Search results

You are missing the key point. What does all of this fanageling have to do with the pocket?

Well actually you did say that. You said the CTE book shows you fractional hits that line up with the pocket. You hit those until you can recognize them. You are back peddling now. I've been trying to explain why fractional aiming isn't the issue, which you thought was and caused you to make...

I'm not confused about anything. You said that CTE works because it tells you to train the cb/ob/pocket relationship until the different fractions look "on." This has nothing to do with CTE. You are also right about the curtain drill. It's not that hard for anybody who already knows how to...

Even funnier is that there is an elegant double negative in this situation. Stan doesn't understand what he is teaching and Renegade doesn't understand Stan. In the end, Renegade is right about CTE and uses it successfully. Well done, Stan!

I'm not trying to be a wise guy, but the bold part confirms that you have no idea what Stan's CTE is. What you are describing is HAMB, or "hit a million balls." By doing rote drills eventually you just "know" when the shot is on. Stan says that the pocket is irrelevant when using CTE and to...

Yesterday you didn't know what the 20-year-old argument was even about and today you have solved it. At least you didn't say "round barn."

The fractions are equally objective no matter what system you use. In Poolology that fraction is derived for you mathematically, which is objective. In CTE the fractions are also supposedly derived objectively but nobody seems to know how. According to you they are learned by rote practice...

So you are saying the foundation of CTE is having known 1/4 and 1/2 and 3/4 ball hits set up so you can practice them and get a feel for what they look like by rote? How is that any different from HAMB? That's because the math actually generates arcs. Brian had to smooth the arcs into...

All of the CTE skeptics would say that aiming at fractions on the ball is more or less objective because that is not what the issue is about, and it has nothing to do with personalities. Let me explain with the Poolology analogy. There is a mathematical relationship between the diamonds on...

Yes, the ball fractions you aim at are more or less objective but, again, that has nothing to do with the issue.

Respectfully, you don't seem to understand what the argument has been about for the last 25 years. It has nothing to do with the ball fractions.

Henry Ford was on vacation in the upper peninsula of Michigan that day at Lake Michigamme. He probably had something like bass with lemon sauce for lunch. Well, you asked! 🙂

I think for the purposes of CTE and whether it is objective the issue of how practical it is or even if possible to use is secondary. There is no evidence that CTE is objective other than "it's 3D...perceptions... round barn!!!." I'd like to see simply how it works before even thinking about...

Yes, agreed, but the topic at hand, I think, is what makes CTE objective? In looking to Poolology I'd say it is an objective system because the geometry of the table and the ball positions are linked to the ball fractions. Bottom line, the system tells you where to aim to pocket the ball...

If he is having trouble imagining such a system I would point to Poolology as an example. The system tells you what fractional hit to aim for. It is up to the player to correctly sight what a 1/2 ball or 3/4 ball looks like. There's more to it, of course, but the system, overall, is objective.

Funny how the guy who doesn't get it doesn't get it, whether it be my friend JP or JB. You are PJ's problem now.

I'm not going to continue feeding your mania. I do have an anecdote that I'm reminded of: When I was in high school I had a "Fat" Mac computer. It was considered fat because it had a whopping 512K RAM, up from the standard 128K. lol. Anyway an older neighbor, JP, was big into gambling in AC...

First of all, let's discuss your attitude. You have been nothing but combative and insulting in almost all of your posts, while both PJ and I have kept our criticism for the method and not the person (I even said "no offense intended"). I would never report you but you could easily go the way...

I did learn how to perform the steps precisely. That's how I know it doesn't work.

Funny. I don't use it because it makes no sense.