Fear of Feel

[Neil]

What does "lined up correctly" mean?


Sounds good on paper. In practice I'm sure it isn't nearly as uniform as you believe, even for you.

pj
chgo

Lined up correctly means that you see both lines at the same time.

Are you saying you can't put the edge of your shaft on center cb? Do you realize that the half tip is for placement of your bridge hand? If you are looking at going down the road of different size tips, ect., you are going down the wrong road. The pivot is to center cb, a fixed point. You see center cb, and line up your cue with the center line you see going through the cb. The exact mm of pivot is immaterial.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Lined up correctly means that you see both lines at the same time.

Do you mean you can see directly along both lines like aligning the sights of a rifle?

Are you saying you can't put the edge of your shaft on center cb?

I'm saying you probably don't every time, even though you could. When you graduate to Pro1 you get to drop the pretense and just "sweep" into whatever aim line is needed.

pj
chgo

 

[Neil]

Do you mean you can see directly along both lines like aligning the sights of a rifle?


I'm saying you probably don't every time, even though you could. When you graduate to Pro1 you get to drop the pretense and just "sweep" into whatever aim line is needed.

pj
chgo

No, it's not like sighting a rifle. (unless you can make one eye go one way, and the other eye the other way)

Pro 1 isn't until you learn where to place your bridge hand correctly, which the 1/2 tip pivot does for you.

 

[mista335]

You agree that those lines are objective. Those lines give you a fixed cb. Once you see both lines lined up correctly, you simply look straight at the cb. That is your fixed cb. On your fixed cb, you find center. Center is easily objective, as you have a top and bottom point to draw a line straight through. Doesn't get any more objective than that.

From your center ccb, you have 1/2 tip offset. Again, very objective. Place your cue at 1/2 tip from center and then pivot back to the center. Very objective. As far as the fine tuning after that, there isn't any. You are now on the shot line.

Best explanation of CTE ever written.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Neil:
Lined up correctly means that you see both lines at the same time.

Me:
Do you mean you can see directly along both lines like aligning the sights of a rifle?

Neil:
No, it's not like sighting a rifle. (unless you can make one eye go one way, and the other eye the other way)

Then I can't tell what "see both lines at the same time" means. It sounds like I'd have to figure that out for myself, which means it's whatever I think the shot calls for - i.e., subjective.

But that's only a symptom of the problem anyway. I believe the actual problem is that it's impossible to prescribe a "formula" that could instruct you how to see the lines correctly for each different shot - and that's what it would take.

Neil:
Are you saying you can't put the edge of your shaft on center cb?

Me:
I'm saying you probably don't every time, even though you could. When you graduate to Pro1 you get to drop the pretense and just "sweep" into whatever aim line is needed.

Neil:
Pro 1 isn't until you learn where to place your bridge hand correctly, which the 1/2 tip pivot does for you.

The pivot could be done precisely the same each time (or close enough), but I don't believe it is. I don't disbelieve you - I think if you use the pivot to "fine tune" you do it unconsciously.

pj
chgo

 

[Mirza]

I've already answered that for you in this or another thread, but you didn't respond.

So, as I already wrote once, BeiberLvr had, for me, the best explanation of how to see both visuals and that there is only one place in which the center of your vision must be to see them both.

Stand in front of a wall clock and point your left hand index finger to the left 1/4 of the clock, and your right hand index finger to the right edge of the clock (this would be LCBEtoA+CTEL alignment).

Now, while standing and NOT moving your hands, fingers or any other part of your body, move your head a little to the right or to the left while still looking at the clock and your index fingers, you'll see that your fingers aren't pointing at those spots on the clock any more.

So there is only one place in which your vision center must be to see the both lines in the same time.

Then I can't tell what "see both lines at the same time" means. It sounds like I'd have to figure that out for myself, which means it's whatever I think the shot calls for - i.e., subjective.

But that's only a symptom of the problem anyway. I believe the actual problem is that it's impossible to prescribe a "formula" that could instruct you how to see the lines correctly for each different shot - and that's what it would take.


The pivot could be done precisely the same each time (or close enough), but I don't believe it is. I don't disbelieve you - I think if you use the pivot to "fine tune" you do it unconsciously.

pj
chgo

 

[Straightpool_99]

................

 

[cookie man]

Cookie,

Neil often refuses to answer such questions & most always says that the asker is just trolling (trawling) for a word trap to nit pick.

Is that what you're doing?

You're hurting my teeth pulling them out one by one.

If you have a point why don't you just simply state it & knock all of my teeth out with the one punch.

But... I'll play along a bit longer, but please make your statement & hopefully a valid point.

Shot #1 is very close to a 15* degree shot & given the exact positioning of the balls & the caveat of the visual 'markers' not being 'objective' by strict definition but since they are discernable by most & could be considered 'objective' for discussion purposes & given the fact, like PJ pointed out, that the decision of when it would be the shot is still base on subjective intuition, then I'd say that it could be considered to be 'objective'.

Now what?

So what exactly is there in shot 2 that would make it not be objective in your opinion compared to shot 1. Just trying to see what you mean by subjective and objective. If one is and the other isn't then why? If your buddy truly uses CTE he shoots them both the same.

 

[Mirza]

PJ said, several times: "Then I can't tell what "see both lines at the same time" means."

That is why I wrote that, even though I know most understand it, how to acquire the visuals - the best explanation I read, for me.

Why do they give you different position to your vision center in relation to center CB - center OB when moved on the table, I don't know, but the only explanation can be that we percieve those lines differently on the rectangular surface when they are in different distance/angles from the rails/edges of the rectangular surface, the concrete math answer isn't yet given, but here is one place to start understanding what could be happening and why:

http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/a/a_02/a_02_p/a_02_p_vis/a_02_p_vis.html

I think a lot of us understand how to get the visuals correctly. It is easy enough to simulate, just by putting two balls out in front of you. Some of us have even understood where to put the bridgehand and how to pivot to center cueball.

The problem lies in the fact that two paralell shots can be made center pocket with the same visuals and pivot. This is from a logic and geometry standpoint completely impossible so long as the instructions are followed strictly and to the letter. I think even the most hardened sceptic will agree to the point that you can get to a specific head position where you perceive the edge of the object ball as dividing the cue ball in halves and the edge of the cueball intersecting the objectball quarter (C or A). The point is that the head position to achieve this will be the same (for a given cueball/object ball distance) no matter where the balls are situated. They could be on the ceiling, floor, kitchen table, whatever. Remember you are only looking at the balls when locking in the visual. Any initial perception of the shot will have zero influence on the head position required to see these visuals. If there would be several head positions where the visuals were locked in (fixed cueball) for the same cue/object ball pair, then I can't find it being mentioned anywhere. If you can find that, without tilting your head or something of that manner, I'd be very interested to see it. It would also mean that I don't understand CTE, which I would be happy to admit to.

If I understand Neil correctly the visuals are somehow influenced by your original "perception" of the shot. But for the two paralell shots the visuals must be the same. That is, the moment you perceive the two lines your head is at the same position for both shots (relative to the cueball and object ball).

1. How can the visuals be different on two paralell shots? It can't. Remember that the visuals are a geometric fact, influenced by the distance between our eyes, the ball distances, line convergences etc.
2. How does your perception of the shot influence the visuals? It can't.
3. The visuals determine where your center cueball is.
4. The understanding of center cueball influences where the v of your bridge hand is placed (half a tip to the side)

From this it follows that once your visual is locked, if you follow the instruction to the letter, there is only one position to put your head, from there you work out where to put your hand and since the point you are pivoting to is determined you must get the same result (again strictly following the instructions) for the two paralell shots.

Some new information has surfaced (at least new to me) that may be the missing key to understand what is happening. But I have to say that it is very hard to grasp these concepts.

The process of "rolling over" the visuals is probably where people no longer understand what is happening. I know it is for me. I know that if I use the method I outlined I can not pocket all shots using strict CTE (on a snooker table, IMO the only true test of aim). I can however pocket balls using Pro 1 from the same visuals. I would be lying if I implied that I understood exactly what is happening, as the movements are so small and subtle. I have some theories, though.

 

[BeiberLvr]

I think a lot of us understand how to get the visuals correctly. It is easy enough to simulate, just by putting two balls out in front of you. Some of us have even understood where to put the bridgehand and how to pivot to center cueball.

The problem lies in the fact that two paralell shots can be made center pocket with the same visuals and pivot. This is from a logic and geometry standpoint completely impossible so long as the instructions are followed strictly and to the letter. I think even the most hardened sceptic will agree to the point that you can get to a specific head position where you perceive the edge of the object ball as dividing the cue ball in halves and the edge of the cueball intersecting the objectball quarter (C or A). The point is that the head position to achieve this will be the same (for a given cueball/object ball distance) no matter where the balls are situated. They could be on the ceiling, floor, kitchen table, whatever. Remember you are only looking at the balls when locking in the visual. Any initial perception of the shot will have zero influence on the head position required to see these visuals. If there would be several head positions where the visuals were locked in (fixed cueball) for the same cue/object ball pair, then I can't find it being mentioned anywhere. If you can find that, without tilting your head or something of that manner, I'd be very interested to see it. It would also mean that I don't understand CTE, which I would be happy to admit to.

If I understand Neil correctly the visuals are somehow influenced by your original "perception" of the shot. But for the two paralell shots the visuals must be the same. That is, the moment you perceive the two lines your head is at the same position for both shots (relative to the cueball and object ball).

1. How can the visuals be different on two paralell shots? It can't. Remember that the visuals are a geometric fact, influenced by the distance between our eyes, the ball distances, line convergences etc.
2. How does your perception of the shot influence the visuals? It can't.
3. The visuals determine where your center cueball is.
4. The understanding of center cueball influences where the v of your bridge hand is placed (half a tip to the side)

From this it follows that once your visual is locked, if you follow the instruction to the letter, there is only one position to put your head, from there you work out where to put your hand and since the point you are pivoting to is determined you must get the same result (again strictly following the instructions) for the two paralell shots.

Some new information has surfaced (at least new to me) that may be the missing key to understand what is happening. But I have to say that it is very hard to grasp these concepts.

The process of "rolling over" the visuals is probably where people no longer understand what is happening. I know it is for me. I know that if I use the method I outlined I can not pocket all shots using strict CTE (on a snooker table, IMO the only true test of aim). I can however pocket balls using Pro 1 from the same visuals. I would be lying if I implied that I understood exactly what is happening, as the movements are so small and subtle. I have some theories, though.

Absolutely it can.

Put CB on the headspot and OB in center of the table.

Line up center to center and hit the ball. Now do the same thing, except this time, instead of lining up center to center. First turn your entire body to the right, and now line up center to center. Hit the ball. It will go to a different spot on the rail.

Why would that happen when the balls are in the same spot for each example? Simply because as we change our position, our perception changes as well. This is turn changes the center of the CB as we view it from each position.

Same thing is happening in the 5 shots example. Center CB in the first shot is different from center CB in the rest of the shots, because each shot requires it's own unique perception.

 

[ENGLISH!]

I think a lot of us understand how to get the visuals correctly. It is easy enough to simulate, just by putting two balls out in front of you. Some of us have even understood where to put the bridgehand and how to pivot to center cueball.

The problem lies in the fact that two paralell shots can be made center pocket with the same visuals and pivot. This is from a logic and geometry standpoint completely impossible so long as the instructions are followed strictly and to the letter. I think even the most hardened sceptic will agree to the point that you can get to a specific head position where you perceive the edge of the object ball as dividing the cue ball in halves and the edge of the cueball intersecting the objectball quarter (C or A). The point is that the head position to achieve this will be the same (for a given cueball/object ball distance) no matter where the balls are situated. They could be on the ceiling, floor, kitchen table, whatever. Remember you are only looking at the balls when locking in the visual. Any initial perception of the shot will have zero influence on the head position required to see these visuals. If there would be several head positions where the visuals were locked in (fixed cueball) for the same cue/object ball pair, then I can't find it being mentioned anywhere. If you can find that, without tilting your head or something of that manner, I'd be very interested to see it. It would also mean that I don't understand CTE, which I would be happy to admit to.

If I understand Neil correctly the visuals are somehow influenced by your original "perception" of the shot. But for the two paralell shots the visuals must be the same. That is, the moment you perceive the two lines your head is at the same position for both shots (relative to the cueball and object ball).

1. How can the visuals be different on two paralell shots? It can't. Remember that the visuals are a geometric fact, influenced by the distance between our eyes, the ball distances, line convergences etc.
2. How does your perception of the shot influence the visuals? It can't.
3. The visuals determine where your center cueball is.
4. The understanding of center cueball influences where the v of your bridge hand is placed (half a tip to the side)

From this it follows that once your visual is locked, if you follow the instruction to the letter, there is only one position to put your head, from there you work out where to put your hand and since the point you are pivoting to is determined you must get the same result (again strictly following the instructions) for the two paralell shots......

.....

:thumbup2: :thumbup2: :thumbup2:

Exactly.

 

[ENGLISH!]

So what exactly is there in shot 2 that would make it not be objective in your opinion compared to shot 1. Just trying to see what you mean by subjective and objective. If one is and the other isn't then why? If your buddy truly uses CTE he shoots them both the same.

Cookie,

See StraightPool__99's post above.

It amazes me how you can say what 'my buddy' does having never met him nor ever spoken to him.

He does not shoot with CTE. I guess you overlooked that part.

Best 2 You, Cookie.
Rick

 

[ENGLISH!]

PJ said, several times: "Then I can't tell what "see both lines at the same time" means."

That is why I wrote that, even though I know most understand it, how to acquire the visuals - the best explanation I read, for me.

Why do they give you different position to your vision center in relation to center CB - center OB when moved on the table, I don't know, but the only explanation can be that we percieve those lines differently on the rectangular surface when they are in different distance/angles from the rails/edges of the rectangular surface, the concrete math answer isn't yet given, but here is one place to start understanding what could be happening and why:

http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/a/a_02/a_02_p/a_02_p_vis/a_02_p_vis.html

Hi Mirza,

I almost transposed those letters again but I caught myself thanks to your guidance.

Those eye things are contrived manmade tricks. I can usually immediately see right through almost all of them.

That is where subjectivity & perception comes into play. We are individuals. We all do not have the same spacial awareness & capability to discern the reality. Some are much more easily tricked.

Also, staring at the bird in the gage is a color related thing. It very briefly 'appeared' in the gage as a purple ghost for me before very quickly vanishing. I think that is what is called retinal retention, but I'm not sure.

If you close your eyes & then quickly open them one should see white first, followed by yellow & then red. Why do you think traffic lights are the colors they are in a green housing. Some are yellow housings for a reason I'm not sure except to maybe be more visual when the lighting is not operating.

The point here is that those 'tricks' are not universal & not objective. You will see one thing & I will see another.

To me, being visually tricked is not 'visual intelligence'.

'Visual intelligence' to me would be the ability to understand & realise the reality, the 'objective truth', of what is actually there & not what it may appear to be to some that do not have that same level of ability & are more easily tricked.

If one perceives a straight shot to not be a straight shot, that does not make the shot not straight. The objective truth is that the shot is straight. One's perception that it is not does not make it not straight. The reality & the 'objective truth' is that the shot is straight.

If CTE's goal or function is to make one 'cross eyed' & perceive what is not, I for one would certainly want no part of it.

Perhaps that is the 'phenomenon' that has been mentioned. Some can be convinced to see what is not.

However there are those that can not be convince to see what is not.

That is subjective perception vs objective truth...or reality.

Sorry for the rant.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

 

[ENGLISH!]

I'm just curious here.

What would be the CTE equivalent of the following?

A shot of less than 15* cut to the left, shot by aligning inside edge of the cue ball to the inside edge of the object ball along with a 1/2 tip pivot from the inside left.

I think Colin might be able to help but I think he is going to ask me what's the separation distance between the balls.

This is probably a waste of time but a thought just poped into my head & perhaps this will spur something from another.

Best,
Rick

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Stand in front of a wall clock and point your left hand index finger to the left 1/4 of the clock, and your right hand index finger to the right edge of the clock (this would be LCBEtoA+CTEL alignment).

Now, while standing and NOT moving your hands, fingers or any other part of your body, move your head a little to the right or to the left while still looking at the clock and your index fingers, you'll see that your fingers aren't pointing at those spots on the clock any more.

So there is only one place in which your vision center must be to see the both lines in the same time.

That's seeing them like sighting a rifle (putting your eyes ON both lines). But Neil says "No, it's not like sighting a rifle". And Stan has said the "visual" is not having your eyes on both lines.

More to the point, it simply isn't physically possible to see straight along both lines at once most of the time because the lines don't cross.

As usual, everybody's description is different, which means there is no "system" description that everybody understands the same way - everybody just makes up their own to describe what they think they do. This is the farthest thing from "objective".

pj
chgo

 

[Mirza]

In my example, as in the CTE Pro1 system, your eyes ARE NOT on the lines.

If you did what I described you would know that.

Your vision and year head is between the hands which are going from your shoulders and not directly under your eyes/vision center.

In my example you align your vision center to the center of the clock, get your hands and index fingers in the air and align them to the points on the clock, in your peripheral view, your vision center and your eyes ARE NOT directly above your hands nor your index fingers.

Now if you move your head a bit right/left without moving any other part of your body while still looking at the clock and your index fingers you'll see that they don't point at the same spots on the clock, which proves that there is only one spot where your vision center can be in so that your index fingers are pointing to those spots on the clock IN YOUR PERIPHERAL view.

I hope you understand now how you're supposed to align and what I'm talking about

That's seeing them like sighting a rifle (putting your eyes ON both lines). But Neil says "No, it's not like sighting a rifle". And Stan has said the "visual" is not having your eyes on both lines.

More to the point, it simply isn't physically possible to see straight along both lines at once most of the time because the lines don't cross.

As usual, everybody's description is different, which means there is no "system" description that everybody understands the same way - everybody just makes up their own to describe what they think they do. This is the farthest thing from "objective".

pj
chgo

 

[ENGLISH!]

That's seeing them like sighting a rifle (putting your eyes ON both lines). But Neil says "No, it's not like sighting a rifle". And Stan has said the "visual" is not having your eyes on both lines.

More to the point, it simply isn't physically possible to see straight along both lines at once most of the time because the lines don't cross.

As usual, everybody's description is different, which means there is no "system" description that everybody understands the same way - everybody just makes up their own to describe what they think they do. This is the farthest thing from "objective".

pj
chgo

Good Morning Patrick,

My interpretation (subjective) is to position oneself on the line that would bisect the other two lines. When that is done you can NOT see down either line. You don't see down the CTE line nor do you see down, say, the ETA line.

Now, I think many of us have taken that THAT is the only place to be & that 'locks' or fixes the center of the cue ball for that 'visual' from which to perform the 1/2 tip offset & pivot back to center.

For the sake of discussion, I have been conceding that to be a discernable position. But...I have taken that THAT is the ONLY position. By that, I mean, 1/2 way between the two lines, ON the bisecting line.

It now seems, from certain descriptions, that one is 'allowed' to be nearly anywhere between those two lines, which seems in total contrast to what I've heard Stan always say, except on the perception videos.

If that is 'allowed', it explains much, at least to me, but...

it also confirms, to me, that it is subjective based OFF of what might be considered 'objectively discernable'.

Best to You & All,
Rick

 

[Neil]

That's seeing them like sighting a rifle (putting your eyes ON both lines). But Neil says "No, it's not like sighting a rifle". And Stan has said the "visual" is not having your eyes on both lines.

More to the point, it simply isn't physically possible to see straight along both lines at once most of the time because the lines don't cross.

As usual, everybody's description is different, which means there is no "system" description that everybody understands the same way - everybody just makes up their own to describe what they think they do. This is the farthest thing from "objective".

pj
chgo

That's not true Pat. There is a system description. It's just that some don't or can't follow the directions as stated. Granted, some are making up their own way of doing things, and then, that is subjective.

You don't need to see down both lines at the exact same time. You need to look at center to edge, then, just moving your eyes over a little, look for edge to A,B, or C. If you can't find both lines from your current position, you need to move over a little until you can see both lines from the same position. Very objective.

 

[duckie]

That's not true Pat. There is a system description. It's just that some don't or can't follow the directions as stated. Granted, some are making up their own way of doing things, and then, that is subjective.

You don't need to see down both lines at the exact same time. You need to look at center to edge, then, just moving your eyes over a little, look for edge to A,B, or C. If you can't find both lines from your current position, you need to move over a little until you can see both lines from the same position. Very objective.

You mean the lines that a person and only that person can see using only their mental imaginary skills.....very subjective.

 

[ronscuba]

I've already answered that for you in this or another thread, but you didn't respond.

So, as I already wrote once, BeiberLvr had, for me, the best explanation of how to see both visuals and that there is only one place in which the center of your vision must be to see them both.

Stand in front of a wall clock and point your left hand index finger to the left 1/4 of the clock, and your right hand index finger to the right edge of the clock (this would be LCBEtoA+CTEL alignment).

Now, while standing and NOT moving your hands, fingers or any other part of your body, move your head a little to the right or to the left while still looking at the clock and your index fingers, you'll see that your fingers aren't pointing at those spots on the clock any more.

So there is only one place in which your vision center must be to see the both lines in the same time.

I'm with you so far. The clock represents the OB, my hands represent the edges of the CB.

But now take the same wall clock and shift it over 3 feet to the right and I also shift over 3 feet to the right. Do as you say, my head, hands and eyes will be in the same exact positions as before.

If I keep my hands in the same fixed position and rotate, my hands no longer point to 1/4 and edge on the clock.

Putting this on the table the same perception on 5 different cut angles doesn't work for me. If I let the rails and pockets influence me and use some other aiming method to give me a rough starting point as someone suggested, CTE with a 15 degree perception works ok for me on shots close to a 15 degree cut.

As cuts get thinner, I struggle using CTE and a 15 degree perception. At this point, I might as well use the same aiming method that gave me the rough starting point. I may fine tune using contact points, overlaps, fractions, ghost ball, etc..

The more I experiment with CTE, the more I conclude that for me, it works OK when I use a 15, 30, 45 perception for shots that are close to that cut angle. So for me, it works similar to fraction method of aiming with subjective adjustments.

Just my experiences. Everyone sees and thinks differently.