Samba vs 90-90

I thought 90/90 only had 3 categories

Edge to Edge (Thick shots)

Edge to Center (Medium shots)

and

End to Opposite Edge (Thin shots)

I use 90/90 for: over a ball, jump shots and combo shots.

I'd be interested in knowing more.

SAMBA vs 90 - 90

Yes Samba devides the shots in more categories than 90-90 but is more accurate inmho.
On top SAMBA covers more than just shot making. It includes how to apply side spin using the method, how to use the method for break shots, straight pool breaks, combos, and position play.
It is designed for the player to understand why which adjustment is needed and it is a very exact step by step learning method... for students of the game as well as for instructors! It maybe needs some days more to incorporate but it is just a matter of taking some hours at the table to understand when to use which category and which adjustments due to the stroke/speed/spin we use are necessary...Once you got it it is a very strong tool in your box!

I'm still going through Samba but here is my take so far.

90-90 is very easy, I first got the video, then when I was in NY I got to meet Ron and learn first hand from him. Was a great experience.
My game when up quickly and I still use it on occasion.

I agree with Ekkes (UBC) that there is more than just shotmaking. As stated , still going through it but I can fine tune certain shots. Also I feel it helped me quite a bit on the break.

I'll get to some more as it goes along but as a side note, I really like to learn in person. Wished I could have met Ekkes when he was in the states but when I can, I like to travel to Jacksonville and learn from Scott Rohleder (scottjen23) as he is very familiar with the material and works with Ekkes.

I learned the 90/90 system from these forums years ago. I called Ron and he filled in the gaps after I started to run with it.

I've also worked with the Samba system since Ekkes released it a few months ago. Ekkes does a great job of going into detail about technique. He even touches on the dominant eye and why he presents his alignments for left and right hand shooters.

My overall opinion of Samba versus 90/90 is that 90/90 is easier to learn, but at a cost. The alignments for 90/90 cover a much broader range of shots and the player has a lot more calculating to do to become consistent. I found I was dead on some days and struggled on others. It took a year or so for 90/90 to become automatic and consistent.

Ekkes goes into much more detail and specific alignments that cover smaller ranges of shots. There is much less calculating involved and the player can move between alignments easily.

They're both visual systems. Samba presents the shot picture like the stick aiming systems do by looking across the shot and blending the image to get the correct shot line. 90/90 uses a ball to ball alignment where you also look across the shot line to visually blend your picture. The problem is you have to learn to adjust for a large shot range through experience and sync it with your pivot, though one alignment is easier to learn.

Best,
Mike

I've used both so therefore am qualified to comment...

90/90 is fairly easy to learn. I played around with it on my own and spoke with Ron a few times. I found the pivoting to be a little viague, in order to make all shots within a given alignment your pivoting arc has to change slightly. At least that's my understanding and execution of it. If that's not the case, would love to know more, but based on conversations with members and Ron and seeing the materials that's what I got. But with practice, I was fairly consistent with it and used it for 6 months or so.

Samba is a little more complex to learn, but with those complexities you get more precision and options in my opinion. With some practice it's pretty easy to tell which alignment to use, and there are checkpoints for that as well. The materials are great, with a blend of written and video and many examples. There are also simple adjustments for speed, distance, spin, etc. that work great. You can get really dialed in with some practice.

I currently use a blend of techniques, the older SEE system, newer SAMBA stuff, even some things I picked up from my Pro One days that I like. My approach is very natural on all but the most difficult of shots, where I tend to slow down a bit and then maybe someone can see me aligning and pivoting more definitively.

I probably shoot at least half of my shots with no real thought given to systems, as said above the movement into the ball is very natural. After some conversations with various people I've found that going back somewhat to my natural visual picture of the shot, which has been enhanced and confirmed through the use of the systems over the years, allows me to shoot my best and stay in rhythm and flow. I think that's the natural evolution of the systems for most, if we continued doing the very regimented movements and step by step approach all the time I think it takes too much away from the subconscious.

My 2 cents anyway...
Scott