Nah, he said his high was 115 prior to the videoed 122 using Pro One.
Best tip for aiming...
- Thread starter duckie
- Start date
Nah, he said his high was 115 prior to the videoed 122 using Pro One.
Ah....well someone said they broke 100 or 150 for the first time. And just for accuracy because I know you keep records .... Didn't he break 200 after learning to use CTE.
Yes. As he said 12 months ago: "219 on a Brunswick Anniversary w/5.5" pockets."
It's funny trying to validated the usefulness of CTE by high runs in 14.1.
Why......cause it proves nothing.
Read some of Babe Ceanfield books. Never once is anything like CTE is mentioned and he was one of the greats 14.1 players unofficially running over 700 and same for Mosconi....running officially 526.
Both not using any form of CTE.
Point is so what if xxx runs vvv using CTE, the same can be done with Ghost Ball.
Or even plain ole simple Put It in the Hole system.
You CTE guys need to get over yourselves....you and the system ain't that special.
Why......cause it proves nothing.
Read some of Babe Ceanfield books. Never once is anything like CTE is mentioned and he was one of the greats 14.1 players unofficially running over 700 and same for Mosconi....running officially 526.
Both not using any form of CTE.
Point is so what if xxx runs vvv using CTE, the same can be done with Ghost Ball.
Or even plain ole simple Put It in the Hole system.
You CTE guys need to get over yourselves....you and the system ain't that special.
How do you know that Cranfield was using GB in his runs? Or Mosconi?
I mean I get that your whole view of pool is based on the beginner pool book that Cranfield's name is on but that he probably didn't even write.
The question I have for you specifically though is what is YOUR high run? What was it before you started with the book and the Arrow tool and now three/four years later what is it now?
I read your words and don't see your deeds. Duke and others put their runs up and claimed that they improved after learning CTE. You learned Ghost Ball and have had seemingly intensive use of the paper arrow tool. So why don't you simply show everyone your proficiency?
I will pay you $1 a ball for every ball you run in any run over 50. That's 3.x racks and you can start with a break ball. So to earn $50+ just put it up on video that you can run more than 50 balls. This offer expires next Monday.
I will pay you $2 a ball if you shoot every shot using the arrow tool.
I have read lots of threads about CTE. I will admit I bought the DVD'S and found it to complicated for myself. Probably more lazy than anything. To my understanding those that have taken the time to learn the system believe in it. Those that haven't are skeptics. Not sure I have read one post of someone who took the time to learn the system state that it doesn't work. Personally I am amazed people can figure out CTE but can't find two contact points. However I did not take the time to learn the system to give my opinion either way. If it helps someone than all the better.
My point was simple and is still 100% accurate. Regardless of the system you use, physics will not change and YOU (not the system) will ultimately determine if you make the shot because EVERY system relies on YOU being able to properly gain the proper "perspective" of the shot to make it. Not a single one of them is any more or less better than the other and every single one of them require you to commit lots of time and practice to commit the shots to your "mind's eye".
So do you know what else takes you center pocket and provides the aim line every time as well as any CTE system? Looking at the object ball to get your contact point and then lining up your shot using what every method you are comfortable with to ultimately get that perspective over and over and over and over again. It has been around since this game was invented, has been used by every player at every level, requires the same amount of work as any other "system" and best of all it is free.:smile:
Please point out my false statements.
Of course we can find an estimated contact point. That isn't the point. Its about what ultimately is more reliable as a way to aim. For some GB or contact points or just do it works perfectly. For others a more concrete approach is better.
For me my arsenal of shots that I can make has gone up tremendously. Unfortunately my physical ability to execute consistently has deteriorated and I have not been diligent in improving my stroke.
But cte or 90/90 or any decent method really does give the user a great tool that is reliable. If the fundamentals are strong then its a great combination to bring to the table.
And not everyone who tries them but doesn't use them are skeptics. Some just decide not to use them. I have plenty of DVDs on kicking and I have not been diligent enough to learn them thoroughly. I know they work. I have used them in practice and in games. But I don't know them 100% because I am too lazy to spend the time needed to know them without hesitation.
Last edited:
False statements and comments
Try using some facts to back up your opinions, it might lend an ounce of credibility.
Try using some facts to back up your opinions, it might lend an ounce of credibility.
I can't provide a spreadsheet that was done 3 years ago and I no longer have and I certainly will not do it again as it became very clear very quick that your perception of the shot greatly effects how you enter the shot and adjust for it. That is no different then any other system sold, taught and/or advised on. Even my 9 year old daughter can look at the OB, show me where she needs to hit it and then address the CB and show me how her aim line needs to be with pretty darn good accuracy. Clearly she has been secretly learning Pro One.
Someone that makes 95 out of 100 shots is an average to slightly above average player in your area according to a national rating system? Impressive. They must be using some kind of modifier as the players there are just too good. The old guy here takes down 6's & 7's (APA 8-ball) on a regular basis, with me being one of them.
I will do you this one thing. I will obtain the system so that the next time we have this conversation I am completely familiar with the teachings. Then when I make the same claim that it is no different/better than any other system out there you can't attempt to say it is because I don't understand it.
Someone that makes 95 out of 100 shots is an average to slightly above average player in your area according to a national rating system? Impressive. They must be using some kind of modifier as the players there are just too good. The old guy here takes down 6's & 7's (APA 8-ball) on a regular basis, with me being one of them.
I will do you this one thing. I will obtain the system so that the next time we have this conversation I am completely familiar with the teachings. Then when I make the same claim that it is no different/better than any other system out there you can't attempt to say it is because I don't understand it.
I'm super excited. Don't hesitate to ask any questions. It's not the easiest stuff to get through. I wish you the best of luck!
I think we're missing the point about aiming systems. Anyone can become as great of a player as they want with enough determination and practice. What makes the difference is the amount of effort to get there. Mostly stroke+aim. No matter what aiming system you use, you have to back it up with a consistent stroke. It takes thousands of hours to get a good stroke, there is no shortcut to get that.
When it comes to aiming systems, each one has its own strengths and merits. For me, CTE is a more objective approach to aiming than GB. That is, using centers and edges as visual cues to align the shot, then using a systematic visual sweep to address the CB has been far more productive than using GB alone. I'm sure I could accomplish the same level of play using GB given enough time and determination. With CTE I can reach higher levels and retain them because of the objectiveness of the system. This is a dramatic effect when you start applying it to thin cuts and banks. Now getting CTE down pat does require some upfront effort, as it is very different from traditional aiming. But once it clicks, its like pool euphoria. Those that don't put in the effort to get there often give up in frustration, which happens often around here. One or two times at the table will give you zero indication of the validity of the system.
For me, CTE vs GB was similar to open sites vs scoped sights on a rifle. I'm sure I can get pretty damn good using open sites with enough practice, but a scope is always going to yield better results quicker. A bit exaggerated example, but the point is there
Last edited:
If I can make one suggestion: give yourself at least 10 full practice sessions going through the shots on the DVDs. Even if it doesn't feel right or make complete sense, at least go through the motions. This is how I initially unlocked the system, repetitive exposure to the mind/body until it clicked.
How convenient that your "PROOF" has disappeared. LMAO!!! Yep, once again, the dog ate the homework.
Obtaining the DVD is easy. Putting in the time to actually understand how it works and be proficient with it is another. I am highly confident you'll be unwilling to make that kind of commitment.
Banks
Banned
How ironic. The person that put me on ignore for saying you need proof is telling somebody they're stupid and asking for proof.
So, what's is like to play for years, own places with tables, have a 9' Diamond at home, take lots of lessons and still be an apa 6? I know, I'll get about as much of an answer for that as the proof you'll never provide for all of the claims you and others make.
The progress is the teacher.
How ironic. The person that put me on ignore for saying you need proof is telling somebody they're stupid and asking for proof.
So, what's is like to play for years, own places with tables, have a 9' Diamond at home, take lots of lessons and still be an apa 6? I know, I'll get about as much of an answer for that as the proof you'll never provide for all of the claims you and others make.
The progress is the teacher.
No Dude, there are days I have the need to feel a little smarter, it really boosts my IQ ego when I read your posts.
What's it feel like? I have put in two or three times the table time, in the past 2 years, that I did the entire previous part of my life. So frankly, my progress feels quite good and rewarding. Based on your remarks, you seem a bit jealous. Here's the bad news for you Dude. I am getting better at a reasonable pace, you seem to be stuck going nowhere. Unless I missed something, I haven't seen you on streaming at any of the big events. So you're a 9 ball APA 9, I'm a 7. Wow, given all the years you've played, you're that far ahead of me. LOL You attempted to insult my pool playing ability when your resume doesn't appear to be all that impressive.
I have a pretty cush life, I don't need to judge my self worth by our relative pool playing expertise. If you want to do a "Who has a bigger pecker" thingie, we can both throw the complete resume out there and see how you compare.'
Thanks for entertainment, I appreciate it.
Banks
Banned
A bit jealous? I've had the same f/t job since before I started playing about 9 1/2 years ago. No real lessons, beat up Valleys in a bar, none of the system stuff. I find it strange that people give so much credit to these things when they have nothing to back it up. I first made it to a 9 about 5 years into playing or so. All by learning on my own. I don't need a gimmick, nor do I need to BS people about how to play.
I'm not judging your self worth by playing pool, because that's just stupid. What I am doing is judging your way of holding aloft CTE as some sort of holy grail. I asked for the mathematical proof that CTE "ties into the geometry of the table" and all you could do was make excuses. Then I see you making these posts asking others for proof and taking the exact opposite stance, when you dodged the exact same question yourself. You're improving no faster than anybody else I've met that puts in any time. Actually, I'd think maybe spending so much time not actually focusing on your own game may even be slowing you down.
I could care less how much $$ somebody's got in their bank account, because it comes and goes. What stays, mostly, is their integrity.. or their lack thereof in this case.
I agree, you do seem to have a major shortage of integrity.
You're mixing your facts to fit your story Dude. This fellow you're referring to stated he had proof and had created spread sheets that proved what he was saying. When called upon to produce his proof, the dog had conveniently ate his homework. I never said I had mathematical proof, never hinted at it. I've always been clear on that.
It took you 5 years to make it to a 9, in 2 years I've made it to a 7. I'd say I'm well ahead of your pace. To be clear. however, you are not the benchmark I'm looking to achieve. I actually hope to become a good player someday.
Banks
Banned
So, it's ok to make claims without proof then?
In two years you've made it to a 7.. when I can find posts that state you started playing 10 years ago? Nice. I made it to a 7 in 9 in just over a year.
I also saw a post of yours claiming that after a few lessons, you were one of the stronger 6's in your area.. at least two years ago. How's that been coming along? Must be the strongest 6 in the area, what with all of the pro lessons, 9' diamond at home and everything. CTE is like some kind of miracle, but can't quite get ya over the hump, eh?
This "discussion" is over. I wanted to point out the hypocrisy in your idolizing CTE and requiring proof from others for their claims, but not caring what's substantiated on your own end. There's no use in "discussing" learning with somebody that treats their "aiming system" like a religion.
Now, back to your regularly scheduled sales pitch.
Edit: You're right, I'm not a good player. Any time you ever feel you've become one, feel free to load up the cash and have somebody let me know you're ready to bet.