lol, who say's i cant shoot cte and apply english like you or anyone else? inform yourself
How CTE reconciles with Ghost Ball - My Theory (long)
- Thread starter JB Cases
- Start date
lol, who say's i cant shoot cte and apply english like you or anyone else? inform yourself
Using the edges of the cue can be extremely accurate once you dial in the adjustments needed for your individual cue and stroke. I can use it to pocket about anything on the table. The contact point is where I may have a problem, but that's me, not the system.
It breaks down in the same places all systems pretty much do...when the balls get close together. I solved that problem for very thin cuts by using a small, flat pivot from the direction of the cut (left pivot for left cuts).
This is what I think some players are doing as they aim one side of the cue ball and stroke to the other. Just another way to employ a pivot and make a hair adjustment by feel.
I also think that since the ferrule method is determined by the contact point (ghost ball), and you can pivot with this system, there is a link to pivot systems and adjustments when using the ghost ball. Try this and see what you think.
:smile:Best,
Mike
Since you wrote your thread originating post, I ahve been watching my execution. It seems I use GB for geometry and then make CTE-like corrections just before executing the sroke.
Anyway, thanks for atempting to reduce the argument into geometrical near equivalence between the competing theories.
About two months ago, you started a thread on this "Mullen Method" of aiming the edge of the ferrule or stick at the contact point. As I explained at that time, if the Mullen Method is followed literally and exactly, it is really "right on" (to the center of the pocket) for just one cut angle. For the stick I was using in my illustrations (13mm ferrule), that angle was approximately 15 degrees. However, the method is approximately "on" for some small range of angles (somewhere greater than zero and less than 30 with my stick), and may pocket many of these shots because of pocket slop. The method may serve as a good approximation method within that range of shots. It may also serve as a good starting point for the player to make further refinements of the aim.
Incidentally, the example you show with the WEI table looks like approximately a 45-degree cut. If you followed the Mullen Method precisely for that shot, you would miss it by a lot. For a 45-degree cut, if the cue ball is hit dead center (no english), the edge of the stick needs to be pointing outside the edge of the object ball, not at the contact point.
I concur.
If the ferrule is 13mm then the center of the shaft at it's tip is 6.5mm. If the side of the cue is aimed at the contact point, this will always send the CB 6.5mm away from the contact point.
Thanks.:smile:
Last edited:
Actually no. If you read the read the rest of it you will see that I think that the CTE Line narrows it down to the point where "feel" doesn't feel like feel. Obviously there is a variable because the human shooter has to decide where to put the bridge hand down and where the bridge hand goes is what determines the line the cue will be on.
The pivot to center happens as a result of using the CTE line - so if the bridge hand placement is accurate then the pivot to center results in the cue being on the shot line.
That series of steps is a far cry from "guessing" which is how the "scientists" are describing feel. At least in my opinion.
So that to me is why using CTE feels very precise and also feels "wrong" on certain shots that you have either never shot before or shots for which you have always set up the wrong way using whatever other way you used to aim.
This is where trust comes in which is the opposite of feel in this case. If the shot line you are on feels wrong after getting there with CTE then you force yourself to trust it and thus reprogram your mind to the correct line.
So no, this is not reconciling with the people who say that CTE is guessing and subconscious adjustment. It is merely stating how CTE brings the shooter in line with the GB and in fact how LITTLE feel is involved in the process.
Dear Whitewolf,
My frustration is not with the CTE system. Hal Houle's methods work. My frustration was not being able to explain why they work.
I don't really care what Sigel does. Or what Stevie Moore does. Or what Rodney Morris does. Or Shane Van Boeing.
I only care what I do and what is comfortable for me and brings me greater success. If I know what a pro does and they or someone else can show me properly then I may try it and if it gels with me then I will adopt it. Copying successful techniques is the way to success, no doubt. However in a sea of competing methods you have to choose one and run with it as far as you can.
I really do disagree with the "shoot til you know" methods of learning. Throwing balls out does nothing to help you other than frustrate you further when you miss. In my opinion.
Regarding your comment about shooting by feel let me share a recent victory, two of them actually which for me illustrates the value of having a strong system, pre-shot routine and stroke to back them up.
I played a player who shoots by feel and he is about even with me. He had beaten me pretty good last time we played.
This time I was armed not only with a pure understanding of how CTE works (so no confusion as to whether I was "right" or not) - and I was armed with a better stroke thanks to some high level coaching.
The guy I played came out of the gate playing well and was making some terrific outs putting the pressure on me. I responded with good outs of my own and kept the scores close. Still he beat me a few sets and I beat him a few set. When the bet was raised however my game stayed constant and even went up a notch and his fell apart. SO much of the game is mental for sure but I credit having a system and a stroke mantra with keeping me grounded even as the pressure was huge.
Eventually I expect that using the system and sticking with the proper stroke techniques will evolve into a style that is steady and natural looking and feeling.
P.S. Regarding using english, I use english (side spin) with CTE with zero problems. Personally I use the back hand english method and it's works great. I have no problem using spin with distance. I line up using CTE to center ball and then adjust my back hand slightly for the application of spin. That's the next chapter.
Last edited:
I am not sure how this thread got into a discussion of the ferrule aiming method but I suppose it's not unlike so many other threads morphing into the CTE method.
I just want to say that it's my experience that CTE works with any cue regardless of ferrule size as that seems to be a limiting factor in the ferrule method. Even SVB said so when describing the method he uses, that adjustment was required for him when switching ferrule sizes.
I don't think that the adjustment should be that much but it's still there. CTE on the other hand allows me to pick up any cue and play right away.
I just want to say that it's my experience that CTE works with any cue regardless of ferrule size as that seems to be a limiting factor in the ferrule method. Even SVB said so when describing the method he uses, that adjustment was required for him when switching ferrule sizes.
I don't think that the adjustment should be that much but it's still there. CTE on the other hand allows me to pick up any cue and play right away.
On this shot the 15 in the side is easy to line and shoot with side spin using CTE. The point is that it does not matter how we get there as long as we get there. I have never asked an opponent in a serious game how he is aiming. He runs out usign whatever works for him.
Let's not make this now into a competition between the "ferrule" system and the CTE system. I think that would be counterproductive to both.
Two months ago 3andstop started a thread on the Mullen Method and you interloped talking about CTE. Here, you started a thread on CTE and 3andstop interloped talking about the Mullen Method. Turnabout ...
I just tried the 45degree side pocket shot and made it the first time with the Mullen method. Second try missed by an RCH. Third, fourth and fifth shots all fell. For a cut to the right use the right side of the shaft!
Sorry John for butting in on your well thought out thread!
This simply means you are doing something a little different from precisely following the Mullen Method prescription.
Put an OB on the foot spot with some mark on the OB in the necessary contact-point position for the nearby right corner pocket. Place the CB at a spot that requires a 45-degree cut (measured as closely as you can). Aim the center of the cue stick at the center of the CB while pointing the right edge of the stick at the contact point (this is the Mullen-Method aim for this shot). Stroke straight on the CB with no english. You will undercut the shot.
Now set up the same shot again. Put a second OB in the ghost-ball position for making the first OB. Get down on the shot, aiming through the center of the CB at the center of the ghost ball. Stay in place and ask someone else to now remove the ghost ball. You are now on the proper aim to make this shot. Where is the right edge of your stick pointing? The correct answer is outside the left edge of the OB, not at the contact point on the OB.
Edit: My comments about the Mullen Method assume the shooter is actually sighting down the edge of the stick or close thereto and that he is not moving his head to the side somehow to "fudge" it.
Last edited:
As I said before, it works.
I just set up the shot you described. I only made it 3 out of five tries, but I'm tired and the lights over my table suck.
I put the ob on the spot and the cb at the center of the table, just half a ball to the left and cut the ball in the right corner. Piece of cake.
Sorry it doesn't work for you, but I am doing exactly as described in the video.
I can see if you had a tip that was less than say 12mm or more than 14mm some adjustments will need to be made.
I am now putting on my tin foil hat in hopes of avoiding becoming an aiming system zelot.:grin:
I just set up the shot you described. I only made it 3 out of five tries, but I'm tired and the lights over my table suck.
