Why CTE is silly

Status
Not open for further replies.
duckie said:
This is all you need to know. Everything else is bullshit. Make the training aid and have at it.

http://books.google.com/books?id=dK...v=onepage&q=the arrow babe cranfield&f=false

You all look silly still discussing this stupid way to aim.
Click to expand...


Short of the Arrow...(which is uneeded BTW) this is exactly the beginning of how I aim.....(This is the Center to Center Method)

Now that I think about...I am not even sure it should be called a Ghost Ball system...The reality is that I never envision a ghost ball of any kind...I am only looking for the spot on the cloth that is the exact center of where the Ghost Ball would be...That is the extent of the connection...

That is only the beginning however....I (standing behind the CB now) extend a line from the center CB (to the center GB) and past to the OB...I look at where the line contacts the OB and in combination what is the overlap....aka...which of the 3-line aim lines am I on......sometimes it is not dead on one of the 3 line aims...but what I have found is that it is always very close and only favors to one side or the other (of the 3-lines)...when that happens I just do what it tells me and "favor" to that side of the 3-line contact......I feel that this "makes up" for the minute differences in some of GetMeThere's graph that breaks it down to within "cheating the pocket" differences.

The beauty of the system is that "everything" is based off of center CB as a starting point...not pivots are necessary and there is no need to remember to change pivot lengths based on shot length...

That honsetly is the main draw back that I see with CTE...the pivoting really thows me off and moreso thows off my foot/body/cue alingment....

With the "center to center conversion to 3-line" system...aka...CTCC3L method...as your standing behind the CB and found your aim line...the back foot ends up on that line so you can't "lose" the line...and it does not really matter anyway...because you have also already converted to one of the 3-line shots....(perhaps with a "favor" to one side)

"Yeah..but how do you find center CB without the Arrow"....Glad you asked.....I have done it for so long that I just know where it is....it is pretty much habit....If I need some re-assurance that I have the right spot......and I don't have my handy arrow....I will stand behind the OB in direct line with where I want the OB to go...(may not be a corner pocket)

I will take my cue tip and place it directly behind of the OB along the intended line...I will drag the tip back from the OB while looking at the tip reflection on the OB....as the reflection moves up to the halfway point...My actual tip will be where the center of the GB would be....Keeping the tip in place if I have to I can then swing the butt of the cue around so it is directly over the CB.....in that instant I have the center to center aim point.....and a conversion to one of the 3-line shots....I could now go take a drink walk around the table or whatever if I had to...when I come back I already know which 3-line aim point I will be shooting at.

"Yeah...but how do you know when the reflection is halfway?" .....well I am glad you asked....if you look at the OB, you will notice that the bottom half of the ball is shaded...the top has direct light...Most probably never realize that is the case...but once you look close you will see what I meam....As I draw the cue back from the OB...and the tip moves up...just before it reaches the point where the shade turnes to light....that is halfway.....To check yourself to see if you "see it right" you can mark what you think the the correct "center" and then place a ball in that spot......then adjust accordingly...after you do it a couple times...you will find it real simple to find the center mark.

For some...CTE is the better method....I get that and am fine with it...but for those that want to use a 3-line method....have a hard time picking the right line....and have a hard time with the pivoting....this may be the alternative method.

From what I have read/seen....experimented with...the CTE pivot ends you in the exact same aims....However...the only way I know how to use CTE is into the corner pockets...CTE does not get me to the side pockets...or points on rails....
 
This makes more sense if you open the doc at the end and follow along. Oh yeah, there's no charge for all this good info.

Since I like ghost ball, this is the way I got there. Back in the early 70's is when I started playing pool and back then there was nowhere near the available info on pool as there is now. It was all trial and error at first but kinda grew into using ghost ball. I played that way and was not too bad, but was not very serious about playing. More social than anything and faded from playing over time.

Back about 5 years or so, with the kids grown and time on my hands, I started playing again. Of course, I just used the old ways. The difference now is that I'm more serious than before, so I really want to improve. Read and tried fractional, parallel, light/reflection aiming systems, just about anything out there to help my quest. I even tried various banks systems.

I realized that I really didn't understand what was happening to make the cue ball actually hit the object ball to put it into a pocket. I had a general idea but nothing really solid.

So, on a sheet of paper, I drew two circles touching, one representing the OB, the other representing the GB. Where they touched is the contact point. I marked both centers on the paper. Then I drew a line from the contact point toward the direction of the pocket. Then I drew another circle somewhere on the paper to representing the CB with its centered marked. Ghost ball on paper.

Studying that drawing, I noticed a few things and kinda came up with some new terms, at least for me.

One is contact patch. That is the area where the ball meets the table and is also the center of all the circles. That’s what all balls roll on.

Another is direction of travel. That would be the direction a ball rolls. I like this because the word travel implies movement which is a big part of pool and needs to be thought about. This is also what the contact patch rolls on.

Looking at just the OB and GB circles, I noticed the OB and GB contact patches and contact point are on the same line. I then realized the direction of travel of the OB really started at the GB contact patch. Also, that the GB contact patch is always 1/2 ball from the edge of the OB, as long as both are the same size.

I then included the CB circle into the mix. First thing I noticed was that if I put the CB contact patch at the GB contact patch, the OB will go in. Second, was that no matter the cut angle, I had to put the CB contact patch at the GB patch. This is why I have a hard time believing a true 90 degree cut shot. Third, that the direction of travel of the CB after hitting a OB ball starts at the GB contact patch which also the starting point for the direction of travel for the OB.

Now, I added spin into the mix. I noticed that any hit on the center line of the CB circle is right toward the GB contact point and on the CB circle direction of travel to the GB contact patch. This also means that the cue stick should be on that same line. This is the heart of shot making.

This is why learning center ball is very important.

Since the GB contact patch is always 1/2 ball from the OB edge, adjusting for side spin is just a matter of rotating the GB contact patch in the proper direction around the edge of the OB for the side spin used. How much? That’s where table time comes in. You just can't know all about English unless you hit alot of balls with all types of spin and on different tables and hw the same table and set of balls can play different depending oh how clean and the weather. This is the biggest reason that HAMB is so important.

Something I noticed about using the direction of travel line of the OB. That was how far the pocket is from the OB really doesn't matter. What matter was this, knowing what the direction of travel of the OB would be for the type of shot being made and picking a point on that line about 4-6 inches in front of the OB. If you put the CB on the proper point on the table to cause the OB roll over that point, than the OB will go in.

Of course this was on paper, so time to go the table. This is where I started my GB visualization drill. At first I used the 8 and 1 ball and the CB. I'd place the 8 on the table as the OB and the 1 on the table as the GB and the CB somewhere else on the table like I did on paper.

I'd look at the 8/1 from a straight in shot point of view then move over to where the CB was, got in my stance as if to shoot, but didn't, but just looked the 1's contact patch. I would move the CB around or the 8/1 and repeat. It looked strange doing this drill, but I really didn't care. Drills are not always about hitting balls. This is also where the Arrow comes in handy cause you can actually have the arrow on the table and just aim at its point cause its point is the same as the GB contact patch.

Now, I have realized a few more things from this. One is the tops of the OB and CB are opposite of the contact patch. At times I use the top of the CB to sight to the where the GB contact patch would be. Sometimes I use just the tops of the CB and OB to sight. Also, I noticed my eye pattern is more up and down, looking from where the CB is to where I want to put it on the table. Unlike looking from a contact point on the OB to a spot table to where the CB should be and then back to the CB and back to the spot on the table to the contact point of the object for needed adjust.

Sometimes I use the lights to reference where the GB contact patch is. Sometimes I use fractional to reference where the GB contact is.
Sometimes I use parallel to reference where the GB contact patch is.

But I aim for the GB contact patch. There have been times, I see where the OB direction of travel starts, which is the same spot of the GB contact patch, I put the CB on that spot on the table and never really consider the OB. But this comes and goes and takes time, practice to learn.

Seldom do I even think of the contact point. I just used it to help establish the start point for the OB direction to travel. Once I have that, its forgotten. I never think about trying to hit a contact point on the OB with a contact point on the CB. It’s about putting the CB at the proper point on the table to make the OB go where I want it. I never try to "see" a GB.

Anyway, this is how I got to believe what I do about making shots in pool. I thought I had something new until I got Babe Canfields’ "Straight Pool Bible" and read the chapter about the arrow. I had nothing new, but I felt great that my thinking was almost exactly like his.

FWIW
 

Attachments

duckie said:
This makes more sense if you open the doc at the end and follow along. Oh yeah, there's no charge for all this good info.

Since I like ghost ball, this is the way I got there. Back in the early 70's is when I started playing pool and back then there was nowhere near the available info on pool as there is now. It was all trial and error at first but kinda grew into using ghost ball. I played that way and was not too bad, but was not very serious about playing. More social than anything and faded from playing over time.

Back about 5 years or so, with the kids grown and time on my hands, I started playing again. Of course, I just used the old ways. The difference now is that I'm more serious than before, so I really want to improve. Read and tried fractional, parallel, light/reflection aiming systems, just about anything out there to help my quest. I even tried various banks systems.

I realized that I really didn't understand what was happening to make the cue ball actually hit the object ball to put it into a pocket. I had a general idea but nothing really solid.

So, on a sheet of paper, I drew two circles touching, one representing the OB, the other representing the GB. Where they touched is the contact point. I marked both centers on the paper. Then I drew a line from the contact point toward the direction of the pocket. Then I drew another circle somewhere on the paper to representing the CB with its centered marked. Ghost ball on paper.

Studying that drawing, I noticed a few things and kinda came up with some new terms, at least for me.

One is contact patch. That is the area where the ball meets the table and is also the center of all the circles. That’s what all balls roll on.

Another is direction of travel. That would be the direction a ball rolls. I like this because the word travel implies movement which is a big part of pool and needs to be thought about. This is also what the contact patch rolls on.

Looking at just the OB and GB circles, I noticed the OB and GB contact patches and contact point are on the same line. I then realized the direction of travel of the OB really started at the GB contact patch. Also, that the GB contact patch is always 1/2 ball from the edge of the OB, as long as both are the same size.

I then included the CB circle into the mix. First thing I noticed was that if I put the CB contact patch at the GB contact patch, the OB will go in. Second, was that no matter the cut angle, I had to put the CB contact patch at the GB patch. This is why I have a hard time believing a true 90 degree cut shot. Third, that the direction of travel of the CB after hitting a OB ball starts at the GB contact patch which also the starting point for the direction of travel for the OB.

Now, I added spin into the mix. I noticed that any hit on the center line of the CB circle is right toward the GB contact point and on the CB circle direction of travel to the GB contact patch. This also means that the cue stick should be on that same line. This is the heart of shot making.

This is why learning center ball is very important.

Since the GB contact patch is always 1/2 ball from the OB edge, adjusting for side spin is just a matter of rotating the GB contact patch in the proper direction around the edge of the OB for the side spin used. How much? That’s where table time comes in. You just can't know all about English unless you hit alot of balls with all types of spin and on different tables and hw the same table and set of balls can play different depending oh how clean and the weather. This is the biggest reason that HAMB is so important.

Something I noticed about using the direction of travel line of the OB. That was how far the pocket is from the OB really doesn't matter. What matter was this, knowing what the direction of travel of the OB would be for the type of shot being made and picking a point on that line about 4-6 inches in front of the OB. If you put the CB on the proper point on the table to cause the OB roll over that point, than the OB will go in.

Of course this was on paper, so time to go the table. This is where I started my GB visualization drill. At first I used the 8 and 1 ball and the CB. I'd place the 8 on the table as the OB and the 1 on the table as the GB and the CB somewhere else on the table like I did on paper.

I'd look at the 8/1 from a straight in shot point of view then move over to where the CB was, got in my stance as if to shoot, but didn't, but just looked the 1's contact patch. I would move the CB around or the 8/1 and repeat. It looked strange doing this drill, but I really didn't care. Drills are not always about hitting balls. This is also where the Arrow comes in handy cause you can actually have the arrow on the table and just aim at its point cause its point is the same as the GB contact patch.

Now, I have realized a few more things from this. One is the tops of the OB and CB are opposite of the contact patch. At times I use the top of the CB to sight to the where the GB contact patch would be. Sometimes I use just the tops of the CB and OB to sight. Also, I noticed my eye pattern is more up and down, looking from where the CB is to where I want to put it on the table. Unlike looking from a contact point on the OB to a spot table to where the CB should be and then back to the CB and back to the spot on the table to the contact point of the object for needed adjust.

Sometimes I use the lights to reference where the GB contact patch is. Sometimes I use fractional to reference where the GB contact is.
Sometimes I use parallel to reference where the GB contact patch is.

But I aim for the GB contact patch. There have been times, I see where the OB direction of travel starts, which is the same spot of the GB contact patch, I put the CB on that spot on the table and never really consider the OB. But this comes and goes and takes time, practice to learn.

Seldom do I even think of the contact point. I just used it to help establish the start point for the OB direction to travel. Once I have that, its forgotten. I never think about trying to hit a contact point on the OB with a contact point on the CB. It’s about putting the CB at the proper point on the table to make the OB go where I want it. I never try to "see" a GB.

Anyway, this is how I got to believe what I do about making shots in pool. I thought I had something new until I got Babe Canfields’ "Straight Pool Bible" and read the chapter about the arrow. I had nothing new, but I felt great that my thinking was almost exactly like his.

FWIW
Click to expand...

You see, this is all good information and it goes well beyond the "simple" explanation of Ghost Ball aiming.

This is the point I have been making all along. Hal Houle has done the same thing in his own way by thinking about and analyzing aiming and coming up with his own methods that work.

This is why any statement that CTE is "silly" or "BS" is itself BS.

You have mentioned that you use several methods to find the right line based off of the GB method.

I am sure that with a proper demonstration and some practice that any player could learn and implement your methods.

Some may be able to get them from your written description while others may struggle. Same as with CTE.

The fact that you got validation from seeing that Cranfield had also come up with similar methods is normal. Ron Vitello developed his aiming methods without any input from Hal Houle and yet they are similar.

At the end of the day the balls are just sitting there. Who really cares how any individual gets to the one correct aiming corridor (corridor because there are really many lines in a range that work to pocket the ball)?

So why is it so hard for people to just calm down and discuss all the ways that these aiming systems DO work and what the pitfalls and shortcomings are with each one. Because they ALL have shortcomings, mostly based on the estimation part where the shooter has to decide WHERE to put their bridge hand down.

In my opinion that is.
 
lfigueroa said:
Even though your happiness comes at my expense, I'm good with it.

In fact, I don't think I've felt this way about another person's victory since I was a volunteer for The Special Olympics.

Enjoy, John :-)

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

Aww Lou you didn't.......you went to the retarded joke????

Come on buddy you're better than that, I know you have more in you.

You know I am messing with you. While I certainly think that I could legitimately win a race to three in one hole against you now I don't think that I have much chance to do it consistently.

You are a very good player and I am certain that I have little chance to beat you in long sessions in any game.

However if you are going to put out the heat with your tinfoil hat comments then maybe you should be able to take a little ribbing on losing to the clown in the tinfoil hat.

As I have said many times before I will be happy to play you some heads up one pocket for a little gas money and donate to your travel fund. Unlike some other internet warriors I give a guy a shot at a rematch :-)

I am going to try very hard to be at Derby in January. But if not then SBE in March. I promise to have my bible of aiming systems handy and use them all when we play. Therefore if they really are useless then that will just be another advantage for you.

How's $50 a game sound with a ten game minimum? Just putting it out there so you can remind me later. Or whatever is good for you.

Can I wear an actual tinfoil hat though when we play?
 
Blue said:
What is post shift???

CTE works pretty consistent on those 85 degree angles, but again I can only effectively pivot from left to right.
Click to expand...

As I understand CTE:

Center of the CB to the edge of the OB (CTE). This is where you start your aim line. You then "shift" your cue shaft a bit off to the right or left of the CB center by moving your bridge to the side. You then "pivot" at your bridge back to the center of the CB.

img062.jpg

:smile::thumbup:
 
JB Cases said:
Aww Lou you didn't.......you went to the retarded joke????

Come on buddy you're better than that, I know you have more in you.

You know I am messing with you. While I certainly think that I could legitimately win a race to three in one hole against you now I don't think that I have much chance to do it consistently.

You are a very good player and I am certain that I have little chance to beat you in long sessions in any game.

However if you are going to put out the heat with your tinfoil hat comments then maybe you should be able to take a little ribbing on losing to the clown in the tinfoil hat.

As I have said many times before I will be happy to play you some heads up one pocket for a little gas money and donate to your travel fund. Unlike some other internet warriors I give a guy a shot at a rematch :-)

I am going to try very hard to be at Derby in January. But if not then SBE in March. I promise to have my bible of aiming systems handy and use them all when we play. Therefore if they really are useless then that will just be another advantage for you.

How's $50 a game sound with a ten game minimum? Just putting it out there so you can remind me later. Or whatever is good for you.

Can I wear an actual tinfoil hat though when we play?
Click to expand...


Aw, come on, John. I put the smiley out there. And it was funny -- don't take it so seriously.

Now *here's* the really funny thing: in a PM exchange, barely 72 hours before this last post of yours, I told someone who asked about you, "John, JB Cases, is a good amateur (but he's basically nuts) -- If you keep pissing him off his standard move will be to challenge you to play for $500 to $1K."

lol. Guess I pissed you off ;-)

Lou Figueroa
see you at
the DCC
 
Last edited:
lfigueroa said:
Aw, come on, John. I put the smiley out there. And it was funny -- don't take it so seriously.

Now *here's* the really funny thing: in a PM exchange, barely 72 hours before this last post of yours, I told someone who asked about you, "John, JB Cases, is a good amateur (but he's basically nuts) -- If you keep pissing him off his standard move will be to challenge you to play for $500 to $1K."

lol. Guess I pissed you off ;-)

Lou Figueroa
see you at
the DCC
Click to expand...

You think I am taking this seriously? You aren't pissing me off in the least. I am proud of two things in my life where you are concerned, A. I beat you, and B. I got you to go the Special Olympics route in our little word games. Now I know you know better than to hide behind a smiley.

As for challenging you I could give a shit whether we ever play again or not. I liked playing you and wish that we had more time to play more the last few times I have seen you.

Since you know you are the better player and I freely admit you are the better player I am just offering to dump up to $500 to you in a one pocket match at $50 a game. It's my challenge to myself to prove that beating you once wasn't entirely a fluke. It may never happen and I am certainly not going to stalk you through the forum or hunt you down with a video camera to bark at you.

If it goes down then you know you have a shot at a little gas money. If not no harm no foul.

As for the PM from Getmethere (I would bet it was from him/her) to you that guy/girl couldn't make a ball in the ocean - I am convinced of that. To me playing him might be too much like stealing so I will refrain from making a challenge to play for money.

See you at the show, I hope.
 
Mr. Wilson said:
So, a polite request isn't enough.

What's it take to get you guys to listen to me? Bannings?
Click to expand...

Come on Dave everyone's just having fun. If anyone deserves to be banned in this thread then it's the person who started the thread.

