Fear of Feel

[ENGLISH!]

You really have no expertise on CTE because you have only studied it at the keyboard. All your opinions are based on what you read here. The conclusions you side with were obtained the same way, from behind the keyboard.

Not true, Cookie.

I HAVE spent time with it on the table.

And... the time was initially totally with a naive hoping nature.

But that really matters not. A paraplegic that could not spend time on a table can still have his or her powers of reason & critical thinking.

Why do CTEers continually 'attack' the messenger instead of addressing the message & the question(s) at hand?

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

 

[ENGLISH!]

Rick, do you even realize that fractional aiming uses one line, as you stated, but CTE uses TWO lines?? Not the same thing, and very different results. The argument you are making is fine for fractional aiming, and no one disagrees with it. But, that is not CTE aiming.

Good try.

But apparently I give the readership more credit for their intelligence than you do.

It's obvious that I know the difference as I was talking about the the TWO(2) lines being seen simultaneously from a given location that 'fixes' the cue ball. Move & lose one or the other line... or both. Hence, moving to a different physical location leaves the objective realm & goes into subjective realm as to how far does one to move for a shot that is off of the visually 'objective' lines.

May God Bless You, Neil.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

AtLarge:
OK, for anyone who wants to read some more absolute ridiculousness (along with some good information here and there), here is the infamous pj-Spidey "bet" thread from 6½ years ago

Thanks, AtLarge. It's pretty ridiculous, alright, but here's the Cliff Notes (the parts in blue are the important bits):

(Post #133)

You'll hold your stick in normal shooting position with your bridge hand on the table as usual and, without moving your bridge hand or any part of it and without removing your stick from it, leaving everything in place as if you're going to shoot a normal shot, you'll pivot your stick around a point that's somewhere other than at your bridge hand.

Is that right?

pj
chgo

SpiderWebComm:
Bet something mr. geometry. You're faltering. Get up and bet.

edit- where's the tap dance music at? wanna dial a friend or something? call dr. dave, if I were you

If you agree that's the bet I'll take any amount up to $5,000, which I'll post with anybody we can mutually agree on. We can also bet something else if money's not your cup of tea, or money plus something else.

pj
chgo

SpiderWebComm:
Wow. I wanted to keep it friendly, but now that i can get all the money, let me see if I can raise the $5k. If I can, I'm in - and we'll let TAR stream it. Nothing like having a sucker step into you on the internet, this is a dream.

This is historic... I make a video showing how it's done and someone wants to bet 5 LMAO. I also wanna bet the loser is perma-banned from AZB while you're at it.

Alright, you agree that you have to accomplish what I described in my post #133, (which is unedited so there's an undisputable record of it) and which you quoted above when you accepted my $5,000 bet. I also accept the additional bet of permanent banning from AZB.

Now all we need is a judge we can agree on and somebody to post with. I suggest Bob Jewett or Mike Page as the judge. They both have technical graduate degrees and I trust both of them. Mike is an acquaintance of mine, so you might want to choose Bob, whom I've never met.

pj
chgo

P.S. I'd also accept Dr. Dave as the judge. And we agree not to edit any of our posts about this bet from now until it's settled.

SpiderWebComm:
Yeah that's nice--- none of your boys will judge. We'll pick someone neutral.

Sure, if it's someone who understands what I described. And you need to confirm that's what you're betting you'll do - what I described in my post #133. Frankly, anybody who understands it will tell you no test is needed, that it's impossible on its face and you should pay up.

pj
chgo

SpiderWebComm:
My bridge doesn't move

There are two things wrong with this bet:

1. There were never any judges agreed upon, so the "proof" never happened.

2. This:

bluepepper:
I think I see what's going on. Are you saying that the bridge BASE stays put, while the RESTING POINT of the cue on the bridge is allowed to move?

SpiderWebComm:
Of course...

In other words, Spidey, you violated the main requirement of the bet: "without moving your bridge hand or any part of it".

So you actually lost the bet and should be thankful it never came off. But if you keep insisting it did, then I want my money. (I won't make you leave AzB forever - the part you added to the bet).

But don't panic - it isn't $5K, or even $3K; that's just one more thing you got wrong. You only came up with $1K - I'll take it in cash.

pj
chgo

 

[Neil]

Good try.

But apparently I give the readership more credit for their intelligence than you do.

