Pivoting systems and their relationship to CTE

[Vorpal Cue]

:wink:

Good Morning Larry,

That is flawed. You're saying the same type things that Stan's CTEers say.

Boy! Where do I start? Let's start with the word "different" & add in Einstein's Relativity.

We need to put the word "different" into the proper context & I guess the word "angle" too, since it is joined with "different".

Let's set an OB at center pocket sitting on the edge of the shelf at a corner pocket... & then place the CB down the long rail but on the same side of the side pocket & parallel to the rail so that the Center LINE is parallel to the rail.

I was unsure here so I drew a pocket hanger at the top corner pocket and put the cue ball just below the side pocket.

Now... let's move that CB one 'tic' at a time for 90* of rotation toward the other corner pocket until the shot line gets parallel to the short rail. We then have 90 straight in shots & we could have an infinite number.

Imagined cue ball rotating around OB by an invisible string at fixed distance from side rail to short rail.

They are all "different"... yet they are all the SAME.

They are all on "different" parts of the table. Yet... they are all THE SAME one ball RELATIVE to the other & the LINES between the balls are ALL the SAME... One Ball RELATIVE to the Other Ball.

Let me say that again.

THEY ARE ON THE SAME ANGLE & WITH THE SAME LINES RELATIVE ONE BALL TO THE OTHER. THE LINES ARE SET BY RELATIVITY... ONE BALL TO THE OTHER BALL.... Even though they each are on 'different' parts of the table.

They're all straight in shots and they use the same visual, a zero angle shot. I don't understand your position. There's been too many different types of lines mentioned too in other posts. I need you to define 'LINES' and when you mention relative to each other are you talking about the shot line?

Now do a similar thing... pull the OB straight out of the pocket toward the diagonal side pocket about a diamond's length... then set up a ghost ball on it. We now have a cut shot. Now extend a line through the Ghost Ball/OB center lines to the point on the shelf where the OB sat for ALL 90 (or infinite #) of the straight in shots.

Now rotate the whole mess, the 3 balls & the STRAIGHT LINES between them with that point at the pocket shelf as the apex point.

Rotate that whole set up, the 3 balls & especially the LINES between them 1 'tic' at a time toward the short rail until the LINE through the Ghost Ball/OB gets parallel to the short rail.

I do not know how many degrees of rotation that that actually is. So I do not know how many DIFFERENT shots that it is, but it is a significantly high number & it could be an infinite number.

They are all "DIFFERENT" but the LINES are the SAME... RELATIVE ONE BALL to THE OTHER.

It is the balls that SET the LINES & NOT where they are on the table.

Sorry for the Caps. I'm not yelling. I'm just highlighting certain words.

I certainly hope that you can understand what I am trying to say.

You just received a brief example of Einstein's Relativity.

I just wish the balls were travelling at the speed of light. Lorentz's contraction would turn them into disks and I'd finally be able to talk about my 2D stuff again.

You need to rotate your watch face.

I hope that you do not have any questions, but if so, I will do my best to answer them... For You.

I'm not inclined to waste time with 'haters' of the scientific truth.

All the Best for You & Yours,
Rick

I don't see your point yet. I hope you can provide some definitions to clear the matter.

 

[ENGLISH!]

I don't see your point yet. I hope you can provide some definitions to clear the matter.

Larry,

Why did you stop with your blue inserts just after the straight in shots.

The point is to show that the word "different" gets misused much because it is used in the WRONG CONTEXT about the points on & the LINES between the balls when talking about things like the 5 shots with the SAME visual & the balls "presenting themselves differently" so as to yield "different" points & "different" LINES.

ALL of those 90(or infinite amount) of straight in shots are all on "different" parts of the table... BUT the points & the LINES between them ARE the SAME Relative between the balls one to the other... when spoken in the proper CONTEXT.

Please read on in my post about the cut shots & the Same is true.

Best 2 Ya,
Rick

PS In attempt to perhaps save some time & effort... Just because the angle of the ball to the pocket changes... does NOT influence the points on the balls nor the LINES between them as they are independent of any angle on the outcome side. "A" is the quarter division of the ball & it is independent of any directional outcome angle. One could walk around an object ball & the "A" division point or division line would change because it is defined from the shooter's side of the ball. But... once a CB is set down & the LINE from "A" to the edge of that cue ball is 'drawn'...that's it. The shooter can walk around the OB but the "A" has been SET & so has the EDGE to "A" LINE & so has the cte LINE. Picture a ball in hand shot as you walk around before setting down the CB. Then set the CB down. The edge to "A" has then been SET as has the cte line... or FIXED in the language of another. The points & LINES are defined by the relationship between the balls & are independent of anything else.

PS There has been nearly 3500 views of this thread in only about 5 days.

 

[Dan White]

Place your tip pre-pivot, it will point at 12, 1/2 ball away from 3

When I point the tip it's at about a 15* angle to the cue ball. I don't think this angle is critical, just that it should be a constant one for a repeatable pivot. I keep the tip just inside the cue ball with the left contour of the tip matching the curve. At the tangent point of where the two circles meet. The left edge of the tip should be pointing at the 12 position.

I made an imaginary error when I said 3. It should have said 9. It's 90* away from 12 or a half ball. I'll correct it in the original.



Do a 1/2 ball pivot

I use a full half ball pivot with no half tip offset. When I pivot with an open bridge I'll turn my hips and/or body (depends on stance and comfort) and let the tip skate across the surface and stop at CCB. The pivot center of the cue stick isn't on the bridge V, but more toward the center of the stick. The guy at SpiderWebComm has a good video about it and he shows some good do's and don'ts about the technique. His video explains the concept better than my words. Highly recommended.

A closed bridge I keep loose and when I get to CCB I'll firm it up. The video shows a different way to do it so it depends on what works best for you.




You are not pointing at 12 but a little before 12.

The first A visual had the CTE line crossing the 3-9 line at a small angle, just above the pocket. The second A visual has the CTE line crossing at a larger angle. Something has rotated and we've been careful not to rotate the cue ball. Your line of sight has changed the angle you see. The edge you were looking at in the first visual isn't the same edge you see now. When you place the tip it's at the 'new' edge it's pointing a little before the 12.

Maybe because I haven't tried to visualize what you are saying closely enough, but I'm still having trouble following you. Let me try in a way that I can maybe understand better. Let's take the infamous 5 shot video as a starting point (don't worry Stan, this isn't about you, it's just for example):

In the 5 shot video shot 1 is on the right side of the table. Let's say the object ball is imagined to be at the center of a two hand clock. The corner pocket is at the end of the hour hand and the line from the ob back to the cue ball and even the shooter's cue is the minute hand. So in shot 1 the minute hand is pointed at 12:00 and the hour hand to the pocket is at about 5:30. If we now move over to the 5th, sharpest cut angle, shot, the minute hand is still at 12:00, but now the hour hand to the pocket is at about 4:00.

Given the above paragraph, if a shooter uses a CTE ETA visual in shot 1 to achieve the 5:30 angle, when he sets up for the 5th shot, he will get the exact same 5:30 angle as before, hitting into the foot rail. At the same time, CTE users say they can see the same visual in all 5 shots and still pocket the ball. This is impossible because if the procedure for finding the CTE ETA line is followed precisely and objectively, you will have the same resulting shot each time, and this is what I find to happen in practice.

This is the crux of the CTE wars. The only explanation I've heard yet is mohrt conjecturing that the location of the rails and pockets relative to the balls fools your eye into thinking you can still see CTE ETA no matter what the actual angle is. I'm highly skeptial of this idea, although I appreciate mohrt sharing his thoughts.

Now, can you tie the above in with your 2D analysis? Does your analysis shed any light on the "riddle of the multi angled outcomes"?

 

[lfigueroa]

If you've come to bicker with Stan you're in the wrong thread. I'm trying to keep on point about a 2D pivoting system and the mechanics about it. The thread got away from me as I took some time off and didn't get back for a day. The off topic comments clutter up the conversation and serve no purpose. This thread is NOT about a 3D CTE world. Please respect my position.

I directly responded to a post by Stan. If you do not care for it... go pound sand.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Vorpal Cue]

:wink:

Good Morning Larry,

That is flawed. You're saying the same type things that Stan's CTEers say.

Boy! Where do I start? Let's start with the word "different" & add in Einstein's Relativity.

We need to put the word "different" into the proper context & I guess the word "angle" too, since it is joined with "different".

Let's set an OB at center pocket sitting on the edge of the shelf at a corner pocket... & then place the CB down the long rail but on the same side of the side pocket & parallel to the rail so that the Center LINE is parallel to the rail.

Now... let's move that CB one 'tic' at a time for 90* of rotation toward the other corner pocket until the shot line gets parallel to the short rail. We then have 90 straight in shots & we could have an infinite number.

They are all "different"... yet they are all the SAME.

They are all on "different" parts of the table. Yet... they are all THE SAME one ball RELATIVE to the other & the LINES between the balls are ALL the SAME... One Ball RELATIVE to the Other Ball.

Let me say that again.

THEY ARE ON THE SAME ANGLE & WITH THE SAME LINES RELATIVE ONE BALL TO THE OTHER. THE LINES ARE SET BY RELATIVITY... ONE BALL TO THE OTHER BALL.... Even though they each are on 'different' parts of the table.

Now do a similar thing... pull the OB straight out of the pocket toward the diagonal side pocket about a diamond's length... then set up a ghost ball on it. We now have a cut shot. Now extend a line through the Ghost Ball/OB center lines to the point on the shelf where the OB sat for ALL 90 (or infinite #) of the straight in shots.

Now rotate the whole mess, the 3 balls & the STRAIGHT LINES between them with that point at the pocket shelf as the apex point.

Imagined board nailed to apex of pocket and allowed to rotate around nail. Glued OB and GB together on centerline of board at one diamond out. Attached CB and GB with rod through their centers. I think that's right .

Rotate that whole set up, the 3 balls & especially the LINES between them 1 'tic' at a time toward the short rail until the LINE through the Ghost Ball/OB gets parallel to the short rail.

I do not know how many degrees of rotation that that actually is. So I do not know how many DIFFERENT shots that it is, but it is a significantly high number & it could be an infinite number.

They are all "DIFFERENT" but the LINES are the SAME... RELATIVE ONE BALL to THE OTHER.

Like the straight in example, all shots, using my system, would have the same visual. Same cut, same visual. I don't see how a fixed set of balls are changing their relative positions. It's just the same shot repeated. It's the relative position between the BALLS that determine visual selection with reference to the pocket desired.

It is the balls that SET the LINES & NOT where they are on the table.

If you mean that if you roll two ball on the table and where they stop will determine the shot line I agree. There's only one shot line. I'm saying that a pivoting system will guide you to the shot line by angular clues like my brand or visual clues like Brand X

Sorry for the Caps. I'm not yelling. I'm just highlighting certain words.

I certainly hope that you can understand what I am trying to say.

I'm trying but don't see the your point.

You just received a brief example of Einstein's Relativity.

You need to rotate your watch face.

Can you see how the angle of the CTE line which I used to establish a reference line is changing? It cuts across the 3-9 line at a larger angle as you move down table. The ball isn't rotating, the table is fixed, so the only explanation is that your viewpoint has changed. You're not looking at the same edge you once were. You can think of the cue ball rotating relative to you or your rotation relative to the cue ball. Same thing, it's relative. :smile:

I hope that you do not have any questions, but if so, I will do my best to answer them... For You.

I'm not inclined to waste time with 'haters' of the scientific truth.

All the Best for You & Yours,
Rick

I hope you can see how there is a rotation involved. The angle across the 3-9 line shows something is changing.

 

[cookie man]

Oh man oh man.....
E=MC2 is now being applied to pool shooting?
(maybe the "wink" icon means something. Otherwise this is absurd)

Absurd is a winner

 

[Vorpal Cue]

Maybe because I haven't tried to visualize what you are saying closely enough, but I'm still having trouble following you. Let me try in a way that I can maybe understand better. Let's take the infamous 5 shot video as a starting point (don't worry Stan, this isn't about you, it's just for example):

In the 5 shot video shot 1 is on the right side of the table. Let's say the object ball is imagined to be at the center of a two hand clock. The corner pocket is at the end of the hour hand and the line from the ob back to the cue ball and even the shooter's cue is the minute hand. So in shot 1 the minute hand is pointed at 12:00 and the hour hand to the pocket is at about 5:30. If we now move over to the 5th, sharpest cut angle, shot, the minute hand is still at 12:00, but now the hour hand to the pocket is at about 4:00.

Given the above paragraph, if a shooter uses a CTE ETA visual in shot 1 to achieve the 5:30 angle, when he sets up for the 5th shot, he will get the exact same 5:30 angle as before, hitting into the foot rail. At the same time, CTE users say they can see the same visual in all 5 shots and still pocket the ball. This is impossible because if the procedure for finding the CTE ETA line is followed precisely and objectively, you will have the same resulting shot each time, and this is what I find to happen in practice.

This is the crux of the CTE wars. The only explanation I've heard yet is mohrt conjecturing that the location of the rails and pockets relative to the balls fools your eye into thinking you can still see CTE ETA no matter what the actual angle is. I'm highly skeptial of this idea, although I appreciate mohrt sharing his thoughts.

Now, can you tie the above in with your 2D analysis? Does your analysis shed any light on the "riddle of the multi angled outcomes"?

I tried to give my take of the 5 baller in post 24 on page two of the thread. It may be worth a few chuckles If you got time to peek at it. My system and Pro One are too dissimilar to compare. Still ain't got a clue about it's operation. I would use different visuals for the shots because it's angle based not visually based like Pro.

 

[stan shuffett]

You do realize that it is this kind of talk that makes the whole CTE thing hard to swallow by those of us that prefer a little logic, right?

I think that, with great sincerity, you describe a system based upon what you see at the pool table. And like many of us, you have labeled certain elements of your personal reality concerning pool, to help in producing a consistent outcomes. You see the table and balls from a certain physical perspective, you descend into shooting position in a unique manner, and then you execute your stroke with a little hiccup, which is also unique to you.

But you are the only one out there with the hubris to claim that what you see and do will work for everyone else. It is just not so.

Lou Figueroa

CTE is an outlier and is outside of typical logic.

Stan Shuffett

 

[stan shuffett]

I tried to give my take of the 5 baller in post 24 on page two of the thread. It may be worth a few chuckles If you got time to peek at it. My system and Pro One are too dissimilar to compare. Still ain't got a clue about it's operation. I would use different visuals for the shots because it's angle based not visually based like Pro.

This will be my last inside of a thread attempt at declaring that my 5 shot video will be presented differently. Perhaps I should start a new thread to that effect. I have stated this at least a half a dozen times.

That does not mean in any way that the 15 can not make a wide range of angles.

Stan Shuffett

 

[ENGLISH!]

I hope you can see how there is a rotation involved. The angle across the 3-9 line shows something is changing.

Larry,

It's too "difficult" to respond with your blue text in my post...

but I don't see us as having any break through in agreement.

You seem to be ignoring certain aspect of what I've said & then go off 'into the woods'.

Basically...

The point on the balls & the lines between those points & extended out if need be...

have NOTHING to do with the pocket.

at least not for That Other Version other than yours.

You the Ghost Ball CP to determine what visual to use as in which of the options would put you closest to the actual shot line... but you SAY that you forget it after that point. (That is the same as selecting what visual to use in that other method.)

So... in essence you have forgotten where the balls are on the table & are simply going to go through your steps... the process. If that is the case then you will get the same result regardless of where the balls are on the table... IF... the balls are the same distance apart & your bridge length & pivot size is the same & all is done objectively with no change due to any subjective or subconscious anything.

Can you not understand that the angle to the pocket in no way dictates what you are seeing...

In other words it does not matter where the balls are on the table relative to anything...

...once YOU in your method has used the angle & the ghost ball CP to select what visual is closest to the actual line... the A & Bare set by the position of the CB & the Edge to those points are Set/Fixed... & the cte line is set Fixed... BY NOTHING but the relationship of the TWO balls... one o the other & back again.

There is no magic, voo doo, mysticism, & I do not think satanism... but satan does distort the truth with deception.:wink:

They is simply the pints on the balls & the lines between those points & that define

Imagine a bar bell that is connected from one big round weight that is connected from the center of one to the edge of the other & the a 2nd. connecting rod from the edge to point "A". now throw that mess all over the Universe...

Nothing changes.

Best 2 Ya.

Best 2 Ya.

 

[Dan White]

This will be my last inside of a thread attempt at declaring that my 5 shot video will be presented differently. Perhaps I should start a new thread to that effect. I have stated this at least a half a dozen times.

That does not mean in any way that the 15 can not make a wide range of angles.

Stan Shuffett

So, respectfully, are you making those shots with the 15 or not? If you just came out and stated what the flaw is in the 5 shot video instead of cloaking everything with secrecy you might have more supporters on board.

It would be helpful to your cause if you did start a new thread on it and explain the deficiencies in the original video. Based on what you say above I'm thinking maybe you made some of those shots with the 15 but not the last one or two?

 

[ENGLISH!]

CTE is an outlier and is outside of typical logic.

Stan Shuffett

Sir,

Your CTE is NOT outside the realm of physics or any of the sciences.

When the smoke, mirrors, & curtains are all taken away...

it resides in the realm of the physical sciences.

Best Wishes for You & Yours.

 

[stan shuffett]

So, respectfully, are you making those shots with the 15 or not? If you just came out and stated what the flaw is in the 5 shot video instead of cloaking everything with secrecy you might have more supporters on board.

It would be helpful to your cause if you did start a new thread on it and explain the deficiencies in the original video. Based on what you say above I'm thinking maybe you made some of those shots with the 15 but not the last one or two?

I was thrilled years ago with my grasp of CTE.......I have called a lot shots over the years by assigning visuals and a pivot direction. No doubt. some were miscalled. Those 5 shots represent my failure to some but those 5 shots represent to me my ongoing efforts at obtaining a perfect understanding of the system. I love those 5 shots for that reason and also the negativity that has come my way because of them. I embrace those 5 shots..... Am I thrilled today with my progress? Yes, a 100 times more so than the dayI posted those 5 shots for the first time.
My work will be freely shared in clinics and online. I am waiting until my book is finished. I had hoped to already be at that point but putting CTE in book form is a very difficult task.But it will be done and as promised it will be supplemented with free clinics and videos.

Stan Shuffett

 

[stan shuffett]

Sir,

Your CTE is NOT outside the realm of physics or any of the sciences.

When the smoke, mirrors, & curtains are all taken away...

it resides in the realm of the physical sciences.

Best Wishes for You & Yours.

You are welcome to challenge my ability to explain CTE as an outlier at my book release. Can we post up $5000 since you think I can not deliver? Should I succeed I will bet 5G back and give you the called 6 out playing 9 ball race to a 100 over 3 days so you can win your money back if I do explain it satisfactorily. Step up to the place, Dizzy.
Normally aspired to table.......

Stan Shuffett

 

[ENGLISH!]

You are welcome to challenge my ability to explain CTE as an outlier at book my release. Can we post up $5000 since you think I can not deliver. I will bet the 5G and then give you the called 6 out playing 9 ball race to a 100 over 3 days to owin your money back if I do explain it satisfactorily. Step up to the place, Dizzy.
Normally aspired to table.......

Stan Shuffett

Perhaps you should qualify as to exactly from what you believe it to be an outlier....

instead of all of the hocus pocus mystery that you do on purpose in advance of the Book for Sale Launch

I'm not sure that by the time your book comes out it will not be "Look there & HAMB & put as many as possible into the pockets & by then you will have learned the 'system'."

I apologize for the tone but it is merely a 'reflection' of yours back at you.

If you truly think that IT is an "outlier" to the Physical Sciences...

that might explain much regarding you.

Best Wishes for You & Yours.

PS Am I now going to be called a word man, a bird, or a weasel, or something worse?

 

[ENGLISH!]

There was some disscusion taking place but I fear that will now be diverted.

 

[stan shuffett]

Perhaps you should qualify as to exactly from what you believe it to be an outlier....

instead of all of the hocus pocus mystery that you do on purpose in advance of the Book for Sale Launch

I'm not sure that by the time your book comes out it will not be "Look there & HAMB & put as many as possible into the pockets & by then you will have learned the 'system'."

I apologize for the tone but it is merely a 'reflection' of yours back at you.

If you truly think that IT is an "outlier" to the Physical Sciences...

that might explain much regarding you.

Best Wishes for You & Yours.

PS Am I now going to be called a word man, a bird, or a weasel, or something worse?

Since you are asking...... I choose Round Man.

Stan Shuffett

 

[ENGLISH!]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well.... I have put on some weight since my heath issues hit & that in & of itself is another issue.

 

[stan shuffett]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well.... I have put on some weight since my heath issues hit & that in & of itself is another issue.

Can respectfully change it to Sphere Man since you are an expert with such.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Dan White]

I was thrilled years ago with my grasp of CTE.......I have called a lot shots over the years by assigning visuals and a pivot direction. No doubt. some were miscalled. Those 5 shots represent my failure to some but those 5 shots represent to me my ongoing efforts at obtaining a perfect understanding of the system. I love those 5 shots for that reason and also the negativity that has come my way because of them. I embrace those 5 shots..... Am I thrilled today with my progress? Yes, a 100 times more so than the dayI posted those 5 shots for the first time.
My work will be freely shared in clinics and online. I am waiting until my book is finished. I had hoped to already be at that point but putting CTE in book form is a very difficult task.But it will be done and as promised it will be supplemented with free clinics and videos.

Stan Shuffett

OK, so you made a mistake. I'm scratching my head trying to figure out why you didn't just take the video down or put a disclaimer on it. Maybe you realized you did something wrong just recently? I hope so, because that one video is responsible for hours upon hours of argument. Also, I hope I'm reading the bold part wrong because it sounds like you love that there has been so much negativity. Surely you didn't mean it to sound like that.

You really should post a new thread on this subject so that your supporters don't have to say stuff in pm's that they don't want made public. They are twisting themselves into knots trying to defend a mistake.