Why CTE is silly

[mikepage]

Oh behave!
C'mon, PJ. After little research it seems that you've posted 3,857 times in threads with Cte in the title. That's almost half your posts! And you don't even know how to use Cte. You are leading by example.

Patrick knows how to use many different versions of CTE. He knows at least as much about aiming and aiming systems as anybody in this thread.

 

[mikepage]

Mike-

Let me just bounce this off of you regarding CTE:

I already have an aiming method that is probably as exact as is feasible within the rules of pool. But, I find it limiting because it is difficult to keep a smooth rhythm to my game and I find myself using it on shots that I should be able to make without computation. And frankly, it can be mentally fatiguing to use. I'm lucky if I play over an hour a week, so hitting a million balls is not an option.

So, my interest in CTE is not for finding the exact aiming point, but is an effort to find a way to improve my feel for the game, and to make my game more consistent when moving from table to table.

I have noticed a phenomenon where if you start the sighting process along an aim line that you know is too wide, and gradually visually sweep in along tighter potential aim lines there is (at least sometimes) a "recognition" response when you find the right aim line. sort of a mental: No, no, no, no, yes! when the right aim line is found, that turns to "no" again if you continue your sweep past the correct aim line. My theory is that this is what the pivoting process really is.

Personally, this is how I think the best players aim: they have the ability to quickly consider the possibilities and recognize the correct choice of aim line from among many. So what if CTE isn't really about three angles or exact geometry, but is really a method of systematically approaching a shot and training yourself to recognize that elusive visual cue that confirms that you are "on the line" for that shot. Is that bad?

I think you've hit the CTE nail squarely on the head.

 

[cookie man]

It's astounding that a grown person can believe this.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

(Kinda like these threads.)

pj
chgo

I expect the same results, OB in the pocket is the result I expect and get. The more you type the less you say that makes any sense.

 

[cookie man]

Go back and look at the end of the video. Can you see the 2 balls on the table reflecting in the foil???? That would be a NO!!!!!! No reflection or at least not enough to make out any thing...it is fanfolded and wrinkled texture. I shot 9 balls in about 1 minute 30 seconds if you take out moving the 8 out of the pocket.
I can promise you I was not looking at any thing but the object ball - Cue ball and letting my minds eye see the pocket.....
You can't explain it so it must not be true?

Sounds like another argument that is going on right now!!!!

Like I said this is not a true blind test... I can see the end rail (my side)and part of the side rails, that gives me enough information to make 6 out of 9, and actually if I had slowed down my speed 2 of the misses could have went. But It proves NOTHING!!! except this and Dave's video are parlor tricks....

I can make out the whole reflection of the table. Pause your video at 2:05. Tell me what you see.

 

[cookie man]

Both these shots are thinner than half ball, so I assume they're both "thin" shots in CTE terms. That means you shift and pivot exactly the same way for both, right? If you shift and pivot the same way, how does the cut angle change?

pj
chgo

Are you joking? Do you really know this little about CTE.

 

[eezbank]

Both these shots are thinner than half ball, so I assume they're both "thin" shots in CTE terms. That means you shift and pivot exactly the same way for both, right? If you shift and pivot the same way, how does the cut angle change?

pj
chgo

Poor PJ. Mike still comes up here to bat for you stating you know how to use cte and know as much as anyone on here about it. Even after you write something like this. I'll try to help you one more time if you'll please remove your blinders and put your tin foil hat on and set your decoder ring to G7.

As explained at least one time already if you move from 40-50 to any angle the edge you see on the ob will change. This will always translate to a different cut.

 

[cookie man]

Patrick knows how to use many different versions of CTE. He knows at least as much about aiming and aiming systems as anybody in this thread.

Are you reading his posts?

 

[SUPERSTAR]

Superstar,
I agree that the contact point on the ball would be the same for each shot if you sighted CTE, however the angle to the pocket would not be the same. In your example, the angle has changed enough that you would not sight CTE and shoot, you would have to perform a pivot, as is the system, and would then be in line with the pocket.

From what everyone has said, CTE is used on all shots, and to use CTE, you are pivoting on every shot.

