Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

[Dan White]

1. You say no one answers you, yet you have received detailed pms from several people that you have discarded.

We had some detailed conversation back and forth, which I appreciate, but frankly I'm surprised at this post given the things you said in pm and the reason you said them in a pm. For anybody reading this, don't read too much into that statement. It's just that I thought we were in closer agreement to what the issue was than what I see in this post.

2. You say Stan's youtube videos don't explain it all perfectly for you. News for you- they are supplemental videos, not main course videos. Why are you complaining that the free supplemental videos don't contain everything that the for sale main course offers? And then basically condemning the entire system because an addendum didn't cover everything. Not very fair on your part.

I can't argue the same points with 3 different people. It's too exhausting! Let's just shortcut it by saying I never said anything close to the bold text above.

3. The system is not a magic pill. However, if you simply follow the steps, which step one is discard what you are now doing, you will receive an AHA moment where it all falls into place, and you then see that it is exactly as it was described. That AHA moment takes time to get to.

Everybody is talking about magic pills and all kinds of stuff way outside the bounds of a simple question that still remains open. Cookie man is taking a stab at it now and maybe something will come out of that discussion.

Out of respect for you I wouldn't share your pm's with the forum but I think your comments would help move the debate forward a lot.

 

[Neil]

Neil, have you ever spent 2 to three hours a night, plus 6 or more hours on the weekends, for weeks at a time shooting ONE shot over and over in order to make stroke improvements? Have you ever recognized that you had some fundamental stroke flaws so stopped playing for 3 years and devoted that time to eliminating those flaws? Well, that's how I approach the game.

Nobody spoon feeds me anything on the pool table and I don't expect it. I'm not going to get into flame wars with anybody in this discussion. It doesn't lead to anywhere good so I stopped doing that years ago. I do react when someone who doesn't know me writes me off as intellectually lazy. You are reading me wrong on that note, FYI.

OK, then I apologize if that is how you approach the game. That is the right attitude. But, with that kind of attitude, why dismiss CTE after just a few shots that didn't succeed for you?

Get the DVD, follow the steps in it to the letter. That includes printing out the layout diagrams and solutions to those shots, and shooting them over and over until that AHA moment hits you. Once that happens, you will be most of the way there.

 

[Neil]

Everybody is talking about magic pills and all kinds of stuff way outside the bounds of a simple question that still remains open. Cookie man is taking a stab at it now and maybe something will come out of that discussion.

Out of respect for you I wouldn't share your pm's with the forum but I think your comments would help move the debate forward a lot.

I'll sum it up here: The three shots are made with the same visuals. They are not made with the same perspectives. The perspective is what you want to do with the shot. That is, do I want to cut it, bank it, what. Your visual intelligence that is required tells you about where to stand to accomplish your objective.

Once in the approximate alignment to achieve your goal, you then look for your visuals. From the proper perspective, there will only be one place to find the visuals. However, there are several perspectives that one can find the visuals from. Again, that is where visual intelligence comes into play.

What your visuals and pivot due for you is fine tune your alignment onto the proper shot line to make the shot.

So, if you were to set up the three shots, all parallel to the rail with ob and cb, but different distances from the side rail for each shot, and then make a mark one each ob 90 from the rail at the spot closest to the side rail, you then have a mark at the exact edge looking at the ob from the end rail straight on.

Now, where most go wrong, is that they think that is the edge one sees for all three shots. It is not. It is not because of your perspective of the shot. Each shot you are initially aligned a little bit differently which actually gives you a different edge for each shot.

 

[KRJ]

AND all 10 would see a completely different edge, that is why the 'edge' of a sphere is not technically objective.

WOW. Tell us more Mr. Science. Why you're at it, why not tell us all about your vast experience as a player and/or instructor.

I mean, we know about Neils, Stan's, and even JB's. Why NOT add your resume to the mix, so folks can have all the information available and thus are not relying on a false sense of expertise from you. I mean, as you mentioned about "going to court" before a judge based on misleading advertisement. So, the first question would be to qualify you as an expert witness.
I mean, you do want all players to be aware of who is making accusations and provide them with the most honest and reliable information, right ? And that you are well qualified to pick apart systems based on your vast experience.

So, please, do tell. We are all waiting anxiously. Though, most everyone has said he would NEVER do it, so don't hold your breath !!!!

 

[Dan White]

And the best player on Mark's university team uses ProOne/CTE and has many national championships under his belt.

Mark Wilson on aiming systems, Play Great Pool, Part 2, Chapter 11:

... While almost any aiming system can yield initial improvement for many amateur payers, the inescapable fact remains that any aiming system works only as well as the stroke of the player using the system. If your stroke is not perfectly straight, perfectly reproducible, very precise, and pressure-resistant, your results will be less than perfect no matter the aiming system that you choose. It would be premature for novice players to spend a large amount of time on aiming before they develop a sound stroke. If you can't propel the cue ball in a perfectly straight line to a point of your choosing, then there is not much to be gained from even the best aiming system in the world. [Note: Stan has a great stroke and this has a lot to do with his success.]

and...Aiming a pool shot is a function of judgment. Having to rely upon judgment, as opposed to relying on some external gimmick, is unsettling and frustrating to many pool players...it is easier for [casual players] to blame a faulty aiming system than to admit that there are inadequacies in their stroke delivery.

and...you do not want an aiming system that allows you to pocket most balls, most of the time. You want an aiming system and a professional-quality stroke that in combination will allow you to pocket all of the balls, all of the time, in the specific portion of the pocket you choose. This is a goal you will not reach, but must strive for anyway.

and... Aiming systems allow you to set yourself up in a position that will allow you to deliver the cue ball to approximately the correct impact position on the object ball. If your system is sound, your judgment is sound, and your stroke is sound, your ball pocketing will become excellent.

and... All aiming systems are just approximations that get you close to the ideal line; all systems require some judgment if you are going to achieve the highest level of proficiency. High level pros quite often use a specific portion of the pocket to create a natural direction of cue ball travel. You will not become great without great judgment of contact points and object ball path...

Mark has much more to say. He is an advocate of ghost ball aiming and makes a good case for it.

 

[cookie man]

OK, cookie man, thanks for engaging me in this on the forum. Stick with me on this... Stan says ETA is the correct visual for each of the 3 shots, although it is a bit of a stretch for the last shot. He has trouble finding the visual at first, and then gets it. I don't get why the location of the pocket changes anything. When I try this set up, ETA is the same for all 3 shots. In fact, it is impossible to find ETA and CTE from any other place but just one standing position and that position is the same for all 3 shots when I try it. What is Stan doing that I am missing?

I can't really say what you're missing. I just set up regular pool balls on my table and i get the same thing Stan does. The body turns a little bit on the second shot and a little more on the third. I'm only guessing but it has to have something to do with the rails and pockets.

 

[Neil]

Mark Wilson on aiming systems, Play Great Pool, Part 2, Chapter 11:

... While almost any aiming system can yield initial improvement for many amateur payers, the inescapable fact remains that any aiming system works only as well as the stroke of the player using the system. If your stroke is not perfectly straight, perfectly reproducible, very precise, and pressure-resistant, your results will be less than perfect no matter the aiming system that you choose. It would be premature for novice players to spend a large amount of time on aiming before they develop a sound stroke. If you can't propel the cue ball in a perfectly straight line to a point of your choosing, then there is not much to be gained from even the best aiming system in the world. [Note: Stan has a great stroke and this has a lot to do with his success.]

and...Aiming a pool shot is a function of judgment. Having to rely upon judgment, as opposed to relying on some external gimmick, is unsettling and frustrating to many pool players...it is easier for [casual players] to blame a faulty aiming system than to admit that there are inadequacies in their stroke delivery.

and...you do not want an aiming system that allows you to pocket most balls, most of the time. You want an aiming system and a professional-quality stroke that in combination will allow you to pocket all of the balls, all of the time, in the specific portion of the pocket you choose. This is a goal you will not reach, but must strive for anyway.

and... Aiming systems allow you to set yourself up in a position that will allow you to deliver the cue ball to approximately the correct impact position on the object ball. If your system is sound, your judgment is sound, and your stroke is sound, your ball pocketing will become excellent.

and... All aiming systems are just approximations that get you close to the ideal line; all systems require some judgment if you are going to achieve the highest level of proficiency. High level pros quite often use a specific portion of the pocket to create a natural direction of cue ball travel. You will not become great without great judgment of contact points and object ball path...

Mark has much more to say. He is an advocate of ghost ball aiming and makes a good case for it.

Not to discount what Mark says there, because he actually says much that is deeper than many realize. Look at the last paragraph. Where he states that all aiming systems are just app. that get one close to the ideal line.

While the statement is or can be true, it is also misleading to many. CTE will get you dead on line to center pocket with no english. That part is true. However, what makes Marks statement also correct, is that some times, or even many times, one will want to use english, or will sometimes want to use other than the center of the pocket. In those cases, CTE does you get close to the ideal line, but now, with the use of english, one must allow for the changes that result from use of it.

So, technically, if one wants to hit a side of the pocket, or use english, then CTE will only get one very close to the ideal line. Which is still a great place to start from. If one knows that they are dead on line for center pocket, it only takes a tiny adjustment to hit either side of the pocket if necessary. English use adjustments can be almost eliminated with some of the systems out there. But, english use in CTE is to be used the same way one normally uses english, so that doesn't detract from the aiming system in the least.

 

[ENGLISH!]

There is only place where both lines are visible to the shooter. That's what move until you see it means.

In fact, that is the definition of objective. There are lots of illusions in life that appear one way until you obtain the right perspective and see them clearly for what they are.

That's really what all this is about, obtaining the right perspective. And the right perspective is the one that comes from OBJECTIVELY using the balls to obtain, as close to humanly possible, a visual that is consistent and reliable.

This is where the practical objectivity comes from. As much as is possible CTE allows the user to be extremely objective in perceiving alignments that work for just about any shot faced. It doesn't matter if there is a little subjectivity in the process. The amount is so small as to be insignificant.

You and others want to make it out as if when there is ANY subjectivity then CTE is not any better than ghost ball or just guessing.

That's not the case. CTE is way better. It's 99% objective in my experience.

It seems from this reply that you did not fully read about or either did not understand the science.

The CTE & ETA lines are exactly the same. Once one is in position or the perspective to see them simultaneously that relationship is set & hence the fixed cue ball.

Take the balls & shooter & put them on Mars. That relationship & visual is set, like in stone. There is NOTHING objective that can influence or change it. Hence if one repeats the same defined 1/2 tip pivot in each direction there is only one outcome angle in each direction.

So... if it pockets shot 1, how can it then pocket shot 5?

That is for what TonyTheTiger, Dan, PJ, I, etc. etc. etc. is looking to have answered in a concise, definitive, 'objective' manner.

The thing is that PJ, I, & others know that that is not possible & hence that is why it has not be replied to in such a manner.

I gave you my time, but all you did was talk around it, once again, just as others continually do.

Please give me an appropriate objective answer that solves the problem?

I don't expect such from you. However it shows the general readership just what it's all about & if you are sincere, it should give you some food for thought.

The former attempts saying that the position of the balls being different on the table present themselves in a manner to give a different CTE/ETA visual is ridiculous.

If one can not see that logic, then one simply lacks the critical intellectual thinking ability needed to do so or they have it & are being disingenuous for some reason other than the truth.

I would have thought that you could see that.

 

[cookie man]

Take the balls & shooter & put them on Mars. That relationship & visual is set, like in stone. There is NOTHING objective that can influence or change it.

We are not on Mars. We are on a pool table and that is the objective that changes it.

 

[Nick B]

It seems from this reply that you did not fully read about or either did not understand the science.

The CTE & ETA lines are exactly the same. Once one is in position or the perspective to see them simultaneously that relationship is set & hence the fixed cue ball.

Take the balls & shooter & put them on Mars. That relationship & visual is set, like in stone. There is NOTHING objective that can influence or change it. Hence if one repeats the same defined 1/2 tip pivot in each direction there is only one outcome angle in each direction.

So... if it pockets shot 1, how can it then pocket shot 5?....

This is the core of my thinking as well plus all the other variables like spin, squirt, swerve, cling, gearing effects. Like a moon shot they all go in the computer.

 

[Neil]

It seems from this reply that you did not fully read about or either did not understand the science.

The CTE & ETA lines are exactly the same. Once one is in position or the perspective to see them simultaneously that relationship is set & hence the fixed cue ball.

Take the balls & shooter & put them on Mars. That relationship & visual is set, like in stone. There is NOTHING objective that can influence or change it. Hence if one repeats the same defined 1/2 tip pivot in each direction there is only one outcome angle in each direction.

So... if it pockets shot 1, how can it then pocket shot 5?

That is for what TonyTheTiger, Dan, PJ, I, etc. etc. etc. is looking to have answered in a concise, definitive, 'objective' manner.

The thing is that PJ, I, & others know that that is not possible & hence that is why it has not be replied to in such a manner.

I gave you my time, but all you did was talk around it, once again, just as others continually do.

Please give me an appropriate objective answer that solves the problem?

I don't expect such from you. However it shows the general readership just what it's all about & if you are sincere, it should give you some food for thought.

The former attempts saying that the position of the balls being different on the table present themselves in a manner to give a different CTE/ETA visual is ridiculous.

