Cowboy Jimmy Moore - Obviously Using Center to Edge

lfigueroa said:
And what would that prove?

Pool is about running balls. And I suspect that is where your system breaks down, unless you're interested in shooting circus shot after circus shot...

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

This is a discussion about an aiming system. All aiming systems at their core are center-ball (they're used to baseline what it takes to run-out...ie. applying english).

Running out has to do with other aspects of pool such as speed control, CB control and accurate use of english. That's not a break-down of the system, it's just the limit of it. There's no "running out system." You imply that people who use systems are robotic to the point where they can't control their rock and run out.

For the record, I don't mind circus shots.
 
These are my CTE claims
1.It gives you a repeatable pre-shot routine
2.You spend approximately the same time in between shots
3.It takes the guesswork out of where to put your feet
4.Every time you pocket a ball you are repeating the same process over and over,and the better and smoother you get repeating this same process the less balls you miss
5.put your back foot on line A and your bridge on line B and hip pivot the tip to center and the ball goes no matter the angle.
6.If you do not have a straight follow through,you will probably miss the ball
7.I taught it to an azer Friday night,and it took me about 15 minutes to teach him
8.After practicing the method for 30 minutes he was missing very few balls
9.He has been reading these CTE threads and came out of curiosity and his words were Amazing
10.He was truly excited and saw the benefits
 
SpiderWebComm said:
It's going to be published soon. You can read all about it.
Click to expand...

If the math doesn't add up, it should put an end to the CTE debate. People can say that it just can't be proven with diagrams or numbers, but if it can't be shown that CTE puts you on the correct line to make the ball then it can't be taken seriously. If it works, it works and it should be demonstrable without having to "just trust it and see." People can pivot roughly into the middle of the cue ball and say they aren't making any adjustments based on feel or experience, but I've seen too many dousers swear that they absolutely are not moving those rods, and heard too many accounts of spirits and Ouija boards:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideomotor_effect

This is why when people say they aren't adjusting, that they give you their word...it just is not good enough!

There may well be benefits to CTE, even if it doesn't put you on the aiming line. It's a consistent routine and it's likely to slow down players that would otherwise rush. The problem is that these things are not benefits of CTE at all; they can be achieved just by working on developing a better and more consistent pre-shot routine, with no faith or magic required. If the numbers don't add-up, we're left with Magic Beans Aiming. If they do, CTE-ers will have a much easier time on AzB!
 
Neil said:
First, why am I bothering to post on this thread???

Now, the "anti-CTE'ers keep asking what pros use it? Well, I'm asking, what pros check out the 'science' portion of anything they do before they try it??? Quite frankly, I could care less if it can proven by the numbers or not. As long as it works, I will use it. Simple test for you- line up like the threads say to, then have someone put something between you and the ob so that you cannot see the ob. THEN pivot to center of the cb. When you say 'shoot', have someone remove the object. That way, there was zero 'feel' to the shot, you are only shooting down the CTE line. See what happens. I did, and the balls were dropping. If you need more of a test than that, you must be shooting with a slide ruler in your back pocket.
Click to expand...

You can say that again. And I heard the term Slide Ruler.

It will take much more than a slide rule to model this system.

There are many seemingly simple things that are extremely difficult to model. I have had lots of high power math (Calc III, Differential Equations, and Complex Variables) in gaining two engineering degrees, and modeling simple processes is often extremely complex.

I assume that is the case here, since no one has done it so far. But if it is true, someone will do the modeling and primarily for personal or professional use. That is where the bucks are.
 
The Science

SpiderWebComm said:
It's going to be published soon. You can read all about it.
Click to expand...

Can't wait to read it Dave! I can only imagine the amount of time, and effort you are putting forth to make this Dave worthy.
Why is it so improbable that CTE could work? Because the math/science of it is not easily explained? We have all tried a system of some sort at some time. If it worked we kept it. If not, we chucked it. The first one for me dealt with kick shots. I didn't make every kick I attemped, but my success increased a great deal. I did wonder how someone had first figured this system out, but I was just so happy it had improved my game. Isn't that what we are all after. Finding one puzzle piece after another that improves our game.
Lou, I didn't think too much of these threads when I first started reading them, but after trying some of the techniques/methods, I can honestly say that CTE has much merit, regardless of my not knowing why it works. I still have much more work to do, but will predict that I will come away from this experience an improved player. Thanks to all that have helped me better understand These methods (Dave, John, Mike, and Pete). Pete, thanks for the lesson! It was time well spent for sure! :thumbup:
 
Last edited:
Neil said:
First, why am I bothering to post on this thread???

Now, the "anti-CTE'ers keep asking what pros use it? Well, I'm asking, what pros check out the 'science' portion of anything they do before they try it??? Quite frankly, I could care less if it can proven by the numbers or not. As long as it works, I will use it. Simple test for you- line up like the threads say to, then have someone put something between you and the ob so that you cannot see the ob. THEN pivot to center of the cb. When you say 'shoot', have someone remove the object. That way, there was zero 'feel' to the shot, you are only shooting down the CTE line. See what happens. I did, and the balls were dropping. If you need more of a test than that, you must be shooting with a slide ruler in your back pocket.
Click to expand...

I've gotten down to shoot, saw what I needed to do, closed my eyes, made the shot and got position, all with my eyes closed. I can do this regularly.

All because of ghost ball, so it must work.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
It's going to be published soon. You can read all about it.
Click to expand...


As I've said, I look forward to it. But you do know that, inevitably, it will raise questions.

I hope that when someone like Bob Jewett asks you to clarify something, like he did a little bit further back up this thread, you are more willing to help us all understand.

Lou Figueroa
 
You're still here!

But what about the two shots I diagramed?


peteypooldude said:
These are my CTE claims
1.It gives you a repeatable pre-shot routine

Great. But you can have a PSR without CTE. The problem with the CTE PSR is that while it may be better than nothing if you have no PSR, you need to be aware that slavish adhere could lock you into a PSR that might not be best for you.

2.You spend approximately the same time in between shots

Most players do this anyway.

3.It takes the guesswork out of where to put your feet

As most decent pool players know, playing pool is a dance with the table and your feet end up all over the place. Sometimes you're just tippy-toe on one foot. What is more important than where your feet end up is maybe how your feet get to where they need to be.

4.Every time you pocket a ball you are repeating the same process over and over,and the better and smoother you get repeating this same process the less balls you miss

Methinks someone has been peeking at the "hit a million balls" theory.

5.put your back foot on line A and your bridge on line B and hip pivot the tip to center and the ball goes no matter the angle.

hmmm. Right. Do you also have to click your heels together three times?

6.If you do not have a straight follow through,you will probably miss the ball

This could be problematic.

7.I taught it to an azer Friday night,and it took me about 15 minutes to teach him

You can teach a lot of different stuff in 15 minutes.

8.After practicing the method for 30 minutes he was missing very few balls

Was this AZer's name John Schmidt?

9.He has been reading these CTE threads and came out of curiosity and his words were Amazing

Many people are easily impressed :-)

10.He was truly excited and saw the benefits

New health plan?
Click to expand...
Lou Figueroa
:-)
 
Palmetto cue said:
Lou, I didn't think too much of these threads when I first started reading them, but after trying some of the techniques/methods, I can honestly say that CTE has much merit, regardless of my not knowing why it works. I still have much more work to do, but will predict that I will come away from this experience an improved player. Thanks to all that have helped me better understand These methods (Dave, John, Mike, and Pete). Pete, thanks for the lesson! It was time well spent for sure! :thumbup:
Click to expand...


I can't imagine anyone having any problem with someone saying what you're saying, which is: CTE has much merit, regardless of my not knowing why it works.

It's when we get into the hyperbole that there's a problem :-)

Lou Figueroa
 
peteypooldude said:
I said I was done with that conversation,Me thinks you can occupy a day arguing with yourself
Click to expand...


lol. Your reason for editing that last one was pretty good.

On just a slightly more serious note: my question remains. And when you guys -- who bang the CTE drum so loudly -- run for the hills the second someone tries to pin you down on specifics (see Bob Jewett's question for another example), it's hard to give your system any credibility.

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:
lfigueroa said:
This conversation is over?! Well, maybe your half :-)

But on the off chance you're still out there... let me ask you: what is the difference between these two shots, and more importantly, why can you use your super-duper aluminum foil cap decoder ring pivot but ha-ha you can't see me do it system on one and not the other?

CueTable Help



CueTable Help



Just askin'.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...
The first shot you use CTE because its a ball pocketing system,and a darn good one. The second shot you hit it any way you DAM please.
 
lfigueroa said:
lol. Your reason for editing that last one was pretty good.

On just a slightly more serious note: my question remains. And when you guys -- who bang the CTE drum so loudly -- run for the hills the second someone tries to pin you down on specifics (see bob Jewett's question for another example), it's hard to give your system any credibility.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

BOB Jewitts question was answered.
 
It's when we get into the hyperbole that there's a problem :-)

Lou Figueroa[/QUOTE]

With statements like this its hard to give you much credibility.
 
jmurphy said:
Jimmy Moore, the son of Cowboy Jimmy Moore is on my pool team on Tuesday nights. I asked him about his dad and he knew nothing about his dad using CTE.
Click to expand...

Thanks for adding this, jmurphy. I played against Jimmy Moore II in a tournament a few years back. He's a very good and knowledgeable player. I think he would know whether or not his dad was using some sort of pivot aiming system, regardless of what name it went by.

Roger
 
cookie man said:
The first shot you use CTE because its a ball pocketing system,and a darn good one. The second shot you hit it any way you DAM please.
Click to expand...


Don't play much 1pocket, do you :-)

So now it's a "ball pocketing system" and not an "aiming system."

Lou Figueroa
nice
 
Last edited:
SpiderWebComm said:
It's not our system. It's either Hal's or Ralph's. Credibility is determined by whether or not it improves someone's game.... not by Lou Figueroa.
Click to expand...


Of course you're right -- it's not up to me. But I think there is also the not so small matter of whether *your* claims, as an advocate, balance out with the proof you offer.

Lou Figueroa
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top