CTE Question

[tonythetiger583]

So I just ordered stans book and I'm waiting for it to arrive. But I've just recently been going through the truth series and have a few questions.

So from what I understand, when you lock in the perception, that's the parallax line? You use pro one to sweep into the standard shot picture.

Can I pro one sweep into the shot while keeping the parallax visuals?

I like the idea of being able to maintain the C-T-E and E-T-(A,B,C) relationship while down on the shot.

I'm sure the book will clear this up but I'm impatient.

 

[One Pocket John]

The book will explain your question in about the first 50 pages.
There is the SL (sight line) and then there is the AL (aim line)
Wait for the book. It weighs over 6 pounds and is very large.
Be ready to read over 450 pages.

John


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[One Pocket John]

I also would like to point out that Stan has a Facebook page to answer any questions you may have.
John


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dan White]

So I just ordered stans book and I'm waiting for it to arrive. But I've just recently been going through the truth series and have a few questions.

So from what I understand, when you lock in the perception, that's the parallax line? You use pro one to sweep into the standard shot picture.

Can I pro one sweep into the shot while keeping the parallax visuals?

I like the idea of being able to maintain the C-T-E and E-T-(A,B,C) relationship while down on the shot.

I'm sure the book will clear this up but I'm impatient.

You will be surprised to learn that the CTE and ET ABC thing has been scrapped as has the visual sweep. Yet it all still works, curiously, I guess...

 

[tonythetiger583]

Be advised that the book is going to require you to "Study" instead of just "read".
You're beginning a wonderful exciting new journey.
The most difficult aspect (for me) was the slow process of "reprogramming your eyes" to REALLY SEE how to aim spheres on a pool table.
The results will be great...especially when you're in combat with your new found knowledge against one of those all too familiar "know-it-all" opponents.
Thousands have followed the CTE road. So I will close with an oblique altered remark from an old time pool player===> It is a route that is NOT "fraught with peril".
Enjoy..!!!

I've been u

Be advised that the book is going to require you to "Study" instead of just "read".
You're beginning a wonderful exciting new journey.
The most difficult aspect (for me) was the slow process of "reprogramming your eyes" to REALLY SEE how to aim spheres on a pool table.
The results will be great...especially when you're in combat with your new found knowledge against one of those all too familiar "know-it-all" opponents.
Thousands have followed the CTE road. So I will close with an oblique altered remark from an old time pool player===> It is a route that is NOT "fraught with peril".
Enjoy..!!!

Thanks! CTE was what I started with when first started playing. But that was during the second DVD. A lot of new stuff and terminology seems to have come out since then and I'm pretty excited.

But yeah I'm pretty excited.

 

[boogieman]

So I just ordered stans book and I'm waiting for it to arrive. But I've just recently been going through the truth series and have a few questions.

So from what I understand, when you lock in the perception, that's the parallax line? You use pro one to sweep into the standard shot picture.

Can I pro one sweep into the shot while keeping the parallax visuals?

I like the idea of being able to maintain the C-T-E and E-T-(A,B,C) relationship while down on the shot.

I'm sure the book will clear this up but I'm impatient.

The book will clear it up, the answer is, hit 'Em good. HAMB but maybe only 300K will be enough with an objective system. Other systems may take more. The end result is the same.

 

[The_JV]

So I just ordered stans book and I'm waiting for it to arrive. But I've just recently been going through the truth series and have a few questions.

So from what I understand, when you lock in the perception, that's the parallax line? You use pro one to sweep into the standard shot picture.

Can I pro one sweep into the shot while keeping the parallax visuals?

I like the idea of being able to maintain the C-T-E and E-T-(A,B,C) relationship while down on the shot.

I'm sure the book will clear this up but I'm impatient.

I'll preface my suggestion by saying I don't use CTE, and have been labelled a "CTE-Hater" by the one of the cheerleaders here on AZB.

That said, I struggled with the 'Truth Series" when I was attempting to dig into CTE. I strongly suggest you wait for the book. I am assuming something within the ~400 pages will provide you the answers you seek. For me the cost/gain was prohibitive, but since you've already pulled the trigger on the investment, then it's content should be your number one resource.

As already mentioned I think the writer of the book has a facebook group that certainly contains individuals that can provide some clarity.

Do not, and I repeat DO NOT, ask questions regarding CTE function/practice on this forum. Your efforts in very short order will be met with endless bickering.

 

[bbb]

As already mentioned I think the writer of the book has a facebook group that certainly contains individuals that can provide some clarity.

Do not, and I repeat DO NOT, ask questions regarding CTE function/practice on this forum. Your efforts in very short order will be met with endless bickering.

sad but true
doesnt take long for threads to go sideways
i still dont understand why the "saviors" cant let the CTE people live in peace

 

[The_JV]

Some people don't like to see BS and unsubstantiated claims made for profit while at the same time knocking all the other aiming systems.

Lol... I was reading the above, and the first thought that jumped into my mind is all the general BS and unsubstantiated comments that fill AZB, so why is CTE so special. ...but then I got to 'profit'.

I would never expect anyone to develop an instructional set, whether it be DVDs or a 400 page book for free. That said, I can understand if someone decided to be vocal about calling out the author if they thought he was swindling the naive. ...If indeed there is some false claims being made. Keep in mind, someone is making money producing bibles. It's really down to the potential purchasers to make a wise decision. If AZB is the only corner of the internet that raises a flag, it isn't necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Low500]

Lol... I was reading the above, and the first thought that jumped into my mind is all the general BS and unsubstantiated comments that fill AZB, so why is CTE so special. ...but then I got to 'profit'.

I would never expect anyone to develop an instructional set, whether it be DVDs or a 400 page book for free. That said, I can understand if someone decided to be vocal about calling out the author if they thought he was swindling the naive. ...If indeed there is some false claims being made. Keep in mind, someone is making money producing bibles. It's really down to the potential purchasers to make a wise decision. If AZB is the only corner of the internet that raises a flag, it isn't necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Low500]

I still don't understand why you keep saying this. Some people don't like to see BS and unsubstantiated claims made for profit while at the same time knocking all the other aiming systems. Why is that hard to understand? I don't think Stan is a snake oil salesman but the net result is the same. Why does that not bother you?

 

[bbb]

I still don't understand why you keep saying this. Some people don't like to see BS and unsubstantiated claims made for profit while at the same time knocking all the other aiming systems. Why is that hard to understand? I don't think Stan is a snake oil salesman but the net result is the same. Why does that not bother you?

it does not bother me because
1) you guys have made your comments over and over and over and over for 20 years......your message is out and available
2) i have faith that every individual can make their own conclusions regarding validity of claims
3) you still dont understand that i am not telling you guys to not post crticism.......
i would just like you guys to have your OWN bashing threads to "protect the innocent"
and let people interested in CTE have discussions without interuption which goes nowhere and is a circle jerk over and over because the "saviors" cant let it go
to quote lou
"CAPISCE ?"

 

[Dan White]

Lol... I was reading the above, and the first thought that jumped into my mind is all the general BS and unsubstantiated comments that fill AZB, so why is CTE so special. ...but then I got to 'profit'.

I would never expect anyone to develop an instructional set, whether it be DVDs or a 400 page book for free. That said, I can understand if someone decided to be vocal about calling out the author if they thought he was swindling the naive. ...If indeed there is some false claims being made. Keep in mind, someone is making money producing bibles. It's really down to the potential purchasers to make a wise decision. If AZB is the only corner of the internet that raises a flag, it isn't necessarily a bad thing.

You also have to remember history. Hal made incredible claims and dismissed all other forms of aiming as inferior. His explanation for CTE is like a page out of a numerology book. It rubbed people the wrong way. It was so bad that Mike had to make the aiming forum and ban talk of aiming in the main forum.

 

[Dan White]

it does not bother me because
1) you guys have made your comments over and over and over and over for 20 years......your message is out and available

Things change over 20 years and the discussion evolves somewhat. Stan's CTE is a distant relative of what Hal did.

2) i have faith that every individual can make their own conclusions regarding validity of claims

It helps to have opposing views in order to make that determination.

3) you still dont understand that i am not telling you guys to not post crticism.......
i would just like you guys to have your OWN bashing threads to "protect the innocent"

Why do you characterize telling the truth as "bashing"? The truth is that the CTE claims cannot be proven or even explained rationally. You are biased. Why don't you call the CTE supporters something like "bullshit artists" and call the bashers something like "skeptics" or "scientists"?

and let people interested in CTE have discussions without interuption which goes nowhere and is a circle jerk over and over because the "saviors" cant let it go
to quote lou
"CAPISCE ?"

Note bias mentioned above. There is a place like that. It is called facebook. This is a discussion forum called AZ and this forum has the subtitle, "Argue to your heart's content." I'm fine if they want a thread to post testimonials but some of them are whoppers and it is hard to refrain from commenting, or even maybe just chuckling. Also, if the CTE people simply ignored us there would be very few problems. You can make another post if you want lecturing the CTE people about not responding to critics and ruining the forum.

