That is beautiful. It's amazing that you can actually see or visualize a single "tick" on the ob end of the alignments.
CTE Does NOT Work - It Did For One Pro
- Thread starter SpiderWebComm
- Start date
That is beautiful. It's amazing that you can actually see or visualize a single "tick" on the ob end of the alignments.
It IS amazing to the uninitiated that a single tick can be singled out for resolving a shot. That just wasn’t supposed to be due to the nature of aiming spheres, but it is.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
Yes, it is amazing that you believe you can pinpoint a 0.5mm difference with an ETA line on the ob, but you don't believe a non-CTE user like myself can pinpoint a fractional aim line within 2mm on the ob.
One "tick" is only 0.5mm, since you say there are 360 ticks on each ball.
A ball's circumference is 179.6mm. So......179.6 ÷ 360 = 0.5, which is about a 1/120 fractional portion of the ob. That is super fine tuning right there. You've said before that it's guesswork for a fractional aimer to be able to distinguish a 2mm aim difference on the ob, which is a 1/32 fractional adjustment. A 4mm aim difference is about 1/16 adjustment. Yet you believe you can adjust a line within a 1/120th difference. I don't get it.
You have said yourself that you are proficient at seeing two line perceptions.
CTE is not a single line process as in conventional. Just as though a player can see a complete CB OB coverage PERCEPTION for a zero angle, it just so happens that 15s 30s and 45s can be seen with the same accuracy.
CTE is a perceptual process that leads to a one tick solution.
Two lines are always superior to a one line hell and three lines are always superior to two lines.
Pool is played visually and physically. Your math logic is holding you back, waaaaaay back.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
Really...how do you explain the same alignment creating a wide range of ticks as in my picture. The person must select one from many because the system fails to produce just one shot line.
I was mainly referring to a video where you explained a shot as having an ETA line "one tick" passed the quarter reference. The CTE line was normal. That means you adjusted the ETA line only. So my question was based on that single line. With fractional aiming I use one line -- ccb to a specific point on the ob. And it never requires an adjustment as fine as one "tick", a 1/120 fraction or 0.5mm difference. A 2mm adjustment is quite simple to do.
As far as two or three lines being "superior" to one....that's a matter of opinion. Typically the quickest and easiest way to get from point A to point B is one straight line, not a two or three line triangulation method that leads to one straight line, but a simple one straight line from the start. That's what I prefer. And I seriously doubt that it's holding me back any at all. Lol.
Regardless, I'm sure many players benefit from your work. And I hope you do well with your book.
Seeing precision multi-lined fractional perceptions ( 15 30 45 ) can be easily learned. The last thing that I’d ever put in the mind of any aspiring player would be to aim with center cue ball.
Amateurs aim with the center of the cue ball while pros aim with one of two cue cue ball edges.
Thanks for the well wish concerning my book!
Stan Shuffett
The extra "X" chromosome Brian has is also holding him back. Yakity-Yak-Yakity-Yak until somebody just gives up.
I swear with more time and under different circumstances if he and James Aranis had a chance to sit down and have a long talk about technique after their short match, Brian would have been telling him that he can make balls and win alright but he certainly doesn't have an understanding of math and the laws of physics because everything he says and thinks about pool is incorrect. It's even a wonder how he can play so good.
Once Aranis knew what he does, he could become the winningest pro in the history of the game and the GOAT.
Anthony, it’s a perceptual process that unlocks unique center cue ball alignments for unique CB OB relationships.
More than one alignment is required for executing the shots in your diagram.
Stan Shuffett
One thing for certain is that James does NOT pick up his shot lines from behind the center of the cue ball.
Most all instructors would like for that to be the case. Why? Because that is easy to explain and advocate. The problem, though, is that’s not the way that pros operate. Hal Houle knew that more than 50 years ago.
The pros and their aiming is written off as feel, but in actuality what they are doing is right on the cutting edge of objectivity and it can be explained.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
The pocket gives you the right perception. When you line edge of the cb to A and cte edge..can you see the shot line?..also are any of the alignments from the beginning still present during and after your sweep into center cb.
Blah blah blah....personal attack as usual.
The pocket does not give me anything. But what is true is that the perceptions of CTE have a natural connection to the right angles of a regulation tables.
Your other two questions are GREAT and I promise you that they’ll be answered in my TS and also my book.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
Personal attack? Nah, I was just being a jokester. You're taking all of this aiming stuff far too serious. Lighten up...
You say all of this stuff, and then we watch and listen to many pro players that simply say they visualize the path the cb needs to take, the ONE line, and then dial into that line.
One can certainly stand directly behind center cb and visualize the shot line. Or they can use CTE perceptions and arrive at a line slightly thinner or thicker than the shot line, then dial into the actual shot line from there.
Many players, including most pros, use the straightforward method of simply looking where the cb needs to go and then positioning their stance and body around this line, bringing the cue in from which ever side of the body they happen to be holding it. You can speculate they're unknowingly or secrerly using half tip offsets and multi visuals all you want, but the reality of it is not so complex.
In that case.....good one.:thumbup:
Can you describe step by step what the pros are doing visually without beating around the bush? If so, lay it on me. I know what they’re doing. I even know what you’re doing when you’re flowing.
Not long ago, I worked with a very strong pro player. In time he recognized that what I was teaching was exactly what he was doing during his peak performances. He also shared that that is what many, many of his counterparts are doing.
Hal Houle was aware of this decades ago. What he had to say intrigued me and I decided I wanted to see and know for myself.
Stan Shuffett
Spider is a completely clueless asshole... Just kidding, Dave! :thumbup:
Of course you know what they're doing. You're a professional instructor, and your way is superior to all. But unless you've done a lot of research on how the brain functions when it comes to learning and performing complicated tasks, I highly doubt your explanation of what we are doing when we are playing "in the zone" is going to be accurate or correct.
Anyway, different pros do different things. James Aranas just looks at where the cb needs to be, then lines up behind it and sends it to where it needs to go.
Here's a great drill where it's pretty easy to see his straightforward approach. Plus when I played him I watched his stroke and his eye movement very closely. The kid looks straight through the cb at a distant target, ghostball more than likely, and then he steps into that line that sends the cb there and shoots. Gerda Hofstetter described the same approach to Allison Fisher, where she talked about seeing the shot line and then dialing into it, and when she feels like she's dead on it she shoots the shot.
https://youtu.be/Ce6AjeW0uQQ?t=37m13s