CTE Aiming Video

Patrick: Obviously as you should know, the effective pivot point changes from shot to shot. Bridging at your effective pivot point will cancel out squirt and the swerve. This requires some practice but is way stronger than changing your aim to adjust for squirt.
 
JB Cases said:
In truth everything is estimation. You are moving static things with a tool held by a constantly moving person. However you use muscle memory plus systems or techniques to reduce the variables as much as you can.

Backhand english doesn't cancel out or correct for deflection. What it does is put the cue stick on the EXACT same line as it would be if you aimed to a ghostball/compensated position. Therefore it virtually eliminates the need to make conscious compensations in the aim/spin motion.

Of course one can overdo it and add more spin than neccessary and that will cause more deflection and throw. But like with any method, system, or technique it takes practice to know what is and isn't possible.

For me the concept of backhand English was entirely foreign. It is like a magic pill because it does make the application of spin so much easier, especially for the shots where you have to use a lot of inside spin.

So an aiming system that gets me to the right line every time combined with backhand English is the nuts as far as aiming goes, for me personally.

All I know is I make far more than I miss. I make tough shots that I used to have less than 50% chance to make. I make a lot more shots that get sincere applause from the knowledgeable players who are watching. Using BHE I find it much easier to apply spin, I seem to have much greater control over the spin I apply, it seems as if my touch has increased and overall I am a better player.

For me BHE pretty much always works EXACTLY.
Click to expand...

Is there a point on the cb that you dont go past when useing
backhand english.
 
Merry C+xy= .375 squared to the 7th power Christmas!!!!

Its really great to see you A.S.guy's spreading Holiday cheer. The suicide hotline number is.........:eek:

Old fashioned Dick

PS. P.J., are you losing your mind ? I thought you were somewhat normal. Don't you know an argument with the A.S. guy's is un-winnable ?
 
Last edited:
eze said:
Is there a point on the cb that you dont go past when useing
backhand english.
Click to expand...

I don't go so far as to miscue. I generally find that one to one and half tip's worth is all I ever need to get anywhere the cueball needs to go.

I have another trick that I use when applying spin as well that seems to work well and it was taught to me by a good shortstop who used to run with the big boys on the road back in the day.

Once I have the aiming line I look past the object ball to the rail and just shoot my cue ball to that spot.

I find that if I apply spin and look AT the object ball last then I somehow almost always throw it off line. BUT if I shoot the cueball to the rail then it works no problem.

So my pre-shot routine looks like this;

1. assess the balls from behind the cueball while standing up.
2. find the aiming line using Hal's system or mostly just see it automatically and sometimes double check it with Hal's quarter system.
3. lay my cue down on the aiming line.
4. look down that line past the object ball to the rail and pick the spot to shoot to.
5. step into the shot with my back foot lined up on the aiming line.
6. pivot my backhand to the spin I need.
7. focus on the rail and shoot.
8. If I am not feeling too good then I will take another stroke after I hit the cue ball - this helps me to stay down as I cannot jump up and also do the second stroke.

All this happens in the space of seconds. If a shot is particularly tricky then I will slow it down and really bear down on focusing on shooting the cueball to the rail. This seems to help me from steering the cue ball.

It seems to me that I can get more spin using backhand English. What I mean by this is that it seems as if I don't have to hit as far out on the ball to get more spin as when I am using the ghost ball/compensation method. This is most likely a perception thing but it is easier for me get the amount of spin I want using BHE.
 
SJDinPHX said:
Its really great to see you A.S.guy's spreading Holiday cheer. The suicide hotline number is.........:eek:

Old fashioned Dick

PS. P.J., are you losing your mind ? I thought you were somewhat normal. Don't you know an argument with the A.S. guy's is un-winnable ?
Click to expand...

It depends on the argument. I know Pat and he is generally pretty cool. It's kind of a bummer that he is bumping heads with other people here that are also cool.

In my mind the last few threads have been pretty productive - some of the more productive ones I have seen in the last several years.

I mean I think it's clear by now that a lot of pros approach aiming in different ways. Whether any of them can be said to use x-system exclusively is surely something that will never be settled until such professionals state that publicly.

I think we are learning that there is more than one way to skin a cat. And we are also learning what sort of adjustments or better said, what is really happening when people use these systems and feel as though they are not adjusting. At least I am.

Aiming systems have always bothered me because they work but I don't understand WHY they work. You know HOW MUCH IT SUCKS to be called to Denver to meet some ancient guy who starts telling you to do stuff you have never heard of or read in any authoritative publication? And how much more it sucks to start rifling balls in by following this guy's instructions? You're like holy crap - that's NOT POSSIBLE.

