Some Rational, Reasonable, Truthfully Logical, Cognitive Thought Regarding CTE

Obviously one angle will only go where it goes whether it's center pocket or all rubber. CTE doesn't even double step in an attempt to explain this. They just keep insisting something or another until it's twisted back their way.
 
LAMas said:
View attachment 599247
Click to expand...
This is correct. Because the shot angle is also different for each distance.

This is how I discovered that the distance between the gb shot line and the cte line as they exit the back of the cue ball is less than .5mm and that is only when the cb is close to the object ball. For all other distances those lines are even closer.
 
The_JV said:
I thought the confusion was regarding the cut angle of CTE changing even though the distance between the CB-OB hasn't changed..?
Click to expand...

Yes. But LAMas isn't talking about the CTE system. He is simply referring to a Center To Edge aim, a halfball aim, which has nothing to do with the CTE Pro1 system.
 
JB Cases said:
This is correct. Because the shot angle is also different for each distance.

This is how I discovered that the distance between the gb shot line and the cte line as they exit the back of the cue ball is less than .5mm and that is only when the cb is close to the object ball. For all other distances those lines are even closer.
Click to expand...
You keep talking about this 0.5 mm thing. It is irrelevant, assuming you even calculated it correctly. If I am brave enough to wallow through another one of your threads maybe I will try to decipher what you are saying. It's all a placebo effect anyway, at JV's thoughtful thread showed to be possible when the player doesn't understand the variables involved in their shooting method.
 
BC21 said:
Yes. But LAMas isn't talking about the CTE system. He is simply referring to a Center To Edge aim, a halfball aim, which has nothing to do with the CTE Pro1 system.
Click to expand...
So are you saying that a center to edge line when talking about a "Center to Edge aim" can hit in different spots on the object ball?
 
Dan White said:
You keep talking about this 0.5 mm thing. It is irrelevant, assuming you even calculated it correctly.
Click to expand...
In case it matters, 0.5 mm on the CB's surface is 1 degree of arc, about 1/4" per diamond.

The distance between the far ends of the CTE and ghost ball lines is up to 1 1/8" - 0.5 mm on the CB only covers that range if the OB's at least 4 1/2 diamonds away (1 1/8" divided by 1/4" per diamond).

pj <- still COVID posting
chgo
 
Last edited:
Dan White said:
You keep talking about this 0.5 mm thing. It is irrelevant, assuming you even calculated it correctly. If I am brave enough to wallow through another one of your threads maybe I will try to decipher what you are saying. It's all a placebo effect anyway, at JV's thoughtful thread showed to be possible when the player doesn't understand the variables involved in their shooting method.
Click to expand...
How would you know? Not like you have ever put even a small fraction of real thought into it.

I don't want to talk to you anymore imo you're not sincere.
 
Way back when, I was working really hard trying to talk my way into this gorgeous chick's pants, and this is what she said, "I don't want to talk to you anymore imo you're not sincere." In the interest of historical accuracy, however, she didn't say, "imo."
 
JB Cases said:
How would you know? Not like you have ever put even a small fraction of real thought into it.

I don't want to talk to you anymore imo you're not sincere.
Click to expand...
See, that's your problem. You are in so deep that you cannot conceive of a different explanation from the one you are set on, which is "it just works because that's what I believe." If you had been a bit more circumspect in your reaction to my "placebo chart" you might understand the relevance. Instead you went crying to Mike that someone doesn't believe what you are selling. The bigger picture is that mohrt has been trying to understand more about the workings of CTE, without apparent success to this point, and I have been taking part in that thread as much as limited time allows me. Maybe the answer really is a placebo effect. Have you ever given that serious thought? JC said that one of the reasons he was interested in CTE was that Robin Dryer taught him a way to make shots hitting maximum inside english and aiming at center ball. He saw a similarity there. He did some experimenting and thinking and concluded that he was fudging the shots to make them work and he HAD NO IDEA he was doing it. Not to put words in his mouth, but it seemed like he was convinced that he was not fudging the shots. He felt good about the shots and good about the explanation. Balls went in. Placebo.

Maybe mohrt will find something, maybe he won't. Sure thing is that the answer won't be found by skewering anybody who has a different idea from yours. If you want the debate over CTE to come to a conclusion sometime in this century you might consider holding yourself to a higher standard.
 
Last edited:
Dan White said:
JV said that one of the reasons he was interested in CTE was that Robin Dryer taught him a way to make shots hitting maximum inside english and aiming at center ball. He saw a similarity there. He did some experimenting and thinking and concluded that he was fudging the shots to make them work and he HAD NO IDEA he was doing it. Not to put words in his mouth, but it seemed like he was convinced that he was not fudging the shots. He felt good about the shots and good about the explanation. Balls went in. Placebo.
Click to expand...
If by 'JV' you're referring to me, then sry no that was not the case at all and I don't know who this Robin Dryer person is.
 
Dan White said:
See, that's your problem. You are in so deep that you cannot conceive of a different explanation from the one you are set on, which is "it just works because that's what I believe." If you had been a bit more circumspect in your reaction to my "placebo chart" you might understand the relevance. Instead you went crying to Mike that someone doesn't believe what you are selling. The bigger picture is that mohrt has been trying to understand more about the workings of CTE, without apparent success to this point, and I have been taking part in that thread as much as limited time allows me. Maybe the answer really is a placebo effect. Have you ever given that serious thought? JC said that one of the reasons he was interested in CTE was that Robin Dryer taught him a way to make shots hitting maximum inside english and aiming at center ball. He saw a similarity there. He did some experimenting and thinking and concluded that he was fudging the shots to make them work and he HAD NO IDEA he was doing it. Not to put words in his mouth, but it seemed like he was convinced that he was not fudging the shots. He felt good about the shots and good about the explanation. Balls went in. Placebo.

Maybe mohrt will find something, maybe he won't. Sure thing is that the answer won't be found by skewering anybody who has a different idea from yours. If you want the debate over CTE to come to a conclusion sometime in this century you might consider holding yourself to a higher standard.
Click to expand...
I tried and tried and tried, and I was truly sincere, no, really............but I never did get in her pants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top