All you are doing is blowing smoke about CTE, you have no idea about the correct steps for even using it.
If you don't understand CTE...
- Thread starter BeiberLvr
- Start date
- Status
All you are doing is blowing smoke about CTE, you have no idea about the correct steps for even using it.
I'm sure this is meant as a negative post since you are a certified CTE troll, so please explain the difference.
What?? You can't explain, and you really don't know the difference.
Of course you can't. You have never really learned CTE.
OK, whatever you say. :thumbup:
Sorry if the truth hurts. You've never been to a certified CTE instructor. You never bought the DVD. I guess you've picked up things on here but you even admitted that there are a lot of mixed signals on here.
You can continue to act like an expert but we all know that's not true by a long shot.
I know the correct steps.
I can even do the correct steps and make it work successfully.
Yet I'm rational enough to at least admit there's a high possibility that subconscious adjustments are being made.
The difference between me and Dan, however, is that I don't think it matters. It's obvious that the system has helped a lot of players, and if Stan marketing it as objective (or whatever descriptions he uses) helps to get more people interested. Then I don't see that as a problem.
There must be something to it. I watched the 2016 Stevie Moore vs. Mike Davis tournament. Stevie used CTE through-out. I don't think he missed a ball that was reachable. Mike seemed very tired and went down 11-3 in short order.
The only think that brings out my skeptical mind is when Stan places two sets of cue balls/object balls on a kitchen island - for analysis - and using the same visuals and sweeps comes up with different aim lines. Something is strange about that. No pockets are present. - from his DVD.
There is also the following video. Stevie uses the same visuals and pivots but pockets the ball differently. Hmmmmmm....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1mlnRiAXA8
The only think that brings out my skeptical mind is when Stan places two sets of cue balls/object balls on a kitchen island - for analysis - and using the same visuals and sweeps comes up with different aim lines. Something is strange about that. No pockets are present. - from his DVD.
There is also the following video. Stevie uses the same visuals and pivots but pockets the ball differently. Hmmmmmm....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1mlnRiAXA8
You know the steps that are 7 years old. The fact that you can be successful with them speaks to their strength. I completely understand your sentiments. I am 7 years further along than DVD1 and 4 years past DVD2. I have not stood still in seeking to figure out what the vision can do to erase any doubts about the process having subconscious influences. The process is 110% conscious and easily explained.
Stan Shuffett
I'm not looking to argue, Stan.
All I'm saying is that even if you are wrong, I don't think it matters. People still benefit from your work.
Actually my point is both require a bit of faith on the shooters part. I use some of Stan's methods, mainly on shots that I don't trust my instincts on, and often they work. I believe both are good ways to aim. My post was a sarcastic attempt to point out that people will shoot down Stan's method without giving it an honest effort, while claiming that ghost ball is somehow better. They can not see any more "OBJECTIVE" points to aim with a ghost ball than they can with Stan's system. A year or so ago I was messing around with my grandson on a 10 foot snooker table with 3 1/4" pockets and just for the hell of it we set up a curtain similar to how stan does in his video. I made 8 out of 10 shots in the corner and could not even see the corner. The 2 I missed I'm sure were just lack of concentration on my part, due to having already made the 1st 7 shots in a row, say what you want, but Stan's system absolutely works if you execute it right. Whether it will help you or not depends on what kind of help you need.
Obviously the kitchen island didn't have a 2:1 ratio but what would happen to the shot line if he had placed them on a round table? Would they still have sought out a 90 degree angle perception? Would the results have been completely different? Is it the fact that the parallel setup (two pairs of CB/OB, same visuals, same sweep = different shot line) are on any rectangle surface that the shot lines are different?
The only way to know is to try. I would think the system, as it stands, works due to how two spheres present themselves on a 2x1 surface with pockets at the squared 90's. I can clearly test that as I move two balls across the table and align the two lines, my physical orientation is unique.
Thank you for the reply. Good information. The number one thing I am struggling with is how do I visualize the two lines (CTE and ETA/B/C) in "stereo". I can line up CTE then move to see a parallel version of A/B/C but I can see that alignment in multiple locations as long as I am willing to fudge on the alignment of CTE.
I have sent a few questions to Stan but I'm afraid he is so busy. I receive short answers that leave me with more questions.
The easiest way to see both lines at the same time is by trying this.
Hold out both hands index fingers (pointing up toward the ceiling) at arms length and a couple of inches apart you can see both index fingers at the same time. Now just imagine one index finger is A,B or C and the other index finger is center of QB to the OB edge.
Now try it with the balls on the table. There is only one standing position that you will be able to see each of the OB points. Stan has a video on YT that explains how to see and position your body to see each of the OB points (A,B and C)
Here is an interesting YT of Bob Nunley wearing a head cam. Bob's method is interesting. I use it, but I also understand that his method of CTE is not like Stan's method.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTLT8QOTloE
Hope this helps.
John
Last edited:
I am sorry for any short answers. I discontinued all personal lessons last June so that I could devote full time to my book.....and then things were compounded on top that with health issues. I am on a fairly good schedule right now. I am doing everything humanly possible to get every last necessary detail of CTE out there........I am going to conduct free clinics, a free online video series and publish my book.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
Thank you for the quick reply, Stan. I know you have been busy and have been bombarded with questions from those who really don't want to learn this system. I believe CTE works and will continue to read and study it until I get it. Thanks for your hard work. Looking forward to more information and your book.
The easiest way to see both lines at the same time is by trying this.
Hold out both hands index fingers (pointing up toward the ceiling) at arms length and a couple of inches apart you can see both index fingers at the same time. Now just imagine one index finger is A,B or C and the other index finger is center of QB to the OB edge.
Now try it with the balls on the table. There is only one standing position that you will be able to see each of the OB points. Stan has a video on YT that explains how to see and position your body to see each of the OB points (A,B and C)
Here is an interesting YT of Bob Nunley wearing a head cam. Bob's method is interesting. I use it, but I also understand that his method of CTE is not like Stan's method.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTLT8QOTloE
Hope this helps.
John
Thank you. I will give this a try. I don't know if it matters but my vision falls in Stan's category 2 (somewhat near the center).
Last edited:
You are welcome! I appreciate your understanding.
Work on chapters 8 and 9. Do manual pivoting and then Pro One sweeps for each shot.
It's best to learn BASIC CTE first. There is only one way for seeing each of those shots while standing at ball address.
Stan Shuffett
straightdraw65
Banned
The Stan Shuffett youtube videos of this are pretty easy to follow as far as seeing the perceptions goes.
I can do that and determine right away if the shot is a 15, 30, 45, 60 degree perception (based on the 'two visual lines')
From that point on is where I get lost.
I don't understand where to physically aim the cuestick.
Is it aimed with center cueball toward the part of the object ball that corresponds to the visual perception?
Is it aimed with center cueball toward the edge of the object ball and then pivoted or shifted to the perception spot. (if it was a 30 degree, it would just remain there aimed at the edge of the object ball or what they used to call "a half ball hit", wouldn't it?)
I don't understand the "center to edge" part? Center of what...to edge of what?
Can you explain that a little, please?
Seeing the two lines fixes the cue ball with a left edge and a right edge. Therefore you have a center cue ball based on the 2 edges. Move straight in to 1/2 tip alignment either to the right or to the left of the identified center. Pivot to center.
This will be greatly refined with my update info. But for now.....that is essentially what DVD1 and 2 conveyed.
Stan Shuffett
straightdraw65
Banned
Well I'll be darned.
So that's how it works.
You know something, that is really clever, and the balls go in the pockets nice and clean without even paying attention to the pocket location. But it's going to take some getting used to.
About your pivot. I see that if I just do a slight "shift pivot" to center cue ball with my bridge hand fingers from that 1/2 tip offset, that it works perfect. Moving my back hand threw me off the line, I think and I was missing by a foot.
This is just after a few hours of trying it.
I like it. I really like it.
- Status