A long comment on "aiming systems" ...
- Thread starter Grilled Cheese
- Start date
That is not vulgar or obscene. Are you homophobic? Why don't you describe what you see when you read what I wrote?
What is obscene in my opinion is your never making an on-topic post.
Do you even know what the actual topic of this thread is?
Also did you report yourself for violating the law governing defamation of character for the many times you have done so on this forum????
www.jbcases.com
Last edited:
JAD (short for "justadub"?):
I was mainly cueing in on (no apologies for the pun) your statement of, "Some folks here seem to have a problem when certain individuals promote their products here, while others, like Dave, don't seem to attract the same venom." Not at CTE in particular. I was mainly focused in on your hint / proposal / innuendo that "things are unfair." Please don't misunderstand me on that point.
I think *all* of the aiming system proponents have one thing in mind above all else -- to help their pool brethren without any requirement of compensation or hidden agendas. That is a very admirable trait. (Like I said, there is one aiming guy who was very different in that regard, but I've already expressed myself fully there.)
But to answer your question as to how the CTE discussions can be (or have been) considered "marketing," I need only to engage your wayback machine a couple years or three, to the kind of statements proposed as to "why" to learn these systems over other more-proven methods of improving one's pool game (e.g. fundamentals, stroke, formal instruction, etc.). Back in those days, there *have* been engagments of specious marketing. It doesn't matter if the product is free or a commercial product -- if you are pushing it, you are marketing, plain and simple. It's the very definition of marketing.
These days though? I don't think the aiming system guys are marketing at all. In fact, I think some valuable lessons were learned about those initial days, and instead, they're trying to have a normal forum discussion about the topic, without those that remember those initial days jumping in, pointing fingers, and crying "marketing foul." Would you agree?
Thoughts?
-Sean
P.S.: I agree on the "getting along famously" thing. Will you be at SBE? I have some scheduling difficulties at the moment -- not sure if I'll able to attend the whole four days / compete in the Open 10-ball event -- but if not, I will at least be there on the weekend.
Um......before you fill your dance card at SBE please remember that we are going to play some one-pocket 70s kung-fu style. "My ProOne System can beat your BOB method........"
TheThaiger
Banned
He's imagining you having an imaginary ménage à trois with himself and Grilled Cheese, and then criticising YOU for it, and you want the man banned? Are you nuts?
The man's a genius.
AHH the infamous 3-ball diagram. This details exactly what you guys have never understood. When the CB and OB change positions the ctel changes also. That gives you a different contact point. Do you really think with all the bullshit about cte that those shots can't be made very easily.
Ok, here is the very last chance I'm offering.
If you do not want to add constructively to the aiming threads, you may not participate.
There are a handful of people who don't like, agree, trust..believe...etc that they work. That is fine.
You may not come into someone elses thread now and continue these arguments. they have gone on long enough.
For the people that I have already spoken to, you know who you are...this is the last call for order.
Your next post that is contrary, defamitory, argumentative...whatever adjective I care to apply will result in significant time off the board.
If you do not want to add constructively to the aiming threads, you may not participate.
There are a handful of people who don't like, agree, trust..believe...etc that they work. That is fine.
You may not come into someone elses thread now and continue these arguments. they have gone on long enough.
For the people that I have already spoken to, you know who you are...this is the last call for order.
Your next post that is contrary, defamitory, argumentative...whatever adjective I care to apply will result in significant time off the board.
What I don't understand is how you are supposed to deploy all this in a game situation. I mean, there are so many things that I'm considering on each shot when I'm playing 1pocket that to add all this on top is ludicrous.
Lou Figueroa
Only speaking for myself, with practice the aiming method became automatic. Although it seems to be a lot of variables in reality most shots fall into a few categories where the steps cover them.
Whatever my shot is in one pocket the aiming method covers it and at this point it is so ingrained that I don't have to think about the aim unless there is some reason I have to adjust consciously as in when I need to throw the ball.
My own experience is that using a system has made me able to line up on certain cross banks which I would previously often sell out by double kissing.
www.jbcases.com
This is an academic study for me.
As I have said before, CTE isn't as parsimonious as double distance and 90/90 aiming that I use. It seems that the various forms of CTE is a useful learning tool for those that cannot visualize or effect other forms of aiming like the ghost ball. This is for them.:smile::thumbup:
LAMas, During your academic study please know that for Cte Pro One, the eyes are not behind the actual CTEL. There is a visual offset. Diagrams that show the actual CTEL cannot work as Hal prescribed.
The challenge is to render in math and words what is happening with one's visual skills in CTE. In CTE PRO ONE there are 2 visual lines that are perceived from a precise visual center. The visual center for each CB OB relationship is unique for that shot. An understanding of CTE must occur from a visual perspective first before diagrams can be best presented.
