Mike...Stan will surely be there. Perhaps you can schedule some time with him. I have after-hoiurs access to a private table onsite, should you be able to do that.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
CTE aiming.
- Thread starter Geometry
- Start date
A hint of Hal's thinking..
The following quote may give you some insight into Hal Houle’s way of thinking concerning CTE.
So many things fail to interest us, simply because they don’t find in us enough surfaces on which to live, and what we have to do is to increase the number of planes in our mind, so that a much larger number of themes can find a plane in it at the same time. Ortega y Gasset
Hal stated to me very clearly that to use CTE was to engage in aiming on a different plane.
Hal’s approach to aiming is simple:
You can use your “Math Intelligence” to tackle the one zillion shots that can happen on the 5,000 square inches of table surface.
Or
You can use your Visual Intelligence in conjunction with CTE to reduce those one zillion shots into “one”. One shot, all day long, every day.
It is absolutely correct to say that there is one shot and one shot only when it’s from the intelligence of a mind’s eye. (How do you want to play pool, with a zillion shots or one shot?)
Visual Intelligence is one of the 8 intelligences known to modern educators. It’s important to know that there are more ways of knowing than just knowing by words and numbers. Our western culture has been dominated by math and language for decades. And yes, those intelligences have their place, but when it comes to playing pool they’ll have to take a back seat.
Stan Shuffett
The following quote may give you some insight into Hal Houle’s way of thinking concerning CTE.
So many things fail to interest us, simply because they don’t find in us enough surfaces on which to live, and what we have to do is to increase the number of planes in our mind, so that a much larger number of themes can find a plane in it at the same time. Ortega y Gasset
Hal stated to me very clearly that to use CTE was to engage in aiming on a different plane.
Hal’s approach to aiming is simple:
You can use your “Math Intelligence” to tackle the one zillion shots that can happen on the 5,000 square inches of table surface.
Or
You can use your Visual Intelligence in conjunction with CTE to reduce those one zillion shots into “one”. One shot, all day long, every day.
It is absolutely correct to say that there is one shot and one shot only when it’s from the intelligence of a mind’s eye. (How do you want to play pool, with a zillion shots or one shot?)
Visual Intelligence is one of the 8 intelligences known to modern educators. It’s important to know that there are more ways of knowing than just knowing by words and numbers. Our western culture has been dominated by math and language for decades. And yes, those intelligences have their place, but when it comes to playing pool they’ll have to take a back seat.
Stan Shuffett
But what if it's one shot with a zillion exceptions/adjustments/subconscious tweaks?
Are you better off just learning the zillion shots in the first place?
Just curious, has anyone tried replicating this aiming method in virtual pool or some other simulator? Is there a way this can be done?
"Visual Intelligence" I love those words. Thanks Stan
I had to look him up to get guidance:
Circunstancia
For Ortega y Gasset, philosophy has a critical duty to lay siege to beliefs in order to promote new ideas and to explain reality. In order to accomplish such tasks the philosopher must, as Husserl proposed, leave behind prejudices and previously existing beliefs and investigate the essential reality of the universe. Ortega y Gasset proposes that philosophy must, as Hegel proposed, overcome both the lack of idealism (in which reality gravitated around the ego) and ancient-medieval realism (which is for him an undeveloped point of view in which the subject is located outside the world) in order to focus in the only truthful reality (i.e. life). He suggests that there is no me without things and things are nothing without me, I (human being) can not be detached from my circumstances (world).
My mind doesn't work this way...but then I failed Phiosopy.
I am sincere in my quest for knowledge or the easier way - Occam's Razor - to see if I can depict CTE in Autocad 2D Computer Aided Design tool.
What I drew is the shifting of the center of the tip of the cue shaft, with a diameter of 13 mm, to the side from the center of the CB (toward the OB) from a line of sight aimed from the center of the CB to the edge of the OB (so that the edge of the shaft was on that line [7.5 mm]) - I shifted my bridge hand in that direction by the same amount or 1/2 of 13 mm = 7.5 mm.
I then pivoted the shaft so that the center of the tip was dead center of the CB and hit the OB and cut it at about 45 degrees.
I repeated the above but shifted the center of the tip another diameter or 20.5 mm (the original 7.5 mm + 13 mm) and that resulted in a thin ~90 degree cut or a missing of the OB.
It looks good on paper, when I have time, I may put it to practice and then graduate to different distances between CB and OB.
Those that have their own pool tables may try this if interested and report back - on why I filed philosophy.
Always - have fun.
Last edited:
Exactly! All the bad information that is continually quoted like it is a fact has had people looking in the wrong direction for a long time.
And its not that people cant explain it online, its that they wont. Most (if not all) that have learned about CTE have been asked not to explain it online. Surprisingly those who really understand CTE have upheld that request.
A friend of mine used to have a quote in their signature, I dont remember the exact wording but I think it was "those that are smart enough to know are smart enough not to tell".
