One pocket table with only two 4" corner pockets?

realkingcobra

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
Just thought I'd ask for opinions about a 9ft Diamond ProAm with only two 4" corner pockets, no side or head pockets, just for playing one pocket. When I get back to the factory, I'm going to put together a set of one pocket rails for a 9ft Diamond ProAm in Washington State at Dave's place. The rails are going to be a cross breed between 3 cushion and pocket pool. I know it'll change the game strategies quit a bit, but I do believe it'll open the game up to many more shots involving multi rail banks, without the fear of scratching, and at the same time turn one pocket into more of an offensive game, instead of mostly defensive, making for more quicker games, what's you're take on this? I've been wanting to build a set of rails like this since 1983, back when I first started building pool tables, but never really had the chance to, so now I have the chance when I get back east.

Glen
 
Might be fun, but what about manuevering by pocketing balls in other pockets, and having them spot up? If you are the one who needs the balls in play, you aren't able to make a ball and hook the guy behind another.
 
branpureza said:
That's a pretty cool idea even though it would change the game a great deal...
Click to expand...

If this table format caught on, you may diminish the value of my copies of W1P and SMS... :D

Now if you played it the opposite... With the rules of 3 cushion combined with 1 pocket... that would be tough. That is playing the cue ball off an object ball and three rails into another object ball into a designated pocket... Or what if you only had two side pockets as opposed to using corner pockets...

Obviously, both of these ideas would not be conducive to a quicker game of one pocket. But I like the slowness of one pocket. I know I've walked away from a good one pocket game when I feel as if I walked away from the table as if I've just washed windows with my tongue.

Regardless, good luck on your venture. I do believe I've seen a few pictures floating around of old billiards tables with only two corner pockets. However, it is too late and I'm too weary to try to track them down. They may be a figment of my imagination... :)
 
Last edited:
I heard that Greg from Diamond had a table such as this in the works awhile back.
 
Josh Palmer said:
Might be fun, but what about manuevering by pocketing balls in other pockets, and having them spot up? If you are the one who needs the balls in play, you aren't able to make a ball and hook the guy behind another.
Click to expand...
I'll agree with what you're saying, if you also agree that for the most part balls spotted are usually balls out of play by being stuck in the jaws of a head corner pocket, and the only way to get them back in play is to pocket them, then re-spot them. With no head or side pockets, I think it would open the door to banking 3 and 5 rail shots to your pocket, and a ball that would normally be out of play deep in the jaws of a head pocket, would then be able to be 2 rail banked out to your pocket:D Faster games of one pocket to me, means you can get in more games of one pocket in an hour:D

Glen
 
watchez said:
I heard that Greg from Diamond had a table such as this in the works awhile back.
Click to expand...
Greg and I first started talking about this back in 2000, but as of yet, haven't proceeded on, but I have some room owners very interested in the changeable rails for the ProAms, talked to Greg again about this last weekend, and we're going to be looking into it when I get back to the factory soon:D

Glen
 
thedude said:
If this table format caught on, you may diminish the value of my copies of W1P and SMS... :D

Now if you played it the opposite... With the rules of 3 cushion combined with 1 pocket... that would be tough. That is playing the cue ball off an object ball and three rails into another object ball into a designated pocket...
Click to expand...
I really do like the idea of being able to send the cue ball all around the table and back to where I'd like it to be after pocketing a ball in my pocket, without the worry of scratching:D Just think of the banks that would now be open to the players...like a 2 rail bank back to your pocket right where one of the head pockets would be;)
Glen
 
thedude said:
If this table format caught on, you may diminish the value of my copies of W1P and SMS... :D

Now if you played it the opposite... With the rules of 3 cushion combined with 1 pocket... that would be tough. That is playing the cue ball off an object ball and three rails into another object ball into a designated pocket...
Click to expand...
Maybe a shot like that could be worth 2 points;)

Glen
 
realkingcobra said:
Maybe a shot like that could be worth 2 points;)

Glen
Click to expand...

I actually think your on to something... but I think the game in the end would be so far removed from one pocket that it'd need a new name. :D

I think it would be cool because it would allow variations as you want, a.)those that are quicker to play... and b.) at the same time, it would add a new dynamic for people like me that like the slow nature of one pocket to make it even slower. :) Its all good either way, like I said previously good luck. I'd like to try one of these tables out regardless.

Now would the table still be 4-1/2 by 9? Would it be beneficial to use a carom cue as opposed to a pool cue... Dude(and I use that term very selectively ;) ) you're blowing my mind here....
 

Attachments

  • CornersTable.jpg
    CornersTable.jpg
    37.1 KB · Views: 717
There's a table out there that already exists. Although it's the foot corner pockets being the only two on the table, there's a similar game to the one that's being described, called "Corners."

Here's the link: http://www.onepocket.org/Corners.htm

It's One Pocket in reverse on a Corners table, essentially?
 
Fast Lenny said:
This is a cool picture of one of these tables from www.onepocket.org
Click to expand...

Whats interesting is that they're racking at the other end of the pockets... so that would change traditional 1-pocket breaks considerably to say the f****** least! Never noticed that until now.

Thanks for doing the work I'm too tired to do. :D

EDIT: The more I look at the two pocket table.... the closer I think I am to seeing heaven. :)
 
thedude said:
I actually think your on to something... but I think the game in the end would be so far removed from one pocket that it'd need a new name. :D

I think it would be cool because it would allow variations as you want, a.)those that are quicker to play... and b.) at the same time, it would add a new dynamic for people like me that like the slow nature of one pocket to make it even slower. :) Its all good either way, like I said previously good luck. I'd like to try one of these tables out regardless.

Now would the table still be 4-1/2 by 9? Would it be beneficial to use a carom cue as opposed to a pool cue... Dude(and I use that term very selectively ;) ) you're blowing my mind here....
Click to expand...
Yes, it would still be a 9ft table, in fact a Diamond ProAm 9ft to be exact. I know this idea is not new, as with the pic posted, but it's never been done to a commercial table before. And that's the value in it I do believe. Imagine if you will, a table that can be changed within 10 minutes from a 6 pocketed table to a one pocket table simply by removing the 24 rail bolts, taking the rails off, and replacing them with one pocket rails, re-inserting the 24 rail bolts, and start playing. In a pool room environment, you wouldn't be changing back and forth all that often as it is, but if you needed the table for say a 9 ball tournament, you still have the option to pull the 6 pocket rails out of storage, install them, host the tournament, then change back again. I don't know of any other commercial table that this kind of switching back and forth could be done on other than the ProAm, because the pockets are mounted in the rails, and there's nothing that has to be removed or unbolted other than the rail bolts to make the rail change happen quickly. Using Brunswick's, you'd have to remove the drop pockets first, and if it had a ball return, forget it. Gabriel's would have to have the pocket baskets removed first, even the Diamond Professionals would have to have the leather drop pocket baskets removed first...but on a ProAm...it would be nothing to do.

Glen
 
realkingcobra said:
Yes, it would still be a 9ft table, in fact a Diamond ProAm 9ft to be exact. I know this idea is not new, as with the pic posted, but it's never been done to a commercial table before. And that's the value in it I do believe. Imagine if you will, a table that can be changed within 10 minutes from a 6 pocketed table to a one pocket table simply by removing the 24 rail bolts, taking the rails off, and replacing them with one pocket rails, re-inserting the 24 rail bolts, and start playing... on a ProAm...it would be nothing to do.

Glen
Click to expand...

Hmm... I do declare you to be the Einstein of billiard tables! I've observed your work in other threads... but this is a truly wonderful idea!
 
thedude said:
Hmm... I do declare you to be the Einstein of billiard tables! I've observed your work in other threads... but this is a truly wonderful idea!
Click to expand...
I was in LA last week, stopped in to see a friend of mine, a room owner. He's looking to open another room with 12 Diamond ProAms. He just about went nuts at the thoughts of being able to maybe "Rent" 12 sets of one pocket rails for all 12 tables, switch them over for some of his one pocket tournaments, then switch back to normal again...he said it's like having 24 tables instead of 12, just not all in the same room:D

Glen
 
thedude said:
Hmm... I do declare you to be the Einstein of billiard tables! I've observed your work in other threads... but this is a truly wonderful idea!
Click to expand...
Since Dec 06, when I first started posting here on AZ, I think this is the first time I've ever asked for someones opinion about tables:D I just don't want to go overboard on something that is not of the "normal" so I thought I'd ask first. I do have the knowledge to build the rails at the factory, so I can do it. But this thread will help me decide that I'm not stepping to far out of line, as I don't expect everyone to agree with what I'd like to try out, but I'm still willing to proceed on.:D

Glen
 
cool idea. I'd actually like to practice 14.1 on that table because the old timers always say the game is supposed to be played in the bottom 2 pockets.

FWIW, my old table had the 2 lower pockets set at 4-1/4" and the uppers at 4-5/8", so I would practice 14.1 at one end and 1 pocket at the other. :D it was cool.
 
King, You are the King

Gerry said:
cool idea. I'd actually like to practice 14.1 on that table because the old timers always say the game is supposed to be played in the bottom 2 pockets.

FWIW, my old table had the 2 lower pockets set at 4-1/4" and the uppers at 4-5/8", so I would practice 14.1 at one end and 1 pocket at the other. :D it was cool.
Click to expand...

You know I live in the Northwest. I am dying to see it and play on it. Let my know where the first one is. I'm still thinking & dreaming. I may have a real opinion by tomorrow.
 
And Diamond gets one step closer to building a 3c table...perhaps?

Thanks for sharing the R&D with us. Very interesting to me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top