Interesting CTE INFO

(((Satori))) said:
It is not his eyes that was the focal point of the lesson.
Click to expand...
In reference to YouTube link.
Pool is a visually driven game, objectively at that.
He could have stood with his feet crossed and it would not have mattered.
He fell right to center cue ball.

Yes, he had to stroke straight to execute the shot but his eyes led the entire way.

Stan Shuffett
 
stan shuffett said:
In reference to YouTube link.
Pool is a visually driven game, objectively at that.
He could have stood with his feet crossed and it would not have mattered.
He fell right to center cue ball.

Yes, he had stroke straight to execute the but his eyes led the entire way.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

It is the consistency obtained from coming straight in with your head on the shot that is a difference imo. I am talking about the head finding the line from standing and staying there on the way down. The head is not off to the side finding a center to edge line and then pivoting into the line.

I didn't want to point out the things I don't like about the system because I wish you success but you guys love to argue it seems.
 
Last edited:
(((Satori))) said:
It is the consistency obtained from coming straight in with your head on the shot that is a difference imo.
Click to expand...

The head does not come straight in from ball address to the shot line by PRO PLAYERS.

Your video link shows one great example of that.

Thank for the discussion.

Stan Shuffett
 
stan shuffett said:
That was as PRO ONE as PRO ONE can be.
Great video!!

He was fumbling with words because I think he was surprised that eyes were not on the shot line at ball address. There is nothing wrong with putting your eyes on the shot line during your study of a shot. I assure you he had proper PRO ONE visuals and then he did a visual right sweep.

Pros do not get on the line and move straight in your video is a perfect example of what I have been advocating.

Appreciate that,

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

Stan, I'm not sure if you watched the whole video or not. I agree that what it looked like was a perfect pro one approach. You can even see that he is lined up edge to A. However, he obviously got there by accident (not knowing CTE). That is how it is supposed to look, but not what he was doing. Later, the instructor goes on to say how that is the wrong way to approach the shot. And, if you aren't using CTE, it would be. So, technically, both of you are right on how you each saw the video.
 
Stan, just confirming for the sweep you described. The first shot is just a straight in Shot, correct ?
 
Thanks, Stan. That's what I thought, but just wanted to confirm it.
 
Last edited:
Neil said:
Stan, I'm not sure if you watched the whole video or not. I agree that what it looked like was a perfect pro one approach. You can even see that he is lined up edge to A. However, he obviously got there by accident (not knowing CTE). That is how it is supposed to look, but not what he was doing. Later, the instructor goes on to say how that is the wrong way to approach the shot. And, if you aren't using CTE, it would be. So, technically, both of you are right on how you each saw the video.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Neil.

I worked with Allison Fisher in September of 2011 at her home. I picked her brain concerning this very topic.
Allison does perceive a shot line at ball address but after that "shot line perception" she slightly adjusts her stance, MINUTELY producing an offset, and she then bends into the shot line. Allison was very clear about this.

She liked the PRO ONE visual references for the repeatability factor when we discussed her offset. Allison is a technician and does NOT keep her eyes on the PERCEIVED shot line from ball address all the way to full stance. I got that info first-hand.

Our "lesson focus"for that day was for Kentucky Banks and not PRO ONE but we discussed many topics over the course of the day.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
Very often the problem in my opinion is, that far too many just do not understand how important the factor perception is. Several ways can guide you to *get this correct perception*.

Still amusing (sometime also very sad!) how ignorant some ppl are, no matter if it s just because they re just stubborn or just a matter of too less knowledge. Both ways keep em away from learning and understanding.

And i am meanwhile so f.....ng impressed how Stan Shuffet is still responding here. Being often really aggressivley attacked...and still being such a nice guy.

@Stan: Pls send me also some of those *keep cool* pills ^^
Me is gettin already angry by reading some comments....even if i m not offended, lol.

Really curious about your 2nd DVD Stan. And is it just to earn again some more knowledge :-)

best wishes to you and your family,

Ingo
 
Ratta said:
Very often the problem in my opinion is, that far too many just do not understand how important the factor perception is. Several ways can guide you to *get this correct perception*.

Still amusing (sometime also very sad!) how ignorant some ppl are, no matter if it s just because they re just stubborn or just a matter of too less knowledge. Both ways keep em away from learning and understanding.

And i am meanwhile so f.....ng impressed how Stan Shuffet is still responding here. Being often really aggressivley attacked...and still being such a nice guy.

@Stan: Pls send me also some of those *keep cool* pills ^^
Me is gettin already angry by reading some comments....even if i m not offended, lol.

Really curious about your 2nd DVD Stan. And is it just to earn again some more knowledge :-)

best wishes to you and your family,

Ingo
Click to expand...

Thanks, Ingo!

I just try and keep everything in perspective as best that I can. It is not always easy. I thought you were the cool one! Lol

Concerning DVD2, Yes, the knowledge that I will be advancing will be quite significant for anyone who is seeking a more thorough understanding of CTE.
System application will take on a new meaning after this info is out. A lot of players use CTE based on faith. I would like to see faith transformed into understanding. Yes. my explanations will be important and I would not want to be without the new info. Very impactful! IMO

DVD2 also describes very clearly the concept of aiming in a new dimension.

I AM NOT doing a #2 just for a reteach. Knowledge is first, primarily focusing on the precise geometric connections. The reteach will be superior to #1 as 1 do have 2 more years of experience in teaching the details of CTE PRO ONE.

DVD#2 will be my FINAL CHAPTER on the subject.

Time to chow down on some steel cut oats and then it's on to a day of editing.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
stan shuffett said:
Thanks, Ingo!

I just try and keep everything in perspective as best that I can. It is not always easy. I thought you were the cool one! Lol

Concerning DVD2, Yes, the knowledge that I will be advancing will be quite significant for anyone who is seeking a more thorough understanding of CTE.
System application will take on a new meaning after this info is out. A lot of players use CTE based on faith. I would like to see faith transformed into understanding. Yes. my explanations will be important and I would not want to be without the new info. Very impactful! IMO

DVD2 also describes very clearly the concept of aiming in a new dimension.

I AM NOT doing a #2 just for a reteach. Knowledge is first, primarily focusing on the precise geometric connections. The reteach will be superior to #1 as 1 do have 2 more years of experience in teaching the details of CTE PRO ONE.

DVD#2 will be my FINAL CHAPTER on the subject.

Time to chow down on some steel cut oats and then it's on to a day of editing.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

Well stan
We both know that you can believe without faith
So the transformation you re hoping for can be difficult for some ppl:D

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9100 mit Tapatalk 2
 
Ratta said:
Well stan
We both know that you can believe without faith
So the transformation you re hoping for can be difficult for some ppl:D

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9100 mit Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

You are correct.

We are all smart in different ways with varying degrees of intelligence in math, language, visual, and physical skills. There are 8/9 different intelligences altogether.

Pool happens to be primarily of the visual/motor nature Not everyone has the same visual and physical intelligence level just as we are different in math and language skills.

The fact is, though, EVERY single one of us can awaken and improve, continuously, our intelligences with proper direction.

My work in pool is dedicated to describing and teaching specific visual and physical skills that can allow a motivated learner to reach their optimal level of play.

Not everyone will connect with What I teach but I truly believe those with the proper motivation and a strong desire to achieve, will.

Stan Shuffett
 
Amen!

With a coach with so much passion...always a win-win situation!
(not to forget the amazing overall knowledge!!!)


Gesendet von meinem GT-I9100 mit Tapatalk 2
 
Jimmy Caras - Pro One Lesson

I just viewed Jimmy Caras opening a match with a 28 ball run against Mosconi.

There is no doubt that Caras rotates left and right into his shot lines. His Pro One like movements are quite explemplary.

That Mosconi Caras video link is on AZ main forum as I am posting this.

There is great significance to this as I have stated scores of times.

The explanations of these left and right movements that occur with Caras will be explained in DVD2 or available by demo at my home.

What I am saying is that I can I put you into the visual position of Caras in an objective way and instruct you how to move your eyes/ body to CCB just like Caras did.

There is a HUGE reason for this.

This is just one more piece and further evidence to support my thoughts in this thread.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
What Caras is doing represents the divide between mathematics and a new dimension in aiming.

There is no doubt, Caras's eyes move left and right to the shot line.

Well, Math, at this time has no explanation for his eye movements to CCB that can be put into formula. The best answer for math at this time is to brush it off as feel. Ain't gonna work.

I have the correct explanation and fortunately I can explain the objective perceptions in language and the significance of his rotations to CCB.

Thanks to those of you that follow this in a serious manner. You will be rewarded!

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top