Cte/pro one vide0
- Thread starter stan shuffett
- Start date
I've always considered you a pretty fair guy Jim, but this was hardly called for. You owe Stan Shuffett an apology.
You're entitled to your opinion and so is everyone else.
The fact is that you are commenting about a system on a video that you have never seen.
I never thought I would see the day when you OR anyone else would stoop this low. I'm sorry Jim, your post is about as low as it can get.
I'm utterly disappointed with you. :angry:
JoeyA
CTE/ PRO One Video
If IF was a skiff we'd all take a boat ride.
I'm not sure how any of this is going to shake out. I have an open mind and I haven't commented much about CTE in these past years, merely defending Hal Houle, a man who has lived longer than any of you who post on this forum, a man who still today enjoys the good conversation and friendship of many.
Hal's contributions to the pool world have been debatable and are debatable.
If this NEW CTE/Pro One video provides proof that this is a finite and accurate aiming system superior to all other aiming systems it would revolutionize pool and the teaching of pool.
If Stan has defined CTE to the degree that he believes he has, his name and Hal Houle's name will be known throughout the ages of pool.
If this new information can be defined to the degree that it enhances EVERY person's pool game, it will be a valuable gem, not only to it's designer but to the pool world.
If such a system exists and it is shown to me and my game improves because of it, I will tell you so. If it doesn't I will also tell you that my game didn't jump. Despite my complaining about getting beat at every tournament I go to, I have to say that my game isn't too bad as it is.
IF STAN'S VIDEO ABOUT CTE AND PRO ONE ARE INDEED PROVEN PERFECTLY ACCCURATE, I WOULD HOPE THAT THE PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM, WOULD NOT POST THE "SECRETS" ON THIS FORUM.
IF STAN'S VIDEO ABOUT CTE AND PRO ONE ARE PROVEN TO BE A PROFESSIONAL SYSTEM FOR AIMING, I HOPE THAT NONE OF YOU WILL POST THE "SECRET" ANYWHERE ELSE.
IF YOU PAY FOR THE SECRET AND FEEL THE INFORMATION IS A LIE, THEN FEEL FREE TO COMPLAIN LONG AND LOUDLY, BUT AT LEAST BE MAN ENOUGH TO GIVE THE VIDEO A CHANCE TO BE REVIEWED BEFORE YOU CONDEMN IT TO HELL.
IF YOU HEAR ABOUT THE VIDEO DON'T POST THE SECRET OF WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD, GIVE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE PERSERVERED WHEN WOULD ATTEMPT TO VILIFY THEM AT EVERY CORNER. Allow them to earn the fruit of their labor.
That's a lot of ifs, so let's take a boat ride.
I'll keep you posted in the weeks and months to come and you have my word that I will post what I believe to be true and nothing that is untrue. I won't be giving up any secrets on CTE/Pro One in this forum but if it does nothing for me, you will hear that from me as well.
JoeyA
If IF was a skiff we'd all take a boat ride.
I'm not sure how any of this is going to shake out. I have an open mind and I haven't commented much about CTE in these past years, merely defending Hal Houle, a man who has lived longer than any of you who post on this forum, a man who still today enjoys the good conversation and friendship of many.
Hal's contributions to the pool world have been debatable and are debatable.
If this NEW CTE/Pro One video provides proof that this is a finite and accurate aiming system superior to all other aiming systems it would revolutionize pool and the teaching of pool.
If Stan has defined CTE to the degree that he believes he has, his name and Hal Houle's name will be known throughout the ages of pool.
If this new information can be defined to the degree that it enhances EVERY person's pool game, it will be a valuable gem, not only to it's designer but to the pool world.
If such a system exists and it is shown to me and my game improves because of it, I will tell you so. If it doesn't I will also tell you that my game didn't jump. Despite my complaining about getting beat at every tournament I go to, I have to say that my game isn't too bad as it is.
IF STAN'S VIDEO ABOUT CTE AND PRO ONE ARE INDEED PROVEN PERFECTLY ACCCURATE, I WOULD HOPE THAT THE PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM, WOULD NOT POST THE "SECRETS" ON THIS FORUM.
IF STAN'S VIDEO ABOUT CTE AND PRO ONE ARE PROVEN TO BE A PROFESSIONAL SYSTEM FOR AIMING, I HOPE THAT NONE OF YOU WILL POST THE "SECRET" ANYWHERE ELSE.
IF YOU PAY FOR THE SECRET AND FEEL THE INFORMATION IS A LIE, THEN FEEL FREE TO COMPLAIN LONG AND LOUDLY, BUT AT LEAST BE MAN ENOUGH TO GIVE THE VIDEO A CHANCE TO BE REVIEWED BEFORE YOU CONDEMN IT TO HELL.
IF YOU HEAR ABOUT THE VIDEO DON'T POST THE SECRET OF WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD, GIVE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE PERSERVERED WHEN WOULD ATTEMPT TO VILIFY THEM AT EVERY CORNER. Allow them to earn the fruit of their labor.
That's a lot of ifs, so let's take a boat ride.
I'll keep you posted in the weeks and months to come and you have my word that I will post what I believe to be true and nothing that is untrue. I won't be giving up any secrets on CTE/Pro One in this forum but if it does nothing for me, you will hear that from me as well.
JoeyA
Joey,
I respect your opinion and if you say it's low, it's low. But, in view of everything, I'm sorry to say, I don't think it's unfair.
Jim
Joey I don't think Stan could have picked a better person for this test. I know your opinion will be an honest one.
One question, Colin Collenso had a great test that measured a persons ball pocketing ability floating out there somewhere. Is it possible for you to do this over a week or a similar test so we can get a better perspective of your gains in ability after your lesson? I think it would add some validity to your findings.
One question, Colin Collenso had a great test that measured a persons ball pocketing ability floating out there somewhere. Is it possible for you to do this over a week or a similar test so we can get a better perspective of your gains in ability after your lesson? I think it would add some validity to your findings.
Last edited:
That's really an outstanding idea Eric.
Joey, you might want to consider doing the shotmaking test some predetermined number of times, say ten times on five different days, before you work with Stan.
Then you can repeat after.
This might be more interesting than your perception of whether you're pocketing balls better or worse.
Joey, you might want to consider doing the shotmaking test some predetermined number of times, say ten times on five different days, before you work with Stan.
Then you can repeat after.
This might be more interesting than your perception of whether you're pocketing balls better or worse.
Mike,
I am not sure if I am up to taking tests ten times on five different days but if you show me the link I will look at it. I don't mind being held to a standard but I don't know how much time this test you are talking about requires.
I am also not sureof the value of the test that Colin described nor have I ever seen it. Colin has always been one of my favorite posters and I have seen a lot of his posts that I like and respect.
The offer that Stan has made is quite direct and quite simple. I don't think that I need to take ten tests on five different days.
Whatever I do, I will do to the utmost of my ability regardless of any "tests".
JoeyA
The problem with using a test is that Joey will be getting used to the system and executing it will initially be uncomfortable at first which will likely cause misses. It would be a more fair test if you have a reasonable amount of time to digest and feel completely comfortable with it.
I am really excited about it and looking forwards to seeing this video. Sounds like its going to be really great.
vakosel
Registered
A great decision from a great teacher
My true respect Stan for your choice . I wish i was in US and be one of your students. A real man and teacher must always share his knowledge -Socrates ( NOT the brazilian player of course.. )
Best Regards,
Kostas
PS Please accept international orders too.
My true respect Stan for your choice . I wish i was in US and be one of your students. A real man and teacher must always share his knowledge -Socrates ( NOT the brazilian player of course.. )
Best Regards,
Kostas
PS Please accept international orders too.
Since we seem to be in experiment construction mode, I would like to request that Joey attempt to find whether he *runs* more balls post-CTE video instruction. Maybe shooting a few sets of EO, or Fargo, or both. I think it's entirely possible that he may run fewer balls, what with the pivoting and whatnot.
Lou Figueroa
Hi Zim,
Absolutely, Landon uses CTE, ultimately PRO ONE. This will all be clear in the video. No stones left unturned.
Thanks,
Stan
Tests, tests and more tests.
These tests kind of make me wonder if it is worth the effort. While I think I can give a good effort on any test that I take, I think the real test of improvement is in the heat of battle. As most of you know, I respect Stan and what he teaches (it's not just CTE,Pro 1) and how he carries himself. With that being said, will I be able to provide a 100% effort on the tests before and after or will my bias toward Stan weigh in on the outcome? I'd hate to waste the effort on these tests just to find out that my bias toward Stan the Man, makes the test results useless or unreliable.
I think I will be able to tell whether or not my game improves without those type of tests. Candidly, I expect my game to drop a bit while I learn CTE, Pro 1. After some period of time, using the aiming system, I would expect to see a leveling off of my learning curve and my skill level should be readily apparent.
I know how I compare to other local players for the cash and how we compete in tournaments and if that changes, it will be readily apparent to me and their pocket books.
(Or not) 
If they start avoiding me or start trying to make appointments for gaming, I'll know something is up.:smile:
I wonder if playing the Ghost is a good idea (before and after)? It probably isn't for the same reason I gave before. Also, I'm not familiar with the other tests you speak about and I'm not sure i want to spend the time getting comfortable with them.
I just think the gambling and the tournament play may be the best test of any change in my game. I have a couple of practice partners who would rather drink battery acid than have me win so I can count on them for some competitive play. Me, I'll just sip Stan's kool-aid and see how it shakes out. :smile:
I wish I had better answers to satisfy everyone but I don't think that's going to happen no matter what I learn or don't learn, do or don't do.