In my picture, the pocketing of the 3 ball is including the pivot as a part of the shot. It isn't a straight cut.

My point is, that you can set the balls up so that every shot has precisely the same edge point (aiming center to edge), and the same pivot (thick, thin, extra thin) and the same line. If all these are constant, the angle produced by the pivot would be the same, because they are the exact same shot.

So please explain to me how if you are pivoting on each shot, and each shot is the same, how the same exact pivot changes the exit angle of the OB so that it goes to the hole.

 

[Neil]

Patrick knows how to use many different versions of CTE. He knows at least as much about aiming and aiming systems as anybody in this thread.

Please tell me this is a joke. Patrick has claimed many times and proven many more times that he knows essentially nothing about CTE. Now, you want to put YOUR reputation on the line by saying that he knows as much about it as Stan does?? As much as the guys that invented CTE???

 

[pool101]

I can make out the whole reflection of the table. Pause your video at 2:05. Tell me what you see.

I see the color green reflecting and that is all I see, and you could probably see that if the blind were white....
If you look at the end of the video, I am right at the end of the table with my camera and I bend down to show under the blind.. do you see me? Do you see the pockets in the reflection?

 

[eezbank]

From what everyone has said, CTE is used on all shots, and to use CTE, you are pivoting on every shot.

In my picture, the pocketing of the 3 ball is including the pivot as a part of the shot. It isn't a straight cut.

My point is, that you can set the balls up so that every shot has precisely the same edge point (aiming center to edge), and the same pivot (thick, thin, extra thin) and the same line. If all these are constant, the angle produced by the pivot would be the same, because they are the exact same shot.

So please explain to me how if you are pivoting on each shot, and each shot is the same, how the same exact pivot changes the exit angle of the OB so that it goes to the hole.

CueTable Help

It works because you always see a different edge on those shots even in 2D.

 

[JimS]

Mike-

Let me just bounce this off of you regarding CTE:

I already have an aiming method that is probably as exact as is feasible within the rules of pool. But, I find it limiting because it is difficult to keep a smooth rhythm to my game and I find myself using it on shots that I should be able to make without computation. And frankly, it can be mentally fatiguing to use. I'm lucky if I play over an hour a week, so hitting a million balls is not an option.

So, my interest in CTE is not for finding the exact aiming point, but is an effort to find a way to improve my feel for the game, and to make my game more consistent when moving from table to table.

I have noticed a phenomenon where if you start the sighting process along an aim line that you know is too wide, and gradually visually sweep in along tighter potential aim lines there is (at least sometimes) a "recognition" response when you find the right aim line. sort of a mental: No, no, no, no, yes! when the right aim line is found, that turns to "no" again if you continue your sweep past the correct aim line. My theory is that this is what the pivoting process really is.

Personally, this is how I think the best players aim: they have the ability to quickly consider the possibilities and recognize the correct choice of aim line from among many. So what if CTE isn't really about three angles or exact geometry, but is really a method of systematically approaching a shot and training yourself to recognize that elusive visual cue that confirms that you are "on the line" for that shot. Is that bad?

I learned to not tell anybody that I do this! I've aimed this way for quite a while but I got so much sh!t about it that I stopped talking about it. Thanks for letting me know that I'm not the only one.

I think of it as being comparable to a piece of artillary moving from side to side until the target is perfectly acquired.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Are you joking? Do you really know this little about CTE.

LOL. I'd bet lots of money that of everybody in this thread you know the least about it. Any time you want to prove me wrong, all you have to do is post something more than your usual empty snide comments.

pj
chgo

 

[SUPERSTAR]

CueTable Help

It works because you always see a different edge on those shots even in 2D.

Is this your version of a legitimate scientific explanation?

If you are going to toss up something like that, please explain what you picture means.
Otherwise, i will interpret it as someone firing balls into the rail.

 

[eezbank]

Is this your version of a legitimate scientific explanation?

If you are going to toss up something like that, please explain what you picture means.
Otherwise, i will interpret it as someone firing balls into the rail.

The five ball is the cueball. It shows that every shot the edge you see is different. Just because they are in a straight line doesn't mean anything. The distance between the shots will always give you a different edge. You asked how it works and I'm trying to show you. The only way I could make it easier for you to see is to have you call me and you can get your crayons out and you can draw your own picture.

 

[Neil]

Is this your version of a legitimate scientific explanation?

If you are going to toss up something like that, please explain what you picture means.
Otherwise, i will interpret it as someone firing balls into the rail.

:thud::thud::thud::thud::thud::speechless::speechless:

 

[Voodoo Daddy]

pool is NOT that hard......put the protractor away and just practice a little. ALL aiming systems work IF the user feels they work.....along with VooDoo, re-incarnation, 4o1k's, energy drinks, LD shafts, lite beer, ab master, chuck norris, ghost whisperers, and the comment that the measles cueball is bigger.....NOT!


anyway.....get on the table, work out your issues, and go win a world championship!

G>

HEY HEY HEY...no Voodoo in there. Although being mentioned with Chuck Norris is ok, BAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Voo~~~the One Pocket Whisperer

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Please tell me this is a joke. Patrick has claimed many times and proven many more times that he knows essentially nothing about CTE. Now, you want to put YOUR reputation on the line by saying that he knows as much about it as Stan does?? As much as the guys that invented CTE???

I'll put my reputation on the line (lol) and say yes to both. I hereby officially declare that I know more about how CTE really works than you, Spidey, Stan or even Saint Hal himself. And I'm not the only one. The people who know the least about how it works (and about how aiming any pool shot works) are CTE users.

pj
chgo

 

[Mikjary]

Ok, now I'm getting scared. I can<and do> understand how people who don't know how to pocket balls<usually beginers, but some people play for years and never figure it out> can benifit from one of these "systems".

But you sound like someone who can play more than a little. How is it that you come up against shots that you don't know how to hit????.

I seriously doubt that I am some undocumented ball aiming genius, but what am I to make of all these war stories - and test shots, both monitored and not, demonstrating that capable players regularly encounter
shots they don't have a clue where to hit?

I never don't know where to hit the ball - I all too often fail to hit the proper target, but it isn't ever because I don't know where it is.

Any thoughts 'different Mike'?

Dale

Hey Dale,

Never fear, different Mike is here! I do have a clue where to hit the balls, but every once in a while I might be off a hair or two. This death rattle usually is heard when I'm 8 feet away from a 75 degree backwards cut on the eight ball while trying to shape the 9 ball frozen on the rail next to the side pocket. Or sometimes on tougher shots. I've actually sparred with a US Open winner who has missed similar shots. But let's not get into any more war stories. We're seeking the truth here.

That being said, my table is unforgiving. I have 4" pockets with Diamond rails and fast Simonis cloth. If you touch the rail on the way in, sit down. You can hit it hard down the rail and pocket the ball, but it measures a tight 2 3/4". Accuracy is a premium. When I'm on a 3 pack I don't want a show stopper. This is where I double check my aiming line. I want to hone my aiming and this is how I have been doing it.

I could just shoot the ball and miss and set it up 27 more times until I was locked in on the aiming line. Or I could use Cte, reset the missed shot, find out the exact aiming line and productively use my successive shots. I choose the latter. I estimate I use a pivot system on less than 5% of my shots. It's a good tool in my toolbox.

Best,
Mike

 

[SUPERSTAR]

The five ball is the cueball. It shows that every shot the edge you see is different. Just because they are in a straight line doesn't mean anything. The distance between the shots will always give you a different edge. You asked how it works and I'm trying to show you. The only way I could make it easier for you to see is to have you call me and you can get your crayons out and you can draw your own picture.

Obviously, you didn't understand my picture.

It is NOT a string of balls on the center line with one cueball on the head spot shooting them all in. That would indeed be several different shots with several different exit angles. That is not what i am talking about AT ALL.

In my picture, it is 3 different cueballs, with their respective object balls, the exact same distance from each other on the same line, i.e., the EXACT same shot.

If you are going to make an argument, please argue the picture and information that i posted.
DO NOT argue something that you imagined that i said, that has nothing to do with what i posted.