Let's All Support Stan

BC21 · Mar 14, 2019

cookie man said:
Maybe you should just totally forget about fractional aiming when trying to learn CTE. After all you said you couldn't get it to work while thinking of fractions

I found it pretty helpful actually. I would set up 100% known half-ball shots, but instead of aiming straight through ccb along this known aim line, I'd follow Stan's/Hal's CTE instructions, using a 15 perception to acquire my "fixed" cb, then I'd do an inside half tip manual pivot from this fixed cb perspective to a final ccb. No fractional thoughts at all. But once I had my final ccb it was pretty simple to look straight through the cb to where my shaft/stroke is pointing. If it wasn't at the ob edge (the dead half ball shot) then I knew I did something wrong, either the perception was off a little or my bridge V was placed a little more or a little less than half a tip from my fixed cb perception.

And I find it odd that you said halfball shots rarely come up in CTE. That's odd because halfball shots are very common on every table during every game when using any other aiming method. But I understand if a player not using fractional aiming, or not paying attention to cb-ob relationships, might never notice how often the halfball shot comes up.

cookie man · Mar 14, 2019

BC21 said:
And I find it odd that you said halfball shots rarely come up in CTE. That's odd because halfball shots are very common on every table during every game when using any other aiming method. But I understand if a player not using fractional aiming, or not paying attention to cb-ob relationships, might never notice how often the halfball shot comes up.

Didn't actually say they rarely come up, but then again i wouldn't even know because i never think in those terms. I'm sure they come up all the time. I just look for my perception, i could care less about anything else.

Dan White · Mar 15, 2019

cookie man said:
Cause I'm sure the line of guys swimming in shit don't have the money or balls to post it.

What do you mean? The way 6pack described it you get the $5K if you can do or prove something. It didn't sound like you lose $5K if you can't do it.

I guess it will remain "a mystery that was never supposed to be." :wink:

cookie man · Mar 16, 2019

Dan White said:
What do you mean? The way 6pack described it you get the $5K if you can do or prove something. It didn't sound like you lose $5K if you can't do it.

I guess it will remain "a mystery that was never supposed to be." :wink:

Just as I'm sure Dan White will remain "a mystery that was never supposed to be."

PS would you ever seriously consider flying to Kentucky yourself to try to explain
CTE on video

PSS Are you going to watch the Truth Series and make an honest effort to understand CTE once and for all.

Dan White · Mar 16, 2019

cookie man said:
PS would you ever seriously consider flying to Kentucky yourself to try to explain
CTE on video

Depends on the circumstances. If I knew I could pick up $5000 by going to KY I'd do it. Wouldn't most anybody?

PSS Are you going to watch the Truth Series and make an honest effort to understand CTE once and for all.

Of course. Unlike you I have an open mind. That's how science works and that process is what has shaped the opinions I hold today. I always question whether what I am saying makes sense before I post something. You're never completely sure, but the evidence is the evidence.

For instance, I could ask you the same thing. Are you going to watch the truth series and make an honest effort to compare what you are being told to reality and actual science? I COULD ask you that but it would be pointless. Over the years I've learned that you are not curious. You believe what you believe and that is good enough for you. The problem is you won't let the rest of us have an opinion without rebutting every... single... thing. I'd be OK with that normally but you have absolutely nothing to back it up.

Take the latest example from just a few posts above. Stan makes a video that is clearly full of contradictions. I ask you some specific questions about throw based on what Stan said and you bail out. So please spare me the condescension.

Oh, and it's PPS, not PSS.

Patrick Johnson · Mar 16, 2019

Dan White said:
...it's PPS, not PSS.

Have you taken PSS to the table and tried it? Until then you don't know nuttin'.

pj <-

chgo

cookie man · Mar 16, 2019

Patrick Johnson said:
Have you taken PSS to the table and tried it? Until then you don't know nuttin'.

pj <-
chgo

Amen to that

cookie man · Mar 16, 2019

Dan White said:
Depends on the circumstances. If I knew I could pick up $5000 by going to KY I'd do it. Wouldn't most anybody?

Of course. Unlike you I have an open mind. That's how science works and that process is what has shaped the opinions I hold today. I always question whether what I am saying makes sense before I post something. You're never completely sure, but the evidence is the evidence.

For instance, I could ask you the same thing. Are you going to watch the truth series and make an honest effort to compare what you are being told to reality and actual science? I COULD ask you that but it would be pointless. Over the years I've learned that you are not curious. You believe what you believe and that is good enough for you. The problem is you won't let the rest of us have an opinion without rebutting every... single... thing. I'd be OK with that normally but you have absolutely nothing to back it up.

Take the latest example from just a few posts above. Stan makes a video that is clearly full of contradictions. I ask you some specific questions about throw based on what Stan said and you bail out. So please spare me the condescension.

Oh, and it's PPS, not PSS.

Circumstances.....Go to Kentucky and explain CTE on video. Shouldn't be too hard for you, right?

You are quite the character Dan. How does science work exactly. Do you take one experiment and declare the results valid and the absolute truth? Or do you run several different tests and then get a more credible result. I mean anyone can pick one result and twist it to get a result to fit their agenda, correct. Not saying you would do that but.......

As you stated you already have an opinion so how could you possibly watch the truth series with an open mind. Now we all know that will never happen. It's completely obvious your mind is already made up.

I will watch the truth series, maybe not with an open mind, but why should I. I've used CTE for years, yes my mind is made up, It's the best playing system out there, bar none. It will help everyone that wants the help. It will help no one that has an attitude against it like you do.

Everyone is completely entitled to their own opinion and contrary to what you think i'm not against that. But posting an uninformed completely wrong opinion over and over, yes i will call you out. You should stop and honor your previous post about not posting about CTE until the Book comes out. Is your word no good? My experience actually playing with CTE and not sitting behind the key board forming an opinion backs up what i post.

PPS have a nice day

Dan White · Mar 16, 2019

cookie man said:
Go to Kentucky and explain CTE on video. Shouldn't be too hard for you, right?

I don't know. My super secret decoder ring keeps saying, "Be sure to drink your ovaltine." I never got the Stan message, nor did anybody else without the secret code so until the secret bet is revealed to all we can only guess.

You are quite the character Dan. How does science work exactly. Do you take one experiment and declare the results valid and the absolute truth? Or do you run several different tests and then get a more credible result. I mean anyone can pick one result and twist it to get a result to fit their agenda, correct. Not saying you would do that but.......

I'll tell you how it doesn't work. It doesn't work when one of the parties involved (you) continually (as in for years) avoids any real discussion and instead relies on personal attacks and vague generalizations. Here, look and see what I mean:

Earlier in this thread I pointed out some significant discrepancies in one of Stan's videos. I asked for feedback about these findings and even posted a specific topic for discussion, which was:

So based on your educated opinion which statement(s) do you agree with:

1. Slow balls do not throw more than hard hit balls,
2. Slow balls do not throw more than hard hit balls only when using CTE Pro1?

Here's what cookie man had to say:

I remember you doing a video and thinking you solved world peace. I also remember that hardly anyone agreed with you or even cared about your video.

PS you want to give an opinion on CTE go right ahead. But you should stop embarrassing yourself and from now on give an educated opinion about it.

Your video requires no response because it just isn't relevant in the over all scheme of things

Just as I'm sure Dan White will remain "a mystery that was never supposed to be."

You should stop and honor your previous post about not posting about CTE until the Book comes out. Is your word no good?

My experience actually playing with CTE and not sitting behind the key board forming an opinion backs up what i post.

You'd think after all this time you would realize that the best way to shut me up is to engage in a little actual "scientific" discussion instead of attacking the messenger. I know, that's too much to ask for. I'll just reopen the question one more time in case you want to further my understanding:

Which statement(s) do you agree with:

1. Slow balls do not throw more than hard hit balls,
2. Slow balls do not throw more than hard hit balls only when using CTE Pro1?

Of course I'll probably get a warning from AZ moderators to stop bashing CTE instead of having a civil debate, which is what I though discussion forums were all about.

cookie man · Mar 17, 2019

Dan White said:
I don't know. My super secret decoder ring keeps saying, "Be sure to drink your ovaltine." I never got the Stan message, nor did anybody else without the secret code so until the secret bet is revealed to all we can only guess.

.

Go explain CTE on video. It's been posted over and over on here. Why so dense? What aren't you understanding

cookie man · Mar 17, 2019

Dan White said:
I'll tell you how it doesn't work. It doesn't work when one of the parties involved (you) continually (as in for years) avoids any real discussion and instead relies on personal attacks and vague generalizations. Here, look and see what I mean:

Earlier in this thread I pointed out some significant discrepancies in one of Stan's videos. I asked for feedback about these findings and even posted a specific topic for discussion, which was:

So based on your educated opinion which statement(s) do you agree with:

1. Slow balls do not throw more than hard hit balls,
2. Slow balls do not throw more than hard hit balls only when using CTE Pro1?

Here's what cookie man had to say:

You'd think after all this time you would realize that the best way to shut me up is to engage in a little actual "scientific" discussion instead of attacking the messenger. I know, that's too much to ask for. I'll just reopen the question one more time in case you want to further my understanding:

Which statement(s) do you agree with:

1. Slow balls do not throw more than hard hit balls,
2. Slow balls do not throw more than hard hit balls only when using CTE Pro1?

Of course I'll probably get a warning from AZ moderators to stop bashing CTE instead of having a civil debate, which is what I though discussion forums were all about.

You are quite the tool. There is nothing to debate considering you know nothing about the subject but i'll play along just for you.

Do a video about throw and it's effects when you hit balls slow and hard in detail, you are the scientist so this should be easy.
Then do a video showing the effects of throw while using CTE, shooting slow and then hard, please describe in detail exactly how you are using CTE so we have no discrepancies and this experiment and it's results done properly. Please shoot shots from from multiple angles so we can base our results off of more then one random shot. This won't be easy for you since you have no actual knowledge how to shoot the shots with CTE, but you've argued against CTE for years with no knowledge so it should be interesting if nothing else.

PPS we are going to need you to use a radar gun so the speeds can be calculated properly

The "lurkers" are watching, please don't let them down

lfigueroa · Mar 17, 2019

Dan White said:
I don't know. My super secret decoder ring keeps saying, "Be sure to drink your ovaltine." I never got the Stan message, nor did anybody else without the secret code so until the secret bet is revealed to all we can only guess.

Good to know there's at least one other member of the Little Orphan Annie Secret Circle out there, lol.

Lou Figueroa
"Arf" goes Sandy

BC21 · Mar 17, 2019

cookie man said:
You are quite the tool. There is nothing to debate considering you know nothing about the subject but i'll play along just for you.

Do a video about throw and it's effects when you hit balls slow and hard in detail, you are the scientist so this should be easy.
Then do a video showing the effects of throw while using CTE, shooting slow and then hard, please describe in detail exactly how you are using CTE so we have no discrepancies and this experiment and it's results done properly. Please shoot shots from from multiple angles so we can base our results off of more then one random shot. This won't be easy for you since you have no actual knowledge how to shoot the shots with CTE, but you've argued against CTE for years with no knowledge so it should be interesting if nothing else.

PPS we are going to need you to use a radar gun so the speeds can be calculated properly

The "lurkers" are watching, please don't let them down

This, along with Stan's CTE Trumps CIT video is a bit rediculous. No video experiments needed here because there's already plenty of scientific data available that proves how and why we get throw. Maybe Stan was referring to how he says CTE overcuts the shots, which compensates for the throw that occurs. In all of his videos he fires the balls in at warp speed. He even says in one video that he likes to stun the balls. But a stun shot causes more throw than a rolling cb, and slow speed causes more throw than fast speed.

Anyway, It doesn't matter what method or system you use to get the cb to the ob, there will always be throw, unless you're using just the right amount of spin and speed to get a gearing effect, where the cb simply rolls around the ob without any throw occurring. It's a well known fact that slower shots cause more throw. Not sure why Stan would say the opposite occurs.

Dan White · Mar 17, 2019

cookie man said:
Go explain CTE on video. It's been posted over and over on here. Why so dense? What aren't you understanding

What I'm not understanding is exactly what Stan's $5000 challenge is. He seems to have posted it only for friends -- people who are sure not to take him up on it.

Dan White · Mar 17, 2019

cookie man said:
You are quite the tool. There is nothing to debate considering you know nothing about the subject but i'll play along just for you.

Do a video about throw and it's effects when you hit balls slow and hard in detail, you are the scientist so this should be easy.
Then do a video showing the effects of throw while using CTE, shooting slow and then hard, please describe in detail exactly how you are using CTE so we have no discrepancies and this experiment and it's results done properly. Please shoot shots from from multiple angles so we can base our results off of more then one random shot. This won't be easy for you since you have no actual knowledge how to shoot the shots with CTE, but you've argued against CTE for years with no knowledge so it should be interesting if nothing else.

PPS we are going to need you to use a radar gun so the speeds can be calculated properly

The "lurkers" are watching, please don't let them down

Sigh... Still avoiding the issue with insults and misdirection. Since Stan believes that throw does not exist and also believes that CTE overpowers throw (that doesn't exist) then I'll just assume you believe whatever Stan believes. That's something to be considered for new players looking for an aiming system or other techniques to speed their learning curve.

Dan White · Mar 17, 2019

lfigueroa said:
Good to know there's at least one other member of the Little Orphan Annie Secret Circle out there, lol.

Lou Figueroa
"Arf" goes Sandy

Yeah, I'll admit I had to look up the exact phrase but it did seem appropriate to use here. My other option was to go with something about Alan Turing and the Enigma machine needed to break the code. :smile:

cookie man · Mar 17, 2019

Dan White said:
Sigh... Still avoiding the issue with insults and misdirection. Since Stan believes that throw does not exist and also believes that CTE overpowers throw (that doesn't exist) then I'll just assume you believe whatever Stan believes. That's something to be considered for new players looking for an aiming system or other techniques to speed their learning curve.

Really, where was my insult?

CTE is 100% visual.
CTE has nothing to do with stroke.
CTE has nothing to do with slow speeds or hards speeds.
CTE is SEE and it’s up to the student align and stroke correctly.
CTE can be applied without the player having a cue in his hand.

So keep telling us how throw exists in CTE Mr. scientist.

cookie man · Mar 17, 2019

lfigueroa said:
Good to know there's at least one other member of the Little Orphan Annie Secret Circle out there, lol.

Lou Figueroa
"Arf" goes Sandy

Dan White said:
Yeah, I'll admit I had to look up the exact phrase but it did seem appropriate to use here. My other option was to go with something about Alan Turing and the Enigma machine needed to break the code. :smile:

So you hurl an insult along with the number one insult-er on AZ. Nice. Didn't you complain in several posts today about people posting insults? But you wouldn't be a hypocrite would you now.

cookie man · Mar 17, 2019

Dan White said:
What I'm not understanding is exactly what Stan's $5000 challenge is. He seems to have posted it only for friends -- people who are sure not to take him up on it.

Explain CTE on video. That's it. His friends have re-posted it for you over and over

Patrick Johnson · Mar 17, 2019

cookie man said:
Really, where was my insult?

CTE is 100% visual.
CTE has nothing to do with stroke.
CTE has nothing to do with slow speeds or hards speeds.
CTE is SEE and it’s up to the student align and stroke correctly.
CTE can be applied without the player having a cue in his hand.

So keep telling us how throw exists in CTE Mr. scientist.

Throw happens no matter how you aim. If you're making shots, you're taking it into account one way or another.

pj
chgo

Let's All Support Stan

https://www.playpoolbetter.com

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Fish of the Day

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

https://www.playpoolbetter.com

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Fish of the Day