CTE - Pro One - 90/90 Usage Poll

Do you use some form of "pivot aiming" CTE - Pro One - 90/90

  • I've never tried pivot aiming, but would like to

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • It's not been proven mathematically so it's useless

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    27

claymont

JADE
Gold Member
Silver Member
A poll to basically see how many people on this forum use some form of CTE - Pro One - 90/90...or not:groucho: The poll is multiple choice and votes are public. Vote accurately please, but other than that, thread civility is optional:groucho:
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
A poll to basically see how many people on this forum use some form of CTE - Pro One - 90/90...or not:groucho: The poll is multiple choice and votes are public. Vote accurately please, but other than that, thread civility is optional:groucho:
90-90 is "a form of CTE"?

pj
chgo
 

claymont

JADE
Gold Member
Silver Member
90-90 is "a form of CTE"?

pj
chgo

You aim at one place depending on the angle of the shot and pivot to center cue ball. I would say it is.

I'll correct my statement. No, it's not, sorry for any confusion.
 
Last edited:

born2push

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I have been using cte for about 9 months. But before i was using a different pivot system for about 1 year that is similar to cte imho called the see system.

Sent from my LM-Q710(FGN) using Tapatalk
 

bbb

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I have been using cte for about 9 months. But before i was using a different pivot system for about 1 year that is similar to cte imho called the see system.

Sent from my LM-Q710(FGN) using Tapatalk

I didn’t think see system used a pivot
Icbe
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
CTE/Pro 1 is definitely different than any other "pivot" style aiming method, because the pivot or sweep is not in reference to any specific aim point or place on the object ball -- it is in reference to ccb, the "fixed" ccb you get when your body/vision is positioned at a certain cb perception based on the two line visuals between the cb and ob (CTE and ETA, B or C). This makes it better, imo, than other pivot systems. There is more to it in order to consistently get it to work, like specific bridge distances when manually pivoting, or experienced judgement when sweeping, but the two visuals definitely enhance the line of reference for the pivot/sweep.

And before any CTEers say I'm wrong about specific bridge distances needed for manually pivoting, just know I am only repeating the exact words Stan has said about the matter. And when I say "judgement" for sweeps it's because the sweep involves a precise bridge hand/V placement (just right or left of the fixed ccb perception/line). These are things learned through practice and trial and error. This is why it isn't something most players can do consistently right out of the box, and sometimes even after weeks or months of trying.

But everything takes practice in order to become consistent. The more times you successfully do something the more consistent you get at doing it. It doesn't matter if you pivot in reference to a specific spot on the ob based on the approximate angle of the shot, or if you pivot or sweep based on a specific "perception" of ccb, or if you aim straight at a spot on the ob with no pivot, or aim at an estimated ghostball, or estimated contact points, etc.... it all takes practice to develop consistency.

I happen to favor aiming methods that are more straightforward, meaning you stand directly behind the cb and fix your vision so that you imagine a line from ccb to the ob that will cause the ob to go the pocket. If you can visualize this line consistently you don't need any aiming system. But this is easier for some than others, because some people just have better spacial skills. That's where practice comes in. Some need more, some need less. Some aiming methods require more practice for some players but maybe not so much practice for others. Find a method that resonates with you and stick with it. However, if you've been using and practicing your method daily for several weeks or months, and you still find yourself missing a lot of shots, try a different aiming method because there are probably too many variables that rely on experience, and you won't develop consistency until each variable becomes consistent. Either that or your stroke is too inconsistent to allow you consistent results with your aiming method. Regardless, you're relying on the HAMB method, and it'll take a while.
 
Last edited:

claymont

JADE
Gold Member
Silver Member
Sounds like your talking to yourself. Really. You dont pivot all the way from edge to center in cte.

Sent from my LM-Q710(FGN) using Tapatalk


Well, at least not out loud...most of the time anyway;)
I pivot from [edge of cue ball - to A/B/C etc. on object ball] [first part of process] [to center of cue ball - to opposite edge of object ball] except for extremely thin cuts. At least that's the way I do it. I line up the shot using Pro One perceptions and table pivot most of the time. Works for me. Some shots I just air pivot also.
 

Low500

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Wrong.

CTE/Pro 1 is definitely different than any other "pivot" style aiming method, because the pivot or sweep is not in reference to any specific aim point or place on the object ball -- it is in reference to ccb, the "fixed" ccb you get when your body/vision is positioned at a certain cb perception based on the two line visuals between the cb and ob (CTE and ETA, B or C). This makes it better, imo, than other pivot systems. There is more to it in order to consistently get it to work, like specific bridge distances when manually pivoting, or experienced judgement when sweeping, but the two visuals definitely enhance the line of reference for the pivot/sweep.
And before any CTEers say I'm wrong about specific bridge distances needed for manually pivoting, just know I am only repeating the exact words Stan has said about the matter. And when I say "judgement" for sweeps it's because the sweep involves a precise bridge hand/V placement (just right or left of the fixed ccb perception/line). These are things learned through practice and trial and error. This is why it isn't something most players can do consistently right out of the box, and sometimes even after weeks or months of trying.

I had a conversation with Stan Shuffett about this post of yours today.
Stan had this to say..here is his direct quote
"Concerning Brian’s most recent long post in the aiming thread, you can let him know that CTE PRO ONE has evolved greatly over the past 5 years and what he thinks he knows about bridge distances and bridge V placement for my CTE work is dead wrong".
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
I had a conversation with Stan Shuffett about this post of yours today.
Stan had this to say..here is his direct quote
"Concerning Brian’s most recent long post in the aiming thread, you can let him know that CTE PRO ONE has evolved greatly over the past 5 years and what he thinks he knows about bridge distances and bridge V placement for my CTE work is dead wrong".

I've been called "dead wrong" by mentioning specific lessons contained in the CTE DVDs and Stan's own YouTube clips. Now you're telling me that Stan says the system has evolved so much since then that my words, which are his words from 5 years ago, are "dead wrong"....?? That's kinda funny, because a lot of players have supposedly learned the system or tried to learn the system from those old lessons.

So this is now "dead wrong"? https://youtu.be/2KwI_62Npos?t=172s And pay attention to where he places his bridge hand, the pivot point from half tip offset to the shot line through ccb. Now, if his hand were closer or farther away than where he places it then the pivot would be a different angle and he'd arrive on a different shot line. I thought this was the reasoning for using specific bridge distances, which he mentions earlier in this same video. That all makes perfect sense. But saying bridge distance doesn't matter with manual pivoting just makes zero sense. When using a strict "objective" half tip manual pivot the placement of your bridge V is a major factor for arriving on the correct shot line. If not it's simply not as objective as defined.

Anyway, if the pro1 sweeps have evolved "greatly" over the last 5 years then it just goes to show how important subjective experience really is when it comes to mastering or creating the method. Practice makes perfect.
 
Last edited:

born2push

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Well, at least not out loud...most of the time anyway;)

I pivot from [edge of cue ball - to A/B/C etc. on object ball] [first part of process] [to center of cue ball - to opposite edge of object ball] except for extremely thin cuts. At least that's the way I do it. I line up the shot using Pro One perceptions and table pivot most of the time. Works for me. Some shots I just air pivot also.
I say if it works keep doing it that way. Good for you.

Sent from my LM-Q710(FGN) using Tapatalk
 

Low500

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Dead Wrong

I've been called "dead wrong" by mentioning specific lessons contained in the CTE DVDs and Stan's own YouTube clips. Now you're telling me that Stan says the system has evolved so much since then that my words, which are his words from 5 years ago, are "dead wrong"....?? That's kinda funny, because a lot of players have supposedly learned the system or tried to learn the system from those old lessons.
You should stick to your "poolology"....something you say you know something about since you say you wrote a book about it.
Since you didn't seem to get the message the first time, here it is again.
Read and heed. (from my Post 15). Don't make me repeat this again.

I had a conversation with Stan Shuffett about this post of yours today.
Stan had this to say..here is his direct quote
"Concerning Brian’s most recent long post in the aiming thread, you can let him know that CTE PRO ONE has evolved greatly over the past 5 years and what he thinks he knows about bridge distances and bridge V placement for my CTE work is dead wrong".
 
Last edited:
Top