Working through the "Truth Series" created by Stan S.

[The_JV]

I will say I'm disappointed by the lack of input from the 'pro' CTE members. While I won't add more crap to the validity argument, it is disheartening that those in the know seem not to care about answering the apparent inconsistencies in the SL, AL, and PX.

I'll assume it's merely because they're tired of being pulled into debates over CTE to validate the teachings. Which is understandable I suppose.

 

[cookie man]

I will say I'm disappointed by the lack of input from the 'pro' CTE members. While I won't add more crap to the validity argument, it is disheartening that those in the know seem not to care about answering the apparent inconsistencies in the SL, AL, and PX.

I'll assume it's merely because they're tired of being pulled into debates over CTE to validate the teachings. Which is understandable I suppose.

Yea answering your questions and getting attacked by all the others isn't very appealing.
The only advice i'll give you is watch the truth series if you want. If it sounds good and you want to pursue CTE find an instructor and finish understanding everything. AZ billiards in reality is useless concerning CTE. Look at Mohrt's thread. He was/is willing to give detailed information and answer questions, all he asked was for the person to actually try the shots on a pool table. NO ONE TOOK HIM UP ON IT.

 

[French Roots]

I will say I'm disappointed by the lack of input from the 'pro' CTE members. While I won't add more crap to the validity argument, it is disheartening that those in the know seem not to care about answering the apparent inconsistencies in the SL, AL, and PX.

I'll assume it's merely because they're tired of being pulled into debates over CTE to validate the teachings. Which is understandable I suppose.

More non-truth from others. Dan White shot Mr. Mohrt's shots and it is not generally known if I &/or others have also done so. Dan White's results were/are exactly what was/is to be expected per science.

 

[Low500]

I will say I'm disappointed by the lack of input from the 'pro' CTE members. While I won't add more crap to the validity argument, it is disheartening that those in the know seem not to care about answering the apparent inconsistencies in the SL, AL, and PX.
I'll assume it's merely because they're tired of being pulled into debates over CTE to validate the teachings. Which is understandable I suppose.

 

[Low500]

It is because THERE ARE NO INCONSISTENCIES.
Any inconsistencies exist in the minds of those who do not know what they're doing.

 

[cookie man]

More non-truth from others. Dan White shot Mr. Mohrt's shots and it is not if I & others generally known if I &/or other have also done so. Dan White's result were/are exactly what was/is to be expected per science.

Yea Dan said he shot them once, who knows if he did or not. But then what happened? Did he do a back and forth with Mohrt while continuing to shoot the shots, oh no. He took to tearing Mohrt's video's apart. And we all know that no one else even tried to shoot the shots so props to Dan for at least trying.

SCIENCE. Please explain your science as it relates to a totally visual aiming system such as CTE. There's an answer we will never get.

 

[The_JV]

Yea answering your questions and getting attacked by all the others isn't very appealing.

I get it... that's unfortunate.

The only advice i'll give you is watch the truth series if you want. If it sounds good and you want to pursue CTE find an instructor and finish understanding everything. AZ billiards in reality is useless concerning CTE. Look at Mohrt's thread. He was/is willing to give detailed information and answer questions, all he asked was for the person to actually try the shots on a pool table. NO ONE TOOK HIM UP ON IT.

Well what I wanted to do is have a frame work of system understood so I could validate it to myself. I'm indifferent as to what other people think.

I was just looking at Mohrt's shot example thread. Was thinking I could give it a go this morning but I'm trying hard not to jump the gun, and follow through with Stan's video first.

 

[The_JV]

It is because THERE ARE NO INCONSISTENCIES.
Any inconsistencies exist in the minds of those who do not know what they're doing.

No worries. I'm assuming you missed the post wherein I list the inconsistencies in using the shot lines. I've quoted and broken them up below for you to review.

-So on the 15 degree perception, the SL is developed first, the AL second, neither has any offset and the PX lands right in the middle.

-On the 30 perception, the SL is developed first with a 1/16" offset, the AL second without any offset, and the PX lands parallel to the AL. Still confused as to how your eyes are meant to follow separate lines that aren't parallel and how the PX ends up being bais towards the AL.

