Some Rational, Reasonable, Truthfully Logical, Cognitive Thought Regarding CTE

[JB Cases]

Exactly....

..and if I say that GB gets me 90% to an accurate aim line, then that's the way it is. If CTE somehow gets you to 100% of an aim line, well I can have my doubts that are easily justifiable in my mind, but that doesn't change your reality.

I have zero money to throw at the illusion of aiming systems. I say illusion, because in my humble opinion in the end regardless of how long it takes to plateau, it all comes down to trial'n'error via HAMB. That's the way humans have been learning tasks since the dawn of time. Somehow I don't think pool is some cosmic outlier that defies that reality.

I would love to see your findings if you ever gain definitive proof of anything other than what I consider the obvious answer.

I wonder why none of the big time gamblers want to bet SUPER HIGH with me that my beginner learning CTE to aim and hamb otherwise would be better than their beginner with GB and hamb otherwise. I will put up 100 thousand dollars if we can lock two players in separate rooms and let one learn CTE aiming and the other GB aiming and give them six months to prepare for a match between them.

If the ONLY variable between these two people was the method of aim they were taught I would bet on the guy who is using CTE every single time. I don't know any other way to express my confidence in the accuracy differences produced by use of these methods respectively.

Why is it not respected that objective aiming systems were very likely developed through trial and error and hamb? If there is some concept that all life ends in death anyway and therefore how the life was lived is not important then yeah making a person struggle more for a longer time with an imprecise method of aiming is no different than teaching an accurate method of aiming and letting a person reach their highest point earlier. Maybe the joy is in the struggle and learning to aim more accurately and consistently isn't desired at all.

90% is your guess for you. Not what applies to everyone else. The majority of human learning is NOT by trial and error now. It is through instruction that was developed through trial and error that was built on instruction that was itself developed through trial and error and so on. All human knowledge stands on the giant shoulders of human discovery that preceded it. There is no major sport where people are expected to learn it with no prior knowledge of what others have discovered in their journeys toward mastery. No one is expected to get where they need to be with nothing but trial and error to guide them.

And, in fact, there are systematic methods present in just about every sport that have been found to help the athletes improve their performance. Some are physical and some are mental tricks and some are a blend.

 

[JB Cases]

If your failures with GB have lead you to that belief then I'm glad you found something that works. GB is easy for me. Maybe because I don't have a problem looking at an object and then recreating it mere inches away from the source. I find the concept of developing the mulitple preceptions of CTE cumbersome. I didn't get far with CTE before the comments here (from both sides) deterred me from really experimenting. I wasn't interested enough to chase dragons to other parts of the internet.

Honeslty, and please don't take this as negatively as I think you most likely going to default to. Spend more time on your fundamentals and stroke mechanics. I believe you'll see a greater return for your efforts then any aiming system could provide.

Please stop talking about ME and my game. Really just stop. What I can and can't do at this moment in my life is of ZERO consequence to this discussion. No one cares because IF I were a top player and touting CTE then I would still get knocked. EVERY player who has been on here in support of CTE gets mocked and dismissed. Some of them are national champions.

If you think I am still searching for some aiming tool that I think will make me much better then you would be making a very very very wrong assumption.

OF COURSE the fundamentals have to be solid. So we can dispense with the conversation about my stroke. Aiming and Execution are separate parts of the shot process.

I have my own little club with four private tables that I can access 24/7. What I don't have is the TIME.

I have had no "failures" with GB per se. - I have had less success with GB than with other methods that are far more objective. I use GB with decent success for the shots where GB is the best method to aid in aiming the shot.

 

[The_JV]

Also, I would NEVER EVER NEVER NEVER say that GB doesn't work. I use GB all the time when I play. Just not for shots that I can shoot directly to the pocket or those which I can bank. I use it for kick shots, for safety shots and for carom shots. I have never said or implied on any video that GB doesn't work.

What I have said is that it's difficult to implement consistently and precisely due to the inherent nature of trying to imagine fully formed spheres or holding a 1.125" distance from the edge of the object ball from 2-3 feet above the table and many feet away.

So I firmly and absolutely REJECT the idea that I have ever implied that GB doesn't work at all. I have stated and even titled a video Why Ghost Ball Aiming is Bad for Good Players. I stand by what I said and I stand by the fact that I am terrible at taking an extra moment to be sure I am fully aligned to the GB center in the templates. I will work on that. I think, however, that the premise I present is sound.