I don't feel like going back through it to list all the "names" he has called anyone in the thread who thinks CTE has merit.

Lou and I are just having a friendly banter. No biggie.

It's productive in the marketing for CTE that every time someone labels a CTE user as Tinfoil hat wearing brainwashed cult member that one of those CTE users should point out that a Tin Foil Hat Wearing cult member beat them.

Proof being in the pudding as the saying goes, whatever that means.
 
JB Cases said:
You see, this is all good information and it goes well beyond the "simple" explanation of Ghost Ball aiming.

This is the point I have been making all along. Hal Houle has done the same thing in his own way by thinking about and analyzing aiming and coming up with his own methods that work.

This is why any statement that CTE is "silly" or "BS" is itself BS.

You have mentioned that you use several methods to find the right line based off of the GB method.

I am sure that with a proper demonstration and some practice that any player could learn and implement your methods.

Some may be able to get them from your written description while others may struggle. Same as with CTE.

The fact that you got validation from seeing that Cranfield had also come up with similar methods is normal. Ron Vitello developed his aiming methods without any input from Hal Houle and yet they are similar.

At the end of the day the balls are just sitting there. Who really cares how any individual gets to the one correct aiming corridor (corridor because there are really many lines in a range that work to pocket the ball)?

So why is it so hard for people to just calm down and discuss all the ways that these aiming systems DO work and what the pitfalls and shortcomings are with each one. Because they ALL have shortcomings, mostly based on the estimation part where the shooter has to decide WHERE to put their bridge hand down.

In my opinion that is.
Click to expand...

This is the best post from you for awhile. I, for once agree, with how you put things.
 
OK, I don't know if this is the right thread, but here goes anyhow.

Reading the original post, I was left wondering how sensitive to error is the line that we approach. I know that you can make adjustments along the way, but it'd be interesting to know the margin of error for the line we're approaching.

For the sake of argument, you can assume that your line of aiming stays the same from the moment you start your pre-shot routine.

What I'm getting at this idea is that I want to know how little differences we should be detecting when we're only lining up for the shot.
 
JarnoV said:
OK, I don't know if this is the right thread, but here goes anyhow.

Reading the original post, I was left wondering how sensitive to error is the line that we approach. I know that you can make adjustments along the way, but it'd be interesting to know the margin of error for the line we're approaching.

For the sake of argument, you can assume that your line of aiming stays the same from the moment you start your pre-shot routine.

What I'm getting at this idea is that I want to know how little differences we should be detecting when we're only lining up for the shot.
Click to expand...

Should we go fishing with the new can of worms you are opening? :grin:

I think that what you are describing is "shooters error", the only "controllable" equation in any aiming method which will render it fallible. It doesn't matter how great any one method/system is for lining up a pool shot, if the shooter makes a judgement error in the equation, the shot can be missed. I am sure that is why anyone and everyone who shoots pool with whatever aiming method they choose misses shots, even the makeable ones. Then, couple the alignment error with a slight wobble in the stroke, then you have a recipe for disaster (as in MY game :o).

Maniac
 
JarnoV said:
What I'm getting at this idea is that I want to know how little differences we should be detecting when we're only lining up for the shot.
Click to expand...

Right. Conventional wisdom is that your stroking arm should be a machine that is never adjusted once you set up. The accuracy needed would seem to suggest that some tiny adjustment, at least, is going to be necessary.

Still, if you get down and the shot "feels wrong" it's my experience that it's worth getting up and trying again.
 
GetMeThere:
...if you get down and the shot "feels wrong" it's my experience that it's worth getting up and trying again.
Click to expand...
You might want to stay down a little while before getting back up again to see if you can figure out what's wrong. That might teach you to avoid that problem in the future. I do this on every shot during a measured pause before taking practice strokes - part of my pre-shot routine. Regular stock-taking like this has helped me to detect stance errors that aren't so obvious, and has helped me improve my pre-shot routine so that fewer of them happen.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top