Will Stan's book be the "end all"?

Status
Not open for further replies.

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
And Brandon is telling a different story these days as he has gotten more used to CTE. That interview was done very early on in his CTE learning.

PS But Brian, you just can't help yourself, throwing little digs out when you can.

Brandon says in the interview that it's been "three years" since he learned CTE pro1, and after all this time he admits to using it occasionally, like a "tool", exactly as I've said about my own system -- that I use it as a tool to get me back into stroke, back to feeling the shots.

PS....no little "digs" on CTE or Stan. From what I've gathered, Stan is an excellent instructor, and Brandon has a lot of good stuff to say about him and about Pro1.
I'm just pointing out the facts, the reality of what Brandon says and does compared to what others are saying he does. It is nothing negative toward CTE or Stan to be honest about the extent of a pro player's actual use of the system.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Can't help wondering when and if POOLOLGY will produce a champion player. And wonder if said player would credit the system since it only gets you close and the originator of the system doesn't even use it.

The same as Brandon admits about his use of CTE, I use Poolology when needed, like a tool.

And with the exception of Landon Shuffett, I don't know of any other pro caliber player using CTE that wasn't already a pro level player before CTE. The pro "name dropping" can easily be credited to Stan's connections.
Having been a top notch player and instructor for many years, he simply has access to pro players, and rightfully so. He's been doing this for a long time, teaching CTE for over a decade, and he has made a good name for himself as a solid instructor. I can only hope to reach such a status over the next 10 years, and I'll be the first to admit that I have a long way to go.
 

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
Brandon says in the interview that it's been "three years" since he learned CTE pro1, and after all this time he admits to using it occasionally, like a "tool", exactly as I've said about my own system -- that I use it as a tool to get me back into stroke, back to feeling the shots.

So you use your system to get you back into stroke which requires FOCUSED VISUALIZATION to specific, very specific and concise spaced spots about 2-2.5 mm on the OB with CCB, and then go back to completely disregarding them with no focus at all other than what "seems right" which could be entirely different or nowhere as concisely seen.

Does that about cover it? If not, go into detail and explain. It doesn't even make good sense.
 
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
So you use your system to get you back into stroke which requires FOCUSED VISUALIZATION to specific, very specific and concise spaced spots about 2-2.5 mm on the OB with CCB, and then go back to completely disregarding them with no focus at all other than what "seems right" which could be entirely different or nowhere as concisely seen.

Does that about cover it? If not, go into detail and explain. It doesn't even make good sense.

Lack of practice and playing makes us intermittently focused. Doesn't matter if you play with CTE, fractions, contact points, etc.....we tend to not focus too well at times. We simply look at the balls and our brain says "this looks good", then we swing away. The better skilled players with more experience have a better visual relationship with what "looks good" or "seems right", so we can get by shooting like this, sometimes feeling like we can't miss. But even a skilled/experienced player can be off, especially with lack of table time.

Believe it or not, when you step up and get your CTE visuals, or your fractional aim point, or whatever, your brain is deciding whether or not it "looks right" based on your personal experience and judgment. This requires visual focus, which becomes automatic with most shots after you play enough, regardless of what aiming method you use. Yet still, as automatic as it becomes, we sometimes have cluttered minds, or lazy minds that don't function as well as they've been programmed to function.

When I was playing several nights per week it felt automatic, like I didn't have to consciously pay attention to any aiming process. And of course, on occasion, I would be off a bubble and have a bad night, not because I didn't know what to do, but because my brain was somewhere else, out of tune with what my eyes were seeing. These off nights occur more often with lack of table time, and that's where a good system can help get your brain back in tune with your eyes. That's what Brandon was talking about in that interview last year. Having a good system to get you back on track is awesome. He says for him it's CTE. Not sure what tool he used prior to learning CTE, but it must've been something..... he had some very profitable years several years back. I hope Stan's book can be a tool for others.

Pool is like roller skating. If you do it enough you get very good at it without consciously trying to do it. But if you don't do it enough, the first few minutes after putting on the skates will feel very uncontrollable and you'll find yourself trying to focus on the process of staying upright. After a few minutes your brain says "oh, I remember this" and you find yourself rolling around with minimal effort, minimal concentration or focus. You're just doing what feels and looks right. Then when you fall you revert back to consciously paying attention again. The more you do this the better you get. And the better you get the less you'll need to revert back to a conscious process.
 
Last edited:

Low500

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
So you use your system to get you back into stroke which requires FOCUSED VISUALIZATION to specific, very specific and concise spaced spots about 2-2.5 mm on the OB with CCB, and then go back to completely disregarding them with no focus at all other than what "seems right" which could be entirely different or nowhere as concisely seen.
Does that about cover it? If not, go into detail and explain. It doesn't even make good sense.
Hello Spiderman. Good to see you on the prowl.:wink:
Again, speaking as another student of the CTE, I will nudge you with this friendly reminder:
Concerning those who "rarely miss a ball" and are boring self-proclaimed experts on just about anything you can think of...........remember the "IGNORE feature" is your friend around here.
You'll be amazed at the peace, quiet, and absence of silly foolishness. And most important: No trouble with Mr. Wilson.
Life goes on. And, as Grady used to say.. keep raising the bet. :thumbup:
Regards,
Lowenstein
 

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
Lack of practice and playing makes us intermittently focused.

I agree. But I'm also referring to those who play almost every day or on a regular basis.

Doesn't matter if you play with CTE, fractions, contact points, etc.....we tend to not focus too well at times. We simply look at the balls and our brain says "this looks good", then we swing away.

Looking at the "BALLS" and looking at something very specific are two different things. Nobody can play excellent pool by looking at two balls and guessing. You seem to think so and always bring it up like the "brain" is what leads you subconsciously and it's called "feel".

NO! It's the EYES and specific focus. It can be any aiming system but it needs to be something. For years Dan White has said he doesn't use an aiming system. In one particular session we beat it around for days after he said he learned from Ghost Ball. We kept breaking it down to a finite end and we both agreed it was an overlap of the CB and OB together at impact. The distance between the two balls didn't matter, it was IMPACT POSITION aiming after telescoping the CB forward to the OB. It's very visible and extremely visual. An actual overlay of the CB on OB.

We have definitely had our differences and battles over the years but I wholeheartedly applaud him for it. I'm glad I was able to help. I think Lou does the same exact thing when he says "I just see the shot". EVERYBODY has to align and aim the balls to make them. When he "sees the shot" I think he's also envisioning full impact positions for all different cut angles.


The better skilled players with more experience have a better visual relationship with what "looks good" or "seems right", so we can get by shooting like this, sometimes feeling like we can't miss.

The better skilled players such as pros who were in the old P&B
magazine article had the MAJORITY of them saying they used a specific visual aiming system. Do we need to beat that dead horse again for a count?


But even a skilled/experienced player can be off, especially with lack of table time.

A skilled/experienced player or pro can be off after playing every single day for months. They go through a period of playing great and then can't string many balls together for days. It's a whacky thing to have happen but it does for everyone. It's called a "slump" and happens from one day to the next for no damn good reason and can last for a while.

Believe it or not, when you step up and get your CTE visuals, or your fractional aim point, or whatever, your brain is deciding whether or not it "looks right" based on your personal experience and judgment.

But it looks more right and is more likely to be right if you're aiming specific parts of both balls to finite visuals instead of a broad area for starters and then trying to close it in tighter little by little with guesses.

This requires visual focus, which becomes automatic with most shots after you play enough, regardless of what aiming method you use.

NOTHING should be taken as an automatic or given in pool. Not BIH, not hangers next to the pocket, not straight in with both balls close to each other and close to the pocket. Why? Because all of us have MISSED them when not being careful.

Yet still, as automatic as it becomes, we sometimes have cluttered minds, or lazy minds that don't function as well as they've been programmed to function.

Hence, we need to focus on the visuals between the balls. Otherwise known as either aim points, or contact points for those users.

When I was playing several nights per week it felt automatic, like I didn't have to consciously pay attention to any aiming process.

Everybody who has played a lot for a long time has been there and done that. It's fleeting.

And of course, on occasion, I would be off a bubble and have a bad night, not because I didn't know what to do, but because my brain was somewhere else, out of tune with what my eyes were seeing.

Or maybe your eyes weren't seeing at all because you were too confident and cocky from being in deadstroke for a while.

These off nights occur more often with lack of table time, and that's where a good system can help get your brain back in tune with your eyes.

It can happen any time. Why not use something like that ALL THE TIME to keep the eyes and brain coordinated? Are you saying a person actually plays better and shoots more accurately when they DON'T? Seems like it to me.

That's what Brandon was talking about in that interview last year. Having a good system to get you back on track is awesome. He says for him it's CTE.

How do you know he isn't using it more often now or all the time? Have you spoken to him?

Not sure what tool he used prior to learning CTE, but it must've been something..... he had some very profitable years several years back. I hope Stan's book can be a tool for others.

You don't need to hope. It's already doing it and has done it. All you're focusing on is the book but have no idea how many lessons he does. A LOT ON A REGULAR WEEKLY BASIS.

Although CTE is the main focus to be taught, Stan is one of the most well rounded instructors in all facets of the game in the country and has been for decades.


Pool is like roller skating. If you do it enough you get very good at it without consciously trying to do it.

What? This has to one of the most absurd comparisons of anything I've ever seen. Roller skating is the entire body working together dynamically like riding a bike. In the beginning it's about keeping your balance so you don't come crashing down. The main part is either peddling fast enough to balance automatically or move your feet fast enough in the right direction which goes out to the sides instead of straight ahead when skating and that's it.

The only thing you AIM for is not crashing head on into something or someone.


But if you don't do it enough, the first few minutes after putting on the skates will feel very uncontrollable and you'll find yourself trying to focus on the process of staying upright. After a few minutes your brain says "oh, I remember this" and you find yourself rolling around with minimal effort, minimal concentration or focus. You're just doing what feels and looks right. Then when you fall you revert back to consciously paying attention again. The more you do this the better you get. And the better you get the less you'll need to revert back to a conscious process.

Oh yeah, pool is exactly the same way. Just pick up that stick and start smacking away and you'll be playing like a pro. Or at least like an APA 7.
 
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
"The eyes lead and the body follows." What you refuse to acknowledge is WHY the body follows. The eyes simply capture images (2D images) that get sent to the back of your head for processing, where the brain does its fancy work of combining these images and creating what looks like 3D. At the same time, the brain is continuously comparing this input (the images provided by the eyes) to previously stored data. So when Dan or Lou or myself looks at the CB to OB relationship, or when you or any other CTE user finds exactly where to stand to get your visuals, the brain is comparing this input to stored data. If it looks right, based on your experience and judgment, which is a 100% function of the brain, then you're good to go. If not, you keep looking until it looks right. Your eyes are leading, but your body is waiting for your brain to say "This looks right, go for it".

In learning mode we consciously decide if a shot looks right. Then we shoot and analyze the results. Do this enough times and you are no longer consciously deciding every shot.... you are recalling decisions/shots that have already been committed to memory.

I doubt any of this is in Stan's book, so it doesn't pertain to the thread. All aiming methods require visual input to the brain, whether its ghostball, CTE, fractions (also called overlaps), contact points, or plain guesswork.....they all require the eyes to see, the brain to process, then the body to respond. CTE is just another way of seeing the shots, and I think it'll be interesting to watch the truth series. I don't know if the book will be the end all for cte debate. That's up to those who purchase it. But I do think it's cool that Stan is going to reveal it all in video so everyone knows what to expect from his book.
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Brandon says in the interview that it's been "three years" since he learned CTE pro1, and after all this time he admits to using it occasionally, like a "tool", exactly as I've said about my own system -- that I use it as a tool to get me back into stroke, back to feeling the shots.

PS....no little "digs" on CTE or Stan. From what I've gathered, Stan is an excellent instructor, and Brandon has a lot of good stuff to say about him and about Pro1.
I'm just pointing out the facts, the reality of what Brandon says and does compared to what others are saying he does. It is nothing negative toward CTE or Stan to be honest about the extent of a pro player's actual use of the system.

That interview was a year ago, and Brandon is speaking a different tune right now.
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
"The eyes lead and the body follows." What you refuse to acknowledge is WHY the body follows. The eyes simply capture images (2D images) that get sent to the back of your head for processing, where the brain does its fancy work of combining these images and creating what looks like 3D. At the same time, the brain is continuously comparing this input (the images provided by the eyes) to previously stored data. So when Dan or Lou or myself looks at the CB to OB relationship, or when you or any other CTE user finds exactly where to stand to get your visuals, the brain is comparing this input to stored data. If it looks right, based on your experience and judgment, which is a 100% function of the brain, then you're good to go. If not, you keep looking until it looks right. Your eyes are leading, but your body is waiting for your brain to say "This looks right, go for it".

In learning mode we consciously decide if a shot looks right. Then we shoot and analyze the results. Do this enough times and you are no longer consciously deciding every shot.... you are recalling decisions/shots that have already been committed to memory.

I doubt any of this is in Stan's book, so it doesn't pertain to the thread. All aiming methods require visual input to the brain, whether its ghostball, CTE, fractions (also called overlaps), contact points, or plain guesswork.....they all require the eyes to see, the brain to process, then the body to respond. CTE is just another way of seeing the shots, and I think it'll be interesting to watch the truth series. I don't know if the book will be the end all for cte debate. That's up to those who purchase it. But I do think it's cool that Stan is going to reveal it all in video so everyone knows what to expect from his book.

But the shots look different with CTE then they did by my old 30 years experience shooting method. That's why there is an adjustment period and why people say you have to trust the system. The eyes lead and the body follows has a different meaning with CTE
 

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
QUOTE=BC21;6154121]

In learning mode we consciously decide if a shot looks right. Then we shoot and analyze the results.

In learning mode I'd say that's correct especially if someone is on the table trying to learn how to make balls on their own from experimentation and repetition.

The process can go a lot faster if they're being taught certain ways to see the balls and shortcut it with greater accuracy and successes.


Do this enough times and you are no longer consciously deciding every shot.... you are recalling decisions/shots that have already been committed to memory.

That's not what is being said most of the time by you and others. What's being stated is to get in the general area and ADJUST. Adjusting takes conscious effort. You have to think about it to decide what "looks" right but it can still end up being wrong.

Your boy Pat Johnson just posted this in another thread: "the vast majority of cut angles require some aiming adjustment. It's a "reference and adjust" system like all of them.

That isn't what YOU just posted. "Do this enough times and you are no longer consciously deciding every shot.... you are recalling decisions/shots that have already been committed to memory."


I doubt any of this is in Stan's book, so it doesn't pertain to the thread. All aiming methods require visual input to the brain, whether its ghostball, CTE, fractions (also called overlaps), contact points, or plain guesswork.....they all require the eyes to see, the brain to process, then the body to respond. CTE is just another way of seeing the shots, and I think it'll be interesting to watch the truth series.

I don't know if the book will be the end all for cte debate.

Absolutely NOT! The ones opposing it for the last 20 years and their newer hard line recruits with see to it. GUARANTEED!!

That's up to those who purchase it. But I do think it's cool that Stan is going to reveal it all in video so everyone knows what to expect from his book.[/QUOTE]

Does purchasing something mean they are experts on whether it works or not? IOW, somebody buys 3 of the greatest golf instructional books ever written that have helped THOUSANDS to improve but thinks they're worthless because he didn't improve since he couldn't grasp what was being taught , was physically incapable, or put in the time and effort. Multiply that by 100 just like him and what do you have? DEBATE and opposing opinions.
 
Last edited:

azhousepro

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
This is thread is starting to get out of hand. Let's rein in the attacks on other systems. Even the veiled ones.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Does purchasing something mean they are experts on whether it works or not? IOW, somebody buys 3 of the greatest golf instructional books ever written that have helped THOUSANDS to improve but thinks they're worthless because he didn't improve since he couldn't grasp what was being taught , was physically incapable, or put in the time and effort. Multiply that by 100 just like him and what do you have? DEBATE and opposing opinions.

Good point. Not everyone learns equally. Most people that have purchased my book find the system easy to apply. And then there's a small number that never bothered with reading any of the words. They opened it, saw a few diagrams, and the word "practice", and decided it was too complicated. I chalk these people off as less creative, or those looking for magic I suppose. So you're right.....regardless of how enlightening Stan's book might be, there will always be a certain amount of negativity. And that's a shame.
 
Last edited:

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
Pat Johnson just posted this in another thread: "the vast majority of cut angles require some aiming adjustment. It's a "reference and adjust" system like all of them.

That isn't what YOU just posted. "Do this enough times and you are no longer consciously deciding every shot.... you are recalling decisions/shots that have already been committed to memory."
I don't think there's a difference. You "adjust" until what you're seeing matches a subconscious memory.

Carry on.

pj
chgo
 

Mkindsv

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It's not about what the book has too offer. It's what you have to offer yourself in the way of learning something new and working at it.

It won't come through osmosis. Didn't for me or anyone else who got good with the system and uses it. So here's the question: Are you willing to put in the time and effort at the table to learn and work at it like a beginner?

If the answer is "NO", don't buy it. Seriously, I'm only trying to help you save money, time, and angst.

Ugh! Pfft! Sheesh! It is none of your business what anyone does with the book, I may just put it in the crapper so that people can read it while they are launching missiles to the underworld. What do you care anyway??? Are you that against Stan making money that you would dissuade people from buying his book??? Are you a closet Stan Shuffett hater pretending to be the ultimate fan??? Kinda seems that way.
 

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
I don't think there's a difference. You "adjust" until what you're seeing matches a subconscious memory.

Carry on.

pj
chgo

How about you don't adjust anything. What you're seeing is right in front of you as clear as day. The edge of the CB is on A, B, or C. Efren used edge of CB. Most amateurs aim with the center of the CB. It's the fattest part of the ball and difficult to determine if you're directly in the center or slightly off to the right or left of an exact contact point or fraction.

When using either the right or left edge of the CB and scanning across the entire radius of the OB, the visuals jump out at you as clear as can be with no reason to adjust if you know exactly where you want to have it aligned to the OB whether it's CTE, fractions, contact points or whatever. Also when using the "fat of the CB" which is center, you can't see the front or opposite side which is where it needs to be for a perfect hit on the OB. It IS a guessing game. Fact is, the center of the CB is NOT what is striking a finite contact point or fraction on the OB that is the correct contact point for angled shots. The contact on the two balls is an equal and opposite part of both balls.

Do you need your subconscious memory telling you to "adjust" when you have a dead straight in shot? If so, you play a different game than most. Subpar.

Aim CCB to COB to center of pocket. You can also do a "full Eclipse" alignment. Left edge of CB to left edge of OB; right edge of CB to right edge of OB and CCB to COB with the tip of the cue center to center. That's it, simple. If you can't see it immediately and have doubts requiring adjustments, your game is in sad shape.

How about a half ball hit when you know it's a dead half ball hit. Do you have to adjust with a lizard head move going back from side to side or just see it and shoot?
Maybe you do and think the way you do. That's why your name is Pat Johnson.
 
Last edited:

SpiderWebComm

HelpImBeingOppressed
Silver Member
Ugh! Pfft! Sheesh! It is none of your business what anyone does with the book, I may just put it in the crapper so that people can read it while they are launching missiles to the underworld. What do you care anyway??? Are you that against Stan making money that you would dissuade people from buying his book??? Are you a closet Stan Shuffett hater pretending to be the ultimate fan??? Kinda seems that way.

Every post you've ever made on here about CTE is either negative, baiting, hostile, or a wise guy.

Stan and I are close friends and he'll stand up for whatever I post because we know where the other is coming from. We communicate regularly.

Buy the book or don't buy the book. He doesn't care, I don't care, nobody cares.

Do what you wish. My wish is you cut the crap already.
 
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Regardless of CTE or fractional aiming or contact points or center cb or edge of cb aiming.....there is always some fine adjustments taking place in order to get your stroke and body lined up perfectly with what your eyes are seeing. I believe Stan called this a normal amount of tweaking that you would use to line up any straight-in shot. He has mentioned this in a video and will probably talk about it again in the "Truth" series or in the book. It's a natural process that happens both consciously and subconsciously.

When a CTE player gets his visuals (the ETA, B, or C line, along with the CTE line or a "tick" off), this conscious effort is automatically compared to stored data. The brain asks, "does this look right?" If not, redo. If so, get that fixed ccb and sweep onto the aim line. The sweep is also a process that requires comparison. The brain says "sweep to here", then asks, "does this look right?" If so, fire away. If not, redo or adjust/tweak. Every action is checked against what looks right based on your experience.

The process works the same way when a player looks at the balls and visualizes an overlap or a fractional hit or a ghostball or whatever. The eyes input data to the brain, the brain compares the data to known data (learned through experience) and then directs the body to where it needs to be to perform the action. Then it compares the body's action (alignment, stroke, etc...) to learned actions and asks, "does this look right?", or "does this feel right?". If so, fire away. If not, adjust/tweak to make it look or feel right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top