 

[Low500]

Things change over 20 years and the discussion evolves somewhat. Stan's CTE is a distant relative of what Hal did.


It helps to have opposing views in order to make that determination.

Why do you characterize telling the truth as "bashing"? The truth is that the CTE claims cannot be proven or even explained rationally. You are biased. Why don't you call the CTE supporters something like "bullshit artists" and call the bashers something like "skeptics" or "scientists"?


Note bias mentioned above. There is a place like that. It is called facebook. This is a discussion forum called AZ and this forum has the subtitle, "Argue to your heart's content." I'm fine if they want a thread to post testimonials but some of them are whoppers and it is hard to refrain from commenting, or even maybe just chuckling. Also, if the CTE people simply ignored us there would be very few problems. You can make another post if you want lecturing the CTE people about not responding to critics and ruining the forum.

Things change over 20 years and the discussion evolves somewhat. Stan's CTE is a distant relative of what Hal did.


It helps to have opposing views in order to make that determination.

Why do you characterize telling the truth as "bashing"? The truth is that the CTE claims cannot be proven or even explained rationally. You are biased. Why don't you call the CTE supporters something like "bullshit artists" and call the bashers something like "skeptics" or "scientists"?


Note bias mentioned above. There is a place like that. It is called facebook. This is a discussion forum called AZ and this forum has the subtitle, "Argue to your heart's content." I'm fine if they want a thread to post testimonials but some of them are whoppers and it is hard to refrain from commenting, or even maybe just chuckling. Also, if the CTE people simply ignored us there would be very few problems. You can make another post if you want lecturing the CTE people about not responding to critics and ruining the forum.

 

[Low500]

Things change over 20 years and the discussion evolves somewhat. Stan's CTE is a distant relative of what Hal did.


It helps to have opposing views in order to make that determination.

Why do you characterize telling the truth as "bashing"? The truth is that the CTE claims cannot be proven or even explained rationally. You are biased. Why don't you call the CTE supporters something like "bullshit artists" and call the bashers something like "skeptics" or "scientists"?


Note bias mentioned above. There is a place like that. It is called facebook. This is a discussion forum called AZ and this forum has the subtitle, "Argue to your heart's content." I'm fine if they want a thread to post testimonials but some of them are whoppers and it is hard to refrain from commenting, or even maybe just chuckling. Also, if the CTE people simply ignored us there would be very few problems. You can make another post if you want lecturing the CTE people about not responding to critics and ruining the forum.

 

[Low500]

You also have to remember history. Hal made incredible claims and dismissed all other forms of aiming as inferior. His explanation for CTE is like a page out of a numerology book. It rubbed people the wrong way. It was so bad that Mike had to make the aiming forum and ban talk of aiming in the main forum.

 

[Dan White]

Why do you keep posting without saying anything?

 

[WGDave]

Why do you keep posting without saying anything?

Think it has something to do with the number 3214?

It is really all you need to know, apparently.

 

[bbb]

Things change over 20 years and the discussion evolves somewhat. Stan's CTE is a distant relative of what Hal did.


It helps to have opposing views in order to make that determination.

Why do you characterize telling the truth as "bashing"? The truth is that the CTE claims cannot be proven or even explained rationally. You are biased. Why don't you call the CTE supporters something like "bullshit artists" and call the bashers something like "skeptics" or "scientists"?


Note bias mentioned above. There is a place like that. It is called facebook. This is a discussion forum called AZ and this forum has the subtitle, "Argue to your heart's content." I'm fine if they want a thread to post testimonials but some of them are whoppers and it is hard to refrain from commenting, or even maybe just chuckling. Also, if the CTE people simply ignored us there would be very few problems. You can make another post if you want lecturing the CTE people about not responding to critics and ruining the forum.

Ok dan
i am not going to get into a 20 year debate with you
I am not biased because i too am somewhat skeptical….
i do not think the CTE people are “ bullshit artists”
so i wont call them that
but you guys are “ bashers “ …. Sorry
they have an approach to aiming that has value
even you and patrick have said something along the lines that it has some positives
so lets say there is some subjectivity to it
which you say all aiming systems have
which they deny and you all say it has to have
so they dont believe the subjectivity part
but if the rest of it has positives
and with practice the devotees will develop the subjectivity for the angles that to you guys are saying cant be done with their perception
( they of course say you guys dont understand)
the practitioners still will learn how to aim even if they dont know why
you guys say all aiming systems have a subjective part
so include CTE as another one
just because they disagree
SO WHAT ?
they have a system that many players find helpful
i hope you agree to that
so why not let them use a system that is helpful
even if all the details are not explained to YOUR SATISFACTION ?
jmho