Did The JB vs Lou Match Settle The Great Aiming Debate Once & For All?

[Johnnyt]

If the ball goes in the hole - the ball goes in the hole.

Put a little spin on it and watch it go into the rail. Johnnyt

 

[mista335]

If the ball goes in the hole - the ball goes in the hole.

Put a little spin on it and watch it go into the rail. Johnnyt

Another CTE Flat-earther.

Obviously you didn't watch Chapter 10 of Disc 1 because like other CTE Flat-earthers you don't own a copy but somehow are experts in CTE Pro One.

So for your benefit here's a free video done by Stan Shuffet on how to shoot with side-spin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGtAqLPY3X4

You can also look at any of Gerry Williams' videos as he shoots a lot of shots with outside english.

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

What are you talking about? When negotiating there is no deal until the contract is signed. And yeah when the choice is between investing in my business and gambling then gambling is out.

If you think spending money on gambling is better than people who depend on you then that is a stance I don't agree with.

When I said double the bet I had the extra money. But when there was no answer then I decided to put the money to better uses.

Sorry if that offends you.

It doesn't offend me at all. It just shows me a lot about your character. You took a lot of potshots at me in the past, calling me a liar, and a whole bunch of other names.

You said you had up to $33k to back your action. We take that at face value, from John "The Truth" Barton. You had side action confirmed, and had verbally agreed to it. There are such things as verbal contracts. I could care less what was going on between you and Lou - $10k, $20k, etc. But, you had placed side bets with people. They had ponied up the cash to bet against you, and would have paid you should you have beat Lou. You backed out at the last minute. That is enough for me to never trust you with a dime of my money. Ever. Imagine if you had won against Lou, and he decided not to pay you, as there was "no signed contract", to quote you.

I'd put you on the bad action list. And I'd warn anyone that has a deposit with you for a case that something with a higher ROI than their case doesn't come up in the next while, because your actions, as well as your own words, have shown you have little to no integrity at all.

I'm not sorry I feel this way. You've screwed people privately for years. Thus, the name change from John Collins to John Barton. And the moves all over the Earth. You're a poor man's Kevin Trudeau.

 

[JB Cases]

It doesn't offend me at all. It just shows me a lot about your character. You took a lot of potshots at me in the past, calling me a liar, and a whole bunch of other names.

You said you had up to $33k to back your action. We take that at face value, from John "The Truth" Barton. You had side action confirmed, and had verbally agreed to it. There are such things as verbal contracts. I could care less what was going on between you and Lou - $10k, $20k, etc. But, you had placed side bets with people. They had ponied up the cash to bet against you, and would have paid you should you have beat Lou. You backed out at the last minute. That is enough for me to never trust you with a dime of my money. Ever. Imagine if you had won against Lou, and he decided not to pay you, as there was "no signed contract", to quote you.

I'd put you on the bad action list. And I'd warn anyone that has a deposit with you for a case that something with a higher ROI than their case doesn't come up in the next while, because your actions, as well as your own words, have shown you have little to no integrity at all.

I'm not sorry I feel this way. You've screwed people privately for years. Thus, the name change from John Collins to John Barton. And the moves all over the Earth. You're a poor man's Kevin Trudeau.

Wow. Been holding onto all that for a while have you?

Even after the apology I made to you and you saying we are cool you still have all this rage inside?

Well I can't help you with that Shawn.

I changed my name because my wife did not want to change hers. Was a spur of the moment decision on my part with zero evil intentions.

I am sorry you felt " screwed" in some way because I didn't bet as much as you think I should have.

As for the match payment each player posted the entry fee and the total was awarded to the winner. That is the reason for posting the money.

Had anyone called me on my raise any one of the four times I asked then I would have posted the extra amount.

But just before the show circumstances were different and so the decision was made to wait and see how we felt on the day of the match. And on that day we decided to leave it at ten because THAT is our choice.

Unlike poker you don't fold your hand because you don't take the raise. You play it out regardless and that's what I did. Sorry again that I did not follow your script.

 

[TheThaiger]

What are you talking about? When negotiating there is no deal until the contract is signed. And yeah when the choice is between investing in my business and gambling then gambling is out.

If you think spending money on gambling is better than people who depend on you then that is a stance I don't agree with.

When I said double the bet I had the extra money. But when there was no answer then I decided to put the money to better uses.

Sorry if that offends you.

For clarity, can you tell us what changed from the time you told Lou to bring money to the venue and the time you told him you were welching on all side bets ie only a few days? What changed during those few days?

You are implying you used the money you told everyone you had earmarked for gambling (up to an extra $20k IIRC) to in invest in your business - how did you invest that money so quickly, and for what purpose?

 

[TheThaiger]

It doesn't offend me at all. It just shows me a lot about your character. You took a lot of potshots at me in the past, calling me a liar, and a whole bunch of other names.

You said you had up to $33k to back your action. We take that at face value, from John "The Truth" Barton. You had side action confirmed, and had verbally agreed to it. There are such things as verbal contracts. I could care less what was going on between you and Lou - $10k, $20k, etc. But, you had placed side bets with people. They had ponied up the cash to bet against you, and would have paid you should you have beat Lou. You backed out at the last minute. That is enough for me to never trust you with a dime of my money. Ever. Imagine if you had won against Lou, and he decided not to pay you, as there was "no signed contract", to quote you.

I'd put you on the bad action list. And I'd warn anyone that has a deposit with you for a case that something with a higher ROI than their case doesn't come up in the next while, because your actions, as well as your own words, have shown you have little to no integrity at all.

Barton will obviously go into PR overdrive on this, but you are right on the money.

Reputation is all in business, and reputations can be trashed very quickly. I shudder to think what Barton would have made of this if it was Jack Justice who had made a load of false promises then deliberately weaseled out of them.

 

[TheThaiger]

Your knowledge of history is even worse than your knowledge of CTE.

First part, correct. Second part, meh.

 

[TheThaiger]

Look. It is absolute fact that none of the CTE based systems work as claimed. Some people simply aren't smart enough to realize this fact for themselves. Sorry if that offends some people but sometimes there simply isn't a softer way to state the truth, and my intent with that statement is not at all to insult, but just to state the truth as it exists. This is why you don't see any scientists backing up these "systems", and there are plenty of scientists here on AzBilliards. And in fact many have weighed in and stated that the "systems" do not work as claimed.

So if you are one of these people that knows the truth, it is hard to stand by and watch others get misinformed. Picture this. Somebody is selling (or even giving away) pills that they claim will help with various pain such as arthritis, migraines, injuries, you name it. The pills work for some people, and don't work for others. You happen to know that the guy is actually selling sugar pills. Do you have a problem with this? Most people would. But why, when the pills are actually helping some people anyway?

Because it was dishonest. Because it is false advertising. If the guy was just honest about them being sugar pills when he sold them then nobody would care. The people that buy them know what they are, and if it ends up helping their pain for whatever reason then more power to them. People don't care that sugar pills are sold, people don't care that people want to buy sugar pills, people only care when the sugar pills are represented as something else when they are sold.

And so it is with aiming systems. The fact is that they help a portion of people for a several reasons, primarily because they are forced to be focused on every shot, and because it improves their confidence since they believe in it. But they are all ultimately still correcting for the inaccuracy of the system and using their own judgment in aiming just like all the non system users even though they may not realize it because they do it subconsciously. It is kind of like trying to barely miss pocketing a ball by intentionally hit the point of a pocket to rattle the ball to hide your speed from an opponent. Try it some time. More often than not you will pocket the ball anyway often splitting the pocket, because your subconscious takes over and does what it knows how to do, which is pocket the ball.

The "anti-system" people aren't actually anti-system at all. They are anti false advertisement and anti dishonesty. If the system people were saying "hey try this system which is just a series of steps that you do when aiming, ultimately you still have to correct for the system inaccuracies and aim with your judgment subconsciously anyway but you will never know you are doing and it actually gets amazing results for some people" then I doubt you would ever hear a peep from any of the "anti's".

The anti's aren't out to get systems, they are out to get false advertisement and dishonesty, just like when you don't care if the guy sells sugar pills as long as he doesn't represent them to be some other medication. This isn't an attempt to disparage aiming systems or start an argument with anyone, I am simply trying to explain why the "anti's" feel the need to let other people know what it actually is even when they don't use it themselves because a lot of people have mentioned this. It is the same reason you would feel the need to tell someone they are really buying a sugar pill even though you don't use sugar pills and don't have any problem with anyone who knowingly does.

Your style of writing is eerily similar to Barton's.

Just saying.

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

Wow. Been holding onto all that for a while have you?

Even after the apology I made to you and you saying we are cool you still have all this rage inside?

Well I can't help you with that Shawn.

I changed my name because my wife did not want to change hers. Was a spur of the moment decision on my part with zero evil intentions.

I am sorry you felt " screwed" in some way because I didn't bet as much as you think I should have.

As for the match payment each player posted the entry fee and the total was awarded to the winner. That is the reason for posting the money.

Had anyone called me on my raise any one of the four times I asked then I would have posted the extra amount.

But just before the show circumstances were different and so the decision was made to wait and see how we felt on the day of the match. And on that day we decided to leave it at ten because THAT is our choice.

Unlike poker you don't fold your hand because you don't take the raise. You play it out regardless and that's what I did. Sorry again that I did not follow your script.

John, I could care less about what you said about me in the past. Tigers don't lose sleep over the opinions of sheep.

If anyone has an issue, it's you. You just pissed away $10k to prove an aiming system works. And you proved nothing, aside from the fact that nothing that comes out of your mouth, or your cue, is as advertised.

Find a better script for life, John. The one you're following belongs to a show that will get cancelled soon.

 

[JB Cases]

John, I could care less about what you said about me in the past. Tigers don't lose sleep over the opinions of sheep.

If anyone has an issue, it's you. You just pissed away $10k to prove an aiming system works. And you proved nothing, aside from the fact that nothing that comes out of your mouth, or your cue, is as advertised.

Find a better script for life, John. The one you're following belongs to a show that will get cancelled soon.

Canceled soon? Tigers don't speak so we have no idea what they dream about. People do talk and when they speak of past things then it indicates that they care about those things.

I didn't piss away 10k to prove anything. Lou and I made a game because we both thought we could win. Only one if us could and now we are moving on.

What I do know is that I got in the ring while you watched.

 

[nobcitypool]

Like I said I really don't want to turn this into another debate and only wanted to clear up why the anti's feel it important that it is not misrepresented in a dishonest way. I have already explained it dozens of times in the past, as have many others, and you can refer back to one of those threads if you wish. I would simply repeat the same thing over word for word that has already been explained before, which you have certainly already read. You simply aren't smart enough to get it. But to briefly humor you, for starters you can't even explain it completely and in enough detail that someone else could replicate it perfectly from your description. And the reason you can't is because part of the system is that you are using your own aiming adjustment judgments from experience to correct for the fact that the system only gets you in the general vicinity of the pocket. If you think you can explain it in a way that someone else can do it without feeling like there is missing steps or anything that is unclear (the parts where you are using nothing but your own aiming judgments based on experience) then go ahead. Nobody else has ever been able to do it.

Again, nice spin. I don't have to explain anything to the likes of you. I use it, I know it works. You obviously lack the mental or physical capacity to grasp it, therefore, that serves as fact for it not working. I've yet to see one single proven fact for it not working.

You're welcome to believe what you wish, have a happy dude.

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

What I do know is that I got in the ring while you watched.

Gladiators got in the ring while the Romans watched them die. Not much honour getting in the ring when it was your mouth that put you there.

You're the kid I went to high school with, doing burnouts down Main Street in his daddy's Camaro. The one that barked about how big and bad he was. Losing $10k proved....what?

Discretion is the better part of valour. All you showed by dropping $10k was that you think winning a pool game makes you a better person. It does not. It makes you juvenile. Lou took your money. And outclassed you.

I don't need to gamble, or put my jelly into the middle to show you up. You do it to yourself on a daily basis. And I got to wear a shit eating grin FOR FREE, watching you show your ass to the newsgroup. Thanks for that. I can leave this group a happy man. Once I'm done selling my cues, I'm done here.

Give me your address, John. I'd like to send you a Charlie Sheen "Winning" t shirt as my departing gift to you. You can wear it while you surf AZB.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JB Cases]

Gladiators got in the ring while the Romans watched them die. Not much honour getting in the ring when it was your mouth that put you there.

You're the kid I went to high school with, doing burnouts down Main Street in his daddy's Camaro. The one that barked about how big and bad he was. Losing $10k proved....what?

Discretion is the better part of valour. All you showed by dropping $10k was that you think winning a pool game makes you a better person. It does not. It makes you juvenile. Lou took your money. And outclassed you.

I don't need to gamble, or put my jelly into the middle to show you up. You do it to yourself on a daily basis. And I got to wear a shit eating grin FOR FREE, watching you show your ass to the newsgroup. Thanks for that. I can leave this group a happy man. Once I'm done selling my cues, I'm done here.

Give me your address, John. I'd like to send you a Charlie Sheen "Winning" t shirt as my departing gift to you. You can wear it while you surf AZB.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Adios pal. Glad what I do in my life fulfills yours.

 

[Neil]

Like I said I really don't want to turn this into another debate and only wanted to clear up why the anti's feel it important that it is not misrepresented in a dishonest way. I have already explained it dozens of times in the past, as have many others, and you can refer back to one of those threads if you wish. I would simply repeat the same thing over word for word that has already been explained before, which you have certainly already read. You simply aren't smart enough to get it. But to briefly humor you, for starters you can't even explain it completely and in enough detail that someone else could replicate it perfectly from your description. And the reason you can't is because part of the system is that you are using your own aiming adjustment judgments from experience to correct for the fact that the system only gets you in the general vicinity of the pocket. If you think you can explain it in a way that someone else can do it without feeling like there is missing steps or anything that is unclear (the parts where you are using nothing but your own aiming judgments based on experience) then go ahead. Nobody else has ever been able to do it.

If you are talking about Stan's claims, then you are very, very wrong. It does work exactly as Stan has described, and no one, not you or anyone else, has proven otherwise. Your posts about CTE remind me of that person that sued car manufacturers because her cruise control did not work properly. She put her RV on cruise control, then went into the back, and promptly crashed the vehicle. She didn't understand how to use it, it wasn't faulty in the least. to this day she claims she was right and that it was mislabeled and faulty advertising.

 

[Poolplaya9]

The real 'flat-earthers' are those that deny that CTE works.

If the ball goes in the hole - the ball goes in the hole.

You flat earthers have a fundamental misunderstanding of the "anti's" position. We don't say it doesn't work. We acknowledge that for some people, it does work. It's the reason it works where we disagree. The reason it works is that the flat earther system users are doing the exact same thing that the non flat earther/non aiming system users are doing which is just using your own aiming judgment and experience (to overcome the inaccuracies of the systems itself) to put balls in the hole. It is not whether it ever works, but why it works that you don't understand. You think if you can pocket some balls the system must be finding the correct aiming line just like the people that think if the earth looks flat then it must be flat. Keep on being a flat earther, it suits you.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Your style of writing is eerily similar to Barton's.

Just saying.

Not even close. My style is full of logic,and lacking all the drama. Polar opposites. :grin:

 

[Poolplaya9]

I don't have to explain anything to the likes of you.

I use it, I know it works.

I've yet to see one single proven fact for it not working.

What you meant to say was that you are not capable of explaining it, because it can't be done without admitting to using your own aiming judgment and experience.

It does work--because you use your own judgment and experience to aim.

I've yet to see any proof for it working. Pocketing balls is not proof, you are just subconsciously aiming the way we all do, with your own experience and judgment. There are many proofs that it doesn't work the way you claim it does, and they have already been provided to you many times, but one of them is that you can't even explain it in detail, and the reason is because a part of the system is using your own aiming experience and judgment. Still waiting for you to explain your system, still hearing only crickets. Chirp.

 

[Poolplaya9]

If you are talking about Stan's claims, then you are very, very wrong. It does work exactly as Stan has described, and no one, not you or anyone else, has proven otherwise.

It doesn't work the way ANY CTE user claims. It requires the user to use their own aiming experience and judgment as part of the process. Because you are doing this subconsciously you don't realize it. And you don't understand how you could be doing it subconsciously. And you don't understand how it is absolutely impossible for the system to work without it. Some things are just beyond some people's capacity for understanding, and that's ok, we are all different. Suffice it to say that no geniuses believe the systems work as claimed. No scientists believe they work the way they are claimed to. Whether you personally happen to understand it or not, that should be pretty telling to you.

 

[BeiberLvr]

It doesn't work the way ANY CTE user claims. It requires the user to use their own aiming experience and judgment as part of the process. Because you are doing this subconsciously you don't realize it. And you don't understand how you could be doing it subconsciously. And you don't understand how it is absolutely impossible for the system to work without it. Some things are just beyond some people's capacity for understanding, and that's ok, we are all different. Suffice it to say that no geniuses believe the systems work as claimed. No scientists believe they work the way they are claimed to. Whether you personally happen to understand it or not, that should be pretty telling to you.

So if I set up a difficult shot I've never practiced before, and drill it 10 times in a row.

That's my subconscious?

Wow, mine and all other proficient Pro One users must have amazing subconscious aiming skills.

thanks for setting the record straight

 

[Poolplaya9]

So if I set up a difficult shot I've never practiced before, and drill it 10 times in a row.

That's my subconscious?

Wow, mine and all other proficient Pro One users must have amazing subconscious aiming skills.

thanks for setting the record straight

Your welcome.

You know who CAN'T make shots with a CTE based system? A beginner. You know why? Because they don't yet know how to aim or have the knowledge and experience to know where to hit balls to pocket them, and without using your OWN aiming experience and judgment the systems just don't work.

And I know in your attempt to grasp at straws and find some plausible explanation for this so you don't have to accept the truth you will just say it's because their stroke isn't straight or something like this. So take a beginner and teach them how to stroke properly. They can only do the drill where you put the cue ball on the spot, shoot it to the middle diamond on the end rail and have it rebound back into the tip. This way they don't get any aiming experience for cut shots etc.

Once you are sure their stroke is straight, teach them the CTE based aiming system of your choice. Then watch them pound object balls into rails over and over and over and over and over for forever until they gain their own aiming experience and knowledge which is the fundamental requirement of any CTE based system, because that is what you are really using--your own aiming experience and knowledge to overcome and correct the inaccuracy of the system that doesn't work on it's own. I know you don't believe me, so try it and see for yourself.