Stan
The challenge is to render in math and words what is happening with one's visual skills in CTE. In CTE PRO ONE there are 2 visual lines that are perceived from a precise visual center. The visual center for each CB OB relationship is unique for that shot. An understanding of CTE must occur from a visual perspective first before diagrams can be best presented.
Stan
I offered a rebuttal to your request for cue aiming on kicks. Here it is agian: There is no OB which to use to sight-in your cue when aiming at a rail.
ftr,
Jeff Livingston
Thanks Stan.
I have not tried using the secondary aim line or head offset from the CTEL to fill in the those angles between the limited cut angles achieved by Hal's original description of CTE - except to say that CTE/Pro can work for me if I spent time at the table and commited the results to memory.
I find CTE to be awkward for me and I soon return to double distance aiming at large distances between the CB and OB and 90/90 for close together shots where my parallax view isn't as fuzzy as it is when the separation is great.
I cannot put myself inside of your student's shoes for I know how to aim using the contact point on the OB that I can identify and use double distance and 90/90 aiming from there to get to the GB position necessary.
I even know how to compensate for CIT and apply english to get shape which is harder for me than aiming.
If I knew CTE/Pro, I could diagram it, but few would understand what they are looking at as with the other diagrams that I have proffered.
Just saying....be well.:smile:
Last edited:
Um......before you fill your dance card at SBE please remember that we are going to play some one-pocket 70s kung-fu style. "My ProOne System can beat your BOB method........"
Ohhhhhhh, you got action, John, trust me on that!
In fact, I'm thinking of digging through my closet for my tae kwon do "gi", and going to a nearby tailor to have a picture of a cartoon pool ball all muscled-up, with its back turned (in "back-of-ball" fashion) displaying a "V" muscle structure in its back. Perhaps add a little pic of you with a pea shooter straw, bouncing peas off that ball's back. 
Hmm... that sounds like a T-shirt idea for our friends at pool-tees...
-Sean
The CTEL does not change, because the distance between the balls is the same, as is their relationship to one another.
Do not forget the claim "CTE doesn't care where the pocket is" ....
That said, Dr. Dave's diagram proves the procedure cannot work for all shots.
Your final statement is not entirely true. The CTE procedures can work for all shots, as long as you use your experience-based intuition to apply the procedures effectively. Several possible explanations for how this actually works (either consciously or subconsciously) can be found on my CTE evaluation and analysis page.
Again, the CTE procedures can work for every shot at the table if one learns to use the systems effectively. This is true for any "aiming system," regardless of how few lines of aim it might have.
Regards,
Dave
Understood, I wasn't being entirely clear in my statement. Allow me to re-word it:
Grilled Cheese said:
That's what I meant to say, but I am guilty of being hasty and using terms like "don't work" which generalizes. I do not want to misrepresent you, so that is not my intent.
I'm with you 100% that CTE based systems do provide some benefits and work toward focusing the player on the shot line (not line of aim), and helping them set up well. Also, anything that makes a person more methodical, deliberate and concentrated is a good thing for making a shot.
My question has always been how does CTE provide the actual line of aim for all these shots. That has been the big question now for years.
I brought up the possibility of a 3D representation based on the idea of visual perception. In Stan's last post, he brings that up (not 3D) but of visual perception. Now, whatever you, I or anyone perceives, what exists in the real world exists, and these objects (balls) are an actual size in space, no matter what our perception "sees" (smaller further away, larger up close)...therefore, 2D representation (top down view) ought to be enough. I'm just wondering if the line as Stan is trying to describe which is visualized with eyes and mind is a distortion of reality, somehow applied in a way that gets your body to conform to the true line of aim.
That is probably the very last hope for a CTE proof. It's a stretch I admit. We'll see....pun intended.
The ctel changes because of the balls relationship to the pocket.
Then you have it about right. ;-)
Make it a 6 ball. The Hulk and David, as in Goliath with a full length period shirt and pivoting sling in hand, instead of pea shooter straw.
Ohhhhhhh, you got action, John, trust me on that!
Hmm... that sounds like a T-shirt idea for our friends at pool-tees...
-Sean
Make it a 6 ball. The Hulk and David, as in Goliath with a full length period shirt and pivoting sling in hand, instead of pea shooter straw.
So where the pocket is, does matter?
If so, then Dr. Dave is correct in saying that there are approximately 4 versions of this CTE system out there.
But back to the pocket for a moment, in order for the relationship of the balls to the pocket to matter, the pocket must be factored in somewhere and some how in some kind of line or line of aim. That is absent from the majority of CTE descriptions and procedures.
Which begs the question, how do you cheat the pocket ?