How Fractional Aiming Systems Help

Patrick Johnson said:
Here's an example (from a post I made a year and a half ago) of how the "visual reference" principle can work as an informal "system" for banking. Instead of "reference cuts" this method uses known equal-angle bank/kick tracks to estimate bank/kick angles for balls that lie between them. I play lots of banks and use this method for just about every shot. Of course, additional adjustments must be made for speed/spin, etc., but "seeing" a nearby equal-angle track is extremely helpful.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

This is INSANITY. PURE INSANITY.

The ONLY method here is to aim thru the diamonds are assign numbers to the diamonds 1 thru 4.

The same numbering systems as Freddy the Beard and Jimmy Reid use.

For example, it takes about 2 freaking seconds to see that the OB lies on the 1.8 thru .9 line. Or the 4.5 thru 2.25 line.

How freaking hard is it? People come up with all these other more complicated systems that are MEANINGLESS.

ARE YOU LISTENING?????? DOWNRIGHT MEANINGLESS.
 
WhatsTheSpot said:
This is INSANITY. PURE INSANITY.

The ONLY method here is to aim thru the diamonds are assign numbers to the diamonds 1 thru 4.

The same numbering systems as Freddy the Beard and Jimmy Reid use.

For example, it takes about 2 freaking seconds to see that the OB lies on the 1.8 thru .9 line. Or the 4.5 thru 2.25 line.

How freaking hard is it? People come up with all these other more complicated systems that are MEANINGLESS.

ARE YOU LISTENING?????? DOWNRIGHT MEANINGLESS.
Click to expand...

Get back on your meds for god's sake first everything must come from within and now you want to change gears and build on Freddy and Jimmy's systems.... ARE YOU LISTENING??? DOWNRIGHT SCHIZOPHRENIC!!!

Angle in and angle out has been used for decades.. well before the onset of whatever mental illness took hold of you....

it is the basis for much of the stuff Brumback shows as he calculates the angle in and out to be long and then holds the ball up.....

It's also called the mirror system among other things....

If you are going to continue to let drivel fall out of your mouth at least find some topic.... any topic that you might have a clue about......

/waiting patiently for the banning of version 13 of pocketpoint or whatever number you are up to..........
 
WhatsTheSpot:
...it takes about 2 freaking seconds to see that the OB lies on the 1.8 thru .9 line. Or the 4.5 thru 2.25 line.
Click to expand...
That's true for me too, but not for everybody. And even for me it takes much less time (a fraction of a second) to visualize a nearby guideline without the math.

In fact, in order to do the math you describe you have to pretty much visualize the nearby "whole number" diamond tracks anyway.

pj
chgo
 
The Renfro said:
Get back on your meds for god's sake first everything must come from within and now you want to change gears and build on Freddy and Jimmy's systems.... ARE YOU LISTENING??? DOWNRIGHT SCHIZOPHRENIC!!!

Angle in and angle out has been used for decades.. well before the onset of whatever mental illness took hold of you....

it is the basis for much of the stuff Brumback shows as he calculates the angle in and out to be long and then holds the ball up.....

It's also called the mirror system among other things....

If you are going to continue to let drivel fall out of your mouth at least find some topic.... any topic that you might have a clue about......

/waiting patiently for the banning of version 13 of pocketpoint or whatever number you are up to..........
Click to expand...

THE ANGLE OUT DOESN'T NEED TO BE DISCUSSED. John banks by finding the natural angle and then adjusting his aiming line a specific amount of diamonds. (.1 diamonds shorter, .5 diamonds shorter, .25 diamonds longer etc.)

There is no "angle out" when banking. The same goes for Freddy's systems. For God's sake anyone that really plays pool knows this.

And of course a banking system doesn't come from within, I was talking about stroke and muscle movements, YOU DON'T EVEN LISTEN TO WHAT YOU'RE READING.

I can't stand people who are using "mirrors" and imaginary tables to try and make bank shots. You just find the natural angle in 1 damn second and then adjust for speed, cut angle, english, and proximity of the object ball to the rail it will be contacting.

THAT'S IT. THERE IS NO GOD DAMN MIRROR. THERE IS NO ANGLE OUT. YOU JUST FIND THE GOD DAMN NATURAL ANGLE AND THEN MAKE SMALL ADJUSTMENTS. IT ISN'T THAT HARD TO FIGURE OUT.
 
PJ
now that your finally understanding it! Do you see how the system will evolve form manual cte to just seeing the shot, using no lines or pivots? Do you understand now when Stan says its a "visual system" i first said this a year and half ago. Do you finally see what the system does and how complete it is from start to finish, you must really think about this. I also see you picked up on the gift i left you and you should read atlarges post also ... you now have enough info in this thread to put it all together.
 
Last edited:
WhatsTheSpot said:
THE ANGLE OUT DOESN'T NEED TO BE DISCUSSED. John banks by finding the natural angle and then adjusting his aiming line a specific amount of diamonds. (.1 diamonds shorter, .5 diamonds shorter, .25 diamonds longer etc.)

There is no "angle out" when banking. The same goes for Freddy's systems. For God's sake anyone that really plays pool knows this.

And of course a banking system doesn't come from within, I was talking about stroke and muscle movements, YOU DON'T EVEN LISTEN TO WHAT YOU'RE READING.

I can't stand people who are using "mirrors" and imaginary tables to try and make bank shots. You just find the natural angle in 1 damn second and then adjust for speed, cut angle, english, and proximity of the object ball to the rail it will be contacting.

THAT'S IT. THERE IS NO GOD DAMN MIRROR. THERE IS NO ANGLE OUT. YOU JUST FIND THE GOD DAMN NATURAL ANGLE AND THEN MAKE SMALL ADJUSTMENTS. IT ISN'T THAT HARD TO FIGURE OUT.
Click to expand...

I use mirrors and imaginary tables a lot for kicks and banks. It is faster and easier for me than counting fractions of diamonds (although I use that too on simple short kicks/banks.) The real benefit is that it easily translates to 2,3,4,5 rail kicks and banks. I only use these methods to find the geometrically correct line. From there I decide what CTE pivot to apply. That said, there is no use arguing how someone should kick and bank. Do what works for you.
 
WhatsTheSpot said:
I just went to Super Billiards Expo. I watched several of Stevie Moore's matches. He most definitely did not use CTE at all when I was watching him. That much I can say for sure.
Click to expand...

The CTE/Pro One DVD at 00:56 quotes hiim as saying "...I've been using CTE Pro One for approximately 3 years and I can tell you it is the most amazing qnd accurate system I've ever seen". Does that mean then that he switched as recently as last month to a new and better aiming system? I wish you'd asked him, cuz I'd like to know what he is using now and if there is a DVD for sale on it. I'm been pretty happy with my progress learning CTE/Pro One, but I'm always interested in new and exciting aiming systems, as I find them addictive.

Fil
 
Filibogado said:
The CTE/Pro One DVD at 00:56 quotes hiim as saying "...I've been using CTE Pro One for approximately 3 years and I can tell you it is the most amazing qnd accurate system I've ever seen". Does that mean then that he switched as recently as last month to a new and better aiming system? I wish you'd asked him, cuz I'd like to know what he is using now and if there is a DVD for sale on it. I'm been pretty happy with my progress learning CTE/Pro One, but I'm always interested in new and exciting aiming systems, as I find them addictive.

Fil
Click to expand...

Listen, ANY POOL PLAYER WILL SAY ANYTHING IF THEY GET PAID FOR IT.

SHANE PREFERS A CUETEC, YEAH RIGHT.

We've got to wake up out of this state of MADNESS we are in.

If someone offers Earl $1,000 to say that he uses their new aiming system, HE'S GOING TO DO IT. HE'S GOING TO TAKE THE MONEY AND WHO GIVES A CRAP IF HE USES THE SYSTEM.

We awaken ourselves to the current state of pool. People will sell you anything to make a dollar. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THE AIMING SYSTEM EVEN WORKS, THEY JUST WANT TO SELL IT TO YOU.

Very few products have true value.
 
AtLarge said:
John, if you followed the threads last year after Stan released his CTE/Pro-One DVD, you should remember that the prescription for Stan's CTE is not all that is involved. Here's something I wrote at that time.

[Stan] is acknowledging that the basic set of prescriptions, if executed precisely the same way every time, would create only a small number of cut angles for a given CB-OB distance. So that issue should be settled. What, then, creates the additional cut angles; what turns a discrete method into a continuous method -- one with enough cut angles to pocket all shots? Where is the "feel" being introduced? Stan has now answered that question -- it is different eye positions for the same set of visuals. In other words, for any particular shot and alignment-menu choice, such as this:

CB-OB distance = 3 feet
cut to left
secondary alignment line to "B"
bridge length = 8"
cue offset = 1/2 tip
pivot from left to right​

multiple cut angles can be achieved by viewing the CTEL and secondary alignment line from different eye positions.

How does one know where to put his eyes? It is knowledge gained from experience. Stan did not acknowledge that this is "feel," but I'm sure many of us would view it that way, as feel in any aiming method is developed from experience in using the method.

So there we have it. Stan's manual CTE depends upon utilizing multiple eye positions within each of the basic 6 alignments. The feel or additional knowledge is not introduced by varying the offset, or by varying the bridge length (beyond what Stan prescribes), or by fudging the pivot -- it comes from knowing where to place the eyes while still somehow holding to the underlying pair of visuals for each of the prescriptions.

I hope this really puts an end to the squabbles. Manual CTE is not some voodoo hocus pocus. It is not geometric magic. There are no supernatural powers to align-&-pivot methods. It doesn't work because of numerology -- the table being 1x2 or 90 being the sum of 45, 30, and 15. It works by utilizing a small number of reference alignments that the player has learned to fine tune based on his explicit knowledge of where the pocket is and the appearance of the cut angle needed for the shot, i.e., his experience-based knowledge of the shot needed.​
Click to expand...

Never said it was magic or hocus pocus. Even though it "feels" that way sometimes.

I think Stan allowed himself to be defined by other people's terms.

For example your six cuts would produce exactly six angles IF the player lined up EXACTLY on an exact line produced by each alignment.

Using the method where the player LOOKS at the the line from the center of the cue ball to the edge of the object ball would produce exactly a half ball hit IF the player were to lay the cue down on that line every time.

But that's not how it works. The initial line is a visual orientation line. The distance between the balls determines the place where the body goes to and the pivot. The distance between the balls affects the perception and the approach.

So it's possible to walk to the table and look at one reference line for every shot on the table. It's not that this one line is the shot line. That one line is simply the initial reference line that directs the body to the right orientation.

It's not feel, not experience. It's a prescribed set of steps that leads to the player settling in on the shot line. Not "I think that this is right" but instead simply taking the line that is given and practicing the method enough to be confident that the line you get on is right.

There is never any guessing a little left or right.

Feel? Yeah sure, any time BEFORE the player pulls the trigger he or she has to feel confident about where the cue is pointing. That's the only feeling in the methods, not any sort of guessing the shot line.

Well except the feeling of being on the wrong line that comes from having a system which produces the right one for a player who spent a lifetime choosing the wrong one by feel. That is one of the dangers of switching to a new way to aim for the amateur player. The amount of retraining required to ignore the feelings of being on the wrong line and just trust the line given is quite a lot. It's as if there is an invisible hand guiding the cue telling you to abandon the system line and take the line your eyes (feel) is telling you is right. When the player learns to overcome this then it becomes much easier to see the right line from the initial reference.

You begin to walk into the shot the right way every time and it all becomes automatic. This is retraining the subconscious by deliberate training of the conscious.

Which then leads to feeling that as soon as you get down on the ball you're on the right line and you can focus on execution.

No magic, just work.
 
WhatsTheSpot said:
Listen, ANY POOL PLAYER WILL SAY ANYTHING IF THEY GET PAID FOR IT.

SHANE PREFERS A CUETEC, YEAH RIGHT.

We've got to wake up out of this state of MADNESS we are in.

If someone offers Earl $1,000 to say that he uses their new aiming system, HE'S GOING TO DO IT. HE'S GOING TO TAKE THE MONEY AND WHO GIVES A CRAP IF HE USES THE SYSTEM.

We awaken ourselves to the current state of pool. People will sell you anything to make a dollar. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THE AIMING SYSTEM EVEN WORKS, THEY JUST WANT TO SELL IT TO YOU.

Very few products have true value.
Click to expand...

Cynical much?
 
AtLarge said:
John, if you followed the threads last year after Stan released his CTE/Pro-One DVD, you should remember that the prescription for Stan's CTE is not all that is involved. Here's something I wrote at that time.

[Stan] is acknowledging that the basic set of prescriptions, if executed precisely the same way every time, would create only a small number of cut angles for a given CB-OB distance. So that issue should be settled. What, then, creates the additional cut angles; what turns a discrete method into a continuous method -- one with enough cut angles to pocket all shots? Where is the "feel" being introduced? Stan has now answered that question -- it is different eye positions for the same set of visuals. In other words, for any particular shot and alignment-menu choice, such as this:

CB-OB distance = 3 feet
cut to left
secondary alignment line to "B"
bridge length = 8"
cue offset = 1/2 tip
pivot from left to right​

multiple cut angles can be achieved by viewing the CTEL and secondary alignment line from different eye positions.

How does one know where to put his eyes? It is knowledge gained from experience. Stan did not acknowledge that this is "feel," but I'm sure many of us would view it that way, as feel in any aiming method is developed from experience in using the method.

So there we have it. Stan's manual CTE depends upon utilizing multiple eye positions within each of the basic 6 alignments. The feel or additional knowledge is not introduced by varying the offset, or by varying the bridge length (beyond what Stan prescribes), or by fudging the pivot -- it comes from knowing where to place the eyes while still somehow holding to the underlying pair of visuals for each of the prescriptions.

I hope this really puts an end to the squabbles. Manual CTE is not some voodoo hocus pocus. It is not geometric magic. There are no supernatural powers to align-&-pivot methods. It doesn't work because of numerology -- the table being 1x2 or 90 being the sum of 45, 30, and 15. It works by utilizing a small number of reference alignments that the player has learned to fine tune based on his explicit knowledge of where the pocket is and the appearance of the cut angle needed for the shot, i.e., his experience-based knowledge of the shot needed.​
Click to expand...

the body follows the eyes and its a visual system. Dont forget also that every time a ball moves, there is a new contact point created. If someone is smart they can put everything together from the info in this thread and all the answers are here.
 
Last edited:
WhatsTheSpot said:
THE ANGLE OUT DOESN'T NEED TO BE DISCUSSED. John banks by finding the natural angle and then adjusting his aiming line a specific amount of diamonds. (.1 diamonds shorter, .5 diamonds shorter, .25 diamonds longer etc.)

There is no "angle out" when banking. The same goes for Freddy's systems. For God's sake anyone that really plays pool knows this.

And of course a banking system doesn't come from within, I was talking about stroke and muscle movements, YOU DON'T EVEN LISTEN TO WHAT YOU'RE READING.

I can't stand people who are using "mirrors" and imaginary tables to try and make bank shots. You just find the natural angle in 1 damn second and then adjust for speed, cut angle, english, and proximity of the object ball to the rail it will be contacting.

THAT'S IT. THERE IS NO GOD DAMN MIRROR. THERE IS NO ANGLE OUT. YOU JUST FIND THE GOD DAMN NATURAL ANGLE AND THEN MAKE SMALL ADJUSTMENTS. IT ISN'T THAT HARD TO FIGURE OUT.
Click to expand...

Ah, now we're getting somewhere, PP.

Apparently, if its not "your" way, it cannot be discussed. Do I understand you? Nothing else can or will work, right?

Keep going, let it all out. It'll be good for your soul...and entertaining for us, till the ban-hammer takes you away again. :p
 
if your using an outside pivot on an A shot, there are multiple eye positions used before you need to switch to an inside A pivot and that continues all the way to a 1/8 shot. All these multiple eye positions lead the body into a shot in a uniquely different position, which sometimes are unnoticeable to the shooter. Now when you see a shot and its an outside A and shoot it and then you get another outside A shot slightly different. Now you make the second shot with the exact same set up as the first shot only a different eye position has set you up in a uniquely different physical position on a slightly different aim line. This is what gives people the illusion that only six angles can make all shots. This is why Stan says cte/pro1 is a very strong "visual" system and not a fractional system but once upon a time it could have been used as a template or starting point? I am trying to keep this basic here also so you can catch on.

Now the ultimate goal of the system in my eyes, is to end up just seeing the shot and this is the short cut cte/pro1 will do with its psr, visual and physical alignments and yes you will need to shot a lot of balls to get there.

i gotta go now but good luck.
 
Last edited:
WhatsTheSpot said:
That's all I've got. Without pool I have nothing.
Click to expand...

Well that's a bit extreme but people discussing how to play pool generally leads to more people playing not less.

I met a guy two weeks ago who is a lifelong friend of one of my dealers. At the kitchen table he asks me if I know anything about CTE.

So we went to the pool table and I showed him and this lifelong player's eyes lit up like a kid at Christmas. He will be at the table playing more and talking about it to anyone who will listen.

So if pool is all you got and you want it to flourish then you should be out there encouraging more people to play. Regardless of what methods people use to aim the first step is getting them to the table if they are going to have any chance of falling in love with the game.

No need to get upset at some pool nerds discussing the finer points of aiming. You don't get upset at scientist who scream at each other over whether a light ray refracts at .348934893 angle .023823094 angle through a crystal so why get worked up over whether some pool nerds decide to spend time arguing about whether or not and to what degree "feel" is involved in aiming.

At the end of the day each and every person has to decide for themselves to use whatever mental tools they have learned to play pool. The more they know they more they can choose from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top