No. But the only way to do that is to do more science, not art. It sounded like science needs to adjust so that our favorite aiming system fits into the category "exact".
We look at the facts which is people claiming that CTE/Pro One has improved their shotmaking. But how? I don't know if Stan explains it in his DVD. Apparently he doesn't, if I interpret Dr. Dave's post correctly. And when asked for specifics like pivot lenghts or bridge lengths and how you can extract this information from the system, there is never a straight answer. Well we need "adjustments", but NOT based on feel, because that would kill the concept of CTE being an exact aiming system. This is the reason why these threads always get so heated. Because for some reason you don't want to acknowledge that it is not an exact aiming system. I don't know why.
It could be a tool that distracts your brain so you can let your subconscious do the work. Or it could be a placebo. Or it could be a tool that helps you find the line of aim. Or it could just force you to focus on each shot. It could be all of the above. But it is not exact.
Speaking for myself it has improved my shotmaking because I am now making more shots, i.e. missing less. I am also making difficult shots more often. My arsenal of shots that I can regularly make has increased quite a bit.
Another benefit which I consider to be huge is that I can play better shape since I don't have to really think about whether I am lined up right.
To better explain this I mean that I used to miss a lot of shots trying to get position. I would not be entirely sure of my shot line and thus be torn between "cinching" the shot and playing for position.
Since becoming proficient using CTE I find that my position play has gotten much much better since I am now not only making the shots but sending the cue ball to the right position with much more accuracy.
As far as your issue with CTE being described as "exact" I think that you have a different idea of what exact means. When I think of CTE and exact I think of the fact that I do the same three steps for each shot - sight the CTE Line, line up my cue tip with the edge of the cue ball as I am placing my bridge hand on the table, pivot to center and I am on the shot line.
Because I do these same three steps for every shot which goes directly to a pocket AND the majority of the time the object ball goes in cleanly, appearing to "split the pocket" so to speak (when my stroke is good) I consider the system as a whole to be an exact method for finding the shot line. No guessing required. In fact there are many shots I face where I honestly have no good feeling that the shot is "on" when I use CTE to line it up. I use CTE to get to the shot line, focus on my stroke and how I need to hit it for position and the object ball goes right in.
So I can come to no other conclusion than the system is exactly bringing me to the shot line for these shots. I am fairly sure I can't guess the correct line with consistency since in the past I have missed these same shots consistently.
The guy I beat out of $900 last night said that I am shooting MUCH better than when I played him about 6 months ago when he beat me pretty soundly. He has his hands full and he knows it. Shots that I missed a lot o when I played him previously where I was still kind of shaky with CTE and my stroke was also flaky are not a problem at all.
Regarding bridge distances and pivot points; Until I see the DVD I can't comment on what Stan is teaching. I would hope that Dr. Dave now feels that he can call and speak with Stan directly to get answers to whatever questions he has.
Honestly, all I really care about is that there is now a video guide with the steps laid out, with demonstrations done by world class players and instruction by a world class instructor.
Now no one can say that they don't have access to the exact instructions. Whether or not the viewer is able to follow those directions is secondary to the fact that the instructions exist. To me this is a big step forward and we can now focus on discussing the exact steps. For Dr. Dave and any other skeptic/engineering-science guy who has been convinced that CTE is hooey because it sounds as if it defies physics and basic geometry at least they now have something concrete to work with that they can dissect and study.
Whether they actually give it a fair shake and apply unbiased study is another story. To me though the doors are now open wide and any one can get this information without having to know someone who is willing and able to share it. People who want to learn CTE can get it now without having to run the gauntlet of argument and ridicule that accompanies any such attempt on this forum.
So whatever the "science" of CTE ends up being the fact is that it's highly beneficial to the majority of people who have been fortunate enough to figure it out and now it's open to everyone.
