CTE Aiming Systems - Fact or Fiction?

The best to learn to use anything is to read the directions first, and follow the direction word for word. Unless you are lucky to have some one show you one on one.

I have shown some of what I know about CTE to a NEW PLAYER with an OPEN MIND who wants to learn to play Pool at a respectable level. Her mind is not full of old ideas, as she is like i said new to pool.

I saw her today, and asked for a report on how the aiming system (cte) was working for her. She replied when she executes the shot right, the ball goes in the hole!

NUFF SAID....
 
I won't respond to everything, because this has to end. Just 2 things.

1) BHE doesn't eliminate deflection. It can get close but it's not perfect. You said that yourself. What my friend found out was, that his "feel and judgement" > BHE.

2) Take Keith McCready for example. He is or was a world class player. But his stroke isn't something you would want to teach a student. Why not? It works great for him. That stroke made him a world class player. So it must be right. In reality his game is full of bad habits, but he got it to work.
Practice, practice, practice!

I'm powerless.
 
ThePoliteSniper said:
I won't respond to everything, because this has to end. Just 2 things.

1) BHE doesn't eliminate deflection. It can get close but it's not perfect. You said that yourself. What my friend found out was, that his "feel and judgement" > BHE.

2) Take Keith McCready for example. He is or was a world class player. But his stroke isn't something you would want to teach a student. Why not? It works great for him. That stroke made him a world class player. So it must be right. In reality his game is full of bad habits, but he got it to work.
Practice, practice, practice!

I'm powerless.
Click to expand...

What has to end? No one said BHE eliminates deflection. I would bet large though that if I were allowed to work with your friend for an hour then he would not only be in love with BHE again but that he would know how to use it super effectively. But at the end of the day whatever works is whatever works. For me I have used BHE since 2001 and during that time I have worked out all the kinks and so it's ingrained into my game.

Who says Keith McReady's game is full of bad habits? Keith just has his particular style.

Keith does the same thing every time. I know Keith and have played him, loaned him money, hung out with him a little so let me know what you want to know about Keith and how he plays. Yes his style is not "textbook" but his delivery is right where it should be.

I taught people to use jump cues for years. The first thing I would ask them is if they could draw their ball halfway down the table. I didn't look at their stroke or style I just wanted to know if they had ENOUGH stroke to be able to use the jump cue. That set the platform for me to work with them. I didn't fit everyone into the same box. I taught them what to do and what the goal was and the effects of certain movements and let them do their thing.

Now I am not sure why you are bringing this up but if you're going to use Keith's style then he would be the poster boy for alternative methods which work to play world class speed - or in other words sometimes something like CTE might just work because it does without knowing exactly why it does.

Like I said if you want to figure out why CTE works then feel free to join the discussion. If not then stick to what works for you.

Your countryman Colin Colenso did a lot of study on this and he knows that CTE works and even postulated as to why it works. You seem to have an analytical mind and so the extra brainpower would be useful to figure out the nuts and bolts to a higher degree than has so far been uncovered.
 
ThePoliteSniper said:
1) BHE doesn't eliminate deflection.
Click to expand...
BHE can eliminate net deflection (the combination of squirt and swerve, AKA squerve), if the right pivot length is used for shot speed, distance, cue elevation, and conditions. BHE is appropriate for some shots (especially short and fast shots with the bridge at the natural pivot length), and FHE is appropriate for some shots (especially long, slow shots with follow); but for most shots, a combination of BHE and FHE (based on "feel") is necessary. For more info, see:

and

Regards,
Dave
 
I tried to stay out of this, but...

OK, I'm a BCA Instructor and a Pro One user. Take my thoughts for what they're worth.

Pro One is a CTE system... actually i call it an EOB System, because you reference is always Edge of Ball, but not always Center of Cue Ball... sometimes Edge of Cue Ball.

So, are CTE, Pivot Aiming or Pro One the "end all, cure all". OF COURSE NOT!!! They are great systems, and when properly implemented they work great. What else works great when properly implemented??? Ghost ball and EVERY OTHER system or method out there (by the way, I prefer to call all of these aiming METHODS, because the word "system" seems to imply absolute failproof precision, and I don't believe anything is failproof... if it was, I'd be hunting down Jamie Barracks to play again!!! Pre Pro One, he beat my brains out. He'd have a tougher time now, but he should still win!)

Here's the deal... again, in MY opinion. Pro1, CTE, Pivot Aiming are all precision aiming methods. How precision? Well, here's where we go back to compare to other methods. For ME, not for everyone but for ME, it's much more precision, because it's easy to see your initial reference lines.

Take Ghost Ball. You're shooting the center of the ball to a point half the diameter of the ball away from the object ball on the shot line. It's very difficult for me to use this system, as I have a hard time determining where "half the diameter" of the ghost ball would be. You have to Estimate where it is.

Now, Contact point... This is what I used most of my life... until my initial conversation with Hal Houle about 7 or 8 years ago. OK, I could find the contact point on the object ball, but the correlation on the cue ball was on the FAR SIDE of the ball. You cannot see it, so your guessing where it is... Estimating...

Now, let's take Pro One... my initial reference line is always one of these. Center to Center, Center to Edge or Edge to Edge. Now, we throw in a little Pixie Dust and have the Zombie Powder in our pockets, Pivot and fire. (In other words, I'm not going to even try, with this crowd, to explain what happens in Pro One aiming method, for fear of being executed as a witch doctor!) PRO ONE or ANY OTHER EOB OR CTE AIMING METHOD depends on your ability to determine CTE, ETE or CTC. NOBODY can be dead precise every time. I can look down a Center to Edge line at 8 1/2 feet and I may think I'm perfect, but the shot being overcut a little tells me that I'm not... guess what. I'm still Estimating

So, Naysayers and Disciples alike, we're all using estimations and subconscious routines. I combine Pro One with a subconscious aiming method that I developed a few years back (I sent Stan a copy of it... ask him what he thinks of it... and that, if anyone wants it, I WILL be happy to email you a copy). All I'm saying is that, for ME, it's easier to see CTE or ETE or CTC than it is to see a contact point on an object ball and a contact point on the far side of the Cue Ball, or easier to see than a Ghost Ball.

Does that make it right for everyone? No it does not. I think it makes it worth investigating for everyone before they break out the cross and nails and start stretching out the guys that they call "Disciples", but it does not make it the ideal Aiming Method for everyone... it just happens to work VERY well for me!

Thanks for listening (or reading),

Bob
 
dr_dave said:
Colin and I have similar thoughts about CTE. What he did was very diplomatically summarize reasons why CTE might work for some people. His summary can be found here:

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

I understand that, you have already linked to this several times.

The thing is, again, that you need to stop with the "might" and "some" and just admit that CTE DOES work for many people.

It works. Now figure out how it works with something a little more definitive than just subconscious adjustment.

I will admit that you have a lot of information compiled on your aiming pages. But you really do CTE a major disservice with your claims that it's only good for a limited range of shots. Your only contribution is criticism because you can't diagram it neatly.

Stop hiding behind Colin's opinion. Take it to video and show us from an engineer's perspective what the relative strengths and weaknesses are. Maybe you will have an epiphany that allows you to reconcile your 2d world of neatly packaged diagrams and the 3d world that CTE lives in.

I just read a PDF document from your site on an aiming system called "double the distance". My head is still ringing from the diagrams the author provided. I am SURE that I won't be trying this method based on the paper I read. I am equally sure though that the author could probably teach it to me in a matter of minutes.
 
JB Cases said:
The thing is, again, that you need to stop with the "might" and "some" and just admit that CTE DOES work for many people.
Click to expand...


If I can show basic CTE to a Novice with an Open Mind, and they can make it work. What does that say She, and I got it to work!!!


IMHO some people just refuse to spend the time to see CTE work for them. This is not Brain, it simple as "A", "B", "C's ".
 
One addition to my post this morning.

As Stan and others have said, there are other variables involved in pocketing balls...

Stroke is the big one, IMO. If you don't have a good stroke, you won't pocket balls consistently, I don't care WHAT aiming method you use.

Speed control. What good is any aiming method if you can't control how far (or short) the CB travels. If you can't get on the next shot, it doesn't matter how well you can pocket an 80 degree shot.

Spin. Although except for straight high and low, I avoid using more than a half tip of side spin, there are times you have to use more. If you can't accurately pocket the ball and effectively use spin, then no aiming method is going to help you.

RandyG put it to me as well as anyone ever did "The only things you can control are Angle, Speed and Spin" You have to have a command of all of these things, or NO METHOD of pocketing balls is going to make you a good, or great player.

All of that being said, I went to Stan to learn Pro One in the hopes of improving my game. As a BCA instructor, I will not teach Pro One to anyone else unless Stan Shuffet says "Go Ahead, Bob, and teach this." I gave him my word that I'd stay out of it for two reasons.

#1, This is Stan's variation of one of Hals EOB systems, and it's how he makes his living. I make my living making bamboo fly rods and I teach pool for FUN. Stan isn't going to get in my pocket making $2000 fly rods, so I'm not going to get in his pocket teaching Pro One.

#2, Stan has worked hard developing Pro One and developing a proper way to teach it. He can teach it better than I could and for me to teach Stan's method to someone else would be to Short Change them.

Later,
Bob (need to get to work and stop playing on the computer for awhile).
 
BobN said:
One addition to my post this morning.

As Stan and others have said, there are other variables involved in pocketing balls...

Stroke is the big one, IMO. If you don't have a good stroke, you won't pocket balls consistently, I don't care WHAT aiming method you use.

Speed control. What good is any aiming method if you can't control how far (or short) the CB travels. If you can't get on the next shot, it doesn't matter how well you can pocket an 80 degree shot.

Spin. Although except for straight high and low, I avoid using more than a half tip of side spin, there are times you have to use more. If you can't accurately pocket the ball and effectively use spin, then no aiming method is going to help you.

RandyG put it to me as well as anyone ever did "The only things you can control are Angle, Speed and Spin" You have to have a command of all of these things, or NO METHOD of pocketing balls is going to make you a good, or great player.

All of that being said, I went to Stan to learn Pro One in the hopes of improving my game. As a BCA instructor, I will not teach Pro One to anyone else unless Stan Shuffet says "Go Ahead, Bob, and teach this." I gave him my word that I'd stay out of it for two reasons.

#1, This is Stan's variation of one of Hals EOB systems, and it's how he makes his living. I make my living making bamboo fly rods and I teach pool for FUN. Stan isn't going to get in my pocket making $2000 fly rods, so I'm not going to get in his pocket teaching Pro One.

#2, Stan has worked hard developing Pro One and developing a proper way to teach it. He can teach it better than I could and for me to teach Stan's method to someone else would be to Short Change them.

Later,
Bob (need to get to work and stop playing on the computer for awhile).
Click to expand...

Good post earn you a GREENIE!
 
JB Cases said:
The thing is, again, that you need to stop with the "might" and "some" and just admit that CTE DOES work for many people.
Click to expand...
OK ... CTE works for many people. But other methods also work, and they work better for many people. I think most of the pros use something more like DAM, which is a combination of ghost-ball, contact point, "just seeing the angle," and "visualizing the amount of ball you need to hit for the required amount of cut." For more info, see the "How the Pros Aim" article on Bob Jewett's site.

JB Cases said:
It works. Now figure out how it works with something a little more definitive than just subconscious adjustment.
Click to expand...
I already know how CTE works, and I have tried my best to illustrate and explain this over many years. Some of the reasons were summarized quite well by Colin. But these reasons explain why almost any "aiming system" works. The key to CTE is establishing the exact initial alignment and the exact pivot arc necessary for the amount of cut needed for each shot. Some people (e.g., you and Spidey) seem to be so good with these subtle adjustments that they happen seemingly subconsciously. Maybe the CTE approach and framework helps some people develop aiming intuition and feel more efficiently than with other systems (or no system). For these people, CTE is a great thing.

Again, I think it is totally clear how CTE works, and I mean no disrespect by any of these statements. If people are successful with CTE, that's all that really matters, regardless of how it works.

JB Cases said:
I will admit that you have a lot of information compiled on your aiming pages.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

JB Cases said:
But you really do CTE a major disservice with your claims that it's only good for a limited range of shots.
Click to expand...
This claim is true only if you follow the published procedures exactly and don't vary your initial alignment and/or pivot arc. If you don't vary one or both of these things, the procedures will lead to a single cut angle for a given CB-OB distance, regardless of the amount of cut actually needed for the particular shot. This is obvious, as explained and illustrated on my CTE resource page.

CTE does work for every shot at the table if you vary your initial alignment and/or pivot arc the right amount for each shot. Again, some people are better than others at doing this. FYI, my resource page and Spidey' blog suggest several ways the initial alignment and/or pivot arc can be varied.

Again, CTE does work if you do it right.

Regards,
Dave
 
JB Cases said:
[...]
The thing is, again, that you need to stop with the "might" and "some" and just admit that CTE DOES work for many people.

It works. Now figure out how it works with something a little more definitive than just subconscious adjustment.[...]
Click to expand...

I've always thought Dave was actually too generous in his "it works; the only question is how and why" mindset.

I'm not saying it doesn't help people, but when I look at testimony from people like you I fear there is a lot of confirmation bias going on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

I played you both before and after your rendezvous with fractional ball aiming, where you were then claiming your game shot up two balls overnight and every cut into the side pocket was a half ball hit and all that

My perception was you pocketed balls the same before and after--firing them into the pocket regularly I might add...


[...]

I just read a PDF document from your site on an aiming system called "double the distance". My head is still ringing from the diagrams the author provided. I am SURE that I won't be trying this method based on the paper I read. I am equally sure though that the author could probably teach it to me in a matter of minutes.
Click to expand...

John - that method is simple. You find the contact point on the object ball the usual way --like when you walk over to the object ball and pretend you're hitting it into the pocket--and then you go out exactly twice as far and that's where you aim.

So if the contact point is a quarter inch to the left of center, you aim the cueball a half inch to the left of center.

There's a subtlety that comes up wen the balls get close together, and discussion of that is why it seems a little more obtuse on the site. Somebody showing it to you at the table would probably either be unaware of that problem or choose to ignore it.

Going back to CTE, like I've said before, I think the most likely source of benefit of an approach like this is it might get you to purge demons that have been haunting you in the past, like

(1) inadequate aiming - disrespecting the set position
(2) being biased by the pocket when down on the shot
(3) being biased by the direction of the stick while aiming

If the pivot length combined with the bridge hand placement was critical to getting to the right aim, like it would be for sometone really relying on this system, then I would expect to see

(1) careful attention paid to pivot length and careful aim to the edge
(2) pivoting to the left or right depending on whether the cut is to the left or right

What I saw when I watched Spidey is he pivots like I do, from left to right every time. Further there looks to me to be no careful pivoting. I think he justs aims the shot with his stick out of the way and brings it in from left to right. I do that. Ralf Souquet does that. Lots of successful aimers do that. Amateurs, on the other hand, will sight down the stick--adjusting if it doesn't look right.

Other players like SVB will frequently put the tip right down on the cloth while aiming. I think that too srves the purpose of removing the stick from the initial aiming process.
 
mikepage said:
I've always thought Dave was actually too generous in his "it works; the only question is how and why" mindset.

I'm not saying it doesn't help people, but when I look at testimony from people like you I fear there is a lot of confirmation bias going on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

I played you both before and after your rendezvous with fractional ball aiming, where you were then claiming your game shot up two balls overnight and every cut into the side pocket was a half ball hit and all that

My perception was you pocketed balls the same before and after--firing them into the pocket regularly I might add...


[...]



John - that method is simple. You find the contact point on the object ball the usual way --like when you walk over to the object ball and pretend you're hitting it into the pocket--and then you go out exactly twice as far and that's where you aim.

So if the contact point is a quarter inch to the left of center, you aim the cueball a half inch to the left of center.

There's a subtlety that comes up wen the balls get close together, and discussion of that is why it seems a little more obtuse on the site. Somebody showing it to you at the table would probably either be unaware of that problem or choose to ignore it.

Going back to CTE, like I've said before, I think the most likely source of benefit of an approach like this is it might get you to purge demons that have been haunting you in the past, like

(1) inadequate aiming - disrespecting the set position
(2) being biased by the pocket when down on the shot
(3) being biased by the direction of the stick while aiming

If the pivot length combined with the bridge hand placement was critical to getting to the right aim, like it would be for sometone really relying on this system, then I would expect to see

(1) careful attention paid to pivot length and careful aim to the edge
(2) pivoting to the left or right depending on whether the cut is to the left or right

What I saw when I watched Spidey is he pivots like I do, from left to right every time. Further there looks to me to be no careful pivoting. I think he justs aims the shot with his stick out of the way and brings it in from left to right. I do that. Ralf Souquet does that. Lots of successful aimers do that. Amateurs, on the other hand, will sight down the stick--adjusting if it doesn't look right.

Other players like SVB will frequently put the tip right down on the cloth while aiming. I think that too srves the purpose of removing the stick from the initial aiming process.
Click to expand...

I pivot with great care, Mike. To say I "make no careful pivoting" is ignorant. To you, it might seem that way. However, when I pivot, I'm not "moving the cue out of the way" so I can aim and then move my tip back to center. I arc my pivot exactly on every single shot. I have no clue of my final aim line until my pivot is complete.

I'm a little frustrated reading your "I played you so I know" posts... but I guess that's my prob, not yours. You're a great guy. What I found out when we played is you and I are a coin flip in 9ball, a coin flip in 14.1 (I was sick on how I played our 14.1 set but oh well), and you can't win at banks. So, take the banks out of it - and we're neck and neck. So, if we're neck and neck and I'm making balls with a CAREFUL pivot from an offset CTEL position - you should prob give CTE a little more credit. Aiming by feel, I don't. I have no clue where to aim (nor care) until I get to center ball.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
I pivot with great care, Mike. To say I "make no careful pivoting" is ignorant. To you, it might seem that way. However, when I pivot, I'm not "moving the cue out of the way" so I can aim and then move my tip back to center. I arc my pivot exactly on every single shot. I have no clue of my final aim line until my pivot is complete.

I'm a little frustrated reading your "I played you so I know" posts... but I guess that's my prob, not yours. You're a great guy. What I found out when we played is you and I are a coin flip in 9ball, a coin flip in 14.1 (I was sick on how I played our 14.1 set but oh well), and you can't win at banks. So, take the banks out of it - and we're neck and neck. So, if we're neck and neck and I'm making balls with a CAREFUL pivot from an offset CTEL position - you should prob give CTE a little more credit. Aiming by feel, I don't. I have no clue where to aim (nor care) until I get to center ball.
Click to expand...

Hey -- sorry I missed you in Vegas.

I keep telling myself to stay out of these discussions. I think I need to actually listen to myself.
 
mikepage said:
Hey -- sorry I missed you in Vegas.

I keep telling myself to stay out of these discussions. I think I need to actually listen to myself.
Click to expand...

I'm still here in Vegas if you want to hook up. I wasn't arguing, I promise. I just wanted to keep the discussion accurate :) This was my first post in a while and I couldn't let the "sloppy pivot" comment slide.
 
dr_dave said:
... the procedures will lead to a single cut angle for a given CB-OB distance, regardless of the amount of cut actually needed for the particular shot. ...
Click to expand...

Dave, base-level Houlian CTE procedures will lead to two cut angles for a given CB-OB distance, depending on whether you offset the cue stick (a) to the left of the CTEL and pivot the tip from left to right or (b) to the right of the CTEL and pivot the tip from right to left. The choice depends on whether the intended cut is thick or thin. [Edit -- i.e., two cut angles in either direction, left or right.]

But as you know, this doesn't exactly cover the waterfront for all cut angles needed.
 
Last edited:
mikepage said:
... What I saw when I watched Spidey is he pivots like I do, from left to right every time. ...

Other players like SVB will frequently put the tip right down on the cloth while aiming. I think that too srves the purpose of removing the stick from the initial aiming process.
Click to expand...

Mike -- In Stan Shuffett's Pro One aiming, a right-hander pivots from left to right on all shots and a left hander pivots from right to left on all shots. That's what you are seeing with Spidey. In base-level Houlian CTE, pivoting is done on the table, and it is both left to right and right to left, depending on the shot.

As for SVB, he was asked about his aiming on a stream from Vegas a couple days ago. He said he uses the cue stick and its edges to aim, rather than the cue ball. I wish the interviewers had followed-up for more details. Shane said it was a simple method.
 
AtLarge said:
Mike -- In Stan Shuffett's Pro One aiming, a right-hander pivots from left to right on all shots and a left hander pivots from right to left on all shots. That's what you are seeing with Spidey. In base-level Houlian CTE, pivoting is done on the table, and it is both left to right and right to left, depending on the shot.

As for SVB, he was asked about his aiming on a stream from Vegas a couple days ago. He said he uses the cue stick and its edges to aim, rather than the cue ball. I wish the interviewers had followed-up for more details. Shane said it was a simple method.
Click to expand...

I've played Shane probably 100 or more games of 10-ball in the last several months. I know I'm not supposed to use my own observations of what other people do here, so let me just say I'll razz him about that comment next time we play--and I'll get to the bottom of it.

And yes, Spidey did teach me CTE with a pivot from both sides. And then later told me he pivots from one side because he sees it better that way--or something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top