If you want to learn about CTE take the time and go see Stan or one of the others that are actually qualified to teach it.
Woody
CTE-Visual Intelligence
I think Ive figured it out the CTE thing. I cant help but think the secret is you do all that stuff and get it close then you just use your "Visual Intellingence" to shoot the shot.
Seriously and from there if you have a good layout and if you have a deft hand for position I think youll get out if you can or youll shoot safe with various degrees of success depending on your knowledge of the game.
I dont believe that any aiming method or system is any better that the Visual Intelligence of the shooter. The Visual Intelligence of the shooter is groomed by a method. So the CTE is the method a lot of people have found to enact their Visual Intelligence. So I do think Stan is exactly right about that part. This is the part I dont believe is being discussed. If you dont have it you have to practice until you do. No matter the method, you have do something in order to figure out what brings you to the hypothesis that you are right on the money and you have to shoot with the confidence that you are. No shaky stroke allowed. That is your Visual Intelligence and you dont get it unless you want it. When you have it you know it and if you can keep yourself shooting for the second shot, playing safe and getting safe and bank your way out of a tight spot as long as you get behind a ball if you miss, how are you supposed to lose? Now what part of CTE did Willie Mosconi use? Well Id bet he figured out how to zone in on his Visual Intelligence somehow. To me it doesnt mean that Visual Intelligence is only acquired by CTE, 3 Cut Systems or barking at the moon. It could be any method that gets you close, keeps you close and you use that wonderful feel you have for the game to micro adjust. I hear you Stan I think I know what Visual Intelligence is and how its acquired, but Im with you Dr. Dave I remain a skeptic when it comes to the validity of the solving all the minute' shot equations with CTE. I think its a personal journey and if youre willing to part with some cash Id bet Stan can explain it to you. Sounds like he has a great angle. You gotta love that!! So do I get the 6? It wouldnt help me because if I never see the ball you could give me the 4 and it wouldnt matter. A deft hand at position and some good old fashioned horse sense and excellent safety play is really hard to beat. I apologize for blowing the secret but weve just been talking all around it and it was just waiting to come out. No I havent had Stans instruction my version only of what I think the true secret really is. Incidentally my CTE buddy keeps losing money to my other friend who cant tell you how he aims the ball. Now how is that?
I think Ive figured it out the CTE thing. I cant help but think the secret is you do all that stuff and get it close then you just use your "Visual Intellingence" to shoot the shot.
Seriously and from there if you have a good layout and if you have a deft hand for position I think youll get out if you can or youll shoot safe with various degrees of success depending on your knowledge of the game.
I dont believe that any aiming method or system is any better that the Visual Intelligence of the shooter. The Visual Intelligence of the shooter is groomed by a method. So the CTE is the method a lot of people have found to enact their Visual Intelligence. So I do think Stan is exactly right about that part. This is the part I dont believe is being discussed. If you dont have it you have to practice until you do. No matter the method, you have do something in order to figure out what brings you to the hypothesis that you are right on the money and you have to shoot with the confidence that you are. No shaky stroke allowed. That is your Visual Intelligence and you dont get it unless you want it. When you have it you know it and if you can keep yourself shooting for the second shot, playing safe and getting safe and bank your way out of a tight spot as long as you get behind a ball if you miss, how are you supposed to lose? Now what part of CTE did Willie Mosconi use? Well Id bet he figured out how to zone in on his Visual Intelligence somehow. To me it doesnt mean that Visual Intelligence is only acquired by CTE, 3 Cut Systems or barking at the moon. It could be any method that gets you close, keeps you close and you use that wonderful feel you have for the game to micro adjust. I hear you Stan I think I know what Visual Intelligence is and how its acquired, but Im with you Dr. Dave I remain a skeptic when it comes to the validity of the solving all the minute' shot equations with CTE. I think its a personal journey and if youre willing to part with some cash Id bet Stan can explain it to you. Sounds like he has a great angle. You gotta love that!! So do I get the 6? It wouldnt help me because if I never see the ball you could give me the 4 and it wouldnt matter. A deft hand at position and some good old fashioned horse sense and excellent safety play is really hard to beat. I apologize for blowing the secret but weve just been talking all around it and it was just waiting to come out. No I havent had Stans instruction my version only of what I think the true secret really is. Incidentally my CTE buddy keeps losing money to my other friend who cant tell you how he aims the ball. Now how is that?
Thanks Stan for a very interesting perspective. I like the way you think.
A new window to the world enables improved performance. Like an old engineer taking up pool. If I have enough time, I will be a champion. When your time is limited, alternatives are a useful path. My preferred learning mode is visual. I have an outstanding but dated math background and aptitude which I gathered while taking two degrees. At work, I once (1980's) used calculus in a budgeting program.
Until you can see through a new or different window, the concept is unknown. It is like the first use of a strobe light on a machine, a movie camera of horses, a electron microscope, or spot on the wall in pool. The issue is discussed in the thin classic math book "Flatland" with 2 dimensional and 1 dimensional worlds.
I would be interested in hearing a lot more about new perspectives, different planes or windows. Are there any references or examples on this?
Are you trying to make a point or do you just want the 6 ?
Cookieman,
Well the CTE guys obviously have "the secret" none of us others do. I think that makes a good case for "the four".
That's what I thought.
CTE Aiming
Cookie,
Im being facicious, I think I have a valid point obviously or I wouldnt have gone to so much trouble. I sort of figure you dont agree but thats your call. So have you had the CTE training from Stan and did it help you? Sounds like it may be helping some folks.
Cookie,
Im being facicious, I think I have a valid point obviously or I wouldnt have gone to so much trouble. I sort of figure you dont agree but thats your call. So have you had the CTE training from Stan and did it help you? Sounds like it may be helping some folks.
This is just one of many benefits of "aiming systems." For a lot more, see:
I never once thought CTE should be tested with some sort of "equations." The "secret" with CTE or any pivot-based system is in the "pivot." Whether you do it in "air" or at the bridge, the effective pivot length must be varied for changes in cut angle and CB-OB distance ... and judgment is required to know how much to pivot and to pivot the right amount. I'm not saying this is a bad thing ... I've just always wanted the "aiming system" proponents to be clear about these facts. No equations are necessary to understand this; although some simple diagrams make it crystal clear. For more info, see my November '08 and December '08 BD articles and my CTE resource page.
Regards,
Dave
Last edited:
Dr. Dave:
Did you forget to drink you coffee this morning?? I gave you the shot circle diagram that hangs on your beautiful website a year ago that shows this exact adjustment. Who hasn't been truthful about the adjustment in the pivot? It's not really an adjustment or a variable - it's a constant - a constant ratio: pi.
While I'm at it: EVERY aiming method on planet earth requires human adjustment even if it's geometrically PERFECT due to human perception errors.
Make sure your coffee is black
Nobody is being dishonest about details - sheesh. Dave
P.S>
YOU CAN FIND INFORMATION ON HOW TO PIVOT WITH CTE HERE:
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#CTE
Last edited:
I appreciated you posting and describing that, but it doesn't take the cut angle into account. Knowing where the pocket is (i.e., knowing how much to cut the ball) is a very important detail (no matter how you define the word "is") ... don't you think? :grin:
Now don't start the stories about not needing to know where the pocket is, and shooting with a sheet covering the table. I've heard those stories a thousand times. If people can see part of the table, they can judge where the pocket is without seeing it in their field of vision. However, the pocket location (i.e., the required amount of cut) is critical in deciding which alignment reference to use and in deciding (or judging) how much to pivot (i.e., what "effective pivot length" to use).
But how can you "adjust" if you don't know what the "perception errors" are?
Now I agree that all "aiming systems" do require compensation for squirt, and swerve, and throw (CIT and/or SIT) when using English, and for throw (CIT) when not using English, per the list of effects here:
I probably should have chosen a different word here. I guess I was in a bad mood. "Imcomplete" might be a better word than "dishonest." :sorry: FYI, I just changed the word "honest" to "clear" to be more respectful in my original post.
That's a great resource. Thanks for providing the link. :grin-square:
Regards,
Dave
Last edited:
The outermost edge determines 1/2 the cut angle and the pivot to center ball completes the angle. The CB/Pocket moves around the OB as the center of a circle as you prepare to address the CB. Nobody is being dishonest - it's just that we're not cluing you in. If you invested an hour on a pool table and read what I've posted in this thread, you'd figure it out. But you won't, so you won't. It is what it is.
Dave
Last edited:
Another Aiming Thread? Wonde how all those young people in the Phillipine play so well with out Pool Instructional Books, Pool Instructional DVD, a Case full of Accessories, like Tip Tapper, etc?
Are you saying it doesn't matter how much you need to cut the ball?I'm on record as saying the pocket isn't required geometrically and I'm not a Ph.D. I wonder who's right?
Here's one of the diagrams from my November '08 article:
The CB-to-OB distance and alignment are the exact same for every shot in this diagram, and for every possible shot between all of these shots. Yet, the pocket is in a different position (relative to the balls) for each shot. How can the pocket location, and the necessary amount of cut, not matter?
If you line up and pivot the exact same way on all of these shots, most of them will miss the pocket. Even shot "D," which is very close to shot "A," won't go if you use the same alignment and pivot as with shot "A!" (BTW, for shot "D" assume the CB is the still the same distance away from the OB as in shot "A").
I know we have looked at this diagram, or diagrams like it, in many past debates, and we got nowhere. I honestly hope this time might be different.
Regards,
Dave
Your glass has always been half-empty hasn't it.
You do realize that you are knocking people who work hard to make a living by creating and selling pool related items. :scratchhead:
Lucky Joe