Cte

[Patrick Johnson]

Me to Neil:
So you can explain how the same "visuals" and pivot can produce different cut angles?

Please do.

Neil (inexplicably):
Already did.

jsp (confused):
Hmmm, from my recollection you said that you "can't really describe just why" or you "can't explain why" because it was like "some magic trick".

In other words, you didn't explain anything.

That's what it means when a CTE user says "Already did". They speak a unique language.

pj
chgo

 

[JB Cases]

Since when is body alignment part of an aiming system? That belongs to execution.

Since now. Try putting your body 90 degrees to the shot and lining up. Body position is everything.

You only have a very limited range of where your cue can be to make any given shot and since your cue is held by your hands which are attached to your body then body alignment matters.

The rest of your post was nonsense. If you want the information then buy the DVD because none of us are going to help you for free. Not you.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Since now. Try putting your body 90 degrees to the shot and lining up. Body position is everything.

You only have a very limited range of where your cue can be to make any given shot and since your cue is held by your hands which are attached to your body then body alignment matters.

I agree that body position is important, and that CTE's method of ensuring consistent body alignment is a good idea.

The rest of your post was nonsense.

The rest of his post was clear and correct - no wonder you don't get it. And it illustrates how your own argument is inconsistent. You know less about what Stan's DVD says than those you argue with about it.

pj
chgo

 

[champ2107]

I agree that body position is important, and that CTE's method of ensuring consistent body alignment is a good idea.


The rest of his post was clear and correct - no wonder you don't get it. And it illustrates how your own argument is inconsistent. You know less about what Stan's DVD says than those you argue with about it.

pj
chgo

So what are we stuck on today? i made a civil request a few post back about posting shots on a cue table that people have any kind of issues with. aim lines, body position, etc, is someone going to post any? I really would like too see you post some PJ more than anyone and let me take them to a table, i think this is a decent request?

 

[jsp]

Both shots fall under the same category thickness. The lines A1 and B2 are both parallel to the rail and are also the same length. The CTE lines are the same. The reference points are the same. The only difference is that the position of the pocket has changed.

This is the crux of the problem right here that none of the advocates can answer (that makes any sense). That's why I prefer the moving pocket argument that I presented in another thread, because there is absolutely no denying that the CB, OB, primary and secondary alignments all have not changed (assuming you move the pocket only a small amount such that you maintain the secondary alignment).

And how do the advocates dispel this air-tight counterexample demonstrating CTE cannot possibly be a "center pocket" system for all shots? By stating that it's impossible to have a table with moving pockets so why bother even considering it.

But to be fair, champ2107 and mantis99 eventually did concede that an adjustment is needed if you move the pocket. But they still don't understand that this concession is enough to sufficiently disprove the claim that CTE is a center pocket system.

 

[champ2107]

This is the crux of the problem right here that none of the advocates can answer (that makes any sense). That's why I prefer the moving pocket argument that I presented in another thread, because there is absolutely no denying that the CB, OB, primary and secondary alignments all have not changed (assuming you move the pocket only a small amount such that you maintain the secondary alignment).

And how do the advocates dispel this air-tight counterexample demonstrating CTE cannot possibly be a "center pocket" system for all shots? By stating that it's impossible to have a table with moving pockets so why bother even considering it?

But to be fair, champ and mantis99 eventually did concede that an adjustment is needed if you move the pocket. But they still don't understand that this concession is enough to sufficiently disprove the claim that CTE is a center pocket system for all shots.

This is without a doubt the dumbest thing i have read in all 20 of these cte threads people have started! Even Pj is laughing at it

i eventually conceded what? You think you have made points in any cte thread dont you lol you have made>>>>>>>>>>> none! <<<<<<< Now go find just one post that i have said there are no adjustment that are occasionally need ed in cte/pro1?

 

[Mikjary]

Since when is body alignment part of an aiming system? That belongs to execution.

You must first determine the visuals for PROPER BODY ALIGNMENT. Do not under play this part of the system as it IS the system.

Here is a summary of the reference points for each type of cut:"

Both shots fall under the same category thickness. The lines A1 and B2 are both parallel to the rail and are also the same length. The CTE lines are the same. The reference points are the same. The only difference is that the position of the pocket has changed.QUOTE]

....................

The word, reference, is the key to your question as far as initial lineup. There an infinite number of contact points, but the reference lines will put you where you need to be. Your visuals will gain enough information from this setup to dial in your angle and pivot.

And yes, you can slightly shift your alignment while sighting in the reference lines. We are not robots. An imperceptible movement will not change the visuals. To be more EXACT, lol, the visuals will ask that you make extremely small adjustments on certain shots as you move between reference points and pivots.

The arguments start when a visually accurate aiming system which relies on perceptions and compensations for sighting alignments is asked to be turned into a monocular, laser guided, geometrically diagrammed system. Stand behind any shot on the table using feel. Close one eye and then the other. What do you see? I'm guessing you're noticing two completely different angles and some perception differences. This is how stick aiming systems work also, with different perceptions that are not simply diagrammed. Some look at the big picture and the lines. I like to notice the brush strokes and how the colors blend. To each his own. It's what makes the pool world go 'round.

BTW, excellent diagrams. :thumbup:

Best,
Mike

 

[mohrt]

This is the crux of the problem right here that none of the advocates can answer (that makes any sense). That's why I prefer the moving pocket argument that I presented in another thread, because there is absolutely no denying that the CB, OB, primary and secondary alignments all have not changed (assuming you move the pocket only a small amount such that you maintain the secondary alignment).

And how do the advocates dispel this air-tight counterexample demonstrating CTE cannot possibly be a "center pocket" system for all shots? By stating that it's impossible to have a table with moving pockets so why bother even considering it.

But to be fair, champ2107 and mantis99 eventually did concede that an adjustment is needed if you move the pocket. But they still don't understand that this concession is enough to sufficiently disprove the claim that CTE is a center pocket system.

Maybe this helps... The DVD at 1:22:22 outlines three full table length shots, each off 5 degrees from each other:

shot 1: CB @ 26, OB @ 27 (10 deg cut)
shot 2: CB @ 26/17, OB @ 27/18 (15 deg cut)
shot 3: CB @ 17, OB @ 18 (20 deg cut)

All shots shot into pocket 6 (top left)

Shot 1: CCB to ROBE, LCBE to OB 1/8 (not A), LP
Shot 2: CCB to ROBE, LCBE to OBA, LP
Shot 3: CCB to ROBE, LCBE to OBB, LP (no stun)

 

[Mikjary]

LOL. Not quite there yet - some of your ideas still make a little sense.

pj
chgo

You silver tongued devil! That's the nicest thing I've heard yet. Did you star in that movie, The Paper Chase, ? I swear I"ve seen you somewhere before.

Best,
Mike

 

[jsp]

Now go find just one post that i have said there are no adjustment that are occasionally need ed in cte/pro1?

Do you feel that CTE is a center pocket system without any "adjustments" outside the system? If you don't, then I apologize...because then you would actually be agreeing with us. So why aren't you arguing with us? You should be convincing your fellow CTE advocates that adjustments outside the system are necessary in order to pocket all shots center pocket.

 

[JB Cases]

I agree that body position is important, and that CTE's method of ensuring consistent body alignment is a good idea.


The rest of his post was clear and correct - no wonder you don't get it. And it illustrates how your own argument is inconsistent. You know less about what Stan's DVD says than those you argue with about it.

pj
chgo

I am sorry but is Sniper referring to the DVD or referring to something Dr. Dave wrote about the DVD?

I have the DVD, what part of it is he referring to?

The rest of his post is nonsense, not clear, not correct and based on the second hand description by someone who doesn't understand the content of what he is describing.

That's how I see it Professor.

 

[jsp]

Maybe this helps... The DVD at 1:22:22 outlines three full table length shots, each off 5 degrees from each other:

shot 1: CB @ 26, OB @ 27 (10 deg cut)
shot 2: CB @ 26/17, OB @ 27/18 (15 deg cut)
shot 3: CB @ 17, OB @ 18 (20 deg cut)

All shots shot into pocket 6 (top left)

Shot 1: CCB to ROBE, LCBE to OB 1/8 (not A), LP
Shot 2: CCB to ROBE, LCBE to OBA, LP
Shot 3: CCB to ROBE, LCBE to OBB, LP (no stun)

Doesn't help. You're changing the secondary alignment. Keep the secondary alignment the same, and tell us how you can get two distinct aim lines. If you can't do it with 5 degrees of separation, then do it with only 2 degrees (or less).

 

[champ2107]

Do you feel that CTE is a center pocket system without any "adjustments" outside the system? If you don't, then I apologize...because then you would actually be agreeing with us. So why aren't you arguing with us? You should be convincing your fellow CTE advocates that adjustments outside the system are necessary in order to pocket all shots center pocket.

If I new exactly when a 1/8 adjustment was needed to pocket the ball center pocket would you consider that a center pocket system? You do know the 1/8 adjustments are part of the system right? Im also not afraid to admit if i have made an error about this stuff also, i just thought i would let you know this

if i was on your side i could be really giving out some tough question to answer since i know the system and you guys dont

 

[Mikjary]

Do you feel that CTE is a center pocket system without any "adjustments" outside the system? If you don't, then I apologize...because then you would actually be agreeing with us. So why aren't you arguing with us? You should be convincing your fellow CTE advocates that adjustments outside the system are necessary in order to pocket all shots center pocket.

These are not adjustments outside the system. These are adjustments outside diagrammable, geometric shot configurations which you (collective, since you lump all Cte advocates together :wink insist on comparing with pivot systems.

It's over, it's done. I'm officially telling all who care, this isn't ghost ball or double the distance aiming, etc. ad infinitum. Let's start to explore the adjustments within the system created by the visual perceptions and move on to better things. This is a complete and utter waste of bandwidth and cerebral energy. Allow yourselves to have a life and start on this new project. We can move pool forward this one little baby step by taking this look at something different instead of comparing genitalia and splitting hairs. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, don't post until you do. Let's move forward and find a consensus. This posturing isn't helping anything. Any takers or we happier being miserable? :shakehead: :bash:

Best,
Mike

jsp...this post was a collective you, not directed at you. I respect your civility and position on this subject.

 

[champ2107]

They are not knowledgeable enough to continue further and they dont see this and that is why these silly points have become endless debates by guys like PJ.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

champ2107:
I really would like too see you post some PJ more than anyone

When it appears to me that you can comprehend what's said to you. I haven't seen any evidence of it yet.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Mikjary:
Let's start to explore the adjustments within the system created by the visual perceptions and move on to better things.

LOL. These "changing visual perceptions" should stave off reality until they can think of the next new "explanation".

pj
chgo

 

[champ2107]

When it appears to me that you can comprehend what's said to you. I haven't seen any evidence of it yet.

pj
chgo

ok lol, why dont you post them for someone else than? prove something to anyone that you know what your talking about lol

 

[jsp]

These are not adjustments outside the system.

Maybe you can help me better understand what exactly is included in the system.

If I move the pocket an inch from where it was, what in the system tells me that I have to position my body slightly differently, or position my bridge hand slightly differently, or change my pivot point slightly, to compensate for this minute change in cut angle? How do I know?

For contact point-based aiming systems, the contact point changes for any movement (no matter how small) in the pocket's location. So these adjustments are definitely part of these systems. My understanding is that finding the contact point on the OB is completely unnecessary for CTE (isn't that the point of these pivot systems?) once you determine your CTE and secondary alignments.

So are you actually required to locate the contact point of the OB for these CTE systems? If not, how do you actually know there needs any adjusting?

 

[champ2107]

Maybe you can help me better understand what exactly is included in the system.

If I move the pocket an inch from where it was, what in the system tells me that I have to position my body slightly differently, or position my bridge hand slightly differently, or change my pivot point slightly, to compensate for this minute change in cut angle? How do I know?

For contact point-based aiming systems, the contact point changes for any movement (no matter how small) in the pocket's location. So these adjustments are definitely part of these systems. My understanding is that finding the contact point on the OB is completely unnecessary for CTE (isn't that the point of these pivot systems?) once you determine your CTE and secondary alignments.

So are you actually required to locate the contact point of the OB for these CTE systems? If not, how do you actually know there needs any adjusting?

Can i ask you this? If you and others do not know exactly whats in the system and how to apply it. How is it possible you, PJ and a couple others feel you actually can have an intelligent,civil debate about the system with people that know it and use it?