A reality check on aiming systems of all kinds

[cookie man]

First off. i didn't claim CTE was a more center pocket system then others.
Second, there has been no false advertising about CTE. You and others, that can't even perform CTE. that have made one claim or the other have all been disproved on here and in Stan's book. There is really nothing left for you guys. The complete system is out in the open. Let's face it PJ, you've never gotten it out of your head that CTE is not a fractional system, and it's not a fractional system. Every single claim you make about it is false. Just because you say them a thousand times doesn't make them true. Learn CTE or just keep making false claims like you have for over 20 years.

I'd like to slightly change my answer PJ. You see since the book came out i now know CTE is the best, most accurately described, detailed, explained, pictured, center pocket system on Earth. You got me. I'll go on record right here and say it is undoubtedly the best system ever.

 

[JB Cases]

Far be it from me to correct anything taught by the great Efren.

Here is how I think about position: While standing up I think about pocketing the ball, dead center in the pocket (usually). Then I think about what is possible from there as far as rail targets are concerned, then I think about speed. I imagine the whole shot playing out very vividly in my mind, speed, tip position in extreme detail and the whole shot playing out. This all happens before I step in. After I step in, I'm not allowed to change any of this.

I step in and go down and now all the cueball stuff is forgotten. The only thing I focus on now is to accurately hit the part of the cueball I want and to pocket the object ball. The speed has allready been determined in my mind beforehand, and now cannot be changed. Especialy important since I hit most shots with sidespin, unless there is a special reason not to. I use pullback length for speed control, but other methods are possible ofc. The same is true for safeties. I figure, we are pool players, not carom players, we're experts at controlling the direction of the object ball. We should play to our strenghts. A perfect object ball path usually ensures the cueball does what it's supposed to, and if not, can in itself often get a good safety. I was shit at carom for a while, because I kept focusing on the cueball. Focusing only on the object ball when down ower the ball helped tremendously, and also the fact that I put more emphasis on the object ball path during the visualization when standing up.

We imagine the elaborate thing happening while standing up and when we go down, we focus only on hitting the object ball the way we want, the cueball is taken care of allready by tip position and should not be in our minds at all. Thinking about the path of the cueball while down can often ruin the shot, and is a break of the routine. Tip position, aim, that's it when down.

I don't know that you are correcting Efren per se because Efren wasn't really "teaching" us. He was coaching in the sense of telling where the cueball should end up but other than stepping in with a tip-position command when he thought we were addressing it wrong he didn't offer any other instruction. It was all in fun for an experiment I wanted to do. The interesting part was that Efren could tell simply by ball address that we were NOT going to be able to get the cue ball where he wanted it to go. It did illustrate the gap between what we thought was going to happen and what would actually happen and how important small changes in tip position are.

 

[cookie man]

Then why did you mention it?

pj <- the usual tapdance
chgo

Why not mention the best center pocket system ever. There is no doubt in my mind Efren and Busti use it in one form or the other.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Why not mention the best center pocket system ever.

More tapdancing (you CTE guys sure have busy feet)...

Why did you mention that it's a "center pocket system" if that's a common trait among systems?

There is no doubt in my mind Efren and Busti use it in one form or the other.

lol

I hear Jesus used it too.

pj
chgo

 

[JB Cases]

Every system is a "center pocket" system. The claim that CTE is more so than others is false advertising.

The only really unique thing about CTE is its insistence on advertising falsely despite being called on it repeatedly.

pj
chgo

Good because NO ONE has claimed that it is more so. When I, for example, say that, FOR ME, CTE is more accurate then what I mean is this, easier to use and covers more shots accurately in my experience.

When Stan says center pocket system he is referring to what he says is a slight overcut that compensates for contact-induced-throw. I personally have not verified that to be the case but I can say that when I use CTE correctly I get to a shot line that allows for a ball to be pocketed center pocket or very close to it with a well struck cueball.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

When Stan says center pocket system he is referring to what he says is a slight overcut that compensates for contact-induced-throw.

Which, of course, is how everybody uses every system. In other words, it's not the system.

pj
chgo

 

[JB Cases]

Predictable dodge. That doesn't make it "more objective" - or even "better" - than other systems.

pj
chgo

And it doesn't make it the same or less than other systems either. Your insistence on what something "is" or "is not" does not make it true or not true. The fact is that we are not interested in anything but performance results. If I work at a nuclear plant and I a told to push these buttons in this order to get that result and I do that then all is well with the world. If I push those buttons and don't get the result then I find out why. Someone else somewhere else figured out how to make the buttons work to get the desired results. I don't have to understand nuclear fission to follow directions to get the right results.

If you want to believe that ghost ball and cte are the same and categorize them both as estimation methods reliant on the subconcious then go ahead. If you want to believe that your Fidget Til You Get It method is the same as CTE then go ahead and believe that. As the saying goes you can have your opinion but not your own facts.

You can never win a shot making contest with a CTE user of equal rating as you. Never. Why? Because your fidget method isn't good enough to find the right shot lines for the range of shots that CTE covers. It's that simple really.

Now pool isn't all about shot making so if you were to play a set against another player your speed then you would win your fair share of games because even if the CTE user is a better shot maker he might be deficient in other areas where you are better. If then you improved your aiming or he/she improved in other areas then the one who improved would move up in skill and rating.

 

[JB Cases]

Which, of course, is how everybody uses every system. In other words, it's not the system.

pj
chgo

Really? Please show me where Ghost Ball uses an overcut? It doesn't without SPECIAL instructions on what throw/cling are and how to compensate for them.

CTE has no such instruction. ZERO. It brings the shooter to the position that has the overcut built in - follow the directions and the shot line is given and the shooter gets down and shoots. With more accuracy than the guestimation ghost ball demands.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Please show me where Ghost Ball uses an overcut?

On every shot with throw that's made with it. Hint: it's not the system.

CTE ... brings the shooter to the position that has the overcut built in

Nonsensical false advertising as usual. Not that I expect you to understand that.

pj
chgo

 

[BC21]

..... We just had an average amateur testify to making 46 in a row i believe. ....

Come on Dave..."average" amateur? I know I played horribly down there in Florida, but you weren't exactly playing your best either. Lol.

I think the average amateur has a fargo around 500 or a little higher. I don't see those players running multiple racks during short races to 5 or 7 in 8ball or 9ball, or running out 9 or 10 balls in a one pocket game.

So I should at least rank a little better than average. Lol. Of course, all you have to go by is that one bad couple of hours we played. I can honestly say the best thing about that was the company, not the level of pool that was played. But it happens. We all have ups and downs. We all have to deal with regression to the mean, where we perform at our best about as often as we perform at our worst, and the rest of the time we are playing at our average level.

Just giving you a hard time. And I am 100% certain that I shot all 46 of those spot shots with my nose directly behind the cb, lined straight to a halfball aim. No CTE. Well, actually all CTE! Lol (but not your CTE. I used one line of aim, Center cb to Edge of Object ball)
.

 

[JC]

You didn't respond to what I wrote. You set up a "no-aim" shot, essentially, then said "there's no aim, just mechanics". Now setup a more ambiguously aimed shot and tell the player "it's just mechanics".

My point wasn't about aiming per se, it was about mechanics. Of course these skills develop simultaneously in the progression of a pool player but way too often, the rule rather than the exception, people have soon played enough to know exactly where to aim yet their mechanics let them down as fundamental problems hold them back.

So I should be able to set up a more ambiguous shot and have about the same success if my theory is correct right?

Can you suggest a good shot for illustration purposes? Back cuts are tough to aim for many. In this case aiming deficiencies may multiply the problems of bad fundamentals but can't be overcome with aiming alone.

 

[JB Cases]

Come on Dave..."average" amateur? I know I played horribly down there in Florida, but you weren't exactly playing your best either. Lol.

I think the average amateur has a fargo around 500 or a little higher. I don't see those players running multiple racks during short races to 5 or 7 in 8ball or 9ball, or running out 9 or 10 balls in a one pocket game.

So I should at least rank a little better than average. Lol. Of course, all you have to go by is that one bad couple of hours we played. I can honestly say the best thing about that was the company, not the level of pool that was played. But it happens. We all have ups and downs. We all have to deal with regression to the mean, where we perform at our best about as often as we perform at our worst, and the rest of the time we are playing at our average level.

Just giving you a hard time. And I am 100% certain that I shot all 46 of those spot shots with my nose directly behind the cb, lined straight to a halfball aim. No CTE. Well, actually all CTE! Lol (but not your CTE. I used one line of aim, Center cb to Edge of Object ball)
.

Average is about 600 speed if the ratings are between 400 and 800. The current highest rating is about 829 I think and the lowest I have seen is like 360. If we use those ratings with no other data since clearly Mike Page would be be able to give an accurate world average, then 595 is the center which would mean 600 is slightly above average. It's hard for me to think of myself as just average but the ratings are what they are.

Don't know what your rating is or if you have one. But Dave's point stands regardless, if you can do 46 spot shots in a row there is no reason to believe that someone rated way higher than you can't also do it to a much higher level.

 

[JB Cases]

My point wasn't about aiming per se, it was about mechanics. Of course these skills develop simultaneously in the progression of a pool player but way too often, the rule rather than the exception, people have soon played enough to know exactly where to aim yet their mechanics let them down as fundamental problems hold them back.

So I should be able to set up a more ambiguous shot and have about the same success if my theory is correct right?

Can you suggest a good shot for illustration purposes? Back cuts are tough to aim for many. In this case aiming deficiencies may multiply the problems of bad fundamentals but can't be overcome with aiming alone.

Back cuts are exactly an issue where improvement in pocketing can be found almost immediately with a good aiming system.

One should not presume that fundamentals are equally bad every shot. You could make a video of me only stroking horribly and conclude that I could never run a single rack. Conversely you could make a video of me shooting shots perfectly and think that I ought to be a top professional.

 

[JC]

Average is about 600 speed if the ratings are between 400 and 800. The current highest rating is about 829 I think and the lowest I have seen is like 360. If we use those ratings with no other data since clearly Mike Page would be be able to give an accurate world average, then 595 is the center which would mean 600 is slightly above average. It's hard for me to think of myself as just average but the ratings are what they are.

Don't know what your rating is or if you have one. But Dave's point stands regardless, if you can do 46 spot shots in a row there is no reason to believe that someone rated way higher than you can't also do it to a much higher level.

The average numerically may be 600 but the mean speed is much lower. If you have a 600 fargo you are rated higher than almost 90% of all players with fargo ratings. And since many of the top players are pros you are not an average amateur at 600.

At the last Western BCA regional 8 ball tournament there were 1300 amateur player there and only around 100 had a fargo rating over 600

 

[JB Cases]

On every shot with throw that's made with it. Hint: it's not the system.

Nonsensical false advertising as usual. Not that I expect you to understand that.

pj
chgo

On every shot with throw that's made with it. Hint: it's not the system.

Nonsensical false advertising as usual. Not that I expect you to understand that.

pj
chgo

Really, then disprove it.

Stan says it does. I follow Stan's instructions and get to a shot line that works without having to consciously estimate for throw like ghost ball requires.

So either cte forces the subconscious mind to always adopt the perfect amount of compensation or the ctr users are all lying to you about not consciously estimating and adjusting.

If the former then you can't prove it and if so then we default to the practical. If the practical effect is that following the directions leads to a shot line that is correct when the cue ball is struck properly then it is fair to say that cte objectively leads to the ghost ball/overcut position that works.

Conversely if one uses ghostball and relies on the subconscious to choose the right amount of compensation and the result is that the shooter doesn't land on that shot line consistently then it's fair to say that the ghost ball system does not inform the subconscious objectively enough.

So no, your claim is neither testable nor practically important to this discussion. We aren't launching rockets here. We are talking about how to aim and what works consistently well. Cte works considerably better than ghost ball and the practical effect is that it works to allow the shooter to get to the shot line using clear instructions objectively without consciously adjusting for contact induced throw.

So, since that is the result then the "advertising" is correct. Sorry that you don't like it and that you're hung up on this for what 10-15 years now but maybe you should consider a new hobby, like playing pool instead of talking about playing it. While you knock and nitpick many others are learning cte and other aiming systems and enjoying the benefits.

Whatever your intended goal here is the net effect is that the longer these threads go the more people get interested to see what the fuss is about. So while you might dissuade a few people your continued actions on the topic of aiming systems leads to more people taking an interest and finding their way to CTE and other objective aiming methods.

 

[JB Cases]

The average numerically may be 600 but the mean speed is much lower. If you have a 600 fargo you are rated higher than almost 90% of all players with fargo ratings. And since many of the top players are pros you are not an average amateur at 600.

At the last Western BCA regional 8 ball tournament there were 1300 amateur player there and only around 100 had a fargo rating over 600

That makes sense also. I would think that in just about any popular sport that has competitive opportunities from beginner to professional the broadest number of participants would tend to be in the lower range of rated skill.

Now I feel better, a little.

 

[JB Cases]

Which, of course, is how everybody uses every system. In other words, it's not the system.

pj
chgo

No that's not how everyone uses every system. Ghost ball for example, when taught properly includes the information on throw and specifically instructs the user to compensate for that effect.

In CTE the user is not told to compensate for CIT and yet the net effect is that the user lands on a line that works with no other deliberate compensation needed.

So at least for CTE it is the clear deliberate conscious and objective use of the system that produces this line consistently and correctly.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I follow Stan's instructions and get to a shot line that works without having to consciously estimate for throw like ghost ball requires.

Stan's instructions consist primarily of subconscious estimations - that's pretty much the definition of his "perceptions". Sorry you can't see that (although maybe that's helpful to you), but it doesn't change the fact.

pj
chgo

 

[JC]

No that's not how everyone uses every system. Ghost ball for example, when taught properly includes the information on throw and specifically instructs the user to compensate for that effect.

In CTE the user is not told to compensate for CIT and yet the net effect is that the user lands on a line that works with no other deliberate compensation needed.

So at least for CTE it is the clear deliberate conscious and objective use of the system that produces this line consistently and correctly.

How does it do that? The system must have a way of compensating on the aim line for CIT because it's there no matter how you aim. These types of claims that appear to defy physics need a closer examination and are what lead to nay saying.

 

[BC21]

Average is about 600 speed if the ratings are between 400 and 800. The current highest rating is about 829 I think and the lowest I have seen is like 360. If we use those ratings with no other data since clearly Mike Page would be be able to give an accurate world average, then 595 is the center which would mean 600 is slightly above average. It's hard for me to think of myself as just average but the ratings are what they are.

Don't know what your rating is or if you have one. But Dave's point stands regardless, if you can do 46 spot shots in a row there is no reason to believe that someone rated way higher than you can't also do it to a much higher level.

I am a 613. Amateur is considered below about 730. So discount anything above that as pro level. That makes the average amateur around 500. Congrats...you are above average among amateur pool players. The Fargo app is very cool. It even gives you the percentage of games you've won against different ranked players. The blue is win percentage, red is loss percentage. That probably says more than the fargo rating alone.