Critique of "Dr." Dave's Review of CTE/Pro One

[champ2107]

I asked Stan very politely for a refund and he responded that he was not.

So after he refused you posted a review, correct? it was also negative.

 

[Murdoch7627]

"If you have a class room full of CTE students, if one student has a question, then there's a good chance that other students have the same question too.

If posters are asking questions in writing in Stan's thread, it's to Stan's advantage to respond in writing as there is a good chance that others have the same question."

So you think group instruction is better than one on one instruction, huh? Wow, another interesting thought process from Dr. Dave's and Lou's side.

Let's try again. All you have to do is care enough about your question and about learning CTE/Pro One to call Stan and he will work with you one on one. It's that simple. Are some of you afraid to call Stan. He's really a nice guy and would be happy to help you. No need to be fearful.

 

[Maniac]

To heck with DVD's and aiming systems, I'm still trying to figure out what kind of bait some of the posters here have on their breath !!!

Maniac

 

[mincho]

Where is the review

Where can I find the review?

 

[mlalum]

I have mostly avoided the myriad threads regarding cte, and pro one, as these are not subjects of interest to me.

I must say, though, that after reading this thread, it strikes me as disingenuous, and patently unfair, really, for the op to critique a critique starting with wrongly calling into question, the original reviewer's credentials.

A better and much more credible course of action, IMO, would have been to simply do his own review of the product and share his conclusions, and precisely how he arrived at them. Then, anyone interested could see how these two reviews square with one another and would be able to draw their own conclusions.

From what little I've read, the seemingly neverending aiming system debates bear an uncanny resemblance to certain religious zealot's philosphies that require they either convert you to their way of thinking or kill you.

Let the holy war continue.

Best,
Brian kc

Truth. If chickens can understand what's what why can't the zealots.

 

[JolietJames]

deleted by me

 

[Luxury]

So after he refused you posted a review, correct? it was also negative.

Obviously if I'm asking for a refund my opinion of the dvd was negative. Naturally my review of the dvd was going to be negative if I'm a guy looking for a refund.

Here is the thing. I am not at all against pivot systems. I loved Cleary's youtube video about voodoo aiming and would love to learn more details on 90/90 and will certainly buy Ron Vs dvd if he comes out with it and will probably give it a good review. I can make balls with the simple instructions Cleary gave in his video. I can't make balls with Stan's instructions.

After getting refused a refund from Stan I wrote an honest review of the dvd so that buyers could beware.

If this were big business corporate world and Stan worked for a multi million dollar company there would have been tests done where they would take 100 amateur pool players that hadn't already hit a million balls like Landon and Stevie Moore and they would have left them alone with the dvd and a pool table then done ball potting tests and written tests and surveys and I vehemently believe the dvd would have been sent back to the drawing board.

 

[Scott Lee]

To Hank, and anybody else out there...THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "THE HOLY GRAIL"! This is probably not news to lots of good players (and every pro out there). IMO, Stan did a great job with what he wanted to do. Some people like the dvd...obviously some don't. That's how it is with everything in life. Obviously, watching a dvd cannot replace the one-on-one communication that is available with personal instruction. Anybody who believes that any dvd is/should be as good as working with the instructor is fooling themselves.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

And I mean no offense to Stan. I realize he put his heart into this. But like Figueroa pointed out, this was supposed to be the holy grail.

 

[champ2107]

Obviously if I'm asking for a refund my opinion of the dvd was negative. Naturally my review of the dvd was going to be negative if I'm a guy looking for a refund.

Here is the thing. I am not at all against pivot systems. I loved Cleary's youtube video about voodoo aiming and would love to learn more details on 90/90 and will certainly buy Ron Vs dvd if he comes out with it and will probably give it a good review. I can make balls with the simple instructions Cleary gave in his video. I can't make balls with Stan's instructions.

After getting refused a refund from Stan I wrote an honest review of the dvd so that buyers could beware.

If this were big business corporate world and Stan worked for a multi million dollar company there would have been tests done where they would take 100 amateur pool players that hadn't already hit a million balls like Landon and Stevie Moore and they would have left them alone with the dvd and a pool table then done ball potting tests and written tests and surveys and I vehemently believe the dvd would have been sent back to the drawing board.

so how long did you have the dvd before you asked for a refund, i remember you asking Jb if he would still be willing to buy it from you in a post not long after you received it, possibly days?

What were your expectations before you received the dvd? did you think you would have learned it all in a day,week,month or months?

I have seen you post now 2 or 3 times how Stan refused to give you a refund. You sound bitter to me and you have written a negative review in the main category instead of the review section?

As for lou anyone on here with common sense and a bit of smarts can see he is just a classless shit disturber by reading his review and other posts, he also felt the need to put in the main instead of the review section.

Its sounds like you wanted stan to put more effort,time and possibly more money into this dvd. Are you telling me that would have guarantied you would have learned this system in a week? Where should the line be drawn as to content? should the dvd been 6 hours long for some who have difficulty learning it? Stan has posted his phone number to help the guys who have had trouble figuring the dvd out. You did not take advantage of this, did you! in a corporate world you would be in a bunch of trouble telling your bosses you couldn't figure this system out with the information available to you! This has been your own FAILURE and not stans and that goes with all of the guys that share your thoughts on the dvd.

If i were you i would have started a thread and started at chapter one and posted your thoughts from chapter to chapter and not moving on to another chapter until i had the last one figured out, you know people would have helped along the way! But that is me and thats how i roll i didnt mean this as a personal attack on you either! Lou on the other hand is different story.

 

[Luxury]

I already said I would have skipped the endless loop of them making the shots and traded all that for explaining the details of the system.

I wanted to use this as a system to teach students with.

Anyone can tell that this is not something you are going to give to a student and then say, "it won't make ANY sense whatsoever but occasionally Stan will take phone calls. Cross your fingers that the line isn't busy with other confused callers.

I spent minutes and I understood Cleary's system. I spent days on Stan's and was nowhere near.

I wrote a bad review because the DVD just isn't well explained. He should have explained what aiming points to use for 10-25 degree cuts and so on for instance. Not just figure it out for yourself. The moment where he shows two parallel aiming lines one minute then suddenly the aiming lines are not parallel makes it look impossible to see those two lines at the same time and there is no explanation as to how to see those lines.

Obviously if so many people are confused I really don't need to justify my bad review but I'm glad you asked so I could further explain.

Peace.

 

[champ2107]

I already said I would have skipped the endless loop of them making the shots and traded all that for explaining the details of the system.

I wanted to use this as a system to teach students with.

Anyone can tell that this is not something you are going to give to a student and then say, "it won't make ANY sense whatsoever but occasionally Stan will take phone calls. Cross your fingers that the line isn't busy with other confused callers.

I spent minutes and I understood Cleary's system. I spent days on Stan's and was nowhere near.

I wrote a bad review because the DVD just isn't well explained. He should have explained what aiming points to use for 10-25 degree cuts and so on for instance. Not just figure it out for yourself. The moment where he shows two parallel aiming lines one minute then suddenly the aiming lines are not parallel makes it look impossible to see those two lines at the same time and there is no explanation as to how to see those lines.

Obviously if so many people are confused I really don't need to justify my bad review but I'm glad you asked so I could further explain.

Peace.

You know what, I am going to show you how this system works ok, i will even make quick videos of what ever you want to see? i will get u started and then you will understand the dvd. I assume you still have the dvd right?

 

[TheNewSharkster]

A Critique of Dr. Dave’s Review of Stan Shuffett’s CTE/Pro One Aiming System

I find Dr. Dave’s review of Stan Shuffett’s CTE/Pro One aiming system to be poor at best lacking in the most elementary concepts of research and the utilization of key source data. Dr. Dave states that he used two sources for his write up – Stan’s CTE/Pro One Aiming System DVD and ”many posts in recent CTE and Pro One threads” on AZ. The glaring omission in the source data he used is, of course, Stan Shuffett who publicly announced he was available for discussion or answering questions on CTE/Pro One. If Dave’s paper were being graded by any college professor I believe Dave would get an F on the paper due to poor utilization or lack or proper utilization of the sources available. Now if the three sources available to Dave are the DVD, threads on AZ, and Stan Shuffett and if the objective is to get the most knowledge possible before writing a review on the CTE/Pro One Aiming System which source would be the best to use? Doesn’t take a PhD to figure this one out does it? It’s the one David totally ignored. Remember, Dave is not writing a report on the DVD and if it is good or bad or if it gets the points of CTE/Pro One to the viewers accurately and concisely. He states he is reviewing the CTE/Pro One aiming system itself so the DVD is just one source for this information. The only possible reason for not contacting Stan would be if Dave thought that the DVD was so good that it completely and clearly explained CTE/Pro One and that, hence, contacting the primary source would yield no additional information. From Dave comments on the DVD this does not appear to be the case.

When a professional writer reviews a movie he doesn't interview the cast and directer. He bases his opinion on the movie he watched. I see no problem with Dr Dave forming a opinion on the quality of the Pro One DVD based on the content included with the Pro One DVD.

 

[Luxury]

Champ, I already posted in another thread that I didn't have the heart to sell the DVD because I couldn't take anyone's hard earned money for the DVD. I posted that I traded it for old DVDs instead. I figured it would be fair if someone had old DVDs laying around that they had already seen.

 

[champ2107]

to bad! you would have been gtg in day or two.

 

[Luxury]

Thanks for caring Champ.

 

[burnmarkpubcue]

I already said I would have skipped the endless loop of them making the shots and traded all that for explaining the details of the system.

I wanted to use this as a system to teach students with.

Anyone can tell that this is not something you are going to give to a student and then say, "it won't make ANY sense whatsoever but occasionally Stan will take phone calls. Cross your fingers that the line isn't busy with other confused callers.

I spent minutes and I understood Cleary's system. I spent days on Stan's and was nowhere near.

I wrote a bad review because the DVD just isn't well explained. He should have explained what aiming points to use for 10-25 degree cuts and so on for instance. Not just figure it out for yourself. The moment where he shows two parallel aiming lines one minute then suddenly the aiming lines are not parallel makes it look impossible to see those two lines at the same time and there is no explanation as to how to see those lines.

Obviously if so many people are confused I really don't need to justify my bad review but I'm glad you asked so I could further explain.

Peace.

I was thinking the same thing when I saw small clips of his dvd's on youtube. I was hoping that he was going to explain where he was aiming. Is it true he does not explain this in some shots ?

The reason why I caught this question is because I saw joe tuckers sample video's on Howcast and realized he was not saying the details of aiming. So I am guessing all that is said on the dvd you purchase. But then I thought, Aren't these real samples of the dvd ?

 

[Falcon Eddie]

To Hank, and anybody else out there...THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "THE HOLY GRAIL"! This is probably not news to lots of good players (and every pro out there). IMO, Stan did a great job with what he wanted to do. Some people like the dvd...obviously some don't. That's how it is with everything in life. Obviously, watching a dvd cannot replace the one-on-one communication that is available with personal instruction. Anybody who believes that any dvd is/should be as good as working with the instructor is fooling themselves.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Great post Scott . I was one of the fortunate ones that got it right away. But, like you said working one on one is the best way .I think Stan did a great job presenting and communicating his work. To iron out those small variables ,only someone looking from the outside like yourself or Stan would be able detect the hows or whys something isn't working.