I put the ob on the spot and the cb at the center of the table, just half a ball to the left and cut the ball in the right corner. Piece of cake.
Sorry it doesn't work for you, but I am doing exactly as described in the video.
I can see if you had a tip that was less than say 12mm or more than 14mm some adjustments will need to be made.
I am now putting on my tin foil hat in hopes of avoiding becoming an aiming system zelot.:grin:
This picture shows where the stick should be pointed to make a 45-degree cut to the left (with a no-english hit). The necessary contact point is on the line separating the black from the red. The base of the ghost ball would be in the center of the spot on the table. As you can see, the left edge of the stick is not pointing at the necessary contact point; the entire stick is pointing to the right of the object ball.
Fine, do whatever you want to do. I said my piece about it and IF you take a slight moment to read what I wrote above I acknowledged that most discussions about aiming morph into something else. And I believe I apologized in that thread for bringing up CTE. I also aknowledged in that thread that I tried the method and it works. Which has not been done here.
I just feel that you all are ignoring the most important concept in this thread.
CTE reconciles with GHOST BALL.
So if you want to talk about the Mullen Method (Which by the way Hal was out with long before Mullen) then state how it reconciles with Ghost Ball so that it at least fits the premise of the thread.
Sam Walton built the largest retailer in the world. In his book he recounted the early days when they did the accounting. They would tally everything up and if they were off by a little bit then they would put an entry in the books called "ESP" with a plus or minus amount to make the books balance.
The ESP stood for Error Some Place.
Sam discovered that it was far more important to spend the time keeping the goods flowing than to spend it looking for exactitude. He could live with a little fudge factor as long as the main goal was being reached.
ALL aiming is feel.
Sorry but unless you are using a cue which has a steady rest and a laser scope and some way to insure a dead straight hit on the cue ball then you are depending on feel to settle into the shot.
It does not matter if you are visualizing a ghost ball, mentally doublling the distance, projecting a "line" from the center of the cue ball to the edge of the object ball, using your ferrule or what ever, you are feeling it.
Some of those methods can help you to refine your feel and I personally think that CTE does this the best for me. I think it zeros me in on the shot right where I need to be.
If you use the ferrule method, like Shane Van Boening claims to use, then I imagine like CTE it brings you to a line which hones your CHOICES to a very very small area for you to put your bridge hand down in or a line to put it on. That last little bit where you are putting your bridge hand down is FEEL. It's you saying "this is it, right or wrong I am committed to this line right now."
It's not your subconscious making you move over to the right line. It's your CONSCIOUS decision to plonk your hand down and shoot right there.
I made a ghost ball template yesterday. I cut it out on my laser and it's perfect. So perfect that if I shoot a cut shot I will miss the shot due to throw. No I "know" that I even when I line up for a shot using the perfect GB I must adjust my aim imperceptibly a tiny tiny bit to account for throw. I know that this adjustment varies for speed. This knowledge comes with experience and study.
But when I line up with the center of the cueball through the center of the Ghost Ball then the adjustment is so slight that it's nearly impossible for an observer to detect.
I suspect that with the Mullen Method when you line up on the 45 degree shot from the bridge hand the line of the ferrule that you would use is close enough to the contact point to be able to dial in the aim. Like CTE it probably doesn't work if you diagram it from the cueball to the object ball. I think that possible the line needs to be extended back to the shooter in order to verify it's accuracy. I could of course be wrong as I have not given it very much thought in that regard.
The ESP stood for Error Some Place.
Sam discovered that it was far more important to spend the time keeping the goods flowing than to spend it looking for exactitude. He could live with a little fudge factor as long as the main goal was being reached.
ALL aiming is feel.
Sorry but unless you are using a cue which has a steady rest and a laser scope and some way to insure a dead straight hit on the cue ball then you are depending on feel to settle into the shot.
It does not matter if you are visualizing a ghost ball, mentally doublling the distance, projecting a "line" from the center of the cue ball to the edge of the object ball, using your ferrule or what ever, you are feeling it.
Some of those methods can help you to refine your feel and I personally think that CTE does this the best for me. I think it zeros me in on the shot right where I need to be.
If you use the ferrule method, like Shane Van Boening claims to use, then I imagine like CTE it brings you to a line which hones your CHOICES to a very very small area for you to put your bridge hand down in or a line to put it on. That last little bit where you are putting your bridge hand down is FEEL. It's you saying "this is it, right or wrong I am committed to this line right now."
It's not your subconscious making you move over to the right line. It's your CONSCIOUS decision to plonk your hand down and shoot right there.
I made a ghost ball template yesterday. I cut it out on my laser and it's perfect. So perfect that if I shoot a cut shot I will miss the shot due to throw. No I "know" that I even when I line up for a shot using the perfect GB I must adjust my aim imperceptibly a tiny tiny bit to account for throw. I know that this adjustment varies for speed. This knowledge comes with experience and study.
But when I line up with the center of the cueball through the center of the Ghost Ball then the adjustment is so slight that it's nearly impossible for an observer to detect.
I suspect that with the Mullen Method when you line up on the 45 degree shot from the bridge hand the line of the ferrule that you would use is close enough to the contact point to be able to dial in the aim. Like CTE it probably doesn't work if you diagram it from the cueball to the object ball. I think that possible the line needs to be extended back to the shooter in order to verify it's accuracy. I could of course be wrong as I have not given it very much thought in that regard.
This picture shows where the stick should be pointed to make a 45-degree cut to the left (with a no-english hit). The necessary contact point is on the line separating the black from the red. The base of the ghost ball would be in the center of the spot on the table. As you can see, the left edge of the stick is not pointing at the necessary contact point; the entire stick is pointing to the right of the object ball.
[/IMG]
As I suspected when the picture is zoomed out then it becomes a little clearer. For fun I did a full size diagram in a few minutes on Corel Draw showing a 45 degree cut.
(Note: I am still confused when someone says a cut is x-degrees as to what they mean. Do you mean the angle from the object ball to the pocket or from the cueball to the object ball?)
In any event I chose the angle to the pocket and placed the cue ball randomly.
The diagram shows that the right edge of the 13mm ferrule does in fact line up with the contact point when the cue stick is pointed at center cueball.
I don't know if this bears out all over the table nor what the parameters are nor what what the fudge factor is if any.
I just found it interesting that with no prior knowledge or prejudice the first time I diagrammed a shot it lines up as claimed. I'd be very happy to see other people taking this and running with it to see if my initial finding is purely accidental or whether the Mullen Method holds up with other ball positions.
Attachments
The cut angle is simply how many degrees the OB is hit off the line of travel of the CB.
Here's another way to think of it. Draw two lines. The first line is from the pocket through the center of the OB and extended on back from there (to infinity if you wish). The second line is the line of travel of the CB prior to the collision, then extended on in the same direction past the point of collision (to infinity if you wish). These two lines form a big "X," that has two acute angles (less than 90 degrees) and two obtuse angles (greater than 90 degrees). The smaller angles (the acute angles) are of the same size and are the cut angle.
For a straight shot, for example, these two lines are the same, and there is no angle between them (zero-degree cut).
At the maximum, the big "X" has four equally sized angles, and the cut angle is 90 degrees. (Let's not worry about whether it's actually possible to cut a ball 90 degrees without spin or masse or jumping or ....)
For a 45-degree cut, the CB is knocked 45 degrees off the initial line of travel of the CB (and my big "X" has two 45-degree angles and two 135-degree angles).
The diagram you showed is not a 45-degree cut, it's more like a 30-degree cut. Re-do it with the stick parallel to the bottom rail in your diagram, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Last edited:
lol, who say's i cant shoot cte and apply english like you or anyone else? inform yourself
LOL, just tell me how it feels to be a member of a cult.
?????? i am just informing the ill informed
do a search and find where i have criticized gb or any other aiming system or said cte is the best or anything like that I find it so funny that there are some on here that will to go to there grave trying to prove faults with cte lol looks to me like there running out of options, now days lol Shoot your way and i will shoot my way and maybe one day we will meet up and "the best man playing pool that day will win" not the best system! ... ijs