Center Pocket Music, the long-awaited CTE Pro One book, by Stan Shuffett.
- Thread starter JoeyA
- Start date
I always dream and think about "happy endings". Don't you?
You don't seem to understand the debate. The reason I can get down on a shot and know that it is aligned to a pocket is because I've done it enough times that my brain recognizes it. Stan's system supposedly doesn't require that. Theoretically, with CTE, a person who has never played pool should be able to line up a shot correctly if they can follow the procedure given by Stan. They don't need to know whether the shot will go or not because CTE told them to put their eyes in a certain spot and that would guarantee that the balls are now aligned to the corner pocket. You understand that is what he is claiming, right?
Very stimulating(?) little diatribe of yours. It does, of course, reflect your ignorance as expected.
Regarding Truth Series Video#23--CTE Natural, Systematic, and Rhythmic Play, I have this statement to make:
When YOU "Mr. JC" or "The Fig", or any other person around this joint can post a video of themselves breaking and running three consecutive racks of 9-Ball WITHOUT any 'fades', 'wipes', re-takes, or other camera tricks....THEN AND ONLY THEN are any of you in position to critique Stan Shuffett and his Master Discoveries for improving at the game of pool.
Otherwise, just sit at the kiddie table and wallow in your narcissistic ignorance.
And before you even START with the "where's your video, Mr. Lowe?"...………you get this from me: I am not good enough yet to accomplish that, but I'm a lot closer than YOU are.
Last edited:
And what he says is absolutely correct.
That is exactly what CTE will do...just like your method does and what pooloplogy does and what 90-90 does.
There is NO debate.
It is you who is operating and thinking under a false premise, not the CTE advocates.
You can use whatever words you want to. Money is made from ghost ball daily and it provides way more revenue than cte is likely to provide.
As for pseudo-intellectual, nope, just interesting and accurate. Just because someone struggles to explain an observed phenomena in commonly understood language doesn't invalidate the effectiveness of the results.
If you think that sales revenue is the reason we are here then you would be incorrect.
There are probably a good million players out there who play regularly and competitively. Of those there are very likely hundreds to thousands of players using CTE or similar methods. It is highly doubtful that you have been to places and went around asking everyone if they use CTE. Even I don't do that and I am probably CTE's most vocal booster.
The other night I was at a training facility in OKC called the Pool Dojo. The students there had recently started studying CTE with no input or prompting from me. By the time I got there they had already gotten the basics and were getting into the shot line correctly most of the time. I brought them Stan's book that I purchased for the Dojo's library. A few days later I went back and met another player who was local to OKC but unknown to me. As we started talking about CTE I realized that he knew the terminology and had a good grasp of the perceptions. I found out that he had adopted CTE years earlier and was successfully using it, he had already purchased Stan's book and was already using the new information in it.
Everywhere I went for several years at shows people would come up to me and ask me to show them CTE or they would want to discuss CTE with questions on parts that they were unclear about. Sometimes people would come to me to show me something they discovered about it that they found helpful and get my input.
Online on my videos people comment about their use of CTE and how pleased they are. All of us who use it and are vocal about it have similar experiences. The fact is that often in the world of commerce the amount of great testimonials from satisfied customers lags far behind the actual amount of satisfied customers. Most people just aren't that motivated to write reports on what they use and like. But I am positive that me saying hundreds to thousands of satisfied CTE users is on the low side. CTE works so when people take the time to learn it then it is unlikely that they will conclude that it doesn't work and has no value. Those that might do so either haven't really learned it or they might have some other negative motive. Then there might be a few who just say it works but is more of a process than they want to do when playing. But in is my estimation based on my experiences these past 20 years since I was introduced to objective aiming systems that there is a desire from players to learn these methods and a satisfaction when they find that the methods work.
What I am positive about, and which neither you nor your cohorts will bet on is the following. IF we were to compile a database of public comments about CTE with links to the original comment then we will find that that the positive comments by players who have tried it are far more numerous than the negative comments IF we assign ONE comment per user. So for someone like you we would automatically assign a negative comment. For someone like me one positive comment. And by this method we could find the ratio of positive to negative comments of people familiar enough with CTE to have tried it. I doubt that you have ever actually tried it even if you claim you have but based on your general demeanor on this subject we are clear that you are in the negative on the subject. So I am willing to SPOT you a place in the negative column without needing to see any proof that you understand or have tried to learn CTE.
I am sure that the positive comments/reviews would far outweigh the negative. Regarding data, well the only hard data that could be used for some sort of correlation might be number of DVDs sold with positive reviews versus requests for refunds/negative reviews. I am equally sure that Stan has reams of communications from students all over the world who have taken advantage of his willingness to help students that show a pattern of interest and satisfaction. You making some claim that you have gone to poolrooms and deliberately asked people about CTE is unlikely to be true but even if it is the activity is purely anecdotal and unprovable as you clearly didn't record these interactions in any measurable way. But let's say that you did actually do it on some level then that level is highly likely to be a fairly low number of actual conversations. The likelihood of meeting any given person in a pool room who is a CTE student is low because despite all the chatter here and conversations on other forums the reach is not that far.
Another indicator of popularity though is views. There are many who have made CTE videos in some form or another. Some of those folks have views in the hundreds of thousands. Simple attrition would indicate that the number of people viewing those videos, which in the aggregate might be a half million or more, would produce a number of people who adopt the method because they would find that it works well for them. So not a stretch to say hundreds to thousands of satisfied users.
Conversely your proclivity to embellish your stories would lead one to believe that you would simply make up whatever "story" you want to bolster your viewpoint. Yes there are a minority of players who enthusiastically promote methods that they find highly useful. Simple extrapolation methods would suggest that there are many more, hundreds to thousands, maybe even tens of thousands out of the millions of players, who happily use CTE to some degree in their game.
The fact is that you are reaching for anything you can to discredit CTE but you can't accomplish your goal. That's what happens when a method works provably well for players. The proof is on the table. A shooter KNOWS when they are getting better results after adopting a technique. They also know whether that effect stays or fades. I have made-up a few methods which I took to the table and had initial success with on some shots and then figured out that it wouldn't work for a larger range of shots. The whole field of objective aiming is growing because a lot of people see the power in the systems and they are intrigued enough to explore and develop their own methods based on what they have learned.
Of COURSE GB is the most well known aiming method. It is the EASIEST to diagram on paper and is super easy to show with ball placement. So it is a staple of basic instruction. Also GB is USEFUL in many ways. But it is not the most accurate way to aim and introduces a lot of perception difficulties that become apparent when trying to use it as prescribed. But it would be completely reasonable to say it is the most well known and widely used of the aiming systems/methods. That doesn't mean it is better than CTE or any of the other objective aiming methods out there. This is not a case of fixing what isn't broken. It is a case of introducing new and better ways to reach the goal which is to get the cue stick on the correct shot. GB is not broken, it is simply not as accurate in real life usage for the task of finding the true NO IMAGINATION shot line without physical templates and devices to accurately place the ghost ball.
Thanks for the conversation and the continued opportunities to present CTE. And getting my logo in front of viewers helps my business so organic conversation like this which Google and other search engines LOVE when cataloging content to present in search results does a LOT to promote Center to Edge aiming, Stan Shuffett, the field of objective aiming, and of course personally, my website and logo.
Much appreciated.
You didn't mention me. I assume you'll be offering a cash reward since you won't make a video without getting paid? How do I get in on this action? Do I get a bonus if I do it in under 10 minutes?
Ok, I put it on the list. Should be fun to go through and compile your mistakes and misses. Anyone just SLIGHTLY better than me at one pocket with decent fundamentals would have DESTROYED you based on your play. When I play a good one pocket player the opportunities to score are very few and with you the opportunities are abundant.
That's great! Funny how you post what you do in the main forum and then turn right around and become a hypocrite to the nth degree in the aiming forum about CTE by doing exactly what you blast people for.
You posted THIS yesterday in the Main forum of the Deanoc thread where many were blasting him:
"This entire thread is absurd. It's sole purpose was so you self righteous people could get re energized and repeat over and over again that which you have already beat to death.
I have logic but this subject isn't worthy of it so all it gets is mocking and sarcasm. It was a good thing to debate the first few times but at this point not so much. It's all over now except in the small minds of a few".
I guess your own advice doesn't apply to YOU when it comes to something YOU don't like or disagree with, does it?
JC
Coos Cues
JC
Coos Cues
I fail to see the connection. Which perception do I use?
Like I said: knock yourself out — I haven’t even begun to scratch the surface of that video to mine all your squirrelly gymnastics, lol.
Lou Figueroa
You fail to see the connection? What's so complicated about posting what you did on the main forum for those berating Deanoc
and beating a dead horse when you do the same thing here with CTE, Stan, and everyone who uses or wants to use CTE? You don't know the first damn thing about it for starters. But you know what...THAT'S OK. If it's not your cup of tea, so be it.
Well Mr. JC, I don't know who you are and I've never seen you out on the "tour".
But if that is you in these videos, I gotta' hand it to you, that is outstanding major league pool shooting and I certainly can't do it.
I guess that puts you in the position to say whatever you please about "how to shoot pool".
My only question is what are you doing hanging around this dump with all us amateurs? If I could do what you just did, I'd be making some money with that pool stick at Roy's Basement instead of arguing about aiming systems.
(I still don't like you though)
Last edited:
JC
Coos Cues
You may not like me but you are a sarcastic son of a bitch and I like that already. You probably want to "play a little" now?
For right now I will just keep my day job.
Mister, I wouldn't play you if I had counterfeit money.You may not like me but you are a sarcastic son of a bitch and I like that already. You probably want to "play a little" now?
For right now I will just keep my day job.
I did check out your website and it looks like you make a good pool stick. The costs are reasonable and fair, but too rich for the blood of an old broken down dog like me.
You seem to know what you're doing in that shop. A person who can build lathes from scratch is a top machinist to my way of thinking.
(guess I'll keep on whacking along with my "super duper" Predator 314)…..and I LOVE CTE AIMING too.
Touche on the "sarcastic sonovabitch" part.
Well... except for the minor detail that none of them actually do that - because it's logically impossible.
Oh right... you don't do logic do you?
pj
chgo
Sales revenue is the only reason CTE is here. It attempts to answer the question: How do you make a career of teaching someone to make a ball?
Ghost ball fails there as will contact geometry. The sell in pool is technique, then application. Stan's technique is already overly complex in attempting to address CTE's requirements. The "just three lines" seems to require independent calibration of the eyes and tiny stroke flinches (yeah, that's in one of the truths) per discreet shot. Not pseudo intellectual???
And I am completely ok if you do. You think it bothers me but it doesn't. I know that my form sucks. I know that I am not diligent enough to do what I need to in order to get rid of all the bad habits. I know that any video of me displaying bad form is helpful to others to show what not to do.
What i also know is that I have never bragged about spending four hours a day practicing and thus claimed that I have all I need to play good based on that claim. That's you. But the video of your failed shots and failed position play is a good lesson to the viewers that table time alone isn't enough. I will use it to narrate why CTE and other objective aiming systems coupled with table time and attention to form is a powerful combination. You are actually a great example because we have your vehement opposition to aiming systems to contrast with your abysmal performance and can analyze in that context.
With me people can see a goofball stroke and say well if he was aimed right he sure screwed it up with that terrible stroke. With you having a smooth stroke people could conclude that you simply don't aim correctly.
Thank you for providing plenty of footage for this analysis. I am positive that it will help many players far into the future.
Not everyone can process information easily.