CTE pro one DVD

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A quick check:

Shot 1 15,O --Between 1and 9 ball
Shot. 2. 15, I--left QUARTER of the 1ball
Shot 3. 30, O-- same LQ of the 1ball
Shot 4. 30, I---2 ball
Shot 5 45, O----3 ball
Shot 6 45, I-----5 ball

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:

Renegade_56

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A quick check:

Shot 1 15,O --Between 1and 9 ball
Shot. 2. 15, I--left QUARTER of the 1ball
Shot 3. 30, O-- same LQ of the 1ball
Shot 4. 30, I---2 ball
Shot 5 45, O----3 ball
Shot 6 45, I-----5 ball

Stan Shuffett

So if I get what you are saying then I should get a pattern very much like this Stan?

Stan pattern.jpg
 

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
So if I get what you are saying then I should get a pattern very much like this Stan?

View attachment 459087

Yes, seems very close!

To get started with correct CTE thinking, your first shot as originally set up was directly through
the middle diamond. CTE connects with right angles. So, your 15,O would not align to a right angle, not even 20 tables away. But, as it is set up now the right connection might occur at about 8 tables away in the bottom corner.
The 15 I and 30 0 connect with 90 degree angles two tables away at the bottom corner. The 30I connects to the bottom corner only one table away. The 45 O travels through 3 tables as it's a 3 in the side shot. ( it would take a network of connecting tables to show that one....And lastly, the 45I connects to the base table as no connectors are necessary.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:

Renegade_56

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
well there you have it folks. This is a doable exercise and Stan has shown us what we are striving for, so if you are working on visual sweeps, this is a way to check your progress.
 

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
well there you have it folks. This is a doable exercise and Stan has shown us what we are striving for, so if you are working on visual sweeps, this is a way to check your progress.

For banking, CTE aligns the player to blind pockets table(s) away as if a curtain were up.
Direct pocketing such as the the 45 I is an easier proposition in that speed and spin are essentially nonvariables. Not so for the banks. CTE gives the aim and then speed and spin must be factored in.

CTE is very slow at first......slow slow slow and then it's sudden.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:

Renegade_56

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The inside 15 and outside 30 result in the same shot, you can use either one. This is the only two visuals that overlap. I tend to use outside 30 when angle is wide (reaching outer limits of 15), as it's easier to see.

I now know this is true,

Thanks Mohrt
 

Dan White

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I now know this is true,

Thanks Mohrt

@Renegade: You've been quick to dismiss and ridicule people like me who find CTE a puzzle and yet whatever method it is that you've been using is radically and fundamentally different from what Stan teaches. I had one other CTE proponent tell me they use CTE, but then they followed that statement by saying they use their own version of CTE. It seems you are doing that, too. How can you follow along with DVD1 as you did and come away so far off? If you compare your ball positions to where Stan says they should be, how have you been able to pocket anything if you are following Stan's instructions? The only logical answer is that you are not using CTE as Stan teaches, as you say in your disclaimer. What does it suggest if you think you are pocketing balls using CTE Pro1, but you really are not using CTE Pro1? It isn't even in the ballpark of being remotely similar to CTE Pro1 if the ball positions on your table are a real indication of where the ob goes.

denwhit is trying to learn CTE Pro1, so it might be a good idea for you to let others who actually use Pro1 help him.

Disclaimer: This is not a knock on CTE. It is a strong suggestion that denwhit get instruction from people who are actually using and are well versed on the information presented in DVD1.

Just sayin'.
 

Low500

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Somebody back there in this topic said something about not looking at the object ball..?
How can you line up from full stance to ball address after getting the perception and the 'fixed cueball' if you don't look at the object ball you're lining up on? (you could miss the entire ball)
I know it's not necessary to aim at a pocket...I never did that anyway. I just looked at the angle and "guessed"....using experience.
This concept does away with guessing as I understand it.
I understand that the cue ball is the target for the manual pivoting (I do not understand that "visual sweep" aspect at all.)
It's working pretty good with that basic manual pivot. 15degree-30degree-45degree shots. I beat the ghost twice out of five attempts today using it, although I was on a 4x8 so it wasn't all that great.
 

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
denwhit is trying to learn CTE Pro1, so it might be a good idea for you to let others who actually use Pro1 help him.

Disclaimer: This is not a knock on CTE. It is a strong suggestion that denwhit get instruction from people who are actually using and are well versed on the information presented in DVD1.

I'd have to say this sounds like some fairly sound advice. But on the flip side or your recommendation, you've also been one of the biggest adversaries of the man who knows the most about it when he does videos or tries to explain something in great detail, Stan Shuffett himself. So, it never ends.

If Renegade doesn't have Stan's knowledge, (and lets face it, nobody does) he still has 10 times the understanding of how to make it work over you.


Just sayin'.

My thoughts on denwhit are the best thing that could happen is happening, he's struggling. That's not a bad thing, it's a good thing. He needs to pour over the DVD again, and again, and again until the light bulb goes on and HE gets it all by his lonesome. And he will if he's committed and diligent by being at the table setting up fairly easy shots for starters at the same time he's watching and pausing the video

He's already been given the best advice by Neil and myself (by PM) which is you MUST forget everything you've ever learned, known, used, and visualized to make balls in the past or it's going to corrupt this method.

I don't think he's done it yet. Maybe he won't.

However, you can help denwhit yourself. You've often inferred that you have far, far more knowledge of CTE than you've been given credit for and have challenged Stan on various ball positions with visuals as being impossible as taught. How about you write some posts out for the more basic shots that lead into the different visual options? This is beginner material. Should be a piece of cake for you.

Just sayin'.
 
Last edited:

Renegade_56

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
@Renegade: You've been quick to dismiss and ridicule people like me who find CTE a puzzle and yet whatever method it is that you've been using is radically and fundamentally different from what Stan teaches. I had one other CTE proponent tell me they use CTE, but then they followed that statement by saying they use their own version of CTE. It seems you are doing that, too. How can you follow along with DVD1 as you did and come away so far off? If you compare your ball positions to where Stan says they should be, how have you been able to pocket anything if you are following Stan's instructions? The only logical answer is that you are not using CTE as Stan teaches, as you say in your disclaimer. What does it suggest if you think you are pocketing balls using CTE Pro1, but you really are not using CTE Pro1? It isn't even in the ballpark of being remotely similar to CTE Pro1 if the ball positions on your table are a real indication of where the ob goes.

denwhit is trying to learn CTE Pro1, so it might be a good idea for you to let others who actually use Pro1 help him.

Disclaimer: This is not a knock on CTE. It is a strong suggestion that denwhit get instruction from people who are actually using and are well versed on the information presented in DVD1.

Just sayin'.

Well I don't see what you have offered in the way of help to Dennis, and I don't see how you can say my method is not even in the ballpark. I also don't see how you can say I don't use Pro 1. For one thing, I can do what I do, as in the 1st picture I posted and repeat it, using perceptions to the ball positions and sweeps as in Pro 1. I can also do as stan says and get the result stan recommends, as evidenced in the 2nd picture I posted, so I can do it. What I don't see, and realized 2 years ago when I started with pro 1 is why I need 2 perceptions that do the same thing, and another that leaves a gap in the angles as demonstrated by the 5 and 6 ball in the 2nd image, so I did this very experiment 2 years ago and figured out what a 30 degree perception with an outside sweep would look like to ME that results in an even array of angles to choose from to make balls. The hardest part of this system is the perception part, which is I'm sure the hardest part for Stan to teach. But the thing about perception is that we all have one,,,,,,, this is the way I have taught myself to use mine. I could actually do this same test with fractional aiming and show you some frightening facts about that as well. I see what Stan is saying, I just happen to like the results I get a little better with MY perception on a couple of shots. The rest is Pro 1, and all of it is because of Pro 1. The fact that I can repeat it makes it useful. and I never have to try and see a contact point at 3/8 of ball and such. The fact that I understand it well enough to alter it to suit my perception should be evident that I can and do use it. It could be I know more than you think I do.

I didn't come on here arguing with Spidey or Stan about some perceived flaw in Pro 1, that likely is due to how I see it. I altered it to work for me. I also bought a snapper lawn mower a few years back that had a regular blade on it but a mulching chute. Damn thing cuts like hell, but left a trail of cut grass just outside the cut that made the yard look bad when cut. Guess what I did, I bought another spreader that dispurses the grass more evenly across the yard,,, I made it work better for me,,,,,,, so is it no longer a Snapper mower because I altered it from it's original design? I use Pro 1, in whatever form I use it, because it's dependable and repeatable.

Tell you what Dan, why don't you do a video of the drill I posted in a video in post 36, find a 10 ft snooker table, with 3 3/16" pockets and use regular 2 1/4 in balls and run out using that fractional system you tout. I'd bet money you can't do it. That was using Pro 1 with manual pivots, which by the way I have said repeatedly is the first part of Pro 1 a beginner should get proficient at.
 
Last edited:

Renegade_56

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Somebody back there in this topic said something about not looking at the object ball..?
How can you line up from full stance to ball address after getting the perception and the 'fixed cueball' if you don't look at the object ball you're lining up on? (you could miss the entire ball)
I know it's not necessary to aim at a pocket...I never did that anyway. I just looked at the angle and "guessed"....using experience.
This concept does away with guessing as I understand it.
I understand that the cue ball is the target for the manual pivoting (I do not understand that "visual sweep" aspect at all.)
It's working pretty good with that basic manual pivot. 15degree-30degree-45degree shots. I beat the ghost twice out of five attempts today using it, although I was on a 4x8 so it wasn't all that great.

Basic pivots are very useful, beyond that, I'm evidently not qualified to try and help,,,,,, sorry.
 

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Well I don't see what you have offered in the way of help to Dennis, and I don't see how you can say my method is not even in the ballpark. I also don't see how you can say I don't use Pro 1. For one thing, I can do what I do, as in the 1st picture I posted and repeat it, using perceptions to the ball positions and sweeps as in Pro 1. I can also do as stan says and get the result stan recommends, as evidenced in the 2nd picture I posted, so I can do it. What I don't see, and realized 2 years ago when I started with pro 1 is why I need 2 perceptions that do the same thing, and another that leaves a gap in the angles as demonstrated by the 5 and 6 ball in the 2nd image, so I did this very experiment 2 years ago and figured out what a 30 degree perception with an outside sweep would look like to ME that results in an even array of angles to choose from to make balls. The hardest part of this system is the perception part, which is I'm sure the hardest part for Stan to teach. But the thing about perception is that we all have one,,,,,,, this is the way I have taught myself to use mine. I could actually do this same test with fractional aiming and show you some frightening facts about that as well. I see what Stan is saying, I just happen to like the results I get a little better with MY perception on a couple of shots. The rest is Pro 1, and all of it is because of Pro 1. The fact that I can repeat it makes it useful. and I never have to try and see a contact point at 3/8 of ball and such. The fact that I understand it well enough to alter it to suit my perception should be evident that I can and do use it. It could be I know more than you think I do.

CTE is what it is. The 15I and 30O connect with the GEOMETRY of any 2x1 table. Real CTE dictates that, not me. The 15I and 30 O are interchangeable but more often than not, one of the two is easier to use verses the other. This is getting into visual info that has not been presented to date.
There are NO gaps in the CTE visuals. Please show one.
The perceptions are what they are......never a...I see it this way and others see it differently. Perceptions are seen either correctly or incorrectly. Perceptions are aligned to either correctly or incorrectly. I have not presented the visual info to date that makes this black and white but it's coming. In fact, what I present will have never been presented in our game ever before.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:

Bobkitty

I said: "Here kitty, kitty". Got this frown.
Gold Member
Silver Member
CTE is what it is. The 15I and 30O connect with the GEOMETRY of any 2x1 table. Real CTE dictates that, not me. The 15I and 30 O are interchangeable but more often than not, one of the two is easier to use verses the other. This is getting into visual info that has not been presented to date.
There are NO gaps in the CTE visuals. Please show one.
The perceptions are what they are......never a...I see it this way and others see it differently. Perceptions are seen either correctly or incorrectly. Perceptions are aligned to either correctly or incorrectly. I have not presented the visual info to date that makes this black and white but it's coming. In fact, what I present will have never been presented in our game ever before.

Stan Shuffett

I've just about come to the conclusion that I will only "see the light" in person with someone that can demonstrate it. I just can't fathom CCB that is not aimed at something. I see infinite CCBs and can only isolate one, IF it's aimed at something. Change my handle to dimwit.:eek:
 

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Concerning the 5-6 gap as you see it. That is not a gap.

First off......That is one single array of outcomes based on a 1 in a zillion alignment.
The 5 has a right angle connection as a 3 in the side. The 6 has a right angle connection as a cut to the corner. The gap that you describe is CTE doing its job. There are no right angle connections in that 5-6 space.

Stan Shuffett
 

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've just about come to the conclusion that I will only "see the light" in person with someone that can demonstrate it. I just can't fathom CCB that is not aimed at something. I see infinite CCBs and can only isolate one, IF it's aimed at something. Change my handle to dimwit.:eek:

I am happy that I did NOT have your mindset when I was first exposed to CTE.

Stan Shuffett
 

Bobkitty

I said: "Here kitty, kitty". Got this frown.
Gold Member
Silver Member
I am happy that I did NOT have your mindset when I was first exposed to CTE.

Stan Shuffett

I'm sure a demonstration will clear away the fog. Meanwhile, I'll watch the DVD a 3rd time. I haven't given up. People are sending links to your Youtube videos and maybe one will click. From your post 30 minutes ago, it seems you have new material that will clear it all up. You are welcome to send me anything that could help.
 

Renegade_56

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
CTE is what it is. The 15I and 30O connect with the GEOMETRY of any 2x1 table. Real CTE dictates that, not me. The 15I and 30 O are interchangeable but more often than not, one of the two is easier to use verses the other. This is getting into visual info that has not been presented to date.
There are NO gaps in the CTE visuals. Please show one.
The perceptions are what they are......never a...I see it this way and others see it differently. Perceptions are seen either correctly or incorrectly. Perceptions are aligned to either correctly or incorrectly. I have not presented the visual info to date that makes this black and white but it's coming. In fact, what I present will have never been presented in our game ever before.

Stan Shuffett

I know this Stan, and we both know that the illustration I posted is not a fair example because I set up balls and shot them into a rail, which the system does not teach. I get that the perceptions lock you into a 2:1 ration table and that's why it works. As well as you have tried to convey what you see on a given shot, I think you will agree that this is by far the most arguable part that certain people always grill you about. I never saw the point in arguing with you about this, instead I went to my table and tried to make it work for me. I look forward to the book and more information. I also believe that when the info gets to the point that people will read it, look at a shot and all see the same thing it will be even better. The only thing I saw 2 years ago was a method to test your results, other than you just saying a certain shot will go in a certain pocket. Shooting balls into a rail with no target pocket intended by your instruction to me left a gap between the 5 and 6 ball. I realize that this does not occur if you are actually locking yourself into a perception of a shot at a given target, pocket, or bank shot. Without a method to check my results I came up with this exercise which when shooting into a rail for no other purpose than to shoot into a rail does, in my view cover a more evenly spaced array, or choice, of shot options. For lack of a better way to explain to Dennis and the other guy I posted this exercise, and in no way intended to override or knock what you teach
 

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm sure a demonstration will clear away the fog. Meanwhile, I'll watch the DVD a 3rd time. I haven't given up. People are sending links to your Youtube videos and maybe one will click. From your post 30 minutes ago, it seems you have new material that will clear it all up. You are welcome to send me anything that could help.

I stated publicly well over 2 years ago and many many times since that my understanding of CTE had deepened enough to prompt my book project.
I thought that my book would have been out well over a year ago.
I decided from the get-go with my project that I would not parcel out every bit of new or refined info as I went along. That would be silly.
Having said that......the material in DVD2 works. That's what I used for years and still do.
Part of the process that I used was subconscious....but now the subconscious has morphed into conscious understandings and awarenesses that can be precisely explained.

Stan Shuffett
 

Renegade_56

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Concerning the 5-6 gap as you see it. That is not a gap.

First off......That is one single array of outcomes based on a 1 in a zillion alignment.
The 5 has a right angle connection as a 3 in the side. The 6 has a right angle connection as a cut to the corner. The gap that you describe is CTE doing its job. There are no right angle connections in that 5-6 space.

Stan Shuffett

Poor choice of words on my part probably,,,,,,,,, see post 57 please.
 
Last edited:

stan shuffett

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I know this Stan, and we both know that the illustration I posted is not a fair example because I set up balls and shot them into a rail, which the system does not teach. I get that the perceptions lock you into a 2:1 ration table and that's why it works. As well as you have tried to convey what you see on a given shot, I think you will agree that this is by far the most arguable part that certain people always grill you about. I never saw the point in arguing with you about this, instead I went to my table and tried to make it work for me. I look forward to the book and more information. I also believe that when the info gets to the point that people will read it, look at a shot and all see the same thing it will be even better. The only thing I saw 2 years ago was a method to test your results, other than you just saying a certain shot will go in a certain pocket. Shooting balls into a rail with no target pocket intended by your instruction to me left a gap between the 5 and 6 ball. I realize that this does not occur if you are actually locking yourself into a perception of a shot at a given target, pocket, or bank shot. Without a method to check my results I came up with this exercise which when shooting into a rail for no other purpose than to shoot into a rail does, in my view cover a more evenly spaced array, or choice, of shot options. For lack of a better way to explain to Dennis and the other guy I posted this exercise, and in no way intended to override or knock what you teach

No problem. I saw your exercise and the errors contained therein. I had a choice to let the errors stand or correct them. I figured that a little education would be appropriate in this case.
I have had my nose to the grind with open ears for over a decade in order to get to the bottom of CTE for all of us.
I think your exercise is a great example of CTE outcomes. That is why that I addressed it.
Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
Top