How Do You Aim By Feel
- Thread starter Koop
- Start date
Another loyal groupie fan who has volunteered to be my personal roll of toilet paper.
I take it 12310bch, that your aim-feel capabilities are quite terrible?
You idiot! If you had taken the time to read any of my previous posts on the subject of aiming systems you would know that I almost completely agree with you except when you call people idiots because you don't understand that the ,"Ghost Ball," is not an aiming system but , to many, a method of visualization very close to that which you subscribe. Your basically disagreeing with the people who agree with you and making a horses
ass of yourself I'm out of words for you.
I just get down and shoot. It works. If I'm confident, I'll make the shot. If not, then I could fail.
At high pressure situations heart is racing and your hand may become a bit stiff or twitchy. Of course you may line up wrong or make a wrong decision while standing up too. Better pros handle these situations like it's a walk in the park, because for them it is routine. For amateurs, even good ones, not such a routine.
Some people are looking for an algorithm to play pool or to aim to be specific. Well good luck to them because there isn't any. If there was, it would be a very dull game because everyone could make balls without missing all day.
At high pressure situations heart is racing and your hand may become a bit stiff or twitchy. Of course you may line up wrong or make a wrong decision while standing up too. Better pros handle these situations like it's a walk in the park, because for them it is routine. For amateurs, even good ones, not such a routine.
Some people are looking for an algorithm to play pool or to aim to be specific. Well good luck to them because there isn't any. If there was, it would be a very dull game because everyone could make balls without missing all day.
Actually there IS an "algorithim" to make balls and it's precisely the pressure situations which separate the just good players from the really good players.
The system helps players to get to the right line but if their vision is blurry because their heart is racing or their arm is twitching because of the pressure then they can miss. Other players find that the system helps to keep them calm.
I find that when I get in stroke that I forget about the system, I know it's there, know that I am using it but it's to the point where I just see the right line as I am walking to the table. Then every once in a while I will have to pull up and double check my alignment.
If I had to feel my way through it or GUESS at the right spot then I am certain that I would miss more balls than I make.
I grew up playing with a joss cue. For 20 some years. After playing with bert kinisters first few vids and grady mathues vids. I started aiming just by the tip of the cue.using English to steer the balls in the holes. After a while I could feel the ball going into the pocket along with perfect shape. Knowing in a split second before pulling the trigger exactly where the cue would end up. The cue would go the exact two or three rails and bump a ¼ ball at the end for the perfect shape my imagination gave me. To me that was 100% feel. When I switched to a 314-2 I lost all my feel. I had to aim down the whole shaft and still didn’t get the action on the cue ball after the ob fell into the hole. I played with it for 2 years At that time I was looking for different aiming systems and finally went to a ob classic. And wow. I got all my feel back. Thinking about it now. It was probably just a mind game on myself. I shot probably over 20,000 ball in with my old shaft and only maybe 2000 in with the 314.
Trust "the zone"
AtLarge:
Fair enough -- your interpretation of "feel" is very personal, and your own. To me, "feel" means not having to consciously aim -- i.e. walk over to the object ball, look at the contact point, get behind the cue ball, line it up (equal opposite contact points), practice stroke, and fire. Or, for those pivot-aimers, get behind the shot, see the CTEL, line up your cue on the CTEL and pivot (or, do your air pivot thing before getting down on the shot), practice strokes, and fire. All these are conscious / analytical mind things -- for the first one, you have to "think" about the equal opposite contact points between the cue ball and object ball and "think" about making sure to line up those contact points; in the second (CTE) you have to "think" about the CTEL, lining up on it, how much to pivot, etc. Both of these methods are what I call "calculating the fire control solution."
In my version of ghostball technique (I'm not sure if it's as you call prototypical), I'm subconsciously replacing the ghostball with the cue ball. Try this -- pick up a hammer and go hammer a nail. Did you have to think about the hammering process -- i.e. lining up the face of the hammer with the nail's head? Chances are you didn't. You can just walk up to any partially-seated nail, and without thinking, you can swing that hammer and hit the nail's head first time. Same thing when I get down on a shot and fire at that ghostball. There's no conscious thinking there. I don't have to "consciously" line up -- swinging that cue to deliver the cue ball where the ghostball is located is such a subconscious thing. What I *do* think about, at least for the first couple of racks, is any English (side/follow/draw), and the amount of power I need to use to deliver the cue ball -- i.e. how to start getting into the mode of "getting the cue ball on a string." Virtually all of my thought is put into that cue ball. Once I get warmed up and stroked-in, even *that* conscious thought process starts to disappear. I then step outside of myself, and start to think more in terms of the pattern for the "out." Once warmed up and've gotten a feel for the cue ball, the shot process and delivering the cue ball requires no conscious thought -- just the pattern for the "out" now.
Jude Rosenstock mentioned the book, "The Inner Game of Tennis." And with this, he "hit the nail on the head." That is one of the best books ever written. Very highly recommended reading for those interested in "the zone" and how to get into it.
Unfortunately, when I view these aiming system threads, I think people are discarding their most powerful tool -- the subconscious mind. With these aiming system threads, they are going in the wrong direction. They make up excuses like "oh, I don't have the ability the pro has in just pocketing balls so easily, so I have to rely upon a 'system' that gives me reference points to aim at," and intentionally engage their conscious mind on every shot. Having to calculate that "fire control solution" each and every time, instead of drawing on their huge storehouse of "been there, done that, old hat" subconscious knowledge of how to make that shot. They've already missed -- they just don't know it yet. The conscious mind can only stay "engaged" for so long, before boredom or fatigue sets in (the conscious mind "wants" to wander onto other things, to daydream, etc.).
The problem is, people don't trust their subconscious mind, that massive storehouse of "how to do this without thinking" assembly line of execution. They want to "be in control" at all times. And, the unfortunate thing is, not trusting the subconscious mind *is* not trusting "the zone." That is what "the zone" is -- when the subconscious mind takes over, runs the table with the greatest of ease, and after all is said and done, there's this wonderful sense of accomplishment, of well-being, that is *NOT* gained having done the same with the conscious mind. No, with the conscious mind, one always over-analyzes the situation, saying how he/she should've taken this particular shot over here, or how he/she overran her position with the cue ball over there, yada yada yada. Instead of "I shot good" (sound familiar? our old friend Efren Reyes?), they go, "...whine, whine, whine..."
Someone (NewStroke?) replied to this thread with the notion that when he's "in the zone," he almost can't recall a single shot he made while in it. Gosh, I know this well! After a match, someone will have come up to me and ask me about a particular shot, how I did it or how did I think to fit that into my pattern. I'll most often scratch my head, and not know. I'll try, and I *may* recall the shot -- if it was a tough one that required me to navigate the cue ball in amongst a mess, or if I had to break-up a cluster with it. But other than that, I don't think in terms of individual shots when "in the zone" -- no, I think in terms of the "out" or the "W." I think this is the nature of what our wonderful game/sport is about -- to seek enjoyment by entering that zone; the process carries itself.
Hope this was helpful!
-Sean
AtLarge:
Fair enough -- your interpretation of "feel" is very personal, and your own. To me, "feel" means not having to consciously aim -- i.e. walk over to the object ball, look at the contact point, get behind the cue ball, line it up (equal opposite contact points), practice stroke, and fire. Or, for those pivot-aimers, get behind the shot, see the CTEL, line up your cue on the CTEL and pivot (or, do your air pivot thing before getting down on the shot), practice strokes, and fire. All these are conscious / analytical mind things -- for the first one, you have to "think" about the equal opposite contact points between the cue ball and object ball and "think" about making sure to line up those contact points; in the second (CTE) you have to "think" about the CTEL, lining up on it, how much to pivot, etc. Both of these methods are what I call "calculating the fire control solution."
In my version of ghostball technique (I'm not sure if it's as you call prototypical), I'm subconsciously replacing the ghostball with the cue ball. Try this -- pick up a hammer and go hammer a nail. Did you have to think about the hammering process -- i.e. lining up the face of the hammer with the nail's head? Chances are you didn't. You can just walk up to any partially-seated nail, and without thinking, you can swing that hammer and hit the nail's head first time. Same thing when I get down on a shot and fire at that ghostball. There's no conscious thinking there. I don't have to "consciously" line up -- swinging that cue to deliver the cue ball where the ghostball is located is such a subconscious thing. What I *do* think about, at least for the first couple of racks, is any English (side/follow/draw), and the amount of power I need to use to deliver the cue ball -- i.e. how to start getting into the mode of "getting the cue ball on a string." Virtually all of my thought is put into that cue ball. Once I get warmed up and stroked-in, even *that* conscious thought process starts to disappear. I then step outside of myself, and start to think more in terms of the pattern for the "out." Once warmed up and've gotten a feel for the cue ball, the shot process and delivering the cue ball requires no conscious thought -- just the pattern for the "out" now.
Jude Rosenstock mentioned the book, "The Inner Game of Tennis." And with this, he "hit the nail on the head." That is one of the best books ever written. Very highly recommended reading for those interested in "the zone" and how to get into it.
Unfortunately, when I view these aiming system threads, I think people are discarding their most powerful tool -- the subconscious mind. With these aiming system threads, they are going in the wrong direction. They make up excuses like "oh, I don't have the ability the pro has in just pocketing balls so easily, so I have to rely upon a 'system' that gives me reference points to aim at," and intentionally engage their conscious mind on every shot. Having to calculate that "fire control solution" each and every time, instead of drawing on their huge storehouse of "been there, done that, old hat" subconscious knowledge of how to make that shot. They've already missed -- they just don't know it yet. The conscious mind can only stay "engaged" for so long, before boredom or fatigue sets in (the conscious mind "wants" to wander onto other things, to daydream, etc.).
The problem is, people don't trust their subconscious mind, that massive storehouse of "how to do this without thinking" assembly line of execution. They want to "be in control" at all times. And, the unfortunate thing is, not trusting the subconscious mind *is* not trusting "the zone." That is what "the zone" is -- when the subconscious mind takes over, runs the table with the greatest of ease, and after all is said and done, there's this wonderful sense of accomplishment, of well-being, that is *NOT* gained having done the same with the conscious mind. No, with the conscious mind, one always over-analyzes the situation, saying how he/she should've taken this particular shot over here, or how he/she overran her position with the cue ball over there, yada yada yada. Instead of "I shot good" (sound familiar? our old friend Efren Reyes?), they go, "...whine, whine, whine..."
Someone (NewStroke?) replied to this thread with the notion that when he's "in the zone," he almost can't recall a single shot he made while in it. Gosh, I know this well! After a match, someone will have come up to me and ask me about a particular shot, how I did it or how did I think to fit that into my pattern. I'll most often scratch my head, and not know. I'll try, and I *may* recall the shot -- if it was a tough one that required me to navigate the cue ball in amongst a mess, or if I had to break-up a cluster with it. But other than that, I don't think in terms of individual shots when "in the zone" -- no, I think in terms of the "out" or the "W." I think this is the nature of what our wonderful game/sport is about -- to seek enjoyment by entering that zone; the process carries itself.
Hope this was helpful!
-Sean
Last edited:
driving a car
Put another way, feel is like driving a car. You think that you want to accomplish a task. You let your subconscious and unconscious minds figure out the details. It takes a little experience to be able to do that but once you get there it is far easier than any conscious aiming method.
Hu
Put another way, feel is like driving a car. You think that you want to accomplish a task. You let your subconscious and unconscious minds figure out the details. It takes a little experience to be able to do that but once you get there it is far easier than any conscious aiming method.
Hu
sfleinen, you have said in your post #46( to long to quote ) exactly
what I've been trying to express in all my meanderings about the subject.
Here are two posts from another thread. The first is mine. The second (in response) is mosconiac's)
>You could tell that, "Cold As Ice," Frost and Preacher Ronn were using aiming systems every shot for 29 hours. You betcha!!
>Yeah, I heard that self-deprecating outburst from Scott at around hour 23... "That shot required a 3rd order pivot in the inter-stationary control space, not a 4th order pivot-pause-roll parabola. I'm such a dunder head".
what I've been trying to express in all my meanderings about the subject.
Here are two posts from another thread. The first is mine. The second (in response) is mosconiac's)
>You could tell that, "Cold As Ice," Frost and Preacher Ronn were using aiming systems every shot for 29 hours. You betcha!!
>Yeah, I heard that self-deprecating outburst from Scott at around hour 23... "That shot required a 3rd order pivot in the inter-stationary control space, not a 4th order pivot-pause-roll parabola. I'm such a dunder head".
Last edited:
When we all first pick up a cue we all aim by feel. But even though we think it's just feel our brain is doing alot of calculating.
Little by little we gain better ways for our eyes and brain to decifer the info it gets to aim the shot better. Every piece of info we learn to use is helpful. You can never get enough info.
Years back the Indians were fighting the cowboys the Indians had no guns. When they did get them they really didn't know how to aim very well. As with pool naturally was just not good enough to be very successful. If it was the American Indians probably would be running the country and maybe should be. It was theirs.
Anyone can learn to aim a gun fairly quickly. Put the sight in the sight and make sure it is on the target and the results can be very quick.
With a pool shot there are natural sights also but nobody knows where they are. This is why so many players get down on a shot and it doesn't look quite right. They get back up and go back down and this time it looks right. Now the eyes are in a more correct position to see the shot better. Sometimes it just doesn't look right and you have the same trouble with that same shot all the time. Move the head back and forth and you will see that you can find that spot.
There is that perfect spot for every shot. We just have to find it right away because there is no replay when we shoot a shot.
This can be learned. Once it is learned your aim can improve greatly.
We all aim by feel and naturally. To know how to correct the aim to see every shot perfect is the quickest way to get to the next level and be the best we can be.
Little by little we gain better ways for our eyes and brain to decifer the info it gets to aim the shot better. Every piece of info we learn to use is helpful. You can never get enough info.
Years back the Indians were fighting the cowboys the Indians had no guns. When they did get them they really didn't know how to aim very well. As with pool naturally was just not good enough to be very successful. If it was the American Indians probably would be running the country and maybe should be. It was theirs.
Anyone can learn to aim a gun fairly quickly. Put the sight in the sight and make sure it is on the target and the results can be very quick.
With a pool shot there are natural sights also but nobody knows where they are. This is why so many players get down on a shot and it doesn't look quite right. They get back up and go back down and this time it looks right. Now the eyes are in a more correct position to see the shot better. Sometimes it just doesn't look right and you have the same trouble with that same shot all the time. Move the head back and forth and you will see that you can find that spot.
There is that perfect spot for every shot. We just have to find it right away because there is no replay when we shoot a shot.
This can be learned. Once it is learned your aim can improve greatly.
We all aim by feel and naturally. To know how to correct the aim to see every shot perfect is the quickest way to get to the next level and be the best we can be.
IMO feel = experience. Once you've played long enough each shot feels right or it doesn't. I use the "Put it in the hole" aiming method which is hit the contact point of the OB straight opposite the pocket and hit that. You know if you're 'on' or not. I personally think all the CTE and back hand this and that just adds up to too much fluff and over thinking of the shot.
I think you could compare aiming to readers, some can do it better than others. They understand the letters, sounds and how they react with each other. You have groups that might require a dictionary etc for many, many words or guess the word after seeing the first couple letters and get it wrong...
Once you aim enough the brain detects the line before you have a chance to think about it. It is trained to focus on pocketing balls (not missing balls). I think the great players are hardwired like this from the start.
Once you aim enough the brain detects the line before you have a chance to think about it. It is trained to focus on pocketing balls (not missing balls). I think the great players are hardwired like this from the start.
I dunno I'd have to see a pic of what you're talking about. It just tells you where the cue ball is heading before it hits a rail... and only for shots with natural roll or follow... and for cuts between 1/4 ball and 3/4 ball. So that's... what... about 15 degree cuts to 60 degree cuts.
I've used it and it helps, whitey goes right where my middle finger is pointing.
Nice post, Sean. Yes, I understand what you are saying. My description of "feel aiming" was that one just kind of senses the right cut angle or cue ball path (based on prior experience) rather than using any system or reference points. Your post takes it to a much higher level than I did -- perhaps "playing by feel" rather than just aiming a single shot by feel. The elevated state where my subconscious mind takes over and puts me "in the zone" is not something with which I have gobs of experience. :smile:
This thread has turned out to be quite interesting with some well thought out responses and good points.
Here are the original questions I asked and the general majority consensus regarding aiming by feel:
1. Is feel the same for all players in determining what to do and how to use it?
a. "feel" is something you develop on your own.
b. Probably not because different people learn in different ways.
c. Maybe it's "feel" but I would call it "visualizing the shot". I don't think the term "feel" is accurate.
d. No
2. Is feel transferrable from one player to the next and can it be taught?
a. Nope, it's experience. You could say it's taught... but it's self-taught.
b. No, feel is individual. but feel theory can be discussed.
3. How is feel geometrically correct over all other methods?
a. Pool isn't geometrical, it's far more complicated than that. All I know is, geometry, as a subject, does not cover pool in its entirety.
b. I doubt that it is. It is based more on neurological principles of learning than on math.
c. But feel doesn't claim geometrical correctness and obviously can't be illustrated as such. It just claims results.
d. It's not, but who cares about geometry when you are spinning, bending, curving and pinching balls anyway.
4. Can feel be illustrated on a Wei table?
a. No, because the Wei table is two dimensional and it doesn't give a player the correct perspective we are used to. Depth perception is needed to properly visualize a shot.
b. No
5. Can the exactness of feel be shown in an algebraic or mathematical formula which seems to be the final word to validate a system?
a. Nope. Not many systems can. Ghost ball, I guess could.
b. Aim must add in depth perception, the players head position, speed, spin and the other forces that affect the shot -"mentally seeing the shot". I will add that playing on tight pockets requires more exactness and better visualization - playing on such a table develops sharpness.
6. Is feel the same for an APA3 or anything in between compared to a short stop or pro?
a. No. The better player will have much higher levels of precision. I saw Johnny Archer shoot between two balls that could have had as little as 1/8th inch of clearance - I couldn't believe he could do it. Now, that's visualization.
7. Is feel consistent and exact from one shot to the next or from one day to the next?
a. No. If you feel good physically and mentally, "feel" is much easier, but if you don't, your "feel" will feel like crap. Same way you can play phenomenal, and then get tired and suck. It's all relative to that individual at that particular time.
b. No. Brain activity has measureable differences day to day which can be influenced by mood, rest, health and many other things. In truth, there is no physical activity you can successfully mimic day to day, not one.
8. How do you know if your feel manipulation is correct or incorrect before taking the shot?
a. You don't.
b. No way of knowing, I will say, in fact, that if I can't visualize the shot properly, that is my first clue that something is amiss.
c. I will say that you don't always know it's correct. Everyone misses from time to time. There will be times when you believe you're aiming for the correct spot only to realize afterward you weren't.
d. Sometimes you just aren't sure, you only know you're in the ballpark but not positive you're on the exact line.
I'm with you guys on playing by feel because I do play that way most of the time and my answers fall right in line with yours.
But after spending a good amount of time in person with Hal Houle learning CTE and other pivot based systems, there's a flip side of me that asks why I don't use it 100% of the time based on yours and my answers to this thread. It also brings up some questions as to why more people don't get involved with it and how "feel" is highly praised as the best way and CTE is vilified, castigated, and denounced.
After reviewing and analyzing all the responses, here's what I'm taking from them:
Aiming by feel is the best way to do it, yet it is: (based on question 1-8) 1. HIGHLY INDIVIDUAL 2.cannot be transferred from one person to the next or taught 3.cannot be proven from one player to the next to be geometrically correct because no one knows how others are seeing it and setting up 4. It can't be placed on a Wei table because of variations from one shot to the next even for the same ball placement or how you come to the conclusion of the final aiming point 5. It certainly can't be illustrated in a math or geometry formula from one player to the next or even know if it's on the money to begin with 6. A lesser player compared to a higher level player isn't developed the same way nor see things with the same perspective 7. It's very inconsistent from one day to the next based on physical, emotional, energy levels, or focus and concentration 8. You're never really certain if the "inner voice" is giving you the right advice or the wrong advice on what looks on or off with the shot and where you should hit the CB or aim.
CTE and other pivot based systems have a few things in common with "feel aiming" but get blasted by certain people who don't fully understand the way to do it properly. They're pounced on due to unproven geometrical correctness, the inability to show a Wei table set up or two-dimensional drawing, or to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the mathematical accuracy that can't possibly work for anything to do changes from on table to the next or other variables.
Why is it perfectly OK for feel aiming but not CTE?
CTE can be the same for all players and how to use it; it is transferrable from on player to the next and can be taught; if balls are going in the hole and the pocketing % is higher, it must be geometrically correct; it adds to consistency because there are specific visual alignments that aren't dependent on daily bio-rhythms or setup variables to "sense" the aiming point; it's been proven by some highly talented pros to be effective based on it's concept.
Am I off base with my assessment or missing something? Do you see anything much differently with all of the posts right here in front of us?
Thanks to everyone so far for the well thought out responses.
Koop
Here are the original questions I asked and the general majority consensus regarding aiming by feel:
1. Is feel the same for all players in determining what to do and how to use it?
a. "feel" is something you develop on your own.
b. Probably not because different people learn in different ways.
c. Maybe it's "feel" but I would call it "visualizing the shot". I don't think the term "feel" is accurate.
d. No
2. Is feel transferrable from one player to the next and can it be taught?
a. Nope, it's experience. You could say it's taught... but it's self-taught.
b. No, feel is individual. but feel theory can be discussed.
3. How is feel geometrically correct over all other methods?
a. Pool isn't geometrical, it's far more complicated than that. All I know is, geometry, as a subject, does not cover pool in its entirety.
b. I doubt that it is. It is based more on neurological principles of learning than on math.
c. But feel doesn't claim geometrical correctness and obviously can't be illustrated as such. It just claims results.
d. It's not, but who cares about geometry when you are spinning, bending, curving and pinching balls anyway.
4. Can feel be illustrated on a Wei table?
a. No, because the Wei table is two dimensional and it doesn't give a player the correct perspective we are used to. Depth perception is needed to properly visualize a shot.
b. No
5. Can the exactness of feel be shown in an algebraic or mathematical formula which seems to be the final word to validate a system?
a. Nope. Not many systems can. Ghost ball, I guess could.
b. Aim must add in depth perception, the players head position, speed, spin and the other forces that affect the shot -"mentally seeing the shot". I will add that playing on tight pockets requires more exactness and better visualization - playing on such a table develops sharpness.
6. Is feel the same for an APA3 or anything in between compared to a short stop or pro?
a. No. The better player will have much higher levels of precision. I saw Johnny Archer shoot between two balls that could have had as little as 1/8th inch of clearance - I couldn't believe he could do it. Now, that's visualization.
