Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

Do you use an aiming system or go by feel?

  • I always go by feel

    Votes: 153 53.5%

  • Usually by feel, with aiming systems for hard shots

    Votes: 68 23.8%

  • Usually with aiming systems, by feel for easy shots

    Votes: 24 8.4%

  • I always use aiming systems

    Votes: 26 9.1%

  • I just hit balls very hard and hope they sink

    Votes: 15 5.2%
  • Total voters
    286
cookie man said:
whoooooo, you are the one telling US how we are making shots. It's you that THINKS we are doing things we say we aren't. You are the definition of one who thinks they can read minds.
Click to expand...

Someone has to point it out to you & others because it's obvious that you & some others do NOT know what is really going on.

Did you read Poolplaya9's 3 posts? If not, perhaps you should.

Although, I rather doubt that it would do any good even if you did.

Best Wishes.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Whoa, big fella.

Your reading/posting audience on this forum right now is 10, including you and me. There are less than 200 reading and posting on the Main Forum.

I hope you didn't come here for the exposure. We're not shaping public opinion here.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

You're looking at one moment in time. How many members are there?

I came to AZB because I was led here when trying to by a used LD shaft.
 
ENGLISH! said:
I understand 'probably'. I also understand the implications & made the connection to why Stan said that the math will 'probably' never be done.

He implied that it's because he says it is a visual system & he seems to think that that would preclude math explaining it.

What it seems some do not understand or perhaps just do not want to face it or have it out is that 'math' is man made & not really a real science like physics & others. It was made by man as a tool to explain the real sciences.

Science governs even a 'visual system' & man can use or devise math to explain it.

AND... can some one please define exactly what is 'visual intelligence'?

Intelligence is not a visual thing.

As I've explained before, the image on the retina of our eye from our VISION is upside down just as it is with a camera & it is one's brain that basically configures it so that we are able to perform without a conscious intellectual process needing to be done to reach 'up for down' so to speak.

It, the math, is basically there as Poolplaya9 said. It just says differently than what Y'all want it to say.

As I mentioned to John. One can not start with a false premise & then come out with The Truth.

Best Wishes.
Click to expand...

If you really believe that, why make so many false claims? So, you say you have had physics classes.... and you still say that physics is a real science, and math is not? Maybe you should check your claims before posting them.

You also still falsely claim the math is there because one user said it is and that it doesn't show what we want it to say. That is a false premise on your part leading to the untruth, not the truth. There is math behind it. There has to be. But, what you fail to recognize, is that human intelligence is not yet capable of deciphering what those formulas would be. One guy falsely claims he knows the math, so you jump on that because it seems to fit what you want to hear. Never bothering to even check if the claim is true or not. Your biases against CTE and any of it's users is abundantly clear and really dismisses anything you have to say about it. Your biases prevent any facts being shown, speculation and false premises are all you have to offer.

Your bias became extremely clear to everyone, the whole handful of people worldwide reading this, when you saw a CTE user say that ghost ball is an illusion, and so you immediately had to take the opposite stance from the CTE'er. In doing that, you actually had to claim that seeing a GHOST ball is not an illusion! How far down the rabbit hole are you going to go with your vendetta against CTE?
 
JB Cases said:
Damn, we got caught boys.....Rick you figured it out. Each morning the CTE marketing group has a meeting where we discuss who we will target and what strategy we will employ. You should see the gannt chart we have and the names on it.

Or

Perhaps we all say similar things about CTE because each of us has separately had similar experiences during our table time with CTE.

You pick the option you think sounds more fun.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Perhaps you're right, but I never said anything about you 'all' saying similar things about CTE. It appears reading comprehension issues may also be a common trait & also putting words into the mouths of others that they did not say.

Perhaps they are all just things amazingly picked up through osmosis between like faulty thinking minds regarding a particular subject matter.

Best Wishes.
 
JoeyInCali said:
1 1/8" from the contact point is the math behind the ghost ball .
Same with the stroking line on no English shots.

Diagrams for CTE would be great . Sorry, so many MISREPRESENT CTE .
And from what Stan says, there are very few QUALIFIED TO TEACH IT.
It's like every other person has a different expertise on CTE but are not qualified to teach it .

Vertical lines showing what the visuals and processes are would be very beneficial.
The first Pro 1 DVD was not all that clear to many.
A book or manual would be better for a lot of people.
Click to expand...
I am not qualified but I can give pointers. I have helped a lot of people over the years to understand various aspects of CTE.

Do you honestly think people can consistently find a 1.125" spot behind the object ball consistently and then adjust it for throw with accuracy? Even Mika Immonen says that GB is only good for beginners.

If I can't consistently find this distance with a marker and the ball a foot from my face I know I can't do it at the distances needed and from the angles faced on the table.

https://youtu.be/d-L4QMNiVxk

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
 
ENGLISH! said:
Simple response. That's NOT how an objective system would work.

You seem to want to detach the subconscious mind from the conscious mind's INTENTIONS & DESIRES.

I would trust my subconscious mind before I would would trust my consciousness.
Click to expand...
I think you do as it appears most of your posts seem to be coming from an autocopy generator.

In the terminology we are using system refers to any method deliberately followed as closely to the instructions as possible. Ghost Ball is a subjective judgement system and CTE is an objective measuring system.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
 
ENGLISH! said:
Perhaps you're right, but I never said anything about you 'all' saying similar things about CTE. It appears reading comprehension issues may also be a common trait & also putting words into the mouths of others that they did not say.

Perhaps they are all just things amazingly picked up through osmosis between like faulty thinking minds regarding a particular subject matter.

Best Wishes.
Click to expand...
Admittedly I skim your posts. Sorry but they are too long and dense with a lot of repeated phrases. And that is me saying that who is way too verbose.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
 
JB Cases said:
I think you do as it appears most of your posts seem to be coming from an autocopy generator.

In the terminology we are using system refers to any method deliberately followed as closely to the instructions as possible. Ghost Ball is a subjective judgement system and CTE is an objective measuring system.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

John,

I do not even know exactly what an auto copy generator is or how it would be applicable here.

Your statement that I put in Blue would be IN YOUR OPINION & THAT OF SOME OTHERS.

Ghost Ball is the real line but it is how one envisions it that is subjective.

The part about CTE has not been & is not 'proven' to be such. Therefore such definitive statements should not be made regarding it & it those that are that has led to the 'aiming wars' here on AZB.

What exactly does CTE 'measure?

Best Wishes.
 
JB Cases said:
Admittedly I skim your posts. Sorry but they are too long and dense with a lot of repeated phrases. And that is me saying that who is way too verbose.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well, at least you admit that you are fault regarding this where I am concerned but I see it with you where others are concerned too.

As I said, you may just want to slow down & reroute some of the enthusiastic fanaticism into being more accurate.

Again, this is well intended.

Best Wishes.
 
Last edited:
JB Cases said:
You overestimate your reach on azb concerning this topic. Not that many stick around to read your novels set on repeat. What they do do however is watch the linked videos.

So again, step up your video game if you really want to make a difference. On here you are simply on a small merry go round.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

IT REALLY IS AMAZING how much you seem to be just like another member in that YOU KNOW what others do & do not do.

Once again...

There is no answer nor proof in video regarding subjectivity or objectivity as they are in the 'abstract' realm.

Hence, anyone that wants to use video for that purpose is, IMO, only looking to mislead their audience.

Best Wishes.
 
JB Cases said:
What physics are those? Do you mean the geometry? The calculus? Or the metaphysics involved in imagining a fully formed ball correctly adjusted for contact induced throw?

Yes I am certainly questioning that if that's what you mean.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

John,

It's not "imagined". It really exist as in a location of where the cue ball needs to pass through. One visualizes where that location would be & I have already said that that activity is subjective.

When my Dad taught it to me when I was 13, he never used the phrase 'ghost ball'. That said, I rather quickly went to equal overlap on my own with no directions from anyone.

However, the directions for doing that (ghost ball) can be set down totally in a very step by step manner as to what is needed & then what to do. It is also very easy to understand. I think 'most' move on from the accurate concept to a better method to put the cue all through that location.

All that said, I do understand that CTE is a completely different approach even if it too requires subjectivity.

Best Wishes.

Perhaps if more were as wordy as you & I there would less misunderstandings.
 
ENGLISH! said:
I understand 'probably'. I also understand the implications & made the connection to why Stan said that the math will 'probably' never be done.

He implied that it's because he says it is a visual system & he seems to think that that would preclude math explaining it.




.
Click to expand...
I don't recall him implying that, in fact he has tried very hard to prove the math and enlisted some very smart people to help.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Whoa, big fella.

Your reading/posting audience on this forum right now is 10, including you and me. There are less than 200 reading and posting on the Main Forum.

I hope you didn't come here for the exposure. We're not shaping public opinion here.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

I think i actually like you once in a while,lol.
 
cookie man said:
I don't recall him implying that, in fact he has tried very hard to prove the math and enlisted some very smart people to help.
Click to expand...

Well, it is not my fault if you are not too good at reading implications or if your ability to recall may be lacking.

Well, where is the math?

If they are trying to find a way for the math to prove that it is objective for every shot as perhaps requested, it may be a very long time in coming...

as in never.

But... Poolplay9 laid it out to show that the number of objective outcome angles are insufficient for the number of shots.

By 'show', I do NOT mean in a video.

Best Wishes.
 
ENGLISH! said:
Well, it is not my fault if you are not too good at reading implications or if your ability to recall may be lacking.

Well, where is the math?

If they are trying to find a way for the math to prove that it is objective for every shot as perhaps requested, it may be a very long time in coming...

as in never.

But... Poolplay9 laid it out to show that the number of objective outcome angles are insufficient for the number of shots.

By 'show', I do NOT mean in a video.

Best Wishes.
Click to expand...

I'm very glad Poolplay9 is your new hero, That Tony the Tiger guy wasn't helping you much, But he doesn't know what he doesn't know.
You see, it's pretty simple, if you have not had proper training with cte then you will just keep spouting things that have no bearing on what CTE actually is. Sorry to burst your bubble but things being said like Poolplay9 said and you agreeing with him just further the fact that you don't know very much about CTE. You are wasting your time and your opinion is very weak unlike your post count.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top