CTE/ PRO ONE with Stan Shuffett
- Thread starter JoeyA
- Start date
- Status
Dave,
It is quite apparent that you are not too busy to waste your time making additional unncessary, incendiary, religious related posts about CTE.
Ohhh, but you are only having fun? I see...............
(At the expense of others who might have respect for their religious convictions).Ridiculing CTE once again and adding a little inflammatory God stuff in your posts. Awww, I'm being sensitive aren't I?
Mike Page nor anyone else except maybe Mr. Wilson and the Administrator have the ability to rein in the CTE howling jackals.
This isn't really true. The ones who get teased are the ones who argue - to the point of namecalling and all the other things you find so objectionable - that CTE is "exact without user input", with little or no understanding of that topic.
Climb off the CTE high horse, Joey. Your hat isn't pure white either.
pj
chgo
mlalum
Banned
Shaun i think this is apples and oranges. You're too smart to think otherwise I hope. But i'm fine with your opinion. thanks for the input.
Come off the high horse, Joey. Every mention of God isn't a slam at somebody's religious convictions. This is just an easy emotional card you try to play.
pj
chgo
You have an amazing ability to bring it out in others. Guess we each have our own special talents.
pj
chgo
Johnny Blaze (my new nickname for JB when he starts catching the OCD gear), it's time to flame-off, man. Not worth it.
Stick to the facts, and let's stop getting personal. Most intelligent posters can figure out who isn't playing nice with the other children.
Let's kick it down a notch. They'll stop poking you with a sharp stick if you stop roaring every time they do it. Take it from someone who knows which of your buttons to push.
It's cool. I just couldn't let that opportunity to point out the gambling hypocrisy slide. I'd link to his rant but he was a guest on someone else's blog and I don't want people to out him in the comments there like some preacher who rails against Facebook infidelity while engaging in threesomes with his flock.
All right I will concede that one and leave you alone until you have had a chance to review the DVD I am sending you.
Joey,
Honestly, I thought I was being harmlessly funny referring to this "CTE moment" from the past, but I can see how some people might not appreciate the humor.
FYI, BRKNRUN's fictitious "story" was never meant to be read literally. If it were, I would agree with you that it would have been inappropriate and in bad taste.
I am genuinely sorry if you felt personally offended by my reference to BRKNRUN's historic post.
Regards,
Dave
Michael,
You're an author. The guy's name is right there in bold letters above you. Can't you spell it right?
The W key is far away from the U key.
Do you have anything to say about CTE, Stan's DVD, Joey's trip report? If so I'd like to hear it.
John,
Suppose someone gave just enough of a description of a system from whence you could determine, say, that it depended on the sum of the three internal angles of a triangle being something other than 180 degrees. Without knowing a single thing more about it, you could be sure that something was seriously wrong.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but CTE seems to assert two things:
1) When using it, you can determine the exact aim line, or one that's close enough for most shots.
2) You can do this without invoking any traditional method of aiming, i.e., ghostball in the most general sense of ghostball. (I'm including lining up contact points, fractional overlap, etc.)
It's the second part that's the problem. The aim line cannot be determined from geometry alone, because geometry is not physics - it has nothing to say about where you need to contact the OB. However, once the ghostball premise is asserted (opposite the pocket), then geometry does have a few thing to say. But you have to start with ghostball in some form. Since the very essence of the system is to rid the player of the need to imagine "something that's not there," that is a serious problem.
If CTE or any of the offset-and-pivot systems were presented as a helpful transition from a cold look at the shot to the final aiming step (zeroing in on the ghostball - in the most general sense), then I don't think the controversy would have ever reached the fever pitch that it has.
From who? After Dave Segal set up his blog, I dutifully went there to read his description. After all, he's been offered as one of the prime sources and authorities of CTE. Based on that, I generated some graphs showing pivot position for a range of cut angles, at only one CB-OB separation. It turns out that they would be essentially impossible to come by in any casual way (without the math). As could be expected, and not necessarily because of the graphs, CTE began metamorphosing once again. He now says the stuff on his site is wrong.
Of course, the simple reason that everyone who uses it seems to employ the right-wrong-official-unofficial-original-modified-sanctioned-unsanctioned version, yet manages to sink balls, is that good old ghostball enters in at the last moment. That is the common thread. Why not acknowledge that? Or, correct any erroneous assumptions on my part.
Jim
Last edited:
This just went by me when you said it before. I'll appreciate the chance to review the DVD. Thanks.
My promise to Stan still holds too: if I find value in CTE that I don't already get elsewhere, I'll buy a DVD of my own. And it doesn't have to be "exact" to meet this criterion.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
Glad your speaking a different language.
We aren't afraid to acknowledge that there is "feel" involved. The reason I don't rely on years of experience to finish the job is because my years of experience didn't help me to find the aiming line in the first place.
My personal experience is that I use CTE and my brain is often screaming WRONG WRONG WRONG when I am addressing the cueball. I trust the line CTE gave me and shoot and the ball goes in cleanly. Other CTE users will tell you the same thing.
Where is the feel in CTE then? Well as Dave Segal explained it's in where to put the bridge hand down and which type of pivoting to use.
This becomes quite clear what's best for you in fairly short order. Then it's less feel and more by the numbers. At some point it becomes pretty much autopilot so that you see all the steps as you are approaching the table and you just fall into the shot line in one motion where the "pivot" is included.
With CTE I can make shots where I have no experience with them. I have no experience because they are so crazy that I would never even think to try them in a game using Ghost Ball or pure feel. But with CTE I honestly feel that NO shot is too tough. And so frequently now I shoot those shots and when the ball goes swish I am still amazed at this crazy method that produces amazing results like that.
I can assure you that with the types of shots I am talking about I can't "feel" them in without getting very lucky.
WOW, see what you mean, just got caught up, but it wasn't my fault.
That's a little heavy on my shoulders Joey! But I'll try
Dave, sit down and shut up.
Lou, look at me when I'm talking to you.
Pat, fetch me a beer...
OK, forget the robot, no one wants to play a robot on cte. Say you have a person, never played pool, doesn't even no what it is, spells it pull. You give him two things, a straight stroke and full knowledge of Stan's CTE-PRO-ONE. Then you take him to a pool table, first time hes ever seen one, throw balls out randomly, let Stan call out commands such as thick cut to the right on the three, thin cut to the left on the nine. HE WILL MAKE THE BALLS. Remember he has a perfect stroke and perfect knowledge of PRO-ONE. The balls go center pocket. It really becomes that easy.
I didn't know I was a "howling jackal," but thank you for letting me know.
BTW, I was already "sitting down at my keyboard" when I read your message, so all I can really do at this point is shut up.
Regards,
Dave
I don't care who ya are, that's some funny stuff right there...:grin::grin::grin:
Set up some caroms, or 2-3 balls combos or some rail first shots and then say that. Banks even, any shot where you can not hit the OB first.
I'll even make it easier, block the pocket such that there is only one ball width to make a ball. I bet with this setup the blind shot makers would cry at how often they miss.
I laugh at statements like this one above.
Unproveable babble.
- Status