Why CTE is silly

[Mikjary]

What do you think is the usefulness of believing it's not just what you describe? Why do CTE users vehemently deny the obvious truth of this?

pj
chgo

PJ,

Mike's comments are an absolute truth and very intuitive to me even though I have been known to dabble in Cte. :smile: His last statement is probably the most correct for me. I have found I can apply a pivot to almost any aiming system out there. I have even experimented and developed several "fun" methods of pivoting from all directions. "Magic tricks are easy once you know the secret!", to quote a magician you might recognize from Chicago.

I'm surprised only a few posters have even alluded to the real answers about pivot systems. Cte is just A pivot system and there can be many more if you think about what a pivot really is. The Russians did wonders by reverse engineering things from Germany after WWII.

I can say that the work Stan Shuffett has done is unique and very innovative and does not fall into this category. He has taken pivot systems to the next level with Pro One and is an inspiration to me to develop new ways to employ the pivot. His system is a center pocket system as are all aiming systems. When performed correctly they deposit the ball without cheating the pocket. The reason for missing is 100% operator error. You must achieve a level of proficiency with the mechanics before you fully understand pivot systems. After that it turns into a "feel" system. :smile: Players can't even tell you are using it.

So, as Mike's list of positive truths goes, I agree. Things like this are good for pool and are opening a lot of doors that were hidden by old school agendas. And of course...debate is also good to keep things in perspective. :wink:

Best,
Mike

 

[lfigueroa]

Give me a call and we'll set up a lesson for you at no charge. Also,
you'll receive a DVD at no charge.

Man.

Joey is going to be pissssssssssssssssssssssssssed.

Lou Figueroa

 

[alstl]

Which world class players use CTE?

 

[stan shuffett]

Which world class players use CTE?

A top 6 finisher at the recent U.S. Open used CTE that I taught him.

I received very strong comments just recently concerning this player's improvement because of his PRO ONE lessons in the not too distant past. I did not seek these comments.

A tourney was just won in Europe recently by a PRO ONE user.

Also, Stevie Moore.

PRO ONE is a professional aiming system. Many strong players are connecting with PRO ONE. The visual and physical nature of the system allow them to dial in to an even stronger game.

Thanks for asking.

Stan

 

[8pack]

PJ,

I will explain "precise" to you and show you how to cheat a pocket even if it's just by a tick or 2.

Obviously, you have a keen interest in all of this CTE stuff and I am sure that your aim is beyond your own facts. I want you to have my facts!

Give me a call and we'll set up a lesson for you at no charge. Also,
you'll receive a DVD at no charge. You will be armed with not just DVD info but the totality of a 6 hour lesson which is superior to video instruction.

Also, while you're here, Landon and I will play you some and do some explanations as we play........at your request.

My wife is a great cook...so, we'll eat good, too.

Stan

Wow what a deal!
Why would you give this man such a offer.
Even if you where to change this persons mind, him and a few others who have done nothing but TRASHED what you teach.
I have know doubt your a great instructor but to give a person who
has done little or no service to you something for free and charge people who really want to learn what you teach is wrong.

(That man should at least pay double)

 

[mikepage]

Wow what a deal!
Why would you give this man such a offer.
Even if you where to change this persons mind, him and a few others who have done nothing but TRASHED what you teach.

That's an unfair criticism. Patrick doesn't sugar coat things, but he's a model of fair, objective, and unbiased around here.

He comes down on unsupported claims, as he should.

 

[stan shuffett]

Wow what a deal!
Why would you give this man such a offer.
Even if you where to change this persons mind, him and a few others who have done nothing but TRASHED what you teach.
I have know doubt your a great instructor but to give a person who
has done little or no service to you something for free and charge people who really want to learn what you teach is wrong.

(That man should at least pay double)

I appreciate what you are saying and your point is well-taken.

Of my initial lot of DVDs, there are a few that will be allocated at no charge for various purposes. (probably less than 10)

So, if PJ takes me up on my offer then I will balance out his deal to you with the same offer.

Thanks for your input,

Stan

 

[dr_dave]

Eyes are to remain aligned to view the outside edge of the OB from directly over the top center of the CB. There are 2 pivots. One corresponds to thin cuts and the other to thick cuts.

For thin cuts, place the bridge hand and cue "anywhere" to the inside of this center-to-edge line before pivoting the cue tip to find the (new) CB center. Shoot.
For thick cuts, place the bridge hand and cue "anywhere" to the outside of this center-to-edge line before pivoting the cue tip to find the (new) CB center. Shoot.

That's it.

The problem I see is the "anywhere" instruction. It makes a huge difference where. It also makes a huge difference from shot to shot. So the "where" that works for one shot isn't the "where" that works for another. And the point about which you pivot, your bridge distance, is nearly as important.

Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your perspective, if you're looking for something MORE than what's described in that post I think you're going to be disappointed. Sure there'll be a lot of diagrams & descriptions, etc. But the crux of what is going on is in that post, imo.

So how can this possibly be helpful?

Three ways, I think.

(1) it gets you to aim. I think a significant problem is with players' heads and hearts occupied by other things, AIMING frequently gets inadequate attention.

(2) It gets you to approach each angled shot from the same INITIAL perspective. I think this might be very helpful.

(3) It gets you to bring the stick in from the side. I think if your stick is nearly in line with the shot when you're trying to aim, it tends to throw you off. Bringing the stick in from the side allows you to find the line without the stick.

From here, it doesn't really matter if you place your bridge hand and do a little pivot or just place your bridge hand with the stick aligned. The important part is you're placing your bridge hand on the line you just determined.

Mike,

Good post. CTE is not the "silver bullet" or panacea it is sometimes marketed to be, but it can help some people. This can probably be said for any aiming system. FYI, another good summary (from Colin Colenso) of benefits of CTE and other align-and-pivot systems, can be found here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#benefits​

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

That's an unfair criticism. Patrick doesn't sugar coat things, but he's a model of fair, objective, and unbiased around here.

He comes down on unsupported claims, as he should.

I agree 100%. I think PJ is the best choice possible. I would trust him to have a totally open mind with Stan. I would also trust him to ask and try to get answers to all of the important questions. I hope PJ can take Stan up on his offer and provide the rest of us with a truthful and unbiased explanation and evaluation of Stan's version of CTE.

Regards,
Dave

 

[GetMeThere]

Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your perspective, if you're looking for something MORE than what's described in that post I think you're going to be disappointed. Sure there'll be a lot of diagrams & descriptions, etc. But the crux of what is going on is in that post, imo.

So how can this possibly be helpful?

Three ways, I think.

(1) it gets you to aim. I think a significant problem is with players' heads and hearts occupied by other things, AIMING frequently gets inadequate attention.

(2) It gets you to approach each angled shot from the same INITIAL perspective. I think this might be very helpful.

(3) It gets you to bring the stick in from the side. I think if your stick is nearly in line with the shot when you're trying to aim, it tends to throw you off. Bringing the stick in from the side allows you to find the line without the stick.

From here, it doesn't really matter if you place your bridge hand and do a little pivot or just place your bridge hand with the stick aligned. The important part is you're placing your bridge hand on the line you just determined.

When I learned to play I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW OR INTUIT THE GHOST BALL SYSTEM!

How did I learn? It was surely obvious that the greater the angle of the shot, the thinner you had to cut the ball. I simply developed a "feel" for "how much" to cut the ball in different shots. Then, if you play enough, and if you really consciously and methodically work hard at that "feeling estimation," you learn the shots.

I'm convinced that's the way most decent players of the day probably learned shot making. Then perhaps, after they probably learned enough to make shots well, they picked up a book and learned about GB, or Crane's arrow, or Mosconi's parallel lines, etc., and acquired a more solid foundation than just feel.

I'm also convinced that getting a knowledge of the simple geometry involved in shot-making and caroms, etc., as presented by someone like Dr. Dave, can enhance the "feel method" by LIGHT YEARS--and I wish I had access to info like Dr. Dave provides, way back then. It surely also would have been nice to have known and considered the implications of the calculations I showed in the first post of this thread--but back then one would have actually needed to sit down with a slide rule (or a table of trig values--remember those days??) and plenty of paper in order to compile such a table.

But I have to say that I'm NOT CONVINCED that putting a bunch of mumbo-jumbo between someone who really wants to learn, and the basic information of where OBs need to be hit to pocket them, is going to be a positive influence on people.

And in any case, it can only be proper and positive to call out mumbo-jumbo for what it is. People move forward (in life, or on particular topics) by learning and clarifying--not by putting nonsense between themselves and reality.

It's not enough to say that CTE may "get people aiming." (If it never occurs to you that you have to "aim" in some way, then pool probably isn't for you!).

If someone is going to claim they offer an "aiming system," then they should at least be able to demonstrate how it helps one aim by a technique more sophisticated and deterministic than "greater angles of cut require thinner cuts." No CTE advocate has so far demonstrated that.

 

[GetMeThere]

I agree 100%. I think PJ is the best choice possible. I would trust him to have a totally open mind with Stan. I would also trust him to ask and try to get answers to all of the important questions. I hope PJ can take Stan up on his offer and provide the rest of us with a truthful and unbiased explanation and evaluation of Stan's version of CTE.

Regards,
Dave

Yeah.

But OH GOD, if he came back and spoke vaguely about it I'd literally RUN FOR THE HILLS! The powers of "cults" have mysterious effects

I think a problem here has been that people don't want to hurt the feelings of otherwise nice people. Everything everyone has said suggests that old Hal is probably a very nice guy. I'm sure Randy and Stan and Spidey and JB are probably nice guys. Maybe it's not so nice to have to say that a nice guy, who tries to help people, and who maybe makes their living off teaching people (and who provides useful teaching in other areas), is REALLY WEAK in this one area.

As much as I've raged on this thread, I'm not so sure that even I would want to do it...

The implications of the decade-long vagueness and apparent inability to even HINT at the veracity of CTE are...very clear and very powerful. So clear and powerful that the only way an advocate could possibly overcome them would be to give even ONE EXAMPLE of the geometric basis for ONE CTE SETUP on ONE SHOT, right here, for the world to see!

 

[stan shuffett]

PJ,

I will explain "precise" to you and show you how to cheat a pocket even if it's just by a tick or 2.

Obviously, you have a keen interest in all of this CTE stuff and I am sure that your aim is beyond your own facts. I want you to have my facts!

Give me a call and we'll set up a lesson for you at no charge. Also,
you'll receive a DVD at no charge. You will be armed with not just DVD info but the totality of a 6 hour lesson which is superior to video instruction.

Also, while you're here, Landon and I will play you some and do some explanations as we play........at your request.

My wife is a great cook...so, we'll eat good, too.

Stan

PJ,

Maybe you would have accepted my offer, maybe not. Perhaps my post was too hasty and I did not think it through. Let's just say that I truly want to answer your questions and my DVD should satisfy what you need to know. My DVD will be out in a few weeks. Please accept my apology for the offer and then the change of mind. Thanks for your understanding.

Stan

 

[mantis99]

I fail to understand why the people that know and understand CTE are being pulled into this thread. iYou are talking to people who are going argue and disagree with you no matter what you say. There is no foundation for the system from a geometrical stand point yet established, so there arguments are based simply off of what they think they understand regarding CTE. Until there is a way to quantifiably explain it, or a straight forward demonstration of the system working, then you are just spinning your wheels. Most of the people argung against CTE have been doing so vehemently for yrs. Let Stan get his video out, let people try it, and then people can believe it or not for themselves. Arguing a theoretical construct with people bias against it and not enough info to correctly prove it is like trying to answer what 4 + a =. It won't work. Do yourselves a favor and ignore these threads for now.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

PJ,

I will explain "precise" to you and show you how to cheat a pocket even if it's just by a tick or 2.

After posting that question I realized what you mean by "center pocket system" - you mean it doesn't rely on the pockets being bigger than the balls. Sorry for the misinterpretation.

Obviously, you have a keen interest in all of this CTE stuff and I am sure that your aim is beyond your own facts. I want you to have my facts!

Give me a call and we'll set up a lesson for you at no charge. Also,
you'll receive a DVD at no charge. You will be armed with not just DVD info but the totality of a 6 hour lesson which is superior to video instruction.

Also, while you're here, Landon and I will play you some and do some explanations as we play........at your request.

My wife is a great cook...so, we'll eat good, too.

Stan

That's a great offer, Stan, and I'd definitely take you up on it if I was anywhere near you. Instead, how about if you send me the DVD (I'll PM you my address if you agree), and your phone number so I can call you with any questions, and I'll review it here on AzB as fairly as I know how.

I'll tell you my prejudices up front: I doubt that the system can really be "systematically exact" and easy to use at the same time, but I'm open to being convinced otherwise. However, I believe it's probably useful to many regardless of whether or not it's "exact", basically as Mike Page said - maybe you'll show me some other ways too.

In addition to a fair review, I'll promise this: if there's anything in your system that I think is helpful to me (I'm not a system player) I'll pay for it.

Any chance you could include one of your wife's meals in the package?

pj <- can be bought
chgo

EDIT: Oops, I just saw this later post from you, Stan:

PJ,

Maybe you would have accepted my offer, maybe not. Perhaps my post was too hasty and I did not think it through. Let's just say that I truly want to answer your questions and my DVD should satisfy what you need to know. My DVD will be out in a few weeks. Please accept my apology for the offer and then the change of mind. Thanks for your understanding.

Stan

OK. I doubt that I'll buy the DVD, because it's not what I'm looking for to help my own game. Best of luck with it.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Me to Mike:
What do you think is the usefulness of believing it's not just what you describe? Why do CTE users vehemently deny the obvious truth of this?

Mikjary:
PJ,

Mike's comments are an absolute truth

I agree Mike's right on with his comments. I'm asking sincerely for his further thoughts about that; not trying to challenge anything he said.

pj
chgo

 

[cookie man]

Why not make a video of just ONE POCKETED SHOT (that isn't straight in, or at "15, 30, or 45" degrees), showing EXACTLY, step by step, each move, which finally results in an alignment of cue and CB that point where a correct shot would need to be?

Of ALL the videos out there, I've NEVER SEEN SUCH A THING. (JB has explicitly stated that his videos are NOT demonstrating that, for example). Please provide a link, btw, if you know of such a video already available.

The video should include descriptions of HOW and WHY certain pivots and adjustments are made as determined in CTE, and how their EXTENT is arrived at by the use of CTE.

A video that shows: "edge alignment," "a pivot," and BANG, the shot goes in, WILL NOT QUALIFY.

I'll play along, you want ONE POCKETED SHOT, or do you want descriptions of how and why, or a video that shows everything, wait THAT WILL NOT QUALIFY. I'm as confused by your posts as you are in making them.

 

[lfigueroa]

After posting that question I realized what you mean by "center pocket system" - you mean it doesn't rely on the pockets being bigger than the balls. Sorry for the misinterpretation.


That's a great offer, Stan, and I'd definitely take you up on it if I was anywhere near you. Instead, how about if you send me the DVD (I'll PM you my address if you agree), and your phone number so I can call you with any questions, and I'll review it here on AzB as fairly as I know how.

I'll tell you my prejudices up front: I doubt that the system can really be "systematically exact" and easy to use at the same time, but I'm open to being convinced otherwise. However, I believe it's probably useful to many regardless of whether or not it's "exact", basically as Mike Page said - maybe you'll show me some other ways too.

In addition to a fair review, I'll promise this: if there's anything in your system that I think is helpful to me (I'm not a system player) I'll pay for it.

Any chance you could include one of your wife's meals in the package?

pj <- can be bought
chgo

EDIT: Oops, I just saw this later post from you, Stan:

OK. I doubt that I'll buy the DVD, because it's not what I'm looking for to help my own game. Best of luck with it.

pj
chgo

er, what happen here?

I thought the offer to PJ was exactly the right call on Stan's part ("Keep your friends close, your enemies closer.") Very Sun-tzu (or at least very Don Corleone). I think Pat is the perfect person for an objective review -- unless that's not what you really want...

I don't understand why, seemingly, Stan is now reneging, since PJ accepted the proffer of the DVD. Certainly it can't be that you need personal, in-person, one-on-one instruction (and a home cooked meal from da wife) to understand it all, Alfie

Can someone please splain?

Lou Figueroa

 

[stan shuffett]

er, what happen here?

I thought the offer to PJ was exactly the right call on Stan's part ("Keep your friends close, your enemies closer.") Very Sun-tzu (or at least very Don Corleone). I think Pat is the perfect person for an objective review -- unless that's not what you really want...

I don't understand why, seemingly, Stan is now reneging, since PJ accepted the proffer of the DVD. Certainly it can't be that you need personal, in-person, one-on-one instruction (and a home cooked meal from da wife) to understand it all, Alfie

Can someone please splain?

Lou Figueroa

Lou,

The explanation is simple. I came in this morning from an Indy tourney and had been up in excess of 24 hours and made the post. At that time I felt that the best way to convey info to Pat was 1 to 1.

The post started to create more attention that I had anticipated, so I nipped it and whole-heartedly believe it was the right thing to do. I am full up with lessons this week and do not need any extra on my mind.

As it turned out Pat would not have made the trip anyway.

I do apologize for my initial post. Nothing personal toward Pat in any way.

Stan

 

[GetMeThere]

er, what happen here?

I thought the offer to PJ was exactly the right call on Stan's part ("Keep your friends close, your enemies closer.") Very Sun-tzu (or at least very Don Corleone). I think Pat is the perfect person for an objective review -- unless that's not what you really want...

I don't understand why, seemingly, Stan is now reneging, since PJ accepted the proffer of the DVD. Certainly it can't be that you need personal, in-person, one-on-one instruction (and a home cooked meal from da wife) to understand it all, Alfie

Can someone please splain?

Lou Figueroa

I'm reluctant to touch this one....

but it doesn't make the reneger look very good....

I'd accept a substitute! I vote for Dr. Dave, Lou, Mike Page....

Anyone else? I would think the difficult part would be getting anyone to accept the invitation--even I don't REALLY want to have to DIRECTLY criticize someone's earnest work (which is always why I'd rather hash it out here, on theoretical grounds). The odds seem VERY high that there's nothing substantial behind the CTE hype. Maybe Stan is looking at his work for the first time from the perspective of a critic, and is losing some steam....

I had originally made up my mind POSITIVELY NOT to buy this DVD. I wouldn't want to put money in someone's pocket who I thought wasn't trying 100% to be aboveboard and fully forthcoming about their product.

Now I'm thinking maybe I WILL pick up a copy and offer a review here...if an objective third-party reviewer isn't given a chance first.

 

[stan shuffett]

er, what happen here?

I thought the offer to PJ was exactly the right call on Stan's part ("Keep your friends close, your enemies closer.") Very Sun-tzu (or at least very Don Corleone). I think Pat is the perfect person for an objective review -- unless that's not what you really want...

I don't understand why, seemingly, Stan is now reneging, since PJ accepted the proffer of the DVD. Certainly it can't be that you need personal, in-person, one-on-one instruction (and a home cooked meal from da wife) to understand it all, Alfie

Can someone please splain?

Lou Figueroa

I am sure most anyone would accept the offer of a free DVD. My intent was to have a 1 to 1 session which is always superior to video. My lessons for CTE/PRO ONE are 5 hours and the DVD is close to 90 minutes. The DVD covers content very well but obviously there is no personal feedback and observation on my part. An advantage of the video will be that it can be watched over and over until concepts are understood.

Stan