John Schmidt says CTE works after all.
- Thread starter Sloppy Pockets
- Start date
My, my, how some like to mislead by stating untruths & things of which they know not...
just because of their personal ulterior motives.
I've had my own table since I was 13 years old. That is nearly 50 years.
There was a time when I was playing pool 4 or 5 nights a week every week outside of my own house even for about 5 years after I was married.
I won't go into all of the details of all that but instead will get right to the 5 shots.
I was intrigued, interested & a bit excited by the description of 'an objective aiming system' & was waiting for the then up coming new Pro 1 DVD because Stan told me that it would be all that I would need & that I would not need the first DVD.
My intrigue & enthusiasm for the 'system' then waned significantly based on my experimentation with it, but I was still waiting for the new DVD.
THEN... I saw Stan's 5 shots perception video. I knew then that there would be nothing forth coming that would show it to be an objective aiming system as it was described & asserted to be...
& THAT was for what I was intrigued & interested in & NOT just another method that would still require one's, my, subjective interpretations & input.
BUT, I still went to the table to take a good look at what Stan was talking about.
I DID shoot the shots & actually shooting them confirmed my previous conclusions based on Stan's video regarding them.
I won't go into a long repetitive explanation other than to say that the ETA line & the CTE line are the same relative to the balls & where the shooter can see them both simultaneously & that does NOT change just because the balls, the shots, are moved laterally across the table.
Hence all 5 shots are NOT being pocketed by an objective means as asserted. Just because there is an objective visual does not mean that the same one fits all 5 shots & every shot in between & hence the shots are not being pocketed by an objective means. For all 5 shots to be pocketed by an objective means AND with the SAME pivot there would scientifically NEED to be 5 different objective visuals.
Hence, that word..."perception". Perception by definition is subjective.
I was not looking for another method that would still require subjective perception & that was NOT how the 'system' was being described.
When I & others like 8Pack Anthony & Satori & others have shot the 5 shots, we got the same outcome angle for all 5 because we shot them...
OBJECTIVELY & 4 of the 5 went no where near the pocket.
When I shot # 5 my way with my subjectivity in play, but hitting it hard I rattled it in the rather tight pocket.
When I shot it using TOI, I pocketed it dead center with a loud pop of the pocket.
My post count just increased due to basically another inaccurate assertion by another individual.
just because of their personal ulterior motives.
I've had my own table since I was 13 years old. That is nearly 50 years.
There was a time when I was playing pool 4 or 5 nights a week every week outside of my own house even for about 5 years after I was married.
I won't go into all of the details of all that but instead will get right to the 5 shots.
I was intrigued, interested & a bit excited by the description of 'an objective aiming system' & was waiting for the then up coming new Pro 1 DVD because Stan told me that it would be all that I would need & that I would not need the first DVD.
My intrigue & enthusiasm for the 'system' then waned significantly based on my experimentation with it, but I was still waiting for the new DVD.
THEN... I saw Stan's 5 shots perception video. I knew then that there would be nothing forth coming that would show it to be an objective aiming system as it was described & asserted to be...
& THAT was for what I was intrigued & interested in & NOT just another method that would still require one's, my, subjective interpretations & input.
BUT, I still went to the table to take a good look at what Stan was talking about.
I DID shoot the shots & actually shooting them confirmed my previous conclusions based on Stan's video regarding them.
I won't go into a long repetitive explanation other than to say that the ETA line & the CTE line are the same relative to the balls & where the shooter can see them both simultaneously & that does NOT change just because the balls, the shots, are moved laterally across the table.
Hence all 5 shots are NOT being pocketed by an objective means as asserted. Just because there is an objective visual does not mean that the same one fits all 5 shots & every shot in between & hence the shots are not being pocketed by an objective means. For all 5 shots to be pocketed by an objective means AND with the SAME pivot there would scientifically NEED to be 5 different objective visuals.
Hence, that word..."perception". Perception by definition is subjective.
I was not looking for another method that would still require subjective perception & that was NOT how the 'system' was being described.
When I & others like 8Pack Anthony & Satori & others have shot the 5 shots, we got the same outcome angle for all 5 because we shot them...
OBJECTIVELY & 4 of the 5 went no where near the pocket.
When I shot # 5 my way with my subjectivity in play, but hitting it hard I rattled it in the rather tight pocket.
When I shot it using TOI, I pocketed it dead center with a loud pop of the pocket.
My post count just increased due to basically another inaccurate assertion by another individual.
Last edited:
I cant do the last one with CTE because i dont have the visuals very well yet for only a one line reference. i still use the SEE system until i get to the proper instruction. I had a lesson with Lee Brett who uses an outside edge aiming system that i had been using so I assume CTE was easier for me to pick up. All i know is that it works and don't care why.
I hear you...
but understand that the last one, shot number 5, is supposed to be shot with the SAME ETA/CTE visual & the SAME exact thinning pivot as are the other 4 shots & by extrapolation EVERY one in between.
When you say outside edge for the Lee Brett method, do you mean different parts of the cue ball aligned to the outside edge of the object ball.
If so, that is part of a method that CJ Wiley relayed in one of his earlier instructional videos.
Again, Congratulations on the Increased Success.
I Sincerely Hope that You Keep Well & Keep Playing Well.
Rick
Last edited:
Longer than you have been living & I've posted many times since when & for how long & did so again in my second to last post.
Why would you ask others rather than ask me?
Do you seriously think that others would know how long I have been playing more accurately than I know?
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure that everyone knows how long you've been playing.
Got it.
My immature sarcasm detection antenna must have been disconnected & you did not use green ink.
Or... I'm just still not yet use to insincerity of communication in what is similar to a 'written' format.
But then again, you're no Henny Youngman.
Do a Google Search if you do not know who he was.
Last edited:
Green ink, on a message board?
Do you use white-out on your screen to edit also?
Rick, you could not detect sarcasm, even if you fell out of the sarcasm tree and hit every branch on the way down.
No green 'ink' neccessary.
Do you use white-out on your screen to edit also?
Rick, you could not detect sarcasm, even if you fell out of the sarcasm tree and hit every branch on the way down.
No green 'ink' neccessary.
I first learned about green ink right here on AZB.
I often use sarcasm in a more kind manor than some do here on AZB.
It takes shear genius for some of the guys here to make all of the personally insulting posts that they make & for them to contribute so much with all of their substantive posts based on all of their non cookie cutter substance.
I often use sarcasm in a more kind manor than some do here on AZB.
It takes shear genius for some of the guys here to make all of the personally insulting posts that they make & for them to contribute so much with all of their substantive posts based on all of their non cookie cutter substance.
Last edited:
Yes... you did it much like that small group of whom I was speaking but they don't use green ink.
Now let's see for how long we can all continue this mature intelligent behavior & see how many we can get in to show everyone else just how mature & intelligent we can be before someone slips up.
Now is it your turn or Tony's turn?
Now let's see for how long we can all continue this mature intelligent behavior & see how many we can get in to show everyone else just how mature & intelligent we can be before someone slips up.
Now is it your turn or Tony's turn?
Last edited:
I'm sorry, but I don't quite see how that can be an aiming method as I'm reading what you have here.
To me, it sounds more like a squirt compensation method in the opposite direction of touch of inside.
Don't worry about it, it's not important...
but thanks for the try.
Best,
Rick
Banks
Banned
Started 46 years ago. I think he's up to an hour now.
I used the inside (TOI) system before C. J. ever made his DVD and I'll take C. J.as a Scotch doubles partner playing any of two of our most prolific posting scientists on here.
Last edited:
I have better things to do, like play pool.
Posting here is not my life, as it is for you.
No sarcasm intended.
Posting here is not my life, as it is for you.
No sarcasm intended.
Well, that's twice as long as you have.....
I get the feeling most the posters giving English shit about his playing ability, which are assumptions made in order to disprove his stance on certain matters, are like those I see a lot at pool rooms.
They love to talk a good game of play, but shoot like shit. Come up against o a better play, they want a spot , they need to be given games in order to win.
Or they think 1 pocket or 9/10ball are the test for ons playing ability.
They seldom put in the table time when at the room, even when at the table.
Seldom do they have any structure to their practice but man they love to talk about how hard they practice.
BTW.........I clock just over 500 hours a year now do to I work part time now, but before, there was three years in a row I did over 2000 hours each year.
Match my table time boys.......
They love to talk a good game of play, but shoot like shit. Come up against o a better play, they want a spot , they need to be given games in order to win.
Or they think 1 pocket or 9/10ball are the test for ons playing ability.
They seldom put in the table time when at the room, even when at the table.
Seldom do they have any structure to their practice but man they love to talk about how hard they practice.
BTW.........I clock just over 500 hours a year now do to I work part time now, but before, there was three years in a row I did over 2000 hours each year.
Match my table time boys.......