Are CTE users.
Are CTE users.
What are the other 12?
Which two?
Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)
Which two?
Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)
Shuff and Styer
2 of the 14 finalists for the Mosconi Cup
Are CTE users.
You may be on to something with this portion that I've emphasized from your post, Spider.We all know what they know but they don't know what we know and do because not ONE OF THEM has gotten off their dead asses to get on the table and committed to really learning and executing it as it's supposed to be done and stuck with it.
You may be on to something with this portion that I've emphasized from your post, Spider.
The troublemakers are just too lazy or too smug to "get off their dead asses" and commit.
There's a new CTE student called Sacman on here. Seems to be very sincere and sounds like a hard worker. I have encouraged him...(I guess it's a 'him')
Must have been the "sack" with the "k" missing that tipped you off. :rotflmao: (although in this new world of LGBT there may be a few "her" with "sacks" also)
I mentioned to him in another thread about some in-person table time I spent with a genuine CTE expert recently and how it helped me. I advised him to do the same.
Here is what I posted to him. I hope it helps him somewhat. :thumbup:
Any Poolology users?
Any who has learned a single thing from all the colorful diagrams of CB and OB angles with lines through them to the pocket coupled with math and geometry equations?
I didn't think so.
..................
Well, I never was into that bunch of sissy britches in the "Audio-Visual Club" way back in high school.Good thing you're into the positives of learning techniques instead of the negatives. Otherwise you'd be just like 'you know who'.
A bit unfair, and uneccessary as Wilson would say.
Why would you make such a comparison? Poolology has been out for a little more than 1 year. In 20 years make this comparison again. Actually, I predict the next 3 to 5 years will be sufficient. But CTE will always be 20 years ahead of Poolology.
First of all, the question was to COOKIE. He knew about CTE, I didn't and it was news to me. I wondered if he had any other inside information.
The FIVE OF YOU have been making COMPARISONS with CTE and other systems as well as attempting to point out inadequacies in multiple threads. Much of it erroneous and slanted. Wilson hasn't said anything but he certainly could. Nobody bothered to report it.
I guess time will tell with Poolology. If it happens then ANY AND ALL SYSTEMS are a GOOD THING.
You ask, "Who has learned a single thing?" Well, Poolology is fractional aiming, but unlike the old school method of fractional aiming, Poolology eliminates much of the guesswork and the countless hours of experience needed before proficiency is reached. And as you already know there is no "geometry" to perform. There are only three zone diagrams to memorize and some basic math and straight line visuals. If you can't divide a 2-digit number in half in your head, then you might not be a good candidate for Poolology. That's the most math you have to do. The fact is, most people go beyond simply looking at the diagrams...they actual read and try it out.
I know exactly what Poolology is about. I had the book loaned to me for 2 months and I dissected it sentence by sentence as well as a good amount on the TABLE with it.
But then again, unlike you, their reason for buying the book is to finally have a chance at becoming a better player without having to spend countless hours trying to get an aiming system to work.
Whatever I do or choose to do is none of your damn business! Nor do I need you to tell me how long it took when you have no idea. FYI, the very first time Hal Houle and I were on the phone with each other, he had me knocking balls into pockets from all over the table within a matter of minutes. That's what blew me away and I had to learn more.
There is no mystery here -- with a good stroke Poolology works from day one.
If they're able to see the visuals from CCB to multiple small fractions and use their imagination quite a bit beyond a 1/2 ball hit. It could.
Ghostball and contact point aiming can claim their champion players as well, so it really doesn't mean much when a pro player admits to using any particular system.
If players practice relentlessly ANY aiming method for a long enough timeframe, they could reach pro level. Since the game involves a lot more than just pocketing balls, most of these players end up as great shot makers but not pro players, unless they dedicate enough time to cb control and mental toughness as well.
I don't dispute that at all but CB control, layout analyzing, and planning angles are other very important facets of the game. We're talking pure aiming. Aiming alone isn't enough.
Poolology is subject to unrestricted public review in the marketplace. Here's what people are saying about it....Amazon Reviews for Poolology.
There's some NOT so good in there also but hey, to be expected with ANYTHING! I'll bet there are those who have something to bad mouth and b*tch about regarding a Rolls Royce.
Poolology is subject to unrestricted public opinion and review on YouTube here....Poolology YouTube Channel.
The only reviews that can be found on CTE are those which Stan puts on his own website. Here on AZ it is unthinkable to give an honest review of it. Threads get deleted and people get banned. So it's quite imbalanced and misleading to compare Poolology to CTE, and also against forum rules, but you felt the need to do it anyway.
Quit trying to spin this and CAUSE TROUBLE! There was no comparison. It was a QUESTION to Cookie, NOT YOU. Pat Johnson started a thread specifically about fractions and then compared it to Hal Houle's 3 "ANGLE" alignments. They're 3 LINES and have nothing to do with impact there and cut angles. But all of you jumped in to spin and twist it for the last week with no outside interference. Wait until Stan releases his info and illustrates how the MAJORITY OF ALL SHOTS CAN BE MADE USING ONE ANGLE! This will elongate the 20 year war for another 20 years. At 71 years of age, PJ might not make it for that long. At least it will give him a big incentive to wake up every day and totally waste another two decades like he as with last two.
Thanks for the advertising opportunity. :thumbup:
And feel free to go off in bold blue reply. I will not respond to you again in this thread.
A bit unfair, and uneccessary as Wilson would say.
Why would you make such a comparison? Poolology has been out for a little more than 1 year. In 20 years make this comparison again. Actually, I predict the next 3 to 5 years will be sufficient. But CTE will always be 20 years ahead of Poolology.
You ask, "Who has learned a single thing?" Well, Poolology is fractional aiming, but unlike the old school method of fractional aiming, Poolology eliminates much of the guesswork and the countless hours of experience needed before proficiency is reached. And as you already know there is no "geometry" to perform. There are only three zone diagrams to memorize and some basic math and straight line visuals. If you can't divide a 2-digit number in half in your head, then you might not be a good candidate for Poolology. That's the most math you have to do. The fact is, most people go beyond simply looking at the diagrams...they actual read and try it out. But then again, unlike you, their reason for buying the book is to finally have a chance at becoming a better player without having to spend countless hours trying to get an aiming system to work. There is no mystery here -- with a good stroke Poolology works from day one.
And there are plenty of great players that learned to pocket balls via fractional aiming, the traditional method of guesstimation and trial and error, or vintage German angle diagrams to help determine which fraction matches which angle. The list includes world champions in both snooker and pool. Stan Shuffett gives a great YouTube lesson on traditional fractional aiming here: 5 Lines.
Ghostball and contact point aiming can claim their champion players as well, so it really doesn't mean much when a pro player admits to using any particular system.
If players practice relentlessly ANY aiming method for a long enough timeframe, they could reach pro level. Since the game involves a lot more than just pocketing balls, most of these players end up as great shot makers but not pro players, unless they dedicate enough time to cb control and mental toughness as well.
Poolology is subject to unrestricted public review in the marketplace. Here's what people are saying about it....Amazon Reviews for Poolology.
Poolology is subject to unrestricted public opinion and review on YouTube here....Poolology YouTube Channel.
The only reviews that can be found on CTE are those which Stan puts on his own website. Here on AZ it is unthinkable to give an honest review of it. Threads get deleted and people get banned. So it's quite imbalanced and misleading to compare Poolology to CTE, and also against forum rules, but you felt the need to do it anyway.
Thanks for the advertising opportunity. :thumbup:
And feel free to go off in bold blue reply. I will not respond to you again in this thread.
Good thing you're into the positives of learning techniques instead of the negatives. Otherwise you'd be just like 'you know who'.
Uhm .... sacman is in reference to my last name - thank you very much for the sophomoric humor (ugh). I was a full-blooded male when I was born and will always be on the opposite side of those twisted individuals who can't figure out what they see in the mirror, let a lone what gender they are.
Sophomoric? That's a compliment, thanks. My humor can be quite a few grades lower when I'm at my best. (worst to some)
You sound like my kind of man.
Regarding CTE ... best thing that has ever happend in my pool experience. I played nearly evey day - totally addicted - and my grades suffered for it - when I was in college 30+ years ago. Having returned to the pool hall a couple of years ago (thanks to Iowa no smoking laws) I was never able to return to those college glory days when I could just "feel" it and put the ball in the pocket. Actually, I believe I was using a fractional method without really knowing what I was doing. Last year I bought Stan's DVD2. My brain wasn't ready for it. And now I've come back to CTE and see it differently. CTE is ingenious. It works with those challenging spherical objects ... and putting them in the pocket consistently is a BLAST.
There is no pro near me (Iowa) but will keep my eyes open.
Don't worry, the biggest and most important pro will be visiting you in due time. Not in person, but the book and videos will be the next best thing to having him right along side of you.
'nough said.
Mister Sacman.CTE is ingenious. It works with those challenging spherical objects ... and putting them in the pocket consistently is a BLAST