Center Pocket Music, the long-awaited CTE Pro One book, by Stan Shuffett.

[JoeyInCali]

Yep, because the mechanics are deceptively simple. a person can discover HOW to do something without knowing WHY it works. What was discovered first? The math behind leverage or the fact that you can use a branch with a rock under it to move something heavy?

Huh?
And that deserves TWO DVD's and a 440-page book ??? And you were one of the Houligans who insisted it was a simple system.
ABC reference points. And the in betweeners . The whole system should fit in 5 pages of illustration .

 

[JB Cases]

Who said anything about stars? Yelp and Google have stars but the bulk of the content is the verbal review. You seem to think negative reviews would be good for a restaurant, for example, simply because it generates buzz. I think you are confusing celebrities with businesses. The idea that there is no such thing as negative PUBLICITY has more to do with Hollywood starlets trying to gain name recognition. If Brad and Angelina are splitting up that gets their name in the paper. That's a far cry from saying that debating the legitimacy of an aiming system is good for that system.

well, if that's your criteria then you and the other critics have failed SPECTACULARLY.

Because CTE is more popular now than ever before and getting more students daily. Thanks for keeping the conversations alive.

 

[JB Cases]

Huh?
And that deserves TWO DVD's and a 440-page book ??? And you were one of the Houligans who insisted it was a simple system.
ABC reference points. And the in betweeners . The whole system should fit in 5 pages of illustration .

It is simple. And under that simple system lies a lot of perception that is counter to the "simple" ghost ball method that is easy to diagram. Here we have a visual method that relies on objective references but which can either be gotten immediately by some and which requires more explanation with others.

If everyone was equally adept at seeing things visually then we wouldn't be having these discussions. We also wouldn't have 50 different ghost ball aim trainer products on the market.

 

[JB Cases]

Stuff that imaging software needs to know.

Right arm bro...
OK cyber soldier jokes aside, there seems to be no reason for CTE. ???

Imaging software relies on a whole different set of parameters to discover positions and thus map out routes.

No reason if you don't like to have an objective and accurate way to aim in pool. If you want to wing it and aim by feel that is always the first choice of any beginner and with enough time and brute force practice you can develop a pretty good feel for the shot line for most shots you want to take.

 

[JB Cases]

Huh?
And that deserves TWO DVD's and a 440-page book ??? And you were one of the Houligans who insisted it was a simple system.
ABC reference points. And the in betweeners . The whole system should fit in 5 pages of illustration .

Also, I have NEVER said a single word about ABC and Hal together. I have long ago talked about what Hal taught me. He did not teach me CTE. What he taught worked pretty good for me and I talked about that in regards to yourself and other knockers knocking him and us. CTE is what Hal taught Stan and Dave Segal and others. I learned it from them and not from Hal.

And yes, the basics of CTE are easy and a lot of people get those down fairly quickly. Quick enough to be impressed and able to pocket a lot of shots (given decent mechanics) where they can see the power of the method. Like anything though mastery takes time.

 

[JoeyInCali]

It is simple. And under that simple system lies a lot of perception that is counter to the "simple" ghost ball method that is easy to diagram. Here we have a visual method that relies on objective references but which can either be gotten immediately by some and which requires more explanation with others.

If everyone was equally adept at seeing things visually then we wouldn't be having these discussions. We also wouldn't have 50 different ghost ball aim trainer products on the market.

You're actually arguing a system that has had 2 dvd's and countless of videos to explain is simple ?
The ghost ball or line of aim can be explained in one page . Ghost templates ? It's so simple you can print it yourself .
Line of aim is so simple AND CANNOT BE ARGUED AGAINST because the proof is in the pudding .

 

[JoeyInCali]

Also, I have NEVER said a single word about ABC and Hal together. I have long ago talked about what Hal taught me. He did not teach me CTE. What he taught worked pretty good for me and I talked about that in regards to yourself and other knockers knocking him and us. CTE is what Hal taught Stan and Dave Segal and others. I learned it from them and not from Hal.

And yes, the basics of CTE are easy and a lot of people get those down fairly quickly. Quick enough to be impressed and able to pocket a lot of shots (given decent mechanics) where they can see the power of the method. Like anything though mastery takes time.

Don't matter . CTE involves the ABC. It is left to right , no matter where you are cutting the ball . And this was confirmed by Drivermaker . He stopped threatening me when he asked that trick question . I have a friend who took lessons from Hal and we had him on the phone one time too .

 

[JB Cases]

The CTE guys said when the book comes out they are leaving AZ and migrating to facebook. For a long time (before the book came out) they actually did do that and this forum went pretty much dormant. They came back to announce the availability of the book and then they never left. Personally, I see nothing wrong with "arguing" about CTE as long as it is fact based. If that turns you off then just don't read the thread. If you want to learn CTE just watch the videos and buy the book as they keep saying. Don't try to learn it in an AZ forum. BTW, if you still haven't learned it after all this time doesn't that tell you something?

If you haven't learned something that you want to learn there could be any number of reasons. I want to learn astrophysics and so if I struggle with math does that mean that astrophysical principles don't work or that those who use those principles are just religious zealots because they can't help me understand the foundations needed to apply those principles?

I used to teach people how to jump using a jump cue. I quickly learned that a one-size-fits-all approach was not going to work. I had to develop about five ways to explain the principles and accompanying physical demonstrations to go with them because each person was not guaranteed to understand any particular one of those lessons. I had decent players trying to use a jump cue who JUST DID NOT GET IT until something I said or showed clicked and then they were able to perform the shots and develop their skills.

 

[JB Cases]

You're actually arguing a system that has had 2 dvd's and countless of videos to explain is simple ?
The ghost ball or line of aim can be explained in one page . Ghost templates ? It's so simple you can print it yourself .
Line of aim is so simple AND CANNOT BE ARGUED AGAINST because the proof is in the pudding .

Line of aim? What is the line of aim? The shot line? The line the cue goes on when shooting with no spin? How do you find that line?

 

[JB Cases]

Don't matter . CTE involves the ABC. It is left to right , no matter where you are cutting the ball . And this was confirmed by Drivermaker . He stopped threatening me when he asked that trick question . I have a friend who took lessons from Hal and we had him on the phone one time too .

Right, left to right and what is your point? No matter where you are cutting the ball when the object ball is to be pocketed. Trick question? I don't see the "trick" here. Do you have a shot example where this doesn't apply?

 

[JB Cases]

If anyone wants to join me on Facebook I am doing a facebook live streaming and will answer whatever CTE questions I can. I will not be talking about some of the concepts in the book as have not yet read the whole book and do not feel qualified to talk about what I am not yet up to speed on. I am however qualified to discuss a lot of the points brought up here and I will be naming names so to speak to talk about things that the critics have said. This is my facebook page if you want to participate.

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

 

[bbb]

john
why do you want to beat your head against the wall?

 

[straightline]

Sift through the prebuttal later. Are you related to the violinist Rachel Barton?

 

[JB Cases]

Sift through the prebuttal later. Are you related to the violinist Rachel Barton?

No, I am a Barton by marriage.

 

[JB Cases]

john
why do you want to beat your head against the wall?

I don't see it that way. I have my thoughts about their criticisms but I know when I go to the table their criticisms are fairly easy to defeat.

 

[Dan White]

There is no Church of CTE and this is exactly the type of mocking that causes the arguments.

Then your complaint is with Stan. Haven't you seen his youtube video on the 10' table. Something about the Church of CTE, Sermon on the Mount like comments. I think it is even in the title of the video but I'm not going to bother to look it up. It's there.

 

[Dan White]

No you haven't demonstrated "it". You have demonstrated two shots on a setup that surely took you longer to build than to make the two shots. Stan got up there and threw out balls and pocketed them all as a proof of concept. in order for you to prove that you (or anyone else) can do it you need to duplicate the performance. Yours is akin to running ONE YARD of a 100 yard dash and claiming that anyone can run as fast as the top runners with enough track time.

No one who teaches or uses CTE has stated that pocketing balls without seeing the target pockets IS a magic trick. Your claim to be "protecting newbies" is ludicrous.

Show me a makeable shot directly to a pocket that is not consistently solvable through the use of Center to Edge aiming. IF you come up with one or a few then those shots will be in the teeny minority of shots a player might face. The vast majority, nearly all IMO, of shots which go directly to a pocket or which are bankable to a pocket are solvable through using the OBJECTIVE Center to Edge method of aiming.

The fact that you THINK after all of this that a half-ball HIT is a reference point for aiming in the CTE method is indicative of why you grossly misunderstand and continuously mischaracterize the system that you criticize.

I never said that but since you bring it up, yes, it is part of the CTE aiming process, no? It's even in the name of the aiming method "Center To Edge" aka a half ball hit.

 

[Dan White]

Having watched the entirety of the Schmidt 626 thread, I don't believe there will be any bans under the current moderation standards. (That's not to encourage anyone to act like certain posters in that thread act. This is predictable, but civil compared to that trainwreck.) I was shocked to see a post regarding "bashing" at the beginning of this thread, we see how that has been administered throughout the remainder of this thread.

No dog in the fight, just an observer of this saga for 12 or 13 years now...

CTE discussion is held to a different standard. As long as the CTE'ers continue to ignore the aiming forum there won't be any bans.

 

[Dan White]

Yes you can. Do you even understand the dynamics of banking? Unlike shooting directly to a pocket there are other factors that come into play. CTE can bring you to the "perfect world" shot line but your "pool sense" of how to deal with those factors is what guides you from there to either decide that the perfect shot line works or to make CONSCIOUS deliberate micro adjustments based on those factors. It's not a difficult concept to understand as thousands around the world already do.

CTE gives a shot line means exactly what I said. Proper application gives a shot line that is CONSISTENTLY correct.



Don't I? I think I understand you quite well.



Stan did no such thing. He claimed that using the method he teaches results in him being able to pocket balls without seeing the target pocket. He clearly showed that he can pocket balls without the pocket being in view. So what's left is whether you believe that he is using the method as claimed or at all. You clearly do not believe that he is using it as claimed. And you clearly believe that your two-shot video is proof that you can perform shots without the target pocket being visible IS proof that anyone can achieve the same results with just playing long enough. Yet, you outed yourself in the video by admitting that it took some trial and error to FIND the objective aiming from a fixed position to pocket a single shot.

This nonsense about disclaimers and "protecting the consumer" is exactly that. I protect consumers by buying competing cases and dissecting them to see how they are built and when I find practices that are NOT protective I show the world OBJECTIVELY and have the proof available to anyone who wants to inspect the case. That way they can check my words and verify that I am telling the truth.

If you have ANY player on earth who wants to go bank for bank against Stan with a curtain blocking the rails I am down to back Stan. I personally believe that the proof is ON THE TABLE. That's what draws us to the CTE method. We see what happens when we use it and are extremely happy with those results.


You're forgiven. Banking with ANY method requires knowledge of speed and spin and WHEN the use of such is required. I could set up the projection system that lays down the line like Virtual Pool and you wouldn't be able to make a lot of the bank shots shown without knowing the speed and spin adjustments needed off those "perfect world" lines.

And actually this would be a great way to test CTE. I am willing to bet SUPER HIGH that most proficient CTE users could get to the "perfect world" shot line for banks at ball address. And similarly I am willing to bet that most average players such as myself would have a lot of mistakes in judgement trying to get to the bank shot line on feel alone. It's funny that you don't complain about Dr. Dave's instructions on how to find the aiming for banks nor complain about his disclaimers that the shot can be altered due to conditions and that the shooter needs to be aware of how to adjust for conditions.

It doesn't matter if no other CTE user has duplicated Stan's videos. They are students of the method and they are not as invested in teaching it as Stan is. Furthermore as you well know creating a setup to demonstrate the blind shots is time consuming. Stan set up a clevel curtain method that allows him to block any pockets easily without and apparatus being connected to the table. If you actually knew Stan you would know that this was done for his own education and not to SELL people DVDs. The guy had these videos up long before he produced a DVD. The reason is because Hal Houle would hold a ball tray in front of the shooter to prove to them that trusting the line given by the CTE method works. Stan wanted to see if that applies for other shots and banks and he proved that it does.



CTE is not deceptive. It works for pretty much all shots directly to a pocket where a cue ball can be struck center ball and the object ball goes towards the pocket. Perhaps you mean that it can be intoxicating at first when the player starts to get the visuals right and those visuals cover a certain range.

Ultimately the player does what is necessary to pocket balls? This is another way to repeat the nonsense that CTE is nothing more than subconscious adjustment. You honestly don't get it and you likely never will. CTE users, those who truly study it, have all had the moments where they are down on the shot and their brain is screaming that the line is wrong and they go ahead and shoot and watch the ball split the pocket. This is the "magic" if you REALLY want to find some. It is the equivalent of you putting your finger on the rail and telling a newbie to just trust you even though they really think that the line you chose is wrong.

As my diving coach used to say, if you have been doing it wrong then doing it right is going to feel wrong.

JB I appreciate the time you spent on this reply but honestly it isn't worth it. Nothing I say will change your mind. I want to refer you to the hour long youtube video you made with my name in the title to explain how CTE works on your mini table. At one point in the video you actually got to the point where you were going to state how CTE can pocket balls in slightly different positions with the same perception. When it came down to it you glossed right over it and simply said "It works." The fact that you cannot seem to understand that you didn't actually explain anything, and "it works because it works" kind of thinking is acceptable to you says all I need to know.

 

[lfigueroa]

It's not about being challenged. It's akin to entering a flat earth forum for debate, there is little to no value to doing it, debating the same handful on knockers. Anyways, enjoy your banter amongst yourselves, I hope you feel accomplished This might be my last post here for a long time.

ah, actually, this is a forum to discuss aiming — the CTE guys are the “flat earthers” showing up at the wrong venue.

Lou Figueroa