CTE and a 2x1 Surface Explored

[JB Cases]

This is what I think 'objective' means:
ob·jec·tive
adjective

1.1.​

(of a person or their judgement) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.​

So please don't assume I mean something other than the definitions of the words I use. Forgive me if that seems overly frank. Just saying you shouldn't expect me to stretch the meanings of what I write.

So I'm clueless regarding the CTE method. However if it is 'objective' then it should be easy enough for me to set up a shot, follow the method to find the CB to OB aim line, and shoot. There should be no interpretation what so ever in this practice. I've watched some of John's vids, and he'll go through the motions saying that "this is this amount of a cut", "so I find CTE", "shift to 3" (or something), "walk into the shot and shift my body to the shot line"... etc. I'm paraphrasing so please don't take the quotes literally.

-So finding the center to edge alignment from CB to OB is objective
-Knowing the cut number based on the OB pocket line I would also imagine is objective
-The PSR mechanics are probably up to the user so not objective
-The shift into the shot line is the key to the whole thing it seems, so although it doesn't appear to be, lets call it objective.

So why can't the above be drawn out by one person and followed by another...? If you do your CTE calc and provide me with a path to shoot the CB down, then the OB should drop in the pocket. If that's not the case, then how can it be an 'objective' system...?

You are not just paraphrasing you are grossly misrepresenting. Not intentionally but negligently because you are relaying what you heard instead of what I said. Now let me be clear what I mean. Sometimes when I am watching an instruction video (on anything) I will be half listening expecting to "easily" hear the important parts. Almost always I have to go back and pay attention.

If you watch my videos I always start with the cte line, then I determine the perception (edge to a,b,c), then choose the sweep, then I go into ball address.

I don't ever say anything other than objective steps and I list them in order.

What i don't do is give all the detailed instructions for each step. I do videos that are more discussion and proof of concept than instruction.

Ok, past that.

Yes I can absolutely do the cte steps and establish a shot line for you to put your cue on.

Further more I could tell any proficient CTE user, they could tell ten more and any of them can do it as well.

And if you were a proficient cte user then I could tell you the "formula" and with that you would know exactly how to get to the shot line not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

The "shift to shot line" as you put it is in fact very objective. If it were not then the line being pivoted to would not be correct some percentage of the time because the subjective nature of the task would cause inconsistency.

The much more important word is practicality.

What is getting on the correct shot line worth? Depending on how competitive you are it could be the difference between making profit or expense.

So it stands to reason that if any method produces the correct shot line consistently then that method is practical. Arguing about the amount of objectivity doesn't change the thing that the system does.

 

[JB Cases]

Finalizing the aim line - the only actual "active aiming" that's done and the vast majority of the aiming effort - is done by rote memorization/recall with the orienting aid of objective "landmark" references. I think this describes all aiming methods.

pj
chgo

And are all aiming methods equally good at producing the shot line?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...are all aiming methods equally good at producing the shot line?

Aiming methods don’t “produce” the shot line - the player does that. Which “orienting landmarks” and methodology suit you best for that task is largely an individual choice, as much about “fit” as function.

All of this reflects the fundamentally personal (one might say subjective) nature of aiming.

pj
chgo

 

[The_JV]

You are not just paraphrasing you are grossly misrepresenting. Not intentionally but negligently because you are relaying what you heard instead of what I said.

Nah, I was relaying what small fraction my memory retained of what little I paid attention to. Based on that it's probably a fairly accurate recounting of what I took away from the video. The only things that really stuck in my mind was the horrific chicken wing stroke you put on some ghost ball shots, compared to the relatively straight ones you did when demonstrating CTE method.

If I had a link handy I would have included it, or maybe even scanned it again.

However the point was, that you went through the various steps of finding a shot line and performing some type of shift to get yourself aligned. That is indeed a gross simplification but more or less what's happening at some point. My post in question is in regards to what people are calling 'objective' steps, but when in reality they have an element of subjective perception.

So it stands to reason that if any method produces the correct shot line consistently then that method is practical. Arguing about the amount of objectivity doesn't change the thing that the system does.

Nope not at all... I, believe it or not have zero axe to grind regarding the validity of CTE. If it works for people, so be it, and all the power to them. My only interest is in the claim that it is truly an objective system. If this really was the case, then I honestly believe it could in short order raise my game to a professional level.

 

[JB Cases]

Nah, I was relaying what small fraction my memory retained of what little I paid attention to. Based on that it's probably a fairly accurate recounting of what I took away from the video. The only things that really stuck in my mind was the horrific chicken wing stroke you put on some ghost ball shots, compared to the relatively straight ones you did when demonstrating CTE method.

If I had a link handy I would have included it, or maybe even scanned it again.

However the point was, that you went through the various steps of finding a shot line and performing some type of shift to get yourself aligned. That is indeed a gross simplification but more or less what's happening at some point. My post in question is in regards to what people are calling 'objective' steps, but when in reality they have an element of subjective perception.

Nope not at all... I, believe it or not have zero axe to grind regarding the validity of CTE. If it works for people, so be it, and all the power to them. My only interest is in the claim that it is truly an objective system. If this really was the case, then I honestly believe it could in short order raise my game to a professional level.

If you find it please share. I have $100 to send you if you can find the exact sequence you described.

Why would you think that an aiming system would raise your game to pro level? You can test this easily. Get a piece of paper and create a template that gives you the exact shot line. Place this template in line with the pocket every time before you shoot.

Do you run out every time using the template? If no then aiming isn't your catalyst to pro level.

Conversely, the fact that you think that an objective aiming system is the key you need to go to pro level indicates the importance you place on aiming.

I am not mad at you. Yes my stroke is sometimes horrible. Sometimes it is good though. I am an average player with average player problems. Still you completely mischaracterized what I present in regards to cte and I would offer to bet high on that but people here don't like it when I do that. So I will just pay you to find anything I put out that matches your completely wrong assessment of what I do when demonstrating the steps in cte.

 

[JB Cases]

Aiming methods don’t “produce” the shot line - the player does that. Which “orienting landmarks” and methodology suit you best for that task is largely an individual choice, as much about “fit” as function.

All of this reflects the fundamentally personal (one might say subjective) nature of aiming.

pj
chgo

The use of the aiming methods produces the shot. That's like saying that a hammer doesn't produce a fastened joining of two pieces of wood. Try driving a nail without the best tool for the job.

Yes you can drive nails with a variety of objects but the guy next to you with a hammer will do it better and faster all day every day.

 

[JB Cases]

Aiming methods don’t “produce” the shot line - the player does that. Which “orienting landmarks” and methodology suit you best for that task is largely an individual choice, as much about “fit” as function.

All of this reflects the fundamentally personal (one might say subjective) nature of aiming.

pj
chgo

And........ Again you avoid the actual question.

 

[Dan White]

Nope not at all... I, believe it or not have zero axe to grind regarding the validity of CTE. If it works for people, so be it, and all the power to them. My only interest is in the claim that it is truly an objective system. If this really was the case, then I honestly believe it could in short order raise my game to a professional level.

Let's be clear about one thing. JB keeps talking about how objective CTE is in terms of the steps you need to take. That is, aligning the A perception, aligning center to edge (although that is not done any more on 3 out of 4 shots) and so on. JB likes to discuss how these are objective things like using a rail system or ghost table for banks. What he ignores is the question as to whether these objective steps really do put you on the shot line. That is the crux of the issue, not whether the instructions are objective or not (I'd argue there is a lot of subjectivity in finding some of these landmarks, btw). Logically, if you do the same thing you get the same result but the "mystery" is that when the balls are moved a little CTE users seem to pocket the ball anyway. Not a mystery to some of us.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

And........ Again you avoid the actual question.

The answer went over your head (color me unsurprised). The system/method that suits you best is the best one for you - none are better for everybody (or more or less "objective" than others), despite your inability/refusal to accept that fact.

pj
chgo

 

[JB Cases]

Let's be clear about one thing. JB keeps talking about how objective CTE is in terms of the steps you need to take. That is, aligning the A perception, aligning center to edge (although that is not done any more on 3 out of 4 shots) and so on. JB likes to discuss how these are objective things like using a rail system or ghost table for banks. What he ignores is the question as to whether these objective steps really do put you on the shot line. That is the crux of the issue, not whether the instructions are objective or not (I'd argue there is a lot of subjectivity in finding some of these landmarks, btw). Logically, if you do the same thing you get the same result but the "mystery" is that when the balls are moved a little CTE users seem to pocket the ball anyway. Not a mystery to some of us.

They really do put me on the shot line.

Or it's my magic subconscious somehow getting enough information through the steps to make the leap from unknown to known right as I go down to the shooting position.

And, if so and my conscious mind is completely and totally unaware of this magic moment but my conscious mind is fully and totally aware of the fully objective steps that led up to it how then should my conscious mind describe the experience?

 

[JB Cases]

Let's be clear about one thing. JB keeps talking about how objective CTE is in terms of the steps you need to take. That is, aligning the A perception, aligning center to edge (although that is not done any more on 3 out of 4 shots) and so on. JB likes to discuss how these are objective things like using a rail system or ghost table for banks. What he ignores is the question as to whether these objective steps really do put you on the shot line. That is the crux of the issue, not whether the instructions are objective or not (I'd argue there is a lot of subjectivity in finding some of these landmarks, btw). Logically, if you do the same thing you get the same result but the "mystery" is that when the balls are moved a little CTE users seem to pocket the ball anyway. Not a mystery to some of us.

Finding the edge of the object ball from a standing position is subjective? So if were to set up a two balls on the table and have my 8 year old daughter stand behind it so that the two balls are in a perfect line from her perspective and then take a business card and have her tell me to stop when it is touching the equator parallel to the center line of those two balls you think that she would be guessing at that?

What if she did guess and got it wrong? Would there be any possible way for her to ever get it right now than she gets it wrong? Would there ever be any way for her to never get it wrong?

 

[JB Cases]

The answer went over your head (color me unsurprised). The system/method that suits you best is the best one for you - none are better for everybody (or more or less "objective" than others), despite your inability/refusal to accept that fact.

pj
chgo

No, nothing I have ever read by you has been over my head. At all.

Nor have I ever stated that cte is better for everyone. I have said that cte is objective and is much more objective than ghost ball or fidget aiming. And I have stated that cte is fully objective from the users point of view.

Hey Joe how should I drive these 30 nails into this board. Joe: just use whatever works for you because anything is as good as anything else for that task.

Ok, I am willing to have a contest with you using dr. Dave's bu tests. I don't think your aiming methods are superior to mine. Certainly you think your stroke is better so you ought to win easily.

I will do every possible task to figure out who aims better as long as you do it on video. I want the whole planet to see how you fidget and see if you can score higher than me.

Yeah yeah I know.......

In your mind actually shooting shots doesn't say anything about aiming. Which makes me wonder why people put their fingers on rails to indicate the shot line.....

Funny that objective templates are used to train people to use ghost ball. But take the template away and their make percentages drop. Give then cte their make percentages go way up. You just will never admit that there are better tools.

Which makes sense if you have never used a better tool.

 

[JB Cases]

I will bet high that even with my crappy stroke I will pocket more shots out of 100 different shots from medium to hard difficulty in less tries than Dan or Pat.

Anyone want to back them?

If aiming is completely subjective then how I aim cannot be any better than them. We all know that my terrible stroke will cause misses so I am clearly spotting them.

I have 5000 to bet against them both.

Money where your mouth is. I think cte is practical and helps me to aim more accurately. Clearly I need that since my form is so bad. Dan said he has worked hard on his stroke so he should have an advantage there. Pat plays decently as I remember it and has all 27 cut angles memorized or should.

Shots are a mix of banks and direct to pocket.

Let's take this to the table.

 

[Valiant Thor]

No, nothing I have ever read by you has been over my head. At all.

Nor have I ever stated that cte is better for everyone. I have said that cte is objective and is much more objective than ghost ball or fidget aiming. And I have stated that cte is fully objective from the users point of view.

Hey Joe how should I drive these 30 nails into this board. Joe: just use whatever works for you because anything is as good as anything else for that task.

Ok, I am willing to have a contest with you using dr. Dave's bu tests. I don't think your aiming methods are superior to mine. Certainly you think your stroke is better so you ought to win easily.

I will do every possible task to figure out who aims better as long as you do it on video. I want the whole planet to see how you fidget and see if you can score higher than me.

Yeah yeah I know.......

In your mind actually shooting shots doesn't say anything about aiming. Which makes me wonder why people put their fingers on rails to indicate the shot line.....

Funny that objective templates are used to train people to use ghost ball. But take the template away and their make percentages drop. Give then cte their make percentages go way up. You just will never admit that there are better tools.

Which makes sense if you have never used a better tool.

The answer went over your head (color me unsurprised). The system/method that suits you best is the best one for you - none are better for everybody (or more or less "objective" than others), despite your inability/refusal to accept that fact.

pj
chgo

Pj you don't know this but I have met you and watched you play . Toy are a Apa 3 t best, yet you come on here and act like a pro instructor,you are living your life vicariously through this form. You are just a old man who wishes he could plaay

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Let's take this to the table.

lol

Real men measure packages or arm rassle.

pj
chgo

 

[Dan White]

They really do put me on the shot line.

Or it's my magic subconscious somehow getting enough information through the steps to make the leap from unknown to known right as I go down to the shooting position.

And, if so and my conscious mind is completely and totally unaware of this magic moment but my conscious mind is fully and totally aware of the fully objective steps that led up to it how then should my conscious mind describe the experience?

You claim to have a good grip on reality, right? What is more likely: a) randomly placed balls are connected to the pockets in some mysterious way that nobody has recognized in 125+ years of play, and in a way that even the most ardent CTE supporters cannot describe, or b) CTE gets you near enough to the pocket that your brain makes gentle adjustments as you get down on the shot to pocket the balls (or the adjustment is made somewhere in the process)?

 

[Dan White]

Finding the edge of the object ball from a standing position is subjective? So if were to set up a two balls on the table and have my 8 year old daughter stand behind it so that the two balls are in a perfect line from her perspective and then take a business card and have her tell me to stop when it is touching the equator parallel to the center line of those two balls you think that she would be guessing at that?

What if she did guess and got it wrong? Would there be any possible way for her to ever get it right now than she gets it wrong? Would there ever be any way for her to never get it wrong?

Tell her to find one line with her right eye and the other line with her left eye but be sure to turn her face toward the pocket first. How much? Doesn't matter. Yes, I find a lot of subjectivity in that process.

If you asked her to line up the center of the cue ball to the edge of the ob simply using her dominant vision then I'm sure she'd get pretty close and repeatable.

 

[Dan White]

I will bet high that even with my crappy stroke I will pocket more shots out of 100 different shots from medium to hard difficulty in less tries than Dan or Pat.

Anyone want to back them?

If aiming is completely subjective then how I aim cannot be any better than them. We all know that my terrible stroke will cause misses so I am clearly spotting them.

I have 5000 to bet against them both.

Money where your mouth is. I think cte is practical and helps me to aim more accurately. Clearly I need that since my form is so bad. Dan said he has worked hard on his stroke so he should have an advantage there. Pat plays decently as I remember it and has all 27 cut angles memorized or should.

Shots are a mix of banks and direct to pocket.

Let's take this to the table.

Just to be clear what exactly do you think a shooting contest will prove? If you win what does that mean? If PJ or I win what does that mean?

 

[Dan White]

Pj you don't know this but I have met you and watched you play . Toy are a Apa 3 t best, yet you come on here and act like a pro instructor,you are living your life vicariously through this form. You are just a old man who wishes he could plaay

And what kind of scumbag hides behind a fake name while secretly taking notes on people in this forum? You accuse him of being a phony and nobody even knows your real name. What is it? He has a right to know when some guy is dissing him. You call that Valiant?

 

[Valiant Thor]

And what kind of scumbag hides behind a fake name while secretly taking notes on people in this forum? You accuse him of being a phony and nobody even knows your real name. What is it? He has a right to know when some guy is dissing him. You call that Valiant?

That is my name,google it