Name one here. And please show where you asked it in the past.
Last edited:
Please vote me on or off the island! No mercy!
- Thread starter stan shuffett
- Start date
Name one here. And please show where you asked it in the past.
I really don't think there are CTE "haters". That's a label assigned to people that ask challenging questions or point out obvious stumbling blocks. I have people email me on occasion that don't understand something in my book, or they challenge certain aspects of the system regarding the numbers. I don't believe they are out to ruin me or my work. Dr Dave politely let me know that he felt Poolology was a little too difficult for a beginner to start out on. AtLarge did a brief review and we exchanged a few civil posts. I didn't call these guys "haters", and I didn't attack them for their comments or questions, regardless of whether I agreed or didn't agree with them.
Neil, I once asked Stan a very honest question, and I'd like to know how you would answer it. We were discussing the objective perceptions of CTE, and Stan was adamant that fractional aiming was not objective, that only CTE was. So I asked this: What's the difference between visualizing an ETA line and visualizing a 3/4 ball aim line? Both are defined by the exact same OB focal point. Why is it only considered objective when CTE is being used? Stan was matter-of-fact about it, refusing to accept the obvious truth of what I was saying, and even went so far as saying I was a fool for thinking fractional aiming could be objective. What do you think? What's the difference between an ETA line and a 3/4 aim line?
A fractional aim line has no set point of reference t determine what fraction to use. Is it 3/4, or is it 7/16th's? You are starting out with something subjective. CTE starts out with known set points.
That's not an answer to my question. There is a known aim line from CCB to the 3/4 aim point on the OB. There is a known CTE line from the Edge of CB to A on OB (ETA). Each of these lines is a known repeatable visual. The only difference is that one is the exact aim solution as seen directly from behind the CB, and the other is an offset line (not directly viewed from CCB) that, when combined with another offset visual line, then a pivot or sweep, will yield an aim solution. My question is: If the ETA line is objective then why isn't the simple CCB to 3/4 aim point line considered objective?
And for the record, Poolology gives you a known fractional aim point. It's not like the traditional quarters system where players need experience or have to resort to guessing.
Last edited:
First off, what Stan said was not wrong. Traditional fractional aiming is not objective. (which is what I was responding to) And, it seems to me, that is what Stan was replying to.
Now, as to just the 3/4 line in both, both are objective. (although some will argue that they aren't)
I am not familiar with your system, which is why I have said nothing about it, so I will take your word for it that there is a known fractional aim point. If that be the case, and if finding that known point isn't subjective, then I would say without further knowledge of it, that it would be objective.
I'd like to see Stan stay! What i dont understand is why the moderators let these threads get out of hand. Must be buddies or something. Well it's wrong! Damn near every thread in here gets trashed! Backhanded comments the baiting. I dont blame him at all for getting pissed! I'd get pissed off too! This AIMING SECTION HAS CANCER IN IT AND IT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED.
That was my whole point with Stan. And, in his defense, he didn't know anything about my system either. So we were two guys debating the objectivity of each other's work with very little knowledge of each other's work. I was just saying that having a known aim point, one aim line that is repeatable, without the need for acquiring any experienced-based skill or developed knowledge, could be considered objective. But he was stuck on a one-track traditional fractional aiming mentality, so we had a little back forth over it where he stuck to his guns, saying that I was flat wrong and just didn't know any better. And then I suggested that traditional fractional aiming (where a player must know from experience (rote) which fraction to use) could also be considered objective if a similar process of experience is considered objective when CTE users determine which perception to use. They are either both objective, or both subjective, or possibly a little of each.
Mike, you often refer to us as you "children". And, in a way, we are. This is your forum, and you have the right to run it anyway you want to.
But, when you have a "child" that repeatedly tells you, the "parent", that they are being bullied by another of your "kids", and your response to them is "if you don't like it, just leave". While saying nothing to the one doing the bullying, well, that is just messed up.
Stan, I personally think it would be better for you to leave, at least until youtube videos and book is out.
These ppl that question you and CTE PRO 1 won't stop until you start answering some of their questions, and you can't and won't do that until videos and book is out, so what is the point? Just for them to get on your nerves, day in day out? Why would you do that to yourself?
Come back when videos and book is out so we can all talk about it and share the info.
Until then I would suggest you get working on those videos and finishing the book instead wasting your time here, because it is a waste currently.
I also once suggested you create a facebook closed group for CTE Pro1 users where you would be the moderator and just let in the ppl for whom you know are CTE users, so we can share the info freely amongst ourselves and help each other, without interference.
These ppl that question you and CTE PRO 1 won't stop until you start answering some of their questions, and you can't and won't do that until videos and book is out, so what is the point? Just for them to get on your nerves, day in day out? Why would you do that to yourself?
Come back when videos and book is out so we can all talk about it and share the info.
Until then I would suggest you get working on those videos and finishing the book instead wasting your time here, because it is a waste currently.
I also once suggested you create a facebook closed group for CTE Pro1 users where you would be the moderator and just let in the ppl for whom you know are CTE users, so we can share the info freely amongst ourselves and help each other, without interference.
Yes he did and bbb is a good, wise man! Thought you had another loser for the "HATERS"? But you misjudged and failed.
I'll take it. How much?
The post above is a great idea, go forth and build a Brave New World. I believe this forum would actually become what I thought it was when I joined back in February - an open forum for discussing and learning about aiming methods. Instead I found a snake pit of old hostility and pent up emotions based on 20 years of arguing. Nobody wants that all the time. A good forum needs challenging questions and civil responses. All it takes is a little humility and less ego.
RIIIIGHT! That's all it takes. Maybe thee should be dubbed "POLLYANNA" instead of "BRIANNA".