Aiming systems: Why the problems?

Hello!
I have been reading all the threads on CTE/PRO ONE. I have never taken lessons from stan. I purchased his DVD and in two days was able to pickup on his teaching on aiming system. I'm a BCA instuctor and proud member of the SPF family. Like randy said, as instructors we have to know a lot of aiming systems to teach our students. Everyone see visual perceptions different. The pivot in CTE is a small movement. If you find yourself moving the back of your cue at a wide margin, you are not pivoting from your aim line or you started the cuetip on the wrong side of the cueball at the set position. Stan said a 49 degree angle cut shot is difficult to perceive with CTE. He is right. I use SAM aiming system on those shots. Much easier to see. Your basic fundamentals should be solid. The CTE/PRO ONE is a great system. If you are missing a lot of shots using CTE/PRO ONE, try setting up a ghostball behind your objectball and notice the aiming line to pocket the objectball. Now when you go back and perform CTE, pivot your cuestick from your aim point on object ball to the aim line you seen through the ghostball. Don't forget to remove the ghost ball before you shoot the shot. A friend would be of great help in moving the ghost ball for you while in the set position at cueball address. Remember left-handed players pivot from right to left. Reverse for right-handed players. Good luck.

Ken
BCA Pool Instructor
 
I about laughed myself silly reading some of the blast from the past =) Thanks Cameron... I noted JB was 2 balls better using some mysterious system back then and I think he said he got 2 balls better using CTE so man he must be hard to handle now =)

On a side note what does 2 balls better mean I'd rather have a definite answer on that than what aiming system anyone thinks is the best. I think the best system is the 1 that works for you. I will be getting Stan's DVD just because I think there is something that can be gained from it even if I don't use the whole thing. I was hoping to catch a lesson with him as well but so far my schedule isn't allowing it.
 
Cameron Smith said:
I'm not sure what you mean, I've only been around pool for about 6 going on 7 years. And only 5 of that has been on the forums.

The first time I heard about ghost ball was players mentioning it by name on these forums. I figured out pretty quickly what it referred to, no one was antagonistic about it though if that's what you mean.
Click to expand...

GB has had to be around for a long time I would think. Curious if when it was first mentioned was it accompanied by so-called outrageous claims.
 
My stance on aiming systems prior to meeting Hal was none. I skipped 99% of the threads on them on RSB. If I ever said anything about aiming then it was repeating something I read in a book or magazine. My mind was pretty firmly closed to anything "new" about aiming. I figured I had it down and didn't need to know anything else.

After meeting Hal my whole perspective changed and I began to wonder what else I didn't know about playing pool.

Basically I learned that it's silly to be close minded about things because it's always possible that someone else has figured out a better way.

An example: I was tasked with doing a replica of the Fellini case. I beat my head against the wall for weeks trying to figure out the pattern and do it the way that it was originally done. Finally I got it and once I did I was unhappy because it was not a good way to do it in my opinion. So I spent the next few weeks figuring out a better way to it and I did. Then a year later I figured out an even better way.

if I were to travel back in time and show Bob Hemphil my way then I am sure he would agree that it's better and would have implemented it on all his cases.

That's how I now look at aiming systems or anything related to playing pool. When someone says that they have invented or discovered something then I want to try it because it might just be the thing that works to take my game to the next level.

I don't play pool for fun. I play pool to win matches in tournaments, get the trophies and the prize money, win the stakes and get the good feeling that comes with it.

If I play badly and miss shots that I should make, especially when they are critical then I feel badly, am angry and depressed.

So for me it's important that I have done all that I can to be the best player I can be. I have to go in feeling confident that at that moment I am as prepared as I can be.

I know that some of you feel this way too. You are competitors and you want to win when you play. So I can't understand that anyone would look down on something that is designed to help people play better. I can understand not wanting to do it if you are happy with where your game is at and you feel super confident. But why ruin it for others and cast doubt?

Unless you absolutely with 100% certainty know that something is dangerous, and what I mean by dangerous is that it will cause users to do the wrong thing, miss balls and lose matches, why not just leave it alone and let the people who want to mess around with it do so in peace?

I agree that it's hard to look at someone expressing joy at having found something to help their game without wanting to take them down a peg. Especially if they say things like it's the nuts and I can't miss etc......

But that is just a person who is having a good time playing pool. Let them have it unless they start 50 threads on the subject.

I mean seriously, Colin Colenso posted a potting (pocketing) challenge and if I remember correctly Dave Segal posted the highest score. No one was talking about what aiming system was being used by each person. We were all having fun comparing our scores (not me because I just made a funny video as my entry).

Isn't that what it should all be about? Having fun while collectively getting better as players? Shouldn't that be the purpose of a pool forum beyond sharing the news?

I have some very exciting news about how to stroke which I am very hesitant to share as I don't want to be attacked over it. The person teaching me is a well known coach here and has several champions under his belt. But his method of teaching is not textbook. I can see his information igniting debates similar to the aiming system wars on a smaller scale. There was a time when I wouldn't have thought twice about it. Now I probably won't release this information because the last thing I would want is for the criticism from people who won't even take it to the table to make it's way back to him.

I hope that this forum can make it to a state where no one is ever afraid to share something that they think will help pool players everywhere. And by that I don't mean simply knocking something.

I think that this forum is the best one for pool. I think that www.cuetable.com is the best one for learning pool. Any major negativity brings it down and wastes valuable energy. Energy that could go into becoming better players and helping others to become better players.

So my plea is for people to think twice before they knock someone else's experience and efforts. Just don't do it unless there is some really good reason.
 
I found the aiming threads interesting and informative. I was originally unaware, then opposed to learning an aiming system, but changed my mind due to the feedback.
 
Luvthegame said:
It's been around as long as pool has been played, the only difference is that no one tried to package it and sell it.
Click to expand...


Not exactly. Someone came up with it, I have seen references to the GB in books more than a hundred years old.

But there have certainly been a plethora of devices made and sold under the premise that using them will teach the user how to "see" the ghost ball.

Plenty of effort has been put into these devices with the most extravagant and expensive being the Spider laser aim trainer which projects and actual disk of light onto the table where the ghostball would be.

I would bet that you could count around 20 such devices if you tried.
 
JB Cases said:
And I can see that what I say now is exactly what I said then.
Click to expand...

pro-player10-24-2003, 07:48 PM
Before anyone defends the ghost ball method anymore, try what I said to try in one of my other posts.

As for other aiming systems, yes, I believe they can be used as a crutch for amatuers and beginners. For intermediate and above, aiming systems become more of a distraction than a tool. Most professional players admit they do not use aiming systems, most of them never did use an aiming system. It's all feel, memory, experience, etc.

If a pool teacher can get his students to shoot the CB exactly to wherever they aim each time, that is much more important than teaching them how to aim at cut shots. If a player cannot get the CB to go where he aims at consistently, teaching an aiming system is pointless. Sure he knows how to aim, but the question is can he execute?
 
JB Cases said:
Not exactly. Someone came up with it, I have seen references to the GB in books more than a hundred years old.

But there have certainly been a plethora of devices made and sold under the premise that using them will teach the user how to "see" the ghost ball.

Plenty of effort has been put into these devices with the most extravagant and expensive being the Spider laser aim trainer which projects and actual disk of light onto the table where the ghostball would be.

I would bet that you could count around 20 such devices if you tried.
Click to expand...

You are correct! Probably more than 20.
 
Luvthegame said:
pro-player10-24-2003, 07:48 PM
Before anyone defends the ghost ball method anymore, try what I said to try in one of my other posts.

As for other aiming systems, yes, I believe they can be used as a crutch for amatuers and beginners. For intermediate and above, aiming systems become more of a distraction than a tool. Most professional players admit they do not use aiming systems, most of them never did use an aiming system. It's all feel, memory, experience, etc.

If a pool teacher can get his students to shoot the CB exactly to wherever they aim each time, that is much more important than teaching them how to aim at cut shots. If a player cannot get the CB to go where he aims at consistently, teaching an aiming system is pointless. Sure he knows how to aim, but the question is can he execute?
Click to expand...

Stevie Moore. CJ Wiley. Bustamante. SVB. These are a few top players who say that they use an aiming system.

The point of this thread is that all methods are valid. NO ONE comes up with or advocates any technique that is truly detrimental to playing good pool.

The end result is whether you are making the shots or not.

If you were a Scrabble player and you were having trouble remembering all the three letter words and I offered you an obscure memory improvement technique then it would be with the goal of helping you to become a better Scrabble player. If you tried and it didn't work then what have you lost? Nothing but the time you put into it. But if it worked for you then you gained a lot.
 
JB Cases said:
Stevie Moore. CJ Wiley. Bustamante. SVB. These are a few top players who say that they use an aiming system.

The point of this thread is that all methods are valid. NO ONE comes up with or advocates any technique that is truly detrimental to playing good pool.

The end result is whether you are making the shots or not.

If you were a Scrabble player and you were having trouble remembering all the three letter words and I offered you an obscure memory improvement technique then it would be with the goal of helping you to become a better Scrabble player. If you tried and it didn't work then what have you lost? Nothing but the time you put into it. But if it worked for you then you gained a lot.
Click to expand...

Watson I believe this is the correct answer.
 
Hey JoeyA got to say you are a brave man for opening this thread. On the other hand the responses so far have been well thought out before posting..maybe the thought of being reprimanded or ripped apart verbally.
I really believe that most of us want to rely on something that brings confidence, regardless of the method. And are willing to at least try another system. Bringing up the point, that everything that works , works to a point. Then , survival kicks in and we go to what we know. Maybe I'm wrong in this and if so it's just a thought. I will continue to study each one until I can go no further.. Got to say so far the Pro One is one of the most intriguing. It will hold my attention for awhile.
 
Fear the RED REP!

Falcon Eddie said:
Hey JoeyA got to say you are a brave man for opening this thread. On the other hand the responses so far have been well thought out before posting..maybe the thought of being reprimanded or ripped apart verbally.
I really believe that most of us want to rely on something that brings confidence, regardless of the method. And are willing to at least try another system. Bringing up the point, that everything that works , works to a point. Then , survival kicks in and we go to what we know. Maybe I'm wrong in this and if so it's just a thought. I will continue to study each one until I can go no further.. Got to say so far the Pro One is one of the most intriguing. It will hold my attention for awhile.
Click to expand...

Eddie,
Sometimes, you have to be the better man and extending the olive branch is one way to do it even if you believe you haven't done the wrong that created the problem.

The posters so far have all met my expectations and have restrained themselves fairly well. I guess it's the fear of that omnipotent red rep that I possess that they are afraid of. :smile:

The truth is that I have faith in my fellow posters to make things right, however I am disappointed at the absence of some of those involved in these sometimes heated and controversial debates.
 
JoeyA said:
Eddie,
Sometimes, you have to be the better man and extending the olive branch is one way to do it even if you believe you haven't done the wrong that created the problem.

The posters so far have all met my expectations and have restrained themselves fairly well. I guess it's the fear of that omnipotent red rep that I possess that they are afraid of. :smile:

The truth is that I have faith in my fellow posters to make things right, however I am disappointed at the absence of some of those involved in these sometimes heated and controversial debates.
Click to expand...

Hi Joey!

As promised, here's my participation in this thread. I do hope that you didn't target that sentence in blue at me. Yes, I did post this morning in another thread, but it was one of those "flurry of the fingers" things that didn't require much thought, and it was something I could do on a 5-minute break.

Back on topic, I think the following apply when discussing aiming systems:

  1. The topic of aiming systems themselves is controversial. It sounds obvious by virtue of the heat that naturally ensues anytime the phrase "aiming system" is brought up on these boards, but think about this for a second. Why? Why are aiming systems -- a way of systemizing "aim" so it's repeatable and more accurately reproducible -- controversial? (You'd think that everyone would be jumping onboard aiming systems. Heck, just "do" these steps, and the ball goes in the hole! Don'tcha just love this cheat-code?) I thought long and hard about this one, and the conclusion I came to, is this: because it offends our sense of creativity, that's why. The very idea that a maestro of our sport -- say, Efren, or Mosconi -- could be using an "assembly line" aiming "system" that if you follow these steps, it pockets the ball -- offends the respect we have for these maestros. They are no longer the high-level talents we put on a pedestal, but rather "practitioners" of a Wal-Mart stick-figure assembly diagram. The creativity, perception, magic, mystique, and "wow factor" just went out the window -- or, at least got severely diminished.

  2. Unjustified / unsubstantiated sales pitches. You know my thoughts on this one. This is the only thing that will get my active involvement in an aiming system thread. And somehow, I think some aiming system advocates know this. ("Psst! If you want to drag Sean out of the woodwork, just say that if you switch to CTE, you'll go up 'x' number of balls to Bustamante level." :) ) All kidding aside, there's no shortage of exuberance when it comes to aiming systems. For the beginner or the average Joe/Jane, to be able to take this most complex aspect of playing pool, and systemize / package it, is very powerful to them. "Oh my gosh, before, I was just Joe-banger, barely able to run 3 balls, and after I learned CTE, I can now run-out. Thank you SO much CTE!" We've seen it before. And you know, I personally find this heart-warming, when I hear of a player that's discovered newfound excitement for our beloved sport. I love to read about a player that feels on top of the world, because he/she ran-out and won the team championship for his/her team.

    What gets me, though, is the active trolling and used-car-salesmanship that goes on. The literal *promise* that CTE is much better than all other aiming "systems" or techniques that came before it, and it will be the "new standard" by which all pros will elevate to. And I've actually had CTE advocates PM me and tell me that if I'm a 100-ball runner now, "look out" if I learn CTE -- I'll be Bustamante speed! Or, that CTE is much better than the system I use -- which is basically a "catalog" method of aiming based on the Back-of-Ball technique -- shooting from my subconscious, from rote, or from "feel," if you will. In other words, rather than effortlessly sink into the "zone" as I do (which is largely responsible for some of my high runs), I should instead "always stay" with my conscious mind involved, following the steps of CTE, because this way, the conscious/analytical mind is "always in control." (This guy has obviously never experienced being in the zone, and therefore needs a system to follow.) The active trolling and used-car-salesmanship is what gets a lot of the CTE advocates in trouble, because: 1.) folks are already sensitized to it, and 2.) they don't see how "clan-ish" it looks.

  3. We have a bunch of troublemakers on this site. Yep, I dare say it, but we do. Now I'm not talking about Dr. Dave, or Lou, or PJ, although they have, at times, contributed to the stress. No, I'm talking about the ones that have nothing to add to the discussion to help calm it down, so they instead incite flames by pouring gas on it. Those that swoop down like a kamikaze, let loose with a nice pile of diarrhea, pull up and out of the dive, and then resume back on a high perch, ready for another go. The problem is that the folks targeted by these piles of diarrhea react to this, and react very negatively. The conflagration feeds itself.

  4. We have some folks that don't know when to quit. There's a point at which each side of the debate has said their piece (and peace, for that matter), but for some unknown reason, the debate rages on, and on, and on, and on... I think there is a point in these "aiming system" debates where a stalemate, or impasse, is reached. You can go no farther. This is common in debating circles -- it's *going* to happen to even the finest debaters, especially when they're evenly matched. The correct thing to do is to acknowledge what each side has said, maybe summarize them, and move on. If there is no moving on -- nothing else to talk about -- that's where the thread should end, with a summary of both sides. This way, when someone new wants to look for this information, it's easily readable and retrievable. Have you tried looking on AZB for CTE information? The CTE advocates will say (in an "OB-1" ;) Kenobe voice), "use the Search, Luke!" Have you ever tried looking for CTE information? It's a friggin' mess! The state these threads are left in -- if they'd not been removed by Mr. Wilson because someone got out of hand, which is often the case -- the thread is otherwise just a mess and hard to follow. You have to wade through a haystack to retrieve that needle of information you're looking for.
However, things are looking up. The first start to addressing a problem, is the acknowledgment that the problem exists, and taking the first step to work around it. I think this thread is that first step.

Now, I may've offended some people with the things I write above, as many will recognize the particular situations I talk about, even though I don't give specifics. The truth is, I'm not here to offend, but merely to participate and point-out those very things that cause the ruckus we experience with aiming system threads. If "you" (the royal you, not you personally, Joey) recognize one of the situations/scenarios I wrote above, it's not that I'm calling you out. I'm just cataloging those events that I feel are "exhibit A" of why aiming system threads go south.

Thoughts?
-Sean
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top