John Schmidt's and Corey Deuel's comments on aiming systems

[Jal]

We don't have to accept it, but you're right, it would be hard to prove or disprove. There's more to aiming than body position.

What more is there? There is a target and there an object that needs to point at that target. In pool you have 2.25" of cue ball to hit to send it towards a target 2.25" wide. The real target of course is a tiny fraction of that 2.25".

If the goal is to pocket the ball then the actual cue positions that allow the ball to be made are extremely limited. And since the body holds the cue and propels it the actual body position to properly strike the ball consistently in a forward motion are also extremely limited. And by extremely I mean probably less than an inch off the optimal line.

Don't beleive me? Set up a simple straight in shot and get in the proper postion to shoot it. Now stand up and move over 1" to the right or left and bend back down to shoot the shot placing the cue stick on the proper shot line. You will find that you are in a postion so uncomfortable that you almost cannot bear to take the shot. You can repeat this for any shot on the table and it will be very clear to you that there really is only one cue and body positon that works for the shot you are facing.

So, this objective aiming system depends critically on how comfortable you feel given the location of your body in relation to the shot? I guess that definitely would include me out since I feel quite comfortable using the same position over a fairly wide range of cut angles - a little more sway here, move the elbow in or out there, rock the bridge hand slightly. That may not be the best thing to do for the sake of consistency, but how can one claim any sort of objectivity and universal application when considering the different body types, dimensions, preferred postures, etc. of players? Even if everyone were to perceive the visuals in exactly the same way, there's a substantial list of somatic variables intervening between what one is seeing and where the cue is aimed. That's why I ask, where do you point the cue prior to pivoting? That should have a straightforward answer in any so-called objective system.

I might add the obvious in that the difference between making most shots and missing them rather badly, depends on only small differences in cueball direction. At 18" of separation, the difference in approach angles between a 20 and 25 degree cut is 0.57 degrees, and 0.53 degrees for a cut of 30 versus 35 degrees. At 36" of separation, the corresponding differences are 0.29 and 0.26 degrees. It requires hardly any effort to shift between them. Having your body in a decent position helps, but the job hardly ends there.

Jim

 

[Roadie]

So, this objective aiming system depends critically on how comfortable you feel given the location of your body in relation to the shot? I guess that definitely would include me out since I feel quite comfortable using the same position over a fairly wide range of cut angles - a little more sway here, move the elbow in or out there, rock the bridge hand slightly. That may not be the best thing to do for the sake of consistency, but how can one claim any sort of objectivity and universal application when considering the different body types, dimensions, preferred postures, etc. of players?

In the exact same way that ten players describe what happens when they draw a ball and you get ten difference answers. There is only ONE answer that actually is right from a physics standpoint and only one thing that players REALLY do when they draw the ball regardless of what they think they are doing, which may or may not be the right answer.

You can have 20 body types and different stances but the connection to the cue ball in relation to the shot will be nearly identical IF the cue is actually laid on the right shot line.

If you are using a little elbow here, little sway there, little bridge hand here and there then you are not using a consistent method but rather a best guess method. Which is fine if your best guess is right most of the time. The CTE method is not conscious guessing or fidgeting into position. It's simply letting the eyes come to a point where two lines are clearly in the frame of vision, allowing the body to adopt a stance from that eye position, bending to the shot with cue coming into position. The same routine is followed shot after shot. Kinda of boring really.

Even if everyone were to perceive the visuals in exactly the same way, there's a substantial list of somatic variables intervening between what one is seeing and where the cue is aimed. That's why I ask, where do you point the cue prior to pivoting? That should have a straightforward answer in any so-called objective system.

What variables? If everyone sees the visuals the same way then the body naturally assumes the correct position. That is the whole point. How can an entire platoon of soldiers orient themselves in a perfect formation despite being of many body types?

It's been clearly explained dozens of times that for a hard pivot, one that occurs after the bridge hand is on the table, the cue points to the edge of the object ball.

I might add the obvious in that the difference between making most shots and missing them rather badly, depends on only small differences in cueball direction. At 18" of separation, the difference in approach angles between a 20 and 25 degree cut is 0.57 degrees, and 0.53 degrees for a cut of 30 versus 35 degrees. At 36" of separation, the corresponding differences are 0.29 and 0.26 degrees. It requires hardly any effort to shift between them. Having your body in a decent position helps, but the job hardly ends there.

Jim

Objective refers to the use of real objects to align to. Subjective would be the use of imaginary objects which are then subject to each person's abiliity to accurately imagine or measure distance from a concrete object to a point in space.

When the cue tip is facing the cue ball at center ball then in order for the cueball to travel to the ghost ball center with no side spin the v-notch in the bridge hand MUST be aligned to the gb center. There is not any physcial way around that. Now you can certainly be facing the cue ball at center ball and NOT be aligned to the GB center and yet still get the cue ball to GB center with a little swerve, squirt, deflection or combination of any of those. But there is only one true GB center line. No matter what your body type is or what your name is you have to lay the cue down on that line if you want to shoot the cue ball straight into the GB center.

You can lay down a chalk line so that every player clearly sees where the cue must go and you can ask 100 people to get in the shooting position - photograpgh them from above - and compare their body positions and the better players will be remarkably similar over a wide range of body types while the poor players will vary a lot more. But up to the shoulder all the players will be the same because the bio mechanics dictate that it must be so.

Now when they swing the cue they might do all sorts of funky movements to throw the cue ball off line and miss but that's execution and not aiming. The aiming is given to them.

So if you take the CTE method and then repeat the experiment I contend that the better players who understand it will be on the GB line almost always even without knowing where that line is. You can have an overlay on the video that shows the GB line superimposed over the cue after they get down.

The objective system depends on following the instructions and taking the line given whether you feel comfortable or not. The idea is to reduce feel to the point of practical elimination and replace it with full confidence. After practicing with the method until the visuals become second nature the confidence is there. You don't have to rely on feeling the shot, you simply see it and you instantly see any needed adjustments. It's really that simple.

The quesiton that lies before us is WHY do people miss rather badly. Is because they are lined up wrong, because they threw the ball of course or some of both? By doing whatever possible to acquire the GB shot line at least the player can confident that the aim is right. Now one can of course use any of the dozens of ghost ball trainers out there, one can make one with a regular piece of paper and some scissors and a ruler and then one can diligently use this to train one's perception until such time as they feel entirely confident aiming without it. That is one way to insure that in practice sessions the shooter knows where to point the cue stick when down.

Or one can try a method which does not require the use of a ghost ball template and yet brings the shooter to the ghost ball line anyway. I submit that this is the much better way to learn since it directly translates to the actual competitive side in terms of being the exact same technqie in practice as in competition.

Writing about it is way harder than doing it. And I am way out of my depth trying to. My advice is to buy the DVD and challenge Mr. Shuffett's instructions with the material in front of you. You have a table and I am sure you can follow the instructions as presented. Then you can go straight to the parts where the physics don't work for you and fill in the gaps.

 

[stan shuffett]

Thanks for the response. What I meant to ask is where is the cue pointing in relation to the CTE and secondary line prior to the pivot, assuming you're doing the manual version? For instance, is the cue parallel to either the CTE or secondary line, or does it split them, or something else? Does it vary with cut angle, and if so, what causes it to vary?

Stan, I'm not trying to be disingenuous - I think you know my motives. But if you believe CTE can stand up to analysis, perhaps you would oblige me with an answer anyway. If, as you say, the system is objective, then I see no reason why such answers couldn't be obtained, if they don't already exist.

Thanks.

Jim

Jim,

I answered your question. .

The Ob in relation to where a cue points is not important once I have acquired the correct visuals for a given shot. What is important is that once the visuals are obtained then the cue ball becomes the target. The OB can be removed once my visuals are established. Why? Because my eyes are fixed on the CB. 2 specific edges fix the CB. The vertical axis of the CB is all I need to see.

Therefore, considering the information above, I can move into a CB with no OB present and pivot. I could then have the OB precisely replaced and then shoot.



Stan Shuffett

 

[stan shuffett]

Jim, I answered your first question in another post.

Concerning your considerations for variances in CB OB relationships, CTE PRO ONE effectively handles all of your concerns. At some point, I will demonstrate all of this.......Words on a computer do not teach.
I would be happy to work with you personally to address any issues you may have.

Stan Shuffett

 

[BeiberLvr]

So I tried something out in practice yesterday.

I would stand facing the shot and holding my cue by my hip a few inches to the right of the CB. After making sure I was lined up I would then come straight down (I use a more forward stance) and pivot my cue over the CB all in one motion.

Is that CTE?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

IF CTE brings the shooter to within a tiny sliver of the 100% correct shot line so consistently that the brain makes the tiny shift from the wrong line to the right line without the shooter being aware of it then this method is the nearest to an exact solution of directing the shooter to the shot line that is known to exist.

Please make note of the word IF in this statement and the previous statement you took issue with.

LOL. IF frogs had wings...

pj
chgo

 

[stan shuffett]

LOL. IF frogs had wings...

pj
chgo

PJ, When I think about IF this comes to mind for me not silly frogs and stuff like that.

If

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too:
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or, being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise;

If you can dream---and not make dreams your master;
If you can think---and not make thoughts your aim,
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same:.
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build'em up with worn-out tools;

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings,
And never breathe a word about your loss:
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with Kings---nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much:
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And---which is more---you'll be a Man, my son!

Rudyard Kipling

 

[Patrick Johnson]

PJ, When I think about IF this comes to mind for me not silly frogs and stuff like that.

Uh... OK, Stan... Nice poem, I guess...

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

So I tried something out in practice yesterday.

I would stand facing the shot and holding my cue by my hip a few inches to the right of the CB. After making sure I was lined up I would then come straight down (I use a more forward stance) and pivot my cue over the CB all in one motion.

Is that CTE?

Close enough.

pj
chgo

 

[LAMas]

So I tried something out in practice yesterday.

I would stand facing the shot and holding my cue by my hip a few inches to the right of the CB. After making sure I was lined up I would then come straight down (I use a more forward stance) and pivot my cue over the CB all in one motion.

Is that CTE?

Where on the DVD does it say that?

 

[lfigueroa]

Lou,

A significant point that is frequently overlooked is the fact that most players including you do not place their eyes directly on the shot at ball address. I can assure you that John and Corey do a visual sweep into the cue ball most of the time to their shot lines.

Doing a reverse study of this can result in determining a specific visual offset to their shot lines.

What is that visual offset in CTE PRO ONE? 1/2 tip. That means that a player's visual sweep to center cue ball or a very slight rotation as in Pro ONe is equal to a 1/2 tip pivot.

I teach manual pivoting as a foundation to understanding that which is happening with many many professional players. The teaching of pivoting is only a means to an end. In CTE PRO ONE there is no pivot, only a visual sweep.

Stan Shuffett

"Visual sweep." Must have missed that on your DVD where you instructed players on what the "visual sweep" is, how it works, and how to replace the pivot with it.

Lou Figueroa
stranger and stranger

 

[lfigueroa]

Excellent. If you can get your conversations on video that would be even better. Even better than that I will donate $500 towards a fund that gets you, Stan Shuffet and John Schmidt into a room together for a lengthy discussion on how to aim in pool. I am certain that the result of that will worth it.

You're going to donate $500 to a fund to get us on tape? (lol, you're starting to sound more and more like JB.) Let me know when you get to $500 a man and the dough is posted.

Lou Figueroa

 

[stan shuffett]

"Visual sweep." Must have missed that on your DVD where you instructed players on what the "visual sweep" is, how it works, and how to replace the pivot with it.

Lou Figueroa
stranger and stranger

Lou,

I do not just toss phrases out there in a loose manner as you are suggesting.

I will give the origin of how that phrase came to be used in the context of CTE PRO ONE.

Three years or so ago I had a student from Ohio and before his visit he indicated to me that he discussed limited aspects of CTE with Corey. He asked Corey about lining up to the CTE line in some way.
Corey did not say to the student that he used a CTE system but Corey did say....
Yeah I do something like that.....It's a visual sweep. There is no reason to think my student just made up that story. I have used that phrase ever since then.

And yes, I am happy to report to YOU that the phrase, VISUAL SWEEP, is on my DVD and can be located in the GLOSSARY SECTION. And I did make the connection of how it equals to 1/2 tip pivot in CTE PRO ONE.

I am sorry that your study of CTE PRO ONE was incomplete.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Hungarian]

Yeah, but I heard Corey and John said aiming systems don't work...

 

[BeiberLvr]

Where on the DVD does it say that?

Lol I should've been more clear. I haven't seen the DVD, and have only read briefly about CTE.

So I wasn't sure if what I was doing was considered CTE.

 

[lfigueroa]

Lou,

I do not just toss phrases out there in a loose manner as you are suggesting.

I will give the origin of how that phrase came to be used in the context of CTE PRO ONE.

Three years or so ago I had a student from Ohio and before his visit he indicated to me that he discussed limited aspects of CTE with Corey. He asked Corey about lining up to the CTE line in some way.
Corey did not say to the student that he used a CTE system but Corey did say....
Yeah I do something like that.....It's a visual sweep. There is no reason to think my student just made up that story. I have used that phrase ever since then.

And yes, I am happy to report to YOU that the phrase, VISUAL SWEEP, is on my DVD and can be located in the GLOSSARY SECTION. And I did make the connection of how it equals to 1/2 tip pivot in CTE PRO ONE.

I am sorry that your study of CTE PRO ONE was incomplete.

Stan Shuffett

ah yes. Buried in the Glossary. Guilty as charged, lol.

Lou Figueroa
just clicks "I Agree"
and doesn't really read
End-User License Agreements
either

 

[LAMas]

Lol I should've been more clear. I haven't seen the DVD, and have only read briefly about CTE.

So I wasn't sure if what I was doing was considered CTE.

How do you aim now...if you have one? If it's double distance and or contact point aimed at thee contact point on the OB, the practice that.

Can you shoot 10 out of 10 long straight in shots? If not, practice your stroke and proper vision alignment.

I hope that you have $$$ to invest in DVDs, lessons and table time to get proficient with CTE.

 

[The Saw]

Lou,

I do not just toss phrases out there in a loose manner as you are suggesting.

I will give the origin of how that phrase came to be used in the context of CTE PRO ONE.

Three years or so ago I had a student from Ohio and before his visit he indicated to me that he discussed limited aspects of CTE with Corey. He asked Corey about lining up to the CTE line in some way.
Corey did not say to the student that he used a CTE system but Corey did say....
Yeah I do something like that.....It's a visual sweep. There is no reason to think my student just made up that story. I have used that phrase ever since then.

And yes, I am happy to report to YOU that the phrase, VISUAL SWEEP, is on my DVD and can be located in the GLOSSARY SECTION. And I did make the connection of how it equals to 1/2 tip pivot in CTE PRO ONE.

I am sorry that your study of CTE PRO ONE was incomplete.

Stan Shuffett

Haters are always going to hate Stan.... I'm just glad to have seen, believed, trusted, and practiced "The Gospel of Stan "The Man" Shuffett"!

Learning and trusting Pro One is like Luke training to be a Jedi in Star Wars. And as Yoda would say "This one the force keeps getting stronger in....".

Lou, PJ.... You two are the types that would bite off your own nose to spite your face, we all know that. Go ahead and spite your own face, but don't spite Stan. His systems and regimen get proven results, how are yours working out for the two of you and your flock? There in lies the real answer.

 

[JoeyInCali]

I seriously think most pros like CD and JS aim by controlling the cue ball/visualization of the whole shot.
By visualizing the hit ( how fat, how thin, the spin, the swerve etc ) they know where the two balls are going after collision.
Add to that complexity, different shafts and tips are to be considered too as mentioned by JS.

 

[LAMas]

I seriously think most pros like CD and JS aim by controlling the cue ball/visualization of the whole shot.
By visualizing the hit ( how fat, how thin, the spin, the swerve etc ) they know where the two balls are going after collision.
Add to that complexity, different shafts and tips are to be considered too as mentioned by JS.

On those rare occations when, "Your're in the zone.", you see the whole shot and shoot....shot after shot.