CTE/ PRO ONE with Stan Shuffett

[cookie man]

Set up some caroms, or 2-3 balls combos or some rail first shots and then say that. Banks even, any shot where you can not hit the OB first.

I'll even make it easier, block the pocket such that there is only one ball width to make a ball. I bet with this setup the blind shot makers would cry at how often they miss.

I laugh at statements like this one above.

Unproveable babble.

You win Duckie, your the best.

 

[JB Cases]

John,

Suppose someone gave just enough of a description of a system from whence you could determine, say, that it depended on the sum of the three internal angles of a triangle being something other than 180 degrees. Without knowing a single thing more about it, you could be sure that something was seriously wrong.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but CTE seems to assert two things:

1) When using it, you can determine the exact aim line, or one that's close enough for most shots.

2) You can do this without invoking any traditional method of aiming, i.e., ghostball in the most general sense of ghostball. (I'm including lining up contact points, fractional overlap, etc.)

Correct.

It's the second part that's the problem. The aim line cannot be determined from geometry alone, because geometry is not physics - it has nothing to say about where you need to contact the OB. However, once the ghostball premise is asserted (opposite the pocket), then geometry does have a few thing to say. But you have to start with ghostball in some form. Since the very essence of the system is to rid the player of the need to imagine "something that's not there," that is a serious problem.

Understood. Believe me when Hal is telling you to just do it and your brain is saying no and you shoot it anyway and the ball splits the pocket you begin to wonder if you know anything about pool at all. Believe me when I line up on the ball using CTE and it's a weird angle and I can't "see" the ghostball and I don't know if I am right or not but I trust the line CTE gave me and the ball goes in it's no comfort to me to not understand WHY this works.

If CTE or any of the offset-and-pivot systems were presented as a helpful transition from a cold look at the shot to the final aiming step (zeroing in on the ghostball - in the most general sense), then I don't think the controversy would have ever reached the fever pitch that it has.

Well, I for one have said often that the system brings you to the true GB position. It has to or it can't work at all. I think that the issue is that people refuse to believe that you can do three steps and not even look at the object ball beyond the initial sighting of the CTE line and then end up on the line that takes the CB right through the Ghost Ball.

This is why I have said that the bridge must be built by the engineers and not by the travelers. We don't know why it works but we know it works. We think we are cognizant enough of our bodies and minds to know when we are making more shots and tougher shots and becoming better players. It's up to folks like you to study the system and study the users and make the scientific determination. To my knowledge that has not been done yet.

From who? After Dave Segal set up his blog, I dutifully went there to read his description. After all, he's been offered as one of the prime sources and authorities of CTE. Based on that, I generated some graphs showing pivot position for a range of cut angles, at only one CB-OB separation. It turns out that they would be essentially impossible to come by in any casual way (without the math). As could be expected, and not necessarily because of the graphs, CTE began metamorphosing once again. He now says the stuff on his site is wrong.

Dave is not a mathematician. He is a player. He struggles to understand the WHY as much as anyone. So he attempts within his capacity to explain the phenomena. Trying to play over his head.

My point about working with him is that he can show you the steps and how he does them and you can duplicate his actions. That would be one way to get a pure version of CTE to use as your baseline.

Of course, the simple reason that everyone who uses it seems to employ the right-wrong-official-unofficial-original-modified-sanctioned-unsanctioned version, yet manages to sink balls, is that good old ghostball enters in at the last moment. That is the common thread. Why not acknowledge that? Or, correct any erroneous assumptions on my part.

Jim

Because we don't always sink balls. You aren't accounting for the misses. I can tell you with 100% honesty and with my right hand on Robert Byrne's Standard Book of Pool that when I use CTE then I do not use Ghost Ball in any way whatsoever. Right or wrong I use the line that I get though the CTE method and shoot the shot.

I can see where you make the assumption that ghostball comes in at the last minute. But my question to you is how can you know whether that's true or not if you don't know how to execute all the steps yourself?

As for people being able to sink balls using "different" methods of CTE I don' think that there are many really different ways to use it. I think that people think there are because there is no "offical" version out there. That would be Hal's original instructions I guess. I don't even know who came up with "Center to Edge".

Anyway, the point is kind of moot now. Stan's DVD will be here soon and in the absence of anything else it will be the defacto standard version of CTE from which you and anyone else can use as a baseline to apply your questions to.

I for one am just happy that something will finally come out so I can stop saying "it works" without having something to give people.

 

[JoeyA]

That's a little heavy on my shoulders Joey! But I'll try

Dave, sit down and shut up.

Lou, look at me when I'm talking to you.

Pat, fetch me a beer...

You have all the characters lined up I see.

I knew you would be up to the task. Now let's see if your troupe pays attention to you at all.

 

[mlalum]

It's cool. I just couldn't let that opportunity to point out the gambling hypocrisy slide. I'd link to his rant but he was a guest on someone else's blog and I don't want people to out him in the comments there like some preacher who rails against Facebook infidelity while engaging in threesomes with his flock.

I do have thoughts about CTE JB Crazy but you're the last person i'd talk to about it or at a place where you can intercede with your overwrought namecalling bs.

 

[eezbank]

Another positive thread turned into a flame war.

 

[JB Cases]

S

I'll even make it easier, block the pocket such that there is only one ball width to make a ball. I bet with this setup the blind shot makers would cry at how often they miss.

It's 2:30am right now over here. I have 30 minutes of video that I need to cut into three segments.

I will show you a video that does exactly as you propose above and you can see me make balls into a tube that is ONE ball width. And not only when it's in the pocket.

I will start uploading it on Vimeo and see how far it gets.

 

[mlalum]

Michael,

You're an author. The guy's name is right there in bold letters above you. Can't you spell it right?

The W key is far away from the U key.

Do you have anything to say about CTE, Stan's DVD, Joey's trip report? If so I'd like to hear it.

Really JB they have medication in China for your illness.

 

[JoeyA]

Come off the high horse, Joey. Every mention of God isn't a slam at somebody's religious convictions. This is just an easy emotional card you try to play.

pj
chgo

No high horse here, Patrick.

I don't think I have a right to discuss your lack of religious convictions in this forum or anyone else's.

Throwing out parodies about God and "God jokes" about CTE or anything else in this forum is in poor taste and shows a lack of respect for those who do believe in a higher power.

Your continuous ridiculing and knocking of CTE users hasn't gone unnoticed either. (Thank goodness I appreciate the investment of your time in pool.)

Me? (just so you know) I'm a poor excuse for a Christian, but one nevertheless, warts and all.

 

[Neil]

Set up some caroms, or 2-3 balls combos or some rail first shots and then say that. Banks even, any shot where you can not hit the OB first.

I'll even make it easier, block the pocket such that there is only one ball width to make a ball. I bet with this setup the blind shot makers would cry at how often they miss.

I laugh at statements like this one above.

Unproveable babble.

I'm still trying to figure out just what your "beef" with CTE and it's users is. Every post you make, all you do is say how great ghost ball is, and imply that it is the only way to shoot. This post, you set up ridiculous parameters to boot. I say ridiculous, because I can easily post up a cue table for some shots for you to make with ghost ball. You could easily do it on paper, but that doesn't mean squat when it comes to the real world. In twenty tries you wouldn't be able to make them. Which begs the question, why keep promoting something that obviously has flaws??

If you could see the ghost ball everytime, then if you have a straight stroke, you should never be missing any balls. Yet, even without seeing you play, I know you do miss. And, there are many shots that are makeable that you won't even attempt. Why not if ghost ball is so easy???

All CTE is, is another way for one to improve their game. For the life of me, I just don't understand why some of you feel the need to find fault with that. A few want to know the "hows" of it, and I understand that. But the rest of you don't care about the hows of it either, you just want to knock something you don't even know much about.

Anyone serious about their game will give it an honest shot. If it works for them, they are way ahead. If it doesn't, then they can file it with a lot of others things that don't work everybody. But.... to have nothing but bad things to say about it?????

 

[JoeyA]

Another positive thread turned into a flame war.