It's obvious that I know the difference as I was talking about the the TWO(2) lines being seen simultaneously from a given location that 'fixes' the cue ball. Move & lose one or the other line. Hence, moving to a different physical location leaves the objective & goes into subjective as to how far does one to move for a shot that is off of the visually 'objective' lines.

May God Bless You, Neil.

In other words, you really have no clue what you are talking about. Your statement proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you do not understand the steps to take in doing a CTE shot.

Not meaning to degrade you, but your statement is akin to someone thinking that auto-cruise on a car means that you don't have to steer anymore. You only have a little piece of the actual picture, yet you are trying to come off as knowledgeable about it.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Thanks, AtLarge. It's pretty ridiculous, alright, but here's the Cliff Notes (the parts in blue are the important bits):










There are two things wrong with this bet:

1. There were never any judges agreed upon, so the "proof" never happened.

2. This:



In other words, Spidey, you violated the main requirement of the bet: "without moving your bridge hand or any part of it".

So Spidey, you actually lost the bet and should be thankful it never came off. But if you keep insisting it did, then I want my money.

But don't panic - it isn't $5K, or even $3K; that's just one more thing you got wrong. You only came up with $1K - I'll take it in cash.

pj
chgo

I guess if a finger on my bridge moved 1 atom, you won the bet??? Pay up, loooooooserrrrrrr.

 

[Neil]

I guess if a finger on my bridge moved 1 atom, you won the bet??? Pay up, loooooooserrrrrrr.

Your video was in post #111 of that thread correct? If so, the link doesn't work anymore.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I guess if a finger on my bridge moved 1 atom, you won the bet??? Pay up, loooooooserrrrrrr.

That was the point of the bet. You were so gleeful that you were going to "trap" me that you forgot to read the terms of the bet that you agreed to.

Actually, I don't think you understood them - that's why I never pressed it. But you did press it, and still do - so pay up.

pj
chgo

 

[ENGLISH!]

In other words, you really have no clue what you are talking about. Your statement proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you do not understand the steps to take in doing a CTE shot.

Not meaning to degrade you, but your statement is akin to someone thinking that auto-cruise on a car means that you don't have to steer anymore. You only have a little piece of the actual picture, yet you are trying to come off as knowledgeable about it.

No Neil.

It's you that is ever continuingly to show that you really do not know the difference between what is objective & what is subjective perception.

You've shown 'beyond a shadow of a doubt' that you can not logically or rationally truly explain your side of the disagreement.

I've had my say regarding the subject of 'feel' as it relates to the subject brought up by others.

I'll leave it to the readership to make their own determinations as to what makes rational common sense.

May Blessings be sent your way, Neil.

PS I will now heed the advice of others.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

That was the point of the bet. You were so gleeful that you were going to "trap" me that you forgot to read the terms of the bet that you agreed to.

Actually, I don't think you understood them - that's why I never pressed it. But you did press it, and still do - so pay up.

pj
chgo

Keep back peddling, loser. Read Dr. Dave's posts about effective pivot points. You were a stone cold loser, loser.

 

[swest]

Two things... one clear, and one confusing.

1) Since SpiderWebComm has not disputed the facts, it would seem clear that, had a judge been agreed on, he would have lost the bet. However, since a judge was <not> mutually agreed upon, the bet was never validated. To claim otherwise is disingenuous at best, deceitful at worst, and casts him in a new light.

2) Although it's still early, I'm a little surprised that there is not a single taker, pro or con, on making direct use of the quotable verbiage from the transcript of the CTE video to make some sort of point in support of a position about CTE vs 'whatever', when it comes to this notion of feel (i.e., the topic of this thread... remember that?)

 

[SpiderWebComm]

Two things... one clear, and one confusing.

1) Since SpiderWebComm has not disputed the facts, it would seem clear that, had a judge been agreed on, he would have lost the bet. However, since a judge was mutually agreed upon, the bet was never validated. To claim otherwise is disingenuous at best, deceitful at worst, and casts him in a new light.

2) Although it's still early, I'm a little surprised that there is not a single taker, pro or con, on making direct use of the quotable verbiage from the transcript of the CTE video to make some sort of point in support of a position about CTE vs 'whatever', when it comes to this notion of feel (i.e., the topic of this thread... remember that?)

Bridge ain't the pivot point, dummies.

THAT was the bet.

