WPBL (Bonus Ball) - Pocket Cut

[Palmerfan]

Ernesto / Oscar

I'm sure RKC's way is great for the usual pool games. But this is Bonus Ball and they didn't ask for his opinion for a reason. I wouldn't either. Makes me happy to hear that Ernesto did the work, I doubt anyone had to talk him into making the requested changes.

Just a question if anyone knows, (not trying to derail the thread)..Is Oscar as qualified and/or considered as good a table mechanic as his Dad? I know in the past they have done jobs together.

 

[Needing weight]

I think Nathan's theory on how the pockets should be cut/designed will prove to be the best for all of us in the end....

 

[JumpinJoe]

I've seen a similar table once. It played like a complete bucket table.

 

[realkingcobra]

This was mentioned in another thread, so I figured I'd just start a new one. Pocket cuts are like aiming systems as it seems people are very defensive about them, but I figured I'd explain my take on them, as I feel it's a very important element of what we're doing here at the WPBL arena.

I've been a firm believer that the current pocket cut in North America is one of the reason why pool is suffering here. Sounds a bit harsh, and maybe it is, but hopefully I can explain why. I've had an idea of how to improve this for a few years, and proposed it back in a thread last year.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=255620&highlight=pocket

Unfortunately I was met with nearly universal resistance, but I stuck with it anyway. Bonus Ball finally offered me the chance to put my ideas into action.

The issue is that the current pocket standard is penalizing the better players by opening the faces. It jaws balls, and forces players to play pocket speed, thus making the pocket play "phony". A player can slop a ball in softly if rolled in, but a well hit shot done firmly will be rejected. Its terrible for the better players, and even worse for TV, as players often opt to play safe instead of taking on a shot where a ball needs to be pounded in down the rail. I feel a player should be able to pound balls in with speed, with as much spin as possible, and the pocket should always accept it provided the shot was accurate. The aggressive guys who are willing to play dramatic shots should be rewarded, and this new cut does exactly that.

The trick is to shrink the pocket, push the facings back towards parallel so they're around 138 (rather than 141-142), and then ditch the shelf. A ball either goes in, or it misses entirely. No more pocket speed or jawed balls. If you put the ball into the tiny opening, it goes in. If you miss, it leaves the pocket area entirely, thus eliminating jawed balls almost entirely.

It's basically doing the exact opposite of what everyone else has been doing.

I called Ernesto, and had him cut the pockets the way I wanted. To my surprise, he agreed and said that he's done this before, and thinks its the way a pocket should be cut. Sure enough, as players trickled in during opening week, they all agreed. The result is what all the pros here are now calling "a true pro cut". As far as I know, the support is unanimous.

You have to be accurate as hell, but the balls take as they should. Its the best of all worlds, and I'm a firm believer that this will become the new standard, as I know that Rasson over in China is already testing this cut, and may make it the new standard in Asia (albeit 4.25" inch for amateurs, which plays like a 4.5"). Time will tell whether it takes, but from what I've seen this far, the pros may be hesitant to go back to the old cut style.

Please keep in mind that I'm just doing what I feel is best for the game. Not everyone will agree, but whats important to me is that its best for TV, and what the players now agree they want.

If a ball made it 10% of the way in that pocket, it would fall in, is that what pool tables need to play like....really? Cuz that's a joke in my opinion, no different than the APA trying to handicap all players to the point that anyone can win, with...or without the needed skills to play at a top level.

 

[fasted71465]

I hate rattling the pocket because of angle of shot and the speed of hit. I like the idea of this and would love to try it out. I don't think you should knock it until you try it. You can never please everyone.

 

[watchez]

Farboy's rails on his Diamond 9ft ProAm are an excellent example of how tighter pockets should play. I could line up a 5 ball combination shot with all the balls frozen to the side rail, shoot the combo at break speed...and the point ball would go right in the pocket, no rattle, no bobble. .. nothing but gone!!! Now, if someone couldn't repeat that same shot with a single ball frozen to the rail, and cue ball in hand to start with....is it the pocket, or is it the shooter? The only reason this conversation is even taking place, is once again how can we make the tables appear to be harder to play on, but really make the pockets take balls that they normally wouldn't, thus bringing the skills of players closer together....or so it seems.

The OP description makes me think that the 4 1/2 x 9 plays like a big bar table with semi tight pockets based on the diameter only.

 

[realkingcobra]

But this is Bonus Ball and they didn't ask for his opinion for a reason. I wouldn't either.

That comment right there is out of line, and has nothing to do with this tread, and is totally uncalled for

 

[JumpinJoe]

Some room in Florida had like 12 tables, their whole room with pockets like this once. It didn't last long. They play very soft, everything falls in.
I'm all for tight pockets, but these are not tight. Very misleading.

 

[Masayoshi]

Maybe I can help you better understand as to what I mean when I say shooting balls down the rail should be harder.....for one the point of aim going down the rail is the smallest target....you agree with that?

Now if that's the smallest target on the table...why should if accept the balls easier?
I'm not here to prove anyone wrong.....I know exactly what I'm saying and I'm 100% right.

Players that miss a ball going down the rails more than likely catch the long rail just before the ball goes in the jaws of the corner and it hangs up....they look around because they hit the ball perfect....so they think....now on a diamond table the large facing will hang a ball hit in the very front of the facing without hitting the long rail....because the pockets have a 141.....and 15 down angle.....which in turn means the 15 down angle traps the ball to help it to the back of the pocket....only problem is the slate shelf is so deep it makes the ball hang.

The shelf depth of a pocket means a ton on how the pockets play....shallow shelf the softer the pocket....I understand that the smaller the pocket the more the throat closes up in the back of the pocket.
Now remember on a 5" pocket....depending on the miter cut....the throat is not that small but the ball hangs on a shallow shelf.....because there's more slate shelf close to the facings.

The reason the throat on Ernesto's pockets look Parallel is because of the 48 degree miters.....say someone puts a 54 degree miter on a pocket...the throat looks closed more..the pockets look really big.....but it's hard to make the ball down the rail because of the miter of the pocket.

After 15 years of trying everything on rails....pretty sure I understand what's going on with rails and pockets.

Like I said I have 4" corners on my GC 5 and the table plays pretty good...and has no phony shots going down the rails.

Look I'm not saying its a bad thing if everyone likes and wants it......it's the same pocket for everyone......all I'm saying is by putting more of a parallel corner pocket....shooting balls down the rail becomes and even playing field for all.
That's where the Stricklands...Archers...Alex....Shane....all the great players have and advantage in their skill.....all I'm saying is why take that away from them.

Mark Gregory

There are obviously tradeoffs for each style of pockets.

Ernesto-style pockets have similar accuracy tolerances without much regard to the speed of the shot. This comes with the opportunity cost of making rail shots relatively easier (although at 3 7/8", easier is obviously also a relative term).

Diamond-style pockets make shots more difficult the closer you get to the rail, which adds further accuracy requirements to the game. The drawback is that the error the pocket will tolerate is affected greatly by the speed of the shot.

Personally I would much rather play on tables that i don't have to adjust to the speed of the pockets to a great extent. I could care less if rail shots are made easier. If I am a more accurate shooter than my opponent, my accuracy will be an advantage on all shots. Not just shots down the rail.

I don't think Ernesto-style pockets even the playing field between good and great players. You say the great players' advantage in pool lies in their ability to shoot more accurately down the rail. Why should their accuracy advantage only lie in shooting down the rail? If they are more accurate, they should also be more accurate at shots from the center of the table as well. If you make the target smaller all across the board, as Ernesto's pockets do, then their advantage in accuracy should shine even more.

 

[nb92]

... yes I hate hanging balls because I played a bad position and had to hit it harder then the pocket would accept to get to the next ball. :angry:

So this is a great change to the game ... I never liked the idea that someone who plays better position or had a better touch or who could keep spin on the ball longer (even at a soft speed) should have an advantage just because of table design.

BANGERS of the World Unite! :thumbup:

 

[realkingcobra]

Some room in Florida had like 12 tables, their whole room with pockets like this once. It didn't last long. They play very soft, everything falls in.
I'm all for tight pockets, but these are not tight. Very misleading.

That's because a small target, with a big hallway is really mis-leading. Yes, the pockets are smaller at the openings, but the throats of the pockets are about a 1/2" bigger than that of a ProCut pocketed Diamond 9ft, with most of the slate shelf covered over by the extended rail to cut the size down to 4". All that means is the ball is either in, or it's out, as there won't be any balls sitting in the jaws of the pockets after a narrow miss. This is what makes the difference in how the table plays between good players and the best. The good players will still get credit for making balls that wouldn't normally have gone, thereby keeping up with the best players, who still pocket the balls more straight into the pockets. On a normal Diamond with ProCut pockets, the best are going to out play the good because they use more of the pocket when making balls than the good players do, as in they're more use to using the whole width of the pocket, including cheating the pocket in order to pocket balls. So when this is more equalized into the ball is either in or out, then it starts to become more of a level playing field because of the pockets not being able to reject a near miss, but in fact taking the ball in.

Glen

 

[Neil]

Farboy's rails on his Diamond 9ft ProAm are an excellent example of how tighter pockets should play. I could line up a 5 ball combination shot with all the balls frozen to the side rail, shoot the combo at break speed...and the point ball would go right in the pocket, no rattle, no bobble. .. nothing but gone!!! Now, if someone couldn't repeat that same shot with a single ball frozen to the rail, and cue ball in hand to start with....is it the pocket, or is it the shooter? The only reason this conversation is even taking place, is once again how can we make the tables appear to be harder to play on, but really make the pockets take balls that they normally wouldn't, thus bringing the skills of players closer together....or so it seems.

You say a 5 ball combo will go. But, have you tested the theory, really?? If you take a 5 ball combo and hit it at break speed, the ball being pocketed will have essentially no forward or backward roll to it. It will be sliding. A sliding ball will go at speed. However, try it with a draw shot or a follow shot and see what happens. It gets spit back out. That should not happen.

If you think having to slow roll balls, or only use stun shots at speed is the right way to play, you and I have vastly different ideas of what playing the game right means.

You put the ball inside the points, it should drop. You want a tougher game, make the pocket size smaller.

If you really feel the way you say, then why are you messing with Diamonds tables? Olhausen (sp??) already plays the way you say you prefer. Any ball hit with speed won't go.

 

[realkingcobra]

There are obviously tradeoffs for each style of pockets.

Ernesto-style pockets have similar accuracy tolerances without much regard to the speed of the shot. This comes with the opportunity cost of making rail shots relatively easier (although at 3 7/8", easier is obviously also a relative term).

Diamond-style pockets make shots more difficult the closer you get to the rail, which adds further accuracy requirements to the game. The drawback is that the error the pocket will tolerate is affected greatly by the speed of the shot.

Personally I would much rather play on tables that i don't have to adjust to the speed of the pockets to a great extent. I could care less if rail shots are made easier. If I am a more accurate shooter than my opponent, my accuracy will be an advantage on all shots. Not just shots down the rail.

I don't think Ernesto-style pockets even the playing field between good and great players. You say the great players' advantage in pool lies in their ability to shoot more accurately down the rail. Why should their accuracy advantage only lie in shooting down the rail? If they are more accurate, they should also be more accurate at shots from the center of the table as well. If you make the target smaller all across the board, as Ernesto's pockets do, then their advantage in accuracy should shine even more.

Then, where are all them world champions hiding that play on, and practice on Ernesto's perfectly built pool tables...they should be ruling the world of pocket billiards on tables with bigger pockets than what they play on...right? I've said it before, I'll say it again....all the push toward tighter pockets is coming from the players that CAN'T win on 4 1/2" ProCut pockets, so they feel the need to try and make it harder to get beat, by making the pockets tighter and tighter...in order to make it HARDER to get beat, but in the end....still lose!

Glen

 

[JumpinJoe]

This was mentioned in another thread, so I figured I'd just start a new one. Pocket cuts are like aiming systems as it seems people are very defensive about them, but I figured I'd explain my take on them, as I feel it's a very important element of what we're doing here at the WPBL arena.

I've been a firm believer that the current pocket cut in North America is one of the reason why pool is suffering here. Sounds a bit harsh, and maybe it is, but hopefully I can explain why. I've had an idea of how to improve this for a few years, and proposed it back in a thread last year.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=255620&highlight=pocket

Unfortunately I was met with nearly universal resistance, but I stuck with it anyway. Bonus Ball finally offered me the chance to put my ideas into action.

The issue is that the current pocket standard is penalizing the better players by opening the faces. It jaws balls, and forces players to play pocket speed, thus making the pocket play "phony". A player can slop a ball in softly if rolled in, but a well hit shot done firmly will be rejected. Its terrible for the better players, and even worse for TV, as players often opt to play safe instead of taking on a shot where a ball needs to be pounded in down the rail. I feel a player should be able to pound balls in with speed, with as much spin as possible, and the pocket should always accept it provided the shot was accurate. The aggressive guys who are willing to play dramatic shots should be rewarded, and this new cut does exactly that.

The trick is to shrink the pocket, push the facings back towards parallel so they're around 138 (rather than 141-142), and then ditch the shelf. A ball either goes in, or it misses entirely. No more pocket speed or jawed balls. If you put the ball into the tiny opening, it goes in. If you miss, it leaves the pocket area entirely, thus eliminating jawed balls almost entirely.

It's basically doing the exact opposite of what everyone else has been doing.

I called Ernesto, and had him cut the pockets the way I wanted. To my surprise, he agreed and said that he's done this before, and thinks its the way a pocket should be cut. Sure enough, as players trickled in during opening week, they all agreed. The result is what all the pros here are now calling "a true pro cut". As far as I know, the support is unanimous.

You have to be accurate as hell, but the balls take as they should. Its the best of all worlds, and I'm a firm believer that this will become the new standard, as I know that Rasson over in China is already testing this cut, and may make it the new standard in Asia (albeit 4.25" inch for amateurs, which plays like a 4.5"). Time will tell whether it takes, but from what I've seen this far, the pros may be hesitant to go back to the old cut style.

Please keep in mind that I'm just doing what I feel is best for the game. Not everyone will agree, but whats important to me is that its best for TV, and what the players now agree they want.

This type of pocket could NEVER be used for one pocket. Some people to have been around pool along time, or seen most things amaze me at how silly they are. These are buckets, valleys.
If you think these are super tight, then a "B" player like myself should get action to play like the 7 ball ghost.
Anyone want that action? I'll play it on this table if allowed come July during the BCA. And if I get lucky and win, I'll give you a shot for the same bet playin the 9 ball ghost right after.

 

[spanky79]

Just a question if anyone knows, (not trying to derail the thread)..Is Oscar as qualified and/or considered as good a table mechanic as his Dad? I know in the past they have done jobs together.

yes, he works with him all the time. Obviously doesn't have the years of experience his pops does but he know what he is talking about.

 

[realkingcobra]

You say a 5 ball combo will go. But, have you tested the theory, really?? If you take a 5 ball combo and hit it at break speed, the ball being pocketed will have essentially no forward or backward roll to it. It will be sliding. A sliding ball will go at speed. However, try it with a draw shot or a follow shot and see what happens. It gets spit back out. That should not happen.

If you think having to slow roll balls, or only use stun shots at speed is the right way to play, you and I have vastly different ideas of what playing the game right means.

You put the ball inside the points, it should drop. You want a tougher game, make the pocket size smaller.

If you really feel the way you say, then why are you messing with Diamonds tables? Olhausen (sp??) already plays the way you say you prefer. Any ball hit with speed won't go.

Olhausen tables spit the balls out of the pockets because of soft cushions, and super soft facings, which when added together won't hold the angle of a ball going into the pocket with most shots made harder than a roll, so on them, it's the pocket design, as I've changed many of them as to how they play just by changing the facings to a higher compression rating and just a little thicker so that they don't change the angle of the ball going into the pocket by compressing the cushions and facings, causing the angle to change and rattle out of the pocket.

Glen

 

[Fatboy]

Farboy's rails on his Diamond 9ft ProAm are an excellent example of how tighter pockets should play. I could line up a 5 ball combination shot with all the balls frozen to the side rail, shoot the combo at break speed...and the point ball would go right in the pocket, no rattle, no bobble. .. nothing but gone!!! Now, if someone couldn't repeat that same shot with a single ball frozen to the rail, and cue ball in hand to start with....is it the pocket, or is it the shooter? The only reason this conversation is even taking place, is once again how can we make the tables appear to be harder to play on, but really make the pockets take balls that they normally wouldn't, thus bringing the skills of players closer together....or so it seems.

what are the specs on those rails, i know we made the down angle a bit more than usual.those rails play great.

 

[Masayoshi]

Then, where are all them world champions hiding that play on, and practice on Ernesto's perfectly built pool tables...they should be ruling the world of pocket billiards on tables with bigger pockets than what they play on...right? I've said it before, I'll say it again....all the push toward tighter pockets is coming from the players that CAN'T win on 4 1/2" ProCut pockets, so they feel the need to try and make it harder to get beat, by making the pockets tighter and tighter...in order to make it HARDER to get beat, but in the end....still lose!

Glen

Not Ernesto's tables, but players from Taiwan are famous for practicing on very tough tables and they have produced some of the strongest players in recent memory.

 

[Neil]

IMO when a ball jaws on a Diamond at speed it's because the OB touched a point and people don't realize it. When coming at the pocket facing at higher speed from a point the ball will be rejected. In othjer words, at speed, if you're inaccurate you'll be penalized.

These BB pockets will make the pocket easier but some people don't want to come right out and say that.

At a slow speed a ball will go in on a Diamond when you hit anywhere inside the first diamond if the angle is shallow.

I don't see how they are easier. You have a much smaller target to hit to make the ball. If you hit the rail, the balls not going in like it will on other tables. You actually have to be more accurate, and the bonus is, you aren't penalized for only hitting one speed.

 

[Fatboy]

FWIW Ernesto just did rails for me that are about like the BB table as it is now and it's tough action. I just spent 2 months playing on 4 3/4" pockets in Germany and I have causght my self walking more than once, hitting the point when i thought i made the ball.