I believe this is the right answer - but we interpret its meaning differently. I interpret it this way: Because the system user believes CTE is "exact", he can stop doubting his own "instinctive" ability to learn and repeat shot alignments by feel. Removing this nagging doubt allows him to "get out of the way" of his own innate (subconscious) ability.
Everyone does not have innate subconscious ability. We all have a sort of supercomputer in our heads but it has to be programmed through experience. However there are instructions which a person can be taught and follow right away which work to provide a shortcut to repetitive trial and error learning.
You don't get it and you never will.
Let me restate this for the thousandth time.
Aiming by system allows the shooter to get on a shot that they HAVE NOT practiced a thousand times and have a very very very good chance to make it. Aiming by "feel" on a shot that the shooter has never practiced means that the typically it's a very low percentage shot for them.
This is ALL the difference. It's everything Pat. Everything.
You aim by feel?
Ok then do you want to bet $100 a shot on this same shot in different positions on the table?
http://pool.bz/P/?@2AbHm4BCxA3CCYA4DAMd3EBJl4FBil4GBjO3HBKO4IAMA1PHFV2UbHm2UbCJ1kHFV2kaqV@
That would be all methods.
Not true.
Right. And this is where systems that claim to eliminate "feel" come in.
And the system do eliminate it for all practical purposes.
Still, most shooters learn to shoot "by feel" with complete confidence and reliability.
No, actually they don't shoot with complete confidence and reliability. If they did then there wouldn't be so much interest in these methods.
My purpose is to show what kind of system CTE is, not to "object to" its inexactness. All systems are inexact.
Who made you the guy who gets to show what "kind" of systems any system is? All systems are not inexact. You simply don't know how to apply it if you are not getting exact results.
You use words like "fidgeting and guessing", not me. I suppose you're trying to belittle other methods in comparison.
Not belittling, describing what I observe. I have a bunch of videos up, why don't you tell me WHERE in any shot on the videos that I am using "feel" to shoot with. Is is ok if I put up a video of your technique, aiming by feel as you describe it, and let people comment on it?
Yes, that's what I'm saying (although I think "guessing" is your word intended to cast aspersion).
Guessing is feel Pat. Either you KNOW something or you don't. If you don't then you feel something when it's an intangible thing. Aiming is very tangible. How do you describe your personal method of getting down and wiggling before you settle on a line? Why do you do this?
If it's "simply not true", then you can simply show how. That's the nature of clear system steps: they're clear.
Already done. The steps are clear. Just like with the jump cue I can show anyone how to do it in a few easy steps. However when they pick up the cue that does not mean that they can do it the way I do. Sometimes I have to completely alter their stroke to repair it before they can apply the EASY steps. Does that mean my steps to jump a ball are wrong? No, it means that the shooter has to learn to recognize their own bad habits and correct them BEFORE they can then get consistent on the jump shot.
Sure, and the same is true of CTE, other fractional systems, and shooting by feel.
Right, except that knowledge+practice trumps "feel" + practice. That's been true in EVERY sport in the world. Even the spelling bees are won by people who use systems to remember how to spell words. People who simply try to memorize every word by rote will never win a modern spelling bee. By the same token someone who tries to memorize every possible shot will find themselves lost more than they want to.
Same to you.
pj
chgo
Not quite. Unlike you I have proof where you don't.
Last edited: