Well, I've tried some CTE at the table.

[sixpack]

Seems to me you are way over thinking everything. There is no need to ponder over multiple tangent lines created by slightly different hits on the object ball. Also, CTE is not going to magically point you to the shot line unless the two balls happen to be on that line in the first place. It may ultimately do more harm than good.

Here's a suggestion. Set up some simple shots and shoot them. Before each one ask yourself if the shot looks on. If the answer is yes and the ball goes in then your subconscious has that shot down and you can TRUST that feeling that says the shot is on. If the shot looks good and you miss then set it up over and over again until it looks on and actually goes in. If you do this for awhile you will begin to see that the little voice in your head can be trusted. This is the ultimate goal. Do not do this with difficult shots because then your stroke errors are magnified and you might misinterpret a stroke error as an aim error.

You are quoting my "More or Less" aiming system. Start lined up center to center and then move the cue stick towards the correct aim telling yourself "more, more, more, more" until you go too far then you say "less, less, less" while moving the cue stick back the other way. When you can't tell if you should cut it more or less shoot.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

You are quoting my "More or Less" aiming system. Start lined up center to center and then move the cue stick towards the correct aim telling yourself "more, more, more, more" until you go too far then you say "less, less, less" while moving the cue stick back the other way. When you can't tell if you should cut it more or less shoot.

And my "Aiming by Halves" system. I think I posted this some years back...

pj
chgo

The “ADCs” of Aiming By Halves:

1. Aim CB center at center of Aim Range (start = CB center at OB edge)
2. Decide whether the actual shot is thicker or thinner
3. Cut the Aim Range in half, leaving only the chosen (thicker or thinner) half

Repeat ADC until:
- you’re sure of the aim, or
- you can’t decide whether the shot is thicker or thinner.

Then shoot.

 

[The_JV]

You are quoting my "More or Less" aiming system. Start lined up center to center and then move the cue stick towards the correct aim telling yourself "more, more, more, more" until you go too far then you say "less, less, less" while moving the cue stick back the other way. When you can't tell if you should cut it more or less shoot.

lol... This is actually exactly what I used to do to compensate for my eye dominance problem when cutting blind to the left. "Cut, cut ...cut", "nope just a bit to much", and come back.

 

[sixpack]

And my "Aiming by Halves" system. I think I posted this some years back...

pj
chgo

Probably the inspiration for it for me.

 

[boogieman]

This is the one aspect of CTE that interests me - adding the center-to-edge reference to the usual fractional reference not only "anchors" the CB/OB relationship while aiming, but the changing visual relationship between the two lines might add visual "triangulation" to aid recognition of memorized cut angles.

pj
chgo

This is what it seems like to me. I'm a ripe newbie so I can't say for sure, but having the two reference points and knowing where/how to see where you need to see really dials you in. The whole "stepping the ball" thing is damn near impossible for me to explain (the book explains it) but it gets you seeing what you need to see. I think the visual part of CTE is very valuable even if you don't use the entire system with three aim points. The edge gives you a perfect reference, the middle CB gives you another reference and in between when you get your vision in the correct place gives you the shot line.

This isn't CTE, but think of a half ball hit. The center nor the edge or the CB is where the balls contact, it's the middle in between. When you have both edge and center to aim from, it's much easier to find the actual points the balls will contact. When you do the visual stepping thing it helps you to nail the point you're trying for. I think the small sweep helps negate/calculate throw without really thinking about it.

 

[Dan White]

This is how everyone I knew prior to joining AZB learned to aim.

As did I, but I never considered that I was actually programming my subconscious to recognize when shots were on. I think it may help to understand that and even set up certain shots, like half ball hits and quarter ball hits to the cb/ob/pocket relationship becomes familiar. Or, using Poolology would be another short cut to guide the subconscious.

When discussions do not involve a particular aiming method they tend to stay much more on topic.

 

[The_JV]

As did I, but I never considered that I was actually programming my subconscious to recognize when shots were on. I think it may help to understand that and even set up certain shots, like half ball hits and quarter ball hits to the cb/ob/pocket relationship becomes familiar. Or, using Poolology would be another short cut to guide the subconscious.

When discussions do not involve a particular aiming method they tend to stay much more on topic.

Yep, agreed...

Back when I was learning how to put cherries into tiny pockets, I never gave any thought to programming my subconscious, or recognizing angles for half ball hits, or whatever. I simply had my head down, and raced toward HAMB as hard as I could. I won't claim that that's a good way to learn how to aim, but it eventually I built up a large enough bank of shot pictures that I rarely find myself in a head scratching moment.

I have zero doubt I could have accelerated my learning curve with a good mathematical aiming system. However that simply wasn't the way you learned snooker back in my early days.

 

[JB Cases]

For any shot, isn't there always just one tangent line? And this is true regardless of what aiming method you use.

No it depends on the line chosen and whether you will choose to spin the object ball in. There is one center pocket tangent line and there are many other tangents that correspond to the approach vector. Dr. Dave actually covered this pretty well in one of mythbusting videos.

 

[JB Cases]

Seems to me you are way over thinking everything. There is no need to ponder over multiple tangent lines created by slightly different hits on the object ball. Also, CTE is not going to magically point you to the shot line unless the two balls happen to be on that line in the first place. It may ultimately do more harm than good.

Here's a suggestion. Set up some simple shots and shoot them. Before each one ask yourself if the shot looks on. If the answer is yes and the ball goes in then your subconscious has that shot down and you can TRUST that feeling that says the shot is on. If the shot looks good and you miss then set it up over and over again until it looks on and actually goes in. If you do this for awhile you will begin to see that the little voice in your head can be trusted. This is the ultimate goal. Do not do this with difficult shots because then your stroke errors are magnified and you might misinterpret a stroke error as an aim error.

yes, in fact there is a need to think of different tangent lines IF you value accuracy and shape.

 

[JB Cases]

Well the thing is on days I am "on" I can handle anything the table can throw my way. Then on other days, I better only play one shot ahead.

I've not really played much since that night, but I wasn't in pool mode for a whole week before. It did seem to greatly simplify things. For example, if you only hit certain cte aims, you only have one tangent line, and you don't try to force dumb stuff. I don't know, again, it shows promise but only more usage will tell if it's "new cue syndrome" or not.

Your understanding will only get stronger and your accuracy and ability to adjust off the baseline aim will deepen. Being able to really see the shot line and corresponding tangent is a strong addition to your skill set.

 

[Dan White]

Your understanding will only get stronger and your accuracy and ability to adjust off the baseline aim will deepen. Being able to really see the shot line and corresponding tangent is a strong addition to your skill set.

Translation: The more you play pool the better you will get.

 

[The_JV]

Translation: The more you play pool the better you will get.

word...

 

[JB Cases]

Translation: The more you play pool the better you will get.

No, the more you study cte the stronger you will get with that tool.

Boogie is doing and experiencing something that you can't.

You are not smart enough to start hammering when you are given a great hammer. You prefer to stand there and debate the theory of hammers.

 

[JB Cases]

Boogie,

Just keep doing what you are doing. Don't let these people plant doubt in your head. They do NOT have the courage to get up and do what you are doing. You want to play better pool and you've chosen to take a shot on something that shouldn't even be controversial. People who have ZERO INTENTION of ever helping you and couldn't help you anyway are buzzing around your experience to tell you that what you are experiencing on the table is not what you are seeing and feeling.

Don't let them. Just keep working the lines.

 

[JB Cases]

As did I, but I never considered that I was actually programming my subconscious to recognize when shots were on. I think it may help to understand that and even set up certain shots, like half ball hits and quarter ball hits to the cb/ob/pocket relationship becomes familiar. Or, using Poolology would be another short cut to guide the subconscious.

When discussions do not involve a particular aiming method they tend to stay much more on topic.

When discussions about CTE aiming don't involve CERTAIN people, like YOU they stay on topic.

 

[Dan White]

I'm a ripe newbie so I can't say for sure,

You are a newbie to pool and/or aiming discussions but you are not a newbie to life and common sense. I've dealt with people in various situations that I was not expert in, like foam insulation or walkway pavers, etc. When your knowledge level is low everybody in that business looks like an expert, unless of course there is something outright fishy about them, but they're not always experts or even that good. Use your common sense when it comes to pool. You already have it right that the set up and delivery of the cue is the whole enchilada.

Think of it this way: Let's say you had a cue that could be set down on the table as if you were holding it, and all you had to do was aim the cue at the cb/ob to pocket the ball. Only, you don't touch the cue. You say "Shoot"! and the cue automatically shoots the ball with perfect mechanics. If you kept setting up the cue for every new shot and got down in aiming position to line it up I'd say you'd have aiming mastered in a week or so, if that (not including using english). The point is that you don't know what you don't know. You are on the right track with fixing your fundamentals. You most likely already know how to aim much more than you think you do. Given that, and that you probably don't have 10 hours a day to devote to pool, spend your time on what gives you the biggest bang for the buck. Fix your fundamentals and by the time it comes to worrying about how to aim you might find that you already know how to do it.

 

[JB Cases]

You are a newbie to pool and/or aiming discussions but you are not a newbie to life and common sense. I've dealt with people in various situations that I was not expert in, like foam insulation or walkway pavers, etc. When your knowledge level is low everybody in that business looks like an expert, unless of course there is something outright fishy about them, but they're not always experts or even that good. Use your common sense when it comes to pool. You already have it right that the set up and delivery of the cue is the whole enchilada.

Think of it this way: Let's say you had a cue that could be set down on the table as if you were holding it, and all you had to do was aim the cue at the cb/ob to pocket the ball. Only, you don't touch the cue. You say "Shoot"! and the cue automatically shoots the ball with perfect mechanics. If you kept setting up the cue for every new shot and got down in aiming position to line it up I'd say you'd have aiming mastered in a week or so, if that (not including using english). The point is that you don't know what you don't know. You are on the right track with fixing your fundamentals. You most likely already know how to aim much more than you think you do. Given that, and that you probably don't have 10 hours a day to devote to pool, spend your time on what gives you the biggest bang for the buck. Fix your fundamentals and by the time it comes to worrying about how to aim you might find that you already know how to do it.

Great test, let's do it. Let's call the MAGIC CUE a professional player and the amateurs the ones who choose the shot lines. The pro is ONLY allowed to pick up the cue and shoot it in a straight line with no spin.

I will bet $10,000-$50,000 that the amateur who has mastered CTE aiming puts the cue on the correct shot MORE OFTEN than the amateur who uses ghost ball or feel.

We can do this test with a bunch of amateurs at every skill level.

Tell me when you're ready to set this up and post the money.

 

[Dan White]

Great test, let's do it. Let's call the MAGIC CUE a professional player and the amateurs the ones who choose the shot lines. The pro is ONLY allowed to pick up the cue and shoot it in a straight line with no spin.

I will bet $10,000-$50,000 that the amateur who has mastered CTE aiming puts the cue on the correct shot MORE OFTEN than the amateur who uses ghost ball or feel.

We can do this test with a bunch of amateurs at every skill level.

Tell me when you're ready to set this up and post the money.

Stick to making cue cases and leave the experimental design to those who can distinguish between science and magic.

This could actually be done, I think, if a piston-type cue were available. I know there is a cue robot on youtube that makes most shots. If you had something you could hold like a real cue but didn't have to stroke it that might work to illustrate the point.

I assume you haven't been able to get your gambling fix at the local pool hall?

 

[BC21]

For any shot, isn't there always just one tangent line? And this is true regardless of what aiming method you use.

No it depends on the line chosen and whether you will choose to spin the object ball in. There is one center pocket tangent line and there are many other tangents that correspond to the approach vector. Dr. Dave actually covered this pretty well in one of mythbusting videos.

Lol....That's what I mean.... For every shot you choose to play, however you decide to play it, be it center pocket or where ever you choose to aim the ball, there is only one tangent line that relates to the shot line you choose.

 

[JB Cases]

Stick to making cue cases and leave the experimental design to those who can distinguish between science and magic.

This could actually be done, I think, if a piston-type cue were available. I know there is a cue robot on youtube that makes most shots. If you had something you could hold like a real cue but didn't have to stroke it that might work to illustrate the point.

I assume you haven't been able to get your gambling fix at the local pool hall?

Stick to sticking your finger up your ass. There is no gamble here from my side because unlike you I have already taken this to the table.

You will never take any of my monetary challenges precisely because you would be gambling because you don't know if you're right or wrong. I already know that I am right before I make the challenge.

And yes, pool shooting devices have been and are easy to make. So are you ready to do the test?