Guessing someone needs a lesson in comedy also.Sugarplum fairies?The comedy is too much to resist.
FEEL IN AIMING
- Thread starter SpiderWebComm
- Start date
phreaticus
Well-known member
The CTE debate needs some Sylvester McMonkey McBean star-on & star-off machines
dquarasr
Registered
I’ve been lurking here. I’d like an explanation how a single alignment, all else being equal, can result in pocketing various cut angles.
Questions:
1) When we say “alignment”, are we talking stance (foot, shoulder, elbow), or are we also including the actual path the cue is aligned on?
2) When using a single alignment for various cut angles, and successfully pocketing balls, does the OB sometimes go in at the far left of the pocket, sometimes dead center, and sometimes far right?
3) Does the CTE stroke vary the tip line during the stroke, i.e., swoops to the right or left as a way to account for using a single alignment for various cut angles?
Or am i simply not understanding what CTE proponents are claiming with respect to alignment and lines?
NOTE: this post is NOT intended to stir up crap. Rather it is borne of a sincere desire to understand CTE if only at a superficial level. Thanks.
Questions:
1) When we say “alignment”, are we talking stance (foot, shoulder, elbow), or are we also including the actual path the cue is aligned on?
2) When using a single alignment for various cut angles, and successfully pocketing balls, does the OB sometimes go in at the far left of the pocket, sometimes dead center, and sometimes far right?
3) Does the CTE stroke vary the tip line during the stroke, i.e., swoops to the right or left as a way to account for using a single alignment for various cut angles?
Or am i simply not understanding what CTE proponents are claiming with respect to alignment and lines?
NOTE: this post is NOT intended to stir up crap. Rather it is borne of a sincere desire to understand CTE if only at a superficial level. Thanks.
It's all on Youtube for free. CTE Pro One Truth Series. Here's the introduction. You can then go 1-27 or skip around. #2: Purchase the book
#3: Take lessons in person #4: Say screw it...looks like too much work
dquarasr
Registered
K thanks. I’ll check it out.
Let me know if you learn anything from that video.
Thousands of people have.
MM: You're new in this asylum. What cookie said is all you're going to get. "It works because it works" is the default answer. Years ago JB posted an hour long youtube video addressed to me in which he (I think) sincerely tried to prove his point using a miniature table. When it came down to the nut of the problem (your question) he said the same thing cookie said. It works because it works. All of Stan's videos say the same thing. You won't get any more because there isn't any more. Well, there is mohrt. He's a CTE instructor who doesn't post much. He guesses that the rails kind of fool your eye into finding the correct shot line depending on where the balls are on the table. Stan says, "The balls present themselves differently depending on where they are on the table." Of course, the curtain shots take away sight of the rails so mohrt's explanation is questionable.
Attack away, guys!
Attack this post you made embarrassing yourself again lol. Black Eye Dan.
dquarasr
Registered
OK, I've watched the video. Here's my gut reaction:
WTF?
Stan's system,, in my view, introduces so many complications!
- Stepping (wth is it, anyway?)
- Pivoting
- Disguised (wth?) pivoting
- It took an entire year for him to realize that the 30 degree shot doesn't work for all shots? I know that intuitively.
- Sight line vs aim line (this one I sorta get; sight line, I assume is the line from the CB to the OB to the ghost ball position; aim line is the line from the OB to the pocket. At least I think that's what it is.)
- Pros sweep into shots (Pro 1)? I've never noticed pro players sweeping in. Most of the best of the best come down straight on the alignment line.
- Half ball pivot (wth is that?)
- It's not center to edge - it's stepped center. Huh?
Everything I've read, heard, watched, and experienced says that as much as possible it is important to remove variables from execution of a shot. Why aim at A, B, or C, then have to adjust after down on the shot? Why not come down on the shot where the cue is already aligned? (OK, I do understand BHE for side spin, but even that is optional if one knows how to adjust the aiming point to account for deflection and swerve.)
The complexity of these "building blocks" is, to mine eyes and sensibility, overwhelmingly unnecessary.
Line it up. Get down. Shoot it. Missed? Figure out whether it was your aim or stroke delivery problem. After developing a reliable stroke, missing is because of misalignment, aiming poorly, or not accounting for gearing and/or side spin deflection and swerve. Keep hitting balls until you know how to adjust for your various angles of shots, speeds, your particular cue, and CB behavior you want with side spin. It doesn't have to be complicated.
I cannot imagine that getting down via sweeping, then pivoting arm in or arm out can be conducive to consistently accurate stroke delivery. This whole concept is contrary to everything I've understood to be strong foundational tenets of building a pool game.
DISCLAIMER: I am a student of the game: I'm 66 years old, consider myself analytical, and I played when I was younger (18-20). I sucked then. I bought a table in my 30s and played very casually and rarely in my 30s, 40s, and 50s, and have only recently in the last couple of years gotten serious about the game. I still suck, but I'm slowly getting better. I'm currently a C-. It's been about 18 months and I'm just now developing a fairly reliable stroke. Up until the last few months, aiming systems didn't matter because I couldn't deliver the CB properly. But now, with a better stroke recently, I see my progress accelerating. Now I can more reliably predict and account for gearing, alignment, shot line, aim line, etc. I don't see how adding variables back into my stroke delivery can help my game. They can only hurt stroke delivery.
I got nothing from this video to convince me that CTE would be useful to me. Sorry to CTE proponents, but that's what I got from the building blocks video. (Script says author of this post needs to duck after posting reply.)
Last edited:
Thanks for the honest review, I completely agree.
So, what do you suggest he uses instead? Did you ever consider actually helping someone with what you've used over the years
and use now instead of being the flaming old anti-CTE asshole that you've become? When and where does your actual pool knowledge come into play with instructions on what to see in linking up the CB to the OB and how to do it?
I would say most Pros do sweep into there shot. That’s not saying they use CTE just that they do sweep into shots. SVB definitely sweeps into shots.
If you think there’s too much movement and such with CTE just pull up some video of Tyler Styer playing with CTE.
5 dollars says you didn’t watch it
Maybe the best post ever in this insane asylum. Totally agree.
I’ll go another 5 dollars that you didn’t watch it either.
You are getting sucked in lol. Next 20 years will be fun.
Watched it. The old man never touched a cue. Donate the $5 to AZB.
“True but remember if you like posting and being on social media the trolls roam. They are trolls because they hate themselves.”
I think this sums up the naysayers pretty good
I think this sums up the naysayers pretty good
What? You ran out of smoke and mirrors?