CTE experiment, with civil discussion
- Thread starter dr_dave
- Start date
Quite a few years ago, before Hal was teaching CTE, he was a strong proponent Of BHE.
I typed up a 3 page post on the difference between Dr. Dave's three shots and I lost it. UGGGH
Will type again...ugh I'm sick
Will type again...ugh I'm sick
I can't believe I lost my post. I put 3 hours into it. Anyways, stare at these pics for a while and see if you can find out the difference between the shots.
Same setup. Same alignment. Same pivot.
The center of rotation for each shot is the OB.
Think about this and brain storm.
Dave
Same setup. Same alignment. Same pivot.
The center of rotation for each shot is the OB.
Think about this and brain storm.
Dave
If this visual doesn't make it obvious I don't know how you can better explain it. Great job Dave! Rep to you!!
I can't believe I lost my post. I put 3 hours into it. Anyways, stare at these pics for a while and see if you can find out the difference between the shots.
Same setup. Same alignment. Same pivot.
The center of rotation for each shot is the OB.
Think about this and brain storm.
Dave
well, I hate to say it, but they don't make it obvious to me. What I see is him using the center of rotation thing to show all three shots resulting in the same vertical line extending from OB to CB. That line is (or at least looks) exactly the same for all 3 shots.
I also see lines from the original pocket to the rotated pocket, and in all 3 cases that little red line ALSO looks exactly the same.
Dave's point is that something different has to happen for all 3 shots to fall. Showing three identical black lines and 3 identical red lines is not only failing to convince me, it's adding to the confusion >_<
edit: that's brutal about losing a multi-hour post. If it happens in the future and you're using firefox, go back to the page where you typed the reply and try edit-undo a couple of times. Often the text comes back. That or do ctrl+A, ctrl+C before posting. Then you can paste it back if it fails to go through.
I also see lines from the original pocket to the rotated pocket, and in all 3 cases that little red line ALSO looks exactly the same.
Dave's point is that something different has to happen for all 3 shots to fall. Showing three identical black lines and 3 identical red lines is not only failing to convince me, it's adding to the confusion >_<
edit: that's brutal about losing a multi-hour post. If it happens in the future and you're using firefox, go back to the page where you typed the reply and try edit-undo a couple of times. Often the text comes back. That or do ctrl+A, ctrl+C before posting. Then you can paste it back if it fails to go through.
Last edited:
I can tell you first hand this works great. I used to miss a ton of shots when 1 & 2 tips of side spin were needed. Now since Walter Glass showed me BHE I fire those shots in with total confidence.
Now I am curious if CTE can help in pocketing balls better than GB?
As I am a high "B Player" looking to step it up to the next level.
Das Vorfuhrungs Effect. That's what the Germans call the situation when you can't perform something in front of others that you can do in your sleep otherwise. - You know it's really hard to get something down on video that adequately explains what is in your head? At least for me it is.
I got my table all marked up - do all my practice runs - everything is firing on all cylinders - Back Hand English test is sweet the cue ball is swinging around the corners as effortlessly as monkeys through the trees - CTE aiming is rocking - I am firing thin cuts - thick cuts - all cuts in the pocket easily.
Then I turn on the camera and nothing goes.
It really feels foolish. It feels like I am wrong about BHE and CTE but I know that I am not.
And I really don't have time to spend doing these videos. But I promise I will get something down on video that explains what's happening AND which proves that CTE and BHE are not magic but really ARE a better and superior approach to pocketing balls than ghost ball guessing.
I want to show you video that is uncut and unedited which proves that CTE works as advertised, which proves that BHE requires no adjustment other than the back hand pivot.
How to do that? Well as Lou Figueroua once said in one of these aiming threads, "the way to get to Carnegie Hall is practice." So I have to practice until I am certain I can see the lines every time, until my stroke is nice and smooth again (because honestly, sometimes I have more chicken wing than KFC can fry) and until I can do it in front of others and on camera.
I have had a few epiphanies today. Things that probably aren't new to people like Stan and Spidey and Dave and Mike Page etc.... but thoughts that are new to me when it comes to trying to explain and reconcile CTE/BHE with Dr Dave and Mike Page's physics demonstrations.
Squirt exists. Deflection exists. Swerve exists. duh. Contact induced throw exists.
The object balls are not approaching the pocket at the same angle.
These are all givens.
However despite that the CTE approach works. When I am confident enough then I will do something live on the web if I can. I was able, even with my crooked stroke and bad timing and impatience to make Dr. Dave's three shots by using CTE and without adjusting the way I approached the balls.
Anyway, I put in about an hour or so on video today. I am going to sit down with it tonight and analyze it.
Maybe tomorrow I can put down somethng that will be useful to someone else.
I got my table all marked up - do all my practice runs - everything is firing on all cylinders - Back Hand English test is sweet the cue ball is swinging around the corners as effortlessly as monkeys through the trees - CTE aiming is rocking - I am firing thin cuts - thick cuts - all cuts in the pocket easily.
Then I turn on the camera and nothing goes.
It really feels foolish. It feels like I am wrong about BHE and CTE but I know that I am not.
And I really don't have time to spend doing these videos. But I promise I will get something down on video that explains what's happening AND which proves that CTE and BHE are not magic but really ARE a better and superior approach to pocketing balls than ghost ball guessing.
I want to show you video that is uncut and unedited which proves that CTE works as advertised, which proves that BHE requires no adjustment other than the back hand pivot.
How to do that? Well as Lou Figueroua once said in one of these aiming threads, "the way to get to Carnegie Hall is practice." So I have to practice until I am certain I can see the lines every time, until my stroke is nice and smooth again (because honestly, sometimes I have more chicken wing than KFC can fry) and until I can do it in front of others and on camera.
I have had a few epiphanies today. Things that probably aren't new to people like Stan and Spidey and Dave and Mike Page etc.... but thoughts that are new to me when it comes to trying to explain and reconcile CTE/BHE with Dr Dave and Mike Page's physics demonstrations.
Squirt exists. Deflection exists. Swerve exists. duh. Contact induced throw exists.
The object balls are not approaching the pocket at the same angle.
These are all givens.
However despite that the CTE approach works. When I am confident enough then I will do something live on the web if I can. I was able, even with my crooked stroke and bad timing and impatience to make Dr. Dave's three shots by using CTE and without adjusting the way I approached the balls.
Anyway, I put in about an hour or so on video today. I am going to sit down with it tonight and analyze it.
Maybe tomorrow I can put down somethng that will be useful to someone else.
I can't believe I lost my post. I put 3 hours into it. Anyways, stare at these pics for a while and see if you can find out the difference between the shots.
Same setup. Same alignment. Same pivot.
The center of rotation for each shot is the OB.
Think about this and brain storm.
Dave
Excellent post!
So the difference between the pictures is that the pocket rotates around the OB and as the OB location is different, the amount that the pocket displaces in relation its orbit around the rotation is also different?
So there is two distances at work here. The first distance is obtained by drawing the line from the OB to pocket and that the pocket moves in a circle around the OB (kinda like our solar system and the OB acting as the sun) and the second is the line of the OB to the CB which also moves in circle around the OB. During this process the edges of the balls are also shifting in relation to one another.
With the distance being constant between the three shots from CB to OB, the difference is that the distance between the OB and Pocket is not constant and the pocket displaces differently in relation to its orbit around the OB location.
I'm still very much working this out still.
Sorry been away for last few days but had some stuff to sort out and am back now
.
Agreed. For every shot distance, bridge length, and ball/cloth condition, there are certain cue elevations and shot speeds that will result in no net CB deflection (i.e, the swerve will exactly cancel the squirt). Both your video and mine show this. However, judgment is required to adjust for shot distance, shot speed, cue elevation, and ball/cloth conditions. As I show in my videos (NV B.70 and NV B.71), if you are slightly off with any of this judgment, the CB won't hit the OB where you want. This can happen if you are using a combination of ghost-ball-aiming and BHE, and it can also happen if you are using CTE with subconscious adjustments.
Regards,
Dave
Agreed. All six images show the exact same thing concerning the CB and OB. The OB-center-to-CB-edge line is the same, regardless of how much you rotate the image. The only thing different in the six images is where the pocket is relative to the balls.
Now, when you do an alignment shift and pivot, you can change the direction of lines going through ball edges or centers. And the line directions will depend on how much you actually shift and the exact arc length with which you actually pivot. But this has already been made clear, and this is where the subconscious adjustments take place.
Regards,
Dave
Insight? Yeah, graphs are just what we need to understand CTE. I am starting to remember how my eyes used to glaze over when Ron Shepard would start in with the math.
I can see how this is supremely interesting to you and others but it doesn't solve the original question of how it's possible that a player can approach two seemingly different shots with the same "method" and still pocket both balls.
It doesn't solve the question of how a person with no formal experience in said method can suddenly, when they learn the system, start making shots from what "appear" to be difficult and formerly troublesome positions.
Because this is exactly the experience that I have had, that Dave Segal has had, that Scott Lee has had and many others have had when using the systems.
Ok, so maybe we are all drinking the Houleaid. But as Dave Segal said this is a results oriented task. Aim the ball - shoot - if it goes in then you did it right and if it doesn't go you did it wrong.
The difference for us is that we, and I really can only speak for myself here, had a lot of shots which were troublesome pre-system. Thin cuts up the rail, shots with inside english, shots where you have to follow to the corner and spin two rails out, shots where you have to draw back to the rail with opposite sidespin etc.... IIRC one of the columns in one of the billiard mags once had an article on inside english and how hard it was to judge and the gist of the article was that inside english should be avoided whenever possible.
Speaking for myself, using a system erased nearly all my problems with those shots.
Doing your test I could have made the three balls dozens of times had I not been on a super tight table. As it was I made two out of three many times. And the times I missed with a few exceptions the object ball rattled in the hole. So it wasn't as if the object ball was consistently missing all over the place.
Now, can I say that I wasn't subconsciously adjusting somehow in order to make three "different" shots? Of course I can't say that because not being conscious is the definition of subconscious.
Your contention is that this is the only explanation as you state above.
I don't think that this is true if one is willfully and consciously trying very hard to use a specific method to align oneself to the shot.
Especially when the results are that a player who understands the system and can implement it is then able to consistently pocket balls which were previously low percentage shots for them. I don't see how they can subconsciously adjust to something that they were not able to do previously.
Thoughts?
Me thinks Dr. Dave has 2 new words to lean on for a while (subconscious adjustments ). I learned in this thread that you (dr. dave)will never be convinced of the value of CTE. This thread acclomplished alot on CTE and pro-one yet constently recieved nothing but little jabs from dr.dave. It really is a shame that you and your following will never give it an honest try.
This is my take on things.....I believe CTE and,pro 1 are just what they claim(they being spidey and stan)but I have not heard either of THEM say that no allowance is needed 4 spin,if you send a spinning cb especially with inside into an ob their is an allowance no matter how you apply it,but most good players are not trying to use 2tips of side spin unless the ob is hanging,I believe you can make these adjustment subconsciously ,but hitting a ball long distance with a lot of sidespin needs compensation ,I have got a great player that has agreed to teach me first hand his method of CTE and I cant thank him enough in advance and I dont expect him to tell me I never need to compensate for side spin
"Value," that's the thing that I've really been interested in having defined. What is the actual value of CTE? Can a person start pocketing balls say 50% better over night? Or 40%, or 30%, or on and on? If we could actually measure the increase in consistency, then we could actually measure CTE's value.
Here's my plan: If I can come up with a reasonable way to teach CTE, I will offer it to my students as another alternative aiming method, and will include this instruction as part of my normal course at no extra charge to the student. And if I ever come up with an easy way to explain it (CTE) in print, I will do so in an instructional article and post it on the front page of AZBilliards.com so that everyone can benefit from it for FREE.
I am saying this because I truly believe that the actual benefits that can be derived from CTE are grossly out-weighed by the current time and money investments required to learn it.
Roger
My 2 cts,
i tried to test those 3 shots Dr. Dave posted really seriously- perhaps it s my fault or whatever- for me it doesn t work. Ok, i m not a *atom-physican* or a *world-champ* not either.....i tried hard, and even so i tried to understand what i m doing there after it didn t work for me....searched again some stuff about cte-and started again to *challenge* with those 3 shots- absolutley no chance for me.
no offense- but for me it didn t work- maybe i m doing something wrong...and maybe a *qualified cte-instructor* could show me what i did wrong...but until then i ll never try again.
lg
Ingo
i tried to test those 3 shots Dr. Dave posted really seriously- perhaps it s my fault or whatever- for me it doesn t work. Ok, i m not a *atom-physican* or a *world-champ* not either.....i tried hard, and even so i tried to understand what i m doing there after it didn t work for me....searched again some stuff about cte-and started again to *challenge* with those 3 shots- absolutley no chance for me.
no offense- but for me it didn t work- maybe i m doing something wrong...and maybe a *qualified cte-instructor* could show me what i did wrong...but until then i ll never try again.
lg
Ingo
Here is my video showing BHE with no "compensation".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLfyuAF7kNk
It is my contention that using backhand english one does not need to "compensate" i.e. move to a new space when using side spin.
When someone says "compensate" then this is what I understand; I understand that you mean to say that you must get up off the centerline of aim and reposition your body so that your aim is now to the right or left by x-distance based on your judgement of how much deflection there will be so that the cue ball will contact the object ball in the right spot to make the object ball go into the hole. Is this what you also think of when you say compensate?
If you use backhand english then you will find that you do NOT have to move your entire body to a new place when aiming with spin. ALL you need to do is move your backhand so that the tip pivots to the desired spin and shoot the shot.
The cue will be on the EXACT SAME LINE as if you had moved your entire body.
That's the whole "trick" to BHE. There is no "magic" to it although it certainly feels that way.
If you have say six spin positions - HR, R, LR and the opposites, or better said 1-2 o'clock - 3 o'clock and 4-5 o'clock and their opposites then you have SIX different body movements to get to in order to "compensate" for deflection. However if you use BHE then the compensation is automatically built in as you don't have to move your feet. Instead you move your backhand a little bit and you're right on the right line.
Now of course you can go to far out on the ball and cause way too much deflection and still miss the ball but once you start using BHE you figure out pretty quickly where the tip has to be.
I welcome discussion from Stan and Dave as to whether they "compensate" as I defined compensation above when they use CTE. I don't. I use CTE (Or what I think is CTE) to line up and then I apply my spin using BHE.
I welcome anyone to put up a video that shows how to compensate (move your body) as defined above while also using BHE. I understand that Joe Tucker advocates front hand english, ie. moving the bridge slightly to the left or right in conjunction with BHE, "A little of both" as he puts it. I can see where this COULD work as well and might even be much better. I don't use FHE (not consciously) but maybe that "little bit of both" is part of it.
In any event BHE works. Watch the video and offer your critiques.
Disclaimer. I did miss a few shots because I was putting way too much spin on the ball and one time I just rushed into the shot and didn't aim it properly. Towards the end I miss some really thin cuts because I was starting to get ahead of myself and get into CTE plus BHE and I wasn't focused. So feel free to criticize the misses but understand that they don't invalidate BHE - rather they show that poor aim makes you miss - duh - and adding too much spin throws the cueball way off.
Maybe tomorrow I will have calmed down enough to be able to do the CTE/other systems video.
Last edited:
Excellent post!
So the difference between the pictures is that the pocket rotates around the OB and as the OB location is different, the amount that the pocket displaces in relation its orbit around the rotation is also different?
So there is two distances at work here. The first distance is obtained by drawing the line from the OB to pocket and that the pocket moves in a circle around the OB (kinda like our solar system and the OB acting as the sun) and the second is the line of the OB to the CB which also moves in circle around the OB. During this process the edges of the balls are also shifting in relation to one another.
With the distance being constant between the three shots from CB to OB, the difference is that the distance between the OB and Pocket is not constant and the pocket displaces differently in relation to its orbit around the OB location.
I'm still very much working this out still.
Sorry been away for last few days but had some stuff to sort out and am back now
Correct. The pocket orbits around the OB differently--distance and direction for the exact same alignment procedure. The amount is determined by the OB/pocket distance and the direction (which part of the circle the pocket moves) is determined by the CB/OB positioning. I had pages typed up with different examples and I lost it.