Fear of Feel

[cookie man]

High Pidge,

I'm not looking to get into any brew ha ha, but what point are you addressing with this?

Obviously as one rotates around a sphere the perpendicular cross section changes. How is that relative to looking at 5 parallel shots & supposedly seeing the same reference points differently or seeing different reference points that are called the same designation.

The 2 balls relationship to one another is exactly the same as they always are. It is the markers & getting on the line between the different marker relationships of the balls that i supposed to put one on the shot line for the angle required.

If one moves instead of the moving the ball the two lines that fix the CB is lost. One is no longer in a spot where one can see the two lines simultaneously.

Sloppy stated it rather well. You can not have your cake & eat it too. 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. There is nothing objective to tell one how far to go to get the line that will pocket the ball. It has become subjective based on one's individual subjective interpretation. You have no longer been led by objectivity of seeing the reference points in a particular relationship.

If their is something that Stan has been holding back that makes it totally objective, I'm all ears & with an open mind.

Sorry for the rant.

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

So you say one perspective is objective and the different one is subjective. So which one is which.

 

[cookie man]

Hi Ron,

That is exactly what one of the best players in my area has done with it.

When I asked him about CTE & whether or not it was objective for all the shots, he almost yelled, 'Oh no, it has holes'. He confirm my own findings.

He then went on to say that all systems have holes & that is why you need to use 2 or maybe 3 different methods.

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.

Everyone is different & will use tools differently. I too use many methods depending on the shot at hand.

Some are okay using multiple methods & some only want to use one method.

It's to each their own as it should be.

If you don't mind me asking, what enticed you to look into CTE?

Best 2 You & All,
Rick

So CTE is what he bases his correct shot line on, very interesting. Why again does he not use it all the time instead of just the shots he not sure of,lol.

 

[cookie man]

You don't change the one and only OB edge the CB center can align with.

I'll it put another way to help you visualize it: if you anchor a line at the CB's "center of mass", starting with it pointing past the outside edge of the CB, and then pivot the line at the CB's center until it just touches the outside edge of the OB, it can only touch the OB at that same point no matter where you stand or "rotate". That's the only CTE "edge" that exists for that CB position (for that direction of cut). If you think you're seeing more CTE edges, you're fooling yourself.

pj
chgo

Wow, your still stuck there. Go try your experiment yourself.

 

[cookie man]

Let me try to explain my position more clearly and lets forget about the 5 shots for now. Imagine that you have a single shot, that calls for a CTE/ETA visual with a left sweep to be pocketed.
1. I can only see the CTE/ETA from one head position which is the fixed cueball that Stan mentions in his videos. This is the most important point, from which my argument flows.
2. No matter where I approach the shot from my head will always end up in this position, so long as the CTE/ETA lines line up correctly.
3. Now lets imagine that I shift both the balls two balls widths to the left, but that the shot still calls for the same visuals and sweep.
4. My position then is as follows: As far as the cueball/object ball/head relationship is concerned, nothing has changed! Relative to the cueball and object ball my head position at "fixed cueball" will be exactly the same as previously!. Yet, to hit center pocket, the cue ball must contact the object ball at a different location.

I don't care about being "right" about this issue, but I hope this clarifies my position on the matter. If I'm wrong about this, then I'm happy to change my mind, as I'm not one to get married to any position. Nor am I interested in insulting people, at least on purpose.

In regards to no.4. When the balls move you still look at the same thing but the lines auto corrected so to speak. This is where I refer to it as revolving around the ob.This is the big point most don't get and I feel is what connects CTE to the table. Otherwise we would make one shot and the rest would go into a rail. Do you really think this is all about making one shot.

 

[LAMas]

Ahhhh,

But one is with the bridge V on the shot line & pivoted away.

The other is dependent on the placement of the Bridge V to arrive at the shot line after the pivot.

Anyway, as you said you now have an expanded toolbox.

Best 2 Ya & Shoot Well,
Rick

Rick,

I watched Efren in the vid earlier in this thread and how, on some shots, he starts with his tip at the bottom of the CB and uses his wrist to apply BHE...that works for me.

Be well.

 

[ps611846]

Haven't seen that video in some time. Effing love it! If more people spent their time learning PIITH, we would probably get along much better on these aiming threads. Unfortunately, many people are unable to learn PIITH, so that seek the magic bullet of aiming. PIITH IS the magic bullet. It works every time you PIITH. Learn this system and learn it well, and YOU too will be able to PIITH!
FYI, there is only one method of aiming that works as well as PIITH. It is the PTB method! Every time you pocket the ball, your system has done it's job!

Hey MASTER !!! Guess that's what you use for your "high" runs........
Nothing but troll. You are a joke.

 

[cookie man]

Haven't seen that video in some time. Effing love it! If more people spent their time learning PIITH, we would probably get along much better on these aiming threads. Unfortunately, many people are unable to learn PIITH, so that seek the magic bullet of aiming. PIITH IS the magic bullet. It works every time you PIITH. Learn this system and learn it well, and YOU too will be able to PIITH!
FYI, there is only one method of aiming that works as well as PIITH. It is the PTB method! Every time you pocket the ball, your system has done it's job!

So why are u buying dvd's and searching,lol.

 

[ps611846]

So why are u buying dvd's and searching,lol.

He does nothing. He doesn't even play pool. He is just a pathetic troll.

 

[HawaiianEye]

And, the only reason you really don't have a clue, is because all you guys want to do is nitpick words out of context and not take it to a table and actually learn something.

This ISN'T directed at YOU, so don't take it personal.

You just happened to bring up a point and it is the same thing that happens when CJ or anyone brings up TOI.

IMHO, there are people who will argue about things WITHOUT ever trying them out. I think these people just like to argue or have nothing better to do than play keyboard champion.

If I think something may help my game, I will give it a go at the table for a test run to see if there is any merit in it. If it works, I practice it and incorporate it into my game. If it is too difficult, or I don't feel it improves my game, then I will go along my merry way.

I'm NOT one to come on here and say "it doesn't work" without the caveat of "for ME" at the end. It may work for somebody, so I won't knock it. Placebos work for some people. If it works, don't break it.

Aloha.

 

[ENGLISH!]

So you say one perspective is objective and the different one is subjective. So which one is which.

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.

 

[Straightpool_99]

.................

 

[ronscuba]

So CTE is what he bases his correct shot line on, very interesting. Why again does he not use it all the time instead of just the shots he not sure of,lol.

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.

 

[ENGLISH!]

So CTE is what he bases his correct shot line on, very interesting. Why again does he not use it all the time instead of just the shots he not sure of,lol.

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.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Wow, your still stuck there. Go try your experiment yourself.

There is no need for any experiment.

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

 

[ENGLISH!]

In regards to no.4. When the balls move you still look at the same thing but the lines auto corrected so to speak. This is where I refer to it as revolving around the ob.This is the big point most don't get and I feel is what connects CTE to the table. Otherwise we would make one shot and the rest would go into a rail. Do you really think this is all about making one shot.

IMO, You're misrepresenting what StraightPool__99 said too.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Rick,

I watched Efren in the vid earlier in this thread and how, on some shots, he starts with his tip at the bottom of the cue and uses his wrist to apply BHE...that works for me.

Be well.

Hi E,

I'm not quite sure how to take that but I know you meant well.

Best 2 Ya,
Rick

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Wow, your still stuck there. Go try your experiment yourself.

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

 

[Neil]

Let me try to explain my position more clearly and lets forget about the 5 shots for now. Imagine that you have a single shot, that calls for a CTE/ETA visual with a left sweep to be pocketed.
1. I can only see the CTE/ETA from one head position which is the fixed cueball that Stan mentions in his videos. This is the most important point, from which my argument flows.
2. No matter where I approach the shot from my head will always end up in this position, so long as the CTE/ETA lines line up correctly.
3. Now lets imagine that I shift both the balls two balls widths to the left, but that the shot still calls for the same visuals and sweep.
4. My position then is as follows: As far as the cueball/object ball/head relationship is concerned, nothing has changed! Relative to the cueball and object ball my head position at "fixed cueball" will be exactly the same as previously!. Yet, to hit center pocket, the cue ball must contact the object ball at a different location.

I don't care about being "right" about this issue, but I hope this clarifies my position on the matter. If I'm wrong about this, then I'm happy to change my mind, as I'm not one to get married to any position. Nor am I interested in insulting people, at least on purpose.

Your #4 is wrong. Your perception of the shot changes, which in turn changes how you see the visuals.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Your perception of the shot changes, which in turn changes how you see the visuals.

And that's as close as we'll ever get to a sensible explanation. "Perception", "visuals" and "you had to be there" - sounds an awful lot like feel to me.

Still, that doesn't mean it doesn't work as well as other methods that are described more clearly - just that it's not a "new way from another dimension".

pj
chgo

 

[ENGLISH!]

And that's as close as we'll ever get to a sensible explanation. "Perception", "visuals" and "you had to be there" - sounds an awful lot like feel to me.

Still, that doesn't mean it doesn't work as well as other methods that are described more clearly - just that it's not a "new way from another dimension".

pj
chgo

Patrick,

Wouldn't that sort of be akin to shooting a rifle with one eyes on the side of the gun barrel & not looking down the sights but just sort of perceiving them to being lined up correctly? You still see the 'objective' sights but from a slightly different perspective which yields a subjective perception.

Best 2 Ya,
Rick