You're right as can be and who is the first ones to cast the stone, I might ask?

Who are the ones who continue to create strife in this forum? The same troupe, time after time.

They say they want to learn about CTE but they actually prefer to lambast CTE any time a thread about CTE starts up even if it simply a report on a positive pool experience like this one.

DAM those NAYSAYERS! ooops (I forgot Dave's link)

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Mike:
Pat, fetch me a beer...

Aw, Ma... Why can't Davey get it? He's already up.

pj <- what Ma called me (when I wasn't in trouble)
chgo

 

[dr_dave]

You're right as can be and who is the first ones to cast the stone, I might ask?

Who are the ones who continue to create strife in this forum? The same troupe, time after time.

They say they want to learn about CTE but they actually prefer to lambast CTE any time a thread about CTE starts up even if it simply a report on a positive pool experience like this one.

DAM those NAYSAYERS! ooops (I forgot Dave's link)

Joey,

FYI, I added the link for you in your quote above.

I'm surprised you include me in the "Naysayers" group. For a long time, I have agreed that CTE works, and I have worked really hard to try to help explain how and why it does work. I know that many of the true "Naysayers" don't like that I say that "CTE works," but it does. It also provides many benefits to some people.

Now, I have also mocked many of the outrageous and unsubstantiated claims made by some of the CTE proponents. In my opinion, these claims and "marketing strategies" are bad for pool. IMO, they reflect poorly on pool's image.

I honestly hope Stan's DVD provides additional insight, beyond what I have posted on the CTE resource page, concerning how and why his version of CTE works. It will also be nice to actually find out what Pro-One really is, because absolutely nothing meaningful (not even a simple, clear, and concise description) has been shared to date, IMO.

Regards,
Dave

 

[champ2107]

Here for support :grin:

 

[JB Cases]

I do have thoughts about CTE JB Crazy but you're the last person i'd talk to about it or at a place where you can intercede with your overwrought namecalling bs.

Wow, that's pretty funny. You manage to call me a "name" and chastise me about "namecalling" in one sentence.

I guess you haven't figured out yet that I don't call people "names" until they start in first.

And even then I like to stick with factual ones, like for you lying hypocrite is about as accurate as it gets.

You are a liar because you lied on the open forum about me. And you are a hypocrite because you tell other people to act a certain way and yet you act the same way. And you are a hypocrite because you tell people that gambling is ruining pool and yet you gamble on pool matches, illegally.

Maybe all those five parents who read your children's books felt the hypocrisy oozing out and that's why you didn't sell any. Does that make you bitter? All retired and unable to make a living writing, unable to play pool at any decent level, and unable to communicate on a pool forum without getting into fights. I can't recall seeing much positive content from you on this forum? Do you have any?

I will paypal $5 to anyone who can post a link to any original and positive contribution mlalum has made to AZB? Let's see how far back we have to go where he isn't calling someone a name or chastising someone or making illegal wagers (cuz he says gambling is bad for pool) - I won't even check his posts. Someone earn that $5.

Well if you aren't going to talk about CTE, Stan's Video, or Joey's trip then why are you in this thread? Can't you go to your special place and talk about CTE there with whoever makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside?

 

[mlalum]

Wow, that's pretty funny. You manage to call me a "name" and chastise me about "namecalling" in one sentence.

I guess you haven't figured out yet that I don't call people "names" until they start in first.

And even then I like to stick with factual ones, like for you lying hypocrite is about as accurate as it gets.

You are a liar because you lied on the open forum about me. And you are a hypocrite because you tell other people to act a certain way and yet you act the same way. And you are a hypocrite because you tell people that gambling is ruining pool and yet you gamble on pool matches, illegally.

Maybe all those five parents who read your children's books felt the hypocrisy oozing out and that's why you didn't sell any. Does that make you bitter? All retired and unable to make a living writing, unable to play pool at any decent level, and unable to communicate on a pool forum without getting into fights. I can't recall seeing much positive content from you on this forum? Do you have any?

I will paypal $5 to anyone who can post a link to any original and positive contribution mlalum has made to AZB? Let's see how far back we have to go where he isn't calling someone a name or chastising someone or making illegal wagers (cuz he says gambling is bad for pool) - I won't even check his posts. Someone earn that $5.

Well if you aren't going to talk about CTE, Stan's Video, or Joey's trip then why are you in this thread? Can't you go to your special place and talk about CTE there with whoever makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside?

Maybe there isn't a cure in China for what you have.

 

[JB Cases]

Really JB they have medication in China for your illness.

No, I don't think that they can cure me of laughing at people like you. I tried and the doctor said "don't worry, God put stupid people here to make you laugh, laughing good for health."

You're great for my health. Still haven't thought of anything you'd like to share about CTE, Joey's trip report or Stan's video?

How about for or against or on the fence? Tried it or not? Took a lesson from Bruce?

From Lenny?

Anything?

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

I'll even make it easier, block the pocket such that there is only one ball width to make a ball. I bet with this setup the blind shot makers would cry at how often they miss.

I laugh at statements like this one above.

Unproveable babble.

Make the pockets 2.25" wide, and ANYBODY shooting at the pocket with ANY aiming system would cry at how often they miss.

If you want to laugh, laugh at your own statement.

 

[JB Cases]

How about we ALL call a general truce until Stan's video is out. We aren't getting anywhere. I don't even know what what either side would consider a "victory" anymore and since Malum got here we aren't even talking about CTE anyway.

I will be the first to retire from the field and I hope you all can too. Remember that THIS thread was Joey's trip report. If you know Joey then you know he isn't a liar. He gave an honest account of his experience. Joey is a good player, a little below shortstop speed is how I'd clock him.

I will put Pat in the same category. And Mike Page. So these are all "players" who have decent speed.

Let's all just quit for a month until Stan's video is delivered and then we can start it up again just in time for Christmas

How about it?

 

[JoeyA]

Joey,

FYI, I added the link for you in your quote above.

I'm surprised you include me in the "Naysayers" group. For a long time, I have agreed that CTE works, and I have worked really hard to try to help explain how and why it does work. I know that many of the true "Naysayers" don't like that I say that "CTE works," but it does. It also provides many benefits to some people.

Now, I have also mocked many of the outrageous and unsubstantiated claims made by some of the CTE proponents. In my opinion, these claims and "marketing strategies" are bad for pool. IMO, they reflect poorly on pool's image.

I honestly hope Stan's DVD provides additional insight, beyond what I have posted on the CTE resource page, concerning how and why his version of CTE works. It will also be nice to actually find out what Pro-One really is, because absolutely nothing meaningful (not even a simple, clear, and concise description) has been shared to date, IMO.

Regards,
Dave

YOUR constant commercializing of the forum is making me SICK. :barf:

If anyone wants to learn about CTE/Pro One, they can order a DVD by Stan Shuffett or do like I did and get a lesson from him in person. (The lesson is more expensive but is probably better for people who are not as smart as Dr. Dave).

Stan is the best information source for CTE Pro One (ONLY SOURCE FOR CTE/PRO ONE), best instructor and PLAYS TOP SPEED POOL and you can order by clicking here. :wink:

 

[cookie man]

Joey,

FYI, I added the link for you in your quote above.

I'm surprised you include me in the "Naysayers" group. For a long time, I have agreed that CTE works, and I have worked really hard to try to help explain how and why it does work. I know that many of the true "Naysayers" don't like that I say that "CTE works," but it does. It also provides many benefits to some people.

Now, I have also mocked many of the outrageous and unsubstantiated claims made by some of the CTE proponents. In my opinion, these claims and "marketing strategies" are bad for pool. IMO, they reflect poorly on pool's image.

I honestly hope Stan's DVD provides additional insight, beyond what I have posted on the CTE resource page, concerning how and why his version of CTE works. It will also be nice to actually find out what Pro-One really is, because absolutely nothing meaningful (not even a simple, clear, and concise description) has been shared to date, IMO.

Regards,
Dave

What exactly are you admitting to when you say it works? Do you think it works as an exact system?