Couple observations.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/misc.php?do=whoposted&t=419215
English has a 3:1 post count against his next closest rival in this thread, and from what I gather isn't a fan of CTE.
Not sure why banning anybody is a necessity, does this forum not have an ignore feature? I'm about to go look for it because I've had enough of this English fellow.
Cheers!
Blaine, the ignore feature might work if the guy made a normal amount of posts, but he deliberately hijacks every thread by relentlessly injecting his off-topic and inappropriate remarks over and over again. EVERY thread he gets on gets derailed within a few comments, and all subsequent attempts to bring the conversation back around get met with an accelerated posting rate from the guy until there is no hope of ever getting back on topic.
Take this very thread, which he started to derail on the very first page:
I am not one that is against aiming methods. I very quickly went from ghost ball to equal & opposite fractional over lap & have used & still sometimes do use the shadows method & I use TOI with CTC, CTE, & C to the 1/4 line.
That said...
Do you understand that there is no sufficient 'system' that does not require one's subjective analysis, interpretations, & final decisions as to the actual final shot line?
Otherwise the 'system' would need 75 to 90 indicators & even then it would still involve the shooter to subjectively make the decision as to which one would be applicable to any given shot.
Hence there really is no real system, but merely a method of implementing one's own individual subjectively TIME learned pictures or 'perceptions' of the shots at hand.
If one wants to call one's own subjectively time learned pictures or 'perceptions' their 'visual intelligence', then that's fine, but we should be clear as to exactly what that 'visual intelligence' actually & truly is.
Would you agree?
If not, then we will just have to disagree & that's fine.
Best Wishes for You & Yours.
Then this:
But here is where matters can get started down the toilet bowl.
Your words the "the system works".
Did you not just a few short posts ago say that you were pretty sure we were in agreement?
Well I basically said that there really is no sufficient 'system' but merely methods to implement one's subjective interpretations, analysis, & decisions.
If "the system works", How does it work? What is there in the 'system" that tells the shooter where the final cue line is for each individual shot?
Why & how does "the system work"?
I hope you can see how loose lips sink ships, so to speak. Language is all that we have & certain language can be very suggestive.
Also did John take an extensive good look at it or did he just allow you to convince him that the method has benefited you... so therefore "the system works"?
Ghost ball works. Is it a system? Or is it a method?
I hope you can see & understand my points.
Best Wishes.
And another irrelevant post to make the same point he has made constantly on other threads he has destroyed:
Well, that's fine.
But..
If they mean the same thing to you, then I would suggest not using the term system as it has implications that the term method does not have.
I can understand why you would not want John taking an intense look unless he is ready to do so.
Perhaps you could "communicate" it here as you communicated it to him to maybe get some here to have a better understanding of what made him change his mind.
Or was it just that he had no good regard for ANY aiming method & now considers ALL methods as 'okay'?
Cheers to You Too. I'm sitting my 2 year old Grandson & may have a glass when his Parents get home.:wink:
Up to this point, I just let it ride, attempting to find common ground between us with a response about his grandkids. At that point he stepped on the gas with the "objectivity" thing:
ATC,
Since you have 'spoken' directly to me, I will respond.
Since you have already admitted that to you it is not an objective aiming system, your characterizations of it seem rational.
I think perhaps you should do a bit of research & know the assertions & descriptions that have been made about & assigned to it.
Like earlier when the term system was used. That word along with other assertions has implications that can be rather misleading.
I think you have a common sense understanding of just what it is.
Others think it is more & portray it as more & that can be rather misleading.
If all that was said about it is what you've said here then there probably never would have been any 'objections' made of which I am a relative rookie.
I was pulled in by the 'objective' assertion. The enticement of that assertion made me lose sight of reality for a brief time in hope that the assertion might be true. I rather quickly came back to recognize the reality of the situation.
I even suspended my final 'self judgement' in hope that there might be some form of revelation with the then upcoming new Pro 1 DVD as it was sort of implied.
But... I then I saw Stan's 5 shot perception video & I realized based on that there would NOT be any such revelations forth coming.
There can not be any truly objective aiming 'system' in a form that can be utilized by any normal human being.
The reality is that ALL methods require the time spent to build a subjective reference file, based on what ever means are being used to 'define' a set of base shots along with the variances off of those base reference shots.
When I say variances, I do not necessarily mean conscious adjustments of any specific nature.
When a shot does not fit a fractional 1/2 ball alignment & one is using fractional aiming, one makes some sort of adjustment in order to pocket the ball...
BECAUSE... the 1/2 ball alignment alone will NOT pocket the ball.
That adjustment may or may not be a conscious one. It may be one made subconsciously based on the subjectively leaned pictures or perceptions garnered over time of the trial & error & successes & failures when utilizing the method.
Sorry, I am not trying to convince you or any of the other 'normal' crowd.
I'm just throwing out some food for thought in regards to the reality of the 'aiming' situation.
Best 2 Ya,
Rick
PS1 If one wants to call that subjectively & experience based learning & building of that data base their "CTE visual intelligence", that's fine...but we all should know exactly what that factually & truly is.
PS2 I would NOT have made this post if you had not specifically referred to me implying that I think it is said to be something that it is not. My ONLY desire is to make matters clear so that the chance of others being 'unintentionally' misled is reduced. Language is all that we have to communicate ideas, etc. & it can at times be challenging to be precise so as to not mis-communicate & not cause others to be misled.
At which point I told him to stop hijacking my thread because his posts were not at all in keeping with the spirit of the thread that I had started, to which he replied:
I would apologize if I had done anything wrong... but I have not.
This thread that you started (but is not yours) is about a world class player that was of the opinion that "aiming methods" were of no real value. That was the opinion of a Very Good World Class Player.
I am not, & never have been of that opinion, yet I can understand how he may have been of that opinion.
You've brought it to OUR, the AZB members, attention that he has now formulated a different opinion based on something that a friend of his has communicated to him.
We do not know what it was that that friend "communicated' to him, but I think it would be of interest to most who are interested in aiming methods or also to those that are of the same opinion that John was & think that aiming methods are of no real value.
There are implications made by the use of words.
I do not agree with some of those implications without certain caveats tagged along with them.
I have sort of explained them in THIS NEW thread for any NEW reader to consider however he or she determines to do so, as well that they should.
'Censorship' is usually implemented by those that have something to hide.
I know of no occasion were censorship was ever the tool of any virtuous endeavor.
When oldmanatc 'spoke' directly to me. I responded to him with an explanation in order to clarify the implications of his statements. He & I are good terms & it appears that John's Friend, bwally, & I are too as he has said that we are in basic agreement on this subject.
We ALL have no rights here, but I would certainly think that management would, at the very least, allow one to respond when 'spoken' to... or even when spoken about.
Socrates was a rather intelligent individual.
By this time, one CTE user had already been banned, and this dude was off to the races.
So, I would like to know how putting this guy on my personal ignore list could to anything to prevent the ruination of the thread I took the time to start. I don't care about the "legality" of his postings according to the strict interpretation of the rules of the forum, it's just flat out rude and destructive. He got banned for a year for doing the same thing when his arguments about the pendulum stroke vs. the piston stroke took over every thread he took part in. Same back then, people put him on ignore, but he figured out how to ruin the threads anyway.
I don't have an answer for any of this. Apparently, the owners of the site have decided to let him have his way. I have no control over that situation. It wasn't too long ago that he was threatened with a permanent ban if he posted in ANY aiming thread. Shortly after that he came on here and made an announcement that he had "spoken" to Mr. Wilson (the head mod) and it was cool for him to start posting here again. I have no idea what might have taken place during that conversation, but it's kinda scary thinking he has that much power over the mods and owners that he is allowed to run amok on thread after thread without so much as a warning.
Maybe he's the Pope?
What are we to do? Well, I guess we have to quit this place and have our pool community on Facebook, but it's not the same at all, not even close. If I want to discuss pool and get answers to questions I have, there is really no other place to visit but this site. Folks like Rick are destroying this resource for everybody, and I think it's worth any attempt to either get him reigned in (usually the mere threat of a ban is enough for most people to get the message) or removed. I'm not a fan of banning, but sometimes you gotta cut out a tumor to prevent it from becoming malignant.
