The best "system" for safety play and strategy is VEPS III - Safety Play and Strategy. :grin:
Regards,
Dave
Why CTE is silly
- Thread starter GetMeThere
- Start date
- Status
Regards,
Dave
Just to keep the record straight. I didn't come up with the way I aim, I thought I did until I read Babe Cranfield book, "Striaght Pool Bible". I just happen to be studying a drawing of two circles representing the OB and CB and just noticed a few things and thought I was onto something big. Few days later, the book came and WHAM, there was my aiming system in his book with a training device to boot.
So, a little history on why I use the method I do to make balls. I like the word method over system. To me a system is like the fuel injection system on your car, the brake system and so on.
Making balls is more of a method than a system.
I've just added a few new terms to help me understand whats is going to make a ball and put the cue ball where you need it.
It's all Babe Cranfields way, the Arrow. Now the fact that I ended up with thinking along the same lines as him in regards to aiming, well it made me feel good.
FYI, yesterday I was playing someone in 8 ball. Not once, not twice, but three times, I got to the table after my opponent broke, nothing made on the break, and ran out on him. There were a few times, where he would run down to 2-3 balls, which let me at the table with all my balls on it, and I run out. I wish I could say it was all due to my aiming method, but it wasn't. It was becasue I spend alot of time practicing and honing my skills. I've said it before and I'll say it again, a amining method will take you only so far, after that, you gotta put in the work.
OH GMT shut the **** up.
FWIW
Last edited:
Thanks Dave, I'll check it out...you got a lot of great tools on your site. Probably take me years to go through them. 
.
.
Thanks Dave, I'll check it out...you got a lot of great tools on your site. Probably take me years to go through them.
You're welcome.
I aim to squerve,
Dave
I don't have any charts or math in the main section of my CTE resource page. Maybe you're referring to Jal's stuff?
Here's my explanation for why/how CTE works:
Everything can be explained with "effective pivot length" (what Spidey calls the "shot arc"). If this is varied from one shot to another, a wide range of cut angles can be created with the same initial alignment and bridge length. Also, if the eye alignment is changed from one shot to another, the perceived cue alignment and parallel shift will be different. The difficulty for people who can't use CTE effectively is in judging or feeling the amount of eye shift and "effective pivot length" needed on each shot. These things seem to come naturally to people who use CTE effectively; but, IMO, these are the "missing pieces" of the puzzle that are difficult (or impossible) to describe with a written "procedure."
I think all of this can be made perfectly clear with a short online video that includes different views and close-ups (especially from above) that show exactly how an experienced CTE user aligns, pivots, and strokes. The video must clearly show the steps (alignment, pivot, stroke) and how they change with varying cut angle and ball distance. The changes might seem natural and even subconscious to the user; but with clear camera views, the differences from one shot to the next will be obvious, and this will conclusively prove how and why CTE works.
Maybe this isn't very "dumbed down," but I do have some illustrations on the CTE resource page that help understand what some of it means. For example, here's an illustration that shows how changing the "effective pivot length" (with a fixed initial alignment) affects the cut angle of the shot:
And here's an illustration of how you can change "effective pivot length" with a fixed bridge distance:
If you have specific questions about anything else on the CTE resource page, please let me know. I'd be happy to do my best to try to explain or illustrate it better.
Regards,
Dave
Ok, i agree with this because i do move my bridge length according to the shot when i use cte. When i did shoot the third shot which would be the most inside shot, i went down on the ball, lined it up and noticed it would not go, i had to move my bridge back a few inches and re-aim the shot until i felt comfortable i could make the shot. I never really payed attention to this before, i would just adjust and then shot.
If I ever make it up to Toronto, we'll make a trip to Peelers and put a few townies in some straps, eh? :thumbup:
Thanks for clarifying the peelers and townie questions for me.
Good shooting to you my friend from way up north!!!
Maniac
Anytime my friend! :smile: and keep up your good shooting way down south and kik all those guys butts using cte! :grin:
Thanks Dave, I'll check it out...you got a lot of great tools on your site. Probably take me years to go through them.
Here's something that I use to visualize the "ghost ball" to points on the OB and cloth to derive "double the distance" aiming.
It can't hurt but it's not CTE.....sorry.
:smile:
Here's something that I use to visualize the "ghost ball" to points on the OB and cloth to derive "double the distance" aiming.
It can't hurt but it's not CTE.....sorry.
:smile:
View attachment 160280
That's some great stuff there Lamas. I really like the visual. Thanks for posting. rep+1
Maybe "varying the effective pivot length" comes naturally to people who use CTE effectively and consistently, but it seems to me that it would take a lot of practice. Also, it is definitely one of the "missing pieces of the puzzle" in the descriptions of the various versions of CTE.Here's my explanation for why/how CTE works:
Everything can be explained with "effective pivot length" (what Spidey calls the "shot arc"). If this is varied from one shot to another, a wide range of cut angles can be created with the same initial alignment and bridge length. Also, if the eye alignment is changed from one shot to another, the perceived cue alignment and parallel shift will be different. The difficulty for people who can't use CTE effectively is in judging or feeling the amount of eye shift and "effective pivot length" needed on each shot. These things seem to come naturally to people who use CTE effectively; but, IMO, these are the "missing pieces" of the puzzle that are difficult (or impossible) to describe with a written "procedure."
I think all of this can be made perfectly clear with a short online video that includes different views and close-ups (especially from above) that show exactly how an experienced CTE user aligns, pivots, and strokes. The video must clearly show the steps (alignment, pivot, stroke) and how they change with varying cut angle and ball distance. The changes might seem natural and even subconscious to the user; but with clear camera views, the differences from one shot to the next will be obvious, and this will conclusively prove how and why CTE works.
Maybe this isn't very "dumbed down," but I do have some illustrations on the CTE resource page that help understand what some of it means. For example, here's an illustration that shows how changing the "effective pivot length" (with a fixed initial alignment) affects the cut angle of the shot:
And here's an illustration of how you can change "effective pivot length" with a fixed bridge distance:
If you have specific questions about anything else on the CTE resource page, please let me know. I'd be happy to do my best to try to explain or illustrate it better.
Ok, i agree with this because i do move my bridge length according to the shot when i use cte. When i did shoot the third shot which would be the most inside shot, i went down on the ball, lined it up and noticed it would not go, i had to move my bridge back a few inches and re-aim the shot until i felt comfortable i could make the shot. I never really payed attention to this before, i would just adjust and then shot.
Regards,
Dave
That little pivot clip really is missing leading. Why, well the only way to get that pivot point there is to move the bridge hand and grip hand and not just the bridge.
Moving just the bridge hand, the cue will pivot where ever the grip hand is.
Moving just the grip hand, the cue will pivot at the bridge hand.
To pivot anywhere else along the cue requires to move both the bridge and grip hands.
Moving just the bridge hand, the cue will pivot where ever the grip hand is.
Moving just the grip hand, the cue will pivot at the bridge hand.
To pivot anywhere else along the cue requires to move both the bridge and grip hands.
Nice...but that just too much for my Brian to absorb. The diagram should be simplified...just show one OB,GB and multiple CueBall position for the various angle. I don't think we can use 2d diagram to illustrate the line of aim for some of these methods as visualization need to be done in 3D.
Regards,
Duc.
Regards,
Duc.
Here's something that I use to visualize the "ghost ball" to points on the OB and cloth to derive "double the distance" aiming.
It can't hurt but it's not CTE.....sorry.
:smile:
View attachment 160280
The cloth resting point? You mean the point where the invisible ghost ball would rest on the cloth if it were an actual real physical object?
You think that this is SO EASY.
Well here is an experiment you can do. And let's use GMT's premise that being off by a human hair's width will result in a failed shot - (unless subconsciously adjusted for) -
Take a piece of paper, a ball, and a fine tip sharpie.
Put a dot anywhere on the paper. Put the ball on that dot. now take your sharpie an put dots all around the ball at what you think is the Ghost Ball center.
Should be an easy exercise since you are sitting at your desk, with all the time in the world, not standing above the table with a cue stick in your hand under pressure to shoot.
When you are done pick up the ball and measure the distance from the original dot to the estimated dots and see how well you were able to measure JUST the distance alone. This doesn't even take into account being able to accurately place the invisible ball along the right line which SOME people can't consistently do with a REAL ball.
Here a video of me trying this experiment ONCE and only once. Using the same measuring tool that would be available to me if I were at the table, my brain. Watch it and see how I did. I bet none of you who claim Ghost Ball as the greatest way to aim will even try it and put up your results.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-L4QMNiVxk
Only 3 of the 11 dots were even within .15" (that's a fifteenth of an inch) of 2.25" from the center of the object ball. The rest were off by an average of a quarter inch.
Let's see how well you can do it.
And by the way Dave. I make your three shots with no adjustment in alignment, bridge length, or pivot using CTE. Just like with GHOST BALL I don't figure the angles or the offsets. I look, bend down, pivot, and shoot.
The best CTE post of the decade http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=208952
Dave Alciatore,
I think that you need to really think about some of these videos you are putting up.
The ones you link to above are just plain awful. You intend to show me how to use "the imaginary ball" (your words) by putting a real ball there then removing it? And of course you are using "training" balls which have convenient lines on them.
Your video is a great example of why Ghost Ball fails. Simply put it's super easy to transmit as a concept and incredibly HARD to execute consistently in real life.
Which is why CTE is the way of the future. With CTE you learn how to align to the shot using only the balls which EXIST and don't need to imagine any. Nor do you need to point your cue tip to an APPROXIAMATE spot on the cloth and then pivot (the dreaded word) around that point (hoping that you managed to keep the tip in the same spot) and then pull the cue back OVER the cue ball while trying not to hit IT as you then try to keep all that straight so you can FINALLY get down on the shot.
As opposed to - walking up to the table behind the cueball, see the center to edge line and align to that, put the cue down, pivot to center and shoot. Rinse and repeat. Shot after shot until all the balls are gone.
I will bet you any amount of money that we can take two RAW beginners off the street and give them both five hours of instruction - you get your guy for five hours and Stan Shuffet gets his guy for five hours - and Stan's guy will out shoot your guy clearly.
You do great for pool but you need to jsut stay out of CTE threads until you go and learn CTE. You don't know it and your fence sitting and constant self-promotion with pointing to your little clips is NAUSEATING. And this is coming from a person who invented self-promotion.
You know damn well that all of us here in this discussion are CLEAR about what Ghost Ball is and we especially don't need a basic primer on it.
Just go away. IF you are truly a scholar then go get the real deal. I will even lend you some money to go get it if you need it.
I think that you need to really think about some of these videos you are putting up.
The ones you link to above are just plain awful. You intend to show me how to use "the imaginary ball" (your words) by putting a real ball there then removing it? And of course you are using "training" balls which have convenient lines on them.
Your video is a great example of why Ghost Ball fails. Simply put it's super easy to transmit as a concept and incredibly HARD to execute consistently in real life.
Which is why CTE is the way of the future. With CTE you learn how to align to the shot using only the balls which EXIST and don't need to imagine any. Nor do you need to point your cue tip to an APPROXIAMATE spot on the cloth and then pivot (the dreaded word) around that point (hoping that you managed to keep the tip in the same spot) and then pull the cue back OVER the cue ball while trying not to hit IT as you then try to keep all that straight so you can FINALLY get down on the shot.
