center-to-edge?
Which center to which edge? Maybe there are two center to edges? Maybe one isn't good enough mathematically? Which center-to-edge does what? Why is each important? Where does the shot circle come in? How do you know how to align your cue to get to the proper center based on the above?
P.S. The "magic" is only partially in the pivot. There's another element you're missing.
I was honestly hoping this post (see below) would lead to some useful discussion and information, but I guess I was being unrealistically dreamy. :sorry:
Still hoping for more "clarity,"
Dave
previous post from dr_dave:
Are you saying it doesn't matter how much you need to cut the ball?
Here's one of the diagrams from my November '08 article:
The CB-to-OB distance and alignment are the exact same for every shot in this diagram, and for every possible shot between all of these shots. Yet, the pocket is in a different position (relative to the balls) for each shot. How can the pocket location, and the necessary amount of cut, not matter?
If you line up and pivot the exact same way on all of these shots, most of them will miss the pocket. Even shot "D," which is very close to shot "A," won't go if you use the same alignment and pivot as with shot "A!" (BTW, for shot "D" assume the CB is the still the same distance away from the OB as in shot "A").
I know we have looked at this diagram, or diagrams like it, in many past debates, and we got nowhere. I honestly hope this time might be different.
Dave,...It took him YEARS to come up with the proof and he didn't want to just GIVE it to whoever (i.e. spoon feed Dr. Dave) Only the "serious" player will grind on it until they get it. This is what separates the forum spoon-feeder from someone who wants the secret to pool.
Dave,
Whenever one these threads teeters on the brink of civility and mutual respect, you're always there to insure that the safety margin is maintained. Yes, I haven't been without sin myself, but it seems to be a persistent habit with you.
One thing you might learn from Dr. Dave (and others), CTE aside, is how to post without constantly trying to demean. It makes it harder for the rest of us "weaker characters" to resist returning the favor. He, on the other hand, was under pretty severe attack from the moment he showed up on the forums years ago ("why's a professor trying to teach pool?"). Instead of taking his marbles back home, he's consistently produced grade-A material for the rest of us, much of it freely available, and without firing back. And as you'd expect from a professor, it hasn't been cloaked in all the obscurantist bull-dingy that seems to forever accompany yours.
A while back you stated that you were seriously trying to prove CTE, in the mathematical or graphical sense, but got hung up with something like rotating a line, or whatever. Now we learn that you had proven it (in your mind, at least) years ago. Maybe you should get that story straight, first.
I know you're committed to keeping Hal's secrets from the lascivious eyes of us forum voyeurs, while at the same time seeing to it that he's chiseled into Mt. Rushmore. That must be very frustrating. But it's not Dr. Dave's fault, or anyone else's.
Jim
I'm a little hard on him, you're right. But at the same time, he wants to be spoon fed and refuses to cook on it. He asks questions after they've been answered.
That's the whole point of the diagram. If you don't account for where the pocket is (i.e., the amount of cut you need), you won't be very successful. See the article for more info.It appears that in that diagram you correlate the distance between CB and OB to mean you pivot the same way. It's not the distance between the balls that matters as much as it is the angle to the pocket that designates which way, if at all you pivot.
Cookie,
Im being facicious, I think I have a valid point obviously or I wouldnt have gone to so much trouble. I sort of figure you dont agree but thats your call. So have you had the CTE training from Stan and did it help you? Sounds like it may be helping some folks.
That's the whole point of the diagram. If you don't account for where the pocket is (i.e., the amount of cut you need), you won't be very successful. See the article for more info.
Regards,
Dave
If a system like CTE is impossible to describe or diagram - and takes a long time and a lot of work before someone finally gets "it" - then where is its value to novice and intermediate players? Why should 99% of all players even care to invest that much time and effort (and sometimes money) into a "system" whose only promise is that it will help them to shoot balls into pockets more consistently? And being that pool is not most people's way of making a living; should we even care which aiming system they choose to use?
Roger
And the other element has already been mentioned
Great post Spider. I had called Hal a few years ago, spent 8 hrs on the phone with him LOL. We talked about many things, one being CTE. He gave me just enough to let me know there was something there, but held back enough to make me keep searching.
I quit playing for a few years, but when I decided to come back I also decided to continue my research. After working with Stan and continuing with my own research am I just now really starting to understand
A video link was posted not long ago with someone using a CTE based system. Those that understand it would notice, those that dont would never pick up on it.
Hope your doing well Spider!
Woody
Thanks Jim. I appreciate your supportive and kind remarks concerning me....
One thing you might learn from Dr. Dave (and others), CTE aside, is how to post without constantly trying to demean. It makes it harder for the rest of us "weaker characters" to resist returning the favor. He, on the other hand, was under pretty severe attack from the moment he showed up on the forums years ago ("why's a professor trying to teach pool?"). Instead of taking his marbles back home, he's consistently produced grade-A material for the rest of us, much of it freely available, and without firing back. And as you'd expect from a professor, it hasn't been cloaked in all the obscurantist bull-dingy that seems to forever accompany yours
...
Don't you teach people to pocket balls more consistently. Isn't that the goal?