Perception...what you see ain't always real

This whole argument could be settled if somebody would create a "machine/robot" that did the aiming and shooting.

It wouldn't have to be anything fancy and probably could be built relative cheap, using off-the-shelf parts and technology, by one of our MANY scientists on here.
 
HawaiianEye said:
This whole argument could be settled if somebody would create a "machine/robot" that did the aiming and shooting.
Click to expand...
It can't be done, and that's the point. No robot could follow CTE's instructions ("acquire the visual"?) - a basic test of objectivity.

pj
chgo
 
HawaiianEye said:
This whole argument could be settled if somebody would create a "machine/robot" that did the aiming and shooting.

It wouldn't have to be anything fancy and probably could be built relative cheap, using off-the-shelf parts and technology, by one of our MANY scientists on here.
Click to expand...

It would be about the programming.

Or...

Perhaps a remote controlled cueing mechanism that is 'aimed' from a camera monitor that ONLY sees the the two balls & nothing else but green or blue cloth.

A CTEer would look at the random shots & relay the visual, like CTE & ETA with a thinning pivot. Then a technician that only knows how to set the cue exactly 1/2 tip parallel from the ONLY LINE from upon where those two can be seen simultaneously would set the cue & the mechanism would make the 1/2 tip pivot & shoot.

I'd hazard a guess that the CTE side would balk at that.

Best Wishes.
 
ENGLISH! said:
It would be about the programming.

Or...

Perhaps a remote controlled cueing mechanism that is 'aimed' from a camera monitor that ONLY sees the the two balls & nothing else but green or blue cloth.

A CTEer would look at the random shots & relay the visual, like CTE & ETA with a thinning pivot. Then a technician that only knows how to set the cue exactly 1/2 tip parallel from the ONLY LINE from upon where those two can be seen simultaneously would set the cue & the mechanism would make the 1/2 tip pivot & shoot.

I'd hazard a guess that the CTE side would balk at that.

Best Wishes.
Click to expand...

So, you think we would balk at a test that only uses some of the proper steps and is doomed to fail....hmmm.........glad to say you finally got something right!
 
ENGLISH! said:
A CTEer would look at the random shots & relay the visual, like CTE & ETA with a thinning pivot.
Click to expand...
And then what? How does the robot translate those two lines into a direction to point the stick?

CTE's instructions are too vague to be tested that way. That's a test in itself.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
Patrick Johnson said:
And then what? How does the robot translate those two lines into a direction to point the stick?

CTE's instructions are too vague to be tested that way.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Actually Pat, the directions make it quite obvious which direction to point the stick. You just gloss over it all the time because you don't take it to the table to try and understand it.

hint: fixed cb
 
Patrick Johnson said:
And then what? How does the robot translate those two lines into a direction to point the stick?

CTE's instructions are too vague to be tested that way. That's a test in itself.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

A technician that would control the cueing mechanism while looking only at a camera monitor would set the cue the precise 1/2 tip parallel to the single line that bisects the CTE & ETA lines perhaps even with computer assistance & then pivot to center & shoot.

The point being no subjectivity since the line is chosen via an announced visual & direction of pivot by a CTE user, say Stan, & then the setting of the cue performed by a remote controlled cue mechanism manipulated by a technician that need not know anything other than set the cue 1/2 tip parallel to a certain side of the line bisecting the called out visual lines before the pivot & then pull the trigger.

If that were done for the 5 shots, the first might pocket & the the rest would be driven into the short rail at the same distance of separation as is the parallel shots because the subjective 'perception' has been taken out of the picture & the system would be performed objectively.
 
Last edited:
Neil said:
So, you think we would balk at a test that only uses some of the proper steps and is doomed to fail....hmmm.........glad to say you finally got something right!
Click to expand...

No OBJECTIVE step was left out.

THAT is what YOU simply do NOT understand.

The 'move until you see it' is NOT an objective step. That is purely subjective based.

Best Wishes.
 
CTE is the most accurate subjective way to aim a shot. It so perfect that it feels totally objective and produces perfect shot lines for experienced users.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
 
ENGLISH! said:
No OBJECTIVE step was left out.

THAT is what YOU simply do NOT understand.

The 'move until you see it' is NOT an objective step. That is purely subjective based.

Best Wishes.
Click to expand...

And, despite the actual definitions being given on here, and you even posting some of them, you still fail to understand the meanings of the words. You take one isolated case of a definition where there are several definitions, and cling to that to try and make a case. All the while discarding any other legitimate definitions that do apply.

Not to mention the fact that you are the only one on here that seems to have a problem with the definition of the word.
 
Neil said:
And, despite the actual definitions being given on here, and you even posting some of them, you still fail to understand the meanings of the words. You take one isolated case of a definition where there are several definitions, and cling to that to try and make a case. All the while discarding any other legitimate definitions that do apply.

Not to mention the fact that you are the only one on here that seems to have a problem with the definition of the word.
Click to expand...

That is completely misleading.

There are several here at AZB that are vocal about CTE not being an objective 'system' & more that think like that but are not as vocal or vocal at all about it in public.

Post the definition that YOU think is applicable. I'm fairly sure I know what it is & it is NOT how it was used.

But... go ahead & post it & maybe we can get Stan to agree with it.

Best Wishes.
 
JB Cases said:
CTE is the most accurate subjective way to aim a shot. It so perfect that it feels totally objective and produces perfect shot lines for experienced users.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

John,

What definitive scientific test results do you have to support & confirm your statements of it being 'the most accurate subjective way to aim a shot' & produces perfect shot lines?

I'm asking because you did not qualify them as being in your opinion.

So... I would then think that what I ask for must exist in order for you to make them so definitively, as I doubt that you would otherwise be so irresponsible.

Best Wishes.
 
ENGLISH! said:
That is completely misleading.

There are several here at AZB that are vocal about CTE not being an objective 'system' & more that think like that but are not as vocal or vocal at all about it in public.

Post the definition that YOU think is applicable. I'm fairly sure I know what it is & it is NOT how it was used.

But... go ahead & post it & maybe we can get Stan to agree with it.

Best Wishes.
Click to expand...

Rick, all you have to do is google the word. I'm not playing your games. This is really getting old. Same old nonsense for years. Go learn the system on the table, then come back and talk about it.
 
ENGLISH! said:
...set the cue the precise 1/2 tip parallel to the single line that bisects the CTE & ETA lines
Click to expand...
Nobody has said that line is the CTE visual. The CTE visual is undefined - that's the issue.

We don't need to test whether a carefully defined setup creates only one cut angle - we know that already.

pj
chgo
 
Neil said:
Rick, all you have to do is google the word. I'm not playing your games. This is really getting old. Same old nonsense for years. Go learn the system on the table, then come back and talk about it.
Click to expand...

Same tactics.

Complain about something & then when asked to clarify make an excuse & then run back into the hills like a gorilla fighter trying to leave an impression as though a battle was won.

The intelligent members & readers here can see right through this habitual tactic.

ob·jec·tive
əbˈjektiv/Submit
adjective
1.
(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
"historians try to be objective and impartial"
synonyms: impartial, unbiased, unprejudiced, nonpartisan, disinterested, neutral, uninvolved, even-handed, equitable, fair, fair-minded, just, open-minded, dispassionate, detached, neutral
"I was hoping to get an objective and pragmatic report"

Best Wishes.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Nobody has said that line is the CTE visual. The CTE visual is undefined - that's the issue.

We don't need to test whether a carefully defined setup creates only one cut angle - we know that already.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

Who are 'we'?

It appears that Cookie, Neil, Morht, Stan, & others don't agree, hence the 5 parallel shots from that same visual & pivot.

You, I, & some others here understand. There is not now & probably never will be any objective directions or instructions on how to arrive at the shot line in a completely objective manner.

Either they do not understand that or... they are being disingenuous in the 'discussions'.

He certainly won't admit it or doesn't understand it, but Neil's balking at my test suggestion referring to a step or steps being left out indicates that it is not objective in it's entirety & is dependent on the subjective interpretation of the shot at hand, at least based on his rejection of my proposed test for the reason that he states.

Best Wishes.

PS It seems that Neil's interpretation of 'objective' is that 'anyone can or should be able to do it'. He either does not understand the real meaning of the word or is just being disingenuous in the 'discussions'.
 
Last edited:
Anyone that is considering buying & trying CTE should certainly do so but should understand that the assertion that it is an 'objective aiming "system''' at it's core has not been proven nor 'convincingly' unproven to some & is a point of much contention by myself & some others.

If that is not an issue for consideration then have at it.
 
Last edited:
(((Satori))) said:
Can you or Dr dave determine how many degrees a 1/2 tip pivot makes? I know this depends on tip width and the bridge legth but in video one Stan tells the appropriate bridge legths. I cant remember now... but if we could get that bridge length again (and what tip width is required), and determine how many degrees of change a one half tip pivot makes, it would give us what is suppose to be the cte viuals or a single line when viewing the cte visuals.
Click to expand...
When viewing what CTE visuals? Where do we place the cue before pivoting? Parallel to what line?

pj
chgo
 
ENGLISH! said:
It appears that Cookie, Neil, Morht, Stan, & others don't agree, hence the 5 parallel shots from that same visual & pivot.
Click to expand...
They don't agree that it's the same "visual". You have to convince them of that first.

In your own way you understand as little as they do.

pj
chgo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top