That fixes that.
CTE PRO ONE: Tyler is a champion using it... now what? discredit CTE more?
- Thread starter Se7en6ix
- Start date
That fixes that.
Lol. My thoughts exactly. Here's a weird thing... was showing a buddy some dead halfball shots that come up often, and how to rasily recognize them. He is a great player, said he's never played around with fractional aiming. I set a few long shots up and asked him to shoot them. He fired them into the pockets like nothing. I set them up again and told him they were all 1/2 ball shots. So he tried it, simply aiming ccb toward the ob edge. He overcut each shot.
I think his perception of a halfball hit is slightly thinner than a true halfball hit. So he'd have to practice that until his brain figures out how to align or see the shot properly in order to pocket balls in that manner.
Nor defined.
My "perceptions" using contact points or any other aiming method aren't difficult (after lots of practice) or mysterious either.
pj
chgo
JC - I said I was trolling....come on man.
Stan has makes claims in the past that several great players were using CTE but they just didn't know it.
Stan has makes claims in the past that several great players were using CTE but they just didn't know it.
Yup. That is if we believe Low since he was the one who posted it for Stan.
Truth is everyone is using the ghost ball in one form or another to visualize where the cue ball and object ball are going.
In bold....absolutely. With aiming it helps to look beyond the ghostball in order to reference a portion of the ob, an overlap or an aim point on the object ball or just outside the left or right visible edge of the ob. A good trick for tough angles is to stand behind the ob and plant your tip on the cloth where the bottom of the ghostball needs to be, then while keeping your tip on that spot you walk your cue around to where it's hovering straight above the center of the cb. Look at where your tip is pointed in reference to the ob, its edge or width or whatever, and that's the spot you need to send the cb toward.
They are somewhat defined to me. I know this because when I was messing around with the system I did notice that on different shots where the distance between cb and ob is the same, my 15° perception would provide the same fixed ccb in relation to where this perceived perception line hits the ob. And that's with no practice. It just took watching several videos before finding one that clearly explained where to look once you get the visuals locked in.
Last edited:
"Defined to me" just means (again) "I know it when I see it". That describes the end result of every aiming method, including "entirely by feel".
Define it for somebody else (like you successfully do with Poolology).
pj
chgo
I understand. But once you know how to use the two line visual and then focus in on what Stan calls a "fixed" ccb, it is no less defined than telling someone to aim at the edge of the ob. You can visualize the line pretty easily without needing much experience. How this fixed ccb perception is used in conjunction with pivots and sweeps, the "halftip" offset portion, is less defined (judging by my results) and more apt to be something you have to work at until you just know it when you see it or feel it.
This is where the system gets iffy for me, because a halftip offset pivot creates a measurable angle in relation to ccb, and this pivot angle changes any time the bridge distance changes or the offset changes. The only way the pivots can be repeated consistently and precisely every time is if the bridge and offset distances remain consistent and precise. And since the pivot or sweep directly affects the shot angle, any personal fluctuations that deviate from the precise halftip pivot (as described in the system) will either cause the ob to miss the pocket or hit the pocket, depending on how good you are at "knowing it when you see it."
This is probably why the few pros that admit to using it may potentially be benefitting from it, because they, like Stan, are very good at just knowing that shot line when they see it. If they were to use a strict manual pivot for each shot they wouldn't be using their developed skill of just knowing when they are on the shot line. Instead they'd be forced to shoot to wherever the pivot points the cue, wasting one of the very skills that after years of hard work got them to their pro status in the first place. I don't think that would be easy to turn off. I don't believe many could turn it off. It's ingrained. But the sweeps are not as strictly defined as manual pivots. So a good player can simply place their bridge hand down where they recognize the shot line to be, which may or may not correspond to an exact halftip offset. They simply allow their cue to follow their eyes.
Last edited:
OK, Bryan, so this is why I asked what exactly you do when you say you "use CTE" and it works "exactly" as described. You may have learned it from Stan but you are not using Stan's CTE Pro1 system. You are doing what most players do, which is to use some elements of CTE and not others depending on what you like.
Let me ask you this. Let's say you have a shot that works out a center to edge for you with a pivot. Now look at another shot that is the same but the object ball is moved over 2 inches. Do you still use center to edge but adjust your pivot amount, or what?
Everyone would love to buy a magic bean stalk, or magic cue. Truth is none are real, but many sales people, great sales people will sell you one if you buy their pitch.
Recall this guy from El Paso, Texas they called "Fat Ralph", he was a fixture at the BCAPL 8 Ball thing in Las Vegas practice area. People lined up to play him, donating to his wallet.
His Cue was some old dog sneak Pete with the handle held to get her with duck tape, his case was from maybe some thrift shop $5.00 special.
But the man could play pool, seldom lost, but he was smart enough to play people who thought they were world class, with money to blow.
Saw Fat Ralph in PHX on his way home come into this bar, played two guy for $100.00 each race to 7 or was it 9 in 9 Ball. Made $200.00, walk out in like 20-25 minutes, the local hot shot did not get many shots.
How do you tell someone what you're seeing when you "use the two line visual and then focus in on what Stan calles a 'fixed' ccb"? If the system doesn't describe it objectively enough so that they can immediately see it too (like the edge of the ob), then it isn't "defined" by the system.
pj
chgo
I suppose in a private lesson the instructor could easily tell you to look beyond ccb to where the perception leads directly to the ob. This seems like the only way an instructor would know you're getting the same ccb perception he gets, by where it will send the cb if shot straight from that fixed ccb. It's also how a newbie CTE user, according to Stan, can determine whether or not the perception is thick or thin, and therefore know which pivot to use. When doing this the line might lead straight to one of the quarters, the edge, or anywhere else. It could be different every time, depending on the distance between the balls, even when the same visuals are used.
This is not any particular fractional aim line. It is the line from which the offset cue alignment is applied prior to manual pivoting or freely sweeping.
Maybe the upcoming book will explain it better than ever.
Last edited:
For the op....Tyler is awesome. I've been watching some of his matches. It's very obvious he is using the CTE visuals. They seem embedded into his psr, very consistent, very solid. I did notice though, whenever the camera angle shows his face, that he focuses on the object ball while stroking and hitting the cb, which makes it look exactly like I suspect, that he uses the visuals as part of his psr to get his body or foot work positioned for the shot, then he simply sweeps his cue straight to the shot line, like any player does that just knows the line when they see it. His eyes are referencing back and forth from cb to ob, not from an offset to a fixed ccb, but straight on from cb to ob, a "noser" approach as Stan would say, then he keeps his eyes fixed on the ob throughout the final stroke. Regardless, he plays jam up!
Last edited:
Bottom line is you have to use some system to aim, if you keep switching systems, you will be like someone who complains about sore feet. Because he or she never let their shoes break in. First the shoe has to fit right, second it takes time to break in shoes, then they feel & become comfortable.
The cartoon above is funny, beware of people who sell "their systems", unless they offer a money back guarantee.
System salespeople are profit driven, its like thinking a car salesmen is working to get you the best deal. Because they said so, believe that, I will sell you the title to the Brookline Bridge. BS they are work to get the dealership the most profit, because the more profit, the more Comission the salespersongets paid.
It not just Amiming System it everything from Cues, Cases, Chalk, Bridges, or other for profit gizmos. Pool is a game of skill, not a game won by the person with the pretties Cue made by some maker with a 10 year wait.
Number of Cues, Cases, Pool Gizmo Collecting is just that a hobby collecting something. Enjoy your hobby if that is your hobby.
Last edited:
And? Many of us could be that guy. CTE comes in SUPER handy in the bars with shitty tables. The only difference between me and fat ralph is that I don't take easy money from suckers.
I did know a road player once who used an aiming/stroking method that is really powerful. He said it's like stealing without a gun.
They play at every skill level just like everyone else. Or did you somehow think that Center to Edge aiming was some sort of magic wand that instills knowledge and experience in all other aspects of the game that are critical to having a complete skillset?
If so no it's not. It's a method of aiming for a center ball hit. Pretty good foundation for learning everything else though. Easier to figure things out when the baseline aim is dead on.
Oh yeah....big profits in the pool and billiards aiming systems. Lol i agree though about some custom cue prices. But as long as people are buying them, like overpriced cars, then the prices won't be going down anytime.
Seriously, players like me who came up with a better way to learn and apply fractional aiming, or people like Joe Tucker with his aiming system, or Stan Shuffett or Tor Lowry or whoever else, have dedicated a lot of time to find ways to help others improve. I don't know of one person that is trying to sell a gimmick aiming system for the purpose of making big bucks by ripping people off, selling them magic bullets. This includes Stan. He's been referred to as a snake oil salesman in the past because of some CTE claims. But I truly believe that he trusts and believes every word he says about CTE, unlike a swindler or snake oil salesman. He is passionate about the game, as most of us are.
We live in a world where anyone with creative or imaginative effort can produce a product and try to sell it. If it's no good, fake, or useless, the product will not sell. If it is good, if it works, if it's useful, then it will sell. In today's open market it's highly unlikely that a true snake oil salesman could find enough suckers to make much money.