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

[JB Cases]

Ok. Still confused but only as to how CTE is supposed to work. The Raga thing was more like incremental clicks on a gun scope. It was an easy shot but the cue ball landing was tricky and perfect.

Think of it as focused elimination of all that is not correct. Or perhaps better said OBJECTIVELY using the reference lines to narrow to the body position that can only result in going from standing to shooting position with the cue on the correct shot line.

 

[JB Cases]

I'm confused.

If he can't diagram his system in a book, what's in it for all those hundreds of pages?! Anyone know?

Lou Figueroa

I know. There are hundreds of helpful diagrams in the book. It's not written for you. Players who are better than you could ever dream of being know the value of this information. Players who will become better than you have ever dreamed are using this information.

You're a decent player, slightly above average. You have a nice stroke. But you're just another guy who thinks that the only way to get better is through endless hours shooting the same shot. That's normal. Only through all those countless hours of practice you have only achieved a very modest skill level. This book is for those who want to blow past you with less self-torture. In other words those who learn CTE AND put in the hours that you have WILL BE WAY BETTER THAN YOU.

After all, you BARELY beat me and I am a terrible player with awful form. If I had put in the hours you have I would be so far above you that your name would be nothing to me and you would have never played me. I know the value of this information AND the value of diligently working it. The saddest part of all this is that your incessant criticism has been the fuel for this information to be continuously improved, codified and presented to the world in ways that will impact pool positively for generations to come long after no one remembers your name. I am actually sad for you that through it all you never got the benefit. You might have been able to break 200 if you had taken a fraction of the time you spent criticizing that which you don't know how to do.

I am glad to be on the right side of history here. Stan's work will stand the test of time and your criticisms will be forgotten by the very few who bothered to read them. I don't have any problem with people asking questions I have a problem with malicious people. Stan is salt of the earth good people and you are the complete opposite.

So, like I said, the book has plenty of diagrams that explain clearly the aspect being taught. And beyond that Stan accomplished more in his retirement, on and off the table as a player than you. So when choosing who to listen to on how to play pool correctly I will go with the guy who trains champions rather than the guy who donates to them.

 

[mohrt]

Why am I a schmuck simply for asking if it was hard cover and pointing out he used a mock up?!

And to be frank, at a $100 a pop (plus shipping), I'll be able to buy a copy off the For Sale Forum in no time, or offer a bounty for a copy someone else has bought for me, or have someone else just order it for me.

Lou Figueroa

For dismissing the amount of effort that goes into a book worth its salt.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

CTE replaces "feel"

No, it doesn’t. Like every other aiming method, it just assists your development of feel.

pj
chgo

 

[straightline]

It doesn't replace pool physics. The physics of how balls react on a pool is the same no matter what the propulsion method. CTE replaces "feel" with multiple objective lines to allow the shooter to zero in on the shot line, the line the cue ball should travel on to correctly send the object ball to the pocket.

What is "line of centers"?

Line of centers is the line through the centers. Of the balls. You know the spheres which Proone would have you believe are just illusory quantum states.
You say CTE replaces feel? Cybernetic Tactile Elimination? This is one of my main misgivings about the method. That is, since the users attempt to play automatonically, without regard to contact geometry, those raised on CTE will have no pool knowledge to rely on. You know like when you've been cornered into dogging it; the only option to go off. ???

Think of it as focused elimination of all that is not correct. Or perhaps better said OBJECTIVELY using the reference lines to narrow to the body position that can only result in going from standing to shooting position with the cue on the correct shot line.

Cyber Target Estimation ignores what is given about pool. Defacto THE pool. People like Stan who already know pool can easily get out on familiarity; the perceptions and lines just a reference for drawing a bead. Thing is, the balls already provide the required information. Why transpose from reality to conceptual referencing? Developing a marketable product is the logical conclusion. Other possibilities all fall into the domain of mad scientific research.

 

[duckie]

So, does the book explain how a ball has a edge?

 

[lfigueroa]

I know. There are hundreds of helpful diagrams in the book. It's not written for you. Players who are better than you could ever dream of being know the value of this information. Players who will become better than you have ever dreamed are using this information.

You're a decent player, slightly above average. You have a nice stroke. But you're just another guy who thinks that the only way to get better is through endless hours shooting the same shot. That's normal. Only through all those countless hours of practice you have only achieved a very modest skill level. This book is for those who want to blow past you with less self-torture. In other words those who learn CTE AND put in the hours that you have WILL BE WAY BETTER THAN YOU.

After all, you BARELY beat me and I am a terrible player with awful form. If I had put in the hours you have I would be so far above you that your name would be nothing to me and you would have never played me. I know the value of this information AND the value of diligently working it. The saddest part of all this is that your incessant criticism has been the fuel for this information to be continuously improved, codified and presented to the world in ways that will impact pool positively for generations to come long after no one remembers your name. I am actually sad for you that through it all you never got the benefit. You might have been able to break 200 if you had taken a fraction of the time you spent criticizing that which you don't know how to do.

I am glad to be on the right side of history here. Stan's work will stand the test of time and your criticisms will be forgotten by the very few who bothered to read them. I don't have any problem with people asking questions I have a problem with malicious people. Stan is salt of the earth good people and you are the complete opposite.

So, like I said, the book has plenty of diagrams that explain clearly the aspect being taught. And beyond that Stan accomplished more in his retirement, on and off the table as a player than you. So when choosing who to listen to on how to play pool correctly I will go with the guy who trains champions rather than the guy who donates to them.

yawn.

You've been "learning" CTE for 20 years and where has it got you -- nowhere. Read and study the book, I will still be the better player ;-)

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

For dismissing the amount of effort that goes into a book worth its salt.

Like a said, people take years and years to write a book -- that does not establish its worth.

BTW, is it hardcover or do you just get the cover with a piece of wood glued to it?

Lou Figueroa

 

[JB Cases]

yawn.

You've been "learning" CTE for 20 years and where has it got you -- nowhere. Read and study the book, I will still be the better player ;-)

Lou Figueroa

No I haven't been. But it has made me appreciate this sport so much more. You are not the better player but you are a couple bucks ahead of me and that's ok. I spend that much without thinking about it these days.

The fact is that Stan has put a body of work out there that will live on when you are dust. Your name night be remembered by a few people and Stan Shuffett's will be remembered by thousands and his information used to create players far better than you ever were.

I know who I am and what I stand for. I know who you are as well. You're a super nobody whose only contribution to pool was to motivate Stan to do the DVDs, write the book and to put dozens of videos online for anyone to learn from for free. You will never know the joy that comes from learning to use a great tool like cte. For that I actually pity you. For motivating Stan alongside your fellow knockers, I say thank you.

 

[JB Cases]

So, does the book explain how a ball has a edge?

Yes

 

[JB Cases]

Line of centers is the line through the centers. Of the balls. You know the spheres which Proone would have you believe are just illusory quantum states.
You say CTE replaces feel? Cybernetic Tactile Elimination? This is one of my main misgivings about the method. That is, since the users attempt to play automatonically, without regard to contact geometry, those raised on CTE will have no pool knowledge to rely on. You know like when you've been cornered into dogging it; the only option to go off. ???

Cyber Target Estimation ignores what is given about pool. Defacto THE pool. People like Stan who already know pool can easily get out on familiarity; the perceptions and lines just a reference for drawing a bead. Thing is, the balls already provide the required information. Why transpose from reality to conceptual referencing? Developing a marketable product is the logical conclusion. Other possibilities all fall into the domain of mad scientific research.

It replaces feel with objective reference points. Or better said it reduces feel to the point where aiming isn't guessing. Whatever feel might still be present is so miniscule that it doesn't cause any second guessing.

The balls don't have the information intuitively. The contact offset is a major problem in aiming. You cannot aim the center of the cueball to the center of an imaginary ball with the level of consistentcy that CTE provides. Beyond that CTE works for bank shots for which the line of centers imaginary ball estimation method is completely useless.

For example if I said that ETC-inside pockets to the corner and ETA-outside banks into the opposite corner then there are thousands of players who can take that instruction and aim accurately to make both shots with no further instruction needed.

In fact I would bet very high on the cte users in a shot making contest against feel and imaginary ball aimers.

You say those raised on cte will have no pool knowledge? Well first the feel spoken of is the visual estimation/imagination part of aiming. That is what is significantly reduced to inconsequential. Cte does not and cannot replace any of the other important factors needed for success at the table. It is an aiming tool and is the best aiming tool in my experience.

Users of cte are not playing automatically. They are aiming objectively as part of their overall game. The notion that using an objective aiming method makes a player robotic is like saying using a hammer all day makes a person violent. But even if it did the best players in the world are praised for their super consistent mechanics. We say often to denote a high skill level that a player with great mechanics is a machine. So if the effect of becoming highly consistent in the pre-shot routine through objective aiming is that the player wins more, shows improvement, and increases their joy when playing what's the issue? Decreasing frustration while increasing satisfaction should be desirable in just about every situation.

 

[JB Cases]

No, it doesn’t. Like every other aiming method, it just assists your development of feel.

pj
chgo

Yes it does. Unlike many other methods CTE replaces the feel/guessing in aiming with objective reference points and specific visual practices that tremendously increase the likelihood of getting on the correct shot line.

