MIkjary understand the visual part of cte/pro1 better than anyone on this board. If you have trouble understanding what he means, just ask him nicely and im sure he will tell you. Im telling you now you will be making a big mistake not listening and trying to understand what he is saying and i know stan would also agree with what Mikjary has posted so far in these threads, trust me.
Tips for Students of CTE
- Thread starter AtLarge
- Start date
People like to talk about ____ version of CTE or ____ version of CTE or Stan's CTE/Pro1, etc, etc. Fact is, CTE is CTE and many of these methods are looking at the same core thing from a different angle --- but the core method is really no different.
People sometimes say, "Well, Hal's version of CTE was incomplete, etc." I kind of cringe when I read that stuff because nothing he did was incomplete. Stan's method comes largely from the infamous Hal post (you know, there are 6 pockets on the table post -- the one everyone made fun of). Hal simply left out the pivot.
Furthermore, basic core information was sometimes lost in between Hal's mouth and the bashing threads here on CTE. I've always said CTE was a misnomer. It's really center to "outermost" edge. Hal would tell me to "poke my head out to see a new edge." It took me a few years to really get what he was saying. Fact is-- your eyes should never straddle the CTEL for each and every shot.
Therefore, there are different ways to accomplish the same core thing. Some, however, are easier to teach than others. Stan's method is without a doubt the easiest and most effective way to absorb this info. I think when someone masters his info, it would be beneficial to experiment with a visual approach (outermost edge method, probably the same as what Mikjary is saying) just for completeness. You'll find when you sight an OB's outermost edge and then peer down to the CB, you'll see the edge alignments are the same as Stan's method.
NOTHING Hal did/said was incomplete -- I can't stress that enough.
Thanks, Mike, for the pat on the back, :thumbup: but I can defer to many posters on here who have much more knowledge than I do. I am simply repeating what they have shown to me in posts and pms.
Dave Segal, for instance, opened my eyes to Perfect Aim techniques and the different possibilities of changing how you can look at a shot. I believe you can look at a shot wrong, have an incorrect alignment and still pocket balls. You can do the same thing in every sport; hit a baseball, hit a golf ball, etc. With an improved visual setup, you can improve your chances of making more accurate contact, targeting, etc.
Pool players achieve a certain level or peak and try many things to improve their game. Some help, but most are exercises in futility. I like to try them all. If it doesn't work for me, I move on. I don't hang around and criticize others for using it. I keep tabs, though on their progress, just in case I was wrong. My negative views would only slow down the chance for advancement or new ideas to emerge.
When we stop searching, the challenge is gone. Pool becomes just an activity and fills in our leisure time like going out to dinner or going to the movies. If you're at this point in your pool career, you probably wouldn't be reading these threads. You either believe there is something out there that can improve your game, or it's all been said and done before. I tend to hang with the first part and listen to what players are saying. Whether they are a novice or a seasoned pro. A fresh perspective can be just what you're looking for.
Best,
Mike
So far so good, 5 pages in and no name calling yet... 
Looking forward to more good information in this thread. As posted in this thread and others I'm a relatively recent convert to CTE/Pro One and loving it! Interesting thing was I skipping playing for about 2 weeks (busy / sick on my normal pool nights) and was itching to play last night. Since I'm still new to this, I started out shooting really rough, not seeing the lines, not trusting myself, and stroke was a bit off too. Then someone came over to play (I should have said no) and more crap followed. But once I got back to practice again, and did some reference shot drills to reinforce the aim lines and pivots and some straight stroke drills everything fell back into place, thankfully.
The recent discussion on using both eyes to sight the lines rings true with me, that's when I "got" it and was able to see the shots and use the system appropriately. I still shoot with the stick under my dominant eye (left for me) as I always have, but when sighting in my preshot routine while upright both eyes are definitely being used.
