CTE PRO ONE Contrast with Quarters System

ENGLISH! said:
I'm not defying any AZB personnel. If so, I've misunderstood & I invite a clarification. I do not wish to get the boot. Who here does.

In context, I was told that I had stated my conclusion that CTE is not totally objective enough times in that thread.

I'm trying to find something that would get me to possibly see it your way or to find a common language to make it clear one way or the other.

Simply speaking, I'm looking for answers as to why some see it one way & others see it another way.

It is one way or the other, or is it somewhere in between? I see others having rather great success with it & I wonder what are they doing that allows that success that I can't seem to do & have similar success with it.

If there is a piece that I am missing that is keeping me from pocketing balls when totally objectively implementing the method then I would like to know what that is.

As of now I don't see a totally objective implementation working without shots that won't work for the objective visuals. Yet others are pocketing balls.

There are TOM, the 30 that have PM'd him, the ones that PMd me & have told me in person, & that means that there are others that are not having any complete success with it.

I'd think you'd like to find out why as much as we do.

If it takes 6 months to a year to get it & have that Ahhh Ah moment, I'll be honest, then I'm not interested.

To me, if it's totally objective then it should be see it, do it, pocket the ball. But when I do that, there are times that the ball does not go anywhere near the pocket if I implement it objectively.

I'll PM Mr. Howerton for a clarification to see if I'm forbidden to discuss the topic at all.

I respect your work. I respect the time, effort, & money that you have spent to try to bring a better method to the general playing public & those that will come along new to the game.

I just agree with your assessment of it's nature at this time.

Sincerely,
Rick
Click to expand...


Absolutely, I would not expect you to be interested in a professional system that connects with pockets by way of understanding a natural phenomenon even if it did take a few months.
You are of a magic pill mentally......the quick fix..

Stan Shuffett
 
nobcitypool said:
That's great! Didn't he clearly tell you to back off from these same posts in the aiming forum? I guess we'll find out if he meant it.
Click to expand...

He is one of a few that relentlessly harass me and what I present. It never stops. It is a constant twisting of words. NEVER anything added....

Stan Shuffett
 
Colin Colenso said:
1. I didn't knock anyone or anything in this thread and
2. I now know that getting visuals from down in the stance is advanced.

The rest is pretty much inflammatory, so I'd rather ignore it than add fuel to it.
Click to expand...

Not intended to be inflammatory. You asked a similar question in a previous thread. I referred you to a YouTube video provided by Stan. You keep spinning the same old questions without taking the time to study the dvd's, youtube videos or spending any time at the table working at it. One can only conclude you don't have a sincere interest in the system but instead, to simply be disruptive with the same old list of questions.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
Thr ctel is an objective variable, not constant, in regards to how you perceive it. As distance increases, your eyes must move to maintain a certain look due to the perceived perspective illusion (OB appearing smaller).
Click to expand...
If you're talking about visually aligning the CB center with the OB edge (so one is directly behind the other in your sight), there is no change as the balls or your eyes move back or forward. The CTE line is constant, and if you're looking along it, so is your perspective relative to it.

Here's a couple of 3D diagrams to show what I mean. What am I misunderstanding?

pj
chgo

View attachment 39471
 

Attachments

  • CTEL.jpg
    CTEL.jpg
    46.4 KB · Views: 213
Colin Colenso said:
Stan recently said that he can get the visual after getting down on the shot, at which point one would have halved the distance between the eyes and the CB I'd estimate.

Not saying this is a contradiction, but curious how this effects the perspective and/or how easy it is to compensate for changes in visual perspective.
Click to expand...
It's not a contradiction. There's no single point... there's a range...and all in exact proportion. Distance vs eye position is a ratio.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
If you're talking about visually aligning the CB center with the OB edge (so one is directly behind the other in your sight), there is no change as the balls or your eyes move back or forward. The CTE line is constant, and if you're looking along it, so is your perspective relative to it.

Here's a couple of 3D diagrams to show what I mean. What am I misunderstanding?

pj
chgo

View attachment 39471
Click to expand...


You are stuck in 2D knee deep.

The closer ball could easily be dialed into a 30 while the more distant ball could easily be dialed into a 15.....

CBE is important.......

Stan Shuffett
 
stan shuffett said:
It is like Dave mentioned previously......the perspective can change but the objectivity, the fixed CB, can remain.....

New players to CTE must learn the perceptions and how to properly fix the CB at ball address. That is a critical first principle.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...
How does a new player to CTE learn the perceptions? I believe you've said practice and experience, right?

pj
chgo
 
stan shuffett said:
He is one of a few that relentlessly harass me and what I present. It never stops. It is a constant twisting of words. NEVER anything added....

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

That's apparently obvious Stan to everyone but the mods here. English was clearly told by Mike to stay away from these CTE threads yet here he is again with the same old crap. I'm guessing the outcome will be me getting banned. Patrick is doing the exact same thing. It's blatantly obvious he had no intention other than to be disruptive and to pick fights. And par for the course, Lou has to drop in with a derogatory email. Again, the mods do nothing.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
What CTE instruction tells you where to stand relative to the CB/OB relationship?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
Completely wrong. You're using a 2D representation of a 3D image. That's not real world perspective. Sorry.
Patrick Johnson said:
If you're talking about visually aligning the CB center with the OB edge (so one is directly behind the other in your sight), there is no change as the balls or your eyes move back or forward. The CTE line is constant, and if you're looking along it, so is your perspective relative to it.

Here's a couple of 3D diagrams to show what I mean. What am I misunderstanding?

pj
chgo

View attachment 39471
Click to expand...
 
I want to add... this eye offset adjustment to maintain a visual due to distance is why CTE as well as 90/90 go from thin to thick visual alignments for a shot as distance increases. Conversely, as the shot gets very close, you can go from a thick to thin visual alignment. That's why 2D screenshots of Virtual Pool are not representative of how a person sees.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
Completely wrong. You're using a 2D representation of a 3D image. That's not real world perspective. Sorry.
Click to expand...
So just "wrong" is all you can say about it? Oh right, there's also "you've never tried it" and "it's on the videos". These non-answers have become the CTE meme - I think CTE loses lots more potentially interested players than it gains with it.

Anyway, continuing the (seemingly hopeless) quest for any actual answer to any question about CTE...

If I go to the table and try to see this different perspective you claim exists, how should I go about it? What am I looking for?

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
So just "wrong" is all you can say about it? Oh right, there's also "you've never tried it" and "it's on the videos". These non-answers have become the CTE meme - I think CTE loses lots more potentially interested players than it gains with it.

Anyway, continuing the (seemingly hopeless) quest for any actual answer to any question about CTE...

If I go to the table and try to see this different perspective you claim exists, how should I go about it? What am I looking for?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting virtual pool replicates one's vision? Really?

Your understanding of perspective in regards to human vision is very flawed. I'm not motivated to explain what I consider basics.

Good luck with your game.
 
SpiderWebComm said:
Are you suggesting virtual pool replicates one's vision? Really?

Your understanding of perspective in regards to human vision is very flawed. I'm not motivated to explain what I consider basics.

Good luck with your game.
Click to expand...
Your eyes must move to maintain an alignment due to convergence in real 3D space, not a 2D representation of 3D space.
 
nobcitypool said:
And Patrick reveals his true objective right there.
Click to expand...
CTE users give the non-answers, not me. I ask clear questions to which there should be clear answers.

Are you saying it's your "true objective" to turn off potential CTE users? I'm joking, of course - it's pretty clear that CTE users believe the answers they give are sensible.

pj
chgo
 
nobcitypool said:
And Patrick reveals his true objective right there.
Click to expand...

That is the whole agenda. My last video is simply too potent as a positive for CTE.
So, it brings the ones out that want CTE to go away. They can't stand it that the video presents CTE as it does. They choose their battles and attack!
It is too late, though, for that. Will not do any good.

Stan Shuffett
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top