7. Is feel consistent and exact from one shot to the next or from one day to the next?
a. No. If you feel good physically and mentally, "feel" is much easier, but if you don't, your "feel" will feel like crap. Same way you can play phenomenal, and then get tired and suck. It's all relative to that individual at that particular time.
b. No. Brain activity has measureable differences day to day which can be influenced by mood, rest, health and many other things. In truth, there is no physical activity you can successfully mimic day to day, not one.
8. How do you know if your feel manipulation is correct or incorrect before taking the shot?
a. You don't.
b. No way of knowing, I will say, in fact, that if I can't visualize the shot properly, that is my first clue that something is amiss.
c. I will say that you don't always know it's correct. Everyone misses from time to time. There will be times when you believe you're aiming for the correct spot only to realize afterward you weren't.
d. Sometimes you just aren't sure, you only know you're in the ballpark but not positive you're on the exact line.
I'm with you guys on playing by feel because I do play that way most of the time and my answers fall right in line with yours.
But after spending a good amount of time in person with Hal Houle learning CTE and other pivot based systems, there's a flip side of me that asks why I don't use it 100% of the time based on yours and my answers to this thread. It also brings up some questions as to why more people don't get involved with it and how "feel" is highly praised as the best way and CTE is vilified, castigated, and denounced.
After reviewing and analyzing all the responses, here's what I'm taking from them:
Aiming by feel is the best way to do it, yet it is: (based on question 1-8) 1. HIGHLY INDIVIDUAL 2.cannot be transferred from one person to the next or taught 3.cannot be proven from one player to the next to be geometrically correct because no one knows how others are seeing it and setting up 4. It can't be placed on a Wei table because of variations from one shot to the next even for the same ball placement or how you come to the conclusion of the final aiming point 5. It certainly can't be illustrated in a math or geometry formula from one player to the next or even know if it's on the money to begin with 6. A lesser player compared to a higher level player isn't developed the same way nor see things with the same perspective 7. It's very inconsistent from one day to the next based on physical, emotional, energy levels, or focus and concentration 8. You're never really certain if the "inner voice" is giving you the right advice or the wrong advice on what looks on or off with the shot and where you should hit the CB or aim.
CTE and other pivot based systems have a few things in common with "feel aiming" but get blasted by certain people who don't fully understand the way to do it properly. They're pounced on due to unproven geometrical correctness, the inability to show a Wei table set up or two-dimensional drawing, or to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the mathematical accuracy that can't possibly work for anything to do changes from on table to the next or other variables.
Why is it perfectly OK for feel aiming but not CTE?
CTE can be the same for all players and how to use it; it is transferrable from on player to the next and can be taught; if balls are going in the hole and the pocketing % is higher, it must be geometrically correct; it adds to consistency because there are specific visual alignments that aren't dependent on daily bio-rhythms or setup variables to "sense" the aiming point; it's been proven by some highly talented pros to be effective based on it's concept.
Am I off base with my assessment or missing something? Do you see anything much differently with all of the posts right here in front of us?
Thanks to everyone so far for the well thought out responses.
Koop
Not sure why I deserved red for this thread but I won't stoop and hit you back.
If you don't like the thread, or me, then stay away, pretty simple.
I tried that aim by feel method one night with my second wife. What I felt damn near scared me to death and I never tried it again. 
Only sissies give red reps for threads that have legitimate questions.
Hey Koop,
Even though I am not a fan of most aiming systems (not sure what CTE is), there's another level of thought that kinda plays into this. "Feel" is ALWAYS there. For example, speed control is ONLY feel, no system has been developed for that. I think, as a player improves, even if they're using an aiming method, an internal feel method begins to penetrate their game. Perhaps they use it as a red-alert like, if it doesn't feel right, get up. Perhaps they use feel to know when their aiming-method's limitations have been met. I don't think any decent player completely ignores their instincts.
Thanks Jude. CTE = Center to Edge, which is what Hal Houle teaches.
I like the bolded statement and I agree.