Is there a common CTE focus point or final aiming point?

cfrandy said:
lol...you and me both.
Click to expand...

you claim to not understand a thing but yet went on a ramp page even starting threads that cte sucks and even exchanged unpleasant posts with Stan. this is a "typical uninformed cte deniers speaking of what he knows nothing about and spreading BS" :banghead: This is gone on in every cte thread and the only one knowledgeable enough to discuss it is dr dave! you guys and PJ all just are not informed enough.
 
Last edited:
LAMas said:
Good thread.
Wouldn't double the distance aiming be easier than the 1/8 dia spot on the cloth?

About CTE and the many variations:
You know about the fractions on the OB - edge, 1/8, 1/4 (A), 1/2 (B) and 3/4 (C) - that s a good start.

Assume that you are aiming at the CTE line with you dominant right eye and stroking with your right arm, look at the edge of the CB, with your left eye and where it lines up with relation to the OB - this I believe is the secondary reference.

You can move your stance sideways until the edge of the CB is lined up with the fractions on the OB. The cut angles that you achieve for the fractions and points in between will vary from shooter to shooter especially if one doesn't have a dominant eye. move the ferrule say 1/2 tip to the corresponding side and pivot back to the center of the CB. You only have to look at the CB for the cut angles and their corresponding fractions have been predetermined and commited your memory.

:thumbup:
Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with double the distance method. I'll check it out on Dave's site. To be clear, I differentiate between an aiming method (CTE, double the distance, contact point, ghost ball, fractional, bracketing, using ferrule edge, etc) and the final reference (which can be the contact point, ghost ball, aimpoint, edge of CB or OB, rail, entire OB, light reflections on the OB, etc as described by several others in this thread). Some methods such as contact point and ghost ball explicitely describe the final reference but not all methods do (such as CTE which is why I asked the initial question). I do this because the method is mainly mechanical and although it does play an important role in your shot routine, the final reference is central to the final focus point which plays a key role in your ability to execute the actual shot with precision and consistency.

I can use several methods to find a reference aimpoint (CTE, ghost ball, pure feel, bracketing, etc). Once I settle on a method, similar to settling on using a reference aimpoint, I will use only one to be consistent - I never use multiple methods or reference points. Also, although I use the term 'aimpoint at the base of a ghost ball' to describe where the aimpoint is, I don't use the ghost ball aiming method. I've never been able to visualize a ghost ball. I can and have, however, used training aids to see where the aimpoint is.

With regard to the 1/8 inch spot, note that's what I train with, in actual practice I pick out something physical in the cloth located where that 'spot' would be. So it's the edge of a chalk mark, a discoloration in the cloth, a part of the cloth itself that stands out, etc. Even on brand new cloth I've never had a problem picking out a mark or object that works.

I've tried the fractional edges before as reference points and I haven't been able to make it work for me. Perhaps I'm lazy but the aimpoint is working quite well right now and I think it's possible that the process of using CTE may help to validate the final reference aimpoint providing additional confidence in it's selection. I won't know until I try it...
 
JoeyA said:
I look at the object ball last, just like I did prior to CTE/Pro1.

Some people are known to look at the cue ball last on some shots but I have had more success looking at the object ball last.

HOWEVER, I make great effort to make sure I am shooting through the center of the cue ball unless I am intentionally planning to do otherwise.
Click to expand...

JoeyA do you pick out a spot or place on the OB or look at the OB in general? Do you use it even on thinner cut shots where the aimline is off of the OB?

It sounds like we may be doing something similar. I'm happy with the reference aimpoint I'm using now (seems like you were happy using the OB as a reference) so I won't have to make the big shift I did when I went from using a contact point aiming method to using a aimpoint reference by feel/experience. That was a painful process. I would just like to put a little more process on validating the aimpoint and perhaps CTE may provide it.
 
plfrg said:
I'm not familiar with double the distance method. I'll check it out on Dave's site. To be clear, I differentiate between an aiming method (CTE, double the distance, contact point, ghost ball, fractional, bracketing, using ferrule edge, etc) and the final reference (which can be the contact point, ghost ball, aimpoint, edge of CB or OB, rail, entire OB, light reflections on the OB, etc as described by several others in this thread). Some methods such as contact point and ghost ball explicitely describe the final reference but not all methods do (such as CTE which is why I asked the initial question). I do this because the method is mainly mechanical and although it does play an important role in your shot routine, the final reference is central to the final focus point which plays a key role in your ability to execute the actual shot with precision and consistency.

I can use several methods to find a reference aimpoint (CTE, ghost ball, pure feel, bracketing, etc). Once I settle on a method, similar to settling on using a reference aimpoint, I will use only one to be consistent - I never use multiple methods or reference points. Also, although I use the term 'aimpoint at the base of a ghost ball' to describe where the aimpoint is, I don't use the ghost ball aiming method. I've never been able to visualize a ghost ball. I can and have, however, used training aids to see where the aimpoint is.

With regard to the 1/8 inch spot, note that's what I train with, in actual practice I pick out something physical in the cloth located where that 'spot' would be. So it's the edge of a chalk mark, a discoloration in the cloth, a part of the cloth itself that stands out, etc. Even on brand new cloth I've never had a problem picking out a mark or object that works.

I've tried the fractional edges before as reference points and I haven't been able to make it work for me. Perhaps I'm lazy but the aimpoint is working quite well right now and I think it's possible that the process of using CTE may help to validate the final reference aimpoint providing additional confidence in it's selection. I won't know until I try it...
Click to expand...

interesting that you haven'r known about double distance aiming and it is in Dave's Colostate site.

It requires that you know where the contact point on the OB that sends the OB to the pocket/target. One then looks at that point to the distance to the center of the OB and adds that distance to the outside of the contact point -parsimonious.

On cut shots less than 30 degrees (CTE) the aim points can be visualized on the OB. For cuts greater than 30 degrees, the aim point is off of the edge of the OB and on the cloth - like your 1/8 diameter base of the GB.

When the CB and OB are close together the aim point is a bit outside of the double distance point of aim and outside english can also be used to compensate for this.
 
LAMas said:
interesting that you haven'r known about double distance aiming and it is in Dave's Colostate site.

It requires that you know where the contact point on the OB that sends the OB to the pocket/target. One then looks at that point to the distance to the center of the OB and adds that distance to the outside of the contact point -parsimonious.

On cut shots less than 30 degrees (CTE) the aim points can be visualized on the OB. For cuts greater than 30 degrees, the aim point is off of the edge of the OB and on the cloth - like your 1/8 diameter base of the GB.

When the CB and OB are close together the aim point is a bit outside of the double distance point of aim and outside english can also be used to compensate for this.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm stubborn when it comes to new aiming methods. I've researched and settled... and I'm only reluctantly considering using CTE to validate the aimpoint. Given what you described above I will likely not use DD as it uses a more flexable aimpoint reference than I'm used to using.

The vast majority of my time training is focused on refining my shot routine, running balls, and working on mental management issues so I actually don't spend a great deal of time with aiming any more. Although adding a bit of confidence to my aimpoint selection would be helpful, I shoot pretty well. The vast majority of my runs do not end because of missed balls, they end from position errors or mental mistakes.
 
plfrg said:
JoeyA do you pick out a spot or place on the OB or look at the OB in general? Do you use it even on thinner cut shots where the aimline is off of the OB?

It sounds like we may be doing something similar. I'm happy with the reference aimpoint I'm using now (seems like you were happy using the OB as a reference) so I won't have to make the big shift I did when I went from using a contact point aiming method to using a aimpoint reference by feel/experience. That was a painful process. I would just like to put a little more process on validating the aimpoint and perhaps CTE may provide it.
Click to expand...

I use all available visual information available to me including the contact point. I align myself using CTE/pro1 which not only sets you on a standard of aligment but also refines your aiming line with the use of the coordinates to lock me in on the shot. I look at the object ball last. When I am playing my best, the alignment, the coordinates, the pivoting are all AUTOMATIC and I don't think about any of them, I just do them.
 
I am looking forward to seeing how to aim at that 1/8 diameter pstch where the GB rests and where it is (so abstract) - why CTE is sought after.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
Three core focal points:

1) Primary and secondary visuals, which lead to:
2) the correct 180-deg view of the CB (never lose sight of) so you can
3) pivot to the "correct" center of the CB

The TARGET is actually the CB, assuming you do 1 and 2 correctly. Meaning, the correct center of the CB is your true target. Not saying you stare at the CB last -- just saying that's what determines if you make it or not.



Dave
Click to expand...
This method is used all too frequently by the lowest level of players on the game table.

pj
chgo
 
JB Cases said:
After I am settled into the shot I am looking past the object ball to the rail and focusing on hitting the cue ball pure. Looking past the object ball helps me to hit the cue ball in a straight line. I am essentially following a line that runs through the cue ball to the rail. Since the object ball is in the way it goes in (most of the time).
Click to expand...
In the gauntlet of aiming systems, CTE is right there with the pre-schoolers.

pj
chgo
 
cookie man said:
Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean they can't.
Click to expand...
CTE can't be understood. If it could everybody would understand it by now, even you. It's a "pretend" system to calm those who can't face the realities of aiming and can't see the gaping holes in CTE.

Hey, if pretending is what you need, CTE is your ticket. Good luck with it.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
CTE can't be understood. If it could everybody would understand it by now, even you. It's a "pretend" system to calm those who can't face the realities of aiming and can't see the gaping holes in CTE.

Hey, if pretending is what you need, CTE is your ticket. Good luck with it.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Oh enlighten me. Describe these "gaping holes" in cte you talk of.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Exactly.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

By experience Pat. Two ways. Either you have practiced the shot enough to be sure you are on the shot line or you are using a method of aiming that brings you to the shot line consistently.

With the second method you don't have to have practiced the shot a hundred times to know you are on the right line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top