Stevie Moore parallel shots CTE video

Status
Not open for further replies.
John can choose to learn my material but John has years and years with his own understanding of CTE. As far I know he has not committed the proper time for rewriting.

There are plenty in your own room that can learn CTE. I will investigate the possibility of developing some CTE customers for you right in your own room.

Stan Shuffett


lol, when/if the day ever comes that I need help finding "customers" I'll be sure to let you know. I can get in plenty of trouble all by my lonesome.

Lou Figueroa
 
If he's been playing for 15 years, why would anyone be trying to help him during the match? You contradict yourself.


I don't know why John enlisted the help of Dennis Spears, an open level NJ player who calls Sandcastle his home room.

#####
Somewhere in the latter part of the match I knew something was up. John seemed to be playing different safeties than he had previously and seemed more deliberate about what he was trying to do. So I began to pay more attention to his corner.

I don’t know Dennis Spears but am told that he is a local open level player that plays pros 1pocket, even. He is sitting next to John’s wife, clapping loudly every time John makes a good shot. We progress to the point in the last game of the night where two balls are on the spot and I hide the third ball on the table on my side. John looks at the shot and then goes to his corner and studies the shot from there. That made no sense to me -- studying the shot from that angle. Then, to my surprise, John comes to the table and shoots an intentional foul laying the CB up behind two balls on the spot. The owed ball is spotted and I am now sandwiched between two balls. Now in this situation, taking himself off the hill is actually the wrong shot but nonetheless it's a pretty sophisticated move and I’m wondering what’s going on.

I notice that from my player’s chair, Dennis is sitting out of my line of sight, slouching down behind one of the arena’s wooden pillars. Now, any time I’m near John’s corner, I’m trying to listen in to what Dennis is saying to John. (Gail says I have hearing like a dog.)

Some folks have wondered, “What could anyone say to John in a just couple of seconds?” But it was way more than that. While I was standing at the table figuring out my shot, Dennis was mumbling away to John with plenty of time to assess the table and brief him on options. Dennis was doing this while holding both hands up to his mouth, sort of like you see baseball players with their gloves during a pitcher/catcher mound conference, but I could still hear bits and pieces like, “You gotta protect the four ball” or “Bank the six over to your side.” And no: there was no prior discussion, much less agreement, on cornermen or coaching.

Soon that game is over, we finish the night at 8-6, and I walk over to the far side of the arena where AZers Koop and Jerry are sitting and I ask them if they could see what was going on in John’s corner and one of them says, “Oh yeah. It was totally obvious from here that he was getting coached. We had a clear view of it.”

So then I go up to Ed and we have the following conversation:

Lou: “I got a complaint.”
Ed: “What is it?”
Lou: “John was getting coached by the black guy in his corner.”
Ed: “Oh yeah. I could see it from the booth. I was waiting for you to say something.”
Lou: “It can’t happen tomorrow.”

My crew slept the coaching. To be honest we didn’t anticipate someone would try that. In any case, I know they’ve beaten themselves up enough about it. So that’s the answer to why Lou’s corner didn’t say anything. The next day before John and I start up again, I go up to Ed:

Lou “There cannot be any coaching today.”
Ed: “I talked to John about it and he admitted that Dennis was telling him stuff but claims it was generic things to pump him up and I told him that even that can’t be going on.”
Lou: “He was getting coached and all I know is that I won’t tolerate it today.”

And what Ed does is to talk to Dennis, one of his room players, and tells him he cannot sit anywhere near John, and that was the end of that.

Here is my last comment on this subject: 1pocket is often likened to chess because so much of the game is the knowledge you accumulate over the years and bring to a game, knowing the right move and when to make it. In all my years of playing 1pocket, coaching has always been verboten and, whether it’s 1pocket or chess, it cannot possibly be considered anything but cheating to have a superior player whispering in your ear while playing a match.
#####

I mentioned at the time, a couple of long time AZers were in attendance at the match. If you'd like I can quote their comments to the effect that John was obviously getting coached.

Let me know :-)

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:
Where did I challenge you??? Seems you have major comprehension issues.

Since you're one of the doubters about CTE and other things, are you now moonwalking or crawfishing and saying you weren't a part of the "some of these guys" included in this statement?

"Why don't you play some of these guys that doubt your wizardry?"


Which Jalopy, Range Rover or Porsche 911?
Jason

Which ever one you choose to travel to Kentucky or Florida to play Stan, Landon, Stevie Moore or Cookie. I'd say they can produce some wizardry.

Talk about comprehension problems, you can't even remember what you wrote or understand it.
 
I don't know why John enlisted the help of Dennis Spears, an open level NJ player who calls Sandcastle his home room.

#####
Somewhere in the latter part of the match I knew something was up. John seemed to be playing different safeties than he had previously and seemed more deliberate about what he was trying to do. So I began to pay more attention to his corner.

I don’t know Dennis Spears but am told that he is a local open level player that plays pros 1pocket, even. He is sitting next to John’s wife, clapping loudly every time John makes a good shot. We progress to the point in the last game of the night where two balls are on the spot and I hide the third ball on the table on my side. John looks at the shot and then goes to his corner and studies the shot from there. That made no sense to me -- studying the shot from that angle. Then, to my surprise, John comes to the table and shoots an intentional foul laying the CB up behind two balls on the spot. The owed ball is spotted and I am now sandwiched between two balls. Now in this situation, taking himself off the hill is actually the wrong shot but nonetheless it's a pretty sophisticated move and I’m wondering what’s going on.

I notice that from my player’s chair, Dennis is sitting out of my line of sight, slouching down behind one of the arena’s wooden pillars. Now, any time I’m near John’s corner, I’m trying to listen in to what Dennis is saying to John. (Gail says I have hearing like a dog.)

Some folks have wondered, “What could anyone say to John in a just couple of seconds?” But it was way more than that. While I was standing at the table figuring out my shot, Dennis was mumbling away to John with plenty of time to assess the table and brief him on options. Dennis was doing this while holding both hands up to his mouth, sort of like you see baseball players with their gloves during a pitcher/catcher mound conference, but I could still hear bits and pieces like, “You gotta protect the four ball” or “Bank the six over to your side.” And no: there was no prior discussion, much less agreement, on cornermen or coaching.

Soon that game is over, we finish the night at 8-6, and I walk over to the far side of the arena where AZers Koop and Jerry are sitting and I ask them if they could see what was going on in John’s corner and one of them says, “Oh yeah. It was totally obvious from here that he was getting coached. We had a clear view of it.”

So then I go up to Ed and we have the following conversation:

Lou: “I got a complaint.”
Ed: “What is it?”
Lou: “John was getting coached by the black guy in his corner.”
Ed: “Oh yeah. I could see it from the booth. I was waiting for you to say something.”
Lou: “It can’t happen tomorrow.”

My crew slept the coaching. To be honest we didn’t anticipate someone would try that. In any case, I know they’ve beaten themselves up enough about it. So that’s the answer to why Lou’s corner didn’t say anything. The next day before John and I start up again, I go up to Ed:

Lou “There cannot be any coaching today.”
Ed: “I talked to John about it and he admitted that Dennis was telling him stuff but claims it was generic things to pump him up and I told him that even that can’t be going on.”
Lou: “He was getting coached and all I know is that I won’t tolerate it today.”

And what Ed does is to talk to Dennis, one of his room players, and tells him he cannot sit anywhere near John, and that was the end of that.

Here is my last comment on this subject: 1pocket is often likened to chess because so much of the game is the knowledge you accumulate over the years and bring to a game, knowing the right move and when to make it. In all my years of playing 1pocket, coaching has always been verboten and, whether it’s 1pocket or chess, it cannot possibly be considered anything but cheating to have a superior player whispering in your ear while playing a match.
#####

I mentioned at the time, a couple of long time AZers were in attendance at the match. If you'd like I can quote their comments to the effect that John was obviously getting coached.

Let me know :-)

Lou Figueroa

I agree, coaching should not be allowed, especially in a game of one pocket where knowledge of the game is so crucial. This should not be tolerated, and rightly so. This also vindicates the statement that this match was about one pocket knowledge, and very little to do with CTE. You mention if John can't make CTE work then who? Well, who ever said John can't make CTE work? He wasn't having problems pocketing balls. He lost that match largely from making poor one pocket move decisions.
 
I agree, coaching should not be allowed, especially in a game of one pocket where knowledge of the game is so crucial. This should not be tolerated, and rightly so. This also vindicates the statement that this match was about one pocket knowledge, and very little to do with CTE. You mention if John can't make CTE work then who? Well, who ever said John can't make CTE work? He wasn't having problems pocketing balls. He lost that match largely from making poor one pocket move decisions.


au contraire. AtLarge did one of his statistical analysis's of the match and basically my runs were longer than John's. When I was getting fives and sixes, John was getting two's and threes.

Lou Figueroa
 
Here ya go genius.

You give new meaning to the word slowwwww
Jason


One doesn't have to be fast to know where you're coming from and what you're about.

People have tried to be nice you in this thread and at other times. Stan was very gentlemanly in his explanation. Cookie offered to show you some things the next time you get to Florida. JB told me that you seemed like a decent guy when you went to his booth at SBE. And I posted a while back if John said you were OK in person, I'm good with his word.

Well, every so often people can misjudge and I think he did. You come in this particular thread about CTE shooting off your big mouth like you're the genius expert and don't even have a leg to stand on since you don't know squat about the first thing involving it. You don't even know what CTP to CTP is and you use it.

I made a mistake in going with John's assessment and gave you the benefit of the doubt. Not any more. Not only do you have nothing of value to add about CTE or your understanding of it, you just badmouth and shoot off with your mouth like a 3rd grade child on a playground.

Grow up! Fact is, I can't stand you. I wouldn't have a beer with you, play pool, or even waste my time meeting up in person.

Go into the NPR forum where you can argue about all kinds of crap with people who love to do likewise. No more getting sucked into your 3rd grade crap for me any longer. You just got your DEAR JOHN letter. Comprende?
 
I've watched numerous videos, and if you recall, I did some stroke analysis on some of them. I found that Stan adjusts his final aim in mid-stroke. How often? I don't know because I can't do a video analysis of every shot he takes, and of course some of the shots will be at the correct angle to pocket the ball, requiring no subconscious adjustments. So to address the part in bold, I have at least a little evidence that the shots are being made by last second adjustments. Maybe that's part of CTE.



What is equally infuriating is debating with people who can't seem to think critically when it comes to CTE (hence the "cult" term). You, however, seem in every other way to be a reasonable guy. Answer this: IF you use CTE and it works well for you, and IF you don't understand FOR A FACT how it works, then how can you rule out any alternative possibilities as to how it works?

Question 2: If I paraphrase you correctly, you are claiming that CTE works because even though you are still hitting the same visual with two different shots (two different cut angles), the position of the rails and pockets fool your mind into thinking the two different cut angles still LOOK LIKE the same visual alignment when in reality they are not. That's one possibility and is your suggestion. Another possibility is that you are so busy making all the CTE adjustments and pivots that you don't realize that you are really not on the same visual alignment. That, or like Stan you are making swoops at the last second to make the shot go. Which explanation would most people bet $100,000 on?

Why is it that you keep falling back on the same nonsense YOU state and then refute what only YOU state? Or are you just that blind and have that poor of a reading comprehension that you don't even realize you do it?

How many times do you have to be told the difference between visuals and alignment before you finally have it register in your brain? You do NOT use the exact same alignment on two different shots.

Why is this so hard for you to understand? Of course CTE can't work the way you describe it. No one says it can. So, why do you insist on claiming that others agree with how YOU say it works?

You are like a broken record, you keep making false claims about it, and then refuting those claims. Ridiculous. All this time, and you still totally miss the very basics of using it. And, it's not for lack of clarity, because many others have understood it.
 
Why is it that you keep falling back on the same nonsense YOU state and then refute what only YOU state? Or are you just that blind and have that poor of a reading comprehension that you don't even realize you do it?

How many times do you have to be told the difference between visuals and alignment before you finally have it register in your brain? You do NOT use the exact same alignment on two different shots.

Why is this so hard for you to understand? Of course CTE can't work the way you describe it. No one says it can. So, why do you insist on claiming that others agree with how YOU say it works?

You are like a broken record, you keep making false claims about it, and then refuting those claims. Ridiculous. All this time, and you still totally miss the very basics of using it. And, it's not for lack of clarity, because many others have understood it.
I'm going to say his major problem in understanding CTE is that he is not lacking in common sense.
 
One doesn't have to be fast to know where you're coming from and what you're about.

People have tried to be nice you in this thread and at other times. Stan was very gentlemanly in his explanation. Cookie offered to show you some things the next time you get to Florida. JB told me that you seemed like a decent guy when you went to his booth at SBE. And I posted a while back if John said you were OK in person, I'm good with his word.

Well, every so often people can misjudge and I think he did. You come in this particular thread about CTE shooting off your big mouth like you're the genius expert and don't even have a leg to stand on since you don't know squat about the first thing involving it. You don't even know what CTP to CTP is and you use it.

I made a mistake in going with John's assessment and gave you the benefit of the doubt. Not any more. Not only do you have nothing of value to add about CTE or your understanding of it, you just badmouth and shoot off with your mouth like a 3rd grade child on a playground.

Grow up! Fact is, I can't stand you. I wouldn't have a beer with you, play pool, or even waste my time meeting up in person.

Go into the NPR forum where you can argue about all kinds of crap with people who love to do likewise. No more getting sucked into your 3rd grade crap for me any longer. You just got your DEAR JOHN letter. Comprende?

Looks like you have your sensitive feeling turned all the way up. Might wanna turn it down a bit.

I showed you what I said, you were wrong and tried twisting words. Now you're all butthurt.

I gambled for the first time in probably 5 years 2 days ago. The guy asked to play, I didn't go to him. We played 9ball $10/game, when I got 10 games ahead he quit.
Jason
 
Why is it that you keep falling back on the same nonsense YOU state and then refute what only YOU state? Or are you just that blind and have that poor of a reading comprehension that you don't even realize you do it?

How many times do you have to be told the difference between visuals and alignment before you finally have it register in your brain? You do NOT use the exact same alignment on two different shots.

Why is this so hard for you to understand? Of course CTE can't work the way you describe it. No one says it can. So, why do you insist on claiming that others agree with how YOU say it works?

You are like a broken record, you keep making false claims about it, and then refuting those claims. Ridiculous. All this time, and you still totally miss the very basics of using it. And, it's not for lack of clarity, because many others have understood it.

What took you 4 paragraphs to say can also be said in three words: straw man argument. Of course that's not what I did.

I answered mohrt's questions, now I'm waiting on his response to mine.
 
I agree, coaching should not be allowed, especially in a game of one pocket where knowledge of the game is so crucial. This should not be tolerated, and rightly so. This also vindicates the statement that this match was about one pocket knowledge, and very little to do with CTE. You mention if John can't make CTE work then who? Well, who ever said John can't make CTE work? He wasn't having problems pocketing balls. He lost that match largely from making poor one pocket move decisions.

Lou probably paid Dennis to give John bad information
 
I'm going to say his major problem in understanding CTE is that he is not lacking in common sense.

And this is precisely why Hal Houle pulled his horns in about sharing step by step CTE instructions.

At first, CTE does seem to fly in the face of common sense., CTE students must let of conventional wisdom if they're interested in getting to first base. After letting go and then seeing that CTE is visual and that vision can offer an unusual connection between CB OB and pocket, then it's free sailing from there.

Common sense is stopper for many......Hal did not want to fool with trying to get through to thick skulls that constantly cried like a baby about logic and common sense.

Attend one of my clinics and you will readily see that the conventional approach to playing to wrong.



Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
I've watched numerous videos, and if you recall, I did some stroke analysis on some of them. I found that Stan adjusts his final aim in mid-stroke. How often? I don't know because I can't do a video analysis of every shot he takes, and of course some of the shots will be at the correct angle to pocket the ball, requiring no subconscious adjustments. So to address the part in bold, I have at least a little evidence that the shots are being made by last second adjustments. Maybe that's part of CTE.







What is equally infuriating is debating with people who can't seem to think critically when it comes to CTE (hence the "cult" term). You, however, seem in every other way to be a reasonable guy. Answer this: IF you use CTE and it works well for you, and IF you don't understand FOR A FACT how it works, then how can you rule out any alternative possibilities as to how it works?



Question 2: If I paraphrase you correctly, you are claiming that CTE works because even though you are still hitting the same visual with two different shots (two different cut angles), the position of the rails and pockets fool your mind into thinking the two different cut angles still LOOK LIKE the same visual alignment when in reality they are not. That's one possibility and is your suggestion. Another possibility is that you are so busy making all the CTE adjustments and pivots that you don't realize that you are really not on the same visual alignment. That, or like Stan you are making swoops at the last second to make the shot go. Which explanation would most people bet $100,000 on?



Those are your words, not mine. The placement of two spheres on a square plane affect how we perceive the alignments. If you want to call perception fooling the eye, go ahead. I'm not saying it's wrong.

An alignment on, say, ctel/A is not a protractor and ruler alignment, our perception gives us the correct alignment for the given shot. Accurately and repeatedly. In Stevie's two examples, the same procedure results in slightly differing physical cue position in relation to the balls. If you cannot accept that to be possible, then we are at a stand off. That is the visual phenomenon that happens at the table. I agree it may not be obvious at first. It's right under our nose in plain sight, yet it's not readily identified by everybody. It took me time to figure it out too.
 
Those are your words, not mine. The placement of two spheres on a square plane affect how we perceive the alignments. If you want to call perception fooling the eye, go ahead. I'm not saying it's wrong.

An alignment on, say, ctel/A is not a protractor and ruler alignment, our perception gives us the correct alignment for the given shot. Accurately and repeatedly. In Stevie's two examples, the same procedure results in slightly differing physical cue position in relation to the balls. If you cannot accept that to be possible, then we are at a stand off. That is the visual phenomenon that happens at the table. I agree it may not be obvious at first. It's right under our nose in plain sight, yet it's not readily identified by everybody. It took me time to figure it out too.

There is actually a dual phenomena:
1. The 2 spheres on the table and their special alignment and connection to right angles.
2. Then there's the visual phenomena of how to see CCB.
Number 1 is not so explicable but 2 can be precisely described and soon will be.

Stan Shuffett
 
And this is precisely why Hal Houle pulled his horns in about sharing step by step CTE instructions.

At first, CTE does seem to fly in the face of common sense., CTE students must let of conventional wisdom if they're interested in getting to first base. After letting go and then seeing that CTE is visual and that vision can offer an unusual connection between CB OB and pocket, then it's free sailing from there.

Common sense is stopper for many......Hal did not want to fool with trying to get through to thick skulls that constantly cried like a baby about logic and common sense.

Attend one of my clinics and you will readily see that the conventional approach to playing to wrong.



Stan Shuffett

No thanks. No offense, I just don't fit into your target market.
 
au contraire. AtLarge did one of his statistical analysis's of the match and basically my runs were longer than John's. When I was getting fives and sixes, John was getting two's and threes.



Lou Figueroa



Is it not easier to get longer runs when your opponent makes more mistakes and gives you open shots?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top