pls tell us you don't really buy the tilted head bull sh8
A Curious CTE Diagram
- Thread starter Dan White
- Start date
No, we can't have a discussion because every time someone says something that makes sense you broadcast your opinion that they don't know anything about CTE.
I’ve had the book since mid-July and have worked my way through it.
What have I said since then that demonstrates a lack of knowledge about CTE? Did I get something wrong addressing Dan’s question about head tilt?
I’ve been straight with you, how about returning the favor?
Lou Figueroa
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
Pro X shoots Y way. If Pro X puts out a book with detailed information on how they shoot, is that a bad thing, even if it doesn't work for Player Z? I don't think so. In Pro X's mind this is the best way, and is workable for some players if they put the time in. Is it worth pursuing? Only Player Z knows this for sure. I'm pretty sure every pool author ever that tries to teach their method is guilty of this. The real proof is if it works for some people, not all people or every style player there is. Some players will be like ducks to water to method Y, others will not. The method may never work for Player Z, but it might be the cat's meow for Player W.
I see the potential but at this point I'd rather put work into fundamentals than learning an exotic aiming system. I've missed more shots in my pool "career" from bad fundamentals or speed control than from faulty aim.
But can't that be said of any system..? Even the horrific ghost ball method..?
So just that I'm completely clear. Any missed shot I have seen a CTE user make is due to an error in stroke...? No room for a miscalculation with a thick/thin, pivot or no pivot, perception, etc..?
I'm ok with notion that misses only occur for system users when they stroke it bad. However I think it still plays into my take on system users not getting direct feedback. If I believe I used the system correctly and I miss with a straight stroke, where do I go from there..?
Mr. Boogieman, sir.
I've missed more from ALL of those things.
I really reduced one of them though, and that was the aiming part....thanks to Stan Shuffett/Hal Houle. Dumping that absurd stuff from Willie Mosconi's book about "all shots can be determined mathematically so let's leave nothing to chance" was one of the best things I ever did. I'd been brainwashed for decades by that bull.
Then went to work on some stroke twitches and cleaned those up....thanks to Stan Shuffett.
Now I only have to deal with speed....and the occasional misjudged perception.
Once the aiming was under control, it was "one less bell to answer" and I could really tighten down on the fundamentals.
I still shoot terrible though and just about anyone can rob me...that's why I need such big handicaps. (I have no talent or natural ability)
Glad that whatever you're doing makes you fulfilled and happy.
No I never said that. Reread the post I replied to. A missed shot from a CTE user could easily be from a miscalculation. That would be the obvious reason if your stroke is straight
Well they don’t. And you’ve admitted that you don’t and have we have seen from your posts that you don’t.
If you knew exactly what it means you would buy into it also. In fact it’s a pretty strong move all buy itself
Just about everything you’ve said justifies my opinion on your postings. You haven’t posted any new info from the book at all.
No there is no unit of measure. The diagram is just a helpful guide for cte users created by a user to help people with bridge placement. It isn't something Stan created.
Find the head string and put your bridge hand down so that the v is on the line. Now do it so that the v is just a bit to the left or right of that line. That's all this guide is odd trying to help other users get a better sense of bridge hand placement based off a chosen line. The line chosen was so chosen because of the initial perception.
Would be great if we had units of measure that could be used and increase the precision in the process.
Anything that reduces guessing and increases consistency in aiming is a good thing.
No that is guessing. If someone is never taught ghost ball then it is very unlikely that they use gb at all.
Ghost ball is a specific instruction. Imagine a ball in line with the pocket, adjust for throw, replace that imaginary ball with the cueball.
That is the most basic instructions for the ghost ball method of aiming.
If you were certain that you were on a and did everything else right including the stroke then you would be right. However it has been our experience that users getting inconsistent results has been because users are not doing everything correctly.
Even I still pick the wrong perception from time to time.
WRONG!
That's you limiting it .
One can picture it as a disc, ball, line to the center, spot on the table or vicinity .
Landon and Styer mush have missed the lesson.
Lol amazingly predictable
Actually all that means is that there are other ways to aim and get into shooting position that work. Stan never says that there aren't other ways to play.
He does think that what he teaches is the best way but I have never heard him say it's the only way. I haven't yet read every word in the book but I can't recall him saying that cte is the only way to be successful when playing.
Maybe you could post a picture of where you say he says this in the book?
Missed what lesson? Tyler taught this to me two years before the book came out.
Landon and Tyler both are expert users who can do every method of cte and they use whatever version they prefer.
Would you be comfortable talking shit to either of them directly they way you talk shit about them and cte users on here?
And yet you never say anything to prove otherwise