Here you go putting words back in my mouth. Read the damn quote you're using before you respond please.

Here's your video, wherein you start "missing" the OB using your GB template, and you "don't know why". This implies there is fault with the method. I can tell you why you miss, but lets watch the clips and see if we can sort it out ourselves.

...and again (note the god awful stroke)

...and again

...here's where you display how good you are at rolling over the template target

Looks like a clear miss to me:

...here you manage to hit the ball but miss

...here you make roughly the same shot using your best guess at a CTE preception. Note no chicken wing
https://youtu.be/fMNs82JOumU?t=635
...here you come "pretty close" with CTE (half diamond miss)
https://youtu.be/fMNs82JOumU?t=792

You claim that there may be some optical illusion that's causing you to miss with your template. Well if you were actually aiming for the template target then the illusion would always be there and not the product of a thin cut. The reality is, your stroke is wildy inconsistent and more likely to lift you off the ground then to display the difficulties involved with hitting a target.

FWIW, I never have ever used a template for GB training. You don't need one. Maybe this is why you have such difficulties with using it.

 

[The_JV]

Please stop talking about ME and my game. Really just stop. What I can and can't do at this moment in my life is of ZERO consequence to this discussion.

Here's a pro tip about discussing topics on a forum with quoting features. If you make it about you then expect the responses to be address you...

No, there are no magic pills for aiming but there are better tools than GB for the human mind to use as far as I can tell through my experience and primitive experiments.

If you have issues with me responding as you as an example then stop talking about yourself in your posts....

 

[JB Cases]

Here's a pro tip about discussing topics on a forum with quoting features. If you make it about you then expect the responses to be address you...

If you have issues with me responding as you as an example then stop talking about yourself in your posts....

"I" say it like that BECAUSE I am not in collaboration with anyone else on this subject for the purposes of designing and carrying out experiments.

I wish you and EVERYONE else would stop using the "work on your stroke" bullshit because that is exactly what it is. We aren't talking about stroking. Find the VERY BEST PLAYER WITH THE BEST STROKE and I will put him on the wrong line and he will miss everything. I am fully aware that a good stroke is essential to COMPLETING the shot as intended IF one is aimed properly.

I can ONLY give my perspective based on my own experience and evidence gathered elsewhere. And when I present evidence gathered elsewhere I link to it or post the source.

I have issues with people who don't want to discuss the topic and instead want to discuss me personally. I could be a full anon making the same points and the responses would be different because NO ONE HERE would have anything personal about my form to go on. If I use myself as an example then it is in full knowledge of my level and my limitations and not intended to be used as hard evidence that should be unquestioningly convincing.

Did I make one single remark about you missing a two foot shot and go off on a tangent about how your technique is so very flawed that you would do way better to work on your bridge? No, because I understood the CONTEXT that is in discussion and have zero need to look for things about how you perform to try and knock you. EDIT: I don't think your form is good or bad, I didn't pay attention to it.

That said I have NO PROBLEM if we all take the same test and establish our relative skills to one another so that we can get it all out of our systems and talk about how best to move forward. IF you are truly interested in learning CTE leave this forum and go be part of Stan's CTE forum on FB. There you will meet many people who play as well as you do and some better likely who will be happy to help you with every possible question on the application of the CTE method. And they are very very nice people who love pool.

Making it about me doesn't change the facts, whatever they may be.

 

[JB Cases]

Here you go putting words back in my mouth. Read the damn quote you're using before you respond please.

Here's your video, wherein you start "missing" the OB using your GB template, and you "don't know why". This implies there is fault with the method. I can tell you why you miss, but lets watch the clips and see if we can sort it out ourselves.

...and again (note the god awful stroke)

...and again

...here's where you display how good you are at rolling over the template target

Looks like a clear miss to me:
View attachment 598828
...here you manage to hit the ball but miss

...here you make roughly the same shot using your best guess at a CTE preception. Note no chicken wing
https://youtu.be/fMNs82JOumU?t=635
...here you come "pretty close" with CTE (half diamond miss)
https://youtu.be/fMNs82JOumU?t=792

You claim that there may be some optical illusion that's causing you to miss with your template. Well if you were actually aiming for the template target then the illusion would always be there and not the product of a thin cut. The reality is, your stroke is wildy inconsistent and more likely to lift you off the ground then to display the difficulties involved with hitting a target.

FWIW, I never have ever used a template for GB training. You don't need one. Maybe this is why you have such difficulties with using it.

I said maybe there is an optical illusion, I don't know. But either I am completely inept and blind and unable to see a path with a template in front of me OR there is some other reason.

Please try actually listening to what I say.

As for you not using a GB template ever, GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The point of my video was that I don't think that GB templates are that great anyway to use to learn GB. Either you're really good at imagining fully formed spheres or you're not and I don't think that having a template on the table actually helps a person to get better at that once the crutch is not there.

Anyway SCREW THIS.

When I get my table set back up in my shop then I will be making a ton of videos. Glad that you want to dissect mine to nitpick about me and give unsolicited advice about my form but I honestly WONDER why no one EVER - not once - not ever - has mentioned Gerry Williams, Monte, Bob Nunley, Cookie and others who make balls over and over and over? Oh I know they are not here as much and aren't as prolific so they are not targets. AND of course they are making balls so either they are LYING about CTE usage OR CTE works and it wouldn't be a good idea to draw attention to them.

Apparently if you have a perfect stroke then you CANNOT also be a good example of CTE in action. If you don't have a perfect stroke then you can certainly be a target for negative comments about form vs aiming and are absolutely the world champion of PROVING that a system doesn't work.

Yes, the times I missed were indeed clear misses. Let's just SKIP all the INCREDIBLE SHOTS I have demonstrated over the years and focus on the misses.

Not once has anyone said wow that shot was tough good job on making it. Nah, they skip over all of those and focus on the misses and dissect those but not in CONTEXT of aiming.

It's truly unreal. I need to get all the way the out of this insane asylum. All I want to do is discuss pool in peace and help this sport grow and all I feel here is that people want to see pool disappear. I am starting to really get the message loud and clear.

Make tons of shots - get ZERO RESPECT. Miss some shots get totally shit on. It's ok though, I have a plan to market the everloving out of CTE and not worry one bit what people think of me. I can learn. First round was passion talking and trying to demonstrate. Round two is relentless marketing with zero invitation for commentary. There is a really good reason that short and slickly produced videos get results. They are carefully crafted to evoke exactly the response desired.

I know you said you were trying to help "me" and really thank you for that. But you're focusing on the very wrong thing.

I get it. This forum is a place where NOTHING can be solved on this topic. It is fully against the nature of this forum to actually get together and figure this stuff out. Forums attract the type of people who value argument above everything else. Not everyone is like that of course but for the argumentative types forums that allow unlimited arguing on topics are heaven on earth. Unfortunately I am in that category and it's time to go my own way with people who want what I want for this game in real life. I am wasting my time and the time of every reader by continuing to type ANYTHING on this subject on this forum.

I see the light though. I really do and it will cost me some money to do what I want to do on this subject but I have plenty of that and what's better than bringing objective aiming to the masses using well scripted short videos to aid pool players all over the world. I might leave the previous videos up but probably not because they don't serve the purpose I want them to in light of better ways to go about it.

And if the people still here want to dissect those coming videos ad nauseum, great. Won't make one tiny ripple in the effect they will have in the larger pool world. No one outside of azb links to "criticism reaction posts".

Nothing against you personally JV. Just tired of being kicked by people I am trying to have good discussion with, intentionally or not.

 

[JB Cases]

...here you come "pretty close" with CTE (half diamond miss)

You claim that there may be some optical illusion that's causing you to miss with your template. Well if you were actually aiming for the template target then the illusion would always be there and not the product of a thin cut. The reality is, your stroke is wildy inconsistent and more likely to lift you off the ground then to display the difficulties involved with hitting a target.

FWIW, I never have ever used a template for GB training. You don't need one. Maybe this is why you have such difficulties with using it.

By the way the miss was NOT half a diamond. It was about a ball. And thanks for mentioning that shot #2 was in the heart of the pocket.

Starting position.

SHOT #1 in the sequence. About a ball and a half at most.

Shot #2 in the heart.

Shot #3 in this sequence - tougher position. Edge to A.

In the center of the pocket.

I NEVER get credit for shots like #2 NOR any of the times I make tough shots on the first try. No one ever says great shot, good stroke, great form or any sort of acknowledgment.

I make honest uncut videos and people think that they are going to make some GREAT points by going after me with the misses and ignore the made shots.

Why is that? If people are paying attention to what I miss shouldn't they also be paying attention to what I make? Or have I missed something in how things should be analyzed?

 

[Boxcar]

It's probably because they don't care about you and they're just stringin' you along for the laughs. But, they still luvya, man!

 

[The_JV]

I make honest uncut videos and people think that they are going to make some GREAT points by going after me with the misses and ignore the made shots.

No I made the effort to grab the relavent clips for the point at hand. The point that you insinuate that ghost ball somehow stops working in reality your stroke sucks, or at the very least 'sucks at times'. No one is perfect, but some of those swings were brutal.

I always give you credit where credit is due. However you choose to ignore that fact because I presume that it wouldn't provide you a leg to stand on...? If you need me to, I will recognise that you did happen to make some CTE based shots on the first try. I'll also add that you only made some after a couple of attempts, and that other GB swings for the fences had you hardly putting in any effort at all. Since there's no credit for grabbing the snippets please view the entire video for those examples.

 

[JoeyInCali]

Templates are not magic .
You still need to have a solid PSR and straight stroke .
And you can't be talking 100 words a minute and match that thought speed with the stroke .
It's kinda naive to even think you can make tough cut shots consistently with that kind of effort .
And you can't shoot in BAD FAITH and expect it to go .

How about when it's done right ?

Cue in line with his pectoral, shoulder , chin, eye , straight follow through with double pause . Rear foot lined up perfectly with a dead still rear leg.

There are no magic pills says Niels.

 

[JB Cases]

No I made the effort to grab the relavent clips for the point at hand. The point that you insinuate that ghost ball somehow stops working in reality your stroke sucks.

I always give you credit where credit is due. However you choose to ignore that fact because I presume that it wouldn't provide you a leg to stand on. If you need me to, I will recognise that you did happen to make some CTE based shots on the first try. I'll also add that you only made some after a couple of attempts and that other GB swing for the fences had you hardly putting in any effort at all. Since there's no credit for grabbing the snippets please view the entire video for those examples.

NO I didn't say it STOPS WORKING - am I not able to speak the same language??????????

I said, I don't know why I missed the shot, which is my IMMEDIATE reaction and not something I said later after reviewing the video frame by frame. Clearly missing the whole damned ball 2-3 times in a row with a damned guide in front of me is an indication that MAYBE something OTHER THAN MY STROKE is at issue.

Yes, I can see that perhaps I should have started farther back and made absolutely sure that I was aligned center of the cb to the tiny little fucking arrow point but think about it for a moment and ask yourself if it SHOULD be easier or harder to align to the GB "center" with a template or without? Also when I use CTE in these videos I give about the same amount of time to aiming with the exception of often taking the few seconds to mention the steps in full or in part while doing it. As a result it is VERY VERY likely that the make percentages in my videos would be higher IF I took a little extra time on every shot.

This is my entire point, even with a template, such as the cranfield arrow, it's not easy to always line up to GB center. Sure I could be more diligent about it but even if I hit the shot 100 times in a row with a template I can predict that the make percentage without a template is going to be way less on that shot.

GB templates have their uses. Ghost Ball is good for a lot of things in pool. But I am willing to bet high that on average over a good number of players of the same skill level those using CTE will score higher than the GB users on every test out there for the shot making. And that's if both groups are concentrating as hard as they can and every one of them has perfect fundamentals.

 

[JB Cases]

Templates are not magic .
You still need to have a solid PSR and straight stroke .
And you can't be talking 100 words a minute and match that thought speed with the stroke .
It's kinda naive to even think you can make tough cut shots consistently with that kind of effort .
And you can't shoot in BAD FAITH and expect it to go .

How about when it's done right ?

Cue in line with his pectoral, shoulder , chin, eye , straight follow through with double pause . Rear foot lined up perfectly with a dead still rear leg.

I bet you orgasmed the first time you watched that video? I can see the thoughts in your head, "we got him now, hot damn we got him NOW!"

Niels is a bonafide world champion! He got there through really hard work from an average league player to the elite. However he is not the last word on ANYTHING pool related. Just another OPINION.

When Niels can do this using GB I will re-consider my stance on GB.

Ok let's talk about form.

This kid seems to have the form you describe above. Tyler uses and teaches CTE. Maybe you want to go dog him about form?

Mosconi Cup, facing an elite player like Niels, 2:0 down in sets for the team, and 1:0 down in a race to five in front of the home crowd, how much pressure should this kid be under facing this for his first clear shot?

How's the form?

We can do this ALL DAY. You can post about Niels as if his video is your "magic bullet" against CTE and I can post videos of people using CTE Aiming + excellent form to make balls under pressure.

Meanwhile, you're still unable to accept my challenge because in my opinion you are scared to be shown to be wrong on this topic. I am not scared and willing to put my money up and if I am proven wrong then I lose some money and some dignity and move on with a better understanding and would alter my position accordingly.

The match:

 

[JB Cases]

No I made the effort to grab the relavent clips for the point at hand. The point that you insinuate that ghost ball somehow stops working in reality your stroke sucks, or at the very least 'sucks at times'. No one is perfect, but some of those swings were brutal.

I always give you credit where credit is due. However you choose to ignore that fact because I presume that it wouldn't provide you a leg to stand on...? If you need me to, I will recognise that you did happen to make some CTE based shots on the first try. I'll also add that you only made some after a couple of attempts, and that other GB swings for the fences had you hardly putting in any effort at all. Since there's no credit for grabbing the snippets please view the entire video for those examples.

JV then either no credit is due for the shots I make. I don't know, I will gladly correct my comments and apologize profusely if you point out where you have done screenshots and time stamps for the shots I made.

I mean in the example above you just decide to focus on the misses and come to some sort of conclusion that I ONLY missed because of the stroke. Not MAYBE you missed because of your stroke but CLEARLY you missed. Then you toss in the "missed by half a ball" (WHICH WAS WRONG) mentioning that it was "with your best CTE perception guess" but failed to say that it was MAYBE my stroke and FAILED to mention that I made the next two shots in the heart of the pocket. I don't know how you think I should take this method when you mostly, like 99% focus on the misses and don't analyze the makes.

Anyway, this is all more wasted time. I thought, naively, that maybe we had achieved a semblance of topical discussion but I can see that I will not be able to point to the things I have done on this topic without getting "dissected" and told I suck in various ways.

I personally will never be able to prove anything about CTE or Ghost Ball that any of the contrarian folks here would ever in the tiniest way acknowledge has any merit whatsoever. People like Duckie and Joey defend GB rabidly as if the goal is to eliminate all possible references to GB and insure that no one teaches it EVER. I take the concepts presented here and try to work them out on the table and if I do a 45 minute video it seems like the only part that is interesting is the 60 seconds of missed shots. I guess I will never understand it. It's kind of like looking at ONLY the price of a cue case and making a determination that the case is protective or not based on the price. I want to know how the case is built inside and out before I trust my high end cues to it no matter what the price is. Conversely when I watch a video about pool instruction I want to have the full context and not just snippets taken OUT of context. It is perfectly fine to discuss snippets and from time-stamps IF one does not ignore important information surrounding the snippet.

LIke I said, I have no problem being shown that I am wrong. But it is extremely unlikely that I will be convinced that I am wrong based on out-of-context focus on parts of my videos. Especially when I go back and start watching to see if I see what is claimed to be there and find that important information was left out.

 

[JB Cases]

No I made the effort to grab the relavent clips for the point at hand.

I think part of the problem is that we are not really on the same page with this discussion. I am making points about the general nature of these things and going on the pool table to try and see how it plays out. It does not feel like you see that and it does feel like perhaps you think I am attacking some sort of sacred cow that dare not be touched. and if so then it becomes easier to go after my "form" and tell me that I don't use GB "correctly" when there are many ways taught to use GB. So which of them is correct?

 

[duckie]

JV then either no credit is due for the shots I make. I don't know, I will gladly correct my comments and apologize profusely if you point out where you have done screenshots and time stamps for the shots I made.

I mean in the example above you just decide to focus on the misses and come to some sort of conclusion that I ONLY missed because of the stroke. Not MAYBE you missed because of your stroke but CLEARLY you missed. Then you toss in the "missed by half a ball" (WHICH WAS WRONG) mentioning that it was "with your best CTE perception guess" but failed to say that it was MAYBE my stroke and FAILED to mention that I made the next two shots in the heart of the pocket. I don't know how you think I should take this method when you mostly, like 99% focus on the misses and don't analyze the makes.

Anyway, this is all more wasted time. I thought, naively, that maybe we had achieved a semblance of topical discussion but I can see that I will not be able to point to the things I have done on this topic without getting "dissected" and told I suck in various ways.

I personally will never be able to prove anything about CTE or Ghost Ball that any of the contrarian folks here would ever in the tiniest way acknowledge has any merit whatsoever. People like Duckie and Joey defend GB rabidly as if the goal is to eliminate all possible references to GB and insure that no one teaches it EVER. I take the concepts presented here and try to work them out on the table and if I do a 45 minute video it seems like the only part that is interesting is the 60 seconds of missed shots. I guess I will never understand it. It's kind of like looking at ONLY the price of a cue case and making a determination that the case is protective or not based on the price. I want to know how the case is built inside and out before I trust my high end cues to it no matter what the price is. Conversely when I watch a video about pool instruction I want to have the full context and not just snippets taken OUT of context. It is perfectly fine to discuss snippets and from time-stamps IF one does not ignore important information surrounding the snippet.

LIke I said, I have no problem being shown that I am wrong. But it is extremely unlikely that I will be convinced that I am wrong based on out-of-context focus on parts of my videos. Especially when I go back and start watching to see if I see what is claimed to be there and find that important information was left out.

Fuck off......

 

[JB Cases]

Fuck off......

LoL. After all of these years of your stellar contributions to this topic we finally get the very best one you you have ever made.

From the person who says there is no such thing as a half-ball hit this might be the most well-aimed comment I have ever seen from you.

 

[boogieman]

I said maybe there is an optical illusion, I don't know. But either I am completely inept and blind and unable to see a path with a template in front of me OR there is some other reason.

Please try actually listening to what I say.

As for you not using a GB template ever, GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The point of my video was that I don't think that GB templates are that great anyway to use to learn GB. Either you're really good at imagining fully formed spheres or you're not and I don't think that having a template on the table actually helps a person to get better at that once the crutch is not there.

Anyway FUCK THIS.

When I get my fucking table set back up in my shop then I will be making a fuckton of videos. Glad that you want to dissect mine to nitpick about me and give unsolicited advice about my form but I honestly WONDER why no one EVER - not once - not ever - has mentioned Gerry Williams, Monte, Bob Nunley, Cookie and others who make balls over and over and over? Oh I know they are not here as much and aren't as prolific so they are not targets. AND of course they are making balls so either they are LYING about CTE usage OR CTE works and it wouldn't be a good idea to draw attention to them.

Apparently if you have a perfect stroke then you CANNOT also be a good example of CTE in action. If you don't have a perfect stroke then you can certainly be a target for negative comments about form vs aiming and are absolutely the world champion of PROVING that a system doesn't work.

Yes, the times I missed were indeed clear misses. Let's just SKIP all the FUCKING INCREDIBLE SHOTS I have demonstrated over the years and focus on the misses.

Not once has anyone said wow that shot was tough good job on making it. Nah, they skip over all of those and focus on the misses and dissect those but not in CONTEXT of aiming.

It's truly unreal. I need to get all the way the fuck out of this fucking insane asylum. All I want to do is discuss pool in peace and help this sport grow and all I feel here is that people want to fucking see pool disappear. I am starting to really get the message loud and clear.

Make tons of shots - get ZERO FUCKING RESPECT. Miss some shots get totally shit on. It's ok though, I have a plan to market the everloving fuck out of CTE and not worry one bit what people think of me. I can learn. First round was passion talking and trying to demonstrate. Round two is relentless marketing with zero invitation for commentary. There is a really good reason that short and slickly produced videos get results. They are carefully crafted to evoke exactly the response desired.

I know you said you were trying to help "me" and really thank you for that. But you're focusing on the very wrong thing.

I get it. This forum is a place where NOTHING can be solved on this topic. It is fully against the nature of this forum to actually get together and figure this stuff out. Forums attract the type of people who value argument above everything else. Not everyone is like that of course but for the argumentative types forums that allow unlimited arguing on topics are heaven on earth. Unfortunately I am in that category and it's time to say FUCK THIS and get the fuck out and go my own way with people who want what I want for this game in real life. I am wasting my time and the time of every reader by continuing to type ANYTHING on this subject on this forum.

I see the light though. I really do and it will cost me some money to do what I want to do on this subject but I have plenty of that and what's better than bringing objective aiming to the masses using well scripted short videos to aid pool players all over the world. I might leave the previous videos up but probably not because they don't serve the purpose I want them to in light of better ways to go about it.

