Why CTE is silly

Status
Not open for further replies.
Roger,

When is your final CTE article due out? I look forward to seeing it to learn about your CTE "reality."

Regards,
Dave
Roger Long said:
I'm not wanting to throw any fuel on the fires, but I am now curious about something: What constitutes "reality?" I just looked that word up in the dictionary and did not get a clear definition. Is reality something that you must see, hear, feel, taste, or smell in order for it to exist? If that's the case, then almost nothing in this universe exists for a deaf, dumb, and blind person. By that I mean, how could you ever prove the existence of stars to a person like that? Or how would we explain your cut-angle chart to a person like that? And yet, both you and I believe that stars, and your cut-angle chart, are very real because we've received evidence that we are willing to accept.

Let's take this a little further. Is ghost ball real? I know you can "see" it, but you can't really SEE it. And you certainly can't hear it, touch it, taste it, or smell it. Even so, many of us believe in it as a real concept because we've received evidence that we are willing to accept.

Is playing by "feel" real? Again, many of us believe so because we've received evidence that we are willing to accept.

Is God real? I believe so because I've received evidence that I am willing to accept.

EVERYBODY believes in something. And that's a reality.

BTW, I appreciate your apology. Have a great day, G.M.T.! :smile:

Roger
Click to expand...
 
randyg said:
We teach CTE known as SAME AIM. If used correctly, SAME AIM takes the object ball to the center of the pocket whether you are cutting or BANKING. Might be the best Banking system I have ever used/taught.

I don't think CTE is silly, just very mis-understood.....SPF=randyg
Click to expand...

I agree, and don't see why people like the op seem so set on making those of us who use it admit that it doesn't work for whatever reason he can come up with. Honestly, I think a lot of these guys do this just to stir the pot and get a rise out of as many people as possible. Hal has been harassed unmercifully over the years by some people just out sheer obnoxiousness. They don't admit to it, obviously, but Hal has no reason to lie about it. And, it hasn't been just about CTE, long before that.
 
randyg said:
We teach CTE known as SAME AIM. If used correctly, SAME AIM takes the object ball to the center of the pocket whether you are cutting or BANKING. Might be the best Banking system I have ever used/taught.

I don't think CTE is silly, just very mis-understood.....SPF=randyg
Click to expand...
I teach DAM. It is extremely effective AND well understood. It doesn't replace existing useful kicking and banking systems, but it does help with aiming and alignment for all types of shots (cuts, banks, kicks, caroms, combos, jumps, etc).

Regards,
Dave
 
Pushout said:
I agree, and don't see why people like the op seem so set on making those of us who use it admit that it doesn't work...
Click to expand...

Because the "system" as discernible from Hal's words (linked by several posters throughout the thread, and posted by Dr. Dave) would not and could not "work." When summarized it only (approximately) describes the angles a (frictionless) OB would take if struck at the 1/4, 1/2, or 3/4 CB overlap positions. That's not an "aiming system"--when you admit that there are MANY angle shots that are required to meaningfully pocket balls (as shown in my OP).

When the CTE supporters take a REST from saying "all the CTE information is already out there--but I'm not going to spoon feed it to you" they will then say "you have to adjust (usually "pivot to the center") after the 1/4-3/4 stuff--but no geometrical information is given (or even implied) that COULD result in a correct aiming point.

If you post on a forum that having a plastic jesus on your dashboard increases your mileage from 20 mpg to 24 mpg, and your evidence is "IT WORKS! I don't know why, but IT WORKS. And I KNOW it works, because my mileage was 20 mpg BEFORE I put the plastic Jesus on the dashboard, and after I put it up my mileage was 24 mpg!" Then....sorry, but you're gonna be taking some flak...

...and sensible people are not gonna be going out and buying plastic Jesuses for their dashboards. (But SOME people will. And because they WANT IT to work--because they want better gas mileage--they will put it up, take it easy on the gas pedal a bit, avoid jackrabbit start ups from red lights, etc., and their mileage will IMPROVE. They will be BELIEVERS! And they will be ANGRY and FRUSTRATED that others don't believe their reports that IT WORKS!

EDIT: And Dr. Dave will come along and inform everyone that it DOES work--because those drivers were able to watch their driving habits better with the plastic Jesus on their dashboard than without it :D
 
ThePoliteSniper said:
How is it misunterstood?
Click to expand...

Good questions deserve an answer.

I have studied Aiming Systems under the tutelage of 27 different mentors over the last 40 years. All of them work!

I have been using & teaching a CTE system called SAME AIM for quite a long time in Pool School. It is the BEST aiming system I have every used with the exception of S.A.M. Easy to teach because it's easy to use. Two shots, choose one and go....now that's already 50% correct.

The mis-understandings?

Pivot
Pivot point
Bridge length
side spin
eye patterns
dominant eye
Throw
Deflection
Squirt


None of these matter. You can learn SAME AIM with or with-out them. Once you have SAME AIM in your game then start adding your personal preferences. Not all students warm up to SAME AIM, so I have several more systems to fit their fancy.

"When a system fails, check the operator first".....SPF=randyg
 
randyg said:
Two shots, choose one and go....now that's already 50% correct.
Click to expand...

With logic like that you could make it big in the markets, Randy. "Up or down, choose one and go--you're already 50% correct."

Now that IS in fact true in the markets (yet 99.9% of people find it almost impossible to make money trading them).

I can easily offer you TWENTY "shots" where, AT MOST, only one would be correct. That's already...uh...FIVE PERCENT.
 
