CTE pro one DVD

[BC21]

The SOMEHOW is visual for CTE. CTE does NOT need bridge Vs, distance stuff, PIVOTING and not even a cue.

Stan Shuffett

I get that. I think maybe that is what confuses most players -- saying Pro1 is a visual pivot movement, not a manual pivot movement. Manual pivots are easy to demonstrate, while visual pivots are not. I can demonstrate manual pivots. All I need to know is where to place my bridge and where to begin my pivot. The sweeps, which you specifically state as taking place of the manual pivots, is not as straight forward to learn. Maybe the book, in combination with the videos, will open the door a bit wider for those trying to step through it.

 

[stan shuffett]

I get that. I think maybe that is what confuses most players -- saying Pro1 is a visual pivot movement, not a manual pivot movement. Manual pivots are easy to demonstrate, while visual pivots are not. I can demonstrate manual pivots. All I need to know is where to place my bridge and where to begin my pivot. The sweeps, which you specifically state as taking place of the manual pivots, is not as straight forward to learn. Maybe the book, in combination with the videos, will open the door a bit wider for those trying to step through it.

You can not demo manual pivoting systems with objectivity. You will be forced to introduce feel.
You can't explain where to objectively place bridge Vs with fractions that would be commensurate with 2d presentations for GB or contact points. You would be forced again to introduce feel.
Be my guest...do it !

Stan Shuffett

 

[BC21]

You can not demo manual pivoting systems with objectivity. You will be forced to introduce feel.
You can't explain where to objectively place bridge Vs with fractions that would be commensurate with 2d presentations for GB or contact points. You would be forced again to introduce feel.
Be my guest...do it !

Stan Shuffett

Oh, I could very easily do it, providing (like I said) someone show me exactly where to place my bridge and where to begin my initial pivot. It's a show-and-tell thing, like telling someone how to turn a doorknob, then showing them. Anyone can do it. It gets complicated when the doorknob is removed and replaced with a hidden panel somewhere in the woodgrain of the door, and then the person has to figure out certain visual methods to locate the panel in order to open the door. It doesn't make the door any less spectacular, but it does complicate the process of opening it. Once the visuals are mastered, it's probably like having a physical doorknob there. But until then people have to feel around for the hidden panel, and then all of a sudden, "click", the door opens. Eventually they learn how to locate the panel automatically, subconsciously. Is that good analogy?

 

[stan shuffett]

Oh, I could very easily do it, providing (like I said) someone show me exactly where to place my bridge and where to begin my initial pivot. It's a show-and-tell thing, like telling someone how to turn a doorknob, then showing them. Anyone can do it. It gets complicated when the doorknob is removed and replaced with a hidden panel somewhere in the woodgrain of the door, and then the person has to figure out certain visual methods to locate the panel in order to open the door. It doesn't make the door any less spectacular, but it does complicate the process of opening it. Once the visuals are mastered, it's probably like having a physical doorknob there. But until then people have to feel around for the hidden panel, and then all of a sudden, "click", the door opens. Eventually they learn how to locate the panel automatically, subconsciously. Is that good analogy?

That's a good pivot!

Stan Shuffett

 

[BC21]

.........
You can't explain where to objectively place bridge Vs with fractions that would be commensurate with 2d presentations for GB or contact points. You would be forced again to introduce feel.
Be my guest...do it !

Stan Shuffett

I don't understand​. When using fractions (or ghostball) there is no special bridge V placement to figure out. The bridge hand is always positioned so that the cue is lined directly through CCB along the aim line. 2D, 3D, makes no difference. A line through the center of the CB is the same on a flat/horizontal 2D drawing as it is on a real table, only it becomes a vertical center line viewed from behind the CB instead of an overhead view showing a horizontal line on the paper.

No "feel" is needed to follow basic point and shoot instructions, with or without pivoting. But if there is going to be a pivot, the player must know where to initially point their cue, and where the pivot point (bridge V) needs to be, prior to pivoting. I think that is the problem most confronted by newbies when it comes to pivot aiming.

 

[stan shuffett]

I don't understand​. When using fractions (or ghostball) there is no special bridge V placement to figure out. The bridge hand is always positioned so that the cue is lined directly through CCB along the aim line. 2D, 3D, makes no difference. A line through the center of the CB is the same on a flat/horizontal 2D drawing as it is on a real table, only it becomes a vertical center line viewed from behind the CB instead of an overhead view showing a horizontal line on the paper.

No "feel" is needed to follow basic point and shoot instructions, with or without pivoting. But if there is going to be a pivot, the player must know where to initially point their cue, and where the pivot point (bridge V) needs to be, prior to pivoting. I think that is the problem most confronted by newbies when it comes to pivot aiming.

You know WAY less about aiming that I realized. You are perhaps the first ever on this forum or anyway else to make the ridiculous comment that figuring out the bridge V for GB, CPs and fractions is objective for a center pocket aim. You have some serious learning gaps concerning the intricacies of aiming.

Stan Shuffett

 

[SpiderWebComm]

You know WAY less about aiming that I realized. You are perhaps the first ever on this forum or anyway else to make the ridiculous comment that figuring out the bridge V for GB, CPs and fractions is objective for a center pocket aim. You have some serious learning gaps concerning the intricacies of aiming.

Stan Shuffett

Trust me when I say this, what you said right here, everything you've said in the past, and all you will say in the future will be going over his head just like below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6DUbxCpszU

How can you get through to someone who already knows everything?

Don't you just love his analogies though? :boring2:

 

[stan shuffett]

Trust me when I say this, what you said right here, everything you've said in the past, and all you will say in the future will be going over his head just like below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6DUbxCpszU

How can you get through to someone who already knows everything?

Don't you just love his analogies though? :boring2:

You are exactly right!
CTE has been attached for 20 years as having BRIDGE V deficiencies where feel is concerned. I took aCTEaminophen to get over it!
BC21 is doing something right and I cant figure out what it is. He gets a pass on the bridge V attacks. Help me understand that, please, please. I am missing something. I need a BC headache powder.

Stan Shuffett

 

[BC21]

You know WAY less about aiming that I realized. You are perhaps the first ever on this forum or anyway else to make the ridiculous comment that figuring out the bridge V for GB, CPs and fractions is objective for a center pocket aim. You have some serious learning gaps concerning the intricacies of aiming.

Stan Shuffett

Really? "Serious" learning gaps? What exactly leads you to this assumption? Maybe I'm the only one stepping outside the box filled with decades of aiming systems that cause so many players to continually struggle for consistency. Any pro-level player such as yourself can point a finger at me and say, "what does he know!?", and I am quickly marginalized. Yet the aiming struggle continues, despite decades of "professional" systems and superior knowledge being readily available.

Try being less defensive, less demeaning, and more constructive. I provide an obvious difficulty with learning CTE Pro1, and instead of thinking that perhaps I'm on to something that could help someone learn it, you belittle me and dismiss my comments as ignorance. Maybe it's because you are so much better than average players that you cannot possibly bring yourself down to their level. If you could, you'd see things from their skill set that you can't see from yours.

 

[stan shuffett]

Really? "Serious" learning gaps? What exactly leads you to this assumption? Maybe I'm the only one stepping outside the box filled with decades of aiming systems that cause so many players to continually struggle for consistency. Any pro-level player such as yourself can point a finger at me and say, "what does he know!?", and I am quickly marginalized. Yet the aiming struggle continues, despite decades of "professional" systems and superior knowledge being readily available.

Try being less defensive, less demeaning, and more constructive. I provide an obvious difficulty with learning CTE Pro1, and instead of thinking that perhaps I'm on to something that could help someone learn it, you belittle me and dismiss my comments as ignorance. Maybe it's because you are so much better than average players that you cannot possibly bring yourself down to their level. If you could, you'd see things from their skill set that you can't see from yours.

You don't understand the problem of aiming with spheres.

Stan Shuffett

 

[BC21]

You don't understand the problem of aiming with spheres.

Stan Shuffett

I agree 100%, when it comes to the visuals that fix the CB so that a player can easily determine where to place the bridge in order to pivot or sweep to CCB along the shot line. That's what I'm saying.....THAT is where players get stumped.

