What I Suspect Limits Many in Learning CTE/Pro One

Stan - I thought we agreed that nobody else was to see this :)

There will always be naysayers - fact is it works and I am living proof. I snapped off my league tournament (33 players, 5K 1st place) using the system after spending 4 months working with it. I don't know why people continue to argue despite a ton of video evidence.

Gets easier every day.

Jim - have you spent any time with CTE aiming?

Gerry

Nonsense, hardly, and one day you may see. More and more will see and understand once the info on DVD2 is out...

Stan Shuffett
 
As the quip goes, if it begins to make sense, then you should start to worry.

If you've committed some heinous act and are seeking self-administered justice, you could read through the long history of debates on this topic. In the end, you'd probably come to the conclusion that no one that's had, say, high-school geometry or better and bothered to apply it, would agree that the system yields correct aim lines on its own. Not that math is required. One of the most tenacious critics of the system, Patrick Johnson (now suspended), attacked this claim on mainly logical grounds.

That's not to say that there aren't any potential benefits of using it, and possibly more than the critics have given it credit for. The idea of lining up ones eyes and body in a consistent way for some span of cut angles can only be good, imo. But from that point on, you're going to have to rely on more traditional aiming "methods" to get the job done (i.e., feel/judgement/estimation - whatever you want to call it). These "methods" are all ghostball-based in that you have to visualize things that haven't yet happened. No one, to my awareness at least, has invented a practical way of getting around that. Claims that CTE is a replacement for traditional aiming are, to put it bluntly, nonsense.

Jim

You are simply wrong.
 
As the quip goes, if it begins to make sense, then you should start to worry.

If you've committed some heinous act and are seeking self-administered justice, you could read through the long history of debates on this topic. In the end, you'd probably come to the conclusion that no one that's had, say, high-school geometry or better and bothered to apply it, would agree that the system yields correct aim lines on its own. Not that math is required. One of the most tenacious critics of the system, Patrick Johnson (now suspended), attacked this claim on mainly logical grounds.

That's not to say that there aren't any potential benefits of using it, and possibly more than the critics have given it credit for. The idea of lining up ones eyes and body in a consistent way for some span of cut angles can only be good, imo. But from that point on, you're going to have to rely on more traditional aiming "methods" to get the job done (i.e., feel/judgement/estimation - whatever you want to call it). These "methods" are all ghostball-based in that you have to visualize things that haven't yet happened. No one, to my awareness at least, has invented a practical way of getting around that. Claims that CTE is a replacement for traditional aiming are, to put it bluntly, nonsense.

Jim

You write with a sense of intelligence. Which reminds me of that old adage...
 
If you hit a million balls wrong you are going to hit the millionth +1 wrong as well.


Well no duh...... Geez.

If you hit a million balls wrong, you got bigger issues than what aiming system you use.

But if you hit a million balls right, then guess what, you gonna keep hitting them right huh....

It's all the player and not the aiming visualization method used.

Ever wonder why pros still practice? I mean why do they need to if they are already pros?

Answer these questions.....Why do pros still practice? Why is there spring training in baseball?

Why is there football training and practice long before there is a game?

Why do pro golfers still go to the driving range or practice putting green?

If you can't answer these question, you must be a system user.
 
Well no duh...... Geez.

If you hit a million balls wrong, you got bigger issues than what aiming system you use.

But if you hit a million balls right, then guess what, you gonna keep hitting them right huh....

It's all the player and not the aiming visualization method used.

Ever wonder why pros still practice? I mean why do they need to if they are already pros?

Answer these questions.....Why do pros still practice? Why is there spring training in baseball?

Why is there football training and practice long before there is a game?

Why do pro golfers still go to the driving range or practice putting green?

If you can't answer these question, you must be a system user.

Except you ignore the FACT that the system users put in a lot of table time learning and honing their methods. What upsets you is the idea that they can get far more out of each hour of practice than you do.

I will bet on every system user on this forum against you in any pool game.
 
Well no duh...... Geez.

If you hit a million balls wrong, you got bigger issues than what aiming system you use.

But if you hit a million balls right, then guess what, you gonna keep hitting them right huh....

It's all the player and not the aiming visualization method used.

Ever wonder why pros still practice? Uh...no. I mean why do they need to if they are already pros?
Many say they don't, but could it be to get even better???


Answer these questions.....Why do pros still practice?Hey, you already asked that one! Why is there spring training in baseball? I know this one- It's too hard to find the balls in winter practice! duh...

Why is there football training and practice long before there is a game?
So they have time to heal up before the actual game??
Why do pro golfers still go to the driving range or practice putting green?
Because their yards aren't big enough.
If you can't answer these question, you must be a system user.

Wait a minute....I answered them, does this now mean I'm no longer a system user? Crap, there goes my game down in the toilet.:angry:
 
Except you ignore the FACT that the system users put in a lot of table time learning and honing their methods. What upsets you is the idea that they can get far more out of each hour of practice than you do.

I will bet on every system user on this forum against you in any pool game.

John, puhleeeeeeeze,

If that ridiculous "Dan's Plan" link you put up, ( http://thedanplan.com/4k_hours/ )..is your argument for 'practice makes perfect', you are in serious, serious trouble..If that guy (Dan) quit his job, and spent untold thousands of $$$$, documenting,
and televising, how he could become a competitive pro golfer, in 10,000 hrs. of practice, he is a complete whack job..
By the way, at 12 hrs. a day, that is only a little over 2 years....He would have to have very naive sponsors, or more $$$$ than
any pro golfer would have..to spend it on such a meaningless project..Please don't tell me YOU invested in that fiasco ! :eek:

You have completly lost whatever respect I had for your 'google searching,' to find ways to support your theories on 'aiming, coaching or practicing..I skipped through most of the forty-some clips, (which were very well done by the way) just because
of the preposterous concept. I would suggest you find better examples to support your cause..(by the way, what is your cause ?)
...Even JoeyA would laugh at THAT infomercial..(which, now that I think, may have been sponsored by golf instructor's ;))

PS..Practicing may help people improve..but ONLY if they stay within the boundaries of 'sanity and reality' !
 
Last edited:
Look at the object ball from behind the cue ball, find the center of the cb and the edge of the object ball. Move your eyes to the next aim point that works for the angle, go down into your shooting stance and bring your cue to center ball at the same time. Shoot.

That's what the system is in simple and easy terms.

Sure anything can be explained simply but the simple explanation doesn't always make it where you can be an expert in it.

Nuclear fusion? Bunch of teeny things come together making a lot of heat. Can you become a physicist with that information? No, you will need to study a lot more and work on the comprehension until you understand the underlying foundation.

I mean really all CTE is at it's core is aligning yourself to the balls using two lines instead of one. Find the two lines which automatically positions your body when you have them and from there you simply bend down and shoot. That's it.

Where are the two lines you ask? One is always the edge of the object ball to the center of the cue ball and the other is in one of three places. Except for very thin cuts when there is only one line. Simple choices really. For any given shot outside of thin cuts you only have three choices and once you practice for a while you automatically see the right choice for any shot you encounter.

Even when you practice it's clearly obvious that at least one of the choices is absolutely not going to work so that leaves two. Those two have a slight overlap where either one will work but for the most part you easily begin to see which choice works for what angles and when you do it's pretty much cake from there. But you have to put in the table time to become really comfy with it. Not a magic bullet by any means even if it starts to feel like magic when you are consistently putting shots down that gave you fits before.

Sounds like what I do naturally. And if this is CTE PRO ONE why would anyone need 2 dvds to explain it? I am being honest with that question.
 
Last edited:
...

Jim - have you spent any time with CTE aiming?

Gerry
No... that is, not at the table, and for two reasons. First, time constraints have prohibited me from playing for quite some time. But, if I did have the time, I wouldn't try the full blown version (i.e., with the pivoting part) unless they announced the laws of logic/geometry had been altered.

In another sense, though, I have tried it, on a piece of paper. That's actually the acid test, and many false notions never make it past that point. (We're not talking about new science here).

Nevertheless, as I indicated, the idea of being very careful with your initial alignment, such as in Stan's version of CTE, and whether or not you believe it produces the right aim line, is a valuable contribution, imo. If and when I get the chance to return to the game, I might just partake. But I won't have any illusions that adding the pivot would thereby complete the aiming process.

Jim
 
No... that is, not at the table, and for two reasons. First, time constraints have prohibited me from playing for quite some time. But, if I did have the time, I wouldn't try the full blown version (i.e., with the pivoting part) unless they announced the laws of logic/geometry had been altered.

In another sense, though, I have tried it, on a piece of paper. That's actually the acid test, and many false notions never make it past that point. (We're not talking about new science here).

Nevertheless, as I indicated, the idea of being very careful with your initial alignment, such as in Stan's version of CTE, and whether or not you believe it produces the right aim line, is a valuable contribution, imo. If and when I get the chance to return to the game, I might just partake. But I won't have any illusions that adding the pivot would thereby complete the aiming process.

Jim

Jim, don't you think you should give some/show actual information to back your opinion or do you want people to believe what you say just because you are saying it?

I seen Brandon Shuff post this tonight on facebook, I think Shuff maybe getting a lesson from Stan Shuffett.

Brandon Shuff: It's easy to be overwhelmed with what Pro One offers. For real though, Pro one is the truth !!! I was blind but now i see!! Very happy to be here
 

Attachments

  • 942223_10200343344760422_2022122532_n.jpg
    942223_10200343344760422_2022122532_n.jpg
    71.7 KB · Views: 246
Last edited:
Sounds like what I do naturally. And if this is CTE PRO ONE why would anyone need 2 dvds to explain it? I am being honest with that question.

Because some people don't do what you do naturally and they don't get it with the simple explanation.

I used to sell jump cues. When I decided to make and sell them I decided that I would need to be able to demonstrate them effectively. So I practiced in my shop until I developed a lot of shots. My goal was to show how effective this cue could be in game situations. I was successful and developed a great show that made it very clear what was possible with a jump cue and practice. My job was done right?

No. Not at all.

Because what I found out was that while people could see what I was doing, while they could listen to my pitch, they could not use the cue properly.

And at first I was lost as to how to help them. To me it was easy to use a jump cue because I had practiced so much with it and when I first started I wasn't great with it. So the answer was easy, buy it and go practice. But that is not how it works because at a show people want to make it work right there before parting with their cash.

So I had to learn to teach this "simple" act. And the problems ranged from wrong perceptions to really bad mechanics. Sometimes I had to trick the person psychologically into completing the stroke and other times I had to rebuild a person's stroke. I had at least ten different approaches to help the player understand the mechanics of using a jump cue. I did thousands of lessons over a four year period, sometimes with as many as four people on the table at once.

When you have a concept as foreign to "conventional" by-the-book aiming as CTE is then it's a great mental hurdle, especially for the lower level players. I have noticed that really good players "see" it much easier. For the B and C level players though this is not an easy concept to explain in words or even capture on video.

And without someone there to observe the player's form how can the distant instructor know what the proper approach is to help the player understand the concept?

As to why one would need a second or third or fourth dvd to teach a concept that's easy....teaching is easier when you have done more of it. I spent a lot of time refining my approach to explaining how to jump balls and my methods were hugely more effective in the second year I was doing it. By the third year it was nothing for me to teach anyone to jump in less than five minutes, and I mean ANYONE regardless of their skill level. This ability developed through lots of experience with the subject and with hundreds of students.

Anytime someone does a first version of anything they almost immediately see where they could have done it better after it's shipped. That's just the way it is, rarely is anything perfect the first time.

Why don't you flip the question and ask yourself what it is about CTE that a man would devote so much time and effort and endure relentless ridicule, endure criminal defamation, and intense criticism to create a DVD teaching it?

It ain't for the money.
 
One thing I've clearly picked up from my lessons with Stevie Moore. You need solid fundamentals in set up, alignment and stroke for CTE/Pro One to work as it is capable of working. You need to be able to execute precise movements, into the CB, after you achieve your visuals.

I've put in a lot of time working on Pro One. I've certainly gotten frustrated. It's clear to me I was frustrated at the wrong thing. Stevie and I worked quite a bit on Pro One this past weekend. He told me he believes I have a solid understanding of Pro One and I believe I even have a reasonable handle on when the different visuals should be applied (different cut angles). It's my set up, alignment and stroke that were the primary culprits in causing misses.

I made significant progress between my first lesson and yesterday. I'm anxious to incorporate the fine tuning Stevie showed me yesterday in our lesson in the next few months of practice. Just some seemingly small modifications that really made me much more comfortable and relaxed and also simplified the whole process of utilizing Pro One more effectively.

Now that I understand it better, I can see how Pro One isn't that complicated. BTW, I'm not saying it is simple either. Stevie has completely rebuilt his game to incorporate Pro One. I firmly believe the pool world is going to see the results of this in the next few years when Stevie competes in tournaments.

Anyway, for those who may be struggling a bit with Pro One, you may want to have someone look at your setup, alignment and stroke. Those may be the root cause problem in struggles you may be having with CTE/Pro One.

I want to add to this that it is my opinion that it's easy to throw a shot OUT of the correct path when CTE has put you on the right line.

At least I have noticed this in my game. In the past I would use throw unintentionally to throw the cue ball into the right space. Now when I use CTE I am on the right line but sometimes I will revert to bad habits and steer the ball and when you are on the right line and do this then the effect is that you throw the cue ball into the wrong space.

It is absolutely essential to develop and maintain a straight stroke. Many will see this as a step backwards thinking that their stroke is already straight enough. I think that perhaps it's not as straight as they think if they are lining up right and still missing shots. Of course at that point it becomes a chicken/egg proposition with CTE as how do you know if you were lined up right in the first place.

So work on the stroke and be sure that it's straight and you eliminate one half of the cause.
 
:smile:
No... that is, not at the table, and for two reasons. First, time constraints have prohibited me from playing for quite some time. But, if I did have the time, I wouldn't try the full blown version (i.e., with the pivoting part) unless they announced the laws of logic/geometry had been altered.

In another sense, though, I have tried it, on a piece of paper. That's actually the acid test, and many false notions never make it past that point. (We're not talking about new science here).

Nevertheless, as I indicated, the idea of being very careful with your initial alignment, such as in Stan's version of CTE, and whether or not you believe it produces the right aim line, is a valuable contribution, imo. If and when I get the chance to return to the game, I might just partake. But I won't have any illusions that adding the pivot would thereby complete the aiming process.
Jim

If, just if, one can sight the edge of the CB at the OB, like the left edge of the CB to the left edge of the OB and can stroke the cue parallel to that sight line with the tip aimed at the center of the CB, then one can make a straight in shot (though aiming the center of the CB at the center of the OB would be easier).

If, just if, one can sight the left edge of the CB at the right edge of the OB and stroke parallel to that sight line, then one can make a thin 90 degree cut to the left.

If one can aim the left edge of the CB at the center of the OB, then one can make a geometrically correct 30 degree cut to the left using a bit of outside English to eliminate cut induced throw (CIT).

With time at the table, one can aim the left edge of the CB at other fractional points between the left edge of the OB and the right edge of the OB to achieve all of the cut angles to the left - reverse for cuts to the right.

The rub is achieving a parallel stroke with the tip aimed at the center of the CB to the sight line at the edge of the CB.

I have tried the 1/2 tip of the cue offset to the side of the center of the CB and then pivoting back to the center of the CB to achieve that parallel stroke, but the 1/2 tip offset is not a constant for if the CB and the OB are very close together, it must be greater than 1/2 and if the CB and OB are far apart, it must be smaller than 1/2 tip to prevent sending the CB at the same angle to the OB. Sending the CB at the same angle that works for a shot where the CB and OB are close together will send the CB farther to the outside of the OB and changing the desired cut angle and even causing it to miss the OB altogether.

When I realized this, I found that it (fractional tip offsets pre-pivot) was too much to remember, for me. I also realize that it may be easy for others.

So, though, this isn't CTE/Pro1, I also like advancing to the elimination of the offset and pivot as soon as possible.

Be well all.:smile:
 
Last edited:
Stan - I thought we agreed that nobody else was to see this :)

There will always be naysayers - fact is it works and I am living proof. I snapped off my league tournament (33 players, 5K 1st place) using the system after spending 4 months working with it. I don't know why people continue to argue despite a ton of video evidence.

Gets easier every day.

Jim - have you spent any time with CTE aiming?

Gerry


You have a league tournament with only 33 players and 5K first place? I want to live by you... :)

Scott
 
I have tried the 1/2 tip of the cue offset to the side of the center of the CB and then pivoting back to the center of the CB to achieve that parallel stroke, but the 1/2 tip offset is not a constant for if the CB and the OB are very close together, it must be greater than 1/2 and if the CB and OB are far apart, it must be smaller than 1/2 tip to prevent sending the CB at the same angle to the OB. Sending the CB at the same angle that works for a shot where the CB and OB are close together will send the CB farther to the outside of the OB and changing the desired cut angle and even causing it to miss the OB altogether.

When I realized this, I found that it (fractional tip offsets pre-pivot) was too much to remember, for me. I also realize that it may be easy for others.

So, though, this isn't CTE/Pro1, I also like advancing to the elimination of the offset and pivot as soon as possible.

Be well all.:smile:

There are clear instructions for handling visuals when the CB and OB are 12.5" apart and closer.
 
I want to add to this that it is my opinion that it's easy to throw a shot OUT of the correct path when CTE has put you on the right line.

At least I have noticed this in my game. In the past I would use throw unintentionally to throw the cue ball into the right space. Now when I use CTE I am on the right line but sometimes I will revert to bad habits and steer the ball and when you are on the right line and do this then the effect is that you throw the cue ball into the wrong space.

It is absolutely essential to develop and maintain a straight stroke. Many will see this as a step backwards thinking that their stroke is already straight enough. I think that perhaps it's not as straight as they think if they are lining up right and still missing shots. Of course at that point it becomes a chicken/egg proposition with CTE as how do you know if you were lined up right in the first place.

So work on the stroke and be sure that it's straight and you eliminate one half of the cause.

A bad stroke is mostly from a person that is not confident enough on being on the correct shot line in my opinion. I have seen myself adjust as soon as my bridge hits the table,in my practice strokes and on my stroke that actually hits the cue ball. You have put doubt in your mind and I give you a 50./50 chance on making just a simple shot and fighting off any other subconscious adjustments.
 
A bad stroke is mostly from a person that is not confident enough on being on the correct shot line in my opinion. I have seen myself adjust as soon as my bridge hits the table,in my practice strokes and on my stroke that actually hits the cue ball. You have put doubt in your mind and I give you a 50./50 chance on making just a simple shot and fighting off any other subconscious adjustments.
 
A bad stroke is mostly from a person that is not confident enough on being on the correct shot line in my opinion. I have seen myself adjust as soon as my bridge hits the table,in my practice strokes and on my stroke that actually hits the cue ball. You have put doubt in your mind and I give you a 50./50 chance on making just a simple shot and fighting off any other subconscious adjustments.

I do not entirely disagee with this. But I think a bad stroke is also from bad form, tension and pressure.

How else do you explain when a player blows the easy shots?
 
Back
Top