Stan Shuffet Challenge

[8pack]

For players like Stan,mohrt,and other experienced pro1 uses, a cte an edge to A and all angled shots that fall into that alignment are just cte an edge to A. There experience has taught them the correct starting offset position to make all those angled shot that fall under a specific pro1 alignment, get it?

Math cant be applied to this system

The math.
Your right...I mean the way its taught you can't. He needs to detach this 2 to 1 thing , I've already proven awhile back this notion is wrong.

 

[Timothy Rose]

Sooooo, are you saying that they are seeing the same 'visual' from different angles as they stand to the cue ball?

If so, now we are getting somewhere. But...if so then the method would not work for an inexperienced player.

hang on a minute a let me try and correctly understand what you mean.

Not an easy question to answer

like everything the more experienced you get the better you become. This is probably the best system for an inexperienced player to learn about angles and alignment.

 

[8pack]

hang on a minute a let me try and correctly understand what you mean.

like everything the more experienced you get the better you become. This is probably the best system for an inexperienced player to learn about angles and alignment.

How long have you been playing...37 hours.:thumbup:

 

[Timothy Rose]

How long have you been playing...37 hours.:thumbup:

I havent even played pool in a couple years :wink:

 

[Timothy Rose]

Sooooo, are you saying that they are seeing the same 'visual' from different angles as they stand to the cue ball?

If so, now we are getting somewhere. But...if so then the method would not work for an inexperienced player.

I need you to rephrase this question to maybe help me answer it, ok english. it truely is not an easy question to answer if you know the system well

 

[ronscuba]

I don't want to debate terminology either, I want to discuss the difference between knowledge based fact and speculative opinion. You can't factually equate subjectivity and visual intelligence. You are implying that visual intelligence includes an intuitive tweak or something similar. That simply isn't true. You're back peddling now because you made a statement as if it were fact when in reality, you simply don't understand how the system works and is correctly applied. I could go outside, look into the sky and say the sun is obviously rotating around the earth. That would be an erroneous opinion based upon lack of factual knowledge. It is understandable why one would form that opinion but it doesn't make it any less erroneous.

Yes, I am respectfully stating my opinions. The tone of your post is a little strong, but I take it as respectful as well. Mine tone might be strong too.

Back peddling ? I don't know what you are talking about. I'm not hear to argue. I re-posted a video link and brought attention to a section of video I thought was important because it explained something that was not clear to me after I watched DVD 2. I applied the word subjective to it because it's my opinion. You can call that erroneous. Others can watch that segment and form their own opinion.

No need to debate, because I accept we have a difference of opinion on some of the terms and definitions.

 

[ENGLISH!]

I need you to rephrase this question to maybe help me answer it, ok english. it truely is not an easy question to answer if you know the system well

Okay lets 'see' if I can do that. I can look down the canter of a two rail railroad track. I can look down it from standing in the middle or I can look down it while standing on either rail or I can look AT it while standing off to one side or the other of it.

I very often do not look down my shaft when using outside 'parallel' english.

I can perceive the parallelness (that's not a word) of my sight line & that of my stick line.

So is Stan looking at the cte & edge to A from between them or from one side or the other in order to get a different outcome.

 

[Timothy Rose]

Okay lets 'see' if I can do that. I can look down the canter of a two rail railroad track. I can look down it from standing in the middle or I can look down it while standing on either rail or I can look AT it while standing off to one side or the other of it.

I very often do not look down my shaft when using outside 'parallel' english.

I can perceive the parallelness (that's not a word) of my sight line & that of my stick line.

So is Stan looking at the cte & edge to A from between them or from one side or the other in order to get a different outcome.

Ha ...

This is still not easy to answer lol He is always looking down the tracks the same way but he is knowledgeable and experienced enough that he knows he has to adjust the train tracks positioning but he is still looking down them the same way, your not going to understand that lol

 

[ENGLISH!]

Ha ...

This is still not easy to answer lol He is always looking down the tracks the same way but he is knowledgeable and experienced enough that he knows he has to adjust the train tracks positioning but he is still looking down them the same way, your not going to understand that lol

So you mean that he turns the whole track so that it originates from a slightly different point from his end. It sort of rotates on the Cue ball end.

Is that it?

 

[nobcitypool]

Looking down the railroad tracks isn't a perfect analogy. I think a closer, but not perfect analogy, would be imagine looking down the railroad tracks entering a tunnel. Now imagine the tracks entering that tunnel at different angles. Further, you're not looking down the exact Center of the tracks, you're offset slightly dependent upon the angle. That is closer to what is happening with CTE than simply using the horizon railroad track perspective as viewed from the middle of the track.

 

[Timothy Rose]

So you mean that he turns the whole track so that it originates from a slightly different point from his end. It sort of rotates on the Cue ball end.

Is that it?

yep, that's pretty much it.

 

[Timothy Rose]

Looking down the railroad tracks isn't a perfect analogy. I think a closer, but not perfect analogy, would be imagine looking down the railroad tracks entering a tunnel. Now imagine the tracks entering that tunnel at different angles. Further, you're not looking down the exact Center of the tracks, you're offset slightly dependent upon the angle. That is closer to what is happening with CTE than simply using the horizon railroad track perspective as viewed from the middle of the track.

im just trying to keep things as simple as possible and not correcting things i could if i wanted, you know what i mean?

 

[ENGLISH!]

yep, that's pretty much it.

If so, then why not just say so. I know you can't answer for Stan but that is simple enough to say.

AND it explains much. Even though, to me, it seems to make the whole thing more complicated & experience based.

But I can also see how that would fill in the holes that some including myself perceived.

I hope this does not open up a whole new can of worms.

Now like in Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid...Who is this guy?

 

[Timothy Rose]

If so, then why not just say so. I know you can't answer for Stan but that is simple enough to say.

AND it explains much. Even though, to me, it seems to make the whole thing more complicated & experience based.

But I can also see how that would fill in the holes that some including myself perceived.

I hope this does not open up a whole new can of worms.

Now like in Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid...Who is this guy?

So what have you gotten out of our little back and forth here?

 

[8pack]

So what have you gotten out of our little back and forth here?

That you was telling the truth...

 

[nobcitypool]

Yes, I am respectfully stating my opinions. The tone of your post is a little strong, but I take it as respectful as well. Mine tone might be strong too.

Back peddling ? I don't know what you are talking about. I'm not hear to argue. I re-posted a video link and brought attention to a section of video I thought was important because it explained something that was not clear to me after I watched DVD 2. I applied the word subjective to it because it's my opinion. You can call that erroneous. Others can watch that segment and form their own opinion.

No need to debate, because I accept we have a difference of opinion on some of the terms and definitions.

I'm an Engineer by degree, spent a lot of my career dealing with Engineers and have spent the majority of my Professional Career dealing in high dollar capital projects. It's been drilled into my head that words are very important. When you're dealing with million dollar plus level projects, try going back and saying "well, that may have been what I said but it isn't what I meant." Perhaps I take things too literal for this type of discussion.

My point is, you've made comments in a tone that they were fact. They weren't precluded by "In my opinion" or "The way it appears to me". When I communicate with someone, regardless of the medium, I take their words at face value. If I sold you a cue and told you I was going to ship it tomorrow, rest assured, short of death or serious injury, I would ship it tomorrow. If I meant to ship it tomorrow but knew there was a chance I couldn't get to it, I'd tell you I would be shipping it in the next 2 or 3 days. I realize this sort of thing isn't very important to some people but in the world I've worked in, it is of paramount importance. My tone isn't meant to be angry or mean, I hope this explanation helps put it into the proper perspective.

With that said, consider this perspective. Imagine someone who wanders onto this site and is considering the purchase of Stan's DVD's or getting a lesson from Stan. Don't you think it could be important that person understands, from what he reads, the difference in fact and opinion? Just imagine in your own professional world if someone's careless words cost you money or your job. How would you feel about that? What would your tone be? I realize this may not be important to guys like 8pack, who delivers pizzas for a living and can barely afford to pay attention.

 

[ENGLISH!]

So what have you gotten out of our little back and forth here?

If what you say is true & it seems to be, I think it is now fairly obvious that there are more actual physical alignments than just A, B, C, 1/8, & Edge with a pivot or sweep to thicken or thin. For instance if one can rotate all of them 1,2,3 etc. degrees in either direction the result would basically be 90 angles that can actually be created.

That said, those rotations would seem to now bring subjectivity even more into play.

Does one 'tweak it 1,2,3,4, or 5 degrees or should one use a different starting point & 'tweak' in the other direction 1,2,or 3, degrees.

The system also becomes even more complex, to me, with all of the 'tweaking' options that may be needed to avoid a miss. It would seem that perceived holes are real unless the 'tweak' is employed.

This may be a rare time when more info is detrimental.

The more people are finding out about Obamacare the less they are liking it.

But...as long as those that are using it are happy with it, that is all that matters. CTE I mean, not Obamacare.

 

[8pack]

I'm an Engineer by degree, spent a lot of my career dealing with Engineers and have spent the majority of my Professional Career dealing in high dollar capital projects. It's been drilled into my head that words are very important. When you're dealing with million dollar plus level projects, try going back and saying "well, that may have been what I said but it isn't what I meant." Perhaps I take things too literal for this type of discussion.

My point is, you've made comments in a tone that they were fact. They weren't precluded by "In my opinion" or "The way it appears to me". When I communicate with someone, regardless of the medium, I take their words at face value. If I sold you a cue and told you I was going to ship it tomorrow, rest assured, short of death or serious injury, I would ship it tomorrow. If I meant to ship it tomorrow but knew there was a chance I couldn't get to it, I'd tell you I would be shipping it in the next 2 or 3 days. I realize this sort of thing isn't very important to some people but in the world I've worked in, it is of paramount importance. My tone isn't meant to be angry or mean, I hope this explanation helps put it into the proper perspective.

With that said, consider this perspective. Imagine someone who wanders onto this site and is considering the purchase of Stan's DVD's or getting a lesson from Stan. Don't you think it could be important that person understands, from what he reads, the difference in fact and opinion? Just imagine in your own professional world if someone's careless words cost you money or your job. How would you feel about that? What would your tone be? I realize this may not be important to guys like 8pack, who delivers pizzas for a living and can barely afford to pay attention.

Who cares turd.
Need a pizza...:thumbup:

 

[Outre Bron]

Why are so many members in this forum quick to inject Politics into the conversation? Besides you know, being complete douchebags?

If snooker was played in this country I would gladly trade in my new cue for a snooker stick. I am certain that sport is populated by men far more civil and educated than this lot. It's disappointing to see.

 

[Timothy Rose]

If what you say is true & it seems to be, I think it is now fairly obvious that there are more actual physical alignments than just A, B, C, 1/8, & Edge with a pivot or sweep to thicken or thin. For instance if one can rotate all of them 1,2,3 etc. degrees in either direction the result would basically be 90 angles that can actually be created. On paper there are alot of aim points but on the "pool table" they are not needed with pro1, its odd but its true


That said, those rotations now bring subjectivity even more into play.Now what if I can lay that train track perfectly on the CB and OB to make the shot at a very high percentage on first perception of the shot?

Does one 'tweak it 1,2,3,4, or 5 degrees or should one use a different starting point & 'tweak' in the other direction 1,2,or 3, degrees. The system with it alignments and experience on the table make this a non issue

The system also becomes even more complex with all of the 'tweaking' options that may be needed to avoid a miss. It would seem that perceived holes are real unless the 'tweak' is employed. With experience with the system you can easily perceive the starting offset position, this is what the system teaches you. The current pro1 alignments cover all shots, anymore and the system will become to complex and any less will make it a feel based system like any of the other cte methods of pocketing a ball.

This may be a rare time when more info is detrimental.

The more people are finding out about Obamacare the less they are liking it.

But...as long as those that are using it are happy with it, that is all that matters. CTE I mean not Obamacare.

Dont come to any conclusions yet on the system, your still a long way off from understanding the system at a level Stan or other can shoot it at