CTE experiment, with civil discussion

[JB Cases]

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

I'd agree with you EXCEPT for the fact that I make balls consistently using an aiming system that I cannot make consistently any other way.

So, since we know that balls are round and the table is fixed and that for every shot there is only ONE corridor that works to make that shot in the intended pocket the obvious conclusion is that if I adopt any given method that get me to that line over and over then it must be correct.

I mean Dr. Dave could do this testing quite easily. The Ghost Ball line adjusted for contact induced throw is known to be the correct line to pocket the shot. That's not in dispute and everyone can agree on it.

So it's really simple. Take couple people who are rank beginners and teach them to aim using various methods, assuming you know how to teach those methods.

Then simply film their alignment. Once they are down on the ball check their alignment against a laser line that can be switched on and off.

If they are lined up in the one corridor that works for the shot then the aiming method works (assuming that the test subject's vision and spatial awareness is sufficient for them translate instructions into activity correctly).

The thing you don't get is that there are plenty of us who get it, we face shots that we know are nearly impossible for us, we have no clue how to hit it or where to hit the ball but we align to the ball using the system and it goes. If we were trust our own instinct then 9 times out of 10 we wouldn't even be close on the shot and the 10th time we might get close.

However with the system then it's the other way around and we start making the same seemingly impossible shot say 3-4 times out of ten and the other 6 times it's close.

Which means that we have to work on making sure our approach is correct and our stroke is accurate because the system is obviously putting us on r very near to the correct corridor.

That's more than a mantra. That's a repeatable physical and tangible method that yields immediate and measurable results.

That's what you don't get. Yes, the system is forcing the player to focus on aiming more intently but it's not forcing them to focus on it using the 'old way'. It's introducing a new paradigm and framework for addressing the cueball in relation to other balls.

The old paradigm is simple and easy to understand. Imagine a ball on the same line and replace that ball with the cueball and make little adjustments for throw, speed and spin. We all get it. We all know it, we all read the same books on it. But it doesn't work for all of us and breaks down in situations where it's not very easy to see the imaginary ball or keep your eyes on the tiny contact point or guess correctly for the other factors.

I honestly wish I had the time and resources that Dave Alciatore has. Because if I did then I would have already done everything possible to document these systems straight from the man himself. I would have put them on video and I would have figured out the math involved as well any adjustments that are made subconscioulsy or otherwise.

I would not be calling the systems hooey, instead I would truly figure out scientifically with video evidence and analysis why they work, what the limitations are and how those limitations are corrected for.

That's the sort of discussion that needs to happen, not a collection of opinions as to why they "work" or don't coupled with an undertone of clear disdain.

I submit that Dr. Alciatore just take all the information about that which he does not know off his website because he is only further muddying the waters with incomplete data and slanted opinion.

He should stick to the things that he does know and can prove such as all the EXCELLENT material that is there concerning things that have been put on video and have sufficient analysis.

Let CTE continue to be it's own underground thing where people pass it on from person to person until such time as someone can or will publish something that makes the how and why of it clear.

And for you, just hope that you play people like me who believe in and use the "hooey" because if we are wrong then you are going to win easily.

Unless of course they happen to be named Stevie Moore or Matt Krah in which case they use the hooey a little better than most of us on here.

Of course people who use a system are approaching the table in a systematic way. I look at the shot and instantly see the lines I need to guide me to the shot corridor and from there I trust it, wrong or right, that's the line I choose and for me that equates to more success on the table. But it's not a cure-all for bad vision, bad strokes, chicken wing arm, jumping up, lunging forward, jab stroking, poor speed control etc... it's merely a way to find the right line.

 

[Elephant Man]

Wow! I tried to weed out the quotes that would be most useful.

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


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.

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.

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

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.

6/19/2008 -- One Angle Can Pocket Any And All Shots.

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

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.


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

 

[Roger Long]

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

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

Regards,
Dave

PS: I am not serious about the "baffle" remark. I know you probably relate to these posts quite well. I just didn't like you ragging on engineers (although, you can rag on the mathematicians all you want).

Yes, I think I understand Mike Page pretty well. He seems like a very intelligent and knowledgeable man - much like yourself. Founded in facts. One well above exaggeration infatuation.

Roger

 

[Roger Long]

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

Those are some pretty wild claims by HH. No wonder the subject of CTE always stirs so much controversy.

Roger

 

[LAMas]

Those are some pretty wild claims by HH. No wonder the subject of CTE always stirs so much controversy.

Roger

Very civil of you Roger.:smile:

 

[CreeDo]

Hal's claims are indeed wild. Every pro (with zero exceptions) aims the exact same way, and let's throw in all past pros as far back as 1924, and they keep it a big secret and have conspired and agreed to not reveal it. And it in no way involves the pocket and they don't have to worry about cheating the pocket. ...I coulda sworn an actual pro chimed in and said you don't need a system. Maybe he was lying to protect the secret.

If I were a CTE user I'd be a little embarrassed by all of this.

That's to say nothing of some of the followers claims about a high-school dropout quintupling his pocketing overnight, low level players drilling in shots that are way over their head, being able to fire balls into holes while literally not seeing the pocket... next we'll be hearing they can make balls in the dark.

---

eez: to say dave's page is a "circus" and imply it's not a good instructional site is really lame. Dave has too much class to even respond to something like that, but I don't.

Are you the kind of guy who automatically bashes everything someone says because they disagreed with you on ONE thing? If you had a friend who agreed with 90% of what you say but you don't go to the same church or he voted red while you voted blue, do you kick him out of your home and say "don't ever talk to me again"?

All dave is doing is disagreeing on the claims of one silly aiming system. And even then he's going way out of his way to give it some credit. Meanwhile his page is full of useful, completely legit information ...info that is tested, proven on camera, in slow motion, and can be easily reproduced by anyone at the pool table; info that has helped thousands. There's a reason he gets paid to write articles about pool and you and I do not.

When Dave posts other people's info, of course he gives his opinion on it... but he tries to include multiple points of views. He doesn't just copy the parts he agrees with or believes. He's a scientist (mechanical engineering, if it matters) and he approaches pool in a scientific way. His page and videos reflect that.

Some CTE advocates apparently approach things in more of a 'religious' way - there is one right way, you must have faith that it's gonna work, everyone who counts knows about it, everything that's said about it is true and you must accept that completely, and anyone who questions it is living in the dark and can go to hell.

---

I wanna thank the CTE guys who have tried to keep it civil and who resist the urge to make miraculous claims. Those who are in touch with me by PM, I'm still perfectly happy to learn whatever you can offer... despite my skeptical posts.

 

[Beer:30]

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,

Wow! I didn't know I didn't need to know anything about position play and strategy to be a pro!

 

[Geometry]

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.

I don't think so personally. Like I said, there is a level of intelligence in this alignment. The person that could create this alignment would have to have thought about aiming geometry reasonably deeply. It's perfectly logical that someone that looks into aiming at a deep level over a few years could of found an amazing aiming system.

 

[STICKBNDER]

PM sent

PM sent to you JB cases

 

[JB Cases]

Hal's claims are indeed wild. Every pro (with zero exceptions) aims the exact same way, and let's throw in all past pros as far back as 1924, and they keep it a big secret and have conspired and agreed to not reveal it. And it in no way involves the pocket and they don't have to worry about cheating the pocket. ...I coulda sworn an actual pro chimed in and said you don't need a system. Maybe he was lying to protect the secret.

If I were a CTE user I'd be a little embarrassed by all of this.

That's to say nothing of some of the followers claims about a high-school dropout quintupling his pocketing overnight, low level players drilling in shots that are way over their head, being able to fire balls into holes while literally not seeing the pocket... next we'll be hearing they can make balls in the dark.

As someone who made those claims referring to my friends in Loveland Colorado I guess if you want to call me a liar then that's your call. Of course I can back it up if you or anyone else cares to BET ME on it.

As for making balls in the dark I once had a guy run racks on me in a pool room where the power was out and the table we were playing on was very dark. I don't know whether he had a system to aim or not. Pissed me off though.

---

eez: to say dave's page is a "circus" and imply it's not a good instructional site is really lame. Dave has too much class to even respond to something like that, but I don't.

It's not a "circus" but his information on CTE is not information at all. It's opinions. Dr. Dave whom I do actually respect is not doing the right thing here and he knows it. He holds a belief that CTE is bullshit and he is going to great lengths to say that in a very backhanded way.

All dave is doing is disagreeing on the claims of one silly aiming system. And even then he's going way out of his way to give it some credit. Meanwhile his page is full of useful, completely legit information

Not when it comes to CTE.

...info that is tested, proven on camera, in slow motion, and can be easily reproduced by anyone at the pool table; info that has helped thousands. There's a reason he gets paid to write articles about pool and you and I do not.

Seriously? I can give you examples of plenty of other people who write articles for well known websites and magazines and they are not great players.

Dave should stick to writing about that which he knows how to do and not about that which he does not know how to do.

The info on Dave's site which is on video and has been thoroughly tested is great information and supremely helpful. Why not leave CTE alone if he doesn't get it?

Why not PROVE on video that CTE doesn't work? I guess in order to do that he would need to go and learn it from the source.

When Dave posts other people's info, of course he gives his opinion on it... but he tries to include multiple points of views. He doesn't just copy the parts he agrees with or believes. He's a scientist (mechanical engineering, if it matters) and he approaches pool in a scientific way. His page and videos reflect that.

With the exception of the CTE discussion.

Some CTE advocates apparently approach things in more of a 'religious' way - there is one right way, you must have faith that it's gonna work, everyone who counts knows about it, everything that's said about it is true and you must accept that completely, and anyone who questions it is living in the dark and can go to hell.

Well not exactly. No you don't have to have "faith" that it's going to work. You just have to know what you are doing. Once you know what to do then it works. The "faith" if any comes in making yourself pull the trigger when the line you are on "feels" wrong when using a system.

It's that retraining process where you go from the old way to the new way and you doubt it that gets a lot of people.

Now ghost ball is easily found all over the net. But at some point you had to learn it. Either you found someone to teach it to you for free or you had to pay for it in the form a book, tape or personal instruction.

You had to take it on faith that this was "the way" to aim. The book said so. If you were properly lined up and you then missed the shot then it was because of your technique or if you were shooting with sidespin then you miscalculated the compensation needed, etc... but the underlying point is that you are using a method to aim that you learned from someone else.

Had you learned from the beginning from a person who used something else besides ghost ball then you wouldn't give it a second thought now. But you didn't.

So you are stuck between wanting to learn this information which unfortunately is still not properly documented in the modern era and that which you already know and believe in. (Dr. Dave COULD be a major catalyst in documenting and dissecting the nuts and bolts of this but he chooses not to even though it's all there for him).

---

I wanna thank the CTE guys who have tried to keep it civil and who resist the urge to make miraculous claims. Those who are in touch with me by PM, I'm still perfectly happy to learn whatever you can offer... despite my skeptical posts.

Well it's a bit backhanded to say that you don't know it, call it a "silly" system and yet are prepared to accept other people's time and effort to help you learn it.

That's not something that personally entices me to free up a chunk of time devoted to helping you out. I have enjoyed our discussions through PMs and you know how I feel about it.

My suggestion is to just forget it. Put CTE and all like systems out of your mind and just play like Chris Bartrum suggests. Spend your time on the table and you will get what you need.

Chris Bartrum is pissed off at Joe Tucker for revealing things that he had to pay to learn on the road about racking. Chris Bartrum is a triple smart gambler who makes part of his living beating people on the pool table. I very much doubt that he is going to tell you or anyone else on a public forum something that can beat him down the road. I am not saying that Chris has any super secret aiming system that he uses. I am saying that if he did odds are he wouldn't tell about it on this forum.

Or he might go the other way and tell you that pool's not tough just to go out and play more. Because if you are out playing trying to get better by repetition then chances are you are going to be wanting to test yourself by gambling or playing events - which is great for guys like Chris because more people playing means more people donating to guys like him.

But now I am getting deep. At the end of the day who really cares?

I mean it's just a game. I have something that works for me - I was lucky to have Hal seek me out or I would never have gone looking for him.

If you want to call people liars and snakeoil salesmen and religious fanatics then go ahead.

I will be playing pool and making the shots with my system and having a good time like I always do.

 

[lfigueroa]

I'd agree with you EXCEPT for the fact that I make balls consistently using an aiming system that I cannot make consistently any other way.

So, since we know that balls are round and the table is fixed and that for every shot there is only ONE corridor that works to make that shot in the intended pocket the obvious conclusion is that if I adopt any given method that get me to that line over and over then it must be correct.

I mean Dr. Dave could do this testing quite easily. The Ghost Ball line adjusted for contact induced throw is known to be the correct line to pocket the shot. That's not in dispute and everyone can agree on it.

So it's really simple. Take couple people who are rank beginners and teach them to aim using various methods, assuming you know how to teach those methods.

Then simply film their alignment. Once they are down on the ball check their alignment against a laser line that can be switched on and off.

If they are lined up in the one corridor that works for the shot then the aiming method works (assuming that the test subject's vision and spatial awareness is sufficient for them translate instructions into activity correctly).

The thing you don't get is that there are plenty of us who get it, we face shots that we know are nearly impossible for us, we have no clue how to hit it or where to hit the ball but we align to the ball using the system and it goes. If we were trust our own instinct then 9 times out of 10 we wouldn't even be close on the shot and the 10th time we might get close.

However with the system then it's the other way around and we start making the same seemingly impossible shot say 3-4 times out of ten and the other 6 times it's close.

Which means that we have to work on making sure our approach is correct and our stroke is accurate because the system is obviously putting us on r very near to the correct corridor.

That's more than a mantra. That's a repeatable physical and tangible method that yields immediate and measurable results.

That's what you don't get. Yes, the system is forcing the player to focus on aiming more intently but it's not forcing them to focus on it using the 'old way'. It's introducing a new paradigm and framework for addressing the cueball in relation to other balls.

The old paradigm is simple and easy to understand. Imagine a ball on the same line and replace that ball with the cueball and make little adjustments for throw, speed and spin. We all get it. We all know it, we all read the same books on it. But it doesn't work for all of us and breaks down in situations where it's not very easy to see the imaginary ball or keep your eyes on the tiny contact point or guess correctly for the other factors.

I honestly wish I had the time and resources that Dave Alciatore has. Because if I did then I would have already done everything possible to document these systems straight from the man himself. I would have put them on video and I would have figured out the math involved as well any adjustments that are made subconscioulsy or otherwise.

I would not be calling the systems hooey, instead I would truly figure out scientifically with video evidence and analysis why they work, what the limitations are and how those limitations are corrected for.

That's the sort of discussion that needs to happen, not a collection of opinions as to why they "work" or don't coupled with an undertone of clear disdain.

I submit that Dr. Alciatore just take all the information about that which he does not know off his website because he is only further muddying the waters with incomplete data and slanted opinion.

He should stick to the things that he does know and can prove such as all the EXCELLENT material that is there concerning things that have been put on video and have sufficient analysis.

Let CTE continue to be it's own underground thing where people pass it on from person to person until such time as someone can or will publish something that makes the how and why of it clear.

And for you, just hope that you play people like me who believe in and use the "hooey" because if we are wrong then you are going to win easily.

Unless of course they happen to be named Stevie Moore or Matt Krah in which case they use the hooey a little better than most of us on here.

Of course people who use a system are approaching the table in a systematic way. I look at the shot and instantly see the lines I need to guide me to the shot corridor and from there I trust it, wrong or right, that's the line I choose and for me that equates to more success on the table. But it's not a cure-all for bad vision, bad strokes, chicken wing arm, jumping up, lunging forward, jab stroking, poor speed control etc... it's merely a way to find the right line.

A couple of times in this post you say that there are shots that you can only make consistently with CTE, I would be interested in seeing a couple of Wei table diagrams of shots you usually miss, but can make consistently with the system.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Dead Crab]

If anyone wants to set up a fair experiment in aiming using a laser to confirm accuracy, count me in. I am confident that I can estimate cut angles to within 0.5 degrees and aim point to within 1mm. But, you won't see me touting my method as a magical secret that you must have.

