But with poolology, newbies trying to use it would be groping and gasping at trying to figure out which fraction to see and pick to make those shots. "Is it this one or that one...no, it must be the other one. I can't find CCB. This looks screwy and like too much work. Now what was that part about all the math based on the diamond locations and shot line. I need a calculator, compass, and T-square. I think I have it. CRAP, I MISSED!"
The setup was for me to have a way to control and see the exact same thing as Dan was seeing just to learn the visuals and PIVOTS. The ball going in was secondary. It apparently served its purpose because he MISSED all of them as a result of not pivoting the right way.
Could I have had him throw balls out randomly with all kinds of cut angles from mild to severe and not knowing what he was doing or supposed to be doing? Sure, and it would have been a disaster with nothing to learn.
You can be a real wise ass and should learn to keep your nose out of where it doesn't belong, especially when you don't know what's really going on and why.
Uh.... I was just stating the reason why all 3 balls can hit the pocket with the same aim - large margin for error, large window of pocket accessibility.
You mentioned something like no other aiming method could do that, pocket all 3 shots with the same aim. That's just not true, which was my point: With a margin of error greater than 10°, the same aim using any method can pocket many different shots, some will go center hole and some will go left of right of center hole. Move the object balls out another 15 inches and that's when more refined aiming or tweaking would be needed.
Really, no sense in getting bent out of shape simply because you and Dan and PJ are having another little hissy fit over CTE. My post had nothing to do with CTE or Shiskabob or any aiming in general. I simply stated the reason why the aim reference can work for multiple shots when the object balls are close to the pocket.