Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

[ENGLISH!]

So you agree with him?

Yes I would say that I agree with nearly all of 'what' he said & there is a reason why I said so with a bit of 'math'.

 

[stan shuffett]

I have no investment in if it does or it doenst but I don't see how this is possible.

You have A B and C and how many manipulations off of those? If there is a finite amount you might have a angle that works for the fact that a pocket is 4.5 inches wide and several angles would in fact work but that is about all I can readily see from the information that I know.

Doesn't Stan even say that CTE wont work on table with pockets that aren't at right angles or if the table isn't 2 to 1?

CTE is up the creek on an irregular table. Will not, can not work as a viable system.

The manipulation is not a manipulation in the form of any adjustment as let's start here and move over to this line.

The manipulation, if we were to use that term, occurs within one's vision and how 2 sphere can be uniquely viewed using the the objective aspects for the sheres used on 2x1 table. CTE Is a visual system and that is exactly where the underpinnings will be uncovered as to the "how" behind center to edge aiming.

Stan Shuffett

 

[JB Cases]

Why would it be subconscious ???
When you go down then look at the two balls along with your tip pointing at the edge of the ob, if the hit calls for less than 1/2 ball , can't you tell then it'll be too fat of a hit ?

I guess you could see that consciously. But we are debating whether the shooter is or is not responsible for making conscious shot line choices.

The whole point to CTE is that the shooter makes deliberate choices based on clear objects that lead him to get down on a shot line that was unknown before starting the process. The shooter accepts that line and shoots without knowing if the line chosen is correct or not.

In this method there is no conscious fidgeting to make the shot thicker or thinner. There is a conscious choice to start the sweep inside or outside to thicken or thin the shot and this is done from the standing position.

So this is a big part of why I don't think that CTE works because of any subconscious adjustment/correction

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[BeiberLvr]

Yes I would say that I agree with nearly all of 'what' he said & there is a reason why I said so with a bit of 'math'.

Oh ok cool. I just wasn't sure if you approved of his post or not. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Oh ok cool. I just wasn't sure if you approved of his post or not. Thanks for clarifying.

While do I feel like I'm being positioned for a knife in the back?

Before you go to too much trouble please note that I said nearly all of what he said & I'm not going to pick it out & invite any arguments with it.

Best Wishes & Have a Good Weekend.

 

[336Robin]

No comprende

CTE is up the creek on an irregular table. Will not, can not work as a viable system.

The manipulation is not a manipulation in the form of any adjustment as let's start here and move over to this line.

The manipulation, if we were to use that term, occurs within one's vision and how 2 sphere can be uniquely viewed using the the objective aspects for the sheres used on 2x1 table. CTE Is a visual system and that is exactly where the underpinnings will be uncovered as to the "how" behind center to edge aiming.

Stan Shuffett

Thank you for your answer although I don't full understand it. I would think I would have to have it drawn out to actually understand how that is possible but I do have my theories as to how CTE could be made to work off of any table.

 

[ENGLISH!]

I guess you could see that consciously. But we are debating whether the shooter is or is not responsible for making conscious shot line choices.

The whole point to CTE is that the shooter makes deliberate choices based on clear objects that lead him to get down on a shot line that was unknown before starting the process. The shooter accepts that line and shoots without knowing if the line chosen is correct or not.

In this method there is no conscious fidgeting to make the shot thicker or thinner. There is a conscious choice to start the sweep inside or outside to thicken or thin the shot and this is done from the standing position.

So this is a big part of why I don't think that CTE works because of any subconscious adjustment/correction

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

John,

Do you think that subjective & subconscious analysis & application ONLY happens once on is down on the shot?

Good Morning, by the way.

 

[JB Cases]

Again, your argument is "well I can make balls with it so it must be mathematically correct." You can make balls with just about any system no matter how wrong it is because your subconscious will adjust. It might take some time (which is why it always takes CTE users a while "playing" with the system before it "works"), but it will. Some people do actually know the math though, and the math doesn't lie, nor is it inconclusive. The math (and common sense) shows that the CTE Pro 1 system and all other CTE based systems absolutely positively do not and cannot find the correct aim/shot line on almost any shot. It generally gets you in the ball park and that is about it.


Yep, all those posts say "well I can make balls with it so it must be finding the correct aim/shot line." That isn't proof, evidence, or even logic. Anybody that believes "I can make balls with it" is proof that it finds the correct shot line is beyond help and simply lacks the capacity for understanding CTE (and lots of other things). No amount of proof or explanation or anything else will ever help that person understand.


That's not exactly what I said. I said that because you fear that it would make you will feel stupid, and you fear that others would see you as stupid and it would be publicly humiliating, it caused a bias and denial that will not allow you to ever truly consider that CTE finds the wrong aim line and you make it work by subconsciously adjusting. Your bias (because of the above fears) simply won't allow you to ever accept that conclusion no matter what proof could be offered, and lots has already been offered but there is literally nothing that would ever make you or John or Stan accept it. You will "deny 'til you die" in the face of any and all possible proof no matter what it is or ever could be. It doesn't matter. That is the power that bias can and does have over you.


How do you know you made a subconscious adjustment if it was subconscious? I'm not sure you have an understanding of what subconscious means and that knowledge would certainly help in understanding the discussions being made and in communicating accurately in them.


Quite wrong, opposite in fact. No CTE user in history, ever once, has ever been able to explain all the system steps in detail. Detail means two things here. First, that it is comprehensive and precise enough that it doesn't allow all that room for your subjective subconscious adjustments by feel like your current instructions do. Second, they would be comprehensive and precise enough that any two people who followed the instructions would have to be doing exactly the same thing. If there were a system that objectively finds the correct shot line, then it could be explained in a way so as to make it impossible for any two people to be able to do anything any differently from each other when following those instructions. Otherwise your steps are just allowing the necessary subjectivity (adjustments by feel) in.


I and many others absolutely know the system well enough and have tested it thoroughly enough to know that it simply does not and cannot objectively find the proper shot line for almost any shot without user adjustments based on experience (feel). This isn't even rocket science though. Among a multitude of other evidence and proof, just count out how many objective angles the CTE system can give you (without your feel adjustments) and draw them out. If it is possible to put a pocket in between any of them at a distance of say eight feet then you know the system can't find the correct shot line.


But some here are mathematicians. Every last one of them says CTE doesn't find the correct shot line. Just because you or someone else doesn't understand the proof doesn't make it any less so.


Half of those steps are "use feel for this", and "use feel for that". Nobody has ever, in history, ever been able to give detailed steps that don't allow for subjective adjustments based on feel, and that don't allow for different people to be doing it differently. If it objectively finds the shot line you could write out steps that didn't allow for feel or for people to do things differently. If you think you are able to go ahead. Nobody else has come remotely close in twenty years of desperately wishing they could.



How do you know what your subconscious is doing if it is subconscious? Again, I don't think you are understanding that concept.


Actually, you are dead opposite from the truth, again. The problems arise when CTE'ers refuse to follow the steps exactly without the adjustments and subjectivity. When they do force themselves to just follow the instructions (like when most first learned it) they shoot most of the balls dead into the rail. It is only after you your subconscious learns to creep in and correct for the incorrect shot lines that you can then make anything with it. But if you make the instructions more detailed, as they should be, then it takes away the ability to be able to do things slightly differently (at least intentionally) and to make adjustments by feel.

I have given the steps in detail. Stan gives them in detail on his DVDs and on his youtube videos. Others have provided the steps in detail.

If you can subconsciously aim right with any system why then are there 50 ghost ball aim trainers out there?

I mean if your premise was correct then this discussion would not exist. No one would have ever thought up all these various aiming methods if the subconscious was so great at directing the body to the correct shot line.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[stan shuffett]

Thank you for your answer although I don't full understand it. I would think I would have to have it drawn out to actually understand how that is possible but I do have my theories as to how CTE could be made to work off of any table.

Drawing CTE out is fruitless. I will gladly show it to you at a table in a way that you can experience it in a very short time.

CTE is about learning 4 perceptions that can not be penciled out on paper. CTE is visual.
CTE is a vision thing and the body follows in the form of an ever so slightly angled cue. The value of angling one's cue compared to the visual value of CTE is practically nothing.

Stan Shuffett

 

[cookie man]

I have no investment in if it does or it doenst but I don't see how this is possible.

You have A B and C and how many manipulations off of those? If there is a finite amount you might have a angle that works for the fact that a pocket is 4.5 inches wide and several angles would in fact work but that is about all I can readily see from the information that I know.

Doesn't Stan even say that CTE wont work on table with pockets that aren't at right angles or if the table isn't 2 to 1?

Manipulations is a bad word, i don't like it.
Not sure he says it wont work but that doesn't matter.
He does say it works on a 2 to 1 table and that is the important part.
If that's all you see than yes you need more information.


PS I stand corrected, Stan has said it doesn't work on an irregular table.
PSS Above all else Stan is the expert on CTE. We all have opinions but Stan has devoted the most time and knows the most about it.

 

[cookie man]

Ya ok




1

Got a problem with that?

 

[336Robin]

A rose is a rose

Manipulations is a bad word, i don't like it.
Not sure he says it wont work but that doesn't matter.
He does say it works on a 2 to 1 table and that is the important part.
If that's all you see than yes you need more information.

I meant no harm. Manipulation isn't a bad word really as it denotes changes. What word would you have preferred?

 

[BeiberLvr]

While do I feel like I'm being positioned for a knife in the back?

Before you go to too much trouble please note that I said nearly all of what he said & I'm not going to pick it out & invite any arguments with it.

Best Wishes & Have a Good Weekend.

No need to defend yourself. You have made it clear that you agreed with his post. I'm okay with that.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Drawing CTE out is fruitless. I will gladly show it to you at a table in a way that you can experience it in a very short time.

CTE is about learning 4 perceptions that can not be penciled out on paper. CTE is visual.
CTE is a vision thing and the body follows in the form of an ever so slightly angled cue. The value of angling one's cue compared to the visual value of CTE is practically nothing.

Stan Shuffett

Can we shake hands before we go to our corners?

At what angle, & relative to what, is the cue angled & is it a necessity of the 'system'?

I would say Thanks in Advance but that might just be a waste of time. (Jab :wink

 

[lfigueroa]

Lou. Did you ever feel like laughing at John's flaps during that match? I'm not sure i could have held it together.

I thought they were pretty nuts but tried to stay focused on the table and not his gyrations.

Lou Figueroa

 

[stan shuffett]

I meant no harm. Manipulation isn't a bad word really as it denotes changes. What word would you have preferred?

It is no easy task to assign correct language for what occurs in CTE.

It is an even harder task to assign math for what is occurring in CTE. I am unsure if any absolute math will ever emerge. That does not matter!

What really matters at this point is that, FORTUNATELY, language can covey all that one needs to know in order to experience and use CTE at a table.

Stan Shuffett

 

[stan shuffett]

Can we shake hands before we go to our corner?

At what angle, & relative to what, is the cue angled & is it a necessity of the 'system'?

I would say Thanks in Advance but that might just be a waste of time. (Jab :wink

I am speaking of what happens at the pro level and you can refer to my presentations of BASIC CTE for the answers you seek. Or I can show you at a table in a matter of minutes.

What you are going to do is pass through this life and wake up one day and kick yourself in your hindend for missing out on CTE.

Stan Shuffett

 

[(((Satori)))]

Can we shake hands before we go to our corners?

At what angle, & relative to what, is the cue angled & is it a necessity of the 'system'?

I would say Thanks in Advance but that might just be a waste of time. (Jab :wink

I am speaking of what happens at the pro level and you can refer to my presentations of BASIC CTE for the answers you seek. Or I can show you at a table in a matter of minutes.

What you are going to do is pass through this life and wake up one day and kick yourself in your hindend for missing out on CTE.

Stan Shuffett

And Stan slips the jab with a nice evasive maneuver. Then counters E with a shot he never saw coming. I can picture E thinking to himself WTF did he just hit me with.

It does appear as if the shot did no damage to E though.

 

[Colin Colenso]

I am speaking of what happens at the pro level and you can refer to my presentations of BASIC CTE for the answers you seek. Or I can show you at a table in a matter of minutes.

What you are going to do is pass through this life and wake up one day and kick yourself in your hindend for missing out on CTE.

Stan Shuffett

That's a premonition!

Colin <~ Joining Dots

 

[ENGLISH!]

I am speaking of what happens at the pro level and you can refer to my presentations of BASIC CTE for the answers you seek. Or I can show you at a table in a matter of minutes.

What you are going to do is pass through this life and wake up one day and kick yourself in your hindend for missing out on CTE.

Stan Shuffett

That's sort of what I thought & expected. Nothing of any substance relating to any 'system'.

Why come on a discussion forum, if you do not wish to honestly discuss what you are putting out?

Ulterior motives?

Best Wishes.

PS Anyone wishing to buy & try CTE should certainly do so but should just know that the question of it's nature, objective vs subjective has not been proven.