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

[Low500]

Just because you say it's false doesn't make it true. PROVE IT, don't just say it.

He'll be waiting forever for a "Euclidean" moment. (don't hold your breath)

 

[Patrick Johnson]

You have NEVER, NEVER said it works!

That is a flat out lie.
You have NEVER said it works.

lol

You guys are too easy.

Here's just the latest example, from two weeks ago - I've said the same thing many, many times over the years.

I "get" CTE (better than those who use it), and I don't attack it - in fact I've pointed out many times that it works like every other aiming system.

I "attack" the absurd claims made about how it works, as I would with any other system that did the same. Except CTE is the only system that does that.

Maybe CTE would have a better reputation here if its loudest "defenders" weren't hyper-combative morons.

pj
chgo

 

[JB Cases]

You talk a good game but when it gets down to it your fall back position is basically "its objective because its objective and you'd know that too if you bothered to try it." Stan says that CTE aligns the balls to the pockets essentially for you (by overcutting the pocket) and this is 100% objective as long as you learn to see the objective points as directed by his method. I always know that if a person buys into this explanation then one of two things must be true: 1. They don't really understand what Stan is saying, or 2. They have no formal education in the sciences and do not understand how to test a hypothesis. I'm pretty sure you fall into category 2. I suppose there is a third category for those who have an emotional attachment to the issue and don't allow reason to destroy that dream. You're most likely in that group, too.

Your faith trumps all reason that has been presented to you in clear, simple examples of errors displayed in Stan's videos.

And yet I don't claim to be any more than I am and don't falsify results as you do.

What errors?

 

[lfigueroa]

I think everyone has said that as a PSR CTE would be beneficial to someone who has not had one.

Pretty much anything that gets a player paying more attention and introduces some discipline is a good thing, including CTE.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Low500]

lol

You guys are too easy.

Here's just the latest example, from two weeks ago - I've said the same thing many, many times over the years.

Maybe CTE would have a better reputation here if its loudest "defenders" weren't hyper-combative morons.

pj
chgo

You cannot squirm out of this Johnson. It won't work.
You've been exposed and caught in lies....little "qualifiers" added, do not grant you a parole from your failures.
You are NO "scientist" and you are no debater. Your very existence relies on a bombastic series of lies, half truths, and distortions.
You are truly the "Nancy Pelosi" of the pool shooting forums.
Note for readers: The picture below represents a "scientist" caught in lies and his comments are...…"Help, help, what shall I do? A dumb hillbilly CTE person has exposed me for what I really am".

 

[Low500]

I think everyone has said that as a PSR CTE would be beneficial to someone who has not had one.

Pretty much anything that gets a player paying more attention and introduces some discipline is a good thing, including CTE.

Lou Figueroa

And ANOTHER ONE confesses that it works.
Glory Glory Glory.
They're ALL running for cover now...like a stack of dominoes.
JUSTICE is lovely.

 

[lfigueroa]

And ANOTHER ONE confesses that it works.
Glory Glory Glory.
They're ALL running for cover now...like a stack of dominoes.
JUSTICE is lovely.

Been saying it for years, dufus.

Lou Figueroa

 

[cookie man]

lol

You guys are too easy.

Here's just the latest example, from two weeks ago - I've said the same thing many, many times over the years.

Maybe CTE would have a better reputation here if its loudest "defenders" weren't hyper-combative morons.

pj
chgo

PJ has said over the years that it works, with the disclaimer that it just doesn't work in the way we think it works. Which has always been really funny actually, considering after 20 plus years of speaking out against CTE he actually has no clue how to perform CTE as described. 20plus years wasted i should add.

 

[Low500]

Been saying it for years, dufus.

Lou Figueroa

You LIE...prove it.

 

[lfigueroa]

You LIE...prove it.

yawn.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

You LIE...prove it.

Here you go, Chuckles.

From 10 years ago and my review of Stan’s first DVD posted on AZ.

Lou Figueroa

And so, here’s my review

I tried watching the DVD with an open mind. But frankly, very quickly, the DVD became painful to watch. There is a thimbleful of basic info, followed by endless loops of shot demonstrations, often repeated a second time, and a couple of break and runs, all edited without a miss.

Here’s the good stuff: Stan teaches you a PSR. He tells you to offset your body, establish contact with the cue with your bridge hand and slide into the shot in a consistent manner. Good solid stuff, no doubt, but hardly news worthy. (Having just watched the video of his 183 ball run at the DCC, it is surprisingly similar to Darren Appleton’s PSR.) He even goes into a suggested shot routine (eye movement and warm up strokes) which was also some good stuff.

And I think that’s why some folks find success with the systems outlined on the DVD: they are adding some consistency to their pre-shot and shot routines. That, and what all this edges and centers stuff does is: *it forces you* to look -- and I mean *really look* -- at the cue ball and object ball. It is something tyros and advanced players can benefit from. So, all of that taken together is probably worth some serious improvement to a wide range of players. But that’s about it.

The bad part is that there is movement of the cue after you’re down. Or even with the air/body pivots, alignments that may or may not benefit you as an individual player. IOW, they may work for Stan, Landon, and Stevie, but not necessarily for many others. (I think that actually, for the camera, they could make it work shooting between their legs This is most evident where Stan demonstrates the changing position of the V of his bridge hand and you sit there and wonder: how on God’s good green Simonis covered Earth does he think that is going to equally apply to all the pool players in pooldom.

And, in all probably, that little pivot is going to mess with your cue delivery. If you don’t believe me take a close look at the *huge* sideways movement of his cue, hand, forearm, elbow, and bicep when Stan demonstrates for the use of BHE. None of that is good for a good consistent repeatable and accurate stroke that won’t break down under the heat.

The systems themselves reminded me, by and large, of some of the 3C systems I’ve seen diagrammed over the years. You know: the ones where you put all kinds of numbers on the diamonds and corners, check the path/line the balls are on, do some rudimentary math, and viola! You can’t miss the shot. Of course that only works under perfect conditions and after you’ve done some major experimentation.

And so you have a DVD that contains a modicum of basic system info -- which I think Dr. Dave has done an excellent job of summarizing -- and then an endless loop of Stan, Landon, and Stevie, shooting shot after shot demonstrating how, if you make the right choices, you will not miss and the system will work for you.

The chapter on banks is… problematic. Banks are fired in by all participants, after you are told the right formula for various positions on the grid, but without any insight into how those formulas were arrived at for the appropriate aim point on the rail. And, of course, according to the DVD, the system works flawlessly not only for banks, but jump shots, break shots, caroms, and paper thin cuts (with an adjustment and a surprising amount of small print that basically explains how you’re on your own on these shots.) I was surprised it wasn’t claimed that it was perfect for masse shots too

And so, bottom line: the systems can and will be whatever the player wants them to be.

Sometimes the pivot is obvious; sometimes not; sometimes the body turns, sometimes it does not; bridge length -- pick one; amount of pivot -- till it looks right; back hand English can be used with gay abandon, to a point, if you pivot just so; and, according to the DVD, of course you can use the systems for everything from the lag shot to five ball combo kick banks (just kidding on that last one, but just barely).

IOW, if you work with it long enough you can make it work, but only because you’ve played with it so long that you eventually make all the necessary intuitive adjustments for any kind of success. Oh yes, and it seems that if you get outside the realm of a minimal use of English, to “get the cue ball off the object ball,” you are, once again, on your own. There is a very quick screen that does come up to mention (almost in passing), that English can be important for positional play. Who knew?

If you think the DVD is going to provide you with a definitive proof that these systems are scientifically and/or geometrically precise -- you can lose that thought right now, it’s not there. If you think you’re going to learn some aiming system that is going to make you a successful player in short order, forget that too -- to make these puppies work you are going to have to study, memorize, experiment, and put in loooooong hours (you’ll probably need to make a phone call or two, and probably sign up for a lesson or three). And you need to realize that all that system induced movement before and after you get into shooting position could send you down a path -- which depending on your devotion to the system -- from which you may never emerge and could possibly (probably) keep you from ever being as good a pool player as you might otherwise be.

Which brings me to this: overall, there is a part of me that wants to say that, perhaps, there is some (much) key info kept purposely fuzzy, because there is *no way* you could put this out in the marketplace and expect people -- that had no prior knowledge and understanding of the system -- to succeed. If you want “to believe” after watching this DVD you are almost compelled to contact Stan, because IMO, it certainly does not stand alone as advertised.

One last thing: I have no doubt that Stan really and truly believes in what he’s teaching. IOW, I do believe his work on these systems is a sincere effort to further pool knowledge and help the players watching it. But, I think he’s gone too far down the aiming system Rabbit Hole and perhaps can no longer see that his systems are highly inexact, or at least presented in an inexact manner on the DVD, and for many a dead end, or worse, a problem inducing course of endeavor.

For me, in all honesty, if Mosconi hisself came back from the grave and told me this was the greatest thing since sliced bread I’d tell him to go back and take a nap. This one is not a keeper, for me, and if anyone wants to buy a lightly used copy for $30, shipping included, please PM me for a PayPal address.

Lou Figueroa
all the above
JMHO, of course

 

[Dan White]

Just because you say it's false doesn't make it true. PROVE IT, don't just say it.

I have proven that some of Stan's statements about CTE are flat out wrong. It is right there in living color 100% fact in the throw video I analyzed. That doesn't stop the non-science crowd from dismissing it and there's not much I can do if you refuse to acknowledge reality.

 

[Dan White]

And yet I don't claim to be any more than I am and don't falsify results as you do.

What errors?

Like I wrote to cookie, the analysis of Stan's throw video unravels his assertion that speed does not affect throw when using CTE. All of you contributed to that thread and all of you dismissed it. The facts are right in front of you. The balls were throwing about an inch, which is something that disproves the assertion that there is no subjective adjustment required when using CTE. I'd post the link but what's the point? I can show you the proof but I can't make you acknowledge it.

 

[JB Cases]

lol

You guys are too easy.

Here's just the latest example, from two weeks ago - I've said the same thing many, many times over the years.

Maybe CTE would have a better reputation here if its loudest "defenders" weren't hyper-combative morons.

pj
chgo

Maybe hyper-combative attitudes would not be on display if the knockers would just leave. You don't understand CTE and you have proved that yet again with your claims that the visuals are exactly equal to ball overlap hits.

CTE is as close to 100% objective as it gets from a sensory perspective. Whatever role, if any, the subconscious plays in the process is unknown to you and unknown to me. Is it .001% of the process? You don't know. So for 20 years you're hung up on a description that you disagree with but one which you can neither prove nor quantify. When a user says they follow the directions and and on the shot line then they are told that they don't know what they are doing and that their subconscious did it. When they miss why isn't it subconscious adjustment?

If that's your only issue then what is your desired outcome? That Stan says a particular phrase that you deem acceptable? Or is there a list of people you want to sign onto that statement? Are you standing by with an internet-wide scanner to catch all the offenders who exuberantly proclaim that CTE is 100% objective and that they are making balls at a higher success rate than ever before? Are you waiting to swoop in and berate them wherever they might fail to disclose the gap between 99% objective and 100% objective in the context of human perception?

If so is that your only purpose? If so then your dedication is commendable although misguided and not needed. But for what it's worth I am compiling a list of all the times you said CTE and Hal's methods are great. I appreciate the 20 years of posts that you have made from which to mine relevant quotes in service to objective aiming.

Earlier you said that if an aiming system can't survive open discussion then it doesn't belong in the main form. Any aiming system can survive open discussion. But ANY topic can be ruined by those who troll it. I can derail ANY thread you start easily with unreasonable and unrelenting critiques and snide remarks. Making readers wade through toxic dumping in the form of needlessly trolling posts is not open discussion it is sabotage.

 

[JB Cases]

I have proven that some of Stan's statements about CTE are flat out wrong. It is right there in living color 100% fact in the throw video I analyzed. That doesn't stop the non-science crowd from dismissing it and there's not much I can do if you refuse to acknowledge reality.

You're wrong. I analyzed the same video frame by frame and a different conclusion was shown.

1. Your video CLAIMING that Stan was steering the shots either unconsciously or deliberately. Maybe learn to use the tools you claim to use.

2. Analysis of your video.

3. Rebuttal analysis of your rebuttal to the first video.

There is no "reality" in your video that needs to be acknowledged. The frame by frame version that I put up clearly debunks your "effort".

But I would be willing to bet 50k that you and I can go to Stan's house with a high speed camera for extreme slow motion and he would make shot after shot aimed using CTE with no steering. The only shot that there was anything that could be called steering was the ONE shot that stand called a half-ball hit which we determined was not actually a half-ball hit. And that only proves the point of CTE because it shows that pure estimation of a fractional hit when trying to find a shot line fools even high level players. On on all of the CTE-aimed shots Stan's stroke was perfectly straight.

 

[Dan White]

Maybe hyper-combative attitudes would not be on display if the knockers would just leave.

What happened to the idea that the CTE people were going to facebook and leaving AZ alone? Recent history shows that when you guys disappear so does CTE. Problem solved.

 

[JB Cases]

What happened to the idea that the CTE people were going to facebook and leaving AZ alone? Recent history shows that when you guys disappear so does CTE. Problem solved.

I have decided to hang around. You drove Stan away and others away who had enough of your disgusting mockery. You can't drive me away.

 

[Dan White]

You're wrong. I analyzed the same video frame by frame and a different conclusion was shown.

You are barking up the wrong tree. Analyze this:

CTE and Throw, Further Thoughts

Stan recently made a video on how CTE handles throw with soft vs hard hits. Since he has sworn off AZ, at least for now, mohrt posted up the video, here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFrpI-5rKbM&t=6s I thought this video was an important breakthrough for those of us interested in the nuts...

forums.azbilliards.com

Be sure to read Stan's comment, which only took 3 years in post#31.

 

[Dan White]

But I would be willing to bet 50k that you and I can go to Stan's house with a high speed camera for extreme slow motion and he would make shot after shot aimed using CTE with no steering.

Maybe maybe not. The redirection may occur during the draw back of the cue and would not be seen as a steer. Anyway, I think it is more probable anyway that the adjustments are baked into the perceptions, which is why it takes so long to make all the shots. It is HAMB with an intricate PSR thrown in, IMO.

 

[Dan White]

I have decided to hang around. You drove Stan away and others away who had enough of your disgusting mockery. You can't drive me away.

I think you just like to argue.

Option 1: Leave this tiny corner of AZ with about 10 viewers alone and spend your time helping the vast number of new CTE users on facebook understand the system. CTE is not disussed here when CTE believers don't post... problem solved. Become a mentor and positive influence, or

Option 2: Get in the weeds with people you don't like and have little respect for. Engage in novel-length, hour long time consuming diatribes that don't make you look very good and haven't resolved anything for over a decade.

John chooses Option 2... go figger.