Stan The Man Shuffett

[jay helfert]

What a pleasant surprise Stan was. He played some high level pool all week. He had too! I guess Landon isn't the only pool player in the family. By the way, Stan has been mentoring 20 year old Phil Burford, who has actually been living with him in Lexington. This young man played GREAT! Stan's The Man in my book!

 

[Salamander]

Exactly. True words of wisdom.

You guys are certainly free to discuss anything you want in any given thread. But if the OP and you truly had Stan's best interests at heart -- and wanted him to receive the praise he deserves, with nary a discouraging word -- you would have kept it to: way to go Stan for a great showing at the Open. And then you'd a had three or four pages of laudatory comments.

But no.

You don't have Stan's best interests at heart. You, and Spider, are the haters. You sacrificed Stan's good name and efforts at the Open on the altar of your aiming system so you could get your rocks off. You had to use his performance to tout an aiming system, purposely poking people in the eye and reopening a subject that has led to more blood-letting on this and other forums that just about any other, because you guys are the little dogs that like to instigate the scrum and then innocently sit on the side lines going: tsk, tsk, tsk.

Stan needs to look around at his supporters and see them for what they are. You and Spider make a pretty ugly pair as far as friends go.

Lou Figueroa

 

[sfleinen]

1. Every CTE/Pro One user that I know has ALWAYS said that there is much more to playing good pool than just aiming well.

2. No CTE/Pro One user that I know is fixated on it because they all know that in addition to great aiming that you can get from it, you need dozens of other things to complement the good aiming and alignment that you get from CTE/Pro One.

Sean, for the most part, CTE/Pro One users as well as the person who refined CTE (Stan "THE MAN" Shuffett) continue to receive attacks and ridiculing from naysayers and that is the basis for any thumbing in the eye that you or they might perceive.

If the people who don't believe in CTE/Pro One would just go about their own personal business, everything would be just fine, but NO, they have to tell everyone else how they should be aiming and what aiming system they should be using. CTE/Pro One users don't tell others that they shouldn't be using ghost ball, contact aiming or any other aiming system. They just leave it up to the other people to use whatever they prefer using. Why can't naysayers leave CTE/Pro One alone? I'll answer that one for you. Naysayers have dug themselves a hole, a deep one. They've said some very derogatory things about CTE/Pro One and now they've been proven wrong and they can't stop putting "doggie do-do", wherever they see CTE/Pro One. It's really PATHETIC.

When Lou comes on this forum and into STAN'S THREAD and tells people to "NOT MAKE THIS ABOUT CTE/Pro1", it makes me want to throw up.

CTE/Pro1 is one of the many things that is, about Stan Shuffett and if Lou doesn't like it, he should shush his ownself.

To come on a thread about Stan "THE MAN" Shuffett and to suggest that others shouldn't discuss CTE/Pro One is contemptuous at best.

When the attacks and ridiculing on CTE/Pro One and Stan "THE MAN" Shuffett are discontinued, there won't be any need to "engage and continue the hostilities" THAT THE NAYSAYERS KEEP STARTING.

Joey:

A couple things:

1. I don't think you squeezed enough mentions of "CTE/Pro One" in there. And honestly, I'm not sure what you're trying to do by flooding this thread with diarrheal mentions of the words/phrase, "CTE/Pro One". In your "day job" fashion, are you getting kickbacks from Stan for every instance that that phrase is mentioned? (I'm only half-kidding here, by the way. As I was reading your post, the cash-register "cha-ching!" sound echoed in my head every time I saw that phrase used. Enough so, that I began to hum the bass line of the the Pink Floyd song Money.)

2. "CTE/Pro One users don't tell others that they shouldn't be using ghost ball, contact aiming or any other aiming system. They just leave it up to the other people to use whatever they prefer using."

Reply: Baloney. I think we conveniently have very short memories. For as long as I've been on these boards, the aiming system advocates have indeed been cajoling, needling, and outright selling others; at the expense of (i.e. demeaning/deriding) other aiming systems or methodologies. Often blatantly. I myself have been the recipient of PMs from *several* of the aiming system advocates, after I'd announced a new high run or what-not, of "how much better I'd be if I learned 'this' aiming system." And although it's died down quite a bit (presumably because the aiming system advocates had been dragged to the carpet about it), one can still find this behavior from time to time.

3. "They've said some very derogatory things about CTE/Pro One and now they've been proven wrong and they can't stop putting 'doggie do-do', wherever they see CTE/Pro One."

Reply: Joey, help me out here. What in the world does Stan's lone achievement have to do with "proving the naysayers wrong"? Stan is a very experienced and well-rounded player, that I'm sure has seen many tournaments in his day. He's ONE GUY. And his protege, Phil Burford? Phil's been tearing up the pool scene in the UK long before he met Stan, even though Phil credits Stan with getting him through a plateau. ONE GUY (or even two guys, if you want to include Phil) is not "blanket proof" that can be foisted to "disspell without question" anything the naysayers have said. I'm not saying the aiming systems do not work (I've always said you use what you have to to make those balls fall in the pockets). Rather, I'm saying that I've watched both sides of the argument here, and both sides are guilty of the very behavior they accuse the other of.

CTE/Pro One doesn't make Stan. Stan makes himself, from the many varied facets that make a good player. And Stan -- not CTE/Pro One -- deserves all the congratulations on a such a fine performance.

-Sean

 

[SpiderWebComm]

You guys are certainly free to discuss anything you want in any given thread. But if the OP and you truly had Stan's best interests at heart -- and wanted him to receive the praise he deserves, with nary a discouraging word -- you would have kept it to: way to go Stan for a great showing at the Open. And then you'd a had three or four pages of laudatory comments.

But no.

You don't have Stan's best interests at heart. You, and Spider, are the haters. You sacrificed Stan's good name and efforts at the Open on the altar of your aiming system so you could get your rocks off. You had to use his performance to tout an aiming system, purposely poking people in the eye and reopening a subject that has led to more blood-letting on this and other forums that just about any other, because you guys are the little dogs that like to instigate the scrum and then innocently sit on the side lines going: tsk, tsk, tsk.

Stan needs to look around at his supporters and see them for what they are. You and Spider make a pretty ugly pair as far as friends go.

Lou Figueroa

You're out of your mind. There's NOTHING wrong with me linking to Stan's page in the OP. Anyone with a gnat-sized brain would know I was playing off of JoeyA's posting style, which is why I "hahaha'd" in that post.

Dr. Dave links to his site every time and so do countless others. Why does it chafe your puss SO bad when I prop Stan up and link to his site? That makes me a bad friend?

Lou, take your lips off the crack pipe before you lose your teeth.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk

 

[genomachino]

Just had to say something.............

Sorry but I'm not seeing the clear link between Stan's results and Pro1. Appleton won the US Open using the SEE system so maybe Stan should drop Pro1 and take up SEE instead? Or adopt whatever aiming system Hohmann or SVB or other champions use?

There's far more to becoming a top player than just mastering an aiming system. Numerous other details like how good you are in breaking the rack, playing good safeties, jumping and kicking, and many other factors play a role in how strong a player you will be.

Pool is a game of inches where just one shot can be the difference in whether you win the match or go home.

All the things you brought up here obviously all have something to do with aiming.
The break, if you don't aim great your not going to have good result.

Safties, if you don't hit the right amount of the object ball that you waht to hit it probably won't work out very well.

Jumping or kicking, your aim really has to be correct on these shots or you have hardly no chance to be successful.

Other factors such as using English,adjusting for throw or squirt. If you don't have the shot aimed right in the first place there is no way you can apply anything else and be consistent. You can't adjust if your not lined up right to begin with.

I wasn't there but I'm sure there were many shots that if Stan would of missed he would have lost the match. That's just the nature of the beast. I've been there. One shot in the middle part of the tourny, in a middle match kept you alive.

It's your knowledge that helped you get to where you are with your own eye, hand coordination. And when i say eye hand coordination, I'm talking about envisioning the shot as good as humanly possible.

With Stan we obviously have a man that can teach and can play. When he teaches players he wants them to learn the best he has. His reward is not only the small one time cash but the ever lasting satisfaction of seeing the results of what he teaches to his students.

Any player that can get to Stans in Kentucky and work with him should do it if they want to improve their game to the highest level possible for themselves. It's not even a maybe but a given.

Stan Shuffet can play at a higher level and he can teach at a higher level. His actions and testimonials speak for themselves.

Read the testimonials.

Have a great day. geno............

 

[lfigueroa]

You're out of your mind. There's NOTHING wrong with me linking to Stan's page in the OP. Anyone with a gnat-sized brain would know I was playing off of JoeyA's posting style, which is why I "hahaha'd" in that post.

Dr. Dave links to his site every time and so do countless others. Why does it chafe your puss SO bad when I prop Stan up and link to his site? That makes me a bad friend?

Lou, take your lips off the crack pipe before you lose your teeth.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk

As others have pointed out, you (and then Joey) did more than link to his page. Out of respect to Stan -- as his friend and supporter -- you could have played it straight. But instead you decided to go with a style you would have had to have known would stir it up. With friends like you and Joey, Stan doesn't need enemies.

Lou Figueroa

 

[peteypooldude]

As others have pointed out, you (and then Joey) did more than link to his page. Out of respect to Stan -- as his friend and supporter -- you could have played it straight. But instead you decided to go with a style you would have had to have known would stir it up. With friends like you and Joey, Stan doesn't need enemies.

Lou Figueroa[/
deleted...........................................

 

[JB Cases]

As others have pointed out, you (and then Joey) did more than link to his page. Out of respect to Stan -- as his friend and supporter -- you could have played it straight. But instead you decided to go with a style you would have had to have known would stir it up. With friends like you and Joey, Stan doesn't need enemies.

Lou Figueroa

By the same token you could have also played it straight instead of making the "dog whisperer" comment right away.

Stan Shuffet and the aiming method he teaches are linked together. You have made a point of calling out the instructors who teach similar aiming methods by asking them for their qualifications as players.

So Stan took the initiative and decided to take the risk of sponsoring the US Open with advertisements for his product and putting himself in as a real-time example of his product in action.

You said don't make the discussion about aiming but that was exactly the tone that Dave set when he made the thread. The whole point was to celebrate the good run Stan was having as THE main representative of ProOne aiming method.

You didn't have to jump in at all.

But as far as that goes Lou, the reason that any discussion on aiming turns to crap is because you can't leave it alone. What in the world is wrong with simply adopting the attitude that it exists and is not going away so let it be just another thing in the world that you don't like but is harmless?

The fact is that there isn't enough data to make any sort of real conclusion on the effectiveness of any "system". No one has collected it and no one is likely to ever collect it because pool is just not important enough for anyone to conduct the kind of study needed. So all we are left with are examples like Stan's US Open run and anecdotal accounts of people's own similar experiences of improved performance.

Precisely because of the amount of vitriol and animosity shown by you and a few others it's only natural that those who have gained positive experiences in pool due to the aiming methods developed by Hal and Stan would seek to celebrate any major examples of good performance.

It's a cat and mouse dynamic at this point. They push, you push, they push back. So for every time you say that they could have done this then you are on the opposite side also not exercising restraint.

Stan's accomplishment is particularly noteworthy BECAUSE of the aiming system debates. Therefore it is entirely proper to mention it and link the performance to the fact that he sells an aiming system. You did after all ask for credentials and Stan stepped up to provide some.

 

[peteypooldude]

By the same token you could have also played it straight instead of making the "dog whisperer" comment right away.

Stan Shuffet and the aiming method he teaches are linked together. You have made a point of calling out the instructors who teach similar aiming methods by asking them for their qualifications as players.

So Stan took the initiative and decided to take the risk of sponsoring the US Open with advertisements for his product and putting himself in as a real-time example of his product in action.

You said don't make the discussion about aiming but that was exactly the tone that Dave set when he made the thread. The whole point was to celebrate the good run Stan was having as THE main representative of ProOne aiming method.

You didn't have to jump in at all.

But as far as that goes Lou, the reason that any discussion on aiming turns to crap is because you can't leave it alone. What in the world is wrong with simply adopting the attitude that it exists and is not going away so let it be just another thing in the world that you don't like but is harmless?

The fact is that there isn't enough data to make any sort of real conclusion on the effectiveness of any "system". No one has collected it and no one is likely to ever collect it because pool is just not important enough for anyone to conduct the kind of study needed. So all we are left with are examples like Stan's US Open run and anecdotal accounts of people's own similar experiences of improved performance.

Precisely because of the amount of vitriol and animosity shown by you and a few others it's only natural that those who have gained positive experiences in pool due to the aiming methods developed by Hal and Stan would seek to celebrate any major examples of good performance.

It's a cat and mouse dynamic at this point. They push, you push, they push back. So for every time you say that they could have done this then you are on the opposite side also not exercising restraint.

Stan's accomplishment is particularly noteworthy BECAUSE of the aiming system debates. Therefore it is entirely proper to mention it and link the performance to the fact that he sells an aiming system. You did after all ask for credentials and Stan stepped up to provide some.

Good post. I know it was one of the best things ever introduced to my game. Thank you Dave and Stan for the information and time