A real CTE shot for you to try.

[JB Cases]

Where I'm coming from on the CTE issue is this: Nobody in CTE world has been able to explain how CTE works. The textbook, sanctioned explanation provided by Stan is that it is a mystery. I'm not happy with that. I'd like to know why it really works, if it does. As years go by I learn things here and there and I begin to come up with my own ideas of what is going on. I have concluded that the most likely scenario is that the player is making it happen somehow, either in the initial set up or during the stroke. Not sure because there is so little data. What I do know is that when I follow the steps with manual pivoting I do not get good results and I believe that is because I am following the instructions rigidly and not allowing the pocket location to skew the process. Mohrt offered this thread so I take it as an opportunity to see, again, if there is a clear explanation, which we are in the process of discussing now.

You really have to get off this idea that my laser video is some kind of idiotic or evil plot. Again, it was interesting to illustrate the edge to center with the laser as a tool to help learn the steps, which were to see that line with my right eye (something I couldn't do). I don't think I ever replied to mohrt on that as we moved on to other things, like this waste of time responding to red herrings.

Let's get back to where we started, OK? A little less drama and more answers forthcoming.

Dude, YOU DRAGGED ME INTO THIS THREAD. YOU LITERALLY WENT TO OTHER THREADS AND DEMANDED THAT I WATCH YOUR VIDEO AMD COMMENT ON IT.

I don't think your video is evil, I do think it is idiotic.

Yes, the player is making it happen somehow. By following the directions and training themselves in the perceptions and by NOT thinking of CTE as fractional overlaps that are the same as fractional hits.

 

[Dan White]

Dude, YOU DRAGGED ME INTO THIS THREAD. YOU LITERALLY WENT TO OTHER THREADS AND DEMANDED THAT I WATCH YOUR VIDEO AMD COMMENT ON IT.

I don't think your video is evil, I do think it is idiotic.

Yes, the player is making it happen somehow. By following the directions and training themselves in the perceptions and by NOT thinking of CTE as fractional overlaps that are the same as fractional hits.

Yawn. I'll discuss this with mohrt. You can go back to writing your diatribes to PJ. If we come up with something interesting we'll let you know.

 

[JB Cases]

Yawn. I'll discuss this with mohrt. You can go back to writing your diatribes to PJ. If we come up with something interesting we'll let you know.

Sorry son, go ahead and discuss with whomever you want to. I will write on whatever topic I find interesting.

As for you coming up with anything interesting.....I doubt it but hope does spring eternal.

 

[Low500]

Dude, YOU DRAGGED ME INTO THIS THREAD. YOU LITERALLY WENT TO OTHER THREADS AND DEMANDED THAT I WATCH YOUR VIDEO AND COMMENT ON IT.
I don't think your video is evil, I do think it is idiotic.
Yes, the player is making it happen somehow. By following the directions and training themselves in the perceptions and by NOT thinking of CTE as fractional overlaps that are the same as fractional hits.

John, you're posting good stuff.
John, I think the problems experienced with CTE, by the masses, are caused by the misinformation or the "various methods" they see on the web from various "experts".
Whereas we, as bona fide students, only deal with the information straight from Stan Shuffett himself.
For example, I don't think most skeptics (especially those without the book Center Pocket Music) are aware that there are FOUR methods of accomplishing the task within the CTE framework and that Stan himself advocates being proficient in all.... in order to "cycle" back and forth between them.
Basic CTE, Pro One, Disguised Pivoting, and Bustamante Style pivoting.
I personally "cycle" between Basic CTE and Pro One. (I am working on the Bustamante Style, but it's not yet ready to take into combat).
I find that for my game, Basic CTE works better (for me) when the cueball is frozen or close to the rail over Pro One.
When the bridge hand is out on the table bed, Pro One is the stone cold nuts.
By having these modern professional tools available, it becomes more efficient to locate that NISL and deliver the cue to that NISL with a straight efficient stroke. And if I get on tilt and miss 2-3 shots in a row, all I do is switch right into Basic CTE and it gets me right back "in gear" for Pro One.
The skeptics and critics will never enjoy these luxuries because they #1 Will not immerse themselves in the study. #2 Will not own the book Center Pocket Music. #3 Or they just choose to live a life of negativity.
Regards...Lowenstein

 

[Dan White]

Why don't we start with you first learning the system with the steps provided, and if something isn't working we can discuss what might be going wrong. Leave the lasers and solving the WHY for a later time. Let's get you at least functional with the steps. Maybe we should start with a much simpler shot for learning on, like the one I posted earlier for PJ.

Thanks for being the adult in the room. I'm game for whatever but I have some concerns. First, it isn't like I've never tried to use CTE. I possibly even spoke to Hal before you did. I contend that CTE does not work for me BECAUSE I am following the steps. I'm talking about pre NISL stuff. Simple ETB, CTE and half tip pivot like you were doing. Second, how do we know when I'm doing it right? Pocketing the ball CANNOT be the metric we use to measure success. Are you going to say I got it working right because I'm pocketing balls? That is circular logic. Like I say I'm game to try whatever but you just presented a video where your pivots were inconsistent and you said it didn't matter as long as you could get on the NISL. There doesn't seem to be any measurable yardstick for doing it right so I am not confident that we will get very far.

I have a request for you in return. Are you able to set aside your bias and judge what is happening objectively? This isn't a one way street in which I am assumed to be the one in need of correction. If I propose logical, rational explanations for things I expect you to be open to exploring those possibilities and maybe even making another video or two to investigate further. Sound reasonable?

To kick this off I published a video outlining the conundrum. I think it is interesting and I hope you can shed some light.

 

[mohrt]

Thanks for being the adult in the room. I'm game for whatever but I have some concerns. First, it isn't like I've never tried to use CTE. I possibly even spoke to Hal before you did. I contend that CTE does not work for me BECAUSE I am following the steps. I'm talking about pre NISL stuff. Simple ETB, CTE and half tip pivot like you were doing. Second, how do we know when I'm doing it right? Pocketing the ball CANNOT be the metric we use to measure success. Are you going to say I got it working right because I'm pocketing balls? That is circular logic. Like I say I'm game to try whatever but you just presented a video where your pivots were inconsistent and you said it didn't matter as long as you could get on the NISL. There doesn't seem to be any measurable yardstick for doing it right so I am not confident that we will get very far.

I have a request for you in return. Are you able to set aside your bias and judge what is happening objectively? This isn't a one way street in which I am assumed to be the one in need of correction. If I propose logical, rational explanations for things I expect you to be open to exploring those possibilities and maybe even making another video or two to investigate further. Sound reasonable?

To kick this off I published a video outlining the conundrum. I think it is interesting and I hope you can shed some light.

I agree that this is the problem some people have with CTE and the big question of WHY. Two CB OB positions, same distance apart, same perception and same pocket, resulting in two different shot line angles. Clearly the positions of the balls on the table do affect our perception, starting clear back at ball address. I have another video where I’m shooting similar shots but moving the CB and OB slightly parallel to the left by an inch or so, and I state how I can see how each shot the AL and SL are a unique perception.

So, if I take the two shots you mention, and for each one I stand at ball address and get in the offset such that I can see the AL and the SL (the first step of the process), and I stop right there and look at how NISL extends to OB, they will be very slightly different. Different perceptions, different ball orientations. Yes it is because of the placement on the table. I don’t know why this happens, but I do know it is consistent and repeatable, and I’m doing the same thing from a process point of view. I don’t have and answer to this WHY, although I have been trying things now and then to try to figure it out. You recall my post about the floating finger trick. That was part of my discovery process, maybe it will lead somewhere. You mention you think it is because "I know where the pocket is." I'll take this to a broader description of "orientation of the CB and OB on a 2x1 surface". I think that is more accurate because I can make the shots pretty decently with the pocket obscured from my vision.

So maybe the goal here is to practice the 2nd shot until the ball can be pocketed and what the perception looks like when that happens, and how it differs from when the ball came short. I believe I too can force the alignment to be ridged like a 2D laser, but it just won’t look right.

I offer up the wording: stand behind the AL such that you can see the SL. In other words, make sure your head is poked sufficiently to get on that AL. Try getting the AL first, then SL.

Also, did you try the shorter shot I mentioned? Does it go?

 

[BC21]

Thanks for being the adult in the room. I'm game for whatever but I have some concerns. First, it isn't like I've never tried to use CTE. I possibly even spoke to Hal before you did. I contend that CTE does not work for me BECAUSE I am following the steps. I'm talking about pre NISL stuff. Simple ETB, CTE and half tip pivot like you were doing. Second, how do we know when I'm doing it right? Pocketing the ball CANNOT be the metric we use to measure success. Are you going to say I got it working right because I'm pocketing balls? That is circular logic. Like I say I'm game to try whatever but you just presented a video where your pivots were inconsistent and you said it didn't matter as long as you could get on the NISL. There doesn't seem to be any measurable yardstick for doing it right so I am not confident that we will get very far.

I have a request for you in return. Are you able to set aside your bias and judge what is happening objectively? This isn't a one way street in which I am assumed to be the one in need of correction. If I propose logical, rational explanations for things I expect you to be open to exploring those possibilities and maybe even making another video or two to investigate further. Sound reasonable?

To kick this off I published a video outlining the conundrum. I think it is interesting and I hope you can shed some light.

The second shot is the same one you've already analyzed in a video a while back, where Stan shoots it.
Outside spin was used. Buy that doesn't mean it has to be used. It's just one way to make the shot using the same line up. The other way is to somehow get a different line up than what you get when the ob is center table.

To learn how to do that you might have to take a lesson from Stan, or Tyler Styer or Stevie Moore. Or you could just shoot it the way you would normally shoot it.

 

[Dan White]

I agree that this is the problem some people have with CTE and the big question of WHY. Two CB OB positions, same distance apart, same perception and same pocket, resulting in two different shot line angles. Clearly the positions of the balls on the table do affect our perception, starting clear back at ball address. I have another video where I’m shooting similar shots but moving the CB and OB slightly parallel to the left by an inch or so, and I state how I can see how each shot the AL and SL are a unique perception.

So, if I take the two shots you mention, and for each one I stand at ball address and get in the offset such that I can see the AL and the SL (the first step of the process), and I stop right there and look at how NISL extends to OB, they will be very slightly different. Different perceptions, different ball orientations. Yes it is because of the placement on the table. I don’t know why this happens, but I do know it is consistent and repeatable, and I’m doing the same thing from a process point of view. I don’t have and answer to this WHY, although I have been trying things now and then to try to figure it out. You recall my post about the floating finger trick. That was part of my discovery process, maybe it will lead somewhere. You mention you think it is because "I know where the pocket is." I'll take this to a broader description of "orientation of the CB and OB on a 2x1 surface". I think that is more accurate because I can make the shots pretty decently with the pocket obscured from my vision.

So maybe the goal here is to practice the 2nd shot until the ball can be pocketed and what the perception looks like when that happens, and how it differs from when the ball came short. I believe I too can force the alignment to be ridged like a 2D laser, but it just won’t look right.

I offer up the wording: stand behind the AL such that you can see the SL. In other words, make sure your head is poked sufficiently to get on that AL. Try getting the AL first, then SL.

Also, did you try the shorter shot I mentioned? Does it go?

Before I go much further with this I would like to talk about something you have been silent on up to now in this thread, despite my floating the idea more than once. You said to PJ:

There is no steering or feel. You read my instructions, was there any gaps? How can you "feel" your way into lining up on the AL and SL? You are the victim of your own literal thoughts. All you have to do now is just go to the table and prove to your self if the ball goes in or not. I think the real problem here is, if you did discover the system works as described, you'd have no excuse for your 20+ years of incorrect arguments. That's fine, let's see if someone else will give this post an honest try.

That's a pretty strong statement. I asked of you:

JB recently asked me why I completely discount the idea that CTE could possibly work as stated. I actually never really discard possibilities but I do draw conclusions based on the evidence. So I'll ask you the same question. Why do you rule out the possibility that it is your subconscious store of knowledge [In other words, your sight of the pocket tells you that the shot is on] that alters your perception of the NISL so that while you think you are setting up the same each time you line up a 30 degree perception you really are not? The fact is you don't really know why it works so how can you rule this out as a possibility?