As opposed to - walking up to the table behind the cueball, see the center to edge line and align to that, put the cue down, pivot to center and shoot. Rinse and repeat. Shot after shot until all the balls are gone.
I will bet you any amount of money that we can take two RAW beginners off the street and give them both five hours of instruction - you get your guy for five hours and Stan Shuffet gets his guy for five hours - and Stan's guy will out shoot your guy clearly.
You do great for pool but you need to jsut stay out of CTE threads until you go and learn CTE. You don't know it and your fence sitting and constant self-promotion with pointing to your little clips is NAUSEATING. And this is coming from a person who invented self-promotion.
You know damn well that all of us here in this discussion are CLEAR about what Ghost Ball is and we especially don't need a basic primer on it.
Just go away. IF you are truly a scholar then go get the real deal. I will even lend you some money to go get it if you need it.
John, very good points. But, not a good test. It is impossible to see the dots on your paper. Therefore, how hard is it for someone to pre-dot a paper, then film it by putting a darker mark over the light ones to prove you wrong? Not saying that anyone here WOULD do that, but it invalidates the test unless they can film it better.
I think this deserves it's own thread John.
Just like you say in your video, in reference to CTE:
Ghost-ball is "easy to use at the table once somebody shows you."
Here are some other typical CTE-like responses that can also apply to ghost-ball aiming:
You can't diagram or describe the system in 2D. Pool is 3D!!!
It is your "visual intelligence," "eye-body connection," and "experience at the table" that make the system work.
It might not work on paper or at your desk, but it is "the nuts" at the table.
Whoever invented this system is an "aiming genius."
You just don't know all of the details. If you paid a certified ghost-ball instructor and really tried to learn and use the system, it would work really well for you at the table.
It is your "visual intelligence," "eye-body connection," and "experience at the table" that make the system work.
It might not work on paper or at your desk, but it is "the nuts" at the table.
Whoever invented this system is an "aiming genius."
You just don't know all of the details. If you paid a certified ghost-ball instructor and really tried to learn and use the system, it would work really well for you at the table.
Sorry, I couldn't resist. Now to some serious comments:
Nobody said it was easy. If it were, pool would be boring. As with any system, you get better the more you practice.
Also, I think DAM is a better approach, where ghost-ball is supplemented by other visual information and a structured and consistent pre-shot routine.
Concerning CTE, I could easily create and post a video that shows errors in judgment of:
1.) the center of a ball
2.) the projected edge of a ball
3.) a projected line through the center of one ball and the edge of another ball
4.) a parallel shift of a line a certain number of "tips" or to a projected line through the edge or center of a ball
5.) a pivot to the center of a ball
6.) the "effective pivot length" needed for a particular shot
I could also demonstrate how these things can change significantly with:
1.) head alignment, tilt, height, and distance from the CB
2.) bridge length
3.) distance between the CB and OB
4.) the amount of body motion during the pivot
5.) the amount of bridge shift/tilt/bend during the pivot
This is a long this of things that require judgment and feel, compared to ghost-ball. An the real problem is that none of this takes into account the actual amount of cut or CB-OB contact point needed to pocket the ball, as ghost-ball does.
I don't think you would like a CTE video like this very much, so don't push me.
Regards,
Dave
CTE, on the other hand, can't even be described in simple, easy to understand steps. You yourself admit that after years of study and effort you still don't know if what you're doing is CTE. And those who say they do know CTE can't seem to describe all the steps either - after the initial half-ball lineup they all start mumbling under their breaths about "shifts" and "pivots" and eyes of newts.
So Ghost Ball may be hard to master, like any aiming method, but it has a giant step up on "mystery" systems like CTE: it can be described.
pj
chgo
You think too much. I doubt anyone will prove me wrong here because the majority of people who try it will get similar results as me.It's a great test and it's not even so much about me being proven wrong on video, it's about each person realizing that Ghost Ball has specific limitations like this that are significant.
- Status