Why CTE is silly

Status
Not open for further replies.
Patrick Johnson said:
JB Cases said:
Hal asked people not to print directions on the net and people are following his directions
Click to expand...
Bullshit.
Click to expand...
PJ,

Just face it ... you're just not a "believer.":grin-square:
It can be difficult to change the thinking or logic of a true "believer." In fact, it is usually not helpful to even try.:confused:

But even if CTE is just a religion, many people find comfort in and benefit from religion, so maybe CTE is a good thing after all. At a minimum, it does provide the same benefits many "aiming systems" provide.

BTW, below is an earlier quote you might think is relevant to John's statement.

from BRKNRUN:
Ok...You know people talk like CTE is some sort of Religion....I did some research and this is what I found out.

One day God called Hal to the top of the mountain and he gave him the first part of his new system of pool aiming laws for his people - The Center To Edge method. (CTE summarized the absolutes of spiritual and moral shot makeing that God intended for his people.)

God continued to give direction to his people through Hal, including the civil and ceremonial laws for controlling their CB. Eventually God called Hal to the mountain for 40 days and 40 nights. During this time he gave him instructions for the tabernacle and the CTE instructions. When God finished speaking to Hal on Mount Ivory Rock, he gave him two tablets of stone inscribed by the very finger of God. They contained the CTE instructions.

Meanwhile, the people of the pool world had become impatient while waiting for Hal to return with the instructions from God. Hal had been gone for so long that the people gave up on him and begged Stan to make them Pro-1 so they could worship. So Stan collected offerings of gold from all the people and made a instruction video in the form of Pro-1. Then they held a festival and bowed down to worship their idol. So quickly they had fallen into the idolatry they were accustomed to in the pool world and disobeyed God's CTE instructions.

When Hal came down from the mountain with the tablets of stone, his anger burned when he saw the people given over to idolatry. He threw down the two tablets, smashing them to pieces at the foot of the mountain.

Now you all know why there is not complete written instructions for CTE.​
 
JB Cases said:
I define works as the ball goes in the hole when I use a method to align myself to the shot. Using CTE/Hal's methods I get successful results more often than by using any other method.

Actually there are clearly defined steps. You just don't have them. Yet.

But there is no method which satisfies your definition as all methods require a bit of estimation coupled with perceptual differences. Where you "see" the GB center may not be where I see it. GB is only objective on paper. In real life it's quite subjective and prone to user error.

Actually Pat, just because I haven't yet "dissected" it doesn't mean I can't. You should know better than to make that correlation.

And it certainly doesn't apply to all "those" who learn it. I know it's really hard to understand that Hal asked people not to print directions on the net and people are following his directions and not putting out ABC guides to CTE just yet.

And I know it's frustrating and leads to Hal being criticized and the people who learned from him being criticized. Cest' La Vie. It is what it is. I agree with you. Until there is a CTE/Pro1 for dummies diagram or video then it will continue to urban legend. No biggie, helps the post count. and keeps the lights on.

I think you got my point about acupuncture and the fact that ultimately it was found that it does work and why even though it was used without precise knowledge of HOW it worked for thousands of years.
Click to expand...

You really don't understand Ghost Ball. Using GB is to know where to to the base or is I say the contact patch of the CB on the table in order to pocket the OB. Contact point of the OB ball is used only to find the spot on the table for the contact patch of the CB.

There is no trying to see the center the GB or trying to see a GB.

Its like putting.

And GB has a training aid called the Arrow by Babe Cranfield that shows you exactly where to put the CB contact patch to pocket the OB.

Also, you can use the Arrow to learn banks, caroms, off the rail first and with two you can learn combos and so on.

FWIW.
 
dr_dave said:
But even if CTE is just a religion, many people find comfort in and benefit from religion, so maybe CTE is a good thing after all.
Click to expand...

You obviously haven't considered well enough that it's guys like you who are the FIRST ONES to THE STAKE when religion gets powerful enough :D

Galileo only got house arrest, but Giordano Bruno made his last stand at the stake...
 
GetMeThere said:
You obviously haven't considered well enough that it's guys like you who are the FIRST ONES to THE STAKE when religion gets powerful enough :D

Galileo only got house arrest, but Giordano Bruno made his last stand at the stake...
Click to expand...
If the CTE mob ever comes after me, I'll just claim that I've seen the light and I'm a true believer. Hopefully, that will save me.

Until then, I'm still "skeptical" of many of the claims. :grin-square:

Regards,
Dave
 
dr_dave said:
If the CTE mob ever comes after me, I'll just claim that I've seen the light and I'm a true believer. Hopefully, that will save me.

Until then, I'm still "skeptical" of many of the claims. :grin-square:

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

Just as long as you can demonstrate a pivot with smiling assurance...you'll probably pass. They'll probably be carrying MY head on a stick on the way to your house...
 
dr_dave said:
If the CTE mob ever comes after me, I'll just claim that I've seen the light and I'm a true believer. Hopefully, that will save me.

Until then, I'm still "skeptical" of many of the claims. :grin-square:

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

If CTE claims are ever satisfied to your satisfaction, you are hereby ordered to go back and count each post where you ridiculed CTE and make a separate apology post for each one. :slap:
 
JoeyA said:
If CTE claims are ever satisfied to your satisfaction, you are hereby ordered to go back and count each post where you ridiculed CTE and make a separate apology post for each one. :slap:
Click to expand...

If CTE claims are ever vindicated, it'll be difficult to reach one's computer to post without being struck by one of the many flying pigs the air will be thick with.
 
JoeyA said:
dr_dave said:
If the CTE mob ever comes after me, I'll just claim that I've seen the light and I'm a true believer. Hopefully, that will save me.

Until then, I'm still "skeptical" of many of the claims. :grin-square:
Click to expand...
If CTE claims are ever satisfied to your satisfaction, you are hereby ordered to go back and count each post where you ridiculed CTE and make a separate apology post for each one. :slap:
Click to expand...
Joey,

Are you calling me a "crawfish" again? :eek: :grin-square:

I agree that I have ridiculed many of the outrageous claims made by CTE proponents over the years, but I don't recall offering many apologies, except in cases where I thought my ridicule might have been inappropriate (e.g., in cases where, in the heat of an emotional debate, I may have written things that were "out of line," or where I might have directly, personally, and unjustly offended an individual I respect).

BTW, examples of many of the outrageous claims that have been made by CTE proponents over the years can be found in the italicized intro of the DAM system announcement. Every sentence in that description is based directly on things I have read and heard over the years concerning CTE, 90/90, and other align-and-pivot "aiming systems."

I will forever ridicule outrageous statements like these ... without apology. I will also continue to provide solid evidence for why such statements deserve ridicule.

Having said all of this, I still see value in "aiming systems" for many people. But the outrageous claims go too far.

Regards,
Dave
 
Dave:
I'm still "skeptical" of many of the claims.
Click to expand...
I think the only specific claims made are:

1. It "works".

I believe this, but don't think any of CTE's users have a clear undertanding of the real distinction between this and #2.

2. It's "mechanically exact".

I'm not just skeptical of this one; I'm certain (beyond a reasonable doubt) it's untrue.

pj
chgo
 
Dave:
It can be difficult to change the thinking or logic of a true "believer." In fact, it is usually not helpful to even try.
Click to expand...
I don't try to do that. I just try to provide, for readers who may find it useful, a clearly reasoned alternative to the muddled stuff that's usually posted by CTE's users (may all their shots split the pockets).

pj
chgo
 
dr_dave said:
I've changed the credit line to read: "from Patrick Johnson (paraphrasing Mike Page)." Please let me know if you think something else would be more appropriate.

Agreed.

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

I would also mention that the cylinder/barrel/canister analogy was first published in the 1994 book The Physics of Pocket Billiards by Wayland Marlow.

I've attached a scan of page 92 of my edition. In figure 35, there's an interesting stereoscopic image pair that gives a 3D effect to makes it easier to see. He writes: "The ball acts as if it is a canister, shown dashed, rolling on its edge, but the cylinder radius slowly shrinks as the ball moves along the x-axis."

Robert
 

Attachments

  • Marlow High Z-spin schematic.jpg
    Marlow High Z-spin schematic.jpg
    42.1 KB · Views: 227
Patrick Johnson said:
I think the only specific claims made are:

1. It "works".

I believe this, but don't think any of CTE's users have a clear undertanding of the real distinction between this and #2.

2. It's "mechanically exact".

I'm not just skeptical of this one; I'm certain (beyond a reasonable doubt) it's untrue.
Click to expand...
I think many more "claims" have been made, but you've certainly summarized two important ones. Maybe the new videos and documents that are expected to come out will better explain and demonstrate all of the "missing pieces" of the puzzle. Until then, threads like this, which have gone on for years and years, will continue to go nowhere. Regardless, the threads are still fun to read at times ... not for the information (which is fairly nonexistent), but for the childish and passionate rants, outrageous claims, frequent personal attacks, and creative anecdote-based arguments.

Regards,
Dave
 
Robert Raiford said:
I would also mention that the cylinder/barrel/canister analogy was first published in the 1994 book The Physics of Pocket Billiards by Wayland Marlow.

I've attached a scan of page 92 of my edition. In figure 35, there's an interesting stereoscopic image pair that gives a 3D effect to makes it easier to see. He writes: "The ball acts as if it is a canister, shown dashed, rolling on its edge, but the cylinder radius slowly shrinks as the ball moves along the x-axis."
Click to expand...
Robert,

Thank you for sharing that. I've read the entire Marlow book in the past, and didn't remember him using the "barrel" analogy.

I still think PJ/Mike's description is good. The credit line doesn't imply they invented the idea ... just that they described it well.

Regards,
Dave
 
Robert Raiford said:
I would also mention that the cylinder/barrel/canister analogy was first published in the 1994 book The Physics of Pocket Billiards by Wayland Marlow.

I've attached a scan of page 92 of my edition. In figure 35, there's an interesting stereoscopic image pair that gives a 3D effect to makes it easier to see. He writes: "The ball acts as if it is a canister, shown dashed, rolling on its edge, but the cylinder radius slowly shrinks as the ball moves along the x-axis."

Robert
Click to expand...
If I'm reading it correctly he makes a (maybe typographical) mistake: the cylinder radius slowly grows as the ball rolls (and loses sidespin). The cylinder length shrinks.

But he's still my hero for including homemade 3D graphics - totally cool!

Thanks for the post.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
If I'm reading it correctly he makes a (maybe typographical) mistake: the cylinder radius slowly grows as the ball rolls (and loses sidespin). The cylinder length shrinks.

But he's still my hero for including homemade 3D graphics - totally cool!

Thanks for the post.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

I should've added some extra context. He's describing the case where z-spin stays on the ball and the ball rolls to a stop, whereas you're thinking of the case where the ball rolls continuously and the z-spin decays to zero. In other words, you're both right :) I really just wanted an excuse to post the cool diagram!

Robert
 
cookie man said:
The pigs will be flying and you will be eating crow.
Click to expand...

Why not enjoy seeing it happen right now? Simply give an example of an angled shot, and what CTE tells you to do/how to aim, to give the precise aiming solution for the shot. Giving just one example won't break the vow of silence (did you even take such a vow?).

Or...as some people might say..."Put up or shut up."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top