Stan Shuffet Challenge

[ENGLISH!]

I could show you in short order: CTE and A. Same pivot. And 500 different shots......

If that is not so.....then how in the world can the 15 and 30 do a zillion shots.

REAL CTE is the answer. PERCEPTION: something that can be explained for a 2x1 table that was never supposed to be. Meaningful perception in that the CTE perceptions lead to right angles.

Stan Shuffett

Again, thank you for your personal input. I don't think anyone is saying that CTE & ETA will not pocket 500 or more shots.

I think what some of us are saying is that CTE & ETA will yield two(2) specific outcome angles depending on the pivot direction. So there are only 2 angles that can be created. That is IF the edge & 'A" are objective & not subject to interpretation.

That said, how can CTE & ETA pocket FIVE(5) different angled non banked shots as you represent in your video?

I would be very appreciative, as I am sure others would be as well, if you can answer that question with a logical explanation.

Perception is defined as apprehending by means of the senses.

The sense that we are taking into consideration is sight or vision.

Sight is dependant on the straight line travel of light.

If CTE is totally objective then it is confined by the laws of physics that govern light & hence sight or vision.

There is nothing mystical about sight & seeing. I could say much more as to why one line with equal pivots to each side can only yield two other lines but I'd rather hear a logical explanation as to how it can yield more than two from you as I certainly do not understand how that is possible

I'd guess that the only explanation could be that the line determined by CTE & ETA is different depending on where the balls are on the table but then they would not be objective but are dependant on interpretation of the different position on the table.

I've never heard that CTE is based on interpretation of the balls position.

Sorry for being so long winded & thanks in advance for any help that you can provide.

Sincerely,
Rick

 

[SpiderWebComm]

How would you know that Dave...I mean Timothy?

I hope you're not implying I'm knocking myself. That user is clearly one of the banned.

 

[Timothy Rose]

Dave segal used a specific cte method that was highly based off of feel but he was unaware of it.

Like, who DOESN'T know this is a resurrected banned user.

I didn't mean this as an insult Dave but I was just speaking from my experience and my opinion on cte methods. feel free to discuss your opinion on what I had to say and dont go off topic like that Sean guy. We can talk about it, I am good with that and not looking for trouble, honestly.

 

[8pack]

I hope you're not implying I'm knocking myself. That user is clearly one of the banned.

Just having fun Dave. Not sure who it is but it sounds like he knows you. One of the band, how can you tell?

 

[Timothy Rose]

And how do you judge swerve and deflection ?
Or know where the cue ball goes after contact ?

No visualization of the cue ball path or the two balls colliding ? All that is given by the system ?

Experience at and off the table showed me.Most likely the same way it showed you.

 

[nobcitypool]

And how do you judge swerve and deflection ?
Or know where the cue ball goes after contact ?

No visualization of the cue ball path or the two balls colliding ? All that is given by the system ?

You judge swerve, deflection, throw, etc. as you normally would. CTE takes you to the CCB aim line. Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to use any significant amount of side spin, you have to adjust for those variables. If you were playing on a bar box with dirty balls and had a 1/2 ball cut you had to make at slow speed, you might need to adjust for throw. If you want to cheat the pocket, you'd slightly adjust off that CCB aim line. Your going to have to consider and adjust for variables regardless of how you aim. All CTE does is provides you with the aim line that takes the object ball to center pocket. Not sure what your point was, I don't recall seeing Stan or anyone else claiming anything different. Perhaps you can point to me to where Stan is saying anything different than that.

 

[JoeyInCali]

Experience at and off the table showed me.Most likely the same way it showed you.

OK, that would be HAMB.

 

[Timothy Rose]

OK, that would be HAMB.

Nothing like learning at the table hitting them balls, its a great way to learn a lot.

 

[stan shuffett]

Again, thank you for your personal input. I don't think anyone is saying that CTE & ETA will not pocket 500 or more shots.

I think what some of us are saying is that CTE & ETA will yield two(2) specific outcome angles depending on the pivot direction. So there are only 2 angles that can be created. That is IF the edge & 'A" are objective & not subject to interpretation.

That said, how can CTE & ETA pocket FIVE(5) different angled non banked shots as you represent in your video?

I would be very appreciative, as I am sure others would be as well, if you can answer that question with a logical explanation.

Perception is defined as apprehending by means of the senses.

The sense that we are taking into consideration is sight or vision.

Sight is dependant on the straight line travel of light.

If CTE is totally objective then it is confined by the laws of physics that govern light & hence sight or vision.

There is nothing mystical about sight & seeing. I could say much more as to why one line with equal pivots to each side can only yield two other lines but I'd rather hear a logical explanation as to how it can yield more than two from you as I certainly do not understand how that is possible

I'd guess that the only explanation could be that the line determined by CTE & ETA is different depending on where the balls are on the table but then they would not be objective but are dependant on interpretation of the different position on the table.

I've never heard that CTE is based on interpretation of the balls position.

Sorry for being so long winded & thanks in advance for any help that you can provide.

Sincerely,
Rick

Pool is not played with the logic you desire and therein lies your roadblock.

You want 2D logic. Sorry, but CTE is a 3D system.

I teach and work with perception. Just this past Thursday/Friday my student, an architect/engineer saw and experienced real CTE.
He said it was not logical.....but a phenomena of perception that connects to right angles.

My words are sufficient in conveying what one must do to learn real CTE. I can not motivate you to get in there and get after it. That is your choice.

Stan Shuffett

 

[BeiberLvr]

And how do you judge swerve and deflection ?
Or know where the cue ball goes after contact ?

No visualization of the cue ball path or the two balls colliding ? All that is given by the system ?

All of these questions were answered numerous times already.

As were the ones in our little discussion in your elbow drop thread.

17k+ posts. I'm not surprised you forget a lot.

 

[BeiberLvr]

Again, thank you for your personal input. I don't think anyone is saying that CTE & ETA will not pocket 500 or more shots.

I think what some of us are saying is that CTE & ETA will yield two(2) specific outcome angles depending on the pivot direction. So there are only 2 angles that can be created. That is IF the edge & 'A" are objective & not subject to interpretation.

That said, how can CTE & ETA pocket FIVE(5) different angled non banked shots as you represent in your video?

I would be very appreciative, as I am sure others would be as well, if you can answer that question with a logical explanation.

Perception is defined as apprehending by means of the senses.

The sense that we are taking into consideration is sight or vision.

Sight is dependant on the straight line travel of light.

If CTE is totally objective then it is confined by the laws of physics that govern light & hence sight or vision.

There is nothing mystical about sight & seeing. I could say much more as to why one line with equal pivots to each side can only yield two other lines but I'd rather hear a logical explanation as to how it can yield more than two from you as I certainly do not understand how that is possible

I'd guess that the only explanation could be that the line determined by CTE & ETA is different depending on where the balls are on the table but then they would not be objective but are dependant on interpretation of the different position on the table.

I've never heard that CTE is based on interpretation of the balls position.

Sorry for being so long winded & thanks in advance for any help that you can provide.

Sincerely,
Rick

There are no angles in CTE.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

I didn't mean this as an insult Dave but I was just speaking from my experience and my opinion on cte methods. feel free to discuss your opinion on what I had to say and dont go off topic like that Sean guy. We can talk about it, I am good with that and not looking for trouble, honestly.

Your experience? And just what is your experience? I spent countless hours at Hal's house...countless. Who the f are you?

 

[JoeyInCali]

All of these questions were answered numerous times already.

As were the ones in our little discussion in your elbow drop thread.

17k+ posts. I'm not surprised you forget a lot.

Well, I asked him b/c he said there is no feel involved.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Pool is not played with the logic you desire and therein lies your roadblock.

You want 2D logic. Sorry, but CTE is a 3D system.

I teach and work with perception. Just this past Thursday/Friday my student, an architect/engineer saw and experienced real CTE.
He said it was not logical.....but a phenomena of perception that connects to right angles.

My words are sufficient in conveying what one must do to learn real CTE. I can not motivate you to get in there and get after it. That is your choice.

Stan Shuffett

Thanks for the reply, but first you say you can show me in short order & now this.

I guess I & others can't motivate you to give a concise explanation of what seems to be totally incorrect & by all rationale & logic to be impossible. How does one take 1 line & add 1 in each direction & get 5 different lines?

Believe it or not I know how to do that but it is not with a center ball hit.

Dictionary.com defines perception as apprehending by means of the senses or of the mind; cognition; understanding & the immediate or intuitive recognition or appreciation.

My perception of 1 +1 +1 = 5 is that it is false.

I guess we will just have to agree that we have different perceptions.

Best Wishes & Success to You & All that try Your CTE.

 

[BeiberLvr]

Well, I asked him b/c he said there is no feel involved.

There isn't unless you want to involve other factors. Meaning, if the only goal is to pocket the ball, then no feel is involved.

 

[Neil]

Neil, where do you see someone saying that "it doesn't / can't work"? I see people asking about how the visuals play into the picture to *make* it work. (Big difference.)

It seems if someone is asking the "why" or "how" it works question, there are certain folks (including you?) who take that to mean they're automatically assuming it "doesn't" work.

There's a big difference between someone asking how the visuals play into the picture for making something work, versus someone outright asking the "show me to prove to me it works" question.

And before you go there, please don't assume I'm writing this to be malicious. I'm not -- I'm only calling out what I think is the "hidden thorn" in peoples' sides when it comes to discussion of aiming systems -- i.e. the knee-jerk reaction that "he/she must be asking because they're trying to put 'us' into a bad position or catch 'us' in a lie." That's really getting old. (Yes, I know there are naysayers, but not all people posting the "why" and "how" question are asking in the form of naysayers.)

-Sean

That's a poor attempt at a joke, right??? If not, maybe you should try reading all the posts.

 

[stan shuffett]

Thanks for the reply, but first you say you can show me in short order & now this.

I guess I & others can't motivate you to give a concise explanation of what seems to be totally incorrect & by all rational & logic to be impossible. How does one take 1 line & add 1 in each direction & get 5 different lines?

Believe it or not I know how to do that but it is not with a center ball hit.

1 +1 +1 = 5

Dictionary.com defines perception as apprehending by means of the senses or of the mind; cognition; understanding & the

My explanations are plenty if one is motivated to work.

You can not see the visuals of A and CTE on a table as you would on a 2D sheet. And that is where you are stuck, my friend. My explanations of perceptions are assisting students around the world in learning CTE.

My prediction is that in 5 years you will still be asking the same question. One day your window for really learning and benefitting from CTE will all but be gone.

Like I said. I tried with you. I do not care at this point that you will not work properly to gain knowledge of real CTE. Your choice.

Honestly, I think your energy is basically directed at trying to stifle the advancement of my work.

Too late for that.

Stan Shuffett

 

[sfleinen]

That's a poor attempt at a joke, right??? If not, maybe you should try reading all the posts.

Neil:

There *are* detractors, no doubt. I'm not talking about them.

What I am talking about is the "all or nothing" stereotype where it seems "all" people who question CTE/Pro-1 (or any pivot-based aiming system) "are" detractors.

That's all I'm trying to say. You should know by now that I'm not a detractor, and when I question something, it's not done maliciously. I'm really trying to lift the veil on something -- either for others or for myself. It's just acquisition of knowledge, 's all.

-Sean

 

[ENGLISH!]

There are no angles in CTE.

Nothing mystical about manipulating & overlapping photographic images to create another one & nothing mystical about selective vision just as there is nothing mystical about all clowns thinking that they are wits but only some having the wits to be a good clown.

 

[Neil]

Monte:

I agree that the 2:1 relationship of the table and Stan's continued insistence (in his DVD and YouTube videos) that "CTE/Pro-1 connects you to the table" has been a long-standing assertion.

Where I think this is getting muddied, however, is in the marketing with the curtain where that same assertion gets lost, and instead is replaced with "I don't need to know where the pocket is; in fact, the curtain hides more than half of the table."

In other words, there's some inconsistency with the message, there. On the one hand, we're saying that the table is an integral part of the equation; on the other hand, we're shooting that assertion right in the forehead.

I do understand the point in a previous post where it was said that if someone were to obfuscate the location of *all the rails* (i.e. place a curtain on all four sides of the table and plop Stan or Stevie or Landon in the middle of those four curtains), that they wouldn't have any reference points, and the system would break down. That point should've been made a l-o-n-g time ago, because the inference (the "take away") all this time was that was not the case.

-Sean

Why should that point have been made long ago? No user of it ever claimed that. Why should any user make points that are, well, quite frankly, rather ridiculous?

Sean, the problem lies, quite simply, with many readers reading comprehension. Your included. Get off the forums and get your butt on a table, and just simply follow the directions AS STATED. Listen to ALL the directions. (something straightypool_99 made quite clear that he did NOT do, even though he thinks he did) Forget what you THINK you know, and just do it.

What you will find out, is that all the claims made by the actual users of it, are correct. And, until you pull your blinders off, you will never ever see that. You read one thing, and automatically assume it means something other that what it says. You thereby contaminate the system with useless info.

Take your example above. No, you don't need to know exactly where the pocket is. But, you do need a general area for where you want to pocket the ball. That's called visual intelligence. Once you have that, then the system will fine tune you right into the heart of the pocket.

Quite frankly, you can forget about figuring out the math. You have zero chance of doing that until you first learn to let go of your pre-concieved notions, and just follow the directions. Until you can finally learn to do that, you have no chance of ever even learning how to use the system, let alone figure out why it works mathematically.