View Single Post
Old
  (#161)
Sloppy Pockets
AzB Silver Member
Sloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond reputeSloppy Pockets has a reputation beyond repute
 
Sloppy Pockets's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 2,820
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Just outside the Blue Line
   
06-23-2013, 06:20 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC View Post
Here are the three evolutions of my own GC in the dozen years I've had it. The center photo played much easier than it does now in the bottom photo although they would both rate "average" using this thread's formula.
What makes that pocket play hard is the facing angles, not the actual measurements. They had to be cut that way because your pocket liners are way too wide to have the cushion terminate in a point at the throat.

I put in some lines on the Diamond spec pocket to show what the real angle is. It's even worse than your numbers would indicate.

Knowing the width of the cushions (usually 2" I'm told), you can measure along the long sides to the points I've drawn at the back of the throat and use a little trig to get the actual facing angles. That's all that matters when you are considering the acceptance/rejection of balls hit into it.

Not trying to nitpick, but these small errors in measurement are another fly in the ointment in building a database with info garnered from various sources.

And, yes, I'll bet they play real hard.
Attached Images
 
  
Reply With Quote