I have graphic evidence in ACAD that a larger lateral shift is desired when the CB and OB are close together. At large separations like 6 feet the shift can be less tha 1/2 tip with similar cut angles as 2 feet....but I digress.:wink:
Tips for Students of CTE
- Thread starter AtLarge
- Start date
I have graphic evidence in ACAD that a larger lateral shift is desired when the CB and OB are close together. At large separations like 6 feet the shift can be less tha 1/2 tip with similar cut angles as 2 feet....but I digress.:wink:
The larger lateral shift is not needed. I covered that on the DVD. 1/2 tip pivot works as prescribed.
LAMas -- when you did that, weren't you keeping a constant bridge length? Stan's recommendation is for bridge lengths that vary with CB-OB distance (shorter when the balls are closer together). See the DVD or Dr. Dave's summary for the recommended bridge lengths.
You are correct sir.
I was replying in a positive manner to Neil - who wrote:
"...I keep my bridge length/pivot distance the same..."
I was in concurrence with what Neil had found out for himself in mastering CTE at the table. There is geometric evidence in his self discovery.
I was just saying.:thumbup:
FYI, I just made some additional revisions, based on some PM input I received. I think the summary is fairly good now, based on clarifications from Stan and others.
Regards,
Dave
Neil,
I know that you were using CTE before the DVD and were looking for a version of CTE where you could use your normal bridge distance behind the CB for all CTE cut angles.
As you said,"...This is just a tip for those that are actually using it. It works for me, and might for you too."
I am a casual user of your/this version of CTE and have found that to achieve the same cut angles at 2 feet with a 1/2 tip offset pre-pivot, one can use a full tip offset at 1 foot separation and achieve the same cut angles as those at 2 feet.
At a 3 foot separation, the offset is reduced to 1/4 tip and at a 4 foot separation, the offset is reduced to 1/8 etc. I have graphed this for different cut angles and they follow simlar curves and for thin cuts, the offset at 1 foot can be as large as 1 1/2 tip offset.
If you spend time at the table, and persist with this discovery, I would like to read about your progress on this version of CTE/Neil.
:thumbup:
Your summary is neither concise nor complete!! In fact you have so much misleading information
that it would be hard for someone to even fathom of learning CTE/Pro-One from this website!!
Last edited:
Neil,
I know that you were using CTE before the DVD and were looking for a version of CTE where you could use your normal bridge distance behind the CB for all CTE cut angles.
As you said,"...This is just a tip for those that are actually using it. It works for me, and might for you too."
I am a casual user of your/this version of CTE and have found that to achieve the same cut angles at 2 feet with a 1/2 tip offset pre-pivot, one can use a full tip offset at 1 foot separation and achieve the same cut angles as those at 2 feet.
At a 3 foot separation, the offset is reduced to 1/4 tip and at a 4 foot separation, the offset is reduced to 1/8 etc. I have graphed this for different cut angles and they follow simlar curves and for thin cuts, the offset at 1 foot can be as large as 1 1/2 tip offset.
If you spend time at the table, and persist with this discovery, I would like to read about your progress on this version of CTE/Neil.
LaMas, if you're that exact with tip offsets. Why would you even bother since you're so proficient with double the distance and ghostball........... I want lessons!!
Last edited:
FYI, more improvements were made this morning. I think the summary is now as simple and concise as possible, while still capturing the complete essence of Stan's manual CTE system.
BTW, I received a couple of PMs from people claiming the summary hasn't changed. This might be the case for you if you've viewed the summary in the past and your browser is accessing a cached (old) copy of the page. To see the latest version, you might have to Refresh or Reload the page (and you might need to hold down the Shift key while you click on the Reload or Refresh button to force the update).
Please let me know if you have any corrections or suggestions for further improvement and/or simplification.
IMO, recent CTE threads have been very helpful in further defining and clarifying the details of Stan's version of CTE.
Thanks,
Dave
Last edited:
Pablo,
Thanks for your help in the past before the DVD.
Yes I am a DD and GB aim shooter and as I have said before, I look to CTE for thin cuts over 30 degrees where I can aim at fractional points on the OB instead of the green felt jungle outside of the edge of the OB.
I have said for the last year or so that CTE works and have had help from several users. I had hoped to diagram CTE to show that it can be geometrically correct. I now realize that there are perception differences that will result in different resulting cut angles for the shooter.
If the bridge distance behind the CB remains constant and the location of the cue under or between the eyes is known - I can diagram that for the shooter, not that anyone really cares for if it works why should it?
Thanks Pablo for your help.
:thumbup:
Plonk Plonk Plonk!
Perfect. Thanks. One less mindless drone I have to deal with in the future.
Lou Figueroa
This thread is so far down the aiming system rabbithole that everybody but the posters has been "run out" by the same thing - boredom.
I think the CTE wonks deserve their own permanent thread - where they can continue their monklike task of cataloging system head and bridge positions beneath the rotating edges of the endlessly shining Sun.
pj
chgo