiming, yes, but discussions of aiming 'systems'? I haven't observed that.

 

[JB Cases]

Discussion of aiming, yes, but discussions of aiming 'systems'? I haven't observed that.

They discuss Ghost Ball, BOB and Fractional Ball systems. Those are the ones I have seen most frequently discussed.

I am sure that CTE would be roundly denigrated if someone were to bring it up on a snooker forum.

I might go and try some CTE on a 6x12 and see how I do. Got plenty of them here.

 

[swest]

I am sure that CTE would be roundly denigrated if someone were to bring it up on a snooker forum.

Why do you think that?

 

[BasementDweller]

LOL, I am perfectly focused on the discussion. I understand your point but I think that you are harping on the "perfect" in the saying a little too much.

it's really just a play on words. As you know the original is "practice makes perfect" - someone twisted it around to say perfect practice makes perfect.

And conceptually what they mean is structured practice as opposed to unstructured practice, in general. They don't mean that if you have a day of unstructured practice or some unfocused practice that you won't get there. They only mean that to truly achieve the highest levels it takes practicing the right way and practicing the right things.

I agree with that and think that anyone who reaches the top without doing it that way is the exception rather than the rule.

Alright fine! Maybe I was getting hung up on the word "perfect" too much.

The "I hate cliches" red light in my brain went off and I had to post something to turn it off. The funny thing is I'm all about structured practice, but I also see the benefit is those long practice sessions or better yet competition, were your not focused at all, you're just gliding along on auto pilot (well maybe that's being perfectly focused).

I just have seen several posts recently about this and it seems like the standard response it to only practice for a short duration because you will not be able maintain the proper level of focus and then you will develop bad habits. This goes against everything that I believe you should do as a competitor. Don't quit - fight through it. Don't get sloppy but keep shooting! That's what champions do, or so I've been told.

At this point, I'm sure everyone knows what I think about this and I'm sure nobody really cares. Not too mention, how far off the subject I took this. For that I apologize sort of.

So I guess I will give ME the last word on this. I guess I was right again!

Now what is this new fad diet CTE thing???

 

[JB Cases]

Why do you think that?

Because snooker players have a very rigid sense of how it should be done. Their stance is square to the cue with the chin over the cue so the sighting is different. They emphasize minimal movement and the shifting and pivoting is not appealing to the snooker style.

Also because there is little margin of error as compared to pool they have to be much more precise in their aiming whereas we have wiggle room, which we use a lot when we "cheat" the pockets.

Deliberately trying to cheat the pockets to gain position is a huge no-no in snooker.

I am not saying that CTE won't work for snooker as well as pool. I know CTE works on 4" pockets because I have used it successfully on a table with 4" pockets. All I am saying is that it goes against everything that snooker players are taught with regard to setting up on a shot and thus I think it would be ridiculed.

 

[swest]

...because there is little margin of error as compared to pool they have to be much more precise in their aiming whereas we have wiggle room, which we use a lot when we "cheat" the pockets.

Actually, when you 'cheat' the pocket, you are, in fact, requiring a more accurate placement of the object ball into the pocket. That it is allowed by having larger pockets doesn't change the fact that you are lessening the margin of error in that case.

So, as a cue sport which relies much more heavily on centerball striking and pure aim for results (as opposed to the greater emphasis of, and reliance on, sidespin that is more characteristic of American Pocket Billiards), wouldn't it follow that an aiming system such as CTE would be of even greater benefit for snooker than for pool? Not even to mention the, enforced, smaller margin of allowable error (as opposed to the luxury of choosing a smaller margin of error by 'cheating' the pocket).

I would think that this potential benefit would override any cultural differences that you imply exists between the two sports.

 

[AtLarge]

Last jan i went on a diet ... . I lost 20 pounds which i have kept off ...

Good job! Now please change your screen name to "fewer-cookies man."

 

[JolietJames]

I'm probably a B level player at best. I've beaten a couple champs in tournaments but in the long run don't take home first place honors because I'm not consistant enough to stay in the zone for more than one day. I'd like to experiment with an aiming system in hopes it will help me pocket those shots that cause me the most problems. Here's a question for anyone who has tried some of these systems. Is there a system similar to cte that doesn't focus on the actual contact spot alone AND does not require setting up misaligned and cheating back onto the line? The instruction I received years ago when I was more serious about the game was very sound. It had me taking my stance and establishing myself in the line that makes the ball. Nothing wrong with that.
Lately I have missed a handful of balls where I actually hit the OB exactly where I wanted to hit it. This left me swimming in a sea of doubt. My eyes are quite good so I think I might benefit from more than one way of looking at a shot. I suppose I could spend a couple hours a week practicing similar shots and maybe I can get to the point where they are no longer problems?

 

[Neil]

................

 

[sfleinen]

Good job! Now please change your screen name to "fewer-cookies man."

Or "cookie man-ette?" Nah. "Diet cookie man"? Nah. "cooke man Zero"? Nah. "Reduced fat cookie man"? Nah.

"half-a-cookie man"? That might work. "cookie man Lite"? That might work also. "Contents-may-have-settled-during-shipping cookie man"? That might work.


-Sean

 

[Druid]

When you use a system like CTE, or 90/90, the system puts your whole body on the right line, so those kind of misses don't happen. Now, no matter how you aim, when you first get to the table, you are not in the right line.

Getting your body on the right line is something I was taught years ago, and Bert Kinister went over this concept in great detail in his "Fundamentals" video. But it was never referred to as an "aiming system". Pool teachers I know just call it "stepping into the shot". Aligning your body perfectly on the line of aim before you bend down and "step into the shot". 99% of your aiming is done standing up getting your body on that aim-line. I even heard Johnny archer use those words when saying he was a believer in “stepping into the shot”.

CTE is a decent framework to teach someone how to get their body on the right line, but the concept is very old and can be learned many other ways. CTE is a tool to learn a fundamental truth in pool: You have to have your body in line with the shot.

 

[JB Cases]

Actually, when you 'cheat' the pocket, you are, in fact, requiring a more accurate placement of the object ball into the pocket. That it is allowed by having larger pockets doesn't change the fact that you are lessening the margin of error in that case.

So, as a cue sport which relies much more heavily on centerball striking and pure aim for results (as opposed to the greater emphasis of, and reliance on, sidespin that is more characteristic of American Pocket Billiards), wouldn't it follow that an aiming system such as CTE would be of even greater benefit for snooker than for pool? Not even to mention the, enforced, smaller margin of allowable error (as opposed to the luxury of choosing a smaller margin of error by 'cheating' the pocket).

I would think that this potential benefit would override any cultural differences that you imply exists between the two sports.

I don't know Sam and frankly it's not high on my priority list to find out. I have enough on my mind defending CTE here without being told I am a wanker by a bunch of people who already consider themselves to be superior cueists in every aspect of the sport.

As far as cheating the pocket requiring greater precision that's subjective. Because pool has pockets that allow for the ball to be struck high on the rail and still go in the opens up the pockets considerably. If you watch Efren play he uses the rails a lot. This sort of pocketing absolutely will not work in regulation snooker with the curved pocket sides. Balls do rattle in on a snooker table but they do not strike the rail from any significant distance away and go in as they do in pool.

And no matter how you slice it the allowable margin of error in pool is much greater than in Snooker due to pocket sizes alone. There is a window which allows the ball to go in that is larger than the ball and that window is much smaller in snooker, relatively speaking.

So yes, any system which did truly produce a line which sent the object ball to the absolute center of the pocket every time would be of great benefit to any game where the margin of error is smaller. I see no reason why CTE won't work on a snooker table just as well as it works on a pool table.

The system is mechanically consistent in it's rules and application. So if it works there by having the player do the same thing every time and the results are the same each time then it should scale as long as the parameters are the same with the table being twice as long as it is wide. I will try it sometime this week when I am at the pool room. All the pool rooms here have 6x12 snooker tables.

But I still think that it would get ridiculed and I think that you know it.

 

[champ2107]

i have used cte on a snooker table and on 7 foot bar box, the balls drop the same on all sizes

 

[JB Cases]

Getting your body on the right line is something I was taught years ago, and Bert Kinister went over this concept in great detail in his "Fundamentals" video. But it was never referred to as an "aiming system". Pool teachers I know just call it "stepping into the shot". Aligning your body perfectly on the line of aim before you bend down and "step into the shot". 99% of your aiming is done standing up getting your body on that aim-line. I even heard Johnny archer use those words when saying he was a believer in “stepping into the shot”.

CTE is a decent framework to teach someone how to get their body on the right line, but the concept is very old and can be learned many other ways. CTE is a tool to learn a fundamental truth in pool: You have to have your body in line with the shot.

I have said many times that any method of aiming which is valid produces the exact same shot line. It has to because there is only one shot line pe shot that works. Only one and no other.

Stepping into the shot is a valid method. It works except when it doesn't. And when it does not is when you step into the shot and you think that you are 100% lined up right and you miss.

Also there are some shots that are very difficult to step into because they lie at strange and awkward angles.

CTE is a way to be SURE that your body is properly aligned to the shot.

Even today I line up on some shots using CTE and I am not sure it's right. The reason I am not sure is because either I have never shot that shot before and so I don't know what's right or wrong - or - and this is the more frequent feeling - my instincts from the "stepping into the shot" period of aiming are telling me I am wrong.

But I ignore that feeling and go with the CTE alignment and the ball goes in. I can tell you with 100% honesty that every time this happens - and it happens at least several times in a good session - I feel a slight moment of disorientation and actual surprise that the shot went in.

It takes quite a bit in my mind to throw out the old method and trust the new method, especially when you are betting your own money and hundreds to thousands of dollars hang on your ability to win. For me I am convinced that CTE is definitely a tool that forces proper alignment rather than allowing the player to guess at it.

 

[Neil]

...........

 

[lfigueroa]

Everyone has to get one, and when it don’t work they buy an other one. I bought the south beach diet book and read it three times, and it still don’t work. Why? I think everyone can figure that out! It takes alot of sweat and dedication to set any goal. There's no magic pill or system to get ya where u want to be.
Pick one that u understand and is easy to follow. Put in a couple hundred hours on it. Then let’s hear about it. Not 2 days in the gym and all u ate was salad for a one week.
I hope everyone gets the picture.

I got my copy last Saturday and have it sitting on my desk. I haven't had time to watch it yet, but when I do I'll post my review, FWIW.

Interestingly, while at the DDC I had several discussions about this system with some world champion type players. I mean: certified gilt-edged champions. In fact one of them was aware of my previous participation in some of these threads and, unsolicited, offered his strong, rather unequivocal opinion. Like I said, it was interesting

Lou Figueroa

 

[JB Cases]

Well, all I can say is that I got my DVD and on it Stevie Moore says that he has been using ProOne for three years. As I remember it he put an ass whipping on Bartrum in a TAR Match where Bartrum said that no one on the planet had to beat to Stevie during that match.

I personally however could care less what anyone else thinks of it. I know that my game is better and come Valley Forge I am looking for action and ESPECIALLY against AZB members who have been less than polite about Hal Houle and his aiming systems.

I doubt that any of them will play me because if they lose then the shame will be more than they can bear.