Lets say I have a few pet peeve shots that bother me. Can I just learn cte/pro 1 for these shots or I must learn the whole system to encompass all shots? Is it all or nothing?
Can you just learn some shots with cte/pro1?
- Thread starter Socopool79
- Start date
I wouldn't say it is all or nothing. The system is very powerful - I have been working to incorporate it everywhere and this was a struggle at first. It is now really starting to pay off as I am not as stressed on tough shots because I have objective visuals that guide me consistently into the shot line.
Cheers,
Gerry
Cheers,
Gerry
From what I know of it, it's a rather all-encompassing system. If you learn it well enough for you "trouble shots" you'll want to use it elsewhere. There are some simplified CTE techniques you can use for trouble shots (cut shots that always seem to go wrong) that you might consider instead. Otherwise I'd recommend going all in or not at all.
For trouble shots you could use a stick aiming method, or you could use a simplified pivot system...aim center CB at the contact point on the Object Ball...parallel shift to center OB, then pivot back to center CB. Depending on the average length of your bridge, it can be very effective--and simple. Since you're relying on the contact point on the OB as the reference, you avoid calculations and variations in CTE lines based on cut angles. But this is an oversimplification of a robust system that works if you commit to it, so it's up to you....
For trouble shots you could use a stick aiming method, or you could use a simplified pivot system...aim center CB at the contact point on the Object Ball...parallel shift to center OB, then pivot back to center CB. Depending on the average length of your bridge, it can be very effective--and simple. Since you're relying on the contact point on the OB as the reference, you avoid calculations and variations in CTE lines based on cut angles. But this is an oversimplification of a robust system that works if you commit to it, so it's up to you....
I've taught a modified version to a few students now just for banking. It's a condensed version and I use language in a way that they would see the visuals and pivot and not have to worry about other intricacies.
It's amazingly suited to this task, only really need 2 visuals and 2 pivots for most scenarios, in all cases the students saw balls going in much better than before and were not only able to continue using the visuals and manual pivots but were also able to just bank by pure feel as well since the success they had helped train their eye on proper bank paths. One student recently started asking followup questions about using it for other shots, and he may be in the process of getting the DVD and working with it further.
In general, though, I would say you need to put the work in to really understand it and become consistent, but then I could see people not liking it for all of their shots for whatever reason but only using it on tough backcuts etc.
Scott
It's amazingly suited to this task, only really need 2 visuals and 2 pivots for most scenarios, in all cases the students saw balls going in much better than before and were not only able to continue using the visuals and manual pivots but were also able to just bank by pure feel as well since the success they had helped train their eye on proper bank paths. One student recently started asking followup questions about using it for other shots, and he may be in the process of getting the DVD and working with it further.
In general, though, I would say you need to put the work in to really understand it and become consistent, but then I could see people not liking it for all of their shots for whatever reason but only using it on tough backcuts etc.
Scott
CTE/Pro One is a system. Is it possible to learn CTE/Pro One and then use it for certain shots, more difficult shots, etc.? Theoretically, it could be. But if you put in the time and effort to learn the system, I'm not sure why you'd want to. If you watch the DVD of Stan's 105 ball run, you'll see he isn't robotic about it in the least.
I may be mistaken but I suspect most players use some combination of aiming systems when they play. If you have a ball centered 3" from the pocket at a straight in or thick cut, do you need an aiming system? You're likely thinking about CB position but I seriously doubt you're applying an aiming system, at least I think most people wouldn't. In other words, I believe most players use a feel/experience system for a lot of shots and then apply their aiming system of choice for shots that don't fit into their automatic or "on cruise control" library.
I may be mistaken but I suspect most players use some combination of aiming systems when they play. If you have a ball centered 3" from the pocket at a straight in or thick cut, do you need an aiming system? You're likely thinking about CB position but I seriously doubt you're applying an aiming system, at least I think most people wouldn't. In other words, I believe most players use a feel/experience system for a lot of shots and then apply their aiming system of choice for shots that don't fit into their automatic or "on cruise control" library.
I'll agree that most probably don't. However, they should. The reason is in one word- CONSISTENCY!
If I have a "duck" shot, I still use the same aiming method for it as for any tough shot. It keeps you in a rhythm of doing the same thing again and again. Most never realize just how strong that really is for ones game.