Then you start setting up all these shots that give you fits otherwise and they hit the back of the pocket every time.

How can that not be exhilarating and disconcerting at the same time?

Then add to that that you don't KNOW why it works and have a hard time explaining it in print. Frustrating.

But you can't ignore it because it works.

To those of us that don't have the benefit of your experience, meaning we didn't get to take the path you did playing against champions and being around top notcher to absorb their knowledge and copy their techniques - stuff like this is like honey to a bear, irresistible.

So that's why those of us that use aiming systems extol the virtues. We don't want to argue about why it "can't work" because it clearly does. We'd sure like to know why it does and would welcome anyone who could show definitively why it does and what the limitations are, if any. And I think that we are getting closer.
 
JB Cases said:
I don't go so far as to miscue. I generally find that one to one and half tip's worth is all I ever need to get anywhere the cueball needs to go.

I have another trick that I use when applying spin as well that seems to work well and it was taught to me by a good shortstop who used to run with the big boys on the road back in the day.

Once I have the aiming line I look past the object ball to the rail and just shoot my cue ball to that spot.

I find that if I apply spin and look AT the object ball last then I somehow almost always throw it off line. BUT if I shoot the cueball to the rail then it works no problem.

So my pre-shot routine looks like this;

1. assess the balls from behind the cueball while standing up.
2. find the aiming line using Hal's system or mostly just see it automatically and sometimes double check it with Hal's quarter system.
3. lay my cue down on the aiming line.
4. look down that line past the object ball to the rail and pick the spot to shoot to.
5. step into the shot with my back foot lined up on the aiming line.
6. pivot my backhand to the spin I need.
7. focus on the rail and shoot.
8. If I am not feeling too good then I will take another stroke after I hit the cue ball - this helps me to stay down as I cannot jump up and also do the second stroke.

All this happens in the space of seconds. If a shot is particularly tricky then I will slow it down and really bear down on focusing on shooting the cueball to the rail. This seems to help me from steering the cue ball.

It seems to me that I can get more spin using backhand English. What I mean by this is that it seems as if I don't have to hit as far out on the ball to get more spin as when I am using the ghost ball/compensation method. This is most likely a perception thing but it is easier for me get the amount of spin I want using BHE.
Click to expand...

I have been using parralle english for years and while i have got rather
good at it when the shots where close,distance is a killer ,falling on the
right line is almost virtualy impossible. Thanks for your input.
 
devindra said:
Patrick: Obviously as you should know, the effective pivot point changes from shot to shot. Bridging at your effective pivot point will cancel out squirt and the swerve. This requires some practice but is way stronger than changing your aim to adjust for squirt.
Click to expand...

Adjusting your pivot point for each shot in order to indirectly adjust your aim is "stronger" than simply adjusting your aim? You're just adding another layer of estimation, which compounds the possible error (also a drawback of aiming systems).

If you can't adjust your aim directly this might be a worthwhile compensating method, but it's not one you should choose if you can do it directly.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick, it must be stronger than adjusting your aim because as far as I know nearly all pros use back hand english. The pivot point is roughly the same for most shots as well. This is assuming that your keeping your stroke as level as possible to minimize swerve.
 
The pivot point is roughly the same for most shots
Click to expand...

Maybe, but you can't be "roughly accurate" in pool, so BHE is an "approximation" system like pivot aiming systems. It doesn't really adjust your aim for you; it gets you closer so you can do that. And then you either adjust your aim directly or adjust your pivot point, and you're back to the comparison we started with.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
I think the key phrase here is "as far as I know". How do you think you know this?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Maybe you should leave the house every now and then PJ and go to a pro tournament and look at how they apply english.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Maybe, but you can't be "roughly accurate" in pool, so BHE is an "approximation" system like pivot aiming systems. It doesn't really adjust your aim for you; it gets you closer so you can do that. And then you either adjust your aim directly or adjust your pivot point, and you're back to the comparison we started with.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Changing your aim to adjust for squirt requires a lot of feel because you have to judge how much the ball will squirt. With back hand english it is easier. If your off your pivot point by a little the ball will still go. Pockets have a margin for error.
 
devindra said:
Changing your aim to adjust for squirt requires a lot of feel because you have to judge how much the ball will squirt. With back hand english it is easier.
Click to expand...

Yes, for some.

If your off your pivot point by a little the ball will still go. Pockets have a margin for error.
Click to expand...

Now you're arguing that BHE is "stronger" because you don't have to be all that accurate anyway? LOL. Don't quit pool for the debating team.

BHE, like aiming systems, is "strong" for those who are suited to it. For others it's an unnecessasry layer of "artificiality" between the player and what he's trying to do. I don't know for sure if one is more limiting than the other, but if one is I'm betting it's systems.

pj
chgo

P.S. Just to pick a nit: you shouldn't have to judge squirt with backhand english; that's what BHE is supposed to do for you. It's the swerve you have to judge anyway, and what makes your "effective pivot point" change from shot to shot.
 
Last edited:
Patrick Johnson said:
Yes, for some.



Now you're arguing that BHE is "stronger" because you don't have to be all that accurate anyway? LOL. Don't quit pool for the debating team.

BHE, like aiming systems, is "strong" for those who are suited to it. For others it's an unnecessasry layer of "artificiality" between the player and what he's trying to do. I don't know for sure if one is more limiting than the other, but if one is I'm betting it's systems.

pj
chgo

P.S. Just to pick a nit: you shouldn't have to judge squirt with backhand english; that's what BHE is supposed to do for you. It's the swerve you have to judge anyway, and what makes your "effective pivot point" change from shot to shot.
Click to expand...

I don't think the debating team would allow the pick and choose approach you use in your responses either pj. He didn't say that you didn't need to be accurate. Maybe if you read it again you will see what he was trying to tell you. He said there is a margin for error. In the future you might want to read more carefully.
 
I had a thought, why do pool players wax so poetic about aiming systems? Do snooker players suffer the same malady?

I did a quick google search and didn't come up with a single one for snooker, yet you can get volumes of hits on pool aiming systems.

Why is it that snooker players don't invest as much time into aiming systems, yet the players of a simpler game (IMO pool is big step down from snooker) struggle so mightily?

Could it really be that the process of aiming is entirely a delicate mix of instinct & memory?
 
Patrick Johnson said:
I didn't say he said that. Maybe you should read (or quote) more carefully.



What do you think "margin for error" means?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by Patrick Johnson
Maybe, but you can't be "roughly accurate" in pool...

My reading skills are pretty accurate.

Margin for error in pool... depending on the table and distances, the pockets are bigger than 2 1/4in. this gives you a "margin for error"
 
Patrick Johnson said:
I didn't say he said that. Maybe you should read (or quote) more carefully.



What do you think "margin for error" means?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
Is your favorite game TWISTER!!!
 
Patrick Johnson said:
CaptiveBred is right. He throws it in and that's what he was trying to do - you can see the spin on the CB and the throw on the OB as it splits the pocket rather than hitting the left tit. You can even tell by his body english after hitting it that it was a tricky shape shot.

I don't know whether or not he uses a pivot aiming system, but he threw that ball on purpose and didn't pivot to do it. If this an example of how you "know for sure" he uses CTE, then your "knowing" is pretty similar to "wishful thinking".

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
I'll agree with the others on this one.

There's no appreciable english on Busta's CB here. Rewatch the video. I don't think he's trying to throw it in. In fact, I think it isn't really much use throwing an OB in unless you can't hit enough of it to make the pot comfortably without throw. Bob Jewett showed a test whereby you hit an OB up the rail trying to throw the OB so as to change the finish position of the CB. On a shot of this distance it is damn near impossible to create any appreciable effect of holding the CB.

I've seen Busta doing this quite a lot, and imho he is using some form of CTE. Of course, it would be good to hear him fully describe what he does.

Colin
 
eze said:
Is there a point on the cb that you dont go past when useing
backhand english.
Click to expand...
eze,
With inside english we can hit as far to the side as we want with little change in result. In fact, more spin is often better such as on slow thicker shots when slow spin creates more throw. With outside english, large side offsets will hit the same contact point, but create big changes in throw. With power shots large OE offsets don't require much adjustment.

The beauty of BHE ove Parallel type english aiming is that the aim needs to be changed for all amounts of offsets with the parallel method, so it is hard to burn all these aim adjustments into one's memory.

With BHE, all you need to know is how to aim for one standard shot (say a roll through pot) and make some aim and bridge length adjustments from there. Learning those adjustments takes some time and some knowledge, but even without them, you'll have a bunch of shots that you learn to get comfortable with, regardless of the amount of offset you require.

I do have a complete adjustment system that I am putting to DVD in coming months. It's a little complex for some, but with some practice a player can use it to play just about any shot with english surprisingly accurately. I think it's a faster and more permanent method than using the parallel method and learning all the adjustments instinctively and then retaining that instinctive judgement between periods away from the table.

Colin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top