I am always eager to see your videos. I can watch them over and over and always learn something new.
"Aiming Systems" are Junk, DO the Work!
- Thread starter Bobkitty
- Start date
I am always eager to see your videos. I can watch them over and over and always learn something new.
Do the fractional video, Stan. I'd love to see it. You continually talk about gaps and tweeners in fractional aiming. Show me. Show us all. I'm really interested because you say this 5-line system is better than my system, even though you don't know my system. If it's better I'd love to see it. Show me the proof.
The proof to me is that it can be easily used for every shot. Additional proof is that 5 simple lines are easier to work with than dissecting the Cb for more 8 or even 16 lines. That's crazy IMO. It is still unbelievable to me that you think fractional aiming of any kind is void of gaps but if that's what you want to think, be my guest. I don't care. If I'm gonna do fractions, I'm mentally skipping the 8ths and totally forgetting about the 16ths, the 32nds and the 64ths.
Stan Shuffett
Your CTE method has been around for many years. Traditional fractional aiming (the "Quarters" system) has been around for many decades. Poolology was introduced 7 months ago and it's creating quite a wave. So if there's any piggybacking (wave riding) going on, it's not me. My simple little fractional book has traction in spite of you or CTE because it is much better than traditional fractional aiming, and that's not just my opinion.
I think your work is fine but it doesn't lend itself in any as an every shot routine. That's a huge negative.
How in the heck can it be better than traditional fractional aiming when it's too cumbersome to employ on every shot. I doubt that you use it 10% 20% of the time. There is no way that a pro would ever go through that rigamuro for aiming but pros, specifically snooker players are on record as employing traditional fractions as their method of aiming.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
I have no doubt that the fractional system you're going to demonstrate can be used for every shot, as long as the player using it has enough experience estimating which basic quarter aim to use, and whether or not the sho is slightly thicker or thinner from there or quite a bit thinner or thicker. It's guesswork. I could be wrong, but that's how we learn -- be being shown a better way of doing something. We just have to be open-minded enough to accept the proof, which I am.
I'm looking forward to the lesson.
Fractions have been around for a century or more. There's not much new that I can add.
But Im positive that I can throw a wrinkle or two in, especially on the visual side of things.,Nothing that Ive created, just two or three little nuggets that I have picked up along the way that some will appreciate.,
I'm not being negative toward fractions. I have a very special affinity for them in that fractions helped fertilize my mind for CTE.......
Go fractions! Hell, fractions are good knowledge.
Stan Shuffett
You are 100% correct about the system not covering every shot. It works for cut shots as thin as about 70°. Beyond that is a simple matter of experience. And I don't expect any professional player to run out and buy my book. Lol. I didn't write the book to help pros become more consistent shot makers. They are pros because they already more consistent than millions of other pool players. I wrote the book to help those that aren't pros.
Snooker players are often taught via fractional aiming, but the method is much more difficult to master than the method I've introduced. Of course there are no diamonds on a snooker table, but a guy in Germany has told me he practices my system by placing little white stickers on the rails of his snooker table where the diamonds would be.
You are correct that I use my system about 20% of the time on a normal basis. Because I play well enough to not need it the other 80% of the time. Certain shots cone up that just don't immediately look right, so I employ the system. The intent of Poolology is to allow a player to develop a sense of feel/intuition, eventually breaking free from the dependency of using any systematic method for pocketing balls.
Yeah but can fractions supplant FEEL touted by all the pinball wizard real players on pool forums?
Where do I find the best instructional verbalization for a pure "feel" method of making balls?
First of all.....CTE is easier than feel once in place. I would not even describe CTE as a system from a proficiency standpoint. It's see align with no guess or tweeners or adjustments. . A relationship is seen and the player falls on the shot knowing what to see and how to align to CCB. CTE is a complete way for visually playing the game. Pool is visual. CTE maximizes one's vision, shot after shot after shot.......to the point that it eventually becomes boring.
Pool inherently has a family of 5 lines and that's all that the brain needs.....Any more than that is a negative to the process. Technically, in CTE, the line family consists of 4 members, a couple of which can handle nearly every shot on the table.
What I'm gonna share is a fractional system that can be used as effortlessly as feel once in place.
It's almost deadly for many bar tables. The quarters is great info whether a player uses it or not.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
You got me Grasshopper! The problem with fractions is that one's vision is in a decent place for seeing things but not in a perfect place. A decent location represents a block for real aiming that occurs with the edge of the cue ball. The thing about feel aiming is that it's close to CTE aiming but close don't count. What I mean by being close is that the edge of the cue ball dances all around the object ball aim points with no choreography of where the edge is really aimed. There's no description for where the edge lands and that's why no one can explain feel aiming. The damned Cb edge can't be corralled!
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
The ETA, ETB, and ETC lines are the exact same visual lines used for a 3/4 aim left, straight in, and a 3/4 aim right using fractions. How does an average player (new to CTE) know which of these lines to use, other than through personal experience or trial and error? Also how does this average player know if the 15 or 30 or 45 or 60 is thick or thin, other than through personal experience or trial and error?
I believe you're right about the quarters being great info for any player, and I think your video lesson would benefit many players.
Maybe you should miss on purpose every now and then to add a little spice to your game. "Boring" is not good.
:grin-square:
I love the wording here...."dances"....."choreography". Very good writing. :smile:
Description: The edge of the OB (contact point) always lands halfway between center OB and the fractional aim point for any cut shot, as viewed from the CB's perspective. If you are aiming for a 1/2 ball it, the contact point is at the 3/4, etc... But like you, I think the contact point (though actually a patch area on the ball's circumference, not just one point) is difficult to visualize and hit with consistency, at least for average players trying to get better.
No, they are NOT the same lines. If the CTE lines were congruent with fractional lines , it wouldn't be CTE and consequently CTE would be cooked....done, not palatable.
I get visually bored! Nothing else to figure out, visually. Doesn't mean that I don't miss.
My shaking arm makes miss plenty enough. Just miserably bored cause I spent a lifetime working on my vision and alignment. Now, I don't knows what to do with myself. I gotta get back to playing after I get this book done., shaky arm and all.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
The edge ain't got no consistent home with fractions. Too many tweeners and tick to tick combinations to even think about. Would make your head spin. The edge is homeless, never really knowing where it's gonna wipe its feet. It's here,,it's there it's everywhere and it's destination can't be defined from shot to shot, not even in CTE because the aim is visual. The real way to aim is not with CCB but with the CB edges.
Stan Shuffett
I just mean visualizing a line from edge of CB to "A" OB, or from center CB to edge of OB, is no more or less objective than visualizing a line from center CB to the 3/4 fractional aim point.
Anyhow, getting back to playing sounds like a good plan Stan. If your book contains a lot of the colorful words you've used in posts here on AZ, I bet it'll be a great read.:smile:
Yeaaah! But, angles are invisible. Nobody can even tell if a straight in is really a straight-in.
There's no way to read exact angles. I mean exact angles ffor Cb OB relations. Just close won't cut it.
The problem with your description for fractions is those shots iworks only on exact angles and no one can read exact angles without tools for measuring exact angles.
If every shot was fractional as if in precise center to quarter or precise center to edge, there'd be no need for cte. In CTE every shot can be made with a 15 or a 30 along with a known CCB. You take your 14 and 30, fractionally, and promise to use it every shot and I will take my 15 and 30 and use it every shot on my 10 footer or even a snooker table and you will get mauled, hypothetically. You can't ventured to the tweeners. I have no teeeners.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited: