Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

[LAMas]

John,

Just how 'difficult' is it to be able to see the CTE line along with the edge to A, B, or C line?

That seems rather simple to many of us & should not take 'any' real amount of time to 'learn'.

Best Wishes.

Shifting 1/2 tip to the right or left as required prior to pivoting, if pivoting is used, results in 5 discrete cut angles for a given CB to bridge distance. when the distance between changes, one can increase (far) or decrease (close) the bridge distance from the CB to compensate. This can be graphed and the graph can be memorized and recalled.

For the cut angles between the 5, one can also change the bridge distance and this can be graphed and combined with the other graph.

Would this be a 2D proof?

Be well.

 

[ENGLISH!]

And perhaps you can't understand what the simple truth actually is. All life may be governed by mathematics but life doesn't require knowledge of math to exist.

John,

Life is NOT governed by mathematics. Mathematics is a man made 'science' that is used to explain the other real sciences.

It does not require knowledge of the real sciences to exist, but it does take the use of those sciences to continue to exists.

Best Wishes.

 

[one stroke]

So? John also said, "I could be wrong". And in fact he is. Corey was cut off in that session and didn't get to finish his thought. I talked with Corey for a few hours a couple weeks ago and he is 100% NOT against aiming systems. Unlike you Corey is a serious student of the game who has a very open mind for any and all concepts about how to play the game.

The only part of your statement that is true is that Corey does in fact have one of the best minds in pool.

Maybe with a good aiming system John could run 800 balls. Who knows? No one, because until John decides to try it he won't know if it's helpful or not. But his statement is not true on many levels.

Even John knows that it's more than just table time and more than just aiming. He is 100% right when he mentions the other factors that come along with execution. He is wrong when he wraps all that into aiming and commits the same mistake that knockers here do, namely calling aiming systems a magic bullet that is supposed to turn bangers into champions. No aiming system proponent has ever said that. It was created as a red herring by knockers to use when they point out that aiming system users haven't jumped from B category to spotting Shane.

They then go on to totally discount any claimed improvement. When system users report that they are winning more, have gotten to the top of their leagues, snapped off decent tournaments, making more scores, running more balls, beating the ghost etc....all this is pooh poohed by knockers as if ALL these people are lying.

But if you want to play this game - Shane has four US Open titles and uses an aiming system. Darren has two or three world titles and uses and endorses an aiming system. Landon Shuffett has many junior national championships and uses an aiming system - PUBLICLY -

So you can put John's statement on your side and I will put these guys up on the other and undecided readers can choose for themselves if they want to spend a little time trying out new ways aim or stick with hit balls until my fingers fall off. I know what I would do with my limited table time.

Well here we go again Shane's aiming is a method it's not a system ,,
I'm sure Corey's not the first person to nod his head to you to get out of the conversation but regardless he does not use one I doubt thiers s shot u can line up and make that him and JS can't the only thing that's kept either one from more winning is thier lack of commitment

1

 

[Ron Swanson]

As much time as you have to write it as a link.

Alright then, thesnookerforum.co.uk.

 

[cookie man]

Very good post.:thumbup2:

I talked to one of the best players in my area about CTE & whether or not it had holes. He almost screamed, 'Oh Yeah!' & continued... 'That's why you need at least 2 or 3 methods.'.

Best Wishes.

Please elaborate on the holes,

 

[cookie man]

I posted in this thread former world and U.S. open champions take on aiming systems
One of them considerd one of the best minds in pool the other well all he's done is run over 400 balls
1

Did you post the quote from Efren Reyes. "I use centers and edges"

 

[cookie man]

John,

Has Stan not said that CTE can NOT be explained in any 2 dimensional manner.

You & others just can not seem to understand that NO video can show whether or not one is employing their subjective perceptions or not or whether one is performing entirely in a totally objective manner.

So... a video, any video, wil NOT prove anything in those regards.

The question regarding those abstract issues can ONLY be resolved through intelligent critical thinking as PJ has pointed out probably thousands of times more than I have.

Best Wishes.

Just describe a shot that is considered one of the holes.

 

[one stroke]

Did you post the quote from Efren Reyes. "I use centers and edges"

Ya and so does everyone who plays pool

1

 

[cookie man]

John,

It is not those that object to the assertion made that it is a totally objective 'system' along with other assertions in an attempt to support that one that made those assertions.

The root cause IS those assertions.

The issue is that you & others continue to portray it as such. Okay you reduced it down to 99%. I'm not sure that Stan would agree with your estimation.

I agree with much of what you've said when it comes to playing the game, etc.

The list of PJ, Satorie, 8pack/Anthony, I, & considerable others that have indicated such pretty much only take exception to the manner in which it is portrayed & the assertion(s) because intellectual analysis indicates the assertion to NOT be accurate & it has not been proven in any manner.

Some or your examples, assertions, & suppositions in the quoted post are just as intellectually lacking & certainly unproven.

If CTE can help anyone & PJ & I have indicated that it certainly can for some, then that is great for them & certainly is a good thing.

If it's helped you, then that is great for you, but helping 1,000,000 individuals does not make the assertion correct.

So, If the assertion was retracted or stopped being made or it stopped being presented as such, THEN all of the hub bub regarding it would disappear along with it.

Best Wishes.

I'm curious. If it's subjective as you think it is, how can it have holes?

 

[ENGLISH!]

I have posted a video where I go around a 180 degree arc and show that it's the same steps each time.

In fact I posted one previously that Pat had YouTube take down because I mentioned his name in it. Which was the right thing to do since it was in direct response to his assertions.

Pat's diagrams have never shown any holes in CTE aiming. As for CTE aiming not being able to be drawn out in 2d I guess I agree with Stan BECAUSE CTE aiming starts above the table at the eyes. So any diagram would need to account for the space between the eyes and the cueball-object ball relationship and this could only be in 3-d I suppose.

The bottom line is you make claims with no proof. YOu can't seem to figure out how to make even a simple video showing the holes, you won't post any shot diagrams that show the holes you claim are there. But what you will do is write another 400 posts claiming they are there.

John,

Your 180* project that shows that the 'STEPS' are the same proves nothing regarding whether or not the performance was done 100-99% objectively or if subjective perception were in play.

NO video or diagram can do that & that is the basic issue as of late when one gets past those that give no real credit to ANY aiming method.

How many posts have you made pushing CTE with no REAL proof to support what you say?

I tried to open two threads for only positive support for CTE. Both were blown up by CTE supporters before they any chance to get off of the ground.

Go back & reread my posts where I hav been supportive of CTE in nearly every regard except it being portrayed as a totally objective 'system'.

If it is NOT a totally objective method then one's subjective perception comes into play. With that being utilized then for those with sufficient such subjective perceptive the 'holes' can & are filled in.

You want to blame upr

 

[cookie man]

Ya and so does everyone who plays pool

1

Well at least almost everyone should

 

[Neil]

Well here we go again Shane's aiming is a method it's not a system ,,
I'm sure Corey's not the first person to nod his head to you to get out of the conversation but regardless he does not use one I doubt thiers s shot u can line up and make that him and JS can't the only thing that's kept either one from more winning is thier lack of commitment

1

Yep, here we go again, apparently you either missed post #737, or you are just hoping others did and if you repeat the same thing enough times, some might actually start to believe it.

And, just what does the fact that John and Corey are expert shotmakers have to do with the lack of validity of any aiming system?

 

[JoeyInCali]

So, I guess Stevie Moore was not able to convince Rodney Morris to use CTE.

 

[JB Cases]

John,

Your 180* project that shows that the 'STEPS' are the same proves nothing regarding whether or not the performance was done 100-99% objectively or if subjective perception were in play.

NO video or diagram can do that & that is the basic issue as of late when one gets past those that give no real credit to ANY aiming method.

How many posts have you made pushing CTE with no REAL proof to support what you say?

I tried to open two threads for only positive support for CTE. Both were blown up by CTE supporters before they any chance to get off of the ground.

Go back & reread my posts where I hav been supportive of CTE in nearly every regard except it being portrayed as a totally objective 'system'.

If it is NOT a totally objective method then one's subjective perception comes into play. With that being utilized then for those with sufficient such subjective perceptive the 'holes' can & are filled in.

You want to blame upr

Great. We have different ideas of what proof is. Mine are more practical.

I personally think you have been very passive/aggressive in your comments about CTE.

Kind of along the lines of with friends like that....... or he's a really good guy but......

Anyway thanks for keeping the conversation going.

 

[JB Cases]

So, I guess Stevie Moore was not able to convince Rodney Morris to use CTE.

I don't know. You would need to ask Rodney. From Rodney's comments back then he felt that he was playing better because of whatever about CTE that Stevie showed him.

 

[JB Cases]

Ya and so does everyone who plays pool

1

No they don't.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

We have different ideas of what proof is.

You've shown time after time over the years, without exception, that you have no idea what proof is.

pj
chgo

 

[JoeyInCali]

I don't know. You would need to ask Rodney. From Rodney's comments back then he felt that he was playing better because of whatever about CTE that Stevie showed him.

The last time, you PM'd him at FB. Can you PM him now?

 

[lfigueroa]

This is so wrong. The fact is that "you", the feel player, can't possibly know if an objective method of aiming would help your game or not until you really try it.

So it you stand there with your feet planted and refuse to move in the thought that you have nothing to gain then only one thing is 100% true, you will gain nothing.

It's all fine to say things like trust your stroke, and be the ball, and let it flow, etc....but these are not precise instructions. They don't measure anything. There is no baseline to operate from. No benchmark to beat.

You personally are a decent player Lou. You're methodical and careful. You make some good shots and you dog shots like everyone else. You could become a better player in my opinion if you had a better way to aim. But you won't become any better than you are in my opinion because you're limited by how you aim. Your stroke is great, your demeanor at the table is calm and you are very good at patiently picking the right shot. All those things are ingredients to being a good player.

I, in contrast have a wonky stroke, I rush shots, I have little patience, and I am certainly not calm without forcing myself to be. So on net you have a lot more going for your game than I do when all the needed traits are factored in. Aiming better doesn't make me a better player than you. We saw that clearly. But I know for certain that aiming better would make you a better player than you currently are.

The reason Stan would likely beat you if you two matched up is simply that he will make more shots than you will in any game you play. And by shots I mean he will pocket more balls and he will bank better than you. You both might move equally well, you might pick patterns about the same, you both will have very smooth strokes. But in the end he will simply outshoot you because you miss due to uncertainty in aim in my opinion.

This is just my personal analysis based on playing you for nine hours. I know you likely don't agree but you certainly have zero basis to tell everyone else they can't benefit from an aiming system. CTE at least is not a placebo at all.

Baloney. I did try it and it makes no sense.

So then what? Youze guys all come back and say, "Oh, but you didn't *reeeeeeally* try it." What do you mean I didn't *reeeeeeeally *try it? What am I suppose to do? Don a robe and tinfoil hat?! Get a decoder ring? Swear a blood oath? Sacrifice virgins?

I tried it (really) and it blows.

And pool as with most sports, you don't measure -- you see and do whether it's hitting a golf or tennis ball or playing beer pong. There is no measure, there is just see and do, then repeat.

I play at the level I do because I just knock them around a few hours a week. I don't roam the pool halls at night like I used to nor do I gamble $400/$500 a day like I used to. Now I'm lucky to get a $10 game now and then. That's why I play the way I do. Oh, that and the fact that I spent my life doing something that would actually provide for a decent income and comfortable retirement instead of playing pool all the time.

AND before you worry about me becoming a better player I would worry about myself if I was you ;-)

Lou Figueroa

 

[ENGLISH!]

I have posted a video where I go around a 180 degree arc and show that it's the same steps each time.

In fact I posted one previously that Pat had YouTube take down because I mentioned his name in it. Which was the right thing to do since it was in direct response to his assertions.

Pat's diagrams have never shown any holes in CTE aiming. As for CTE aiming not being able to be drawn out in 2d I guess I agree with Stan BECAUSE CTE aiming starts above the table at the eyes. So any diagram would need to account for the space between the eyes and the cueball-object ball relationship and this could only be in 3-d I suppose.

The bottom line is you make claims with no proof. You can't seem to figure out how to make even a simple video showing the holes, you won't post any shot diagrams that show the holes you claim are there. But what you will do is write another 400 posts claiming they are there.

John,

Your 180* project that shows that the 'STEPS' are the same proves nothing regarding whether or not the performance was done 100-99% objectively or if subjective perceptions were in play.

NO video or diagram can do that & that is the basic issue as of late when one gets past those that give no real credit to ANY aiming method.

How many posts have you made pushing CTE with no REAL proof to support what you say?

I tried to open two threads for only positive support for CTE. Both were blown up by CTE supporters before either had any chance to get off of the ground.

Go back & reread my posts where I have been supportive of CTE in nearly every regard except it being portrayed as a totally objective 'system'.

If it is NOT a totally objective method then one's subjective perception comes into play. With that being utilized then for those with sufficient such subjective perceptions the 'holes' can & are filled in.

No video by me, you, Stevie, nor Stan can prove anything of the abstract realm like subjectivity or objectivity. It is the CTE advocatse that have done that & do not seem to understand that those videos are no proof of anything in that abstract realm.

Best Wishes.