How does CTE help you “synch your visual and physical alignment”?! (Or are you on your own for that part?)
Every shot has a center to edge line that is the correct one for that shot. Could be the right or the left edge of the object ball but one of those two sides is the right one to use. That line can only be seen properly from one position around the table. Not two inches to the right of it, not two inches to the left of it but in just one spot. So when you find that one spot you are then standing in a line that is not only easy to see but is fixed. This is the base line to get it all started on the way to getting down on the shot. As Mr. Shuffet says the eyes lead and the body follows. Thus the result of using the CTE line allows the eyes to be oriented to a fixed and unmoving line that is the same regardless of the shot being addressed.
You can walk around the table and walk around the shot but you can only find the CTE line at one point. When you see it that is the place you align your body to and complete the rest of the steps to get down on the shot. To me this is how CTE helps to align my visual input and my physical alignment.
Contrast that with Ghost Ball, where I have to pick a spot on the cloth, or a contact "point" on the ball and align to that. The same thing applies, I see where I want to go and I pick a line and orient my body to it. Only with GB there are several positions which may or may not be right. Still, I have to choose one and stick with it to get down on the ball. With CTE I know that I am choosing the only line that exists for that shot with no guessing.
You're correct: CTE may work for you, but not necessarily for the next guy. Part of the problem, as anyone who has ever been a semi-serious photographer can tell you, is that very small variations in camera placement can dramatically change perspective and the final scene in the viewfinder. Same for pool.
Well the only way for the next guy to find out would be to try it. If I understand your participation in these discussions your main objective seems to be to prevent others from trying CTE because it does not work for you. You consider it to be bogus and of no value to anyone. If I am wrong about your stance please correct me.
It’s not a matter of the task being “fairly limited.” At pool, within that universe of “fairly limited” is a world or highly fractionated variations that constitute the difference between a tyro and a world champion.
And by reducing the variables, i.e. by the use of a constant line as in CTE, the task becomes somewhat easier to repeat. In pool the word consistency is used a lot with good reason. Here you have a method which is incredibly consistent in the application which should lead to consistency in approach, as if in fact does, and yet you continue to object to it? Why?
Yes, go on YouTube and freeze the frame of all the players down on a shot in their starting positions. They all will look relatively similar. But because of what happens in that “fairly limited” zone of operation, what will happen next when they pull the trigger can be dramatically different. Our game is one of very small increments, different setups, and very great skill that "the system" cannot account for nor provide.
Lou Figueroa
And with the magic of YouTube you can allow the video to progress and study the results. You can rewind to to study the approach to the table, the act of getting down on the shot and the resulting shooting action. In the recent match between Landon Shuffett and Earl Strickland Mr. Shuffett misses a ten ball late in the match. By analyzing the video we can clearly see that Mr. Shuffett lined up on the shot correctly but that he made a significant physical error while stroking that made the cue ball throw off the shot line. Upon review of Mr. Shuffett's other shots this stroke error is not present.
We simply disagree. Mr. Houle and Mr. Shuffet have shown us that in fact there is a systematic approach to finding the shot line that works extremely well. We have shot making tests where only the system users have posted high scores. We have more and more professionals adopting systematic approaches to aiming and those professionals are getting results out of it. Times are changing. Just as the techniques in most sports evolve pool is no exception.
In every major sport the actual physiology of the sport gets studied intensely. By breaking down the motions into the distinct components we can then undertand what's really happening vs. what we think is happening. Then with this new understanding of the actual motion techniques are developed to help the athlete be more efficient and consistent. This is the single biggest reason why performance across the board in all sports has risen immensely over the past 100 years.
I understand the romantic side of pool. When men were men and we simply battled it out by grinding on the pool table. To get good you had to earn your stripes by shooting a milliion balls and getting pounded on by better players. I put in a lot of time on the road doing just that. And it has merit. And was a hell of a lot of fun. But it's not the only way to play this game. At the end of the day this isn't art it's a job. Now the best of the best make it look like art and play the balls like a violinist fiddles. But it's a task-oriented game where the shooter has to face the shot, make it and move on to the next one. ANYTHING that helps them to do this more consistently is helpful, especially if it's really good.
My apologies but if the sum total of your opposition to CTE is that all players are different and there is no one-size-fits-all solution then I have to say that this is a weak argument. What you ought to be saying is that every player should try it and see for themselves. The difference between us sir is that if you had developed a technique for playing pool that you though was worth sharing I would try it and more importantly I would NOT try to stop others from trying it.
In truth all players are far more similar than they are different. The reason for this is because the task of pocketing balls forces them to be.
it makes very good sense to me on how i see cte/pro1.