I have a few questions for the experts here:
- When cutting a ball to the right, I feel like I can pick up the CTE line and aim points while in a normal stance offset as described. But when cutting to the left, I find I have to "lean" to the right to pick up the lines and then be very conscious of my (typical) right pivot to make sure I get across the CTE line so to speak. Any tips for this, or is that little head lean just going to become part of my routine?
- Any tips for picking up the visuals for longer shots? Because of the perceived size of the object ball, seems to me the precision needed for both the alignment portion and actual pivot/stroke is much higher than on normal routine shots say within 2 - 3 feet. Luckily, at least if you are playing well, most of your shots are within 2 - 4 feet of the object ball, so these awkward longer shots don't come up often. I'm getting better at them, so maybe just practice is needed.
- Also related to longer shots, I realized that at distances more than 4 diamonds or so that if aim point B is required based on the angle of the cut, I actually use aim points A or C instead. I think that info was in the DVD and Stan mentioned it as well in a conversation. Oddly, seems that when an original aim point of A or C is required, or a thinner cut of 1/8, there seems to be no corresponding adjustment. Is this correct?
I'll probably have more as I continue to practice, thanks again for the continued discussion.
Scott
Looking forward to more good information in this thread. As posted in this thread and others I'm a relatively recent convert to CTE/Pro One and loving it! Interesting thing was I skipping playing for about 2 weeks (busy / sick on my normal pool nights) and was itching to play last night. Since I'm still new to this, I started out shooting really rough, not seeing the lines, not trusting myself, and stroke was a bit off too. Then someone came over to play (I should have said no) and more crap followed. But once I got back to practice again, and did some reference shot drills to reinforce the aim lines and pivots and some straight stroke drills everything fell back into place, thankfully.
The recent discussion on using both eyes to sight the lines rings true with me, that's when I "got" it and was able to see the shots and use the system appropriately. I still shoot with the stick under my dominant eye (left for me) as I always have, but when sighting in my preshot routine while upright both eyes are definitely being used.
I have a few questions for the experts here:
- When cutting a ball to the right, I feel like I can pick up the CTE line and aim points while in a normal stance offset as described. But when cutting to the left, I find I have to "lean" to the right to pick up the lines and then be very conscious of my (typical) right pivot to make sure I get across the CTE line so to speak. Any tips for this, or is that little head lean just going to become part of my routine?
- Any tips for picking up the visuals for longer shots? Because of the perceived size of the object ball, seems to me the precision needed for both the alignment portion and actual pivot/stroke is much higher than on normal routine shots say within 2 - 3 feet. Luckily, at least if you are playing well, most of your shots are within 2 - 4 feet of the object ball, so these awkward longer shots don't come up often. I'm getting better at them, so maybe just practice is needed.
- Also related to longer shots, I realized that at distances more than 4 diamonds or so that if aim point B is required based on the angle of the cut, I actually use aim points A or C instead. I think that info was in the DVD and Stan mentioned it as well in a conversation. Oddly, seems that when an original aim point of A or C is required, or a thinner cut of 1/8, there seems to be no corresponding adjustment. Is this correct?
I'll probably have more as I continue to practice, thanks again for the continued discussion.
Scott
So far so good, 5 pages in and no name calling yet...
Looking forward to more good information in this thread. As posted in this thread and others I'm a relatively recent convert to CTE/Pro One and loving it! Interesting thing was I skipping playing for about 2 weeks (busy / sick on my normal pool nights) and was itching to play last night. Since I'm still new to this, I started out shooting really rough, not seeing the lines, not trusting myself, and stroke was a bit off too. Then someone came over to play (I should have said no) and more crap followed. But once I got back to practice again, and did some reference shot drills to reinforce the aim lines and pivots and some straight stroke drills everything fell back into place, thankfully.
The recent discussion on using both eyes to sight the lines rings true with me, that's when I "got" it and was able to see the shots and use the system appropriately. I still shoot with the stick under my dominant eye (left for me) as I always have, but when sighting in my preshot routine while upright both eyes are definitely being used.
I have a few questions for the experts here:
- When cutting a ball to the right, I feel like I can pick up the CTE line and aim points while in a normal stance offset as described. But when cutting to the left, I find I have to "lean" to the right to pick up the lines and then be very conscious of my (typical) right pivot to make sure I get across the CTE line so to speak. Any tips for this, or is that little head lean just going to become part of my routine?
- Any tips for picking up the visuals for longer shots? Because of the perceived size of the object ball, seems to me the precision needed for both the alignment portion and actual pivot/stroke is much higher than on normal routine shots say within 2 - 3 feet. Luckily, at least if you are playing well, most of your shots are within 2 - 4 feet of the object ball, so these awkward longer shots don't come up often. I'm getting better at them, so maybe just practice is needed.
- Also related to longer shots, I realized that at distances more than 4 diamonds or so that if aim point B is required based on the angle of the cut, I actually use aim points A or C instead. I think that info was in the DVD and Stan mentioned it as well in a conversation. Oddly, seems that when an original aim point of A or C is required, or a thinner cut of 1/8, there seems to be no corresponding adjustment. Is this correct?
I'll probably have more as I continue to practice, thanks again for the continued discussion.
Scott
Hey Scott,
You are picking this stuff up fast judging by your questions. I'll be asking you for help next month.
Sticking your head out is not a problem. It is to be expected on certain shots. It is your eyes telling your body where to be to get into the correct alignment. This will become smoother and more comfortable with practice.
The long shots are hard to see with any system. With Cte/Pro One, you get the additional benefit of two points to look at instead of one contact point. For sighting, I like what Stevie does on the dvd. He bends over to get a good look at the aiming points. I do this, too.
When the balls are further apart, the perspective will change. At six diamonds, I can use B to cut a ball fairly thin. A or C will still be used for the straighter shots with very little change. This is something that takes some experience to figure out for each individual shooter. In a short time, since you are aware of your shot making abilities and ranges, you will automatically learn this. You just have to see it and your brain catalogs it in no time.
When I use 90/90 aiming, I use 90 half/ball quite a bit. It covers a large range of angles for me. Basically, I visually give my brain the information for the shot with my setup. My body moves into position as I hold my visuals and I'm there. The key is giving my mind the correct, consistent visual setup.
Best,
Mike
scottjen26,
I shouldn't post here for I don't have the DVD.
But.....
When I started to try CTE years ago, I got down on the shot lined up with the CTE line (CTEL) before the secondary aiming line from the edge of the CB to the points on the OB were proffered by CTE/Pro-1. The pre-pivot distance was described by some as 1/2 tip, one tip, 1/4 ball shift to the side of the center of the CB.
The side shift of 1/2 tip was absorbed in my CTEL stance, but the 1/4 ball shift took my head to the side to sight over the cue and then the pivot took me further away from my stance - I wasn't moving my feet back then.
I now set up on the CTEL while looking for the secondary aim line and walk into the shot putting my bridge down and with the 1/2 tip shift to the side pre-pivot - I then pivot and make a slight adjustment so that I can stroke naturally before I shoot.
You are correct about the 2 foot separation between the CB and OB being fine with a 1/2 tip offset and you can practice that until you get repeatable cut angles. What I have found is that to achieve those same cut angles for each secondary aim point on the OB requires a smaller than 1/2 tip offset for larger separations between the CB and OB. It might be 1/4 tip offset for 3 feet separations and at 4 feet,iit may be as small as 1/10 offset for 4 feet.
For a 1 foot separation between the two, the offset can be as large as 2 1/2 cue tip diameters. This is caused by the OB appearing larger when close to the CB, where the distances between "A" and "B" appear to be correspondingly larger. The converse is also true as explained above.
This is self compensating for if you think about it, If you shot the smaller appearing OB with the same 2 1/2 tip offset pre-pivot for a separation of 1 foot and achieve say a 10 degree angle to the GB. That 10 degree would be traveling away from the smaller appearing OB and at 7 foot separation, the CB will miss the OB altogether.
This is how I see it for now and still don't know how to get both of my eyes on the CTEL and the secondary aim line - some say to put the head at an angle to the cue by adjusting ones stance more at a say 45 degree angle to the cue - this effectivly brings the lines of sight of the eyes closer together.
Just sayin how things work for me.:thumbup:
I shouldn't post here for I don't have the DVD.
But.....
When I started to try CTE years ago, I got down on the shot lined up with the CTE line (CTEL) before the secondary aiming line from the edge of the CB to the points on the OB were proffered by CTE/Pro-1. The pre-pivot distance was described by some as 1/2 tip, one tip, 1/4 ball shift to the side of the center of the CB.
The side shift of 1/2 tip was absorbed in my CTEL stance, but the 1/4 ball shift took my head to the side to sight over the cue and then the pivot took me further away from my stance - I wasn't moving my feet back then.
I now set up on the CTEL while looking for the secondary aim line and walk into the shot putting my bridge down and with the 1/2 tip shift to the side pre-pivot - I then pivot and make a slight adjustment so that I can stroke naturally before I shoot.
You are correct about the 2 foot separation between the CB and OB being fine with a 1/2 tip offset and you can practice that until you get repeatable cut angles. What I have found is that to achieve those same cut angles for each secondary aim point on the OB requires a smaller than 1/2 tip offset for larger separations between the CB and OB. It might be 1/4 tip offset for 3 feet separations and at 4 feet,iit may be as small as 1/10 offset for 4 feet.
For a 1 foot separation between the two, the offset can be as large as 2 1/2 cue tip diameters. This is caused by the OB appearing larger when close to the CB, where the distances between "A" and "B" appear to be correspondingly larger. The converse is also true as explained above.
This is self compensating for if you think about it, If you shot the smaller appearing OB with the same 2 1/2 tip offset pre-pivot for a separation of 1 foot and achieve say a 10 degree angle to the GB. That 10 degree would be traveling away from the smaller appearing OB and at 7 foot separation, the CB will miss the OB altogether.
This is how I see it for now and still don't know how to get both of my eyes on the CTEL and the secondary aim line - some say to put the head at an angle to the cue by adjusting ones stance more at a say 45 degree angle to the cue - this effectivly brings the lines of sight of the eyes closer together.
Just sayin how things work for me.:thumbup:
Last edited:
LAMas,
Have you tried using only one eye instead of two? For about 10-15% of my shots I use only one eye to pick up both lines. You don't have to use two eyes. To each his own. You might be the only person in the world who sees the shot like you do. It doesn't matter. It's what works for you visually.
Hope I helped ewe. :grin-square:
Best,
Mike
I think most of the system's benefit can be attributed to that.
pj
chgo
This description is meaningless except as a metaphor for "precise", and as a metaphor for "precise" it's misleading or untrue.
pj
chgo
I spent an hour and a half to validate the cut angles derived from my diagrams for they seemed to be too large. I started by shooting spot shots with the CB just to the right of the left corner pocket in the kitchen. I used top/follow at pocket speed to minimize the effects of CIT. After making several in a row, I then used that english top/follow to shoot after aligning the secondary aim line. I realized that my diagrams used a OB diameter that was too small so I increased it for the 2 foot separation between the CB and OB based on perspective that I derived using ACAD.
I started with the OB on the spot and the CB at CTEL just to the right of the center of the table (between the side pockets). I put the secondary aim line on the left edge of the OB and achieved about a 35 degree cut angle - check. I then tried the 1/8 and achieved around 40 degrees - missing the left upper corner pocket to the right of it and hitting the end rail behind the spot.
I then moved to the 1/4 OB and started to pocket the OB into the 4.0" wide opening. I am not accurate in aligning my left eye and missed some shots by and inch or so. I started to stick aim and lifting the cue tip vertically to try to be more accurate - I still suiffer from parallax, for the OB appears above the CB with the felt in between, and I have to concentrate and focus on the secondary aim line, get down with a 1/2 tip offset, pivot and shoot - most shots went in.
I then went to 1/2 OB and was hitting to the left of the pocket by about 1/2 the distance to the first diamond. The 3/4 OB hit the rail between the first and second diamond and the right 1/8 at around the second diamond. Fatigue set in and I stopped.
Aiming with my left eye improved so I tried PJ's doubling the distance from the contact point with the left edge of the CB and I found it to be more natural for me and thus more accurate - it works very well.
The last half hour was banging balls and getting shape to run out a few balls - 4.0" pockets is taxing.
Mike, I use only one eye that is closest to the edge of the CB to establish my stance and stroke under the center of my chin (1.125" to the side to stroke about at the center of the CB). For me, this is geometrically diagrammable and is yielding consistent results. You wrote me months ago to use one eye on the secondary aim line at the quarters before A, B and C.
It works for me.
Thanks
Patrick,
I normally appreciate your contributions to CTE threads as I believe they make interested parties really think and study the subject, but in this thread the OP respectfully asked for opponents of CTE/ProOne to refrain from posting. Is really too difficult to leave just one thread alone?
Roger
A Bonus From CTE
In the league I play in, there are four different bars that still use the oversize cue ball. These have always given me problems with aiming.
I even bought one of the larger balls so I could practice at home before league night. It helped some, but I still had problems.
Today, I tried some of the CTE manual pivot shots, and was happy to find that the cue ball size didn't seem to affect my results.
Evidently, the reference lines take care of the size difference. This is another bonus for me.
In the league I play in, there are four different bars that still use the oversize cue ball. These have always given me problems with aiming.
I even bought one of the larger balls so I could practice at home before league night. It helped some, but I still had problems.
Today, I tried some of the CTE manual pivot shots, and was happy to find that the cue ball size didn't seem to affect my results.
Evidently, the reference lines take care of the size difference. This is another bonus for me.
Nice idea for a thread. It is good to see that the thread has remained non-combative, non-hostile, non-mean-spirited, and non-childish. I don't think any CTE thread in the past has remained this civil and for so long. Good job everybody!
To help avoid possible confusion, or if some readers don't know the details of what is being discussed, here's a concise summary of Stan's version. Also, I know you don't want other versions/hybridizations discussed in this thread, which I think is a good idea; but if people want to see how other versions compare or contrast with Stan's version, several common versions are described here.
I think it is helpful to use the "outside" and "inside" terminology for both the alignment points (1/8-left, 1/4-left, center, 1/4-right, 1/8 right) and the pre-pivot cue tip position (left or right). This allows Stan's approach to be summarized very concisely (as shown here) and allows cuts in both directions (left or right) to be covered by a single menu of choices. The concise summary might help some people learn and remember the system more easily. It might also help some people see the patterns and trends concerning how the alignment and pivot change as the necessary amount of cut increases.
Regards,
Dave
I just wanted to clarify that shot arc concept. The smaller the pivot, the less it matters. The DVD is specific to 1/2 tip pivots because very little can go wrong.
CTE as a system doesn't have a pre-configured "offset," if you would. Hal specifically said the offset didn't matter (and he's right); however, additional considerations need to be made if a player chooses to offset beyond 1/2 tip (say, a 1/2 ball).
So, when releasing a DVD and making this as objective as possible without fooling around with a lot of variables - Stan chose 1/2 tip pivots so a player could see results right away.
I know this thread is for DVD-content-only, so I'll be brief. Once your tip offset increases beyond 1/2 tip, the player cannot pivot straight from the bridge as they'd pivot to the incorrect center based on shot distances. That's where pivoting along the OB plane comes in to ensure you're getting to the correct center.
I made a detour this past Sunday to Walnutport, PA to see Hal. I was warned ahead of time that his "clarity" has slipped considerably since my last visit. When I sat by his bed, he was a little foggy. But as soon as I mentioned "the aiming police," "Pat Johnson," "Bob Jewett," and other members of the gang, Hal snapped into ninja mode. In fact, I'm not sure if I ever recall Hal being so cognizant of detail in our discussion! Unreal! Sunny was elated and couldn't believe it. I told her if he ever clouds up, just tell him that Patrick Johnson is knocking CTE on AZBilliards and watch what happens (nothing like poking the tiger through the cage). LOL! (Pat -- hopefully you see the humor in that and don't mind I totally used you to get Hal back into instruction-mode)
One of the questions I snuck in was, "Hal, when you were playing -- what was your bridge length and offset?"
He replied by saying his bridge length was VERY short (about 4-5" or so) and his offset was VERY small (smaller than 1/2 tip). His goal, he explained, was to minimize the chance of "losing the trajectory" to the target after getting to center. The true target, as he explained it, was hitting the exact center of the CB (this lead into a lengthy discussion on how to do that).
Now, I want to preface that comment with the fact that Hal comes from an era where 14.1 was the game of choice. Many of us are rotation players and playing with a bridge that short would break your game. Hal's consideration was minimal CB movement.
In conclusion, smaller offsets mitigate the need to worry about pivot arcs. If you offset 1/2 ball, like me, and pivot from the bridge--- you'll never make a ball. Once you get to 1/2 tip and within, you can. See? Stan eliminated a big variable
Dave
I have Stan's DVD and watched it many times..and spoke to him on the phone on an issue that confused me and he took all the time necessary for me to understand it. To me trying CTE..ETE..90/90..whatever is that where ever you start your aim on the cue ball better be the exact same offset that you spot on the object ball. I know where Dave gets his half ball pivot as I get it from the same source.
I think Stan's system can be used as a complete system if the half tip offset helps you sight better, and it can be used as a reference point (A,B or B,C) after a larger pivot if you use a larger amount of offset to begin with..like the cueballs edge or half ball to start your pivot.
From Stan's thread.
...CTE/PRO ONE is a VISUAL SYSTEM.
If a player's eyes were positioned exactly the same for each shot, A and B, the results would be identical.
For the 1 ball shot, a player's body is behind the CB with the headed tilted to the right to see the visuals.
For the 2 ball shot, a player's body is clearly much more to the right of the cue ball than for the 1 ball.
The eyes are in different positions for each shot. The proper visuals are easily obtained for each shot. The table can dictate body and eye positioning and even the distance that eyes are from the CB. That is the nature of the rectanglular table.
Actually shot 2 could be played as a stop shot safety as I demoed on the DVD or possibly an iffy 4 rail bank. BUT, one must postion the eyes just as if they were shooting the 1 ball.
Just because a CB and an OB share a common distance and the same visuals does not mean the eyes will be postioned the same way for each shot. Perception is altered with varied eye positions. As I mentioned on the DVD the table will often dicate a player's ball address postion.
Very commendable work, AtLarge! The 2 shots you presented represent a great lesson in CTE/PRO ONE.
Stan
-------------------------------------------
The head tilted is a recuring instruction.
If the head is tilted, then the eyes are in a different location and thus the visual is altered to the side; and the secondary aim line is no longer directly on the aim point on the OB, say "B" for example.
If this is all one does without shifting the body to a new stance, then the result will be the same as if one didn't tilt the head.
If one the other hand, one tilts the head and aquires a new visual a bit off of point "B" and then moves the body accordingly to recapture point "B", then the cut angle will be different than if one didn't tilt the head etc..
I guess that one can tilt the head to move the eyes a small bit for a slightly different cut angle than the original aim point "B", and one can tilt the head to move the eyes even more for a larger "slightly" different cut angle.
The results of this progressive tilting of the head can be stored in memory for recalling later for 1/8, A, B, C and 1/8 along with pivoting left or pivoting right.
This is viable, is geometrically diagrammable for each shooter with different visuals i.e., left or right dominant eye or somewhere in between - though not parsimonious.
Viable for those that have mastered CTE/Pro-One.
Just saying without malice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dumluk
...CTE/PRO ONE is a VISUAL SYSTEM.
If a player's eyes were positioned exactly the same for each shot, A and B, the results would be identical.
For the 1 ball shot, a player's body is behind the CB with the headed tilted to the right to see the visuals.
For the 2 ball shot, a player's body is clearly much more to the right of the cue ball than for the 1 ball.
The eyes are in different positions for each shot. The proper visuals are easily obtained for each shot. The table can dictate body and eye positioning and even the distance that eyes are from the CB. That is the nature of the rectanglular table.
Actually shot 2 could be played as a stop shot safety as I demoed on the DVD or possibly an iffy 4 rail bank. BUT, one must postion the eyes just as if they were shooting the 1 ball.
Just because a CB and an OB share a common distance and the same visuals does not mean the eyes will be postioned the same way for each shot. Perception is altered with varied eye positions. As I mentioned on the DVD the table will often dicate a player's ball address postion.
Very commendable work, AtLarge! The 2 shots you presented represent a great lesson in CTE/PRO ONE.
Stan
-------------------------------------------
The head tilted is a recuring instruction.
If the head is tilted, then the eyes are in a different location and thus the visual is altered to the side; and the secondary aim line is no longer directly on the aim point on the OB, say "B" for example.
If this is all one does without shifting the body to a new stance, then the result will be the same as if one didn't tilt the head.
If one the other hand, one tilts the head and aquires a new visual a bit off of point "B" and then moves the body accordingly to recapture point "B", then the cut angle will be different than if one didn't tilt the head etc..
I guess that one can tilt the head to move the eyes a small bit for a slightly different cut angle than the original aim point "B", and one can tilt the head to move the eyes even more for a larger "slightly" different cut angle.
The results of this progressive tilting of the head can be stored in memory for recalling later for 1/8, A, B, C and 1/8 along with pivoting left or pivoting right.
This is viable, is geometrically diagrammable for each shooter with different visuals i.e., left or right dominant eye or somewhere in between - though not parsimonious.
Viable for those that have mastered CTE/Pro-One.
Just saying without malice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dumluk
I don't know whether "progressive tilting of the head" is a way Stan would recommend for achieving the multiple eye positions, and therefore multiple cut angles, within any single, fundamental instruction set (same two visuals and pivot direction). An alternative is simply shifting the head, and therefore the eyes, slightly laterally without altering the tilt of the head. I'm going to watch the DVD again sometime soon, trying to pay close attention to the eye positions for each shot.
I thought that the Rosetta Stone of CTE/Pro-One was revealed by Stan to you, only to have him reject your understanding of what he said.
Progress is being made in understanding how one can fill in the cut angles between the 1/8ths and 1/4ths secondary aim points in a cogent manner/instruction.
Perhaps some of the non-users understand it better than the users.:wink: Otherwise, after countless hours at the table, you, as Bolo Ocho says, "get into a 'Zone' " where the subconscious takes over.
After a couple of hours of DD practice at the table, getting my fundamentals zeroed in, I can also get into the "Zone" and run racks - the Zen of pool.:wink: - but I digress for this thread is about Stan's method that has not yet been unequivocally revealed - even in the DVD (that I don't have).
So for now, "experience" means "time at the table.":thumbup:
If you took this shot ( the 1 ball shot) to the table you would see without any doubt, the only way to obtain the visuals as a right hander is to tilt the head. IF the body were on the right side of the CB for this shot it would be almost physically impossible to execute.
Last edited:
As I stated on the DVD, thick shots to right, including straight-ins, for right handed players requires a tilting of the head to the right to obtain the visuals.
I said nothing about a progressive tilting of the head on the DVD and there is no such thing in CTE/PRO ONE. I can assure of that.