Cte
- Thread starter jamesroberts
- Start date
Yeah well, well sure you can make all those shots pivoting on every shot but you were cheating. You used an open bridge instead of a closed bridge. :wink: I really liked the shot at 2:54.
JoeyA
If Patrick and all the "naysayers" go away, all the controversy will go away with them. Correct?
Roger
8pack -
Great video, as usual. Ya know, I don't think I've ever seen a "naysayer" post any videos (i.e. colins drill, or something similar like yours).
Great job.
Dave
Great video, as usual. Ya know, I don't think I've ever seen a "naysayer" post any videos (i.e. colins drill, or something similar like yours).
Great job.
Dave
Unfortunately only one side seems to be able to produce such videos. The other side only posts pictures and charts showing why something shouldn't work in theory. Meanwhile those of us that took the time to think outside the box are improving dispite the negativity of the naysayers.
I, for one, don't want the naysayers to go anywhere. Except when the superfluous, unnecessary comments start, they CAN go somewhere! :grin: We need objective debate. We need contribution to put new ideas into the mix.
The problem is that some posters are still stuck on go. They've got their minds made up and won't look at things differently. Everything is cut and dried, so why bother? The yeasayers have some crazy ideas at times, but negatively attacking them backs them into a corner.
JSP has been doing an excellent job of maintaining decorum and trying to solve this impasse between factions by looking at new ways to get his points across. His examples of examining different claims by Cte users generates some productive definitions and parameters we can all agree to use.
I try to coax the threads in a direction that will help research. I can be a beyotch when I see the bullies circling a target. I teach people how to fight in the real world as my night time job. I don't enjoy this written word combat at all. Puts me on tilt. Don't say it unless you can do it face to face and mean it.
What do you think, Roger? If they knew they weren't going to be slammed for a possible slip of the tongue in one of their posts, would people post more and contribute more?
Best,
Mike
Instead of pointless trolling and bragging, could we address the core issue?
Sure. If you were using ghost ball or contact point aiming, what would you change to pocket each ball?
Best,
Mike
If you mean what's the difference between the two methods, it's what you're aligning with what.
With ghost ball aiming you align the (pretty-easy-to-visualize) CB center with the (not-as-easy-to-visualize) ghost ball center.
With contact point aiming you align the (difficult-to-estimate) CB contact point with the (easier-to-visualize) OB contact point.
In this context "estimated" is different from "visualized" - "estimated" is used to mean actually hidden from sight (on the opposite side of the CB).
pj
chgo
Last edited:
This will never be addressed and is why I gave up on these threads.
Of course I say that, but here I am lol...
It has been rephrased a hundred times in a hundred ways but it boils down to this:
Without the pocket, there is no aiming system.
I tried to point it out with my "pockets are out of view" example.
You tried to point it out with your "two different shots in the same CTE category" example.
Patrick tried to explain it with his "the table moved 4 inches" post.
And Dr. Dave tried to point it out with his "three shots" example.
Others have found variations on these. The point is, several people have taken different paths to arrive at the exact same point.
This obstacle just can't be explained away. I haven't even seen someone take a decent stab at it.
---------
It bums me out (irrelevant, just a personal aside) to see otherwise nice guys who make good posts seemingly married to defending CTE. There's a lot of hostility. Maybe they're equally bummed to see me or you knocking it. As patrick's pointing out... there's lots of avoidance and defensive tactics.
- "You shouldn't say anything til you try it" ...ok, I did, and I had no way to adjust myself when I tried moving everything 4 inches to the left or right.
- "The answers have already been posted" ... hard as it is to believe, people have managed to write hundreds of pages on CTE without answering this specific question. And nobody wants to dig through hundreds of pages, when just one well-written paragraph will do.
- "Well if you don't wanna sift through it and do the work, you don't deserve it. Pay for the CD" ...well, that doesn't convince me you're right or I'm wrong, so it's irrelevant. But it does seem fishy. It's weird someone will accuse guys like Pat of having an agenda... but the CTE guys are the ones trying to "sell" something (both metaphorically and sometimes literally).
Good points. I'll quit with the drama.
My question rephrased is, what changes when you aim the two shots on Sniper's link with different methods? I was suggesting that nothing changes from each shot physically except the alignment. For any aiming system you move your alignment to shoot the new angle.
This point of contention is a given in the Cte equation also. Common sense tells us this. A physical adjustment is made to turn the body to the new shot. This is initiated by a physical movement...a visual set up in order to direct the body to gain the correct position to pocket the ball. This is the first physical step we use to begin the pre-shot routine. It is the difference between a smooth stroke and steering the cue ball and missing.
With this ability to determine the correct alignment, we can reduce the available choices to smaller target areas or reference points. This is a comfortable piece of real estate for the eyes to give specific information to our brains and with minute adjustments get our bodies to the correct aiming line. A small, almost imperceptible movement will make you miss a ball. The same idea is true with your alignment. Without a stroke compensation, you will miss the shot. A small, correct adjustment for a changing angle will also allow you to pocket a ball.
If you move your alignment a millimeter you can miss a ball by a large margin. You can also use this idea to change your alignment and create a large change in your aim. I contend that these minor adjustments by the user are so small that they are unnoticeable. But the results speak for themselves. Players are improving their shotmaking percentages, and using words like "feel' are too vague and all encompassing to give justice to such a consistent result. If it was feel, we would have no consistent results as each shooter is an individual with completely different wiring.
The physical adjustment happens after the first physical alignment...the visual engagement of the cue ball/object ball. With a quick calculation from the visual feedback, the user turns their body as the visuals are setting up. This arrangement of the visuals, guiding the body, allows the mind to fine tune an alignment, despite the user seemingly not aware of the correct line. It is an automatic response that befuddles beginning users, and they have to learn to trust what is happening.
