CTE. Why I think it works...

[stan shuffett]

These exchanges with you are basically useless.

Did you & do you even read any of what I said or say to you?

It's to the point now that nothing that you are posting has anything to do with an objective aiming system.

It's as though you have put it out of your mind.

I've played & have even coached Baseball & Golf. I know a bit about seeing from an offset.

Do you know what subjective is?

You're doing the same thing that has been going on for years. Attack the opposing side in a variety of ways in order to distract from the FACT that no reasonable, rational, logical explanation has ever been put forth.

Golfers see in curves and hit fades and draws.

Pitchers throw curves.....

But what in the heck is it about pool that it can't have curves some way or another.

Yup, you are right I do not read much of what you say because I read your first post years ago and they have all been the same ever since.

You coached baseball......let's you and I meet and have a game of burn-out. I think I can take you!

Subjective is when you stick your finger up your tail and pull it out and proclaim that it smells like a rose.

Stan Shuffett

 

[ENGLISH!]

Two posts in a row from two individuals & nothing but personal attacks & no explanation to answer the ongoing question that has been in place for years.

That's fine.

I think any neutral party can see the light of day in that regard.

I sometimes wonder if some think that that only ones reading these threads are the only ones posting in them.

Some of the best advice I received not long after joining here was that there are way more out there that read but rarely if ever make a post. Always keep them in mind was the advice.

Nearly 2,000 views in basically 2 days just in this thread. The other one is over 10,000 views.

How many of them might be mislead by an inaccurate description?

The needs of the many... out weigh the needs of the few... or the one.

 

[Tony_in_MD]

Nearly 2,000 views in basically 2 days just in this thread. The other one is over 10,000 views.

How many of them might be mislead by an inaccurate description?

The needs of the many... out weigh the needs of the few... or the one.

The real question is how many of them care.

Only you.

Get a real life, you have taken this beyond absurd.

 

[ENGLISH!]

The real question is how many of them care.

Only you.

Get a real life, you have taken this beyond absurd.

So you admit that the description is inaccurate.

You just question how many might or might not care if they are mislead.

Perhaps now we may be getting somewhere.

 

[Tony_in_MD]

The only thing I admit, is that there is something seriously wrong with you.

Don't put words in my mouth. You have enough trouble talking out of both side of yours.

Have a blessed evening, posting more girly pics.

Jesus is watching.

So you admit that the description is inaccurate.

You just question how many might or might not care if they are mislead.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENGLISH! View Post
Nearly 2,000 views in basically 2 days just in this thread. The other one is over 10,000 views.

How many of them might be mislead by an inaccurate description?

The needs of the many... out weigh the needs of the few... or the one.

QUOTE=Tony_in_MD;5481188]The real question is how many of them care.

Only you.

Get a real life, you have taken this beyond absurd.[/QUOTE]

 

[DTL]

.................

 

[Tony_in_MD]

What? Did you run out of words that now you need to quote Movie Lines?

Do you have problems distinguishing from fantasy and reality?

Jesus is watching.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENGLISH! View Post
Nearly 2,000 views in basically 2 days just in this thread. The other one is over 10,000 views.

How many of them might be mislead by an inaccurate description?

The needs of the many... out weigh the needs of the few... or the one.

QUOTE=Tony_in_MD;5481188]The real question is how many of them care.

Only you.

Get a real life, you have taken this beyond absurd.

[/QUOTE]

 

[tonythetiger583]

Tony,

Please think of this.

IF what you are suggesting would be true then you're saying that there are only 8 outcome angles required to play the game.

That's just not the case & especially for tight pockets & especially for center pocket play.

[...]


PS Are you having most success with it now than you were before?

I think this the exact point of misunderstanding between you guys.

P.S I'm having much more success with cte now thanks

 

[chefjeff]

Did you see my post about how you lost your 'virginity' & the psychological & physical damage that would be the results.:wink:

Yes, and thank you for that....but....

...but it's just crazy enuf around here that I can't leave!!!!!!!:joyful::indecisive::deadhorse:


MAKE IT STOP!!!!!!!!

Jeff Livingston

 

[ENGLISH!]

Yes, and thank you for that....but....

...but it's just crazy enuf around here that I can't leave!!!!!!!:joyful::indecisive::deadhorse:


MAKE IT STOP!!!!!!!!

Jeff Livingston

Yes. It is so crazy that...

Now...

Jesus is being brought in in regards to a completely different & unrelated topic regarding beautiful, attractive women as though somehow they were not created by God & pictures of them should not be viewed.

They do everything... except provide a simple rational, logical explanation that would end the 'war'.

It's almost like they want the 'war', they need the 'war', yet they complain about the 'war'.

So, I do not see it stopping unless the subject is banned.

The simple solution would be to admit that a mistake was made & it is not factually 'an objective aiming system' & hence it, the 'war' would stop.

This sub forum is the NPR of AZB that simply has an attached component to pool.

And it is NOT because of any of the non proponents like PJ, Lou, Satori, 8pack Anthony, Jal, Dan White, myself, or others.

Do you have a good recipe for Red Fish Couvillion?

 

[ENGLISH!]

What? Did you run out of words that now you need to quote Movie Lines?

Do you have problems distinguishing from fantasy and reality?

Jesus is watching.

Jesus was the epitome of that phrase.

The needs of the many... out weigh the needs of the few... or the one.

Do you not know that art, fantasy, imitates reality.

No, I guess you are incapable of seeing such as you may be one that is keeping themselves in the dark.

But... do you not now communicate on a wireless "communicator".

I can't go on regarding you or I would not be complying with a request by management.

 

[Straightpool_99]

Who cares!

Seriously, at this point, who bloody cares why CTE works? I mean it, there is no gold at the end of this rainbow folks. People have been fighting over this blasted system for so long, and for what? People are just out for a fight, that is it. Some can pocket balls with it, others can't, and nobody can prove a damned thing, this discussion is no further along from the RSB days.

Some people can pocket balls this way, good for them, they should stick with it. Others cant', they should move on. There are probably hundreds of different ways to aim, one or more of them will be right for you.

That objective/subjective distincition is nothing but a distraction IMO, if I were Stan I'd just let it go, because no aiming system will ever be truely objective (and feasible to use) in the strict sense. This is not a put down of the system in any way, in fact I think it's pretty clever. The only thing that detracts from the system, for me, is the bullying on this forum, on both sides of the debate. It's a pity too, because Stan comes off as somebody I could probably learn a lot from, and his passion about the system shows in the effort he puts into his videos. It's not to be, because of this stupid forum nonsense, which has once and for all soured me on that system.

I never took a wasted pool lesson in my life, I've manage to learn something from just about everything, even if I don't use what the teachers are teaching, there could still be good knowledge there. At the very least you'll know that that system or whatever, is not for you. I learned something from my CTE pro one DVD 1, even though I was disappointed at the time. I used what I learned working with that system, to improve my setup and fundamentals, especially the upper body posture and how to pivot precisely. That helped immensely with other pivot systems, which were more suited to me.

If pool is truely your passion, then you owe it to yourself to try anything you think can help improve your skill. What is a few hours, compared to the endless hours you will spend playing pool throughout your life?

 

[ENGLISH!]

Seriously, at this point, who bloody cares why CTE works? I mean it, there is no gold at the end of this rainbow folks. People have been fighting over this blasted system for so long, and for what? People are just out for a fight, that is it. Some can pocket balls with it, others can't, and nobody can prove a damned thing, this discussion is no further along from the RSB days.

Some people can pocket balls this way, good for them, they should stick with it. Others cant', they should move on. There are probably hundreds of different ways to aim, one or more of them will be right for you.

That objective/subjective distincition is nothing but a distraction IMO, if I were Stan I'd just let it go, because no aiming system will ever be truely objective (and feasible to use) in the strict sense. This is not a put down of the system in any way, in fact I think it's pretty clever. The only thing that detracts from the system, for me, is the bullying on this forum, on both sides of the debate. It's a pity too, because Stan comes off as somebody I could probably learn a lot from, and his passion about the system shows in the effort he puts into his videos. It's not to be, because of this stupid forum nonsense, which has once and for all soured me on that system.

I never took a wasted pool lesson in my life, I've manage to learn something from just about everything, even if I don't use what the teachers are teaching, there could still be good knowledge there. At the very least you'll know that that system or whatever, is not for you. I learned something from my CTE pro one DVD 1, even though I was disappointed at the time. I used what I learned working with that system, to improve my setup and fundamentals, especially the upper body posture and how to pivot precisely. That helped immensely with other pivot systems, which were more suited to me.

If pool is truely your passion, then you owe it to yourself to try anything you think can help improve your skill. What is a few hours, compared to the endless hours you will spend playing pool throughout your life?

:thumbup2: Good Post.

Yes. Drop that inaccurate description & ALL move on to focusing on matters that can make a difference.

But... it is clung to like the Goose That Laid The Golden Egg.

My only real concern regarding it is that it is a very provocative suggestive statement & can be... & actually is... misleading because it is inaccurate.

No one should be enticed into wasting time hoping to get something that just does not exist & that is exactly what can & I am rather sure does happen because of that description.

It was just said that PJ brought that description up & that I have latched onto it.

If that is the case, then why is it not just simply stated that it is NOT what PJ brought up. It is NOT an objective aiming system.

Then ALL can move on to matters that make a difference like those that you mentioned.

Again, Good Post, Sir.

Actually... a VERY GOOD POST.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Seriously, at this point, who bloody cares why CTE works? I mean it, there is no gold at the end of this rainbow folks. People have been fighting over this blasted system for so long, and for what? People are just out for a fight, that is it. Some can pocket balls with it, others can't, and nobody can prove a damned thing, this discussion is no further along from the RSB days.

Some people can pocket balls this way, good for them, they should stick with it. Others cant', they should move on. There are probably hundreds of different ways to aim, one or more of them will be right for you.

That objective/subjective distincition is nothing but a distraction IMO, if I were Stan I'd just let it go, because no aiming system will ever be truely objective (and feasible to use) in the strict sense. This is not a put down of the system in any way, in fact I think it's pretty clever. The only thing that detracts from the system, for me, is the bullying on this forum, on both sides of the debate. It's a pity too, because Stan comes off as somebody I could probably learn a lot from, and his passion about the system shows in the effort he puts into his videos. It's not to be, because of this stupid forum nonsense, which has once and for all soured me on that system.

I never took a wasted pool lesson in my life, I've manage to learn something from just about everything, even if I don't use what the teachers are teaching, there could still be good knowledge there. At the very least you'll know that that system or whatever, is not for you. I learned something from my CTE pro one DVD 1, even though I was disappointed at the time. I used what I learned working with that system, to improve my setup and fundamentals, especially the upper body posture and how to pivot precisely. That helped immensely with other pivot systems, which were more suited to me.

If pool is truely your passion, then you owe it to yourself to try anything you think can help improve your skill. What is a few hours, compared to the endless hours you will spend playing pool throughout your life?

I woke up this morning hoping maybe everyone had agreed to drop this whole argument about essentially nothing. I also woke up hoping maybe Donald Trump made an announcement saying he was only kidding about running for president.

Like Trump's campaign, this has gone way beyond bizarre. I'm actually ashamed of myself (and should be) for even taking part in any of it. You make some excellent points, but in the end it will still be the same ol' rabid pitbulls going at each others throats until one of them is dead.

This beagle puppy is out of here. I have no taste for the jugular.

 

[Tony_in_MD]

Jesus was the epitome of that phrase.

The needs of the many... out weigh the needs of the few... or the one.

Do you not know that art, fantasy, imitates reality.

No, I guess you are incapable of seeing such as you may be one that is keeping themselves in the dark.

But... do you not now communicate on a wireless "communicator".

I can't go on regarding you or I would not be complying with a request by management.

Yeah, you would know all about fantasy.

Jesus is watching.

 

[BeiberLvr]

:thumbup2: Good Post.

Yes. Drop that inaccurate description & ALL move on to focusing on matters that can make a difference.

But... it is clung to like the Goose That Laid The Golden Egg.

My only real concern regarding it is that it is a very provocative suggestive statement & can be... & actually is... misleading because it is inaccurate.

No one should be enticed into wasting time hoping to get something that just does not exist & that is exactly what can & I am rather sure does happen because of that description.

It was just said that PJ brought that description up & that I have latched onto it.

If that is the case, then why is it not just simply stated that it is NOT what PJ brought up. It is NOT an objective aiming system.

Then ALL can move on to matters that make a difference like those that you mentioned.

Again, Good Post, Sir.

Actually... a VERY GOOD POST.

IF it is misleading. Why do you care? Are you the ethics police?

You've said countless times that people should make their own determinations about what works and doesn't work. So why the complete 180 when it comes to CTE?

Why can't people make their own determinations about CTE? Again, I ask. Are you the ethics police?

 

[ENGLISH!]

IF it is misleading. Why do you care? Are you the ethics police?

You've said countless times that people should make their own determinations about what works and doesn't work. So why the complete 180 when it comes to CTE?

Why can't people make their own determinations about CTE? Again, I ask. Are you the ethics police?

Let's first say... that it is YOU that is using the word ethics & implying unethical... & NOT me.

So...

Do you think it is ethical to entice individuals to buy something with a provocative inaccurate description of a product.

A product that could get one to waste much time, a year or more for some, pursuing that inaccurate description.

I've said many times now that if one realizes the inaccuracy of that description & still wants to buy & try it to make their own determination then that is exactly what they should do.

But... I do not like thinking of the potential many that would be & are enticed by the intrigue of a possible objective aiming system that would spend & possibly totally waste much time pursuing what does NOT exist... & for what they thought they were getting based on that description.

I hope that answers your question.

I've said that here, what is now coming to be many times.

That said, I have NEVER said that Stan has been or is being unethical. But... he has made a mistake if he thinks it is 'an objective aiming system' & what that implies.

 

[stan shuffett]

Let's first say... that it is YOU that is using the word ethics & implying unethical... & NOT me.

So...

Do you think it is ethical to entice individuals to buy something with a provocative inaccurate description of a product.

A product that could get one to waste much time, a year or more for some, pursuing that inaccurate description.

I've said many times now that if one realizes the inaccuracy of that description & still wants to buy & try it to make their own determination then that is exactly what they should do.

But... I do not like thinking of the potential many that would be & are enticed by the intrigue of a possible objective aiming system that would spend & possibly totally waste much time pursuing what does NOT exist... & for what they thought they were getting based on that description.

I hope that answers your question.

I've said it here what is now coming to be many times.

That said, I have NEVER said that Stan has been or is being unethical. But... he has made a mistake if he thinks it is 'an objective aiming system' & what that implies.

LEAVE ME OUT OF IT! Your blue font and all.

Stan Shuffett

 

[BeiberLvr]

If I was on a sinking ship with English, Kanye West, and Hitler and there was only room for two on the lifeboat...