A CTE test!

champ2107 said:
This is how cte/pro1 works, If your perfect with the ctel/aim points/pivot and stroke, the ball will go in the exactly dead center. If there were an obstacle blocking the pocket you would have to adjust because center pocket is no longer available. The system is designed to work on a regular pool table and not one that has a pocket out of alignment.
Click to expand...
You're not getting it.

For arguments sake, let's say you can move the pocket on the table. Take one particular cut shot where you know with absolute certainty CTE/Pro1 makes you hit center pocket. Now, move the pocket an inch such that the pocket's center (the target) is offset an inch. How can CTE/Pro1 compensate for this shift in the target given the EXACT SAME CB and OB placements?

Does it matter that it's impossible to have a table with a moving pocket? No. Keep the pocket right where it is and move both the CB and OB an inch in the same direction, and you'll have the exact same dilemma.
 
jsp said:
You're not getting it.

For arguments sake, let's say you can move the pocket on the table. Take one particular cut shot where you know with absolute certainty CTE/Pro1 makes you hit center pocket. Now, move the pocket an inch such that the pocket's center (the target) is offset an inch. How can CTE/Pro1 compensate for this shift in the target given the EXACT SAME CB and OB placements?

Does it matter that it's impossible to have a table with a moving pocket? No. Keep the pocket right where it is and move both the CB and OB an inch in the same direction, and you'll have the exact same dilemma.
Click to expand...

It compensates by starting with a new CTEL!!
 
jsp to champ:
You're not getting it.
Click to expand...
LOL. Ya think?

What you're saying is true and essential to understanding CTE. But champ will never get it and neither will pablocruz, cookie man, JB, etc., etc. They're simply incapable of understanding. They don't even understand what's meant by "exact" in this context.

Hopefully it's useful to other readers and maybe that makes it worth repeating over and over to this wall of uncomprehending blank stares. Hoping the light will someday dawn on them is not a good bet.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
pablocruz said:
It compensates by starting with a new CTEL!!
Click to expand...
How? Please explain. In the first case, I already stated the CB and OB doesn't move at all, only the pocket moves a small amount. How does the system come up with a brand new CTE line if the CB and OB remains in absolutely the same locations?
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Groan. Why isn't there one CTE defender who can visualize this simple geometry? Not one.

It must be a requirement of the system - if you can visualize simple geometry you can't use CTE.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
as i said i dont care whether its exact or not.if something works then its good for the person that aims that way.
for the record if i need to aim to a certain part of the pocket i just either pivot slightly more or less than a tip.
these shots are the only occasions i use basic cte over pro one as i find it easier to adjust
 
Patrick Johnson said:
LOL. Ya think?

What you're saying is true and essential to understanding CTE. But champ will never get it and neither will pablocruz, cookie man, JB, etc., etc. They're simply incapable of understanding. They don't even understand what's meant by "exact" in this context.

Hopefully it's useful to other readers and maybe that makes it worth repeating over and over to this wall of uncomprehending blank stares. Hoping the light will someday dawn on them is not a good bet.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

without a doubt in anyones mind that have followed these threads must think you are helpless lol
 
Last edited:
exact - who cares??......does everything in life have to be exact for it to work.:wink:
 
jsp said:
You're not getting it.

For arguments sake, let's say you can move the pocket on the table. Take one particular cut shot where you know with absolute certainty CTE/Pro1 makes you hit center pocket. Now, move the pocket an inch such that the pocket's center (the target) is offset an inch. How can CTE/Pro1 compensate for this shift in the target given the EXACT SAME CB and OB placements?

Does it matter that it's impossible to have a table with a moving pocket? No. Keep the pocket right where it is and move both the CB and OB an inch in the same direction, and you'll have the exact same dilemma.
Click to expand...

ok, how about instead of moving the pocket why not just move the cueball an inch, same thing right? Now you will have the same aim point,pivot and like pablo said you will have a new ctel. Now in some cases you will have to change the aim point,pivot also. I have realized you have no idea how this system works,correct?
 
Last edited:
sh1.jpg

sh2.jpg


You know these two shots are made with the B aim point and left pivot a center cueball to right object ball edge. I showed this PJ and asked him what these have in common but he ran away from this question i asked as usual, because he has no cte knowledge.
 
Last edited:
jsp said:
How about you just focus on the example I first gave and move the pocket. How does the system account for the change in target. Answer this first.
Click to expand...

You really need to pay attention to the pictures and what i have written under the pictures and try to get it to sink in. Are you asking about the geometry or how is possible those two shots i have shown can be made with the exact same set up?
 
Last edited:
champ2107 said:
You know these two shots are made with the B aim point and left pivot a center cueball to right object ball edge. I showed this PJ and asked him what these have in common but he ran away from this question i asked as usual, because he has no cte knowledge.
Click to expand...

champ, for the second shot, yes, I'd use B with a pivot from left to right. That seems to work reasonably well.

But for the first shot, B with a left pivot overcuts the shot for me. B with a right pivot undercuts it (usually, in my trials). The best solution for me with your first shot is A with a left pivot.

So I disagree that the two shots are absolutely both B's with a left pivot. Apparently the visuals are a bit different from person to person.

But the reason both shots could work for some people with the same B/left alignment is that the CB/OB separations for the two shots are very different. The separation is about two times as much for shot 2 as for shot 1. That creates different angles sighting to the smaller appearing OB on the longer shot.

But in any case, these two shots say nothing about the point that jsp and I have been making over and over. That point relates to having two shots with the same CB/OB separation, doing exactly the same thing in terms of choosing an alignment from Stan's menu of possibilities (including pivoting from the same side with the same amount of offset), using the same bridge length -- and then getting different results (different cut angles).
 
AtLarge said:
champ, for the second shot, yes, I'd use B with a pivot from left to right. That seems to work reasonably well.

But for the first shot, B with a left pivot overcuts the shot for me. B with a right pivot undercuts it (usually, in my trials). The best solution for me with your first shot is A with a left pivot.

So I disagree that the two shots are absolutely both B's with a left pivot. Apparently the visuals are a bit different from person to person.

But the reason both shots could work for some people with the same B/left alignment is that the CB/OB separations for the two shots are very different. The separation is about two times as much for shot 2 as for shot 1. That creates different angles sighting to the smaller appearing OB on the longer shot.

But in any case, these two shots say nothing about the point that jsp and I have been making over and over. That point relates to having two shots with the same CB/OB separation, doing exactly the same thing in terms of choosing an alignment from Stan's menu of possibilities (including pivoting from the same side with the same amount of offset), using the same bridge length -- and then getting different results (different cut angles).
Click to expand...

those two shots i pulled from the dvd, i myself have never tried any shots from the dvd. I have no idea what you guys mean, im trying to understand you guys but dont get it?
 
MahnaMahna said:
How are things going on onepocket.org? When is your match with Lou?
Click to expand...

They didn't want to play $1000 a game ten ahead so there will be no match. The counter offer I made was more than fair.

It's not going there - they are a closed sorority. No loss on my part.
 
champ2107 said:
those two shots i pulled from the dvd, i myself have never tried any shots from the dvd. I have no idea what you guys mean, im trying to understand you guys but dont get it?
Click to expand...

That's helpful. I was trying to have a rational discussion.
 
AtLarge said:
That's helpful. I was trying to have a rational discussion.
Click to expand...

maybe you guys can show what you mean on a cue table? i have come up with every explanation i think you guys maybe talking about? Does anyone understand what they mean and if you do can you explain?
 
Last edited:
brad21156 said:
Didn't you beat Lou once already?
Click to expand...

I sure did and let me set the scene so that it's in proper context.

We had been having a bitter round of flame fests on Rec.Sport.Billiard over Hal Houle's aiming systems.

I had JUST learned a couple from Hal a few months prior to this match with Lou and was being soundly insulted and denigrated by Lou and Deno Andrews over my enthusiasm for what Hal taught me.

So while in Chicago a little RSB tournament was arranged with 9 ball and one pocket as the games of choice. One pocket was a race to two or three, two I think and nine ball a race to five, I think. I beat Deno in nine ball first.

Then I ended up having to play Lou in one pocket, and at this time I could barely spell one pocket. So it was the tin-foil hat wearing Houligan vs. the stoic flaming skeptic.

Normally I should never beat a one pocket EXPERT ever, even in a short race. But I did. Using Hal Houle's aiming system and some great amount of luck I managed to get a victory over the great Lou, who once beat Larry Nevel in a tournament match.

Of course I didn't beat Pat Johnson so score one for the anti-Hal crowd and two for the pro-Hal crowd since I beat both Lou and Deno.

I offered Lou a friendly match with a guarantee to freeze up $500 so that he could redeem that one unfortunate loss to a houligan. In a fit of oversized ego I even offered to give Lou 9/8 for this friendly match up.

Instead his new manager Lenny Marshall tried to high roll me on One Pocket.Org with an offer to play a race to 7 for 20k. I countered with an offer to bet freeze up 10k and play 10 ahead for it even. And I said if I win then I would give up 9/8 and play another 10 ahead set. And if I won that one then I would give up 10/8 and do it again.

Apparently $1000 a game for a match where they are supposed to be stone cold stealing is not enough action for these hardened gamblers. Ah well, I can only bet what I can afford to lose. I learned that lesson the hard way in a previous grudge match.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top