Hell, Efren seldom looks from the ob to the pocket. He just stands behind the cb, sees where it needs to be to pocket the ball, and then sends it there.
John Schmidt's and Corey Deuel's comments on aiming systems
- Thread starter PoolSharkAllen
- Start date
Hell, Efren seldom looks from the ob to the pocket. He just stands behind the cb, sees where it needs to be to pocket the ball, and then sends it there.
He does on backwards cut. Seen him do many times playing one hole at Hard Times.
Efren uses a "ghost pocket" system.
He visualizes the true center of the pocket some 6 inches from the OB, no matter how far the pocket is .
Last edited:
I do the same but envision the pocket 3ft beyond the table. Helps with accuracy
Of course, having the wrong aim line won’t help the best stroke.
Conversely knowing the aim line then failing to send the tip on it through contact, because of mechanical faults, is also a formula for failure.
Everything is interconnected and co-dependent.
Controlling two balls starts with a reference line, but positional needs will modify that line based on what part of the ball needs to be contacted, at what speed, turns the game into a complementary mind/body coordinated effort.
Our tendency to break stuff down into parts loses the whole of what we need to do.
How do you know? Efren said that for you?
It does not mean that people are watching contact point if they see what line object ball is going to pocket. I do it almost every shot and not watch any contact points..
You don't need to do that if you use CTE
You are correct, CTE usage means you don't need contact points.
Are John and Corey the authority on aiming systems? I mean which professional player should we be listening to and why? What happens if pro players of similar stature don't agree? Who is right?
By the way John Schmidt later said that he thinks that CTE is a valid way to aim. What happens when a pro says something one year and changes their mind the next?
"There is no magic pill" - Niels Feijen on aiming. I fully agree with Niels. There are, however, much better aiming methods than ghost ball out there. None of them magic, many of them very objective and accurate.
By the way John Schmidt later said that he thinks that CTE is a valid way to aim. What happens when a pro says something one year and changes their mind the next?
"There is no magic pill" - Niels Feijen on aiming. I fully agree with Niels. There are, however, much better aiming methods than ghost ball out there. None of them magic, many of them very objective and accurate.
How about went to Stan several times? That works. There are many players who have been there, pros and amateurs alike. Many are not public people they just seek knowledge that can help them play better. It has been my experience this past decade that I have not met even one person who says that they were unhappy with the experience after taking lessons with Stan.
I would ALMOST bet that they don't but the overriding point for me is that THEY CAN whenever they want to. Someone who does not have an objective aiming system in the tool box CAN NOT do anything but aim by feel or ghostball or whatever you are defining as traditional aiming.
I have said this many times. Ghostball is ALWAYS going to be available to me, feel is always available to me. I don't throw those methods away just because I have a tool that works better in most situations.
You are 100% wrong.
Except you can't prove that I am. I however can prove that you are.
Prove.
Wait, you mean they can't just "unsee" the shot picture they have seen thousands of times then go with the pivoting franchise system ?
Yep, CTE users have different "shot pictures".... Correct ones. I feel bad for you that you will likely never experience it. I think you don't even like pool really.
How would you ever know what shots any given person has seen anyway? Sometimes you need to think a little deeper Joey and understand that it's extremely unlikely that any amateur has shot any particular shot hundreds much less thousands of times. And you have no idea what anyone's make percentage is on the breadth of shots they have taken.
CTE literally allows the user to get in the correct shot line for shots they have never taken. It can't be explained to you how this feels. When you don't know you really don't know.
You argue against CTE from an abstract perspective based on your imagination and cte users argue from experience. The joy a cte user feels making sick shots that they were previously scared of or wouldn't have even tried is pretty much forever out of your reach.
You might make one occasionally but it's doubtful you can repeat it consistently whereas a cte user can repeat it consistently. I really wish that you could experience it but I am pretty sure that you have invested so much of your life trying to knock it that you couldn't ever bring yourself to learn cte.
So while you knock, cte aimers rock. We are out making shots and enjoying pool while you spend time knocking something you really don't understand. And to be clear, you don't understand it, at all.
(Yes Pat I know you are going to chirp with your go-to claim that cte users don't understand what they are doing either, but we most certainly do and more importantly we enjoy pool much more by being able to precisely aim.)
JBNC , you are like a fly buzzing around explaining why shit is better than honey to whoever..no offense but your shit is old
This is retarded.