If neccessary, move both shots closer to the side rail so they both become ETE.
Aiming Voodoo Video
- Thread starter JB Cases
- Start date
If neccessary, move both shots closer to the side rail so they both become ETE.
Hello all...
I've been frequenting these forums for quite sometime, but haven't registered until now. I guess everyone has that one post that compels them to register, and I guess this one is mine.
Some form of mechanical aiming system has intrigued me for sometime, as pool is full of many 'constants', so an objective system of aiming seems perfectly plausible. This system seems to be the closest I've seen yet, but I see some serious flaws...
First, the desired direction of the OB has no bearing on the equation. ETE, ETC, CTE, etc..does not take into account the desired direction of the object ball, and therefore cannot be a complete system. What if you want to play a combination, or a carom? Cannot be accomplished!
Second, where is the pivot point? Bridge? if so, where is the bridge in relation to the CB? It seems like this pivot point needs to be clearly identified.
So as to the first flaw: I prefer to think instead of 'edge to edge', it should instead read 'edge to contact point'. This now takes into account the ultimate aiming line, and allows the player to define exactly where the OB goes (and also the CB along the tangent line). This also explainsmore accurately the need to transition from 'edge to edge' to 'edge to center' to edge to opposite edge' on different angles.
As to the second flaw...this needs to be worked out and defined, but in terms of a 'constant'. I like the 'pivot from the hip' suggestion, as it suggests a fixed pivot distance, provided the tip of the cue is positioned as close as possible to the CB, then 'pivot' the cue stick from the 'edge' of the CB to a center ball hit, with the pivot being a pre-determined point on the cue stick that is used consistently each time. This pivot point would actually need to be adjusted from table-to-table as dirty OB, friction, etc..would all affect the amount of 'throw'. The more 'throw', the closer the pivot point would need to be to the CB, the less 'throw', the further away from the CB.
Seems like a lot of work to figure out where to shoot, and it definitely isn't for everyone, but I can only assume, that with time and diligent practice (like everything), it can become quicker and easier.
...whew (helluva first post, huh?)
I've been frequenting these forums for quite sometime, but haven't registered until now. I guess everyone has that one post that compels them to register, and I guess this one is mine.
Some form of mechanical aiming system has intrigued me for sometime, as pool is full of many 'constants', so an objective system of aiming seems perfectly plausible. This system seems to be the closest I've seen yet, but I see some serious flaws...
First, the desired direction of the OB has no bearing on the equation. ETE, ETC, CTE, etc..does not take into account the desired direction of the object ball, and therefore cannot be a complete system. What if you want to play a combination, or a carom? Cannot be accomplished!
Second, where is the pivot point? Bridge? if so, where is the bridge in relation to the CB? It seems like this pivot point needs to be clearly identified.
So as to the first flaw: I prefer to think instead of 'edge to edge', it should instead read 'edge to contact point'. This now takes into account the ultimate aiming line, and allows the player to define exactly where the OB goes (and also the CB along the tangent line). This also explainsmore accurately the need to transition from 'edge to edge' to 'edge to center' to edge to opposite edge' on different angles.
As to the second flaw...this needs to be worked out and defined, but in terms of a 'constant'. I like the 'pivot from the hip' suggestion, as it suggests a fixed pivot distance, provided the tip of the cue is positioned as close as possible to the CB, then 'pivot' the cue stick from the 'edge' of the CB to a center ball hit, with the pivot being a pre-determined point on the cue stick that is used consistently each time. This pivot point would actually need to be adjusted from table-to-table as dirty OB, friction, etc..would all affect the amount of 'throw'. The more 'throw', the closer the pivot point would need to be to the CB, the less 'throw', the further away from the CB.
Seems like a lot of work to figure out where to shoot, and it definitely isn't for everyone, but I can only assume, that with time and diligent practice (like everything), it can become quicker and easier.
...whew (helluva first post, huh?)
If you believe that Patrick is here just to "stir the pot" you couldn't be further off the mark. I don't mean to speak for him, but having actually read Patrick's posts for over a decade (as opposed to knee jerking in response to some complaints) it is clear that Patrick is here out of an intellectual interest in the game. If some started arguing here that CIT, or squirt didn't exist, or that the right way to shoot a ball frozen to the rail is to hit the rail and ball simultaneously, the same crowd would be involved in those threads. If there's an issue at hand with "coddling" it's that the problem for some here is that Pat refuses to "coddle" those who make posts one step removed from gibberish.
As another has already pointed out, restarting a thread a moderator has locked up and thrown away the key to is insolent to begin with, but you let John get away with it with impunity. I doubt you would have let some others here do that. As a larger matter, I don't think anyone here really cares what the posting rules are -- as long as they are applied in an even-handed manner. But lately you've let a number of posters run rough shod, while others have actually improved their behavior, yet are still taken to task. This last bit of nastiness identified by Mike seems to indicate that you have actually chosen sides in this whole CTE discussion and that you are no longer acting as a dispassionate party.
Say it ain't so.
Lou Figueroa
i guess its pretty much impossible to have a positive thread on a topic that a group of people find interesting, without a certain few people derailing the thread over and over. There input is all negative,they make little comments on how they are superior in intellect,they try and get a rise out certain posters,they post off topic,etc.
Last edited:
Here is what is interesting about Clearys method as compared to other methods....and then I am out of here and let y'all discuss.
Cleary (as stated) pivots from the back of the cue......the bridge hand slides over during the pivot and then is locked in.
Other CTE methods seem to use a fulcrum from about 8-12"...the pivot is applied by pivoting about a stationary bridge hand.
Here is and experiment..(I have already tried it).
Just for this example we can forget about the pocket....all that matters is the edge alignment and then pivot part....or lets just call this a straight in shot.....I have heard the method for straight in shots is align edge to edge and pivot to center....so lets use that.
Align your cue through edge CB to edge OB....then.
1 - Using a bridge length of 1" (just behind the ferrule) pivot to center CB and stroke the shot.
2 Using a bridge length of 29" (right at the joint of the cue for exaggeration)...pivot to center CB and stroke the shot.
See chart the results you get with each pivot fulcrum.
NOTE: Cleary's fulcrum is at the complete far back of the cue.
DISCLAIMER: Not a naysayer or saying CTE does not work or is not effective as an alignment method....
Have Fun debating...
Cleary (as stated) pivots from the back of the cue......the bridge hand slides over during the pivot and then is locked in.
Other CTE methods seem to use a fulcrum from about 8-12"...the pivot is applied by pivoting about a stationary bridge hand.
Here is and experiment..(I have already tried it).
Just for this example we can forget about the pocket....all that matters is the edge alignment and then pivot part....or lets just call this a straight in shot.....I have heard the method for straight in shots is align edge to edge and pivot to center....so lets use that.
Align your cue through edge CB to edge OB....then.
1 - Using a bridge length of 1" (just behind the ferrule) pivot to center CB and stroke the shot.
2 Using a bridge length of 29" (right at the joint of the cue for exaggeration)...pivot to center CB and stroke the shot.
See chart the results you get with each pivot fulcrum.
NOTE: Cleary's fulcrum is at the complete far back of the cue.
DISCLAIMER: Not a naysayer or saying CTE does not work or is not effective as an alignment method....
Have Fun debating...
I dont think this is a very fair TEST of this system. My opinion is, and alot will back me up (I hope...gulp) but no one in this world pivots at 29 inches or 1 inch for that matter...I want to see video of the people who do.Here is what is interesting about Clearys method as compared to other methods....and then I am out of here and let y'all discuss.
Cleary (as stated) pivots from the back of the cue......the bridge hand slides over during the pivot and then is locked in.
Other CTE methods seem to use a fulcrum from about 8-12"...the pivot is applied by pivoting about a stationary bridge hand.
Here is and experiment..(I have already tried it).
Just for this example we can forget about the pocket....all that matters is the edge alignment and then pivot part....or lets just call this a straight in shot.....I have heard the method for straight in shots is align edge to edge and pivot to center....so lets use that.
Align your cue through edge CB to edge OB....then.
1 - Using a bridge length of 1" (just behind the ferrule) pivot to center CB and stroke the shot.
2 Using a bridge length of 29" (right at the joint of the cue for exaggeration)...pivot to center CB and stroke the shot.
See chart the results you get with each pivot fulcrum.
NOTE: Cleary's fulcrum is at the complete far back of the cue.
DISCLAIMER: Not a naysayer or saying CTE does not work or is not effective as an alignment method....
Have Fun debating...
Now, try this method using your own bridge length...and then post your results.
How about everyone who tries this system post a vid of themselves using it? Be good for debate!
EDIT - Also, as a note for everyone, this system has never been mentioned as EXACT. Just known as an Aiming System.
Last edited:
Well the OP uses a pivot point of about 57"...He even shows it at the very beginning of the clip.
Lou, here's your opportunity to defend this post..one I deem as stir the pot quality.
For the record, the thread wasn't removed because of the topic material. It was because of people offering opinions that were designed to add nothing to the thread but friction.
I've been patient and allowed you guys to have your say.
Now its time for the detractors to pipe down and allow these guys to talk amoungst themselves.
Add something constructive or stay out of the conversation.
If you don't like it, you certainly can start your own thread and throw your own CTE party and these guys won't be invited.
Here is what is interesting about Clearys method as compared to other methods....and then I am out of here and let y'all discuss.
Cleary (as stated) pivots from the back of the cue......the bridge hand slides over during the pivot and then is locked in.
Other CTE methods seem to use a fulcrum from about 8-12"...the pivot is applied by pivoting about a stationary bridge hand.
Here is and experiment..(I have already tried it).
Just for this example we can forget about the pocket....all that matters is the edge alignment and then pivot part....or lets just call this a straight in shot.....I have heard the method for straight in shots is align edge to edge and pivot to center....so lets use that.
Align your cue through edge CB to edge OB....then.
1 - Using a bridge length of 1" (just behind the ferrule) pivot to center CB and stroke the shot.
2 Using a bridge length of 29" (right at the joint of the cue for exaggeration)...pivot to center CB and stroke the shot.
See chart the results you get with each pivot fulcrum.
NOTE: Cleary's fulcrum is at the complete far back of the cue.
DISCLAIMER: Not a naysayer or saying CTE does not work or is not effective as an alignment method....
Have Fun debating...
I couldn't make a ball pivoting from the bridge. I watched spiderwebcomm's YouTube video and it helps a lot
http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=/&gl=US#/watch?xl=xl_blazer&v=Ij38hYBti4c
I had some success sliding and pivoting at the same time but not sure if I'm doing it right. Anxious to show someone who doesn't already know how to feel a shot like I do.
Dave, *clearly* Pat is making "a funny" in that comment. The thread was killed and it came to life, just like a zombie. That's making a joke -- not stirring the pot. And who can know what motivates people? I see that all the time: you did/said that because -- but no one can know and make a fair assessment like that, much less an accusation. You say people were adding stuff just to cause friction. How can you know that? How can anyone know that?
But OK, I, or someone else, can start their own CTE party and "they who shall not be named" won't be invited. I can live with
Lou Figueroa
Patrick,
This one will be better...like CTE you gotta have faith.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu3VTngm1F0
This one will be better...like CTE you gotta have faith.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu3VTngm1F0
mlalum
Banned
Yeah Patrick really was bad on that one. That is so much worse than JB Cases constant name calling and threatening posts. You are clearly uneven in your approach.
mlalum
Banned
maybe adults should be able to control themselves or not be given keys to the car.
Not to worry, Dave. AzB's getting too content-lite to hold my interest anyway, so I'll probably be a diminishing problem for your sensitive aiming system divas.
I suppose it's understandable that AzB prefers the greatest number of unruffled posters over the highest standards of information, and as the forum becomes more of a social network and less of an information resource the smartalecks who challenge the nonsense will (already have to a noticable degree) inevitably drift away, so that will probably work out for you.
pj
chgo
sdasda
Welcome to posting. The direction of the object ball is taken into account from the initial alignment.
We are all working out the other stuff
Welcome to posting. The direction of the object ball is taken into account from the initial alignment.
We are all working out the other stuff