Checkers and Pool

[SpiderWebComm]

Wrong. Very easy to do if you know how to use the search feature, and if the person you are searching only has a handful of posts to begin with.

Who cares? It still shows what your priorities are and it doesn't have anything positive like the 14.1 forum. You're trying to chase down a member who you have a hard on for.

Why do you spend your time here instead of there? You're a NON-AIMING SYSTEM POOL PLAYER.

You don't belong in the AIMING SYSTEM FORUM to begin with.

Wilson would be doing YOU and especially US a big favor with your vacation. I can't imagine how quiet and peaceful this place would be if it was only about the positives of any and all aiming systems but especially CTE.

The perfect solution would be the formation of another forum called "THE NON-AIMING FORUM" for those who just see the shot and play by FEEL or GUESSWORK. I guarantee we WOULD NOT give a damn or infiltrate it to tell you the evils of your ways. DO WHAT YOU WANT!

That's where you belong! Sure would be interesting to read page after page of threads and posts about how you do NOTHING to run rack after rack with a 92% potting number.

One last question - why are you back in here making this post or any post?

 

[Dan White]

Who cares? It still shows what your priorities are and it doesn't have anything positive like the 14.1 forum. You're trying to chase down a member who you have a hard on for.

You act like people can post whatever they want in this forum and there are no consequences. In once sense this is a marketplace where people are promoting and selling their aiming systems. When one promoter uses unfair trade practices against another, it damages that other person. That was my motivation for posting.

I am unable to continue with this conversation as I'm unsure of what will trigger a ban. You may carry on with your diatribe du jour. Have a good day.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

You act like people can post whatever they want in this forum and there are no consequences. In once sense this is a marketplace where people are promoting and selling their aiming systems. When one promoter uses unfair trade practices against another, it damages that other person. That was my motivation for posting.

First of all when did you become the prosecutor, jury, and judge to preside over all of the posts and make the decisions?

You've been doing it for many years when there were no comparisons or other aiming system creators with systems.

I am unable to continue with this conversation as I'm unsure of what will trigger a ban. You may carry on with your diatribe du jour. Have a good day.

I know what triggered my bans and they were mostly deserved. In your case, you should have been banned a long time ago for being a complete nuisance and attacker on this forum.

 

[BC21]

I believe Dan's motivation to call out low500's obvious bait droppings toward me and my book is more than justified. I never reported low500 for the baiting comments. Instead, I simply replied by proving the ignorance of his comments. I'm not sure what low500's agenda is, why he can't praise CTE and Stan without feeling the need to belittle me or my "sterling epic" book called Poolology, that bunch of "gobbledygook" that involves "complicated mathematical formulas" just like "Mosconi's little red book" from the 1950's, which low500 incorrectly claims taught fractional aiming and contained mathematics. (All words in quotes were low500 comments.)

Like I said, I'm not sure what low500's agenda is. Maybe he can explain that. But I am sure he is not doing Stan Shuffett any favors. Low500 said he learned CTE Pro1 within one week by simply watching Stan's YouTube videos, NOT by purchasing Stan's DVDs or taking lessons like every other true CTE supporter has done over the years. So not only do low500's comments toward me and Poolology lack honesty/integrity, he also hasn't done much of anything to support Stan and his work. Lame and irrelevant cracks toward Poolology, and toward me personally, accomplish nothing. Poolology stands on its own, as does my character and personal reputation -- no defense needed.

Brian Crist

 

[Dan White]

I know what triggered my bans and they were mostly deserved. In your case, you should have been banned a long time ago for being a complete nuisance and attacker on this forum.

I guess it's ok to be the judge, jury and executioner when you are the judge, jury and executioner.

 

[Low500]

I know what triggered my bans and they were mostly deserved. In your case, you should have been banned a long time ago for being a complete nuisance and attacker on this forum.

My boss used to say......"If John has a problem with Bill, and if Lucille has a problem with Bill, and the cafeteria has a problem with Bill, and the policeman in the parking lot has a problem with Bill.................then it's very likely the problem is Bill." :wink:

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I believe Dan's motivation to call out low500's obvious bait droppings toward me and my book is more than justified.

Brian Crist

Then how do you feel about Dan's motivation to do and say what he has negatively, erroneously, attacking repetitively with no respect over the last 5-7 yearstoward CTE itself, Stan, and any successful proponents of the system? He has never purchased either of the two DVDs Is that justified?

If so, why? What's the difference?

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I guess it's ok to be the judge, jury and executioner when you are the judge, jury and executioner.

I've never been the judge, jury, and executioner for ANY aiming system, it's creator, or the successful users of it. NEVER!

You're in an entirely different category with NO qualifications to do it and have no right. I've also never attacked any Pro player who has come on the forum sharing their methods and secrets for playing better or what they put together to sell in the way of a DVD or book.

The opposite seems to be your only purpose on this forum and your life.

I think EVERYONE who posts in the Aiming Forum, especially when it comes to CTE and Stan, is so sick and friggin' tired of you coming in with your disruptions and agenda that it's beyond the point of accepting it any longer. It's absolutely disgusting and something needs to happen other than you continuing free reign to keep doing this crap.

Here you are again back in here baiting and stirring the pot.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

My boss used to say......"If John has a problem with Bill, and if Lucille has a problem with Bill, and the cafeteria has a problem with Bill, and the policeman in the parking lot has a problem with Bill.................then it's very likely the problem is Bill." :wink:

I'm assuming your boss never knew anyone by the name of "Dan" back then, correct?

 

[BC21]

Then how do you feel about Dan's motivation to do and say what he has negatively, erroneously, attacking repetitively with no respect over the last 5-7 yearstoward CTE itself, Stan, and any successful proponents of the system? He has never purchased either of the two DVDs Is that justified?

If so, why? What's the difference?

I've read quite a bit of older posts, trying to get a fair assessment of the anti-cte postings. What I find most often is this: An honest question is asked, and then the questioner is verbally attacked and accused of baiting. There are legitimate questions. Not every one that questions CTE is fishing for an argument. Most are players like Denwit, who have are honesty trying to get answers, not ridicule. Low500 has asked no questions about Poolology. He flat out makes bogus statements about it for whatever reason. I haven't seen Dan do that with cte, and I've read back through dozens of posts over the last few years. His statements on CTE mirror my own. Questioning something, or stating obvious facts mentioned by Stan or other CTE users, is not the same as making blatantly untrue statements.

 

[Neil]

I've read quite a bit of older posts, trying to get a fair assessment of the anti-cte postings. What I find most often is this: An honest question is asked, and then the questioner is verbally attacked and accused of baiting. There are legitimate questions. Not every one that questions CTE is fishing for an argument. Most are players like Denwit, who have are honesty trying to get answers, not ridicule. Low500 has asked no questions about Poolology. He flat out makes bogus statements about it for whatever reason. I haven't seen Dan do that with cte, and I've read back through dozens of posts over the last few years. His statements on CTE mirror my own. Questioning something, or stating obvious facts mentioned by Stan or other CTE users, is not the same as making blatantly untrue statements.

You don't work for CNN by any chance, do you?

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I've read quite a bit of older posts, trying to get a fair assessment of the anti-cte postings. What I find most often is this: An honest question is asked, and then the questioner is verbally attacked and accused of baiting.

I don't know whether to classify the above as a total misstatement or outright lie. How about complete BULLSH*T.

You haven't been a member here for very long. 2-6-17. Are you kidding me?! CTE has been around for 20 years on the internet and was discussed on this forum before Stan got involved with it around 2010. (I might be a little off on his time) We were ALL helpful as could possibly be with interested guys who wanted to learn more.

We did videos to illustrate how to do it and then Stan made so many videos for FREE to show how it was done I don't know if his efforts can even be accurately counted. Answers were written out as comprehensively as possible.

There are legitimate questions. Not every one that questions CTE is fishing for an argument.

That's correct and we have definitely learned who has a sincere interest vs. those who pose questions for flame war fodder. It's not only how they ask the questions but how they then follow up with on the table usage or garbage that shows they haven't been on the table at all or are asking the same stupid things over and over.

Most are players like Denwit, who have are honesty trying to get answers, not ridicule.

I have no idea where Dehwhit is coming from nor do I care. All I know is he's pissing off a lot of members on the main forum and other forums with his threads and posts. Seems to be a trend.

Low500 has asked no questions about Poolology. He flat out makes bogus statements about it for whatever reason. I haven't seen Dan do that with cte, and I've read back through dozens of posts over the last few years. His statements on CTE mirror my own.

That's easy to explain, both of you are totally CLUELESS about CTE. Actually you more so than him. He never bought either of the DVDs nor have you, or you did and sold it. You don't know what end is up nor where to start because you've spent NO TIME on the table with it and doing it the CORRECT WAY from the START.

Do you remember this post? "I should clarify that many have taken the time and put the effort to learn CTE as Stan has instructed. Others have not. Some because it made no sense, some because they didn't want to dedicate the time needed to figure it out. I am guilty of both, I admit. I just couldn't ignore years of doing things my way. I had the dvd years ago, purchased from a friend that couldn't figure it out. I didn't invest a lot of time before selling it on eBay."

YOU WROTE IT!!! CLUELESS!! But at least honest enough at the time to say you put NO TIME INTO IT. Now you're back to badmouthing.

Questioning something, or stating obvious facts mentioned by Stan or other CTE users, is not the same as making blatantly untrue statements.

I have NOT ONCE badmouthed your concept of fractional aiming in poolology. I did ask one question to you and that was how many fractional aim points are there in both right and left cuts and you told me.

I have no interest in learning more or trying it on the table. Hal Houle had over 20 aiming systems that he developed, not just CTE. I learned and used one of his methods which was a combination of fractional alignment, (3) in both right and left cuts, stick or ferrule alignment to those fractions, and a pivot. It was DEADLY for me.

But I know from his that yours is probably also a viable and somewhat strong method of aiming. There's no need to make derogatory comments.

You can say what you want but you are definitely in the anti-CTE camp with Dan and the others who come in and out of these threads from not knowing enough as well as them praising poolology to get you in their camp.

What I still find as the most incredible aspect of it all is NONE OF YOU uses poolology 100% of the time. It's either 0% or at most 30% to 50%, if that including you.

 

[cookie man]

I believe Dan's motivation to call out low500's obvious bait droppings toward me and my book is more than justified. I never reported low500 for the baiting comments. Instead, I simply replied by proving the ignorance of his comments. I'm not sure what low500's agenda is, why he can't praise CTE and Stan without feeling the need to belittle me or my "sterling epic" book called Poolology, that bunch of "gobbledygook" that involves "complicated mathematical formulas" just like "Mosconi's little red book" from the 1950's, which low500 incorrectly claims taught fractional aiming and contained mathematics. (All words in quotes were low500 comments.)

Like I said, I'm not sure what low500's agenda is. Maybe he can explain that. But I am sure he is not doing Stan Shuffett any favors. Low500 said he learned CTE Pro1 within one week by simply watching Stan's YouTube videos, NOT by purchasing Stan's DVDs or taking lessons like every other true CTE supporter has done over the years. So not only do low500's comments toward me and Poolology lack honesty/integrity, he also hasn't done much of anything to support Stan and his work. Lame and irrelevant cracks toward Poolology, and toward me personally, accomplish nothing. Poolology stands on its own, as does my character and personal reputation -- no defense needed.

Brian Crist

I tend to agree with this post. And in turn Dan White should go after Low500 if thats the route he wants to take to defend poolology, not baiting Stan as he obviously did.

 

[stan shuffett]

I tend to agree with this post. And in turn Dan White should go after Low500 if thats the route he wants to take to defend poolology, not baiting Stan as he obviously did.

I think that Fancy Dan, IMO, was trying to flush me out or prove in some way that I have been assuming a double identity for unfair trade practices.

Stan Shuffett

 

[BC21]

I have NOT ONCE badmouthed your concept of fractional aiming in poolology. I did ask one question to you and that was how many fractional aim points are there in both right and left cuts and you told me.

I have no interest in learning more or trying it on the table. Hal Houle had over 20 aiming systems that he developed, not just CTE. I learned and used one of his methods which was a combination of fractional alignment, (3) in both right and left cuts, stick or ferrule alignment to those fractions, and a pivot. It was DEADLY for me.

But I know from his that yours is probably also a viable and somewhat strong method of aiming. There's no need to make derogatory comments.

You can say what you want but you are definitely in the anti-CTE camp with Dan and the others who come in and out of these threads from not knowing enough as well as them praising poolology to get you in their camp.

What I still find as the most incredible aspect of it all is NONE OF YOU uses poolology 100% of the time. It's either 0% or at most 30% to 50%, if that including you.

I don't give people advice about CTE, other than the advice I've read from guys like you and Neil, which is pretty straight forward. You say to keep working on it, to get lessons, to keep at it until it clicks.... One doesn't have to know much about it to give that advice.

And did you happen to ridicule or ask Brandon Shuff why he doesn't use CTE exclusively? I watched the interview JB posted, and it was obvious Brandon doesn't use it all the time.

I appreciate the fact you haven't attacked Poolology with lies and false statements. I also believe you could never find a lie or false statement made by me toward CTE. Saying something is confusing and difficult to grasp is NOT a lie. And I have stated many times that others have learned it quite well, some over a period of days, and others over several months or years. That is also true, and could even apply to my own book, so that doesn't mean I'm trashing or ridiculing CTE.

I have read posts from several years back, not 20 of course, and an honest appraisal of the mud slinging just isn't possible with the participants of that time. Anyway, I'm not a bandwagon type, not a in-the-camp type either. I say what I say based on personal experience and observation. And no...lol....I'm not with CNN.

 

[Dan White]

For Stan and Mr. Wilson

I think that Fancy Dan, IMO, was trying to flush me out or prove in some way that I have been assuming a double identity for unfair trade practices.

Stan Shuffett

I would like to take a "time out" here for a second to explain something. I am not just throwing out assumptions that there is a link between Low500 and Stan out of the blue. I see that several people, including Stan and Low500, have made some comments here and I don't see this thread as the end of the world. We're just talking. But why are are talking about this?

In a nutshell, Stan gave his "blessing" for me to look into any aliases he might have and even encouraged Mr. Wilson to help me in that effort. So I took him up on the challenge. To refresh your memory:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=5858472&postcount=48

So, Stan, how about holding up your end of the bargain by talking to Mr. Wilson and asking him to allow me to present all of the information that makes me think something funny is going on without the risk of me getting kabonged? You can all look at my information and have good laugh. I'm not here to ridicule or make up funny names to call anybody, just to give a straightforward presentation of facts.

What do you say?

 

[stan shuffett]

I would like to take a "time out" here for a second to explain something. I am not just throwing out assumptions that there is a link between Low500 and Stan out of the blue. I see that several people, including Stan and Low500, have made some comments here and I don't see this thread as the end of the world. We're just talking. But why are are talking about this?

In a nutshell, Stan gave his "blessing" for me to look into any aliases he might have and even encouraged Mr. Wilson to help me in that effort. So I took him up on the challenge. To refresh your memory:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=5858472&postcount=48

So, Stan, how about holding up your end of the bargain by talking to Mr. Wilson and asking him to allow me to present all of the information that makes me think something funny is going on without the risk of me getting kabonged? You can all look at my information and have good laugh. I'm not here to ridicule or make up funny names to call anybody, just to give a straightforward presentation of facts.

What do you say?

You go right ahead BIG BOY!

I will agree to cease posting forever on AZ if in any way I have ANY association with Low500.....other than 2 brief PMs that I am aware of-one of which I did not respond to. He signed off as an individual that I do not know.....I have no clue if he is an alias of another or not. I will also do a polygraph to the effect that I have zero to do with this person. If he is misrepresenting his name then I am not aware of it.....

Now BIG BOY, will you agree to to cease posting if you fail to prove your accusation.
One other option: I get to slap you in the face or you can slap me in the face for YouTube. I will drive to your location.

Stan Shuffett

 

[BeiberLvr]

I would like to take a "time out" here for a second to explain something. I am not just throwing out assumptions that there is a link between Low500 and Stan out of the blue. I see that several people, including Stan and Low500, have made some comments here and I don't see this thread as the end of the world. We're just talking. But why are are talking about this?

In a nutshell, Stan gave his "blessing" for me to look into any aliases he might have and even encouraged Mr. Wilson to help me in that effort. So I took him up on the challenge. To refresh your memory:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=5858472&postcount=48

So, Stan, how about holding up your end of the bargain by talking to Mr. Wilson and asking him to allow me to present all of the information that makes me think something funny is going on without the risk of me getting kabonged? You can all look at my information and have good laugh. I'm not here to ridicule or make up funny names to call anybody, just to give a straightforward presentation of facts.

What do you say?

Just gonna go out on a limb here and say that Mr. Wilson or any other moderator/admin would have a much better chance of proving someone was using multiple aliases than you would.

 

[Low500]

Some of this has become ridiculous.

 

[stan shuffett]

Some of this has become ridiculous.

Yes, I agree! I am fed up with Dan White's ongoing harassment. When does it stop?

Stan Shuffett