the basis of

Looking forward to it.

CJ Wiley said:
I'm going to be around Ft. Worth more in the coming months. Maybe we can go to Rusty's in Arlington or Ft. Worth sometime.

yeah, I understand not wanting to be "abused" by the two smartest pool sweaters in the world. ;) ttys
Click to expand...

I know one thing for sure,, I'm sure i can learn more from you, than you could from me !!! LOL

Respectfully,
y
 
LAMas said:
If the center of the CB is aimed at the edge of the OB it is geometrically fixed regardless of the location of the CB and OB on the table.

View attachment 256103
Click to expand...

th

please explain more! All these balls are on the same line yet have different CTEL lines!
 
Center of CB to Edge of OB

There is no angle created by CTE alone. There is only a line from the center of the CB to the edge of the OB (CTEL).

For what purpose one wants to know an angle like from the CTEL to the center of the other OB locations is not being discussed and is of no use to me...save to explain why the OB appears to be smaller at greater distances away from the CB and shooter.

CTE angle.jpg

In your diagram, the CTEL yields different angles with respect to the center of the CB and other OBs being on the same center line as the CB. If you concentrate on the CB and any one OB, taking away the other OBs and the table, the CTEL will be a line from the center of the CB to the edge of that or any other OB...CTE/L is a line.

When one starts his stance at CTE, the center of the OB is not relevant at that point.

I hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
LAMas said:
There is no angle created by CTE alone. There is only a line from the center of the CB to the edge of the OB (CTEL).

For what purpose one wants to know an angle like from the CTEL to the center of the other OB locations is not being discussed and is of no use to me...save to explain why the OB appears to be smaller at greater distances away from the CB and shooter.

View attachment 256144
Click to expand...

I am certainly not proficient enough with CTE to 'argue' one way or the other. But... if you draw a line from the center of the CB to the other sides of those object balls i.e. the left side as though cutting them into the corner pocket on the right, you would have a different angle for each one of them.

I'm just saying, not 'arguing'.

Regards &
 
ENGLISH! said:
I am certainly not proficient enough with CTE to 'argue' one way or the other. But... if you draw a line from the center of the CB to the other sides of those object balls i.e. the left side as though cutting them into the corner pocket on the right, you would have a different angle for each one of them.

I'm just saying, not 'arguing'.

Regards &
Click to expand...

I respect your thought, but when we say center of the CB to the edge of the OB (CTE) we are describing a line (CTEL) and not an angle.

When we select a target/pocket to hit, we pay attention to another line to the secondary aim fractions on the OB including, at times, it's center. This creates an included angle.

This may be a nit but one needs to explain their utilization of the CTE line (CTEL) or the derived CTE to OB fraction/s angle....perhaps CTEA?:smile:
 
LAMas said:
There is no angle created by CTE alone. There is only a line from the center of the CB to the edge of the OB (CTEL).

For what purpose one wants to know an angle like from the CTEL to the center of the other OB locations is not being discussed and is of no use to me...save to explain why the OB appears to be smaller at greater distances away from the CB and shooter.

View attachment 256144

In your diagram, the CTEL yields different angles with respect to the center of the CB and other OBs being on the same center line as the CB. If you concentrate on the CB and any one OB, taking away the other OBs and the table, the CTEL will be a line from the center of the CB to the edge of that or any other OB...CTE/L is a line.

When one starts his stance at CTE, the center of the OB is not relevant at that point.

I hope this helps.
Click to expand...

You're cue ball is not on the same line as the object balls!
 
pablocruz said:
You're cue ball is not on the same line as the object balls!
Click to expand...

We are dicussing center of the CB to the edge of the OB (CTE) and the CB center is on the CTE line as is the edge of the OB.

When does an angle enter into the mix?
 
LAMas said:
We are dicussing center of the CB to the edge of the OB (CTE) and the CB center is on the CTE line as is the edge of the OB.

When does an angle enter into the mix?
Click to expand...

the angle doesn't change, the core center changes, does it not?
 
LAMas said:
We are dicussing center of the CB to the edge of the OB (CTE) and the CB center is on the CTE line as is the edge of the OB.

When does an angle enter into the mix?
Click to expand...

do you also use a different edge, no matter how slight?
 
LAMas said:
There is no angle created by CTE alone. There is only a line from the center of the CB to the edge of the OB (CTEL).

For what purpose one wants to know an angle like from the CTEL to the center of the other OB locations is not being discussed and is of no use to me...save to explain why the OB appears to be smaller at greater distances away from the CB and shooter.

View attachment 256144

In your diagram, the CTEL yields different angles with respect to the center of the CB and other OBs being on the same center line as the CB. If you concentrate on the CB and any one OB, taking away the other OBs and the table, the CTEL will be a line from the center of the CB to the edge of that or any other OB...CTE/L is a line.

When one starts his stance at CTE, the center of the OB is not relevant at that point.

I hope this helps.
Click to expand...

Move your drawing off the half ball hit line, do you get the same results?
 
Years ago a sage named Hal described various forms of an aiming system that he called CTE.

He proffered that lining up one's stance behind the CB center in alignment to the edge of the OB that is opposite the target/pocket puts the shooter in a good starting position. He then goes on to say that the shooter should move the tip of the cue a full tip or fractions thereof and then pivot back to the center and shoot.

The variations of how to effect all of the cut angles to the target/pocket from there are many and are offered in the Aiming Forum, elsewhere, for sale and private instruction.

I studied and tried some of them but found that my memory was lacking and reverted to double distance and contact point to contact point aiming that didn't tax my memory.
 
LAMas said:
If the center of the CB is aimed at the edge of the OB it is geometrically fixed regardless of the location of the CB and OB on the table.

View attachment 256103
Click to expand...

True but the table IS the constant. If you move the pocket then you move the shooter as well. Which is the same thing as moving the balls.

On your diagram the exact same CTE steps work for each table position to allow the shooter to get into GB shot line.

www.jbcases.com
 
ENGLISH! said:
John,

All I'm saying is that until the robot, you're fighting a losing battle even if it is the good fight. Iquiring minds want to know. Other minds, well they're happy with what they have.

Best Regards to You &
Click to expand...

Not at all fighting a losing battle. The battles have already been won. Highly respected and qualified instructors teach CTE now, many good and above average amateurs use it, some pros openly use it in high level competition.

A robot proof would only be icing on the cake.

But since I slept on it what would a robot need to know? Is the range of .12mm to .41mm a small enough gap that a robot can be programmed to follow the manual CTE steps and make almost every shot on the table?

Possibly.

What if the robot is programmed with the ability to make those exit line distances even smaller by the use of secondary lines as on ProOne? One would have to assume that a tighter pair of lines would increase the accuracy even more.



www.jbcases.com
 
JB Cases said:
Not at all fighting a losing battle. The battles have already been won. Highly respected and qualified instructors teach CTE now, many good and above average amateurs use it, some pros openly use it in high level competition.

A robot proof would only be icing on the cake.

But since I slept on it what would a robot need to know? Is the range of .12mm to .41mm a small enough gap that a robot can be programmed to follow the manual CTE steps and make almost every shot on the table?

Possibly.

What if the robot is programmed with the ability to make those exit line distances even smaller by the use of secondary lines as on ProOne? One would have to assume that a tighter pair of lines would increase the accuracy even more.



www.jbcases.com
Click to expand...

What do you think the finding's would be?
 
Last edited:
ENGLISH! said:
John,

I hope you know that I was only referring to the immediate participants of the immediate 'discussing' at hand. This battle, not the larger war. The larger war probably does not even exists.

How are Mother & Child?

Best Regards to You &
Click to expand...

Everone is good. Growing and healing.

I can guarantee you that if someone were to build a robot and program it to use the CTE steps and if that robot then made every shot on the table then Pat and others would still say that humans only make it work with feel and estimation.





www.jbcases.com
 
JB Cases said:
Everone is good. Growing and healing.

I can guarantee you that if someone were to build a robot and program it to use the CTE steps and if that robot then made every shot on the table then Pat and others would still say that humans only make it work with feel and estimation.

www.jbcases.com
Click to expand...

Hey John,

Glad Karen & Katrina are doing well.

Did you see my post about your new cue tips & my experience with the solution you are using to soak them in?

That was my point even if the robot with a laser set up & programed to make a tip pivot could make all of the shots it would be someone affecting the robot through mental telepathy.

Best Regards to You & Yours &
 
JB Cases said:
True but the table IS the constant. If you move the pocket then you move the shooter as well. Which is the same thing as moving the balls.

On your diagram the exact same CTE steps work for each table position to allow the shooter to get into GB shot line.

www.jbcases.com
Click to expand...

True that, but if you froze the shooter behind the center of the CB aiming at the edge of the OB together like a statue, you could move or rotate this statue with balls anywhere atop the table, but the relationship of the shooter to the center of the CB to the edge of the OB staue would not change.

Bottom line is this is just the start and the important part is the...."Rest of the story.":wink:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top