sent the next entry twice, don't know how I did it.......................
Last edited:
Stevie Moore parallel shots CTE video
- Thread starter CueAndMe
- Start date
- Status
sent the next entry twice, don't know how I did it.......................
Stan's Book
Appreciate the status, Stan. If it was mentioned before, I didn't see it.
Sounds like a hell of an effort, put me at the top of the list wanting one when you do release it.
I just re-read all the posts, when you start scheduling the clinics, I would appreciate being put down for one. Will the clinics be a day, few hours etc. ?
I also saw in post 34 that you had some health issues, hope everything is ok now.
John
Appreciate the status, Stan. If it was mentioned before, I didn't see it.
Sounds like a hell of an effort, put me at the top of the list wanting one when you do release it.
I just re-read all the posts, when you start scheduling the clinics, I would appreciate being put down for one. Will the clinics be a day, few hours etc. ?
I also saw in post 34 that you had some health issues, hope everything is ok now.
John
Last edited:
Since this is the AIMING SECTION and you don't know JACK SQUAT about CTE, my thoughts are you need to start a thread in the MAIN FORUM about the STROKE.
You certainly sound like the STROKE expert. We can all learn from you.
I assume you spent $70 for Mark Wilson's book which you've previously mentioned but never purchased the 2 DVDs from Stan and only watched the freebie youtube videos to come to your erroneously whacked out conclusions. For all we know, you're a miserly mooch who pays for nothing and got the book as a loaner from someone.
Either way, start your STROKE THREAD in the main forum with all the nuances you've come to learn.
Btw, the stroke IS very important but they're two separate aspects of pocketing balls.
Those are my thoughts. Thanks for asking. Start the thread.
LOL. This reminds me of the time John Barton/Collins offered to send me a free copy of DVD2 for me to take a look at. I took him up on the offer and pm'ed him my address. Instead of sending the DVD, he posts in the forum what a cheapskate I am for not wanting to purchase the DVD.
LOL. This reminds me of the time John Barton/Collins offered to send me a free copy of DVD2 for me to take a look at. I took him up on the offer and pm'ed him my address. Instead of sending the DVD, he posts in the forum what a cheapskate I am for not wanting to purchase the DVD.
LOL, that is hilarious! I can see that happening.
Not the way it went down. John was going to send it but I indicated in some way that I thought he shouldn't send it.....John merely respected my thoughts and went on to make additional comments about it......something akin to Fancy Dan being a trolling nit as well as a cheapskate.
It's all here in print......
Stan Shuffett
LOL. This reminds me of the time John Barton/Collins offered to send me a free copy of DVD2 for me to take a look at. I took him up on the offer and pm'ed him my address. Instead of sending the DVD, he posts in the forum what a cheapskate I am for not wanting to purchase the DVD.
Dan, if you never saw DVD2, you did not miss anything.
I was sent a copy by someone who wanted me to review it, as I did DVD1 (the one that was supposed to "stand alone" and when it didn't, folks wanted a refund for), but I passed because I thought it'd just be ruled "piling on." Just more gobbledygook.
Lou Figueroa
Hey Dan, I did your shots as a thought experiment and I made 11 of 'em. Have you given any thought to mine?
I don't claim to be an expert on CTE and I don't use visual sweeps with a 1/2 tip pivot that Stan teaches as his Pro One system. I use a full 1/2 ball pivot to dead center cue ball with a hip pivot.
I just had a pm exchange with another member and I'll cut out the text and give you MY, not Stan's, comprehension of how a pivoting system works for mere mortals like myself.
Snip:
Let's take a look at a straight in shot again and I'll tell you how I (just me, not Stan) think it works and how it's working for me. I'll still use the same visuals and terms that I think everyone finds standard.
By definition a 0-15 cut share the same visual that uses a quarter ball spot that's either called A or C depending whether it's a right or left cut. I'm going to use a right cut because it's easier for me to find the a key on the keyboard.
I also believe there's only one body position that defines that ball/table/pocket position. Your head and body has to be aligned 'just so' to obtain the 'visual'. I'll use the above as axioms and try to develop a proof. If you can't agree that those statements are correct then I guess we won't be able to reconcile our differences about CTE.When you pivot from A, you get back to the same straight in shot you started with. If you don't, you have to work on your pivot twist amount, bridge length, etc. until you have the muscle memory ingrained. I guess I should have called that axiom three. This shows, when done correctly, that a 90* pivot is equal to a 15* cut.
As in my previous example use a marked cue ball with the mark placed at the extreme RIGHT edge for this try at explaining it. Tap the object ball for a 10-12 cut to the right. When you 'twist' or move down/up table to get the visual again, you'll see that the spot has moved from it's original perspective. It's 'added' an angle amount that's proportional to your table position or 'twist'. When done correctly this will add the proper amount of offset to the object ball to make the shot.
"It's only a tiny amount" you may be thinking now, but you must consider the distance between angles at the edge of the cue ball. The angles between 0 and 60* take up 3/4 of the cue ball. If you look at the values for the sine angles, you'll notice they rise much faster after passing 60*. Only 1/4 of the ball is used for 30* of cut angle. The difference between 90* and 75* is much less in distance from the edge towards the center than from the center of the cue ball to the 1/4 mark. (which marks a 15* cut)
Consider a 30 perspective where the pivot is away from the pocket. This will 'subtract' the correct amount of angles to put you on the shot line. The same mechanism is at work for the other visuals of the system. As you can see I believe the correct cut angle offset is obtained by your visual of the shot and the body position required to reach it.
End of Snip:
I may have only a few post relative to the rest of the members in this thread, but it doesn't mean I just fell off a turnip truck either. I was a 'nuke' electrician in the Navy almost too long ago to remember and those boys don't let you play with a reactor unless you have a good understanding of math and physics.
I've been playing for a good many years and after I found out about pivoting systems I went digging for more clues. I found a handy little pivot triangle that marks a spot on the cue ball you can use to shoot with first. As I dug deeper I found more. The info above is based on my tinkering with and trying to understand the pivot methods. Remember this is MY take on pivoting systems. For all I know, Poor Ol' Hal may be spinning like a top now.
Actually what I said above is exactly what happened. John offered a video in pm, I sent him my address, then he called me cheap in the forum.
@lou: Stan becomes at first passive-aggressive when he senses less than 100% devotion to the cult, then if you continue on questioning you become an outcast. JE54 is on his first warning when Stan said, "Sorry, John. I thought I had already answered your question twice in this thread." John groveled back that he has now read every word in this whole thread and wants to be the first one to buy his book, so for now he has remained in good graces. Just don't get out of line again, John, and you'll be fine. :thumbup:
I'm not going to get into a computer argument with you. It's not in my nature.
I guess you would consider me a cult member, because I first learned CTE from Hal.
I've been to see Stan, bought his video's, watched his you tubes and I have no problem with his work or his instruction. And if I want to buy his book, I will.
No, You are dead wrong! John changed his mind because I clearly expressed a suggestion to him to not mail it to you.
The conversation exists in my posts and can be crossed referenced with John's.
JES is not complaining about my response. I thought I had already said 2017 a couple of times. John typically reads any CTE threads.
Stan Shuffett
Last edited:
Thanks, John!
Actually my post above regarding your interaction with Stan came off a bit rude. I shouldn't have said you were groveling. Apologies.
Stan, this back and forth seems to be a microcosm of your CTE instruction. We are talking past each other. John offered a DVD, I gave him my address, and he then called me cheap. The fact that you killed the transaction does not change that. It doesn't matter to me why John didn't send it. Don't you think since he offered the DVD in a pm that maybe he could have sent another pm and told me he just changed his mind, or you didn't want me to have it?
Let's just drop it. It isn't important.
LOL.
Yes, I read all that post 40 - 45 stuff, but I'm left wondering, "So what"? I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just not sure why you are pointing out that when you move the object ball and then move your body that you are rotating around the cue ball. That happens with every shot with or without an aiming system.
The crux of the issue is this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1Psy5hOJT0&t=415s
There is no explanation as to how Stan gets the ob to go in 5 different directions using the same visual. Each of the CTE supporters has their own theory as to "why it works" but nobody really knows. The only explanation I can even make sense of is from mohrt, who if I recall correctly, says this (paraphrasing): Let's say you have two balls in an ETA perception that pockets the ball in the corner. Now move the ob 2 inches. You can use the same ETA perception but the ball will still go in the same pocket because the position of the rails and pockets fool your eye so that you can still line up ETA and it will LOOK LIKE ETA (when it really isn't) because the angle of the rails to the two balls makes it look that way. So, after having written that I hope I got that wrong and he isn't really saying that.
Use your technical and/or reactor background. What do you think? Sometimes the simplest answer it the most likely. Is it possible that adjustments are being made in Stan's video and either 1) not realized, or 2) not disclosed?
@Vorpal: one more thought...
If you went to the engineers and physicists that designed a reactor and told them you had an idea about how you wanted to change something in the reactor, would you listen to their answer? If they said, "No, I see where you are going with that idea, but you can't do that because of x, y and z. It just won't work and may do damage."
I can think of three physicists off the top of my head who are passionate about pool, and have written extensively on just about everything in pool that you can put a number on. None of these guys believe there is any merit to CTE as advertised. Don't you think their opinion carries any weight, if not your own "lyin' eyes"? Just something to consider.
If you went to the engineers and physicists that designed a reactor and told them you had an idea about how you wanted to change something in the reactor, would you listen to their answer? If they said, "No, I see where you are going with that idea, but you can't do that because of x, y and z. It just won't work and may do damage."
I can think of three physicists off the top of my head who are passionate about pool, and have written extensively on just about everything in pool that you can put a number on. None of these guys believe there is any merit to CTE as advertised. Don't you think their opinion carries any weight, if not your own "lyin' eyes"? Just something to consider.
Accepted, thanks
Your welcome.
Last edited:
Please just keep that dog on a leash!
you wouldn't believe it but that's when he's happy.lol
- Status