Snooker instruction was all over tv since the 50s
LOL in color too!!!
Snooker instruction was all over tv since the 50s
Um, come on Scott, A silver bullet kills werewolves. Jeesh, you know if you visited over at the kill a monster forums you would know this. Except, there aren't any professional monster killers over there so you might not.
So stupid.
There are tons of forums where people discuss pro baseball, pro basketball, and pro football. How many of those guys became pro at those sports by having an account on an internet message board?
None you jackass.
You complain about the state of pool but then expect anyone who wants to offer their opinion to not say anything because they aren't shooting .900 on accustats.
STFU and GTFO. Thanks
So, has your game got better or worse since you learned CTE?
There isn't any pool game that exists that I would be afraid to play you for a lot of money. I'd probably crush you on a snooker table too if I just had a week's worth of practice before we played.
Only those without talent need your 'knowledge' - and they will be mediocre til the end of time, no matter what they do.
Easy, cowboy! Easy! lol
I know you're confused but let me break it down for you since you don't know much about pool.
When someone is actively competing they are sharper and more focused because of being constantly in action, either through tournament play, league play or gambling. So before I learned CTE or any aiming systems I was playing a lot more and thus posting better results in tournament play and gambling due to the sheer volume of activity.
After I learned aiming systems it coincided with a sharp drop in activity due to my job and and personal situation and a deterioration physically. So while I became a better player technically I stopped playing so much and thus have not coupled the increase in knowledge and ability with the amount of competition I had before.
Thus the answer is that I am a better player AFTER learning CTE (and many other things from many people associated with this forum) but I am not as prolific a player nor as consistent a player due to the factors mentioned above. So results in tournament play, from matching up, and personal records have not matched pre-CTE levels for those reasons.
Which is one of the reasons I wish I had learned these aiming systems when I was 17 instead of when I was 35. If I had the access to the knowledge that today's young players have I would have been a much better player today than I am right now.
And if I still had the drive and desire to pursue it I could still be much better than I am now. As it is I am content to know that I am probably way better than you will ever be. Content to know that I have had more success on the pool table than you ever have and more than you ever will.
There isn't any pool game that exists that I would be afraid to play you for a lot of money. I'd probably crush you on a snooker table too if I just had a week's worth of practice before we played. The question isn't whether I am better before or after learning CTE it's whether you are any better of a player due to your presence on AZB and I think that the answer is no and not because the opportunity to become a better player isn't presented to you.
It is but you would prefer to knock those who teach rather than to support them. You would rather knock those who want to learn rather than to be one of them.
https://youtu.be/dCE40Z-HpMM
Actually, carry on. We all know there's not a chance in hell Barton will play me for tuppence, any game.
Is the answer to my question 'i have got worse since learning CTE'?
A very simple yes or no will suffice, john.
No, I am a better player since learning CTE.
What is it with all this 'knowledge' nonsense? Kids in the uk learned to play on their own, in their bedrooms. No instruction. No books. No dvds. Nothing. Nada.
Only those without talent need your 'knowledge' - and they will be mediocre til the end of time, no matter what they do.
What is it with all this 'knowledge' nonsense? Kids in the uk learned to play on their own, in their bedrooms. No instruction. No books. No dvds. Nothing. Nada.
Thats got me a bit baffled.
Really? The ONLY reason I wouldn't play you is logistical not psychological.
1. I have no idea who you really are.
2. I have no idea where you really are.
3. If I knew these things then there is little chance that we could actually arrange a game due to the unlikely chance that I would be ever going to your location.
However if you were willing to come to Oklahoma City and your identity could be resolved to my satisfaction then I'd be happy to play you an all around match for up to $10,000. One pocket, nine ball, 10 ball, 14.1, 8 ball, bank pool and snooker on a 5x12. Whoever wins the majority of the matches wins the money.
I've been on here about 11 years. You would think with all the silver bullets sold on here, the 100's of APA members, and the same 20 know it alls on here, that you would see a few graduate to pro level from here in 10 years. I wonder why this is. Johnnyt
Tanner Pruess comes to mind. He got really good really fast, and he showed no signs of slowing down before life apparently got in the way. It seemed like the feedback and support he got here played a big part in his development.
What is it with all this 'knowledge' nonsense? Kids in the uk learned to play on their own, in their bedrooms. No instruction. No books. No dvds. Nothing. Nada.
Only those without talent need your 'knowledge' - and they will be mediocre til the end of time, no matter what they do.
Really? The ONLY reason I wouldn't play you is logistical not psychological.
1. I have no idea who you really are.
2. I have no idea where you really are.
3. If I knew these things then there is little chance that we could actually arrange a game due to the unlikely chance that I would be ever going to your location.
However if you were willing to come to Oklahoma City and your identity could be resolved to my satisfaction then I'd be happy to play you an all around match for up to $10,000. One pocket, nine ball, 10 ball, 14.1, 8 ball, bank pool and snooker on a 5x12. Whoever wins the majority of the matches wins the money.
Most pros I know were playing great young or within say five years or so of picking up the game seriously. I don't know anyone that has played for 10 or 15 years and then moved up to a pro level.
My definition of a pro is someone who is a threat to win any event he enters.
I think natural talent/aptitude is a real thing when it comes to who makes it to the highest level.
This guy signed up in 2005 and has been doing okay. Last signed on in 2009. I guess Sam Lambert has a chance in 5 years.