Has anyone else seen the new series of articals on CTE by Roger Long?

[ShootingArts]

like the funny stuff too

OK, thanks again, Hu.

Lou Figueroa
will have to work on
the funny stuff
so Hu likes that too

Lou,

I like the funny stuff too, especially the longer posts. I should have said the posts you put serious effort into. I do laugh at some of the needling too but I try to maintain neutrality between two people I like and respect when you and Joey get going. :grin-square: :grin-square:

Here is the very slightly fictionalized version of how I took over grazing rights at a little place. I don't think the bar even had a name, we just called it the same name as the community. Hope you like it.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=2551978#post2551978

Hu

 

[dr_dave]

I seriously doubt this, even if your first chapters go to 11. And if you could, against all odds, do it, how useful is "exactness" that takes 10 chapters to demonstrate? Aiming methods that are truly "exact" are obviously so and don't need CDs and math theses to prove it.

CTE is useful to many despite not being exact, and CTE boosters are painting themselves into a credibility corner by putting so many of their eggs in that very weak basket.

pj
chgo

it's exact enough to make nearly every shot. It's nearly perfect in a frictionless world. Therefore, it's perfect up to a certain cut angle until CIT/cling affects the result when alignment/english adjustment is needed.

It'll be interesting to see what happens in the near future. Welcome back.

I was on vacation all of last week. I can't believe I missed the return of "Spidey vs. PJ." I very much look forward to the release of the long-anticipated document and video from Spidey and Stan. I'm sure the resulting "discussion" should be epic. These are exciting times.

Roger, please post links to this thread when your subsequent articles come out. I'm sure many people are waiting in extreme anticipation to see what you write. You are a "brave" man.

Regards,
Dave

PS: WELCOME BACK PJ!!! I'm glad you were finally freed from AZB prison.

 

[dr_dave]

What is BHE, I am more than a little thick when it comes to all these terms?

BHE (back-hand English) and FHE (front-hand English) are described, illustrated, and demonstrated here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/English.html#BHE​

More info on CTE (center-to-edge) aiming can be found here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#CTE​

A long list of benefits offered by "aiming systems" like CTE can be found here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#benefits​

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

... Is the system perfect? No. Are there adjustments at times? Yes.

Stan,

I appreciate statements like these. IMO, much of the CTE debate in the past occurred because many CTE proponents were not willing to admit these things.

I wish you great success with your product. I look forward to seeing it.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

My posts were only "contrary" to the otherwise unchallenged assertion that CTE is exact. Nothing in what I said was particularly inflammatory or more than mildly critical. I have better things to do than waste my time on a forum that's arbitrarily and heavy-handedly censored by a moderator with an apparently personal bias.

pj <- the late
chgo

I'm not sure how it happened, but I'd like to protest the removing of PJ's posts in this thread. I favor moderated forums, but he wasn't being insulting or crude, just argumentative in an intelligent way. Since when is that a crime?

I was also extremely disappointed to see the inappropriate "censorship" in this thread. PJ has "crossed the line" in the past, but he didn't seem "out of line" in this thread. PJ is a great contributor to this forum and often offers excellent insight and perspective. It would be a loss to the AZB community for PJ to be driven off again.

Sincerely,
Dave

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I can't stand PJ but he shouldn't be censored if he's not breaking forum rules. Same for Lou - we disagree on almost everything but I'd never want to see him censored either (or anyone for that matter). I think as long as the language is adult-like, it should be OK here.

 

[ShootingArts]

Dave and Dave

I can't stand PJ but he shouldn't be censored if he's not breaking forum rules. Same for Lou - we disagree on almost everything but I'd never want to see him censored either (or anyone for that matter). I think as long as the language is adult-like, it should be OK here.

See post #135, all becomes clear. While I'm not a fan of posts disappearing I do prefer it to posters disappearing.

Hu

 

[SpiderWebComm]

See post #135, all becomes clear. While I'm not a fan of posts disappearing I do prefer it to posters disappearing.

Hu

I didn't know PJ and JB couldn't address one and other. Wasn't PJ on hiatus when those rules came about?

I don't wanna get involved nor do I care, but I was just wondering. I mean, if the powers that be told PJ to not engage JB -- then I totally get it.

 

[peteypooldude]

PJ seems to like to quote ,more so than most . I did say MOST lol

 

[ShootingArts]

a temporary bandaid I suspect

I didn't know PJ and JB couldn't address one and other. Wasn't PJ on hiatus when those rules came about?

I don't wanna get involved nor do I care, but I was just wondering. I mean, if the powers that be told PJ to not engage JB -- then I totally get it.

Dave,

I saw the thread where they were all told not to talk to each other. In post #135 I see that was extended to me for John Barton. While I haven't been directly told not to talk to John I think the mods trust my sense of fair play that I won't say things to provoke him when he can't respond. I have cleaned most of the stuff off of my sigline, I didn't like all the clutter anyway.

After months of John attacking my credibility as a pool player when he started talking about playing me he first wanted a spot and then bragged about his heart offering to bet $5000 against the nuts. Since the original attacks went on for months I'll leave that part of the sigline awhile. It makes it plain that John never believed what he was saying himself. I feel like the people who read all the attacks should read these words straight from John's own keyboard too. Once I feel that it has been in circulation long enough that will come down also.

Hu

 

[Falcon Eddie]

I'm glad I read his CTE part-1 article. It just re-motivated me to get this technical doc completed (it's about 85% there - complete with Dr. Dave's two example diagrams, etc.).

I'm kinda surprised Roger is putting together a CTE series. It took Stan and I about 5000 hours between the two of us to get everything reverse-engineered from Hal (probably because outside of Hal - we were on our own at the time). A physicist friend of mine spent countless hours in AutoCAD working out math/geometry behind the technique. I'm eager to read about Roger's knowledge of the subject.

Dave

So does this mean the video production is on. The last I heard Stan wasn't going to do it

 

[peteypooldude]

So does this mean the video production is on. The last I heard Stan wasn't going to do it

It will be out in the fall , Stan has commented on it in this thread

 

[SpiderWebComm]

So does this mean the video production is on. The last I heard Stan wasn't going to do it

Taping is complete. They're editing it now and doing all production work.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Me:
...Aiming methods that are truly "exact" are obviously so and don't need CDs and math theses to prove it.

CTE is useful to many despite not being exact, and CTE boosters are painting themselves into a credibility corner by putting so many of their eggs in that very weak basket.

Spidey:
[CTE is] exact enough to make nearly every shot.

Nonsense. What we've seen of CTE is just a half-ball alignment followed by an undefined "shift-and-pivot" of the stick to complete the aiming process, basically dividing all shots into "fuller than half-ball" and "thinner than half-ball" and leaving it to the shooter to take it from there. This isn't much more "exact" than lining up each shot as a straight-in shot (center-to-center) and instructing the shooter to aim either left or right of that to make any cut shot. [I'm a little surprised Hal Houle never suggested this One Angle system...]

It's obvious on the face of it that no "shift-and-pivot" methodology can possibly be both precise enough and simple enough to guide an average shooter mechanically from a half-ball alignment to the correct aim for more than a few shots, let alone "nearly every shot".

All attempts to learn how a "shift-and-pivot" from half-ball can possibly result in anything resembling an actual shot alignment have been met with silence, deflection or gibberish. Everything we've seen from you so far about it, including the stuff on your website, is incomprehensible. But we're supposed to believe that you've suddenly, after years of this, become such a skilled geometrician and articulate writer that you're going to enlighten us in one post? Please.

Sorry to be so blunt, but it's the only way I can see to cut through all the meaningless confetti that usually substitutes for "discussion" of this topic.

pj
chgo

 

[cookie man]

This is going to be so much fun.

Nonsense. What we've seen of CTE is just a half-ball alignment followed by an undefined "shift-and-pivot" of the stick to complete the aiming process, basically dividing all shots into "fuller than half-ball" and "thinner than half-ball" and leaving it to the shooter to take it from there. This isn't much more "exact" than lining up each shot as a straight-in shot (center-to-center) and instructing the shooter to aim either left or right of that to make any cut shot. [I'm a little surprised Hal Houle never suggested this One Angle system...]

It's obvious on the face of it that no "shift-and-pivot" methodology can possibly be both precise enough and simple enough to guide an average shooter mechanically from a half-ball alignment to the correct aim for more than a few shots, let alone "nearly every shot".

All attempts to learn how a "shift-and-pivot" from half-ball can possibly result in anything resembling an actual shot alignment have been met with silence, deflection or gibberish. Everything we've seen from you so far about it, including the stuff on your website, is incomprehensible. But we're supposed to believe that you've suddenly, after years of this, become such a skilled geometrician and articulate writer that you're going to enlighten us in one post? Please.

Sorry to be so blunt, but it's the only way I can see to cut through all the meaningless confetti that usually substitutes for "discussion" of this topic.

pj
chgo

 

[CocoboloCowboy]

CTE is like God to many, some are believers, some are not. I believe in CTE because I see it work.

 

[Mikjary]

Taping is complete. They're editing it now and doing all production work.

That's great. Your document after the video release should really complement Stan's efforts.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I believe in CTE because I see it work.

I think the reverse may be true for many CTE users - it works because they believe in it. I think maybe subconscious aiming ability develops in everybody, but some can't use it as easily as others and having faith that the system is fully in charge makes it easier to "let it happen".

pj
chgo

 

[cookie man]

I think the reverse may be true for many CTE users - it works because they believe in it. I think maybe subconscious aiming ability develops in everybody, but some can't use it as easily as others and having faith that the system is fully in charge makes it easier to "let it happen".

pj
chgo

I see you think alot, but what do you really know about CTE.

 

[ThePoliteSniper]

CTE is like God to many, some are believers, some are not. I believe in CTE because I see it work.

But there is no god.