I'm OK with that and will simply give my best effort, and anyone who knows me, knows that while I may not be a MSFB like Donny Mills, I am a very tenacious guy.
JoeyA (See Donny Mills Facebook for translation)
These tests kind of make me wonder if it is worth the effort. While I think I can give a good effort on any test that I take, I think the real test of improvement is in the heat of battle. As most of you know, I respect Stan and what he teaches (it's not just CTE,Pro 1) and how he carries himself. With that being said, will I be able to provide a 100% effort on the tests before and after or will my bias toward Stan weigh in on the outcome? I'd hate to waste the effort on these tests just to find out that my bias toward Stan the Man, makes the test results useless or unreliable.
I think I will be able to tell whether or not my game improves without those type of tests. Candidly, I expect my game to drop a bit while I learn CTE, Pro 1. After some period of time, using the aiming system, I would expect to see a leveling off of my learning curve and my skill level should be readily apparent.
I know how I compare to other local players for the cash and how we compete in tournaments and if that changes, it will be readily apparent to me and their pocket books.
(Or not) If they start avoiding me or start trying to make appointments for gaming, I'll know something is up.:smile:I wonder if playing the Ghost is a good idea (before and after)? It probably isn't for the same reason I gave before. Also, I'm not familiar with the other tests you speak about and I'm not sure i want to spend the time getting comfortable with them.
I just think the gambling and the tournament play may be the best test of any change in my game. I have a couple of practice partners who would rather drink battery acid than have me win so I can count on them for some competitive play. Me, I'll just sip Stan's kool-aid and see how it shakes out. :smile:
I wish I had better answers to satisfy everyone but I don't think that's going to happen no matter what I learn or don't learn, do or don't do.
I'm OK with that and will simply give my best effort, and anyone who knows me, knows that while I may not be a MSFB like Donny Mills,
I am a very tenacious guy.JoeyA (See Donny Mills Facebook for translation)
These tests kind of make me wonder if it is worth the effort. While I think I can give a good effort on any test that I take, I think the real test of improvement is in the heat of battle. As most of you know, I respect Stan and what he teaches (it's not just CTE,Pro 1) and how he carries himself. With that being said, will I be able to provide a 100% effort on the tests before and after or will my bias toward Stan weigh in on the outcome? I'd hate to waste the effort on these tests just to find out that my bias toward Stan the Man, makes the test results useless or unreliable.
I think I will be able to tell whether or not my game improves without those type of tests. Candidly, I expect my game to drop a bit while I learn CTE, Pro 1. After some period of time, using the aiming system, I would expect to see a leveling off of my learning curve and my skill level should be readily apparent.
I know how I compare to other local players for the cash and how we compete in tournaments and if that changes, it will be readily apparent to me and their pocket books.
I wonder if playing the Ghost is a good idea (before and after)? It probably isn't for the same reason I gave before. Also, I'm not familiar with the other tests you speak about and I'm not sure i want to spend the time getting comfortable with them.
I just think the gambling and the tournament play may be the best test of any change in my game. I have a couple of practice partners who would rather drink battery acid than have me win so I can count on them for some competitive play. Me, I'll just sip Stan's kool-aid and see how it shakes out. :smile:
I wish I had better answers to satisfy everyone but I don't think that's going to happen no matter what I learn or don't learn, do or don't do.
I'm OK with that and will simply give my best effort, and anyone who knows me, knows that while I may not be a MSFB like Donny Mills,
JoeyA (See Donny Mills Facebook for translation)
You make some very good points here, Joey, but they also tend to complicate things even more.
Stan's video is meant to prove that CTE is an exact system. Being such, it will have to demonstrate that CTE yields exact results. I don't think there is any way to measure "in the heat of battle" results.
I like Lou's idea. Use some sort of scoring system for cut and bank shots, and do "before and after" testing. This would of course require that both tests be set up exactly the same way, on the same table, using the same cue, and conducted at the same time of day, in order to eliminate the variables. Doing it that way would provide measurable results.
Just a suggestion.
Roger
YOu are spot on Mike. I'm sure it will take time to learn to be consistent with it.
JoeyA
I appreciate the suggestions Roger. The tests might be "nice" for some people. It's just not something I want to labor on and invest my time in.
Sorry to bail on these test suggestions but I didn't take on the job of learning CTE/Pro One for anyone's benefit but my own. If I get something out of it, you'll know about it and if I don't, you'll still know about it. I actually believe it will be very difficult to improve my skill level at this point no matter what system/technique that I learn and use. The improvements jumps that I get these years are no longer large increments and the epiphanies well, sometimes they're often just old information being recycled as if they were new epiphanies. :smile:
It would be great if Hal Houle's CTE aiming system proves to be accurate and measurable but I think like most things, the proof will be in each person experiencing it for themselves. I've warned Stan that I will share my perspective no matter what the result. The same stands for any naysayers.
Stan's OK with that and I hope the rest of the forum is too because it's all I have to give.JoeyA