This is because I can also clearly demonstrate that 1mm aim isn't really worth much if you have a >2mm stroke accuracy variance at 7-feet and can't play position very well. Long straight-in shots don't even require any aim, yet they can be some of pool's toughest to make.

All this hostility about aim, which is probably less than a third of the game for any B-player wannabe. Frankly, taking a novice and giving them exact aim just isn't going to help them much, as they won't get the CB to it anyway.

If CTE is really the magic method that it's proponents claim it to be then it must really be a stroke and alignment corrector. There is no other plausible explanation for the claimed results. The proponents thereof should try to figure out how it accomplishes this, and forget the "aim" stuff, which even in the best of circumstances could never produce the claimed results.

 

[Beer:30]

It's not a "circus" but his information on CTE is not information at all. It's opinions. Dr. Dave whom I do actually respect is not doing the right thing here and he knows it. He holds a belief that CTE is bullshit and he is going to great lengths to say that in a very backhanded way.


Not when it comes to CTE.

I've gotta call you on this. I've seen a lot of generalizations by CTE proponents about CTE and implications that the "doubters" are just citing opinion instead of any real evidence. Back up what you're saying and cite, specifically, where dr_dave's page is wrong, what you think is dr_dave's opinion as opposed to fact.

Seriously? I can give you examples of plenty of other people who write articles for well known websites and magazines and they are not great players.

Dave should stick to writing about that which he knows how to do and not about that which he does not know how to do.

The info on Dave's site which is on video and has been thoroughly tested is great information and supremely helpful. Why not leave CTE alone if he doesn't get it?

Where is he wrong? Why is it wrong?

So you are stuck between wanting to learn this information which unfortunately is still not properly documented in the modern era and that which you already know and believe in.

So are you implying that the system predates the modern ear?

(Dr. Dave COULD be a major catalyst in documenting and dissecting the nuts and bolts of this but he chooses not to even though it's all there for him).

It's already been dissected, as described, at a mechanical level. Where the current knowledge base sits it's not a mechanically functional system. It must be "massaged" by the individual to be functional. What is incorrect on dr_dave's page that is preventing the system from working?

Hal Houle learned that through CTE a player can quickly tap into the purity of aiming. A key factor in CTE is that the shooter learns to largely disengage his conscious mind from the aiming process. Your mind’s eye can easily perceive each of the 500 shots referenced above as ‘one’.

As stated above much of CTE is subconcious. Is it possible that if you are truly aiming on a subconscious level that you are adjusting the outlined conscious mechanical construct so that the balls are sunk?

 

[cookie man]

Hal's claims are indeed wild. Every pro (with zero exceptions) aims the exact same way, and let's throw in all past pros as far back as 1924, and they keep it a big secret and have conspired and agreed to not reveal it. And it in no way involves the pocket and they don't have to worry about cheating the pocket. ...I coulda sworn an actual pro chimed in and said you don't need a system. Maybe he was lying to protect the secret.

If I were a CTE user I'd be a little embarrassed by all of this.

That's to say nothing of some of the followers claims about a high-school dropout quintupling his pocketing overnight, low level players drilling in shots that are way over their head, being able to fire balls into holes while literally not seeing the pocket... next we'll be hearing they can make balls in the dark.

---

eez: to say dave's page is a "circus" and imply it's not a good instructional site is really lame. Dave has too much class to even respond to something like that, but I don't.

Are you the kind of guy who automatically bashes everything someone says because they disagreed with you on ONE thing? If you had a friend who agreed with 90% of what you say but you don't go to the same church or he voted red while you voted blue, do you kick him out of your home and say "don't ever talk to me again"?

All dave is doing is disagreeing on the claims of one silly aiming system. And even then he's going way out of his way to give it some credit. Meanwhile his page is full of useful, completely legit information ...info that is tested, proven on camera, in slow motion, and can be easily reproduced by anyone at the pool table; info that has helped thousands. There's a reason he gets paid to write articles about pool and you and I do not.

When Dave posts other people's info, of course he gives his opinion on it... but he tries to include multiple points of views. He doesn't just copy the parts he agrees with or believes. He's a scientist (mechanical engineering, if it matters) and he approaches pool in a scientific way. His page and videos reflect that.

Some CTE advocates apparently approach things in more of a 'religious' way - there is one right way, you must have faith that it's gonna work, everyone who counts knows about it, everything that's said about it is true and you must accept that completely, and anyone who questions it is living in the dark and can go to hell.

---

I wanna thank the CTE guys who have tried to keep it civil and who resist the urge to make miraculous claims. Those who are in touch with me by PM, I'm still perfectly happy to learn whatever you can offer... despite my skeptical posts.

Hal has some wild claims on the surface, I agree. But have you ever heard a pro say he aims any way but by feel. Is this right considering there is a system for everything else,kicking, banking, diamond system,etc.
Then consider the instructors who have spent time with hal- randy g. scott lee, tom simpson, and my personal favorite Stan Shuffett, who have incorperated Cte into their aiming systems. Hal knew something and why is he the only one that these instructors sought out about CTE. There is something to it.
EEZ problems with Dr. dave sight is only cocerning CTE, to many opionons from people who don't know enough about CTE and not enough info from the people that do. He quotes the naysayers and how do you learn from non believers?
Creedo, if it is such a silly aiming system why are you still trying to learn it, and if your not trying to learn it why do you care.
A non-believer who cares should put up the money, go see Stan Shuffett and report back. Whether you like CTE or not the rest of the lessons are worth the money so yuor not losing anything, unless you choose to play Landan after the lesson, then your probably going to lose but that is another subject.

 

[dr_dave]

Yes, I think I understand Mike Page pretty well. He seems like a very intelligent and knowledgeable man - much like yourself. Founded in facts. One well above exaggeration infatuation.

Roger,

Thank you. You are a true gentleman, and it seems like you have great common sense concerning our wonderful game.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

CreeDo,

Thank you. I appreciate your sentiments.

Regards,
Dave

Hal's claims are indeed wild. Every pro (with zero exceptions) aims the exact same way, and let's throw in all past pros as far back as 1924, and they keep it a big secret and have conspired and agreed to not reveal it. And it in no way involves the pocket and they don't have to worry about cheating the pocket. ...I coulda sworn an actual pro chimed in and said you don't need a system. Maybe he was lying to protect the secret.

If I were a CTE user I'd be a little embarrassed by all of this.

That's to say nothing of some of the followers claims about a high-school dropout quintupling his pocketing overnight, low level players drilling in shots that are way over their head, being able to fire balls into holes while literally not seeing the pocket... next we'll be hearing they can make balls in the dark.

---

eez: to say dave's page is a "circus" and imply it's not a good instructional site is really lame. Dave has too much class to even respond to something like that, but I don't.

Are you the kind of guy who automatically bashes everything someone says because they disagreed with you on ONE thing? If you had a friend who agreed with 90% of what you say but you don't go to the same church or he voted red while you voted blue, do you kick him out of your home and say "don't ever talk to me again"?

All dave is doing is disagreeing on the claims of one silly aiming system. And even then he's going way out of his way to give it some credit. Meanwhile his page is full of useful, completely legit information ...info that is tested, proven on camera, in slow motion, and can be easily reproduced by anyone at the pool table; info that has helped thousands. There's a reason he gets paid to write articles about pool and you and I do not.

When Dave posts other people's info, of course he gives his opinion on it... but he tries to include multiple points of views. He doesn't just copy the parts he agrees with or believes. He's a scientist (mechanical engineering, if it matters) and he approaches pool in a scientific way. His page and videos reflect that.

Some CTE advocates apparently approach things in more of a 'religious' way - there is one right way, you must have faith that it's gonna work, everyone who counts knows about it, everything that's said about it is true and you must accept that completely, and anyone who questions it is living in the dark and can go to hell.

---

I wanna thank the CTE guys who have tried to keep it civil and who resist the urge to make miraculous claims. Those who are in touch with me by PM, I'm still perfectly happy to learn whatever you can offer... despite my skeptical posts.

 

[dr_dave]

I've gotta call you on this. I've seen a lot of generalizations by CTE proponents about CTE and implications that the "doubters" are just citing opinion instead of any real evidence. Back up what you're saying and cite, specifically, where dr_dave's page is wrong, what you think is dr_dave's opinion as opposed to fact.

Where is he wrong? Why is it wrong?

It's already been dissected, as described, at a mechanical level. Where the current knowledge base sits it's not a mechanically functional system. It must be "massaged" by the individual to be functional. What is incorrect on dr_dave's page that is preventing the system from working?

As stated above much of CTE is subconcious. Is it possible that if you are truly aiming on a subconscious level that you are adjusting the outlined conscious mechanical construct so that the balls are sunk?

Excellent questions. I would be happy to change or improve any of the descriptions on my CTE resource page if there are inaccuracies. I've done my best to quote and reference all of the best information available from the experts, and I am happy to add more if it will improve understanding of CTE and help people use it more effectively.

Regards,
Dave

 

[LAMas]

"...A non-believer who cares should put up the money, go see Stan Shuffett and report back.... "

As with all of the posts, "Those that know, know and those that don't, have to manage."

Before or after the lessons, the student will be sworn not to divulge the necessary offsets from CTE to cut all of the angles that the OB must travel to the center of the pocket and at the various distances from the CB. If that has been disclosed here, then I must have missed it.

I/m sorry if I was sleeping during class.:smile:

 

[Roger Long]

Hal has some wild claims on the surface, I agree. But have you ever heard a pro say he aims any way but by feel. Is this right considering there is a system for everything else,kicking, banking, diamond system,etc.
Then consider the instructors who have spent time with hal- randy g. scott lee, tom simpson, and my personal favorite Stan Shuffett, who have incorperated Cte into their aiming systems. Hal knew something and why is he the only one that these instructors sought out about CTE. There is something to it.
EEZ problems with Dr. dave sight is only cocerning CTE, to many opionons from people who don't know enough about CTE and not enough info from the people that do. He quotes the naysayers and how do you learn from non believers?
Creedo, if it is such a silly aiming system why are you still trying to learn it, and if your not trying to learn it why do you care.
A non-believer who cares should put up the money, go see Stan Shuffett and report back. Whether you like CTE or not the rest of the lessons are worth the money so yuor not losing anything, unless you choose to play Landan after the lesson, then your probably going to lose but that is another subject.

Cookie:

Please don't take offense when I say this, but you're not helping your own cause here. You seem to be trying to force your own opinion onto CTE's skeptics, and then you're turning around and saying there are "too many opinions from people who don't know enough about CTE, and not enough information from the people that do."

Hal Houle supposedly had all the information on CTE that anyone could ever want or need, and yet he didn't share any of it in these forums; all he did was state a bunch of his own opinions. And they were all outrageous opinions at that.

The proponents of CTE have offered up tons of information here (and we all thank them for that), but they have offered NO proof to back up any of Hal's claims. And I do think that proof is all that Dr. Dave is looking for. Not more information, not more evidence, not more opinions, not more testimonials, not more endorsements, not more arguments, not more posturing; just proof.

I want the same thing, and I think Cocobolo Cowboy is hiding it from me.

Roger

 

[cookie man]

Cookie:

Please don't take offense when I say this, but you're not helping your own cause here. You seem to be trying to force your own opinion onto CTE's skeptics, and then you're turning around and saying there are "too many opinions from people who don't know enough about CTE, and not enough information from the people that do."

Hal Houle supposedly had all the information on CTE that anyone could ever want or need, and yet he didn't share any of it in these forums; all he did was state a bunch of his own opinions. And they were all outrageous opinions at that.

The proponents of CTE have offered up tons of information here (and we all thank them for that), but they have offered NO proof to back up any of Hal's claims. And I do think that proof is all that Dr. Dave is looking for. Not more information, not more evidence, not more opinions, not more testimonials, not more endorsements, not more arguments, not more posturing; just proof.

I want the same thing, and I think Cocobolo Cowboy is hiding it from me.

Roger

Proof of what, Spideys blog has all you need. Have you even tried CTE yet?