CTE aiming.

[AtLarge]

... After learning Hal's Quarters System (my name for it) my game went up two balls over night....

John -- I'm wondering whether you actually do use Hal's CTE aiming method. From the post quoted above, and from vague memories of posts of yours years ago, it seems to me that you are/were using a fractional-ball aiming system along with BHE. My understanding is that Hal did teach fractional-ball aiming at one time.

Or was the "Quarters System" just one of the systems you learned from Hal? Or did you use that at some time in the past, but now use CTE? If you aren't doing, as Dave says

"see a CTEL--- offset your bridge and pivot to center"​

then you aren't using Hal's CTE aiming method. BHE can be applied after the CTE process, but the pivot that is fundamental to CTE is not the BHE pivot, it's the pivot back to the center of the CB.

Just trying to make sure I'm clear about things when I read your posts on this topic.

 

[JB Cases]

John -- I'm wondering whether you actually do use Hal's CTE aiming method. From the post quoted above, and from vague memories of posts of yours years ago, it seems to me that you are/were using a fractional-ball aiming system along with BHE. My understanding is that Hal did teach fractional-ball aiming at one time.

Or was the "Quarters System" just one of the systems you learned from Hal? Or did you use that at some time in the past, but now use CTE? If you aren't doing, as Dave says

"see a CTEL--- offset your bridge and pivot to center"​

then you aren't using Hal's CTE aiming method. BHE can be applied after the CTE process, but the pivot that is fundamental to CTE is not the BHE pivot, it's the pivot back to the center of the CB.

Just trying to make sure I'm clear about things when I read your posts on this topic.

I am learning CTE now. My comments were directed at the general discussion of whether CTE is even valid or worth learning. I have nothing to offer anyone on HOW to use CTE at this moment. I THINK I have a pretty good grasp of it and last night I ran a three pack using what I think is CTE and yes, there was a pivot involved.

For me using what I think is CTE the pivot happens almost naturally when I line up.

Again though I don't KNOW yet for certain that I am doing it the right way but I must be close because I was making the balls.

Edited to add that Hal's fractional ball system, the one I call the Quarters, still works perfectly for me and is also the nuts.

Furthermore, after watching Dave's youtube video on CTE pivots I get it fully. The entire key to this is that it's NOT a pivot at the bridge hand. The bridge hand is not the fulcrum. To me using the Center of the cueball and sighting to the Edge of the object ball is the way accurately align myself to those two balls in relation to the pocket. Then the pivot (or shift) that occurs is the same as stepping into the shot line with other methods.

At least that is how I see it after two days of playing around with it. I understand the term "air pivot" to mean when a player shifts the body and cue to the shot line as they are going down on the shot. To the untrained eye this looks like nothing unusual as it's a fluid motion. This is what I do and I started doing it pretty much automatically when trying CTE.

A while back I was under the false assumption on my part that the "pivot" that was being talked about was the same pivot that I do when using backhand english. It's not and this is the key. Where on some methods of aiming, ghost ball being one of them you should step into the shot line from the same line as if you are a point on that line with CTE you sort of slide into the shot line from the side. At least this is the best way I can say it.

If you superimpose two players over one another - one who stepped into the shot line and the other who pivoted (shifted) in then their two cues will be laying on top of each other identically. Their exact body placement, feet, head, arms....might be slightly different but the two cues will be perfectly in line.

I have tested this against the quarters system, against the system I am using that I think is CTE, against another method taught to me by a road player using ghost ball as the control. It works. When I mount my overhead camera next month I will prove it using other players, better players than myself.

 

[cookie man]

delete...........

 

[dr_dave]

Hey guys, here's what I'll do. I'll deliver a webinar on CTE and the mechanics involved. I'll deliver it pro-like with PPT and nice live video. I'll charge $50/person (via paypal). I'll only do it if there are at least 10 people interested. Otherwise, I'll keep responding to these posts until I get bored of it.

Here's how I'll use the money:

25% me (only because I'd put my time in to do this first-class)
75% Donate to Sunny and Hal for changing our lives with this information. Nothing would make me happier than showing up with an envelope full of $ and handing it to Hal and surprising him.

PM me if interested.
Dave

Man, I've been waiting for this day to come!

Jim

I think Spidey should also do a book with Kevin Trudeau:

"The CTE Cure ... All of the Secrets the Pros Don't Want You to Know"
​

He should at least start an "instructor training program" pyramid scheme.

Regards,
Dave

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I think Spidey should also do a book with Kevin Trudeau:

"The CTE Cure ... All of the Secrets the Pros Don't Want You to Know"
​

He should at least start an "instructor training program" pyramid scheme.

Regards,
Dave

WHOA----- what a minute here. Weren't you the one wanting all the answers???? Why did you bother wasting your time posting in 30 pages of this thread!? Now that you bugged me to the point of actually doing something you throw out a comment like that?

Your comment confirms what I've known all along--- that

1) You don't want to learn it

2) You've been knocking it for so long you can't hack the thought of it being legit . You're so vested in arguing against it - you're about to lose a ton of face

3) When that guy posted the math behind most of it (without the circular geometry to calibrate the bridge distance and offset), out of nowhere you no "speaka no english" and immediately got "BUSY" with "REAL" work even though you've been hitting refresh in your browser constantly to make sure you were up to date and posting in the other 30 pages


Now that a lot of good info popped up in the math thread (although incomplete) and I'm about to deliver a session on it, you knock me with your crap. I hope most Azers can pick up on this.

Unfortunately for you, the time is near for everyone to get educated. GOD are you a hater! Hating on me won't make you play better, Dr. Dave.

This info I'm about to deliver online is why I'd be sick if you got to 35 before I got to 100 in 14.1

Unreal. Hate away and keep DAMing your balls into the rail.
Dave

"CTE--- WHAT DR. DAVE DOESNT WANT YOU TO KNOW"

 

[dr_dave]

I was just "pulling your leg" and "jerking your chain" like you often do.

I hope you realize I wasn't serious.

I do appreciate how much effort you are putting into trying to better refine and explain your version of CTE. That is helpful.

Regards,
Dave

WHOA----- what a minute here. Weren't you the one wanting all the answers???? Why did you bother wasting your time posting in 30 pages of this thread!? Now that you bugged me to the point of actually doing something you throw out a comment like that?

Your comment confirms what I've known all along--- that

1) You don't want to learn it

2) You've been knocking it for so long you can't hack the thought of it being legit . You're so vested in arguing against it - you're about to lose a ton of face

3) When that guy posted the math behind most of it (without the circular geometry to calibrate the bridge distance and offset), out of nowhere you no "speaka no english" and immediately got "BUSY" with "REAL" work even though you've been hitting refresh in your browser constantly to make sure you were up to date and posting in the other 30 pages


Now that a lot of good info popped up in the math thread (although incomplete) and I'm about to deliver a session on it, you knock me with your crap. I hope most Azers can pick up on this.

Unfortunately for you, the time is near for everyone to get educated. GOD are you a hater! Hating on me won't make you play better, Dr. Dave.

This info I'm about to deliver online is why I'd be sick if you got to 35 before I got to 100 in 14.1

Unreal. Hate away and keep DAMing your balls into the rail.
Dave

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I was just "pulling your leg" and "jerking your chain" like you often do.

I hope you realize I wasn't serious.

I do appreciate how much effort you are putting into trying to better refine and explain your version of CTE. That is helpful.

Regards,
Dave

The tone of your other post sure didn't seem like you were pulling any legs. I read it 5x before responding. But, thanks for clearing that up. It was the use of 'pyramid scheme' that was easy to be taken the wrong way - as if I'm a con artist. Not to mention, putting me in the same sentence as that F@#K after I lost a TON of $$$$ on the IPT pushes my "RAM" button to the extreme. Maybe you didn't know that - but you do now.

Let me ask you this--

Do you still think CTE is inferior or less mathematically accurate as ghostball? Do you still consider it an approximation system, or are you starting to think otherwise? For me, finding a spot off 1 1/8" off the face of a sphere is the epitome of approximating- but I just wanted to pick your brain since a little info is starting to bubble up.

Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Do you still think CTE is inferior or less mathematically accurate as ghostball? Do you still consider it an approximation system, or are you starting to think otherwise?

No "aiming system" is perfect.

Honestly, every version of CTE I've seen described so far is still "incomplete," IMO. However, I do look forward to seeing what you eventually post on your blog. It is difficult to comment any further until I see a definitive CTE system described and illustrated to the point where it is clear how it is used to accurately and consistently aim a wide range of shots. I have not seen that yet.

Regards,
Dave

 

[CocoboloCowboy]

.

Honestly, every version of CTE I've seen described so far is still "incomplete," IMO. However, I do look forward to seeing what you eventually post on your blog. It is difficult to comment any further until I see a definitive CTE system described and illustrated to the point where it is clear how it is used to accurately and consistently aim a wide range of shots. I have not seen that yet.

Regards,
Dave

I am glad you said, No "aiming system" is perfect honestly no matter how perfect a system may be don't you have to factor in:

Cue Ball Speed

Throw

Spin/English

Cloth Speed

Ball Condition be they Clean or Dirty

and other factors.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

No "aiming system" is perfect.

Honestly, every version of CTE I've seen described so far is still "incomplete," IMO. However, I do look forward to seeing what you eventually post on your blog. It is difficult to comment any further until I see a definitive CTE system described and illustrated to the point where it is clear how it is used to accurately and consistently aim a wide range of shots. I have not seen that yet.

Regards,
Dave

Is ghostball an approximation system?

 

[Fast Lenny]

I will say this that I am unsure how many aiming methods are out there but there are pros out there using them and then you have others who go on feel/experience and the ghost ball along with other stuff. I was a person who was guessing so to speak, I got taught what the teacher called a shaft method which I am not sure if that is CTE or not as I have not got deep into all this as I have been so busy as of late and dont want to get all mixed up with what I am using now, but if its the same then I will get more into it.

I am still learning it but my game has jumped up quite a bit, I had to trust it and practice it, not doubt it, I gave it a fair shot and I am playing better then ever. I guess I could set up my camera and show you how this shaft method works but I am still learning but for some shots I might use center of the shaft to the left edge of the ball, right side of the shaft or left side of the shaft to the left edge of the ball and vice versa, I still need to continue to fine tune it but it works for sure.

For a spot shot I take my cue ball and put it in the kitchen, one diamond from the side rail and 2 diamonds up from the end rail, when shooting the spot shot I am shooting center shaft to the left edge of the ball to pocket it in the right hand corner, try it and tell me if it works for you.

 

[JoeyA]

Perfect Aim

I am glad you said, No "aiming system" is perfect honestly no matter how perfect a system may be don't you have to factor in:

Cue Ball Speed

Throw

Spin/English

Cloth Speed

Ball Condition be they Clean or Dirty

and other factors.

That's not true! There is an aiming system which is even called PERFECT AIM and if you line up like it says, well, it's PERFECT.

JoeyA

 

[JoeyA]

I think Spidey should also do a book with Kevin Trudeau:

"The CTE Cure ... All of the Secrets the Pros Don't Want You to Know"
​

He should at least start an "instructor training program" pyramid scheme.

Regards,
Dave

WOW! And not a smiley face in the whole post.
Lucky Joe

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I will say this that I am unsure how many aiming methods are out there but there are pros out there using them and then you have others who go on feel/experience and the ghost ball along with other stuff. I was a person who was guessing so to speak, I got taught what the teacher called a shaft method which I am not sure if that is CTE or not as I have not got deep into all this as I have been so busy as of late and dont want to get all mixed up with what I am using now, but if its the same then I will get more into it.

I am still learning it but my game has jumped up quite a bit, I had to trust it and practice it, not doubt it, I gave it a fair shot and I am playing better then ever. I guess I could set up my camera and show you how this shaft method works but I am still learning but for some shots I might use center of the shaft to the left edge of the ball, right side of the shaft or left side of the shaft to the left edge of the ball and vice versa, I still need to continue to fine tune it but it works for sure.

For a spot shot I take my cue ball and put it in the kitchen, one diamond from the side rail and 2 diamonds up from the end rail, when shooting the spot shot I am shooting center shaft to the left edge of the ball to pocket it in the right hand corner, try it and tell me if it works for you.

From that position, you can also sight CB center to OB center with your tip at the center, and hip-pivot 1/2 tip to the outside. That way, the solution includes outside english to get to where you're going.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

WOW! And not a smiley face in the whole post.
Lucky Joe

That was my point. I read it multiple times before going off the deep end. I don't mind people busting my balls - bust away. But include a smiley if you're not trying to get personal.

 

[JoeyA]

I will say this that I am unsure how many aiming methods are out there but there are pros out there using them and then you have others who go on feel/experience and the ghost ball along with other stuff. I was a person who was guessing so to speak, I got taught what the teacher called a shaft method which I am not sure if that is CTE or not as I have not got deep into all this as I have been so busy as of late and dont want to get all mixed up with what I am using now, but if its the same then I will get more into it.

I am still learning it but my game has jumped up quite a bit, I had to trust it and practice it, not doubt it, I gave it a fair shot and I am playing better then ever. I guess I could set up my camera and show you how this shaft method works but I am still learning but for some shots I might use center of the shaft to the left edge of the ball, right side of the shaft or left side of the shaft to the left edge of the ball and vice versa, I still need to continue to fine tune it but it works for sure.

For a spot shot I take my cue ball and put it in the kitchen, one diamond from the side rail and 2 diamonds up from the end rail, when shooting the spot shot I am shooting center shaft to the left edge of the ball to pocket it in the right hand corner, try it and tell me if it works for you.

That spot shot is the exact shot that Hillbilly (Charlie Bryant, of www.hillbillyonthehill.com shared on my livestream from Galveston, TX and IT DOES WORK as long as you stroke correctly. :smile:
JoeyA

 

[dr_dave]

Is ghostball an approximation system?

First of all, we should be clear what you mean by the "ghost-ball system." FYI, I have a complete description with an illustration, article links, and video demos here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#ghost​

Now, many things can go wrong with the ghost-ball system, as is the case with any "system" (e.g., contact-point-to-contact-point, double-the-distance, or any other system based on "ghost ball"). Some people will have trouble visualizing the necessary contact point on the OB. People with this difficulty will probably have trouble with any "system." Some people will have trouble visualizing the center of the ghost ball (although, I have some resources to help with this here). And some people will not understand how and when to adjust for cut-induced-throw (CIT). And most people will not be able to compensate the aim perfectly for squirt, swerve, and throw when using English.

Therefore, the answer to your question is: yes. The "ghost-ball system" (or any system based on "ghost ball") is an approximate system (depending on how you define "approximate system.")

Now, what distinguishes ghost-ball-based systems from limited-reference-line systems like CTE, 90/90, and fractional ball, is "geometric validity" over a wide range of shots. The ghost-ball systems do result in an exact line of aim if the contact points and/or ghost-ball center are visualized properly. And the systems work (geometrically anyway) for shots of any distance (CB-to-OB and OB-to-pocket and CB-to-pocket) and any angle (i.e., for any relative positions of the CB, OB, and pocket). This cannot be said for the limited-reference-line systems unless something is "adjusted" (e.g., vary the bridge length or the "effective pivot length" based on the ball distances and/or amount of cut needed).

All systems require "visual intelligence" (i.e., the ability to perceive points, lines, and angles in 3D), but some systems also need judgment and adjustments beyond the visualization requirements (e.g., because they are not "geometrically valid" over a wide range of shots).

Again, I haven't seen a complete description (with a detailed and clear procedure), illustration, and demonstration of your version of CTE, so I don't know if it fits in the category of the others or not. However, I do look forward to seeing what you eventually post on your blog.

Regards,
Dave

 

[SpiderWebComm]

First of all, we should be clear what you mean by the "ghost-ball system." FYI, I have a complete description with an illustration, article links, and video demos here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#ghost​

Now, many things can go wrong with the ghost-ball system, as is the case with any "system" (e.g., contact-point-to-contact-point, double-the-distance, or any other system based on "ghost ball"). Some people will have trouble visualizing the necessary contact point on the OB. People with this difficulty will probably have trouble with any "system." Some people will have trouble visualizing the center of the ghost ball (although, I have some resources to help with this here). And some people will not understand how and when to adjust for cut-induced-throw (CIT). And most people will not be able to compensate the aim perfectly for squirt, swerve, and throw when using English.

Therefore, the answer to your question is: yes. The "ghost-ball system" (or any system based on "ghost ball") is an approximate system (depending on how you define "approximate system.")

Now, what distinguishes ghost-ball-based systems from limited-reference-line systems like CTE, 90/90, and fractional ball, is "geometric validity" over a wide range of shots. The ghost-ball systems do result in an exact line of aim if the contact points and/or ghost-ball center are visualized properly. And the systems work (geometrically anyway) for shots of any distance (CB-to-OB and OB-to-pocket and CB-to-pocket) and any angle (i.e., for any relative positions of the CB, OB, and pocket). This cannot be said for the limited-reference-line systems unless something is "adjusted" (e.g., vary the bridge length or the "effective pivot length" based on the ball distances and/or amount of cut needed).

All systems require "visual intelligence" (i.e., the ability to perceive points, lines, and angles in 3D), but some systems also need judgment and adjustments beyond the visualization requirements (e.g., because they are not "geometrically valid" over a wide range of shots).

Again, I haven't seen a complete description (with a detailed and clear procedure), illustration, and demonstration of your version of CTE, so I don't know if it fits in the category of the others or not. However, I do look forward to seeing what you eventually post on your blog.

Regards,
Dave

I was checking out your fractional page today. In regards to the 3 aims making everything... Hal left out information intentionally. You must pivot on each aim. Fractional potting has a ton of validity with a pivot.

OB Center, quarter and edge - all with 1 tip pivots. either 1 tip inside to pivot to center or starting from center and pivoting to the outside 1 tip.

I can make nearly every shot by sighting the OB center, 1/4 or edge... all you need is what you're missing on your page: a slight pivot. When you did the analysis of Hal's quarter system (TP A-11) and you showed the "tweener" into the side (I'm going off of memory here), that was a center to outside quarter sight with a 1 tip pivot (from either starting position I just mentioned). Obviously, you arc to the shot circle - it's the same concept.

 

[peteypooldude]

DR dave,you are not on the cte thread to ask questions you are doing nothing but posting one negative comment behind another and posting that same reference to your library over and over,give it a break you are acting like a child,if you have something relevant then fine if not help someone who is asking YOU for help whats your place in this,you say you dont know and the ones other than spidey that do know are not trying to help,some claiming they spent time with Hal and claim they answer all questions but thats not the case evidently ,This is not all I have to say but I am going to leave it alone 4 now .NOT SMILING

 

[LAMas]

...Furthermore, after watching Dave's youtube video on CTE pivots I get it fully. The entire key to this is that it's NOT a pivot at the bridge hand. The bridge hand is not the fulcrum. To me using the Center of the cueball and sighting to the Edge of the object ball is the way accurately align myself to those two balls in relation to the pocket. Then the pivot (or shift) that occurs is the same as stepping into the shot line with other methods....
.

...A while back I was under the false assumption on my part that the "pivot" that was being talked about was the same pivot that I do when using backhand english. It's not and this is the key. Where on some methods of aiming, ghost ball being one of them you should step into the shot line from the same line as if you are a point on that line with CTE you sort of slide into the shot line from the side. At least this is the best way I can say it.....


.

You are describing another version of CTE...sounds good...if not the bridge, where is the axis/fulcrum...at the hip or stroke hand grip?
Thanks