I bought Poolology

BeiberLvr

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Shite! Gimme back my money!


loljk

I just started reading it, and after a few pages in, I can already say it's worth the $6 I spent on Amazon for the e-book.

Truth be told, my understanding of fractional aiming was not as good as I thought it was. But it is now something I'll be adding to my tool box.



I would recommend to anyone.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Shite! Gimme back my money!


loljk

I just started reading it, and after a few pages in, I can already say it's worth the $6 I spent on Amazon for the e-book.

Truth be told, my understanding of fractional aiming was not as good as I thought it was. But it is now something I'll be adding to my tool box.



I would recommend to anyone.

Thanks. If you have any questions, comments, or complaints, don't hesitate to send them my way.
 

nobcitypool

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I am going to purchase it. Nothing wrong with evaluating the knowledge of different approaches. Thanks for the comment Bieber.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
I am going to purchase it. Nothing wrong with evaluating the knowledge of different approaches. Thanks for the comment Bieber.

Thank you. If you are working with CTE you might find the fractional information very handy for determining which perception category to use, or for determining whether the perception looks thick or thin. I know others say this determination is obvious, but I believe they say this because to them it is obvious because they have developed an eye for it. When the balls are farther out from the pocket, determining thick or thin isn't quite that obvious. And that's not a dig on CTE....distance negatively affects all aiming methods in regards to accuracy, allowable margin of error, and visualization.
 

jokrswylde

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I bought it yesterday. I am going to try and read it and take it to the table this weekend. I just read the first few pages, and it has already got me thinking about simply judging cuts as </> 1/2 ball cuts. Played around last night and consciously tried NOT to use ghost ball and made a lot of cut shots...
 

nobcitypool

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Thank you. If you are working with CTE you might find the fractional information very handy for determining which perception category to use, or for determining whether the perception looks thick or thin. I know others say this determination is obvious, but I believe they say this because to them it is obvious because they have developed an eye for it. When the balls are farther out from the pocket, determining thick or thin isn't quite that obvious. And that's not a dig on CTE....distance negatively affects all aiming methods in regards to accuracy, allowable margin of error, and visualization.

You should quit misleading people and trying to leverage CTE to sell your book. If your perceptual ability is such that you need to know the fractional aim every time, you're pretty much screwed regardless. Further, CTE is not fractional aiming as many have tried to tell you a hundred times. You simply cannot take a fraction and automatically derive the CTE perception from it. The fact that you keep saying things like this shows how void your knowledge of CTE is. Doesn't seem to prevent you from making some strange statements and even statements as if you do have the knowledge.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
I bought it yesterday. I am going to try and read it and take it to the table this weekend. I just read the first few pages, and it has already got me thinking about simply judging cuts as </> 1/2 ball cuts. Played around last night and consciously tried NOT to use ghost ball and made a lot of cut shots...

Cool. Thanks! I hope you find it more and more useful as you explore it.
 

Renegade_56

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
You should quit misleading people and trying to leverage CTE to sell your book. If your perceptual ability is such that you need to know the fractional aim every time, you're pretty much screwed regardless. Further, CTE is not fractional aiming as many have tried to tell you a hundred times. You simply cannot take a fraction and automatically derive the CTE perception from it. The fact that you keep saying things like this shows how void your knowledge of CTE is. Doesn't seem to prevent you from making some strange statements and even statements as if you do have the knowledge.

Absolutely true, and sadly much more common than it should be since Stan doesn't argue back. The video of Stan shooting balls in behind a curtain proves perceptions work and fraction aiming not so well. Try doing the math calculations without a pocket to count from sometime.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
You should quit misleading people and trying to leverage CTE to sell your book. If your perceptual ability is such that you need to know the fractional aim every time, you're pretty much screwed regardless. Further, CTE is not fractional aiming as many have tried to tell you a hundred times. You simply cannot take a fraction and automatically derive the CTE perception from it. The fact that you keep saying things like this shows how void your knowledge of CTE is. Doesn't seem to prevent you from making some strange statements and even statements as if you do have the knowledge.

I have had numerous players tell me that they use fractions or contact point aiming to double-check their CTE shot solutions. For open minded players that just want to improve, regardless of what system they may or may not use, it's a good tool and good advice. A popular CTE guy on YouTube says to use ghostball to double check. Stan uses a fractional 1/2 ball hit in a few videos to show how you can double-check your CTE CCB solution. Yet you troll this thread to stir trouble. I see that Dan was correct about you.

How do you know when a shot is too thin for a 15-inside? What about too thin for a 30-inside? Recognizing the shot angles, which can easily be done using a good fractional system. The traditional Quarters or 5-lines is not good for this because there's too much trial and error and guesswork. That's why it takes a while to develop consistency with it. So how am I misleading anyone here by suggesting my system can be used in conjunction with other systems, including CTE?
 
Last edited:

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Absolutely true, and sadly much more common than it should be since Stan doesn't argue back. The video of Stan shooting balls in behind a curtain proves perceptions work and fraction aiming not so well. Try doing the math calculations without a pocket to count from sometime.

Here you go.... https://youtu.be/AXvRx5XhPB0
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
Well hell, you marked the diamonds with chalk cubes, and looked under the cardboard on the first shot at the pocket, and still took 2 minutes per shot.

Lol. I couldn't see the pockets. But it doesn't matter. I think Stan's curtain trick is much more impressive also, but if course he's been working with CTE for about 12 years and was pro-caliber prior to that anyway. So I'm surely not going to try to outdo him.

Please troll elsewhere. If you have questions about Poolology or fractional aiming, please ask away.
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I have had numerous players tell me that they use fractions or contact point aiming to double-check their CTE shot solutions. For open minded players that just want to improve, regardless of what system they may or may not use, it's a good tool and good advice. A popular CTE guy on YouTube says to use ghostball to double check. Stan uses a fractional 1/2 ball hit in a few videos to show how you can double-check your CTE CCB solution. Yet you troll this thread to stir trouble. I see that Dan was correct about you.

How do you know when a shot is too thin for a 15-inside? What about too thin for a 30-inside? Recognizing the shot angles, which can easily be done using a good fractional system. The traditional Quarters or 5-lines is not good for this because there's too much trial and error and guesswork. That's why it takes a while to develop consistency with it. So how am I misleading anyone here by suggesting my system can be used in conjunction with other systems, including CTE?

"numerous players" A few weeks ago you didn't know anyone that used CTE, now you know numerous players. That's a little funny. CTE aimers have no need to double check there aim with fractions.
 

8pack

They call me 2 county !
Silver Member
I think Brian has been pretty civil about things.

Again you guys start with your bs.

As far as anything goes ,none of you got any proof of anything on how well you play.

Bunch of d players preaching to the high heavens with your nonsense. :p
 

cookie man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I think Brian has been pretty civil about things.

Again you guys start with your bs.

As far as anything goes ,none of you got any proof of anything on how well you play.

Bunch of d players preaching to the high heavens with your nonsense. :p

I finished ninth in the U S Amateurs a few years ago, what have you done?
Or for that matter, what has Brian done
 
Top