Spot Shot Aiming Methods
- Thread starter SpiderWebComm
- Start date
I like the "tags" concept - you could think of systems as the organized creation/recognition and use of tags.
pj
chgo
By the way, VP4 models the shot exactly as predicted - 3° of throw to center pocket.
pj
chgo
pj
chgo
So the next time you find yourself in a spot shot competition, this cb location should give you the best chance of nailing as many as possible. If your opponent is using the same cb position then the winner will end up being the player with the most consistent cue delivery/stroke.
Hey, that's my "half-ball plus smidgens" method: https://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=3542500&postcount=29
[snappier, right?]
I've noticed over the years that the pro's just looked more careful about everything. I used to think it was just because they were in competition and were being more careful than they normally are. Now I realize that anybody can wing it and knock down a bunch of shots with speed, but that's not the way to win in the long run.
Just the other day I started to play more deliberately, slowing everything down. Someone mentioned the "quiet eye" needing two seconds. I ran about 50 balls right off the bat. For me, I'm not thinking so much in terms of paying more or less attention to easy or hard shots. I'm trying to simply make my normal PSR the same on all shots, which means deliberate, relaxed, quiet.
In bold .... I believe it is most important -- give every shot the same deliberate attention. A lot of players, including myself, tend to rush certain shots because they feel so natural, automatic, and we never consider the possibility of missing one of those typed of shots. But rushing into the shot, bypassing some or all of the psr, sure does increase the likelihood of missing. It takes discipline to build and maintain a consistent psr. And it takes a lot of table time.
I can't ever remember one of the Anti-CTE gang members admitting to an error after attacking any facet of CTE in my 14 years of being on this forum.
What makes it even worse is coming from a position of ignorance by never knowing the intricacies of the system because they've never studied, learned or used it. So you don't know what is correct and what is an error on your part.
It started that way with Hal and has gone on to this day.
You have a pool table at home. How about setting up various shots and verbalizing exactly what you're seeing and doing on those shots. If it's on the money with all of it, then we can't say you're wrong.
Brian, you're exactly right in your first paragraph.
All shots in CTE are just like aligning to a line that is known such as a perfectly set up zero angle shot. The center for zero angle shots is known and just because a center to center line is known does not mean that a player’s bridge V can follow the eyes exactly to that line. The bridge V slides around until it is on that objective line.
A perfectly set up zero angle shot is objective for all systems, but that is where it stops, with the exception of CTE. In CTE all shots have a known center line, a line that is not finished off with feel. This is at the heart of the 22 year war.
This is the crux of why I gave up on defending CTE users. You have no way of knowing it isn't finished off with feel, because you don't understand how our subconscious works.
Maybe you shouldn't have had your subconscious mind in conflict with the conscious mind and studied the videos more and harder instead of throwing in the towel.
With your level of play, you should have moved your chips all in.
How can you finish off with feel if you don't see the OB while bending down?
Isn't this video one of the answers to knowing that Stan didn't finish them off with feel, because I don't see how would that be possible, if you're gonna make corrections to the shotline that you got while standing you gotta make them while bending down, and to make them you have to see the OB and the pocket, don't you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l0fAwmeOq8
How many big events or money matches have you won with CTE?
Actually, forget the personal attacks for a moment.
How many big events or money matches have been won by anyone that claims to be a CTE user? Before you go and post your list of names again, might I remind you the only person on your list that has any relevancy in professional pool is Tyler Styer. Even then he's only had one big win, and has a 1-3 record in singles at the Mosconi Cup.
I suppose you could keep hanging on to that time Landon beat Earl 7 years ago.
What you should be focusing on is yourself, ONLY.
What do the numbers 57-37 mean to you and where it's located among other numbers?
Does it give any indication of what you know (which could be good, could be wrong, or terribly deficient)
Does it give any indication of how it's put into action or play along with positive/negative results? I think 57-37 tells the tale.
What do the numbers 57-37 mean to you and where it's located among other numbers?
Does it give any indication of what you know (which could be good, could be wrong, or terribly deficient)
Does it give any indication of how it's put into action or play along with positive/negative results? I think 57-37 tells the tale.
The "feel" occurs at the cb. In other words, Stan's stroke must be perfectly aligned to the perception before sweeping or pivoting to ccb. The final alignment to ccb stems from a perfect offset sweep or pivot. It takes practice to get good at it because you must learn how it feels, how your stroke alignment feels in accordance with what you are looking at.
With other types of aiming, the focus is on a line from the cb to the ob, and one must be able to "feel" when they are perfectly on that line. You see the line from a standing position, but it usually requires a little tweaking once you're down on the cb in full stance. It takes practice to develop a good feel for coming down on that line. Once down you must ensure everything still feels right in accordance with what you are seeing.
In this video Stan explains how it applies to CTE. The final ccb alignment is not tweaked, but one must ensure that the cue is perfectly aligned, correct bridge V placement, etc... with the perception before sweeping or pivoting to ccb. This "tweaking", or whatever we want to call it, is feel. In other words, with traditional aiming a player must be able to feel/recognize when their body/stroke is aligned properly in accordance to what they are seeing. With CTE the same feel/recognition is required before sweeping/pivoting to that final ccb. It's no jab at the system or to Stan. It's just the reality of how we ensure our body is positioned correctly for a physical task that is orchestrated by our vision. The more you do it the better you get at it. Whether it's CTE or some traditional aiming method, practice and experience helps reduce the tweaking that he's talking about. Eventually you find yourself feeling spot on the money as soon as you drop down on the shot. Other times you find yourself needing to tweak a little until everything clicks.
https://youtu.be/VyCSgUtLKdk?t=273s
Last edited:
It's even more obvious than that - there's no possible way to design a system that can "take you to" every needed cut angle (even accounting for pocket slop) that wouldn't be too detailed and complex to use at the table.
What Stan and CTE Defenders claim CTE does (with its mystical "connection to 2:1 table geometry") is simply not possible. The "debate" comes from their inability to understand that - and/or their unwillingness to accept it.
pj
chgo
All of the above from "MR. VIRTUAL POOL" himself. Far more time on the computer than on a table. Please post another one of those exciting 3D layouts.
Last edited: