CTE/ PRO ONE with Stan Shuffett
- Thread starter JoeyA
- Start date
- Status
I have pressed you SEVERAL TIMES on the issue of CTE not taking into account the relative positions of OB and pocket. If it DID, you could simply have said "Yes, it directly takes that into account, but you'll have to wait for the DVD to come out to see the information."
INSTEAD, you drifted into vagueness on the subject "I'm aware of the pockets," and other sidestepping. From that it's PERFECTLY REASONABLE to draw the conclusion that your system DOES NOT in any way measure or analyze the relative position of OB and pocket--as does NO version of CTE that has ever been talked about. And Dave Segal's position on the issue is in agreement--he has even videotaped himself pocketing balls with the pockets covered, in order to "prove" that their position is unnecessary to know.
It has been my CENTRAL THESIS throughout the entire discussion that if an OB is not directly, exactly, and systematically AIMED AT A POCKET, then no "aiming system" is being used. You have said NOTHING that HINTS otherwise. So it's PERFECTLY FAIR to draw the conclusion that your "system" as described by your DVD will fail in that regard--unless you have been purposely misleading in your discussion on the issue.
I didn't say that you will not provide anything of value. I directly implied that you will not provide anything of value that shows how an aiming system that doesn't aim at pockets can be called an aiming system.
Regarding your THREAT: "Your days are numbered in my opinion."
Do realize the implication of that? The implication of that (and your reluctance or inability to discuss your system on the forum) is that you HAVE NO DEFENSE of your system, and that you can only rely upon doing everything you can behind the scenes to have me banned from the discussion in order to put an end to negative opinions about CTE.
I'm just going to go out on a limb here and guess that I have the edge on you when it comes to the subject of PR, having been in that profession for just bit. But you are of course entitled to your opinion.
Lou Figueroa
This system is not for the stubborn or hard headed. I could never teach my wife thisShe will say "i shoot fine, why should i change" and "You know what! dont bug me, i shoot the way i shoot, leave me alone" :thumbup: I may get her to actually try it once and she would give up after a couple minutes. Does this sound familiar? lol
hmmm, no.
Lou Figueroa
I know you've been reading the CTE threads, so I don't get this. Sean has made some great posts. I mean a couple of them give all of your posts in all of the CTE threads put together The Break & The Rainbow when it comes to thoughtful posts.
Lou Figueroa
Had to do with a kernel of popcorn ---- cause you'd likely POP
Here's a close-up for you:
Cute. You don't even have the cojones to stand by what you wrote, lol.
Lou Figueroa
It is not your job to press me. I do not have to answer to you in any way.
I can release information concerning my DVD as I see fit.
I have told you before that pockets are in the equation to some degree and I do not have to say another word to you.
You have crossed the line in my opinion. I do not ban anyone. If you get banned it will be by your actions not mine.
Let me restate something. I did not threaten you with anything. You just constantly twist my words. Your days could be numbered on this site but that is not up to me. That is only my opinion and others have said the same.
I am tired of you attacking me..Do you get that?????"
My DVD will speak for itself and I do not need you telling folks that it contains no substance of value concerning CTE. You have not seen my DVD. Who made you product man of this site to try and discourage people from purchasing what I am going to put forth?
And just maybe they won't because of the real information about what it takes to make balls is also brought out.
CTE is just too limited as a aiming method to learn. It may work on certain shots as noted by CTE users. This means there are shots where CTE is useless.
What ya gonna do when those shots come up? Have another aiming method to use?
Keep it simple......Make the arrow training device, video yourself, and spend QUAILTY time at the table.
Its just that simple.
I don't think pool is quite that simple. There are different aiming systems for all different kinds of shots (Kicks with Running English, Kicks with Inside english, Kicks close to the rail, banking systems, diamond systems, etc). Any and all system are beneficial as long as they work for the individual using them.
I'd say use whatever helps "you" shoot better. There's no reason to totally dismiss using a technique, at least until you've really gave an honest effort to see if it will improve your game. I think that's why JoeyA made the original post because he was seeing the benefits of using Stan's system after taking a lesson. People can argue whether or not they think the system will work, but I don't see how they can say that JoeyA or any other player that finds CTE useful are wrong in their assessment.
