From what Ive seen of the CTE supporters on here, they don't even have a parachute to open.
Reply to Dan White's Questions
- Thread starter JB Cases
- Start date
From what Ive seen of the CTE supporters on here, they don't even have a parachute to open.
So says the guy that is so open minded that he will argue all day, day after day, that balls don't have edges. But ghost balls are easy to see.
Nice video. I couldn't watch it all at work but one thing I didn't see addressed when I skimmed it was the pivot point. Once you get the CTE part done, the pivot point makes ALL of the difference. Your video proves their has to be an adjustment of the pivot point in relation to the CB to OB distance. Will watch entire video later but the pivot point works out to be about 2/3 the distance between the CB and the OB. Thanks for the video.
On snooker players playing the center ball drill:
Some do and some don't. I believe Steve Davis one hundred percent on this, though. He was always a very methodical, studied player. All snooker players are fanatical about center ball striking. Doesn't mean they always shoot center, but they are very concerned with hitting exact center when it's needed.
I find many pool players to be sloppy in that regard. It's amazing how many problems simply disappear when you are hitting the cueball accurately. Too bad it's EXTREMELY difficult to do so consistently without a lot of practise. I do the kiss back drill on the pool table a lot and do very well at it. I still sometimes struggle hitting center in snooker, though. The small diameter cue and accuracy needed, means the problems are amplified. I do more fine tuning of my aim in snooker and sometimes you just barely loose the exactness of the center ball striking. You may still make the ball, but lose position, or barely miss.
I think a lot of "aiming" problems are caused by other factors. Lack of exact cueball striking is one of the main reasons why people's games get stuck at a certain level. Without accurate cueball striking you won't run centuries in snooker, and you'll have problems in pool as well.
Some do and some don't. I believe Steve Davis one hundred percent on this, though. He was always a very methodical, studied player. All snooker players are fanatical about center ball striking. Doesn't mean they always shoot center, but they are very concerned with hitting exact center when it's needed.
I find many pool players to be sloppy in that regard. It's amazing how many problems simply disappear when you are hitting the cueball accurately. Too bad it's EXTREMELY difficult to do so consistently without a lot of practise. I do the kiss back drill on the pool table a lot and do very well at it. I still sometimes struggle hitting center in snooker, though. The small diameter cue and accuracy needed, means the problems are amplified. I do more fine tuning of my aim in snooker and sometimes you just barely loose the exactness of the center ball striking. You may still make the ball, but lose position, or barely miss.
I think a lot of "aiming" problems are caused by other factors. Lack of exact cueball striking is one of the main reasons why people's games get stuck at a certain level. Without accurate cueball striking you won't run centuries in snooker, and you'll have problems in pool as well.
Now you did it. You just dragged him back in. He has to reply to you don't you know.LMAO
Who needs a parachute when you have the Ultimate Flying Suit.
Bob Jewett and Dr. Dave have no clue and no desire for the the truth about CTE.
Why bring them in?
PS do you approve of Dr. Dave's personal stroking mechanics
Um, you do realize that the Matrix was about understanding that "reality" exists on infinite levels? The part where a red/blue pill choice is given to stay inside the matrix or go "outside" of it is revealed later to be just another layer of the matrix with the matrix itself being an infinite loop.
So like it or not you're stuck with us and the fact is that you're the one who is choosing to stay at the lowest level of the matrix. Stan has already transcended to another level by refusing to stick with the "conventional" and instead to explore the alternative.
The folks like you, mercifully few yet vocal, are the ones who are trying to keep everyone inside of YOUR reality instead of going on the journey of discovery to find what other realities exist. For example that reality that CTE works incredibly well and the person using it doesn't need to know why just that it does in order to keep aiming accurately and keep running out when they unleash their perfect Steve Davis stroke on a perfectly CTE-aimed shot.
All while guys like you sputter.....but but but but......that can't possibly work (as claimed) while what you really are upset about is the idea that maybe Hal Houle and Stan and others who have spent time developing these methods might have tapped into an eye/brain/subconscious interface that has eluded you for your entire pool life and it defies your convention. And more perturbing to you is that the majority don't care about why CTE works, they simply take the red pill to discover a higher level in the game they love trusting that overcoming the aiming part of the game will free their minds to work on other aspects.
Sorry but if you want to use the Matrix then you are the Mr. Smiths and Hal is Morpheus, Stan is Neo and I am the Oracle.....(it's my post I can choose my role).
