CTE Aiming Systems - Fact or Fiction?

What way is that?

The real truth is that they work.

Here are a few testimonials from the "particularly weaker players" about CTE/Pro1;

I learned the PRO ONE aiming system from Stan Shuffett about 1 year ago. I successfully used PRO ONE in the 2008 Derby City Classic 9-Ball division getting a top 10 finish. I recently used the system getting wins at 2 Seminole Florida Pro Tour events. .

Stevie Moore
2008 Winner of the Florida Pro Tour Steve Mizerak Championship





Before I took instruction from Stan I totally went by feel when I was aiming my shots. During my foundation course with Stan, I learned this amazing aiming system--PRO ONE. The pressure that I once felt with aiming has disappeared. PRO ONE has given me the confidence to pocket balls more easily. I feel like everything I shoot at is supposed to go. I recommend PRO ONE to any player who is serious about winning!

Matt Krah 2006 UPA Tour Rookie of the Year
Blaze 9-Ball Tour Player of the Year





Hi Stan,
Just wanted to let you know that I took first place in a tough Blaze event in New Jersey yesterday. I won twice against a very strong player, 7-2, 7-1, in the finals. Amazingly this was my first event I played in since working with you and applying the things you showed me!! I cant thank you enough for the things you taught me. I have been using PRO ONE with ease and everyone is telling me how disciplined I look on the table. Also, my break is working wonderfully and really making my run outs much easier.

Thanks again. Talk to you soon!

Matt Krah


Just a word about endorsements.

One thing I learned very early on in the PR business is to look at testimonials askance. Just turn on your TV and watch for all the people swearing that the product or system they used is the best thing since sliced bread. They're a dime a dozen.

People hand out wonderful endorsements for a variety of reasons. Maybe they just want to do a nice thing, they like the person, they don't want to hurt their business, or maybe they're related or have a stake in the business.

And if you've ever gotten a request to make an endorsement, from someone you know and/or like, you know how hard it is to not make a nice statement, even if you no longer use the product or system, for whatever reason.

So, I would recommend taking the testimonials with a grain (or lump) of salt. YMMV.

Lou Figueroa
 
Poolplaya9 said:
I never said that these systems never helped anybody in any way at all. I said that this and the similar systems do not, cannot, and will not ever work in the way that is claimed, and that is an absolute provable fact.

These systems can be of benefit to certain people because of placebo effect, or by getting you in the general aiming vicinity that is a starting point that is easier for some people to adjust from using their experience and intuition, and/or the fact that it forces an increased focus and concentration on the object ball and the angle of the shot, which in turn makes your adjusted intuition or experience based aiming even more accurate. The latter is probably the most significant factor for those that see any improvement.

Another way of putting it is that the system itself does not work, but when you are using it you are unintentionally doing some things that do actually help (like focusing more on the object ball and bearing down harder).
Similar points have been made by others, especially Colin Colenso, Mike Page and Patrick Johnson. My compliments for stating them so directly and forcefully.

If we could ever get past the issue of whether or not these systems are exact, or even close enough for your typical shot (which as you well know, are not), maybe we could focus in on the potentially helpful features that you just outlined.
I agree that Colin did an excellent job summarizing all of the benefits in a very respectful manner. Excellent quotes from Colin, Mike, and many others on this topic can be found here:

Here's Colin's famous quote that I think is the best and most diplomatic I've seen:

from Colin Colenso (concerning 90/90 and CTE pivot-based systems):

I wanted to make a post listing what I perceive to be the strongest advantages of these systems.

I think these advantages are the main reason players often find great success aiming and shooting this way.

PLAUSIBLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS:

1. Sighting point to point helps one to perceive an exact line and to take in the positions of the two balls relative to this line. In other words, they use a repeatable fixed method to visualize the ball positions.

2. These systems put you either right on line to begin with or in the ball park when used for appropriate shots.

3. In the pivot phase they move from this fixed line to another visual line that they perceive through the center of the CB. This finding of an aim line forces the mind to be decisive and exact. I believe forcing this decisiveness trains the mind not to wander and to make better decisions than just feeling around back and forth hoping to feel a ghost ball or contact point angle.

4. I suspect this one is the most powerful factor in these aiming methods. They force a player to commit to a pot line and then strike the cue dead straight through that line, rather than to swoop sideways on the shot as almost all beginners do. Because they focus hard on their pre-stroke alignment, they trust this line and stroke straight. If they do miss certain shots they will soon compensate with their aim until they learn to see the correct line. The normal player very often aims thick on their cut angles and swoops a little to make the cuts. When they try to bring speed or english into those shots they meet with many difficulties. So using any system that forces a player to adopt strict and accurate pre-alignment, followed by a straight stroke, should meet with considerable success and consistency after intensive practice.

5. Because players learn to trust their pre-alignment they begin to be able to relax during the actual stroke. This takes tension out of their arms and body and they can begin to execute with better speed and a more satisfactory feeling during execution. This may explain the feeling that they feel like they just pivot, bang and the ball goes in.

6. A system that requires a focus on the positioning of the cue may cause the player to be more highly aware of the line of cue. In standard aiming, some players may glance a little at the tip and CB but be mainly focused at the OB and therefore not getting much visual feedback from their cue, which is a straight line guide waiting to be used. Also, this cue position awareness may lead to a more constant positioning of the eyes over the cue. This is quite different to the normal play experience where there is a tendency to ride the ball into the hole. This occurs when players don't trust their alignment and tend to swoop a little to ride the cue ball to the correct point. This method of playing tends to make one have to work physically and mentally during the stroke. When pre-aligned well, the stroke is simply a matter of swinging the cue.

7. Using these systems may represent the most organized approach they have attempted for aiming. Several aspects have been compartmentalized so that each of these aspects can be focused on more clearly and developed individually. This organization may also assist in allowing the player to relax through the early implementation stage and then put their entire focus into the final alignment stage.

8. While sliding or shifting the cue into the final line of the shot, players may be incorporating a method that helps them to sight the required line of aim. This may be due to coming across the line, from left to right or vice versa, such that the sighter gets a feel for how the line of aim is moving relative to the position of the OB.

The only thing I don't agree with regarding these systems is that the systems find the aim line. I think it is the players that align themselves (via slight intuitive adjustments) to the correct aim line when need be. It will take them a little while to develop this ability for a wide range of shots.​
 
I'm going to ask this for the last time, because it has been ignored in the other 70 pages long thread.

I understand step 1.

Step 2: Align your cue to the edge of the cb... aiming at what? The edge of the ob? The center of the ob?

Step 3: It doesn't matter what your answer is on step 2. This will only work, if your bridge hand is at a certain distance from the cueball.


Aiming at what? Aiming what at what? it's really simple if you did step one then there is only one edge of the cue ball to line up to that is clearly in tune with the sighting you did in step one. I didn't say AIM your cue at the edge of the cueball I said align it to the edge.

And you're wrong about step 3. Because IF your bridge hand lands on the ONLY line that works to push the cueball into the object ball then it doesn't matter at all where your pivot is from, whether your hand is four inches from the cueball or ten inches from the cue ball.

As Stan has said many times this is a VISUAL system - in other words you SEE IT when you do it.

The whole process IS the aiming. It's not aiming your stick at something, it's aligning your body in a certain way so that your stick ends up on the only possible line to shoot the cueball into the object ball.

There are several test shots that you can shoot to see that this is 100% correct.

I can show you a straight in shot that is aimed using Center to Edge and the final placement of the bridge hand is EXACTLY where it would be if I used no aiming system whatsoever and put my hand down on the line.

From there you can move around the semi-circle and you will immediately see how the system is adjusting to the different angles. It becomes perfectly clear at that point that it works.

I have shots on video that are near 90 degrees with the object ball less than a ball's width away and I am actually over cutting them using CTE.

Without CTE I would not even get close to cutting them in the pocket much less over cutting them. I drive them into the rail EVERY TIME.

The point I as making with the three step description is that it's almost impossible to translate the WORDS into a functioning method without someone to instruct you on it. Can someone diagram it? I am sure that someone can and people have in fact diagrammed it.

Those are my simple plain language words describing what I do. I do these three steps every time for every shot.

Sometimes I pivot at ten inches - sometimes I pivot at five inches - sometimes I air pivot on the way into the shot - Sometimes the pivot is easy to see and sometimes it's nearly imperceptible.

Today I shot about 12 minutes on video where I deliberately tried to shoot very slowly showing the cue lining up as described and the pivot back to center and then the shot itself so that people could see it working when someone is trying to shoot very softly and slowly.

Since it was quite hot and sticky in the shop today and I have little time I decided not to try and upload that video. But I will.

Slowly but surely I will build up my understanding of just exactly how this works and the way I will do that is by systematically using it through all the shots on the table.

The "pivot" is what's confusing everyone. Where to pivot, what bridge length, how do you add spin??

The pivot is a naturally occurring thing once you understand step one and two.

Once you stand behind the cueball and correctly do step one and two then step three is pretty much automatic. Not entirely but pretty much if you have correctly aligned yourself using step one and two.

Why not entirely? Because it is possible to second guess yourself and second guess the system when the place your bridge hand lands doesn't "feel" right. This occurs for me mostly on open table shots. So I might try to "adjust" a little into what I "think" is the correct line. And every time I do I miss the shot.

So as I said I am learning or retraining my visual sense to use this system. And when I KNOW how to demonstrate it perfectly then I will also know how to explain why it works in simple terms.
 
Aiming at what? Aiming what at what? it's really simple if you did step one then there is only one edge of the cue ball to line up to that is clearly in tune with the sighting you did in step one. I didn't say AIM your cue at the edge of the cueball I said align it to the edge.

Ok, so there is only one edge to line up to. Just to clarify before i continue:
Does that mean, there is only one possible alignment in step 2?
 
Where is Dave's physical proof that CTE does not work?
My diagrams and articles don't prove that CTE doesn't work. They just show that it doesn't work as advertised.

I haven't seen it demonstrated on the pool table? I mean he has every other shot on the table on video so why not CTE?
I could easily create and post a video showing how the versions of CTE that have been described so far don't work if the procedures are followed exactly (based on the illustrations and explanations here), but I'm sure I would be attacked for being disrespectful. I could also easily create a video showing any version of CTE working for every single shot, but I would be using DAM to help me with "fine tuning" during the align and/or pivot steps, so that video wouldn't be very helpful or useful.

Where is the video where he says THIS IS CTE and shows us exactly what CTE is?
If your version of CTE is different from the versions posted here and/or on Spidey's blog, please describe the step-by-step procedure in detail. Only then could it be clearly demonstrated on video in a way that is complete and understandable to people.

Regards,
Dave
 
I agree that Colin did an excellent job summarizing all of the benefits in a very respectful manner. Excellent quotes from Colin, Mike, and many others on this topic can be found here:

Here's Colin's famous quote that I think is the best and most diplomatic I've seen:

from Colin Colenso (concerning 90/90 and CTE pivot-based systems):

I wanted to make a post listing what I perceive to be the strongest advantages of these systems.

I think these advantages are the main reason players often find great success aiming and shooting this way.

PLAUSIBLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS:

1. Sighting point to point helps one to perceive an exact line and to take in the positions of the two balls relative to this line. In other words, they use a repeatable fixed method to visualize the ball positions.​


You don't need to visualize the ball positions - the balls are fixed in position - unmoving as you face them. Only you are moving and you can either be correctly aligned or not.


2. These systems put you either right on line to begin with or in the ball park when used for appropriate shots.

They either put you on the right line or on the very narrow corridor which is the ONLY place you can be aligned to have any HOPE of making the shot.

3. In the pivot phase they move from this fixed line to another visual line that they perceive through the center of the CB. This finding of an aim line forces the mind to be decisive and exact. I believe forcing this decisiveness trains the mind not to wander and to make better decisions than just feeling around back and forth hoping to feel a ghost ball or contact point angle.

This is essentially correct. Because of aligning oneself to fixed references, i.e. Center to Edge one can then settle into the shot on the correct line.

4. I suspect this one is the most powerful factor in these aiming methods. They force a player to commit to a pot line and then strike the cue dead straight through that line, rather than to swoop sideways on the shot as almost all beginners do. Because they focus hard on their pre-stroke alignment, they trust this line and stroke straight. If they do miss certain shots they will soon compensate with their aim until they learn to see the correct line.

This is also correct. An aiming system that works forces the player onto the proper line. If a player finds them selves consistently missing to one side or the other then they can fine tune their sighting to be closer to the exact edge of the object ball.

The normal player very often aims thick on their cut angles and swoops a little to make the cuts. When they try to bring speed or english into those shots they meet with many difficulties. So using any system that forces a player to adopt strict and accurate pre-alignment, followed by a straight stroke, should meet with considerable success and consistency after intensive practice.

Exactly.

5. Because players learn to trust their pre-alignment they begin to be able to relax during the actual stroke. This takes tension out of their arms and body and they can begin to execute with better speed and a more satisfactory feeling during execution. This may explain the feeling that they feel like they just pivot, bang and the ball goes in.

This is exactly correct.

6. A system that requires a focus on the positioning of the cue may cause the player to be more highly aware of the line of cue. In standard aiming, some players may glance a little at the tip and CB but be mainly focused at the OB and therefore not getting much visual feedback from their cue, which is a straight line guide waiting to be used. Also, this cue position awareness may lead to a more constant positioning of the eyes over the cue.

This is also 100% correct.

This is quite different to the normal play experience where there is a tendency to ride the ball into the hole. This occurs when players don't trust their alignment and tend to swoop a little to ride the cue ball to the correct point. This method of playing tends to make one have to work physically and mentally during the stroke. When pre-aligned well, the stroke is simply a matter of swinging the cue.

And again 100% correct. I sure miss Colin. He was smarter than us all and left this place.

7. Using these systems may represent the most organized approach they have attempted for aiming. Several aspects have been compartmentalized so that each of these aspects can be focused on more clearly and developed individually. This organization may also assist in allowing the player to relax through the early implementation stage and then put their entire focus into the final alignment stage.

Once again spot on.
8. While sliding or shifting the cue into the final line of the shot, players may be incorporating a method that helps them to sight the required line of aim. This may be due to coming across the line, from left to right or vice versa, such that the sighter gets a feel for how the line of aim is moving relative to the position of the OB.

The player IS using a method that brings them across the right line and zeros them in on it. Hello Dave Segal's shot circles.

The only thing I don't agree with regarding these systems is that the systems find the aim line. I think it is the players that align themselves (via slight intuitive adjustments) to the correct aim line when need be. It will take them a little while to develop this ability for a wide range of shots.

And this is where I disagree. I do not see intuition playing a part in this. Intuition must be developed through experience. If a player learns a system and suddenly is cutting balls in from everywhere the they can't be making intuitive adjustments to something that they never had before.

Either the system works or it doesn't. Either CTE puts you on the right line or it doesn't. CTE doesn't bring you to a line that's a little to the left or a little to the right of the correct aiming line. It puts you ON the correct line and the only way that you are not on the correct line using CTE is IF you incorrectly sighted the Center To Edge Line.

That is in my opinon of course as I am currently unable to prove it satisfactorily. But I am working on it having the capability to show this visually from several angles.

However I will reiterate my contention that CTE can be used to make any shot on the table where it's possible to shoot an object ball directly into a hole. And furthermore, for me, CTE makes it possible to make a lot of shots which I am unable to make using feel or ghost ball aiming. Not that I make them sometimes, I mean make them never. But with CTE I make them sometimes and some of them are now high percentage for me.

So for me CTE does in fact find the line.
 
My diagrams and articles don't prove that CTE doesn't work. They just show that it doesn't work as advertised.

I could easily create and post a video showing how the versions of CTE that have been described so far don't work if the procedures are followed exactly (based on the illustrations and explanations here), but I'm sure I would be attacked for being disrespectful. I could also easily create a video showing any version of CTE working for every single shot, but I would be using DAM to help me with "fine tuning" during the align and/or pivot steps, so that video wouldn't be very helpful or useful.

If your version of CTE is different from the versions posted here and/or on Spidey's blog, please describe the step-by-step procedure in detail. Only then could it be clearly demonstrated on video in a way that is complete and understandable to people.

Regards,
Dave

I am sorry which diagram of yours specifically shows that CTE doesn't work?

The link you posted above under words "as advertised" does not link to an advertisement for CTE.

It links to a page where you have copied various things that people have written about CTE sometimes without their permission, and you have interjected your OPINION about it not working for some shots yet you do not show those shots. Futhermore you interject your opinion into someone else's writing without informing the reader that you are now speaking thus giving the ILLUSION that the writer you credit in that section is actually saying that CTE won't work for some shots when in fact he categorically says the exact opposite.

Nor do you ever post any thing on this page showing that YOU understand what CTE is and how to implement it despite your claims to have spent hours on the phone with Hal. Surely you could have recorded those conversations and given a WORD FOR WORD transcription of what Hal said to you.

But no, none of that is there.

If you could post a video disproving CTE "as advertised" then you would have. You can't.

I will give you $500 if you post one that proves that CTE does not work by the end of June.

All you have to do is explain and demostrate what CTE is and get Stan and Dave to agree that your explanation of CTE and demonstration is correct as they understand it. Then you can show us all the limitations which you say are there or the adjustments you claim are there.

Go ahead.

Or just continue to steal other people's content and claim that something you don't know how to do doesn't work (as advertised).
 
Ok, so there is only one edge to line up to. Just to clarify before i continue:
Does that mean, there is only one possible alignment in step 2?

Yes, only one that is clearly right. Of course you can disregard the CTEL line from step one and line up the cue stick to any edge of the cue ball that you want to. But this will be patently obvious to you that your bridge hand is nowhere close to the right line to be able to propel the cueball into the object ball along the path to the pocket.
 
Yes, only one that is clearly right. Of course you can disregard the CTEL line from step one and line up the cue stick to any edge of the cue ball that you want to. But this will be patently obvious to you that your bridge hand is nowhere close to the right line to be able to propel the cueball into the object ball along the path to the pocket.

In step 1 you get the CTEL, which is always half-ball.
In step 2 the CTEL gives you the one and only edge of the cueball to line up to.
Then you pivot back to center ball in step 3 without moving your bridgehand, which will result in one possible line of aim. Let's say you can make a full ball hit shooting down that line. What if the shot demands a three quarter ball hit? Where is the difference in your 3 step process? Because as you're describing it, those 3 steps will always result in the same cutting angle.
 
Well IMHO CTE works, but you have to have OPEN MIND to try CTE, than you have to work with CTE to make it work for you. I can not make SHOTS using CTE that before I was like a Tourist Stranded in the DESERT with no idea where I could find water.

John Barton has tried an tried to help people with CTE, he is spending his time tying to help you with something HE HAS NO FINICAL INTEREST IN, and is making NO MONEY off of.

Well CTE work for you I think 100% NOT, unless you give try CTE, and Practice CTE. John has IMHO given you a KEY & THE MAP to a treasure, but some of you don't seem to want to look at the treasure map, and invest some time in finding the treasure chest.
 
In step 1 you get the CTEL, which is always half-ball.
In step 2 the CTEL gives you the one and only edge of the cueball to line up to.
Then you pivot back to center ball in step 3 without moving your bridgehand, which will result in one possible line of aim. Let's say you can make a full ball hit shooting down that line. What if the shot demands a three quarter ball hit? Where is the difference in your 3 step process? Because as you're describing it, those 3 steps will always result in the same cutting angle.

To get a "feel" for the pivot I used a reverse process. I lined up to the correct alignment for the shot angle as if I had already pivoted. Then I reverse pivoted to see if I was lined up correctly. It's a kind of backward chaining technique I used as a baseball hitting coach. If you want to learn how to get somewhere, start there and work backward.
 
Well IMHO CTE works, but you have to have OPEN MIND to try CTE, than you have to work with CTE to make it work for you. I can not make SHOTS using CTE that before I was like a Tourist Stranded in the DESERT with no idea where I could find water.

John Barton has tried an tried to help people with CTE, he is spending his time tying to help you with something HE HAS NO FINICAL INTEREST IN, and is making NO MONEY off of.

Well CTE work for you I think 100% NOT, unless you give try CTE, and Practice CTE. John has IMHO given you a KEY & THE MAP to a treasure, but some of you don't seem to want to look at the treasure map, and invest some time in finding the treasure chest.

See, here is the big problem. Believing that CTE is a treasure and everyone should be looking for it.

Those that are speaking so highly and continously about CTE as the end all to aiming systems are doing more harm than good for their cause.

I have no further desire to understand CTE because I have my own treasure.
 
To get a "feel" for the pivot I used a reverse process. I lined up to the correct alignment for the shot angle as if I had already pivoted. Then I reverse pivoted to see if I was lined up correctly. It's a kind of backward chaining technique I used as a baseball hitting coach. If you want to learn how to get somewhere, start there and work backward.

Using JBCases' steps, you would only get the right line from one specific cut angle.
 
Well john, your PM box is full so let's go public -
---------
I guess I must have truly insulted you and now you're firing back with insults of your own. I'm clueless about producing video, know nothing about business in general, I make misinformed comments on things I know nothing about, I called you fraud, zealot, snake-oil salesman, gullible (You sure that was me who used those terms?)

Well, I've seen the light. I thought I was an openminded guy who was curious about learning some neat new aiming system I heard about. Turns out I'm an asshοle who just likes to hear himself talk. I probably had bad intentions from the start and never really wanted to learn CTE. I have no right to be bothered by anyone's claims or to even participate in the discussion. I probably can't play pool at all, I just registered on this forum because it looks like the people here are easy to rile up.

Go soak yourself, John.

And for the record: Bert Kinister sold thousands of videos using worse equipment than what you already own and I'll f*ck a beehive if cocobola cowboy "gets" CTE.
 
Back
Top