Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

[JB Cases]

I'm glad you see some sense in this JB, it seems to fly over many peoples' heads.

I have viced a bridge to the table, with CB and OB placed in dimples 4-5 feet apart, and placed a cardboard curtain b/w CB and OB (not OB and pocket) and made the shot time after time with all manner of strokes.

I video'd some of it, but had some problems executing without the cue slipping out of the small bridge on some attempts due to having my left hand over my head filming the shot during execution, but I think it demonstrates the stroke myth quite well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNKXUQYKckA

Colin

I did a similar video a long time ago that has a similar theme.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNrpN3V15fY

and a another one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLfyuAF7kNk

I REALLY REALLY REALLY respect people who take the time to take these concepts to the table and record their efforts.

 

[Dan White]

IF anyone is looking for a totally objective system or method, they won't find it because it does not now exist & most probably never will, unless there is some dramatic technological advancement that will give us a pair of 'goggles' that will allow us the see something totally foreign to what we can see at this time.

It's already been invented...

 

[ENGLISH!]

I'm glad you see some sense in this JB, it seems to fly over many peoples' heads.

I have viced a bridge to the table, with CB and OB placed in dimples 4-5 feet apart, and placed a cardboard curtain b/w CB and OB (not OB and pocket) and made the shot time after time with all manner of strokes.

I video'd some of it, but had some problems executing without the cue slipping out of the small bridge on some attempts due to having my left hand over my head filming the shot during execution, but I think it demonstrates the stroke myth quite well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNKXUQYKckA

Colin

Colin,

I would guess you are aware but perhaps not.

Cornerman/Freedie uses the hard bridge of Bob Meucci's robot as a fault is his squirt findings in that it can 'cheat' the cue is how I thing he said it, but he did also include that with the tight hard 'grip' on the cue too.

Cheers.

 

[JB Cases]

Hi John,
Just for total clarity.
I do not have a treasure chest full of Hal's precise descriptions for CTE but the one's that I do have I am extremely proud of and pleased to share.
The following descriptors are originally from Hal:
NEVER SUPPOSED TO BE
AIMING ON A DIFFERENT PLANE
AIMING IN A NEW DIMENSION
It's phrases like the above that piqued my interest in CTE and highly motivated me to immerse myself in the subject.
I choose to keep those bits of Hal alive and share them for as long as I live.
My near decade long study of CTE has led me to believe that those phrases are absolutely valid descriptors for CTE.
I will be advancing my work once again, this time in text form. I have not let up in any way in getting to the absolute core of CTE.....I can't wait to release my book but it is still months away.
Thank you for your many great posts!
Stan Shuffett

Thank you for the clarification Stan. Whenever you are ready I would like to donate FOREVER the domain name and web hosting for a website to pay tribute to Hal and have a space to introduce him and his methods along with your efforts to preserve and continue this very important topic.

 

[Dan White]

Dan,
I can set up a shot, with CB and OB 6 feet apart and OB 18 inches from the pocket, and make that shot, with the exact same bridge position and speed of shot, hitting the CB anywhere within the 1.125 inch diameter tip offset zone. Basically my cue is flying in all directions, with the same set aim, but it doesn't affect the line the CB takes.

This is pretty weighty evidence against your theory that one needs to hit precisely at one particular spot on a CB to make a shot.

Colin

Actually, I didn't say that. I'm saying that delivering the cue as intended is much harder than knowing the aim point. If you can squirt the ball this way and that, great, that's part of the game, but it doesn't change my point. If you use a pivot point that minimized error introduced from all the offset hits, then that's great but it is a different issue. I have no problem with the idea of pivot points offsetting squirt, etc.

 

[Colin Colenso]

On the contrary, I'm always open to good ideas. I think Patrick Johnson is, too, but he sets the bar high for proof.

