Why CTE is silly

Status
Not open for further replies.
GetMeThere said:
Available? Links please.
Click to expand...

Try talking to Hal yourself, oh, that's right, that won't make sense because nobody can explain it to you and make any sense. You know more than the people who use it, therefore, it doesn't work. You really have a lousy attitude.
Sorry, I don't always use dictionary definitions to make a point, but other people know exactly what I mean by "an axe to grind", you're doing it.
Welcome to the short list!
 
GetMeThere said:
I've replied to your posts; but you seem unwilling to reply to mine. Why not tell me what "common sense" I lack?

Is it common sense to believe only 3 shots are needed to pocket all balls?
Is it common sense to believe any claim from any person (especially if they have something to sell), who insists their method can't be explained?
Click to expand...

No one who teaches CTE-like methods for a fee has said that they can't explain or describe why it works. They have said that they will not do it online.

There is a difference between can't and won't which is in fact common sense to most folks. That's one example of common sense that you lack.

Common sense tells you that if enough people you trust swear by something then it's probably ok to try it out.

Of course that doesn't mean that the thing people are in favor of really works but it's certainly worth investigation IF it's something that can help you. If you don't need it then just don't fool with it.

As for your comment about there only being three "shots" in pool, actually what Hal said a decade ago was three ANGLES. But no less than Steve Davis, the multiple world Snooker Champion, has said that there are three main angles which cover the majority of shots, 1/4 ball, 1/2 ball and 3/4 ball covers with slight adjustments in between.

I assume you already knew that right? I didn't know it until I started looking deeper into this whole aiming business and came across Steve's instructional series posted on YouTube. Instead of stopping with simply accepting Hal's teaching verbatim I look for corollaries and feel confident that I have found enough out there to convince me that Hal is right in that there are many many alternatives to Ghost Ball aiming.

Funnily enough I have never once seen any American book on pool put forth the idea that one can approach most shots with three "covers", 1/4, 1/2 or 3/4 ball and that will suffice. Turns out, it's true, once you try it on the table. And this from a snooker pro where pocketing (potting as they call it) is much much much harder than in pool.

Funny what one finds with an open mind and a little research.
 
GetMeThere said:
Available? Links please.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I have the information but I don't feel like giving you Hal's number. At this point I think that you would argue and aggravate him. So use your research skills you learned at Berkley to look it up if you really want it.

I am sure that with a little effort on your part you can identify the folks on this board who are proponents of CTE and like systems and who are also skilled players. Cozy up to them under new username with a nicer attitude and perhaps they may lead you in the right direction.
 
Pushout said:
Try talking to Hal yourself...
Click to expand...

I've gotten the impression that he's no longer available to speak with, either because he's not willing to speak, or has passed away.

But, shouldn't you check your outrage a bit? Am I the ONLY ONE who has criticized his ideas? Wasn't he RUN OFF THE INTERNET by the hordes of people who said he was full of bull? One thread says he moved and changed his phone number to escape his detractors. Why single me out as a villian?
 
JB Cases said:
Sorry, I have the information but I don't feel like giving you Hal's number. At this point I think that you would argue and aggravate him. So use your research skills you learned at Berkley to look it up if you really want it.

I am sure that with a little effort on your part you can identify the folks on this board who are proponents of CTE and like systems and who are also skilled players. Cozy up to them under new username with a nicer attitude and perhaps they may lead you in the right direction.
Click to expand...

You've been outed before for just that same BS attitude: "It's secret. You have to be NICE to me if ya wanna hear about it." This is an internet forum, bud--getting on it and claiming secrets is BS. Didn't you just flip into outrage about me claiming I've received negative PMs a few posts back?

I have no right to publish what people have said to me in PMs, but you have EVERY RIGHT to tell people what you know. You choose not to. On an internet forum, that attitude comes off as PURE BS!
 
JB Cases said:
No one who teaches CTE-like methods for a fee has said that they can't explain or describe why it works. They have said that they will not do it online.

There is a difference between can't and won't which is in fact common sense to most folks. That's one example of common sense that you lack.

Common sense tells you that if enough people you trust swear by something then it's probably ok to try it out.

Of course that doesn't mean that the thing people are in favor of really works but it's certainly worth investigation IF it's something that can help you. If you don't need it then just don't fool with it.

As for your comment about there only being three "shots" in pool, actually what Hal said a decade ago was three ANGLES. But no less than Steve Davis, the multiple world Snooker Champion, has said that there are three main angles which cover the majority of shots, 1/4 ball, 1/2 ball and 3/4 ball covers with slight adjustments in between.

I assume you already knew that right? I didn't know it until I started looking deeper into this whole aiming business and came across Steve's instructional series posted on YouTube. Instead of stopping with simply accepting Hal's teaching verbatim I look for corollaries and feel confident that I have found enough out there to convince me that Hal is right in that there are many many alternatives to Ghost Ball aiming.

Funnily enough I have never once seen any American book on pool put forth the idea that one can approach most shots with three "covers", 1/4, 1/2 or 3/4 ball and that will suffice. Turns out, it's true, once you try it on the table. And this from a snooker pro where pocketing (potting as they call it) is much much much harder than in pool.

Funny what one finds with an open mind and a little research.
Click to expand...

Well said, John! Spidey, too, LOL!
 
GetMeThere said:
I must have missed all that friendly "dialogue" going on between the CTE advocates and others before I stepped in with my spreasheets.

When I see BS I point it out. It's true, people find the sound of alarms unpleasant--but those who ignore them might someday get burnt.

It goes like this: I say that all I can find about CTE is that 3 shots are all that are needed to pocket all balls. I mathematically show that's wrong. Why can't we have an advocate simply step up and explain how incorrect I am?

What happens instead are great displays of emotion and screaming insistence that "IT WORKS!" Let's always keep in mind that it's the advocates who bring the emotion into the issue, when all that would be necessary from them is to explain how their method works.

Finally, I would NEVER have brought this subject up if it weren't for the current AZ series of articles by Roger Long. The topic is appropriate for this forum, at this time, because it's being written about under the auspices of the owners of this site.
Click to expand...

When two balls are sitting on the table and the person approaches them with a pocket in the distance it so happens that that one can use the centers and edges of the two balls align oneself to the centerball aiming line that is needed to pocket the ball.

There is only ONE corridor which works to pocket any given shot.

Thus it so happens that Hal Houle has discovered a variety of ways to allow the player to get in line with the proper vector to propel the cueball across that corridor and impact the object ball in just the right spot to propel it along that corridor and into the pocket.

How it works is fairly easy. It just so happens that when people use the edges and centers of the balls in a certain way that those reference points tend to fall pretty much right on the cueball-to-object ball line needed to pocket the shot. Incredibly this phenomena repeats itself in nearly every position on the table. Using these reference points allows me to confidently get down on the shot and focus on my delivery.

Sorry but the math is beyond me, just as it's beyond me to explain the physics and math behind the Ghost Ball method. Perhaps someone with more education will take it upon themselves to figure out the math for those that want to know it.
 
JB Cases said:
As for your comment about there only being three "shots" in pool, actually what Hal said a decade ago was three ANGLES. But no less than Steve Davis, the multiple world Snooker Champion, has said that there are three main angles which cover the majority of shots, 1/4 ball, 1/2 ball and 3/4 ball covers with slight adjustments in between.

I assume you already knew that right? I didn't know it until I started looking deeper into this whole aiming business and came across Steve's instructional series posted on YouTube. Instead of stopping with simply accepting Hal's teaching verbatim I look for corollaries and feel confident that I have found enough out there to convince me that Hal is right in that there are many many alternatives to Ghost Ball aiming.

Funnily enough I have never once seen any American book on pool put forth the idea that one can approach most shots with three "covers", 1/4, 1/2 or 3/4 ball and that will suffice. Turns out, it's true, once you try it on the table. And this from a snooker pro where pocketing (potting as they call it) is much much much harder than in pool.

Funny what one finds with an open mind and a little research.
Click to expand...

OK, good. So now I know you're just crazy and I don't really have to bother responding to you anymore. Thanks for making everything so easy.

btw, did you know that the only difference between a "hundred-dollar-aire" and a billionaire is the small adjustment region in between the two figures?

See, I can tell you the REAL truth if you're interested (but I know you aren't, because you're so close minded :) Here it is, anyhow, and I'm GLAD you'll probably ignore it:

You can make ALL pool shots just by knowing the 1/8th, 3/8ths, 5/8ths, and 7/8ths shots--and making minor adjustments in between! And IT WORKS!

[Added, extra special, secret note: There's also the Russian system, of knowing the 1/3 and 2/3 shots, and making adjustments in between. First, I don't BELIEVE that one, and if it IS true, it's still COMMUNIST!]
 
GetMeThere said:
You've been outed before for just that same BS attitude: "It's secret. You have to be NICE to me if ya wanna hear about it." This is an internet forum, bud--getting on it and claiming secrets is BS. Didn't you just flip into outrage about me claiming I've received negative PMs a few posts back?

I have no right to publish what people have said to me in PMs, but you have EVERY RIGHT to tell people what you know. You choose not to. On an internet forum, that attitude comes off as PURE BS!
Click to expand...

Been outed? Like a person is "outed" for being gay? Is outed even a proper word for a molecular biology student to be using.

Believe me you haven't even seen a glimmer of outrage from me.

But common sense says that you catch more flies with honey and all that.

So if you want to to know something that isn't freely available then either pay for it or be nice to someone who has it, or steal it. That's the way the world works, sorry to break it to you.

I didn't say that you have to publish the contents of the PMs. However you stating that you have them without offering the "proof" is not at all unlike what you accuse others of. We say that we know how CTE works but are not allowed to publish details and that's not satisfactory for you yet you seem to think that we should then turn around and accept your "inside information" just because you say you have it.

You can't have it both ways. You can't slam us for using a secret sauce and not revealing it if you want to do the same thing to prop up your side.

You have the wrong idea about internet forums I think. Let's recap, you think internet forums are for the unlimited free sharing of information and ideas yet you come on with a post that calls a method that people have found effective bullshit and a sham and the people who teach it charlatans and lunatics and you expect them to respond with a detailed playbook for you?

How about this, just a suggestion, 'I can't figure out how CTE is supposed to work? I did a chart which outlines the angles needed to make all shots and I can't see how the seemingly simplistic definitions of CTE along with the sparse instruction found online can account for all these angles. Can anyone provide a little more clarity on this?'

Perhaps an approach like that might have been better.
 
JB Cases said:
When two balls are sitting on the table and the person approaches them with a pocket in the distance it so happens that that one can use the centers and edges of the two balls align oneself to the centerball aiming line that is needed to pocket the ball.

There is only ONE corridor which works to pocket any given shot.

Thus it so happens that Hal Houle has discovered a variety of ways to allow the player to get in line with the proper vector to propel the cueball across that corridor and impact the object ball in just the right spot to propel it along that corridor and into the pocket.

How it works is fairly easy. It just so happens that when people use the edges and centers of the balls in a certain way that those reference points tend to fall pretty much right on the cueball-to-object ball line needed to pocket the shot. Incredibly this phenomena repeats itself in nearly every position on the table. Using these reference points allows me to confidently get down on the shot and focus on my delivery.

Sorry but the math is beyond me, just as it's beyond me to explain the physics and math behind the Ghost Ball method. Perhaps someone with more education will take it upon themselves to figure out the math for those that want to know it.
Click to expand...

OK. If that's your honest and straight description (and it matches what's been said in some recent forum posts in the last few months) then, thanks (sincerely)....but....it sounds like something somebody would say after having been abducted by aliens.

If all those lines and edges and centers and corridors don't include at least one line from the pocket--it ain't gonna work (or, stretching my imagination, some lines from table dots). And in any case all those "corridors" will involve some internal visualization from the player (unless the shot is straight-in).

There are no lines and points that can be drawn between OB and CB that will show how to pocket a ball at some undefined location. Including lines from an off-axis (i.e., not straight in) pocket will require visualization that turns into SOME variation of something like a ghost ball.
 
John, time to quit replying to him. He has shown that he has absolutely no desire to know about the system. His only desire it to detract from it because he can't figure it out. (and this from a scientist??) He doesn't want to know it, and doesn't even want to admit that it helps people. Why waste any more time arguing with him?? It's like talking to a wall.

For all his education, he isn't even smart enough to know that his chart means next to nothing when it comes to pool. He is still hung up on the fact that you have to know 64 different shots to make a ball. He doesn't even realize that a human can't even discern 64 equally spaced spots in their proper location on a sphere, let alone do it in a few seconds. Or, that you can change which spot to hit very easily with english, making his chart worthless. Some people just can't see the trees for the forest, he's one of them.
 
GetMeThere said:
OK, good. So now I know you're just crazy and I don't really have to bother responding to you anymore. Thanks for making everything so easy.

btw, did you know that the only difference between a "hundred-dollar-aire" and a billionaire is the small adjustment region in between the two figures?

See, I can tell you the REAL truth if you're interested (but I know you aren't, because you're so close minded :) Here it is, anyhow, and I'm GLAD you'll probably ignore it:

You can make ALL pool shots just by knowing the 1/8th, 3/8ths, 5/8ths, and 7/8ths shots--and making minor adjustments in between! And IT WORKS!

[Added, extra special, secret note: There's also the Russian system, of knowing the 1/3 and 2/3 shots, and making adjustments in between. First, I don't BELIEVE that one, and if it IS true, it's still COMMUNIST!]
Click to expand...

My pleasure. My wallet is open for you to take as much out it as you can on the pool table. The results will determine which us has mastered the game we both claim to love at the higher level.

You can PM me your real name and location and I will be glad to find you if the opportunity presents itself and donate some money to your ongoing education.
 
cleary said:
This is a silly. If you think CTE doesn't work, you learned it wrong. Its really that simple. Talk with an instructor that teaches it, you will quickly change your mind.
Click to expand...


Hal called me up (no, really) and we discussed CTE a long time ago.

Didn't change my mind, quickly or slowly :-)

Lou Figueroa
 
JB Cases said:
...So if you want to to know something that isn't freely available then either pay for it or be nice to someone who has it, or steal it. That's the way the world works, sorry to break it to you.

I didn't say that you have to publish the contents of the PMs. However you stating that you have them without offering the "proof" is not at all unlike what you accuse others of. We say that we know how CTE works but are not allowed to publish details and that's not satisfactory for you yet you seem to think that we should then turn around and accept your "inside information" just because you say you have it....
Click to expand...

Wow, you must have really CONFUSED those sixth graders on the playground with that one!

Either you have something to say, or you don't. If the total of what you have to say is "Some guy has a secret system that's GREAT!" Then thanks. Why have you bothered with so many posts then?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top