Ferrule and Tip Aiming System

[tonythetiger583]

Nice discoveries. It always pays to pay attention to what's going on. My question for thick or thin is just a curious probe into the workings of different visual "perceptions", like the 15 and 30. How most CTE users say that after a while they can use just those two visuals to make a varying array of cut shots. Just trying to understand....if your cue tip always points to the contact point on a 15 visual pivot, wouldn't that always produce the same shot angle? I thought maybe that's where the thick or thin (outside or inside pivot or sweep) came I to play.

That's pretty much the heart of the entire argument. People who use CTE, use the same visuals and pivot the same way, but we get different results depending on the location of the balls in relation to the table. I don't know why.

I keep bringing up 90/90 because it operates on pretty much the same mechanism, but is simpler to learn.

And no the thick and thin pivots don't come into play.

So on pretty much every category of cut, you thin it. It's just how it works.

The exception is if you want to turn a 15 degree perception into a straight-in shot. So you pivot to thicken your offset.

Every other shot you pivot to thin it in the same way. And it won't fill in any of the gaps like I'm assuming you're guessing.

The only other exception is if you want to turn a 30 degree perception into a 15 degree thinned perception. It's done purely for comfort (depending on which hand you hold your cue in, you might like pivoting from the left more than the right). But it doesn't add anything.

If you're doing a 15 perception CUT, you thin it. category 30, you thin, same with 40 and 60. You only thicken the 15 degree offset perception, to turn it into a straight-in shot.

Also I've noticed I can make a 0 degree perception, by lining up edge to edge and thinning it, but that's not canon.

 

[stan shuffett]

that's pretty much the heart of the entire argument. People who use cte, use the same visuals and pivot the same way, but we get different results depending on the location of the balls in relation to the table. I don't know why.

I keep bringing up 90/90 because it operates on pretty much the same mechanism, but is simpler to learn.

And no the thick and thin pivots don't come into play

so on pretty much every category of cut, you thin it. It's just how it works

the exception is if you want to turn a 15 degree perception into a straight-in shot. So you pivot to thicken your offset.

Every other shot you pivot to thin it in the same way. And it won't fill in any of the gaps like i'm assuming you're guessing.


The only other exception is if you want to turn a 30 degree perception into a 15 degree thinned perception. It's done purely for comfort (depending on which hand you hold your cue in, you might like pivoting from the left more than the right). But it doesn't add anything.


If you're doing a 15 perception cut, you thin it. Category 30, you thin, same with 40 and 60. You only thicken the 15 degree offset perception, to turn it into a straight-in shot.


Also i've noticed i can make a 0 degree perception, by lining up edge to edge and thinning it, but that's not canon.

notes did not contrast . Will redo

stan shuffett

 

[stan shuffett]

That's pretty much the heart of the entire argument. People who use CTE, use the same visuals and pivot the same way, but we get different results depending on the location of the balls in relation to the table. I don't know why.

I keep bringing up 90/90 because it operates on pretty much the same mechanism, but is simpler to learn.

And no the thick and thin pivots don't come into play.

So on pretty much every category of cut, you thin it. It's just how it works.

The exception is if you want to turn a 15 degree perception into a straight-in shot. So you pivot to thicken your offset.

Every other shot you pivot to thin it in the same way. And it won't fill in any of the gaps like I'm assuming you're guessing.

The only other exception is if you want to turn a 30 degree perception into a 15 degree thinned perception. It's done purely for comfort (depending on which hand you hold your cue in, you might like pivoting from the left more than the right). But it doesn't add anything.

If you're doing a 15 perception CUT, you thin it. category 30, you thin, same with 40 and 60. You only thicken the 15 degree offset perception, to turn it into a straight-in shot.

Also I've noticed I can make a 0 degree perception, by lining up edge to edge and thinning it, but that's not canon.

Misinfo Correction:

Thick and thin pivots are an inherent aspect of CTE.
Cuts are either thickened or thinned.
There are no straight ins in CTE. They're cut shots. They're thickened.
There are no gaps!
30s are thickened into 15s not thinned.

Stan Shuffett

 

[BC21]

Agreed, I'm sure he doesn't pivot either.


I'm wondering how well his aiming system would pair with Poolology. I haven't tried either yet, but they seem to compliment each other.

From what I gather, Poolology gives a very precise method of determining what fractional overlap is correct to make the ball.

I like shaft aiming, but I feel like Shane's method has too many gaps, that the video kind of glazes over for the sake of making the system sound simple.

It would be nice to smooth out his categories, even if they involve more categories, and pairing them up with their correct angle values.

Combining that with poolology would seem pretty sweet, if you knew what they exact values were for his center shaft, vs 1/3, vs 1/4 vs full edge alignments.

Maybe using Center OB, 1/3, 3/4, 1/2 ball and Edge of OB, and using the shaft alignments to fill in all the in between angles.

Maybe even solely using Center. 3/4, 1/2 and Edge while bringing in the other edge of the shaft depending on whether you want to thicken the shot or thin it.

For example. He uses Edge of Shaft to a hair outside of edge of ball for a really thin cut.

Say on all slight angle left cuts, you still point at the 3/4 mark, but with different parts of the shaft. Use the left if you want to thin it more, use the right if you want to thicken it more.

I like shane's idea, but it bugs me that you can't determine which category to use, other than trial and error.

That might be a good way to fine tune fractional aiming - using your tip or shaft in reference to the OB fraction AND the CB hit. I use backhand/pivot english occasionally, but I don't like the idea of incorporating any pivot to help determine where the CB needs to be when it hits the OB.

In the Poolology book I break shots down into 1/8 fractions. But that doesn't mean there are gaps. Example: The system may provide an aim point that falls between a 3/8 and a 1/2 ball hit. In the book I suggest to use the closest 1/8. But I also state to pay attention to the result and learn from it.

On a 3/8 shot the side of your tip/shaft would be outside the OB, flush with its edge if you could stroke it that far. A 1/2 ball shot of course splits your tip on the edge of the OB. Well, if you aim through CCB to put a quarter of you tip inside the OB edge you'll be aiming for a 7/16 hit, between a 3/8 and a 1/2.

I don't go over this in the book. Keeping it simple is the key. And paying attention to results and fine tuning the aim as needed is what gives a player feel. But it's not guesswork, it's a precise point of aim that happens to fall in the "gap" between two easy to recognize 1/8 fractions.

 

[tonythetiger583]

Misinfo Correction:

Thick and thin pivots are an inherent aspect of CTE.
Cuts are either thickened or thinned.
I meant you can play by just using an inside sweep for 15, 30, 40, and 60 other than when you use an outside sweep for the 15 for relatively straight in shots. 30, outside is a comfort issue more than a requirement.
There are no straight ins in CTE. They're cut shots. They're thickened.
I understand what you're saying here, but I think it's more important to understanding CTE as a whole on a fundamental and principle level. Like it's neat, but it's not going to make sense to someone who doesn't know CTE.
There are no gaps!
I didn't say there were gaps, I'm just addressing his implication that maybe variable pivot amounts are responsible for various cut results. Pivot amounts are fixed and do not come into play as an explanation for different cut angles within the same perception category.
30s are thickened into 15s not thinned.
I forgot to write that you thicken into a 15, but yes. In my head to turn a 30 into a 15 automatically implies thickening. I guess that wouldn't be obvious.


Stan Shuffett

I don't disagree with you,

 

[tonythetiger583]

Misinfo Correction:

Thick and thin pivots are an inherent aspect of CTE.
Cuts are either thickened or thinned.
There are no straight ins in CTE. They're cut shots. They're thickened.
There are no gaps!
30s are thickened into 15s not thinned.

Stan Shuffett

Upon re-reading my original post, I just realized that my answer to gaps could be taken incorrectly. For clarification, I meant to say, you don't pivot by different amounts to make a visual achieve different cuts.