I don't think anyone has ever made it clear, logically, how the five shot scenario is supposed to work without subconscious adjustments. And really, it shoulnd't be a problem for the aiming system as such, since people are being very successful with it. The problem is the obviously logically impossible claim that no such adjustments take place. CTE's strong point is the fixed relationship between the eyes and the cueball/object ball parts, but in this case it is also the downfall of some of it's claims, because no matter what gymnastics you do, you end up with the same relationships in the outlined scenario. For a cueball and object ball distance there is only one head position from which CTE/edge to A can be seen (this is the basis of all CTE aiming). This head postion is the same for the 5 shots mentioned (logically indisputable). How you arrive at this postion is immaterial (for the aiming). Of course as far as delivering a straight stroke, it is of vital importance, but this is not what we are discussing. If you tilt your head or vary the distances etc, then a new relationship is found. Unless the light beams somehow bend for you, this cannot be refuted. The difference has got be caused by something else.
I don't understand how you are coming up with your conclusions. You say that what I said isn't logical, but I feel that what you are saying isn't logical. Let me try it a different way so maybe you can understand the difference.
Place an ob in the dead center of the table. Now place the cb at the head spot of the table. Locate the edge of the cb to the edge of the ob. That gives you a finite spot on the ob.
Now, move the cb to the side pocket and do the same thing with it. You now have a different finite spot on the ob as the edge point.
That example was rather extreme, but it shows that as you move the cb, the edge point of the ob changes. Hopefully, we agree so far.
Now, with the ob still in center table. CB on the head spot again. Look at the cb/ob center to center and you will again have a finite edge point. Now, we want to bank the ob off the short rail to the far right corner pocket. To do that, you have to shift your aim line to the left of the ob. Agreed so far I hope. When you shift your alignment to the two balls, your body shifts (or at least should shift) with your cue.
As your body shifts over a little bit, you can now see a little more of one side of the ob, and a little less of the other side of the ob. Your edges have just changed position from where they were looking straight down the centers of the two balls. If you kept shifting, eventually you would get all the way around the ob.
So, you see, the edges do not remain the same. You are still looking at the edge of the ob, but as you shift your body over, the point that was the edge previously is no longer the edge.
You are still using center to edge and edge to A,B or C, but the actual point on the ob and the cb changes. Same visuals, but different results due to different perspective of the shot.
If you keep the same perspective on the shots, you will find that you will cut the nearest to the rail ball, and then bank the second from the rail ball. (on the 5 shot test) Your perspective has to change. Without the proper perspective, the system won't work, and neither will any other system.
