CTE automatically corrects stroke issues

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
Not going to jump on the heavily tenderized deceased horse meat beating train, but I find the most important thing about CTE is that it actually gets you looking at the balls. You have two references, which is better than one. You can use the two references with any system. It's probably beneficial to divide the balls into "targets" along with the dual references. If you know you are hitting the balls where you mean to hit them, it's powerful, and the second reference helps to get closer to know you're not being the victim of optical illusions. When the balls look funny, if you have a second reference it helps you to fix why they are looking funny.

I'm not a practitioner but I have the book and have worked through some of it. I (possibly incorrectly) didn't pay attention to the angles. I took my normal aim and asked myself, which ABC is closest to where I know the aim is. I then used that perception to set up and shoot the shot. It worked, but I cannot say if it were me making adjustments or what the deal was. It did seem that if I missed, the balls tended to end up in a pocket a little more if they had enough speed to reach another pocket. So maybe CTE somehow increases the likelihood of getting some slop love in a rotation game, maybe not, didn't do enough testing other than getting a gut feel. It's also possible that I missed some shots that would have made it and that's why I noticed the lucky slops a bit more.

CTE does seem to work, it's a workable aiming system, better, worse, you have to decide for yourself, but it's workable.
Cte is not only workable it is a precise tool for aiming.

It's not a quick fix though. I think if you're kind of sort of using CTE you will see some benefit but the results will not be precise or consistent.

I agree that the act of even trying to use cte increases the amount of objective focus that is being used for aiming and that by itself should lead to more shot making.
 

Dan White

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yes I know how you feel about it. Not exactly a carnival barker then eh?
Hal's little speech sounds exactly like a carnival barker but that upset you so I changed it.

I made a video and explained how "I think" it works. I didn't say that my opinion is how it works mechanically. There isn't a problem. CTE is a tool that works.
When I say problem I mean that nobody knows how it supposedly actually works.

I notice you did not comment on how you are able to make the ball go center pocket while for me it would hit the left point.
 

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
Hal's little speech sounds exactly like a carnival barker but that upset you so I changed it.
What speech? I spent about 8 hours with him and he didn't speak to me in any way that resembled the character you describe.


When I say problem I mean that nobody knows how it supposedly actually works.
Problem for you. Not a problem for those successfully using CTE aiming.



I notice you did not comment on how you are able to make the ball go center pocket while for me it would hit the left point.

I imagine that you are doing something differently than I am.

My guess would be that you aren't applying the method correctly.

I would suggest you spend time with a qualifed instructor who might be able to help you figure that out.

Maybe your subconscious doesn't work. I don't know who could help you with that. But in your characterization of cte it is either that the subconscious automagically does the work or the system doesn't work. So since others are successfully using CTE I can only guess that either their subconscious is working perfectly to lead then to the shot line as they objectively use the cte process or there is something mechanical happening that is unknown to you but which they are doing correctly.

Perhaps your conscious bias against CTE is not allowing you to objectively apply it.

I don't know. I know that I use CTE successfully and I have helped many others so the same without needing to have any conversation about the subconscious. I teach them the steps, I correct anything I see that they are not doing correctly and when they do the steps the right way then they get on the correct shot line.
 

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
If it makes you feel better I am a dunce at basic mental math (especally if i had to do it in a race, I would lose to a normal 3rd grader...) and I'm pretty good at higher level math. Higher level math is a whole different ballgame and based more on applying concepts vs rigid memorization.

You didn't answer my question (well I didn't really phrase it in the form of a question) about what is seen after the eye shift. Does the ball fraction appear in the corner of the eye or is it the aim line or is it both? I find a I definitely 'see' something different after the shift, and I find that if I mess around with placing either edge or center of the cue ball on the chosen letter of the object ball I see something differently, and normally one of those choices does look like i see a line into the pocket.

Validating (not proving) normal manually pivot CTE mathematically should not be very hard. Pro1 is a different story because the descriptions of how it works are so vague they leave much up to the imagination.

The way I see it Stan's videos are totally disorganized and more of esoteric sales literature than teaching material. For one he never seems to give definitions of the nomenclature. If you watch all of stan's videos and watch your videos and watch lil chris's video and read dr. dave's information (without which all of the other videos are basically useless because they don't include the tables) you get a rough idea of how pro1 works.

I tried to buy Stan's Pro1 DVD a year and a half ago or so and they were out of copies so I was told to wait for the book and by the time the book was out I had already solved many, but not all of my aiming issues. I was taught some (what i consider useless) version of CTE which I posted about here before by a BCA instructor. Patrick quickly (and correctly) shot down its validity. This made me much more skeptical about aiming systems. I tried Fractional Ball aiming and it didn't seem to do that much to help me.

And as I said before the changes in fundamentals that Geno taught me, did more for my aim than any of the other (Pivot CTE, BCA instructors CTE, Fractional Ball, tip contact point aiming, etc) aiming systems I tried. It is worth noting that I had figured out a (what i considered weak) way to fix some of my aiming problems, and using it won some tournaments. I told geno about it before my lesson and he said 'oh, so you figured that out,' so he left it out of the lesson.

So now I'm just trying to figure out a way to fix the remaining shots that I miss the same exact way over and over again and am willing to give CTE Pro1 a shot regardless even though I am somewhat sceptical due to the fact that no compensation is made for distances as is done with Pivot CTE.
I didn't address that part of your post. Tbh I didn't fully read it as I often do at first sight. I often go back and parse the post to answer specific points.

I will do so later when at home and using the laptop.
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
Follwing the methods leads to the shot line. Not close to it, on it.
That belief is clearly an essential part of CTE's attraction for you, and probably for lots of other users. I think it sells your own developed skills short, but it must be a good trade for the confidence it gives.

pj
chgo
 

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
Hal's little speech sounds exactly like a carnival barker but that upset you so I changed it.
In this quote of Hal (from a 1997 post on RSB), he sounds to me like a pool "medium".

pj
chgo

There are only 3 angles for any shot, on any size table. This includes;
caroms, single rail banks, double rail banks, 1, 2, 3, and 4 rail
banks, and double kiss banks. Any table has a 2 to 1 ratio; 3 1/2 x 7,
4 x 8, 4 ½ x 9, 5 x 10, 6 x 12. It is always twice as long as it is
wide. The table corners are 90 degree angles. When you lay a cue from
the side pocket to the corner pocket, you are forming an angle of 45
degrees. When you lay a cue from the side pocket to the middle diamond
on the same end rail, you are forming an angle of 30 degrees. When you
lay a cue from the side pocket to the first diamond on the same end
rail, you are forming an angle of 15 degrees. When you add up these 3
angles, they total 90 degrees, which is the same angle formed by the
table corners. The cue ball relation to object ball relation shot angle
is always 15, 30, or 45 degrees. The solution is very simple.
There are only 2 edges on the cue ball to aim with, and they are always
exactly in the same place on the cue ball. There are only 3 exact spots
on the object ball to aim to, and they are always exactly in the same
place on the object ball. So, 2 edges on the cue ball, and 3 spots on
the object ball; 2 x 3 = 6 which is the total number of table pockets.
This means that, depending upon how the cue ball and object ball lie in
relation to one another, you may either pocket the object ball directly
into a pocket or bank it into any one of the remaining 5 pockets. Of
course, the reverse is true. If the relationship of cue ball to object
ball can only be a bank, so be it. There is never a need to look at a
pocket or cushion while lining up the edge on the cue ball to the spot
on the object ball. You have only those 3 angles Your only requirement
is to recognize whether your shot is a 15, 30, or 45 degree angle.
Recognizing those 3 angles can be accomplished in an instant by aiming
the edge of the cue ball to one of the spots on the object ball. It
will be obvious which object ball spot is correct. There will be no
doubt. Any time either one of the 2 edges on the cue ball is aimed at
any one of the 3 spots on the object ball, that object ball must go to
a pocket. Choose the correct spot and the object ball will most
certainly go to the chosen pocket. The top professional players in the
game have always known about this professional aiming system, but they
are a closed fraternity, and you are the enemy. Interested in where
those spots are located?
The 2 places on the cue ball are the left edge of the cue ball when you
are cutting the object ball to the left; and the right edge of the cue
ball when you are cutting the object ball to the right. The 3 spots on
the object ball are the quarters, and the center. The quarters and
center of the object ball face straight at the edges of your cue ball,
not facing toward the pocket. In other words, if you were on a work-
bench at home, there would be no pocket, so you would just line up the
edge of the cue ball straight to your target on the object ball. When
you cut to the left for 15 degrees, aim the left cue ball edge at the
object ball left quarter. When you cut to the left for 30 degrees, aim
the cue ball left edge at the object ball center. When you cut to the
left for 45 degrees, aim the cue ball left edge at the object ball
right quarter. When you cut to the right for 15 degrees, you aim the
cue ball right edge at the object ball right quarter. When you cut to
the right for 30 degrees, you aim the cue ball right edge at the object
center. When you cut to the right for 45 degrees, you aim the right cue
ball edge to the object ball left quarter. If you'll just get down and
aim your old way, you'll be close to where you should be aiming. Look
to see (without changing your head or eye position) just where the cue
ball edge is aiming at the object ball. You'll see that on every shot
that the cue ball edge is always aiming at the same targets on the
object ball. Remember, this system is for any shot on the table; banks,
caroms, combinations, and so forth. The only shot remaining is the
extreme cut for any shot over 45 degrees. Aim the cue ball edge to the
eighth of the object ball (which is half of the quarter). Don't let the
pocket influence you. Have a friend hold the ball tray between the
object ball and the pocket, so you cannot see the pocket, and you'll
see that those 3 angles will handle just about anything. Of course, you
would have chosen the 15, 30, or 45 degree angle before your friend put
the ball tray in place. It also makes it much more interesting if you
don't tell your friend how you are pocketing the ball without seeing
the pocket. Have some fun. For any questions, call me.

Regards, POOL HAL
 
Last edited:

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Instead of replying line by line let's take an example of the problem by setting up a shot. Set up a straight in shot with the ob on the foot spot and the cb a diamond and a half away so that the two balls are lined up straight in to center corner pocket. This shot can be made using CTE with a 15 degree, or "A" perception, and an inside manual pivot. This puts the cue straight in line with the two balls and the shot line provided your bridge hand is in the right place for the pivot. Shoot the shot to confirm center pocket. Now replace the balls to the same position but now move the cb to the right about an inch so the two balls are now lined up to the left point. This is still a 15 degree perception with an inside pivot, right? When I shoot this shot the ob hits the left point because the 15 degree perception with an inside pivot "naturally" gives you a straight shot. When you shoot it the ob goes center pocket again. Why?
The 15 degree perception with an inside pivot does not always naturally give you a straight in shot.
 

CocoboloCowboy

Cowboys are my hero's
Silver Member
Well why do people continue to think CTE HAS ZERO, Merit?

I think it saying is like saying indo not like KFC chicken, but never eating anything on menu.
 

boogieman

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
I think it saying is like saying indo not like KFC chicken, but never eating anything on menu
What if you looked in the local KFC's dumpster and found a hundred cat pelts? Would it still be chicken? It might be tasty and filling but it ain't chicken.
 

boogieman

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
So who put them there? People after they closed?

Your question was goofy.
Let me rephrase it. You find fresh cat skins in the dumpster, maybe some cat entrails and heads in the dumpster. The pieces of chicken look funny. Is the KFC still serving chicken?

Is the "chicken" still tasty and filling? If so, does it matter if you just ate chicken or cat? Results are the same, you're still full and it was tasty.

It's a pretty easy question, you're already at the trough but it's your decision to drink or not.
 

CocoboloCowboy

Cowboys are my hero's
Silver Member
Let me rephrase it. You find fresh cat skins in the dumpster, maybe some cat entrails and heads in the dumpster. The pieces of chicken look funny. Is the KFC still serving chicken?

Is the "chicken" still tasty and filling? If so, does it matter if you just ate chicken or cat? Results are the same, you're still full and it was tasty.

It's a pretty easy question, you're already at the trough but it's your decision to drink or not.


If is not anything. Maybe you do not like Chicken? If so say so.
 

boogieman

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
If is not anything. Maybe you do not like Chicken? If so say so.
Ok, one more time. KFC is the pool hall. The price of tea in china is $30/Kg. The meat is the aiming system. Does it do what it should? If it were rabbits or chickens in the dumpster would it matter? Your belly is full and so are the pool table's pockets, so why complain about what meat got you there? You're still full, the shots still went. Why argue over what meat filled your belly? You're still full after all.
 

CocoboloCowboy

Cowboys are my hero's
Silver Member
Ok, one more time. KFC is the pool hall. The price of tea in china is $30/Kg. The meat is the aiming system. Does it do what it should? If it were rabbits or chickens in the dumpster would it matter? Your belly is full and so are the pool table's pockets, so why complain about what meat got you there? You're still full, the shots still went. Why argue over what meat filled your belly? You're still full after all.


Well I will make it simple, have your tried CTE to improve? Or are you just not convinced to try?

Or late do you have better system?
 

boogieman

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
Well I will make it simple, have your tried CTE to improve? Or are you just not convinced to try?

Or late do you have better system?
I have tried CTE and bought the book. I tried it enough to know there is a very workable system there. I tried it enough to pick up some nuggets that help with any aiming system. I tried using only CTE at a league night and won more matches than usual. I then realized my fundamentals had drifted into crap (not from CTE, CTE was an attempt to get back to playing better). I then spent months working on stance and alignment, stroke, bridge etc. I then realized that if I can see the shot I can make the shot. If I miss, I didn't see it correctly enough to get into stance correctly. I've pretty much drifted back into Perfect Aim System, but I will use two reference points on shots that don't look right.

If you properly see the shot and come down with good alignment and your fundamentals hold up you should make the shot. The trick is seeing the shot correctly and being able to extrapolate enough info from previous experience to hit it right.

I'm not knocking CTE, I'm saying aiming systems work as long as you put the effort in to properly learn them. It doesn't matter which one fills your belly. A buffet costs money. Eating at the aiming buffet is paid for by practice instead of money.
 

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
That belief is clearly an essential part of CTE's attraction for you, and probably for lots of other users. I think it sells your own developed skills short, but it must be a good trade for the confidence it gives.

pj
chgo
It is not a belief. The table doesn't lie about it. It's that simple really. I have tried going back to pure feel, tried using ghost ball again. The fact is that CTE is more accurate than feel. Much more. It is an objective way to aim that produces the shot line.
 

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
In this quote of Hal (from a 1997 post on RSB), he sounds to me like a pool "medium".

pj
chgo
Sounds to you because you never got past the parts you think don't work.

As I have said the table doesn't lie. I read this long AFTER I met Hal. I didn't seek him out he sought me out. I thought he was a nut and wanted to get away from him and find action. Instead, I emptied my cup and just listened and followed the instructions and started making shots that were troublesome and making shots cleanly without guessing. It did "feel like magic" but the magic feeling never went away and only got stronger the more that myself and others learned about the techniques.

You all were mocking Hal and those who reported success with his aiming methods long before I met him. I am an atheist and I don't believe in magic. I believe in what happens on the pool table because it's a constrained space with clear and immediate results. CTE is not guessing. Ghost ball is guessing. Feel is guessing.

That you can't see the objectivity in the system is a huge part of why after MORE than 20 years you have been carrying on a crusade to save the world from Hal Houle. That you see this as nothing more than fractional aiming with a shimmy dance - your words - is why you continue this over several forums and more than two decades.

Ironically, YOU are a huge reason why CTE is getting more and more popular. You and those like you are DIRECTLY responsible for the motivation to continue this conversation and exploration into videos, dvds, books and endless forum threads. If you want to mock CTE users as religious cult members then the best way to make that "religion" stronger is to kill the messiah and make him a martyr. You could have stopped at any time but you prefer to have to someone to knock.

You are the reason I am spending money to promote this. I tried to get you to get together with me and some others and hash it out but you think you know everything about the human mind and how it processes images and acquires targets. Somehow even though you have never been off the block in pool you think you know more than someone who was running with one of the greatest players ever. I think it would be fair to say that Hal Houle in 1997 had likely forgotten more about aiming in pool than you are likely to ever know. The experiences I have had on this aimig system journey have been awesome and awful and everything in between. At least I have been off the block with it.
 

JB Cases

www.jbcases.com
Silver Member
Of course.

When challenged with math he doesn't understand, a CTE inventor and retired grammar school reading teacher will say that it is a "visual system in 3D" and cannot be diagrammed. Then his yapping dogs follow up ad nauseum with propaganda.
FUCK YOU. Call me a YAPPING DOG? This is your idea of peace?

Listen, get up ALL THE MONEY YOU CAN AND I WILL DO THE SAME up to $250,000 and we can BET FUCKING HIGH on whether the beginners that Stan teaches CTE aiming to will outscore your beginners that you teach ghost ball to.

I will bankroll the experiment if you will put up at least 50k.

Time for the talk to stop and see if ANY OF YOU can walk the walk?

And that retired teacher plays better than you ever have. He teaches CHAMPIONS and you do what?
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I have tried CTE and bought the book. I tried it enough to know there is a very workable system there. I tried it enough to pick up some nuggets that help with any aiming system. I tried using only CTE at a league night and won more matches than usual. I then realized my fundamentals had drifted into crap (not from CTE, CTE was an attempt to get back to playing better). I then spent months working on stance and alignment, stroke, bridge etc. I then realized that if I can see the shot I can make the shot. If I miss, I didn't see it correctly enough to get into stance correctly. I've pretty much drifted back into Perfect Aim System, but I will use two reference points on shots that don't look right.

If you properly see the shot and come down with good alignment and your fundamentals hold up you should make the shot. The trick is seeing the shot correctly and being able to extrapolate enough info from previous experience to hit it right.

I'm not knocking CTE, I'm saying aiming systems work as long as you put the effort in to properly learn them. It doesn't matter which one fills your belly. A buffet costs money. Eating at the aiming buffet is paid for by practice instead of money.
In your CTE trials can you make balls from different locations using the same perception lines? Can A inside make balls from multiple locations?
 
Top