Good post. I agree!
Why CTE is silly
- Thread starter GetMeThere
- Start date
- Status
Good post. I agree!
You generally make good posts, but I think Stan is improperly cast in a bad light here. I would suggest that much of the reason the Pro-1 DVD is coming out is because of the huge outcry on here for just that type of thing to be produced. When he initially presented the idea, the thread was bombarded with favorable posts and people saying they would pay whatever was necessary to get the info. None the less, I think $45 shipped is a very reasonable price for a well produced DVD.
I think Stan would also first emphasize a good fundamental stroke first. You make this sound like he says that CTE will solve all problems. While good fundamentals are essential, aiming is also very important just as speed control is. I have learned speed control drills that greatly improved my speed control instead of just going by feel. Aiming systems look to do the same.
He may have been better off just staying out of this thread, but I doubt his reasons for posting in a thread regarding a topic that he is an expert in fall entirely to selling his DVD.
LOL. A little breathless, aren't we?
It's the most talked about system on AzB these days, but that just means it's talked about by twenty people or so - among the millions that play pool. And it's only talked about so much on here because it's so overhyped by the ten or so people here who use it that another ten people feel compelled to challenge their hyperbole, causing arguments and extended threads about it.
One thing I will say about CTE: it's the most overblown aiming system (at least since Hal Houle's last one). Your comment is the latest example.
pj
chgo
That would be nice but it is apparent that some people already know all there is to know about CTE and have made up their minds.
Stan's video will most likely make a lot of proponents of CTE very happy and it is also most likely to infuriate those who think it has little value.
Personally, I like to see a person profit from their work. Some people apparently think differently.
Stan has worked long and hard on CTE and Pro One and I am hoping that he sells lots of videos and makes lots of money.
I agree that selling something (and I'm sure he makes far more off lessons than he will the DVD) is cause for skepticism about the seller's claims regarding his wares. But being a businessman alone doesn't make somebody a fraud.
The DVD is a step in the direction of fair and honest disclosure (which is more than Stan's supplying on this thread, IMO). It will have to be fairly reviewed and discussed.
Everybody deserves their day in court
More sillyness.
I am a double the distance aimer - from the center of the OB to the contact point, that sends the OB to the target/pocket, toward the outside edge of the OB. This serves me well for shots from 1 degree to 30 degrees. All of the contact and double distance points can be visualized on the surface of the equator of the OB. For cuts that are more than 30 degrees, the double distance aim points are off of the edge of the OB.
I have little trouble with cut angles from 31 degrees to 45 degrees for the aim points are just off of the edge of the OB, but for cut angles from 46 degrees to 90 degrees the aim points are far enough away from the edge of the OB to be hard to estimate.
The center, contact and the double distance points on the OB are self compensating when the OB is separated from the CB down table as the OB progressively appears smaller. When this happens, the included angle from the bridge to the double distance aim point gets smaller as the OB appears smaller.
This also needs to happen for the way that I imagine CTE to work. The resulting included angle after the pivot to the center of the CB must also be smaller as the OB goes down table and appears smaller. Some describe the lateral shift to the side from the center of the CB before the pivot of the cue back to the center of the CB as ½ tip, full tip diameter all the way to the edge of the CB.
Any offset (pre pivot) that is always the same will with a constant distance from the CB to the bridge will result in one cut angle. As the OB is down table away from the CB, this one angle will contact the OB progressively toward the edge of the OB until it misses.
What I have toyed with is that when the CB and OB are close together with a bridge distance from the CB of 1 foot, and the parallel offset from CTEL is to the center of the OB before the pivot back to the center of the CB, results in a thin cut of, say 85 degrees. As the OB is moved down table, the shift to the center of the OB becomes a smaller distance from the original CTEL because when the OB appears smaller, the distance to the center of the CB on a smaller appearing OB is also smaller. With the same 1 foot bridge distance, the cut angle remains the same 85 degrees even when the OB is 8 feet away.
I conclude that this utilization of CTE is a practical method of achieving thin and thinner cuts by aiming at points on the equator of the OB. The bridge distance remains constant and unlike my double distance aiming that requires thin and thinner cuts to be aimed at estimated points off of the edge of the OB.
Thanks for your time…wasted.:smile:
I am a double the distance aimer - from the center of the OB to the contact point, that sends the OB to the target/pocket, toward the outside edge of the OB. This serves me well for shots from 1 degree to 30 degrees. All of the contact and double distance points can be visualized on the surface of the equator of the OB. For cuts that are more than 30 degrees, the double distance aim points are off of the edge of the OB.
I have little trouble with cut angles from 31 degrees to 45 degrees for the aim points are just off of the edge of the OB, but for cut angles from 46 degrees to 90 degrees the aim points are far enough away from the edge of the OB to be hard to estimate.
The center, contact and the double distance points on the OB are self compensating when the OB is separated from the CB down table as the OB progressively appears smaller. When this happens, the included angle from the bridge to the double distance aim point gets smaller as the OB appears smaller.
This also needs to happen for the way that I imagine CTE to work. The resulting included angle after the pivot to the center of the CB must also be smaller as the OB goes down table and appears smaller. Some describe the lateral shift to the side from the center of the CB before the pivot of the cue back to the center of the CB as ½ tip, full tip diameter all the way to the edge of the CB.
Any offset (pre pivot) that is always the same will with a constant distance from the CB to the bridge will result in one cut angle. As the OB is down table away from the CB, this one angle will contact the OB progressively toward the edge of the OB until it misses.
What I have toyed with is that when the CB and OB are close together with a bridge distance from the CB of 1 foot, and the parallel offset from CTEL is to the center of the OB before the pivot back to the center of the CB, results in a thin cut of, say 85 degrees. As the OB is moved down table, the shift to the center of the OB becomes a smaller distance from the original CTEL because when the OB appears smaller, the distance to the center of the CB on a smaller appearing OB is also smaller. With the same 1 foot bridge distance, the cut angle remains the same 85 degrees even when the OB is 8 feet away.
I conclude that this utilization of CTE is a practical method of achieving thin and thinner cuts by aiming at points on the equator of the OB. The bridge distance remains constant and unlike my double distance aiming that requires thin and thinner cuts to be aimed at estimated points off of the edge of the OB.
Thanks for your time…wasted.:smile:
Last edited:
The contact point is not only centered between the CB/OB centers; it's also centered between their inside edges. When you get past a 30-degree (half ball) cut you can switch from "double-the-distance" to "double-the-overlap". You can't aim your stick at it, but it might help.
pj
chgo
Not unless your shift is not really parallel.
pj
chgo
I have tried that but I have a slight parallax problem if I stay over my shot - chin over the shaft. Should I shift my head/eyes to the side to get a better perspective of the overlap?
I was only stating my opinion of paying for improvement...If I was going to spend money...I would spend it on the fundamentals/mechanics....
I am not saying that Stan does not teach fundamentals....If I were to get lessons from Stan...It would be a fundamentals lesson.
This thread..(not me) is the one responsible for making it sound like CTE is the most important thing to pool.
What qualifies as a huge outcry?
My other statement was just a point of clarification....Stan will not be making any "presentations" of Pro-1...He will be selling a DVD for around $40
I just hope there is at least a section in the DVD that gives Hal some credit...:smile:
Everybody deserves their day in court
The jury has found that this is all your fault....Post #1 on this thread was submitted as proof. :smile:
I'm not sure why you'd want them deleted. If nothing else they stand in testament to the fact that CTE is so goofy that even its most ardent proponents can't make sense of it, despite their best efforts.
Lou Figueroa
I was about to write /must be using ghost ball when some of us *just see the shot.* I know that drives them crazy, but that's just the way it is.
Lou Figueroa
I cannot fathom how ghost ball offers any advantage whatsoever over any legitimate aiming system for dealing with throw. Please explain. Thanks.
You must be kidding, right?
There is much more going on during those 10,000 hours and while hitting those million balls than just establishing proper perception. You are learning (hopefully) about your mechanics, fundamentals, PSR, stroke, and how to blend speed and throw and swerve and squirt.
So you can't say it's a trade off and your approach "beats the heck" out of putting in the time and doing the reps. It's these kinds of claims that I have a problem with -- they reek of the late-night TV come on:
Buy the DVD! Learn the system that is the most talked about aiming system "in the world!" Make all the shots, all the time! It's the can't miss system you've heard so much about and been waiting for -- but that *they* don't want you to know about! It's the painless approach to pool! Forget about practicing for 10,000 hours -- in weeks or even days, you'll be able to make any shot! Cut thousands of hours off your practice time! Just $44.99!
Lou Figueroa
and if you call
in the next 10 minutes
we'll include FREE shipping
Last edited:
You must be kidding, right?
There is much more going on during those 10,000 hours and while hitting those million balls than just establishing proper perception. You are learning (hopefully) about your mechanics, fundamentals, PSR, stroke, and how to blend speed and throw and swerve and squirt.
So you can't say it's a trade off and your approach "beats the heck" out of putting in the time and doing the reps. It's these kinds of claims that I have a problem with -- they reek of the late-night TV come on:
Buy the DVD! Learn the system that is the most talked about aiming system "in the world!" Make all the shots, all the time! It's the can't miss system you've heard so much about and been waiting for -- but that *they* don't want you to know about! It's the painless approach to pool! Forget about practicing for 10,000 hours -- in weeks or even days, you'll be able to make any shot! Cut thousands of hours off your practice time! Just $44.99!
Lou Figueroa
and if you call
in the next 10 minutes
we'll include FREE shipping
Mr. Figueroa,
I am not kidding.
I merely indicated that a student can learn to see or perceive the balls correctly early in their learning curve vs. way down the road which is often the case.
I NEVER in any way diminished any other important aspect of the game. You MISREAD my post!
This thread is primarily about aiming and aiming is largely visual.
I commented on the VISUAL and nothing else.
It must be fun to sit back and just joke and about what I am doing.
Stan
Yes, I DID mean "squirt". My brain was fried from reading this thread :grin:!!! Thanks for steering me right Fred!!!
After a good nights sleep, Maniac is now clear-headed and thinking properly.
Maniac
You must be kidding, right?
There is much more going on during those 10,000 hours and while hitting those million balls than just establishing proper perception. You are learning (hopefully) about your mechanics, fundamentals, PSR, stroke, and how to blend speed and throw and swerve and squirt.
So you can't say it's a trade off and your approach "beats the heck" out of putting in the time and doing the reps. It's these kinds of claims that I have a problem with -- they reek of the late-night TV come on:
Buy the DVD! Learn the system that is the most talked about aiming system "in the world!" Make all the shots, all the time! It's the can't miss system you've heard so much about and been waiting for -- but that *they* don't want you to know about! It's the painless approach to pool! Forget about practicing for 10,000 hours -- in weeks or even days, you'll be able to make any shot! Cut thousands of hours off your practice time! Just $44.99!
Lou Figueroa
and if you call
in the next 10 minutes
we'll include FREE shipping
Lou,
You should get over this petty jealousy or whatever it is you are harboring. It doesn't make you look good.
This jealousy or whatever it is, is starting to make you look like a stalker.
You are now saying that Stan is purposefully lying about what he said? What's the purpose?
He didn't say anything about CTE making you a great player or fixing it so you will never miss a shot.
The only thing he said was that CTE would help you visualize the ball pocketing aspect which you know darn well, is only a small part of the whole process of playing pool, although it could be one of the corner stones of playing pool.
What gives with you and these personal attacks on Stan?
If you're going to attack him and CTE at every turn at least have the decency to address what he shared about CTE will help a player with their visual aiming skills, rather these .
You naysayers claim that you want to learn about CTE , yet you attack the very people who might potentially be willing to share some vital information about it.
If I were Stan, I wouldn't waste my time writing another post in this forum.
Shame on you, Lou!
- Status