Question for "Pivot" aimers

[jwpretd]

Surely there are more of you out there...

??

I think maybe there are two problems, Mike.

First, and possibly foremost, users of pivot-based systems, and especially of Stan Shuffett's version, have gotten quite wary about answering such questions when they don't know how the answers are going to be used (JoeyA's reply reflects this).

Second, the question isn't well-worded with respect to Shuffett's methods, ProOne in particular. ProOne has no pivoting of the cue, not even the "air pivot" that is referred to in some other peoples' systems. The moral equivalent (sort of) of a pivot is handled by a shift in the eyes' focus point. Even with the "basic CTE" portion of Stan's system, where there is an explicit pivot, it's not clear to me that its function in Stan's system is the same as in other pivot-based systems. The difference may be subtle, and indeed it may at bottom be purely semantical, but there does seem to me to be a difference.

Now that I think about it, there may be another problem with the question: the term "final shot line". It's unclear to me what that means, especially in the context of Stan's systems.

Also scottjen26 noted a possible problem: the right answer for Stan's basic CTE and ProOne systems might well be "bridge placement and perception of the final shot line occur simultaneously". That isn't a choice, and if I used either, I'd be inclined to not answer the question rather than answer it in a way that would be misunderstood (particularly in light of 1 above ).

 

[mikepage]

Do you experience on the table with cte/pro-one and if so how much? If you have then what is your position?

I have tried many different ideas that folks describe as being CTE based. I have different responses to different claims and ideas. Again you would need to be more specific.

Pro one in particular I've never learned from Stan Shuffett, so I could not be sure I was actually discussing pro one.

I object to the divisive yeasayer/naysayers approach. I think Joey and a few others have propagated a major disservice to useful discussion with that kind of talk. By doing so they have emboldened a handful of folk that rarely try to have an honest discussion but are more than ready to attack at the drop of a hat anybody they see as threat to some sort of blanket allegiance to some cause or something. It makes me sad.

But anyway, if you have a specific question, I'd be glad to respond to it.

 

[Scott Lee]

Well said Mike. Personally I like CTE, and use it often. I also believe someone should use whatever seems to work best for them.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

I have tried many different ideas that folks describe as being CTE based. I have different responses to different claims and ideas. Again you would need to be more specific.

Pro one in particular I've never learned from Stan Shuffett, so I could not be sure I was actually discussing pro one.

I object to the divisive yeasayer/naysayers approach. I think Joey and a few others have propagated a major disservice to useful discussion with that kind of talk. By doing so they have emboldened a handful of folk that rarely try to have an honest discussion but are more than ready to attack at the drop of a hat anybody they see as threat to some sort of blanket allegiance to some cause or something. It makes me sad.But anyway, if you have a specific question, I'd be glad to respond to it.

 

[Neil]

..............

 

[Patrick Johnson]

The "naysers" are the ones that coined the terms. And, Joey has added a LOT to the discussions on pivot systems. Lately, he is fed up, as am I and others, with those that just want to discredit the system at any cost. Some of us, mainly Joey lately, have made it a point to point out what they are trying to do and why they are doing it. Some, are still having a meaningful discussion on the topic. If you kept up with the topics, you would easily see that it is the so called naysayers doing all the attacking. The yeasayers are doing the defending.

Bullshit. The Polarizer in Chief, JoeyA, came up with the divisive labels and has made it his personal mission to paint the "discussion" solely in terms of "us vs. them" and "win vs. lose" (carrying on the legacy of insanity left by John Barton).

CTE's defenders have said almost nothing except "you have no credibility if you aren't a CTE user" - yet no CTE user ever has anything of substance to say about it. Just about all real substance in the discussion about CTE has been provided by "naysayers", with CTE users providing mainly battle noise.

pj
chgo

 

[Neil]

..............

 

[cookie man]

Bullshit. The Polarizer in Chief, JoeyA, came up with the divisive labels and has made it his personal mission to paint the "discussion" solely in terms of "us vs. them" and "win vs. lose" (carrying on the legacy of insanity left by John Barton).

CTE's defenders have said almost nothing except "you have no credibility if you aren't a CTE user" - yet no CTE user ever has anything of substance to say about it. Just about all real substance in the discussion about CTE has been provided by "naysayers", with CTE users providing mainly battle noise.

pj
chgo

Outdated misguided beliefs are all you contribute PJ.