And if the people still here want to dissect those coming videos ad nauseum, great. Won't make one tiny ripple in the effect they will have in the larger pool world. No one outside of azb links to "criticism reaction posts".

Nothing against you personally JV. Just tired of being kicked by people I am trying to have good discussion with, intentionally or not.

I'm not trying to crap on you or be disrespectful with this, it's not my intention. I'm also not trying to fuel the fire, but I did notice something in the videos. If the forum were to do a video review of me playing I'm sure I'd get whipped on to hell and back, so this isn't meant as a critique or knock. When I come down wrong (saw the shot wrong standing, lost visual focus, exhausted, etc.) my stroke ain't pretty. I love the game anyway, it happens to us all and anyone saying their form is perfect on unknown shots/new methodology is either ignorant, lying to themselves, or superhuman.

It looks like on your GB shots you didn't give the stance/alignment the same attention that you do on your CTE shots. It may also be that you're used to doing it differently since it involves no sweep, but I really don't know. Not a critique because I know you're experimenting, but the steering/BHE is likely because you didn't come down on the shot line for the GB shots. I can guess (can't we all lol) that CTE has given you a PSR which gets you seeing the "shot" while standing and you're coming down into position/shot line correctly with CTE. That's great! The thing is, once someone understands how important that aiming while up and coming down into the correct shot line is, it can be applied to any aiming method, though slight differences will exist. I think CTE does a great job at giving you an objective (here come the pitchforks!) way to see the shot while standing and getting onto the shot line for CTE. This is possible with GB, but it's not built into the system. You have to figure it out for yourself and it's what separates "good" GB system users from "average" GB system users. Honestly it's great that CTE is getting you down in the correct position, this is one huge ingredient in the recipe that makes a good pool player. That said, if you want to experiment, try getting down on GB while using the same stand up/into stance procedure that you use for CTE, or maybe aim to come down as if you had done the sweep in the air. Likely it will feel very familiar. The standing/stance part of CTE makes perfect sense to me and I'll admit I haven't practiced the sweep/aim points to know anything about the rest. I'm not knocking it or doubting it because I don't know, and it's entirely up to you if you have the time or want to experiment. Since CTE is working well for you, it might not be worth the time or effort.

I know you are a passionate person. I own one of your cases and it's clear that you are someone who is passionate and dedicated to pool and probably anything you set your mind to. The quality of your cases alone tells me that you don't half ass things and don't mess around with bunk. I have no idea why the aiming forum is such a hotbed of arguments, I've had some back and forth heckling with some CTE proponents on here, but I honestly think you're one of the most logical, and truthful CTE proponents here. The thing is, you could literally walk on water and you're still going to get shat on. Not saying everyone or anyone in particular, but there are folks who won't capitulate or try to learn anything. It's like politics, even with the absence or presence of truth, a closed mind doesn't change.

 

[BC21]

I'm not trying to crap on you or be disrespectful with this, it's not my intention. I'm also not trying to fuel the fire, but I did notice something in the videos. If the forum were to do a video review of me playing I'm sure I'd get whipped on to hell and back, so this isn't meant as a critique or knock. When I come down wrong (saw the shot wrong standing, lost visual focus, exhausted, etc.) my stroke ain't pretty. I love the game anyway, it happens to us all and anyone saying their form is perfect on unknown shots/new methodology is either ignorant, lying to themselves, or superhuman.

It looks like on your GB shots you didn't give the stance/alignment the same attention that you do on your CTE shots. It may also be that you're used to doing it differently since it involves no sweep, but I really don't know. Not a critique because I know you're experimenting, but the steering/BHE is likely because you didn't come down on the shot line for the GB shots. I can guess (can't we all lol) that CTE has given you a PSR which gets you seeing the "shot" while standing and you're coming down into position/shot line correctly with CTE. That's great! The thing is, once someone understands how important that aiming while up and coming down into the correct shot line is, it can be applied to any aiming method, though slight differences will exist. I think CTE does a great job at giving you an objective (here come the pitchforks!) way to see the shot while standing and getting onto the shot line for CTE. This is possible with GB, but it's not built into the system. You have to figure it out for yourself and it's what separates "good" GB system users from "average" GB system users. Honestly it's great that CTE is getting you down in the correct position, this is one huge ingredient in the recipe that makes a good pool player. That said, if you want to experiment, try getting down on GB while using the same stand up/into stance procedure that you use for CTE, or maybe aim to come down as if you had done the sweep in the air. Likely it will feel very familiar. The standing/stance part of CTE makes perfect sense to me and I'll admit I haven't practiced the sweep/aim points to know anything about the rest. I'm not knocking it or doubting it because I don't know, and it's entirely up to you if you have the time or want to experiment. Since CTE is working well for you, it might not be worth the time or effort.

I know you are a passionate person. I own one of your cases and it's clear that you are someone who is passionate and dedicated to pool and probably anything you set your mind to. The quality of your cases alone tells me that you don't half ass things and don't mess around with bunk. I have no idea why the aiming forum is such a hotbed of arguments, I've had some back and forth heckling with some CTE proponents on here, but I honestly think you're one of the most logical, and truthful CTE proponents here. The thing is, you could literally walk on water and you're still going to get shat on. Not saying everyone or anyone in particular, but there are folks who won't capitulate or try to learn anything. It's like politics, even with the absence or presence of truth, a closed mind doesn't change.

I wish there was a double thumbs-up to give for this post. Well shit, I guess that is a double thumbs-up. Lol

 

[Boxcar]

So, there you are, deep at third. The guy at bat is a known pull hitter and you know he's coming at you. Numbnuts serves him a medium fastball right down the pipe and he cold crushes it, a freakin' bullet that hits the ground the first time right beside your bag. You backhand it, take a couple of crow hops and gun him down at first.

 

[JB Cases]

I'm not trying to crap on you or be disrespectful with this, it's not my intention. I'm also not trying to fuel the fire, but I did notice something in the videos. If the forum were to do a video review of me playing I'm sure I'd get whipped on to hell and back, so this isn't meant as a critique or knock. When I come down wrong (saw the shot wrong standing, lost visual focus, exhausted, etc.) my stroke ain't pretty. I love the game anyway, it happens to us all and anyone saying their form is perfect on unknown shots/new methodology is either ignorant, lying to themselves, or superhuman.

It looks like on your GB shots you didn't give the stance/alignment the same attention that you do on your CTE shots. It may also be that you're used to doing it differently since it involves no sweep, but I really don't know. Not a critique because I know you're experimenting, but the steering/BHE is likely because you didn't come down on the shot line for the GB shots. I can guess (can't we all lol) that CTE has given you a PSR which gets you seeing the "shot" while standing and you're coming down into position/shot line correctly with CTE. That's great! The thing is, once someone understands how important that aiming while up and coming down into the correct shot line is, it can be applied to any aiming method, though slight differences will exist. I think CTE does a great job at giving you an objective (here come the pitchforks!) way to see the shot while standing and getting onto the shot line for CTE. This is possible with GB, but it's not built into the system. You have to figure it out for yourself and it's what separates "good" GB system users from "average" GB system users. Honestly it's great that CTE is getting you down in the correct position, this is one huge ingredient in the recipe that makes a good pool player. That said, if you want to experiment, try getting down on GB while using the same stand up/into stance procedure that you use for CTE, or maybe aim to come down as if you had done the sweep in the air. Likely it will feel very familiar. The standing/stance part of CTE makes perfect sense to me and I'll admit I haven't practiced the sweep/aim points to know anything about the rest. I'm not knocking it or doubting it because I don't know, and it's entirely up to you if you have the time or want to experiment. Since CTE is working well for you, it might not be worth the time or effort.

I know you are a passionate person. I own one of your cases and it's clear that you are someone who is passionate and dedicated to pool and probably anything you set your mind to. The quality of your cases alone tells me that you don't half ass things and don't mess around with bunk. I have no idea why the aiming forum is such a hotbed of arguments, I've had some back and forth heckling with some CTE proponents on here, but I honestly think you're one of the most logical, and truthful CTE proponents here. The thing is, you could literally walk on water and you're still going to get shat on. Not saying everyone or anyone in particular, but there are folks who won't capitulate or try to learn anything. It's like politics, even with the absence or presence of truth, a closed mind doesn't change.

I agree and having gone over it I am of the opinion that I didn't stand back and find the clear line between gb center and cb center.

But this point could be made respectfully instead of claiming "bad faith" or lying as joey has implied. Could be made without immediately blaming fundamentals.

I haven't misrepresented any method of aiming at all and try to be accurate in my assessment and depiction of any aiming methods I talk about.

And that should be recognized by all in my opinion.