Stan's New Video Part Deux

Dan White

Dan White

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTUCzxsW9-c&t=579s


Well, i give up. There are no real answers when the leader decides to insulate himself from scrutiny, and the followers (see, I didn't say cult members) will support everything the leader says religiously.

I do have to note one remark Stan made. He says the brain is a computer figuring everything out through repetition. When you perfect aiming through ghost ball, apparently, it isn't good enough because you are still guessing. Actually, you aren't guessing at that point. Your computer brain is telling you when the shot looks right. That's not a guess. It is how virtually every professional player plays the game and is the reason they can't really tell you how they pocket balls. The only problem is nobody had to invent that.

It has become more and more clear to me, especially after this video, why CTE seems to work and why there are no rational explanations. I'd be pleasantly surprised if Stan's new book explains how his system is objective.
 
I just want to make it clear Dan. I'm not a follower for the sake of following. Hal Houle had unravelled a very perplexing visual occurrence at the table, one that could be used to pocket balls in a very highly proficient manner, and one very unlike conventional aiming. He spent much of his life working out all sorts of pool related things, and CTE was just one of them, but probably the most prominent one.

Hal shared his findings with a lot of people, Stan included. Hal never told the whole story, he always wanted you to figure things out for yourself, and he'd feed you bits and pieces along the way. Stan took the challenge to solve it once and for all. This challenge has not been without its hardships, that is for sure. The journey through DVDs and online videos to his upcoming book, a lot of new information and words to explain it have been discovered along the way.

When I first heard of CTE I was very skeptical. I'm an IT professional, I'm very technical, analytical, scrutinizing by trade and by personality. I bought DVD1 just for curiosity sake. My first run through I was at a loss, I didn't get it at all. But there was something about it that made me decide to just go through the motions for some weeks and see what happened. That is how it finally clicked what was going on, at least visually. Although the words were not perfect, what was happening visually was finally revealed to myself. This prompted to me want to learn more, as I now knew that whatever this was, it was working and now I understood the passion and determination to figure it out felt by others.

I think the biggest hurdle to CTE is the language that surrounds it. I think that is slowly coming to a close for those that truly want to seek it out and put in some work at the table for themselves. That is what it took for me, and even if the language was perfected it will still take some upfront work to get the wheels greased on this system. I also think that standing at a table with a knowledgable person goes a LONG way in figuring it out quicker. It is HARD to put into words how this system works in a way that someone can walk to a table and figure it out. We never had anything close to this before Stan put out his information.
 
Last edited:
mohrt said:
I just want to make it clear Dan. I'm not a follower for the sake of following.
Click to expand...

I do appreciate your dedication and perseverance. The mind is an amazing thing and can make all kinds of creative things happen. For instance, for much of my pool playing "career" I had been aligning the cue crooked to the line of the shot -- not a lot, but just enough that you could see it if an observer were looking for it. Without realizing it, I would re-position the butt of the cue at the end of the back stroke to put it in the true line of the shot. I began to think there was something wrong with my eyes or my brain until I learned more about perception and started using slow motion video capture.

So that is a roundabout way of suggesting that you not take any one explanation with too much conviction. Lots of things you have no understanding of could be happening when you take a shot (as was the case with me). I suppose you also might not care why you get good results, but as a technical person I think it is probably always in the back of your mind.

Just my opinion.
 
Dan White said:
I do appreciate your dedication and perseverance. The mind is an amazing thing and can make all kinds of creative things happen. For instance, for much of my pool playing "career" I had been aligning the cue crooked to the line of the shot -- not a lot, but just enough that you could see it if an observer were looking for it. Without realizing it, I would re-position the butt of the cue at the end of the back stroke to put it in the true line of the shot. I began to think there was something wrong with my eyes or my brain until I learned more about perception and started using slow motion video capture.

So that is a roundabout way of suggesting that you not take any one explanation with too much conviction. Lots of things you have no understanding of could be happening when you take a shot (as was the case with me). I suppose you also might not care why you get good results, but as a technical person I think it is probably always in the back of your mind.

Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I do like to understand everything going on, especially when I'm getting bad results ;) I too once upon a time, lined up my shots about a 1/16th of an inch off center. To me that "looked" to be center cue ball. It wasn't until one day I looked at my tip, closed one eye, then the other, and had an eureka moment that I was not centered. It took me only a few days to retrain my brain where "center" was. Better consistency immediately followed.
 
Last edited:
mohrt said:
I do like to understand everything going on, especially when I'm getting bad results ;) I too once upon a time, lined up my shots about a 1/16th of an inch off center. To me that "looked" to be center cue ball. It wasn't until one day I closed one eye, then the other, and had an eureka moment that I was not centered. It took me only a few days to retrain my brain where "center" was.
Click to expand...

Yes, excellent point. The more you know why and how you do something the easier it is to diagnose when the shots aren't going right.
 
Dan White said:
Yes, excellent point. The more you know why and how you do something the easier it is to diagnose when the shots aren't going right.
Click to expand...

If you take a look at my blog, you'll get a lot of info I've come across over the years, much of it not CTE related, that hopefully may help someone the same as it helped me.
 
mohrt said:
If you take a look at my blog, you'll get a lot of info I've come across over the years, much of it not CTE related, that hopefully may help someone the same as it helped me.
Click to expand...

I'll take a look, and promise not to make any Youtube videos based on anything I see. :grin:
 
Did I hear him right, aiming at the back of the ball where the contact point goes to the pocket is the wrong way to line up to the ball??? What...:confused: Is this Guy a real pool instructor or just cte? Its hard to tell.
 
Last edited:
mohrt said:
I just want to make it clear Dan. I'm not a follower for the sake of following. Hal Houle had unravelled a very perplexing visual occurrence at the table, one that could be used to pocket balls in a very highly proficient manner, and one very unlike conventional aiming. He spent much of his life working out all sorts of pool related things, and CTE was just one of them, but probably the most prominent one.

Hal shared his findings with a lot of people, Stan included. Hal never told the whole story, he always wanted you to figure things out for yourself, and he'd feed you bits and pieces along the way. Stan took the challenge to solve it once and for all. This challenge has not been without its hardships, that is for sure. The journey through DVDs and online videos to his upcoming book, a lot of new information and words to explain it have been discovered along the way.

When I first heard of CTE I was very skeptical. I'm an IT professional, I'm very technical, analytical, scrutinizing by trade and by personality. I bought DVD1 just for curiosity sake. My first run through I was at a loss, I didn't get it at all. But there was something about it that made me decide to just go through the motions for some weeks and see what happened. That is how it finally clicked what was going on, at least visually. Although the words were not perfect, what was happening visually was finally revealed to myself. This prompted to me want to learn more, as I now knew that whatever this was, it was working and now I understood the passion and determination to figure it out felt by others.

I think the biggest hurdle to CTE is the language that surrounds it. I think that is slowly coming to a close for those that truly want to seek it out and put in some work at the table for themselves. That is what it took for me, and even if the language was perfected it will still take some upfront work to get the wheels greased on this system. I also think that standing at a table with a knowledgable person goes a LONG way in figuring it out quicker. It is HARD to put into words how this system works in a way that someone can walk to a table and figure it out. We never had anything close to this before Stan put out his information.
Click to expand...

Very similar experience. I started learning CTE around the same time Stan was talking with Hal. A mutual friend was teaching me. We are both amazed and extremely thankful that Stan followed through on things and figured it completely out.
 
Dan White said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTUCzxsW9-c&t=579s


Well, i give up. There are no real answers when the leader decides to insulate himself from scrutiny, and the followers (see, I didn't say cult members) will support everything the leader says religiously.

I do have to note one remark Stan made. He says the brain is a computer figuring everything out through repetition. When you perfect aiming through ghost ball, apparently, it isn't good enough because you are still guessing. Actually, you aren't guessing at that point. Your computer brain is telling you when the shot looks right. That's not a guess. It is how virtually every professional player plays the game and is the reason they can't really tell you how they pocket balls. The only problem is nobody had to invent that.

It has become more and more clear to me, especially after this video, why CTE seems to work and why there are no rational explanations. I'd be pleasantly surprised if Stan's new book explains how his system is objective.
Click to expand...

Ghostball is a very acceptable way to play. I have no problem with people playing that way.
But then you have to put down CTE saying there is no rational explanation, of course there is. You just haven't been spoonfed all the info.
 
cookie man said:
Ghostball is a very acceptable way to play. I have no problem with people playing that way.
But then you have to put down CTE saying there is no rational explanation, of course there is. You just haven't been spoonfed all the info.
Click to expand...

C'mon, that's a convenient dodge and you know it. Are you saying Bob J. and Dr. Dave and 1000 other people have also not been spoonfed? That's right up there with "I could tell you if I wanted to but I don't" and "I know you are but what am I"?
 
Dan White said:
C'mon, that's a convenient dodge and you know it. Are you saying Bob J. and Dr. Dave and 1000 other people have also not been spoonfed? That's right up there with "I could tell you if I wanted to but I don't" and "I know you are but what am I"?
Click to expand...

The info is out there. The only ones not seeming to understand are those that don't want to put in the time to learn, or spend a little money for a dvd or lesson.
 
At last..................(hopefully)

Dan White said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTUCzxsW9-c&t=579s


Well, i give up. <=Good for you. There are no real answers when the leader decides to insulate himself from scrutiny, and the followers (see, I didn't say cult members) will support everything the leader says religiously.
I do have to note one remark Stan made. He says the brain is a computer figuring everything out through repetition. When you perfect aiming through ghost ball, apparently, it isn't good enough because you are still guessing. Actually, you aren't guessing at that point. Your computer brain is telling you when the shot looks right. That's not a guess. It is how virtually every professional player plays the game and is the reason they can't really tell you how they pocket balls. The only problem is nobody had to invent that.
It has become more and more clear to me, especially after this video, why CTE seems to work and why there are no rational explanations. I'd be pleasantly surprised if Stan's new book explains how his system is objective.
Click to expand...
Glad to see that you've given up. It's about time, in my opinion.
Now, people who desire new and efficient knowledge about the game can move on in a positive direction without your knocking the knowledge and putting doubts into their progress.
 
GoldenFlash said:
Glad to see that you've given up. It's about time, in my opinion.
Now, people who desire new and efficient knowledge about the game can move on in a positive direction without your knocking the knowledge and putting doubts into their progress.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize I had the power to prevent people from moving on in a positive direction. Who knew? :shrug:

Hey, I was out of this forum for a long time until JB pulled me in by posting to a youtube video. You guys are about as bad as the global warming crowd. All you have to do is ask for some data or evidence that has meaning and all hell breaks loose.

Pool is full of dead ends. That does not mean there is no merit in them. Often you learn something you weren't expecting, or pick up some skill, when you were trying to do something else. So it's nothing to me if someone wants to learn this stuff.

It is the baseless claims that become problematic, but I'm not of a mind to harp on it unless Stan keeps making videos that don't make a lot of sense when you dig beneath the surface just a little.
 
Dan White said:
It is the baseless claims that become problematic, but I'm not of a mind to harp on it unless Stan keeps making videos that don't make a lot of sense when you dig beneath the surface just a little.
Click to expand...

Of course, because ignoring it and just living and let live is never an option.
 
Dan White said:
I didn't realize I had the power to prevent people from moving on in a positive direction. Who knew? :shrug:

Hey, I was out of this forum for a long time until JB pulled me in by posting to a youtube video. You guys are about as bad as the global warming crowd. All you have to do is ask for some data or evidence that has meaning and all hell breaks loose.

Pool is full of dead ends. That does not mean there is no merit in them. Often you learn something you weren't expecting, or pick up some skill, when you were trying to do something else. So it's nothing to me if someone wants to learn this stuff.

It is the baseless claims that become problematic, but I'm not of a mind to harp on it unless Stan keeps making videos that don't make a lot of sense when you dig beneath the surface just a little.
Click to expand...

Just because it doesn't make sense to you, doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense to everyone else. No one made you the sole arbitrator of what makes sense and what doesn't.
 
Neil said:
Just because it doesn't make sense to you, doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense to everyone else. No one made you the sole arbitrator of what makes sense and what doesn't.
Click to expand...

Person A: 2+2 = 5

Person B: No, 2 + 2 does not equal 5. How can you even say that?

Neil: Who made you the sole aribiter (not arbitrator) of what makes sense and what doesn't?
 
CTE/Pro 1 absolutely works. There's probably a 1000 players using it. Maybe more.

What's the argument here?
 
Dan White said:
Person A: 2+2 = 5

Person B: No, 2 + 2 does not equal 5. How can you even say that?

Neil: Who made you the sole aribiter (not arbitrator) of what makes sense and what doesn't?
Click to expand...

So your point is a person saying 2+2 = 5 is akin to a person saying CTE is 100% objective?

Well it's quite easy to prove that 2+2 does not equal 5.

How easily can you prove that CTE is NOT 100% objective?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top