Let's All Support Stan
- Thread starter Dan White
- Start date
Lol. Never take a bet on anything where winning or losing is determined by the person holding the cards and making the rules. Reminds me of this old "Friends" episode where Joey loses some money and Chandler makes up a game on the spot to allow Joey to win his money back. Very funny stuff.....https://youtu.be/vYhYJS7LC_Y
Is it me or is somebody in this forum off their rocker? Different people keep blurting out different variations of some kind of challenge from Stan that Stan has yet to announce publicly, and then I'm made to look the fool because I'm still confused as to what Stan's wager or challenge or bet actually is. I must be in bizzarro world.
OK so finally an answer. cookie man, an expert CTE user, believes that throw does not exist in CTE physics (in spite of direct video proof to the contrary). Got it. I also see from above that you prefer to deal in slogans rather than actual science. Got that, too. We've already learned that you don't understand the difference between objective and subjective and now we see that you don't know the difference between science and advertising.
At least we finally got to the bottom of something after like three days. I'm done with it. You can make your final insults.
Thanks for finally answering the question.
I believe what cookie is saying is that CTE is 100% visual, a simple perspective of the cb by use of 2 visualized lines. The actual stroke and the cb hitting the ob are not part of the system, which means everything that happens after that final pivot/sweep to ccb is NOT part of CTE. The cue stick, however, is part of the system because it must pivot or sweep to ccb in order to finalize the process. After that the system is over and it's time to shoot.
Of course, the same "no throw" can be said for ANY aiming system. Systems provide a shot line, and once the cb is moving along that line it is no longer within the system, so therefore there is zero throw in the system itself. It's a good tricky use of wordage. But when Stan says CTE trumps throw, I don't believe he's using such wordplay...he is saying that the system aligns you in a manner that offsets or compensates for throw, like most players do anyway by aiming to hit certain shots a little thinner when they know throw will be a major factor.
I think you are bending logic into a pretzel in order to be diplomatic. Stan has said that CTE actually straightens out a crooked stroke so you might put that in the blender as well and see what you get. :wink:
You can shoot a cut shot firm, then shoot the same shot soft, and there will be over a 3° difference in the throw (firm hit may throw the ob 3°, while the soft hit will throw it 6°). So when Stan says the system automatically aligns you for an overcut, he should say it's an overcut that accounts for normal/average throw.
If you make a cut shot with stun when the ob is at least 4ft from the pocket, and then set the exact same shot back up (which would require the exact same perception and pivot/sweep), but this time hit it with a rolling cb at medium speed, the ball won't hit the pocket. There's about a 2° margin of error from that distance, and the difference in throw between these two shots exceeds that 2°. So the system can't make both shots -- it has to be one or the other, but not both. The system might "trump" or automatically compensate for a certain amount of throw by providing an overcut, but two identical shots shot at different speeds will need two different amounts of overcut, and that's not going to come from using the same perception and pivot on each shot. The player would need to use draw or spin or speed or stun to compensate for the extra +/- throw that occurs.
So I if you use a touch if inside then the surface to surface speed differential will be the same as a firm shot and result in less throw.
So we just have to shoot slow shots with inside right?
You have one wild imagination.
---------------
Last edited:
Even in the video you provided a link to, Stan says he is going to "augment" the overcut.
Do you really believe (since every CTE perception automatically provides an overcut) that the amount of overcut is different for two identical shots requiring the exact same visuals and sweep/pivot to ccb?
You have to do as Stan does, which is to shoot the shot in a manner that augments the natural overcut (his choice of wording).
You can say I'm wrong, but facts are facts. If the ob is within a couple of feet from the pocket the throw difference with different speed or spin or stun won't make much of a difference pocketing the ball, other than the ob dragging its feet as it goes into the pocket. But from half table (where the margin of error going into the pocket is less than 2°), shooting a stun shot vs shooting a shot with a medium-speed rolling cb, the difference in throw is plenty enough to cause a miss.
Anyway, I wish Stan the best with his book and truth series. I'm sure it'll all be explained and accounted for in the book. The more pool books available the better! We need more people playing pool.
Last edited:
----------
Last edited:
Cups...lol
Except the video would be published for the world to see. And it's not really a bet, you get 5000 dollars if you succeed. But we know by the comments and questions of the people against CTE that they could never do it anyways. Shame you guys never took the time to actually learn CTE. Keep on bashing away though.
It's definitely you and your obsession
Taking bets on how long this will last lmao