Many people in pool rooms are not overly accurate in what they say.
you noticed too
Many people in pool rooms are not overly accurate in what they say.
they say theres a fine line between genius and madness, old Bert never looked the full shilling to me.
I'm embarrassed for you and me if this is a Dixie Chix reference. If it is well played sir, that was a good one. Wait I think that was Earl, whatever.
You would only win your bet if the pocket were the exact size of the ball on one side and 1-atom wider on the other end... and that wouldn't include the elasticity of the pocket. If you execute the same way and the ball goes, but in different parts of the pocket, it's the same shot as far as the construct of the question goes.Something is terribly wrong here !...The question was, how many "DIFFERENT" possible shots are there, not how many 'similar' shots there are !...Two guys could play for 6 months straight, and the "EXACT" same shot will never come up twice !..It will ALWAYS be a 'fraction' (or more) different !..Maybe a better question would have been..."How many different 'fraction's' are there" ???..(I feel like I'm talking to 'wool' !)
PS..I'm thinking seriously of taking up drinking again !...I have had more sensible conversations, with the drunk at the bar next to me...We made more sense, when we talked about quantum physic's and the medicinal extrapolation in small rodents, than this cluster ***k debate !
Adios, flyweights !![]()
No, I just think you two are confusing sub-atomic minutia in regards to shot differences with what could be, and should be, considered the same shot, perceptually speaking.1000% correct Bob !...I don't understand why Spidey and CJ did not challenge YOUR perfect logic?
...Suppose maybe they thought the old drunk, ex-pool player, was a 'softer target' ? (but then, they've both made that mistake several times before)...![]()
No, I just think you two are confusing sub-atomic minutia in regards to shot differences with what could be, and should be, considered the same shot, perceptually speaking.
"Picking fly shit out of pepper" when it's just "pepper."
In any one cut direction, I probably see about 5 shots, as far as my execution is concerned. Scientifically speaking, there are an infinite number of shots.Spidey, what a tangled web you weave !
It is YOU who keep trying to confuse "shots", with the number of possible DIFFERENT layouts, of object balls on a pool table !..Until you realize, that is NOT the question at hand...we will never end this debate !.."Perceptually speaking" as Bob, Dr. Dave and I have pointed out, it IS minutia based, and the possibilities of how the balls can wind up, are virtually limitless ! :sorry:
You are so fixated on 'different shots', you have even introduced 'pocket size' into the equation ???.. What could pocket sizes, possibly have to do with ANYTHING in this scenario ?..At least as MOST reasonable, clear thinking people, seem to interpret the question ?![]()
![]()
Maybe if you just took the cue ball 'OFF the table', you would have a better chance of understanding our point !..Reducing the number of balls to 15, from 16, won't change things much !.. Maybe only about one gazzilionth, of possible different layouts.
SJD---I keep hoping the light bulb will come on for you...It must be getting very dark in there !
View attachment 373675
In any one cut direction, I probably see about 5 shots, as far as my execution is concerned. Scientifically speaking, there are an infinite number of shots.<--I'm taking that as a concession..:thumbup:
I don't know why you're being condescending... just trying to have a friendly discussion. I'm not debating anything.<--Boy, sure had us fooled...230 posts, for a 'non-debate' ?![]()
San Jose... page back in the thread. I mentioned way back that the number of shots were infinite, if the answer is to be scientific in nature.Sorry Spidey, I did not mean to hurt your feeler's ! :embarrassed2:..I do tend to get a bit impatient, (and "Don Ricklish") when people refuse to see, or ignore, the obvious ! :sorry:
Peace (again)...End of discussion ! :wink:
SJD
Imagine an infinite line of fence posts, there are an infinite number of points between every two fence posts. So the infinite set of points between posts is a larger infinity than the infinity of the fence posts.
That makes sense. You gave me something to research. Thx.This example was not to prove the OP's question, but aimed at Don Owen's post where he said one infinity can be larger than another. This example illustrates that fact.
The shots on any pool table are contained within a specific area.
How can there be an infinite number of shots .?
If that were true,would there be the same amount of shots on a bar box compared to a Bigfoot...?
I just can't believe anyone gives a shit.
Now you're thinking - sometimes our problems are much easier than they first appear.
A "shot" was defined as the cue ball and {one} object ball creating a specific angle, contacted together with a specific speed, and tip target (accentuating a specific spin/deflection)........many of these same "shots" present themselves over and over. At the highest level of pool our subconscious can create any of these speeds, angles and spin/deflection rates as if they were the same shot...