CTE experiment, with civil discussion

[lfigueroa]

You have made the ball with no shape on the next ball? I am not sure what your point is? No one who advocates using an aiming system says that position play doesn't matter.

I think that we would all agree however that making the ball if you are trying to make the ball is the number one task.

What would you say to a player who misses the ball but gets perfect shape?

"My turn" comes to mind.



And wind speed, and the lie, and how the table was brushed, and the humidity level, etc....

Any aiming system or method exists for one purpose and that is to put you on the only possible line to make the ball. If you aren't on that line then you can account for everything else perfectly and you will still lose your turn at the table.

Aiming is only one part of pool for sure but it's a very important part.

Today I did a 30 minute video where as a lark I decided to shoot all the balls with a "half-ball" aim, that is to line up side of the cue ball with the center of the object ball and the center of the cue ball with the side of the object ball. I did this on all sorts of shots to see what would happen.

The result was that I made most of the shots and the ones I missed were made the next time I tried it.

I had several discoveries today. One of them is that a "half-ball" aim does not result in a half ball hit. As in when I stand directly behind the cueball and line it up so that it "should be" a half ball bit it doesn't actually happen that way. In order to get a real half ball hit I actually have to line up slightly to the right of center and slightly inside the edge of the object ball.

I have tried to put this video up on Vimeo but my bandwidth won't support it. So I will probably need to cut it into three sections and put it up on Youtube.

What you will see is a person trying something he has never tried before. What I wanted to see was the effective pocketing range of a half-ball aim. Originally I wanted to see if the same aim would make the ball at whatever the half ball angle was and maybe 5 degrees on either side.

What I discovered is that using this aim I was able to make cut shots at shallow angles up to almost 90 degrees.

So great I discovered I could make all these shots using the same aim. What about it?

Well then I decided to try those shots with a little backhand english. Same thing, I could make the shots and play position.

Now this isn't any system. It's definitely not any that I have heard of although I am sure that someone somewhere can say that they know this too.

But what it does show is that it is indeed possible to make a wide range of shots using the same approach and "aim" and it's possible to play position starting with that same "aim".

So you can call it hooey if you want to Lou and I know you are a great player and a student of the game as is Mike Page and Dr. Dave. But it's not hooey and the more people discuss it and do diagrams and videos and think about it the closer we will get to figuring out why or how it works.

Anyway....hopefully my video will upload and then you can watch it and offer your comments as to what you think is happening and why.

John, CTE works because you want it to work -- not because of any scientific merit. It is probably more akin to a Zen or Buddhist mantra than a geometric formula.

All that's happening with this CTE hooey is that people who like it are focusing on their aiming process more intently than they might have otherwise and consciously or unconsciously making all kinds of adjustments for things like swerve, squirt, english, throw, speed, and elevation. And yes, humidity and if outdoors wind speed. (If you're on a boat add in sway Perhaps they're also approaching the table in a more systematic way, pivots included. That's it.

Lou Figueroa
gaté, gaté, paragaté, parasamgaté, bodhi svaha

 

[lfigueroa]

Geometry:
"faith" and "hoax" often go hand in hand. Hoaxes can't work without faith. But they collapse under the weight of strict reasoning. There are lots of red herrings about CTE that sound really deep and hint at mathematical soundness. We have shot arcs, pivot points, a recently introduced "pocket circle", and all of those nifty CAD diagrams.

Faith may be a necessary component in CTE, in the sense that the shooter needs to believe he's using a mathematically flawless system that puts him on the right aiming line. That confidence helps your ball pocketing. And when the shooter subconsciously sees that he's arrived on the perfect line, and this tells him to stops pivoting... he is reaffirming the 'science' behind it. "After my pivot, I can just see right now I'm on the perfect line. It looks like I can't miss it. Holy crap it really works!"

When he misses, he attributes it to errors in fundamentals because he has faith the system couldn't have possibly let him down.

Lou:
Not to jump to the other side of the fence but this is not necessarily a fair argument against CTE. No aiming system or method plays shape for you, but that doesn't mean it's not useful. If you had a magic bullet that could put your stick on the right line of aim... you've got a huge leg up on the guys who are just guessing. Everyone still has to figure out how to play shape, but the other guys have nothing but unknowns. You'd have one of those important unknowns solved already.

Shank:
There are lots of things working against the webinar -

Some people are just cheap. Some would be willing but the naysayers have convinced them it's a waste of time. Many never believed in this or any other aiming system. Some are turned off by the massive threads and complex diagrams. Some are turned off by the way Spidey has chosen to handle it (intentionally adding some difficulty to the learning process so that people can "earn it"). Some are turned off that Spidey has chosen to charge for it (if it's charity for hal, then 100% of the proceeds should go to him. Though hal didn't charge for it and who knows if he approves of others doing so). These things all add up to people being unwilling to pony up 50 bucks.

On the other hand maybe spidey has enough interest but is just busy.

------

It's getting hard to keep any sort of open mind about all of this. I've got some info that was helpfully PMed to me. If that doesn't work, I probably will just drop it. I was going to get help from one CTE guy, but now he doesn't want to show it to just one guy, he wants more people and some compensation. Then another guy offered to help, but he wants to make it a good video and maybe look into some better equipment and he's also go other stuff going on in his life, so who knows when that'll appear.

I can't believe it's only been 3 weeks since Geometry posted the initial thread that started all of this. Feels like longer.

I have never had my own spokesmodel before

Lou Figueroa
hope CreeDo looks good
on camera

 

[Roger Long]

Roger, does my last post (see below) really "baffle" you? :nono:

Well, maybe your site doesn't baffle me, but it does make my eyes cross whenever I look at its voluminous content. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if I had enough time to read and study all of it; but I don't. That's the same problem I'm having with CTE, only there must be a quick and simple way to learn CTE because Cocobolo Cowboy picked up on it right away. I'm just going to wait and see if he can help me out.

Roger

 

[Elephant Man]

I "figured out" CTE many years ago. I'm just trying to help others "figure it out," because I'm tired of the endless barrage of ridiculous claims of how amazing and great CTE is. For examples of some of these claims, see the DAM marketing paragraph.

Regards,
Dave

I suspected from the beginning of this thread that you were not serious about getting to the bottom of CTE, unless getting to the bottom meant disproving. It seems when people start heading in the right direction you lead them away with "feel" and "subconscious". The way YOU define CTE, yes I agree it is impossible. Many posters on this thread DO want to make CTE work. Some just to see the math on paper, and others to help their game. I don't think CTE is going to help the "A" players much, but I think it can help the "C" players like me. It can help a "C" player recognize proper lines/angles and transition them into a better player who may drop the CTE routine as they progress. In my quest to figure CTE out I have definitely become a better player in a short time. Do I execute CTE perfectly? I doubt it. But if I am doing it wrong, I have at least stumbled onto something that has taken my game up a couple notches quickly. So even if CTE does not exist, the fact that the idea of CTE exists has made me a better player pronto.

 

[cookie man]

I "figured out" CTE many years ago. I'm just trying to help others "figure it out," because I'm tired of the endless barrage of ridiculous claims of how amazing and great CTE is. For examples of some of these claims, see the DAM marketing paragraph.

Regards,
Dave

If you truly figured it out, enlighten us, tell us all about it, beginning to end, and not some link to info you gathered that may or may not have something to do with CTE. Tell us in your own words what you figured out.

 

[dr_dave]

I suspected from the beginning of this thread that you were not serious about getting to the bottom of CTE, unless getting to the bottom meant disproving.

I admit that I've been skeptical of CTE and all "systems" like it for many, many years. However, the reason for this skepticism is all of the outrageous claims I've heard over the years concerning "aiming systems" (for examples, see the paragraph here, where most of the sentences are direct quotes from proponents of "aiming systems"). I have put in a lot of time and effort (much more than most people) over many years to keep an open mind and try to fully understand the systems and the claims. I started this thread with the three-shot experiment because I honestly thought the discussion would help us learn more about CTE. I honestly think this thread did a lot to improve understanding of CTE and how different people use it effectively (see some of the earlier posts in the thread, before we got too "distracted" by the details).

I don't think CTE is going to help the "A" players much, but I think it can help the "C" players like me. It can help a "C" player recognize proper lines/angles and transition them into a better player who may drop the CTE routine as they progress.

I think any "aiming system" can do this, and I do value the systems for this. For more info, see:

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

Regards,
Dave

 

[cookie man]

... or how about this one (see below) from Mike Page?

BTW, the answer to how and why CTE works is here.

Regards,
Dave

Your "here" link for the answers to CTE only quote people who don't understand CTE. Where is the info from HAL HOULE, the expert on CTE.
Opionions are like, well you know what they're like. Give us expert testimonies in your obsessive links to knowledge.

 

[Elephant Man]

If you truly figured it out, enlighten us, tell us all about it, beginning to end, and not some link to info you gathered that may or may not have something to do with CTE. Tell us in your own words what you figured out.

I think he "figured out" that there the are only 6 shots with CTE and then "Subconsciously" put up a mental mental block. That rationale does seem to make some people "feel" better.

 

[dr_dave]

If you truly figured it out, enlighten us, tell us all about it, beginning to end, and not some link to info you gathered that may or may not have something to do with CTE. Tell us in your own words what you figured out.

Everything I have figured out about CTE, in my own words, using resources (descriptions, illustrations, and demonstrations) from me and and others, can be found here:

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

If you or others would prefer, and can post all of the resources here; although, the post would be quite long.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Ratta]

hm....

the longer the thead goes, it seems i understand less than before
I really tried, but im really not able to understand how to use it for these 3 shots (or other shots, too)- at least i think that maybe only a personal lesson with an instructor like Stan or Hal could explain it to me.
I ll end trying bc it makes no sense for me to work on something where noone is able to show me how i should start from the beginning til it works. This is absolutley no negative about cte or Pro1. But now i m feelin really a bit too stupid to understand how it works- (and i really think i have a bit advanced knowledge after 25 years).
The aming-system i used to work with is working-but im for sure open for new things-i LOVE to learn everything what is new to me about billiards-and how to give my knowledge further.

Unfortunatley i don t know one person here in germany, who knows this system perfectly that he could explain it to me :-(

lg
Ingo

 

[Eric.]

I "figured out" CTE many years ago. I'm just trying to help others "figure it out," because I'm tired of the endless barrage of ridiculous claims of how amazing and great CTE is. For examples of some of these claims, see the DAM marketing paragraph.

Regards,
Dave

And, assuming that you truly have figured it out, despite everything you say that contradicts that, then why continue to rant against it?

Listen, if CTE works for many people, but not for others, then why is it "bunk" compared to say, ghostball (which I have a harder time being consistent wtih)?

The bottom line is that if it works for some/many, then it has merit. I can give two hoots about your attempts to mathematically quantify it. It doesn't have to "add up on paper" to be a good visual aid in aiming.

*Edit-please don't refer me to your ridiculous tome of a website

Eric >eggheads...sheesh

 

[dr_dave]

... the answer to how and why CTE works is here.

Your "here" link for the answers to CTE only quote people who don't understand CTE. Where is the info from HAL HOULE, the expert on CTE.
Opionions are like, well you know what they're like. Give us expert testimonies in your obsessive links to knowledge.

The only thing I've been able to find from Hal in written form is quoted here:

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

although, it concerns his early three-angle system, and not CTE.

Eezbank's video posted on my CTE resource page (at the top of the page) is apparently one of Hal's versions of CTE.

I also have an insightful quote from Stan on my CTE resource page (scroll down to the "from Stan Shuffett" quote).

I also have several links and references to Spidey's blog on my CTE resource page.

