Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

[Dan White]

Dan that would be impossible for me to tell you that. First I don't know that Hal was teaching you CTE per se. He had dozens of systems. Secondly I don't know what was said between you. I don't know what you thought you understood.

I can tell you this. If you go to your table and put up shots that you think will not work with CTE I promise you that by the end of the week I will go to the table and make a video showing you how I apply CTE for those shots and demonstrate as best I can how CTE handles them.

Stan or Gerry or others could do a better job than me but I relish doing things like this as it keeps me involved and keeps me sharp in this subject.

I will say this as a general statement. Whenever you move the balls you move your body as well and that changes the perceptions. The pocket however doesn't move so the fact is that the angle to the pocket is different for the two shots. Thus it stands to reason that the CTE perception would be different for both shots. Both shots may start with the CTE line as the initial orientation but the bridge hand placement will be determined by the secondary line perception and the type of sweep into the shot, inside or outside. I did cover this on a video somewhere, I will try to find it and edit this post.

Thanks John and Cookie Man. If, as you correctly state, the shot line is different for the two shots, while the CTE line is the same, can't the rest of what happens simply be shown on a piece of paper? After all, ultimately it all comes down to geometry. As I understand the issue, this is the point at which CTE proponents have trouble explaining how the CTE system objectively puts you onto the correct shot line. Is this correct?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Since I have to satisfy those who nitpick language......it seems to me like CTE takes the shooter to a shot line... etc.

That's the language that doesn't make unfounded assumptions.

pj
chgo

 

[cookie man]

You haven't understood the real reasons.

pj
chgo

(Not reasons it "doesn't work" at all - reasons it doesn't work without feel.)

You don't even understand the system, so anything from you wouldn't be REAL.

 

[cookie man]

Thanks John and Cookie Man. If, as you correctly state, the shot line is different for the two shots, while the CTE line is the same, can't the rest of what happens simply be shown on a piece of paper? After all, ultimately it all comes down to geometry. As I understand the issue, this is the point at which CTE proponents have trouble explaining how the CTE system objectively puts you onto the correct shot line. Is this correct?

The CTE line falls at a different angle for each shot. So when you say it's the same then yes you look at it the same, but it's really different.

 

[cookie man]

Thanks John and Cookie Man. If, as you correctly state, the shot line is different for the two shots, while the CTE line is the same, can't the rest of what happens simply be shown on a piece of paper? After all, ultimately it all comes down to geometry. As I understand the issue, this is the point at which CTE proponents have trouble explaining how the CTE system objectively puts you onto the correct shot line. Is this correct?

No one and that includes some very smart people, not on AZ, have been able to put the geometry of the system on paper.
Wish they could.

 

[Neil]

That's great that it helped you. My question, and I admit it is probably a basic one, is how do you make that same shot if you move the object ball to the left a half an inch? Is there something about the pivot or way you perceive each shot that makes that adjustment for you? Let's say I set up a shot where aiming center to edge (ie, a half ball hit) pockets the ball. If I am not using CTE aiming, then if I move the object ball a half inch to the left or right, but I still aim at the half ball hit, I will miss. That's what I don't understand about CTE. How does CTE adjust for this without requiring "feel"?

It adjust for it by using two lines and your initial perspective to see those two lines. As the cb or ob moves over, those two lines also change.

 

[Neil]

No one and that includes some very smart people, not on AZ, have been able to put the geometry of the system on paper.
Wish they could.

Until someone figures out how to put perspective and how the eyes actually see into a formula, it will never happen. Fortunately, the formula is not required to become expert at using the system.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Well, Stan for example shows shots on his video that he clearly states have no CTE solution. For those shots he explains how he adjusts to try and make them.

Honestly though Dan there is almost no shot which can be made directly into a pocket which doesn't have a CTE solution. So the fact is that if someone claims to use CTE and they claim it doesn't work for a shot that does have a CTE solution then the only conclusion is that they are not applying CTE correctly.

The same thing applies if I tell you that drawing the ball according to your instructions does not work and you come to find out that I am not hitting it two tips below center but just one instead although I swore to you that I was using two tips as instructed.

How many times in our lives have we seen players who cannot hit the cue ball consistently where they think they are hitting it? Why can't the same thing apply to CTE? It can't and should not be assumed that just because a new user is not getting the same results as an expert that the system is not valid.

Stan, myself, Gerry Williams, Stevie Moore, Shaun Wilke, Landon Shuffet and many others have put in the time to find out what CTE works for and what it doesn't work for.

I have an example from my cases that fits here I think. Once in a while I will get a call where someone is complaining to me that my case is defective. They will say it's too tight and doesn't hold what I say it will. 100% of the time they are using the case wrong. I have made videos showing how to load the case but sometimes people get one and they haven't see the videos and they start putting the cues in the wrong slots in the wrong order. Now, I should send a card explaining this with links to the videos but I don't yet do that. Despite that lack of instruction on my part the case still works as advertised and is not defective just because the user isn't figuring it out correctly.

John,

You can not state a false or unproven premise & then arrive at what you say is a true conclusion based on that false or unproven premise.

ONLY If, the premise is true can a true conclusion be drawn from it & even then, not always, depending on the conclusion drawn.

Best Wishes.

 

[Zphix]

Who needs an aiming system? We all know that the cue makes the player. So, buy a Predator or an OB cue and you'll be golden. Oh, you also need a glove, some Kamui chalk, and the cue must weigh exactly 18.57309293 ounces and have iridium joint and butt collars.

 

[Neil]

Shooting better isn't proof that the subconscious is no longer involved - in fact, I'd guess it's a sign that your subconscious is more deeply involved, maybe because CTE "speaks your mind's language" better than other methods.

The evidence in favor of the subconscious being involved is that it's logically impossible to define a set of conscious steps complex enough to produce all the cut angles needed, yet simple enough to be used by a player at the table. Evidence of that within the system itself is how vague and undefined the instructions are (except the first couple of familiar "fractional" instructions).

To avoid unnecessary sidetracks, let me restate that I don't believe this makes CTE a "bad" or "unworkable" system - just that it doesn't work exactly the way most of its users think.

pj
chgo

Pat, really?? Do you realize that you just stated that CTE unlocks a portion of the subconsciousness that before hand was unattainable? That's really your claim? And you also have a problem with "from another dimension"?

Why, after years of trying to pocket a certain shot, was the subconscious unable to adjust to make it, but just using CTE suddenly the mind is unlocked and the shot becomes like a hanger?

No, Pat, the subconscious had nothing to do with it. It's simply the steps of CTE put one on the correct shot line to make the shot.

 

[lfigueroa]

Contradiction requires evidence, not speculation.

That JB, doesn't even know his name, seems to weaken that speculation.

Really? In what world does that requirement exist?

contradict |ˌkäntrəˈdikt|
verb [ with obj. ]
deny the truth of (a statement), especially by asserting the opposite: the survey appears to contradict the industry's claims | he did not contradict what he said last week.
• assert the opposite of a statement made by (someone): he did not contradict her but just said nothing | within five minutes he had contradicted himself twice.
• be in conflict with: that evaporation seems to contradict one of the most fundamental principles of physics.


The Koop and Jersey Jer (and me) are denying JB's claim he wasn't getting coached. They are asserting the opposite and what they've said is in conflict to his claim.

If you'd seen it you too would have thought he was getting coached.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

I remember the threads from around the time, and JB certainly knew his name then. If I remember correctly JB claimed he was there to give "encouragement". Not coaching, "encouragement".

Honestly, I don't think it matters much one way or the other now, given the result of the match. At the time I thought it should be pretty clear that having a high level player standing next to you, talking to you under his breath during play (whether it was actual coaching or just friendly encouragement as JB claimed) isn't really on.

No, it doesn't matter now, except as to how that incident reflects on JB.

It was wrong and the room owner would not allow Spears to sit near JB the second day of the match. Second day... it was over in no time at all

Lou Figueroa

 

[JB Cases]

Thanks John and Cookie Man. If, as you correctly state, the shot line is different for the two shots, while the CTE line is the same, can't the rest of what happens simply be shown on a piece of paper? After all, ultimately it all comes down to geometry. As I understand the issue, this is the point at which CTE proponents have trouble explaining how the CTE system objectively puts you onto the correct shot line. Is this correct?

I think that CTE (and really most Ball to Ball methods) are not as easily diagrammed because the sighting that leads to the shooter's body placement and subsequent bridge placement happens while standing up.

Ghost Ball in my opinion became the dominant "aiming method" presented in books because it diagrams easily and geometrically correct. The problem is that the practical use of it relies heavily on visualizing phantom balls and estimating the placement of those balls.

So there is not any really good way to diagram this in 2d space to explain the geometry of why a human can perceive the two balls a certain way and get consistently down on the shot line

I think that some folks have done a decent job with 3d diagrams that attempt to show how a perception would look from the eye positions. I'd show you those diagrams but they reside on a hard drive in a drawer far away.....

 

[JB Cases]

No, it doesn't matter now, except as to how that incident reflects on JB.

It was wrong and the room owner would not allow Spears to sit near JB the second day of the match. Second day... it was over in no time at all

Lou Figueroa

Nonsense, YOU insisted that Dennis sit somewhere else. I agreed because it didn't matter to me.

It was over the second day quickly because I SOLD out having misread a shot early in the first game.

 

[JB Cases]

John,

You can not state a false or unproven premise & then arrive at what you say is a true conclusion based on that false or unproven premise.

ONLY If, the premise is true can a true conclusion be drawn from it & even then, not always, depending on the conclusion drawn.

Best Wishes.

Ok. Glad we cleared that up.

 

[cookie man]

Really? In what world does that requirement exist?

contradict |ˌkäntrəˈdikt|
verb [ with obj. ]
deny the truth of (a statement), especially by asserting the opposite: the survey appears to contradict the industry's claims | he did not contradict what he said last week.
• assert the opposite of a statement made by (someone): he did not contradict her but just said nothing | within five minutes he had contradicted himself twice.
• be in conflict with: that evaporation seems to contradict one of the most fundamental principles of physics.


The Koop and Jersey Jer (and me) are denying JB's claim he wasn't getting coached. They are asserting the opposite and what they've said is in conflict to his claim.

If you'd seen it you too would have thought he was getting coached.

Lou Figueroa

All they did was state an opinion, no real evidence

 

[Dognit]

This thread still here? Yawn

But I has a question..

Of the feel players, (Me included), what are the supposed "Usually by feel, with aiming systems for hard shots" systems that are "used" on hard shots?

It sure aint CTE. Im kinda smart, but I cant for the life of me think that a feel player would use something SO COMPLICATED on just hard shot. lol Ive yet to find a secret decoder ring/cheat sheet to explain it. So maybe I aint so smart.

CTE seems to be an all in commitment.

 

[cookie man]

No, it doesn't matter now, except as to how that incident reflects on JB.

It was wrong and the room owner would not allow Spears to sit near JB the second day of the match. Second day... it was over in no time at all

Lou Figueroa

You seem to have had a lot of outside help with this match. Room owner, guy threatening John before the match.

 

[Banks]

All they did was state an opinion, no real evidence

Then where's the evidence for cte? Just sounds like a bunch of opinions to me.

Still waiting for you guys to go pro.

 

[lfigueroa]

Nonsense, YOU insisted that Dennis sit somewhere else. I agreed because it didn't matter to me.

It was over the second day quickly because I SOLD out having misread a shot early in the first game.

#####
Soon that game is over, we finish the night at 8-6, and I walk over to the far side of the arena where AZers Koop and Jerry are sitting and I ask them if they could see what was going on in John’s corner and one of them says, “Oh yeah. It was totally obvious from here that he was getting coached. We had a clear view of it.”

So then I go up to Ed (owner of Sandcastle) and we have the following conversation:

Lou: “I got a complaint.”
Ed: “What is it?”
Lou: “John was getting coached by the black guy in his corner.”
Ed: “Oh yeah. I could see it from the booth. I was waiting for you to say something.”
Lou: “It can’t happen tomorrow.”

My crew slept the coaching. To be honest we didn’t anticipate someone would try that. In any case, I know they’ve beaten themselves up enough about it. So that’s the answer to why Lou’s corner didn’t say anything. The next day before John and I start up again, I go up to Ed:

Lou “There cannot be any coaching today.”
Ed: “I talked to John about it and he admitted that Dennis was telling him stuff but claims it was generic things to pump him up and I told him that even that can’t be going on.”
Lou: “He was getting coached and all I know is that I won’t tolerate it today.”

And what Ed does is to talk to Dennis, one of his room players, and tells him he cannot sit anywhere near John, and that was the end of that.

Here is my last comment on this subject: 1pocket is often likened to chess because so much of the game is the knowledge you accumulate over the years and bring to a game, knowing the right move and when to make it. In all my years of playing 1pocket, coaching has always been verboten and, whether it’s 1pocket or chess, it cannot possibly be considered anything but cheating to have a superior player whispering in your ear while playing a match.
#####

As to selling out the shot... I guess a coach the second day would have helped prevent that ;-)

Lou Figueroa