Yes, I've seen all thatt. Again, I'm glad you like CTE and it works for you. That's not really the point.
Stan and a 33 minute video...
- Thread starter Dan White
- Start date
Yes, I've seen all thatt. Again, I'm glad you like CTE and it works for you. That's not really the point.
Maybe this will help?
One famous account in the Talmud (Shabbat 31a) tells about a gentile who wanted to convert to Judaism. This happened not infrequently, and this individual stated that he would accept Judaism only if a rabbi would teach him the entire Torah while he, the prospective convert, stood on one foot. First he went to Shammai, who, insulted by this ridiculous request, threw him out of the house. The man did not give up and went to Hillel. This gentle sage accepted the challenge, and said:
"What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation of this--go and study it!"
There are some members who seem to think that CTE can be explained while they're 'standing on one foot'. Here's my try at it. Learn to identify the visuals and develop a consistent pivot. The rest is just mechanics. GO AND STUDY IT ON THE TABLE!
Bonus points if you can identify the 'cult' that originated the tale.
Full or ourselves, aren't we?
Nope, just tired of your bullshit.
I think we all just need to have one big skype session, lets figure it out.
Around and around we go
If the system relied on last second adjustments, it would not work. So what you are trying to convey here is that a perception, such as CTEL/A with right sweep always has the same physical alignment for any shot, and the adjustments for multiple angles are made from swooping the cue on the last stroke. If that's the way it worked, I would have walked away a long time ago. "multiple shot angles from one prescribed alignment", is a misinformed statement. A given perception (two lines, sweep to CCB) visually resolves to a unique physical alignment for that specific shot. As you move the CB/OB around the table and align the same visuals, your physical alignment behind CCB will be unique for the given shot. A straight stroke is the answer to pocketing, not adjustments or swooping.
Around and around we go
Amen? :grin-devilish:
One for the "Web-ster"
Since this is a pretty useless thread I was tempted to ask about the best opening checker moves but decided to see if the 'Spiderman" is perusing through it. Here's a pokey man pic for ya.
Since this is a pretty useless thread I was tempted to ask about the best opening checker moves but decided to see if the 'Spiderman" is perusing through it. Here's a pokey man pic for ya.
The point is this. You've a got two line visual perception...railroad tracks going right to the object ball on paper they are parallel. visually they look like down the road they're going to meet but they never do. Object ball appears smaller than the cue ball even though we both know they're both the same size. From the visual offset to perceive these lines an angle forms on the object ball an angle you wont see but its there. That ob angle changes in relation to the pocket up and down the table due to the railroad effect within the category you're aiming in. Remember the railroad tracks going to the object ball do not appear parallel because the object ball is smaller than the cue ball. There is more going than this this alot more. This is a general idea of whats going thats my take on it. I'll wait for the book and videos. In the meantime im gonna keep on studing the balls. And yes visual intelligence will teach you things.
Around and around we go
We go 'round and 'round because you only address topics that are convenient for you, with respect. I asked you about why Stan throws the ball 1 inch when he's not paying attention, yet doesn't throw when he is shooting into a 3 inch pocket. You only care to talk about how well Stan shoots into a 3 inch pocket while he is making a video to prove that throw isn't an issue. So how about addressing that.
Second, I said very clearly that I believe the more likely thing that is going on in reference to the 5 shots video is that he is determining the shot line while still standing. That doesn't require any swoops at the last second. It is kind of like Stan is the one reverse engineering the shot. Turn your body a little more, little more until the shot looks right, then sweep down onto the shot line. Probably picking out two reference lines allows you to fool yourself into seeing the two lines the same way in those 5 different shots. It's a working hypothesis, anyway. We do the best we can with limited information.
If you would address those two items in a straightforward way then we might not have to keep talking about it.
Actually the lines for most of the visual perceptions are not parallel. Do the math. I believe "visual intelligence" is Stanspeak for rote learning, or HAMB. Just keep doing something over and over and your brain will make it work one way or the other.
One way he could use the same visual would be to change his sight picture with a 'nose tweak'. He did a vid showing S/Bob using that technique. You make it sound as though no one can pocket a ball with CTE. Maybe you can't get it but other folks can. Meethinks perhaps thou durst protestest overmuch.
Ok so in reply to Stan’s stroke, why he strikes it perfectly one time and not another, I don’t have an answer to that. It’s not my place to answer questions about Stan’s stroke, that would be for Stan to answer. I’ll guarantee my stroke will not be straight down the center every shot, but that not because I’m steering it, or rely on that to pocket the ball.
As for the 5 shot setup. I have not frequented these forums every day since that video was made. There apparently have been mentions from Stan about the 5 shot video that indicate this was an area where mistakes were made, and refinements to the system have updated the way these shots are now presented. As this is book material I haven’t pressed the issue. So my suggestion is ignore the 5 shot info until the book comes out. It’s admittedly a bad example.
Exactly, maybe they should pick apart his video where he drains like 20 shots in a row under a curtain. How do you steer a ball to a pocket you can't see. Hell, even I made 8 out of 10 shots doing this on my 10 foot snooker table a couple years ago with 2 1/4 inch centenials into 3 1/4 inch snooker pockets.
You give such sensible answers. Thank you
Subconsciously steering to the left is because of an initial bad aim alignment and is done by the brain to correct that. You can clearly tell when someone is doing it as often the whole body also moves.
A stroke glitch is purely mechanical, no steering involved, and is hard to detect as in Stan's case.
Stan's glitch clearly does not invalidate the system
So your answer to probably the two most important questions we are debating re CTE is 1) I don't know and 2) I don't know. You gonna add that to the FAQ? :smile: j/k. Seriously, don't come back in a month and say we've been over all this stuff before.
Regarding question 1, I may have you at a disadvantage here. I'm forgetting that you might not have been following all the recent developments, so let me clarify question 1, as it has nothing to do with Stan's stroke: Why, as the attached link discusses, does Stan achieve a 1" throw in the first video when he clearly is thinking more about reproducing the hit exactly the same in both cases, only varying the speed? Forget the video with 3" pockets. Let's talk about the first one where I contend that he wasn't trying to control the ball direction, only the speed of the shot. Why does the ball throw, twice in a row exactly the same way in that first video (1" less throw when hitting hard)?
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=462546
Regarding the 5 shots, Stan said he would present things differently now but at the same time he still says everything is correct. He also said you know the answer to the "mystery" perception as well as he does. You are the only other person on earth who understands. But, curiously, you are as much in the dark as the rest of us who are waiting for the book. The book that Stan has just about as much admitted in his latest videos that will not explain the mystery. I guess it will be up to a team of scientists at Cal Tech to figure it out.
If you don't have a 100% straight stroke then you already know how to pocket balls while steering (or swooping, or use whatever word you want) the cue. I did it for most of my years playing pool. You can be very accurate until you need to hit hard, in which case it becomes difficult to time everything exactly. I haven't concluded that Stan steers on every shot, but we do have evidence that he does it at least on some shots. That is not debatable. Well. let me rephrase, we have proof that Stan does not always deliver the cue in the same direction that he takes his practice strokes, which is where his CTE method tells him to aim.
CTE works perfectly well for the shot angles that result from the different visual perceptions. Filling in the gaps requires adjustments either in stroke or initial set up (ie, finding the aim line before even starting the CTE process). I don't pretend to have the final answers, but these discussions are certainly putting us on that path!
answers in blue.
Last edited:
Another load of bull from Dan.
CTE works perfectly well for the shot angles that result from the different visual perceptions. Filling in the gaps requires adjustments either in stroke or initial set up (ie, finding the aim line before even starting the CTE process).
No it doesn't. You've been told the answer and refuse (or are unable) to comprehend.
I don't pretend to have the final answers, but these discussions are certainly putting us on that path!
Yep, you've been a load of laughs and I hope you don't hurt your elbow by patting yourself on the back so much.
CTE works perfectly well for the shot angles that result from the different visual perceptions. Filling in the gaps requires adjustments either in stroke or initial set up (ie, finding the aim line before even starting the CTE process).
No it doesn't. You've been told the answer and refuse (or are unable) to comprehend.
I don't pretend to have the final answers, but these discussions are certainly putting us on that path!
Yep, you've been a load of laughs and I hope you don't hurt your elbow by patting yourself on the back so much.
Last edited:
Not a try.....an obvious observation. Anyone with eyes can see the outside english being applied. And anyone that sets the shot up can see that a 1/2 ball hit sends it into the end rail. I was going to post a link to the video for everyone to see the truth, but thought that would be a little mean.