Yet another CTE thread (sigh)

[Dan White]

In previous posts, respondents asked about my fundamentals, and I had responded that I had been working on them to good effect: stance, alignment, and stroke. Also, respondents requested videos.

At the risk of ridicule and embarrassment , I submit two videos of the "spot-to-spot shot CB returning to cue stick" drill/test. Please note I performed these back-to-back with a few warm up shots before I started recording. So I think I've come a long way since I posted my "Terrible stroke" video asking for help some weeks back. Please let me know what you think,, and thanks.

Looks good! One thing though -- your head should not be tilting up and down depending on where you are looking. You head should be still and only your eyes should move. I suspect this is because of the glasses. There are glasses made for playing pool. Just something to think about.

 

[dquarasr]

Looks good! One thing though -- your head should not be tilting up and down depending on where you are looking. You head should be still and only your eyes should move. I suspect this is because of the glasses. There are glasses made for playing pool. Just something to think about.

Yeah, I broke my neck Thanksgiving Day 2010 (head went WAY back on my shoulders), so anytime I can relieve my neck from being angled back on my head, it’s an unconscious “relief” movement. I’ll experiment and see if I can use just my eyes without incurring extra stress on my neck but it will require me keeping my head in the stressed “looking up” position longer. I’ll try and see how it goes.

The longer I play the more my left shoulder hurts with phantom pain because the C4/C5 disc bulges and presses on the nerves going to my left shoulder and arm.

Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[BC21]

I just bought your book Brian. Been meaning to for a while now.

Can't believe how many times the richest man in the world lets me abuse him on shipping via free prime trials.

Anyone says he's not paying his fair share is full of it.

Thanks! Let me know if you have any questions or comments or complaints. All feedback is welcome.

 

[BC21]

Yes, and then after you go to the CTE website and if it doesn't help you I have a great aiming system involving 3 jelly beans. It really works well but only after about 6 months of focused practice.

Whatever gets a player to the table to practice is probably going to improve his/her game eventually, whether it's jellybeans or CTE Pro1 or ghostball or contact points or Poolology.... it's all about learning to recognize where the cb needs to be, then doing it enough times to become consistent with it.

 

[Dan White]

Whatever gets a player to the table to practice is probably going to improve his/her game eventually, whether it's jellybeans or ghostball or contact points or Poolology.... it's all about learning to recognize where the cb needs to be, then doing it enough times to become consistent with it.

If a method's instructions lead you down the wrong path yet you manage to play better anyway due to table time or some accidental fix, then is it something that should be endorsed?

 

[BC21]

If a method's instructions lead you down the wrong path yet you manage to play better anyway due to table time or some accidental fix, then is it something that should be endorsed?

As the old saying goes...All Roads Lead to Rome.

It's not my responsibility or obligation or business or whatever to tell people they are on the "wrong path", especially when what's considered "right" or "wrong" is often a matter of personal preference.

I believe people are smart enough to realize whether or not the path they're on isn't leading them to where they want to go when it comes to skill development. Using almost any aiming method, a player that practices every day for just 30min to an hour should should see drastic improvements within a few weeks. If not, they either have inconsistent flaws in their fundamentals or they aren't paying attention to what they're doing and what their results are. Because the brain figures out how to make things works.

As far as trying CTE with strict manual pivots as instructed...I did that. And I think it's a neverending road unless a player learns to navigate it in their own way, not following the instructions so rigidly, and focusing more on what they're seeing rather than on trying do perform a perfect 1/2 tip offset pivot. It's either that or they'll have to hop onto a different road altogether.

Pro1 is not so rigid, because there is no strict manual pivot. The player learns how to use the visuals to "sweep" into the correct shot line without pivoting. It's all about how to see where to send the cb. Pro1 uses a few visual alignments/perceptions, and using the same visual references can provide different cb-ob perceptions (pre-sweep reference lines) depending on the distance between the balls. Still, it all boils down to what you are seeing and knowing what to do with that.

The same "sweep" method could be used with fractional aiming, meaning a player could estimate the nearest quarter aiming reference line (based on experience) then "sweep" into what looks like a more accurate aim line, a little thinner or thicker as needed, based on what the "eyes are telling you". It's not the same as CTE visual perceptions because because the basic fractional references are always the same, always provide the same cb-ob reference line. But if you do this everyday for a few weeks you should notice an improvement in pocketing consistency.

This is why I say table time with any method will eventually improve your game. Of course, that's only if you pay attention to what you're doing and what results you're getting. That's how we learn to make all the micro-adjustments needed here and there. The mind is amazing when we allow it to be.

 

[Dan White]

As the old saying goes...All Roads Lead to Rome.

It's not my responsibility or obligation or business or whatever to tell people they are on the "wrong path", especially when what's considered "right" or "wrong" is often a matter of personal preference.

I believe people are smart enough to realize whether or not the path they're on isn't leading them to where they want to go when it comes to skill development. Using almost any aiming method, a player that practices every day for just 30min to an hour should should see drastic improvements within a few weeks. If not, they either have inconsistent flaws in their fundamentals or they aren't paying attention to what they're doing and what their results are. Because the brain figures out how to make things works.

As far as trying CTE with strict manual pivots as instructed...I did that. And I think it's a neverending road unless a player learns to navigate it in their own way, not following the instructions so rigidly, and focusing more on what they're seeing rather than on trying do perform a perfect 1/2 tip offset pivot. It's either that or they'll have to hop onto a different road altogether.

Pro1 is not so rigid, because there is no strict manual pivot. The player learns how to use the visuals to "sweep" into the correct shot line without pivoting. It's all about how to see where to send the cb. Pro1 uses a few visual alignments/perceptions, and using the same visual references can provide different cb-ob perceptions (pre-sweep reference lines) depending on the distance between the balls. Still, it all boils down to what you are seeing and knowing what to do with that.

The same "sweep" method could be used with fractional aiming, meaning a player could estimate the nearest quarter aiming reference line (based on experience) then "sweep" into what looks like a more accurate aim line, a little thinner or thicker as needed, based on what the "eyes are telling you". It's not the same as CTE visual perceptions because because the basic fractional references are always the same, always provide the same cb-ob reference line. But if you do this everyday for a few weeks you should notice an improvement in pocketing consistency.

This is why I say table time with any method will eventually improve your game. Of course, that's only if you pay attention to what you're doing and what results you're getting. That's how we learn to make all the micro-adjustments needed here and there. The mind is amazing when we allow it to be.

I've always said that time at the table will make you better, be it aiming or recognizing how the balls collide or come off the rails, or whatever. I've also maintained what you essentially said above, that if you stick to the strict pivots it doesn't work. Cookie went ballistic a day or two ago when I said this.

I do not believe CTE in the book involves a sweep anymore. Is it still called Pro1? The sweep was replaced by turning the head and then "stepping" the cue ball, which amounts to looking at the edge of the cue ball and picking up the resulting shot line from your averted gaze. A fixed pivot turned into a visual sweep (not to be confused with sweeping the cue in from the side as many misunderstand) and that turned into the head turn and "stepping." Amazingly, all three methods put you precisely on the shot line, supposedly. Sweeping/head turning/whatever I guess it about amounts to the same thing. It seems "stepping" is the game changer in Stanspeak, though.

The only issue I have with your take on it is that I would not endorse a product that misinforms the customer. Anybody who has put in any real effort at this game has gone down dead ends and lost time. It's part of the process. I don't think we need to make things harder than they already are for people who might be just starting out. I could go through the claims made by Stan but most already know them and cookie has been busy with the report button, I'm sure, so I'll let it go at that. Having said all that, I'm open to being proven wrong by mohrt's study. Seems like he's given up the effort, though.

I recall a wise person once said how it is good to have an open mind but not so open that one's brain falls out.

 

[cookie man]

As the old saying goes...All Roads Lead to Rome.

It's not my responsibility or obligation or business or whatever to tell people they are on the "wrong path", especially when what's considered "right" or "wrong" is often a matter of personal preference.

I believe people are smart enough to realize whether or not the path they're on isn't leading them to where they want to go when it comes to skill development. Using almost any aiming method, a player that practices every day for just 30min to an hour should should see drastic improvements within a few weeks. If not, they either have inconsistent flaws in their fundamentals or they aren't paying attention to what they're doing and what their results are. Because the brain figures out how to make things works.

As far as trying CTE with strict manual pivots as instructed...I did that. And I think it's a neverending road unless a player learns to navigate it in their own way, not following the instructions so rigidly, and focusing more on what they're seeing rather than on trying do perform a perfect 1/2 tip offset pivot. It's either that or they'll have to hop onto a different road altogether.

Pro1 is not so rigid, because there is no strict manual pivot. The player learns how to use the visuals to "sweep" into the correct shot line without pivoting. It's all about how to see where to send the cb. Pro1 uses a few visual alignments/perceptions, and using the same visual references can provide different cb-ob perceptions (pre-sweep reference lines) depending on the distance between the balls. Still, it all boils down to what you are seeing and knowing what to do with that.

The same "sweep" method could be used with fractional aiming, meaning a player could estimate the nearest quarter aiming reference line (based on experience) then "sweep" into what looks like a more accurate aim line, a little thinner or thicker as needed, based on what the "eyes are telling you". It's not the same as CTE visual perceptions because because the basic fractional references are always the same, always provide the same cb-ob reference line. But if you do this everyday for a few weeks you should notice an improvement in pocketing consistency.

This is why I say table time with any method will eventually improve your game. Of course, that's only if you pay attention to what you're doing and what results you're getting. That's how we learn to make all the micro-adjustments needed here and there. The mind is amazing when we allow it to be.

Brian, your CTE knowledge is extremely lacking but I know you are not interested in really learning it so I’ll just leave it at that.

 

[cookie man]

I've always said that time at the table will make you better, be it aiming or recognizing how the balls collide or come off the rails, or whatever. I've also maintained what you essentially said above, that if you stick to the strict pivots it doesn't work. Cookie went ballistic a day or two ago when I said this.

I do not believe CTE in the book involves a sweep anymore. Is it still called Pro1? The sweep was replaced by turning the head and then "stepping" the cue ball, which amounts to looking at the edge of the cue ball and picking up the resulting shot line from your averted gaze. A fixed pivot turned into a visual sweep (not to be confused with sweeping the cue in from the side as many misunderstand) and that turned into the head turn and "stepping." Amazingly, all three methods put you precisely on the shot line, supposedly. Sweeping/head turning/whatever I guess it about amounts to the same thing. It seems "stepping" is the game changer in Stanspeak, though.

The only issue I have with your take on it is that I would not endorse a product that misinforms the customer. Anybody who has put in any real effort at this game has gone down dead ends and lost time. It's part of the process. I don't think we need to make things harder than they already are for people who might be just starting out. I could go through the claims made by Stan but most already know them and cookie has been busy with the report button, I'm sure, so I'll let it go at that. Having said all that, I'm open to being proven wrong by mohrt's study. Seems like he's given up the effort, though.

I recall a wise person once said how it is good to have an open mind but not so open that one's brain falls out.

More bad info on CTE. You have no idea what the book says. You have no idea how to perform CTE at the table. All you know how to do is try to keep bashing CTE against forum rules with no factual knowledge.

Busy with the report button? Did uncle Mike tell you that.

You should let go of everything CTE. You have no knowledge of it and no interest in learning it.

Did your mole tell you our group is over 1200 members now. CTE continues to grow.

 

[Dan White]

More bad info on CTE. You have no idea what the book says. You have no idea how to perform CTE at the table. All you know how to do is try to keep bashing CTE against forum rules with no factual knowledge.

Busy with the report button? Did uncle Mike tell you that.

You should let go of everything CTE. You have no knowledge of it and no interest in learning it.

Did your mole tell you our group is over 1200 members now. CTE continues to grow.

Do you know what happened to mohrt?

 

[cookie man]

Do you know what happened to mohrt?

Doesn't your mole know, lol.
My guess is he was just tired of all the bullshit. After all he started a thread hoping someone would actually be serious and work through his instructions to give CTE an honest try. But with all the loud talk against CTE on here no one really stepped up and did that. I know you will argue that you did, but did you really? You say you tried some shots but IMO you didn't really follow Mohrt's instructions and work with him to learn. You just tried to push and get him to accept your agenda. The lasers weren't going to tell him anything. CTE is a visual system.

Why do you bother? CTE is a dead issue on here, everyone knows that.

I can honestly say with no bullshit, you are 100% wrong in your beliefs on CTE. 100%

 

[dquarasr]

And there goes the thread. I’m out……….

 

[straightline]

It's ironic these demonstrations tend to confirm the suspicions of the critics. With Mohrt, pleasant fellow though he be, the first shot he took in the last video posted shows him explaining the perception and then having to micro cinch the shot on delivery. Micro cinching in and of itself is a questionable habit and IMO, self esteem dependent. Means error prone if your psyche is ebbing.
Anyway, I stopped paying attention at that point.

 

[Dan White]

Doesn't your mole know, lol.
My guess is he was just tired of all the bullshit. After all he started a thread hoping someone would actually be serious and work through his instructions to give CTE an honest try. But with all the loud talk against CTE on here no one really stepped up and did that. I know you will argue that you did, but did you really? You say you tried some shots but IMO you didn't really follow Mohrt's instructions and work with him to learn. You just tried to push and get him to accept your agenda. The lasers weren't going to tell him anything. CTE is a visual system.

Why do you bother? CTE is a dead issue on here, everyone knows that.

I can honestly say with no bullshit, you are 100% wrong in your beliefs on CTE. 100%

Lasers are a visual system, too. mohrt didn't seem to have the same opinion as you since he purchased two of them. The way science works is ideas get challenged and tested. The more the better. What should come out of that gauntlet is the truth as best we can define it.

I understand you are 100% confident in your BELIEF, which is where people get into real trouble when it comes to finding the truth. It's OK though, don't worry about it.

 

[The_JV]

And there goes the thread. I’m out……….

Unfortunate..., but I think you received and went ahead with the best advice already.

 

[The_JV]

Lasers are a visual system, too.

I would have been really interested in the results of reconstructing CTE alignment with the lasers. No dog either way, but it would have been cool to see the vindication in either direction.

 

[Dan White]

And there goes the thread. I’m out……….

The best place for your thread is probably the Ask the Instructor's forum anyway. Much less noise. You did get some good feedback, though. Most threads go off topic once the subject gets exhausted so don't feel picked on.

 

[Dan White]

I would have been really interested in the results of reconstructing CTE alignment with the lasers. No dog either way, but it would have been cool to see the vindication in either direction.

I think we have the results. They just haven't been made public yet.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I would have been really interested in the results of reconstructing CTE alignment with the lasers. No dog either way, but it would have been cool to see the vindication in either direction.

Can’t be done without clear objective instructions, which have never existed.

pj
chgo

 

[straightline]

VP5 is prolly out of the question.