 

[JB Cases]

Just so people know where I'm coming from on this, watch this segment of the video. Watch up to 19:35 which is less than a 60 second clip. What Stan is saying here is that his book will not discuss why all shots can be made with just a few perceptions but only HOW TO DO IT. He is saying that the "math" hasn't caught up to the perceptions. He is really saying that physics can't explain it. The issue is that he keeps saying that nobody has been able to explain his system with physics. The reality is that, yes, simple physics and geometry have been able to explain it. He simply refuses to accept it.

Also, Stan says earlier in the video that it is impossible to come up with a new way of aiming by using math first and then perceptions. Simply impossible. Well, talk to Brian Crist about that as he pretty much did that with Poolology. He used the inscribed angle theorem as a basis for his brilliant system.

Here is the video:
Edit: for some reason you can no longer imbed a video that will start at a particular point. Maybe I'm doing something wrong. Anyway, scroll the video to 18:50 minutes in.

What is the math governing ghost ball?

Now show me anyone who uses that math to teach how to aim using the ghost ball method.

Insisting on "the math" for a system that is used in 3d space is simply silly. When I was a springboard diver I didn't need the math governing force vectors and water tension to follow the directions on how to perform complex dives.

All these years the people saying they need the math have simply been tossing out red herrings to confuse the readers into thinking that the math matters. Most people on this planet do complex tasks each day without ever having learned the mathematical and physics that govern their activity.

 

[lfigueroa]

No I haven't been. But it has made me appreciate this sport so much more. You are not the better player but you are a couple bucks ahead of me and that's ok. I spend that much without thinking about it these days.

The fact is that Stan has put a body of work out there that will live on when you are dust. Your name night be remembered by a few people and Stan Shuffett's will be remembered by thousands and his information used to create players far better than you ever were.

I know who I am and what I stand for. I know who you are as well. You're a super nobody whose only contribution to pool was to motivate Stan to do the DVDs, write the book and to put dozens of videos online for anyone to learn from for free. You will never know the joy that comes from learning to use a great tool like cte. For that I actually pity you. For motivating Stan alongside your fellow knockers, I say thank you.

Actually not much of what you say is true.

I have also been writing a book, so what I have learned playing pool will also live on in perpetuity. It'll be some of the stuff I've written over the years as well as lessons learned. I intend to include what I wrote recounting our match so that people will know, forever, what a tool you were.

And you seem to have forgotten how, when your name came up in this very forum a few years ago, Stan threw you under the CTE bus, and even backed it up a few times, lol.

As to me not being the better player -- not gonna lose much sleep over that one.

Lou Figueroa

 

[straightline]

@JB Cases

Line of centers just locates the balls. It's a more concise positioning scheme than edges per the correct single eye if Stan was looking. Your impressions of CTE tend to confirm my belief that it's a Goldberg contraption of an approach to a very simple problem.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Unlike many other methods CTE replaces the feel/guessing in aiming

No, it doesn't.

CTE aiming is accomplished by experience-based estimation ("feel") with the assistance of objective reference points - exactly like every other aiming method.

The unique thing about CTE is the number of users who (need to?) believe the nonsense that it's "uniquely objective". That mistaken belief obscures the facts, making CTE actually more subjective than other methods.

pj
chgo

 

[mohrt]

So, does the book explain how a ball has a edge?

The edge of a ball is a perception concept Duckie, you wouldn't understand.

 

[JC]

Why is scrutinous curiosity (CTE allowance) bashing?

Because the questions it cannot explain are not allowed to be asked or even implied. Catch up.

 

[JoeyInCali]

Actually not much of what you say is true.

I have also been writing a book, so what I have learned playing pool will also live on in perpetuity. It'll be some of the stuff I've written over the years as well as lessons learned. I intend to include what I wrote recounting our match so that people will know, forever, what a tool you were.

And you seem to have forgotten how, when your name came up in this very forum a few years ago, Stan threw you under the CTE bus, and even backed it up a few times, lol.

As to me not being the better player -- not gonna lose much sleep over that one.

Lou Figueroa

He was making CTE videos before he even learned it properly and before seeing Stan. So, how was he making balls in his CTE videos ? Let me guess, visualization and experience ? His videos proved you can pretend to do things before shooting and not do it and shoot .

 

[fastone371]

I just do not understand why the naysayers of Pro1 feel the need to chime in with their dislike and negative comments about CTE/Pro1 in each and every aiming thread. If you dont like it or believe in it that is your prerogative but unless asked this would be a much more pleasant place if you kept to yourself, I doubt that anybody really cares if someone here doesnt like it. If someone calls the Aiming Police you will then know its your turn to share your thoughts (for about the 10,000th time, must be how some of you get your post count so high, thats one to be proud of)