I'm really only interested in how it works. I think the most plausible explanation, and the one that is supported by some evidence, is that the player's subconscious alters the set up/shot as needed to pocket the ball.
The Simplest Aiming Systems to Visualize and Use
- Thread starter SpiderWebComm
- Start date
You are so busy concocting retorts that you don't stop to read and think about what I'm saying.
How many got CTE to work and how many tried and discarded it? Given that CTE has been around in earnest for what, 10 years, and most have never heard of it I'd say there are far more who have discarded it.
How do you know that? I didn't. The results I obtained formed my opinion.
Bad science doesn't impress me. It is simply a thought of mine that one reason some people don't have success with CTE is that they follow the instructions literally. Maybe it's not that, I don't know for sure. The point you are missing is that some have success while others don't. Instead of simply dismissing those who don't make it work as doing it wrong, maybe there is something to be learned in why it doesn't work for them. I know, too nuanced. Fire away.
So you aren't impressed when a scientist explains something on the pool table but you are impressed when a grade school teacher delves into science?
All it takes to make me a believer is to explain how it can work. Brian did that with Poolology very easily. Why can't any of the 1000's upon 1000's of great CTE users do that? You said Stan did explain it in the book. What's the page and paragraph where that happens?
Just HAMB mostly.
GB gets me into correct alignment for stance then it's HAMB recognition from there.
You really must be a glutton for punishment.
I guess you can now pack up your cues and go home then
I know what you're going to say before you say it because you keep regurgitating the same things over and over.
Most pool players in leagues or elsewhere don't even bother with a pool forum. They could care less.
Garbage in = Garbage out.
It's not that and you don't know diddly squat for sure.
That can be said about any pool aiming system and other areas of pool such as banks.
ROTFLMAO! ABSOLUTELY!! Especially the one who really knows pool and knows how to play the game far better than YOU
and me. He has a mind for pool and devoted his entire life to it on the side from teaching as a player and instructor.
How did that happen, just because the math dazzled you? You admitted to never using or trying it!
Page 1 through page 429. What page or pages can I find the secrets in YOUR BOOK?
Last edited:
That’s a great way to do it.
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
If this is the question then yes. 3 degrees is nothing. If you understand the system, from this point you would use "ticks" to get it where you want it, or you know, does it look right or not? If not poke your head a bit and it will look right. No one that I know has bionic eyes with built in protractors so in the end, it looks right or it doesn't. SEE the shot, FEEL the shot, SHOOT the shot.
When they squirm, hold their feet to the fire.
Here's an example... Cookie, who is oh so quick to say how everyone else doesn't know anything about CTE, will not define what it is he's asking (hint, he doesn't know) and doesn't know the book well enough to give a reference to what in the hell he is exactly talking about. Vaguery upon itself. How can a guy be expected to answer a question made up of mist?@cookie man, why don't you enlighten us, is Dan right or wrong and why? Just calling him a waffle headed muppet doesn't make you right and him wrong. Defend your position. Do you think he's wrong? Can you explain why? We might be on the same side of the argument but there's no way of knowing if you can't even tell me what it is you're asking or if you think he's right or wrong and most importantly why.
Simple stuff here, is he wrong and why, and also what it is he's wrong about? Personal attacks and trying to change the conversation will not work. Please do the simple task of telling me what it is you're even asking. If you can't ask a good question there cannot be a good discussion or conversation.
Last edited:
I think Dan is 100% wrong. A 15 inside is what he is actually talking about. He thinks it only makes one shot. I know it makes shots from multiple angles He won’t ever believe me. If you tell the truth instead of dancing around maybe he will believe you. I really just thought if a neutral party told Dan he is wrong then maybe the discussion could evolve. I guess you are scared to put yourself out there though. DAN IS 100% WRONG IN HIS THINKING. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH?If this is the question then yes. 3 degrees is nothing. If you understand the system, from this point you would use "ticks" to get it where you want it, or you know, does it look right or not? If not poke your head a bit and it will look right. No one that I know has bionic eyes with built in protractors so in the end, it looks right or it doesn't. SEE the shot, FEEL the shot, SHOOT the shot.
When they squirm, hold their feet to the fire.
@cookie man, why don't you enlighten us, is Dan right or wrong and why? Just calling him a waffle headed muppet doesn't make you right and him wrong. Defend your position. Do you think he's wrong? Can you explain why? We might be on the same side of the argument but there's no way of knowing if you can't even tell me what it is you're asking or if you think he's right or wrong and most importantly why.
Simple stuff here, is he wrong and why, and also what it is he's wrong about? Personal attacks and trying to change the conversation will not work. Please do the simple task of telling me what it is you're even asking. If you can't ask a good question there cannot be a good discussion or conversation.
And CTE users believe in Hamb also
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
Did he say this? I think what he said was it makes one shot then you adjust from there, consciously (ticks) or subconsciously (see it, feel it, just do it and let the subconscious take care of it). I'll let him answer what he meant, @Dan White, what did you mean? Did you mean it makes one shot then you adjust in the ways I assumed above? I can't say if he's right or wrong without actually hearing what he meant. He knows but most discussion is shut down. By the point he's ready to answer he's been called names and the conversation derailed enough that no one knows what was asked in the first place.
Do you believe that one perception makes one shot? I think you do, especially if you understand the round barn, ticks, pivots etc. They are ways to adjust the "one shot" to the multiple shots that are needed. CTE does explain how to do this stuff but somehow most pro and anti CTE seem to not realize they are being shown how to do the stuff. One perception = one shot. The other ideas/methods presented in CTE are how you can get multiple angles from one perception. When you do the visual tricks in CTE, you are changing the perception to a different single perception that makes a different single shot. Easy stuff. In one paragraph, I've somehow distilled the truth. Was it that hard to understand CTE and how it works? Did it cost me anything to explain it? Does it harm CTE in any way? This is what we're asking, simple how and why. Asking for a concise answer isn't attacking CTE.
I'm not yet ready to tell him he is wrong. In fact he may be correct here. One perception = one shot. I don't think he has ever addressed the fact that the visual tricks, pivots and such are for getting multiple angles, aka fine tuning from there. It can be done subconsciously, so if this is his stance, he is correct. I don't know, @Dan White can you address this? It can also be done with visual tricks such as ticks, poking heads out, playing around with vision center, pivots, etc. If someone finds the correct shot with visual tricks/fine tuning, or doing it subconsciously, what's the difference?
I'll go out on a limb here and say that CTE gives you a way to do it, a methodology to trust in so you can perform the shot how it needs done. It keeps the doubting inner voice quiet and gives you confidence. (same with the "tips of english = diamonds" kicking system) At some point after you hit enough of the shot, you don't need the visual tricks and you just do it subconsciously/feel or however you want to explain it. Look harder into Pro One. The reason it is suggested to be learned after the others is because at that point you should have hit enough shots that you're ready for it. If you tried to teach Pro One or DP to a ripe beginner, they would probably fail. If you try to teach Basic CTE to a good player it seems odd because it's literally the training wheel stage of CTE. Once you can ride a bike training wheels get in the way. Maybe it would be more wise for a better player to only try basic enough to see if it passes the BS meter then move directly to Pro One or DP. If you know how to address the CB, pivoting does nothing. Meaning you can already pre-pivot and get onto the shot correctly without manual pivots.
Thank you, I do appreciate a clear answer.
One perception = one shot. Totally agree.
Multiple perceptions come from a 15 inside reference dependent on the shot at hand
Multiple perceptions come from a 15 inside reference dependent on the shot at hand
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
You're right, but it's dark outside and 14 degrees. It's much easier to discuss on a forum than go out in the cold. Nice comfy fleece pajama pants and a hoodie sitting in a sort of comfy computer chair. Nobody is playing pool tonight as super bowl is going on and I'm feeling too lazy to go shoot in the basement. Playing 9B til 4:15am and waking up at 9 makes me not want to do much than relax today.You guys need to get a life
take a walk around your block and experience life around you
jmho
icbw
and will probably get flamed for my post….
I believe you begin to recognize angles and your subconscious does the work. Systems and methods get you close when you don't recognize the shot, but are never going to be accurate or dependable. They just get you close, so that you are one step towards learning the shot. Systems are also good for distracting the conscious mind so that the subconscious can do its job.
Watch someone shoot a whole bunch of wing shots in, and ask them what aiming method they use.
Watch someone shoot a whole bunch of wing shots in, and ask them what aiming method they use.
What kind of systems are you talking about? Any specific ones?I believe you begin to recognize angles and your subconscious does the work. Systems and methods get you close when you don't recognize the shot, but are never going to be accurate or dependable. They just get you close, so that you are one step towards learning the shot. Systems are also good for distracting the conscious mind so that the subconscious can do its job.
Watch someone shoot a whole bunch of wing shots in, and ask them what aiming method they use.
I got you beat lol. I’m at an outside bar in Cabo watching the super bowl and arguing with you guys. I do need to get off Az lolYou're right, but it's dark outside and 14 degrees. It's much easier to discuss on a forum than go out in the cold. Nice comfy fleece pajama pants and a hoodie sitting in a sort of comfy computer chair. Nobody is playing pool tonight as super bowl is going on and I'm feeling too lazy to go shoot in the basement. Playing 9B til 4:15am and waking up at 9 makes me not want to do much than relax today.
My statement applies to pretty much all systems. But mostly the ones that apply to shots that are easily recognized. (most aiming systems)
Kicking systems are more helpful to me, since it's not as easy to recognize certain angles and multiple rail paths. These are even more susceptible to inaccuracy though, since there are many more factors that can affect the shot and cause deviation.
Last edited:
I am jealous