Roger Long said:
I'm not wanting to throw any fuel on the fires, but I am now curious about something: What constitutes "reality?" I just looked that word up in the dictionary and did not get a clear definition. Is reality something that you must see, hear, feel, taste, or smell in order for it to exist? If that's the case, then almost nothing in this universe exists for a deaf, dumb, and blind person. By that I mean, how could you ever prove the existence of stars to a person like that? Or how would we explain your cut-angle chart to a person like that? And yet, both you and I believe that stars, and your cut-angle chart, are very real because we've received evidence that we are willing to accept.

Let's take this a little further. Is ghost ball real? I know you can "see" it, but you can't really SEE it. And you certainly can't hear it, touch it, taste it, or smell it. Even so, many of us believe in it as a real concept because we've received evidence that we are willing to accept.

Is playing by "feel" real? Again, many of us believe so because we've received evidence that we are willing to accept.

Is God real? I believe so because I've received evidence that I am willing to accept.

EVERYBODY believes in something. And that's a reality.

BTW, I appreciate your apology. Have a great day, G.M.T.! :smile:

Roger
Click to expand...


This is reality. The ole glass that has water up to the middle of the glass. The question is "is the glass half full or half empty". The answer was suspose to indicate if you are a pessimist or a optimist.

In reality, the glass is too big. That's a realistist.
 
GetMeThere said:
With logic like that you could make it big in the markets, Randy. "Up or down, choose one and go--you're already 50% correct."

Now that IS in fact true in the markets (yet 99.9% of people find it almost impossible to make money trading them).

I can easily offer you TWENTY "shots" where, AT MOST, only one would be correct. That's already...uh...FIVE PERCENT.
Click to expand...

Could this be another "mis-understanding"? :wink:....SPF=randyg
 
I find it rather odd that when MR Shuffet post anything on the cte threads he is treated with Respect and he should be.
But if someone else post something about it like Dave (Spidey) or anybody else that it works they get mud thrown there way .
Stan posted it was a center pocket system.What are you closed minded
Know it all's waiting for? Are you so ballless to question his authority but yet
are willing give other people sh!t.
 
I was pretty much sold that there has to be something to it when RandyG stated that they teach a version of it.

That's enough for me.

Now if I could only arrange the $$$ and the time to go and get taught first-hand by him and his people. Ah well, dreaming is fun, who knows, maybe my lottery ticket will hit tonight? :)
 
8pack said:
I find it rather odd that when MR Shuffet post anything on the cte threads he is treated with Respect and he should be.
But if someone else post something about it like Dave (Spidey) or anybody else that it works they get mud thrown there way .
Stan posted it was a center pocket system.What are you closed minded
Know it all's waiting for? Are you so ballless to question his authority but yet
are willing give other people sh!t.
Click to expand...

You must have missed post #198...:rolleyes:
 
8pack said:
I find it rather odd that when MR Shuffet post anything on the cte threads he is treated with Respect and he should be.
But if someone else post something about it like Dave (Spidey) or anybody else that it works they get mud thrown there way .
Stan posted it was a center pocket system.What are you closed minded
Know it all's waiting for? Are you so ballless to question his authority but yet
are willing give other people sh!t.
Click to expand...
Stan has been careful to not make any outrageous claims about CTE or Pro-One. He has also not provided any real details about how CTE or Pro-One are used or how they work. He also seems like a nice guy with respect for other people. In other words, there has been no reason to "challenge" Stan. After his video comes out, there might be some things to discuss and debate; but until then, the discussion centers around only what has been posted.

Regards,
Dave
 
randyg said:
Good questions deserve an answer.

I have studied Aiming Systems under the tutelage of 27 different mentors over the last 40 years. All of them work!

I have been using & teaching a CTE system called SAME AIM for quite a long time in Pool School. It is the BEST aiming system I have every used with the exception of S.A.M. Easy to teach because it's easy to use. Two shots, choose one and go....now that's already 50% correct.

The mis-understandings?

Pivot
Pivot point
Bridge length
side spin
eye patterns
dominant eye
Throw
Deflection
Squirt


None of these matter. You can learn SAME AIM with or with-out them. Once you have SAME AIM in your game then start adding your personal preferences. Not all students warm up to SAME AIM, so I have several more systems to fit their fancy.

"When a system fails, check the operator first".....SPF=randyg
Click to expand...

That doesn't really tell me anything.
 
Mikjary said:
Because you are using "combinations" in a Cte thread and most people know you can't use Cte for "combinations", caroms, banks, kicks, etc. :smilewinkgrin: ....
Click to expand...
Given the context, I'd accept your explanation without question; except I tried "making a ball go into a pocket," to which it remains mum. (probably crashed) :smile:

Jim
 
CTE can be used for caroms. One's accuracy with the method depends squarely on his/her ability to strike the OB with zero spin (no follow/draw).

Depending on the layout of the balls, performing a thin alignment/pivot with no spin upon contact brings the CB to an adjacent pocket (scratch). Using that as a baseline, applying proper draw/follow brings the CB up or down a diamond or % of a diamond. Therefore, if there's another ball you'd like to hit, try to make, etc, you identify the track and apply the appropriate follow/draw required at contact.

There are times when using this method is more accurate than say, aiming at the ghost ball required for the carom angle--- others, not. Is feel involved - of course. Does it take a lot of practice... yup. Is it a powerful weapon when mastered - yup.

I have an idea. Let's have someone like Dr. Dave post a bunch of carom diagrams and Getmethere and I will post videos on how well we do.
 
Last edited:
justadub said:
I was pretty much sold that there has to be something to it when RandyG stated that they teach a version of it.

That's enough for me.

Now if I could only arrange the $$$ and the time to go and get taught first-hand by him and his people. Ah well, dreaming is fun, who knows, maybe my lottery ticket will hit tonight? :)
Click to expand...

Thanks. First time we are close to each other I will show you SAME AIM.....SPF=randyg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top