This is not uncommon and is possibly the first time they have been exposed to letting their eyes/mind take over the shooting. It may have occurred when they were in dead stroke, but this is the first time they thought they were consciously in charge and they were wrong. The eyes were doing all the work. This accounts for small adjustments for the pivot, also.
Exploring how the mind/eyes work is the next generation of aiming systems. Not tricks or voodoo, just understanding. We've analyzed the properties of the game inside out. I think understanding how we work and perform should be a new direction to take. Pool is still rooted in the past. All the other sports are exploring their psychology, visuals and physical applications. We're still fighting about who said and did what. Are any of us winning the big tourneys? Maybe we need to look at a different approach. HAMB is fun, but what about the second million? Maybe not so fun, unless you just want to hit balls as the pool world goes past your window. Anyway, PJ, I answered my own question. :grin:
Best,
Mike
I think this (and the rest of the post, for that matter) is exactly correct. What's really unfortunate is that there isn't enough money involved to interest, say, Ariel Dynamics (Gideon Ariel). They (and some of their competitors, and nowadays probably quite a few university kinesiology programs) have the the knowledge, experience and tools to obtain real data about the physiological and visual aspects of physical performance. Some of the work might even be interesting. I don't know if anybody has done much in the way of analyzing things involving recognition of very fine, static spatial relationships that culminate in very small, slow physical motions.
aiming systems
Personally I like CTE and ProOne even more, because I prefer the air pivoting over the manual pivoting. For me it works - and for people I show it it works too. Nevertheless I tried to work on my own system. Actually it is a system that mixes up parts of shadow aiming, inner part of the ferule aiming, very little of perfect aim and ProOne. It includes pivoting like ProOne too.
I have tested it night and day and taught it to 16 of my students.
Until now I am just before finishing the German version of it. I plan to release a pdf and will show each shot of different angles and different strokes on video which you can watch by typing in a link and a password.
Price is not yet fixed-probably somewhere around 25 US Dollars I think.
Here is a little video I did 2 weeks ago.
Here I do a drill of Joe Tucker (cueball at the rail). I did it with my aiming system.
So I have a little challenge for all the naysayers of CTE/ProOne because I know that CTE and ProOne both work great as well for this so very difficult drill.
I encourage you-any of you to shoot this drill with ghostball, contact to contact, BOB or FEEL just any system without pivoting and to post it here on the AZ-forum.
If you happen to make it in less than 20 tries for these 17 shots a will
transfer 30 Dollars via PayPal to you.
So you have a million tries... Go for it...we all wait for a video of a naysayer....
here is the link to my video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3duLCS-e7U
Personally I like CTE and ProOne even more, because I prefer the air pivoting over the manual pivoting. For me it works - and for people I show it it works too. Nevertheless I tried to work on my own system. Actually it is a system that mixes up parts of shadow aiming, inner part of the ferule aiming, very little of perfect aim and ProOne. It includes pivoting like ProOne too.
I have tested it night and day and taught it to 16 of my students.
Until now I am just before finishing the German version of it. I plan to release a pdf and will show each shot of different angles and different strokes on video which you can watch by typing in a link and a password.
Price is not yet fixed-probably somewhere around 25 US Dollars I think.
Here is a little video I did 2 weeks ago.
Here I do a drill of Joe Tucker (cueball at the rail). I did it with my aiming system.
So I have a little challenge for all the naysayers of CTE/ProOne because I know that CTE and ProOne both work great as well for this so very difficult drill.
I encourage you-any of you to shoot this drill with ghostball, contact to contact, BOB or FEEL just any system without pivoting and to post it here on the AZ-forum.
If you happen to make it in less than 20 tries for these 17 shots a will
transfer 30 Dollars via PayPal to you.
So you have a million tries... Go for it...we all wait for a video of a naysayer....
here is the link to my video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3duLCS-e7U
aiming system
...by the way...my system shows you how to adjust EXACTLY for CIT.
and it shows a way how to adjust for english on base of my "no english system". Because the factors of squirt, deflection, cloth, kind of stroke vary from player to player and cue and shaft and tip NO system can allow for SIT and all the other stuff just mentioned. BUT IT SHOWS YOU HOW TO ALIGN YOUR BODY AND YOUR VISION AND SHOWS YOU A BASE VIA VIRTUAL REFERENCE POINTS AND VIRTUAL LINES ON WHICH YOU CAN THAN EXACTLY ADJUST FOR YOUR NEEDS when using english, draw, punch, slow or fast strokes.
...just wanted you to know...
...by the way...my system shows you how to adjust EXACTLY for CIT.
and it shows a way how to adjust for english on base of my "no english system". Because the factors of squirt, deflection, cloth, kind of stroke vary from player to player and cue and shaft and tip NO system can allow for SIT and all the other stuff just mentioned. BUT IT SHOWS YOU HOW TO ALIGN YOUR BODY AND YOUR VISION AND SHOWS YOU A BASE VIA VIRTUAL REFERENCE POINTS AND VIRTUAL LINES ON WHICH YOU CAN THAN EXACTLY ADJUST FOR YOUR NEEDS when using english, draw, punch, slow or fast strokes.
...just wanted you to know...
Sure he can
That wouldn t be the question after watching this video for sure!But a bit difficult to see, how he makes the balls
@Ekkes: I m sure that you know that i this is absolutley no offense against you
But you know also for sure, that it won t take long until some railbirds will discuss HOW you make those balls- may it be the H.I.I.T.F.H system or just P.E.T --
Greets to Regensburg ^^
lg
Ingo
p.s. i don t care how he made them. Great shooting!
I doubt it.
Then you agree that exploring how pivot systems work is useful and their users shouldn't be so defensive about it.
pj
chgo