phreaticus
Well-known member
He nuked my posts just because I called you & Spiderwuss wonder-twins & posted some silly gifs. Just how much censoring do you ladies require to get through a day without having an emotional meltdown?
My 2 cents on aiming systems
- Thread starter 406jwh
- Start date
Mike - this is as good a place as any to air this out. For YEARS now cookie thinks I know you from somewhere and that you give me special treatment because of that. I keep telling him I wouldn't know you if I tripped over you, but he can't give it up. He just called you dishonest by letting me slide when you shouldn't. Would you please straighten him out?
Last edited:
How does it even make sense that I would compare you to a jihadist? It makes NO SENSE. You don't seem to understand the concept of metaphor. When in the past have I ever called a CTE user a jihadist??? The analogy I used to use is that you are all cultists. That makes far more sense. I stopped doing that because we're not supposed to call each other names and I've tried to be more circumspect.
It was surely put out there to be interpreted in different ways and somewhat implied regarding a specific group who do AIM a certain way. A way you've bad mouthed for years without being able to duplicate at the table.
These last two sentences contradict each other. First it has nothing to do with aiming people, then it points out that aiming and non aiming people are never going to agree. You can't have it both ways. We CAN read.
Or maybe you don't care one way or the other. You said what you said and that's it.
It's not about aimers and non aimers. It's about HOW the aiming takes place and is done. Non aimers are beginner bangers because they don't know how to aim and what to look for.Let me rephrase my original statement: Getting aimers and non aimers to agree is as likely as making cute fuzzy little puppies and kittens look ugly. NOT GONNA HAPPEN!
Every pool player who plays regularly, AIMS either with the cue or linking the CB and OB together to make the OB go in a certain direction so it goes into a pocket.
Does that work for you, Danny?
Last edited:
Mike acted on his own. I don't know who you think you are but here you are doing it all over again. A real tough guy. If anyone should be banned, it would be you for thumbing your nose at Mike.
Are you crying right now. Sure seems like you are crying right now.
Good try but I never said Mike was dishonest. I said I wasn’t surprised by his response. He’s taken that same road and let you guys get away with everything for a long time now. It’s why the aiming forum is a shit show and everyone knows it.
I nuked those posts because they were just more attempts to derail posts and turn them into arguments. It was just stirring the pot. Yes, it was just a little, but a little tends to turn into a lot around here pretty quickly.
It's called stalking! You're so brazen that you even admit to it with pride.
There are far better names that would apply.
Did you ever consider not coming into the aiming forum to save all the angst? Not that bright, huh? Yes, you are a stalker and trying to create a SHIT SHOW every chance you can get. You're successful at that!
@phreaticus will be missed here in the aiming forum.
You have your opinion on how things should be moderated, and I have mine.
Let's agree to disagree.
I didn't think I said anything particularly notable, but I'll take it.
Nope, don't even go there.
I made a curtain video of my own to show that using a curtain does not necessarily validate any particular aiming system. Long time users know pretty much where the pocket is. CTEers mocked and chided, and intentionally misrepresented that video, but I'm glad at least one of you has come around to a more reasonable position.
I agree that the pocket is not important once the aiming decision has been made. It's about execution of the shot at that point.
The difference still is how the two balls are aligned to each other. The anti-CTEers (you for one) continue to claim it can't possibly work as stated.
The aiming method has always been the sticking point and controversy. Why? Because Hal Houle and Stan Shuffett created them, and it was jumped on since day one of Hal posting it on RSB and never let up for 25 years. Will it all end tomorrow...next week...next month...next year...next decade? Hell NO! Not until the main perpetrator and a few minions' croak. It could be
reaching that point though with age.
You know this is false. The controversy has always been about the misleading claims of its unique "exactness".
pj
chgo
i hope i dont get banned for this
azhousepro
you must understand for the guys that havent argued over the same thing for 25 years
we find the banter amusing
and occasionally from time time enter in
speaking for myself and maybe phreaticus
for amusement
although me personally have tried many times to get a peace accord with no success
you banning phreaticus who has only had a few posts and maybe provocative
is nothing like what goes on between dan white/patrick johnson/ cookie man/and spidey
yet you let them do the same sh*t to each other all the time
if you want the aiming section to be an educational part of your site
you need to stop them from interacting
its the same crap over and over
and does not teach anyone a thing
jmho
icbw
and i hope you take this as a constructive post and not an attack
Claims aren’t misleading if they are true. Can you point out exactly where CTE isn’t exact?
In defining aiming solutions.
To be fair, it's no less exact than other aiming systems - also no more.
pj
chgo
No less exact. No more exact. Not exact at all. Are you trying to make some kind of point?