A long comment on "aiming systems" ...

Petros Andrikop said:
A fellow member mentioned F. Bustamante.
He is the exception to many rules not the primary example..
What works for him doesn't work for others.
Changing anything about your cue line after you take your stance might work for some too, but it's not recommended for the reasons I mentioned..
Click to expand...

The point was he doesn't look uncomfortable doing it. His body is not all out of whack.
 
Grilled Cheese said:
In one sense, yes, in another no.




There are people who think that the pocket moves? What I know is that the exact same CB to OB relationship can exist on multiple positions of the table.





The most I've seen the pocket used as a reference in description is in whether to determine a thin cut, thick cut or super-thin cut. That plays a role in using CTE or ETE or ETC whatever.


There's a few problems with that. For one, there's no precise limits to what is thick or thin. Secondly, what these three references do is to group the CTE alignment system into three "classes" or groups of angles. Unfortunately, there are more angles necessary to pocket balls. CTE does not account for those, and defaults to "feel" based pivoting and judgment.


A proponent can say "well at least it narrows you down", meaning to within a smaller possible range of acceptable angles for the shot. Doesn't mean they all work, only one will work. But it could lessen the margin of error. Kind of how low deflection shafts lessens the total range of squirt, allowing the player to work with and "feel" or adjust within a smaller range.


Problem for me is, that is a lot of work and unnecessary steps just to narrow down a little bit. When I get down on a shot, I'm either on the exact line of aim or I am really, really close to it. If I need to guesstimate or adjust, I'm working with a small adjustment range already. I will not go very far, because I know I'm already close to the line. How is this system better in making that a simpler process or easier? To me, it's more complex.


Now, for the few shots CTE does give the line of aim, that's great. But again, I question the usefulness of a system like that for only obtaining a line of aim on a group of shots. For example, if I need a 30 degree cut, I know that is a half ball hit. Aim to the edge of the OB. That is super easy. And like CTE, it only works for a particular angle.
Click to expand...

Similar cb to ob relationships always happen, and they are always different in there relationship to the pocket.
Pocket is for reference only.
CTE accounts for ALL normal angles, any shot you would shoot now can be shot with CTE.
It narrows it down to the right angle.
It gives you something concrete to sight and you don't have to guesstimate. VERY SIMPLE.
CTE gives you the line of aim for every shot, unless your Duckie.


Your not getting that the ctel revolves around the OB depending on the position of the balls in relation to the pocket.
 
cookie man said:
[...]
CTE gives you the line of aim for every shot, unless your Duckie.
[...]
Click to expand...

Dave:

Hmm... I would think you know to expect an offer from duckie to... how does he put it?... go suck eggs, if I'm using his terminology correctly?

:p
-Sean

P.S.: hope this finds you well. Going to SBE?
 
champ2107 said:
im good with that, if you master it and it works, that's great :)
Click to expand...

That's just one of the things I like about you CHAMP. You don't care how someone else aims and you're happy for them if it works for them. It's really sad that everyone doesn't believe as you do.
 
JoeyInCali said:
So you can judge if the hit is too thick or too thin with CTE ?
In ghost ball or line of aim, to aim thicker, you just reduce the angle of approach or imagine a thicker hit.

In CTE, how do you do that ?
Change the CTEL ?
Click to expand...

Part of the answer is in Dr. Dave's site:

I am taking this out of context, but to change the cut angle from the static 3 or 4 often described, one can:
"....
1.) Change the initial alignment slightly (e.g., by shifting your eye alignment so the perceived cue alignment and/or parallel shift is different)
or
2.) Change the amount of the parallel shift (before the pivot) so you don't quite go all of the way to the perceived CB edge (e.g., shift a given number of "tips" instead)
or
3.) Pivot a slightly different amount (e.g., not quite to center, or just past center).
or
4.) Change the "effective pivot length" slightly (e.g., by adjusting your bridge length or by shifting/tilting your bridge during the pivot).
..."

Then there is the secondary aim line that can be adjusted and needs more clarification or described in more detail.
:smile:
 
LAMas said:
Part of the answer is in Dr. Dave's site:

I am taking this out of context, but to change the cut angle from the static 3 or 4 often described, one can:
"....
1.) Change the initial alignment slightly (e.g., by shifting your eye alignment so the perceived cue alignment and/or parallel shift is different)
or
2.) Change the amount of the parallel shift (before the pivot) so you don't quite go all of the way to the perceived CB edge (e.g., shift a given number of "tips" instead)
or
3.) Pivot a slightly different amount (e.g., not quite to center, or just past center).
or
4.) Change the "effective pivot length" slightly (e.g., by adjusting your bridge length or by shifting/tilting your bridge during the pivot).
..."

Then there is the secondary aim line that can be adjusted and needs more clarification or described in more detail.
:smile:
Click to expand...
Thanks.
Sounds easy enough.
 
JoeyInCali said:
Thanks.
Sounds easy enough.
Click to expand...

if you had to list the exact steps that efren does to aim then it would seem complicated. however to himself and anyone watching it is fluid. same thing with these aiming methods. once practiced they become fluid.
 
LAMas said:
Part of the answer is in Dr. Dave's site:

I am taking this out of context, but to change the cut angle from the static 3 or 4 often described, one can:
"....
1.) Change the initial alignment slightly (e.g., by shifting your eye alignment so the perceived cue alignment and/or parallel shift is different)
or
2.) Change the amount of the parallel shift (before the pivot) so you don't quite go all of the way to the perceived CB edge (e.g., shift a given number of "tips" instead)
or
3.) Pivot a slightly different amount (e.g., not quite to center, or just past center).
or
4.) Change the "effective pivot length" slightly (e.g., by adjusting your bridge length or by shifting/tilting your bridge during the pivot).
..."

Then there is the secondary aim line that can be adjusted and needs more clarification or described in more detail.
:smile:
Click to expand...

it is even easier. once the gb line is found or better said once the shot line found the adjusting to hit a little more or less cb is simply a tiny movement of the cue. there is a very limited range of lines that cue ball can move straight down and contact the ob at to make the ob.

in my opinion everrrything stems from behind the cue ball and any chosen line is easily adjusted off of from that position.
 
JB Cases said:
if you had to list the exact steps that efren does to aim then it would seem complicated. however to himself and anyone watching it is fluid. same thing with these aiming methods. once practiced they become fluid.
Click to expand...

It's actually pretty simple for him.
He just says, " dito ang pato ".
Cueball is here.
 
Last edited:
JoeyInCali said:
It's actually pretty simple for him.
He just says, " dito ang pato ".
Cueball is here.
Click to expand...

Yes, but scientifically if you were to break down all the steps then it would be confusing to the reader. You can apply the same phrase to the aiming systems.

"dito ang pato" is what it all boils down to. Hal Houle got this and made it into something other people could experience as well.

What you don't want to understand Joey is that all this is in service of allowing the shooter to develop their own sense of dito ang pato. At the end of the day when I am playing for money I have to get into the groove and let it happen. All the aiming system practice, all the video waching, all the practicing a few Efren Magic Shots, all the touch drills, all the practicing banger fluke shots, all has to gel into dito ang pato if I want to have a chance to be successful.

You ask questions like, how do you cheat the pocket with xyz system because you honestly believe that this is all a waste of time. But if you would take a step back and realize that the goal is to give the player something to work on so that they can eventually get to the level where they simply step to the table and instantly see and do what they have to do then maybe you would give it some slack.

Thanks for the phrase. I am going to use it a lot when talking about aiming systems because I believe it's the key to everything. Dito ang pato.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top