Tips for Students of CTE

Spidey,

This is untrue. You are mistaken.

You posted your interpretation of Stan's information on 1/27/2011 here.

I didn't publish my interpretation of Stan's approach on my website or on AZB until 2/17/2001, per the message here.

Regards,
Dave
Um, not quite. Nice try. ... That was made AFTER you posted his content to your personal site.
Spidey,

You and others can think whatever you want to think, but the facts remain as I have stated them. I promise that I did not post my original description until the day I announced it on AZB (2/17/2011). Again, your description was posted on 1/27/2011.

I have revised my interpretation of Stan's approach several times recently, based on new insight shared by Stan and others on AZB, but my original version definitely did not appear on my website until 2/17/2011. It is ridiculous to imply otherwise. But again, believe whatever you want to believe.

Regards,
Dave
 
After practicing with the manual CTE shots from the DVD for a couple of hours, I came to the conclusion that lining up the cue parallel to CTEL when moving into the shot helped (pre-pivot). Is this the right way to think of it, or am I going down the wrong path? I asked Stan and he simply stated "If you are making balls, then you are doing it right."

Others familiar with the system, are there any other tips to moving into the shot, besides having both visuals? Is parallel to CTEL a good approach?
 
Depends on the tip offset. Based on a certain ob/cb distance and pivot arc, there is one point between the edge of the cb and the center of the cb where the cue is parallel to the cte.

Sent from my SPH-M910 using Tapatalk
 
Depends on the tip offset. Based on a certain ob/cb distance and pivot arc, there is one point between the edge of the cb and the center of the cb where the cue is parallel to the cte.

Sent from my SPH-M910 using Tapatalk

You mean whether it's right or left pivot yes? I understand there is one place the cue is parallel. My question is, is that a good thing to do... try to come in parallel to that line, or just ignore that and "move in", on the visuals. My problems specifically were on thinner cuts. I could never move in and get enough pivot to make the cut. Then I concentrated on moving in parallel to CTEL and I started getting a bigger pivot.
 
Personally I don't move into the shot along either the CTE or aim point lines, I just move in along the path of my visualization of the lines, When I see the lines I start moving into the shot, which might be parallel to one of the lines above but I don't worry about that.

I admit in the beginning I wanted a concrete place to aim, or some frame of reference, but after just a few sessions I was able to pick up the sight lines fairly easily and quickly and my body and alignment would just fall into place along the proper line of attack or "plane". Add to that the Pro1 style pivot and everything continues to become more and more seamless, now after 2 months on most shots I don't think anyone would even know what I was looking at or that I was pivoting at all.

Scott
 
Unscrupulous is the word for Dr. Dave

I moved to a new Thread at the request of AtLarge.
 
Last edited:
... Don't take my word for it. Anyone having any doubts on the real timeline can simply call Stan and ask who posted what and when.

Spidey -- as you know, I have been following this saga pretty closely. Your claims about the time line for who posted what/when are incorrect, and Dr. Dave's are correct. You, and others, had been posting reviews, analysis, and comments about the DVD (including your long post that I cited) for several weeks before Dr. Dave posted his review on 2/17. Dr. Dave did post a few preliminary comments after viewing the DVD for the first time, but his more detailed post, the one that caused the furor, was on 2/17.

On 2/18, you said: "When I noticed Dr. Plagiarizer posted Stan's content today and plopped it on his website, I couldn't contain myself and had to call a spade a spade." On 2/18 you also began a rant against Dr. Dave for posting material about the DVD on his web site, then removing it, and lying about doing so. This went on for a few days -- including your offering to bet your life on the accuracy of your claims and offering $500 for Dr. Dave to take a lie detector test -- until Lou Figueroa figured out that you had simply been looking in a different section of the web site. I.e, your claims were wrong. I think the same thing is happening here regarding the time line.

So -- many people, most specifically including you, had been posting information about the DVD long before 2/17. Some of the information was understandable and accurate; some was inaccurate or poorly written. No one was criticized for posting that information. Then Dr. Dave wrote something that covered the same ground, but was actually well organized and understandable, and he got blasted.

I'd like to thank the posters (such as LAMas, gordml, daphish1, Grazelli, scottgen26, mohrt, brophog) who have tried to get this thread back on its original track after it was derailed a week ago. Contentious debate and personal insults -- and regurgitation thereof -- are not what this thread is about. I still believe the original purpose is valid and I'll ask again that we stick to that.
 
After practicing with the manual CTE shots from the DVD for a couple of hours, I came to the conclusion that lining up the cue parallel to CTEL when moving into the shot helped (pre-pivot). Is this the right way to think of it, or am I going down the wrong path? I asked Stan and he simply stated "If you are making balls, then you are doing it right."

Others familiar with the system, are there any other tips to moving into the shot, besides having both visuals? Is parallel to CTEL a good approach?

When pivoting try moving your shoulder/ torso into the correct sight line. Try to learn other pivoting methods as well as they are quite similar with each other and you will be amazed how they coincide with each other. :)
 
FACT: Stan Shuffett put in many hundreds of hours developing a new aiming system called CTE/Pro One. The system is original material. That is, this aiming system as presented by Stan has never been presented by anyone anytime before Stan.

FACT: Stan spent money and time producing the CTE/Pro One DVD. As others who produce DVDs (Dr. Dave, for example) I believe Stan did this for the love of the game and to recover his costs and hopefully to make some money on the DVD. (Does anyone see a problem with this concept?)

FACT: Within a few weeks of the DVD coming out Dr. Dave put on his own web site as much information as he could understand and in as much detail as he could a large amount of Stan original information from the DVD.

FACT: Dr. Dave continues to update and add on his web site more of Stan's original information.

FACT: Dr. Dave publicly announced that he had put information concerning Stan's CTE/Pro One on his web site. This meant people could see essentially the basic concepts of Stan's CTE/Pro One DVD for free on Dr. Dave's web site.

FACT: Dr. Dave did not ONE TIME contact Stan to ask permission or to at least inform Stan of his plans to see if Stan had any objections.

Can anyone out there say they believe this was the honorable and right thing for Dr. Dave to do to Stan and to the original information on Stan's CTE/Pro One DVD?

I believe Dr. Dave's actions were not honorable nor right and hence, unscrupulous. (Oblivious to or contemptous of what is right and honorable)

Maybe Dr. Dave can tell us how his actions in dealing with Stan and the original information on Stan's CTE/Pro One DVD could be anything other than unscrupulous.

I believe you have your facts in order. I also think we should respect the OP and his thread and move this discussion to another thread. People are coming to this thread for tips on CTE and they have to sift through all the arguing to find the gems.

With that said, AtLarge has his facts wrong about dr_dave and we should continue that discussion in another thread.
 
It might be nice to have one thread where we could exchange tips about aiming with CTE -- things we have learned that might help someone else learn more easily or quickly.

I ask that this thread be limited to talking about Stan Shuffett's version of CTE -- not earlier versions or someone's hybridization.

I also plea that everyone leave all contentious debate out of this thread. Let's just accept that "it works" in some fashion, whether that is with mechanical precision or through conscious or unconscious user adjustments. Some people are over-the-top advocates, some think it's an absurd way to try to hit a pool shot, and others are somewhere in between -- let's just accept all that. I'll also be disappointed if anyone tries to use this thread as a platform for ill-mannered attempts at humor, such as "Tip: use ghost-ball aiming instead."

I hope that we all have reached a stage now where a thread like this is possible. I'll start it out.

Tip -- Buy Stan's DVD.
I have been amazed at how many people seem to be sincerely interested in CTE, and in aiming methods more generally, but have not spent a measly $45 (and that is pretty measly in this day and age) to hear and see what Stan presents first hand. The on-line outlines, summaries, and discussion can be useful, but they don't adequately substitute for the DVD.

I was a student of CTE long before the DVD came out, and what was available was pretty poor. A lot of people who tried to learn it from Hal Houle were left mystified or deemed it geometrically flawed and unworkable. Hal's instructions, at least to many people, were simply: sight center to edge, offset the stick inside or outside depending on thickness of cut needed, and pivot to center. That simple prescription is full of holes, and many of us were unable to add enough meat to the bones to make it into a usable method.

Stan was one of those students who went to see Hal. But Stan was intrigued enough to stick with it until he was able to give it some structure and make it a much more usable method. Stan's specification of secondary sighting lines and specific pivot lengths (for manual CTE) elevates the method to something that is now useful to many more people.

The DVD has high production qualities (for a pool DVD). Some viewers wish he had explained some things more fully or differently, but, overall, it is reasonably well done. I urge those interested in CTE, or aiming methods more generally, to buy it.​

Tip -- Use Streamlined Shot "Call-Outs"
Stan's method essentially presents the player with a menu of ways to align oneself -- or determine the final cue-stick alignment -- for a shot. Some students have expressed confusion, difficulty, or dismay in trying to keep the options straight as the shots present themselves during a game or match. When I use the method, I find it helpful to streamline that menu in my mind, in the following ways.

The center-to-edge line always goes to the outside (side farther from the pocket) of the object ball, and I doubt that anyone has any difficulty in immediately seeing that. Stan then uses A, B, and C for the secondary alignment lines, and left and right for the pivots. My mental way of implementing this makes two changes in terminology:

Instead of thinking of A, B, or C, I find it easier in actual play to just think "1" or "2," where this means 1 or 2 quarters of the OB. So "A" and "C" are both "1" (one quarter) and "B" is "2" (two quarters). Since the side for the CTEL is instantly obvious on a shot, I just think whether to align for 1 vs. 2 quarters for the secondary alignment (forget the very thin cuts for now).

Instead of thinking "left" or "right" for the 1/2-tip offset for the pivot, which have different effects depending on the direction of the cut, I just think "out" or "in," where "out" means outside and "in" means inside.

So as I approach a shot, I call out (to myself) either "1-out," or "1-in," or "2-out," or "2-in" depending on the shot.

This can be done very quickly. In fact, I find that I can make an alignment-menu selection and align myself for the shot, including pivot, almost as quickly as I can go around the table one-stroking using only "feel." And the process can certainly be done at least as quickly as ghost-ball or contact-point-to-contact-point aiming. For precision, it is probably good to not do it that quickly, but I just mention this because of objections sometimes made about CTE possibly disrupting one's "flow" or pace of play.

So ............ as I move to each shot, I just call out to myself one of:
1-out
1-in
2-out
2-in​

and then go into aligning my body for CTEL plus the call-out. I hope someone finds this tip useful. If you need any further clarification, please just ask.​

Now -- how about some tips from other users.

If we are gonna limit ourselves to Stan's version of CTE/Pro-One, why are we using your interpetation? Or anyone else's for that matter!! What is so damn hard about A,B,C left or right?
 
If we are gonna limit ourselves to Stan's version of CTE/Pro-One, why are we using your interpetation? Or anyone else's for that matter!! What is so damn hard about A,B,C left or right?

pablo -- Although you don't say so, I imagine you are referring to my tip that I called "Use Streamlined Shot 'Call-Outs'." It's something I found helpful for myself as I moved from shot to shot. It is not something Stan said to do. If you prefer to use A/B/C rather than 1 and 2, and if you prefer to use left and right rather than in and out -- fine, do so. I imagine someone more experienced with Stan's CTE or Pro1 than I am would not actually have to call out anything to himself; he would just look and do.

There was nothing controversial or antagonistic about my "tip," it was just something that I thought might help another student or two. Why in the world would you react to it with antagonism? Calm down.
 
If we are gonna limit ourselves to Stan's version of CTE/Pro-One, why are we using your interpetation? Or anyone else's for that matter!! What is so damn hard about A,B,C left or right?

The goal is to make one round ball hit another round ball and make it go to the desired target. This thread is nothing more than an attempt at helping all achieve that goal, using this methodology as a guide.
 
pablo -- Although you don't say so, I imagine you are referring to my tip that I called "Use Streamlined Shot 'Call-Outs'." It's something I found helpful for myself as I moved from shot to shot. It is not something Stan said to do. If you prefer to use A/B/C rather than 1 and 2, and if you prefer to use left and right rather than in and out -- fine, do so. I imagine someone more experienced with Stan's CTE or Pro1 than I am would not actually have to call out anything to himself; he would just look and do.

There was nothing controversial or antagonistic about my "tip," it was just something that I thought might help another student or two. Why in the world would you react to it with antagonism? Calm down.

I immediately began using 1-2 and in-out. It is much easier to think in these terms, for me anyways. I have found the vast majority of shots are 2-outs. (B, pivot away from target)
 
Last edited:
I immediately began using 1-2 and in-out. It is much easier to think in these terms, for me anyways. I have found the vast majority of shots are 2-outs. (B, pivot away from target)

Interesting, I find that probably 75% of the shots are 1's (A or C), maybe more, since a good portion of the time I'm looking for that 15 - 25 degree angle, not thin enough for a B hit. Agree on the outside pivot though.
Scott
 
Last edited:
Interesting, I find that probably 75% of the shots are 1's (A or C), maybe more, since a good portion of the time I'm looking for that 15 - 25 degree angle, not thin enough for a B hit. Agree on the outside pivot though.
Scott

I'm actually referring to the manual CTE shots from the DVD, not typical shooting.
 
I'm actually referring to the manual CTE shots from the DVD, not typical shooting.

Have you shot all of the shots in your diagrams? Do you shoot square to the shot or do you tilt your head to visualize the two aim lines - CTE and the 2nd ary? Do you change the distance between the CB and bridge - close for small distances between the CB and OB - and the converse?
 
Last edited:
I aproove this message !!!

Not to be negative, but another 200+ thread. is not going to teach you how to make the ball go in th hole...There are too many variables... To rely on ANY system is a farce...Learn to play the game with all its variables, and you will enjoy more success than any "aiming system" can ever provide.

Most aiming systems are designed for beginners, or at best "C" players, who just can't make the ball go in the hole often enough...:cool:
 
pablo -- Although you don't say so, I imagine you are referring to my tip that I called "Use Streamlined Shot 'Call-Outs'." It's something I found helpful for myself as I moved from shot to shot. It is not something Stan said to do. If you prefer to use A/B/C rather than 1 and 2, and if you prefer to use left and right rather than in and out -- fine, do so. I imagine someone more experienced with Stan's CTE or Pro1 than I am would not actually have to call out anything to himself; he would just look and do.

There was nothing controversial or antagonistic about my "tip," it was just something that I thought might help another student or two. Why in the world would you react to it with antagonism? Calm down.

Calm down? Is this supposed to be on your terms? There's no one here to appease you!! Is it a mere coincidence that you and others have tried to change the meaning of CTE/Pro-One?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top