I'm really curious about this. Here's an 8 ball shot on a regular 2:1 table:
and here's the "same" shot on a 5:2 table:
CTE would work fine on that shot, right?
How beneficial is an aiming system?
- Thread starter nahog99
- Start date
I'm really curious about this. Here's an 8 ball shot on a regular 2:1 table:
and here's the "same" shot on a 5:2 table:
CTE would work fine on that shot, right?
TheThaiger
Banned
And maybe you should look up the word "desperate".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_R4yF_Wnzk
He says he finds the line. He steps in and plants the foot on the line he thinks is right and sweeps down from the side to plant his bridge hand.
He calls it a system - which may have simply been him repeating the anchor phrase from the question asking him what aiming system he uses.
Thanks for being a voice of reason Roger. I think all that use CTE would love all this to stop. The problem is that every time a thread like this comes up the CTE opponents forever claim they want "proof", or it's referred to as a religion or cult. Most of the time these claims are made without any effort to even try using CTE to aim. Ends up being frustrating and somewhat personal.
I for one hate this kind of stuff and I don't even know why I have chosen to get involved. Probably because I have personally experienced success with CTE.
Anyways, thanks again for the voice of reason... Brian
I'm really curious about this. Here's an 8 ball shot on a regular 2:1 table:
and here's the "same" shot on a 5:2 table:
CTE would work fine on that shot, right?
The system can work on some pockets but the table geometry is disturbed enough to make the system inconsistent for the pockets as group.
The 3 in the side bank for the gaffed table is out with REAL CTE.
Thank you for the diagrams!
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
CTE makes you more consistent.
DR. Dave always listened way too much to PJ'S opinion. I don't believe he ever gave it a fair shot.
This is my understanding as well. Any time CTE is used to shoot to a 90 degree corner from within any single square or from within a 2:1 rectangle then it works for me exactly as prescribed.
Mr. Banks
Maybe you missed my post earlier where I clearly said there is no math that proves whether or not CTE works. In fact, there may never be since the system is all visual. So while, the idea of the balls being made more frequently by users may not be proof enough for you, it's all we [users of Pro One] have at this moment, and I'd say it's good enough.
Now if that's not good enough for you, too bad. You can just drop it now instead of going around in circles, and constantly asking for something that doesn't exist. Go back to playing league and drinking beer, and enjoying this game in the way that makes you happy.
Maybe you missed my post earlier where I clearly said there is no math that proves whether or not CTE works. In fact, there may never be since the system is all visual. So while, the idea of the balls being made more frequently by users may not be proof enough for you, it's all we [users of Pro One] have at this moment, and I'd say it's good enough.
Now if that's not good enough for you, too bad. You can just drop it now instead of going around in circles, and constantly asking for something that doesn't exist. Go back to playing league and drinking beer, and enjoying this game in the way that makes you happy.
I think it's cool that people like Banks are around. They serve a very important purpose, to act as shills for those who would like the conversation to continue.
By posting a continuous string of comments that are all pretty much "does not" they allow those of us who have worked with the methods to post our experiences over and over. I feel that continuous positive reinforcement sparks those readers who are unsure . At some point they think well if those guys are so fired up that it's working for them then maybe I should give it a try and the end result is more people who know that these methods work.
I never worry anymore about converting guys like Banks or Duckie or Lou or any one of about 6 or so naysayers. Those guys already wouldn't accept it even if Efren were teaching it. What they are great for is keeping the conversation going. Every "does not" post is an opportunity to tell a positive story, to post a video, to go deeper into the why and how.
We already won the debate, it's not even a debate any more. We just humor these guys by answering their comments for our own amusement and the benefit of the readers. I for one, would like to thank them, they took their best shots and were defeated. They continue to bravely try and discredit something that works and are shot down each time. What I want to thank them for is that they did make us think about what we are saying, they made us go to the table and prove it to ourselves and to others. They made us learn to teach it better.
Thus in person and on video, we can and do prove it. I am constantly asked about CTE/ProOne during my travels and I can and do adequately prove it on the pool table in person each time. I am entirely positive that others are able to do the same to an even better level than I can.
That's what really matters.
Understood, though to me there are two aspects of CTE...
1) Does it work for me? Yes or no. No emotional response needed here.
2) Is it working because it is following a repeatable scientific or geometrical system? Or is it a baseline that I am following combined with some subconscious, or feel adjustments? This could be discussed and debated without emotion too (and ultimately, if I have success with the system, do I care so strongly? Probably not as much as what I see on AZBilliards...)
When it comes to pure testimonials, they have some use good or bad. Obviously players like Stevie Moore or the Shuffetts add credibility with their testimonial due to success on the table. On the other hand, old forum favorites like "Champ" or "John Barton" endorsing the system, perhaps without knowing they are a "negative testimonial" (ie: if someone is vocal a system is great but can't demonstrate it, it may not be a helpful testimonial for the system)
It would also be a powerful testimonial if some snooker pros used CTE but to my knowledge, none are using it.
Anyway, I appreciate seeing the links on Dr. Dave's website because that covers a variety of topics and questions that can come up about CTE.
I will give it another shot thanks to some of the explanations I read in this thread.
Last edited:
1) That will be up to you. It works for some and some can't seem to get it. An honest effort is all you can give it.
2) Probably all of the above mentioned. There probably is geometric relationship that is yet to be put on paper and yes there is some sort of feel and knowledge associated as well that can only be learned with table time.
Not sure if Snooker Pro's and their instructors are even aware of Stan's system. I would guess that group would be a hard one to show CTE. I am not from there, however I did cut my teeth playing snooker. Was a decent player (High run of 75) but not great.
Good luck with giving CTE a shot. There are many here who can help.
Brian
Why? So I can understand why you are making the posts you are?
Well, then you may as well look up Troll and Insane while you're at it!!!
Wouldn't focused, concentrated practice do just the same??
I don't even know if CTE/Pro One is applicable to snooker due to the smaller ball size. Will ask Stan.
Whether you adopt CTE/Pro One or not as your system, becoming knowledgeable about the system can only help your game. I own the SEE DVD's and Ron Vitello's latest DVD. All these systems have something to offer. At the end of the day, all I care about is utilizing the best and most efficient method for pocketing balls and getting the CB precisely where I need it to be. Anything that helps me with that is good.
Any good practice should improve consistency. If I gave you ten reference shots and said practice these until you can make them all 90% of the time I think you would be happy if I gave you A method to use in your practice that made the task easier.
Or perhaps not. I feel like if I can save time in one area I can spend more on another area.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
I can demonstrate it and have done so dozens of times.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
CTE & 90/90 work very well with snooker size balls.
I play a lot of "golf" and use both all the time.
randyg