I read your comment earlier in the thread and I don't need to correct you. Your post agrees with what I said. You wrote about the positioning of the bridge hand and associated that with aim. I think a definition of terms is a good idea. When I said aiming is pretty elementary and anybody can do it in pretty short order (which you agreed with more or less) I am saying ONLY THAT. If someone is in a standing position they can learn quickly the correct contact point. Once you get down on the shot and start talking about bridge hand positions, that is all part of the stroke. Of course your stroke won't be straight if the bridge hand is in the wrong position. There are many other variables that make up the complete stroke, too.

I'm actually surprised there is any controversy about this. Is it harder to learn the correct contact point to pocket a ball, or is it harder to deliver the cue ball to that spot with a stick? I can take anybody off the street and he will be able to tell me, with at least some accuracy, where to hit the ball. If I give him a cue and tell him to do it, there is a good chance he will miss the cue ball entirely.

Hi Dan,
Nothing personal, just that you raised an aspect that needs consideration.

As I said before, I pretty much agree with you on people's ability to see where to aim, though, an inexperienced player will point at the contact point, and if we aim through CCB at that, we actually only get half of the cut angle we require. That said, with some familiarity, most can develop a talent for perceiving the required aim line.

That said, I can not accept lumping in bridge positioning as part of the stroke, it is the most critical aspect of the application of aim.

It's like bridge positioning is the ugly step-sister no one wants to talk about. But the funny thing is, she is the butler in the library with the knife.... not the stroke.

Hope you get the mangled metaphor

Colin

 

[JB Cases]

On the contrary, I'm always open to good ideas. I think Patrick Johnson is, too, but he sets the bar high for proof.

I read your comment earlier in the thread and I don't need to correct you. Your post agrees with what I said. You wrote about the positioning of the bridge hand and associated that with aim. I think a definition of terms is a good idea. When I said aiming is pretty elementary and anybody can do it in pretty short order (which you agreed with more or less) I am saying ONLY THAT. If someone is in a standing position they can learn quickly the correct contact point. Once you get down on the shot and start talking about bridge hand positions, that is all part of the stroke. Of course your stroke won't be straight if the bridge hand is in the wrong position. There are many other variables that make up the complete stroke, too.

I'm actually surprised there is any controversy about this. Is it harder to learn the correct contact point to pocket a ball, or is it harder to deliver the cue ball to that spot with a stick? I can take anybody off the street and he will be able to tell me, with at least some accuracy, where to hit the ball. If I give him a cue and tell him to do it, there is a good chance he will miss the cue ball entirely.

Nick Varner and I had a conversation about stroke and aiming earlier this year. He said, "when I missed it was almost always due to aiming wrong. I never felt that my stroke was off." The other reasons for missing were skids and table roll.

Dan I completely disagree that beginners can just see the right aiming fairly quickly. I ran a series of informal test with my shop staff and it was quite clear that they were NOT able to see the shot line without concrete instruction on how to do that.

 

[stan shuffett]

Thank you for the clarification Stan. Whenever you are ready I would like to donate FOREVER the domain name and web hosting for a website to pay tribute to Hal and have a space to introduce him and his methods along with your efforts to preserve and continue this very important topic.

John, Once my book project is completed, a new justcueit site will be launched. I will be in that mode. My daughter and Connie are quite schooled in that area. I am VERY interested in your offer. I certainly look forward to discussing that idea with you and hopefully it can come to fruition in a very way.
Stan Shuffett

 

[ENGLISH!]

I got my first pool table in 1962 if that has any purpose to this subject.
The topic was how does someone know if its there aim or stance stroke and follow thru and speed is why you missed a bank or a kick.
But if you want to throw in how many years I have been missing shots , well ok I got about 53 years of playing pool.

I was introduced to the mirror systems about 4 years ago from a guy by the name of Dan Pons.
He is the one who refined or produces the bank bandit and the bank buddy ( Mirror system ) Set of three mirrors which can be mounted to a regulation table by the means of suction cups .
The mirror used as a billiards training tool or devise was invented in the 1890's
Sorry I cannot find the link to the mirrors.
Here is the one on the bank bandit .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wZU_oN8bOM

If you have never used a mirror to bank or kick you really should.
Very cheap experiment to try and you cannot help but to learn something.

Thanks again,

I was initially just referring to John's comment about his studies & was putting it into context has to how does he study any particular shot for what caused the miss, aim or something else.

I have used a mirror a few times when I was having an issue & usually found that it was 'vision' center related.

I had a small eye injury about 30 years ago now that resulted in my shooting eye developing an astigmatism.

Gene Albrecht has shown me that I am now left eye 'dominant' for shooting pool.

Thanks again for the assistance, the suggestion, & the link.

Best Wishes.

 

[Dan White]

I will pay you $50 if you post a video of you running two consecutive racks of 9 ball. You can have the break and ball in hand.

I'm not generally a braggart, but can I have that bet?

 

[stan shuffett]

Nick Varner and I had a conversation about stroke and aiming earlier this year. He said, "when I missed it was almost always due to aiming wrong. I never felt that my stroke was off." The other reasons for missing were skids and table roll.

Dan I completely disagree that beginners can just see the right aiming fairly quickly. I ran a series of informal test with my shop staff and it was quite clear that they were NOT able to see the shot line without concrete instruction on how to do that.

To further strengthened your position, Nick, in a BD article said that every player should be a life-long student of aiming.....Nick eluded to the fact that we all miss and that aiming is inherently a part of it.
Stan Shuffett

 

[Dan White]

Colin,

Unless I missed something, I think Dan White & you agree.

I think part of his post was perhaps misstated a bit.

I think you both are talking about execution being the issue.

But...I could be wrong.

Cheers.

I agree. What part was misstated?

 

[JB Cases]

Hi Dan,
Nothing personal, just that you raised an aspect that needs consideration.

As I said before, I pretty much agree with you on people's ability to see where to aim, though, an inexperienced player will point at the contact point, and if we aim through CCB at that, we actually only get half of the cut angle we require. That said, with some familiarity, most can develop a talent for perceiving the required aim line.

That said, I can not accept lumping in bridge positioning as part of the stroke, it is the most critical aspect of the application of aim.

It's like bridge positioning is the ugly step-sister no one wants to talk about. But the funny thing is, she is the butler in the library with the knife.... not the stroke.

Hope you get the mangled metaphor

Colin

And one of my contentions is that "somehow" (don't kill me Stan) CTE forces the shooter who applies it correctly to place their bridge hand correctly more often than not and because the cue is now on the true shot line accuracy improves even with a less than perfect stroke.

Yes, that "somehow" is not clear to me in the sense that I could write a sensible paper on it. But I have my thoughts as to why which I have made videos on. What I do NOT "think" it is that it is subconscious adjustment but IF it is then great, CTE leads to a finer, narrow corridor and the brain makes the final "connection" as the shooter is going into stance and the result is that the cue lands on the real shot line. Rinse and repeat and run out.

 

[Colin Colenso]

Actually, I didn't say that. I'm saying that delivering the cue as intended is much harder than knowing the aim point. If you can squirt the ball this way and that, great, that's part of the game, but it doesn't change my point. If you use a pivot point that minimized error introduced from all the offset hits, then that's great but it is a different issue. I have no problem with the idea of pivot points offsetting squirt, etc.

Dan, I have somehow got you mixed up with Daphish1 during this thread which is racing along at a rate of knots!

My apologies.

Colin

 

[JB Cases]

I'm not generally a braggart, but can I have that bet?

If you want to post five years worth of posts telling people how you are so great and all they need is the "arrow" template to learn ghost ball I will gladly pay you $50 when you run two racks after that.

Duckie, is literally an APA 3 tops and as such belongs in the listen and don't speak category. IF he ever puts a video up of him running even ten balls in 14.1 I would be shocked.

Several people I know have even gone to Edgie's in Milipitas California to try and meet him and play with him to ascertain his skill level and no one in the place knows who he is.

Like most people on here I am sure he is a nice guy in person but on AZB he doesn't appear too bright when it comes to talking pool.

 

[ENGLISH!]

It's already been invented...

Thanks for chuckle.

 

[stan shuffett]

And one of my contentions is that "somehow" (don't kill me Stan) CTE forces the shooter who applies it correctly to place their bridge hand correctly more often than not and because the cue is now on the true shot line accuracy improves even with a less than perfect stroke.

Yes, that "somehow" is not clear to me in the sense that I could write a sensible paper on it. But I have my thoughts as to why which I have made videos on. What I do NOT "think" it is that it is subconscious adjustment but IF it is then great, CTE leads to a finer, narrow corridor and the brain makes the final "connection" as the shooter is going into stance and the result is that the cue lands on the real shot line. Rinse and repeat and run out.

I agree! In general let's say that there are 3 possible V placements.
PREPIVOT INSIDE
CONVENTION GB LINE
PREPIVOT OUTSIDE

One aspect of real CTE is that the rotation to CCB represents a slight overcut to a given GB center.

CTE students learn very quickly that proper V placement matters.......V placement can not just be random. In CTE the inside and outside PPAs represent an action that is looped over and over and over based on, yes, objectivity.

Stan Shuffett

 

[cookie man]

I would hazard a guess that you will balk at this suggestion as would others.

I would like to have you explain in outcome angles 89 different outcome angles based on the OBJECTIVE alignments along with only just the two extremely definitive pivots.

When you move or rotate to see the proper perception of the shot you are employing subjectivity.

The two balls relative to one another or in a straight line.

Y'all can not have it both ways in a logical 'argument' & say that seeing the CTE & an 'edge to' line places one with a Fixed Cue Ball & then also say that those two lines present themselves differently given the shot that one selects to shoot.

SCIENCE!

When i move or rotate to see the proper perception i am looking at my objective lines, cte and reference. How are they not objective. Anyone with knowledge of CTE should know exactly what they are.
Explain in outcome angles please. My objective aim points create all angles needed. Learn cte and you would know that.
How about you post up shots to prove holes in the system? You've made that claim for months but never not one time posted a shot and explained the hole.

 

[Colin Colenso]

Colin,

I would guess you are aware but perhaps not.

Cornerman/Freedie uses the hard bridge of Bob Meucci's robot as a fault is his squirt findings in that it can 'cheat' the cue is how I thing he said it, but he did also include that with the tight hard 'grip' on the cue too.

Cheers.

Hi Rick,

I'm not familiar with Fred's exact critique of the robot arm. I assumed it was more about the effects of cue weight affecting swerve and consistency of tip offset.

While my set bridge had issues (very shallow with broad V angle), I don't see a rigid bridge as a problem, so long as the cue doesn't deflect out of position during the stroke.

btw: I just saw I missed a post of yours directed to me about 80 posts back. I've been having some gateway access errors and this thread is racing along in so many directions it's been hard to keep up. I'll get back to it if time permits.

Cheers,
Colin

 

[ENGLISH!]

And one of my contentions is that "somehow" (don't kill me Stan) CTE forces the shooter who applies it correctly to place their bridge hand correctly more often than not and because the cue is now on the true shot line accuracy improves even with a less than perfect stroke.

Yes, that "somehow" is not clear to me in the sense that I could write a sensible paper on it. But I have my thoughts as to why which I have made videos on. What I do NOT "think" it is that it is subconscious adjustment but IF it is then great, CTE leads to a finer, narrow corridor and the brain makes the final "connection" as the shooter is going into stance and the result is that the cue lands on the real shot line. Rinse and repeat and run out.

John,

How do feel about this analogy?

CTE is sort of like an LD shaft. There is still some squirt but it's considerably less than other regular shafts.

I'd like to take this opportunity to say that anyone that want's to buy & try CTE should certainly do so.

They should just know that it being a 'totally objective system' has not been proven & neither has the contrary, but it has been questioned.

Best Wishes to ALL.