Millions of Views!!!!

[cookie man]

I have enough knowledge to understand that it is poor form to blame the student for something the teacher is unable to communicate. Some call it a cop out. If the only way to learn this stuff is by taking a personal lesson, then why is he selling books and DVDs?

G.

Personal lesson is not the only way, it's the best way. Some can easily pick it up from the dvd and you tube videos.
You are not a student as you have done very little to learn. A student studies and does the work not just sit behind a computer and question everything.

 

[mohrt]

Yes they can.



Mohrts words.



That is to say CTEL/A, although a single perception, is not a single physical alignment.As you stand behind each of these 5 shots and line up on the CTEL/A perception, the physical alignment becomes slightly thinner and thinner as you move from the nearest shot to the farthest (from the target pocket). This isn't something you have to force yourself to do, your perception does the work



He sounds kinda confused with this post but what he's really saying is you must move (adjust for the thinner cut) to make it work for all shots using the same line up.



Adjustments are what really needs to happen, call it what you want.



Some people are easily fooled. Objective..Ok..good luck with that.



Hopefully someday its seen the same way by all.

The physical alignment differences between shots are the outcome of each perception. They are the product, not the cause. You don't adjust thinner, the perception puts you on the correct alignment. From an execution standpoint they all follow the same steps.

The issue is recognizing the perception and harnessing it. This only comes with experience. It's like explaining to a trumpet player how to play a high G. Explain all you want, it takes experience to get it.

 

[Ron Swanson]

The instruction over and over was On topic and Constructive.

The constant arguing about prove it, you're wrong, etc...
If you can't agree, so what? Say so ONCE and drop out of the conversation.

Badgering everyone else that wants to talk about it is done, not just for him, but all.

On that basis, there would only be one aiming system thread and only one comment per poster, yet that would be absurd. Not allowing critical discourse, no matter how repetitious, is equally absurd.

In short, you cannot have one way Aiming Conversation. It is a two way street.

 

[cookie man]

On that basis, there would only be one aiming system thread and only one comment per poster, yet that would be absurd. Not allowing critical discourse, no matter how repetitious, is equally absurd.

In short, you cannot have one way Aiming Conversation. It is a two way street.

Why not? I mean what have you added to the conversation?

 

[Mr. Wilson]

On that basis, there would only be one aiming system thread and only one comment per poster, yet that would be absurd. Not allowing critical discourse, no matter how repetitious, is equally absurd.

In short, you cannot have one way Aiming Conversation. It is a two way street.

Negative.

However, you are very close to not being able to join these conversations as well....
Opening that door to your very own one way street.

Last time.
Add constructively to the conversation or stay out.

 

[8pack]

The physical alignment differences between shots are the outcome of each perception. They are the product, not the cause. You don't adjust thinner, the perception puts you on the correct alignment. From an execution standpoint they all follow the same steps.

The issue is recognizing the perception and harnessing it. This only comes with experience. It's like explaining to a trumpet player how to play a high G. Explain all you want, it takes experience to get it.

The only way you get away with the 5 shots with the same line up is expanding your objective points on the OB. In others words your edge of the cb is not always on the a, b or c points but rather a thick a,b or c.

Perception harnessing , trumpet player, what..lol

 

[mohrt]

The only way you get away with the 5 shots with the same line up is expanding your objective points on the OB. In others words your edge of the cb is not always on the a, b or c points but rather a thick a,b or c.

Perception harnessing , trumpet player, what..lol

The only way you can ever understand CTE is to put away the rulers and protractors and instead learn to understand how our perception works. It is affected by the CB/OB placement. When you visually align CB edge to C for example, it is a unique physical alignment depending on CB/OB position. But anyways, most things said here feels like it just goes in one ear and out the other, so what can you do. I know exactly where you come from, I was there once. To be honest the only to get it is to go to the table and spend some time with it. No amount of explaining on a keyboard is going to strike a chord. So with that, I'm done with this thread. I hope I helped someone :shakehead:

 

[mohrt]

The only way you get away with the 5 shots with the same line up is expanding your objective points on the OB. In others words your edge of the cb is not always on the a, b or c points but rather a thick a,b or c.

You would be correct if it were a 2D system of lines. But the same point on the OB results in differing alignments. Perception. Over and out.

 

[8pack]

You would be correct if it were a 2D system of lines. But the same point on the OB results in differing alignments. Perception. Over and out.

Thanks for your reply's Mohrt.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

It's like explaining to a trumpet player how to play a high G. Explain all you want, it takes experience to get it.

I agree it's like that - a learned subjective perception for which no objective instructions are possible.

pj
chgo

 

[JB Cases]

I agree it's like that - a learned subjective perception for which no objective instructions are possible.

pj
chgo

No, it's an objective perception for which there are explicit instructions. But one has to step away from ghostball/feel ways of aiming in order to start looking at the balls objectively to perceive the alignments that the objective perceptions provide.

 

[JB Cases]

Dan, my thought is that Dave Segal has done a tremendous amount to advance Hal Houle's methods of aiming. He has been a major supporter and front line soldier in the fight against the knockers and naysayers.

Dave has put out videos that show the systems in action as well as taken on the challenges presented.

The whole point of this thread was to say that video demonstration goes way farther than incessant arguing on the forum. Every time I go to events I am approached by players who are eager to learn about CTE because of videos they have seen.

Stan doesn't even promote the fact that he SELLS dvds on his youtube videos. He is extremely low key yet passionate about the journey to explore this method of aiming in pool. It is classless of you to knock him as a teacher because you don't understand the lesson.

Most people don't know that Stan is an accomplished instructor as well beyond the aiming aspect of the game. He has built a wonderful training studio in addition to a personal pool room that any of us would be envious of. He has a great 9ft Diamond in the training area and a 10ft Diamond in the personal pool room.

Adorning his walls are pictures and accolades spanning his pool life including many from top level players who have taken lessons from him. On these forums we only see facets of people. Pat Johnson is actually a nice guy in person. Here he is not a pleasant person.

But the bottom line is that it's a waste of energy for all sides to argue on here. Very people are tuning in whereas on YouTube tens of thousands are watching and learning every day. I was genuinely interested in sending you a DVD but I won't because I respect my teacher's wishes on the matter.

I will say this and I sincerely mean it. IF you are a true student of the game then spending $40 on the DVD so as to have the source material shouldn't even be an afterthought. Taking the time to study a method that so many report success with should be something you would be eager to do.

You already have the supplemental information that Stan provides for free. Literally hours of instruction for those of us who didn't hesitate to purchase the source material . I know you don't fully understand the free videos and the reason is partially because you don't have the foundation in place to understand the terms used and how they fit into the context.

 

[Dan White]

This is a mind numbing paragraph you just wrote. Totally CLASSLESS and IGNORANT!!! What do you think he was doing as far as finding different ways to explain and demonstrate things so students can understand when he poured HOURS INTO THOUGHT AND MAKING THESE FREE VIDEOS POSTED ON YOUTUBE??!!
https://www.youtube.com/user/stanandlandonshuffet His phone and emails are ALWAYS AVAILABLE to eager students that have PURCHASED the dvds
unlike yourself. NOBODY OWES YOU SQUAT, ESPECIALLY STAN!

Stan has more credentials and certifications for teaching than any pro pool instructor out there. HE WAS A SCHOOL TEACHER IN THE KENTUCKY SCHOOL SYSTEM AND RETIRED AFTER 30 YEARS OF TEACHING TO PUT UP WITH THE CRAP ON A POOL FORUM REGARDING CTE. HE'S DEVELOPED THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN TO BECOME SUCCESSFUL ADULTS!

HE'S BEEN A PROFESSIONAL BILLIARDS INSTRUCTOR FOR 29 YEARS.

HE OBTAINED HIS INITIAL BCA INSTRUCTION UNDER JERRY BRIESATH IN 1989.

IN 1992, HE BECAME ONE OF THE ORIGINAL 19 CHARTERED MEMBERS OF THE BCA INSTRUCTORS' PROGRAM AS WE KNOW IT TODAY.

IN OCTOBER 2006 HE ADDED BCA ADVANCED LEVEL TRAINING TO HIS INSTRUCTING CREDENTIALS.

STAN COMPLETED HIS TRAINING FOR PBIA MASTER INSTRUCTOR IN FEBRUARY OF 2014 UNDER THE DIRECTION OF SCOTT LEE.

So Dan, would you be so kind to list YOUR TRAINING/TEACHING CREDENTIALS AND CERTIFICATIONS in pool? How about Pat Johnson? How about troll English or troll Ron Swanson aka Thaiger? HOW ABOUT ANYBODY OF YOUR CHOICE WHO YOU DEEM WORTHY?

Spider - when you reply in blue inside my post it is difficult to address each issue. On the other hand there are really only two things I want to reply to.

First, you say I'm cheap not to buy the DVD. You are unaware of weeks of back and forth in the "Sam" thread in this forum. I'm not going to rehash all that.

Second, when I said:

How about this, instead of having a lot of back and forth and not producing anything of use, why not answer this question that Stan simply ignores:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpo...postcount=1615

You replied :

It's up to Stan, not me or anyone else.

So basically you are unaware of weeks of effort I've spent trying to get simple answers, acknowledging all along that I wasn't a paying customer and Stan could tell me to go buzz off or buy the DVD. Nobody ever told me I had no right to ask questions, so I continued.

The problem I have with all this, again, is that any time someone asks a detailed, specific follow up question as I did in my link above, I get the now very predictable answer that you gave, some variation on "well it's not up to me to explain something to you," or "I've had enough of this. You have an agenda." If Stan has the greatest thing since sliced bread, and he is half as good an instructor at that resume shows, then it would be child's play for him to clarify the information in the link above. He not only chooses to ignore repeated requests on more help in making this information more clear, he goes on to tell me he hopes I do not get his DVD. How's that for classless?

I have nothing against Stan. I'm sure he earned all those accolades and did a great job with his son and others. But guess what, if he can't reword and clarify the central concept behind his Pro 1 method, then he's not a particularly good instructor. Sorry, I said it. You do realize that none of his supporters have any idea how CTE Pro 1 works, don't you? And that's not my opinion, that's coming from some of those people themselves via pm.

I hope you can read between the lines when I say that Stan is not a good teacher. I'm not a rude person. What I am trying to get across is the idea that if the best instructor in the world can't explain how his system works, then just maybe the system doesn't work at all the way he says it does.

 

[Dan White]

Personal lesson is not the only way, it's the best way. Some can easily pick it up from the dvd and you tube videos.
You are not a student as you have done very little to learn. A student studies and does the work not just sit behind a computer and question everything.

Not sure what you base that on but you are free to believe that. I have a table in my basement and use it every day I can. I'm pretty sure you don't know how I spend my table time! :grin:

Clearly, you are upset that I've questioned Stan's instruction skills, and I understand that. Hopefully you can see past my remarks if you read my reply to Spider. Note that I have never questioned Stan's motivation, although he is the only one to benefit financially, and I'm being accused of having an agenda!

 

[Dan White]

The only way you can ever understand CTE is to put away the rulers and protractors and instead learn to understand how our perception works. It is affected by the CB/OB placement. When you visually align CB edge to C for example, it is a unique physical alignment depending on CB/OB position. But anyways, most things said here feels like it just goes in one ear and out the other, so what can you do. I know exactly where you come from, I was there once. To be honest the only to get it is to go to the table and spend some time with it. No amount of explaining on a keyboard is going to strike a chord. So with that, I'm done with this thread. I hope I helped someone :shakehead:

mohrt - I took a look at your website and I respect the fact that you allow debate and try to answer questions (unlike others who disable comments). I also think something about CTE has genuinely helped you.

One criticism in your debate with "skeptic" is that you refer to Stan's 3 perception videos and state that these videos clear everything up. Nothing could be further from the truth, IMO!

Regards,

 

[8pack]

Spider - when you reply in blue inside my post it is difficult to address each issue. On the other hand there are really only two things I want to reply to.

First, you say I'm cheap not to buy the DVD. You are unaware of weeks of back and forth in the "Sam" thread in this forum. I'm not going to rehash all that.

Second, when I said:

How about this, instead of having a lot of back and forth and not producing anything of use, why not answer this question that Stan simply ignores:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpo...postcount=1615

You replied :

It's up to Stan, not me or anyone else.

So basically you are unaware of weeks of effort I've spent trying to get simple answers, acknowledging all along that I wasn't a paying customer and Stan could tell me to go buzz off or buy the DVD. Nobody ever told me I had no right to ask questions, so I continued.

The problem I have with all this, again, is that any time someone asks a detailed, specific follow up question as I did in my link above, I get the now very predictable answer that you gave, some variation on "well it's not up to me to explain something to you," or "I've had enough of this. You have an agenda." If Stan has the greatest thing since sliced bread, and he is half as good an instructor at that resume shows, then it would be child's play for him to clarify the information in the link above. He not only chooses to ignore repeated requests on more help in making this information more clear, he goes on to tell me he hopes I do not get his DVD. How's that for classless?

I have nothing against Stan. I'm sure he earned all those accolades and did a great job with his son and others. But guess what, if he can't reword and clarify the central concept behind his Pro 1 method, then he's not a particularly good instructor. Sorry, I said it. You do realize that none of his supporters have any idea how CTE Pro 1 works, don't you? And that's not my opinion, that's coming from some of those people themselves via pm.

I hope you can read between the lines when I say that Stan is not a good teacher. I'm not a rude person. What I am trying to get across is the idea that if the best instructor in the world can't explain how his system works, then just maybe the system doesn't work at all the way he says it does.

You make a lot of sense.

If you following the instructions of the system, you have nothing other then a different kind of fractional system. Sometimes your on the shot line, sometimes you must adjust a little. Its all good if it makes you play better, just don't make into something it isn't.

Aiming systems are like a box of chocolates, there's always gonna be a few you just don't like no matter how good they look.

 

[Dan White]

Stan doesn't even promote the fact that he SELLS dvds on his youtube videos. He is extremely low key yet passionate about the journey to explore this method of aiming in pool. It is classless of you to knock him as a teacher because you don't understand the lesson.

Please read my reply to Spider regarding criticizing Stan. So let me ask since you bring it up: what do you think it means when I ask Stan to clarify this link so that the ones who don't "get it" can understand better, and he chooses not to even give the courtesy of any reply (repeatedly)?

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=5321812&postcount=1615

Pat Johnson is actually a nice guy in person. Here he is not a pleasant person.

Are we talking about Stan or Pat? Actually I find Pat to have great wit. Even if you disagree with him and he pissed you off, you have to admit that.

But the bottom line is that it's a waste of energy for all sides to argue on here. Very people are tuning in whereas on YouTube tens of thousands are watching and learning every day. I was genuinely interested in sending you a DVD but I won't because I respect my teacher's wishes on the matter.

Actually you baited me into a reasonable exchange via pm and then insinuated that I'm a cheapskate in the public forum when I actually accepted your offer and even provided my personal address. Also, good educators strive to educate.

I will say this and I sincerely mean it. IF you are a true student of the game then spending $40 on the DVD so as to have the source material shouldn't even be an afterthought. Taking the time to study a method that so many report success with should be something you would be eager to do.

You already have the supplemental information that Stan provides for free. Literally hours of instruction for those of us who didn't hesitate to purchase the source material . I know you don't fully understand the free videos and the reason is partially because you don't have the foundation in place to understand the terms used and how they fit into the context.

Not sure what is in the video that will explain the link above. The consensus that I've read is that there's not a whole lot to add that's not been shown online anyway.

I don't need CTE in order to pocket balls better. Aiming is the easiest part of play. The trick is in perfecting the body mechanics so that the cue can deliver the ball to the intended target.

Also, I've spent many more hours on this than I originally thought I would. I haven't seen anything to suggest that CTE is anything more than a placebo, or a framework that motivates the player to keep practicing. If it works for you guys, then more power to you, but in my "objective" and unbiased opinion, the marketing of this product overstates what CTE Pro1 actually does for your game, compared to what just plain structured practice does.

For my money I go with Mark Wilson's PGP, but that's another story.

Carry on...

 

[cookie man]

Spider - when you reply in blue inside my post it is difficult to address each issue. On the other hand there are really only two things I want to reply to.

First, you say I'm cheap not to buy the DVD. You are unaware of weeks of back and forth in the "Sam" thread in this forum. I'm not going to rehash all that.

Second, when I said:

How about this, instead of having a lot of back and forth and not producing anything of use, why not answer this question that Stan simply ignores:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpo...postcount=1615

You replied :

It's up to Stan, not me or anyone else.

So basically you are unaware of weeks of effort I've spent trying to get simple answers, acknowledging all along that I wasn't a paying customer and Stan could tell me to go buzz off or buy the DVD. Nobody ever told me I had no right to ask questions, so I continued.

The problem I have with all this, again, is that any time someone asks a detailed, specific follow up question as I did in my link above, I get the now very predictable answer that you gave, some variation on "well it's not up to me to explain something to you," or "I've had enough of this. You have an agenda." If Stan has the greatest thing since sliced bread, and he is half as good an instructor at that resume shows, then it would be child's play for him to clarify the information in the link above. He not only chooses to ignore repeated requests on more help in making this information more clear, he goes on to tell me he hopes I do not get his DVD. How's that for classless?

I have nothing against Stan. I'm sure he earned all those accolades and did a great job with his son and others. But guess what, if he can't reword and clarify the central concept behind his Pro 1 method, then he's not a particularly good instructor. Sorry, I said it. You do realize that none of his supporters have any idea how CTE Pro 1 works, don't you? And that's not my opinion, that's coming from some of those people themselves via pm.

I hope you can read between the lines when I say that Stan is not a good teacher. I'm not a rude person. What I am trying to get across is the idea that if the best instructor in the world can't explain how his system works, then just maybe the system doesn't work at all the way he says it does.

So you want KEY info for free but you are not cheap.lol

 

[cookie man]

Not sure what you base that on but you are free to believe that. I have a table in my basement and use it every day I can. I'm pretty sure you don't know how I spend my table time! :grin:

Clearly, you are upset that I've questioned Stan's instruction skills, and I understand that. Hopefully you can see past my remarks if you read my reply to Spider. Note that I have never questioned Stan's motivation, although he is the only one to benefit financially, and I'm being accused of having an agenda!

I base it on the fact I sent you a youtube of good info and you dismissed it in ten minutes, pretty telling.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I have nothing against Stan. I'm sure he earned all those accolades and did a great job with his son and others.

You're sure? It's OBVIOUS and out there for the world to see what his credentials are. HE'S DONE IT! But I'm sure HE'S SURE you finally gave him your blessings. Now he can rest peacefully.

But guess what, if he can't reword and clarify the central concept behind his Pro 1 method, then he's not a particularly good instructor. Sorry, I said it.

You aren't sorry about anything and his video library on youtube addresses direct questions or problems written here in the forum by those who want to learn as well as those like yourself who really don't but have an agenda.

You do realize that none of his supporters have any idea how CTE Pro 1 works, don't you? And that's not my opinion, that's coming from some of those people themselves via pm.

When Hal first started telling me what to do over the phone while I was at the table I also didn't know how it worked. He's telling me to aim here, aim there with the center and edges of the balls like I had never done or thought about doing and it looked weird, offset your tip and pivot back to center and shoot the ball. After doing this for about half an hour my jaw was dropped so far down and I was scratching my head because I DID NOT know how it worked yet balls were going in that didn't "look" like they could or should go in. THAT is when I knew this was something special.

I hope you can read between the lines when I say that Stan is not a good teacher. I'm not a rude person.

Reading between the lines isn't necessary since it jumps right out. You're disrespectful, condescending, classless and a man with an agenda despite how many times you deny it.

What I am trying to get across is the idea that if the best instructor in the world can't explain how his system works, then just maybe the system doesn't work at all the way he says it does.

It will NEVER work for you and your best bet is to stay away from it on the table as well as continuing to open your mouth about it on a forum or anywhere else.

As far as Stan not wanting JB to lend his DVD to you...I'm just guessing but he probably sees through you like a cleanly washed window and flat out doesn't like your condescending attitude or YOU period.

Btw, all you ever wanted to do is attempt picking some things apart which all of your gang members like Pat Johnson have ever done...but you NEVER once posted if you had success for the most part on different shots. If you did, can you explain why it worked? Did you have success? What shots or cut angles did you find to be the best when you worked with it? ANY?