Is it a foul to use a piece of chalk as a measuring device?

[MattPoland]

The f. must be a correction of the miss application of the cue on the table rule I saw ....well it was 10 or more years ago. Nice to see improvements made.
Giving hope to petitioning the rules committee if you think a rule is "retarded".

That’s one difference from WPA rules. World standardized rules require your hand on the cue to measure an angle. CSI does not.

 

[gregcantrall]

Reductio absurdum, That mean inane dismissing??

In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity"), also known as argumentum ad absurdum (Latin for "argument to absurdity") or apagogical arguments, is the form of argument that attempts to establish a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to absurdity or contradiction.[1][2][3][4] This argument form traces back to Ancient Greek philosophy and has been used throughout history in both formal mathematical and philosophical reasoning, as well as in debate.

Google's People Ask tells me

An example of reductio ad absurdum would be a an anti-Equal Rights advocate claiming that anyone in favor of an Equal Right Amendment must be in favor of killing babies. The reductio ad absurdum fallacy is similar to the straw person fallacy.

So my being in favor of following the rules doesn't mean I am in favor of the rule. Blatant and or obvious miss application of same would fall in same category.

So I was sitting in traffic court awaiting my case. The person before me was miffed at the judgement and called the judge an Asshole. The judge responded with, "contempt of court $50. Next!" My judgement went the same way. So I said, "Judge, I saw you fine him for calling you an asshole." His simple response was "Yes?" "Well can you fine me for thinking?" Was my question. Upon hearing no, my response was, "Good because I think you're an asshole."

 

[gregcantrall]

People also ask


What is a strawman argument example?


Strawman Argument Example

Strawman arguments commonly occur when making choices. A person takes someone else's point then exaggerates it. For example, a teacher recommends longer class lectures. A person using strawman may reply, “No, because that means giving a perfect score to students.”

 

[ShootingArts]

People also ask


What is a strawman argument example?


Strawman Argument Example

Strawman arguments commonly occur when making choices. A person takes someone else's point then exaggerates it. For example, a teacher recommends longer class lectures. A person using strawman may reply, “No, because that means giving a perfect score to students.”

A sumbitch got me many years ago. He created an article that was published in a magazine with a pretty much worldwide distribution. He twisted something I had said in a thread and mocked me in the article. Everyone who had seen the thread on a fair sized international site knew exactly who he was talking about as he had recorded my words faithfully enough for the most part. My first thought was to fire off a letter to the editor which probably would have been published but a quarter or less of the people that read the article might see the letter. You got me you old bastard! Less than a year later I had a chance to make a fool of him on a busy internet site where I was at least as well respected as he was. I directed people from a few more sites there for good measure! While having my fun I made it appear that fifteen or twenty times as many people were reading my posts in the thread as were reading his, paybacks for him having the magazine bully pulpit!

Haven't thought of him in years. He is long ago dust best I recall. Still if I see him when I go to my just reward I'll smack him in the teeth! I'm not one to hold a grudge but I'm still of the opinion that the doctor slapped my ass harder than he needed to when I was born, and he definitely didn't need to put any spin on the shot.

Hu

 

[ShootingArts]

An hour late but I have been meaning to type out a Thanksgiving present to everyone reading this thread and haven't gotten around to it.

Generally if we are trying to get through a gap narrow enough it takes a lot of effort to decide if a ball will go through there, regardless of having clearance, we are still going to contact something and miss the shot.

The reason is fairly simple. We see in straight lines, the cue ball rarely travels in a straight line. That means that for these shots instead of the usual two component shot, pocketing the ball, and shape, we are now dealing with a three component shot, getting through the gap, pocketing the ball, and shape.

The trick is to decide what the cue ball has to do from the gap to the object ball to make the shot. Once we figure that, we are going to almost forget about that, we have to get through the gap! The trick is to forget about the object ball, forget about the pocket, we have established how we need to get through the gap to make these things work.

Aim for the gap. We know that everything will work if we go through the gap so forget about the object ball, forget about the pocket, our target is the gap. These are tough shots so we still won't make them all but once we start consistently going through the gap without fouling or knocking our cue ball way off line we have a much better chance of making these shots.

If it is the object ball that has to go through a tight opening that we can't really see well from behind the cue ball the trick is to look at how to barely pass by the nearer side of the gap and then focus on the contact point on the cue ball to achieve that.

These ways of thinking and aiming work for me and I don't think there is anybody any better at not going through gaps than I was. I would have sworn the balls had an attraction to each other!

Hu