A Curious CTE Diagram

Or you can just move your bridge hand .
Seen Efren walk the bridge hand many many times.
Busti feathers the outside left of the cue ball to hide the spin he applies on the cue ball.
Totally insane way. Practice stroke at the outside left then hit the cb somewhere else in the final stroke .
And he always aims the money ball thick and spins it in .
Yep... I do adjust my bridge hand first then re-align my grip hand to avoid BHE. Now that I have broken down the process, it's not techincally a true 'in unison' parallel shift, but the end result is the same.
 
P.S. I know what you mean, but it’s confusing to call something “parallel” that’s non-parallel by definition.
You say that, but I speaking of a shift that's horizontally parallel to the original aim line. If my cue originally follows the aim line exactly, and then I shift both the tip and butt of the cue an equal amount to either the left or right. Is the cue not in parallel with the original aim line after the shift..?

I honestly don't have a better description for such an adjustment other than a "parallel shift".
 
When Busti first came to Germany he freaked everyone out with the cue not pointing straight down the shot line. it looked like he was aiming into space because in Germany they are very strict about the form and the cue and body must be aligned just exactly so.
No where near the ability of a pro, let alone Busti, but there's a local player who has a crazy chicken wing practice stroke. When he is planning on hitting the upper half of the CB his practice strokes actually pass over top the CB as well.

When he's on, man he pots like mad and generates amazing action. Most of the time, he's a banger at best. Some times watching his game is like a train wreck that just doesn't end.

If you have enough talent and put in the hours. You can be successful with what would otherwise be the worst practices.
 
... it’s confusing to call something “parallel” that’s non-parallel by definition.
You say that, but I speaking of a shift that's horizontally parallel to the original aim line. If my cue originally follows the aim line exactly, and then I shift both the tip and butt of the cue an equal amount to either the left or right. Is the cue not in parallel with the original aim line after the shift..?
Yes, it is. And, except for the rare case where swerve exactly counters squirt, you miss - unless you subconsciously angle the cue by feel to counter it.

I think when players say they use "parallel english" they usually just mean they do it entirely by feel rather than using a system like BHE.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
The problem with this theory of yours is that all the recent testimonies being posted are all coming from people who have purchased the book They are detailing there success after buying the book. The people you are using as your examples are those of us that have been using CTE for years not the ones who are giving the recent testimonials. That being said there is new information in the book that most of us are learning for the first time. Though there has been some deviation in the past CTE is now complete and I would expect those of us from the past that now have the book are all pretty much going to be on the same page
So how can there be deviations yet the mysterious relationship between the balls and the pockets is still revealed to the shooter? IF these differences are not important to the success of the method then I wonder exactly which steps are mandatory for everybody to do the same.

it’s a shame you keep bringing Freddie up. He has stated he uses his version that he put together after talks with Hal. He doesn’t play enough pool these days to be worried enough to learn from Stan. He has other interests at this point in his life. Leave this nice guy out of this shit show here.
Not sure how talking about Freddie's method is some kind of insult.

You forgot to say I don't know anything about CTE and don't know what I'm talking about. ;)
 
That's pretty much completely wrong when it comes to Freddie. Maybe I heard him wrong and he'll correct me, but Freddie's system does not require some magic or unexpected connection between the balls and the table. I believe Freddie's system is to pick one of the 7 fractions on the ob to get you close to the pocket and then pivot AS NEEDED to pocket the ball.
(y) Ah yes...the telephone is indeed a wonderful research tool.
Research from those "in the know" have now enlightened me about who Freddie is. A super guy and MENSA intelligent. (I like and admire those kind.)
Anyway, as usual Mr. White you have failed again.
You believe 100% INCORRECTLY. A thread got totally deleted in here within the last two weeks and Freddie posted what he uses and teaches. It is not CTE but it IS a Hal Houle aiming system called SHISKABOB.
SHISHKABOB is similar to CTE in that there are 3 spots to aim at like CTE. The 15 - 30 - and 45. It has NO 7 fractions along the face of the OB. That "7 fractions" stuff is total BALONEY and I have no idea where that got pulled out of.
SHISHKABOB is pretty much a ferrule aim that can be set up from the INSIDE while aiming at the 15, 30, or 45 and then pivot to center or it can be set up at CCB aiming at the 15, 30, or 45 and pivot to outside.
On severe cuts the same two choices of ferrule placement with an inside to center or center to outside are aimed at the EDGE of the OB and then pivoted before stroking.
Take heed, Mr. White upon what you enter. Selah.
:)
 
So how can there be deviations yet the mysterious relationship between the balls and the pockets is still revealed to the shooter? IF these differences are not important to the success of the method then I wonder exactly which steps are mandatory for everybody to do the same.


Not sure how talking about Freddie's method is some kind of insult.

You forgot to say I don't know anything about CTE and don't know what I'm talking about. ;)
The "deviations" are things that happened through the years from some players. Remember, Stan started with Hal's half ball pivot. It took a while for Stan to break it down and put it all back together. So yes through the years we have used different versions, but you know this even though you've never understood any of them. The final complete version is out now and all the new testimonials are on the same page. And most of us that have used a deviated version will also be converting to the final version that Stan has put out.
The deviations are not that extreme that they messed with the guts of the system. You are trying to make a mountain out of nothing.

I didn't say you were insulting Freddie, I said there was no need to continue to drag him into this shit show. I for one will concede that he doesn't use or know Stan's version at this point. If he decides to learn it at some point then so be it.
 