If you refuse to consider that this might be the answer to the mystery then we aren't going to be able to get very far. I'm open to the idea that something odd is happening, at least when you shoot, but you do not yet seem open to the idea that nothing odd is happening when others like PJ or I shoot and it is not because we are doing it wrong. Are you willing to be wrong if the facts point that way?

I did not try the closer shot because I don't know what purpose it will serve. More shots will go in because the pocket is closer. I have attempted CTE shots off and on for many years. If you can explain how hitting shorter shots helps solve the mystery then I'm all ears.

 

[mohrt]

I shoot the shot based on the AL and SL I see. It's the same for a given CB/OB orientation. If my brain is somehow wiring up what the AL and SL look like based on past knowledge of the given shot, then that is perplexing given that the same process works all over the table, regardless of my particular familiarity with the given shot. It is also not something I can control or even perceive, if that is indeed what is happening. I'll agree to the possibility that is what happens, given that I can't explain exactly what does happen. But that doesn't really explain the dead accuracy of my subconscious brain changing the perception for me everywhere.

As for the shorter shot, the purpose is for learning. You don't learn to putt a golf ball from 85 feet from the hole. You start with easier shots and get the basic mechanics down. Same with CTE, start with simpler shots, get the basic mechanics down. If you don't have them down, it is possible to miss even the most basic shots too. The question isn't can you make that simple shot, the question is can you make that shot following the CTE process to a tee. If not, this is a chance to really focus on the perception process itself and not the mechanics and stroke to make that long shot line.

 

[Dan White]

I shoot the shot based on the AL and SL I see. It's the same for a given CB/OB orientation.

To be sure I understand -- when you say a "given cb/ob orientation" you are talking about the 4 CTE perceptions, right? In our example all the shots down the center of the table so far have been 30 degree perceptions so you get on the sl and al the same way but somehow this yields a different cut angle. In my case, when I did the same thing I did not get a different cut angle as shown by the cue positions in my video. Just making sure we are still on the same page.

If my brain is somehow wiring up what the AL and SL look like based on past knowledge of the given shot, then that is perplexing given that the same process works all over the table, regardless of my particular familiarity with the gven shot. It is also not something I can control or even perceive, if that is indeed what is happening. I'll agree to the possibility that is what happens, given that I can't explain exactly what does happen. But that doesn't really explain the dead accuracy of my subconscious brain changing the perception for me everywhere.

When you see the corner pocket in your peripheral vision and it is in a different location each time do you think it is possible that that target might be causing you to do something a little differently each time?

As for the shorter shot, the purpose is for learning. You don't learn to putt a golf ball from 85 feet from the hole. You start with easier shots and get the basic mechanics down. Same with CTE, start with simpler shots, get the basic mechanics down. If you don't have them down, it is possible to miss even the most basic shots too. The question isn't can you make that simple shot, the question is can you make that shot following the CTE process to a tee. If not, this is a chance to really focus on the perception process itself and not the mechanics and stroke to make that long shot line.

OK, I'll hit some short shots using the pivot, not the NISL. I'm more familiar with use of the pivot.

 

[mohrt]

To be sure I understand -- when you say a "given cb/ob orientation" you are talking about the 4 CTE perceptions, right? In our example all the shots down the center of the table so far have been 30 degree perceptions so you get on the sl and al the same way but somehow this yields a different cut angle. In my case, when I did the same thing I did not get a different cut angle as shown by the cue positions in my video. Just making sure we are still on the same page.

I'm talking about the placement of the CB/OB on the table. Each placement is a unique perception. Consistent and repeatable.

When you see the corner pocket in your peripheral vision and it is in a different location each time do you think it is possible that that target might be causing you to do something a little differently each time?

I'll repeat, I think its more like the postion of the CB and OB on the table surface, so more than just the target pocket. I can cover the pocket from my view and still do pretty well with it once I know which perception and pivot to use.

OK, I'll hit some short shots using the pivot, not the NISL. I'm more familiar with use of the pivot.

IMHO I'd go with stepping and NISL, as it is more refined than manual pivots. I like that the eyes do all the work, and no reliance on mechanical movements of cue and bridge hand. That said, manual pivots take you to the same thing: the NISL.

 

[The_JV]

Why do you rule out the possibility that it is your subconscious store of knowledge [In other words, your sight of the pocket tells you that the shot is on] that alters your perception of the NISL so that while you think you are setting up the same each time you line up a 30 degree perception you really are not? The fact is you don't really know why it works so how can you rule this out as a possibility?

...and the above is why I was attempting basic Poolology shots with never looking at the target pocket. It felt extremely awkward not looking at the pocket, but I needed/wanted to remove any possibility of subconcious adjustment.

 

[Dan White]

To be sure I understand -- when you say a "given cb/ob orientation" you are talking about the 4 CTE perceptions, right? In our example all the shots down the center of the table so far have been 30 degree perceptions so you get on the sl and al the same way but somehow this yields a different cut angle. In my case, when I did the same thing I did not get a different cut angle as shown by the cue positions in my video. Just making sure we are still on the same page.

I'm talking about the placement of the CB/OB on the table. Each placement is a unique perception. Consistent and repeatable.

I'm getting confused with this word "perception." Generally when I hear that word it is used like "a 30 degree perception," or "a 15 degree perception." Let me try to interpret what you are saying again. In the several shots in your video they are all 30 degree inside "perceptions." However, when you move the balls down table you are talking about a "unique" perception which is a little different from the 30 degree perception, right? You are saying that because of the location of the balls on the table that same "30 degree perception shot" will yield a different cue position at address or shot line because each ball location produces a unique perception that leads to the corner pocket. Do I have that right now?

Edit: follow up question. In your video you are pointing your face toward the right pocket then you get down on the shot. Do you still keep your head at that angle when down on the shot? It is hard to tell what you are doing with your vision between stand up position and getting down to find the NISL.

 

[mohrt]

I'm getting confused with this word "perception." Generally when I hear that word it is used like "a 30 degree perception," or "a 15 degree perception." Let me try to interpret what you are saying again. In the several shots in your video they are all 30 degree inside "perceptions." However, when you move the balls down table you are talking about a "unique" perception which is a little different from the 30 degree perception, right? You are saying that because of the location of the balls on the table that same "30 degree perception shot" will yield a different cue position at address or shot line because each ball location produces a unique perception that leads to the corner pocket. Do I have that right now?

I thinks so. What I’m saying is for each of these CB OB orientations, although they use the same 30I process, they are all unique in that they all have their own unique alignment to AL and SL, or otherwise unique visual perception, which results in a unique NISL for that orientation. The interesting thing is you don’t consciously “do” anything different to make that happen, your perception “naturally” takes you to the NISL for that orientation. I say naturally because it works all the same as a process. Maybe because you keep in your mind that they can’t possibly be different, you are aware and force them to physically align the same? I’m guessing here. I think if you let your perception do what works naturally you will find it. Use the steps I said: find the AL first, then SL. Face toward cutting edge. As another check you can cover one eye then the other to be sure each eye is dominant for its line. It’s just a check, they won’t work to find the perfect line individually so after you check eye dominance, then with both eyes find AL and SL.

Yes face still angled at full stance. And all the way through the shot.

 

[lfigueroa]

Thanks for being the adult in the room. I'm game for whatever but I have some concerns. First, it isn't like I've never tried to use CTE. I possibly even spoke to Hal before you did. I contend that CTE does not work for me BECAUSE I am following the steps. I'm talking about pre NISL stuff. Simple ETB, CTE and half tip pivot like you were doing. Second, how do we know when I'm doing it right? Pocketing the ball CANNOT be the metric we use to measure success. Are you going to say I got it working right because I'm pocketing balls? That is circular logic. Like I say I'm game to try whatever but you just presented a video where your pivots were inconsistent and you said it didn't matter as long as you could get on the NISL. There doesn't seem to be any measurable yardstick for doing it right so I am not confident that we will get very far.

I have a request for you in return. Are you able to set aside your bias and judge what is happening objectively? This isn't a one way street in which I am assumed to be the one in need of correction. If I propose logical, rational explanations for things I expect you to be open to exploring those possibilities and maybe even making another video or two to investigate further. Sound reasonable?

To kick this off I published a video outlining the conundrum. I think it is interesting and I hope you can shed some light.

Having watched the video (nice work by the way, Dan) it seems to me that Monty is drawing upon experience (HAMB) and making a subconscious adjustment when getting into shooting position. You can see that with the lines drawn on his cue and his CT position on the CB.

Unless you do photo/video analysis, such as Dan has done, there would be no way a player would be aware of the small, but critical, differences in cue alignment they’re setting up with for those two shots.

Lou Figueroa

 

[mohrt]

Having watched the video (nice work by the way, Dan) it seems to me that Monty is drawing upon experience (HAMB) and making a subconscious adjustment when getting into shooting position. You can see that with the lines drawn on his cue and his CT position on the CB.

Unless you do photo/video analysis, such as Dan has done, there would be no way a player would be aware of the small, but critical, differences in cue alignment they’re setting up with for those two shots.

Lou Figueroa

Wrong. It’s already explained I’m putting the cue on the NISL. The NISL is the CCB seen by the perception offset. Not adjustments.

 

[mohrt]

Stan posted a useful blog post. He estimates 100 hours to be proficient at seeing aim lines.

Determining the Proper Aim Line is Simple — www.justcueit.com

Aiming up the CBE to the correct OB aim point is actually very easy when using CTE. You’re (already) ALMOST aiming with precision aim lines when engaged in your favorite conventional approach. Here’s how simple it can be to vastly improve your decision-making for choosing the proper aim line: Stan

www.justcueit.com

 

[Dan White]

Wrong. It’s already explained I’m putting the cue on the NISL. The NISL is the CCB seen by the perception offset. Not adjustments.

Having watched the video (nice work by the way, Dan) it seems to me that Monty is drawing upon experience (HAMB) and making a subconscious adjustment when getting into shooting position. You can see that with the lines drawn on his cue and his CT position on the CB.

Unless you do photo/video analysis, such as Dan has done, there would be no way a player would be aware of the small, but critical, differences in cue alignment they’re setting up with for those two shots.

Lou Figueroa

Thanks. mohrt said one thing that I think I can confirm on video but I need a day to put it together.

 

[Dan White]

I thinks so. What I’m saying is for each of these CB OB orientations, although they use the same 30I process, they are all unique in that they all have their own unique alignment to AL and SL, or otherwise unique visual perception, which results in a unique NISL for that orientation. The interesting thing is you don’t consciously “do” anything different to make that happen, your perception “naturally” takes you to the NISL for that orientation. I say naturally because it works all the same as a process. Maybe because you keep in your mind that they can’t possibly be different, you are aware and force them to physically align the same? I’m guessing here. I think if you let your perception do what works naturally you will find it. Use the steps I said: find the AL first, then SL. Face toward cutting edge. As another check you can cover one eye then the other to be sure each eye is dominant for its line. It’s just a check, they won’t work to find the perfect line individually so after you check eye dominance, then with both eyes find AL and SL.

Yes face still angled at full stance. And all the way through the shot.

OK then we are on the same page. I just wanted to be sure I understood exactly what you are saying.

 

[Dan White]

Here is a follow up to my last video. Sorry that it is a bit rambling at the end, but I think it gets across what I wanted for now. The purpose of the video is to look in more detail at what Monty is actually doing. Is he doing the same thing each time or not, for instance? Short answer for those who don't want to watch the video is that Monty is doing the same thing at ball address each time, but is not doing the same thing when it comes to pivoting into shot position, the NISL. Surely Monty can sense that he is pivoting more as the shot becomes more acute? When I say "pivot" I mean going from the consistent, repeatable ball address cue position to the NISL position. It doesn't matter whether he is using a manual pivot or the new face turning method to find the NISL (although, curiously, Monty is using both the 1/2 tip pivot AND the face turning at the same time). The point is that different pivots are required for different shots. Why that happens is the big question, but that is beyond the scope of this video.