A Curious CTE Diagram

That's the goal... obviously that's an impossibility, but still the intent

Sure... Again, nothing is absolute so I have to agree to some degree
Or you can just move your bridge hand .
Seen Efren walk the bridge hand many many times.
Busti feathers the outside left of the cue ball to hide the spin he applies on the cue ball.
Totally insane way. Practice stroke at the outside left then hit the cb somewhere else in the final stroke .
And he always aims the money ball thick and spins it in .
 
But people use their definitions very loosely often. Upon questioning you may well learn things from him that we do not currently know.
Sure I say go directly to the source wherever possible and whenever practical.

If I had a financial consideration in promoting CTE aiming in any way then I would be much more active with that. But if I post a testimonial or a comment that I happen across and anyone has a problem with it they are free to go directly to the source of the comment, which is not me, and ask them directly to clear up any questions that are directed at me and which I could only answer speculatively at best.
 
Yep in my opinion, BHE and/or pivots are brutal form. If you'd like to call the pinnacle class of shooters "brainwashed" by the most effective methods for potting a ball then have at it. I consider it the most effective based on nothing more than the relative difficulty compared to the other version of billiards that require potting a ball. Although, I will say that Pyramid appears to be a very tough game.
What a completely charming and colorful response from you.
Naturally... you remain locked in with your opinion.
Naturally... I remain locked in with my opinion.
Naturally...any debating is futile. Validating my premise that "To each his own" is primary when one is shooting pool shots. Unless one is looking to change for improvement. (which is perfectly okay with me)(y)

Thank you.
Cartoon of Man bowing and tipping hat.jpg
 
Or you can just move your bridge hand .
Seen Efren walk the bridge hand many many times.
Busti feathers the outside left of the cue ball to hide the spin he applies on the cue ball.
Totally insane way. Practice stroke at the outside left then hit the cb somewhere else in the final stroke .
And he always aims the money ball thick and spins it in .
When Busti first came to Germany he freaked everyone out with the cue not pointing straight down the shot line. it looked like he was aiming into space because in Germany they are very strict about the form and the cue and body must be aligned just exactly so.

People could not believe that this guy could run a rack much less give ridiculous weight to great players.

I watched him do it live many times. Nobody tried to copy him there, we all considered his style to be an anomaly. Everyone was clear after the first month that his skill was world class but no one wanted to try and teach anyone to have the pre-shot form of Bustamante.

No one back then was even discussing the concept of aiming to the degrees that it has been discussed in the past 20 years. No one in the early 90s made a deep connection between aiming and form. Aiming was treated as a by product of form just as some here continue to advocate today. Bustamante was considered, in Germany, to be one of the rare few who could play world class without "textbook" form.
 
Let me rephrase for the ones interpreting things in the most strictly literal way: Freddie had little knowledge of what Stan's version of CTE entailed as Freddie learned directly from Hal.
That makes better sense. Hal could be thought of as a Johnny Appleseed of aiming in a sense because many people took him up on his offer to call him. I was not one of them.

Hal chose me, perhaps unwisely, perhaps not. But he gifted me with the knowledge that there are more ways to effectively aim in pool than were published at that time and he tasked me with teaching what I knew to others who might be interested.

So I do that. Freddie could describe every system Hal taught him in detail. I couldn't do that. But Freddie was not so interested that he had to find and quiz everyone that Hal taught and compare notes.

Hal taught to use the center and the edges. That's the most basic instruction he gave to me.

Hal also left behind tons of notes on the subject of aiming as I would have expected there to be. I don't recall if those notes are with anyone other than Hal's widow.

The overriding point is that there is a core to cte aiming which is used regardless of which "version" one uses. That core is what the skeptics and the knockers ultimately take issue with.

Knocking the refinements or discoveries of what Hal meant when he said do this or that.... Is just fluff to troll with because the core principle, that one can use three sighting angles to line up correctly for any shot is the one that pisses off geometers more than anything else.

What those geometers should be thinking of is aiming as a 3d exercise rather than just a 2d diagram in my opinion.

That's when we start to think about perspective, perception, visual acuity, illusions and so on.

We hear the claim and it sounds absurd and actually is absurd if one thinks only in 2d.
 
John Barton...bring me up to date, please.
Who is this "Freddie" that you guys are speaking about??
TY
Lowenstein
 
Or you can just move your bridge hand .
Seen Efren walk the bridge hand many many times.
Busti feathers the outside left of the cue ball to hide the spin he applies on the cue ball.
Totally insane way. Practice stroke at the outside left then hit the cb somewhere else in the final stroke .
And he always aims the money ball thick and spins it in .
Do you any info on where he places his bridge hand.
 
...a pivot has zero advantage over a parallel shift
I think of pivots the same way I think of aiming “reference alignments” like fractions - a starting point that gets you close to the correct “parallel shift” to make the estimation easier.

pj
chgo

P.S. I know what you mean, but it’s confusing to call something “parallel” that’s non-parallel by definition.
 
Last edited:
I think of pivots the same way I think of aiming “reference alignments” like fractions - a starting point that gets you close to the correct “parallel shift” to make the estimation easier.

pj
chgo

P.S. I think it’s confusing to call it “parallel” when by definition it’s non-parallel.
 
Just like a typical republican. You try to deflect.
One more chance for you. Failure on your part to answer the questions exposes your deflection attempts and results in dismissal. Take heed upon what you enter. Kindly note that CTE is NOT mentioned in these questions.

Here are the questions again:
Is Ghost Ball "interpreted" differently (as you've described) depending on the player?
Is Poolology "interpreted" differently (as you've described) depending on the player?
Is "Just See the Shot" "interpreted" differently (as you've described) depending on the player?
I ignored your question because it was vague. CTE means different things to different users and when two of them say CTE is great they may well be talking about two very different procedures. All of the others listed above have specific and simple instructions and when two users of one of those methods say they like it they are most likely doing the same thing. In other words, they are doing the same thing where it matters to the aiming system. It seems like CTE by Stan is so regimented that it ALL matters to the end result. Yet, interestingly, two players do it differently and it still "works." Maybe the thing that makes it work isn't what they think it is.
 
Even more odd he looks like Efren, lol. Was talking about Busti when he lines up low left.
Bridges center of cue ball in relation to the shot .
Practice strokes to the left.
Pause before the last stroke.
Hits balls dead center. Leaves tip on the felt a long time after shot .
 
Sure I say go directly to the source wherever possible and whenever practical.

If I had a financial consideration in promoting CTE aiming in any way then I would be much more active with that. But if I post a testimonial or a comment that I happen across and anyone has a problem with it they are free to go directly to the source of the comment, which is not me, and ask them directly to clear up any questions that are directed at me and which I could only answer speculatively at best.
It would not be a quick question for clarification and therefore is probably not practical unless you are paying for a lesson and then want to know every detail on how he aims.
 
That makes better sense. Hal could be thought of as a Johnny Appleseed of aiming in a sense because many people took him up on his offer to call him. I was not one of them.

Hal chose me, perhaps unwisely, perhaps not. But he gifted me with the knowledge that there are more ways to effectively aim in pool than were published at that time and he tasked me with teaching what I knew to others who might be interested.

So I do that. Freddie could describe every system Hal taught him in detail. I couldn't do that. But Freddie was not so interested that he had to find and quiz everyone that Hal taught and compare notes.

Hal taught to use the center and the edges. That's the most basic instruction he gave to me.

Hal also left behind tons of notes on the subject of aiming as I would have expected there to be. I don't recall if those notes are with anyone other than Hal's widow.

The overriding point is that there is a core to cte aiming which is used regardless of which "version" one uses. That core is what the skeptics and the knockers ultimately take issue with.

Knocking the refinements or discoveries of what Hal meant when he said do this or that.... Is just fluff to troll with because the core principle, that one can use three sighting angles to line up correctly for any shot is the one that pisses off geometers more than anything else.

What those geometers should be thinking of is aiming as a 3d exercise rather than just a 2d diagram in my opinion.

That's when we start to think about perspective, perception, visual acuity, illusions and so on.

We hear the claim and it sounds absurd and actually is absurd if one thinks only in 2d.
That's pretty much completely wrong when it comes to Freddie. Maybe I heard him wrong and he'll correct me, but Freddie's system does not require some magic or unexpected connection between the balls and the table. I believe Freddie's system is to pick one of the 7 fractions on the ob to get you close to the pocket and then pivot AS NEEDED to pocket the ball.
 
Bridges center of cue ball in relation to the shot .
Practice strokes to the left.
Pause before the last stroke.
Hits balls dead center. Leaves tip on the felt a long time after shot .
So he bridges center, pivots left for practice strokes, then essentially pivots back to shoot. That’s what I was thinking. Thanks
 
I ignored your question because it was vague. CTE means different things to different users and when two of them say CTE is great they may well be talking about two very different procedures. All of the others listed above have specific and simple instructions and when two users of one of those methods say they like it they are most likely doing the same thing. In other words, they are doing the same thing where it matters to the aiming system. It seems like CTE by Stan is so regimented that it ALL matters to the end result. Yet, interestingly, two players do it differently and it still "works." Maybe the thing that makes it work isn't what they think it is.
Welcome to Fail signCropped.jpg
 
So he bridges center, pivots left for practice strokes, then essentially pivots back to shoot. That’s what I was thinking. Thanks
And if you really look at his elbow, it would be really hard to shoot straight that way .
But, he drops the elbow in almost all shots . Takes that tip through the ball.
 
Back
Top