Ok. That makes sense. The only thing is, the fractional aim no longer has to be based on guesswork. It can be determined very accurately. I can't comment on the CTE portion of the video because I only know as far as the perception. But I have never said it doesn't work, only asked too many why or how questions about it. But maybe my questions were too probing, like I once asked what the exact angle range was for each perception. I'll admit that I tend to focus on details and get a little compulsive with over-analyzing things. Anyhow, I'm good with waiting and buying the book to maybe get the rest of it understood. Maybe I'll never understand it, and that's ok also.
I think the disconnect here Bryan is the perception part of it. I can set up shots with very different angles and make them all aiming at the same thing by varying my perception only slightly.
It's how I shoot in straight shots. I can aim at the exact same thing and pivot and make anything from straight in to about 10 degrees or so just by letting my head float around naturally.
If you aim everything like a rifle (eye, tip, cb, aim point all in a straight line) and try to shift back to that perception when you pivot then you lose the flexibility that the perception shift gives you.
Stan talks about in one of his videos about how you can pivot without moving your head (i.e. not re-aligning your aim) and the center of the cue looks like it is aimed at the contact point.
In reality the perception is off slightly and the cue is aimed at the aim point.
But that perception difference gives you the correct aim point without knowing the correct aim point if you can see the contact point. Like on almost straight in shots.
With starting at the fractional points it works similarly. If you align and aim for the 3/4 ball hit and then pivot - without moving your head - to the center of the CB it will look like the cue is aimed at the CP but it really is aimed at the correct aim spot. It's a combination of deflection and perception delta that makes the shot from there.
It's not surprising that CTE does not work on paper if you don't account for the perception shift. The entire system (at least my understanding of it) is based on the relationship between the perception of the true aim point and the true aim point.
What Stan is working on now with multiple lines and falling into place - I don't really know what he's talking about yet but I can't wait to find out.