I have thought about it. There are differences:
Good points and if I may respond objectively...
1) CTE was first brought on the scene by Hal Houle who specifically stated he wanted it to be FREE to the world--who gave it away to anyone who asked.
As I said before, Hal's stuff is free and understandable if you take the time to work with what he is willing to show you. He did occasionally give out incomplete instructions that frustrated many, but at the same time piqued the curiousity of others who were willing to put out an extra effort until they were successful. His free instructions to most were a test to see who would genuinely work at them and those who would fail due to lack of effort. This sounds like a harsh picture of Hal, but at the same time it is a glowing testament to his uncoddling wisdom. If you want to eat in this world, you have to work. We've become a microwaveable society and hard work is for the other guy of limited talent and intellect. It's not that Cte is hard to learn. On the contrary, I showed my teenaged son who plays once a month with me and he got it in a half hour or so.
2) Some still arguing the point CONFERRED with Hal fifteen years ago, and came away saying it was the BALONEY then as it is now. Hal Houle's near MANIACAL sounding posts are still available for all to read. They're nonsense. Nothing has been said about them since to imply they don't REMAIN anything but nonsense.
Again, to the Cte educated these posts are not cryptic. Time marches on and old news is still old news. I live in the here and now. This is not to ridicule those efforts by others as I felt their frustrations in my own quest, but sometimes negative pressure and poetic license create fierce defensive postures. Have you ever put your foot in your mouth (outside of a yoga setting)? I know I have and I can't take those words back. It happens. I have no control of past events and I'm not making excuses for them now. All I know is I have never been asked to write a speech for the President, but I do understand Hal's technical points.
He is bringing a previously thought outrageous claim of using the balls themselves to aim with instead of direct aiming lines to the pockets. He uses perspective ratios and the CB/OB relationship to find a target in space. He figured out the points to use on the OB and found they were consistent as contact points. The user is asked to maintain their relationship to this "dance" by maintaining a consistent pivot and bridge length, unique to each individual. Hence, the difficulty in a cookie cutter one size fits all scenario. With practice you can do just about anything if you try in all aspects of pool and life.
3) Advocates are NOT silent on the issue. They DEMAND others believe the veracity of their claims. When asked, they DON'T SAY "Well, it's a secret." They say "The information is OUT THERE and AVAILABLE" but.....well, they're not just going to spoon feed it (lovely that John Barton's farewell post in this thread includes another spoon-feeding reference).
This is the same PITA argument I heard when I first started on my search. Frustrating, but you know what? It's the truth and I got past it. You should, too.
4) There still is NO SUBSTANTIAL INFORMATION from which one could get some hints of PRINCIPLES of CTE. The atomic bomb was one of the largest secret projects undertaken; yet even CHILDREN understand the basic principles upon which it is based. Substantial ideas about something can be put forth, and the DETAILS withheld, and in that way outsiders CAN come to reason that the idea has substance, without being able to use it themselves.
I would add to that first sentence the words, "for free". No amount of whining is going to change the fact that people who use the actual Hal/Stan/Spidey Cte are willing to go against their wishes of discretion. I realized this and rather than go 'round and 'round on a public forum full of squabbling and posturing I sought a way to getting the answers for myself.
5) One principle of CTE IS out in the open: It claims to provide "exact" (Stan's promotional literature about Pro-One) aiming solutions for pocketing balls by referencing relative ball position ONLY, and not pocket position (this was again confirmed by Dave Segal in a post within the last day or two). Well such a system CANNOT work--and that can be determined by the SIMPLEST analysis--probably by an intelligent and thoughtful twelve-year-old.
A system is only as exact as the user's concept of the tools needed to implement its techniques. I do not use my Skilsaw with a wood cutting blade to cut masonry. Until you tear down the wall your logic has erected in front of your face and resign yourself to explore the possibilities that could open up before you if you picked up these tools, no explanation will make sense. I mean this respectfully and honestly.
It's true many Cte advocates are lost when it comes to explaining their methods. Some say they use the CB center and others say they use the edge. Some use a half ball pivot and some say quarter ball offset and pivot. They are all doing the same thing. They are using an individualized movement that starts in different places and in varying degrees, but they end up at the correct contact point. It's still a pivot system. Their pivot system. The kids on the sandlot can all swing a bat, but is one doing it better than the next? Stan's dvd will standardize Cte and create a baseline for understanding and further discussion.
Best,
Mike