Just received Stan's Pro One DVD

Falcon Eddie said:
You stated that you haven't had time to analyze Stan'd dvd but go on to put your negative spin in the mix. So in other words your mouth is moving before your brain is in gear. I have read countless things of this sort before the dvd came out and remained closed mouthed because unless I understood what it was, I wasn't going to put anything in writing. It's one thing to profess wisdom and then prove ignorance.
Fundamentals have a lot to do with the game, but it's also an art. Where the shooter can have questionable stroke , stance, ect.
When you ask " where is Dr. Dave or Pat " It is apparent that you are trying to incite. Exactly what you are saying you are not doing.
I hope you take a serious look at yourself . Read this a couple of times and analyze that.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your input, Falcon, but I feel you grabbed onto one sentence in my post and capitalized on it, and ignored the meat of what I said.. When I said I haven't had time to really analyze Stan's system, I meant I haven't fully comprehended it yet. Based on what I said, however, it seems to me you should get the feeling that I've gone thru Stan's DVD more than once.

As I've observed, most people that have tried to comprehend the DVD admittedly remained confused. Despite that, however, I've often seen comments like "I don't think I'm doing it right, but it sure is helping", which to me is meaningless, and better qualifies as hugging. I keep looking for objective input, yet mostly I find sensationalism - like your post .

Like you, I remained largely closed-mouthed and open-minded throughout the anticipation period of Stan's DVD. I read all the heated debates regarding whether CTE was an exact aiming system, and, when Stan assured us he was going to prove that, and offered wagers etc, I believed that CTE might just be an exact aiming system. I'm disappointed to say I'm no longer optimistic about that.

I did acknowledge that CTE seems to be a usable aiming system, which means it might fit some peoples needs. However, since it's not an exact system, I'm not sure I want to endure another learning curve to master another inexact aiming system. I realize it's been stated that the learning curve to CTE mastership is shorter than for other aiming systems, but I've already put in alot of time, and question that CTE will improve the skills I've developed, rather than simply put a different, not better, slant on aiming.

Falcon, note that I am not stating that CTE cannot improve my sklills, because I realize I don't fully comprehend it. If it is inexact, however, as it appears to be, I admit I am not excited about that.

You said my mouth is moving before my brain is engaged. Seems to me that statement fits you better. What did you say?: "It's one thing to profess wisdom and then prove ignorance.
Fundamentals have a lot to do with the game, but it's also an art. Where the shooter can have questionable stroke , stance, ect." Is this supposed enlighten me?

And you state I'm inciting because I'm curious about Dave's and Pat's feelings regarding the exactness of CTE. Each of them is completely objective, I believe. IMO, you're a fool if you choose to ignore their opinions.

So, Falcon, "Exactly what you are saying you are not doing.
I hope you take a serious look at yourself . Read this a couple of times and analyze that. " (Your words) And, enlightened Falcon, if you want to mouth, answer the question I'm struggling with: Is CTE/Pro One an exact aiming system?
 
Unless someone has learned the system and has used it for like 6 months, i personally dont think they should post anything negative about it. Some have learning issues and have trouble, so they come here and post negatively about it, it doesn't seem right to me, im just saying. Cte is pretty much an exact aiming system i think, but the people using it are not, like myself included :)
 
shankster8 said:
Simple logic; good Post!!!!!!!!!!! I'm not blaspheming anything here; but, IMO few seem to comprehend things, yet hug to the max!! I'm still openminded but I can see a parallel with Geno's "system" where everyone hugs, but no one can answer the simplest questions (Even Geno refuses to answer the question asked for a year: If I center the cue beneath my eyes, are my eyes then within 1/8 inch of that perfect spot you continually preach about?

I haven't had time to really analyze Stan's system (big deal, who am I?) It seems to be usable, but too simply presented. Actually, I'm glad it confounds everyone because it stands to shortcut what I consider legitimate pool skill. If you can simply determine whether a shot is "thick" or "thin", then offset your tip and pivot properly, and reliably make balls, where is the challenge we call pool? It seems like cheating. But, I know from experience, pool is alot more than that; and, I believe those claiming this system has transformed their game are hugging and BS'ing. (Stevie Moore was a Pro to begin with. It may have enhances his game, but it definitely did not catipult him into the pro ranks.

Stroke is left out of the equation; and, I believe, if you've got a stroke, you've spent enough time at the table to pretty much know how to aim. Those that are so amateurish as to believe they can circumvent the normal learning curve via this "system" - good luck! Absent stroke, good eye position and alignment, and alot of peripheral knowledge, you're lost! I don't care if you can occasionally do some pivot giration and make a ball. You gott'a not miss, consistently, to be a winner.

CTE/Pro One is supposed to be an exact system - one not reliant on "feel". That was the crux of previous arguments that resulted in numerous bannings. I remain confounded by many issues; for example, bridgelength (It can't be variable, and exact.) I am disappointed that professional edicate(sp?) again prevails over objectivism (like, previously, in consideration of "Perfect Aim", [aka (IMHO) Center the cue beneath your eyes, dumbo - that's all!]).

Dr. Dave, are you still with us? Intimidated? Too polite? Where is Pat?

By the way, I believe Stan produced a pretty good DVD, as far as production is concerned, but it did not resolve that CTE/Pro One is an "exact" aiming system. JMHO
Click to expand...

S8,

I'm glad you're open minded, because what I'm going to say is not meant to derail this thread. It is meant to answer your question and inform you of some of the facts I believe to be relevant that I have found in my aiming adventures.

Yes, the "perfect" place for your eyes is centered over the cue if you are able to pocket balls using this alignment. There is no distraction between dominant and non-dominant eyes. An exception would be placing one eye completely over the cue as many pros do. Again there is no discrepancy from a weaker eye when shooting the shot. This is called "The Pure Eye", by Richard Kranicki in his book, "Answer To A Pool Player's Prayers".

In this text, he describes the cue centered alignment between the eyes as the answer to eliminating aiming problems received by the mind from the eyes. There is an equal balance of images and no eye gets special treatment over the other. No compensation has to be made or change in alignment to aim off center to hit the middle of the cue ball.

If you are one of the lucky few who can pull this off and center the cue between your eyes, you have been blessed. Few players have this ability or close to it. The "Pure Eye", would seem to be more common and attainable with practice.

The vast majority of shooters have a dominant eye and have to rely on various eye setups to get on the correct aiming line. The dominant eye is used mainly when shooting straighter shots. The other eye comes into play when the player is shooting cut shots to the left and right. To sight these shots the player will find if they move their eyes toward the edges of the cue ball, they will gain a perspective that is the correct aiming line. This perspective, especially on thin cuts, is NOT centered over the cue stick. The eyes move away from the center and align edges of the balls.

A prime example is Johnny Archer. He employs this technique well. He is not switching dominant eyes. He is using both eyes for cuts to the left and right, with the cue not centered between the eyes.

"Perfect Aim" exploits this nicely. That is why it is used with Cte or any aiming system for that matter. With Cte, your visuals are a primary objective and have to be correct to get your physical alignment. This information from Geno is probably the biggest "secret" from a pro (besides Joe T.'s book on racking) I have heard about publicly. Please, quit knocking Geno's info. He put the info out there and, "it works."

You (anybody) can sight Cte with only one eye. It still works. You must make your individual alignment to get it to work. Everybody's eyes work differently. There is no standard. Just a ballpark to get into. If you try these things out for yourself, you can make an informed decision. Learning something off of a dvd is tough. If anyone is curious about Cte or Perfect Aim or can't get it from the video, they can call Geno or pm me. I will be glad to help.

Best,
Mike
 
Last edited:
shankster8 said:
Thanks for your input, Falcon, but I feel you grabbed onto one sentence in my post and capitalized on it, and ignored the meat of what I said.. When I said I haven't had time to really analyze Stan's system, I meant I haven't fully comprehended it yet. Based on what I said, however, it seems to me you should get the feeling that I've gone thru Stan's DVD more than once.

As I've observed, most people that have tried to comprehend the DVD admittedly remained confused. Despite that, however, I've often seen comments like "I don't think I'm doing it right, but it sure is helping", which to me is meaningless, and better qualifies as hugging. I keep looking for objective input, yet mostly I find sensationalism - like your post .

Like you, I remained largely closed-mouthed and open-minded throughout the anticipation period of Stan's DVD. I read all the heated debates regarding whether CTE was an exact aiming system, and, when Stan assured us he was going to prove that, and offered wagers etc, I believed that CTE might just be an exact aiming system. I'm disappointed to say I'm no longer optimistic about that.

I did acknowledge that CTE seems to be a usable aiming system, which means it might fit some peoples needs. However, since it's not an exact system, I'm not sure I want to endure another learning curve to master another inexact aiming system. I realize it's been stated that the learning curve to CTE mastership is shorter than for other aiming systems, but I've already put in alot of time, and question that CTE will improve the skills I've developed, rather than simply put a different, not better, slant on aiming.

Falcon, note that I am not stating that CTE cannot improve my sklills, because I realize I don't fully comprehend it. If it is inexact, however, as it appears to be, I admit I am not excited about that.

You said my mouth is moving before my brain is engaged. Seems to me that statement fits you better. What did you say?: "It's one thing to profess wisdom and then prove ignorance.
Fundamentals have a lot to do with the game, but it's also an art. Where the shooter can have questionable stroke , stance, ect." Is this supposed enlighten me?

And you state I'm inciting because I'm curious about Dave's and Pat's feelings regarding the exactness of CTE. Each of them is completely objective, I believe. IMO, you're a fool if you choose to ignore their opinions.

So, Falcon, "Exactly what you are saying you are not doing.
I hope you take a serious look at yourself . Read this a couple of times and analyze that. " (Your words) And, enlightened Falcon, if you want to mouth, answer the question I'm struggling with: Is CTE/Pro One an exact aiming system?
Click to expand...
What makes you think that cte is not exact? In case you didnt know Pat is banned and I would think that if Dr. dave purchased the dvd he would take a considerable amount of time before posting a review. This is good info but I believe it goes against the grain so to speak for Dr. Dave. as well as alot of people. Now that the dvd is out a reputable person should put in enough time using it before doing a review, I would expect this whether the review is pro or con.
 
Mikjary said:
S8,

I'm glad you're open minded, because what I'm going to say is not meant to derail this thread. It is meant to answer your question and inform you of some of the facts I believe to be relevant that I have found in my aiming adventures.

Yes, the "perfect" place for your eyes is centered over the cue if you are able to pocket balls using this alignment. There is no distraction between dominant and non-dominant eyes. An exception would be placing one eye completely over the cue as many pros do. Again there is no discrepancy from a weaker eye when shooting the shot. This is called "The Pure Eye", by Richard Kranicki in his book, "Answer To A Pool Player's Prayers".

In this text, he describes the cue centered alignment between the eyes as the answer to eliminating aiming problems received by the mind from the eyes. There is an equal balance of images and no eye gets special treatment over the other. No compensation has to be made or change in alignment to aim off center to hit the middle of the cue ball.

If you are one of the lucky few who can pull this off and center the cue between your eyes, you have been blessed. Few players have this ability or close to it. The "Pure Eye", would seem to be more common and attainable with practice.

The vast majority of shooters have a dominant eye and have to rely on various eye setups to get on the correct aiming line. The dominant eye is used mainly when shooting straighter shots. The other eye comes into play when the player is shooting cut shots to the left and right. To sight these shots the player will find if they move their eyes toward the edges of the cue ball, they will gain a perspective that is the correct aiming line. This perspective, especially on thin cuts, is NOT centered over the cue stick. The eyes move away from the center and align edges of the balls.

A prime example is Johnny Archer. He employs this technique well. He is not switching dominant eyes. He is using both eyes for cuts to the left and right, with the cue not centered between the eyes.

"Perfect Aim" exploits this nicely. That is why it is used with Cte or any aiming system for that matter. With Cte, your visuals are a primary objective and have to be correct to get your physical alignment. This information from Geno is probably the biggest "secret" from a pro (besides Joe T.'s book on racking) I have heard about publicly. Please, quit knocking Geno's info. He put the info out there and, "it works."

You (anybody) can sight Cte with only one eye. It still works. You must make your individual alignment to get it to work. Everybody's eyes work differently. There is no standard. Just a ballpark to get into. If you try these things out for yourself, you can make an informed decision. Learning something off of a dvd is tough. If anyone is curious about Cte or Perfect Aim or can't get it from the video, they can call Geno or pm me. I will be glad to help.

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...
This is a good post.
 
I am in the tunnel of the system. I can guarantee there are other pros aiming this way. I hope for you'alls sake you dont get left behind any further. Keep refining your movements. I will be thanking Stan for the rest of my life. Enjoy your journey.
 
ChopStick, it is apparent that you are not alone with the fact that you are improving your game with Stan Shuffett's CTE/Pro One.

I'm glad that so many people are having positive results with CTE/Pro One.

For those who are still struggling with it, hang in there. Visit with someone who is proficient with it if you continue to have problems with it. Consider taking a lesson from Stan. It's a one day lesson for CTE/Pro One. His Foundation Course is two days, I THINK.
 
Mikjary said:
S8,

I'm glad you're open minded, because what I'm going to say is not meant to derail this thread. It is meant to answer your question and inform you of some of the facts I believe to be relevant that I have found in my aiming adventures.

Yes, the "perfect" place for your eyes is centered over the cue if you are able to pocket balls using this alignment. There is no distraction between dominant and non-dominant eyes. An exception would be placing one eye completely over the cue as many pros do. Again there is no discrepancy from a weaker eye when shooting the shot. This is called "The Pure Eye", by Richard Kranicki in his book, "Answer To A Pool Player's Prayers".

In this text, he describes the cue centered alignment between the eyes as the answer to eliminating aiming problems received by the mind from the eyes. There is an equal balance of images and no eye gets special treatment over the other. No compensation has to be made or change in alignment to aim off center to hit the middle of the cue ball.

If you are one of the lucky few who can pull this off and center the cue between your eyes, you have been blessed. Few players have this ability or close to it. The "Pure Eye", would seem to be more common and attainable with practice.

The vast majority of shooters have a dominant eye and have to rely on various eye setups to get on the correct aiming line. The dominant eye is used mainly when shooting straighter shots. The other eye comes into play when the player is shooting cut shots to the left and right. To sight these shots the player will find if they move their eyes toward the edges of the cue ball, they will gain a perspective that is the correct aiming line. This perspective, especially on thin cuts, is NOT centered over the cue stick. The eyes move away from the center and align edges of the balls.

A prime example is Johnny Archer. He employs this technique well. He is not switching dominant eyes. He is using both eyes for cuts to the left and right, with the cue not centered between the eyes.

"Perfect Aim" exploits this nicely. That is why it is used with Cte or any aiming system for that matter. With Cte, your visuals are a primary objective and have to be correct to get your physical alignment. This information from Geno is probably the biggest "secret" from a pro (besides Joe T.'s book on racking) I have heard about publicly. Please, quit knocking Geno's info. He put the info out there and, "it works."

You (anybody) can sight Cte with only one eye. It still works. You must make your individual alignment to get it to work. Everybody's eyes work differently. There is no standard. Just a ballpark to get into. If you try these things out for yourself, you can make an informed decision. Learning something off of a dvd is tough. If anyone is curious about Cte or Perfect Aim or can't get it from the video, they can call Geno or pm me. I will be glad to help.

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

Mike,
I have a right eye dominance and during warm up, I shoot several straight in shots to find where under my right eye ala to the right side of my chin gets me in line to consistently make the shot. I aim all of my shots from that chin position.

As you know, I aim double distance for a DD spot with my dominant eye. I don't consciously refer to my non dominant eye when aiming.

As you have said, I can make CTE work even if I have a dominant eye with "adjustments". I am using your advise, to start at CTE and then look with the eye closest to the edge of the CB i.e., right eye for cuts to the right and left eye for cuts to the left.

I then look for the quarter slices on the OB. in order to do this, I have to shift my head to get the proper alignment. This puts my stance in an awkward position so I shift my rear leg to get me on line with what I see. This takes me off of the CTE line (30 degree) which is necessary for the other cut angles.

I then place my bridge hand and cue 1/2 tip to the proper side of the CB and pivot. I shoot several shots from each quarter and document what cut angle is achieved. If I line up the CB edge to the OB edge, I can get an 85 to 90 degree cut angle. If I sight the edge of the CB to 1/4 inside of the OB, I consistently get a 45 degree cut angle.

What that means to me is that I can use the OB for cut angles greater than 30 degrees or CTE by aiming the edge of the CB to points on the OB be it 1/4s, 1/8s or 1/16s for all of the angles from 30 degrees to 90 degrees. I am comfortable with DD aiming for cut angles less than 30 degrees (CTE).

What I have to practice is dealing with the parallax view of the separation between the CB edge and the smaller OB. I have been using my cue to see the line from the edge of thee CB to the fractions on the OB before I put my bridge and cue down for the shot from my new alignment/stance.

This my take away from your posts. It works for me....even though I may not be doing it correctly.

Thanks.:smile:
 
LAMas said:
Mike,
I have a right eye dominance and during warm up, I shoot several straight in shots to find where under my right eye ala to the right side of my chin gets me in line to consistently make the shot. I aim all of my shots from that chin position.

As you know, I aim double distance for a DD spot with my dominant eye. I don't consciously refer to my non dominant eye when aiming.

As you have said, I can make CTE work even if I have a dominant eye with "adjustments". I am using your advise, to start at CTE and then look with the eye closest to the edge of the CB i.e., right eye for cuts to the right and left eye for cuts to the left.

I then look for the quarter slices on the OB. in order to do this, I have to shift my head to get the proper alignment. This puts my stance in an awkward position so I shift my rear leg to get me on line with what I see. This takes me off of the CTE line (30 degree) which is necessary for the other cut angles.

I then place my bridge hand and cue 1/2 tip to the proper side of the CB and pivot. I shoot several shots from each quarter and document what cut angle is achieved. If I line up the CB edge to the OB edge, I can get an 85 to 90 degree cut angle. If I sight the edge of the CB to 1/4 inside of the OB, I consistently get a 45 degree cut angle.

What that means to me is that I can use the OB for cut angles greater than 30 degrees or CTE by aiming the edge of the CB to points on the OB be it 1/4s, 1/8s or 1/16s for all of the angles from 30 degrees to 90 degrees. I am comfortable with DD aiming for cut angles less than 30 degrees (CTE).

What I have to practice is dealing with the parallax view of the separation between the CB edge and the smaller OB. I have been using my cue to see the line from the edge of thee CB to the fractions on the OB before I put my bridge and cue down for the shot from my new alignment/stance.

This my take away from your posts. It works for me....even though I may not be doing it correctly.

Thanks.:smile:
Click to expand...

Hey Big E,

I'm right eye dominant,too. If I want to sight the cte line with only my right eye, I stand more sideways and look at the shot with my left side facing forward (right handed). It is less work for me to use both eyes and feels more comfortable. Some players will sight better with only the one eye and I envy them. Their mind is not melding two visual signals and picking out the right proportions to use.

When I use double the distance, it is always on the straighter cuts. I use only my dominant eye, too. For edge to edge aiming I prefer to use both eyes, but I found I can use only one eye if I want. I am more consistent with two eyes and that is my solution.

Moving your back leg around sets up your aiming line and probably helps or hinders your dominant eye aiming. Standing at a 45 degree angle or greater to the shot (left side forward for a right handed player) may help in your foot placement. Staying on the cte line is important with your visuals.

If you are moving your visuals off of the cte line, but you are still pocketing balls, I can think of a couple of situations. The first is that you're compensating with your stroke a small amount to get into the correct alignment. A small swerve, wrist twist or even jumping up on you're shots. Don't ask me how I know.:rolleyes:

Another possibility is you are on the correct line, but due to head position or operator error with your visual alignment, you are not noticing that you are seeing the cte line. Possibly adjust the angle you view the shot by turning more sideways to the shot.

Stevie Moore, as recommended by Stan in his video, gets low on the shot when there is some distance between balls. It is tough to line up the points at opposite ends of the playing field. I'll use my stick to help find the center to edge on occasion. I'm glad you said this because I didn't think to mention it. It's a good tip.

As usual, a lot of good analysis on your part. :)

Best,
Mike
 
i played league last nite and used pro1 on 60% of shots and manual cte on the rest. It was the first time using the reference points for me also, no practice either since getting the dvd. I blew a very makable 8 ball cut to the corner because i went with a B reference when it should have been a C, i believe and I had a feeling it should it have been C as i was pulling the trigger :( I did end up 5-0 with a 67. Cte/pivot/pro1 is easy for me since i have used it for a while now its just the reference points that i will have to work on.
 
************************
What makes you think that cte is not exact?
************************

I know I will regret this, but here goes...

For a given cut: At a specified CB-OB distance, there are three possible reference points (for example A,B, 1/8) and two initial tip positions (left, right). This results in six possible shot angles via mechanical CTE. For the system to be exact, one of these angles must always be the correct solution, and it is easy to disprove this by counter example. Furthermore, if CTE were always exact, there would be no need for the experience-based Pro One.

That is why I think it is not "exact". Note that I did not say that it would not be very helpful to many people, I just don't see it as being exact.
 
if i new the correct shot every shot ... would that make it exact? pro1 basically gets you looking and feeling like your shooting naturally, basically flowing around the table and not stop, look, drop, pivot and then shoot, kinda robotically i guess you can say, this is my opinion anyways :)
 
I met Stan and Landon at Derby City and asked Stan to go over a few things about the dvd that I was unsure of and its nice to see in person.

He was happy to spend about a half hour with me for free answering any questions I had and making sure I was doing the right thing. He was very nice and I'm glad he took his time to help me out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top