CTE PRO ONE Contrast with Quarters System

I agree 100 percent, however if one is going to debate, how to do something, it is useful for them to have done it.

I am fairly sure that the Atomic Physicists from the 20's- 40's knew where to start, the problem was developing the means to produce enough weapons grade Plutonium, without having it blow up before they intended.

Colin Colenso said:
Correlation does not equal Causation. While there is a correlation between talent and knowledge, those with talent are not always more knowledgeable than those without such talent.

Most of the myths of the game were started by good players. I've met many good players and few of them understand how they do what they do, let alone explain and teach it.

I'm pretty sure Einstein wouldn't have known where to start making an atomic explosive. Maybe a lot of engineers thought he was an idiot as his knowledge was ethereal.
Click to expand...
 
Did I say that????

I trust my own experiences and of those who done it.

I don't trust the experiences of people that have not done it.

Just like I don't trust yours, because as far as I know, you may not play pool at all.
Prove me wrong, and post something other than shots with a ball 6 inches from a hole.

duckie said:
So then, you dont trust your own experiences but others?

Funny, I trust no ones experinces but my own. Guess that makes my own man and not a man made up of others experinces.

Once you start selling your knowledge, it becomes a product and now you are a salesman. Products are fixed. Knowledge grows.

If you teach from a set standard, you are not a master but ajust mimicking someone's else products and not your knowledge.
Click to expand...
 
OMG this is unreal.

You trusted Babe's book and arrow didn't you...his experiences.

You trusted Bruce Lee who developed his "system" from what he believe were the best from others?

As I said your posts are always good for a laugh, especially in these threads when the discussion gets a bit to serious.

If all human civilization was like you I suspect we still would not have learned how to make tools, or use fire.

;)



duckie said:
So then, you dont trust your own experiences but others?

Funny, I trust no ones experinces but my own. Guess that makes my own man and not a man made up of others experinces.

Once you start selling your knowledge, it becomes a product and now you are a salesman. Products are fixed. Knowledge grows.

If you teach from a set standard, you are not a master but ajust mimicking someone's else products and not your knowledge.
Click to expand...
 
sheffield6 said:
really, he didn't win a round on mine
Click to expand...

Actually, I have him ahead by a large margin. The CTE defenders, so far, have offered up the following arguments:

"Bring money and play Stan, Stevie and Landon to prove Pro1 isn't objective"
"You should be pushing a mop if you can't comprehend Pro1"
"It's an objective visual system that you need to practice, spend time with, and adapt to your particular style"

None of those are objective arguments. I can read a book that teaches me to juggle. Did I juggle as soon as I closed the cover? No. I juggled after practicing for days. To call anything that involves physical perception, movement, and judgments a "system" is actually pretty ludicrous. It's an aiming technique. But no two people do it exactly alike. That makes it a personal aiming technique. Just like ghost ball. Or equal/opposite. Or double the distance. Feel free to use whatever aiming technique you'd like. Just because someone can't wrap their heads around Pro1, doesn't make them obtuse, a mop pusher, or mentally challenged. We just choose to stick with what has worked for us. I have spoken with Hal Houle. He gave me his CTE lesson. It was different from Pro1, but seemed to work on a lot of shots. Pro1 seems to be an evolution of his teachings. But the CTE die hards need to take a chill pill. This isn't the aiming inquisition, and you aren't being persecuted. Pat is asking some direct questions, and nobnob feels the need to preach to him minions about how unfairly CTErs are being treated. You bring it upon yourselves with the way you speak down at people, and not by the aiming method you choose. I wouldn't buy the videos simply because of some of the comments I've seen Stan make to people on this board. I'd also never buy a JB Case. Purely because I've seen how sideways these two guys can go.
 
Shawn Armstrong said:
Actually, I have him ahead by a large margin. The CTE defenders, so far, have offered up the following arguments:

"Bring money and play Stan, Stevie and Landon to prove Pro1 isn't objective"
"You should be pushing a mop if you can't comprehend Pro1"
"It's an objective visual system that you need to practice, spend time with, and adapt to your particular style"

None of those are objective arguments. I can read a book that teaches me to juggle. Did I juggle as soon as I closed the cover? No. I juggled after practicing for days. To call anything that involves physical perception, movement, and judgments a "system" is actually pretty ludicrous. It's an aiming technique. But no two people do it exactly alike. That makes it a personal aiming technique. Just like ghost ball. Or equal/opposite. Or double the distance. Feel free to use whatever aiming technique you'd like. Just because someone can't wrap their heads around Pro1, doesn't make them obtuse, a mop pusher, or mentally challenged. We just choose to stick with what has worked for us. I have spoken with Hal Houle. He gave me his CTE lesson. It was different from Pro1, but seemed to work on a lot of shots. Pro1 seems to be an evolution of his teachings. But the CTE die hards need to take a chill pill. This isn't the aiming inquisition, and you aren't being persecuted. Pat is asking some direct questions, and nobnob feels the need to preach to him minions about how unfairly CTErs are being treated. You bring it upon yourselves with the way you speak down at people, and not by the aiming method you choose. I wouldn't buy the videos simply because of some of the comments I've seen Stan make to people on this board. I'd also never buy a JB Case. Purely because I've seen how sideways these two guys can go.
Click to expand...

Really and truly!!!!!
The principal detractors of CTE can NOT demonstrate CTE on a table, yet they debate it.
Think about that very seriously!

What is the problem? Simple....but it will be denied. The major principals of anti cte have difficulty with THE idea that their language and math minds are taking a huge step backwards if the perceptual nature of CTE is true and objective.

Please understand if what I have presented is true, and it is, it is a monumental game changer.

There are some fighting tooth and nail to keep the truth from spreading. CTE is already around the world. Their efforts are falling way short and all that is left is just to just to muddy the water in hopes that CTE might stall in some way.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
stan shuffett said:
Really and truly!!!!!
The principal detractors of CTE can NOT demonstrate CTE on a table, yet they debate it.
Think about that very seriously!

What is the problem? Simple....but it will be denied. The major principals of anti cte have difficulty with THE idea that their language and math minds are taking a huge step backwards if the perceptual nature of CTE is true and objective.

Please understand if what I have presented is true, and it is, it is a monumental game changer.

There are some fighting tooth and nail to keep the truth from spreading. CTE is already around the world. Their efforts are falling way short and all that is left is just to just to muddy the water in hopes that CTE might stall in some way.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

Swap the word "scientology" for CTE in this post, and see how you sound.
 
stan shuffett said:
Really and truly!!!!!
The principal detractors of CTE can NOT demonstrate CTE on a table, yet they debate it.
Think about that very seriously!

What is the problem? Simple....but it will be denied. The major principals of anti cte have difficulty with THE idea that their language and math minds are taking a huge step backwards if the perceptual nature of CTE is true and objective.

Please understand if what I have presented is true, and it is, it is a monumental game changer.

There are some fighting tooth and nail to keep the truth from spreading. CTE is already around the world. Their efforts are falling way short and all that is left is just to just to muddy the water in hopes that CTE might stall in some way.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

Shawn Armstrong said:
Swap the word "detractors" for supporters in this post, and see how you sound.
Click to expand...

I changed your post a bit to present another view.

"yet they debate it.
Think about that very seriously!"
 
stan shuffett said:
Really and truly!!!!!
The principal detractors of CTE can NOT demonstrate CTE on a table, yet they debate it.
Think about that very seriously!

What is the problem? Simple....but it will be denied. The major principals of anti cte have difficulty with THE idea that their language and math minds are taking a huge step backwards if the perceptual nature of CTE is true and objective.

Please understand if what I have presented is true, and it is, it is a monumental game changer.

There are some fighting tooth and nail to keep the truth from spreading. CTE is already around the world. Their efforts are falling way short and all that is left is just to just to muddy the water in hopes that CTE might stall in some way.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

From what I've seen, the principle proponents of CTE can't demonstrate it at the table, either...

CTE spreading around the world? Stalling? Lol. The biggest market for aiming systems is snooker, yet you don't appear to be on TSF - would you like the link?

Shawn armstrong is right. The way you seek to protect your product is a disgrace, and i will never give you a dime because of it.

This is the aiming forum. The day it becomes the CTE forum is the day you can 'hope the mods take note' of reasonable questioning and actually have a point. Until then, it's bullying and incitement.
 
Shawn Armstrong said:
Actually, I have him ahead by a large margin. The CTE defenders, so far, have offered up the following arguments:

"Bring money and play Stan, Stevie and Landon to prove Pro1 isn't objective"
"You should be pushing a mop if you can't comprehend Pro1"
"It's an objective visual system that you need to practice, spend time with, and adapt to your particular style"

None of those are objective arguments. I can read a book that teaches me to juggle. Did I juggle as soon as I closed the cover? No. I juggled after practicing for days. To call anything that involves physical perception, movement, and judgments a "system" is actually pretty ludicrous. It's an aiming technique. But no two people do it exactly alike. That makes it a personal aiming technique. Just like ghost ball. Or equal/opposite. Or double the distance. Feel free to use whatever aiming technique you'd like. Just because someone can't wrap their heads around Pro1, doesn't make them obtuse, a mop pusher, or mentally challenged. We just choose to stick with what has worked for us. I have spoken with Hal Houle. He gave me his CTE lesson. It was different from Pro1, but seemed to work on a lot of shots. Pro1 seems to be an evolution of his teachings. But the CTE die hards need to take a chill pill. This isn't the aiming inquisition, and you aren't being persecuted. Pat is asking some direct questions, and nobnob feels the need to preach to him minions about how unfairly CTErs are being treated. You bring it upon yourselves with the way you speak down at people, and not by the aiming method you choose. I wouldn't buy the videos simply because of some of the comments I've seen Stan make to people on this board. I'd also never buy a JB Case. Purely because I've seen how sideways these two guys can go.
Click to expand...

