Aiming Voodoo Video
- Thread starter JB Cases
- Start date
I do. As I am coming down into the shot I put my tip down so that it points to the left edge of the cue ball. Then I pivot to center ball. Then I shoot.
I think I will do this test again but I will lay down a grid of 1" squares so that we can accurately plot the bridge hand movement shot to shot.
Also, as I have said many times I do not think that I am doing CTE the "right" way or the textbook way. This is one reason that I am so excited to get Stan's DVD. If there is such a thing as the "proper" way to do it then Stan's method has to be very close to it.
What ever gets you there. LOL
After Stan's DVD, there will not be the fog surrounding CTE....I presume.
I keep waiting for the untold "Rest of the story" and you have shared openly what you know works for you.
If you subscribed to double distance or GB aiming, then you wouldn't have missed the balls that you missed for you would have consciously (or sub)
corrected your aim line.
I still find it hard to accept that CTE works for those that after the pivot, don't know where the GB is....for it should be where they are pointing/aiming at....alas perception is everything.
I think that you will also like 90/90 aiming and their variations with or without pivoting.
Merry Christmas to you and yours.
FWIW I have run 98 balls in straight pool, 5 racks of nine ball, five racks of 8 ball and too many 8 and outs in one pocket to list.
I can use the GB just fine when I choose to. But I don't like it because it's cumbersome to me and imprecise.
With CTE, even as I use it right now, I make more shots but more importantly I make more difficult shots more often. CTE allows me to come with shots that I used make much less when using GB.
So with all due respect please don't tell me that I would be playing better if I were to use a system I already know and have used for 20 years. I wouldn't be in these threads if I didn't already KNOW that I play better using CTE than with Ghost Ball and it's derivatives.
If you were transported to another planet where ghost ball aiming was non-existent then you would never tell someone that they had to "know" where the GB is. I can name one top level professional player who does not use any form of ghost ball aiming EVER. As in NEVER EVER. He uses portions of the ball, not contact points, not double the distance, not CTE, he merely aims at the left side of the ball or the right side of the ball in portions. And he is a US Open winner and one of the most fluid natural players ever to play the game.
How do I know this? Because I asked him directly to show me how he aims when we did a booth together one year and he spent five minutes showing me how he was taught to aim by one of the greatest players to ever pick up a cue.
Dave Segal, YOU ARE THE BOMB!!!!
The shot circle is the key. I didn't get it until I watched the overhead video. You are 100% right. The pivot point is irrelevant. The cueball is irrelevant. Follow the arc to center ball and there you are.
Awesome. Simply awesome. Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!
Everyone else, do your homework and read Dave's posts if you really want to know.
The shot circle is the key. I didn't get it until I watched the overhead video. You are 100% right. The pivot point is irrelevant. The cueball is irrelevant. Follow the arc to center ball and there you are.
Awesome. Simply awesome. Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!
Everyone else, do your homework and read Dave's posts if you really want to know.
I want to say something else here.
Many others have said this many times but I think it bears repeating.
CTE Aiming is a paradigm shift. It's a totally different way to align to the balls, to approach shots and to get down on the ball than Ghost Ball Aiming.
Let's all be real here. If you took any group of people and told them to pocket balls then there would be some people in the group who would just "see" the lines and get down on the shots naturally. Others would need to construct visualization methods such as Ghost Ball.
In any event with no formal instruction or introduction to ANY particular methods some of the group would get to a certain level of proficiency and others would not simply due to perceptual differences.
I think that CTE aiming is a perceptual training tool and a powerful one at that. It is not a measuring tool as Ghost Ball aiming is. Ghost Ball aiming says place an invisible object HERE and shoot to hit that invisible object. It relies on your ability to accurately imagine a 2 1/4" ball AND to place it correctly behind the real objct ball.
CTE on the other hand simply says START HERE with a visible and real line and then swing your cue along an arc until the center of the tip and the center of the cueball line up. When they do you are on the aiming line.
That approach is diametrically opposed to the Ghost Ball method of aiming. But from the perspective of the whole "shot picture" it seems to work better than the GB method. For me at least.
Many others have said this many times but I think it bears repeating.
CTE Aiming is a paradigm shift. It's a totally different way to align to the balls, to approach shots and to get down on the ball than Ghost Ball Aiming.
Let's all be real here. If you took any group of people and told them to pocket balls then there would be some people in the group who would just "see" the lines and get down on the shots naturally. Others would need to construct visualization methods such as Ghost Ball.
In any event with no formal instruction or introduction to ANY particular methods some of the group would get to a certain level of proficiency and others would not simply due to perceptual differences.
I think that CTE aiming is a perceptual training tool and a powerful one at that. It is not a measuring tool as Ghost Ball aiming is. Ghost Ball aiming says place an invisible object HERE and shoot to hit that invisible object. It relies on your ability to accurately imagine a 2 1/4" ball AND to place it correctly behind the real objct ball.
CTE on the other hand simply says START HERE with a visible and real line and then swing your cue along an arc until the center of the tip and the center of the cueball line up. When they do you are on the aiming line.
That approach is diametrically opposed to the Ghost Ball method of aiming. But from the perspective of the whole "shot picture" it seems to work better than the GB method. For me at least.
Thanks for the "due respect".
I can see that one can aim the edge of the CB to portions of the OB.:thumbup:
Well I guess you didn't feel like you got any. The due respect is for the fact that I know you have put a lot of thought into these aiming systems.
However I was trying to tell you that we are talking about CTE here and not GB or Double the Distance.
What if I did the test and said that I was using GB for every shot? Would you know any different? Of course you wouldn't. I could put my bridge hand down on the line that GB gives and pivot my cue back and forth all day and it makes no difference.
In fact, I was taught another way to aim that is also very good and accurate which has the shooter putting their back foot on the GB aiming line. The road player who taught it to me said that when your back foot is on the aiming line then you can stand up and talk to the crowd, act like an idiot and move any way you want as long as you don't move that back foot. Then you can spin around and lay down and fire the ball in because you are already on the line. It works.
The point is that I could do the same test using GB and still miss some shots so it's not accurate for you to tell me what I would or would not make using any particular system.
As you know and as has been discussed here many times there is no system where the shooter is directed 100% to the aiming line without some form of having to make up one's mind to settle the bridge hand in a particular spot.
So whether it's CTE or GB or Double the Distance or any system there is always room for operator error. Even if I execute the steps for CTE perfectly but I am an 8th inch off my alignment then I will miss. Same for GB, if I am off in my visualization then I am not on the proper aiming line.
Edited to add that the shooter can also miss any shot due to stroke errors.
Last edited:
This is what i was talking about in the above jb
and this is the adjustments i have said has to be made but is so hard and almost impossible to explain in a post.
JB, thank you for taking the time to shoot and post the video. I obtained some interesting information from watching it. Though, it raises more questions about CTE than it answers...
Please explain more precisely/systematically how you place your cue before you pivot. You say you point to the left edge of the CB, but that's only one point and it doesn't define a unique line. What is the other point? Is it really the left edge of the OB?
Also, if you really are using CTE, how exactly are you using the CTE line in the system you're using?
Thanks.
I also noticed what LAMas observed. Before you pivot, your cue seems to point from the left edge of the CB to to the left edge of the OB. I don't know if you're really connecting those two points, but you did confirm above that you at least point to the CB's left edge. In any case, this pre-pivot cue line is not on the ETC or CTE lines.
Please explain more precisely/systematically how you place your cue before you pivot. You say you point to the left edge of the CB, but that's only one point and it doesn't define a unique line. What is the other point? Is it really the left edge of the OB?
Also, if you really are using CTE, how exactly are you using the CTE line in the system you're using?
Thanks.
Of course that's key, but nobody really pays attention to it. If you're going to use a 1/2 ball pivot--- that's required. Once you understand how the shot circle works.... hold on tight. "Just whack it" as Hal says.
Once you get that down, experiment with pivoting about 1/4 tip shy of center and then stroking crooked on purpose towards the center of the ball--- let your tip fall away to the center. When you realize that you can make balls that way, it opens another universe to explore. Since I can stroke straight 25% of the time and stroke crooked 100% of the time - this is really important.
Anyways, since it's Christmas -- don't hold back on the rep
Glad I could help, John.
P.S. The pivot point is totally irrelevant as far as figuring it out is concerned. You shouldn't care-- it's applied automatically. The CB is NOT irrelevant, however. IN FACT---- (hold on to your seats for this tidbit)-- The CB is your TRUE target, NOT the OB. The moment you lock in your alignment, the OB no longer is the target---- the importance shifts to the CB.
As CJ Wiley recently told me......"FIND YOUR CENTER"
Last edited:
Of course that's key, but nobody really pays attention to it. If you're going to use a 1/2 ball pivot--- that's required. Once you understand how the shot circle works.... hold on tight. "Just whack it" as Hal says.
Once you get that down, experiment with pivoting about 1/4 tip shy of center and then stroking crooked on purpose towards the center of the ball--- let your tip fall away to the center. When you realize that you can make balls that way, it opens another universe to explore. Since I can stroke straight 25% of the time and stroke crooked 100% of the time - this is really important.
Anyways, since it's Christmas -- don't hold back on the rep
Glad I could help, John.
P.S. The pivot point is totally irrelevant as far as figuring it out is concerned. You shouldn't care-- it's applied automatically. The CB is NOT irrelevant, however. IN FACT---- (hold on to your seats for this tidbit)-- The CB is your TRUE target, NOT the OB. The moment you lock in your alignment, the OB no longer is the target---- the importance shifts to the CB.
As CJ Wiley recently told me......"FIND YOUR CENTER"
The CB is your TRUE target, NOT the OB. The moment you lock in your alignment, the OB no longer is the target---- the importance shifts to the CB.
Thinking about your tidbit you added and you really are pretty much right about that.
That ps you left wasnt directed at me was it Dave? when i said focus on the pivot i meant the whole pivot. Jb stepped into the pivot to much to his right on the last ball, is a way you can kinda say it. You agree Dave? lol
Again,
If you stop using the EDGE of the OB as ANY sort of reference, the geometry becomes more achievable. I believe the EDGE is used because it is easier to line up.
If we use the CONTACT POINT of the OB as the ultimate reference, pivot points can actually be eliminated:
Line up (inside) edge of CB to contact point of OB. Shift (pivot is not correct here) to Center of CB staying parallel to initial lineup (easier said than done). Shoot.
you only have to adjust for throw, friction, etc., But then ANY aiming system has to be predicated on a frictionless table.
If you stop using the EDGE of the OB as ANY sort of reference, the geometry becomes more achievable. I believe the EDGE is used because it is easier to line up.
If we use the CONTACT POINT of the OB as the ultimate reference, pivot points can actually be eliminated:
Line up (inside) edge of CB to contact point of OB. Shift (pivot is not correct here) to Center of CB staying parallel to initial lineup (easier said than done). Shoot.
you only have to adjust for throw, friction, etc., But then ANY aiming system has to be predicated on a frictionless table.
You'll over-cut the shot every single time (except for a 90 degree cut shot). It'll be apparent if you simply draw it out.
P.S. The pivot point is totally irrelevant as far as figuring it out is concerned. You shouldn't care-- it's applied automatically. The CB is NOT irrelevant, however. IN FACT---- (hold on to your seats for this tidbit)-- The CB is your TRUE target, NOT the OB. The moment you lock in your alignment, the OB no longer is the target---- the importance shifts to the CB.
Dave are you saying that you look at the cue ball last or does it even matter which ball you look at in a system like this? Thanks to everyone for posting this information. While some days I am more confused than others. Trying to learn the system has made it enjoyable to practice again.
Shev
Dave are you saying that you look at the cue ball last or does it even matter which ball you look at in a system like this? Thanks to everyone for posting this information. While some days I am more confused than others. Trying to learn the system has made it enjoyable to practice again.
Shev
Last edited:
Notice that no matter what the angle is, the spot on the table where the CB needs to be never changes but the CP on the CB does.
This is the advantage of using GB.
Thanks...it really works.:smile::thumbup:
Dr. Dave's
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#contact
contact-point-to-contact-point or parallel-lines system
How does the "contact-point-to-contact-point" or "parallel-lines" aiming system work?
from jsp:
The first step is to draw a line going from the center of the intended pocket to the center of the object ball (purple dashed line). Extending this line to the opposite edge of the object ball gives you the object ball contact point (blue dot). To find the contact point of the cue ball, you simply just reflect ... as shown in the upper right portion of the figure.
Once you have the location of the cue ball CP, the next step is the draw a line through the object ball CP and the cue ball CP (green line). Then, you just simply imagine the line parallel to that line that goes through the center of the cue ball (orange line). This new line is what should direct your aim, since geometry tells you that this line connects the centers of both the cue ball and ghost ball. To make the shot, you just stroke through this line (black arrow).
LOL...I'm famous!
I had no idea that page even existed (if I did, I wouldn't be asking so many questions on CTE), nor did I know that Dr. Dave took a post I made 5 years ago for his website. (If I knew he would do that, I would have certainly cleaned up the typos and created a more respectable-looking picture...lol.)
If anyone is wondering, this is where the post was originally made...
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=230576#post230576
...and coincidentally, it's in the very same thread where drivermaker accused me of being PJ. (EDIT: I was mistaken, it was in another thread where drivermaker asked if I lived in the "middle of the country" knowing that PJ lived in Chicago. I was just making fun of his accusation in that thread.)
Good times, good times.
Last edited: