Fear of Feel

[SpiderWebComm]

A bet to play Stan or anyone does not approve the effectiveness of any system. Common Sense.

Stan played well before his CTE, therefore, his subconscious has years of experiences on the pool table before it. You do not lose those experiences, and You can not tell which experiences he is pulling from.

All you could say is Stan is a better shot, to deduct anything else from it would be like saying the moon is made of cheese


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds like a man who would rather walk on broken glass himself rather than do a pool video or take a sizable bet with someone better. (of course there are different levels of better, some not being very good at all)

Isn't Stan a professional pool instructor as well as player who is highly recognized around the world and worked with quite a few professional players?? Refresh my memory. Who has Patrick taught?

Stan challenged PJ to a debate at the table for money where CTE can be proven where it counts the most with execution of cues and pool balls. Not wordsmithing on the keyboard.

 

[AtLarge]

... if you aim the CB at the same spot on the OB and get different results, you don't actually know where you're aiming the CB.
...

But with Dave's instructions -- offset the stick 1/2 tip from CB center while aiming at OB center, then pivot to CB center and shoot -- the stick does not end up aimed at the same place on the OB if the CB-OB separation is different for the two shots. Hence, we get different cut angles and the pots are not accounted for simply by pocket slop.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

But with Dave's instructions -- offset the stick 1/2 tip from CB center while aiming at OB center, then pivot to CB center and shoot -- the stick does not end up aimed at the same place on the OB if the CB-OB separation is different for the two shots. Hence, we get different cut angles and the pots are not accounted for simply by pocket slop.

You are in big trouble now. I see a huge cloud of dust formed off the horizon and it's that crazed pack of hyenas who are hungry for their next meal.

 

[ENGLISH!]

But with Dave's instructions -- offset the stick 1/2 tip from CB center while aiming at OB center, then pivot to CB center and shoot -- the stick does not end up aimed at the same place on the OB if the CB-OB separation is different for the two shots. Hence, we get different cut angles and the pots are not accounted for simply by pocket slop.

I'll start by saying that I may be wrong...

but I took the directions to do that same thing from two different CB locations & the question was how does the ball pocket from doing the same thing from 2 differently angled CB locations.

The answer is as Colin has pointed out or/& as PJ states, the margin for 'error' of the pocket width & the OB being only 8" away & straight out.

The 1st. shot could pocket to the right side of the pocket & the 2nd. to the center of the pocket.

The 3rd. with the variable & allowable pivot amount of an allowed greater doubled offset might then pocket the ball to the left side of the pocket.

Am I wrong & did I miss something?

Best 2 You & ALL,
Rick

PS I liked your earlier post.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I'll start by saying that I may be wrong...

but I took the directions to do that same thing from two different CB locations & the question was how does the ball pocket from doing the same thing from 2 differently angled CB locations.

The answer is as Colin has pointed out or/& as PJ states, the margin for 'error' of the pocket width & the OB being only 8" away & straight out.

The 1st. shot could pocket to the right side of the pocket & the 2nd. to the center of the pocket.

The 3rd. with the variable & allowable pivot amount of an allowed greater doubled offset might then pocket the ball to the left side of the pocket.

Am I wrong & did I miss something?

Best 2 You & ALL,
Rick

.

As usual you missed something. You slurped up everything PJ and Colin stated and didn't go on the table yourself to prove it with your own hands and eyes.

You may come back and agree totally with them. I would hope it wasn't because you feel more at home in their camp and would never betray your belonging there.

End of my responding to you until if and ever you put a cue in your hand and hit balls on a table. (and whatever you do, don't pray for me. I'm fine and dandy)

 

[Patrick Johnson]

But with Dave's instructions -- offset the stick 1/2 tip from CB center while aiming at OB center, then pivot to CB center and shoot -- the stick does not end up aimed at the same place on the OB if the CB-OB separation is different for the two shots. Hence, we get different cut angles and the pots are not accounted for simply by pocket slop.

Finally, a comment worth responding to.

Yes, I didn't consider that the pivot takes the CB farther offline as the distance increases - probably about 1/10 to 2/10 of an inch farther offline for these two distances, depending on bridge length.

So the cut angle gets larger for longer shots and smaller for shorter ones. What percentage of actual shots do you think this pivot gimmick actually covers without "adjusting"?

pj
chgo

 

[AtLarge]

... What percentage of actual shots do you think this pivot gimmick actually covers without "adjusting"? ...

I don't know. But I would think that a single offset and a single pre-pivot aim on the OB won't get you too far. Seems like it would be only one cut angle (in each direction) for each CB-OB separation (assuming we're pivoting at the bridge with a fixed bridge length and that our eye position for sighting the aim point is consistent). To make a system or method of this for all shots would probably require multiple offsets and multiple pre-pivot targets on the OB -- all based on CB-OB separation and, possibly, other parameters (like bridge length). And then those reference alignments might need some further "tweaking."

 

[ENGLISH!]

As usual you missed something. You slurped up everything PJ and Colin stated and didn't go on the table yourself to prove it with your own hands and eyes.

You may come back and agree totally with them. I would hope it wasn't because you feel more at home in their camp and would never betray your belonging there.

End of my responding to you until if and ever you put a cue in your hand and hit balls on a table. (and whatever you do, don't pray for me. I'm fine and dandy)

You act like I never play. I've been playing since I was 13, for nearly 48 years now & had my own table all that time until Hurricane Katrina.

You chastised Colin in a similar manner even though he too has hit thousands of such shots.

Until my wife's recent knee replacement I have been at the hall 2 to 3 times a week & some times more.

Like I said before, some do not need hands on at the table in order to understand certain things. Some things yes, being at the table might be better, for others no real need.

My wife had a rough day at rehab yesterday so I probably won't get to a table until tomorrow.

But what's the need. We have Colin's assessment. Are you calling him a liar?

If this method helps some, good & well. Now that I have a better picture of the outside english thing & the alignment, like Colin, I don't think I'll be switching to it.

But....who knows maybe at the table tomorrow something might rear it's head & show me something.

As always, each individual should make their own assessment & determinations.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

PS Nevermind.

 

[ps611846]

Finally, a comment worth responding to.

Yes, I didn't consider that the pivot takes the CB farther offline as the distance increases - probably about 1/10 to 2/10 of an inch farther offline for these two distances, depending on bridge length.

So the cut angle gets larger for longer shots and smaller for shorter ones. What percentage of actual shots do you think this pivot gimmick actually covers without "adjusting"?

pj
chgo

You should ask Francisco Bustamante. I think he "adjusts" very well on every shot.

 

[robsnotes4u]

Of the three sports you mentioned, most basketball coaches have either played professionally or been top college players so they have played at the top levels.

There are some ex PGA tour players who played at the highest level and then moved into teaching but the other instructors have professional accreditation and years of serving an internship under a PGA professional.

I don't know about a swimming coach. I would assume they swam quite fast themselves at one time and were on college teams and then professionally.

What is PJ's professional accreditation, professional play record, pro players taught, and total number of pool players instructed who have gone on to be pro players.

How many paid lessons does he do per year? Does he have his own instructional website or created any books and dvds?

Do you understand the word Best?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ENGLISH!]

I don't know. But I would think that a single offset and a single pre-pivot aim on the OB won't get you too far. Seems like it would be only one cut angle (in each direction) for each CB-OB separation (assuming we're pivoting at the bridge with a fixed bridge length and that our eye position for sighting the aim point is consistent). To make a system or method of this for all shots would probably require multiple offsets and multiple pre-pivot targets on the OB -- all based on CB-OB separation and, possibly, other parameters (like bridge length). And then those reference alignments might need some further "tweaking."

I would tend to agree & don't think I would want any part of such a method.

But if one is using such & is happy with the results, then more power to them & them being happy with it is all that matters to them.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Me:
... What percentage of actual shots do you think this pivot gimmick actually covers without "adjusting"? ...

AtLarge:
I don't know. But I would think that a single offset and a single pre-pivot aim on the OB won't get you too far. Seems like it would be only one cut angle (in each direction) for each CB-OB separation (assuming we're pivoting at the bridge with a fixed bridge length). To make a system or method of this for all shots would probably require multiple offsets and multiple pre-pivot targets on the OB -- all based on CB-OB separation and, possibly, other parameters (like bridge length). And then those reference alignments might need some further "tweaking."

Right.

In other words, this is a "reference" system like the others, with a few "reference" cut angles and the vast majority of actual shots up to the shooter to determine by feel. But as you point out, even the "reference" cut angles change with distance, bridge length, etc.

pj
chgo

 

[stan shuffett]

Right.

In other words, this is a "reference" system like the others, with a few "reference" cut angles and the vast majority of actual shots up to the shooter to determine by feel. But as you point out, even the "reference" cut angles change with distance, bridge length, etc.

pj
chgo

Like the others?

CTE is system that you clearly do not understand....so it's impossible for YOU to speak in a knowledgable manner about it.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Patrick Johnson]

CTE.

Stan Shuffett

Thanks for your input, as always, Stan.

pj
chgo

 

[stan shuffett]

Thanks for your input, as always, Stan.

pj
chgo

The subject is CTE input?

How about we meet: And I stack my CTE input against your CTE input?

Forget 20/1.......you can have 40/1 if you will put up a mere $1000. Just gather your CTE work and let's stack it......

Stan Shuffett

 

[Patrick Johnson]

The subject is CTE input?

How about we meet: And I stack my CTE input against your CTE input?

Forget 20/1.......you can have 40/1 if you will put up a mere $1000. Just gather your CTE work and let's stack it......

Stan Shuffett

How about we just talk about things here like adults, without all the bluster and drama?

pj
chgo

 

[stan shuffett]

How about we just talk about things here like adults, without all the bluster and drama?

pj
chgo

What I suggest is that you stop referencing CTE until you actually know something about it. The adult thing for you to do would be to discontinue speaking about subjects, in particularly CTE, in which you have no real knowledge or experience.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Patrick Johnson]

What I suggest is that you stop referencing CTE until you actually know something about it. The adult thing for you to do would be to discontinue speaking about subjects, in particularly CTE, in which you have no real knowledge or experience.

Stan Shuffett

As we can see above and in your several previous posts, you mention CTE multiple times in every post. I haven't mentioned it at all in any of my recent posts. So if you don't want CTE brought up in these conversations, a good place to start would be to stop bringing it up every chance you get.

pj
chgo

 

[stan shuffett]

As we can see above and in your several previous posts, you mention CTE multiple times in every post. I haven't mentioned it at all in any of my recent posts. So if you don't want CTE brought up in these conversations, a good place to start would be to stop bringing it up every chance you get.

pj
chgo

.I might be wrong on this one but I feel fairly confident you will soon be putting your 2 cents in once again concerning CTE.....a dig is coming because you can not help it.
Let's see how many posts it takes!

Stan Shuffett

 

[robsnotes4u]

What I suggest is that you stop referencing CTE until you actually know something about it. The adult thing for you to do would be to discontinue speaking about subjects, in particularly CTE, in which you have no real knowledge or experience.



Stan Shuffett

Anyone that complains so much has a lack of confidence in the product they provide or how they instruct or else they would let it speak for itself.

Embarrassed for you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk