CTE Testimonials

Low500 said:
(y)(y)
I noticed Allison Fisher at the Texas Open yesterday using this exact procedure for her head tilt when she was in ball address. Whether or not she uses all the aspects of the entire CTE method, I do not know. But I do know she took advanced training from Mr. Shuffett to improve her game.
Douglas D. - testimonial
Click to expand...
Well she like most Pro benefit from minor game adjustments.

When you play any game at Professional level, your alway look for that edge that make you sharper knife.
 
Low500 said:
Testimonial from a certified CTE Instructor....powerful good stuff to support the value of the system. (y)(y)

I made this diagram for someone I've been talking to who has been having trouble. Maybe it will help you too.
Before determining where the bridge goes we must first find whether or not the shot from the sight line looks undercut (thick) or overcut (thin).
If we cut to the left the head tilts left.
If we cut to the right the head tilts right.
If we bank to the left the head tilts left.
If we bank to the right our head tilts right.
Once you've determined the proper perception (in this example I used a 15 perception) and determined if the sight line makes the shot look undercut (thick) or overcut (thin) you can decide where the bridge V goes.
Eric Naretto (y)
View attachment 608277
Click to expand...
Thanks to Low500 for finally settling the great CTE debate. According to this diagram CTE requires the player to decide whether the shot is thick or thin before they place their bridge hand. Then, depending on how thick or how thin, the bridge V should be placed "just" on one side or the other of the sight line. Why are these determinations necessary if CTE takes you to the shot line without need for player input? This also shows what some of us have suspected for awhile -- that people learning CTE do not really understand what Stan says the method will do for them.

It is a rote system like all others.
 
Dan White said:
Thanks to Low500 for finally settling the great CTE debate. According to this diagram CTE requires the player to decide whether the shot is thick or thin before they place their bridge hand. Then, depending on how thick or how thin, the bridge V should be placed "just" on one side or the other of the sight line. Why are these determinations necessary if CTE takes you to the shot line without need for player input? This also shows what some of us have suspected for awhile -- that people learning CTE do not really understand what Stan says the method will do for them.

It is a rote system like all others.
Click to expand...
No one said that there is no player input. Of course there is as part of the process. This information about judging thick or thin at a certain point in the process has been around for years and Eric simply made a diagram that he finds to be helpful in determining the choice at that part of the process.

Being able to judge it stems from learning and using the process itself. After a while, as with any progressive practice, the user being well-versed in the process doesn't need to actively judge thick/thin because they will recognize the perceptions and sweep/step for the type of shot they are facing.

So to reiterate, the PROCESS, correctly applied takes the user to the shot line. Learning the process is the task to get this result. If it is too complicated for some to learn or too onerous or too many terms then the answer is very simple, don't use it. Poolology is an excellent way to estimate aiming in a systematic way. 90/90 works really well. The SEE System is very strong. And people can always just go with Ghost Ball and get as proficient as they can with that simple estimation/imagination method. Equal Opposite/Aiming by the Numbers works. S.A.M. Aiming works. There are many good methods to help people aim beyond brute force feel so CTE aiming is not required learning on the journey towards shotmaking ability.

Of course CTE is learned by rote. That's why there is a process and practice shots and reference shots. It takes steady work to learn that process. Once learned though it provides a powerful and objective way to go from your chair to shooting position with complete confidence that the cue is on the shot line. Objective from the user's perspective.

We can go to the mall and set up a table and test the innate acuity of regular non-players and then teach various individuals different aiming systems and get a grasp on which one is more effective. I am VERY CONFIDENT that with 90/90 I will get people making more shots faster than you will with ghost ball for example. That sounds like a fun test that I can actually do in my practice room that is next to a laundomat.
 
Last edited:
Dan White said:
It would be interesting if these testimonials indicated the level of play for each person. A testimonial like this from a beginner is basically worthless.
Click to expand...
Let's not pretend that any one who is against CTE is ever really swayed by the ability of the user. We have been down that road so many times it is familiar and still goes nowhere.
 
JB Cases said:
No one said that there is no player input. Of course there is as part of the process. This information about judging thick or thin at a certain point in the process has been around for years and Eric simply made a diagram that he finds to be helpful in determining the choice at that part of the process.

Being able to judge it stems from learning and using the process itself. After a while, as with any progressive practice, the user being well-versed in the process doesn't need to actively judge thick/thin because they will recognize the perceptions and sweep/step for the type of shot they are facing.

So to reiterate, the PROCESS, correctly applied takes the user to the shot line. Learning the process is the task to get this result. If it is too complicated for some to learn or too onerous or too many terms then the answer is very simple, don't use it. Poolology is an excellent way to estimate aiming in a systematic way. 90/90 works really well. The SEE System is very strong. And people can always just go with Ghost Ball and get as proficient as they can with that simple estimation/imagination method. Equal Opposite/Aiming by the Numbers works. S.A.M. Aiming works. There are many good methods to help people aim beyond brute force feel so CTE aiming is not required learning on the journey towards shotmaking ability.

Of course CTE is learned by rote. That's why there is a process and practice shots and reference shots. It takes steady work to learn that process. Once learned though it provides a powerful and objective way to go from your chair to shooting position with complete confidence that the cue is on the shot line. Objective from the user's perspective.

We can go to the mall and set up a table and test the innate acuity of regular non-players and then teach various individuals different aiming systems and get a grasp on which one is more effective. I am VERY CONFIDENT that with 90/90 I will get people making more shots faster than you will with ghost ball for example. That sounds like a fun test that I can actually do in my practice room that is next to a laundomat.
Click to expand...
It has ALWAYS been said that the player does not need to make ANY adjustments to the CTE directions to pocket the ball and the process is 100% objective. The only judgment I've ever read is about is in learning when to use each perception. You have to look at the balls and get a general idea of the cut angle to the pocket before choosing which perception. OK, no big deal. I can live with that. From there it has ALWAYS been step 1,2,3 shoot and the ball goes in. NEVER has it been to judge whether the ball will go long or short to the pocket after selecting your lines and before placing your hand. NEVER.

There is rote in terms of learning how to use CTE, which you are talking about, and there is rote in terms of recognizing when the ball will go in, which is what the guy who made that diagram is concerned with.
 
Dan White said:
It has ALWAYS been said that the player does not need to make ANY adjustments to the CTE directions to pocket the ball and the process is 100% objective. The only judgment I've ever read is about is in learning when to use each perception. You have to look at the balls and get a general idea of the cut angle to the pocket before choosing which perception. OK, no big deal. I can live with that. From there it has ALWAYS been step 1,2,3 shoot and the ball goes in. NEVER has it been to judge whether the ball will go long or short to the pocket after selecting your lines and before placing your hand. NEVER.

There is rote in terms of learning how to use CTE, which you are talking about, and there is rote in terms of recognizing when the ball will go in, which is what the guy who made that diagram is concerned with.
Click to expand...
Yes, the CTE instructions INCLUDE how to judge thick or thin at a certain point. This comes from the usage of objective reference lines. But even so many users find that they don't need this step and they have great success without it.

I have said things like 1.2.3. and shoot because that's how CTE feels to me. It feels totally objective. However just because I feel that way doesn't mean that other people discover other helpful ways to use the objective references to inform where to place the bridge hand. Any time something is true for one part of a process it is likely that there are truths in other parts of the process. In other words bridge hand placement is very likely to have a consistency based on the starting references.
 
JB Cases said:
Actually my videos have whatever purpose I describe them to have. If I wanted to post a video dedicated to shotmaking percentages then I would do that.

Here is one where I used cte to do a version of a Joe Tucker drill.

No commentary, just the activity.

Click to expand...
If you set your camera to manual brightness settings that illuminate the table evenly it won't dim the table when it detects your shirt back. Wearing a dark shirt would help also.
 
The Great Stuff just keeps on coming !!! (y)(y)(y)

Stan, as you know, I've been along for the ride with you for an awfully long time. This is perhaps the most succinct and clear explanation of how to obtain the shot line that you have ever put forth. Keep on keeping on. It just gets better.
Joe Campbell - CTE testimonial
CTE Riders on the loose RESIZED SMALLER.jpg
 
Low500 said:
Perhaps you did not see ...<snip>
Click to expand...
Perhaps you did not read my question...?

I have made several posts in this thread that are not negative toward CTE, and I'll add in this one that I think CTE could be very beneficial to those who can determine how to use it correctly. That said, I also think you're childish self serving policing of this thread is a disservice to what you're attempting to promote.

So.... You going to report this post as well.? Can you ego absorb the bruise to allow a positive comment concerning CTE to remain..?
 
The_JV said:
Perhaps you did not read my question...?

I have made several posts in this thread that are not negative toward CTE, and I'll add in this one that I think CTE could be very beneficial to those who can determine how to use it correctly. That said, I also think you're childish self serving policing of this thread is a disservice to what you're attempting to promote.

So.... You going to report this post as well.? Can you ego absorb the bruise to allow a positive comment concerning CTE to remain..?
Click to expand...
Now you're getting the idea.(y)
Positive things about CTE only in this thread.
I am glad I was successful in educating you about this.
Enjoy the thread.
No report this time. You're trying to do better...that's a great start.(y):)

(However, the thread can do without (n)your editorializing about.....
"That said, I also think your childish self serving policing of this thread is a disservice to what you're attempting to promote.
So.... You going to report this post as well.? Can your ego absorb the bruise to allow a positive comment concerning CTE to remain..?") I have very little ego. I did correct a few spelling and grammar errors of yours. (Even though I do not like resembling "grammar nazis".) Again enjoy your visits. Positive sharing is always welcome in this thread.
 
Last edited:
QB edge to OB contact point makes sense on majority of shots, works well and is easy to acquire

pre-shot s/u routine will also benefit some
 
And the good stuff just keeps on coming (y) (y)

CTE works on a 6x12 snooker table with 760 simonis and 3" pockets. Played 3 games of golf, first time in over five years and won the third game. Used CTE for all shots to a pocket.
The last shot was a sick crazy cut to the six hole (side).
John Barton - testimonial
 
ribdoner said:
QB edge to OB contact point makes sense on majority of shots, works well and is easy to acquire

pre-shot s/u routine will also benefit some
Click to expand...
It's not clear what you mean. It seems that it would work poorly for straight-ins or any fullish shot.
 
And the good stuff just keeps on coming (y) (y) :)

Another thing the critics fail to mention (other than just being intentionally mean spirited) is that there is a wealth of information in the book concerning the stroke. Furthermore, the YouTube videos discuss vital information concerning the stroke and the various grips that all lead to a higher percentage of success in balls pocketed along with position play. Mr. Shuffett has not overlooked a thing in his efforts to transfer successful knowledge to the player. If the student understands what is meant by "just get me out in the patch"....that tells me the student has been STUDYING instead of merely reading.
Douglas D. - testimonial
 
ribdoner said:
Your right, as poorly as i play i rarely get straight in :)
Click to expand...


Well poor players are what I call recreational players. Being honest unless you are make a good living off Pool from Tournment play, hustling, teaching, or instructional dvd's, books, or cd's. Your a recreational player. People talk about the local best person, who is short stop speed. Big difference between those folks and real deal Pro.

Even the recreational player like to play good, but even on a good day playing One Pocket, I know I could not get noticed against those who finish in money at somer event like DCC.
 
CocoboloCowboy said:
Well poor players are what I call recreational players. Being honest unless you are make a good living off Pool from Tournment play, hustling, teaching, or instructional dvd's, books, or cd's. Your a recreational player. People talk about the local best person, who is short stop speed. Big difference between those folks and real deal Pro.

Even the recreational player like to play good, but even on a good day playing One Pocket, I know I could not get noticed against those who finish in money at somer event like DCC.
Click to expand...
Cowboy... (y)
This thread is for sharing positive statements about CTE.:) (no malice intended toward you)
Sorry to have to mention this as you seem to be a pretty straight-up guy, but I have to "complain equally"...as that's the first thing the anti-CTE people will start whining about. (And they watch me like a hawk)
And the main theme of the thread is drifting just a little.
Mr. Howerton has given us this space to testify on CTE and I am personally very grateful for that ruling.
I'd hate to see this thread shut down or opened up for all "those pests we've known about for years" to get free run in here and destroy this thread like they've done for years in other threads.
Please help me out with it....thank you.
Pete
(Low 500)
 
Low500 said:
Cowboy... (y)
This thread is for sharing positive statements about CTE.:) (no malice intended toward you)
Sorry to have to mention this as you seem to be a pretty straight-up guy, but I have to "complain equally"...as that's the first thing the anti-CTE people will start whining about. (And they watch me like a hawk)
And the main theme of the thread is drifting just a little.
Mr. Howerton has given us this space to testify on CTE and I am personally very grateful for that ruling.
I'd hate to see this thread shut down or opened up for all "those pests we've known about for years" to get free run in here and destroy this thread like they've done for years in other threads.
Please help me out with it....thank you.
Pete
(Low 500)
Click to expand...

Well as I said I am Rereactional player, not World beater, have used CTE, am not expert, but I think the system has merit, have made shots with CTE I use to not make frequently. No expert, just my $.02 on subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top