Pivoting and CTE
- Thread starter lfigueroa
- Start date
But, like many, many players, I don't use an aiming system. So for me it's not a question of looking at the shots differently. I just see the ball and the shot and then rely on my setup to do what I want.
For me, it's about the stroke and body mechanics that lead to consistency. I think you mess with these pivots and such at you own peril.The big thing I'm trying to do nowadays is install greater consistency in my game. And to me, that's not about aiming, it's about stroke set up and execution. But that's just me.
Lou Figueroa
Well color me happy. We have a winner!
Lou Figueroa
somebody tell him
what he's won
Lou:
Actually, he did (color you with happy colors, that is). You were colored happy with blue and red. There was an extraneous "/color" tag thrown in there, but hey, Neil was making SURE you were colored in a happy way!
-Sean
Like I said, I might have missed it -- I don't typically wade through all the CTE ca-ca
But if we are in agreement that doing things the same way, every shot, is the bottom line issue, and can accept that a pivot, while good for some, might be bad for others, then maybe (probably) CTE can actually hinder a player's progress. Even allowing that it might help someone face certain shots with confidence, if it is hindering their stroke from being all it can be, then basically CTE ultimately becomes a handicap.
It does a player no good if he can cut a shot backwards, but can't run any balls. And if CTE, what with the pivoting, is causing some misalignment in the player's body mechanics, it is then a bad thing.
Lou Figueroa
Then that would be for each player to figure out on their own wouldn't it? Of course nothing is one size fits all.
For me it allows me to let my stroke out. I can do things now with my stroke consistently that I could not before learning aiming systems.
One major improvement is that I can SEE where the cueball is going to go and I am not sacrificing the aiming line for position. No more of that getting perfect position but missing the shot. I am able to play position with greater accuracy.
I totally agree - if it's messing you up then don't do it.
My diving coach used to say however that if it feels wrong then it might be right. He was referring to when people develop bad habits and then someone shows them the right way it will feel wrong.
I agree as well that being able to make all sorts of hero shots and not being able to run out is not a formula for success. But it doesn't have to be one or the other.
Any technique that people use is at the end of the day a judgement call. The player has to feel right about it before they pull the trigger and if they stick with something that is not allowing them to be successful then it's their own fault.
Unlike religion this is something tangible that you can touch and try. If you tell me a banking system then I can take it to the table and try it - if it works and I feel comfortable with it then great - I keep it - if not then I drop it.
Freddy Bentevegna's banking systems are like this for me. I have read his book twice and taken it to the pool room twice and honestly his systems are like reading Martian to me. The first time I took the book to the pool room a friend wandered over and was reading over my shoulder - he takes the balls and whack whack whack knocks them in according to Freddy's instructions. I still couldn't do it even with my friend trying to explain it to me and the book in front of us.
Yesterday I was chatting with one of the premier coaches in China. A Taiwanese man named Mr. Chen. I asked him how he teaches his students to aim and he totally surprised me by saying he teaches using the light refection system. His students are incredibly accurate. For example one of his students is a woman who is top five in China and she ran 8 and out on me in the first game of one pocket we ever played. She did it by cutting a ball nearly 90 degrees backward to start her run. But aiming is only one part of it - their fundamentals are rock solid.
Anyway it's all part of the same goal, make lots of balls, win lots of game, get adulation! If something you are using is getting in the way of that then stop it. Conversely if something you are using is helping you then use it even if other people are telling you it can't work.
How does pivoting affect the stroke? I mean once I am down on the shot I don't see how anything I did to get there matters providing I am actually in a position to stroke fully.
Assuming that you and I are facing the same shot and you do your way and I do it my way and we both end up with out bridge hands and stances in the same place why would you think that I have any less chance to execute the shot any worse than you do?
The only way I see any type of negative affect on the actual shot is if the shooter is way out of position and can't stroke properly.
I was faced with this problem a lot when teaching people to jump. They would set on the ball in such a way that they would automatically jerk the cue to the left or right on the down stroke, or they would short stroke it. I had to spend time correcting their alignment so that they could have any chance to stroke properly, then I had to teach them what a proper stroke looked and felt like.
For a sufficiently advanced player however they should know when they are down on the ball whether they can stroke properly or not.
So other than someone who has no clue about the proper way to stand when down on the shot I don't see any player being affected negatively insofar as the stroke is concerned simply by virtue of pivoting to the aiming line and putting their bridge hand down.
I too prefer to step into the shot rather than to pivot into it. It is possible to step into the shot using CTE.
The final step in CTE is coming down on or into the shot line. When you use CTE for a little while you just see the right line as you are walking to the table and when you do you can lay your cue down on that line without any pivots if you choose to.
I agree. Some players, like Hopkins for example, just "envision the ball going into the pocket" and when they pull the trigger.... it does. Some players were born with a visual perception that others just don't have. Doing anything other than instinct would hamper the magic that's going on.
That said, there are FAR more people (me included) that weren't born with the gift of "see ball, make ball" with exceptional percentages. Pivot systems like CTE and 90/90 will help WAY more people than hurt.
CTE is an exact geometric system. My philosophy is "why feel-aim" when you can exact-aim 100% of the time (with practice).
You're totally correct in saying there's WAY more to pool than aiming. There is. Aiming is only 33% of the equation. The others are stroke and speed. I don't think it's fair to say "what good is CTE when you make every ball and get out of position and not run out?" The fact of the matter is that statement holds true for every style of aiming, not just CTE.
When you ran a handful of 80's this week, you prob never had a hard enough shot to care about aiming. For me, the fact that I no longer sweat aiming only means I can focus on my stroke and speed --- I think that's why I'm getting better by the minute.
Are you referring to feel and memory as your way of lining to the shot.
