What is this "pay no attention to the OB for CTE aiming"?

stan shuffett said:
Ok, So.......

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

Yes sir, could a chart be formed to catalog the various cb/ob shot angle relationships?

In other words, "hmmmm i'm not sure if this 15 degree shot on the 1ball requires a left or right sweep, let me pull up the chart (that Stan made) and find out"

I assume it could be done? I have a reason for this question and this is the last time im ever going to say this, the reasons now and the future have nothing to do with backdooring you or CTE into a trap. I'm more direct than that and if I got a issue, ill spit it out and I don't have any concerning issues with you that are important in my personal grand scheme, just like I got issues with anyone else that isn't a deal breaker or else I wouldn't even talk to them.

For the record, the video that from what I understand that brought a lot of controversy with those 5 shots that edge to A perception seems virtually impossible. I get it of course on both sides of the argument.

Yes sir, I also get that from your perspective, there is no argument and I have to agree because if you were trying to bullshit people, why would you make a video like that where it might be hard to swallow for most or whatever.

Are we clear so far? I hate having to explain myself to the dam umpth degree but I'm not lazy, so there you go.

I took the 5th shot and set it up very generously toward not being such a massive cut to see myself if you are rotating reality into complete warpage to pull the shot off and it appears you were.

BUT,

I went and checked the video again, I checked it very carefully this time, that's what I usually do before dumping someone into the abyss, never to return in my memory: analyze..........COMPLETE:

FACT: The table in the video is a 5x10 and not a 4.5 like i was trying to run the test.

FACT: I never heard that particular fact addressed.

FACT: I never read more than a few posts in the thread that contains the original argument.

FACT: The pocket is obviously farther away on a 5x10.

CONJECTURE: You won't like this Stan but it technically means nothing because I am obviously of questionable mind, I found I can bend those edge to A, center to edge lines far enough to conceivably make that cut even on a 4.5 table.

True, I'm not qualified to critique CTE, I don't critique it in reality other than I don't want to go that direction and I think you're too damn rigid, but the other side has a point even if they are wrong and I believe they are because despite you being too damn defensive, I don't think you are a con man or certainly not as in having a malevolent heart.

I rarely trust people Stan, so with that, im staking alot in what I just said. It would not be good if I was wrong and I am not in that sort of business. I take being right pretty serious and i say that lightly.

Fair enough? You got a book coming out, do you really think it's going to shut up the majority of critics?

Personally I don't even see what the problem is. You got a system, you say it works, you come off arrogant about it but I understand the backstory and why you talk the way you do. Personally, your posts don't match the guy in the video or the phone convo we had that helped to settle a serious confirmation I needed about a aspect of this game.

BUT, I don't have a problem with any of your persona's, but understand where others are coming from even if it wasn't you who started it and I would imagine you didn't based off the fkd up pool attitudes out there including my own but damn im not remotely as bad as the consensus.

Are we straight Stan? Probably not lol but I don't mind that.

And with that, im had my fill here for a while, hopefully a month or two. I'm really close to figuring out how to stop shot 45 degree cuts.......on a magnetic table but I won't mention that part when i start making videos......shhhhh don't tell anyone 🤓
 
paultex said:
Yes sir, could a chart be formed to catalog the various cb/ob shot angle relationships?

In other words, "hmmmm i'm not sure if this 15 degree shot on the 1ball requires a left or right sweep, let me pull up the chart (that Stan made) and find out"

I assume it could be done? I have a reason for this question and this is the last time im ever going to say this, the reasons now and the future have nothing to do with backdooring you or CTE into a trap. I'm more direct than that and if I got a issue, ill spit it out and I don't have any concerning issues with you that are important in my personal grand scheme, just like I got issues with anyone else that isn't a deal breaker or else I wouldn't even talk to them.

For the record, the video that from what I understand that brought a lot of controversy with those 5 shots that edge to A perception seems virtually impossible. I get it of course on both sides of the argument.

Yes sir, I also get that from your perspective, there is no argument and I have to agree because if you were trying to bullshit people, why would you make a video like that where it might be hard to swallow for most or whatever.

Are we clear so far? I hate having to explain myself to the dam umpth degree but I'm not lazy, so there you go.

I took the 5th shot and set it up very generously toward not being such a massive cut to see myself if you are rotating reality into complete warpage to pull the shot off and it appears you were.

BUT,

I went and checked the video again, I checked it very carefully this time, that's what I usually do before dumping someone into the abyss, never to return in my memory: analyze..........COMPLETE:

FACT: The table in the video is a 5x10 and not a 4.5 like i was trying to run the test.

FACT: I never heard that particular fact addressed.

FACT: I never read more than a few posts in the thread that contains the original argument.

FACT: The pocket is obviously farther away on a 5x10.

CONJECTURE: You won't like this Stan but it technically means nothing because I am obviously of questionable mind, I found I can bend those edge to A, center to edge lines far enough to conceivably make that cut even on a 4.5 table.

True, I'm not qualified to critique CTE, I don't critique it in reality other than I don't want to go that direction and I think you're too damn rigid, but the other side has a point even if they are wrong and I believe they are because despite you being too damn defensive, I don't think you are a con man or certainly not as in having a malevolent heart.

I rarely trust people Stan, so with that, im staking alot in what I just said. It would not be good if I was wrong and I am not in that sort of business. I take being right pretty serious and i say that lightly.

Fair enough? You got a book coming out, do you really think it's going to shut up the majority of critics?

Personally I don't even see what the problem is. You got a system, you say it works, you come off arrogant about it but I understand the backstory and why you talk the way you do. Personally, your posts don't match the guy in the video or the phone convo we had that helped to settle a serious confirmation I needed about a aspect of this game.

BUT, I don't have a problem with any of your persona's, but understand where others are coming from even if it wasn't you who started it and I would imagine you didn't based off the fkd up pool attitudes out there including my own but damn im not remotely as bad as the consensus.

Are we straight Stan? Probably not lol but I don't mind that.

And with that, im had my fill here for a while, hopefully a month or two. I'm really close to figuring out how to stop shot 45 degree cuts.......on a magnetic table but I won't mention that part when i start making videos......shhhhh don't tell anyone ��
Click to expand...

I need a lifeline.
Nope, the Cb-OB relational perceptions can not be charted for a 2x1.
Nope, the book won't shut up the critics. I am primarily speaking of the ones that hate.
Concerning the 5: It's a moot point. I indicated at least 2 years ago that there were changes to the 5. I made mistakes and have errored on scores of shots over the past 10 years. My mistakes have proven to be my strongest ally. What's important is that the system does not lie. A human can misread a situation but in no way does that weaken center to edge aiming.
I have been fairly consistent no matter where I hang my hat.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
Low500 said:
This issue has confused me about the CTE aiming method from the gate.
I've worked with it and have made great progress, but "not paying any attention to the object ball" has to be either poor transfer of knowledge OR an outright lie.
I watched a CTE aiming player on Youtube "Gerald something" and he sends those balls into the pockets like they were rockets...yet he says, after getting his perceptions, that he pays no attention to the object ball from that point on. ?????????
How can this be???
You've GOT to at least point the cue stick in the direction of the shot to make it work...otherwise, you might shoot totally missing the entire object ball.
Getting the perceptions was the easy part....no big deal to that, in my opinion.
But from THAT POINT ON...what is the MOST EFFICIENT WAY to go down on the shot to let the eyes lead and the body follow..?? I'm still missing some shots I shouldn't miss at times...I don't like that. It costs me money. (Where I play, if you miss during a highly favorable percentage run-out...you don't get back to the table again.)
What is the correct process for getting down into shooting position with that half-tip offset, ready for the manual pivot to Center cue ball...?
Some of you CTE'rs who are far better than me can help me here. (don't tell me about any 'PRO1'...this manual pivoting is all I need to bust most people)
Keep on truckin'
:thumbup:
Click to expand...


Professional troll alert.

Lou Figueroa
 
stan shuffett said:
I need a lifeline.
Nope, the Cb-OB relational perceptions can not be charted for a 2x1.
Nope, the book won't shut up the critics. I am primarily speaking of the ones that hate.
Concerning the 5: It's a moot point. I indicated at least 2 years ago that there were changes to the 5. I made mistakes and have errored on scores of shots over the past 10 years. My mistakes have proven to be my strongest ally. What's important is that the system does not lie. A human can misread a situation but in no way does that weaken center to edge aiming.
I have been fairly consistent no matter where I hang my hat.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

I hear yuh, see, the thing is, sometimes i address a shot and have a hard time distinguishing a "sweep" of thick or thin, which for me, is ultimately a shift or manipulation of left or right eye combined with a physical rotation dependent on how severe i want to warp the tangent line angle of cb contact on ob.....thus being able to bend or straighten shot angles past standard paths.

I always keep reverting back to your line of "you will just know over time" and thats true i found because i could never figure out how to catalog it.

The balls are at static rest, i have 2 eyes, i shoot with my right hand. This is a known constant, yet its as if......well, i dont know how to explain it.

I still dont believe this but im not saying its untrue......the shot angle itself warps and is in flux because of pure perception? So in other words, all things being static or constant, perception throws in a "it depends" variance to the formula that makes the equation unsolvable?

I still say bullshit, but i can understand the multiple effect combination can make quantifying it a very involved and complex and very long system.

If thats the case, my brain storage is getting to full and explains why i have a hard time scooping five spoons of oatmeal into a bowl every morning. Im being funny but i swear i have had to start over a few times after losing count after 2 scoops.

My brain be needing the cloud service Mr Shuffett.
 
Last edited:
paultex said:
I hear yuh, see, the thing is, sometimes i address a shot and have a hard time distinguishing a "sweep" of thick or thin, which for me, is ultimately a shift or manipulation of left or right eye combined with a physical rotation dependent on how severe i want to warp the tangent line angle of cb contact on ob.....thus being able to bend or straighten shot angles past standard paths.

I always keep reverting back to your line of "you will just know over time" and thats true i found because i could never figure out how to catalog it.

The balls are at static rest, i have 2 eyes, i shoot with my right hand. This is a known constant, yet its as if......well, i dont know how to explain it.

I still dont believe this but im not saying its untrue......the shot angle itself warps and is in flux because of pure perception? So in other words, all things being static or constant, perception throws in a "it depends" variance to the formula that makes the equation unsolvable?

I still say bullshit, but i can understand the multiple effect combination can make quantifying it a very involved and complex and very long system.

If thats the case, my brain storage is getting to full and explains why i have a hard time scooping five spoons of oatmeal into a bowl every morning. Im being funny but i swear i have had to start over a few times after losing count after 2 scoops.

My brain be needing the cloud service Mr Shuffett.
Click to expand...

Eye manipulation has zero to do with anything concerning the solution for CCB in the CTE system. It's not a sweep to just somewhere that one thinks makes the shot. It is an alignment to CCB that has nothing to do with guessing. The system takes the player to the CCB that is used.

What one will learn over time is recognition of what the correct visual is along with proper pivot directions. It's not, I look at the shot and I need to impose this or that upon the shot in order to make it go.

It all boils down to-you don't know what you don't know. I honestly doubt that you could figure out how to get to CCB in 500 years from an offset. Not that I don't think you're plenty smart but what I'm sharing has only surfaced one time for explanation in the past 200 plus years.

Call it BS if you want.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
Dan White said:
But if you do you will get banned. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

Even if you could fulfill your fantasy of calling CTE bull hockey here on AZ, that little vibration wouldn't move the needle at all. CTE is off and running. There's nothing that you can do about it. There's gonna be lessons, clinics, online videos and books galore. Oh, but that damn needle is gonna move and move big. Lord help the skinny and frail because the positive vibes will breakem' into little pieces. All of King Louie's haters won't be able to put them back together ever again.

Stan Shuffett
 
stan shuffett said:
Even if you could fulfill your fantasy of calling CTE bull hockey here on AZ, that little vibration wouldn't move the needle at all. CTE is off and running. There's nothing that you can do about it. There's gonna be lessons, clinics, online videos and books galore. Oh, but that damn needle is gonna move and move big. Lord help the skinny and frail because the positive vibes will breakem' into little pieces. All of King Louie's haters won't be able to put them back together ever again.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

You can be a difficult guy to root for at times, Stan, what with your hidden and not so hidden insults, but I really do hope you have something revolutionary and that it does take off. I (among others) have been skeptical because that is the nature of how science gets moved forward. It is nothing personal.
 
Dan White said:
You can be a difficult guy to root for at times, Stan, what with your hidden and not so hidden insults, but I really do hope you have something revolutionary and that it does take off. I (among others) have been skeptical because that is the nature of how science gets moved forward. It is nothing personal.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's personal with you but I do suspect that it's hard to separate me from your desire to see CTE go down the tubes. It's a CTE mission and you're a seasoned soldier.

I wasn't hiding anything a bit more than more than you were with your displeasure of being duck-taped to the point that can't verbalize bull hockey on this aiming forum. Perhaps you can go to the test forum and say "bull hockey" there. That might be fun!

Stan Shuffett
 
stan shuffett said:
I don't think it's personal with you but I do suspect that it's hard to separate me from your desire to see CTE go down the tubes. It's a CTE mission and you're a seasoned soldier.
Click to expand...

You seem to enjoy having adversaries. The only time I did something tricky with you was the Low500 thread. I started that thread by talking about checkers because I was convinced that you and Low were either the same person, or were coordinating your posts somehow. You have to admit there were some strange coincidences, but, in the end I was wrong.

Now, for the tenth time, I have no agenda to see CTE go down the tubes. When I tried CTE originally with Hal and then more recently through your videos and AZ discussion, it didn't work for me. Being curious, I delved into it and proposed some reasons why it might work for some and not others. JB is on record applauding some of the analysis I was doing. Everything soon became ugly (on both sides), but that was not my intention. I just wanted to figure out what was really going on. Now I have moved on and I have a passing interest in what your book says. If you can come with the goods, and I hope you do, then terrific. It will be great for pool and I'm all ears.

I wasn't hiding anything a bit more than more than you were with your displeasure of being duck-taped to the point that can't verbalize bull hockey on this aiming forum. Perhaps you can go to the test forum and say "bull hockey" there. That might be fun!

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

I disagreed in principle that forum moderators forbid discussing the good and bad, the pro and con of different systems. I mean, how can you call it a discussion forum with those rules. Having said that, I have zero interest in debating CTE. You'll note I've barely mentioned CTE in probably the last year. It just isn't productive, so I let it go.

Be well, Stan.
 
Dan White said:
You seem to enjoy having adversaries. The only time I did something tricky with you was the Low500 thread. I started that thread by talking about checkers because I was convinced that you and Low were either the same person, or were coordinating your posts somehow. You have to admit there were some strange coincidences, but, in the end I was wrong.

Now, for the tenth time, I have no agenda to see CTE go down the tubes. When I tried CTE originally with Hal and then more recently through your videos and AZ discussion, it didn't work for me. Being curious, I delved into it and proposed some reasons why it might work for some and not others. JB is on record applauding some of the analysis I was doing. Everything soon became ugly (on both sides), but that was not my intention. I just wanted to figure out what was really going on. Now I have moved on and I have a passing interest in what your book says. If you can come with the goods, and I hope you do, then terrific. It will be great for pool and I'm all ears.



I disagreed in principle that forum moderators forbid discussing the good and bad, the pro and con of different systems. I mean, how can you call it a discussion forum with those rules. Having said that, I have zero interest in debating CTE. You'll note I've barely mentioned CTE in probably the last year. It just isn't productive, so I let it go.

Be well, Stan.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you had your spaghetti "detente" style tonight. Okay! That's sounds good.

Stan Shuffett
 
stan shuffett said:
Even if you could fulfill your fantasy of calling CTE bull hockey here on AZ, that little vibration wouldn't move the needle at all. CTE is off and running. There's nothing that you can do about it. There's gonna be lessons, clinics, online videos and books galore. Oh, but that damn needle is gonna move and move big. Lord help the skinny and frail because the positive vibes will breakem' into little pieces. All of King Louie's haters won't be able to put them back together ever again.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

Lol ok, that's the spirit, some creative humor. Maybe im rubbing off on you.

Hmmmm, you could be right about CTE taking off like that and now is the time to get in on the ground floor BUT, I would feel like I'm selling out my principles and I admit I have gotten to the point where even if I knew your way is better than mine or for me I should say, I still would have to delude myself in proving im right gosh darn it.

That's a first for me but you know this thing is personal from the get go. I'm damn mad and I got a score to settle with the past.

Any way, the perception talk and all that has been pretty good and I hope someone benefits from it even if they don't understand. They will or might but at least it's out there.

Thanks Stan
 
Low500 said:
I just got in from going through 12 guys, undefeated in the "El Cheapo" 8-ball tournament thanks to the CTE and my efforts with studying it.
Broke and ran out on 4 of them. Loved it! You should have heard them squall.:smile:
Got the 140 bucks and am home, showered, and snacked...........and it isn't even midnight. Sipping on my Crown & water.
I had one long one for the money and I would've sworn that sucker was a 30 degree perception at first glance...but the eyes said "no, you dumbass, that's a 15, so hit it that way". I stuck with the system, lined up, made that minute pivot and that 8 ball went into the hole like it was on a radar beam. (the opponent was unscrewing his stick during this as I intentionally made a drawn out deal of the aiming just to teach him a lesson about trying to shark me...I been around too long, in too many pressure situations, to fall for that lame stuff)
I hope none of those guys pick up on this CTE thing themselves. (I know, I know, that's the self centered, greedy, side of me talking)
But as Ayn Rand said........."greed is good".
Regards, Pete.
Keep on truckin'
:thumbup:
Click to expand...

That sounds like some good shooting. Keep up the good work Congrats:) Did you play on 9 footers
 
Here's a good example of why 4 individuals on here should be prohibited from entering into ANY and ALL posts or threads involving CTE or Stan.

One of the top two on the list is DAN WHITE!
He absolutely cannot control himself and it eats him up inside that CTE exists, Stan teaches it, and pool players including pros use it. He/they have to save the world.

Here are 3 or his most recent ramblings of hate smothered with blatant disparities coming out of the other side of his mouth.

"But if you do you will get banned." A supposedly funny opener to break the ice for more to come.. Charm the audience with humor.)
Dan White

"You can be a difficult guy to root for at times, "Which is why I take the opportunity to slam you every chance I have") Stan, what with your hidden and not so hidden insults, ("Off to the races! Here's Dan INSULTING Stan and our intelligence by drawing attention away from himself and putting the blame on Stan.) but I really do hope you have something revolutionary and that it does take off. (Really? He and the other anti-CTE addicts have been trying to destroy it for the last 20 years) I (among others) have been skeptical because that is the nature of how science gets moved forward. It is nothing personal." Somebody would have to be in a brain dead coma to believe there's nothing personal. OF COURSE IT IS!)

Dan White

You seem to enjoy having adversaries. Stan and everyone who uses CTE is an adversary of Dan and the rest of their crew) The only time I did something tricky with you was the Low500 thread. I started that thread by talking about checkers because I was convinced that you and Low were either the same person, or were coordinating your posts somehow. You have to admit there were some strange coincidences, (Only in Dan White's mind. Not one other person considered it.)but, in the end I was wrong.

Now, for the tenth time, I have no agenda to see CTE go down the tubes. (ROTFLMAO! This from the man who has been doing his utmost best to send it down the tubes for years! When I tried CTE originally with Hal and then more recently through your videos and AZ discussion, it didn't work for me. Being curious, I delved into it and proposed some reasons why it might work for some and not others. JB is on record applauding some of the analysis I was doing. Everything soon became ugly (on both sides), but that was not my intention.Innocent Dan strikes again. Of course it was his intention!

I just wanted to figure out what was really going on. (The pouring of honey keeps getting thicker and thicker. Now I have moved on and I have a passing interest in what your book says. (I guess if you've moved on we'll never see another post from Dan White again until the book comes out. Who wants to set the OVER/UNDER in hours or days on this monster fib?)If you can come with the goods, and I hope you do, then terrific. It will be great for pool and I'm all ears. Only to try to dissect it further to slam it into the grave once and for all.)

I disagreed in principle that forum moderators forbid discussing the good and bad, the pro and con of different systems. I mean, how can you call it a discussion forum with those rules. (Interpretation: "It takes away my ability to keep slamming it for fear that I might be BANNED another 24 or 12 hours") Having said that, I have zero interest in debating CTE. ("I'll just come here and slam it under the guise that I'm really not slamming it by sugar coating what I say like in this post.") You'll note I've barely mentioned CTE in probably the last year. THE LAST YEAR?! This has to be the whopper of lies since Bill Clinton said "I did NOT have sex with that woman") It just isn't productive, so I let it go. That's why I'm in here once again.):confused:

Be well, Stan. (How considerate)

Dan White


This will not be the last post made by Dan White about CTE or to Stan until after Stan's book comes out. Anybody want to bet big money on it?

DISCLAIMER: This is NOT an attack on Dan White. I'm just funnin' with him like he was with Stan. It's just about expressing our own individual sense of humor in these posts.
 
Last edited:
paultex said:
I would feel like I'm selling out my principles and I admit I have gotten to the point where even if I knew your way is better than mine or for me I should say, I still would have to delude myself in proving im right gosh darn it.

That's a first for me but you know this thing is personal from the get go. I'm damn mad and I got a score to settle with the past.

Thanks Stan
Click to expand...

Yo, Polty. I don't know if anyone knows what your principles are including you.

Since you said you wouldn't ever be coming out with a book or videos (maybe I incorrectly interpreted it), what is your purpose? As far as I can gather, you've never played as a pro in tournaments, don't gamble or play in leagues, and are not a certified pool instructor with any legitimate and known organizations.

It seems like you're trying to identify the ONE finite aspect in each area of executing a pool stroke which will be the best preferred way to do it from what you do on the table.

Just a reminder, there are many different ways to stand angled to the shot, grip the butt in the fingers and hand with varying grip pressure, form a bridge, position the eyes, aim the shot, bend low or stand upright, point the toes and width of both feet, what to do with the elbow, etc., etc. Observing the greatest of great pro pool players of the past and present clearly illustrate all of the variations in every area.

Since we're all humans as opposed to robots or you at the table, what's right for some might be wrong for others.

I have to wonder if anyone really understands your ramblings or takes you seriously since nothing definitive or completed is ever posted, not to speak of the fact you seem to be in another dimension or parallel world from everyone else.

FOCUS! And as 8pack once posted to you, DUMB IT DOWN.
 
Last edited:
SpiderWebComm said:
Yo, Polty. I don't know if anyone knows what your principles are including you.

Since you said you wouldn't ever be coming out with a book or videos (maybe I incorrectly interpreted it), what is your purpose? As far as I can gather, you've never played as a pro in tournaments, don't gamble or play in leagues, and are not a certified pool instructor with any legitimate and known organizations.

It seems like you're trying to identify the ONE finite aspect in each area of executing a pool stroke which will be the best preferred way to do it from what you do on the table.

Just a reminder, there are many different ways to stand angled to the shot, grip the butt in the fingers and hand with varying grip pressure, form a bridge, position the eyes, aim the shot, bend low or stand upright, point the toes and width of both feet, what to do with the elbow, etc., etc. Observing the greatest of great pro pool players of the past and present clearly illustrate all of the variations in every area.

Since we're all humans as opposed to robots or you at the table, what's right for some might be wrong for others.

I have to wonder if anyone really understands your ramblings or takes you seriously since nothing definitive or completed is ever posted, not to speak of the fact you seem to be in another dimension or parallel world from everyone else.

FOCUS! And as 8pack once posted to you, DUMB IT DOWN.
Click to expand...

If I dumb it down, then I would still be in the same boat just like Stan. If Stan did the same videos and made the same claims but didn't have the resume of past performance and also missed like a mofo on those videos but assured everyone CTE works.......well, let your imagination run riot mate.

I am or was listed in bob jewetts NPL back in the 90's with a 117 average I think and the highest win rate on the list at the time. My peak was short lived and it was not uncommon to find me playing 100$ sets before a tournament started to "get warmed up" or play those type of stakes against anyone without knowing who they were just to find out and ofcourse Ive been drilled hard like that but not always and those times I got drilled and was outmatched, i lose a few hundred and quit. I never asked for weight in those cases and just quit. It would take basically a low level type pro or little less to torture me like that but in all honesty, my game sucked balls. Aim thick and spin out of it, which has no future and is limited and is dangerous.

Have you ever played golf? If so, take a slice game and develop it and find out over time it sucks, then "straighten it out" after 10+ years of basically not playing.

I came back a few years ago, and the rust of all that didn't get really ugly till a year later and that's when it really got FUN. Launching cueball miscues off the table for the cash against strong players and missing ball in hand, but hanging in there because "it will change and it's just around the corner and I'll show them!"

Miscue draw launches off the table where the ball polisher wouldn't get all the knicks out of a measle ball. Weeeeeeeeeee!

Oh it's just around the coe'nuh mang, juz hang in the'h play'uh gucci mane mangggg.

And I did fo MONTHS AND MONTHS MANNNN.

Then a very experienced semi legend I knew of, walked in the pool hall last December, he knew who I was in the past, not that he gave a shit and rightfully so because I wasn't a legit strong player, and clued me in on the dominant eye.

12 hours a day for 3 weeks straight before that new visual picture became "comfortable" and I say that sarcastically.

Then I learned how to read counselor, first it was run away bunny, then spot goes to the farm, then law books mostly.

You ever been a woman? I learned to get in touch with my nurturing feminine side, yep, what isssss the FORM'OOLAH for compensation sir? Is it, stand on the shotline elbow out? Orrrrr elbow in? Stand 2' left of cb to get a right angle shaft across your vision center but now the object ball is 3' to the left of perception?

I really don't think you understand, FO'TEEN YEARS counselor.

Ohhh mee oh my, im late, got to get. See you around coun'sluh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top