-On the 45 perception, the AL is developed first with an offset, the SL is mentioned as a 1/2" from the edge of the CB, but no mention of offset, and finally the PX is now also offset by this 1/16".

So 3 different perceptions, 15/30/45. All with varying sight line methods to produce them. Some with offsets that effect the outcome. Some with offsets that don't seem to matter.

Maybe I heard something incorrectly in the videos. I will run through them again if you think I have.

Granted I don't know what I'm doing in regards to CTE. I'm someone who is attempting to give the system a fair shake with starting at ground zero. So if someone like me, who is admittingly clueless about CTE but trying to learn, finds themselves confused by the forementioned inconsistencies. What am I to do...? If the varying methods are not inconsistencies then are they..?

I'm doing this to learn, not argue

 

[The_JV]

More non-truth from others. Dan White shot Mr. Mohrt's shots and it is not if I & others generally known if I &/or other have also done so. Dan White's result were/are exactly what was/is to be expected per science.

SCIENCE. Please explain your science as it relates to a totally visual aiming system such as CTE. There's an answer we will never get.

Guys, with all due respect there's more than enough threads for the typical bitching.

 

[Low500]

Granted I don't know what I'm doing in regards to CTE. I'm someone who is attempting to give the system a fair shake with starting at ground zero. So if someone like me, who is admittingly clueless about CTE but trying to learn, finds themselves confused by the forementioned inconsistencies. What am I to do...? If the varying methods are not inconsistencies then are they..?
I'm doing this to learn, not argue

Here's your answers.
If you're giving it a fair shake as you say you are...and you're still confused. And you feel there are apparent inconsistencies..
THEN GIVE IT UP AND FORGET THAT CTE EVER EXISTED. IT IS NOT WITHIN YOUR CAPACITY TO LEARN IT. FORGET IT...FORGET IT..FORGET IT.
Buy Brian Crist's book on "Poolology", immerse yourself in IT. Learn his system, make all kinds of shots, win many games, win lots of money, kiss the pretty girls (or guys if you swing that way) and ENJOY POOL SHOOTING AGAIN. His system DOES WORK and you won't get any grief , debates, or arguments from anyone around here for using it...they all like it. You will make many friends.
There are thousands out there in the pool world using CTE who will not blink an eye over your abandonment...including me.
By the same token, there are thousands out there in the pool world using Poolology who will not blink an eye because I do not choose Poolology to aim pool shots. Neither will the "ghost ballers"...neither will the "90-90" guys, neither will the "just see the shot" guys.
In the final analysis of the big picture...nobody really gives a damn what you do or what I do either, when it comes to aiming pool shots. (except for a few nut cases on here who've lived a lie for 20 years ranting about how "Shuffett sells snake oil" and other such crud.")
FORGET ABOUT CTE...FORGET IT..FORGET IT.
You will have lots of company in this aiming forum to discuss with you how smart you are to forget that "stupid, lying, crooked, ignorant method of aiming".
Have fun.
Selah

 

[French Roots]

This is for any CTE proponent.

Please explain with SCIENCE "why" Mr. Shuffett's CTE is supposed to be an "Objective System" that is supposed to "objectively dictate" to the shooter the shot line to center pocket for all shots?

THAT is a request that has never been provided in all of the time since Mr. Shuffett came out with it.

If it is "objective" then it certainly should be explainable via SCIENCE.

Science governs both 3D & the Visual.

The fact that the proponents seem incapable of understanding that the assertions regarding SS's CTE go against ALL science seems to be the crux of why the 'war' has been going on for so long.

 

[cookie man]

This is for any CTE proponent.

Please explain with SCIENCE "why" Mr. Shuffett's CTE is supposed to be an "Objective System" that is supposed to "objectively dictate" to the shooter the shot line to center pocket for all shots?

THAT is a request that has never been provided in all of the time since Mr. Shuffett came out with it.

If it is "objective" then it certainly should be explainable via SCIENCE.

Science governs both 3D & the Visual.

The fact that the proponents seem incapable of understanding that the assertions regarding SS's CTE go against ALL science seems to be the crux of why the 'war' has been going on for so long.

You made the assertion it wasn't science backed but you have provided nothing to back it up, even when asked several times yesterday. YOU HAVE NOTHING

 

[The_JV]

This is for any CTE proponent.

Please explain with SCIENCE "why" Mr. Shuffett's CTE is supposed to be an "Objective System" that is supposed to "objectively dictate" to the shooter the shot line to center pocket for all shots?

THAT is a request that has never been provided in all of the time since Mr. Shuffett came out with it.

If it is "objective" then it certainly should be explainable via SCIENCE.

Science governs both 3D & the Visual.

The fact that the proponents seem incapable of understanding that the assertions regarding SS's CTE go against ALL science seems to be the crux of why the 'war' has been going on for so long.

Ok, I tried being nice before. Let's try this... Take your inflammatory crap to another thread or make your own. Your comments here are doing nothing but derailing my efforts.

 

[French Roots]

Guys, with all due respect there's more than enough threads for the typical bitching.

With all due respect, when false statements are made, why IYO should those false statements not be countered with the truth?

Dan White DID shoot Mr. Ohrt's shots & his results were exactly what should be expected per science.

Someone is basically calling Dan White a liar. There is no basis for that. He has been hit with ad hominem attack after ad hominem attack.

It is not generally known if I or others have also shot those shots. Yet it has been said the no one has.

False statements should not be made & should not be tolerated as such is a form of encouragement.

In all of the time that Hal Houle's CTE & Stan Shuffett's CTE has been out with the affirmation that SS's CTE is an Objective System that "objectively dictates" to the shooter the center pocket shot line has any evidence or proof of any kind of scientific nature been offered to indicate that it is. Yet, those claims/assertions have constantly been made or suggested or implied.

Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of the sciences knows that those asserted claims simply can not be true. Ask anyone with a rudimentary understanding off science. Ask Dr. Dave. Ask Bob Jewett. Ask other members with scientific backgrounds.

The thing is that it should not matter... but it does... to Stan Shuffett & to the proponents. because otherwise CTE is in the subjective realm just like ALL other methods. CTE is different, but being different does not = an objective system.

Again, with all due respect.

 

[French Roots]

Ok, I tried being nice before. Let's try this... Take your inflammatory crap to another thread or make your own. Your comments here are doing nothing but derailing my efforts.

I certainly did not intend to derail your efforts. How long did you read the AZB forums before joining last year? Threads very often go in different directions. In case you have not noticed, I am mostly a counter puncher who responds to the crap of others.

You even posted that you are disappointed with the lack of helpful responses by the proponents.

I will now go back & see if "I" can help you with your efforts.

 

[The_JV]

Here's your answers.
If you're giving it a fair shake as you say you are...and you're still confused. And you feel there are apparent inconsistencies..
THEN GIVE IT UP AND FORGET THAT CTE EVER EXISTED. IT IS NOT WITHIN YOUR CAPACITY TO LEARN IT. FORGET IT...FORGET IT..FORGET IT.
Buy Brian Crist's book on "Poolology", immerse yourself in IT. Learn his system, make all kinds of shots, win many games, win lots of money, kiss the pretty girls (or guys if you swing that way) and ENJOY POOL SHOOTING AGAIN. His system DOES WORK and you won't get any grief , debates, or arguments from anyone around here for using it...they all like it. You will make many friends.
There are thousands out there in the pool world using CTE who will not blink an eye over your abandonment...including me.
By the same token, there are thousands out there in the pool world using Poolology who will not blink an eye because I do not choose Poolology to aim pool shots. Neither will the "ghost ballers"...neither will the "90-90" guys, neither will the "just see the shot" guys.
In the final analysis of the big picture...nobody really gives a damn what you do or what I do either, when it comes to aiming pool shots. (except for a few nut cases on here who've lived a lie for 20 years ranting about how "Shuffett sells snake oil" and other such crud.")
FORGET ABOUT CTE...FORGET IT..FORGET IT.
You will have lots of company in this aiming forum to discuss with you how smart you are to forget that "stupid, lying, crooked, ignorant method of aiming".
Have fun.
Selah

Hi Selah, my name is Jarrett. Based on the track record of the vast majority of CTE threads in this forum. I'm going to assume you simply think this thread and my comments are rooted in an effort to belittle your aiming system of choice. That is not the case.

That said, yes I do find inconsistencies with how the shot lines are utilized for creating the various perceptions. I listed them earlier. I'm not sure if you read them. Can you comment on why these 1/16" offsets are used differently for the 3 perceptions and why the offsets also apply to the PX line in only one perception..?

To be clear and fair to you. I have no need for either Poolology and/or CTE. I don't need an aiming system to better my ability to pot balls. I'm sure those in either camp may think that short sighted, but I'm happy with my potting %, so it is what it is. What I am doing is simply get a handle on the CTE system with an open mind. I did it with Poolology and I see no reason not to do so with CTE.

For the time being I have no intention to "forget about it". If that means that I cannot expect any positive feedback from you..., well that's disapponting but the sun will still come up tomorrow as they say. However I do invite your insight if you change your mind.

Thanks

 

[The_JV]

I certainly did not intend to derail your efforts. How long did you read the AZB forums before joining last year? Threads very often go in different directions. In case you have not noticed, I am mostly a counter puncher who responds to the crap of others.

I'm not a child experimenting on forums for the first time. I understand threads will take tangents. I also have been on AZB long enough to notice when a thread in the aiming section is about to spiral into the waste land of CTE bitching on both sides. I wish to spare my thread the same fate, and you have countless other options.

You even posted that you are disappointed with the lack of helpful responses by the proponents.

..about the topic. Not in regards to the tangent you're more than willing to subject this thread to.

I will now go back & see if "I" can help you with your efforts.

That would be very appreciated.

 

[French Roots]

Ok... figured I'd give really understanding the CTE method a try. To be clear, I will not be attempting to utilize the system at this time. I have other things I'm working on and I don't want to either screw those efforts up and/or not give CTE it's due diligence.

That said, I'm 11:40 into the first video found on YouTube and already have a question. Videos are disabled by Stan so either follow the embedded link or note the screen shot below.
View attachment 597229
How does the 2-ball have a 30 degree relationship with the corner, when its just a few inches off the 45 degree line to the pocket...?

Supposedly the 15 outside & the 30 inside are interchangeable. If that is so, then they would seemingly meet approximately 7.5* toward each other. However, you must keep in mind that there is supposed to be a visual phenomena that would dictate a different angle to then be thicken or thinned via the precisely defined 1/2 tip parallel offset & pivot to center, So... "apparently" & supposedly... you could start at near to 30* & do the thinning pivot & get to that near 45* shot.

Also, given the location of the CB the 2 ball is not that near to a 45* cut.

Like I think I informed you in another post proper language has always seemed to be a problem.

Good luck with trying to understand it all from a reasonable, rational, truthfully logical cognitive standpoint.

 

[JoeyInCali]

This is for any CTE proponent.

Please explain with SCIENCE "why" Mr. Shuffett's CTE is supposed to be an "Objective System" that is supposed to "objectively dictate" to the shooter the shot line to center pocket for all shots?

THAT is a request that has never been provided in all of the time since Mr. Shuffett came out with it.

If it is "objective" then it certainly should be explainable via SCIENCE.

Science governs both 3D & the Visual.

The fact that the proponents seem incapable of understanding that the assertions regarding SS's CTE go against ALL science seems to be the crux of why the 'war' has been going on for so long.

It should take 2 pages of diagrams.
Not 440 pages and a ton of videos .

 

[French Roots]

It should take 2 pages of diagrams.
Not 440 pages and a ton of videos .

I think you know as well as I do that it can not be done at all. There are too many angled shots in the game to be objectively defined by just a few visual indicators.

The_JV,

Please excuse the distractions? They should play out shortly.