Would Kinematics fit??
PRO ONE DVD: Answering Questions
- Thread starter stan shuffett
- Start date
Would Kinematics fit??
I agree with some of your comments (although they are based on snippets of my entire text) but have to disagree on others.
I've been playing 20 years on and off and I play at a pretty decent level, can certainly hold my own against most people. I'm not saying that to brag, just as a point of distinction, between that and the amount of study I've put into the game I think it makes me more aware of what's going on and what I'm doing at the table than a beginning or average player.
That being said, I agree that on the surface the system seems complicated, or illogical, or non-exact, or ... I had the same thought on my first viewing of the DVD, and even the second - I never made it past chapter 9 either time. But my quest to try and make sense of this led me to seek out more information, including talking to Stan himself, and until I got to the table and put in a few hours of time it didn't make sense to me either.
I think it's more than just a fancy alignment system, although I agree that the benefits of aligning oneself in a consistent manner and the increased focus on aiming in general are certainly benefits regardless of what preshot routine or alignment system is being used. And even if it turns out there is no merit to this than just visualization and subconscious aiming, and I've been fooling myself all these weeks, then as you said it's still benefitting me (and others). Since I'm usually a very detail oriented person who requires proof and reasoning behind what I do, I'm actually at odds with myself over the last 4 - 6 weeks as I've used the system, since I can't explain it, also the reason why I continue to monitor and participate in these threads.
One important point though, as I see it anyway. As far as robotic or exact steps, I align myself to the visual lines as described in the DVD no differently than I previously aligned myself to a perceived ghost ball or thickness of hit. It took a little longer at first, just like it took me a little longer to see the ghost ball when I started shooting. I don't really see the difference between the two, I still have to initially align myself to something, whether that's an edge line or an invisible ghost ball or visualizing distances etc.
All good players spend a second or two visualizing the shot before setting their stance and getting over the shot, and it's this preshot visualization and routine that gets them into the position needed to make the shot. As I've mentioned, once I dial in to this initial alignment, I AM able to pivot consistently to center ball WITHOUT looking up at the object ball or pocket, and when I look up at the object ball while taking my practice strokes I feel definitely locked in on my shot and am not making any movements other than normal practice stroke movements. I think if the system got you close (say within 5 or 10 degrees) and the rest was done with adjustments while over the shot it wouldn't be successful for anyone, 99% of the aiming that's done is typically while approaching and lining up the shot in an upright position, I think it's very difficult to aim accurately once down in your stance.
I wish I had a table at home that I could do more analysis on - draw lines, make videos, etc. I get such few hours a week to play that at this point I'm still working with the system and trying to find time to play matches and get back into tournament shape again. I agree that aside from the math or geometry another factor at the heart of this is trying to decide or prove if the CTE users are following exact steps or subconsciously making adjustments either before, during, or after the initial alignment and pivot. I can tell you 100% I feel like I'm not at this point, I will continue to monitor this and provide feedback either way. I certainly would not be ashamed to admit if I find any evidence to support that, as you mentioned I think I would still be okay with the fact that my shot making increased regardless of the basis behind it.
Scott
That's absolutely excellent. Keeps the Greek flavor, and deals with the motion of bodies in space, which could apply to both the player's motions during alignment, and to the motions of the balls.
I came up with "kulečník" but the meaning is a little off, and "kinematics" is vastly better.
Hey Bill,
Spelling may not be important. Emphasis on Cte users is. Choices noted.
Best,
Mike
Hey Paul,
You may have something here. Our study does ultimately explore this. Linear kinematics could be the correct fit. Bill was classifying the last letter like a "Klub". You're saying a description of the quest. What do the brethren command? :grin-square:
Best,
Mike
I will never play scrabble against you! You'd have to spot me the dictionary and free challenges. Kulecnik...did I ever eat one of those? Oh wait, I remember. That's a Soviet handgun. J/K
Kinematics is on target (pun intended). Any more ideas?
Btw, the winner will get their domicile cleaned for free for one week by moi. The only stipulation is that I get to pick the winner and they must live within walking distance of my house. I may have a chance here to get some spring cleaning done by tricking myself into contributing to this contest.
Best,
Mike
How do you know this? Have you shot lots of shots without looking at the OB or pocket after initial alignment (before pivoting)?
I think a careful test would show that you need to look.
pj
chgo
I keep waiting to see this test. I'm waiting patiently for you guys to come up with one so the yaysayers and naysayers can get a few innings each and record the results (almost like the Derby/SBE 14.1 challenge).
Dave
P.S. I know, I know... A "test" won't prove anything if it's not in your favor, right?
No you don't. At least one real test was suggested to you when you posted your shooting "blind" vanity video. That's probably when you started with the "not until naysayers post videos" excuses.
pj
chgo
I always said I'd do ANY test as long as I wasn't the only one doing it. For example, if I do it myself and make 10/15---- it'd be easy for you to dog me and say "TOLD YA SO" for the rest of my life. However, if you, Lou, Mike Page and the rest of the "Naysayers" all participate and you guys average 3/15 --- 10/15 becomes wizard-like.
So, you can invent the test and we'll all do it together.
Dave
Can you think of a test that would eliminate human error?
Let's see if we can come up with a test.
The current controversy is whether or not CTE is a "center pocket system" without adjustments, right?
pj
chgo
Thanks John, you and Mike have been holding down the Fort pretty well!
By my estimation (pun intended) all they've seem to come back with are levitating Tables with no rails. Oh yea and PoliteSnipers comment about visual alignment not being part of an aiming system!! Anyways, where's Champ? He's missing all the fun!
I like the quest, but then again that's a biased statement!! Stan's thread has really gone to shit! LOL! Sorry Stan!
I said "body alignment", which is individual.
I think there's a fairly simple test that could be made. It takes two people and a piece of cardboard. One of the people needs (I think) to be well-versed in Stan's manual CTE and very comfortable with the system. The other needs good reaction times.
Set up a shot. When the shooter feels they are properly aligned and ready to pivot, they say "Go", and the other person puts the cardboard between the cue ball and object ball such that the shooter can't see the object ball or pocket as they pivot and shoot. As soon as the shooter hits the cue ball, the second person lifts the cardboard.
Obviously, this would need to be done several times and at various cut angles to give reliable information. Equally obviously, any stage of the manual CTE process can be substituted for "pivot" above. Most useful, perhaps, would be to place the cardboard immediately as the player starts to move into shooting position.
Also, there would need to be agreement on the width of the piece of cardboard. It's possible, for example, that instead of the object ball or pocket, the shooter really derives information via his peripheral vision from his relationship to the side(s) of the table. If that were so, then the cardboard's width and position relative to the cue ball might be issues.
If a shooter can reliably make the test shots then we will have resolved the issue of needing to see the object ball and/or pocket for at least that shooter. If several people can reliably do the test shots, then we might consider whether that resolves the issue in the general case.
The we can have a lengthy discussion about the meanings of "reliably" and "several", whether person A put the cardboard down soon enough in the video posted by person B, and so on. We should be able to milk that for at least a couple of months and two or three more threads.
Last edited:
The we can have a lengthy discussion about the meanings of "reliably" and "several", whether person A put the cardboard down soon enough in the video posted by person B, and so on. We should be able to milk that for at least a couple of months and two or three more threads.[/QUOTE]
RFLMAO!! This snippet made by belly ache!!
RFLMAO!! This snippet made by belly ache!!
I knew I recognized you from somewhere! You're my boss from my last job!:grin-square:
Best,
Mike
As I've stated before, if there is any subconscious adjustments or "feel" it's definitely happening pre pivot, well for me anyhow. In practice, once I have established the CTE visual for a given shot I never look at the OB again. When I have these visuals locked in place my focus is on crossing the CTEL and then falling (pivoting) into the new center CB. I know this because I can play looking at either the CB or OB last during the final stroke, so during practice it's not difficult for me what so ever to ignore the OB completely, it's like closing your eyes to test your alignment and stroke.
Please leave my name out of any of this "make a drill video" baloney. I don't play pool to get good at drills. On the rare occasion I do drills I do it to get good at pool. And all a drill means is that you get good at doing that particular drill. Given enough time and effort you can get good at the line of balls up table drill; the L drill; the circle drill; the cross drill; the balls on the rail drill; the don't-hit-a-rail drill; and so forth. Proficiency at one or all doesn't mean you can run eight and out when the heat is on; run a 5-pack to win when your opponent is on the hill, or run 100 at 14.1. It certainly proves nothing about the exactness, soundness, or efficacy of an aiming system.
The bottom line test is playing a game of pool well. And that is a matter of proving who strokes better; is able to consistently execute better; has more experience; knows more shots; and yes, aims better. But the aiming is just one component of a complex whole and that is what makes all this CTE baloney so stupid -- it's like saying whoever has the best GPS has the best car.
Lou Figueroa
not making any vids
just to make Spider happy
Last edited: