CTE Does NOT Work - It Did For One Pro

Patrick Johnson said:
Still no answers. That's what I know about you.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Truth be known, over the past 15 years I have taken CTE from being a “ can’t possibly work system, a cult system, a religious system, a ca ca system, a magical system, a numerology impossibility, a tin foil cap society system, a drink the kool aid system”, all the way to a bonafide professional aiming system that has manifested itself on one of our greatest stages, The Mosconi Cup.

At this point you’re clinging onto the hope that I’m just 1% wrong, hoping and wishing that for goodness sake, I can’t describe an objective CCB.

I have moved the ball about 99 yards down the field. Your last hope is that you can make a goal line stand. Ain’t gonna happen. The ball is already in the end zone. You just don’t know it.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
stan shuffett said:
CTE alignments naturally consist of an overcut line to the thin side of the ghost ball core.

This aspect of CTE is just one of its many positive attributes that makes it a professional aiming system.

Three aim lines makes all shots is another super strong attribute of CTE.

What I really love is that CTE leads the player to precision center cue ball alignments minus any adjustments.

I think that I answered Dan’s question about throw in an exemplary manner. In my free TRUTH SERIES I will be addressing topics from A to Z about CTE. My TS will be hugely supportive to CTE players all around the world.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

Really? Here's an analogy to show guys like Scarlett who aren't paying attention what just happened with our recent dialogue:

Little Johnny: Teacher, sir, can you tell me what an isosceles triangle is?

Teacher Stan: Well, Johnny, surely I can answer any question at all, just ask away.

Little Johnny: Uhhh, OK. Can you tell me what an isosceles triangle is?

Teacher Stan: There are all kinds of triangles, equilateral, isosceles, right, and on and on. I can draw all of these triangles using a pen, a pencil, or even on a computer!

Little Johnny: Teacher, sir, that's great but what is an isosceles triangle?

Teacher Stan: You can cut the triangles out of paper or cardboard. You can even color them in. See, I've answered your question in an exemplary manner! Aren't you lucky? Buy my book when it comes out in a few years and you'll have all the answers.

Little Johnny: WTF? :mad::mad:

Stan - how does the student pocket the center table shot if he wants to hit the ball softly instead of slamming it in? Throw is different and won't allow the player to aim the shot the exact same way, CTE or not. Can you explain?

I thought the student is the one who got to judge whether the question was answered to his satisfaction.

Thanks,
Little Johnny aka Dan
 
BC21 said:
For clarification, one thing pops out to me here.

There is a borderline between using a 15 or a 30 (or between using a 30 or a 45), meaning that once the shot angle exceeds a certain amount, the player must progress to the next perception. Are you saying the system provides an overcut everytime, even as the shot angle approaches the borderline where one particular perception will no longer work because it won't provide a thin enough result?
Click to expand...

I think what happened is that Stan figured out a way to play quantum pool while the rest of us are still struggling with classical physics.
 
Dan White said:
Really? Here's an analogy to show guys like Scarlett who aren't paying attention what just happened with our recent dialogue:

Little Johnny: Teacher, sir, can you tell me what an isosceles triangle is?

Teacher Stan: Well, Johnny, surely I can answer any question at all, just ask away.

Little Johnny: Uhhh, OK. Can you tell me what an isosceles triangle is?

Teacher Stan: There are all kinds of triangles, equilateral, isosceles, right, and on and on. I can draw all of these triangles using a pen, a pencil, or even on a computer!

Little Johnny: Teacher, sir, that's great but what is an isosceles triangle?

Teacher Stan: You can cut the triangles out of paper or cardboard. You can even color them in. See, I've answered your question in an exemplary manner! Aren't you lucky? Buy my book when it comes out in a few years and you'll have all the answers.

Little Johnny: WTF? :mad::mad:

Stan - how does the student pocket the center table shot if he wants to hit the ball softly instead of slamming it in? Throw is different and won't allow the player to aim the shot the exact same way, CTE or not. Can you explain?

I thought the student is the one who got to judge whether the question was answered to his satisfaction.

Thanks,
Little Johnny aka Dan
Click to expand...



It’s easy if the student understands the effects of translational energy as it would apply to the two shots...one softly and one with speed. A rolling cue ball is essentially a positive for pocketing the each shot, no problem. The hard-speed shot is a piece of cake when executed with a translationally traveling cue ball. A softly hit cue ball is a negative, but that negative can be offset to a degree with a “follow” tip position that results in dealing with the soft hit as a positive/negative. The softer shot can pose risks, but in tournament conditions only someone that is not in the know would say the two shots can’t be pocketed with the same objective CCB vertical axis CTE alignment.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
stan shuffett said:
It’s easy if the student understands the effects of translational energy as it would apply to the two shots...one softly and one with speed. A rolling cue ball is essentially a positive for pocketing the each shot, no problem. A softly hit ball is a negative, but that negative can be offset with a “follow” tip position that results in dealing with the soft hit as a positive/negative. The softer shots can pose risks, but in tournament conditions only someone that is not in the know would say the two shots can’t be pocketed with the same objective CTE alignment.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

So how do I do it? Let's say I drill the first ETA shot with speed and follow and it goes center pocket. Now I want to hit the ball softly with the exact same set up. If I do nothing different the ball will miss wide. What do I have to change to pocket the ball in this instance?
 
Dan White said:
So how do I do it? Let's say I drill the first ETA shot with speed and follow and it goes center pocket. Now I want to hit the ball softly with the exact same set up. If I do nothing different the ball will miss wide. What do I have to change to pocket the ball in this instance?
Click to expand...

No, the softy won’t miss. There’s an over-cut to the alignment that you’re not factoring in.

Stan Shuffett
 
stan shuffett said:
No, the softy won’t miss. There’s an over-cut to the alignment that you’re not factoring in.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

In the video you posted I showed clearly that there was about a 1 inch difference between soft and hard from just the foot spot to the corner. A center table shot doesn't have much chance of going under the same soft vs hard demonstration you gave.

I think you understand the question but for some reason dance your way around an answer. I thought your offer was to answer any and all questions.

Your answer is that the hard shot will go center pocket and the soft shot will also go center pocket with nothing changing other than the shot speed?
 
Dan White said:
In the video you posted I showed clearly that there was about a 1 inch difference between soft and hard from just the foot spot to the corner. A center table shot doesn't have much chance of going under the same soft vs hard demonstration you gave.

I think you understand the question but for some reason dance your way around an answer. I thought your offer was to answer any and all questions.

Your answer is that the hard shot will go center pocket and the soft shot will also go center pocket with nothing changing other than the shot speed?
Click to expand...

Game over. There’s not one single instructor in the world that can’t easily wrap their mind around my explanations to your concern to include all PBIA master instructors, Mark Wilson and Jerry Briesath. I understand the topic matter and the proof is in the pudding.

Stan Shuffett
 
stan shuffett said:
No, the softy won’t miss. There’s an over-cut to the alignment that you’re not factoring in.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

I think what Dan is saying is that the difference in the CIT angle between a rolling cb hit and a stun cb hit is greater than the allowable margin for error at the pocket opening.

Like in this video, https://youtu.be/ERJ-bZJTGfE, you hit the same setup a few times with a rolling cb hit and a couple of times with a stun shot, all into a 3.25 inch pocket. The margin of error is less than +/- 1°, based on the ob's distance to the pocket with a 3.25 inch pocket opening.

But the CIT of a rolling cb at this angle (or a cb with top or bottom on it) is easily 2° less than the CIT that occurs with the same setup when a stun shot is used at this angle. So I think Dan is asking how it's possible that the stun shot and the rolling cb shot, which produce two different shot angles more than 2° apart, can both hit a pocket that only permits 1° of variance from center pocket.

With a center table shot (ob farther from the pocket) the difference would be even more noticeable. Are you using the exact same perception each time with no side spin on the cb?
 
stan shuffett said:
Truth be known, over the past 15 years I have taken CTE from being a “ can’t possibly work system, a cult system, a religious system, a ca ca system, a magical system, a numerology impossibility, a tin foil cap society system, a drink the kool aid system”, all the way to a bonafide professional aiming system that has manifested itself on one of our greatest stages, The Mosconi Cup.

At this point you’re clinging onto the hope that I’m just 1% wrong, hoping and wishing that for goodness sake, I can’t describe an objective CCB.

I have moved the ball about 99 yards down the field. Your last hope is that you can make a goal line stand. Ain’t gonna happen. The ball is already in the end zone. You just don’t know it.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...


It's not going to be up to you to decide how your final opus on this subject is viewed by the universe of pool players.

Frankly, the huge, vast majority of them will have zero interest in a complex aiming system that apparently needs fuzzy terminology to cover up theoretical holes. It will only be the hard cases who will take a good look at it and see whether it holds up to scientific principles, common sense, and practical use -- and that's when it will be determined as to what merits, if any, the system has. Like I said, you don't get to decide.

The only arena in which the ball on this subject has moved down field is the one in your mind. In reality, the game won't even start until the book is released and read.

