Cte

champ2107 said:
This tells me you have no issues with the system and i see your mostly in these thread trying to give pj support, i guess your his friend or something? I have no issue with you Swest, you seem like an ok guy to me.
Click to expand...

I don't personally know anyone currently involved in this discussion. In fact, I only personally know 2 or 3 azb posters... So I'm not exactly giving PJ support, but his postings.

I support PJ's postings because I feel that, apart from the gibes (giving as good as he got and vice versa), they usually went to the heart of whatever thread of logic was being followed, and laid bare the essential question that wasn't being answered, in a way that others didn't.

Usually, when that happened, the question was met with "PJ, you'll never get it", or "you already got that answer", or something like that. I know that this is just reflective of the long history of this topic and his involvement in it, but each time that happened, and the critical question was again brushed aside, it just reinforced, to me at least, that one couldn't follow the system through to a logically consistent place that did not require an adjustment, conscious or unconscious, not specified by the system.

I have read most, almost all, of the recent collection of threads on this subject, and I have seen nothing to persuade me away from this conclusion.

I have no problem with the $40 for an instructional DVD. I have spent orders of magnitude more money than that for direct instruction (e.g., Jerry Briesath, and I recently spent some productive time with Roger Long), so it's not the money. It's the time, and something less defineable: The element of 'faith' that seems to be a recurring theme for some posters...

I have an acquaintance that has invited me to spend some time viewing the DVD, and I may take him up on it.
 
swest said:
I don't personally know anyone currently involved in this discussion. In fact, I only personally know 2 or 3 azb posters... So I'm not exactly giving PJ support, but his postings.

I support PJ's postings because I feel that, apart from the gibes (giving as good as he got and vice versa), they usually went to the heart of whatever thread of logic was being followed, and laid bare the essential question that wasn't being answered, in a way that others didn't.

Usually, when that happened, the question was met with "PJ, you'll never get it", or "you already got that answer", or something like that. I know that this is just reflective of the long history of this topic and his involvement in it, but each time that happened, and the critical question was again brushed aside, it just reinforced, to me at least, that one couldn't follow the system through to a logically consistent place that did not require an adjustment, conscious or unconscious, not specified by the system.

I have read most, almost all, of the recent collection of threads on this subject, and I have seen nothing to persuade me away from this conclusion.

I have no problem with the $40 for an instructional DVD. I have spent orders of magnitude more money than that for direct instruction (e.g., Jerry Briesath, and I recently spent some productive time with Roger Long), so it's not the money. It's the time, and something less defineable: The element of 'faith' that seems to be a recurring theme for some posters...

I have an acquaintance that has invited me to spend some time viewing the DVD, and I may take him up on it.
Click to expand...

I think you should take him up on his offer, there is nothing to lose but only to gain right?
 
duckie said:
I have yet to read any naysayer back down from their stance on CTE. Just because you keep writing it, doesn't make it so.

All that is need to do is read the thread about answering question from the CTE DVD thread to see how unclear the DVD is to alot of people. Maybe that should be a sticky so people can get a honest feeling for how the DVD is or is not being accepted instead of bullshit being spread.

I've never backed down from my statement that CTE is useless because it is too hard to learn, overcomplicated, does not work on all shots, and can not get you into the correct stance for all shots.

I've posted shots to be made and none have, why is that?

Show how to use CTE one handed?

Show how to use CTE behind the back.

Show how to use CTE using a bridge shooting over a ball in front of the CB.

Show a rail first shot.

Ever seen a fancy drawing using CTE in a combo or carom?

Nope, just, as Woody Allen would say, mental masturbation by the CTE proponents as usual.
Click to expand...


Leave Joey alone. He is in his "happy place."

Lou Figueroa
 
JoeyA said:
You are a true soldier. The naysayers are weakening. Even Silky Johnson is choosing his words more carefully. Some of the naysayers have gone to never-never land and will not be returning. (thank God).
Click to expand...


How long do those mushrooms keep you high?

Lou Figueroa
 
I could have sworn?????

Patrick Johnson said:
The camera loves me.

pj <- LOL
chgo
Click to expand...

PJ I couldve sworn that several years ago I was debating you where you were defending Hal Houle's aiming system.

In fact, it was in that discussion that you started stating that BHE doesn't work and then I made a video and posted it showing that it does???

Maybe I was just thinking that you were defending hal Houle's fractional aiming systems because I was disagreeing with you on the BHE part....

oh well...

Jaden
 
Jaden said:
PJ I couldve sworn that several years ago I was debating you where you were defending Hal Houle's aiming system.

In fact, it was in that discussion that you started stating that BHE doesn't work and then I made a video and posted it showing that it does???

Maybe I was just thinking that you were defending hal Houle's fractional aiming systems because I was disagreeing with you on the BHE part....

oh well...

Jaden
Click to expand...
I don't remember that, Jaden. I've never much liked x-angle systems overall, but I've defended a few positive aspects of them.

I don't like backhand english for almost the same reasons: its users often kid themselves that they're not using any feel to adjust for squirt/swerve. Maybe that's not a bad thing for many players...

pj
chgo
 
Neil said:
Pat has a thread going with his own aiming system. I suggest you work on that. It is 100% feel (guessing). Good luck with that.
Click to expand...


That's not accurate (haha, sometimes I crack myself up). Pat's system gives you some clear parameters to get you close. BUT he then allows for the inherent fudge factor that the CTErs are loath to admit to.

Lou Figueroa
 
Neil said:
Wow, Lou, give it a rest. CTE is bad because you THINK there is a fudge factor. But, PJ's is fine?? Parameters that get you close? Yeah, like face the right direction to shoot the ball, then guess. If you like guessing on shots, have at it. 80% of the people that play pool will be lucky to ever reach a good B level of play trying that. As history shows.
Click to expand...


No, Neil I don't have to give diddly-do-da a rest, particularly while you and Joey keep running around the campfire nekked.

AND I don't have a problem with CTE because of the fudge factor. It's because of all the pivoting, that is potentially taking your stroke out of alignment, and merely the fact that there is an incessant and blatantly false claim that the system is precise and void of fudge.

Of course there's fudge.
But nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
People keep claiming it's an exact and precise system.

Bull
Shee
Toe.

Lou Figueroa
somebody pass
the Kool Whip
 
Neil said:
People, myself included, have stated that the naysayers already have the answer because we have given it to them a hundred times already, and don't want to type it out again just to hear him say the same old bullcrap, that we are wrong (those that actually have tried it) and he is right (who refuses to try it) and that it is just our subconscious making adjustments.

Now, you state that what he says makes sense to you.???? That's really too bad for you, because that means that you will never be open minded enough to follow the directions, spend some time with it to learn it, and THEN make a decision on it. You already have your mind made up that it doesn't work as stated, so, for you, it won't. Your subconscious will make sure of that. So, even viewing the DVD would be a waste of time for you.

Pat has a thread going with his own aiming system. I suggest you work on that. It is 100% feel (guessing). Good luck with that.

Earlier, you had asked a question, I directed you to the answer, and you stated that it was not an answer, that it couldn't be right. With that attitude, forget CTE. Find a different way to aim. Pat's whack-a-mole method is one way. That is, as long as you can "feel" it. If you just aren't "feeling" it that night, well, it becomes "whack-a-mole".
Click to expand...

Case in point.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
It's not a new question.

I didn't say it was.

Better known as "feel".
pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Is this all you can come up with, Professor? Did you miss your nap, again? :boring: I'd enjoy reading about something with a little more substance after 10+ years of debate.

Does this 'feel' start in the feet with your stance or is it purely tactile? Wait, I know, as your chalking the cue, the vibrations from the swipes stimulate nerve endings in the palm of your shooting hand. Purely sensory. Clever! Or is it possibly that 'feel' is safely dismissive and a one size fits all description that can't possibly be wrong when the system is catalogued?

As a system user and being feeble minded because of it, I really would like to know EXACTly what this 'feel' is! While you think about it, I'll go back to using my visuals and pocketing balls. That seems to be a more productive path of research for us zombies. :withstupid:

Best,
Bizarro Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top