Reply to Dan White's Questions

JoeyInCali said:
Um, someone who shows a video claiming the ghost ball fails him after shooting a ball and his follow through shanks way to the side ? Then claims the ball was already gone by the time the shank happened?

Striking line template? Well, there's a great idea. No kidding?
You've already worked on an aiming system you had a huge euphoria two decades ago and to this day still really do not have much grasp of.
Countless of people told you your stroke was whacked way before the match with Lou. You argued what good is a laser straight stroke if you can't aim. How the heck did you make balls before you learned a new aiming system then?

Ya think getting the stroke and fundamentals should have more priority over a fancy system???

Any instructor who gives you lesson would be of disservice if he started showing another system until he fixes your stroke.
I'm glad this new instructor of yours sees that.

This doesn't mean CTE does not work of course.
But, when you came out in the open about CTE two decades ago ( and a lot of peeps too ), everyone was saying it was so simple. Hell, there are only a few shots .
Two decades ( might be 3 already ) and multiple videos later, only a few people really get it .
I seriously think it has done more damage for your game or progress.

$95 well spent.
Click to expand...

You're wrong.

USING CTE I was able to get on the shot line every time. Gordy also agreed that it's great to use with CTE aiming to verify that the shooter can get to the actual shot line.

and two decades ago CTE was not what was being discussed.

And yes you can send the ball INTO THE POCKET even when the stroke has a huge chicken wing. That's simply a matter of hitting the cueball IN THE CENTER at the right time even though the cue came in on a different vector.

That is DIFFERENT to lining up to center ball and NOT hitting center ball. Lots of people have a pretty stroke but they still don't hit the center of the ball when they want to.

They can AIM PERFECTLY, as I was able to do with the striking line templates, and miss because of NOT hitting the cueball in the center as I did. I also showed this years ago on this video.

Stroking on the KNOWN Line.

I am well aware of my shortcomings Joey. doesn't change a damn thing about how good aiming systems are.
 
JB Cases said:
You're wrong.

USING CTE I was able to get on the shot line every time. Gordy also agreed that it's great to use with CTE aiming to verify that the shooter can get to the actual shot line.

and two decades ago CTE was not what was being discussed.

And yes you can send the ball INTO THE POCKET even when the stroke has a huge chicken wing. That's simply a matter of hitting the cueball IN THE CENTER at the right time even though the cue came in on a different vector.

That is DIFFERENT to lining up to center ball and NOT hitting center ball. Lots of people have a pretty stroke but they still don't hit the center of the ball when they want to.

They can AIM PERFECTLY, as I was able to do with the striking line templates, and miss because of NOT hitting the cueball in the center as I did. I also showed this years ago on this video.

Stroking on the KNOWN Line.

I am well aware of my shortcomings Joey. doesn't change a damn thing about how good aiming systems are.
Click to expand...
I'm not wrong.
You are never going to admit, you have spent a zillion more effort in making CTE WORK FOR YOU. Instead of perfecting your stroke and setup.
You though it was the magic bullet .
And it cost you dearly.
And really has cost you years of progress.
Now, you are finally working on your stroke.
You argued vehemently a laser straight stroke was not that valuable to you.

I bet there is more to Gordy saying CTE helps you get to the shot line.
Good Lord. But, does it involve pivoting?
Less that half a ball of a hit? We already know you just move the aiming/stroking line to outside of that .
Almost straight in? Jeesh, just a hair outside of the contact point. We already know that .
Thin cuts, look at the side of the cue ball and the side of the ob. After thousands of times of doing it, that just comes up to you. You don't even need a system for that. That's just experience.

Neils Feijen changed his setup and became a world champion.

https://youtu.be/QeoMzrxU7g8?t=2163
He had semi-chicken wing and had his cue way outside of his eye.https://youtu.be/FVzCPBabfVI?t=3057
Now has his cue closer to his body and lined up much better.

