Serious Investment
I've been reading and hearing about the Zan premium super soft, it's totally off the charts.
I wish I had my notes,
Found It...........(right click title)

Thanks Geoff, that ought to get me started. I'll have more questions when I get to pockets, but that's another day.

Kristina Tkach has about the same Fargo rating as Johnny Archer or John Schmidt.

There's gender, age, experience, etc., to consider.

Maybe the best way to sort it out is a televised "Gender Games" Two tables with a projection system set different patterns and see where the pluses and minuses work out. So each woman and each man would do the same tests.

You could test
- shooting accuracy with a series of increasingly difficult shots.
- bank shots
- safety play,
- 10-ball runouts, and many other facets.

You'd want to compare players with similar ages (?), and similar pool experience (years of play, games in Fargo?).

Does Kristina have the same 3D visualization skills as Johnny or John? Or is her Fargo rate a consequence of her better potting ability than Johnny or John due to her younger age?

skor said:

What did you introduced?
Do we have to in order to have an opinion?

Click to expand...

You could have stated your opinion with one post. Yet, you have single-handedly carried this thread for 3 pages, with your Dunning-Kruger remarks on the product and those who have found it to be useful.

It's a good product. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Simple as that.

skor said:

No it’s not
Thats a Clash Steel 9 ft table

View attachment 834020

Click to expand...

These look like 4 inchers no overhang either.

Hucklebearer.

Tennesseejoe said:

This is amazing information. I just don't know what my next step should be. Any suggestions?

Click to expand...

become and expert obviously

I initially typoed exopert lol. In that regard extropert is also an option.

One pocket needs streamlining. De-wrasslin. Straight pool became an offensive game in spite of the catastrophic potential of an error - no small thanks to the -18 penalty.

skogstokig said:

what's the rule in english 8-ball? many of them are quite hefty, and the table is tiny

Click to expand...

I'm not experienced with English 8-ball, but I found these rules, which state:

K. Standard Fouls
5 Accidentally striking the Cue Ball with any part of the cue
6 Accidentally striking an Object Ball with any part of the cue.
21 Players’ body or clothing touching any ball.

Click to expand...

So, yes.

toysmost said:

I've come to experience that it seems exceptionally difficult to even find the contact info let alone use it successfully to reach cue makers. What's up with that? TIA

Click to expand...

Who are you trying to contact?

Bob Jewett said:

For the one pocket, I wrote a WSR-style set of rules a couple of years ago for a Billiards Digest column. The WSR rules for one pocket are shorter than the onepocket.org rules because they start with all of the general rules and definitions that are used for all other games. Recently Predator asked the WPA refs to handle the one pocket and bank pool demo events in Las Vegas, so I put together a set of bank pool rules, which are a lot like the rules for one pocket. They were then easy enough to add to the final draft. I suppose those two games are the most likely to have errors.

Click to expand...

I gave the onepocket.org rules a re-read, and read the WPA rules. Here are some interesting differences I noticed:

1. No mention of re-rack option for balls pocketed on the break. Some form of this is pretty much always used these days in my experience matching up. Pretty sure DCC uses it, too.
2. I didn't see any mention of jump cues, which are generally not allowed in one pocket. That could seriously change the strategy of "doubling up" an opponent on the head rail.
3. It seems that the WPA rules don't allow the possibility of pocketing an opponents ball while jumping the cue ball off the table for the pocketed ball to be re-spotted. This is sometimes attempted when following the ball in is more difficult. Are there any reasons in particular for this difference? I personally like having this option.
4. Seems like "base of the ball" rules are in effect instead of "full ball" rules for ball in hand behind the head string. This applies to all games, but it's not clear to me what the WPA rules are for behind the line play. I'd like for "on or below the head string" in 6.10 and "crosses the head string" in 6.11 to be defined more clearly. I assume the base of the cue ball is the relevant point in both cases.

Speaking of..

iusedtoberich said:

I have not checked the written rules yet (only watched the video), but since Dave and Bob are on the committee, one vocabulary term that always bothered me is "base of the ball". If it's still there, it should be changed to "center of the ball", imo. The reason is, I've seen some players argue with me that the approx 1/4" wide "patch" that is touching the cloth counts, rather than the exact center only.

Click to expand...

Maybe "the lowest point of the cue ball" is a more precise way to phrase this. "Center" is pretty good, but it has an overloaded use for tip placement, which might get confusing. Downside of "lowest" is we have to agree which way up is.