I’ll just repeat myself. I apply the system at the table, I consistently pocket balls. I’d say from a science standpoint thats pretty hard evidence to defy. The only way it doesn’t work is if I’m lying or cheating the system in some way. I have no reason to do that. It works. I think you are too wrapped up in the explanation of the system, rather than if it works or not. Granted it’s an unorthodox way to aim balls. The instructions have evolved over the years. I think the upcoming book and truth series will clarify quite a lot.
When I use the system at the table I’m using very defined targets (ball edges and quarters) to repeatedly pocket balls. To me that’s objective. No guess work. Better than any previous method of pocketing balls. That’s good enough for me.
Right! That's it in the most SIMPLE terms.
1. What top pro players since Mosconi's era through TODAY ever talked about the importance of science in their usage to make balls and become the winners they were? I've never heard a pro player talk about it, write a book about it, or teach it.
2. Again, the same time frame and pros. Doesn't matter what aiming system they used if any, how many were over the ball thinking and adjusting with a laundry list of specific factors like spin throw, CIT, deflection, skid, swerve etc.in scientific math calculations to take it all into consideration for their impact point on the OB and impact point on the CB.
3. How in the hell does anyone adjust for all that and make 3 balls in a row? Would a 30 second shot clock come close to being enough? The only place this occurs is with hack amateurs on pool forums! I could care less what anybody thinks about me using a so called flawed unscientific system. MY CHOICE! MY GAME! MY SUCCESS OR MY FAILURE! KEEP YOUR NOSES OUT OF MY BUSINESS!
4. There have been many systems developed over the last 75 years but none of them have really come under the attack about explaining the science except for one.
CTE and it all started on RSB by so called science geeks because it was the only argument they had and still do.
5. The effectiveness of any aiming system is performance based and it can vary with individual users. That's the ONLY thing that matters. If it works, use it. If it doesn't don't use it. Also don't forget to STFU if it isn't for those who don't succeed with it.
6. I never heard anyone jump on 90/90 regarding the science behind it. When Ron Vitello was alive he would have busted every science geek down to their last penny.
It was even more "far out" than CTE. But also deadly in the right hands of knowledgeable users. It would be impossible to break it down scientifically by anyone. IT WAS PERFORMANCE BASED AND ALL THAT MATTERS!
7. If science geeks want the science behind an aiming system, figure it out yourselves. That's what turns you on. We don't give a rat's a$$.