PRO ONE DVD: Answering Questions

Patrick Johnson said:
My "personal grudge" is directed at the "personal affection" CTE users seem to have for posting misinformation. For the record (once again) the "offset stance" excuse is brainless nonsense.


That would be a good trick, considering we've never met or corresponded.

More misinformation from CTE users...

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

The only true misinformation is your negative comments without trying to work on a solution as to how this system really works. Here's a solution for those comments. http://youtu.be/i7gIpuIVE3k ;)

Best,
Mike
 
Last edited:
does it make sense to me? Not really, but that doesnt mean it wont work...im just saying.

Tip: there is no ctel visual on your bottom 1/8
 
champ2107 said:
... Tip: there is no ctel visual on your bottom 1/8
Click to expand...

LAMas said:
Please expand on why? It may be important.
Click to expand...

LAMas -- Under Stan's CTE, for very thin cuts, there is no center-to-edge visual (no CTEL), because it would be way out into space rather than on the OB edge. Instead, Stan's alignment line is simply the inside 1/8 point on the CB aligned with the outside 1/8 point on the OB. Sight this single line, offset the stick 1/2 tip from center (left or right as the shot requires), pivot, and shoot.

You do several things differently from what Stan teaches, and this apparently is one of them.
 
AtLarge said:
LAMas -- Under Stan's CTE, for very thin cuts, there is no center-to-edge visual (no CTEL), because it would be way out into space rather than on the OB edge. Instead, Stan's alignment line is simply the inside 1/8 point on the CB aligned with the outside 1/8 point on the OB. Sight this single line, offset the stick 1/2 tip from center (left or right as the shot requires), pivot, and shoot.

You do several things differently from what Stan teaches, and this apparently is one of them.
Click to expand...

Thanks.
Why isn't the 7/8 (1/8) viable with a pivot back to the OB?

Are the visuals of the secondary aim points absolute and not given to other interpretations? If so then that interpretation can be diagrammed by it's users.
 
Last edited:
Patrick Johnson said:
It's definitely not "precisely accurate". I know this because the CTEL, aiming points and pivots only define 6 "precisely accurate" aiming instructions for each direction, which isn't enough to make all shots.

I don't know what you mean by "finite".

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

False, false, false!! You're just a CTE/Pro-1 "TROLL!!"
 
AtLarge said:
LAMas -- Under Stan's CTE, for very thin cuts, there is no center-to-edge visual (no CTEL), because it would be way out into space rather than on the OB edge. Instead, Stan's alignment line is simply the inside 1/8 point on the CB aligned with the outside 1/8 point on the OB. Sight this single line, offset the stick 1/2 tip from center (left or right as the shot requires), pivot, and shoot.

You do several things differently from what Stan teaches, and this apparently is one of them.
Click to expand...
I believe the 1/8-1/8 alignment is a substitute for the "C" aimpoint. It doesn't make sense to say there's no CTE line - how could that be? It also doesn't make sense when Stan says to substitute the 1/8-1/8 aimline for the "C" aimline, since, although they're geometrically the same alignment, they have different eye positions, but that's not why Stan says to substitute. He says to substitute because the "C" alignment makes you "aim into space" - but they both do that. Just one more illogical thing about CTE.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
Patrick Johnson said:
I believe the 1/8-1/8 alignment is a substitute for the "C" aimpoint. It doesn't make sense to say there's no CTE line - how could that be? It also doesn't make sense when Stan says to substitute the 1/8-1/8 aimline for the "C" aimline, since, although they're geometrically the same alignment, they have different eye positions, but that's not why Stan says to substitute. He says to substitute because the "C" alignment makes you "aim into space" - but they both do that. Just one more illogical thing about CTE.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

If your using the 1/8 to 1/8 you are no longer aiming into space, pretty brilliant little adjustment by Stan. Concrete points to aim and align with, I LOVE CTE/ PRO-ONE.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
If you ever back up anything you say with an actual supporting fact, I might stop considering you just part of the incessant CTE "noise" here.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

This, from the same guy that thinks a 1/8-1/8 alignment is the same as the edge of the ball and1/4!! Keep showing your elemantary smarts toward this subject! Haha!! You're about as smart as a brick!!
 
Patrick Johnson said:
I believe the 1/8-1/8 alignment is a substitute for the "C" aimpoint. It doesn't make sense to say there's no CTE line - how could that be? It also doesn't make sense when Stan says to substitute the 1/8-1/8 aimline for the "C" aimline, since, although they're geometrically the same alignment, they have different eye positions, but that's not why Stan says to substitute. He says to substitute because the "C" alignment makes you "aim into space" - but they both do that. Just one more illogical thing about CTE.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

This post shows your hole cards. If you would have worked the system, you'd understand. OBC is not an accurate aim point for .5 tip pivots for left cuts within the context of CTE/PRO ONE. It does take work on the table to know that.

Stan
 
stan shuffett said:
This post shows your hole cards. If you would have worked the system, you'd understand. OBC is not an accurate aim point for .5 tip pivots for left cuts within the context of CTE/PRO ONE.
Click to expand...
A couple of questions, Stan:

1. How is OBC "aiming into space" and 1/8-1/8 not? They're geometrically the same CB/OB alignment (although presumably different eye positions).

2. If OBC and 1/8-1/8 are both thinner than OBB but different, how can one be "wrong"? Are you saying there's no thin cut angle that corresponds to OBC?

It does take work on the table to know that.
Click to expand...
Why isn't it simply pointed out on the DVD?

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
A couple of questions, Stan:

1. How is OBC "aiming into space" and 1/8-1/8 not? They're geometrically the same CB/OB alignment (although presumably different eye positions).

2. If OBC and 1/8-1/8 are both thinner than OBB but different, how can one be "wrong"? Are you saying there's no thin cut angle that corresponds to OBC?


Why isn't it simply pointed out on the DVD?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

1. LCBE to OBC places CCB into space. 1/8 LCBE to 1/8 ROBE obviously places CCB into space.

2. OBB and 1/8 aim points complete the system for left cuts. OBC is not needed. OBC is flawed in the context of CTE/PRO ONE. I learned that at the table. I just did not go to 1/8 out of the blue.

Why did I need to say it on the DVD? I excluded OBC for left cuts. OBB works up to thin cuts and then 1/8 works for very thin cuts. OBC as an initial aim point is simply not needed for left cuts.

STan
 
stan shuffett said:
1. LCBE to OBC places CCB into space. 1/8 LCBE to 1/8 ROBE obviously places CCB into space.

2. OBB and 1/8 aim points complete the system for left cuts. OBC is not needed. OBC is flawed in the context of CTE/PRO ONE. I learned that at the table. I just did not go to 1/8 out of the blue.

Why did I need to say it on the DVD? I excluded OBC for left cuts. OBB works up to thin cuts and then 1/8 works for very thin cuts. OBC as an initial aim point is simply not needed for left cuts.

STan
Click to expand...

You know right now he's not trying to understand what you are saying but hes going over and over your post and is trying to find a word or sentence he can twist to prove you wrong and that he knows more than you do about cte/pro1...im just saying
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top