Old
  (#91)
sfleinen
14.1 & One Pocket Addict
sfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond repute
 
sfleinen's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,671
vCash: 4100
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Carmel, NY (1.5-hour north of Manhattan)
   
06-14-2019, 06:34 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by cookie man View Post
It's absolutely insane how little he knows compared to how much he thinks he knows
Simple explanation, Dave. It's called the Dunning-Kruger effect:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=mZxCuymd_3E

-Sean


"The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom." -Isaac Asimov

"They haven't got brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't think." -Eeyore, The House at Pooh Corner
  
Reply With Quote

Old
  (#92)
sfleinen
14.1 & One Pocket Addict
sfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond reputesfleinen has a reputation beyond repute
 
sfleinen's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,671
vCash: 4100
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Carmel, NY (1.5-hour north of Manhattan)
   
06-14-2019, 08:31 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by sfleinen View Post
Simple explanation, Dave. It's called the Dunning-Kruger effect:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=mZxCuymd_3E

-Sean
Dave:

Here's another video with some helpful animations to describe the Dunning-Kruger effect:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=GJz66wm95-M

-Sean


"The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom." -Isaac Asimov

"They haven't got brains, any of them, only grey fluff that's blown into their heads by mistake, and they don't think." -Eeyore, The House at Pooh Corner
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#93)
ENGLISH!
Banned
ENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,489
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jun 2012
   
06-14-2019, 10:10 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BC21 View Post
Nope. I did it exactly as instructed by Stan in videos.

After I got my visuals I moved in as straight as humanly possible to that fixed ccb. I just happened to have paid attention where my cue was pointing, which you absolutely must do when learning this system in order to visualize whether or not the "perception" is thin or thick, so you'll know which way to pivot. After that you don't look at the ob anymore. Simply align your cue 1/2 tip right or left of this perception line through ccb and then pivot to the final ccb. And I can do it on straight in shots, which is how they say one should begin. I've made other shots with it also, whenever the pivot just happens to work right without having to change the bridge length or offset for the pivot, sticking to an exact 1/2 tip pivot and 9" bridge.

Here's the thing...it's surprising how often the same (or very close to the same) angles come up when playing pool. If you roll a cb and ob across the table, the majority of the time they end up in a position where the shot angle is within 10° or so of a halfball hit. I can set an ob a couple of inches short of center table, toward the foot spot, and place the cb 2ft away from it and lined up to shoot the ob straight to a point on the long rail halfway between the 1st and 2nd diamonds from my targeted corner pocket, same end of the table. This shot requires a 5/8 hit according to the Poolology. But due to slight differences in CIT, and accounting for the allowable margin of error at the pocket, the shot can be made by aiming anywhere between a 5/8 aim and a 1/2 ball aim. Add some outside english and you can aim thicker than 5/8 too. My point is, factoring in the ability to manipulate shots by several degrees using speed or spin to affect CIT and/or SIT, and accounting for margin of error at the pocket, one can use a limited range of aiming references to pocket the majority of shots, regardless of whatever system is being used.
Brian,

Please see what I put in blue.

So... did you set your stick down on the line, & then gauge whether to shift right or left to thin or thicken?

If so, can you direct me to where Mr. Shuffett has said to do that. I have seen where once he has gotten the visual he decides while in the standing position whether it needs to be thinned of thicken. He then makes the sweep or sets the stick offset & pivots. I have not noticed him nor heard him say that you set the stick down on the line in order to determine whether it needs to be thinned or thickened while looking through CCB to see where it is aligned on or off of the OB.

Does that not take subjectively learned info. in order to make that determination?

If that is the case would not there be a wide array of amounts of thinning & thickening needed & would that not put a sense of failure in one's mind knowing that the pivot is specifically defined & can only do so much & in a restricted amount per its defined parameters.

I think we both understand the need for having the subjectively built data base in order to just make the subjective decision whether to pivot to thicken or pivot to thin.

If it is required to set the stick & see where it is pointed before making that determination that is news to me, but is certainly not needed when shooting a straight in shot.

I don't think you answered my question about the angles regarding the 15 visual offset & what the defined pivot yields. At what distance of separation would they equate? I know that it would depend on the bridge length, but when Monty Ohrt wanted me to try the straight in shot he did not specify any bridge length. So, I just used what felt right given where the CB was on the table which was about 11 or 12 inches if I recall correctly.

Thanks in advance for your time & effort.

Last edited by ENGLISH!; 06-14-2019 at 10:14 AM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#94)
BC21
Poolology

BC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond repute
 
BC21's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 2,784
vCash: 500
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: West Virginia
   
06-14-2019, 11:51 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENGLISH! View Post
Brian,

Please see what I put in blue.

So... did you set your stick down on the line, & then gauge whether to shift right or left to thin or thicken?

If so, can you direct me to where Mr. Shuffett has said to do that. I have seen where once he has gotten the visual he decides while in the standing position whether it needs to be thinned of thicken. He then makes the sweep or sets the stick offset & pivots. I have not noticed him nor heard him say that you set the stick down on the line in order to determine whether it needs to be thinned or thickened while looking through CCB to see where it is aligned on or off of the OB.

Does that not take subjectively learned info. in order to make that determination?

If that is the case would not there be a wide array of amounts of thinning & thickening needed & would that not put a sense of failure in one's mind knowing that the pivot is specifically defined & can only do so much & in a restricted amount per its defined parameters.

I think we both understand the need for having the subjectively built data base in order to just make the subjective decision whether to pivot to thicken or pivot to thin.

If it is required to set the stick & see where it is pointed before making that determination that is news to me, but is certainly not needed when shooting a straight in shot.

I don't think you answered my question about the angles regarding the 15 visual offset & what the defined pivot yields. At what distance of separation would they equate? I know that it would depend on the bridge length, but when Monty Ohrt wanted me to try the straight in shot he did not specify any bridge length. So, I just used what felt right given where the CB was on the table which was about 11 or 12 inches if I recall correctly.

Thanks in advance for your time & effort.
Here: https://youtu.be/4iuvQT7dwfs?t=175s

Angles: with a 9" bridge and a 12.75mm shaft, the offset pivot angle is 1.4°. Place an ob two diamonds away from cb and lined straight into a pocket. The 15 perception l get with the visuals would give a 15.8° shot angle. So an outside pivot (a 1/2 tip 1.4° with a 9" bridge) creates zero angle, C2C. An inside pivot would create a shot angle of 32.9°. If you move the ob farther away, the outside pivot will still bring you a zero shot angle, but the inside pivot creates thinner shot angles as the distance between balls increases.


POOLOLOGY
Brian Crist
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#95)
ENGLISH!
Banned
ENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,489
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jun 2012
   
06-14-2019, 12:40 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BC21 View Post
Here: https://youtu.be/4iuvQT7dwfs?t=175s

Angles: with a 9" bridge and a 12.75mm shaft, the offset pivot angle is 1.4°. Place an ob two diamonds away from cb and lined straight into a pocket. The 15 perception l get with the visuals would give a 15.8° shot angle. So an outside pivot (a 1/2 tip 1.4° with a 9" bridge) creates zero angle, C2C. An inside pivot would create a shot angle of 32.9°. If you move the ob farther away, the outside pivot will still bring you a zero shot angle, but the inside pivot creates thinner shot angles as the distance between balls increases.
Yes. I've seen that video. I guess I just pictured you doing something different in the DOWN position.

So... would you say that for the approximate same straight in shot with about 24" of separation that you & I did, that it was my 12" bridge length that yielded totally different results?

Also... are you saying that for a 9" bridge there is 32.9* of difference between an outside pivot & an inside Pivot?

If so, then how would shots between those angles be made with the same visual & same pivot?
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#96)
BC21
Poolology

BC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond repute
 
BC21's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 2,784
vCash: 500
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: West Virginia
   
06-14-2019, 01:12 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENGLISH! View Post
Yes. I've seen that video. I guess I just pictured you doing something different in the DOWN position.

So... would you say that for the approximate same straight in shot with about 24" of separation that you & I did, that it was my 12" bridge length that yielded totally different results?

Also... are you saying that for a 9" bridge there is 32.9* of difference between an outside pivot & an inside Pivot?

If so, then how would shots between those angles be made with the same visual & same pivot?
Here's another one....https://youtu.be/2KwI_62Npos?t=68s

I'm not sure about bridge distances, other than a longer bridge distance would create smaller angles and shorter bridge distance would create bigger angles. And this only pertains to strict manual pivots, certainly not Pro1 sweeps.

As far as angle difference between inside and outside pivots... Using a straight in shot and working backwards, knowing that an exact 1/2 tip pivot must be used, and knowing the exact bridge length I used was 9" (which gives a pivot angle of 1.4° through ccb), it's pretty simple to reverse engineer the math and come up with the shot angles. The outside pivot leads to a center to center alignment, so that's a given starting point, the "outside" pivot line. Rotating this line through center cb at a pivot angle of 1.4° will lead to the perception line. It's from this line that each offset pivot originates. So rotating another 1.4° through ccb takes us to the "inside" pivot line. In the example I provided (ob 25" from cb), the resulting shot angles produced for thick and thin, are 0° and 32.9°. The perception itself would produce a 15.8° shot if used, but it's never used.

I don't know the answer to your last question. That is where I quit trying to make it work, because the balls do not "present themselves differently" for me anytime the same setup is located elsewhere on the table. Maybe the book or truth will explain that little tidbit.


POOLOLOGY
Brian Crist

Last edited by BC21; 06-14-2019 at 01:16 PM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#97)
JoeyInCali
AzB Silver Member

JoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond reputeJoeyInCali has a reputation beyond repute
 
JoeyInCali's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 23,248
vCash: 4400
iTrader: 79 / 100%
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: OC, California
   
06-14-2019, 01:18 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by sixpack View Post
Fair enough.

But even that statement is designed (intentionally or not) to get under people's skin.

You say "a few vocal proponents who can't seem to understand the most basic common sense." I assume I'm included in that and when you said I was being dishonest I lost my cool. If you want to have civil conversations you can't throw those cutesy insults in there.

I was answering the question I thought you were going to next. I understood your point with the rods and assumed you knew I did so I went to the next step.

I have an undergraduate degree in Math/Computer science. First two years were physics before I switched. I have a graduate degree in a very mathematical discipline. Both from a top engineering school. I've done extensive 3d modeling and co-authored a CAD system when I was in college. Believe me I can understand any math/physics/science that you can throw at me. Or Dan or PJ. I've met and played with PJ and we get along just fine. Dr. Dave is another story. I like him and his posts but generally I don't want to work hard enough to understand the math that he throws around. But I could if I wasn't so dang lazy.

On paper, CTE does not work. We all agree on that. Not one person has been able to draw a diagram of CTE that works and is geometrically correct.

But that's not relevant because it isn't supposed to work on paper. It is supposed to work in real life. In three dimensions.

I don't know if it does. I gave up on it years (decades?) ago because I thought there was no way it works. Because I tried to draw it on paper. Because I'm an engineer/math guy.

Then at an AZB meetup I met an AZB member who used CTE and he showed me a little of it. Literally 3-4 minutes. One aim point and the pivot. Something clicked and I was fascinated because it *shouldn't* work but it did. I watched Stan's videos and I had some of the same problems you do with them.

I love Stan (even though I've never met him, I admire his dedication) and I couldn't figure out CTE from the videos.

So I started thinking about how it might work. I started looking at ways that it could work. And you know what happened? I started seeing it and making balls. I remember as clearly as if it were yesterday. I was trying it and a guy came up and asked me to play. I said sure and just decided to use what I was doing (CTE-ish?) on every shot. He racked 8-ball. I broke and ran out. He racked again and went to get a drink. I broke and ran ANOTHER rack. Not even looking at anything but the perceptions and pivoting to the spot. I was playing with a house cue.

The guy I was playing looked at me and turned and walked away without saying a word.

That night I was shooting balls in like a fiend. From everywhere. Straight in, slight angle, hard back cuts full table length. I wasn't even bothering to play position because I knew I could make ANY shot.

