CTErs vs. Ghostballers

Original Idea

My original idea was that we promote some play between the two camps and post up the results. It might make for some interesting conversation. It really has nothing to do with proving or disproving anything as far as a shot making method. Yes Cte pots balls, so does everything else. I just think its a nice way to arrange a game or two.
 
I think CTE is catching on more and more. Think many were confused but with PRO ONE and guys like JB helping answer question. More and more players are trying it. I don't doubt it. Not my thing. If it helps others that's great. I know players who have issues aiming. Who are left eye dominant and shoot right handed. So without someone sharing their knowledge some players would be lost. I understand CTE works for any level. Not all players have natural ability and need some training guide.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
 
336Robin said:
I keep seeing this migrate back to the Cters want a shot making contest. Im just not convinced that a shot making contest is indicative of proving the whole point that I would like to see proven. Im curious about the system to the point I would like to see someone play with it, get position with it and so forth and so on. I could care less about a shot making contest. I would dare say that probably in a shot making contest they might have the advantage because of the systematic approach they have. They already know what shots are going to come up and they practice those so what does that prove? I dont think it proves much on the playability scale, which is what I would be interested in.
Click to expand...

There's dozens of videos of Gerry and Stan playing with CTE/Pro One. I've watched Stevie Moore and Landon Shuffett play with it as well many times, do a search for some of their tournament matches. There's a video of DTL running 200 balls playing 14.1.
 
Hey Stan, Phil Burford just posted on his FB page that he just missed running a 147 in snooker the other day.

stan shuffett said:
There is plenty of internet access to CTE matches.

Gerry Willimans recently posted a 2nd in a semi-pro league in Canada.

You have the Landon/Earl match.

I put a 100 ball run on VIMEO.

Also on Vimeo, I played the 9 and 10 ball ghost on a ten footer.

I won a GSBT event in Bank. The finals were up.

Phil Burford has numerous matches available as well as Stevie.

DTL, soon after learning CTE PRO ONE posted a 200 plus run on YouTube.

Of course, JB just finished with Lou.

Plus I have about 50 YouTube videos up.

REAL CTE is natural and in no way diminishes position play but actually quite the opposite. THERE IS NO MANUAL PIVOTING In PRO ONE.. ...SIMPLY A SWEEP which is what most every single pro is doing. What they 're NOT doing is moving directly in.

The year I advertised Pro One at the US OPEN, I finished 25th.Without it I doubt very seriously I would have been in the money......

I would be happy for any Pro player to camp out with my game for awhile and see it first-hand and report back to this forum what CTE is all about. I am sure they'd be happy with what they'd take away.

Stan Shuffett
Click to expand...
 
336Robin said:
I keep seeing this migrate back to the Cters want a shot making contest. Im just not convinced that a shot making contest is indicative of proving the whole point that I would like to see proven. Im curious about the system to the point I would like to see someone play with it, get position with it and so forth and so on. I could care less about a shot making contest. I would dare say that probably in a shot making contest they might have the advantage because of the systematic approach they have. They already know what shots are going to come up and they practice those so what does that prove? I dont think it proves much on the playability scale, which is what I would be interested in.
Click to expand...

The we can play target pool. The point is that an objective test where both players have to perform the same task will tell you more about the aiming ability than who wins a single match with the randomness of the rolls and situations faced by each player.

If in a race to seven the Gb player has tough situations and the cte player gets 7 cosmos is the cte player the better player when he wins 7 - 2?



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
 
336Robin said:
My original idea was that we promote some play between the two camps and post up the results. It might make for some interesting conversation. It really has nothing to do with proving or disproving anything as far as a shot making method. Yes Cte pots balls, so does everything else. I just think its a nice way to arrange a game or two.
Click to expand...


I would like to play. CTE doesn't pocket balls, neither does ghost ball. The player does.

Consciously aiming only leads to a shot line, pocketing happens only if the shot line chosen is correct and the cue ball hits the object ball correctly.

I think perhaps you are being disingenious when you say matching up isn't about proving one method is better than the other. That's what all the contention is about that you reference. So there is no possible way that a series of matchups would not be seen as a clash of methods to prove superiority.

All of us grew up with kung fu movies where styles were pitted against each other to prove which one is better.

This is no different IMO.
 
JB Cases said:
I would like to play. CTE doesn't pocket balls, neither does ghost ball. The player does.

Consciously aiming only leads to a shot line, pocketing happens only if the shot line chosen is correct and the cue ball hits the object ball correctly.

I think perhaps you are being disingenious when you say matching up isn't about proving one method is better than the other. That's what all the contention is about that you reference. So there is no possible way that a series of matchups would not be seen as a clash of methods to prove superiority.

All of us grew up with kung fu movies where styles were pitted against each other to prove which one is better.

This is no different IMO.
Click to expand...

Do you even understand what you wrote?

If it is the player and not the system that pockets balls, then any test is of the players ability to use their system of choice to pocket and not that the system of choice is better than another of pocketing balls.

And their is no way of proving that one system is gonna benefit all player. Give it up...

Here is my test...... I win. That is all the test results I need.

Here is the latest test results...last 14.1 game. Since this was only my second game, my handicap is not really set, but it did get a big bump after the first game I played in the league. (I'd rather play heads up, but there isn't a league here that does this).

Game was 40 to 100, me 40. I got off to a rocky start. I fouled the CB on my first shot and the guy ran the rack on me.....down 14, plus I owed 1.

Second rack, played a bad safety, guy run the rack....28, plus I owed 1.

There is one thing no system can give you......experience in competition. My nerves were getting to me.

Third rack, I started settling down.....as the game went on, I just started playing well.

At the end of the match, the score was me 40, him 53. My handicap is getting another big bump. This score is why I like to play heads up. I was catching him and there was nothing he could do because I was in control of the table not him.

This is how I test my myself......in the heat of battle....where it counts.

BTW, this is not from what method I was using to determine where the CB needs to be for the OB to go where I want, but structured practice. Practicing with a goal in mind.

Also, in the real world, I seen people do great on test, but do shitty in the real world of application of what they were tested on.
 
duckie said:
Do you even understand what you wrote?

If it is the player and not the system that pockets balls, then any test is of the players ability to use their system of choice to pocket and not that the system of choice is better than another of pocketing balls.

And their is no way of proving that one system is gonna benefit all player. Give it up...

Here is my test...... I win. That is all the test results I need.

Here is the latest test results...last 14.1 game. Since this was only my second game, my handicap is not really set, but it did get a big bump after the first game I played in the league. (I'd rather play heads up, but there isn't a league here that does this).

Game was 40 to 100, me 40. I got off to a rocky start. I fouled the CB on my first shot and the guy ran the rack on me.....down 14, plus I owed 1.

Second rack, played a bad safety, guy run the rack....28, plus I owed 1.

There is one thing no system can give you......experience in competition. My nerves were getting to me.

Third rack, I started settling down.....as the game went on, I just started playing well.

At the end of the match, the score was me 40, him 53. My handicap is getting another big bump. This score is why I like to play heads up. I was catching him and there was nothing he could do because I was in control of the table not him.

This is how I test my myself......in the heat of battle....where it counts.

BTW, this is not from what method I was using to determine where the CB needs to be for the OB to go where I want, but structured practice. Practicing with a goal in mind.

Also, in the real world, I seen people do great on test, but do shitty in the real world of application of what they were tested on.
Click to expand...

I understand what I write but you don't.

Of course a "system" or drills can't give you the experience that competition gives you.

And IF all other things are equal THEN you can say one system is better than another when comparing competive results. For example the Fosbury flop in high jumping was indisputably the better method for achieving the maximum height a human body could be self-propelled over a barrier in one leap given that all competitors were otherwise equal.

In pool there are a LOT of factors determining success. Aiming is only one part of what it takes to play well. Stroke, touch, speed control, shot knowledge, mental strength, reading the table, etc... all things needed to play well. Aiming is only one part, the first part but only one part.

As Robsnotes for you pointed out great aiming with a poor stroke won't get you far. I am an example of that.

As for you - I simply don't believe you really actually play pool. I will try to find you when I get to Milipitas and you can tell me in person all the things you have said about me on here. Then we can see if you can actually play or not. We can have a little shotmaking competition and you can show me how well you can apply the Cranfield Arrow/Duckie Contact Patch method of aiming. Then we can test it in the heat of battle in some sets.
 
bruin70 said:
where are the old threads? or are they caput.
Click to expand...

Of course. If they don't compete with pros as a profession.

One guy you mention who broke 200 attributed it to Cte/ProOne. He never broke a hundred then went from that to 150 then 200.

So IF you want to call him pro speed then I am ok with that. He went from good amateur to pro speed during the time he spent mastering ProOne.

My question to you is do you believe a person who runs 200 balls or beats the ghost in ten ball has enough awareness about their own game to be able to identify the source of their improvement?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
 
duckie said:
Do you even understand what you wrote?

<snip>

Game was 40 to 100, me 40. I got off to a rocky start. I fouled the CB on my first shot and the guy ran the rack on me.....down 14, plus I owed 1.

Second rack, played a bad safety, guy run the rack....28, plus I owed 1.

<snip>
Click to expand...

I've got to ask you the same question.. do you understand what you wrote?

Guy runs a rack and gets 14. What's the matter, he couldn't either make the break ball or he played a safe.. twice in a row? Or are you trying to say that you don't play a break ball and you start over after 14, because it went from him running out to you playing a bad safe?

I'm not quite sure you play the game at all now. Somebody going to 100, while you go to 40, plays that poorly? Either he's not that good and you're absolutely horrible or you're meh and he had somebody else meh filling in for him.

nine_ball6970 said:
So what is your criteria for a pro if someone who has a high run of over 200 in straight pool is considered an amateur?
Click to expand...

Don't get into it with a roadie. He'll tell you that Mosconi himself told him what the criteria are while spelunking a crystal cave at the North Pole and then challenge you to a 5,000,000 point race for a billion.

Anybody that runs over 200 can compete in a pro event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top