Fear of Feel

[cookie man]

If you are talking about me and what I use, then no, I don't base my correct shot line on CTE.

I use different references and visuals for different shots. I am currently experimenting with CTE to decide if I want to add CTE as one of my many references/visuals.

Why do I not use one system or aiming reference ? Because depending on the shot, I find some references and visuals work better than others.

not talking about you

 

[cookie man]

We're all still "stuck" there, cookie. It's the same old thing being said a dozen different ways - to try to find a way of saying it that you guys might understand.

It's ironic to me that you guys can't understand the simple geometry being described to you, but think you understand perfectly the "language from another dimension" that supposedly describes CTE.

pj <- yeah, I know... we're the ones who don't understand...
chgo

Do you think that there is any particular shot that can be made with cte?

 

[cookie man]

If you are sincere & would like an explanation I would need you to be a bit more specific so as to make a bit more 'sure' that we're referring to the same things.

But I don't think I could explain it any better that what PJ & Straightpool__99 have already done so I would probably refer you to their explanations.

you said it, what are YOU talking about

 

[cookie man]

Thats not what he or I said.

Have you taken lessons from someone else with regards to putting words into the mouths of others to cause distortions.

You've just shown to me that you don't seem to be sincere with any of this.

You're just seem to be taking a stroll down the Troll Turnpike.

This is what you posted about your friend "He basically uses CTE as a check for certain shots that he's not sure about with his main method. He said that sometimes CTE will show him that his main method is correct because it does not match up to CTE & other times it will show him that it is correct because it does match up with CTE. "
Sounds like he's checking his way against CTE to make sure he's lined up right. You wrote it.

 

[cookie man]

There is no need for any experiment.

That is basic geometry & the actual physics of the situation.

That's one of your problems, opinions from behind the keyboard.

 

[cookie man]

If you are sincere & would like an explanation I would need you to be a bit more specific so as to make a bit more 'sure' that we're referring to the same things.

But I don't think I could explain it any better that what PJ & Straightpool__99 have already done so I would probably refer you to their explanations.

This is what you said " If you move off from seeing the two lines simultaneously you are then seeing them from a different perspective & will yes have a different perception of them but that perception is no longer objective but has become subjective as the defining guidelines that 'made' them 'objective' have been lost. "
So which perception was objective?

 

[ENGLISH!]

...He basically uses CTE as a check for certain shots that he's not sure about with his main method. He said that sometimes CTE will show him that his main method is correct because it does not match up to CTE & other times it will show him that it is correct because it does match up with CTE. He said that he can do it that way because he is familiar with where the holes are....

For you Cookie.

 

[cookie man]

We're all still "stuck" there, cookie. It's the same old thing being said a dozen different ways - to try to find a way of saying it that you guys might understand.

It's ironic to me that you guys can't understand the simple geometry being described to you, but think you understand perfectly the "language from another dimension" that supposedly describes CTE.

pj <- yeah, I know... we're the ones who don't understand...
chgo

Obviously it's not about geometry since no one has figured that part out,lol.

 

[cookie man]

...He basically uses CTE as a check for certain shots that he's not sure about with his main method. He said that sometimes CTE will show him that his main method is correct because it does not match up to CTE & other times it will show him that it is correct because it does match up with CTE. He said that he can do it that way because he is familiar with where the holes are....

For you Cookie.

Right, so CTE is his foolproof method to check his against

 

[ENGLISH!]

This is what you said " If you move off from seeing the two lines simultaneously you are then seeing them from a different perspective & will yes have a different perception of them but that perception is no longer objective but has become subjective as the defining guidelines that 'made' them 'objective' have been lost. "
So which perception was objective?

If you can not follow that I have no faith in me conveying the meaning to you in an any other description.

This seems to be the basis of the whole disagreement.

There seems to be a very basic & somewhat 'widespread' non understanding of the basic difference between what is objective & what is a subjective perception.

There can be no fruitful discussion or debate when a mutual meaning of basic terms can not even be had from which to form a basic foundation for further discussion.

To do so will only result in further non understanding & misunderstanding.

I think that very well may be the initial reason that CTE has gone down the road that it has gone here on AZB.

Best 2 All,
Rick

 

[BlueCollarBar]

If you guys spent half the time at the table as you do on here knocking other people's methods and style of play you would all be pro. All of you going back and forth on this crap are terrible for the game of pool and should be ashamed of yourselves. I can't imagine what a new player trying to learn the game would think if they came here trying to acquire knowledge and they came across this crap. Who would want to be apart of the pool world if they were exposed to your ridiculous bickering over CTE and other aiming systems?

Maybe try being a positive and constructive example for those new players and youth that are coming into the game that you love so much. Help it flourish and grow by being a positive and helpful influence instead of negative has beens or never will bes. It's easy to be an asshole and know it all from behind a keyboard but it's even easier to be positive and encouraging.

Grow up.

 

[cookie man]

If you can not follow that I have no faith in me conveying the meaning to you in an any other description.

This seems to be the basis of the whole disagreement.

There seems to be a very basic & somewhat 'widespread' non understanding of the basic difference between what is objective & what is a subjective perception.

There can be no fruitful discussion or debate when a mutual meaning of basic terms can not even be had from which to form a basic foundation for further discussion.

To do so will only result in further non understanding & misunderstanding.

I think that very well may be the initial reason that CTE has gone down the road that it has gone here on AZB.

Best 2 All,
Rick

Are there any shots in your opinion that have an objective perception with cte?

 

[ENGLISH!]

Right, so CTE is his foolproof method to check his against

You certainly seem to have learned from another to put your words into the mouth of another.

That is not, & is a very far cry from, what he said.

I do not mean this as derogatory, but you are either extremely disingenuous or you have some issues with the English language.

I'm not sure which it is but I would guess it is the 1st.

Best 2 You, Cookie.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Are there any shots in your opinion that have an objective perception with cte?

You're mixing the words objective & perception. Given the 'arena', I would have to question what you mean by that misnomer.

I have already stated (many times) that with a the small caveat that the ABC, center, edge, 'markers' are not truly objective by strict definition but for the sake of discussion they are discernible enough to be considered as 'objective', with that caveat, then yes there are shots that could be considered 'objective' but as Patrick pointed out, deciding when they would apply would still be subjective intuition based.

 

[Straightpool_99]

..........

 

[Banks]

This is what you posted about your friend "He basically uses CTE as a check for certain shots that he's not sure about with his main method. He said that sometimes CTE will show him that his main method is correct because it does not match up to CTE & other times it will show him that it is correct because it does match up with CTE. "
Sounds like he's checking his way against CTE to make sure he's lined up right. You wrote it.

You're intentionally skipping over the part where he checks against cte to find the line because cte is off.

In the words of a troll, "lol............."

 

[cookie man]

You're intentionally skipping over the part where he checks against cte to find the line because cte is off.

In the words of a troll, "lol............."

lol.......... where did u get that from, can't come up with your own lines i see

 

[8pack]

Except he's not speaking the truth, and neither are you by defending his false accusations. How would you know if he's speaking the truth or not when neither one of you even understand the system enough to know? Simply, you can't.

I do understand the system and even more what needs to happen to make it work.
Check this video out, pay attention to Stans body on his line ups. Its obvious he is not in the same position on both shots,(but he say's he is) and he's creating(different cut angles) this on a surface that isn't a 2x1 surface . Looks like you have done nothing but fool yourself into playing better....I guess. If its working keep at it.:wink:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIFI6K_nNhE

 

[cookie man]

You're mixing the words objective & perception. Given the 'arena', I would have to question what you mean by that misnomer.

I have already stated (many times) that with a the small caveat that the ABC, center, edge, 'markers' are not truly objective by strict definition but for the sake of discussion they are discernible enough to be considered as 'objective', with that caveat, then yes there are shots that could be considered 'objective' but as Patrick pointed out, deciding when they would apply would still be subjective intuition based.

Do you think any of the famous 5 shots are objective?

 

[ENGLISH!]

Do you think any of the famous 5 shots are objective?

Cookie,

Neil often refuses to answer such questions & most always says that the asker is just trolling (trawling) for a word trap to nit pick.

Is that what you're doing?

You're hurting my teeth pulling them out one by one.

If you have a point why don't you just simply state it & knock all of my teeth out with the one punch.

But... I'll play along a bit longer, but please make your statement & hopefully a valid point.

Shot #1 is very close to a 15* degree shot & given the exact positioning of the balls & the caveat of the visual 'markers' not being 'objective' by strict definition but since they are discernable by most & could be considered 'objective' for discussion purposes & given the fact, like PJ pointed out, that the decision of when it would be the shot is still base on subjective intuition, then I'd say that it could be considered to be 'objective'.

Now what?