And your answer is ?How much time have you spent trying the jellybean system, genius?
pj
chgo
And your answer is ?How much time have you spent trying the jellybean system, genius?
pj
chgo
That whooshing sound over your head.And your answer is ?
As the below post said, all the lines must be parallel including those going through the balls. It's all about center cue ball, and where that center actually is for each situation, which are known in CTE as perspectives.So I went back through the New Truth Series videos, specifically the shot videos.
Does this look correct? Anyone have anything to add? Can someone clarify where to SP30 aim point actually is? Is it just center to edge?
15 degree
AL
CB-Edge to A/C
PX
Inside CB-1/4 to OB-Center
SL
CB-Center to OB-Outside 1/4
View attachment 616824
30 degree
AL
CB-Edge to B
PX
Inside CB 1/4 to Outside OB 1/4
SL
CCB to SP30
View attachment 616825
45 degree
AL
CB-Edge to C
Px
Inside CB 1/4 to outside OB edge (1/16th inside to center)
SL
Half inch from outside CB edge
View attachment 616826
The perceptions were different before the book. Two different sets of perceptions yet the method still "works." Logic says what stays the same is the brains ability to pocket balls if that is the objective. If it worked it wouldn't take 8 months of sticktoitness to start pocketing balls. There are other methods far more objective that work within 5 minutes.As the below post said, all the lines must be parallel including those going through the balls. It's all about center cue ball, and where that center actually is for each situation, which are known in CTE as perspectives.
I used to be pretty good with the ghost ball method. Then took up pool again 40 years later. No joy at all at the table. So I watched all the Truth series videos, then got the book. I started the process about 8 months ago and have stuck with it. Slow but sure. Now I'm making most of the shots with ease.
You must engrain the process in your mind. For Stan's CTE Pro One method, you first determine a "perception" for the shot (i.e. one of 5 possible (15, 30, 45, 60, edge to edge). Then you line the shot up BASED ON THE PERCEPTION, not your subjective feel. It's weird at first. When you are in full stance you don't even have to look at the pocket. And after the last glance at the OB, I'm looking at my target: center cue ball. But you gotta watch the videos and read the book over and over depending on how fast it "clicks" with you.
In the end it's all about learning to master at least the 15, 30 completely, then play position so you don't have any thinner cuts. It's really two parts though. Setting up and knowing where exactly to hit for pocketing the ball in the center of the pocket, and then having the stroke fundamentals that make that happen.
You're saying (whether you know it or not) that only 5 cut angles are needed to make every shot in pool.For Stan's CTE Pro One method, you first determine a "perception" for the shot (i.e. one of 5 possible (15, 30, 45, 60, edge to edge). Then you line the shot up BASED ON THE PERCEPTION, not your subjective feel.
Perceptions, not cut angles. Huge difference.You're saying (whether you know it or not) that only 5 cut angles are needed to make every shot in pool.
I guess that's progress toward reality - Hal Houle used to say only 3 were needed.
pj
chgo
Tell that to Submerge...Perceptions, not cut angles. Huge difference.
Or did you mean to say that "perceptions" are just the starting places for figuring out the cut angles?...a "perception" for the shot (i.e. one of 5 possible (15, 30, 45, 60, edge to edge).
Just see you assuming 15,30,45 and 60 meaning cut angles. They are lines through the object ball used in perceptions. You know all this but can’t except it. Why keep up the fight instead of just letting people learn what they want to learn? You’ve acknowledged that you have no desire to learn CTE Just let it go.Tell that to Submerge...
Or did you mean to say that "perceptions" are just the starting places for figuring out the cut angles?
pj
chgo
Man I thought this shit was done for a while.Tell that to Submerge...
Or did you mean to say that "perceptions" are just the starting places for figuring out the cut angles?
pj
chgo
I think Submerge knows he really isn't saying that at all, and so do you, in fact, neither does Stan.You're saying (whether you know it or not) that only 5 cut angles are needed to make every shot in pool.
I guess that's progress toward reality - Hal Houle used to say only 3 were needed.
pj
chgo
why don't you just leave what he said as he said it instead of twisting it into something else?Tell that to Submerge...
Or did you mean to say that "perceptions" are just the starting places for figuring out the cut angles?
pj
chgo
DING DING DING. This is a great post, exactly what I thought 5 years ago when I quit arguing this same point with the same 3 or 4 guys, yet they still refuse to try it for themselves, or want to argue somehow that using 2 objects to aim at 1 object is somehow not objective.Just see you assuming 15,30,45 and 60 meaning cut angles. They are lines through the object ball used in perceptions. You know all this but can’t except it. Why keep up the fight instead of just letting people learn what they want to learn? You’ve acknowledged that you have no desire to learn CTE Just let it go.
I never think in terms of cut angles when using CTE.
Another common indication that CTE users don't understand the topic. Using "objects" in your aiming method (like every aiming method does) doesn't make your aiming method "objective". That's the word that's least understood by CTE users (even less than "works")....they still refuse to try it for themselves, or want to argue somehow that using 2 objects to aim at 1 object is somehow not objective.
So what iyo would make an aiming system objective?Another common indication that CTE users don't understand the topic. Using "objects" in your aiming method (like every aiming method does) doesn't make your aiming method "objective". That's the word that's least understood by CTE users (even less than "works").
pj
chgo
Aligning your eye(s) and the "objects" you use on the final aim line, like sights on a rifle. If you can't describe that alignment clearly, you aren't doing it.So what iyo would make an aiming system objective?
Is lining up to a defined center cue ball objective?Aligning your eye(s) and the "objects" you use on the final aim line, like sights on a rifle. If you can't describe that alignment clearly, you aren't doing it.
pj
chgo
If it's "defined" objectively - and if "lining up to it" means sighting along the line you want it to go.Is lining up to a defined center cue ball objective?
And that is exactly what we believe CTE does. Gives us defined lines that lead to a defined center cue ball that we shoot through to make balls. So we can now finally put this discussion to a rest, Thank You.If it's "defined" objectively - and if "lining up to it" means sighting along the line you want it to go.
Again, simply "using objects" doesn't do it - it's how you use them.
pj
chgo
CTE's definition of "defined" is definitely indefinite....defined lines that lead to a defined center cue ball
the goal is to aim at center cueball, every shot, what is not objective about that?Another common indication that CTE users don't understand the topic. Using "objects" in your aiming method (like every aiming method does) doesn't make your aiming method "objective". That's the word that's least understood by CTE users (even less than "works").
pj
chgo