Hi Pat.
I wanted to make a statement, and try to stay on topic for your thread. We are all well aware that CTE aiming has been a controversial pool topic for years, as seen here on AZB on nearly a daily basis. However, I I'd like to split the controversy into two subjects.
SUBJECT #1) The explanation of how CTE works.
This is by and far the biggest controversy around CTE aiming. I'm not talking about instructions how to execute CTE, but rather the technical details how it actually works. I think it is very clear that there has never been an explanation that everyone agrees with. I want to emphasize that part in bold. We know the words that bring pain points. "objective". "feel". "perception".
If you look at Hal's document posted in 1997, it is clear that if you took that set of words as literal (protractor) alignment instructions, it would not possibly work for all angles. However if you take the information to the table, you may (or may not) find some interesting correlations to what he was eluding to. Hal never gave anything to anyone on a platter, he would give you bits and pieces of information. Many think his 3 angle document was partially to get a rise, but also as a hint, a start, a path of how to unlock CTE.
SUBJECT #2) Does CTE actually work?
Now, for a moment I want to set aside all the nomenclature used to examine and explain CTE up to this point. I'm not going to debate what is "objective" and what is "feel" or anything else. But I do want to make a very clear statement here. I know there are people that think CTE works. Even from those that don't use it. There are also the ones that think it is a completely false claim, and that users must be subconsciously falling back to old methods to steer the shots.
On this subject, I'd like to speak from experience. Firstly, I hope you agree that I speak honestly, or this conversation won't even work. I have nothing to gain by pretending CTE works. If I were steering shots I would have dismissed the system years ago. I am to the point where I use CTE for all shots on the table. There are obvious exceptions like aiming a ball somewhere other than a pocket.
Now, I'm going to explain a little bit about how CTE works for me, purely from a procedural standpoint. I'm also not teaching the system, I'm only going to describe what is already out there in hundreds of videos. Firstly when I approach a shot, I'm making a decision what perception I'm going to be using (15, 30, 45, 60), and what pivot direction. This becomes very quick with experience, almost unconscious. Now I put my eyes on that perception. I know there are arguments around that statement, but I have been able to put myself on a perception very consistently and precisely for some time now. There is no guessing if a perception is "on" or not, it only looks perfect from one place. It is consistent and repeatable with any given shot. Now it is a matter of going in on the center cue ball at the 1/2 tip offset. There is only one center cue ball for my vision center. I'm doing the same thing every time. Once at the offset, I again look at center cue ball from there, and turn my cue onto it. There is only one center cue ball line for my vision center here, and the cue must be directly on it. A simple turn on the bridge is enough (see my pivot dissection article in the link below for details on that.) And, assuming I have no major blunders with stroke, spin, speed, or other human errors and table conditions, that ball is heading to the intended pocket. Only recently Stan has also exposed some "full circle" information that lets you double check if you moved perfectly into the shot. You can look up that video or ask him directly for more information about it.
I have got to the point where the above steps are exactly how I shoot every shot. I trust the system completely and look at CCB last. This works for shots directly to pockets, banks, and shots with the pocket covered. Now if the system didn't work, how on earth can I possibly have any sort of success within the confinement of the steps given above? This cannot possibly work with any consistency if the system was not valid, would you agree? The curtain demos and bank demos are there merely to demonstrate that the shots are made using the system. Not setup shots, not practiced shots, just shots using CTE. This can be discovered for ones self given a little commitment and willing to try something different.
So I guess my statement is, that SUBJECT #1, yes I agree we have no unanimous agreement to explain how CTE works technically, and SUBJECT #2, I will have to say irrefutably that CTE works, it works within the confinement of the given steps, and it works without steering or adjustments made after the fact. This can clearly be understood by learning, using and trusting the system for yourself.
I wanted to make a statement, and try to stay on topic for your thread. We are all well aware that CTE aiming has been a controversial pool topic for years, as seen here on AZB on nearly a daily basis. However, I I'd like to split the controversy into two subjects.
SUBJECT #1) The explanation of how CTE works.
This is by and far the biggest controversy around CTE aiming. I'm not talking about instructions how to execute CTE, but rather the technical details how it actually works. I think it is very clear that there has never been an explanation that everyone agrees with. I want to emphasize that part in bold. We know the words that bring pain points. "objective". "feel". "perception".
If you look at Hal's document posted in 1997, it is clear that if you took that set of words as literal (protractor) alignment instructions, it would not possibly work for all angles. However if you take the information to the table, you may (or may not) find some interesting correlations to what he was eluding to. Hal never gave anything to anyone on a platter, he would give you bits and pieces of information. Many think his 3 angle document was partially to get a rise, but also as a hint, a start, a path of how to unlock CTE.
SUBJECT #2) Does CTE actually work?
Now, for a moment I want to set aside all the nomenclature used to examine and explain CTE up to this point. I'm not going to debate what is "objective" and what is "feel" or anything else. But I do want to make a very clear statement here. I know there are people that think CTE works. Even from those that don't use it. There are also the ones that think it is a completely false claim, and that users must be subconsciously falling back to old methods to steer the shots.
On this subject, I'd like to speak from experience. Firstly, I hope you agree that I speak honestly, or this conversation won't even work. I have nothing to gain by pretending CTE works. If I were steering shots I would have dismissed the system years ago. I am to the point where I use CTE for all shots on the table. There are obvious exceptions like aiming a ball somewhere other than a pocket.
Now, I'm going to explain a little bit about how CTE works for me, purely from a procedural standpoint. I'm also not teaching the system, I'm only going to describe what is already out there in hundreds of videos. Firstly when I approach a shot, I'm making a decision what perception I'm going to be using (15, 30, 45, 60), and what pivot direction. This becomes very quick with experience, almost unconscious. Now I put my eyes on that perception. I know there are arguments around that statement, but I have been able to put myself on a perception very consistently and precisely for some time now. There is no guessing if a perception is "on" or not, it only looks perfect from one place. It is consistent and repeatable with any given shot. Now it is a matter of going in on the center cue ball at the 1/2 tip offset. There is only one center cue ball for my vision center. I'm doing the same thing every time. Once at the offset, I again look at center cue ball from there, and turn my cue onto it. There is only one center cue ball line for my vision center here, and the cue must be directly on it. A simple turn on the bridge is enough (see my pivot dissection article in the link below for details on that.) And, assuming I have no major blunders with stroke, spin, speed, or other human errors and table conditions, that ball is heading to the intended pocket. Only recently Stan has also exposed some "full circle" information that lets you double check if you moved perfectly into the shot. You can look up that video or ask him directly for more information about it.
I have got to the point where the above steps are exactly how I shoot every shot. I trust the system completely and look at CCB last. This works for shots directly to pockets, banks, and shots with the pocket covered. Now if the system didn't work, how on earth can I possibly have any sort of success within the confinement of the steps given above? This cannot possibly work with any consistency if the system was not valid, would you agree? The curtain demos and bank demos are there merely to demonstrate that the shots are made using the system. Not setup shots, not practiced shots, just shots using CTE. This can be discovered for ones self given a little commitment and willing to try something different.
So I guess my statement is, that SUBJECT #1, yes I agree we have no unanimous agreement to explain how CTE works technically, and SUBJECT #2, I will have to say irrefutably that CTE works, it works within the confinement of the given steps, and it works without steering or adjustments made after the fact. This can clearly be understood by learning, using and trusting the system for yourself.
