Coming Soon... the end of all aiming system calculating.

[FASTEDDIE427]

B I N G O. Anothe CTE thread yawn. I'm gonna hit the practice table and bractice my ghost ball aiming that requires no thought and actually works

 

[champ2107]

B I N G O. Anothe CTE thread yawn. I'm gonna hit the practice table and bractice my ghost ball aiming that requires no thought and actually works

this is another uniformed opinion explain this to me, since you posted it :thumbup:

 

[Poolplaya9]

People are going to be people, some will open up & try something new.. others will balk.

I saw a phrase once that describes people's attitudes about something new or different..

A Pool Player convinced against his will, has the same opinion still..

I am claiming that if they try hard enough, anybody is capable of flying after they jump off a building that is at least 20 stories high, and that I have done it. Now are you going to balk, or are you going to try something new?

Your argument is tired and silly. There are many things that are provable without doing them, and whether or not CTE is physically valid is one of them that is easily proven by science. Now whether or not it still has benefits may be something you need to try for yourself to see, because things like a placebo effect, or it giving you better focus on the object ball, or it making your stroke more confidently, may be things you won't know for sure if it will do for you unless you try.

 

[FASTEDDIE427]

If you need ghost ball explained to you you have bigger problems

 

[peteypooldude]

And I asked him to explain what I am to disprove. I'll ask you as well, go ahead and explain CTE. I am expecting to hear crickets.

I also pointed out that all of the attemtped CTE explanations so far have been disproven in many of the threads, and I know for a fact that both of you have seen the proof and just lack the ability to understand. That is not in any way an insult toward anyone as we all have different aptitudes for different things, and some people are no good with basic science, and some people are no good with basic art for example.

One of the proofs that CTE cannot work as it has ever been described is the diagram where the cue ball and three different object balls are all in the same line but at different distances being cut into the same corner pocket. I know you don't agree but it can't be disputed that no CTE explanation so far works for all three shots in that diagram, and we have yet to hear the version that does. If you think it does go ahead and explain your version and exactly how to do it so that someone else can replicate it.

No one can say it doesnt work without knowing the variables. One can
not calculate what they dont know. Rather than post a description I
will wait on that until Stans DVD is out. That is one of the reasons he
made the DVD. That should be respected

 

[champ2107]

If you need ghost ball explained to you you have bigger problems

fail post :thumbup: u cant back ur post up

 

[FASTEDDIE427]

fail post :thumbup: u cant back ur post up

Yawn reaching way to far. It the way you were taught to shoot pool I'm to old for this I'm going to bed

 

[champ2107]

I am claiming that if they try hard enough, anybody is capable of flying after they jump off a building that is at least 20 stories high, and that I have done it. Now are you going to balk, or are you going to try something new?

Your argument is tired and silly. There are many things that are provable without doing them, and whether or not CTE is physically valid is one of them that is easily proven by science. Now whether or not it still has benefits may be something you need to try for yourself to see, because things like a placebo effect, or it giving you better focus on the object ball, or it making your stroke more confidently, may be things you won't know for sure if it will do for you unless you try.

can you back this up with facts? or are you going to keep forcing your opinion down peoples throats? second time i ask this
im going out now so take your time and think about your response

 

[Poolplaya9]

I have yet to see a single video from a CTE opponent that lays out the "truth and facts" about how CTE can't work?

Could you fly if you jumped off the empire state building John? No? I have yet to see the video of you trying to do it so how can you be so sure? I think you are full of crap until you post the video of your attempt.

Here we go, same old tired argument. Some things can be proven on paper. That humans can't fly is one. That CTE is not physically valid is another.

Well for one thing none of them can even explain the steps to do CTE. That would be a start.

Pot. Kettle. Black. No CTE user can explain the steps to do CTE. Not one. All of the incomplete attempts at CTE explanation that we have received so far have all been debunked by science. We are all still waiting for the complete explanation though (and always will be because the missing part to make it work is the user aiming adjustments that you guys refuse to admit to it).

Yet you have seen plenty of videos from CTE users explaining what they are doing.

What we have seen is plenty of guys giving incomplete explanations. There is always missing parts. Not one person yet has given a complete explanation. The irony is that the people that say CTE is not physically valid are more knowledgeable about CTE than the CTE users themselves. We know what the missing part is and you don't (or at least you won't admit it for whatever reason).

On a side note, it's also funny how every single person's way of doing CTE is different, yet they all claim it works great. The reason is that when the user is making subconscious aiming adjustments, it doesn't really matter what you are doing, it all works.

And the same holds true even within the same person. There have been many cases where CTE users were saying how perfect their system worked, only to later change the way they do it, saying they had it wrong before. You are one of them. Well if it worked perfect before, and then you changed it, and it still works perfect, why is that? Again, it doesn't really matter what you do because your subconscious makes the correct aiming adjustments anyway.

Fred Agnir is a mechanical engineer who builds multimillion dollar machines for a living. Is he stupid? Delusional? A flat-earther?

I highly doubt he believes it is a physically sound system. If he does I certainly wouldn't hire him to do any engineering for me, that's for sure. He likely just believes that it works as a whole for some people, without breaking it down to the exact whys, and not many people disagree with that stance.

But personal experience trumps diagrams in my opinion.

Again, nobody is really arguing with this. It works for you, and you don't know why, and nobody has a problem with that. Now when you try to claim that the reason it works is because it is a physically valid system, people take issue with that because it simply isn't true.

 

[Poolplaya9]

can you back this up with facts? or are you going to keep forcing your opinion down peoples throats? second time i ask this
im going out now so take your time and think about your response

And this is the second time I've answered. The first time was in the very next post after you asked.

It's been proven that it doesn't PHYSICALLY work without user aiming adjustments, but you choose to ignore the proof, or simply lack the ability to understand it. So I'll ask you the same question, can you prove that it does PHYSICALLY work? Making balls doesn't prove that you aren't making aiming adjustments from experience. Prove that it is a physically sound system. I'll be waiting.

I'd also like to hear your version of CTE and exactly how you do it. I've got a sneaking suspicion that you are another one that doesn't really have a clue exactly what it is that you are doing or why it seems to work and would love to hear your detailed explanation for exactly how you do your version of CTE. As with every other CTE user, all I'm expecting to get is excuses. That's all you can give when what you are really doing is an incomplete and non-working system with all the glaring gaps filled in with your conscious or subconscious aiming adjustments. I'll be waiting.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Just once on AZB I would like to see an opponent of anything say these words;

"I have the exact instructions and they are these;

Just once I'd like to see ANYONE who could give the exact instructions. Not one CTE user yet has ever been capable of doing it. When it is scrutinized, there are always missing parts. Of course there always will be, because the missing part is the user aiming adjustments. Anyway, we are with you. Just once we would like to se the complete instructions from a CTE user.

I have taken these exact instructions to the table and this is my experience."

We would have to be able to get the exact instructions first. In 15 years of discussing this, nobody has been able to do it yet (nor will they ever, see above).

Preferably on video...You will never see an episode of Mythbusters where they try to bust a myth by just talking about it.

You don't need a video to prove that 2+2=4. They have been kind enough to do some great diagrams but it still made no difference.

Mike Page does good videos, Dr. Dave has access to camera gear.....surely one of those guys can put this all to rest fairly easily????

Am I wrong here?

I mean no offense whatsoever by this to anyone, but I think what this argument comes down to, is that because it is science related, some people have the intellect to understand the science involved, and some don't. I certainly don't understand nuclear fission, and not everybody understands the proof of how this is not a physically valid system. For those that lack the capability of understanding the science, it is an obstacle that cannot be overcome. You can't prove it to them because they don't have the capability of understandng the proof, just like I wouldn't understand the proof about how "x" theory on nuclear fission won't work.

 

[Poolplaya9]

I saw the pres of the Flat Earth Society interviewed a while back and it was abundantly clear that the FE Society was a Tongue in Cheek Organization. They are not at all serious from what i heard/observed.

There are some out there that say the earth is flat with tongue in cheek, and the guy you saw was apparently from one of those. The flat earth society is very legitimate in their belief. Read their history, it is a very old organization. It's scary to know that these people really exist. They have elaborate theories about how the moon landings were all faked on hollywood movie sets (and all photos from space showing a round earth are fakes) etc.

 

[Poolplaya9]

No one can say it doesnt work without knowing the variables. One can
not calculate what they dont know.

I don't think YOU know the variables or the CTE system. I'm still waiting to hear exactly what you do in your version.

Rather than post a description I
will wait on that until Stans DVD is out. That is one of the reasons he
made the DVD. That should be respected

What did I predict? I knew the excuses were coming. You can't post a detailed description because frankly you don't have a clue exactly what it is that you are doing or why it seems to work.

But you always say your version of CTE works, right? So why don't you post it? The two standard excuses are always "because I don't know the whole system", or "because it might be different than what Stan does and you don't want to conflict with him" because he is apparently the CTE authority now with the one true and real version.

Well if you don't even know the whole CTE system, yet still think it works great, doesn't that tell you something (like that you must be making subconscious aiming adjustments which is why is works even though you don't truly know how to do it)?

And if you are worried about your system being different than Stan's system (and it will be because EVERY single CTE user's system is at least a little different), doesn't that also tell you something (like that it must subconscious aiming adjustments that accounts for why everybody's system is different yet they all work perfectly for each person)?

 

[pdcue]

What is laughable is that some people still hold onto the belief that the earth is flat, even when science allows us to prove that it is round beyond any and all doubt, just because "it sure looks flat to me when I look out on the horizon." What is also laughable is that some people still hold onto the belief that systems like this as well as all the CTE variants are physically sound systems, even when science allows us to prove that they are not beyond any and all doubt, just because "well I make balls when I do it so it must be physically sound."


You got that right, and it is beyond obvious if anyone takes two seconds to really think about what is actually happening when you aim the left or right side of the shaft at the contact point on the object ball for different cut angle shots.


Yes, it requires user aiming adjustments (just like CTE) which can easily be done subconsciously.


Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner. It doesn't work on paper, just like CTE, because it is not a physically sound system. In spite of not being physically valid, just like with CTE, it "works" because your mind makes subconscious aiming adjustments based on experience, because it removes shot anxiety and makes you stroke more confidently because of your belief in the system, and because with the system you are concentrating more and are more focused on the object ball than you normally would have been.


Ding, ding, ding, another winner. Just like with CTE, everybody KNOWS it can't physically work, but since they still see positive benefits from using it, they would rather lie to themselves and claim that it must somehow be physically valid instead of just embracing the truth that it "works" for other reasons and just being happy enough with their improvement no matter what the reason. It's the old "the earth sure looks flat, so it must be flat and I'm not going to let anybody tell me otherwise," mentality. "But I can see it with my own eyes, it's flat!!" "But I make balls when I do it, it's physically valid!!"

Best post on lame-ing systems ever.

Dale

 

[Neil]

................

 

[peteypooldude]

I don't think YOU know the variables or the CTE system. I'm still waiting to hear exactly what you do in your version.



What did I predict? I knew the excuses were coming. You can't post a detailed description because frankly you don't have a clue exactly what it is that you are doing or why it seems to work.

But you always say your version of CTE works, right? So why don't you post it? The two standard excuses are always "because I don't know the whole system", or "because it might be different than what Stan does and you don't want to conflict with him" because he is apparently the CTE authority now with the one true and real version.

Well if you don't even know the whole CTE system, yet still think it works great, doesn't that tell you something (like that you must be making subconscious aiming adjustments which is why is works even though you don't truly know how to do it)?

And if you are worried about your system being different than Stan's system (and it will be because EVERY single CTE user's system is at least a little different), doesn't that also tell you something (like that it must subconscious aiming adjustments that accounts for why everybody's system is different yet they all work perfectly for each person)?

You are thinking wrong. I dont half A$$ know, I play with nothing else.
If the rest of your ideas are as WRONG as that one, Then your a poor
judge. I learned from spidey in person and have talked to Stan. Would
you say these people are at the top of the CTE ladder? Now that we are
clear on that. Why would I tell you anything? Keep beleiving what you want. I am not getting dragged into anything. You are welcome to play tag with someone else.

 

[JB Cases]

Ok, CTE is invalid, Mullen's aiming system is invalid. What Shane Van Boeing stated he uses is invalid, what Rodney Morris told me is invalid.

The only valid way to "aim" one pool ball into another one is by using the Ghsot Ball method as decribed by Robert Byrne.

Now that we have settled that can we allow people who want to delude themselves to discuss amongst themselves without a bunch of bullies shoving their way in?

I for one like to try new things and go down all the roads I can. It's fun for me so that I can decide for myself what I want to use or not.

Pool is a singular sport. Results are easy to measure.

I gamble on pool, I play in tournaments, I play on leagues. I don't do these things with the idea of handicapping myself so I use whatever methods I like to use and if the results are good for me and good for my teammates then it's all good.

So I am totally cool with not having the intellect to know something doesn't work. I am absolutely 100% fine with self-delusion, self-hynosis, whatever, while I am playing pool. Whatever it takes to pysche me up and get me in the zone is fine with me.

So if you're intention is to get an admission of ignorance then I am guilty as charged. I am completely ignorant of geometry and physics. I just play pool and use some aiming systems that are not Ghost Ball. If you tell me that what I am doing to make balls is not what I think I am doing then I agree with you. Classify it however you want to.

If you don't mind though I will just keep on doing it because it's fun for me and makes me want to play more pool, pay more table time, buy more cues etc.....

 

[Blue Hog ridr]

All the nay sayers wanted proof, right.
Stan provided proof after all the chiding over producing a DVD.
Its $39, buy it and judge for yourselves, other wise you're going to make JB's head explode before the new year.
John said he was going to buy me one for Christmas.
Thanks John.

 

[Poolplaya9]

WOW! Aren't you just full of yourself! You think we sound ridiculous? You really ought to read your own post!

I was responding to a poster in the same tone that he repeatedly used towards me, nothing more.

You quote me, and break down the quotes, then answer whatever you want to, even though it has NO bearing on what I said!

I answered all of your points, I didn't select, and everything I said had bearing on what you had said, and directly addressed your statements. If you feel I missed something let me know what it was and I will respond to it. But talk about pot, kettle, black. You failed to respond to almost anything I said.

I state that the system in THIS thread doesn't always work, and you then want to say that I said CTE doesn't work.

What you said was "Are the faults with this system? Sure there are. Does it work on paper? No. Who cares, we aren't writing a book about it, we are using it... it does work a lot of the time." Those are the same things you have said about CTE. My response was directed towards both systems really, as there are not much if any differences between the two in how they they may help some people. Neither one is a phsically valid system, but in both the users make aiming adjustments to compensate and in the mean time by doing this it has some other side benefits that appear to help some people.

Also, you categorically state that CTE has been PROVEN not to work! That, despite the fact that in the same post you state that no one has ever described what CTE actually is!

Thats not what I said at all. I said that it has been proven not to work PHSICALLY, that it was not a PHYSICALLY sound or valid system. I said that it does appear to have some other benefits for some people for other reasons other than finding the correct precise aiming line, which it does not. I must have said it a dozen times, and put physical in italics every time, and you still failed to comprehend it correctly so hopefully the bolding and capitalization helps. Basically I am saying the system may work for some people, but not for the reason CTE'ers claim it does. I NEVER said it didn't work.

And nobody has yet described it fully. I'm waiting for your explanation but I know it won't come because you can't describe it either because there are parts that are missing (the user adjusted aiming parts). The explanations we have gotten, although incomplete, enough was there that they could be and were all debunked completely.

Please describe in detail exactly how CTE does NOT work, oh wait, you can't. You can't because you don't even know what it is!

Again, go to the diagram with the cue ball and three object balls all in the same row at different distances and being shot into the same corner pocket. CTE does not adjust for these three different shots as needed, which is proof enough that it does not work. If you think it can take these three shots on the same line at different distances into consideration, please explain in detail how you do this because nobody else can.

And again, pot, kettle, black. It is YOU that cannot describe CTE in detail without any missing parts. If you can, please do so because we have been waiting for over 15 years for someone who can (of course we know it will never happen, because the missing part is the user adjusted aiming, but you haven't figured that out yet).

This thread isn't even about CTE, but yet you feel that coming here soley to bash something you know nothing about will increase you manhood or something. Why was it again that you felt you just HAD to knock any aiming systems that people use??

I came because someone said this system worked in a way that was total hogwash and I, along with others, set the record straight. The person that seems to know nothing about it is you because you apparently can't see how grossly inaccurate this system is from a physical standpoint (yes the subconscious corrects the aim for many people but for some people it may not and they deserve to know that it is not physically valid). If somebody posted a thread stating that the way to draw the cue ball was to hit it above the equator, would you stay silent?

By the way, if you actually knew just who does use aiming systems, maybe , just maybe, you would start taking a serious look at them instead of knocking them.

Lots of people believe all kinds of nonsense, and our pool heroes aren't going to be an exception to the rest of humanity. Again, I'm not saying it doesn't work for people, it just isn't a physically valid system like they may believe.

 

[Poolplaya9]

can we allow people who want to delude themselves to discuss amongst themselves without a bunch of bullies shoving their way in?

If someone made an instructional post saying the best way to draw the ball was the hit it above the equator, because they knew that many people's subconscious would overcome that and make them hit it low anyway and it would still work and they would get draw, would you think it was appropriate for people to not be informed of what was really happening? What if telling them to hit high worked even better than just telling them to hit low, shouldn't they still know what is actually happening instead of being fed incorrect information even though it "worked"? That is all we are doing here.

It's fun for me so that I can decide for myself what I want to use or not.

I agree, everyone should be able to decide for themselves what they want to use or not, but they should have the correct information to choose from, not misinformation, even if it is unintentional misinformation.

I am absolutely 100% fine with self-delusion, self-hynosis, whatever, while I am playing pool. Whatever it takes to pysche me up and get me in the zone is fine with me.

Again, a person has every right to use whatever they want, but they also have a right to know if any part of it does happen to be a mind trick or self delusion or anything of the like.

So if you're intention is to get an admission of ignorance then I am guilty as charged. I am completely ignorant of geometry and physics. I just play pool and use some aiming systems that are not Ghost Ball.

There is no problem with you or anyone else having that "I don't know or care why it works, I just care about the results" mindframe for themselves. It is when you try to argue that it is doing something that it isn't that it becomes a problem because it mininforms people.