Why should anyone have to defend CTE, either use or dont use it, up to you, and as for Johnson and gang, they have no interest in learning CTE, just nitpicking wordsmiths. To me,Stan appears to be an honorable man who has gone out of his way to help people who want to learn .
Anyway, hows the juggling coming along :cool:
 
Honestly you guys sound ridiculous. Stan states over and over that there are objective points used in his system. There are. He has "perceptions" that he uses in conjunction with these objective points that ties everything together and they work. I have only been working with Pro One for 4 days now and there just is no way in hell I could argue that it doesn't work. Now my background is in a very technical manufacturing trade involving Trig, Geometry, and Algebra and I cannot for the life of me set down at my cad system and draw out what makes this system work, It is not a 2d system, it only works when objective objects are perceived from a 3rd angle perspective. I am not real good with Pro One yet, it's a different mindset, but I am getting it. I know this, there have already been many shots that I set up on, in drills, same method of set up but with balls at different locations on the table and at different angles to the pocket, and yet they go, center pocket. I don't understand how it works, but I don't have to. I know in time I will get better at the perceptions choices and I will be a better player because of this system. If you guys spent a third of the time trying it as you spend trying to discredit it you would likely be spending a lot of time on here thanking Stan, rather than trying to beat him down. He has a good product that will help a lot of people and I personally can't thank him enough for what he has done for me.

Stan, maybe if you called it 3D Aiming they would let you be,,,,,,,,,,,or not.
 
stan shuffett said:
You are simply showing your bitterness toward something you do not like.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

Hal called me on his dime from the US, and took me through his version of CTE back in 1998. I have never slagged anyone for using a particular aiming system. The fact that you don't know that shows your level of reading comprehension. We're even.
 
Ron Swanson said:
From what I've seen, the principle proponents of CTE can't demonstrate it at the table, either...

CTE spreading around the world? Stalling? Lol. The biggest market for aiming systems is snooker, yet you don't appear to be on TSF - would you like the link?

Shawn armstrong is right. The way you seek to protect your product is a disgrace, and i will never give you a dime because of it.

This is the aiming forum. The day it becomes the CTE forum is the day you can 'hope the mods take note' of reasonable questioning and actually have a point. Until then, it's bullying and incitement.
Click to expand...

Have you looked at youtube,com lately?

Tell me another system that gives that much instruction away.

I'd say Pro One tech support is AAA.
 
Ron Swanson said:
From what I've seen, the principle proponents of CTE can't demonstrate it at the table, either...

CTE spreading around the world? Stalling? Lol. The biggest market for aiming systems is snooker, yet you don't appear to be on TSF - would you like the link?

Shawn armstrong is right. The way you seek to protect your product is a disgrace, and i will never give you a dime because of it.

This is the aiming forum. The day it becomes the CTE forum is the day you can 'hope the mods take note' of reasonable questioning and actually have a point. Until then, it's bullying and incitement.
Click to expand...

I stopped reading this after the first paragraph. I refuse to read nonsense.

Stan Shuffett
 
Shawn Armstrong said:
Actually, I have him ahead by a large margin. The CTE defenders, so far, have offered up the following arguments:

"Bring money and play Stan, Stevie and Landon to prove Pro1 isn't objective"
"You should be pushing a mop if you can't comprehend Pro1"
"It's an objective visual system that you need to practice, spend time with, and adapt to your particular style"

None of those are objective arguments. I can read a book that teaches me to juggle. Did I juggle as soon as I closed the cover? No. I juggled after practicing for days. To call anything that involves physical perception, movement, and judgments a "system" is actually pretty ludicrous. It's an aiming technique. But no two people do it exactly alike. That makes it a personal aiming technique. Just like ghost ball. Or equal/opposite. Or double the distance. Feel free to use whatever aiming technique you'd like. Just because someone can't wrap their heads around Pro1, doesn't make them obtuse, a mop pusher, or mentally challenged. We just choose to stick with what has worked for us. I have spoken with Hal Houle. He gave me his CTE lesson. It was different from Pro1, but seemed to work on a lot of shots. Pro1 seems to be an evolution of his teachings. But the CTE die hards need to take a chill pill. This isn't the aiming inquisition, and you aren't being persecuted. Pat is asking some direct questions, and nobnob feels the need to preach to him minions about how unfairly CTErs are being treated. You bring it upon yourselves with the way you speak down at people, and not by the aiming method you choose. I wouldn't buy the videos simply because of some of the comments I've seen Stan make to people on this board. I'd also never buy a JB Case. Purely because I've seen how sideways these two guys can go.
Click to expand...

:thumbup2: :thumbup2: :thumbup2:

Perhaps the best & most truthful post in quite some time.

However, JB does make what might be the best cases.

Best 2 You & All
Rick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top