No, it's not. Specifically, there's no exact description of where to place your bridge.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
A CTE test!
- Thread starter mantis99
- Start date
pj
chgo
CTE was not designed by anyone. It was discovered that if you SIGHT along the center to edge line then you can lay down your bridge on that line (happens fairly automatically) and then bring the cue tip to center ball and be on the shot line for the pocket.
This is because if you intend to MAKE the ball into the pocket then you are ALREADY going to be standing in the general direction of the proper shot line by virtue of the fact that the pockets are stationary. When Hal and others say you don't need to know where the pockets are what they mean is that you do NOT have to get behind the object ball and find a contact point on the back of the object ball in order to use CTE.
However CTE works jsut as well to send the object ball to any other place on the table with the same frame of reference ----->object ball ------> target. Think of it like a triangle and you can then find the "edge" to use for the initial sighting. The rest of the steps are the same. The adjustment is a CONSCIOUS adjustment from the 180 degree CTE line to another place very near to the 180 degree CTE line.
I am sure that this can be diagrammed for you to include how many ticks out of 360 the new line would be for any given angle. But guess what? It's easy to see with the tiniest bit of practice and is so much better than GB for this purpose.
For that matter consciously adjusting from the shot line is also easy. So a person can easily find the shot line and once they have it they can adjust off of it to send the cue ball anywhere that is possible to send it.
I tried to show this to Pat Johnson when I visited him but I was unable to clearly express my thoughts as to HOW I can use CTE to send the object ball anywhere I want from the same cue ball - object ball relationship.
Now I know how it works. Sorry that I don't have the math skills to properly formulate it. I am working on it at www.khanacademy.org So far I am only "proficient" in basic arithmetic but I will get there.
Yes there is. On the CTE line.
That is an exact description, alright. The only problem is, it only works if every shot is a 30-degree cut.
Laying your bridge on the center-to-edge line and pointing your tip at centerball ensures that your entire cue is on the center-to-edge line and the CB's center is aimed directly at the OB's edge. This alignment can only produce a 30-degree cut.
LOL. Priceless.
pj
chgo
Yes there is and its so simple you keep missing it.
Do you have a pool table at home PJ? if you listen to me and just be quiet i will have you shooting the system today, we could also do it through pm's if you like?
Last edited:
In Chapter 13 of the DVD - he draws a line across the table as illustration and talks about it a little, of which there are unfortunately few others.
If it can be done in PMs it can be done here. I'm listening.
pj
chgo
do you have a pool table there?
In that demonstration Stan says to place the bridge next to the center-to-edge line. That would mean the "aimpoint" lines are irrelevant and there are only two cut angles defined by the system (left or right pivot from CTE line).
pj
chgo
Line up a shot with an A- aim point, with a little bit of a cut that would need a left pivot.
Now are you able to get yourself in position like stan shows on the dvd and visualize both lines, I assume you can do this since you have had the dvd a month now? From what i get from you is you can but you are stuck on cue and bridge placement, correct?
Patrick, I've posted this more than once, but I'll do it again here. After I viewed the DVD and read Dr. Dave's interpretation, I posted a slightly different interpretation of how to determine bridge placement.
Your descriptions of this seem, to me, a bit vague as to how to find the proper line for placement of the bridge. You seem to say one should shift his sight line off the CTEL to the secondary line (edge to A/B/C) and then, "guided by this line," somehow drop into the proper offset position.
The way I interpret what Stan says is that, essentially, one needs to find the sighting position where he can simultaneously view both the CTEL and the secondary alignment line (to A/B/C). This sighting position will be between those two alignment lines, and this sighting position will define the relevant edges of the cue ball and, therefore, the relevant face (now think of it as a flat disk) of the cue ball. From this sighting position, move straight in toward that cue-ball face (perpendicular to the flat disk) with the 1/2-tip offset needed.
The way I interpret what Stan says is that, essentially, one needs to find the sighting position where he can simultaneously view both the CTEL and the secondary alignment line (to A/B/C). This sighting position will be between those two alignment lines, and this sighting position will define the relevant edges of the cue ball and, therefore, the relevant face (now think of it as a flat disk) of the cue ball. From this sighting position, move straight in toward that cue-ball face (perpendicular to the flat disk) with the 1/2-tip offset needed.
I suppose you might argue that the sighting position I define above is not unique. I kind of view it as optimizing the position from which you can view both the CTEL and the secondary alignment line. But if it is a fairly consistent position, then the bridge placement follows directly by moving in perpendicular (1/2 tip from center) to the view of the OB as a flat disk from that sighting position.
I'm willing to stipulate (in a kind of legal sense) that Stan has defined where to place the bridge. It's on the line I described above, and with a length between 5" and 9", varying with CB/OB distance as given in the glossary of the DVD. But that doesn't change the fact that Stan's manual CTE method is still a discrete method, i.e., that it produces only a limited number of cut angles for any given CB/OB separation. If that's the type of method the player likes, fine, go with it. But don't make it out to be something it is not.
How can an "exact" system step be described as "I kind of view it as"? And what does "view both the CTEL and the secondary alignment line" mean? Your eyes can't be on both lines at once for the vast majority of shots, and that's the only possible precise definition, so this is just another way of saying "position your eyes somewhere between the two lines", which is just another way of saying "position your eyes by feel."
You haven't described a line above.
But I agree this isn't the only non-systematic thing about CTE.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
I would simply like to know what angles these gaps are at, and see if I can make the shot or not without an adjustment. I'd really lile to see a CTE expert shoot it, or give us the pivot and alignment to use, however, I can go down to may basement and try each one for a given shot.
I did go back down and spend more time messing with bridge length and pivot. I did find a difference between the 3 positions. When trying to figure out what allowed for the results earlier, I found that such a short or long pivot felt unconfortable, and when doing it quickly, I pivoted off of the back of my thumb with a shorter bridge, and from much farther up with a longer bridge to get to a more similar spot as my normal bridge. When I did it the same every time, the difference in angle with bridge length was more apparent. Thus, I did perform a subconscious variation in this case, making me more and more interested in seeing what happens when shooting outside of the mathematical CTE boundaries as described.
The only "battle" I see is your struggle to say anything clear and specific about CTE. I understand you not wanting to be on the spot.
pj
chgo
lol go ahead ask me anything and i will answer, but when i ask something you have to give a decent answer, and i will go first ok, agreed? and ignore other people that post, we can do it in your pat thread because nobody follows it?
Thanks for experimenting some more with varying the bridge lengths. The difference between pivoting the tip 1/4" from 2" and 14" is highly significant.
As to the angles produced by each of Stan's alignment-menu choices, I think it varies with CB/OB separation. In other words, a "B" with left pivot from 2 feet may produce a different cut angle than would a "B" with left pivot from 5 feet. So I'm not really interested in trying to figure out what all those angles might be. The important thing from my standpoint is that for any single CB/OB distance, the method, followed precisely (if we first just stipulate that bridge placement is well defined), can produce only a fairly limited number of cut angles in each direction. As such, the method joins a number of others as discrete aiming methods, and many people find one of those methods to be useful.
pj -- YES, you are correct that the description I gave for bridge placement is not exact, and I already acknowledged that. But I think if a player does A/left, A/right, B/left, B/right, etc. enough times, he will, at least, develop a personally consistent way of doing it. Again, what may be a larger issue to me is the discrete nature of the cut angles offered by the method.