Lou Figueroa
 
lfigueroa said:
It's not going to be up to you to decide how your final opus on this subject is viewed by the universe of pool players.

Frankly, the huge, vast majority of them will have zero interest in a complex aiming system that apparently needs fuzzy terminology to cover up theoretical holes. It will only be the hard cases who will take a good look at it and see whether it holds up to scientific principles, common sense, and practical use -- and that's when it will be determined as to what merits, if any, the system has. Like I said, you don't get to decide.

The only arena in which the ball on this subject has moved down field is the one in your mind. In reality, the game won't even start until the book is released and read.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

Good talk.

THREE AIM LINES MAKE ALL SHOTS.

Stan Shuffett
 
Last edited:
BC21 said:
I think what Dan is saying is that the difference in the CIT angle between a rolling cb hit and a stun cb hit is greater than the allowable margin for error at the pocket opening.

Like in this video, https://youtu.be/ERJ-bZJTGfE, you hit the same setup a few times with a rolling cb hit and a couple of times with a stun shot, all into a 3.25 inch pocket. The margin of error is less than +/- 1°, based on the ob's distance to the pocket with a 3.25 inch pocket opening.

But the CIT of a rolling cb at this angle (or a cb with top or bottom on it) is easily 2° less than the CIT that occurs with the same setup when a stun shot is used at this angle. So I think Dan is asking how it's possible that the stun shot and the rolling cb shot, which produce two different shot angles more than 2° apart, can both hit a pocket that only permits 1° of variance from center pocket.

With a center table shot (ob farther from the pocket) the difference would be even more noticeable. Are you using the exact same perception each time with no side spin on the cb?
Click to expand...

Dan qualified the alignment as a 15 inside.

Stan Shuffett
 
BC21 said:
I think what Dan is saying is that the difference in the CIT angle between a rolling cb hit and a stun cb hit is greater than the allowable margin for error at the pocket opening.

Like in this video, https://youtu.be/ERJ-bZJTGfE, you hit the same setup a few times with a rolling cb hit and a couple of times with a stun shot, all into a 3.25 inch pocket. The margin of error is less than +/- 1°, based on the ob's distance to the pocket with a 3.25 inch pocket opening.

But the CIT of a rolling cb at this angle (or a cb with top or bottom on it) is easily 2° less than the CIT that occurs with the same setup when a stun shot is used at this angle. So I think Dan is asking how it's possible that the stun shot and the rolling cb shot, which produce two different shot angles more than 2° apart, can both hit a pocket that only permits 1° of variance from center pocket.

With a center table shot (ob farther from the pocket) the difference would be even more noticeable. Are you using the exact same perception each time with no side spin on the cb?
Click to expand...

That is the magic of the system...once you devote your time to real cte...you'll see it for yourself. :wink:
 
stan shuffett said:
You’re one that would get it.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...

I do get it Stan. Im very open minded and have spent a lot a time at the table..willing to say Ive miss more balls then most the guys on here combined.:wink:

8 hour 10 hour sessions and sometimes a whole day of non stop playing. One thing I can say is know matter how you do it..the more you do it ..you create a relationship with the balls and table. Trying to intentionally tap into that is a not easy...I dont think one can reach his potential that way. The subconscious is powerful if you just let it do its thing.

Unexplainable things can happen. :)
 
8pack said:
I do get it Stan. Im very open minded and have spent a lot a time at the table..willing to say Ive miss more balls then most the guys on here combined.:wink:

8 hour 10 hour sessions and sometimes a whole day of non stop playing. One thing I can say is know matter how you do it..the more you do it ..you create a relationship with the balls and table. Trying to intentionally tap into that is a not easy...I dont think one can reach his potential that way. The subconscious is powerful if you just let it do its thing.

Unexplainable things can happen. :)
Click to expand...

That’s great that you get it. You should do a video and then your “I get it” can be compared to my TS explanation.

Stan Shuffett
 
8pack said:
I do get it Stan. Im very open minded and have spent a lot a time at the table..willing to say Ive miss more balls then most the guys on here combined.:wink:

8 hour 10 hour sessions and sometimes a whole day of non stop playing. One thing I can say is know matter how you do it..the more you do it ..you create a relationship with the balls and table. Trying to intentionally tap into that is a not easy...I dont think one can reach his potential that way. The subconscious is powerful if you just let it do its thing.

Unexplainable things can happen. :)
Click to expand...

i call it magic, only problem i have is sometimes it works and sometimes it don't

both ends of the spectrum are frightening, the more i played the less i encountered the poor side of the spectrum
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top