What I was doing was NOT CTE. Or at least a very limited version of CTE. I know that now. But it worked really, really well. And I think CTE probably works better. What I've learned since tells me that it does work very well.

This week, after three months of travel and hardly playing I went to practice with a buddy. I couldn't make a ball. Then I decided to use CTESP (CTE sixpack) and suddenly everything starts working and I ran a table of 8-ball.

I don't use CTESP all the time because I have been so busy with work and caring for a sick relative the last few years that I haven't had time to really get used to doing it. So I generally use my old aiming system and Poolology if I can't see something right.

I think the answer to your question is that I look for reasons it can work and you (all) look for reasons it won't work.

One of the best banking systems for me is one where you just visualize the path of the ball and it lights up for you.

Same for putting in golf. And I've had 9 holes of golf where I only putted 11 times...And shot 29 (par 36) in case you think I had a lot of chip shots.

Obviously there is something else going on there. Something in the brain. And yet, it works.

What I was trying to explain earlier is that I think the magic happens in the pivot and the perception.

The perception changes. Even in your question you asked me earlier. If you move your eyes right or left the convergence of the rods moves to different places.

So yeah. I believe that there is something there. And I can't wait to see what Stan has been working on because I'm curious about it. I want to explore this mystery. My mind is always looking for patterns and finding them where most don't even look.

That doesn't make me unable to understand common sense. It makes me willing to go beyond it.
Does that mean then ( the way it works ) it varies from person to person ?


  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#98)
HawaiianEye
AzB Silver Member
HawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond reputeHawaiianEye has a reputation beyond repute
 
HawaiianEye's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 9,768
vCash: 500
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Join Date: Apr 2011
   
06-14-2019, 01:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyInCali View Post
Does that mean then ( the way it works ) it varies from person to person ?
EVERYTHING varies from person to person in EVERYTHING they do.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#99)
ENGLISH!
Banned
ENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,489
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jun 2012
   
06-14-2019, 01:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BC21 View Post
Not sure about bridge distances, other than a longer bridge distance would create smaller angles and shorter bridge distance would create bigger angles. And this only pertains to strict manual pivots, certainly not Pro1 sweeps.

As far as angle difference between inside and outside pivots... Using a straight in shot and working backwards, knowing that an exact 1/2 tip pivot must be used, and knowing the exact bridge length I used was 9" (which gives a pivot angle of 1.4° through ccb), it's pretty simple to reverse engineer the math and come up with the shot angles. The outside pivot leads to a center to center alignment, so that's a given starting point, the "outside" pivot line. Rotating this line through center cb at a pivot angle of 1.4° will lead to the perception line. It's from this line that each offset pivot originates. So rotating another 1.4° through ccb takes us to the "inside" pivot line. In the example I provided (ob 25" from cb), the resulting shot angles produced for thick and thin, are 0° and 32.9°. The perception itself would produce a 15.8° shot if used, but it's never used.

I don't know the answer to your last question. That is where I quit trying to make it work, because the balls do not "present themselves differently" for me anytime the same setup is located elsewhere on the table. Maybe the book or truth will explain that little tidbit.
Thanks again.

It is not so little a tidbit.

One other thing that may be a bit of a tidbit.

You say perception line. I noticed that a lot. I think it would be more appropriate to refer to that as the perspective line or bisecting line. It is from that perspective that the 2 lines are seen 'objectively' as dictated by seeing the 2 lines equally & simultaneously.

What do you think?
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#100)
ENGLISH!
Banned
ENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,489
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jun 2012
   
06-14-2019, 01:31 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BC21 View Post
Here's another one....https://youtu.be/2KwI_62Npos?t=68s

I'm not sure about bridge distances, other than a longer bridge distance would create smaller angles and shorter bridge distance would create bigger angles. And this only pertains to strict manual pivots, certainly not Pro1 sweeps.

As far as angle difference between inside and outside pivots... Using a straight in shot and working backwards, knowing that an exact 1/2 tip pivot must be used, and knowing the exact bridge length I used was 9" (which gives a pivot angle of 1.4° through ccb), it's pretty simple to reverse engineer the math and come up with the shot angles. The outside pivot leads to a center to center alignment, so that's a given starting point, the "outside" pivot line. Rotating this line through center cb at a pivot angle of 1.4° will lead to the perception line. It's from this line that each offset pivot originates. So rotating another 1.4° through ccb takes us to the "inside" pivot line. In the example I provided (ob 25" from cb), the resulting shot angles produced for thick and thin, are 0° and 32.9°. The perception itself would produce a 15.8° shot if used, but it's never used.

I don't know the answer to your last question. That is where I quit trying to make it work, because the balls do not "present themselves differently" for me anytime the same setup is located elsewhere on the table. Maybe the book or truth will explain that little tidbit.
Yeah, I've seen that video too & I could say a few things but will refrain. Perhaps in PM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#101)
BC21
Poolology

BC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond repute
 
BC21's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 2,784
vCash: 500
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: West Virginia
   
06-14-2019, 02:04 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENGLISH! View Post
Thanks again.

It is not so little a tidbit.

One other thing that may be a bit of a tidbit.

You say perception line. I noticed that a lot. I think it would be more appropriate to refer to that as the perspective line or bisecting line. It is from that perspective that the 2 lines are seen 'objectively' as dictated by seeing the 2 lines equally & simultaneously.

What do you think?
I only call it the "perception line" because of watching Stan's YouTube videos. He even puts a strip of tape on the table (provided a link to that one in another post) to show the line leading to the "fixed" ccb. This is the ccb view obtained once you are in a position to see both visual reference lines. In other words, from the position where you are able to see the ETA and CTE lines at the same time, you no longer use those two lines. You look straight at the fixed ccb and that's the 15 perception. From here you thin or thicken the perception with a pivot/sweep.


POOLOLOGY
Brian Crist
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#102)
ENGLISH!
Banned
ENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,489
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jun 2012
   
06-14-2019, 02:25 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BC21 View Post
I only call it the "perception line" because of watching Stan's YouTube videos. He even puts a strip of tape on the table (provided a link to that one in another post) to show the line leading to the "fixed" ccb. This is the ccb view obtained once you are in a position to see both visual reference lines. In other words, from the position where you are able to see the ETA and CTE lines at the same time, you no longer use those two lines. You look straight at the fixed ccb and that's the 15 perception. From here you thin or thicken the perception with a pivot/sweep.
Brian,

I obviously understand all of that except the word "perception" being attached to it.

The position from where a certain perception can be obtained is the physical perspective from where that perception can be obtained.

It may seem a small tidbit, but given the loose use of some other words it may be more important than first thought for proper communication between certain people.

Again, Thanks & ALL Best Wishes.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#103)
BC21
Poolology

BC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond repute
 
BC21's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 2,784
vCash: 500
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: West Virginia
   
06-14-2019, 03:00 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENGLISH! View Post
Brian,

I obviously understand all of that except the word "perception" being attached to it.

The position from where a certain perception can be obtained is the physical perspective from where that perception can be obtained.

It may seem a small tidbit, but given the loose use of some other words it may be more important than first thought for proper communication between certain people.

Again, Thanks & ALL Best Wishes.
Copied that. I'm just using the word Stan uses. I used to call the "perception" a perspective, but no one has so I quit. Same page.


POOLOLOGY
Brian Crist
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#104)
ENGLISH!
Banned
ENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond reputeENGLISH! has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 19,489
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: Jun 2012
   
06-14-2019, 03:17 PM

  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#105)
sixpack
AzB Silver Member
sixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond reputesixpack has a reputation beyond repute
 
sixpack's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 9,525
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 3
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: CA
   
06-14-2019, 03:46 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyInCali View Post
Does that mean then ( the way it works ) it varies from person to person ?
No. I meant literally on paper you can’t draw it. Or at least if anyone has been able to accurately draw it on paper I haven’t seen it.


Splitting time between Chicago and San Francisco.

"If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it." - Mark Twain
__________________
Email:
Playing Cues: Ernie Martinez, Schon
  
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 7 of 9 « First 567 89

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.