There is NOT a direct visual alignment for either line as in a 2D illustration.
Stan Shuffett
CTE PRO ONE Contrast with Quarters System
- Thread starter stan shuffett
- Start date
There is NOT a direct visual alignment for either line as in a 2D illustration.
Stan Shuffett
I assume "correctly" means "with your eyes directly on both lines"...?
So this is the objective definition of "the visual"? Do all you CTE users agree with this?
pj
chgo
EDIT: Oh, I see Stan has vetoed this definition. And I remember him vetoing it in the past too. So that's not it.
Last edited:
Have you read my post, if you did, what do you think about that description, originaly written by BeiberLvr?
He must be in a precise visual position.
I must be in a precise visual position.
I can be in more than one precise position should I choose to be.
Stan Shuffett
Thanks, Stan - I thought I remembered you vetoing that idea before.
So now we know one thing the visual isn't. But we need a clear description of what it is to show its objectivity.
Anybody? Bueller?
pj
chgo
I think we might be getting somewhere with this - thanks for all the CTE users trying to help!
I have to go run errands for awhile - didn't want you to think I'd abandoned the conversation. Back Later.
pj
chgo
I have to go run errands for awhile - didn't want you to think I'd abandoned the conversation. Back Later.
pj
chgo
I see a unique but precise CB OB relationship of 15 or 30 as described in CTE PRO ONE for CTE shots.
My visual intelligence does not limit my accurate and precision perceptions to that of a 2d drawing. It amazes me how a math or a language mind tries to stifle what can be done with one's visual nature on a 2x1 surface
Pool is a visually driven game and to even think that accurate 3d perceptions can't be learned and repeated is representative of a woefully inadequate mindset of how our game is really played.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
Yes, & that will give you one(1) outcome angle with a thinning pivot & one(1) outcome angle with a thickening pivot. How does one objectively get 5 (or more) outcome angles from that one objective line? How does one even objectively determine which way to pivot for a given shot?
Please keep in mind that I have not seen anyone recently say that CTE is not a valuable method or that it does not or can not work. The 'discussion' is about how & why it works & the nature of CTE.
Inquiring minds want to know.
Best 2 You & All,
Rick
Weeeee!!!!....
I'm pretty sure the two lines should run parallel, but the last center diamond should be more to the left if it were 3D
Edit: Ooooh I'm an idiot. Since it's 2D, the Center point, as the lowest point we would see on the CB, should actually be represented by being in the middle of the CB, for a top down view.
Tony,
Thats, not how one's vision works. One does not see one line with one eye & another line with the other eye.
I know you're trying to help but the only lines that are actually parallel would be the CTE & CTB lines & those would be seen like railroad tracks, with the distance between them appearing to get narrower as they go out into the distance.
Best 2 You & All,
Rick
PS Perhaps we need a conceptual 3D artist.:wink:
You
Because when the CB OB is moved to a different location, your perception uniquely but objectively changes.....with the same visuals being used....as well as the same pivot.
On a 2d drawing you get an A for understanding outcomes.
But when the manipulatives are in 3d context, you are failing to understand the perceptual nature on a 2x1 surface.
I suggest to really study by engaging your eyes and the manipulative on a pool table. I mean really really work at this. You can do it!
Stan Shuffett
Because when the CB OB is moved to a different location, your perception uniquely but objectively changes.....with the same visuals being used....as well as the same pivot.
On a 2d drawing you get an A for understanding outcomes.
But when the manipulatives are in 3d context, you are failing to understand the perceptual nature on a 2x1 surface.
I suggest to really study by engaging your eyes and the manipulative on a pool table. I mean really really work at this. You can do it!
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
Point of order, your honor: Inserting the word "objectively" in the description doesn't make it objective.
How exactly does your perception change objectively? What are the visible objective things that you tell students of CTE to align in order to make this objective change?
pj
chgo
Good grief! That info is on the first DVD you said you reviewed. It is on DVD2. It in on many of my YouTube videos. It is in many of my posts here on AZ. Like I said it is impossible to convey this information to you. You are not receptive even though you pretend to be interested. You have no desire or motivation to learn CTE. What is your point in continuing the same old questioning?
I am out in front of your thinking by years.......and you just spin your wheels with the same stuff. Go to s table. Get a lesson.
Stan Shuffett
Sorry, Stan, but I didn't recognize that info when you posted it. Maybe you could cut and paste it from one of those sources? Or anybody else who knows where to find it?
I suspect your definition of "objective" is different from mine, so seeing exactly what you mean by it might help to sort out some communication issues.
Please understand, this line of questioning isn't intended to find flaws in CTE, but to find some common ground for communicating about it. As I've said many times, I know that CTE is a useful system for many - I don't want to discourage anybody from trying and using it; I just want to get the terminology about it straight so those who haven't tried it yet can have a better idea if it's for them. Maybe more players will be encouraged to use it if they understand it better up front, especially given the many questions that even past users have about it.
Thanks,
pj
chgo
Who died and elected a lying charlatan with an agenda as their representative? Seriously. Who do you think you are? You obviously lack the technical acumen and pool ability to understand the system. So your alternative is to continuously pick at the system to try and discredit it. You're fooling no one Patrick and you've clearly weakened your credibility for technical pool understanding.
Nobody has to prove anything to you. Stan's resume in the pool world is well established. It's a shame you envy him and must resort to this kind of crap. You should stick to the few things you apparently know and leave the things you know nothing about alone. If you sincerely want to understand the system, study the dvd's and youtube videos then take it to the table like everyone else has to. Or take a drive down to see Stan. Your ploy of asking the same ridiculous questions, when the answers are really available, is laughable.
The other alternative is for you to man up and accept my wagers. You know you'd lose and can't afford the hit to your wallet and credibility. However if you think differently, there's an easy solution.
Last edited:
There is no debate but thanks for your comment. A debate would generally indicate both parties have some knowledge of the subject being debated. Patrick obviously knows little to nothing about CTE nor any real sincere desire to learn it.
No it won't...try it at the table without shooting, just aquire the visuals as I explained with the hands and the clock example and absorve what happens..
For the shot #1 you align that way, as I described in the example, to CBEtoA and CTEL, now without doing anything draw a virtual line through center of the CB and note where it ends up on the OB.
Now do the absolute same thing for the shot #3, and I guarantee you that when you draw that virtual line through the center of the CB, after aligning to the visuals as I explained in the hands/clock example, it WILL NOT end up in the same spot on the OB....and that is why the same half a tip pivot from the inside to center CB will work for both shots.
WHY that happens? I don't know, and others do not know too, but it does work...there is no math proof currently.
I have never had a headache in my life, I think I am getting close.
Carry on men.
Carry on men.
Firstly, & foremost, Thank You for your reply & for your civility.
However...
Do you realize how irrational & illogical that is?
I've shot each of the other shots objectively & sent each one out on nearly the same exact angle & into the short rail. The key word there is objectively. See the same thing. Align to the same thing. Make the same 1/2 tip pivot. AND get the same outcome angle.
Now, IF... I line up to the line given by the objective alignment & then tweak that alignment based on my past experience of what it takes to actually pocket the other shots, then Yes...I can get a different outcome angle, BUT, that is no longer shooting the shot based on the visually objective alignment. I've just interjected subjective intuition based on my past experiences.
I think what you are referring to is arriving on that different line due to being influenced by your subconscious that has 'learned' from your past experiences.
If you instruct a newbie to shoot the first shot & they have a naturally good stroke & pocket the ball & then move them over parallel to a much differently angled shot & tell them to do the exact same thing, there is no way that I can see them making that 2nd. shot IF they objectively do the same thing.
Another question. What is there that is objective that tells one in what direction one should pivot?
I thank you again for your civil reply & Best 2 You,
Rick
PS CTE obviously works very well for very many. I'm not saying that is doesn't. I'm just questioning the true nature of what is actually going on.
Last edited: