Stevie Moore parallel shots CTE video

[SpiderWebComm]

I find this interesting. I indicate that your swoop is so large you could drive a Mack truck through it. Your reply in bold is what caught my eye. Aren't you the guy who wrote the forward to Stan's new blockbuster CTE tome, complete with 3000 photos and diagrams? The guy who writes the forward says essentially, "I swoop all over the place but the ball still goes in. Who cares why?"

Just to read between the lines for you: If you don't know why the balls go in, how do you know CTE is responsible for it?" I know, I know, you don't care because it works and I'm a basher. Burn the witch... yawn.

I'm not much of a golfer but I do play and watch tournaments on TV. Jim Furyk, Lee Trevino, Ryan Moore and a whole host of others destroy the "perfect golf swing model" with the way they swing the club.

If you happened to be a professional golf instructor (which you aren't NOR a professional pool instructor, just a hack amateur wannabe) you'd be first in line to try to have them change their swing to some perfect biomechanical model and it would destroy them to the point where they'd be weekend beer drinking hackers who couldn't break 80.

NEWS FLASH. Their records for winning tournaments, major tournaments, and money over their long careers rank among all the highest in the history of golf.

You, like Lou are nobodies in the world of pool as players or instructors. I'm not either, but STAN sure as hell is. He's well known and respected by ALL of his teaching peers and pro players.

You = NOBODY. A NOBODY with one of the biggest bashing know nothing mouths on an internet pool forum.

 

[lfigueroa]

I find this interesting. I indicate that your swoop is so large you could drive a Mack truck through it. Your reply in bold is what caught my eye. Aren't you the guy who wrote the forward to Stan's new blockbuster CTE tome, complete with 3000 photos and diagrams? The guy who writes the forward says essentially, "I swoop all over the place but the ball still goes in. Who cares why?"

Just to read between the lines for you: If you don't know why the balls go in, how do you know CTE is responsible for it?" I know, I know, you don't care because it works and I'm a basher. Burn the witch... yawn.

lol. I wouldn't let Dave Segal write the invitation to a garage sale, much less the forward to my book. I mean *really?* Playing barefoot on his home track and swooping a few balls in is his big claim to fame. What a riot, lol.

Lou Figueroa

 

[mohrt]

Dan White can you link to this video where you claim Stan corrects his aim? I must have missed that post. I'll preface this with the fact that videos are not always conclusive evidence of geometry or alignments. The camera angle and focal point can make things look funny. I was once called out on one of my videos for forgery, as *clearly* the ball was not heading toward the hole, yet it went in. You can easily find it and judge yourself, I didn't change a thing. I used an iPhone with an orthogonal view of the table.

 

[Dan White]

Why do you insist on blaming this as a conscious forced "aiming correction", Mr. STROKE MAN? We can also say it's unconscious, doesn't matter.

Nobody is doing that intentionally to correct aiming, NOBODY.

Where did I say the correction was intentional?

Lets assume a player is a strict practitioner of Contact Point to Contact Point aiming and a very good one like Joe Tucker. If he matches #7 to #7 visually with his stance, body, and cue aligned correctly, what do you think would happen if he altered his delivery at the start of the forward stroke to compensate for whatever the hell you're talking about as an adjustment since he already was perfectly aligned to begin with?

What would happen is if he then hit the CB at #5 instead of #7 as a result of the adjustment, he'd MISS THE FRIGGIN' SHOT!

Altering the stroke rarely works if ever to make shots, it makes you MISS shots.

IT'S THE STROKE!

Yes, but in this case altering the stroke is just what may be making the shot work, whereas if he only used CTE strictly as described, the shot would be missed. Maybe this is why CTE takes so much effort to learn. Maybe that's why even mohrt doesn't really use CTE, best I can tell.

 

[mohrt]

Where did I say the correction was intentional?







Yes, but in this case altering the stroke is just what may be making the shot work, whereas if he only used CTE strictly as described, the shot would be missed. Maybe this is why CTE takes so much effort to learn. Maybe that's why even mohrt doesn't really use CTE, best I can tell.

You sure like to make a lot of self proclamations. I don't know where this comes from. Just trying to stir the pot?

 

[Dan White]

I'm not much of a golfer but I do play and watch tournaments on TV. Jim Furyk, Lee Trevino, Ryan Moore and a whole host of others destroy the "perfect golf swing model" with the way they swing the club.

If you happened to be a professional golf instructor (which you aren't NOR a professional pool instructor, just a hack amateur wannabe) you'd be first in line to try to have them change their swing to some perfect biomechanical model and it would destroy them to the point where they'd be weekend beer drinking hackers who couldn't break 80.

NEWS FLASH. Their records for winning tournaments, major tournaments, and money over their long careers rank among all the highest in the history of golf.

You, like Lou are nobodies in the world of pool as players or instructors. I'm not either, but STAN sure as hell is. He's well known and respected by ALL of his teaching peers and pro players.

You = NOBODY. A NOBODY with one of the biggest bashing know nothing mouths on an internet pool forum.

Remember earlier when we talked about what a "straw man" argument was? The bold is a perfect example. You put words in my mouth and then discredit them = straw man.

 

[Dan White]

Dan White can you link to this video where you claim Stan corrects his aim? I must have missed that post. I'll preface this with the fact that videos are not always conclusive evidence of geometry or alignments. The camera angle and focal point can make things look funny. I was once called out on one of my videos for forgery, as *clearly* the ball was not heading toward the hole, yet it went in. You can easily find it and judge yourself, I didn't change a thing. I used an iPhone with an orthogonal view of the table.

Here's one example:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=5320374&postcount=1407

Here is a detailed examination of Stan's first CTE stroke in the video above. The purpose of this video is to examine that particular stroke in greater detail:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWZEoyoYMQ8

I gave up on this when John "Mr. Jeckyl and Dr. Hyde" Barton/Collins at first applauded my efforts, as you can see in the comments, but later changed his mind, curiously.

I'll be interested in your comments.

 

[Dan White]

You sure like to make a lot of self proclamations. I don't know where this comes from. Just trying to stir the pot?

I'm not stirring any pot. You and Dave keep saying that CTE wouldn't work if he swooped (actually Dave is on both sides of the fence on that point - it seems to be OK for him to swoop). I'm suggesting that you hide in the laundry basket long enough to escape the compound so that you can take a fresh look at things. Is it not possible that swooping and/or some amount of stroke correction is making these shots go in, and not the CTE alignment alone? Is is possible that these corrections are necessary only on some shots and not others?

Again, it sure seems like you guys (except maybe tony) are so defensive that you are incapable of looking at CTE dispassionately and just maybe improving your knowledge of what is actually happening. Even magic, as tony puts it, has a rather mundane explanation when you draw back the curtain.

I'm not saying CTE is all garbage BS. I'm saying there are curious stroke problems here and there, and what does that tell us, if anything, about how CTE works. Maybe the answer is that you can swoop all over the place like Dave, but if your initial alignment and sweep is "CTE correct" than that's all that matters. That's one possible follow up question that could be asked.

The problem is, nobody cares to ponder the significance of new findings like this.

It's kind of how the scientific method helps us learn new things.

 

[stan shuffett]

There are assertions being made that my stroke is adjusting in order to successfully pocket balls with CTE.

I will award $25000 to the BEF if assessment of my stroke by video analysis shows adjustments for making CTE work. I want fair videoing and judging. I choose Dr. DAVE, Bob Jewett, Pat Johnson and Mike Page. A video highlite compilation and the findings must be presented on this forum.
The analysis must take place at my facility before January 1, 2018.

Stan Shuffett

Bump

Stan Shuffett

 

[Dan White]

OK Stan. Why pussy foot around? We both post $100,000 cash in the hands of someone we both trust, winner takes all, and here is the bet:

While demonstrating CTE on more than one occasion, has Stan made his initial alignment, got down on the shot, taken a practice swing along the alignment, but then during the final stroke deviated from that alignment to bring the cue forward in a different direction to pocket the ball successfully? I'll understand if you want to clarify some of the terms so there is no wiggle room.

You up for it?

...........

Bump

 

[stan shuffett]

I am willing to post my total book allocation money of $50000 that my stroke has no error effect in making CTE work as a system.


Stan Shuffett

 

[mohrt]

I have no problems having civil conversation about CTE, and I really try to keep it that way. However, I do not like my words being twisted, nor do I like being grouped with what others say. Now, I never stated that CTE won't work with a swoop. I don't know if it would, never tried it. Sounds like a bad idea. What I DID say is, no swoop is required to make CTE work. Subtle but very different meaning. You also claim I don't use CTE. I don't know where you get that, but it is completely unsubstantiated as I always use CTE when I play pool.

I'll make a comment that your dissection of stan's stroke is from a shot used in the middle of instruction/demonstration. He is likely focusing on other aspects of the demo and less on his other fundamentals. Go find a video of him playing 9-ball or straight pool, see if you find the same issues. That would be a much more fair test. There are lots of them on his YouTube channel. That said, this rabbit hole is silly. Stan has better fundamentals then all us hacks combined.

 

[Dan White]

I have no problems having civil conversation about CTE, and I really try to keep it that way. However, I do not like my words being twisted, nor do I like being grouped with what others say. Now, I never stated that CTE won't work with a swoop. I don't know if it would, never tried it. Sounds like a bad idea. What I DID say is, no swoop is required to make CTE work. Subtle but very different meaning. You also claim I don't use CTE. I don't know where you get that, but it is completely unsubstantiated as I always use CTE when I play pool.

Apologies if I misunderstood your point. Regarding your use of CTE, I am quite sure somewhere along the line, maybe last year, that you said you do not use CTE the way Stan teaches it. If you deny that, then maybe it is my faulty memory.

I'll make a comment that your dissection of stan's stroke is from a shot used in the middle of instruction/demonstration. He is likely focusing on other aspects of the demo and less on his other fundamentals. Go find a video of him playing 9-ball or straight pool, see if you find the same issues. That would be a much more fair test. There are lots of them on his YouTube channel.

I don't want to misrepresent your position on the video, so allow me to conclude some things and you tell me where I'm wrong:

- you agree that there is a stroke error in the video, meaning that the shooter did not intend to swoop/redirect the cue, as evidenced by the straight practice stroke,

- you believe the shooter was unable to perform the correct CTE fundamentals because he was distracted,

- I assume you observed that the ball was pocketed even with the stroke error. One could then assume that either the error didn't matter because maybe it was too small an error, or we could theorize that the shot would have been missed had he stroked the cue along the practice stroke line. Correct?

One more question: You must have observed the enormous swoop on the first shot where the shooter says he is not using CTE. Do you believe that is also due to the distraction of shooting a video? Oh, wasn't somebody else talking about the thousands of hours of video instruction Stan has made available? You'd think he'd be immune to forgetting how to stroke a cue with so much camera experience.

That said, this rabbit hole is silly. Stan has better fundamentals then all us hacks combined.

Respectfully, if you don't understand why this statement is irrelevant, then maybe we should just agree to disagree and let this thread die down. My intent was to try and learn some things and uncloak some of the magic, not to prove that CTE doesn't work. You call it a rabbit hole. I call it research.

 

[Dan White]

You will have to prove your claims, I've never heard of CTE relying on a swoop. Do you the think Williams has a swoop? He has many videos posted.

And just thinking about it, playing with a swoop would make things extremely hard to be consistent. But that is the outcome for those with a decent stroke.

I just looked briefly at Williams, but only certain shots are useful to the analysis I do. On the first two and only such shots I looked at briefly, he does appear to steer the cue either to the inside or outside depending on the shot. Significant enough to "invalidate" what he is doing with his CTE setup? I dunno. I'm certainly not going to spend more time with these things. If you guys have success with it, that's great. Just don't be so cock-sure of what's really happening on the table when the best idea I've seen yet in this thread is that it is magic. :smile:

P.S. After watching more of Stan briefly, I'm starting to think his habit of pulling the cue in at the last second may be something he does more or less on all strokes. I haven't seen him steer the cue in the other direction, although I don't think I've ever seen him cut a ball to his right in his instructional videos.

 

[stan shuffett]

I can understand Dan's research curve with CTE. I was where he is at now about ten or more years ago.
Here's a little clue, Dan. CTE is visual.,Your research should be on vision and not on stroke......I can use CTE and whack the darn ball in with a broomstick.
HAHAHAHA Yup, you are in the wrong research hole.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Neil]

I can understand Dan's research curve with CTE. I was where he is at now about ten or more years ago.
Here's a little clue, Dan. CTE is visual.,Your research should be on vision and not on stroke......I can use CTE and whack the darn ball in with a broomstick.
HAHAHAHA Yup, you are in the wrong research hole.

Stan Shuffett

Not only that, but for some reason Dan is under the impression that having a swoop invalidates the actual stroke line of the shot. Why he thinks that, I don't know, but he sure is barking up the wrong tree.

For his argument to have any validity, it would have to mean that the only shots ever made were with a perfectly straight stroke, or, that no one that doesn't have a straight stroke ever shoots down the correct aim line. Neither are true, so I'm not sure just what point he thinks he is actually making with his swoop theory.

 

[jasonlaus]

Whoa! This is totally unexpected but very welcomed.

If it still seems strange now just wait until you start training your eyes and brain to see shots in a totally new and different perspective. What won't make sense is how in the hell balls are going in from every where with this kind of process compared to what you're used to doing.

I know because I played exactly the same way you do with contact points for about 15 years before meeting Hal.

If seeing balls go in while doing something so very different from anything you've ever been exposed to doesn't capture your curiosity and quest to delve further, I don't know what will.

All I can say is have fun. Learning something new that works great is always fun.

I've used FOBI(front outside/back inside) and have had great success. Meaning front hand english for outside and back hand english for inside english shots(yes, it makes a difference).

Gonna give it an honest try whenever we meet up

 

[jasonlaus]

Well that's the problem right there in a nutshell. You shouldn't be surprised by this. Most of us "deniers," Lou included, started this CTE journey with interest in what it was all about. Where things go sour is when CTE supporters start talking gibberish and then attack the skeptics. Only now are people starting to say they don't really understand it but it just works. Instead, we get treated to a line of crap that sounds technical but doesn't mean anything.

I like mohrt and tony's take on this: They believe there is some optical illusion that occurs that tricks you into seeing the same "set up" and getting different results. Why not just say that from the beginning and leave it at that? Of course I'm sure there are ways to prove that idea one way or the other, but, again, I'm afraid too many people here are afraid to challenge the orthodoxy (hence the "cult" reference).

Where are you located? Maybe we can get together with my friend and see this together. He does say adjustments are made, whatever that means. He will be able to show us though.

He did say that he figured out the "adjustments" on his own. I think this is what Stan will be showing in this "final" product - could be wrong though.
Jason

 

[jasonlaus]

Maybe CTE only works if you have a swoop in your stroke?

And I say that only semi-facetiously. Reputedly, HH picked some of this CTE stuff up from Greenleaf who, if the available video is any indication at all, had a huge snarly swoop in his stroke.

Maybe it dan't work if you have a straight, piston-like stoke?

Lou Figueroa

Thats why I referred to this as CTE/Hal/Greenleaf. My friend is an expert on almost any aiming system without having ever stepped foot on AZ
Jason

 

[jasonlaus]

Says the man with quotes like "CTE is baloney", and "it's all to make a buck". THAT is where the mud slinging started, not from the other side.

In all fairness, it does sound like "magic". Hopefully it can be explained.