As more and better information, illustrations, and demonstration become available, I will be happy to post it.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Elephant Man]

Back on track here...

I have a question for everyone trying to figure out CTE.


A) Are you dead set on making CTE work by NEVER looking at the pocket, other than to watch the ball drop in after the process.

B) Are you willing to believe that you DO reference the pocket briefly before setting up for a CTE shot?

C) Open to either way

I just want to know when I make replies if I am dealing with an "A", "B" or a "C" mindset.

 

[eezbank]

The reason you will not find it directly from Hal in written form is because Hal had guys like you and PJ or Mike Page who claim to want "civil discussions" and step by step instruction, then turn right back around and call his work "hooey" as you call it. Can you blaim him for not wanting to spoon feed you?? The man has helped thousands of players improve their games for free. If you never get a full understanding of how your three shots are made in the diagram it has to be because you have an agenda here.

I taught my 12 year old the system in roughly 20mins and he fires the balls in the center of the hole.

What exactly is your Phd in doctor?

The only thing I've been able to find from Hal in written form is quoted here:

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

although, it concerns his early three-angle system, and not CTE.

Eezbank's video posted on my CTE resource page (at the top of the page) is apparently one of Hal's versions of CTE.

I also have an insightful quote from Stan on my CTE resource page (scroll down to the "from Stan Shuffett" quote).

I also have several links and references to Spidey's blog on my CTE resource page.

As more and better information, illustrations, and demonstration become available, I will be happy to post it.

Regards,
Dave

 

[eezbank]

Eezbank's video posted on my CTE resource page (at the top of the page) is apparently one of Hal's versions of CTE.

I have removed the video. I don't wish to take part in the circus you call an instructional site.

 

[shankster8]

Whatever came of the 'webinair' (sp?) spider was going to do if 10 AZBr's agreed to pay $50? It is hard for me to believe that at least 10 of us didn't come forward.

Well, I have not received an answer which affirms there are not ten of us willing to spend $50.00 to purchase a detailed syposium/webinair on CTE, to be presented by spider. This, I think, is a joke, in view of the number of us who bought into Gene's "lesson?" for about $80. And then sent that DVD back, with an additional $10, to purchase the new, "improved" edition - which is equally confusing, as evidenced by an apparent unending demand for private lessons.

In fact, this is such a joke that I cannot believe it is true. I signed up for spider's presentation, and peteypooldude says he did also. So, we need eight more members to join in. Let's see if we can't identify at least eight members right here and now, and put this matter to rest. We are all familiar with spider's enthusiasm, and his confidence in CTE. I believe spider is sincere, and will do his level best to prepare a good and thorough presentation. So, it's a no-brainer, and a no-loser, in my mind. What say ya?????

 

[dr_dave]

I have removed the video.

That is unfortunate. Your video was an excellent demonstration of Hal's original version of CTE. I'm sorry if I somehow drove you to remove your excellent video. Hopefully, you will post it again some day so others can benefit. If not, hopefully someone else will post another video that is as clear and informative.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Elephant Man]

Back on track here...

I have a question for everyone trying to figure out CTE.


A) Are you dead set on making CTE work by NEVER looking at the pocket, other than to watch the ball drop in after the process.

B) Are you willing to believe that you DO reference the pocket briefly before setting up for a CTE shot?

C) Open to either way

I just want to know when I make replies if I am dealing with an "A", "B" or a "C" mindset.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that the skeptics would mostly choose "A", and the people who think they have CTE figured out would fall into the "B" group. Anyone else I hope has an open mind. I think a lot of time has been devoted to disproving the "A" theory. I am skeptical of that as well. The "A" people don't want to believe that "B" is correct because it would ruin their perception of CTE. Enough trying to prove "A". Lets see some math and hear some thoughts on "B". Most people in this thread, lurkers included, just want to make more balls. It can happen.