 

[swest]

I know this will bring down the wrath, but...

Another thing that continues to confuse me is Neil's apparent blind-spot regarding his ongoing feud, on principle, with C.J., while decrying the CTE-questioners (I think yeasayers/naysayers should be dropped in favor of something like, believers/questioners...)

In other words:

Neil is to C.J. as (pick your favorite CTE-questioner) is to Stan/CTE.​

- s.west

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Bridge ain't the pivot point, dummies.

THAT was the bet.

The bet was what I said and you agreed to. Pay me.

pj
chgo

 

[swest]

Bridge ain't the pivot point, dummies.

THAT was the bet.

You don't know me well enough to call me a dummy. So don't.

 

[ENGLISH!]

... Although it's still early, I'm a little surprised that there is not a single taker, pro or con, on making direct use of the quotable verbiage from the transcript of the CTE video to make some sort of point in support of a position about CTE vs 'whatever', when it comes to this notion of feel (i.e., the topic of this thread... remember that?)[/QUOTE]

Hi Sam,

Maybe you should highlight the part of which you speak, but it would not really do any good.

Once rational logic is ignored by one side there can be no rational logical discussion.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

 

[SpiderWebComm]

thanks, atlarge. It's pretty ridiculous, alright, but here's the cliff notes (the parts in blue are the important bits):










there are two things wrong with this bet:

1. There were never any judges agreed upon, so the "proof" never happened.

2. This:



in other words, spidey, you violated the main requirement of the bet: "without moving your bridge hand or any part of it".

So you actually lost the bet and should be thankful it never came off. But if you keep insisting it did, then i want my money. (i won't make you leave azb forever - the part you added to the bet).

But don't panic - it isn't $5k, or even $3k; that's just one more thing you got wrong. You only came up with $1k - i'll take it in cash.

Pj
chgo

lmao .... "dummy"

you don't know me well enough to call me a dummy. So don't.

 

[SpiderWebComm]

The bet was what I said and you agreed to. Pay me.

pj
chgo

Bridge isn't the pivot point and skin isn't your bridge...bones dont move, base dont move.... you're a stone COLD loser.

Now.... go get your shine box, air barrel.

 

[Neil]

No Neil.

It's you that is ever continuingly to show that you really do not know the difference between what is objective & what is subjective perception.

You've shown 'beyond a shadow of a doubt' that you can not logically or rationally truly explain your side of the disagreement.

I've had my say regarding the subject of 'feel' as it relates to the subject brought up by others.

I'll leave it to the readership to make their own determinations as to what makes rational common sense.

May Blessings be sent your way, Neil.

PS I will now heed the advice of others.

That's laughable that you say that Rick. I have explained it many times on here. In fact, in the past you claimed that the lines were not objective at all, now you say they are. You can't even stay on the same story.

Hilarious that you talk about rational common sense when you are arguing with statements that don't even make any sense related to CTE. You claim you can't make the simple shots with it, and you have a grand total of about 15 minutes on the table with it. But, your the expert!

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Bridge isn't the pivot point and skin isn't your bridge...bones dont move, base dont move.... you're a stone COLD loser.

Now.... go get your shine box, air barrel.

So after all these years of woofing (while I stayed silent), when finally confronted with the facts, including your own admission in print... you weasel.

I wonder if anybody's surprised. I'm not.

pj
chgo

 

[Neil]

I know this will bring down the wrath, but...

Another thing that continues to confuse me is Neil's apparent blind-spot regarding his ongoing feud, on principle, with C.J., while decrying the CTE-questioners (I think yeasayers/naysayers should be dropped in favor of something like, believers/questioners...)

In other words:

Neil is to C.J. as (pick your favorite CTE-questioner) is to Stan/CTE.​

- s.west

I know it seems that way to some of you that don't understand either one, let alone truly understand both. Stan's system works as described. CJ's doesn't and can't, which I have proven on here, as well as others have. There is not one person on here that has posted on here or p.m.'d me that has even been able to describe what they do as the same thing that CJ describes to do. Not ONE. The reason for that, is that it simply does not work as he describes it.

The guys against CTE on here, the vocal ones, can't even describe the steps to use it correctly, despite all the videos and words posted about it. They are stuck in their little 2D world, and have taken sides to where they no longer can be open minded about any of it, but HAVE to continue down the same path they are on. They will never understand it simply because they don't want to.