Pro Pocket Size TOO Small for 9 Ball

You’re correct in that well played safeties ARE an aspect of 9 ball, in MODERATION. The 3 foul rule seldom comes into play so it’s really a non factor.

Sadly with the “changes” that have been implemented, I.E. racking 9 on the spot, break boxes, and 4” pockets, games have more safety play, far more than what was common in the past, if not for any other factor than players deciding a safety is a higher percentage play than taking on certain shots, with the mitigating factor of that decision being based on pocket size reduction lowering the percentage of pocketing the ball, or more often, being able to cheat the pocket and still pocket the ball and get shape, which WAS a big part of 9 ball. It has changed the style of play, and has made the game into something it wasn’t intended to be.

What I don’t get is the references in threads like this, that “it is boring” to watch players break and string racks in packages, which IS generally the justification given for changing the racking of the balls, 4” pockets and “break box” rules currently used in today’s game. I don’t find it boring to watch players demonstrate their well honed skills in this manner, as that is the goal isn’t it? I never heard players or fans bitch about it until Europeans became more prevalent as both players and fans.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if the “powers that be” that run the pro game don’t like 9 ball as it is intended to be played, then perhaps they should select a different game to feature, instead of tinkering with the rules and equipment to make it something it is not, nor intended to be. If 9 ball is too easy, then go to 15 ball “61 rotation” instead, just leave the damn game alone.
Any pool on buckets is boring, especially if pros are playing. There's also viewer anxiety generated by all the errors they make anyway.
I suppose in threads like this, you have experts who would be nowhere without tight pockets and generously defer to the needs of the many. (buckets) Me, I could GAF. I'm a student of pool and to me, maximum accuracy is fundamental.
Had to refresh that thought...

How do LOW-COST CARBON FIBER SHAFTS Perform Compared to the Best?

This is very interesting. I know you don’t test for this, but do you have a comment on the fit and finish, the sound/feel?

I know you say you don’t care about these things, but most of us would find a shaft buzz, rattle or rough finish to be disqualifying (and if we are going to recommend a cheaper option to newer players it would be nice to know they are at least okay).

Pro Pocket Size TOO Small for 9 Ball

Cost for a 9' is more, they take up more room area so your rent in higher with less tables. Drinkers and food pay the rent these days not full time pool player, and operation costs a Big.
The cost difference is not that great over time at all. You need adequate room around any table for patrons to enjoy and 3 1/2 vs 4 1/2 feet width does not give you a significant number of additional tables if you are not squeezing people together

Drinks and food have nothing to do with pocket size - you get more people in 7 footer rooms only bc the tables are easier than 9 foot Diamonds- so more people = more drinks = smaller tables because folks can enjoy them more.

You are correct drinks and food Trump pool - it is no longer 1965- and the only way to sell a lot of drinks is to have smaller tables — THAT is bc 9 foot tight tables Won’t Draw in most rooms in America.

How do LOW-COST CARBON FIBER SHAFTS Perform Compared to the Best?

Some mind-boggling results finding deflection among these inexpensive shafts like that of the Revo. Got to think some more about this.

Cue tips can be very important in causing deflection!!!! An 11.8mm Rhino soft cue tip likely caused "off the charts' deflection in about 20% of shots at low speed and less-than-maximum spin. And this without a miscue. My avatar is a hard Rhino Time Crystal tip --- hmmm, what will I do with my unused soft tip?

Pro Pocket Size TOO Small for 9 Ball

i dont know where your here is but my here is and are's have barren pool rooms except for the regulars.
I’m in Southern California. And I’m guessing the pool rooms are barren not for lack of players but because you could probably draw a straight diverging line since the 40s with pool room popularity and income inequality. Lots of raging action spots here in SoCal tho. Here’s a pretty regular scene at aloha in Orange County tho. 4” pockets too:

Attachments

  • IMG_5563.jpeg
    IMG_5563.jpeg
    163.3 KB · Views: 69
  • IMG_5564.jpeg
    IMG_5564.jpeg
    146 KB · Views: 67

Pro Pocket Size TOO Small for 9 Ball

watching pool in most cases is boring.

watching exciting players play pool is fun.

if you were ever around when guys like keith, ronnie, fats, red, beenie, crazy bruce, u.j. , earl, busti, mellon, nevel,miz, jersey red,scotty townsend,
mike seigal, etc, etc. were in a room or playing.

people would gather around the tables to watch and listen.

those kind of players made pool and brought new players in as it made pool something exciting to watch. and talk about.
These guys were fun to watch bc the GCs that they played on were 4.75 to 5 inch pockets and you could free stroke and make balls - not today with 4 or 4+. You need super disciplined strokes to pocket and get next close position - robots- basically.

I love my new GC3 with 4.75, new 860, and a new set of Dynaspheres with a ball cleaning machine and TAOM chalk. It is super clean, reasonably fast, fun to play , esp. 14.1, and Anyone can enjoy a day in my home room. I play 10-15 hours a week , not 40 hours or more like young pros.

I like watching balls pocketed, I like the game with some level of personality in the players, The larger pockets give you more of both- I never saw that as a bad thing for pool.

Why have so many commercial rooms in America gone to 7 footers- bc 9 foot smaller pocket tables are just not fan friendly for the masses to reasonably enjoy the game unless they can devote 25+ hours a week to the game - which 99+% cannot!!

Filter

Back
Top