As far as bridge V placement, the reason I get a pass is simple: With pivots or sweeps, the aim line is the final product, the solution, but it is derives from a correct bridge V placement. With fractional aim points or ghostball aiming, the solution (CCB aim line) is already known, and the bridge V placement is secondary, an afterthought that is not part of the equation to obtain a solution.

 

[stan shuffett]

I agree 100%, when it comes to the visuals that fix the CB so that a player can easily determine where to place the bridge in order to pivot or sweep to CCB along the shot line. That's what I'm saying.....THAT is where players get stumped.

As far as bridge V placement, the reason I get a pass is simple: With pivots or sweeps, the aim line is the final product, the solution, but it is derives from a correct bridge V placement. With fractional aim points or ghostball aiming, the solution (CCB aim line) is already known, and the bridge V placement is secondary, an afterthought that is not part of the equation to obtain a solution.

No one has the pulse of what is going on with CTE better than me. In spite it all, those that trust my directions get success. That is why that I have kept my nose to grind so that I could solve every last detail so that trust can transform into conscious knowledge.

Concerning bridge V placement......you just don't get it. The problem for aiming with spheres is that the player almost never gets to aim directly at the contact point. That is the nature of spheres. Guesswork adjustments for the conventional plane must occur. No way around it. Fractions can get close but not exact and that worthless for pros.

Plus......Ghost ball and fractions do not account for throw.

Stan Shuffett

 

[cookie man]

What false info?

I'm explaining to Denwit why CTE can take a while to learn, based on Stan's own words and the words from others that use or have tried to use the method.

If it's not false then please explain the "quirks/intricacies " needed to make CTE work

 

[cookie man]

Oh, I could very easily do it, providing (like I said) someone show me exactly where to place my bridge and where to begin my initial pivot. It's a show-and-tell thing, like telling someone how to turn a doorknob, then showing them. Anyone can do it. It gets complicated when the doorknob is removed and replaced with a hidden panel somewhere in the woodgrain of the door, and then the person has to figure out certain visual methods to locate the panel in order to open the door. It doesn't make the door any less spectacular, but it does complicate the process of opening it. Once the visuals are mastered, it's probably like having a physical doorknob there. But until then people have to feel around for the hidden panel, and then all of a sudden, "click", the door opens. Eventually they learn how to locate the panel automatically, subconsciously. Is that good analogy?

I made my very first pivot shots while being instructed over the phone by Hal Houle.
It's not that complicated.

 

[BC21]

If it's not false then please explain the "quirks/intricacies " needed to make CTE work

With CTE there are certain tuning variables that need to come together in order to produce an accurate CCB solution the way Stan does in his videos. That is not a false statement.

Step 1. Obtain the two simple visual lines that "fix" the CB.

Step 2. From the fixed CB there is another visualization that must occur in order to know where the bridge V must be positioned (either just left or right of CB address/center line, as shown in videos with white tape).

Step 3. Once the bridge V placement is determined there is then a 1/2 tip pivot from left or right of CCB, and possibly a "micro pivot" involved if needed (based on experience), before arriving at the final CCB solution along the aim line to pocket the ball.

This is all from Stan's videos that I and many others have watched over the years. I'm not making it up. All of these intricacies, if done accurately, lead a player to what Stan calls a "Center Cue Ball Solution" for the shot. I believe him. I just don't understand how he does it, and I believe that's because of step 2 above. It's the perception that most players have trouble with. A faulty or guessed perception leads to an incorrect bridge V placement, which throws the whole solution off. If the perception just never comes to fruition, a player will eventually find his way to the solution through trial and error, or he'll give up on it and sell his DVD to a buddy. That's the reality of it. That's why Stan has spent so many years trying to make it easier for people to learn. But that step 2 is still a stumbling block for most.

 

[stan shuffett]

With CTE there are certain tuning variables that need to come together in order to produce an accurate CCB solution the way Stan does in his videos. That is not a false statement.

Step 1. Obtain the two simple visual lines that "fix" the CB.

Step 2. From the fixed CB there is another visualization that must occur in order to know where the bridge V must be positioned (either just left or right of CB address/center line, as shown in videos with white tape).

Step 3. Once the bridge V placement is determined there is then a 1/2 tip pivot from left or right of CCB, and possibly a "micro pivot" involved if needed (based on experience), before arriving at the final CCB solution along the aim line to pocket the ball.

This is all from Stan's videos that I and many others have watched over the years. I'm not making it up. All of these intricacies, if done accurately, lead a player to what Stan calls a "Center Cue Ball Solution" for the shot. I believe him. I just don't understand how he does it, and I believe that's because of step 2 above. It's the perception that most players have trouble with. A faulty or guessed perception leads to an incorrect bridge V placement, which throws the whole solution off. If the perception just never comes to fruition, a player will eventually find his way to the solution through trial and error, or he'll give up on it and sell his DVD to a buddy. That's the reality of it. That's why Stan has spent so many years trying to make it easier for people to learn. But that step 2 is still a stumbling block for most.

Here is CTE...
See CTE
Use your vision for PERFECTLY aligning your cue to an absolute known describable center
That's it!

Stan Shuffett

 

[BC21]

I made my very first pivot shots while being instructed over the phone by Hal Houle.
It's not that complicated.

I made my first pivot shot about 10 years ago when a buddy said "check this out", and he put the OB 7 or 8 inches away from the CB at a fair angle, then aimed his cue tip through the edge of the CB to the edge of the OB, then pivoted to CCB and fired the ball into a corner pocket. I stepped up and did the same thing, several times. Then I pushed the OB on down the table, set up what looked like the same angled shot, and missed the pocket by half a diamond. I told my buddy he could use that method all he wanted to, especially playing against me! Lol. A week later, after messing around with that method on paper, I told my buddy to line up and pivot from left or right of CCB and he might get it working​ from a distance. He doesn't use any system today, and was just curious (like me) every time an aiming system became the talk of the pool room.

 

[BC21]

Here is CTE...
See CTE
Use your vision for PERFECTLY aligning your cue to an absolute known describable center
That's it!

Stan Shuffett

For those that are able to drop all they think or have ever learned about aiming, I'm sure once step 2 clicks in they do it just like you say.....see it, do it.

The same can be said with players that just "see the shot" too, or players that have mastered any other method or system of aiming. Once your subconscious takes over, the system steps are automatically done instantaneously.

 

[stan shuffett]

For those that are able to drop all they think or have ever learned about aiming, I'm sure once step 2 clicks in they do it just like you say.....see it, do it.

The same can be said with players that just "see the shot" too, or players that have mastered any other method or system of aiming. Once your subconscious takes over, the system steps are automatically done instantaneously


----------------


You don't get it and I don't think you ever will. It's apples and organges. CTE is under attack because I say it's apples and EVERTHING else is organges. You say EVERTHING is organges....

PRO players can not tell you how they consciously get to center cue ball for making their adjustment for how they have to aim because they have to point away from the contact point. Just because it can be done does mean that it has a concrete explanation.....According to Dan and Lou and Bob and Dr Dave.....it's experience from hitting a million balls. SEE and tweak.

CTE is see and align to what is known and can be described.

Stan Shuffett

 

[Dan White]

According to Dan and Lou and Bob and Dr Dave.....it's experience from hitting a million balls. SEE and tweak.

CTE is see and align to what is known and can be described.

Stan Shuffett

@Brian: I have essentially given up on this whole topic until the book comes out. One thing I can say, Stan better have a spot on, detailed, no BS with made up terminology explanation for how CTE works and how anybody can do it. He's been promising that ever since he announced his new 38 chapter book in the works. I wish I had made a note every time Stan said "all will be explained" regarding what he called the "mystery" of CTE. Some have said that there will be no explanation forthcoming in the book or else it already would have been divulged. Allowing inane back and forth ad infinitum is really perverse if one of the participants has the answer but won't clear up a 20 year old issue until the book comes out this year, or maybe next year, or whenever. We'll see. Reputations are at stake, IMO.