Why CTE is so controversial

DTL

SP 219
Silver Member
I am, just don’t want to go into only to have you rationalize something that can’t be done.

I dispute a player can see only with one eye.....for one thing, the other eye for another and this based on my understanding of convergence of the eyes line of sight.

Now what you do with the imagine from your eyes in your mind is another thing.

Second, you can’t accurately portray a 3D world in two dimensions and from a point of view that is directly overhead. No one ever has this perspective when shooting.

Perceptual sets are at play here......meaning you will ignore one thing in order to believe another thing.

Yo, Duckie. Reading your posts can be challenging......sort of like trying to read a text message from a young teenager, having to read it several times trying to figure out what the hell they're trying to say.

I think the medical literature you've obviously been reading is way over your head. I did medicine for 20+ years and most of that vision stuff is way over my head, too.

How can you "dispute" what has been going on with my own game for years in terms of vision issues?

Anyway, your post is noted. Have a nice day.
 

DTL

SP 219
Silver Member
What I find unbelievable, and very disputable, is this: I do believe each of those three shots in the side pocket can be shot using a 15 inside, but they all don't track toward center pocket. Do you honestly believe that when the shot reaches the "extreme" limit for a 15 inside (or a 15 outside, or a 30 inside or outside), the ob is still tracking to center pocket? Do you think it magically goes to center pocket right up to the point where you have to use a thinner or thicker perception, and then that perception just happens to lead to center pocket as well?

I have shown in video that the same aim line can work over a wide range of shots due to differences in CIT and using the entire width of the pocket. If you shoot a 15 inside and the ob goes center pocket, moving the ob left or right of this spot will cause the same 15 inside to send the ob left or right of center pocket. This is why the 15 inside (and all the other perceptions and pivots) have limitations, or "extremes", as you said. Eventually the cut will be too thin or too thick and another perception will be needed in order to keep the ob from missing the pocket.

The point of my long post with the illustrations was to show that it is possible to use the same perception/pivot on 2 slightly different shots at equal distance and get a different outcome. Some on here have said that that is impossible. What do you think?

All the other stuff you're talking about will be settled soon.
 

ENGLISH!

Banned
Silver Member
Only one poster responded to this. You know who, with his usual psychobabble mumbo jumbo word salad type posts. Crickets otherwise.

So I'll assume nobody is disputing my points.

It seems that you do not know what YOU make of yourself when YOU assume.

Just because others have not responded does NOT equate to them agreeing with you nor disagreeing with you.

However, if you would actually read my responses to your suppositions & attempt to employ some comprehension, then you might "real eyes"(just for you) that I basically agreed, but NOT as to the wording of your 'conclusion', as it seems to be intended for a misleading purpose as you have added two totally "different" POINTS of view by the same individual.

The statement made by me & others were in reference to a single view "POINT", as in the ONE from where the 2 lines can be equally seen "Simultaneously" & NOT "changing" Point"S" of view.

There is no Psychobabble in my post. You wanted/demanded a Yes or No answer. Your question does not apply to the topic of this thread. You seemed to want to imply something that would be inapplicable.

Gene Albreight has been talking about the eyes things for a VERY LONG TIME & he even has a Product that has been Out for a Very Long Time, called Perfect Aim, but as Lou pointed out, it is NOT an aiming system nor method at all. It is about the different ways our subjective vision can work & what we can do to maximize such for playing the game of pool.

It seems that you merely wanted to try to trap me into admitting that I had earlier made an inaccurate statement...

& then... illogically employ one wrong = ALL wrong.

THAT is not the case nor did I make an accurate statement.

Not so nice try, though.
 
Last edited:

ENGLISH!

Banned
Silver Member
What I find unbelievable, and very disputable, is this: I do believe each of those three shots in the side pocket can be shot using a 15 inside, but they all don't track toward center pocket. Do you honestly believe that when the shot reaches the "extreme" limit for a 15 inside (or a 15 outside, or a 30 inside or outside), the ob is still tracking to center pocket? Do you think it magically goes to center pocket right up to the point where you have to use a thinner or thicker perception, and then that perception just happens to lead to center pocket as well?

I have shown in video that the same aim line can work over a wide range of shots due to differences in CIT and using the entire width of the pocket. If you shoot a 15 inside and the ob goes center pocket, moving the ob left or right of this spot will cause the same 15 inside to send the ob left or right of center pocket. This is why the 15 inside (and all the other perceptions and pivots) have limitations, or "extremes", as you said. Eventually the cut will be too thin or too thick and another perception will be needed in order to keep the ob from missing the pocket.

:thumbup2:
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
The point of my long post with the illustrations was to show that it is possible to use the same perception/pivot on 2 slightly different shots at equal distance and get a different outcome. Some on here have said that that is impossible. What do you think?

All the other stuff you're talking about will be settled soon.

I can't get a different outcome in the situation you describe. I can, however, make two slightly different angled shots using the same perception and pivot for each shot, just as I can use the same fractional aim FG or each shot. This is possible due to slight angle differences with CIT factored in. Sometimes, if the shot angle difference is equally offset by a difference in CIT, both balls might go center pocket. But normally each shot goes into a different part of the pocket as the angle changes slightly but the aim remains constant. If I move the ob a little, then a little more, I will eventually reach a point where that particular perception and pivot misses the pocket entirely and a different perception must be used.

It sounds good when Stan says the balls "connect to the right angles of a regulation pool table", that every shot tracks to "center pocket", etc... But in reality the entire pocket is being used, and as the ob begins to miss the pocket, a different perception/pivot must be used in order to send the ob back toward the pocket.

If the book and truth series can explain or show how the ob tracks to center pocket even when a particular perception and pivot is nearing its limits, then I'll eat my words and graciously admit that I was wrong about the system utilizing the entire pocket.
 
Last edited:

ENGLISH!

Banned
Silver Member
I can't get a different outcome in the situation you describe. I can, however, make two slightly different angled shots using the same perception and pivot for each shot, just as I can use the same fractional aim FG or each shot. This is possible due to slight angle differences with CIT factored in. Sometimes, if the shot angle difference is equally offset by a difference in CIT, both balls might go center pocket. But normally each shot goes into a different part of the pocket as the angle changes slightly but the aim remains constant. If I move the ob a little, then a little more, I will eventually reach a point where that particular perception and pivot misses the pocket entirely and a different perception must be used.

It sounds good when Stan says the balls "connect to the right angles of a regulation pool table", that every shot tracks to "center pocket", etc... But in reality the entire pocket is being used, and as the ob begins to miss the pocket, a different perception/pivot must be used in order to send the ob back toward the pocket.

If the book and truth series can explain or show how the ob tracks to center pocket even when a particular perception and pivot is nearing its limits, then I'll eat my words and graciously admit that I was wrong about the system utilizing the entire pocket.

Brian,

I know time is precious. That is one reason that I object to the inaccurate declaration(s).

But... If you can find the time, perhaps you can do another such video regarding the infamous 5 shots similar to the one you recently posted. That was rather good, by the way.

I think it might be beneficial for some fence sitters.

What do you think?

ALL Best Wishes for You & YOURS.
 
Last edited:

DTL

SP 219
Silver Member
I can't get a different outcome in the situation you describe. I can, however, make two slightly different angled shots using the same perception and pivot for each shot, just as I can use the same fractional aim FG or each shot. This is possible due to slight angle differences with CIT factored in. Sometimes, if the shot angle difference is equally offset by a difference in CIT, both balls might go center pocket. But normally each shot goes into a different part of the pocket as the angle changes slightly but the aim remains constant. If I move the ob a little, then a little more, I will eventually reach a point where that particular perception and pivot misses the pocket entirely and a different perception must be used.

It sounds good when Stan says the balls "connect to the right angles of a regulation pool table", that every shot tracks to "center pocket", etc... But in reality the entire pocket is being used, and as the ob begins to miss the pocket, a different perception/pivot must be used in order to send the ob back toward the pocket.

If the book and truth series can explain or show how the ob tracks to center pocket even when a particular perception and pivot is nearing its limits, then I'll eat my words and graciously admit that I was wrong about the system utilizing the entire pocket.

That's you. Is it possible for some players that are maybe using their eyes differently (unknowingly) to do it?
 

duckie

GregH
Silver Member
There are two overlooked aspects.

One is that going anywhere in the pocket is considered a good shot.

Second is the margin of error which is the area on the OB the the CB can contact and the ball goes in the pocket.

Because of two aspects, it would be easy to believe it possible to have two different point of views and still make the same shot.......anywhere in the pocket.

Requiring the put the OB in a specific location, for example, center pocket, there is only one place the CB can go on the table to make this happen.

If the CB is at location A on the table, there is only one point of view for this shot to go center pocket. When the CB is moved to another location,B, the point of view changes for a center pocket shot.

Using the spot, place a ball on it, then freeze a OB to it so that it is dead into the center of one corner pockets. Remove the ball from the spot.

Place two balls, A and B, such they both are a right cut shots, one, A, a shallow cut, the other ball, B, a inch to the left from the shallow cut shot.

Get behind ball A in shooting position to pocket the ball. The ball must rollover the spot to make the OB go center pocket.

Get behind ball B in a shooting position to pocket the ball. This ball must rollover the spot to make the center ball go center pocket.

Because of the requirement of hitting center pocket, the point of view will be different between each shot, because you are in different shooting positions.

As for as perception is concern, what you convinced yourself to believe based on your perceptual set, as what needs to be overcome to truely understand.
 
Last edited:

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I like that song, thought I heard Stan singing the lyrics while he was lining up some of those shots.

Here are my curtain shots....https://youtu.be/KEYqJ5w6nFI

A tornado was coming through and the video gets cut off abruptly due to power failure. But I manage to make a few shots. Props to you for posting your video and doing so well in the blind.

Question. You shot the first two balls with you version of CTE then went on to explain what you thought would happen if you kept moving the OB to the left. But you never shot the shots just gave an opinion, WHY?
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What I find unbelievable, and very disputable, is this: I do believe each of those three shots in the side pocket can be shot using a 15 inside, but they all don't track toward center pocket. Do you honestly believe that when the shot reaches the "extreme" limit for a 15 inside (or a 15 outside, or a 30 inside or outside), the ob is still tracking to center pocket? Do you think it magically goes to center pocket right up to the point where you have to use a thinner or thicker perception, and then that perception just happens to lead to center pocket as well?

.

Question, can you make all 3 balls center pocket using contact points, of course you can. But the contact points will be different for all 3 shots.
Now can you make all 3 shots center pocket with CTE visuals. Of course you can because the CTEL will be hitting different points on each OB. The CTEL always goes through the outermost point on the OB away from the pocket. Just like contact points change the CTEL changes where it hits the OB depending on ball location.
 

ENGLISH!

Banned
Silver Member
There are two overlooked aspects.

One is that going anywhere in the pocket is considered a good shot.

Second is the margin of error which is the area on the OB the the CB can contact and the ball goes in the pocket.

Because of two aspects, it would be easy to believe it possible to have two different point of views and still make the same shot.......anywhere in the pocket.

Requiring the put the OB in a specific location, for example, center pocket, there is only one place the CB can go on the table to make this happen.

If the CB is at location A on the table, there is only one point of view for this shot to go center pocket. When the CB is moved to another location,B, the point of view changes for a center pocket shot.

Using the spot, place a ball on it, then freeze a OB to it so that it is dead into the center of one corner pockets. Remove the ball from the spot.

Place two balls, A and B, such they both are a right cut shots, one, A, a shallow cut, the other ball, B, a inch to the left from the shallow cut shot.

Get behind ball A in shooting position to pocket the ball. The ball must rollover the spot to make the OB go center pocket.

Get behind ball B in a shooting position to pocket the ball. This ball must rollover the spot to make the center ball go center pocket.

Because of the requirement of hitting center pocket, the point of view will be different between each shot, because you are in different shooting positions.

As for as perception is concern, what you convinced yourself to believe based on your perceptual set, as what needs to be overcome to truely understand.

:thumbup2:
 
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
That's you. Is it possible for some players that are maybe using their eyes differently (unknowingly) to do it?

Can't argue that. All I can do is describe my own experience.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Question, can you make all 3 balls center pocket using contact points, of course you can. But the contact points will be different for all 3 shots.
Now can you make all 3 shots center pocket with CTE visuals. Of course you can because the CTEL will be hitting different points on each OB. The CTEL always goes through the outermost point on the OB away from the pocket. Just like contact points change the CTEL changes where it hits the OB depending on ball location.

I always thought the CTE line was visualized to the edge of the ob, not to the "outermost point on the OB away from the pocket". Now I am totally lost. The contact point on the ob is always at this outermost most point, the ob edge isn't always the contact point, not even most of the time. On a straight in shot, for example, using a 15 outside, are you saying the CTEL goes through or hits the contact point needed to pocket the ball?
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I always thought the CTE line was visualized to the edge of the ob, not to the "outermost point on the OB away from the pocket". Now I am totally lost. The contact point on the ob is always at this outermost most point, the ob edge isn't always the contact point, not even most of the time. On a straight in shot, for example, using a 15 outside, are you saying the CTEL goes through or hits the contact point needed to pocket the ball?

More for cut shots
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I always thought the CTE line was visualized to the edge of the ob, not to the "outermost point on the OB away from the pocket". Now I am totally lost. The contact point on the ob is always at this outermost most point, the ob edge isn't always the contact point, not even most of the time. On a straight in shot, for example, using a 15 outside, are you saying the CTEL goes through or hits the contact point needed to pocket the ball?

On a straight in the CTEL is on the left outermost edge of the OB.
 

ENGLISH!

Banned
Silver Member
I always thought the CTE line was visualized to the edge of the ob, not to the "outermost point on the OB away from the pocket". Now I am totally lost. The contact point on the ob is always at this outermost most point, the ob edge isn't always the contact point, not even most of the time. On a straight in shot, for example, using a 15 outside, are you saying the CTEL goes through or hits the contact point needed to pocket the ball?

Brian,

They mix that up too as a means of avoiding the real issues.

Sometimes it is the CCB to the edge of the OB & others times it is the line yielded by the 2 lines & then other times it is the solution line after the pivot.

They have used CTEL to represent all 3. It is a means of confusion to destroy any rational reasonable discussion as they say, "see, you know nothing about CTE. That is NOT the CTEL.

So... it is.. X today... Y tomorrow... & Z the day after that.

Hang in there if you are so inclined, but one can not have a rational discussion with one who has abandoned reason... & honesty.

ALL Best Wishes.
 
Last edited:

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
I always thought the CTE line was visualized to the edge of the ob, not to the "outermost point on the OB away from the pocket".
I assume he's saying the same thing in a clumsy way. If he really means the CTE line touches the OB contact point, then of course he's wrong - a CTE line, by definition, can't do that.

pj
chgo
 
Top