Why CTE is silly

[Patrick Johnson]

John:
On here you and others are trying to bully people into revealing something that they don't wish to in this format.

Take a pill. Nobody's "bullying" anybody.

Then indignantly you jump to the conclusion that it's because they can't.

Nobody in 15 years of talking about Hal Houle's systems, from the original "3-angle ball fractions" system to its current incarnation (CTE), has ever given a clear, believable description of exactly how one is supposed to work. That's what you call "jumping" to the conclusion? I call that inescapably obvious.

It's certainly your right to make such assumptions but it doesn't mean you are right.

After this long and this many "conversations", that's precisely what it means. Any other conclusion is a perversion of reason.

pj
chgo

 

[GetMeThere]

Take a pill. Nobody's "bullying" anybody.

Oh, it's worse than that: I've been accused of the REPREHENSIBLE act of FEARMONGERING!! I'm a bully AND a fearmongerer!

 

[JB Cases]

Don't buy it 'til you eye it.

pj <- got a million of 'em
chgo

Sure, "try it before you buy it", etc.....

What part of money back guarantee is hard to understand?

Your premise though seems to be don't even try it and certainly don't buy it, or I should say that GTM's premise seems to be that.

In fact people can have it for no money at all. Just a little time talking to the people who know what to do. Those people are generally very helpful about pointing people in the right direction.

They used to be helpful about trying to point EVERYONE in the right direction on the open forum until a few "detractors" kept spoiled those threads that they gave up.

Perhaps if those threads had been left to the people who know the system and the people who want to learn it then you would have gotten the blueprint you need to be happy with it.

But we will never know as you and others could not and would not stay away.

So now you are in the SAME situation as you have always been, demanding something from people who don't want to give it to you at your command.

All the questions you have about CTE can be answered. And in fact I think all of them have been answered.

But getting through the noise and static is impossible because you and Lou and GMT and a few others keep wanting to be disrespectful and condescending and put the conversation on a level that breeds resentment.

The opening of this thread set the tone right away and it hasn't changed.

So what do you expect?

Aren't you always saying that using the same input and expecting a different outcome is stupid?

Well here you are. Same input - same outcome.

 

[GetMeThere]

So what do you expect?

Well, when people are challenged, they usually either MEET the challenge, or just walk away. They don't usually just stomp their feet and say "I'm right! I'm right!" and leave it at that--unless they know very well that they CAN'T meet the challenge, but want to PRETEND that they're still "right" about whatever.

From my long life and internet experience, I don't think I've ever seen a WORSE job of meeting a challenge than supporters of CTE have offered. It's so bad that, as PJ has implied, the only possible conclusion is that they CANNOT meet a challenge with anything of substance; that CTE is bunk, and bunk is all they have to offer.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

John:
Perhaps if those threads had been left to the people who know the system and the people who want to learn it then you would have gotten the blueprint you need to be happy with it.

But we will never know as you and others could not and would not stay away.

So the reason nobody can describe CTE is because people keep asking for a description? Those bastards!

LOL. Absurder and absurderer.

So what do you expect?

More of the same, of course.

pj

 

[JB Cases]

Take a pill. Nobody's "bullying" anybody.

Like CTE it's a matter of perspective.

Nobody in 15 years of talking about Hal Houle's systems, from the original "3-angle ball fractions" system to its current incarnation (CTE), has ever given a clear, believable description of exactly how one is supposed to work. That's what you call "jumping" to the conclusion? I call that inescapably obvious.

You mean that no one has given a description that YOU consider to be clear and believable.

That doesn't mean that other people haven't found the descriptions and instructions both clear enough and the results credible enough.

After this long and this many "conversations", that's precisely what it means. Any other conclusion is a perversion of reason.

pj
chgo

Again this is a matter of perspective. From my perspective 99% of these "conversations" have been extremely antagonistic from your side and then later antagonistic from the other side. So 99% of the content has really nothing to do with the system and is instead simply a clash of egos. At least that's how I see it.

The 1% where the system proponents who actually KNOW the details have tried to lead the horses to water have been buried by the other 99% of ego-masturbation.

So there are gems among the crap but people have to sift through a ton of crap to get to it. Which is why I got out of this thread weeks ago.

And why I need to get out of it now.

 

[JB Cases]

Well, when people are challenged, they usually either MEET the challenge, or just walk away. They don't usually just stomp their feet and say "I'm right! I'm right!" and leave it at that--unless they know very well that they CAN'T meet the challenge, but want to PRETEND that they're still "right" about whatever.

From my long life and internet experience, I don't think I've ever seen a WORSE job of meeting a challenge than supporters of CTE have offered. It's so bad that, as PJ has implied, the only possible conclusion is that they CANNOT meet a challenge with anything of substance; that CTE is bunk, and bunk is all they have to offer.

Why do you think people have to "meet" your challenge?

Why do you feel that you are owed an explanation, description or explicit instructions?

Plenty of people through the years have learned Hal's systems without the need to have them explicitly spoon-fed to them on the forums.

What makes you special?

The other possible conclusion is that "they" don't want to give in to YOUR demand that "they" perform on your command.

But as far as THAT goes - there is plenty of description and even instruction on CTE on the net. You just have to know where to look and be willing to start learning.

Dr. Dave has given you a resource page to get started. If you really want to learn it.

If you don't then don't. No one cares about you and your skill level. And the more you pound your chest and say "by God in the name of Science I strike down your delusional notions that CTE has merit or works" the more people look at you and simply ask, "have you tried it?"

 

[JB Cases]

So the reason nobody can describe CTE is because people keep asking for a description? Those bastards!

LOL. Absurder and absurderer.


More of the same, of course.

pj

Yes, more of the same.

Descriptions of CTE abound. Spoon fed instructions are rare. They are however available.

Would you like to know how and where to get them?

Start with Dale Carnegie's "How to Win Friends and Influence People".

 

[GetMeThere]

Why do you think people have to "meet" your challenge?

You asked what was "expected" not what they "have to do." I expect people to meet challenges, because that's what people usually do.

Why do you feel that you are owed an explanation, description or explicit instructions?

People who make claims (like "CTE works!") usually want to support their claims. If they want MY support they owe me an explanation/description. I think they would prefer my support over my detraction.

Plenty of people through the years have learned Hal's systems without the need to have them explicitly spoon-fed to them on the forums.

Really? Where do you get that kind of information?

I also wonder: Do you realize that you flip back and forth from saying that the information is OUT THERE, to saying that the information ISN'T AVAILBLE except from certain people--who I can only assume then "spoon feed it" to those "plenty of people" who have learned?

JB,

A newsflash for you: I no longer need or seek information about CTE. Enough has ALREADY BEEN PROVIDED to know WITHOUT DOUBT that it is not an aiming system. If you had actually attempted to READ the substance of my posts, you would know that.

The discussion is already over, and you have lost.

 

[GetMeThere]

Dr. Dave has given you a resource page to get started. If you really want to learn it.

Oh, you're not keeping up with the thread, JB--another reason your posts should really just be ignored.

Dave Segal, Stan Shuffet and others (sorry, please don't hold me to having the list EXACTLY right--I'm not gonna go through and reassemble it. I'm talking about "Those guys") have already informed Dr. Dave that his information is WRONG, and should be REMOVED from his site.

 

[duckie]

Yes, more of the same.

Descriptions of CTE abound. Spoon fed instructions are rare. They are however available.

Would you like to know how and where to get them?

Start with Dale Carnegie's "How to Win Friends and Influence People".

OK, I'm going for a first, a first ever ban,

JB,,,,shut the **** up.

 

[JB Cases]

I think it's funny, after 2000 posts, that you haven't addressed a SINGLE CRITICISM of any of the CTE detractors. You've made COUNTLESS negative comments about PEOPLE, but none about "the particulars."

Again and again I've mentioned the KEY particular: CTE doesn't AIM at anything, therefore, it can't be an aiming system. Sadly, I have the impression that you don't even know what I MEAN by that--and, I dread to imagine, it sometimes seems that even the BIG WHEELS, like RandyG and StanS don't know what I mean by that--surely, they're completely MUM on the topic.

Maybe you would like to discuss it, so I'll spell it out a bit and see if you want to take it anywhere:

1) ALL necessary information about OB and CB can be contained in TWO pieces of information: a) A line drawn between them, indicating their separation distance and which is on which end, b) the DISTANCE and ANGULAR relationship of that line to any stationary part of the table. With that information it's possible to know EVERYTHING that's necessary (well, except if other balls are in the way of pockets, etc., you know what I mean).

2) The heart of the game is pocketing OBs. The pockets are STATIONARY, but the balls can be ANYWHERE. So, that line "a" from item #1 can be ANY LENGTH (within the table limits) and angled ANYWHERE on the table--but the pockets are always in the SAME place.

3) It is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to know both a and b (by one or another description) in order to hit the OB to make it go in the pocket, and it's ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE to methodically and systematically make the OB go in the pocket WITHOUT knowing a and b (excepting unimportant conditions, like when both balls are frozen together, with the OB hanging in the pocket--you know what I mean).

How do I KNOW that it's absolutely necessary to know both a and b? Because as I said, line a can be ANYWHERE, so obviously, it's necessary to know b in order to direct the OB to a pocket. Knowing that obvious fact doesn't require any geometry (other than a rough concept of what a table looks like). It's pure common sense. You're not gonna be able to drive to a destination unless you know where to go. This is JUST the same.

4) Advocates of CTE have said that it's not NECESSARY to have information b, and that ALL INFORMATION NECESSARY can be found through a series of alignments and pivots that deal only with line a (and the actual OB and CB). I've heard this from many sources; I'll just mention one: Dave Segal's latest video of pocketing balls with half the table covered. It was his direct INTENTION to demonstrate that information b IS NOT NECESSARY AND IS NOT USED with CTE. Unless he is trying to LIE or MISREPRESENT CTE, then I have to take him at his word.

5) To say that information b isn't required to pocket balls is just like saying directions aren't necessary to go where you want to in your car--after all, the world is "stationary" like a pool table, and cars and people can go anywhere on the surface, just like balls on a pool table. CTE is like saying that if you have a set of instructions: make 2 lefts, go 1.6 miles, then make 3 rights, that you can drive to ANYWHERE YOU PLEASE. Well, that's just fu**ing stupid, now isn't it? Actually, it's more like saying that, if you draw a line from your grill to the front door of the car ahead of you, then turn left, you'll end up at the pizza parlor--OR the dentist; whichever you happen to WANT to go to at the time

6) Then let's go a bit further. Some versions of CTE require or allow for an initial input for the "approximate angle" that you want the OB to go off on to make the pocket. Now that's good, because it will tell you "approximately" where to aim--how accurate that will be will depend on how accurately you can estimate the angle, and how accurately you know where on the OB to hit with the CB for that angle. THEN, nothing FURTHER from CTE can bring you any CLOSER to exactly pocketing the ball, unless MORE INFORMATION about b, the location of the pockets, is considered. But none has been alluded to by CTE advocates.

It's simple: If you don't AIM at a pocket, by using DIRECT INFORMATION about the LOCATION OF THE POCKET in relation to the OB, then you do not possess the NECESSARY INFORMATION to hit the OB in such a way as to put it in the pocket.

THAT IS SIMPLE, ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LOGIC and REASONING. A child could understand it.

The bizarre fact is this: Dave Segal's video of pocketing balls without "knowing where the pockets were" serves as ABSOLUTE PROOF THAT CTE IS BUNK, because it pretends to show, and claims as necessary (for proof of CTE) that it is possible to POCKET BALLS without regard to the position of the pockets. That is not so, just as it is not possible to drive to a destination without knowing where the destination is.

Any small child could tell you that. Sometimes, you have be an ADULT to get so confused about things.

So if I put you in a car and told you point it in a certain direction and drive to the "store" you coudn't get there?

You would have to know the exact address?

I would go in a straight line until I reached a store.

Of course you can drive to places without knowing "where" it is. Can start out in a general direction, like the CTE line.

Then you narrow it down to likely places, shopping centers as opposed to refineries, like the pre-pivot stick placement.

Then you zoom in on the store and pull into the parking lot,

Like the pivot and shoot.

And you get your milk just like I make the shot.

If you want milk and you know that one direction is desert in effect TOTALLY WRONG and the other direction is civilization in effect certainly the right direction then that's all you need to know to start out on your journey.

The whole concept of not needing to know where the pocket is is predicated on getting AWAY from drawing lines through contact points which is the exact opposite of what CTE is. CTE is a general direction which gets distilled down to an aiming line that works to pocket the ball.

Since the pockets are fixed one does not NEED to use them when using CTE. Because as Hal discovered one CAN use the techniques in CTE to end up on the SAME line, the ONLY LINE, which is needed to pocket the ball.

How does that reconcile with your understanding of geometry?

I have no idea. You're the scientist. So go and learn CTE and then come back and tell us.

But BALLS GOING IN HOLES and personal testimony from experienced players is enough for me to see that CTE works. If you want to dissect it then go get you some CTE first.

 

[JB Cases]

You asked what was "expected" not what they "have to do." I expect people to meet challenges, because that's what people usually do.

Great. Then you understand that no one is under any obligation to live up to your expectations in this situation.

People who make claims (like "CTE works!") usually want to support their claims. If they want MY support they owe me an explanation/description. I think they would prefer my support over my detraction.

I don't want or need your support. You are nobody in this business and nobody in this sport.

If I discovered/invented a new aiming system then the only people whose support I would want are professional instructors who are qualified.

That has in fact happened. Anonymous detractors are meaningless. Amateur players of no distinction who refuse to try it and then report are meaningless. The only meaningful commentary is from those who try it.

Experience trumps speculation.

Really? Where do you get that kind of information?

Through reading these forums and private conversations.

I also wonder: Do you realize that you flip back and forth from saying that the information is OUT THERE, to saying that the information ISN'T AVAILBLE except from certain people--who I can only assume then "spoon feed it" to those "plenty of people" who have learned?

The information to get started on the right path is "out there". And the rest is available from those who have mastered the technique. Is this really that hard for you understand.

JB,

A newsflash for you: I no longer need or seek information about CTE. Enough has ALREADY BEEN PROVIDED to know WITHOUT DOUBT that it is not an aiming system. If you had actually attempted to READ the substance of my posts, you would know that.

Yes I have seen that now it's a semantics point for you. Well here is another newsflash, you can't rename what's not your and what you don't understand. Well you can if you like but no one will accept it.

All aiming is pointing something at something else. At the end of the steps in CTE I am aiming the cueball at the object ball. So it's an aiming system.

The discussion is already over, and you have lost.

Not hardly. All you have done is push people to want to find out whether this system holds water or not. Good job. Because one thing you utterly fail to understand is that people already understand the KNOWN. They understand Ghost Ball and lines and tangents. They are looking for something more.

For a lot of people CTE gives them another way to approach the shots. A way that allows them make more shots, make tougher shots, and to do both of things more consistently.

If they end up trying it and find that it's not true for them then they are in NO WORSE position than they were before trying CTE.

But if they listen to you, a person who will not try it and doesn't even know the steps, then they will certainly never know if it could help them.

Pool is about making balls disappear. That's the joy of pool. There are plenty of ways to make that happen but only one line for each shot. How you get to that line is up to you. CTE is one way to get there and it works.

 

[JB Cases]

Oh, you're not keeping up with the thread, JB--another reason your posts should really just be ignored.

Dave Segal, Stan Shuffet and others (sorry, please don't hold me to having the list EXACTLY right--I'm not gonna go through and reassemble it. I'm talking about "Those guys") have already informed Dr. Dave that his information is WRONG, and should be REMOVED from his site.

Yes, that is correct, some of Dave's information is wrong. However he also points to information that is right. And he links to people who know the answers.

So it's still a starting point.

Dave SHOULD remove the information that people ask him to remove concerning THIS topic. But he is obstinate about it and refuses to be cooperative, instead seeming to enjoy his ability to muddy the waters further rather than to work WITH the people who know it best to clear up the information and present only the best, distilled versions.

But people do what people do.

Anyway the point is clear IF you TRULY want the answers then they are available.

If you don't then keep doing what won't produce them. Obviously this ego-trip is satisfying to you so by all means keep it going.

 

[GetMeThere]

The whole concept of not needing to know where the pocket is is predicated on getting AWAY from drawing lines through contact points which is the exact opposite of what CTE is. CTE is a general direction which gets distilled down to an aiming line that works to pocket the ball.

Since the pockets are fixed one does not NEED to use them when using CTE. Because as Hal discovered one CAN use the techniques in CTE to end up on the SAME line, the ONLY LINE, which is needed to pocket the ball.

hehehe. I just happened to have been watching a Seinfeld DVD. It's HILARIOUS how much of what you say reminds me of KRAMER'S NONSENSE

 

[JB Cases]

OK, I'm going for a first, a first ever ban,

JB,,,,shut the **** up.

Why?

Because I don't say what you want to hear? Or because I refuse to allow people to diminish something that is worthwhile?

You can tell me I don't know Ghost Ball and I might have to agree with you.

You have studied GB to the point where you state that you don't even use a phantom ball but instead have a three line check to insure that you are on the GB line.

But you certainly can't say with authority that Stan Shuffet and Randy Goetlicher or Scott Lee don't understand Ghost Ball.

So what do you have to say to theise three teachers who have decided to teach CTE/Pro1/Same Aim or whatever they call it? I mean they don't HAVE TO teach these systems.

These guys would have PLENTY of business without it - just as they have had forever.

The easiest thing in the world for them would be to take the SAFE course and teach Ghost Ball.

But as Robert Frost reminds us, "Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference"

http://www.amandashome.com/road.html

 

[JB Cases]

hehehe. I just happened to have been watching a Seinfeld DVD. It's HILARIOUS how much of what you say reminds me of KRAMER'S NONSENSE

Then you understand Seinfeld's humor even less than you understand CTE.

 

[eezbank]

You asked what was "expected" not what they "have to do." I expect people to meet challenges, because that's what people usually do.




People who make claims (like "CTE works!") usually want to support their claims. If they want MY support they owe me an explanation/description. I think they would prefer my support over my detraction.



Really? Where do you get that kind of information?

I also wonder: Do you realize that you flip back and forth from saying that the information is OUT THERE, to saying that the information ISN'T AVAILBLE except from certain people--who I can only assume then "spoon feed it" to those "plenty of people" who have learned?

JB,

A newsflash for you: I no longer need or seek information about CTE. Enough has ALREADY BEEN PROVIDED to know WITHOUT DOUBT that it is not an aiming system. If you had actually attempted to READ the substance of my posts, you would know that.

The discussion is already over, and you have lost.

I'd like to see things from your point of view but I can't seem to get my head that far up my a$$.

Your posts contain no real substance. How can you expect anyone to read them. It's the same nonsense regurgitated over and over again. At the end of this thread I'll throw you a quarter to call what friends you have left. Just make sure you come back with my change.

 

[GetMeThere]

I'd like to see things from your point of view but I can't seem to get my head that far up my a$$.

Your posts contain no real substance. How can you expect anyone to read them. It's the same nonsense regurgitated over and over again. At the end of this thread I'll throw you a quarter to call what friends you have left. Just make sure you come back with my change.

Yes. More insults and no substance. I've seen a continuous stream of insults (directed at ME). Funny, I've NEVER responded to any post of yours or interacted with you in any way--yet you're eager to say vile things about me....IN PLACE OF challenging my arguments or ideas.

It's really so.....ODD! It really is. That something like....some baloney AIMING SYSTEM can wrap people's heads up in knots and emotions, and make them so DEFENSIVE and ANGRY and ready to RIP and TEAR at anyone who brings up GEOMETRY in relation to their wonderful aiming system.

This is what delusion does. There's no way to defend delusion with REASON, so the response ends up being EMOTION and RAGE.

I feel bad that a pool aiming system brings you to such a low and bitter place. Maybe you would be happier without it. Certainly, to have your ego bound up so tightly to some piece of crap like CTE is...unwise and unhealthy.

 

[JB Cases]

Let's reverse this a little. Since people use CTE to make balls then it's impossible that it's not geometrically correct.

Because if it were not then people would not be able to make more shots, and tougher shots more consistently.

How does the geometry work?

Easy, the line that the bridge hand goes down on corresponds to the SAME line given by the invisible Ghost Ball.

Or the line shown by The Arrow

And the one shown by the Laser Guided Spider

And the same one that the B.A.T aim trainer shows

And the Otto Trainer

And the plexiglas British contraption,

And let's not forget the perfectly named, Ghost Ball Aim Trainer.....

And and and.

However by the application of CTE all one needs is the two balls as reference points. Using ONLY those two balls and the shooter can align himself to the perfect aiming line.

And how exactly does he do this?

Go to Stan Shuffet, Dave Segal, Hal Houle, Randy Goetlicher, Scott Lee or any other instructor who knows the system well enough to teach it and they will show you.

Or, go find all the free resources on the net showing the Ghost Ball diagrams and buy yourself one of the devices above or make one with a printer and some scissors or a laser cutter if you are lucky enough to have one. Then use that device to train yourself to see and eventually FEEL the proper position.

Either way, with due diligence you will learn to pocket balls with confidence.

The difference?

You can't use your Ghost Ball trainer in a match. You can only rely on your muscle memory and your "shot pictures". So if a shot comes up where you haven't hit it a million times in practice then you MIGHT have some trouble with it. I did. A lot.

But with CTE you have everything you need for any shot directly to a pocket. Yourself, the cueball and the object ball. No matter what shot comes up you can approach it the same way (or nearly the same way) and have a damn good chance of making it even if you never shot that shot before. Even if it's some weird off-angle backwards cut in the middle of the table.

THAT is the magic of CTE.

You want to know how to do it? Of course you do, who wouldn't want to be able to shoot every shot without having to practice it a milliion times first?

So what's holding you back?

Some guys who don't know HOW to do CTE, who have never learned it telling you it's impossible?

These guys who have never accomplished anything notewothry in pool telling you it's crap?

Well if it is there is only one way you will ever know for sure. You have to get on the table and figure it out.

Plenty of good people in this thread are willing to help you, but not by printing a manual here.

Here is a CTE discussion group where people who aren't interested in biting each other's heads off for ego purposes are gathered. They help each other to figure out the nuances.

http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/cte-students/

If you truly desire to LEARN and not be endlessly bombarded with what amounts to "is to and is not" then this is a good place to start.

Once you have learned then you can decide for yourself whether CTE fits your game or not.

The REASON that som many of us are passionate about it is really simple. We love to make balls go into the holes and CTE affords us a way to do that by giving us a way to make more shots, and to make tougher shots more consistently.

Membership in the CTE club is free. You can leave anytime. You can modify it to suit you. You can build on it and teach it to others as you are able and feel confident to do so. The only fee is time to learn and absorb it. I guarantee you as a player who has been at this game since he was 12 years old, that this is a better way to great shotmaking than spending years building a shot picture library in your head.

Or you can follow GetMeThere and see where you end up.

Your choice.