Aiming problems don't disappear with a straight stroke. You could literally teach a blind man to have the straightest stroke in the world. Execution problems are what a good stroke solves. The best stroke in the world fails to make the ball when the aim is off.
Aiming is a product of comprehension, vision and spatial awareness. Once aligned and the instrument aimed the execution phase begins.
The other day I used the Striking Line templates in an all day lesson with Gordy Vanderveer. Using CTE I was able to aim perfectly almost every time. But where I had problems (as expected) was in the execution phase. I have a slight swerve in my stoke that is present even when I am totally focused on delivering what I think is a dead straight stroke. Through the analysis and the use of the templates to give me instant visual feedback on the severity of the wobble I was able to discover something significant in how I form and hold my bridge that affected the delivery.
Something that could not be seen or felt in the course of normal practice/play but came out through deliberate practice using well designed training tools. Which brings up what I have said a thousand times on here - aiming and execution are two separate phases of the process. However being aimed wrong WILL force a person to either stroke straight and miss a lot OR force them to start "throwing" the cueball into the right space through the use of slight vector changes at impact WHICH THEN is observable to everyone else as Body English.
I understand what you did. I thinks it's shitty THAT you did it trying to frame Mark's statement as something that Stan is in opposition to fundamentally.
You do understand that the BEST player currently playing for Mark on the Lindenwood University's Pool team is Landon Shuffett right? Or maybe you don't know that. And Landon is a world class player, WORLD CLASS and was world class before ever stepping foot into Mark's program.
Maybe you are not aware that Stan and Mark know each other and even if they don't agree on aiming systems they have a mutual respect for each other's efforts to promote pool. So before you continue trying to use Mark Wilson's words to denigrate Stan Shuffett you may want to try a little harder to find some civility and manners.
You mean like people arguing the ghost ball or line of aim methods don't work?
Who said they don't work? No one that I can recall has said that. But what does "work" mean?
What tests are there to determine how well one method/system works?
I'm well aware of all that, which is why I was a little surprised Stan would throw Mark under the bus unprovoked.
BTW, what did I say in that post that Stan hadn't already? Not exactly sure what you are upset about.
Also, I am out of the CTE discussion, so you are free to continue mischaracterizing my position in any way that makes you feel better.
Enjoy!
You're spinning is pretty sickening. Throwing Mark under the bus? I am speaking the truth as Mark wants no part of the CCB tip drill at various speeds and you do not either.
Put it online and show me otherwise....9 minutes of various speeds. Mark and I speak straight up about pool topics whether it's aiming or stroke.
Good riddance
Stan Shuffett!
Just a thought on a test or demonstration to show that the aim line derived with CTE is not "influenced" - A few random OBs can be placed on the table by the foot string. The CB in each instance would be placed along the headstring. Shooter will align center CB to OB edge, then CB edge to whichever of the 3 positions needed to pocket the shot. Curtain then comes down mid-table, before the pivot to CB center is made.
If the balls are pocketed, then it would be evidence to support that the pivot to CB center produces the correct aim line. A shot from 4 diamonds away would decrease the margin of error on all shots, and having the curtain drop in front of the OB would remove any variable of "uconscious adjustment" or "knowledge" from the equation.
If the balls are pocketed, then it would be evidence to support that the pivot to CB center produces the correct aim line. A shot from 4 diamonds away would decrease the margin of error on all shots, and having the curtain drop in front of the OB would remove any variable of "uconscious adjustment" or "knowledge" from the equation.
Um, someone who shows a video claiming the ghost ball fails him after shooting a ball and his follow through shanks way to the side ? Then claims the ball was already gone by the time the shank happened?
Striking line template? Well, there's a great idea. No kidding?
You've already worked on an aiming system you had a huge euphoria two decades ago and to this day still really do not have much grasp of.
Countless of people told you your stroke was whacked way before the match with Lou. You argued what good is a laser straight stroke if you can't aim. How the heck did you make balls before you learned a new aiming system then?
Ya think getting the stroke and fundamentals should have more priority over a fancy system???
Any instructor who gives you lesson would be of disservice if he started showing another system until he fixes your stroke.
I'm glad this new instructor of yours sees that.
This doesn't mean CTE does not work of course.
But, when you came out in the open about CTE two decades ago ( and a lot of peeps too ), everyone was saying it was so simple. Hell, there are only a few shots .
Two decades ( might be 3 already ) and multiple videos later, only a few people really get it .
I seriously think it has done more damage for your game or progress.
$95 well spent.
Last edited:
Nope. You may analytically divide the two "processes" if you so wish, but in fact they are very much intertwined when it comes to practical pool. The straightness of the stroke will impact the speed at which you learn how to aim, as well as how well you learn. How can you make adjustments and learn when you have no real idea what caused the miss? It cannot be done.
If you spent 1/10 of the time you have on aiming systems on learning a straight delivery instead, you wouldn't have missed 4-5 dead straight in shots in your match. You see, making a ball straight in and close to it, is the first thing a beginner should learn. You'd be surprised how often those shots come up. Missing one of those will completely ruin my day, and I believe any other serious players day as well. It's simply not acceptable. Most good players go weeks without missing those, even under pressure. Everyone does miss one now and then, but not many in a row.
Forget all this aiming nonsense. Set up half table dead straight in shots instead. Draw them straight back to your tip and stay down like a snooker player. Tip on/close to the felt on the finish, and freeze. And for Gods sake time the shot properly instead of hacking away like a crazed lumberjack. Sloooooooow backswing, slooow forward start to the swing. When you don't time the shot, like you, you lose all the action and the accuracy as well. When you can do that proficiently, then you could consider looking for action and be an actual contender instead of a mark. Are all the champions you're donating large sums of money to telling you how good you are? I suggest you watch the video, with an open mind and forget what those hustlers are telling you.
You are moving on the shot, you're stroking crooked, you are not finishing the shot properly, your stance is ludicrous, your head is not properly over the cue. Your stroke is one of the worst I've ever seen, frankly. It's not only wildly crooked, but there is zero timing as well...I'm not saying this to put you down, but to put things into perspective. Those are all important factors that need to be somewhat under control for someone to properly diagnose their game. When you say you're aiming perfectly, I don't believe you are actually in a position to say this, because there is no way for you to know what caused you to make or miss a ball.
https://youtu.be/wYTZVK_gK7k?t=1981
https://youtu.be/rKbMvk0SAF4?t=2818
https://youtu.be/NOk5pZQSh-k?t=5418
https://youtu.be/NOk5pZQSh-k?t=5651
Last edited:
I don't think so. One has to make a conscious effort ( or get in the zone ) to get to that aiming line.
Well the first shot you show you clearly don't understand what the goal was. I could have easily made the shot straight in and drew it straight back but I wanted to cheat the pocket a little and draw for position on the 15. The problem is that that table had a deep shelf which made the 4.5" pockets play tighter.
Secondly, that match was the WORST form I have had in 30 years. Whatever was going on with me emotionally it amplified every bad habit I have ever had.
So YES, stroke FOLLOWS aiming. Yes I showed many GREAT examples of how a bad stroke can ruin a good aim. But in that match as well I wasn't even taking the time to really aim properly a lot of the time. Some of the times when I did take the time the aim properly I actually made some really good shots when I also took the time to stroke properly.
Yes, some drills could help me. But none of your analysis of MY game devalues the FACT that these aiming methods work VERY WELL as evidenced by a LOT of people who use them who do have very good stroking technique.
Hustlers? what the hell are you talking about. I notice you didn't post the shots I made only the ones I missed.
And yes there is a way that I can know why I missed a ball. Especially when we have the video. I can pause it and plot out the GB line to see if I was on it. And if I was then I can check the stroke in slow motion to know whether I threw the cue ball off the line.
Beyond that in practice I can and do set up marked shots where I know exactly what they shot line is and then I use CTE to aim and can see whether or not I am hitting the GB shot line. THEN once I shoot I can see the result and compare it to where my stick finished.
In fact I just did four hours with Gordy Vanderveer and the Striking Line templates.
www.slaiming.com
https://youtu.be/o3ctYxQGt3k
So, respectfully, you don't know ANYTHING about what I have been doing since that match.
I suggest you stop thinking about me and knocking me. I already know that as a player I am not the poster boy example. But I can damn sure put some poster boys in the box any time any one wants to bet something.
Not a one of you has the nuts to criticize them or bet a nickel against them. This is a perfect example of my point, instead of debating the topic many of you want to go personal and insult me rather than to debate the merits of the system.