We are creatures of habit. But, a ton of workout would correct that flaw.
Once I set up hole reinforcers on my table and shot the straight in shots over and over and over again, it opened a lot of doors.
I agree with Bill Stroud and Dan White on this matter. Totally agree.
Kinda disappointed one instructor spent so much time with an aiming system with you instead of correcting your stroke and setup actually.
 
JoeyInCali said:
I'm not wrong.
You are never going to admit, you have spent a zillion more effort in making CTE WORK FOR YOU. Instead of perfecting your stroke and setup.
You though it was the magic bullet .
And it cost you dearly.
And really has cost you years of progress.
Now, you are finally working on your stroke.
You argued vehemently a laser straight stroke was not that valuable to you.

I bet there is more to Gordy saying CTE helps you get to the shot line.
Good Lord. But, does it involve pivoting?
Less that half a ball of a hit? We already know you just move the aiming/stroking line to outside of that .
Almost straight in? Jeesh, just a hair outside of the contact point. We already know that .
Thin cuts, look at the side of the cue ball and the side of the ob. After thousands of times of doing it, that just comes up to you. You don't even need a system for that. That's just experience.

Neils Feijen changed his setup and became a world champion.

https://youtu.be/QeoMzrxU7g8?t=2163
He had semi-chicken wing and had his cue way outside of his eye.https://youtu.be/FVzCPBabfVI?t=3057
Now has his cue closer to his body and lined up much better.

We are creatures of habit. But, a ton of workout would correct that flaw.
Once I set up hole reinforcers on my table and shot the straight in shots over and over and over again, it opened a lot of doors.
I agree with Bill Stroud and Dan White on this matter. Totally agree.
Kinda disappointed one instructor spent so much time with an aiming system with you instead of correcting your stroke and setup actually.
Click to expand...

You don't know a ****ing thing about me. I did Tor Lowry's 1000 shots a day leading up to the match and come game time I was a totally different player.

DON'T Start ASSUMING shit. I did four hours with Gordy to get footage to use when we make a video for his templates. It wasn't done to improve my stroke although that would be some benefit.

You don't have a clue what I worked on in my life or how much I practiced or didn't practice.

But I will tell you this Joey Bautista, at least I am out there warts and all trying to promote this game and help people to get better. You have literally done NOTHING to promote pool in all the time I have known you. NOTHING.

Not a DAMN THING. NOTHING.

SO get off my nuts son. Your a knocker and a nit through and through. About the ONLY good thing you do in pool is make three good pool cues per year from what I can tell.

I am so reminded of that Roosevelt speech about the critics who criticize those who are in the arena getting shit done. The critic sits on the sidelines and CHIRPS while the man in the arena is trying and failing and trying and failing and then trying and succeeding but the meaning is that it's better to have tried and failed than to never have tried and to criticize those who did.

Here you are a guy who not only can't do a single aiming system, but someone who probably can't even play pool, spending all your time on the aiming forum telling everyone NOT to try any aiming systems.

Let's see some videos of Joey Bautista playing pool. Since you claim to be such a guru know it all show us your prowess.
 
3 good cues a year? Thanks .
I'm ahead this year. Already delivered 3.

Sorry John, I do recommend the ghost ball aiming system and the aiming/stroking line systems or methods.

Dozens of cue makers use the jig I designed so they can make straight cues.
I have donated equipment and labor for pool.
Believe me, the local hall had a lot of money when I played a lot.
And I bought a lot of cues.

When I started playing you were already in your second or third decade, I think.
I'll take the 8.

I think you have buried yourself so deep in this argument for more that a decade already. You actually stopped but got back on it again.
I think you know deep inside, you really don't need to make CTE work for you.
From shooting thousands and thousands of shots, you already know the stroking line. You already know where the cue ball has to be.
Aiming is not really your problem imo.
Again, I agree with Stroud and Dan.
 
There are no objective reference points to aim with....NONE.

Take a picture of a shot while pointing to those objective reference points.......can't be done cause they don't exist.

It's just a line of shit in a long line of shitty advice on how to play pool.

Objective points of references would be the rear and front sights on my target pistols, objective point of reference would be the 1 sign going into turn 14 at Thunderhill raceway that I use as a braking reference point.

In pool, there are no such things and do not trust anyone that tries to imply other wise cause there are just full of shit.
 
JB Cases said:
Hustlers? what the hell are you talking about. I notice you didn't post the shots I made only the ones I missed.
And for good reason. When you miss shots straight in, there is something wrong with your delivery, it hasn't been "straightned out" at all.

And yes there is a way that I can know why I missed a ball. Especially when we have the video. I can pause it and plot out the GB line to see if I was on it. And if I was then I can check the stroke in slow motion to know whether I threw the cue ball off the line.
You obviously don't understand what I'm trying to tell you AT ALL. Even IF you are pointing your cue straight at the ghostball when you are over the ball (before you stroke), you ARE NOT from that fact at alone, aligned properly! Sighting without alignment is worthless. Sighting happens before you go down on the ball, BECAUSE your body has to be in the precise correct position to deliver the cue. If you merely point the cue when down over the ball (without having the parts of the body in their correct positions), there is no chance you are going to be anywhere close to consistent. That is why every coach (even the weekend class ones) will tell you NOT to make corrections to your aim when over the ball. Pivoting makes alignment MORE difficult, rather than easier. Doesn't mean it cannot be done, but it's no shortcut! If you are pointing without proper alignment, your subconscious mind will make some corrections and help you pot some balls, but you won't make many big breaks, and certainly not be consistent over time. The snooker table will show you better than the pool table. When pressure is applied, you'll break down. You would have to play 10 hours a day to get "good" this way, and it will hold you back from reaching your full potential for sure.

Beyond that in practice I can and do set up marked shots where I know exactly what they shot line is and then I use CTE to aim and can see whether or not I am hitting the GB shot line. THEN once I shoot I can see the result and compare it to where my stick finished.
Ok. That's good practise, I suppose. You could shoot some shots and finish the cue on the cloth/hand into chest as well. That will tell you, as well.
In fact I just did four hours with Gordy Vanderveer and the Striking Line templates.

www.slaiming.com

https://youtu.be/o3ctYxQGt3k

So, respectfully, you don't know ANYTHING about what I have been doing since that match.
That is true. I sure hope that your coach adressed the points I did, though.
I suggest you stop thinking about me and knocking me. I already know that as a player I am not the poster boy example. But I can damn sure put some poster boys in the box any time any one wants to bet something.
What is it with you guys and betting?
Not a one of you has the nuts to criticize them or bet a nickel against them. This is a perfect example of my point, instead of debating the topic many of you want to go personal and insult me rather than to debate the merits of the system.
Click to expand...

Ok, lets talk about the system, then. Claim: "CTE straightens out your stroke". This is complete baloney. I could tell any beginner to hit a half ball shot and show him pictures of how the sighting picture should look like. It doesn't get anywhere more objective than that, does it? But the fact is, as distance increases he's going to miss those shots. He needs to be taught footwork, how to get his shooting hand on the cue line, how to get his head over the ball, how to keep his elbow reasonably still, how to time the shot (so he doesn't lose his line), how to keep his arm perpendicular to the floor, how to finish the stroke etc. THOSE things are going to straighten out his stroke. Knowing the shot is half ball is not even 1/20th of the battle. Standing there with a laser and telling him that he's now pointing at half ball is completely pointless. When he delivers his cue, he's not going to make the shot in any repeatable fashion.

Every good player I know is continually refining their game, or at least maintaining their fundamentals. It's hard work to get a straight, quality stroke. To claim that there is a shortcut to this, shows extreme ignorance and is in fact rather insulting to all the people who work hard at their games.
 
Last edited:
Straightpool_99 said:
Ok, lets talk about the system, then. Claim: "CTE straightens out your stroke". This is complete baloney. I could tell any beginner to hit a half ball shot and show him pictures of how the sighting picture should look like. It doesn't get anywhere more objective than that, does it? But the fact is, as distance increases he's going to miss those shots. He needs to be taught footwork, how to get his shooting hand on the cue line, how to get his head over the ball, how to keep his elbow reasonably still, how to time the shot (so he doesn't lose his line), how to keep his arm perpendicular to the floor, how to finish the stroke etc. THOSE things are going to straighten out his stroke. Knowing the shot is half ball is not even 1/20th of the battle. Standing there with a laser and telling him that he's now pointing at half ball is completely pointless. When he delivers his cue, he's not going to make the shot in any repeatable fashion.
Every good player I know is continually refining their game, or at least maintaining their fundamentals. It's hard work to get a straight, quality stroke. To claim that there is a shortcut to this, shows extreme ignorance and is in fact rather insulting to all the people who work hard at their games.
Click to expand...
I disagree with you and that "1/20 of the battle stuff." Aiming is a lot more important than that. But, I will never be able to convince anyone of that, as I am a nobody...it's just my opinion based on experience. So don't beat up on me, please.
Years ago in the stone ages, when 9-ball was played, a spot shot from behind the line with cueball in hand was a routine part of the game.
It was easy to come in from the long rail one diamond, come forward from the adjacent short rail one diamond and then make a half ball hit on the object ball with a medium power to make a spot shot. (If you blasted it, except when using heavy draw, you'd scratch in one of the far corners).
I was taught that by Joe Cosgrove when I was 16 years old.
I would guess that back then, I was 95% favorite to make that spot shot. So was anybody else who setup the shot that way.
It's a little different now, but still close, as that was using the old 'beligian phenolic' balls...the balls in play now seem to require a slightly different location of the cue ball. I do not know why.
And my stroke, at the time, wasn't all that hot as a result of seeing pictures of Willie Hoppe in a book and trying to copy him. That eventually got corrected by watching Joe, who got down low and spread his legs way wide apart like he was getting on a horse or something.
My dad paid Joe money for lessons for me on every Saturday morning for a long time and Joe taught me aiming, aiming, aiming....using the old fractional ball process.
He also opened up to me on every trap in the world and I carried a notebook with me to the poolroom and wrote all that stuff down. Pages and pages of what to avoid and how to get the best of it.
All the other hustlers went nuts over that, but he was being paid to show me, "the kid", as I was called.
I had in that notebook some of the best baseball bets in the world, too. Laying the 4-1 on the flyball was just a starting place. Unfortunately all that knowledge is gone forever now, through divorces, lifestyle changes, and Joe's death years ago.
I still maintain that precise aiming can overcome any of what you guys call "chicken wing" shooting. Unless the nerves come into play and a guy starts choking in the clutch. When "the dog" gets out....everything goes to hell quick, as anybody who's ever performed in public knows.
I'm with you all the way on that staying down on the stroke stuff...that is critical.
Just some comments from an old man here.
 
Last edited:
duckie said:
No such thing as a 1/2 ball hit.......
Click to expand...
Is that so?
I'd say that old Willie Mosconi knew a lot more about half ball hits....(as published in his books).
I can think of about 20 more top action players who used half ball hits too.
Too bad they didn't know there was no such thing. How banal of them...they needed to be enlightened.
 
GoldenFlash said:
Is that so?
I'd say that old Willie Mosconi knew a lot more about half ball hits....(as published in his books).
I can think of about 20 more top action players who used half ball hits too.
Too bad they didn't know there was no such thing. How banal of them...they needed to be enlightened.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's right.....in the real world, there is no such thing as a 1/2 ball hit.

Thinking one can hit 1/2 a ball.......also known as a sphere.....is all visualized in the mind.

I can't help if some of the greats really didn't or don't understand the geometry involved in a shot......but I do and it's apparent, even after so many years at the table....you don't either.

This is one of the problems of drawings that show two circles overlapping from the point of view that is 1/2 a ball above the table and from the shooter side.

From this point of view, it does appear a 1/2 ball hit is possible because the circles on the drawing are 2d.......ie both are flat.

But a top view shows this is not possible. But no one does a top view.

So, yep.......there is no such a thing as a 1/2 ball hit and I just explain why and proved even the greats don't know what there are talking about at times.

BTW.....I got years of drafting experience and also dealing with construction, engineering, design, and technical drawings, plus land surveying.
 
Last edited:
......And the band played on.

duckie said:
Yep, that's right.....in the real world, there is no such thing as a 1/2 ball hit.
Thinking one can hit 1/2 a ball.......also known as a sphere.....is all visualized in the mind.
I can't help if some of the greats really didn't or don't understand the geometry involved in a shot......but I do and it's apparent, even after so many years at the table....you don't either.
This is one of the problems of drawings that show two circles overlapping from the point of view that is 1/2 a ball above the table and from the shooter side.
From this point of view, it does appear a 1/2 ball hit is possible because the circles on the drawing are 2d.......ie both are flat.
But a top view shows this is not possible. But no one does a top view.
So, yep.......there is no such a thing as a 1/2 ball hit and I just explain why and proved even the greats don't know what there are talking about at times.
BTW.....I got years of drafting experience and also dealing with construction, engineering, design, and technical drawings, plus land surveying.
Click to expand...
Well.........who am I to debate with someone who has "years of drafting experience and also dealing with construction, engineering, design, and technical drawings, plus land surveying". Especially when it comes to a mundane endeavor like shooting pool.
After all, I consider it a giant accomplishment in engineering just to drive a nail straight into a plank using a hammer.
Writing my name can be challenging as well......at times. (Usually after a 3 day drunk.) :)
*Flash shakes his head and slowly walks away*
(Below is a photo of me after finding out there is no such thing as a 1/2 ball hit)
Cartoon of liberal having a fit.jpg
 
So how would you describe it without putting paper arrows all over a table?

Maybe you should write a book, "Idiots Guide to the Geometry of a Shot"

duckie said:
Yep, that's right.....in the real world, there is no such thing as a 1/2 ball hit.

Thinking one can hit 1/2 a ball.......also known as a sphere.....is all visualized in the mind.

I can't help if some of the greats really didn't or don't understand the geometry involved in a shot......but I do and it's apparent, even after so many years at the table....you don't either.

This is one of the problems of drawings that show two circles overlapping from the point of view that is 1/2 a ball above the table and from the shooter side.

From this point of view, it does appear a 1/2 ball hit is possible because the circles on the drawing are 2d.......ie both are flat.

But a top view shows this is not possible. But no one does a top view.

So, yep.......there is no such a thing as a 1/2 ball hit and I just explain why and proved even the greats don't know what there are talking about at times.

BTW.....I got years of drafting experience and also dealing with construction, engineering, design, and technical drawings, plus land surveying.
Click to expand...
 
louieatienza said:
Just a thought on a test or demonstration to show that the aim line derived with CTE is not "influenced" - A few random OBs can be placed on the table by the foot string. The CB in each instance would be placed along the headstring. Shooter will align center CB to OB edge, then CB edge to whichever of the 3 positions needed to pocket the shot. Curtain then comes down mid-table, before the pivot to CB center is made.

If the balls are pocketed, then it would be evidence to support that the pivot to CB center produces the correct aim line. A shot from 4 diamonds away would decrease the margin of error on all shots, and having the curtain drop in front of the OB would remove any variable of "uconscious adjustment" or "knowledge" from the equation.
Click to expand...

well here is something similar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l0fAwmeOq8
 
duckie said:
No such thing as a 1/2 ball hit.......
Click to expand...

LOL. I think I am going to make this one part of my signature.

Shit I am going to make a laser engraved sign with this quote and put it in my training facility.

"No such thing as a 1/2 ball hit....." - Duckie
 
JB Cases said:
LOL. I think I am going to make this one part of my signature.

Shit I am going to make a laser engraved sign with this quote and put it in my training facility.

"No such thing as a 1/2 ball hit....." - Duckie
Click to expand...

Can you show me how the cue ball makes contact on cut shots and only touches half the surface of a straight in shot


1
 
People usually make fun of things beyond their intellectual capacity to understand.

Much easier to keep their head buried in the sand.

Show a pic of a 1/2 ball hit or objective reference points for aiming......prove me wrong.....go ahead.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top