 

[AtLarge]

Dr. Dave has said that many exaggerated claims have been made over the years regarding CTE. Other posters have lamented the lack of clear instruction from the CTE experts. Well, apparently CTE was invented by Hal Houle. At least I have heard no claims to the contrary. So I thought I would assemble a (partial) list of what Hal has said on the subject of CTE on AzBilliards. To my knowledge, he has never tried to "teach" the system in writing here. His posts usually offered to help people by phone or via an in-person visit.

I'll let the reader decide whether anything he says is exaggerated. [All punctuation and capitalization are Hal's.]


8/18/2007 -- WE AIM THE CENTER OF THE CUE BALL AT THE EDGE OF THE OBJECT BALL FOR ANY AND ALL SHOTS.

9/1/2007 -- stroking a cue stick straight or crooked does not put balls into pockets. we do not aim cue sticks, we aim cue balls at object balls on every shot, trying to see a dot on an object ball or cue ball is ridiculous.

10/3/2007 -- USE A PROFESSIONL AIMING SYSTEM AND YOU WILL NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS.

10/15/2007 -- the body cannot aim any shot. the cue ball aims the object ball into the pocket.

10/16/2007 -- THERE IS NO INSTINCT ABOUT IT AT ALL

11/17/2007 -- THERE IS NO NEED TO LOOK FOR CONTACT POINTS ON CUE BALL OR OBJECT BALL. NO PRO CONTENDS WITH CONTACT POINTS. THERE IS NO NEED. HE WILL USE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SYSTEM THAN AMATEURS USE.

12/6/2007 -- THERE IS NO DOUBLE CHECK WHEN YOU ALREADY HAVE THE SYSTEM THAT DOES IT ALL. PERIOD.

12/7/2007 -- USE THE SAME AIMING SYSTEM MOST TOP PLAYERS USE.

12/8/2007 -- WHAT YOU DO NOT USE IS THE AIMING SYSTEM THAT REYES, BUSTAMANTE, SOUQUET, ARCHER, ORTMAN, VARNER, AND EVERY OTHER TOP PLAYER USES. THERE IS NO LINE TO A TARGET, THERE ARE NO ADJUSTMENTS FOR PHYSICS. THERE IS NO BASE LINE. THERE IS NO MATH SIDE. THERE ARE NO FEEL PLAYERS IN THE PRO RANKS. THEY WOULD GET CREAMED.

12/11/2007 -- First There Are No Visible Spots On The Object Ball Or The Cue Ball To Play At A High Level. Plus Good Players Already Have An Aiming System Used By Efren Reyes, Souquet, Archer, Bustamante, Ortman, And A Host Of Other Top Players. When You Want To Play At A Top Level, Give Me A Call And I Will Show You How The Real Pros Shoot. No Charge.

12/21/2007 -- Takes Only 3 Months To Reach An A Level, And Using A Professional Aiming System.

1/29/2008 -- I WILL TEACH YOU EXACTLY HOW EFREN REYES POCKETS BALLS.

2/12/2008 -- There Are No Angles To Plot In Pocketing Balls. It Is All The Same Shot All The Time. There Are No Angles To Plot In Banking Balls, It Is Always The Same Shot

3/11/2008 -- Learn Real Pool. Same Aim For Any And All Shots, Could You Live With That ????

4/25/2008 -- Archer, Souquet, Ortmann, Reyes, Bustamante, And Many, Many Other Top Players Who Use The Same Aiming System. All The Top Players Use The Same Aiming System. Any One Of You Can Learn The System In One Day.

5/12/2008 -- WHY BOTHER WITH INVISIBLE GHOST BALLS. USE THE SAME AIMING SYSTEM THAT ALL TOP PROS USE.

5/26/2008 -- COME ON OVER TO MY HOME …AND WORK ON THE BEST AIMING SYSTEM ON THE PLANET.

5/30/2008 -- You Do Not Have To Look For Any Lines To A Pocket. Lines Are Invisible. You Do Not Have To Cheat Pockets. You Do Not Have To Decide How Thick Or Thin To Cut Balls. There Is A Simple Method Preventing You From Scratching Any Cue Ball Shot. You Do Not Have To Decide Whether Your Long Straight Shot Is Really Exactly Straight. There Is One Aim For Any And All Shots. Period.

6/2/2008 -- LET US PLAY THE SAME AIMING SYSTEM THAT ALL TOP PLAYERS USE, THAT IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME.

6/19/2008 -- One Angle Can Pocket Any And All Shots. Chew On That Cud, Pilgrim

7/13/2008 -- One Aim All Day Long Every Day And Never Varies.

7/19/2008 -- All Top Pros With No Exception All Use The Same Aiming System. Climb On Board And I Will Show You Exactly How They Play.

7/21/2008 -- PROS DO NOT POINT TO A SPOT ON THE TABLE WHERE THEY WANT THE CUE BALL TO GO AND IT DOES NOT GIVE THEM A CLEAR POINT OF FOCUS OR HELP THEM VISUALIZE WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.

8/2/2008 - i will tell you all you want to know about professional aiming systems. we do not use ghost ball, or contact points,

8/4/2008 -- I TEACH PROFESSIONAL AIMING SYSTEMS. INSTRUCTORS DO NOT HAVE A CLUE ABOUT AIMING SYSTEMS. EVERY TOP PLAYER USES THE SAME PRO AIMING SYSTEM. THAT INCLUDES REYES, SOUQUET, ARCHER, ORTMAN, BUSTAMANTE, AND ON AND ON. I DO NOT CHARGE YOU FOR ANYTHING, IT IS SIMPLE ENOUGH THAT I CAN TEACH YOU OVER THE PHONE.

8/16/2008 -- It Takes Four Minutes To Learn The Best Aiming System On The Planet.

8/18/2008 -- WE DO NOT LOOK AT CONTACT POINTS AND WE HAVE NO NEED TO LOOK AT GHOST BALLS, WE LOOK ONLY AT THE CUE BALL. WE HAVE AN AIMING SYSTEM FOR THAT.

8/19/2008 -- I USE AN AIMING SYSTEM THAT EVERY TOP PRO IS USING. MY AIMING SYSTEM.

8/20/2008 -- THE ONLY THING THE PRO HAS GOING IS HIS AIMING SYSTEM. IF YOU TAKE THAT AWAY FROM HIM HE HAS NOTHING ELSE TO SAY, THAT IS WHY THEY AVOID IT. THERE IS ONLY ONE PRO AIMING SYSTEM OUT THERE, AND EVERY PRO USES IT, EVERY ONE OF THEM. THAT IS WHY THEY ARE CLOSED MOUTH ABOUT IT. IT HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE 1924. YOUR PRO HAS TO CLAM UP BECAUSE EVERY PRO HAS TO DO THE SAME. NOBODY LETS THE CAT OUT OF THE BAG,

9/6/2008 -- ONE AIM ALL DAY LONG. THE AIM IS THE SAME ALL DAY LONG, NO MATTER THE ANGLE OF ANY TYPE SHOT. THINK ABOUT IT.

9/8/2008 -- You Need Only One Angle To Pocket Any And All Manner Of Shot, All Day Long. Think About It

 

[cookie man]

Well, I have not received an answer which affirms there are not ten of us willing to spend $50.00 to purchase a detailed syposium/webinair on CTE, to be presented by spider. This, I think, is a joke, in view of the number of us who bought into Gene's "lesson?" for about $80. And then sent that DVD back, with an additional $10, to purchase the new, "improved" edition - which is equally confusing, as evidenced by an apparent unending demand for private lessons.

In fact, this is such a joke that I cannot believe it is true. I signed up for spider's presentation, and peteypooldude says he did also. So, we need eight more members to join in. Let's see if we can't identify at least eight members right here and now, and put this matter to rest. We are all familiar with spider's enthusiasm, and his confidence in CTE. I believe spider is sincere, and will do his level best to prepare a good and thorough presentation. So, it's a no-brainer, and a no-loser, in my mind. What say ya?????

I believe spidey is in vegas.