Center-to-Edge (CTE) Pivot Issue
- Thread starter CueAndMe
- Start date
I don't know what you're trying to show. Did you give Hal a call? Or are you trying to "answer" the center-to-edge "question" by only reading posts here?bluepepper said:
I'm asking because it seems you are trying to disprove something that any true proponent of any of Hal's system wouldn't say. Even those who teach the SAM method only use center-to-edge as one of their several aim lines.
Fred
Bump in the road...
He is pointing out the simple geometrical fact that if you rotate the shot on the table, the aim needs to change. The underlying question is how, for any particular aiming system, does the aim change.Koopa said:
Some think that several of the shots shown are covered by one particular fractional hit. His diagrams point out that this is not true.
He seems to be asking in a roundabout way for an explanation of how the so-called "Center-To-Edge" (CTE) system works. So far no one seems to have provided a complete explanation in print.
Rather than continue to hijack JoeW's thread on aiming by feel, I figured I'd create a new thread to show why CTE doesn't work without adjustment. The rotating table shows that the balls are independent of the table. The balls don't know where the pockets are. Only the person shooting knows where the pockets are, and it's only because of this knowledge that balls have a chance of consistently being pocketed. The balls have no special geometric connection to the shape of the table or the placement of the pockets.
The orientation of the balls and line in the diagrams are consistent from image to image. Since allegedly the pivot systems (Hal's, Stan's, JoeV's) use only the cue ball and the object ball for alignment, the pockets are supposed to automatically be in the right spots geometrically and are supposed to be unnecessary for the alignment process. But as you can see, whatever method was used to align for pocketing the ball on the first table will not work for the balls on the other 4 tables.
Cornerman, I learned Hal's system from Hal. Knowing the system isn't the issue. I think the system is good, but I want those who use the system to stop endorsing it as a system that requires no adjustment. It's good for other reasons, but by itself, without adjustment it doesn't pocket balls well at all. I believe this is obvious when looking at the 5 diagrams.
The orientation of the balls and line in the diagrams are consistent from image to image. Since allegedly the pivot systems (Hal's, Stan's, JoeV's) use only the cue ball and the object ball for alignment, the pockets are supposed to automatically be in the right spots geometrically and are supposed to be unnecessary for the alignment process. But as you can see, whatever method was used to align for pocketing the ball on the first table will not work for the balls on the other 4 tables.
Cornerman, I learned Hal's system from Hal. Knowing the system isn't the issue. I think the system is good, but I want those who use the system to stop endorsing it as a system that requires no adjustment. It's good for other reasons, but by itself, without adjustment it doesn't pocket balls well at all. I believe this is obvious when looking at the 5 diagrams.
I stand corrected on your intent in this thread. Are you able to describe the system for the rest of us?bluepepper said:
the bottom line on CTE
Regards,
Dave
Thank you Bob and bluepepper for stating and illustrating so clearly what I've been trying to get to bottom of lately. Hopefully, the CTE followers can respond to the specific and simple question posed here and provide a simple explanation for how the adjustments occur.Bob Jewett said:
Regards,
Dave
I don't think CTE aimers believe shooting every shot center-to-edge works. Can you believe that and graduate from high school? Can you believe that and get into high school? Maybe school has changed a lot since I was there.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure (please, God) they know it's a starting place. It's what happens next they can't seem to explain.
pj
chgo
Bob Jewett said:
Sure.
Eyes are to remain aligned to view the outside edge of the OB from directly over the top center of the CB. There are 2 pivots. One corresponds to thin cuts and the other to thick cuts.
For thin cuts, place the bridge hand and cue "anywhere" to the inside of this center-to-edge line before pivoting the cue tip to find the (new) CB center. Shoot.
For thick cuts, place the bridge hand and cue "anywhere" to the outside of this center-to-edge line before pivoting the cue tip to find the (new) CB center. Shoot.
That's it.
The problem I see is the "anywhere" instruction. It makes a huge difference where. It also makes a huge difference from shot to shot. So the "where" that works for one shot isn't the "where" that works for another. And the point about which you pivot, your bridge distance, is nearly as important.
I do not need to change my point of aim. The pan acrossed the ball will line me up. You can cover the pockets and cover the ball after i find my half a ball high line or english line. Yes it works with english. I did this at valley forge on Tom Rossman's table why 75 of you watched. So Ronnie V could learn Hal's system. Mr. Willie Jopling loved it.
I think that deciding where to place your bridge hand is the most important part of aiming. I hope that no one here thinks that "anywhere" is really OK.bluepepper said:
I must have missed this post. I assume that it was not in this thread, since none of your posts in this thread say where to put your bridge hand. Can you be more specific?breakin8 said: