If people want to know the cue's position, it's perpendicular into the visual face of the CB with a 1/2 tip offset from center (all based on the correct "view" or "visual" of the CB).
That's the answer.
PRO ONE DVD: Answering Questions
- Thread starter stan shuffett
- Start date
If people want to know the cue's position, it's perpendicular into the visual face of the CB with a 1/2 tip offset from center (all based on the correct "view" or "visual" of the CB).
That's the answer.
PocketPoint
Banned
I will not say that this method won't work. But is it necessary to complicate things this much?
Or they could spend twenty plus years hitting a million balls. :grin: There's no magic bullet even with Cte. If you wanna eat, you gotta work!
Best,
Mike
Some people do not get the visual picture of CTE/Pro One and those of us who do get it, are trying to share what we see by using the written word. It's not easy sharing the "secrets" of pool with written words.
You should try starting a thread to help someone play better pool.
If you haven't "nailed down" CTE/Pro One try some other subject. It might even help you as well as someone else.
PocketPoint
Banned
Some people do not get the visual picture of CTE/Pro One and those of us who do get it, are trying to share what we see by using the written word. It's not easy sharing the "secrets" of pool with written words.
You should try starting a thread to help someone play better pool.
If you haven't "nailed down" CTE/Pro One try some other subject. It might even help you as well as someone else.
I'll definitely agree with you on that!
Very good description IMO
im going to disagree and say that your cue is aligned parallel at a half tip off set from the vertical axis of the cue ball along the center to edge of object ball line BEFORE THE PIVOT. I can sight down my cue and see this. The different angles and distances i think does not change this because of the reference points,pivots and the different bridge lengths in the manual cte. These adjustment are made to keep you on that line BEFORE THE PIVOT. Once you pivot you are now off the CTEL. I had spit this out and stand by this until proven wrong lol.
Every time i make one of these post the site goes down and i think i got banned because im stressing spidey out! lol
Every time i make one of these post the site goes down and i think i got banned because im stressing spidey out! lol
Mike,
The more you describe your method of Cte, I am reminded of the 90/90 system. You seem to be incorporating a lot of the particulars of Cte , but with some 90/90 aiming alignments. 90/90 is Cte's cousin and when broken down it is essentially the same system with different starting points and reference points, along with a typically different pivot.
What you are doing is definitely not wrong. It is just different from Stan's Cte-ology. :grin-square: There are a lot of hybrids out there. If you can get it to work, run with it! I have a half dozen different methods I use when I get pivot crazy. They all work. I can double, triple and quadruple check a shot if I want, but Stan's Pro One is enough for me. It takes some practice, but it's a solid system.
Best,
Mike
PocketPoint
Banned
Ah, the pool world was so much nicer before Stan came out with this S***
Again, just kidding :thumbup:
Again, just kidding :thumbup:
it really sounds that far off to you Mike? i have tried 90/90 and like the ete,etoe shots but the etc part of it is flawed in my eyes. I have to play some pool tonite and will double check things. I do shoot the exact system stan teaches and i will bust out the my iphone and make a video if i can.
Last edited:
Champ , How are you all of the sudden an expert on pivot based systems ?
Especially disputing Spidey and other people who have spent a lot of time
on this system. That is the part that bothers me
Especially disputing Spidey and other people who have spent a lot of time
on this system. That is the part that bothers me
See... it's not "center-to-edge"--- it's center to OUTERMOST edge. This is why your eyes come off the CTEL (which results in A/B/C alignments) and give you a new 180 degrees of visible CB.
With a static pivot and offset (as Stan presents), it's impossible for your eyes to straddle the CTEL and for your cue to be parallel to that on every shot, every distance and every cut angle. It's impossible. Can you incorporate a highly dynamic pivot to compensate for this? I guess-- but it doesn't apply to this thread.
In regards to 90/90 --- there's nothing about that system that's flawed. ETC is one of the strongest references to see (as is ETE). It's edge-to-reverse-edge that's a little tricky to see because the overlap isn't based on a point - it's based on a certain distance (approx a shaft diameter).
Anyways, I think 90/90 and CTE is the same system mathematically. Just presented differently.
I don’t have the DVD, but I have been having success using variations CTE over several months.
What I have learned from others and several threads is that the initial lining up to the CTE-line is to get you in a starting position behind the CB – especially your forward foot. If you shot from that stance, you would hit the OB sending it at around a 30 degree cut angle. In order to shoot other cut angles, you must move off of that stance before the tip offset and pivoting.
This can be a small distance for say a 25 and 35 degrees cut angle; and a larger distance for a “thin” 90 degree cut angle.
To aid with that movement to the side, the secondary features “quarters” or “A. B, C and 1/8 etc.) on the OB are used to align with. In order to get the outermost eye aligned (thanks Mike), you need to shift your eye, head, body and rear foot until the edge of the CB is aimed at the appropriate quarters or “letters” mentioned above. This achieves a new stance off of the CTE line from which, you raise your cue and bridge hand to the table and in your natural stroking position, you align the tip of your cue ½ tip to the side of the center of the CB and then pivot to the center of the CB, stroke (wherever the cue is aimed at) and shoot.
I find that the moving away from the CTE line to the side to see the line from the edge of the CB to the secondary points is like rotating your stance with the CB at its axis – so the shift to the side is not parallel to the original CTE line but is a slight angle away from CTE line that can increase the more to the side that you need to in order to see the secondary point/s of aim.
When the OB is far down table, the angle decreases for the same cut angle for the OB will appear to be a smaller diameter, but yet all of the references from CTE to the secondary points of aim are all on the OB though proportionally smaller with smaller shifts and angles. That is why CTE doesn’t have to adjust the bridge distance farther back from the CB to decrease the included angle necessary to hit the OB down table.
If you read all of the posts in this thread, you will get other pointers from those that have the DVD.
I hope that this helps.
What I have learned from others and several threads is that the initial lining up to the CTE-line is to get you in a starting position behind the CB – especially your forward foot. If you shot from that stance, you would hit the OB sending it at around a 30 degree cut angle. In order to shoot other cut angles, you must move off of that stance before the tip offset and pivoting.
This can be a small distance for say a 25 and 35 degrees cut angle; and a larger distance for a “thin” 90 degree cut angle.
To aid with that movement to the side, the secondary features “quarters” or “A. B, C and 1/8 etc.) on the OB are used to align with. In order to get the outermost eye aligned (thanks Mike), you need to shift your eye, head, body and rear foot until the edge of the CB is aimed at the appropriate quarters or “letters” mentioned above. This achieves a new stance off of the CTE line from which, you raise your cue and bridge hand to the table and in your natural stroking position, you align the tip of your cue ½ tip to the side of the center of the CB and then pivot to the center of the CB, stroke (wherever the cue is aimed at) and shoot.
I find that the moving away from the CTE line to the side to see the line from the edge of the CB to the secondary points is like rotating your stance with the CB at its axis – so the shift to the side is not parallel to the original CTE line but is a slight angle away from CTE line that can increase the more to the side that you need to in order to see the secondary point/s of aim.
When the OB is far down table, the angle decreases for the same cut angle for the OB will appear to be a smaller diameter, but yet all of the references from CTE to the secondary points of aim are all on the OB though proportionally smaller with smaller shifts and angles. That is why CTE doesn’t have to adjust the bridge distance farther back from the CB to decrease the included angle necessary to hit the OB down table.
If you read all of the posts in this thread, you will get other pointers from those that have the DVD.
I hope that this helps.
But Stan does recommend longer bridge distances for longer shots. The recommended bridge lengths are in the Glossary portion of the DVD.
Champ, if what you say were true, Stan would have no need to identify the A-B-C secondary "aim" points. The system would simply be to offset the stick 1/2 tip from the CTEL (on a line parallel to the CTEL), pivot to center, and shoot. A, B, and C would be irrelevant.
You are correct.
If one only parallel shifted the cue from CTE to 1/2 tip to the side of the center of the CB pre pivot to the center of the CB, that would only accomplish one cut angle.
As dr dave and others have proven, that one cut angle that works for one diamond separation between the CB and OB would sail past the outside of the OB when the separation is seven diamonds apart.
Champ , How are you all of the sudden an expert on pivot based systems ?
Especially disputing Spidey and other people who have spent a lot of time
on this system. That is the part that bothers me
What bothers me is these types of posts that you make petey! I feel like posting my opinion! im not trashing anyone so give it a rest already.
As I said, I don't have the DVD or the glossary, but I agree that shifting the bridge backward from the CB for larger separations between the CB and OB for this also reduces the necessary included angle - created by the line from the pocket/target through the center of the OB back to the shooter and the other line from the center of the CB to the OB.
I haven't had enough time to memorize what those different bridge distances are by playing at the table. I contend that one can vary/decrease the 1/2tip offset from the center of the CB to say a 1/8 tip (or other fractions) offset for larger separations between the CB and OB.
I would rather choose the decreasing tip offsets and retain my normal bridge distance especially if the CB is near the rail with my bridge on the rail.
Thanks.:thumbup: