Possible Proof that Pivot Systems Need Adjustments

bluepepper said:
Dave, Patrick has said that he doesn't deny pivoting working. He, like me, just wants to get to the bottom of why it works.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you and Bustamante pivot the way Hal or Ron teach.
You have developed your own pivot from the left. What it appears to do is sweep the many angles available until you recognize the right one for the shot at hand.
It's as though with every millimeter of the pivot/sweep you're saying, "no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no, YES that's it! Time to shoot."
I think anyone aiming by feel does this. They may do it in a standing position behind the cueball though. They move left or right until it just looks right. Then they get down to shoot. You're just doing it in a different way. Not too bad to be doing it like Bustamante.
Click to expand...

That's his "political spin" gobbledegook which he ROUTINELY and REPEATEDLY follows with comments to the effect that people who think it does work are blithering idiots. I have posted several such comments. Want more?

And from a man who supposedly spent time with MR. Houle...your description above about how the process functions is rather...well...astonishing.

The system DOES NOT in ANY way, shape or form...depend on just "sweep" the cue around until you find a line of aim that looks right.

If you actually spent time with Hal and if you were both reasonably sober at the time, you would know that at Level One...which involves a fully mechanical pivot...you start the pivot from a FIXED POINT and you end it at a FIXED POINT.

Since the above has nothing to do with the Pro One level, I don't mind telling you that the Level One pivot is no random sweep but a sweep of EXACTLY 1 1/8 inches...or as close as possible.

Conveniently, a cue ball is 2.25 in. so if you point the cue to the outside edge of the CB at pivot ON THE HORIZONTAL EQUATOR to the center of the CB, you will have swept awfully close to 1.125 inches...and therefore, will have done the pivot correctly.

Also, it DOES matter where the bridge hand is placed.

For example, place the bridge hand 4 inches to the left of the CTE line and pivot from the edge of the CB to its center...and I guarantee you that you will miss the shot AND MISS THE OBJECT BALL ENTIRELY!

Regards,
Jim
 
Colin Colenso said:
Just to clarify a couple of things. I linked to these diagrams in another thread as I think they give some insights into how adjustments in bridge positioning can be made to alter the pot angle.

This system used aiming at the contact point as a reference. A similar one could be constructed using OB Edge as the reference.

This is not the same as the system or apparent variations (Stage 2, bridge and pivot - Stage 3 air pivot).

FWIW, I'm still in the dark concerning any detail of how either of these systems establish the final cue line through the center of the Cue Ball.

We've heard that the Pro One system is proprietary, and so the details of this system are not being discussed. But a lot of people have apparently learned the Houlian CTE system, yet no one seems able to explain the adjustment system it adapts.

Adjustment systems have been discussed before such as aligning 1/4 tip, or 1/2 tip (etc) off CB center parallel with CTE. These seem like method to expand the usability of the SAM system.

Different proponents of CTE even seem to have different takes on how it works.
Colin
Click to expand...


RGHT Colin! Great point. And there are several reasons for that. Some students are better/worse than others and the teacher cannot be condemned if their students acquire more/less correct information.

Likewise, some people have massive knowledge but a poor teachers so students cannot be condemned if their teacher is less than perfect.

Also, the method itself has evolved over time...including elements of Pro One that I happen to know have only crystalized within the past 48 HOURS!

Finally, with great respect for a man who certainly has some quirks but one who has been enormously generous in sharing his accumulated knowledge...it is nevertheless true that he has invented/proliferated a large number of aiming systems over the years and therefore has become rather controversial.

But after all, Alexander Graham Bell was a terrible student, a royal pain in the a$$ to most who knew him and worked on such projects as the creation of commercially available power from cow manure. That one didn't work out too well!

But there are MANY on this forum who simply dismiss the man as a nutcase and are dismissive of anything that his name is associated with. That is both very unfortunate...and wrong.

Regards,
Jim
 
From another thread....

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpiderWebComm
At the highest level, there's only 1 bridge placement---addressing the CB dead center.


Dave, were pretty much on the same team here but I'm not sure I understand the above.

Since the CB is round..."addressing the CB dead center" can mean a lot of things.

If the reader assumed you meant dead center in relation the the CTE line, that would not be correct because simply aiming through the center of the CB to the edge of the OB merely produces a half ball hit.

I KNOW that advanced users don't even think in terms of determining a specific hand placement...they just land correctly due to repetitive practice...just like you don't have to look at the keyboard keys after a while...but you DO have to look at them at first, and since there are so many readers who are beginners at the system or who haven't even tried it, I'm trying to speak to Level 1...or Level 0...and to that audience, IMHO the bridge hand placement is CRITICAL and has to be learned mechanically at first.

For those interested, first place your bridge hand 4 inches to the left of the CTE line...point the tip to the edge of the CB and pivot to the center. You will see that you will miss the whole OB!

Do the same thing from the right and DITTO.

So, now we have established that bridge hand placement DOES matter. So, where the hell do you place it.

There are several different ways to explain that which is why those who think that simple breif text can teach much of anything are mistaken. (You don't read a book and then go drive a car...at least not MY car!)

GENERALLY, the shaft needs to be a LITTLE offset from the CTE line. It should be outside the line on a cut to the right and inside the line on a cut to the left.

How much? Say 1/4 inch. But the shaft is angled to the CB when you move into the shot so that inside/outside placement is a little difficult to determine.

So, for Level 1...the purely mechanical level that everyone should start on, I have developed a couple of methods myself and therefore, don't mind posting them.

If you imagine the CTE line....and if you can't do that then forget about the whole enchalada...and extend it back from the CB toward you...place your hand so that the CTE line is directly under the inverted V formed by the index finger of your closed bridge.

Push up to your normal bridge length keeping that inverted V RIGHT ON TOP of the CTE line...like it was a track while pointing the cue tip to the outside edge of the CB.

When you get to your normal bridge length, stop...and pivot ALONG THE HORIZONTAL CENTER OF THE CB...to dead center.

THAT is your aim line and if you look, you should see that the V formed by your thumb and index finger of your bridge hand is just about 1.4 inch offset from the CTE line.

Start by setting up pretty easy cuts ...10 degrees and 2 diamonds from the pocket and 1 diamond CB/OF distance and DO NOT take a full backstroke. The shot should be short enough so that lag speed on the CB is plenty so just take a SHORT...Allen Hopkins backstroke of maybe an inch and stroke straight throuh the center of the cb.

All you're doing is trying to verify the accuracy of the aim line...not play pool at this stage.

Then, replace the CB to where it was and move the OB a half ball for a little more angle and do the same thing. Keep doing that...in both directions until you PASS the half ball hit.

Shoot 5 different cut angles 5 times each in both directions for a 50 shot series.

Approach each shot like it was the 9 ball for the match and DO NOT set up longer shots before you have done the 50 shot series. If you race ahead, then don't blame me if you start missing.

As SpideyDave said (I think) this is a PROCESS and if you don't use a building block approach then missing will be your own fault and not that of the system.

If you have trouble PM me. I have now reached the limit of what I am going to post on the forum and won't say much more in PMs at this time...I'll only try to explain the above with different words.


But at this point, you should see that there is NO feel or intuition or any need for subconscious adjustments....dealing of Tarot cards or Gregorian chants necessary.

It is a ROTE system that will work for a HUGE range of cut angles...AS LONG AS THERE IS AN AVAILABLE POCKET i.e. if the OB is frozen to a long rail and the CB is directly across the table on the same diamond line...sorry folks but there is not pocket available for the shot so you bank it or duck.

This is an aiming system not voodoo! And the beauty of it...even at Level 1...is that when the system runs out of gas it is OBVIOUS and you resort to plan be and eventually get to Level 2 and then Pro One at which point you will use CTE on almost every shot...just like Django.

Finally....I'm TRYING to be helpful here and to the extent that sharp comments have passed BACK AND FORTH that is unfortunate.

But there have been a LOT of dismissive posts...you are subconsciously adjusting...you don't understand what you are actually doing...the method cannot work...etc. posted by people who have NO IDEA how the system works and sorry...that is just intellectual laziness and/or closed-mindedness which makes me want to YUKE!

(-:

Jim
 
av84fun said:
First, let me correct you regarding your aviation analogy. Pilots rarely loose control due to being upside down and thinking they are right side up.

Gravity makes pilots QUITE well aware if they are upside down. The problem arises when they mishandle the process of righting the airplane at night or in the clouds.

In addition, pilots are NOT taught to "always believe the instrument panel" because some instruments can and do fail. The pilot must always CROSS CHECK the entire panel in an attempt to determine whether any particular instrument or group of instruments have failed and if so, which ones.

Having said that, I understand and agree with the essence of what you were trying to say. Your point is quite valid. However, it is one of those arguments that a good lawyer would never present in court because it can be used to justify either side of the debate.

While it is true that subconscious adjustments can make a flawed system seem to work, it is equally true that such adjustments can make a perfect system fail. Since, using your own argument, the adjustments are not consciously applied, neither side can prove their case!

Moreover, as I and others have stated, even if the "student" actually attempts to execute the system and no subconscious adjustments are made...intentionally or otherwise...it is true that the cue must be directed straight to the target and not pulled/pushed off line due to a faulty stroke.

No system can survive a poorly executed stroke so ANY testimony from a player who says a given system doesn't work can ONLY be evaluated if the listener/reader happens to know that the "student" has a strong, repeatable stroke.

THAT is one of the many reasons why debates like these are so useless.

Having said all that, it is just fundamentally SILLY for people to crticize a system that they do not fully understand! And there has been A LOT of that in these threads.

Spidey has offered to personally teach the system to Patrick who of course declined and dismissed the system as "religion" WHEN HE DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A CLUE ABOUT THE BASICS OF THE SYSTEM!!!

I have read and enjoyed much of what you posted and I think you are a better man than that.

Frankly, given that Stan Shuffett who is widely known and accepted to be one of the best instructors in America endorses the system and has taught it to his own SON...who at age 14 can drill most of the posters on this forum...and CERTAINLY Patrick Johnson...I am ASTONISHED that so many of you dismiss it as bunk.

Call me a fool...call Spidey a liar for posting that Django told him he uses CTE EXCLUSIVELY...but don't call Stan Shuffett a fool.

Regards,
Jim

(as for my aviation comments: 1000 hours Total Time, Private, Instrument, Commercial and Multi-engine ratings. Former co-owner of Part 135 Charter, Air Ambulance company).
Click to expand...
I kind of figured you might reply. My analagy was intentionally kept simple to avoid a lengthy explanation that was not needed to make a point to the aviation layman, and my analogy was accurate in that context (as you agreed). I did also preface it by saying "in certain circumstances."

You are correct in that a perfect aiming system could be rendered useless by a stroke that is not repeatable, or the inability to hit where you aim. Unfortunately, the perfect system (that is actually usable) has yet to be found.

The fact that any of the common aiming systems cannot work as described is beyond arguing (by the intellectual) and could be proven in court (using mathematics). They are mathematically impossible. This is one of the main reasons why they cannot be explained in writing. It is also a big reason why they don't seem to work at first for many people (until they learn to compensate subconsciously).

I do however think that aiming systems help some people. The only plausible explanation for them working (when we know that they are mathematically flawed and impossible) is subconscious adjustments off of a reference aiming point that gets you close. I also think there could also be a placebo effect in some people that results in increased confidence.

That being said, the bottom line is that if it helps for whatever reasons then that is a good thing for that person. I would be willing to thoroughly learn this system in person, or any other aiming system from anyone in the San Antonio TX or Sacramento CA areas that considers themselves extremely knowledgable and proficient with one. Just contact me by PM if you are willing to share.

Poolplaya9

(as for my aviation comments: son of one of the leading airplane accident investigators in the WORLD for several decades (and himself a pilot), who was lead investigator on several Thunderbird Flying Team crashes as well as numerous other high profile crashes worldwide. Trust me, although not extremely common, there have been many pilots who have flown their planes straight into the ground because they chose to rely on their own senses instead of their instruments.)
 
av84fun said:
Push up to your normal bridge length keeping that inverted V RIGHT ON TOP of the CTE line...like it was a track while pointing the cue tip to the outside edge of the CB.

When you get to your normal bridge length, stop...and pivot ALONG THE HORIZONTAL CENTER OF THE CB...to dead center.

THAT is your aim line and if you look, you should see that the V formed by your thumb and index finger of your bridge hand is just about 1.4 inch offset from the CTE line.

Jim
Click to expand...
Jim,
If the bridge V slides up the track line of the CB to OB Edge line. Then if the cue is pivoted at the bridge hand V to the center of the CB, then the Cue and aim line is directly aligned to the OB edge, or CTE line.

I can't see how the V has become offset at all.

Colin
 
Poolplaya9 said:
I kind of figured you might reply. My analagy was intentionally kept simple to avoid a lengthy explanation that was not needed to make a point to the aviation layman, and my analogy was accurate in that context (as you agreed). I did also preface it by saying "in certain circumstances."

You are correct in that a perfect aiming system could be rendered useless by a stroke that is not repeatable, or the inability to hit where you aim. Unfortunately, the perfect system (that is actually usable) has yet to be found.

The fact that any of the common aiming systems cannot work as described is beyond arguing (by the intellectual) and could be proven in court (using mathematics). They are mathematically impossible. This is one of the main reasons why they cannot be explained in writing. It is also a big reason why they don't seem to work at first for many people (until they learn to compensate subconsciously).
Click to expand...

With respect, that is a SWEEPING generalization and is therefore fundamentally unsustainable in or out of court.

WHICH aiming system "cannot work as described"? And described by whom?

Your argument also fails due to the irrefutable FACT that every shot that CAN be made HAS been made. It is therefore fatally flawed logic to suggest that in spite of the FACT that any given shot CAN be made, that there is no way to explain to anyone HOW it can be made.

Of course it can be explained. Shots are not made by voodoo. And there is NO SUCH THING as "aiming by feel." In fact, all top shotmakers are aiming at SOMETHING...quite intentionally. They may have acquired the understanding of where EXACTLY to aim by trial and error...fine.

But once they LEARN the shot, there is a SPECIFIC AND SYSTEMATIC way that they approach such shots and a specific and systematic approach is, in fact, a "system."

If the above were not true, you could put a blindfold on a player after he is down on the shot and taken is practice strokes. So, in fact, shotmakers aim at something...quite intentionally and quite systematically.


I do however think that aiming systems help some people. The only plausible explanation for them working (when we know that they are mathematically flawed and impossible) is subconscious adjustments off of a reference aiming point that gets you close. I also think there could also be a placebo effect in some people that results in increased confidence.
Click to expand...

Again, WHICH system do you suggest is mathematically flawed and impossible? You seem QUITE sure about that so, since this thread is primarily about the so-called center to edge system, why don't you take a whack at being the FIRST poster in the past 1000 posts on this subject to fully and completely describe that system...including ALL of its components and then opine on which aspects of the system are impossible.

Really...I mean it. You MUST know all of the elements of any system you demand to be impossible, so set them forth and demonstrate why it is impossible.




That being said, the bottom line is that if it helps for whatever reasons then that is a good thing for that person. I would be willing to thoroughly learn this system in person, or any other aiming system from anyone in the San Antonio TX or Sacramento CA areas that considers themselves extremely knowledgable and proficient with one. Just contact me by PM if you are willing to share.

Poolplaya9

(as for my aviation comments: son of one of the leading airplane accident investigators in the WORLD for several decades (and himself a pilot), who was lead investigator on several Thunderbird Flying Team crashes as well as numerous other high profile crashes worldwide. Trust me, although not extremely common, there have been many pilots who have flown their planes straight into the ground because they chose to rely on their own senses instead of their instruments.)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

With great respect to your father, what HE knows and what YOU know are, of course, two entirely different things correct?

I am fully aware of the reasons for aviation accidents including those associated with spatial disorientation. As you correctly pointed out, I agreed with your premise in general so there is no need to debate this sub-topic further. I was just busting your chops a little to the extent that when pilots are upside down, they KNOW they are upside down because A) they are hanging from their shoulder restraints (except at the very top of a loop) and B) unless they are military or aerobatic pilots they know they are upside down because their pi$$ isn't running down their legs!

(-:

Jim
 
Ok, so all of this talk finally has me wondering what all the hoopla is about. :)

I have to ask, what if you need to use English? In the system that you're describing, you're always pivoting back to center. What if you need to use side English? Also, in your thread where you talked about Bustamante's system, he always pivoted from left to right. In the system that Bluepepper just described, it calls for you to pivot from one side or the other, depending on the severity of the cut (and I assume which side you're cutting the ball from). Or am I misunderstanding?

SpiderWebComm said:
LOL it is your fault, that's the ironic thing. But I'm going to help you....

Three things are probably wrong (I have no idea how you play, by the way):

1) You're not perceiving that line correctly. You THINK you're seeing center-to-edge and you're not. I struggled with this when I first started. My guess is many people don't perceive that line correctly and they immediately quit. Setup a wide range of cut angles at different distances to the CB. Get your wife/girlfriend/son/daughter to help you by holding a piece of string at the edge of the OB (equator) and pull it taut to the CB center. I did this for a week or so. Really helped me get past the initial chasm.... perception/sighting.

2) Use Joe Tucker's 3rd eye trainer. ENSURE you know where CB center is. I had a breakdown a few months ago and couldn't figure out what happened to my ball pocketing. I put on the 3rd eye and I was 1/4 tip off of center. No kidding. If you're not pivoting to center, you risk missing the ball.

3) Body pivot instead of using back-hand english. From what I've seen with people, they get slight lateral movement during a pivot and they don't stroke straight post-pivoting. Pivot around your hip (see my banking video, I do a quick demo of how this is done). This will give you the same result, but eliminate pivot variation and unnecessary movement.

Hope this helps,
Dave
Click to expand...
 
I have been playing with this stuff off and on for a few days,,,

CTE seems to send the ball "near" a pocket pretty much all the time so there might not be as much snake oil in this as I had first thought..

however, it keeps coming back to that pivot. the belivers say its always the same..

but reality teaches me that if I hit with extreme top right vs extreme bottom left.. I need to send the cue ball to a SLIGHTLY different spot on the OB to both pocket the ball and get shape...

I am thinking Pivot is a euphemism for feel..

you gotta feel the shot.

everyone needs a baseline to go by and some take the science approach to the extreme and many of them are very knowledgeable about such things and can chart out equasions all day long...

but this is pool and everything about the game is in constant motion

the balls are wearing out

the cloth is wearing out

that dry cold front just moved in..(the humidity might be out of the air but I'd bet it takes a little longer to get out of the felt)

my tip isn't the exact same shape it was before my last shot..

the variables can go on for days and by the time you list them all

half of them have changed.

you want a baseline aim system

I guess this is as good as any..

but you still gotta feel it...
 
Colin Colenso said:
Jim,
If the bridge V slides up the track line of the CB to OB Edge line. Then if the cue is pivoted at the bridge hand V to the center of the CB, then the Cue and aim line is directly aligned to the OB edge, or CTE line.

I can't see how the V has become offset at all.

Colin
Click to expand...

Thanks for the question Colin. If I didn't say so, I should have said that the process I described was for MY closed bridge and that other's may vary.

On my closed bridge, the apex of the inverted V is NOT directly over the center of the shaft but instead slightly to the RIGHT of the shaft.

Therefore, for ME the shaft is offset from the apex of the inverted V.

I have responded to a LOT of posts but somewhere, I stated that the shaft offset from the CTE line should be about 1/4 inch. So everyone has SOME reference on their open and closed bridges that they can determine and use until the hand placement just becomes automatic...in Level 2 or Pro One.

The top speed CTE players aim their shots 100% before they ever bend into them. I'm not there yet and may never be. But Django is...most other Philipinos are...Stevie Moore is and LOTS of other players...many of whom refuse to even discuss the subject for the simple reason that they KNOW it works brilliantly and they must HATE threads like this because they don't want to see their advantage melt away.

But it will. The combination of CTE and Pro One is going to raise the bar Colin.

Finally...not addressed to you but to others who demand that the system works only due to subconscious adjustments...that logic is fatally flawed.

Think of it. If a player experiences virtually immediate shot making improvement and becomes SUBSTANTIALLY better in a brief period of time...which I can testify to in my own case...the "subconscious adjustment" theory goes out the window.

If a player gets BETTER it MUST be the method because subconscious adjustments would REVERT the player to his OLD ways!

The "subconscious adjustment" crowd needs to understand that if the player experiences zero improvement it is because....due to subconscious adjustments...he is NOT executing the NEW system but his OLD methods...by definition!

Conversely, if the player improves substantially, IT CANNOT be due to reverting subconsciously to his old methods because the old methods have just been proven inferior!

(except due to the "placebo effect" as one poster suggested but if that is the reason...so what? Gimme a lifetime supply of placebos please)!

(-:

Jim
 
Jimmy M. said:
Ok, so all of this talk finally has me wondering what all the hoopla is about. :)

I have to ask, what if you need to use English? In the system that you're describing, you're always pivoting back to center. What if you need to use side English? Also, in your thread where you talked about Bustamante's system, he always pivoted from left to right. In the system that Bluepepper just described, it calls for you to pivot from one side or the other, depending on the severity of the cut (and I assume which side you're cutting the ball from). Or am I misunderstanding?
Click to expand...

Excellent question Jimmy. At the present time, here's the deal. Stopping the pivot slightly...say a half tip...along the horizontal centerline before or after dead center doesn't SEEM to abort the accuracy.

I am JUST getting into that aspect of the system so no one hold me to that.

Beyond that, I am not aware of any SYSTEMATIC approach to the application of side although doing so might well be and probably is part of what Stan has accomplished in Pro One.

That's the bad news. The good news is that regardless of what aiming method you now use, you have to use "educated guesses" sometimes referred to as "feel" in order to compensate for the issues related to side.

In my view, it is better to start those educated guesses from a KNOWN line of aim rather than to A) get your line of centerball aim by "feel" and then adjust...AGAIN by feel...to compensate for side.

Regards,
Jim
 
Pool

av84fun said:
If that is the limit of what you were taught...or what you absorbed, no wonder you can't pocket balls accurately.

There are GAPING holes in what you posted nor do I believe that you are accurately describing what you were told. Not that you are engaging in falsehoods necessarily...possibly you simply didn't grasp what you were being taught.

Regards,
Jim
Click to expand...
YOU GOT THAT RIGHT JIM. HAL

JIM CALL ME AT 484 623 4144 I WILL TELL YOU HOW IT GOES.
 
Check out my reply to JimmyM.

CTE is a CENTERBALL aiming system...as far as I know and from a centerball point of view it works BRILLIANTLY.

English is a WHOLE NUTHER MATTER. There are others WAY more advanced in CTE than I am at the moment but so far, I acquire what I really have come to KNOW is the correct line of aim and then, if I need a little low left on a cut to the right, I would adjust for that as I always have..BUT I AM ADJUSTING FROM A FLAT OUT CORRECT BASELINE OF AIM!!!

Big advantage IMHO.

Regards,
Jim



softshot said:
I have been playing with this stuff off and on for a few days,,,

CTE seems to send the ball "near" a pocket pretty much all the time so there might not be as much snake oil in this as I had first thought..

however, it keeps coming back to that pivot. the belivers say its always the same..

but reality teaches me that if I hit with extreme top right vs extreme bottom left.. I need to send the cue ball to a SLIGHTLY different spot on the OB to both pocket the ball and get shape...

I am thinking Pivot is a euphemism for feel..

you gotta feel the shot.

everyone needs a baseline to go by and some take the science approach to the extreme and many of them are very knowledgeable about such things and can chart out equasions all day long...

but this is pool and everything about the game is in constant motion

the balls are wearing out

the cloth is wearing out

that dry cold front just moved in..(the humidity might be out of the air but I'd bet it takes a little longer to get out of the felt)

my tip isn't the exact same shape it was before my last shot..

the variables can go on for days and by the time you list them all

half of them have changed.

you want a baseline aim system

I guess this is as good as any..

but you still gotta feel it...
Click to expand...
 
halhoule said:
YOU GOT THAT RIGHT JIM. HAL

JIM CALL ME AT 484 623 4144 I WILL TELL YOU HOW IT GOES.
Click to expand...

THANK you sir. I absolutely will...SOON.

But I did call you once...maybe a year ago. We talked for a while...you told me what to do...I gave it a half-a$$ed effort..and then abandoned the system!!!

Ever heard THAT before??? (-:

But I came back to it for various reasons and have been saying HOLY $HIT so often that my wife is going to have me committed if I don't settle down.

BIG improvement and I wasn't too horrible to start with.

And the BANKS! I am drilling them from all over the table...and if the OB doesn't go IN the pocket...it SCARES THE HELL OUT OF IT!!!

(-:

THANK you sir...and I know that you are proud of Stan Shuffett and others who have spent enormous amounts of time learning what you have taught them and putting their own footprints in the sand.

Regards,
Jim
 
av84fun said:
Thanks for the question Colin. If I didn't say so, I should have said that the process I described was for MY closed bridge and that other's may vary.

On my closed bridge, the apex of the inverted V is NOT directly over the center of the shaft but instead slightly to the RIGHT of the shaft.

Therefore, for ME the shaft is offset from the apex of the inverted V.

I have responded to a LOT of posts but somewhere, I stated that the shaft offset from the CTE line should be about 1/4 inch. So everyone has SOME reference on their open and closed bridges that they can determine and use until the hand placement just becomes automatic...in Level 2 or Pro One.

Jim
Click to expand...

Jim,
A slight difference between your bridge V and the center of your shaft does not account for the offset of 1.4 inches you stated in your explanation of how you create and offset in a stage 1 type process. In fact, all that difference would account for is that your shaft always ends up being aligned slightly off the CTE line.

It cannot work the way you explained it.

Care to correct it or re-explain it?

Colin
 
av84fun said:
Thanks for the question Colin. If I didn't say so, I should have said that the process I described was for MY closed bridge and that other's may vary.

On my closed bridge, the apex of the inverted V is NOT directly over the center of the shaft but instead slightly to the RIGHT of the shaft.

Therefore, for ME the shaft is offset from the apex of the inverted V.

I have responded to a LOT of posts but somewhere, I stated that the shaft offset from the CTE line should be about 1/4 inch. So everyone has SOME reference on their open and closed bridges that they can determine and use until the hand placement just becomes automatic...in Level 2 or Pro One.

The top speed CTE players aim their shots 100% before they ever bend into them. I'm not there yet and may never be. But Django is...most other Philipinos are...Stevie Moore is and LOTS of other players...many of whom refuse to even discuss the subject for the simple reason that they KNOW it works brilliantly and they must HATE threads like this because they don't want to see their advantage melt away.

But it will. The combination of CTE and Pro One is going to raise the bar Colin.

Finally...not addressed to you but to others who demand that the system works only due to subconscious adjustments...that logic is fatally flawed.

Think of it. If a player experiences virtually immediate shot making improvement and becomes SUBSTANTIALLY better in a brief period of time...which I can testify to in my own case...the "subconscious adjustment" theory goes out the window.

If a player gets BETTER it MUST be the method because subconscious adjustments would REVERT the player to his OLD ways!

The "subconscious adjustment" crowd needs to understand that if the player experiences zero improvement it is because....due to subconscious adjustments...he is NOT executing the NEW system but his OLD methods...by definition!

Conversely, if the player improves substantially, IT CANNOT be due to reverting subconsciously to his old methods because the old methods have just been proven inferior!

(except due to the "placebo effect" as one poster suggested but if that is the reason...so what? Gimme a lifetime supply of placebos please)!

(-:

Jim
Click to expand...
Jim, with all due respect (not intended as an insult at all), anybody with any common sense or citical thinking skills and an open mind can quickly determine that NONE of the practical aiming systems that rely on a set number of contact points can work as described (meaning without using "feel" or subconscious adjustments). They simply do not use enough cut angles or contact points to make any shot that could come up on a pool table.

They also do not account for all of the variables that are present from day to day, and table to table, as softshot pointed out in his excellent post #48 which is spot on. For anyone that is capable of looking at indisputable facts, rather than "well it seems to work for me and I don't feel like I'm making adjustments," then it really is about as simple as Pat Johnson put it when he said it is as obvious as the fact that not every shot can be made with a full ball hit.

As I said before, I think some people benefit from having a system that gets them close, where they only have to use a bit of feel or small subconscious adjustments. Even this is arguable, but as far as I'm concerned it's possible for some people. It would certainly explain how someone could improve almost immediately after being shown an aiming system. And if the player is not that good at aiming to begin with (they haven't yet developed a good feel for the contact point on the object ball or where the ghost ball would be etc), pure odds alone will dictate that they make more balls immediately if all of their shots are a least in the vicinity of the pocket, which is what the systems will get you.

There is NO doubt that the aiming systems DO NOT account for all possible angles and shots, and therefore do not and cannot work in any mechanical, geometrical, or mathematical way. Whether or not they work at all for other reasons is the only thing that is arguable. And if you feel that they do, it can ONLY be because it was a good baseline to start from when making small conscious adjustments by feel, or with subconscious adjustments that you do not even realize you are making.

If it works for you for whatever the reason then be an advocate of it all day long, but recongnize it for what it is, and also for what it indisputably is not.
 
Poolplaya9 said:
Jim, with all due respect (not intended as an insult at all), anybody with any common sense or citical thinking skills and an open mind can quickly determine that NONE of the practical aiming systems that rely on a set number of contact points can work as described (meaning without using "feel" or subconscious adjustments). They simply do not use enough cut angles or contact points to make any shot that could come up on a pool table.
Click to expand...
Poolplaya9,

Such systems, that include some adjustment methodology certainly can make any cut angle. The first post in this thread has diagrams and a link to a complex system that I developed. Developed, not recommended for use.

The argument here is whether the CTE type systems have a systematic method of adjustment. None has ever been publicly described in detail or convincingly in my opinion.

Colin
 
Last edited:
Nick B said:
Dave,
for f sake. The man is not obligated to come nor does he have to answer in 15 minutes not to be branded a coward. Take it easy. This system may have merit. Most have something to offer (well all except the floating lights :eek: )

This reminds my of the IPT. When I spoke up and said the man was a crook I was branded a nit and a fool. Anybody want some of that now? Their is just way too much passion in these HH threads.

Come to Vancouver (it's only 2880 Miles away). I'll play you Snooker (my rules, my local...my game) for say $100.00/game. Should you beat me I will double your money and I'll keep my points. I don't expect you to take me up on my offer nor will I call you a coward if you don't accept.

Nick "My Wife took my tin foil" B
Click to expand...

The funny thing is... I just started playing snooker a year ago in China. I wouldn't come to Vancouver, but if we run into each other in Vegas, we can go to Fatboy's house and you'd have action. :) I'd even stop by the convenience store to make a tin foil hat on the way.... just for laughs.
 
bluepepper said:
Dave, Patrick has said that he doesn't deny pivoting working. He, like me, just wants to get to the bottom of why it works.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you and Bustamante pivot the way Hal or Ron teach.
You have developed your own pivot from the left. What it appears to do is sweep the many angles available until you recognize the right one for the shot at hand.
It's as though with every millimeter of the pivot/sweep you're saying, "no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no, YES that's it! Time to shoot."
I think anyone aiming by feel does this. They may do it in a standing position behind the cueball though. They move left or right until it just looks right. Then they get down to shoot. You're just doing it in a different way. Not too bad to be doing it like Bustamante.
Click to expand...

No...

I'm saying, "not center, not center, not center, CB center....shoot."
 
av84fun said:
From another thread....

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpiderWebComm
At the highest level, there's only 1 bridge placement---addressing the CB dead center.


Dave, were pretty much on the same team here but I'm not sure I understand the above.

Since the CB is round..."addressing the CB dead center" can mean a lot of things.

If the reader assumed you meant dead center in relation the the CTE line, that would not be correct because simply aiming through the center of the CB to the edge of the OB merely produces a half ball hit.

I KNOW that advanced users don't even think in terms of determining a specific hand placement...they just land correctly due to repetitive practice...just like you don't have to look at the keyboard keys after a while...but you DO have to look at them at first, and since there are so many readers who are beginners at the system or who haven't even tried it, I'm trying to speak to Level 1...or Level 0...and to that audience, IMHO the bridge hand placement is CRITICAL and has to be learned mechanically at first.

For those interested, first place your bridge hand 4 inches to the left of the CTE line...point the tip to the edge of the CB and pivot to the center. You will see that you will miss the whole OB!

Do the same thing from the right and DITTO.

So, now we have established that bridge hand placement DOES matter. So, where the hell do you place it.

There are several different ways to explain that which is why those who think that simple breif text can teach much of anything are mistaken. (You don't read a book and then go drive a car...at least not MY car!)

GENERALLY, the shaft needs to be a LITTLE offset from the CTE line. It should be outside the line on a cut to the right and inside the line on a cut to the left.

How much? Say 1/4 inch. But the shaft is angled to the CB when you move into the shot so that inside/outside placement is a little difficult to determine.

So, for Level 1...the purely mechanical level that everyone should start on, I have developed a couple of methods myself and therefore, don't mind posting them.

If you imagine the CTE line....and if you can't do that then forget about the whole enchalada...and extend it back from the CB toward you...place your hand so that the CTE line is directly under the inverted V formed by the index finger of your closed bridge.

Push up to your normal bridge length keeping that inverted V RIGHT ON TOP of the CTE line...like it was a track while pointing the cue tip to the outside edge of the CB.

When you get to your normal bridge length, stop...and pivot ALONG THE HORIZONTAL CENTER OF THE CB...to dead center.

THAT is your aim line and if you look, you should see that the V formed by your thumb and index finger of your bridge hand is just about 1.4 inch offset from the CTE line.

Start by setting up pretty easy cuts ...10 degrees and 2 diamonds from the pocket and 1 diamond CB/OF distance and DO NOT take a full backstroke. The shot should be short enough so that lag speed on the CB is plenty so just take a SHORT...Allen Hopkins backstroke of maybe an inch and stroke straight throuh the center of the cb.

All you're doing is trying to verify the accuracy of the aim line...not play pool at this stage.

Then, replace the CB to where it was and move the OB a half ball for a little more angle and do the same thing. Keep doing that...in both directions until you PASS the half ball hit.

Shoot 5 different cut angles 5 times each in both directions for a 50 shot series.

Approach each shot like it was the 9 ball for the match and DO NOT set up longer shots before you have done the 50 shot series. If you race ahead, then don't blame me if you start missing.

As SpideyDave said (I think) this is a PROCESS and if you don't use a building block approach then missing will be your own fault and not that of the system.

If you have trouble PM me. I have now reached the limit of what I am going to post on the forum and won't say much more in PMs at this time...I'll only try to explain the above with different words.


But at this point, you should see that there is NO feel or intuition or any need for subconscious adjustments....dealing of Tarot cards or Gregorian chants necessary.

It is a ROTE system that will work for a HUGE range of cut angles...AS LONG AS THERE IS AN AVAILABLE POCKET i.e. if the OB is frozen to a long rail and the CB is directly across the table on the same diamond line...sorry folks but there is not pocket available for the shot so you bank it or duck.

This is an aiming system not voodoo! And the beauty of it...even at Level 1...is that when the system runs out of gas it is OBVIOUS and you resort to plan be and eventually get to Level 2 and then Pro One at which point you will use CTE on almost every shot...just like Django.

Finally....I'm TRYING to be helpful here and to the extent that sharp comments have passed BACK AND FORTH that is unfortunate.

But there have been a LOT of dismissive posts...you are subconsciously adjusting...you don't understand what you are actually doing...the method cannot work...etc. posted by people who have NO IDEA how the system works and sorry...that is just intellectual laziness and/or closed-mindedness which makes me want to YUKE!

(-:

Jim
Click to expand...

CB center to me is NOT on the CTE line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top