Cool aiming vid............

JoeyInCali said:

Tor Lowry recommends shooting certain shots some 30 times in a row to make it " automatic ".

Delivering the cue properly takes hundreds and hundreds of practice shots.
People shouldn't even mess with aiming systems till they shoot consistently straight.

Click to expand...

Tor Lowry is awesome. But I guarantee you he doesn't simply mean that shooting any particular shot 30 times is all you need in order to make it automatic every time the shot comes up. That's just not how the brain works. Shooting it 30 times every day for a month is more realistic in order to make it automatic, as long as you successfully pocket it 90% of the time or better.

Let's say one player is 50/50 on a particular shot, consistently makes it 15 out of 30 times. Now let's say on the same shot you are 80%, making it 24 or 25 times out of 30 most of the time. If both of you practice this one shot everyday, diligently, shooting it 30 times a day until you are pocketing it 27 to 30 times in a row everyday, it will likely take the 50/50 player many more days to reach a level of automatically knowing the shot, when compared to you who can already hit it 24 to 25 times. So there's no way that simply shooting a shot 30 times is going to magically make that shot automatic -- it takes successful repetition to make it happen.

I agree with the bold statement, depending on the aiming system. If the system is objective, free of any guesswork, it could really help the player develop a consistent stroke much quicker. Example: Place an ob 2 diamonds from the end rail and 1 diamond from the side rail. Place the cb 1 diamond out from the side pocket, same side rail as the ob. This is a dead 1/2 ball shot to the corner. Explain to the player that he must aim his cue through center cb so that his tip would split the edge of the ob if his stroke could follow through that far. Shoot a normal medium speed, not soft or hard. If he can pocket this 10 or more times in a row then his stroke is fairly consistent within the margin of error for this shot.

Now move the ob to the center table spot and the cb to the head spot. This is also a 1/2 ball shot. From here the margin for error is much smaller. If the player struggles with this shot, begins to rattle the ball more, then he knows 100% that he has a stroke issue. The aim point hasn't changed. We only tightened up the margin for error, and his stroke isn't consistent enough to deliver the cb accurately within this tolerance. If he were to just set up a shot that he wasn't 100% sure about as far as aiming, then there would be 2 possible causes for inconsistency -- fault in the stroke or fault in aiming.

If the stroke is consistent and accurate, then aiming comes quicker because you already know your stroke can deliver. You just have to align it properly. By the same logic, if your aim is consistent, meaning you know exactly where you are aiming everytime -- no inconsistent guesswork -- then any misses can be attributed to an inconsistent stroke or alignment issue.

BC21 said:

No, but probably because I never thought of eye dominance as a potential problem until after joining AZB and reading a few threads on the matter. Still, it's not all that common. Eventually, after enough hits and misses, the brain begins to autocorrect the perception it builds from the images provided by the eyes.

.

Click to expand...

More likely the brain will start making the player steer the cue to the proper shot line. Think body english, lots of players coming up have this problem.

BC21 said:

This applies to CTE players also, meaning that once you understand the visuals, you must have the ability to properly align your cue half a tip from that ccb perception or the pivot to ccb will not put you on the shot line. Or for pro1 you must have the ability to know/feel exactly where your cue is aligned in order to accurately sweep to the proper shot line. .

Click to expand...

Can you personally run a rack of balls with CTE?

cookie man said:

Can you personally run a rack of balls with CTE?

Click to expand...

CookieMan
When Brian BC-21 says it also applies to CTE, those are the fake versions known as just CTE, and he is exactly right.
But, it does not apply to CTE PRO ONE.
Brian, being an uninformed pup, cannot know whether it applies or not because he simply can NOT explain the CTE known as CTE PRO ONE.
All he can do is beat around the bush pushing his narrative with his spin. He should stick with his Poolology which is much safer ground for the uninformed.
Let 'em eat cake.

Low500 said:

Brian ... simply can NOT explain the CTE known as CTE PRO ONE.

Click to expand...

Maybe that's because it's "from another dimension"...?

pj
chgo

Patrick Johnson said:

Maybe that's because it's "from another dimension"...?

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

Let's ask him to explain it.
I bet he can't either.

JoeyInCali said:

Let's ask him to explain it.
I bet he can't either.

Click to expand...

If your faith in CTE is so weak that you need it to make sense, then you're not worthy of it.

Infidel.

pj
chgo

BC21 said:

Eventually, after enough hits and misses, the brain begins to autocorrect the perception it builds from the images provided by the eyes.

Click to expand...

cookie man said:

More likely the brain will start making the player steer the cue to the proper shot line. Think body english, lots of players coming up have this problem.

Click to expand...

First off, I was not referring to CTE perceptions. I was talking about the basic function of how the brain processes vision, how it uses data from the eyes to build a perception of what we are looking at, whether it's a sunset reflecting over an ocean wave or a cb-ob relationship on a pool table.

Ok, on to steering... Steering causes poor results, so the player will realize something is wrong. Body english doesn't work. Steering doesn't work.

When it comes to learning, the brain likes to make sense of things, likes to make things work. But without consistent and repetitive results the brain develops no synaptic connections, which means it can't learn what you are trying to do. You have to develop consistent visualizations and a consistent stroke or your brain won't be getting enough consistent information to make sense out of what is going on. If it can't make sense out of it, then it sure won't be able to make any fine autocorrections.

cookie man said:

Can you personally run a rack of balls with CTE?

Click to expand...

Whether or not I can run a rack of balls using CTE has nothing to do with the fact that every person that plays pool must develop the ability to know/feel that their cue is lined up where they think it is. It doesn't matter if they are lining straight through ccb to a point on the ob, or to center ghostball, or parallel to the contact point, or half a tip left or right of a 'fixed" ccb as seen from a CTE perception, or if they are "sweeping" from left or right of the perception to the shot line. Without the ability of knowing/feeling that your cue is lined up correctly, in accordance with what you see, then you can never be a pool player, not a decent one anyway. It would be like trying to play tennis without the ability of knowing/feeling that the racquet is at the appropriate angle for any given shot.

Can I run a rack using CTE?? Absolutely not. But I can use it to shoot every shot Stan sets up in about all of his videos, especially the curtain videos because there are no more than 5 or 6 angles being used. Anyway, me not being able to run a rack using CTE says more about my unwillingness to practice the method for months until I can make it work for more than a handful of angles than it says about my understanding of the system.

I can run a rack using Pro1. I know the visuals, understand the concept of the perceptions, and I have enough experience to recognize when my cue is on the shot line. So I could easily "sweep" from a left or right offset to arrive on the shot line, but I know the sweep won't always be initiated from an exact half tip offset. That would make it as limiting as the manual pivots. My sweeps would be based on what looks right, not based on an exact/objective half-tip offset.

Let's wait on that book so others will get the full scoop from Stan himself. Hopefully more players can benefit from the latest Pro1, compared to the manual CTE method from so many years ago.

"Let's wait on that book so others will get the full scoop from Stan himself."

What book?

Boxcar said:

"Let's wait on that book so others will get the full scoop from Stan himself."

What book?

Click to expand...

You haven't heard? There is a CTE book coming out soon, plus a free "Truth Series" set of YouTube videos. It's pretty exciting stuff, according to Low500, and is projected to be the most important contribution ever to the pool and billiard world. :thumbup:

BC21 said:

You haven't heard? There is a CTE book coming out soon, plus a free "Truth Series" set of YouTube videos. It's pretty exciting stuff, according to Low500, and is projected to be the most important contribution ever to the pool and billiard world. :thumbup:

Click to expand...

OOHHHHHH!?!?!? I see! The "truth," huh? That whole "truth" thing is mighty powerful medicine. Hmmm, heep big medicine!

Say, if that CTE stuff is such powerful medicine, will it work on snoooookah?

Boxcar said:

OOHHHHHH!?!?!? I see! The "truth," huh? That whole "truth" thing is mighty powerful medicine. Hmmm, heep big medicine!

Say, if that CTE stuff is such powerful medicine, will it work on snoooookah?

Click to expand...

Look up Phil Buford and ask him.

BC21 said:

First off, I was not referring to CTE perceptions. I was talking about the basic function of how the brain processes vision, how it uses data from the eyes to build a perception of what we are looking at, whether it's a sunset reflecting over an ocean wave or a cb-ob relationship on a pool table.

Ok, on to steering... Steering causes poor results, so the player will realize something is wrong. Body english doesn't work. Steering doesn't work.

.

Click to expand...

I didn't mention CTE either lmao. But you seem to work it in every chance you get, obsess over it much.
I've seen people steer and use body english there whole life, can i send them to you for help.

cookie man said:

Can you personally run a rack of balls with CTE?

Click to expand...

BC21 said:

Can I run a rack using CTE?? Absolutely not.

Let's wait on that book so others will get the full scoop from Stan himself. Hopefully more players can benefit from the latest Pro1, compared to the manual CTE method from so many years ago.

Click to expand...

Take your own advice and don't mention CTE till the book comes out. You obviously have very limited understanding of it and are confusing the 2 or 3 people that read your posts.

cookie man said:

I didn't mention CTE either lmao. But you seem to work it in every chance you get, obsess over it much.
I've seen people steer and use body english there whole life, can i send them to you for help.

Click to expand...

Once again, this thread has ZERO to do with cte, but as soon as you or low500 show up in any thread, CTE soon becomes the topic.

The op linked to a snooker fractional aiming video. Then BrooklandBill mentioned "useless aiming theories", and you, being a great defender of CTE, just had to jump in with, "Good thing my system isn't one of those you speak of. Pro-one Aiming is the best !!!!".

You assumed "useless aiming theories" was a poke at CTE, so you brought the old flame war into the thread with a quick adamant defense. Funny thing...no defenders of Split the Difference or 90/90 or ghostball (or any other aiming system) showed up to defend their method against the "useless" comment. They must be more confident in their system because they didn't assume we were talking about their system, or they just don't get the urge to defend it anytime a comment is made that might remotely be insinuating something about their system. The reality is that one person could find something useless while another doesn't. It's no skin off my back if you think every aiming method besides cte is useless, so it shouldn't get you so upset if someone considers cte useless. I don't think it's useless for those who use it. It's useless for me though because I don't use it. It's that simple, no big deal, nothing to get all worked up about.

Anyhow, the subject drifted into the importance of stroke mechanics, and still you remain stuck in CTE defense mode. Move along. No obsessing here, just normal conversation about aiming.

Oh, and about those life-long body english players... If they play well they are not steering their cue -- the stroke moves straight into the cb. What they do with their cue or body after the tip contacts the cb is irrelevant. It looks weird, and they might think it helps, but it makes no difference. I know a player that does some rediculous body english on about every shot, and he is one hell of a good player because his stroke is solid.

Boxcar said:

OOHHHHHH!?!?!? I see! The "truth," huh? That whole "truth" thing is mighty powerful medicine. Hmmm, heep big medicine!

Say, if that CTE stuff is such powerful medicine, will it work on snoooookah?

Click to expand...

I would have to say yes, since it works on a "two by one playing surface" when aiming "spheres", according Stan Shuffett.

A snooker table is a 2x1 surface. There are eight 90° angles, which is apartently how CTE works, by connecting to these 90° angles. I've been told that I can't explain how it really works, but of course this is from people that can't explain it themselves. So I don't bother with it anymore.

BC21 said:

Once again, this thread has ZERO to do with cte, but as soon as you or low500 show up in any thread, CTE soon becomes the topic.

.

Click to expand...

Yet 7 of your posts are about CTE lol. A system you know little about and even admit you can't run a rack of balls with. If i sidetracked it you made dam sure it stayed sidetracked

BC21 said:

Oh, and about those life-long body english players... If they play well they are not steering their cue -- the stroke moves straight into the cb. What they do with their cue or body after the tip contacts the cb is irrelevant. It looks weird, and they might think it helps, but it makes no difference. I know a player that does some rediculous body english on about every shot, and he is one hell of a good player because his stroke is solid.

Click to expand...

I would disagree. There eyes are telling them somethings not right so they steer and try to correct with body english. Sure you can still play ok like that, but it should not be the preferred way to play.

BC21 said:

I would have to say yes, since it works on a "two by one playing surface" when aiming "spheres", according Stan Shuffett.

A snooker table is a 2x1 surface. There are eight 90° angles, which is apartently how CTE works, by connecting to these 90° angles. I've been told that I can't explain how it really works, but of course this is from people that can't explain it themselves. So I don't bother with it anymore.

Click to expand...

But, but, but, the snooker bridge hand is soooo far away from the cue ball, should I pivot a whole tip...or a half a tip...or 13/32 of a tip, and, and, and if I accidentally pivot too much, will I whiff the cue ball. Jeez, this is some treacherous stuff.

Say, I wonder how many world class snoooookah players use SeeTEE-eee?