 

[bhodi]

systems

I would say if you pivot, then (3.) would have to be what you do. Because, the way the pivot method works, is you line up, then pivot. You will (theoretically) automatically be aiming correctly, with the English you then are incorporating. This is a basic rule that kind of works, you have to take into account your bridge length, speed, spin, sticky balls, slippery balls, humidty, etc. Even if you line up correctly, the cue ball is going to squirt out a little, then curve back a little with english, at different rates on different tables, at different speeds. Better to get a "feel" for the game, this is where your brain subconsciously and automatically adjusts to these things. I "kind of" do a pivot on certain shots, only when I am using a decent amount of inside, am close to the ball, and feel I am "guessing" since inside english is a difficult shot to shoot accurately. I honestly haven't watched the cte dvd's and all that. I know certain shots are a half ball hit, but change the position of the object ball a little, and the method doesn't quite work. You can easily miss by an inch. As noted by another post. Even if you did know exactly where to aim each time, there are a thousand other factors that make someone a good player, shot selection, strategy, judging banks, adapting to the table, adapting to the environment, "mental game" aspects, speed, etc. The biggest difference in the outcome I have noted in 20 yrs is learning how to put a rack on someone, since they'll always do it to you. ~peace

 

[Neil]

.................

 

[mikepage]

Mike, if you use some version of CTE, whether that be actual CTE or 90/90, or some similar system, you will place your bridge hand before being on the actual shot line.

That is the way I understand those methods as well.

If you use the Pro One part of CTE, or an air pivot for the other CTE derivatives, or aim in a different way, then you will perceive the final shot line, then place your bridge in the correct place.

This is what I suspect also.

With the possibility of an air pivot, I think that whatever results you end up with from the poll will be skewed from what you might be looking for here.

I'm not looking for any uniform response here. I think from the responses so far that even the air pivoters are split between the two choices.

 

[Mikjary]

Mike,

I appreciate your foray into the root of how pivot systems initiate their techniques. The "perceive" part of your questioning is very astute on your part. This implies more than simply looking at a shot and what processes are involved to pocket balls.

Pivot systems do not look at an aiming line to a contact point/ghost ball even after they pivot, unless a hip pivot is used. This type of pivot swivels the entire torso into an actual aiming line dictated by the pivot. The user can actually see the contact point/ ghost ball position. Cte/Pro One uses a different setup which has been shown by past greats to be a useful approach to accurate alignments. In his book, Daly's Billiard Book, Maurice Daly shows a technique for standing square to the table and setting his stick behind the cue ball and pointing at the object ball. His eyes are not behind the cue, but rather he is standing next to it and is still aligning perfectly with the shot. Mosconi, in his book, Winning Pocket Billiards, also shows the similar setup and technique to achieve the correct alignment for the beginning to a successful pre-shot routine. I take the time to mention this to get the point across that the body is capable of an accurate alignment despite being offset from a traditional aiming line. Shooting from the hip is a well known technique as are many other examples in target shooting.

We see some of our current professionals using this timeless approach, but do we understand what they're doing? Did you ever wonder why Efren stands square to the table with his stick laying on the shot line at his side. I saw Raj Hundahl(?) doing it several times this past weekend. We see it, but we don't notice it unless we know what they're doing.

Mechanical Cte uses this idea well. It the center to edge line. It is part of a shot perceiving, pre-shot routine even before the brain locks in on visual aiming points. This is the baseline to establish a consistent starting point for the brain to process future instructions from visual feedback...the aiming points.

Pro One users have ingrained the Ctel and don't even look at it after learning it. It is their benchmark and with further visual feedback can minutely change their alignment to achieve the correct angle. They automatically drop down on each shot without even worrying about pivot direction.

So, as far as your poll goes, the pivot system users don't need to be on the visual aiming line. They've trained their mind to calculate the angle from the visuals and achieve the correct alignment. I don't use the word, "feel" because they are taking a physical movement (looking at a shot), mentally doing the exact calculations necessary (here's your math), and moving the body into position according to those calculations. No estimation or guesswork, just an exact solution for perceived inputs.

Best,
Mike

 

[champ2107]

I agree with what ever Mike posts now and in the future lol :thumbup:

 

[AtLarge]

I voted as a student of manual CTE as taught by Houle and Shuffett.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...the pivot method works, is you line up, then pivot. You will (theoretically) automatically be aiming correctly, with the English you then are incorporating.

Maybe you're talking about the "backhand" method of applying sidespin?

pj
chgo

 

[champ2107]

Maybe you're talking about the "backhand" method of applying sidespin?

pj
chgo

whether your right or wrong about everything and anything you post, your not worthy of anyone giving you credit because your an ass! and don't deserve nothing more than to be known as a ass and anyone that thinks this is not a fact, is a bigger ass than you are which is an extremely hard thing to be!!!!

 

[cookie man]

whether your right or wrong about everything and anything you post, your not worthy of anyone giving you credit because your an ass! and don't deserve nothing more than to be known as a ass and anyone that thinks this is not a fact, is a bigger ass than you are which is an extremely hard thing to be!!!!

Careful, your gonna make 2 or 3 people mad.

 

[JoeyA]

Careful, your gonna make 2 or 3 people mad.

:killingme::killingme::killingme: