Why CTE is so controversial

mohrt

Student of the Game
Silver Member
I can't get a different outcome in the situation you describe. I can, however, make two slightly different angled shots using the same perception and pivot for each shot, just as I can use the same fractional aim FG or each shot. This is possible due to slight angle differences with CIT factored in. Sometimes, if the shot angle difference is equally offset by a difference in CIT, both balls might go center pocket. But normally each shot goes into a different part of the pocket as the angle changes slightly but the aim remains constant. If I move the ob a little, then a little more, I will eventually reach a point where that particular perception and pivot misses the pocket entirely and a different perception must be used.

It sounds good when Stan says the balls "connect to the right angles of a regulation pool table", that every shot tracks to "center pocket", etc... But in reality the entire pocket is being used, and as the ob begins to miss the pocket, a different perception/pivot must be used in order to send the ob back toward the pocket.

If the book and truth series can explain or show how the ob tracks to center pocket even when a particular perception and pivot is nearing its limits, then I'll eat my words and graciously admit that I was wrong about the system utilizing the entire pocket.

Stan has demos of him shooting into a 2 1/2" pocket, I'll see if I can find it. To accomplish this with any sort of consistency, of course the system has to work, but you had better have some serious fundamentals as well.
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I assume he's saying the same thing in a clumsy way. If he really means the CTE line touches the OB contact point, then of course he's wrong - a CTE line, by definition, can't do that.

pj
chgo

The CTEL has nothing to do with the contact point. It goes through the outermost edge, or point, on the OB.
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
But that outermost edge changes with ball location just like if you were using contact point aiming the contact point would change with ball location.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
The CTEL has nothing to do with the contact point. It goes through the outermost edge, or point, on the OB.
Good - we agree on that.

But that outermost edge changes with ball location just like if you were using contact point aiming the contact point would change with ball location.
But we disagree on that. With the CB and OB the same distance apart CTE line must touch the same point on the OB no matter where you're standing or how you're looking (see again my example with the pivoting cue). That's just basic physical reality.

pj
chgo
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Good - we agree on that.


But we disagree on that. With the CB and OB the same distance apart CTE line must touch the same point on the OB no matter where you're standing or how you're looking (see again my example with the pivoting cue). That's just basic physical reality.

pj
chgo

That's like saying if you point your cue at a contact point, then change ball locations, the contact point stays the same. Clearly doesn't make sense and doesn't work
 

BeiberLvr

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
But we disagree on that. With the CB and OB the same distance apart CTE line must touch the same point on the OB no matter where you're standing or how you're looking (see again my example with the pivoting cue). That's just basic physical reality.

pj
chgo

I believe that’s only true if our heads were fixed and our feet were glued to the floor.

But they aren’t.

But since we can move our heads we can get different perceptions.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Question. You shot the first two balls with you version of CTE then went on to explain what you thought would happen if you kept moving the OB to the left. But you never shot the shots just gave an opinion, WHY?

I shot the farther left shots, as Mohrt had done, after the power came back on. I just didn't record it. I did pocket them using a 30 inside, all the way up to the half diamond placement. I figured, as I said in the video, that it could be done. But I know why and how, and it's for the same reasons I was able to pocket the shots using a straight 5/8 aim point each time.

The angle range from shot 1 to shot 4 is only about 3°. For shot #1 I believe the 30 inside provides just enough of an overcut to account for the CIT. If there was no CIT the ball would probably miss just right of the pocket, maybe rattle up. From shot #4 the 30 inside provides the same angle as it does for shot #1, but the ball ends up going into the pocket left of center, about 3° from where shot #1 went in. Any ball placed between ob 1 and ob 4 can be made using the same visuals and pivot, or the same fractional aim point.

This sketch shows two slighly different cut shots, and both being shot using a halfball hit. The dashed line represents the ghostball aim. A normal amount of CIT thickens the shot by a couple of degrees (solid arrow lines). Any ob placed between A and B will hit the pocket by using one aim point or one perception/pivot. I think this is how CTE works instead of center pocket everytime, and if I'm wrong may the CTE book and truth series set me straight. :thumbup:


picture.php
 
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Stan has demos of him shooting into a 2 1/2" pocket, I'll see if I can find it. To accomplish this with any sort of consistency, of course the system has to work, but you had better have some serious fundamentals as well.

I can shoot balls into a 2.5" pocket, so I have no doubts that a player of Stan's caliber can do it, CTE or not.
 

mohrt

Student of the Game
Silver Member
I shot the farther left shots, as Mohrt had done, after the power came back on. I just didn't record it. I did pocket them using a 30 inside, all the way up to the half diamond placement. I figured, as I said in the video, that it could be done. But I know why and how, and it's for the same reasons I was able to pocket the shots using a straight 5/8 aim point each time.

The angle range from shot 1 to shot 4 is only about 3°. For shot #1 I believe the 30 inside provides just enough of an overcut to account for the CIT. If there was no CIT the ball would probably miss just right of the pocket, maybe rattle up. From shot #4 the 30 inside provides the same angle as it does for shot #1, but the ball ends up going into the pocket left of center, about 3° from where shot #1 went in. Any ball placed between ob 1 and ob 4 can be made using the same visuals and pivot, or the same fractional aim point.

This sketch shows two slighly different cut shots, but both shot using a halfball hit. The dashed line represents the ghostball aim. A normal amount of CIT thickens the shot by a couple of degrees (solid arrow lines). Any ob placed between A and B will hit the pocket by using one aim point or one perception/pivot. I think this is how CTE works instead center pocket everytime, and if I'm wrong may the CTE book and truth series set me straight. :thumbup:


picture.php

Do you think your theory would work (pocket slop) on shots like these?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiwvH_3A7pY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJX5F20avYE
 
Last edited:

mohrt

Student of the Game
Silver Member
I can shoot balls into a 2.5" pocket, so I have no doubts that a player of Stan's caliber can do it, CTE or not.

But I mean using your theory where a 5/8 cut will work for a range of shots. It begins to break down at some level.
 
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
More for cut shots

Only on a very thin cut shot, nearly impossibly thin, could the CTE line cross through that contact point on the backside of the ball that's facing away from pocket. The farthest visible left or right point/edge of the ball is always in the same place regardless of your perspective. So I'm lost here. Are you messing with my head just for laughs? :grin:
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
But I mean using your theory where a 5/8 cut will work for a range of shots. It begins to break down at some level.

Yes, using that 5/8 aim begins to break down when a thinner or thicker aim is needed, exactly like the 15 inside or the 30 inside. Do you honestly believe that when you hit those 4 curtain shots with a 30 inside the ob tracked toward center pocket each time? You even said that from half a diamond it was about at the limits of the 30 inside. So do you think that 4th shot went center hole, but if you moved the ball another half inch out it would miss the pocket entirely? :embarrassed2:
 
Last edited:

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
That's like saying if you point your cue at a contact point, then change ball locations, the contact point stays the same.
No, it's not like that at all.

One more try: Say you glue the CB and OB onto a board and glue a piece of thread stretched straight from the CB's center (on the back of the CB) to the OB's edge (a CTE line). Does that thread touch another part of the OB if you move the board? That's what you're saying happens.

The center-to-edge line isn't a "perception" - it's a physical thing that doesn't change when the shooter moves or the cut angle changes, but the balls stay the same distance apart. For the CTE line to change, the balls have to move in relation to one another (the distance between them has to change).

Of course it's possible for your perception of the same CTE line to change, and I assume that's what happens. That's your doing, not the system's - you're taking into account the pocket's changed position and adjusting how you "see" the CTE line accordingly. I think we all do something similar (to one degree or another) no matter how we aim, and I don't think it diminishes the usefulness of any system - it's how the system fits us that matters.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Perfect Aim is not an aiming system. :rolleyes: I'll inform Gene.


Gene himself has said it's about your dominant eye: "This is what Perfect aim is all about: Making sure the dominant eye is in the most dominant position making sure the other eye is not being dominant at all. This allows your eyes to work together in the most efficient way to [I]envision the shot[/I] as Perfectly as possible."

Dr. Dave also has it listed as a sighting system and not an aiming system on his web site.

Do you need Gene's contact info?

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
Mohrt

The fact you (and most people) aren’t able to successfully employ the system at first speaks volumes about its lack of objectivity.

Wholly untrue.

Just because I don't get algebra at first doesn't invalidate algebra.

CTE asks people to look at the balls in ways that they never ever were taught before. It requires a shift in thinking. It requires that one settle down and empty their cup to be able to really SEE the lines and see the ball divisions. It's visual acuity training with purpose, not simply rote brute force repetition.
 

duckie

GregH
Silver Member
Wholly untrue.

Just because I don't get algebra at first doesn't invalidate algebra.

CTE asks people to look at the balls in ways that they never ever were taught before. It requires a shift in thinking. It requires that one settle down and empty their cup to be able to really SEE the lines and see the ball divisions. It's visual acuity training with purpose, not simply rote brute force repetition.

Clearly you have no idea what the word the objective means, nor do you understand that algebra is groven by a strict set of rules and steps to be used properly.

You, not being able to do algebra does not invalidate algebra because of the strict set of rules and steps used in algebra.

Unlike CTE, where nothing of the kind exist.
 

BeiberLvr

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Wholly untrue.

Just because I don't get algebra at first doesn't invalidate algebra.

CTE asks people to look at the balls in ways that they never ever were taught before. It requires a shift in thinking. It requires that one settle down and empty their cup to be able to really SEE the lines and see the ball divisions. It's visual acuity training with purpose, not simply rote brute force repetition.

But CTE requires you to have knowledge on pocketing balls, and being able to call upon that knowledge and experience is one of the reasons it works.
 
Top