For me personally, I use an aiming system on some shots where for whatever reason I'm just not seeing the contact point very well. For me it's typically backcutting balls. I don't currently use CTE but would consider picking up the DVD when it comes out. I'm not one of those top 10 players winning tournaments and am always looking to improve my game.
So...."You don't have to answer me in any way"
But...apparently I must listen to your numerous charges against me...
To me it seems like you're used to bossing people around.
As for me, I'm just giving my opinion--based on evidence. You'll have to live with it as long as I post. If I'm banned it won't be for any bad will on MY part: I do my best to stay within the reasonable rules of the site.
I've decided that CTE is bunk, and what you have to say about it is bunk. As far as I can tell from the rules, saying such things is within the rights of all posters. Certainly, about a MILLION of your defenders have said MUCH WORSE to me--and I haven't noticed you trying to discourage THEIR bad behavior...so you can save your sanctimonious attitude for those who buy it (probably those who are also used to getting bossed around by you).
I've already argued with lots of people like you: who think because it comes out of their mouths it's like the voice of god. I'm wholly unimpressed with your "system" and your demeanor.
I wish i could go back to kindergarden where the only drama was someone stealing your crayons and we had nap time EVERYDAY
Dr. Dave has a similar aiming aid on his website that I use with students, and they like it a lot. It's called the Ghost Ball Template, you can download it for free here, and it looks like this:
Print out the template (it's a PDF, and you may have to adjust the "print magnification" a little to get the balls exactly 2.25" in diameter - 106% works perfectly on my printer), then stick a donut-shaped hole reinforcer over the center spot of the OB to make centering the OB easy (it says to punch a hole there, but I can't find a hole punch with that deep a mouth).
Then all you have to do is lay it on the table with the long arrow pointed at the pocket, place the OB on the donut hole, and then practice visualizing cuts by aiming at the black dot representing the center of the ghost ball. Balls roll over the paper without moving offline at all, and you even get a "tangent line" indicator to help learn position play.
I think this simple aiming aid helps visualize CB/OB alignments for any aiming method, not just ghost ball. Another great free resource from the huge collection at Dr. Dave's Online Resources.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
I wonder if you came to that conclusion before or after you visited Stan and actually thought about learning what he has to teach.
I suspect that there are just as many on here who have decided that what you have to say about it is bunk.
But they probably read your posts before forming that opinion.
Steve
The topic is EXTREMELY simple. Children could understand it. Every description I've seen of CTE ignores the direct relationship of OB to pocket. Every (vague) response from Stan confirms that of his system--by his refusal to claim otherwise. Thus, CTE is bunk, and what Stan MAY HAVE to say about it will be bunk.
No lessons required!
I've made this same analogy many times (mostly to Neil, who seems to have trouble learning concepts new to him): I don't need to "learn" CTE to debunk it, anymore than I need to learn how to do astrology charts to debunk astrology.
Will you be a faster learner than Neil?
CTE obviously isn't "bunk". Whether or not it's "exact" (it obviously isn't) and whether or not its AzB proponents are capable of open, intelligent discussion about it (they obviously aren't), it's still apparently a helpful system for those who like it.
pj <- this fence hurts my butt
chgo
GMT, Why don't you run for President, I bet you could fix this whole country.
Yes.
Does that make a difference to you? Do you have a list somewhere of all the techniques that all the pros use?
Do you go out and learn how to play based on that?
If so then you should be learning everything out there.
Because that's what the pros use.
Everything out there.
I admit I have difficulty understanding your interest in a position that almost NO ONE ELSE is interested in: that CTE might possibly be useful but NOT for the reasons that CTE advocates say.
It's a discussion you can have only with yourself.
As for me, I confront CTE advocates on the issues THEY PRESENT. I take them at their word.
I will agree, though, that IF there is a possible utility to CTE, that we might have a better chance to discover and understand it if FIRST CTE advocates would end their DELUSION about what CTE does for them--so they can begin to search for what it ACTUALLY does for them.
That is, if it does anything. It was you who presented us with the information that you were unimpressed with what CTE seemed to do for John Barton.
In the meantime, I take CTErs at their word regarding what it does for them--and hope to force them to realize that it DOESN'T do what they believe. I've heard of no remedy for delusion other than direct confrontation of the delusion itself.
- Status