CTE Videos Of The Day - #15, #16, #17

SpiderWebComm said:

CTE Videos Of The Day - #15, #16, #17

#15 - 8 Way Shot 15, 30, 45, Part 1 (70)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNDLqjFyGX4&list=UUW8lTFYIYGN2AjHKN23M-RQ&index=50


#16 - CTE Table Geometry 15, 30, 45 part 2 (71)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfUfZwajFV4&list=UUW8lTFYIYGN2AjHKN23M-RQ&index=71


#17 - CTE Angle Study 15, 30, 45 part 3 (72)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tTXlRQzCsM&list=UUW8lTFYIYGN2AjHKN23M-RQ&index=72


The material in these videos is the foundation of CTE. There are 3 visual alignments to pocket every shot on the table either directly or with banks one, two, three, or four rails. It's A, B, C or 15, 30, 45.

It isn't aligning the CB to OB with 18 - 20 different contact points or fractions which are difficult to see or imagine with the center of the CB or other areas of the CB from one side to the other.

It's done with the two edges of the CB that are clearly apparent when super imposed over a colored OB. Nothing jumps out to your vision more clearly and fast.

Believe what you want to believe on your own or believe the ramblings of those who are NOT in the know and have had a bias with CTE since it's first introduction by Hal Houle.

Watch the videos and come to your own conclusions for the simplicity of it once it's internalized. That having been said, it might not be for everyone.

Click to expand...

Balls don’t have edges........

SpiderWebComm said:

CTE Videos Of The Day - #15, #16, #17

#15 - 8 Way Shot 15, 30, 45, Part 1 (70)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNDLqjFyGX4&list=UUW8lTFYIYGN2AjHKN23M-RQ&index=50


#16 - CTE Table Geometry 15, 30, 45 part 2 (71)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfUfZwajFV4&list=UUW8lTFYIYGN2AjHKN23M-RQ&index=71


#17 - CTE Angle Study 15, 30, 45 part 3 (72)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tTXlRQzCsM&list=UUW8lTFYIYGN2AjHKN23M-RQ&index=72


The material in these videos is the foundation of CTE. There are 3 visual alignments to pocket every shot on the table either directly or with banks one, two, three, or four rails. It's A, B, C or 15, 30, 45.

It isn't aligning the CB to OB with 18 - 20 different contact points or fractions which are difficult to see or imagine with the center of the CB or other areas of the CB from one side to the other.

It's done with the two edges of the CB that are clearly apparent when super imposed over a colored OB. Nothing jumps out to your vision more clearly and fast.

Believe what you want to believe on your own or believe the ramblings of those who are NOT in the know and have had a bias with CTE since it's first introduction by Hal Houle.

Watch the videos and come to your own conclusions for the simplicity of it once it's internalized. That having been said, it might not be for everyone.

Click to expand...

For all those interested in learning CTE, do as Spider suggests....watch the videos, try it, come to your own conclusions. It might be what you're looking for. If it's not, or if you can't "internalize" it, do not post anything in response to these videos that questions the logic of "CTE Table Geometry".

For PJ and others, including myself, that might be feeling a bit tempted to post a comment or two about these particular "geometry" videos, keep this in mind .......https://youtu.be/K0l3bqhwqRU

duckie said:

Balls don’t have edges........

Click to expand...

Ducks lay eggs.

SpiderWebComm said:

Real nice Brian, real nice with the video. You think it's funny? It's a direct slam as you and the others have always done. Yeah, that's cute...real cute.

Lets look at the results of the demonstrations with CTE. How about YOU, Patrick, Dan, Joey, or Lou do a video showing how one rail, two rail, three rail, and four rail banks can be easily identified and made with anything.

Can it be done with fractions or contact points? Of course it can! The question is how consistently and easily are the visuals determined and seen to repeat it?

Do a video. You've done a lot of videos so this should be nothing new to you.

Click to expand...

What "slam"?? There is no slam or negativity with anything word I posted. The "trap" has nothing to do with CTE.

After seeing the back and forth between you and PJ yesterday, and then you post a "table geometry" video today, well.....it's pretty obvious that you are setting out some bait in the hopes that Dan or PJ bite on it. Then you or somebody else can report them for "bashing" CTE or Stan. So, not wanting to see anyone get banned, I pointed out that I think "it's a trap". And yes, that is funny.

SpiderWebComm said:

........

Lets look at the results of the demonstrations with CTE. How about YOU, Patrick, Dan, Joey, or Lou do a video showing how one rail, two rail, three rail, and four rail banks can be easily identified and made with anything.

Can it be done with fractions or contact points? Of course it can! The question is how consistently and easily are the visuals determined and seen to repeat it?

Do a video. You've done a lot of videos so this should be nothing new to you.

Click to expand...

Yes, any of us could plan some really nice setup shots where we can send the ob to several different pockets using just a handful (3 or 4) aiming references, either fractionally or contact points or ghostball.

The results of such a demonstration would prove more about the importance of experience than any particular aiming method. In other words, experienced players can make things work. Some can stand on one leg, shoot behind the back, shoot with a broom handle, shoot one-handed, pocket balls from behind a curtain, etc.... it really proves nothing beyond the fact that thousands of hours have been spent developing such skills, knowledge, and experience.

If a C player (someone that struggles with their ball pocketing skills due to lack of experience) can step up and get the same results that Stan is getting, that would be some excellent proof that experience isn't the key factor. That would be a very persuasive demonstration.

I think everyone chronically involved in the CTE struggle should post up their fargo ratings so we can see if there is a trend on one side or the other.

With a sampling of let's say 7 of the hard core on each side the lower average side should concede and STFU forever.

On an unrelated note I think Stan should get Jill Biden to do his talking for him about CTE.

SpiderWebComm said:

It wasn't a trap nor did I have ANY preconceived intentions with the ones I did today to set a trap or respond to what was said yesterday.

I actually had 3 other videos all planned out for this morning and changed it up at the last second because of my own interest in the subject matter.

I wanted to illustrate how easy it is to see 15, 30, 45 and the broad range those 3 alignments have for shots and types of shots all over the table. It really does get easy once the ability to home in on what the visuals are. Sooooo EASY!

Now I will have to say that it was my fault on the video for hearing something else than "it's a trap." I overlooked the volume setting on the video itself as well as my computer which was very low and interpreted it as CRAP. (maybe this is a time to get tested for hearing aids)

Setting "traps" is Dan White's favorite move to then report me as many times as he can in hopes that something sticks for a ban.

Do I report posts? You better damn well believe it! But I don't factor "traps" into anything I post because there's no need to.

All I have to do is post ANYTHING and guaranteed one of the FAB 5 will be jumping in to engage and take it where it doesn't belong.

Click to expand...

Cool. We're good. I do think the "angle study" vid has a lot of good info in it.

The "struggle" is in the minds of the "Posse"

JC said:

I think everyone chronically involved in the CTE struggle should post up their fargo ratings so we can see if there is a trend on one side or the other.
With a sampling of let's say 7 of the hard core on each side the lower average side should concede and STFU forever.
On an unrelated note I think Stan should get Jill Biden to do his talking for him about CTE.

Click to expand...

There exists no "everyone involved in the CTE struggle...there exists no struggle".
EXCEPT for the members of the Dan White Posse...Lou, PJ, Little BC-21, Joey, and the Grand Potentate Dan White himself.
The real users of the method only wish to impart factual knowledge which will help players. The "Posse" lives to tear down those efforts.....all the while playing the little innocent role. (I make no comments to those bipolar goofuses since they are "on ignore". I can't help but see their silliness when it's quoted in a comment by someone I do not have on ignore.) Speaking of "ignore", I think you get the same treatment after this posting.
On the other hand, "The Posse" will go batcrazy if someone ridicules Little BC-21 and his Poolology book...which he advertises for sale with every one of his posts by stating it at the bottom of his posts. In my opinion, he should be ordered to remove that advertising pitch. (but it won't happen...because he is "cute" and "liked" by the Posse.)
How disgusting.
Oh, once again JC...the following is for you. Enjoy:

Low500 said:

.......

On the other hand, "The Posse" will go batcrazy if someone ridicules Little BC-21 and his Poolology book...which he advertises for sale with every one of his posts by stating it at the bottom of his posts. In my opinion, he should be ordered to remove that advertising pitch.

Click to expand...

Hmmmm....in bold. I bet Low doesn't feel the same about his profile pic, the CTE Pro1 logo. I think it's a neat looking logo, but that's advertising. I bet he wouldn't have had a problem with Stan using this website forum to help promote and sell his DVDs a few years ago either, or his book.

And not that Low would understand the professional courtesy or appreciation involved with this, but many of us here that are involved in the pool and billiards industry in some way or another, whether it's promoting the game, products, or services, have a paid membership (Gold). That can't be said about a few instructors that use this site to drum up business or sell their products, which yes, includes Stan. It also includes some cue makers and all sorts of other fine people that enjoy the small promoting opportunities available here at zero cost.

I'm not saying that anyone who takes advantage of these opportunities should be forced to at least become a Gold member. I think that's more of an individual thing, whether or not you feel you should be giving something back as a way of supporting an awesome website that helps fuel everyone's passion for the game. I'm just saying that when I read things like in bold above, posted by Low500, I can't help but think such an "opinion" is hypocritical and unjustified.

Low500 said:

There exists no "everyone involved in the CTE struggle...there exists no struggle".
EXCEPT for the members of the Dan White Posse...Lou, PJ, Little BC-21, Joey, and the Grand Potentate Dan White himself.
The real users of the method only wish to impart factual knowledge which will help players. The "Posse" lives to tear down those efforts.....all the while playing the little innocent role. (I make no comments to those bipolar goofuses since they are "on ignore". I can't help but see their silliness when it's quoted in a comment by someone I do not have on ignore.) Speaking of "ignore", I think you get the same treatment after this posting.
On the other hand, "The Posse" will go batcrazy if someone ridicules Little BC-21 and his Poolology book...which he advertises for sale with every one of his posts by stating it at the bottom of his posts. In my opinion, he should be ordered to remove that advertising pitch. (but it won't happen...because he is "cute" and "liked" by the Posse.)
How disgusting.
Oh, once again JC...the following is for you. Enjoy:
View attachment 547469

Click to expand...

So I take it you don't feel the CTE cult would win that contest? Hell Cookieman alone should take you guys to the top. I actually think that CTE might win that one especially if you're allowed to have the grand pooba himself counted.

But of course you're not reading this because I'm now on your ignore list. Holy crap I have never seen a group of people take themselves so serious as you all.

What about you Low? Can you play a lick? Or are you all gas?

And don't kid yourself, it's a daily struggle played out right here in this insignificant aiming forum.

In the table geometry, Shuffett lays out the premise of CTE. He details the numerology culminating in the 90* corner. Works as he demonstrates - like everything else he has posted. Problem is the explanation. If you drafted the exercise out, the geometry would fail. It's only the table physics (the active calculus (?) and I am presuming allowances for the cinching of the shots) that seem to validate the theory. As best as I can tell, he is able to do the demo successfully because his lines originate outside the playing rectangle. He needs to detail this thoroughly before the theory can be validated.

SpiderWebComm said:

Pro players and top amateurs in the country have validated it along with league and other players all over the world. They've learned not to come here and go through all the inane questions and harassment. Their time is spent elsewhere to discuss it normally and peacefully without this crap.

Click to expand...

A ghooossst!1!1!!

Actually I might be dyslexic there. The geometry should work on paper but the demo sources the lines from outside the play box to accommodate table physics. Anyway the table geometry makes sense and I like the connection to CTE. Still a helluva stretch to the rest of CTE though.

One snide remark about your players list though.

Tyler Styer mMMAAybe got a shot at proving CTE can take it down. But the only champions I can think of are the repeat offenders like Chang and Reyes, and numerous others whose pool goes/went the distance to the cash.

straightline said:

Actually I might be dyslexic there. The geometry should work on paper but the demo sources the lines from outside the play box to accommodate table physics.

Click to expand...

Nope and nope. The geometry doesn't work and the physics doesn't work. The brain "makes" it work.