Wouldn't that be a system maybe.When someone say's i dont use a system makes me think what are you doing guesstamating the ball in.
Your saying you dont use a system to aim sounds like you dont aim.
Which is false .There is a aiming process going on for you to make the ball,so there is your aiming system.
If not how do you pocket balls without aiming?
That's what I've been saying. Those who say aiming systems are for the birds make no sense. That's like saying, "I go about pocketing a ball differently every single shot." Good players go about ball pocketing the same way, even if it's "feel" - their method(s) are systematic. Someone who does something different on every single shot looks goofy at the table.
Dave:
That bolded paragraph above was a great opener, and basically says it all for those of us that *can* envision the shot, and see right where to aim the cue ball to make that vision happen. That's been my beef with the CTE advocates all along -- these crazy bucket claims of "imagine how many 'balls' higher in skill level you'd be if you'd integrate CTE into your playing." The problem is, for those that don't have the ability to see/envision the shot the way some of us do, simply don't understand how INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT it is to "turn it off" ("it" being the ghost ball, contact point, etc.). I think I used the analogy in a past post of "whack-a-mole" if I recall correctly. For me, ghostball is like a little white mole that pops up next-to/touching the object ball inline with the pocket. If I stare at a table layout for a moment, then close my eyes, not only will I "see" the ghostly image of that table layout on my eyelids, but it will have the ghostball where it needs to be on the shot I was considering. I can't turn it off, and I'll do more harm to my playing if I try. (And believe me, I tried, and it f*cked me up for a long time, until I re-learned to relax and just let what my mind do what it wants to do -- get in the natural zone of seeing the shot and executing it.)
That doesn't mean, however, that I'm not interested in knowing how CTE works -- how it arrives at the correct ghostball position. The science guy part of me rubs his hands together in anticipation of the realization *how* CTE does this -- what math plays into it? Perhaps there's no math other than the 1.125" (inch and one-eighth -- the radius of a standard cue ball) and how your pivot arrives at the contact point on the object ball with this measurement in consideration. Or perhaps something else. But I'm genuinely interested in knowing what it is. And I know when it's finally revealed, the science guys will go -- "hey, that's cool!"
-Sean
My technique document is now 22 pages long. The math document is 31 pages long (1 diagram per page with a short description of what someone is looking at in case they failed geometry in high school). The extended math document (which answers Dr. Dave's 3-shot question) is 51 pages long.
I hope when this is put out in the public, the science guys will not fight logic and give Hal his fair shake. My deep sincere hope is that the science guys will maybe come up with new insight on how to apply the math at the table so hacks like me can retire from being a CTE spokesman.
I was fortunate that I understood what was happening geometrically/visually so I could give a math wizard insight on how to complete the proof. Hal only provided me with technique knowledge. He NEVER discussed math - except in vague allusions so I would get back to the task at hand--- technique. I would ask "why, Hal" and he would say, "don't worry... just DO... the system knows so you don't have to." In many ways, Hal reminded me of Yoda hahahaha. Now that I see the math behind his super simple technique, I now UNDERSTAND why he never wanted to discuss it. It's bloody TOUGH mathematically.
There is a lot of mis-info, some inadvertently caused by me. Hal always said "sight the outermost edge" and if anything, my technique for identifying that is the correct one (so I'll pat myself on the back for that). But, offsetting the cue parallel to the CTEL isn't correct. The cue's angle of attack into the CB changes based on the outermost edge. I've always been doing that but didn't realize I was doing it.
Although the guts (math) of CTE is complicated, the simplicity in its practical application is what makes it genius and beautiful.
I'll go out on a limb and say CTE will be a world-wide ball pocketing technique in a number of years and will allow people who can't "just see it" progress to the levels of those who can. It'll be the great equalizer.
Actually you don't agree. Since you don't agree that CTE actually works then you don't agree that it puts the player on the right line.
My meaning was that after using CTE to find the right line often enough then as you are walking to the table you are already performing all the steps and pretty much settling in on the right line.
My contention has always been, even from all the way to the Fall of 2000, that the aiming system which works to put you on the right line is one which will force you learn what the RIGHT line feels like. When you know what the right line looks like and feels like then AND ONLY THEN do you develop a really good muscle memory of what's right.
Um, that would be (was) me.
Sean, no reference to CTE, wasn't what I was talking about. I learned to pivot bank by local one-pocket players before learning CTe. Just curiuos if you have any shots you do a pivot on.
Help me out Lou, you don't use aiming systems, you just spend all day in aiming system threads. And a pivot has you confused.
cookie man:
I have *NO* shots I do any kind of pivot on. None. Zero. Zilch. Nyet.
I am a pure ghostballer/contact point aimer. Always have been, ever since I picked up a cue for the first time, watching my Dad play in local bars frequented by fellow police on the job (my father is a retired NYC cop).
You keep asking about this pivot thing, as if, by gosh, you're going to find *some kind* of pivot in even the purest of ghostball aimers. You ain't gonna find one in me. Not in ball-to-pocket shots, not in banks, not in caroms, not in tickies. I see every shot the same -- where the ghostball needs to contact the object ball to pocket it, or to bounce it off the rail into the pocket, or to carom the cue ball off that ghostball position/tangent-line to contact another object ball, etc. In fact, when I play 3-cushion, I sight the shot the same way -- I see the cut angle on the first object ball to bring that cue ball around three cushions to contact the second object ball, etc. No pivots. Honest. And I mean scout's honor here. You wanna keep looking/prying for a pivot in my style? Come on up to NY sometime, and you can show me if I have one. I play at Iron Willies Billiards in Yorktown Heights, NY.
Respectfully,
-Sean
Sean, didn't mean anything, just trying to learn. I will try this summer to come up and play, would love to rack for a natural player and if you travel through Balto. you have an open invite.
Thanks, Dave