CTE PRO ONE Contrast with Quarters System

ENGLISH! said:
Firstly, & foremost, Thank You for your reply & for your civility.

However...

Do you realize how irrational & illogical that is?

I've shot each of the other shots objectively & sent each one out on nearly the same exact angle & into the short rail. The key word there is objectively. See the same thing. Align to the same thing. Make the same 1/2 tip pivot. AND get the same outcome angle.

Now, IF... I line up to the line given by the objective alignment & then tweak that alignment based on my past experience of what it takes to actually pocket the other shots, then Yes...I can get a different outcome angle, BUT, that is no longer shooting the shot based on the visually objective alignment. I've just interjected subjective intuition based on my past experiences.

I think what you are referring to is arriving on that different line due to being influenced by your subconscious that has 'learned' from your past experiences.

If you instruct a newbie to shoot the first shot & they have a naturally good stroke & pocket the ball & then move them over parallel to a much differently angled shot & tell them to do the exact same thing, there is no way that I can see them making that 2nd. shot IF they objectively do the same thing.

Another question. What is there that is objective that tells one in what direction one should pivot?

I thank you again for your civil reply & Best 2 You,
Rick

PS CTE obviously works very well for very many. I'm not saying that is doesn't. I'm just questioning the true nature of what is actually going on.
Click to expand...

Simple request.

Do a video showing how the balls come off at the nearly angle for you.

Would love to see you do that.

Stan Shuffett
 
Mirza said:
BeiberLvr once gave a perfect explanation of how to aquire the visuals and why is it "objective", at least it is for me.

Sit in front of a round clock thats on the wall.

Point your left hand index finger at the left quarter of the clock and point your right hand index finger at the right edge of the clock.

Now you see your fingers on both hands clearly pointing at those spots, its objective, why? Because if you now move your head a bit to the left or to the right, while still sitting, and NOT moving anything else, you'll see that now your fingers are pointing to different spots on the clock, so there is only one place where you can put your head in so that your index fingers are pointing directly to the spots where you first pointed them at, the left quarter and right edge of the clock.

Thats objective. For me.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting experiment and it was as you and BeiberLvr said.

Do you use the left eye to see the left edge, 1/8, A then across to B (center) and the right eye to see the right edge, 7/8, C then across to B? I can do that.

I digress:
My eyes are about 2/14 inches apart so that if I look at the CB with my nose pointed at the center of the CB with my left eye, the left edge of the CB is lined up with the left edge of the OB (9:00) on a straight in (aim line) CB to OB alignment; with my right eye the right edge of the CB is pointed at the right edge of the OB (3:00). I close the opposite eye to veryfy this.

What does a one eyed man have to do?
 
ENGLISH! said:
If you instruct a newbie to shoot the first shot & they have a naturally good stroke & pocket the ball & then move them over parallel to a much differently angled shot & tell them to do the exact same thing, there is no way that I can see them making that 2nd. shot IF they objectively do the same thing.



P
Click to expand...

Its not a parallel move you make. Its more of a rotational move.
 
cookie man said:
Its not a parallel move you make. Its more of a rotational move.
Click to expand...

Thanks, but I was NOT talking about rotating around the shot.

I was talking about moving from one shot over to a completely different parallel shot which would have a totally different outcome angle to the pocket.
 
ENGLISH! said:
Thanks, but I was NOT talking about rotating around the shot.

I was talking about moving from one shot over to a completely different parallel shot which would have a totally different outcome angle to the pocket.
Click to expand...

If you move the balls to a parallel location the CTEL rotates around the OB. The CTEL goes through the outermost edge of the OB. So when the balls move that line also moves or rotates around the OB thus creating a different angle with the same visuals. I may not be explaining it real well but I think this is where you and PJ get lost with CTE. The CTEL never hits the same spot on OB unless its the same exact angle, the reference lines however do hit the same spot.
 
cookie man said:
If you move the balls to a parallel location the CTEL rotates around the OB. The CTEL goes through the outermost edge of the OB. So when the balls move that line also moves or rotates around the OB thus creating a different angle with the same visuals. I may not be explaining it real well but I think this is where you and PJ get lost with CTE. The CTEL never hits the same spot on OB unless its the same exact angle, the reference lines however do hit the same spot.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the attempt here.

We may be getting somewhere, but I would find that a bit hard to believe considering past attempts.

I've asked at least 3 times for someone to explain outer most & inner most "edge" & no one has even attempted to do so.

How many 'edges' does the OB have? AND if there is more than one, how can it be objective?

If the whole 'apparatus'... shooter, cue ball, & object ball is shifted parallel like in the 5 shot video from shot #1 to 2 to 3 to 4 to 5, what is there that is objective that would make one objectively see a 'different edge' location?

How many times has it been said that there is only ONE SPOT or line where both the CTE & ETX lines can be seen simultaneously?

Does that place the OB, CB, & shooters vision center on one straight line?

How does that relationship change just because it is positioned in a different location on the table & what is there that is objective to cause it if indeed it does?

Are there no contradictions here?

Sorry for the onslaught of questions but I think they are all relative.

Thanks in advance should you choose to try to explain all or any part.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick
 
Last edited:
ENGLISH! said:
Thanks for the attempt here.

We may be getting somewhere, but I would find that a bit hard to believe considering past attempts.

I've asked at least 3 times for someone to explain outer most & inner most "edge" & no one has even attempted to do so.

How many 'edges' does the OB have? AND if there is more than one, how can it be objective?

If the whole 'apparatus'... shooter, cue ball, & object ball is shifted parallel like in the 5 shot video from shot #1 to 2 to 3 to 4 to 5, what is there that is objective that would make one objectively see a 'different edge' location?

How many times has it been said that there is only ONE SPOT or line where both the CTE & ETX lines can be seen simultaneously?

Does that place the OB, CB, & shooters vision center on one straight line?

How does that relationship change just because it is positioned in a different location on the table & what is there that is objective to cause it if indeed it does?

Are there no contradictions here?

Sorry for the onslaught of questions but I think they are all relative.

Thanks in advance should you choose to try to explain all or any part.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick
Click to expand...
There is no inner most edge that i use only an outermost edge. It's objective because, all though there are many outermost edges, you only use one at a time.
 
cookie man said:
If you move the balls to a parallel location the CTEL rotates around the OB. The CTEL goes through the outermost edge of the OB. So when the balls move that line also moves or rotates around the OB thus creating a different angle with the same visuals. I may not be explaining it real well but I think this is where you and PJ get lost with CTE. The CTEL never hits the same spot on OB unless its the same exact angle, the reference lines however do hit the same spot.
Click to expand...

I re-read this for a third time.

Does not the CTE & ETX line seen simultaneously FIX the cue ball relative to the OB?

If so, how can moving them to any other location change that relationship?

Thanks again should you have an answer.

Best,
Rick
 
ENGLISH! said:
I re-read this for a third time.

Does not the CTE & ETX line seen simultaneously FIX the cue ball relative to the OB?

If so, how can moving them to any other location change that relationship?

Thanks again should you have an answer.

Best,
Rick
Click to expand...

Just for that shot. When the balls move the CTEL moves or rotates to a different spot on the edge of OB. I know you are not really understanding this concept and i may not be explaining it really well but if you can put some balls up on the table and just play with the visuals it might click in. I wouldn't even shoot the balls, just examine the visuals.
 
cookie man said:
There is no inner most edge that i use only an outermost edge. It's objective because, all though there are many outermost edges, you only use one at a time.
Click to expand...

Again, thanks for your civil attempts to try to explain this stuff, but you've left quite a few questions unanswered.

Please understand that I understand that as one walks around a sphere & looks at it there are an infinite number of 'visual edges'. BUT...when one stops and establishes a relationship one can only see two 'visual edges' on the equator line, one to the left & one to the right.

So...what objectively tells you which one of the infinite number of visual edges to use for a certain shot as you rotate around the sphere?

Best,
Rick

Edit: In quarter aiming or factional overlap or shadow aiming one only uses one at a time. Does that make all of those methods totally objective methods?
 
Last edited:
cookie man said:
Just for that shot. When the balls move the CTEL moves or rotates to a different spot on the edge of OB. I know you are not really understanding this concept and i may not be explaining it really well but if you can put some balls up on the table and just play with the visuals it might click in. I wouldn't even shoot the balls, just examine the visuals.
Click to expand...

What makes the CTE line move & is it objective?

Best,
Rick
 
ENGLISH! said:
Again, thanks for your civil attempts to try to explain this stuff, but you've left quite a few questions unanswered.

Please understand that I understand that as one walks around a sphere & looks at it there are an infinite number of 'visual edges'. BUT...when one stops and establishes a relationship one can only see two 'visual edges' on the equator line, one to the left & one to the right.

So...what objectively tells you which one of the infinite number of visual edges to use for a certain shot as you rotate around the sphere?

Best,
Rick

Edit: In quarter aiming or factional overlap or shadow aiming one only uses one at a time. Does that make all of those methods totally objective methods?
Click to expand...

I dont know much about quarters and fractional and dont really care to study them.
The CTEL and the reference line tells me which one to use. When they match up I know what to use.
 
cookie man said:
Yes it is objective so now we must move on from this over asked question.
Click to expand...

I knew it was too good to be true.

How can I make up my mind if it's objective or not when you won't even tell me what it is that makes the line move.

If you know what it is & can make your own determination that it is objective then why won't you tell me what it is so I can make a determination?

If you don't know what makes the line move then why can't you just that you don't know?

Thanks again for the try & for being civil.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick
 
ENGLISH! said:
I knew it was too good to be true.

How can I make up my mind if it's objective or not when you won't even tell me what it is that makes the line move.

If you know what it is & can make your own determination that it is objective then why won't you tell me what it is so I can make a determination?

If you don't know what makes the line move then why can't you just that you don't know?

Thanks again for the try & for being civil.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick
Click to expand...

Come on Rick. You know the answer, you posted it yourself:
" Please understand that I understand that as one walks around a sphere & looks at it there are an infinite number of 'visual edges'. BUT...when one stops and establishes a relationship one can only see two 'visual edges' on the equator line, one to the left & one to the right."
 
lfigueroa said:
You see the way you do.

Everyone sees the shots differently.

Buyer beware. YMMV.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

Funny how there are plenty of people that can see the visuals just fine.

I guess some of us were gifted with the elusive CTE gene.
 
Which of the following two pics is objective or subjective? Are there points of reference anyone can use like in the sights imagine in the pool shot pic? Of course the answer is gonna be "Yep, they are there, but since you learn CTE you'll never see them."

And the third pic of the rail first for the 8 in the corner is to be used to describe how to do the visuals with a interfering ball. Rail first shots are of great value in creating angles when a direct hit on the OB does not provide the angle needed for the next shot. All aiming systems need to deal with shots like this in addition to combs and caroms and banks. Needing more than one system creates a burden in having to learn multiple systems.
 
Last edited:
ENGLISH! said:
Thanks for the attempt here.

We may be getting somewhere, but I would find that a bit hard to believe considering past attempts.

I've asked at least 3 times for someone to explain outer most & inner most "edge" & no one has even attempted to do so.

How many 'edges' does the OB have? AND if there is more than one, how can it be objective?

If the whole 'apparatus'... shooter, cue ball, & object ball is shifted parallel like in the 5 shot video from shot #1 to 2 to 3 to 4 to 5, what is there that is objective that would make one objectively see a 'different edge' location?

How many times has it been said that there is only ONE SPOT or line where both the CTE & ETX lines can be seen simultaneously?

Does that place the OB, CB, & shooters vision center on one straight line?

How does that relationship change just because it is positioned in a different location on the table & what is there that is objective to cause it if indeed it does?

Are there no contradictions here?

Sorry for the onslaught of questions but I think they are all relative.

Thanks in advance should you choose to try to explain all or any part.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick
Click to expand...

You've asked a lot more than 3 times, Rick.

With all due respect, however, if you don't know what is meant by inner and outer edge in your 80 years of playing. Then I suggest you pick up a new hobby.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top