Oh that's right....you wanted to know if 100 different players would arrive at different "fixed" cb's. All I know is for a straight in shot using the 15-outside and manual pivot they would.
A real CTE shot for you to try.
- Thread starter mohrt
- Start date
Oh that's right....you wanted to know if 100 different players would arrive at different "fixed" cb's. All I know is for a straight in shot using the 15-outside and manual pivot they would.
My eyes are 2 5/8" pupil to pupil - pretty common I bet. To get both pupils centered on two lines 1 1/8" apart takes a head turn of 65° - the geometry's pretty clear. If you're turning your head much less than that you can't actually be looking simultaneously down both lines. Maybe you don't need to, but that's the physical fact.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
Interesting. Well the reality is it’s not something I ever think about, and I don’t find myself turning my head too far to be comfortable. So maybe a perfect pupil to pupil alignment is not necessary. Mid face vision between the two lines is probably more important.
Can you shoot those softer and harder and what adjustments are necessary?
For the most part, no adjustment necessary. But there are some fundamentals regarding colliding spheres we must all pay attention to in pool, and I'll address this to the best of my ability. So, we are talking about contact-induced-throw or CIT, which happens when the CB and OB collide. Here are the main points:
What creates the most CIT?
* dirty pool balls. The dirtier they are, the more unpredictable shots can be. So use clean pool balls!
* the angle of the shot. The closer to 30 degrees the shot is, the more CIT is more pronounced.
* the speed of the shot. The slower you shoot, the more CIT is more pronounced.
* the distance between the CB and OB. The closer they are, especially within 1 diamond, CIT is more pronounced.
First off, the pockets are bigger than the ball, so we do have some wiggle room here. Equipment can vary. Second, our test shots are very close to 30 degrees, so I must be aware of that. Given the choice, I'm not going to baby this shot. If I baby it I'm at the mercy of CIT, table roll, ball skid, etc. So I'd much rather hit this shot medium speed or harder. If I hit the ball medium or harder, I don't think about any adjustments to pocket the ball. Also on a shot like this, given the choice, I'm likely going to impart some top or bottom spin to help minimize CIT. If I'm playing 1-pocket and I absolutely have to play pocket speed and I don't want any spin on the CB, I must take into account that the OB will likely drift forward to the end rail, so I'd have to make a slight adjustment to the SL to favor the right side of the pocket.
I hope that covers it?
Yes I'm familiar with all this. I'm getting at the the stroke discrepancies required to make CTE work. These will be speed dependent.
This is only true without side spin.
It's not their closeness that matters; it's the CB's lack of spin. Close means the CB is more likely to be sliding at collision.
Spin also matters generally, but to different degrees depending on amount of spin, cut angle and speed. These are all interrelated factors. (Fun factoid: outside side spin can actually increase throw for some shots.)
pj
chgo
I almost instinctively put bottom spin on close-quarter cut shots, given the choice.
As for stroke discrepancies... I rarely think about CIT. The ball goes in the hole very clean generally speaking.
That would be true if the CB and OB were on your face, but they aren't, are they? Since your standing some distance away from those balls and lines than the distance between them appears a lot smaller, doesn't it?
Good observation, I didn't even think of that. This is a good example where an argument of "the geometry is pretty clear" falls on its face when our visual perception is involved in the equation.
Objects appear smaller with more distance because the angle at which you're looking at them changes with distance.
This is why Stan says that, when he uses basic CTE or disguised pivoting, he needs to rotate his head more to the inside to still see the visuals/lines at ball address.
Yes, which means the AL and SL, even though drawn in 2D as perfectly parallel lines, are actually converging lines when you apply perspective.
No matter how it "appears", those lines are a uniform 1 1/8" apart all the way along. In order to have each eye looking along each of those lines, the eyes must be on those lines, i.e., 1 1/8" apart - otherwise they're looking across the lines at some undefined angle(s) chosen by the shooter.
If they don't have to be looking along each line, how does CTE tell you where the one-and-only correct place for them is (as Mohrt says it does)? And why do you have to have each eye separately dominant (also as Mohrt says)?
The geometry only "fails" if CTE isn't telling you (geometrically) exactly where to place your eyes - then it's a "by feel" choice made by you.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
Second or third candid response regarding CTE ever. Thank you. lol etc...
Contact geometry is so specific, CIT/SpeedIT/SpinIT are very easily identified. Can you detail or demonstrate this with your universal perceptions?
I can tell you what will happen with soft and hard shots. The hard shots will throw less, just like they do in Stan's video.
What faculty did you finish?
That is just not correct. Yes the lines are a uniform 1 1/8 " apart by way of the ruler, but your eyes do not perceive the same thing. The balls appear smaller as they get farther from your eyes. So the AL and SL ever so slightly converge, as the CB and OB are always at differing distances from the shooter. That said, there is only one place the AL and SL look perfect, and it is very repeatable and predictable. And you don't have to wrench your head sideways to see it. This is easily experienced for yourself at the table. No doubt this is very different from conventional aiming and it may take some time to get used to how those perceptions on the AL/SL look perfect, but it doesn't take long at all. This is why we normally start with dead-simple shots to work out the perceptions, so partly my fault for starting on a half-table length shot.
Maybe start with this shot to learn the 30 inside perception:
Last edited:
Here's the problem with all that. Your upper body is the shooting device. Moving around to accommodate what you want to see will require adjustments to this device, many during the act of shooting. It's far more practical and accurate to refine your stroke and learn to see what it shoots.
But since it's not where each eye can see directly along each line, CTE can't describe it clearly - it's just "somewhere" in relation to the lines. In other words it's an eye position that you work out (and memorize) yourself for each different shot - just like other aiming systems.
After all this detail you've shown us nothing new when it comes to actually identifying a shot line - just the same old vague and undefined "perceptions". Thanks for the friendly effort, but I have my own method and "perceptions" to practice.
pj
chgo