JFidanza:
Well, you've been wrong before, like us all, e.g. when you disagreed with what fmags and I were talking about. But since you're always right I won't even point out where it states changing variables of precision, and then graphically representing them back to the player, like the 'crosshairs' (akin to the meter) and that skill level w/ determine the amount of precision attainable from your equipment by the player (which will determine variables)...
...which was all read out to me in English by someone I know who can read the legal patent correctly because they went to Stetson law and is actually a lawyer, and confirmed the facts, to which you will continue to deflect, but because you are not a versed it what the program is legally required to write out...
...I won't waste my time arguing, yet again, like the last thread where you were incorrect and believing that fmagnets and I were making up stories about how WGT maps the hole down an inch. That was funny.
I might agree to disagree and you can have another meltdown, making up more counter points like last time but all the facts are there in legal terms, which I guess you, and a few others, just can't grasp, even with all your wisdom.
Who's deflecting now? Bringing up some other discussion, misrepresenting the facts btw, adds no value to your POV.
Let's be clear about your POV. You claim VEM affects the smoothness of the meter and your "proof" is the VEM patent says "changing variables of precision, and then graphically representing them back to the player, like the 'crosshairs' (akin to the meter) and that skill level w/ determine the amount of precision attainable from your equipment by the player (which will determine variables)..." and that this is accurate because a lawyer you know explained the patent to you in English.
Go see your lawyer friend again. Here are excerpts(for clarity) from the VEM patent you mangled:
"
the VEM 306 minimally includes variables, as described above, representing precision, accuracy, one or more distribution curves, ,,, thresholds, and sweet spots. If the virtual equipment is a golf club, for instance, variables can include stroke power, club face trajectory, distribution curves and associated sweet spots and thresholds for stroke power and club face trajectory, club accuracy, and club precision.
Generally speaking, a VEM 306 variable's value can be based on a user input, a user's skill level at using the virtual equipment, the attribute of the virtual equipment itself, the state of the virtual universe..as determined by a game engine 310, configuration information, the value of one or more other variables, and combinations of these.
An input model 302 maps user inputs ..to one or more variable values for variables in the set of variables associated for VEM 306. The VEM 306 interprets user input provided by the input model 302 using the set of relationships. The VEM 306 has an associated representation 304 of the virtual equipment that is presented to a user, such as through a graphical display means.... For example, in a first person shooter game a virtual gun can have a graphical representation consisting of cross hairs indicating where the gun is currently pointed"
Emphasis added by me.
That's the only mention of cross hairs in the entire VEM patent! As an example of how a first person shooter game presents virtual equipment to the player. And you conclude this is "akin to the meter"? Wouldn't that be akin to WGT's aim box?
Nowhere in the list of VEM variables are meter speed or meter smoothness mentioned. Its a Virtual EQUIPMENT Model not a Virtual METER Model. Think about it, how would they correctly determine user skill level if they were messing with user input?
JFidanza: but because you are not a versed it what the program is legally required to write out...
JFidanza: but all the facts are there in legal terms, which I guess you, and a few others, just can't grasp,
Typical JF, you make these outrageous claims without proof and without even knowing me.
I am well versed in understanding the legalese of a patent having served on our company's Patent Application Review Board for 10 years. I've reviewed hundreds of patent applications for technical accuracy and clarity and provided my 3rd party, unbiased input on the usefulness, novelty, and inventiveness of the invention. (members of the board recused themselves if the application was from within their departments.) So yeah, having worked hand-in-hand with patent attorneys for 10 years I think I got this. I don't need anyone to explain the VEM patent to me.
You offered no valid evidence that VEM messes with the meter. Your opinion(mis-guided as it is) of what the VEM patent says is not evidence. Its still opinion. And to state the meter is running as programmed by VEM is nonsense! P.T. Barnum couldn't have done better.
Since you brought it up in an attempt to deflect and discredit me, lets look at your misrepresentation of the facts of this discussion.
JFidanza: like the last thread where you were incorrect and believing that fmagnets and I were making up stories about how WGT maps the hole down an inch.
I did not disagree that WGT maps the hole down an inch. Mags said it was more likely the OP was on a continuous downslope. I disagreed and said it was more likely the OP was putting into a valley as my example showed.
I would never disagree WGT maps stuff to the inch as I know they laser scan the greens and use Geo-referencing technology as well.
JFidanza: you can have another meltdown, making up more counter points like last time
I don't make stuff up. I have facts or examples to back it up. You demanded in that thread someone post an example of one of those valley putts and when I did you dismissed it because it didn't agree with what you say you experienced. I asked you to post an example of what you say you experienced many times but you never did post one.
And btw, I do think Fmags observation of WGT mapping either the center of the ball as up 1 inch or mapping the cup as 1 inch down has merit. He's supported it with his test video. And it could explain those close in putts on flat greens that show as downhill.
Call this a meltdown if you want to make fun of me some more, its OK, I know I'm a stickler for facts and unsupported opinions presented as gospel.
Are we supposed to know this TM person you referred to? I'm a pain in the ass but I'm not psychic!