If one can not see that logic, then one simply lacks the critical intellectual thinking ability needed to do so or they have it & are being disingenuous for some reason other than the truth.

I would have thought that you could see that.

Answer once again given in post # 1283. Yet, here you are once again saying it's never been given and slurring others. But, your only problem is that it's not objective to someone that doesn't know what objective actually means....right......

 

[JoeyInCali]

#1292 post.
Whoever makes the #1313 post will.....

 

[JB Cases]

It seems from this reply that you did not fully read about or either did not understand the science.

The CTE & ETA lines are exactly the same. Once one is in position or the perspective to see them simultaneously that relationship is set & hence the fixed cue ball.

Take the balls & shooter & put them on Mars. That relationship & visual is set, like in stone. There is NOTHING objective that can influence or change it. Hence if one repeats the same defined 1/2 tip pivot in each direction there is only one outcome angle in each direction.

So... if it pockets shot 1, how can it then pocket shot 5?

That is for what TonyTheTiger, Dan, PJ, I, etc. etc. etc. is looking to have answered in a concise, definitive, 'objective' manner.

The thing is that PJ, I, & others know that that is not possible & hence that is why it has not be replied to in such a manner.

I gave you my time, but all you did was talk around it, once again, just as others continually do.

Please give me an appropriate objective answer that solves the problem?

I don't expect such from you. However it shows the general readership just what it's all about & if you are sincere, it should give you some food for thought.

The former attempts saying that the position of the balls being different on the table present themselves in a manner to give a different CTE/ETA visual is ridiculous.

If one can not see that logic, then one simply lacks the critical intellectual thinking ability needed to do so or they have it & are being disingenuous for some reason other than the truth.

I would have thought that you could see that.

The science does not matter. Show us the math behind gb and explain how it helps anyone use gb

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[JB Cases]

It seems from this reply that you did not fully read about or either did not understand the science.

The CTE & ETA lines are exactly the same. Once one is in position or the perspective to see them simultaneously that relationship is set & hence the fixed cue ball.

Take the balls & shooter & put them on Mars. That relationship & visual is set, like in stone. There is NOTHING objective that can influence or change it. Hence if one repeats the same defined 1/2 tip pivot in each direction there is only one outcome angle in each direction.

So... if it pockets shot 1, how can it then pocket shot 5?

That is for what TonyTheTiger, Dan, PJ, I, etc. etc. etc. is looking to have answered in a concise, definitive, 'objective' manner.

The thing is that PJ, I, & others know that that is not possible & hence that is why it has not be replied to in such a manner.

I gave you my time, but all you did was talk around it, once again, just as others continually do.

Please give me an appropriate objective answer that solves the problem?

I don't expect such from you. However it shows the general readership just what it's all about & if you are sincere, it should give you some food for thought.

The former attempts saying that the position of the balls being different on the table present themselves in a manner to give a different CTE/ETA visual is ridiculous.

If one can not see that logic, then one simply lacks the critical intellectual thinking ability needed to do so or they have it & are being disingenuous for some reason other than the truth.

I would have thought that you could see that.

I am too stupid to think critically but I can follow directions.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[one stroke]

I answered your questions as best I could. Wasn't good enough for you and I can live with that.

I just don't understand a mentality that refuses to go to a source when one is easily available. I already said a dozen times that I am just a student of this method and a lazy one at that.

So why you would pin your acceptance or refusal to try CTE based on whether I give you "customer service" that satisfies you is beyond me.

People can go to the videos in my sig line and ascertain for themselves if the demonstrations they see are enough to try it or not. With about a half million views combined you will hopefully understand why the paltry views on this thread don't matter to me any more. Everything written about CTE pro and con on AZB doesn't matter because YouTube vids are what is driving interest.

These discussions here are just for fun. And for me it gets my logo and links viewed more often which sells more cases. Every time a knocker posts another knock I get to answer them.

Ciao, late for my match.

Yes you have said it gives you free marketing , it's like a infomercial over and over again reminds me of the guy sealing the bottom of his boat with spray on waterproofing it might works for a short while but it's only a matter of time before it leaks
It leaks because it lacks in solid foundation , you can spray more on like sticking your finger in a dyke but another leak will occur , you can keep patching and patching but at the end of the day your just fixing leaks
To build a solid floating boat you need a solid foundation it requires a solid hull a keel and chines and a rudder to steer
Then it needs a Capt who may use a compass or a sextan or a gps , the latter might be considerd a fool proof aiming devise but it has its flaws it could be off as much as a 100 yrds ,, without haveing a solid comprehension of the other navigating skills the gps could be rendered worthless
The point is that although the GPS might put you on track without the other seamanship skills your likely to crash or sink
1

 

[JB Cases]

Yes you have said it gives you free marketing , it's like a infomercial over and over again reminds me of the guy sealing the bottom of his boat with spray on waterproofing it might works for a short while but it's only a matter of time before it leaks
It leaks because it lacks in solid foundation , you can spray more on like sticking your finger in a dyke but another leak will occur , you can keep patching and patching but at the end of the day your just fixing leaks
To build a solid floating boat you need a solid foundation it requires a solid hull a keel and chines and a rudder to steer
Then it needs a Capt who may use a compass or a sextan or a gps , the latter might be considerd a fool proof aiming devise but it has its flaws it could be off as much as a 100 yrds ,, without haveing a solid comprehension of the other navigating skills the gps could be rendered worthless
The point is that although the GPS might put you on track without the other seamanship skills your likely to crash or sink
1

Really? All that to say pool is more than aiming?

We agree.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[ENGLISH!]

Why?

So then if a pro player uses it openly forever then that counts too?

If he liked pepsi three years ago and mountain dew now what does that mean? It means he liked something then and something else now.

You used to be pro-CTE and now you are nitpicky about it. Others were anti-aiming system and now use them.

I was never Pro CTE. I was intrigued by the totally objective assertion & looked into it when the 5 shots perception video convince me that it was not & never would be as asserted. I trusted when I should have & actually did know better but was made brain dead for a bit by the enticement of a totally objective system.

Murdering a child in the womb was illegal before 1967 & since then it has been legal, but that does not make it morally right & might relatively soon once again become illegal.

What Morris did might be relative depending on why he stopped trying to use it, but since he stopped using it you don't care why & say it is irrelevant.

Your don't want the truth. You just want to put your slant on things CTE probably because you feel some sort of duty to Hal.

Well, Hal was not GOD so he was quite capable of making a mistake just as Stan is.

 

[ENGLISH!]

What questions?

Not even plural & you know what the question is, but again... GAMES & talking around.

I wonder if you all know how the general readership sees all of these games & the constant refusal to answer what should be a simple question if CTE were a truly objective system.

 

[JB Cases]

Mark Wilson on aiming systems, Play Great Pool, Part 2, Chapter 11:

... While almost any aiming system can yield initial improvement for many amateur payers, the inescapable fact remains that any aiming system works only as well as the stroke of the player using the system. If your stroke is not perfectly straight, perfectly reproducible, very precise, and pressure-resistant, your results will be less than perfect no matter the aiming system that you choose. It would be premature for novice players to spend a large amount of time on aiming before they develop a sound stroke. If you can't propel the cue ball in a perfectly straight line to a point of your choosing, then there is not much to be gained from even the best aiming system in the world. [Note: Stan has a great stroke and this has a lot to do with his success.]

and...Aiming a pool shot is a function of judgment. Having to rely upon judgment, as opposed to relying on some external gimmick, is unsettling and frustrating to many pool players...it is easier for [casual players] to blame a faulty aiming system than to admit that there are inadequacies in their stroke delivery.

and...you do not want an aiming system that allows you to pocket most balls, most of the time. You want an aiming system and a professional-quality stroke that in combination will allow you to pocket all of the balls, all of the time, in the specific portion of the pocket you choose. This is a goal you will not reach, but must strive for anyway.

and... Aiming systems allow you to set yourself up in a position that will allow you to deliver the cue ball to approximately the correct impact position on the object ball. If your system is sound, your judgment is sound, and your stroke is sound, your ball pocketing will become excellent.

and... All aiming systems are just approximations that get you close to the ideal line; all systems require some judgment if you are going to achieve the highest level of proficiency. High level pros quite often use a specific portion of the pocket to create a natural direction of cue ball travel. You will not become great without great judgment of contact points and object ball path...

Mark has much more to say. He is an advocate of ghost ball aiming and makes a good case for it.

And again the best player on Mark's team uses CTE.

Mark can have any b player he wants and Stan gets an equal level player for a month. Stan's player will win any shot making contest in my opinion

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[Neil]

Not even plural & know what the question is, but again... GAMES & talking around.

I wonder if you all know how the general readership sees all of these games & the constant refusal to answer what should be a simple question if CTE were a truly objective system.

Oh, believe me, the definitely see how you ignore the answer given once again and then claim no answer was given.