Yes, it is. And, except for the rare case where swerve exactly counters squirt, you miss - unless you subconsciously angle the cue by feel to counter it.
Miss what...? The CB with the cue, or the shot...? There's other things that are happening to correct for squirt. I just didn't mention the rest of my process because we were discussing BHE .vs. parallel shifts. Not all things that make the OB go in the hole.
 
I thought I did that. Other than swerve or angling your cue, what "other things" correct for squirt?
adjusting aim line...

Maybe that's what you mean by 'angling your cue'. However to me your comments reads as though you mean to 'angle' the cue away from the aim line.
 
adjusting aim line...

Maybe that's what you mean by 'angling your cue'. However to me your comments reads as though you mean to 'angle' the cue away from the aim line.
I mean angling your cue so it's not parallel with the direction you want the CB to go - duplicating the expected squirt angle (minus expected swerve) in the opposite direction. Is that "away from the aim line"?

I'm not sure what you mean by "aim line"... the direction you want the CB to go? the direction your cue stick is pointed? They're rarely the same (parallel) for spin shots.

pj
chgo
 
I mean angling your cue so it's not parallel with the direction you want the CB to go - duplicating the expected squirt angle (minus expected swerve) in the opposite direction. Is that "away from the aim line"?

I'm not sure what you mean by "aim line"... the direction you want the CB to go? the direction your cue stick is pointed? They're rarely the same (parallel) for spin shots.

pj
chgo
In my world the "aim line" is the line that the CB will travel to strike the OB at the desired angle.

For future reference. The "shot line" is the line the OB will follow after being struck by the CB.

I'm not entirely sure why this conversation has gone such an odd path. If it helps you can just assume that I'm wrong in either the way I adjust my aim, or my terminology. I'm really indifferent to validating my thoughts and approach to the forum ;)
 
When Busti first came to Germany he freaked everyone out with the cue not pointing straight down the shot line. it looked like he was aiming into space because in Germany they are very strict about the form and the cue and body must be aligned just exactly so.

People could not believe that this guy could run a rack much less give ridiculous weight to great players.

I watched him do it live many times. Nobody tried to copy him there, we all considered his style to be an anomaly. Everyone was clear after the first month that his skill was world class but no one wanted to try and teach anyone to have the pre-shot form of Bustamante.

No one back then was even discussing the concept of aiming to the degrees that it has been discussed in the past 20 years. No one in the early 90s made a deep connection between aiming and form. Aiming was treated as a by product of form just as some here continue to advocate today. Bustamante was considered, in Germany, to be one of the rare few who could play world class without "textbook" form.
It's funny and I know I've mentioned it on here before but I tried to mimic Busty's style one time just to try and see what he is looking at. I couldn't figure it out but damned if I didn't start making balls like crazy! And with all kinds of english. It was a lot of fun and sometimes I do it when I practice still.
 
I'm really indifferent to validating my thoughts and approach to the forum ;)
Don't take it personally - I'm trying to interpret the info for everybody here, especially less experienced players. I think we've (mostly) done that now - thanks for hanging in there with me.

The term "parallel" for cue adjustment/alignment has always confused me because when using side spin the cue is rarely parallel with anything.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
The "deviations" are things that happened through the years from some players. Remember, Stan started with Hal's half ball pivot. It took a while for Stan to break it down and put it all back together. So yes through the years we have used different versions, but you know this even though you've never understood any of them. The final complete version is out now and all the new testimonials are on the same page. And most of us that have used a deviated version will also be converting to the final version that Stan has put out.
The deviations are not that extreme that they messed with the guts of the system. You are trying to make a mountain out of nothing.

I didn't say you were insulting Freddie, I said there was no need to continue to drag him into this shit show. I for one will concede that he doesn't use or know Stan's version at this point. If he decides to learn it at some point then so be it.
I'm not talking about deviations in terms of how Stan presented it over the years. I'm talking about the deviations made by each user to fit their own needs. As in, "Oh, I love Stan's method. I use it myself but when I do it I ...Insert alteration to the method here. I know you'll say that doesn't happen but we all know it does.
 
(y) Ah yes...the telephone is indeed a wonderful research tool.
Research from those "in the know" have now enlightened me about who Freddie is. A super guy and MENSA intelligent. (I like and admire those kind.)
Anyway, as usual Mr. White you have failed again.
You believe 100% INCORRECTLY. A thread got totally deleted in here within the last two weeks and Freddie posted what he uses and teaches. It is not CTE but it IS a Hal Houle aiming system called SHISKABOB.
SHISHKABOB is similar to CTE in that there are 3 spots to aim at like CTE. The 15 - 30 - and 45. It has NO 7 fractions along the face of the OB. That "7 fractions" stuff is total BALONEY and I have no idea where that got pulled out of.
SHISHKABOB is pretty much a ferrule aim that can be set up from the INSIDE while aiming at the 15, 30, or 45 and then pivot to center or it can be set up at CCB aiming at the 15, 30, or 45 and pivot to outside.
On severe cuts the same two choices of ferrule placement with an inside to center or center to outside are aimed at the EDGE of the OB and then pivoted before stroking.
Take heed, Mr. White upon what you enter. Selah.
:)
Hi Stan, nice to see you posting again. I believe Freddie said he dissects each half of the ball with 7 vertical lines and chooses the one that will get him to the pocket with a pivot. I'm not going to bother contacting him about it but if he reads this maybe he will comment.
 
I'm not talking about deviations in terms of how Stan presented it over the years. I'm talking about the deviations made by each user to fit their own needs. As in, "Oh, I love Stan's method. I use it myself but when I do it I ...Insert alteration to the method here. I know you'll say that doesn't happen but we all know it does.
So am I. But to be sure why not just give some specific examples of some of the deviations you are talking about in detail to help the conversation
 
Back
Top