These statements are given as if from a player's perspective, but they are really from a table owner's perspective. If you were playing in a typical poolroom, you would be playing on a GC with three piece slate that may or may not be perfectly leveled, with pockets bigger than a Diamond and with rubber inferior to Artemis.
Doesn't having your own GC brought closer to the level of Diamond quality mean that you recognize its inferiority and you compensate?
Fair enough. Yes I'm a table owner but I would still maintain that my comments are from a player's perspective and not from an owner's viewpoint.
For example, as a table owner I went with the Artemis cushions because they last a lot longer than the superspeeds, not because I think they play so much better. From a player's perspective, if I'm in a pool hall with GC's and the cushions are dead I wouldn't blame that on the table at all, I'd call that a maintenance issue. If the table has good condition superspeed cushions they play just fine. Conversely, if I go into a room with Diamonds and the cushions are dead, I'm not writing off Diamond tables as crap because of this.
So if your saying superspeeds are inherently inferior PLAYING to Artemis, I don't necessarily agree with that. If you are saying they are inferior because they don't last as long, well that is a statement made from an owner's perspective. Some people feel the Artemis play a little too lively and prefer the superspeeds as being more "natural". Again, that's a matter of personal preference. It doesn't make the superspeeds FACTUALLY better.
Same goes with the pocket size, that's a set up issue from a player's perspective. By itself pocket size doesn't make a Diamond a better table than a Gold Crown. I visited the Jointed Cue in Sacramento and was not at all impressed with the tables there (Gold Crowns). 5" pockets, cushions on the dead side, worn cloth stained and full of holes/tears and no table lighting. From a players perspective I don't consider that the fault of the Gold Crowns. Across town at Hard Times the Gold Crowns had nice lively rubber, tight pockets set up by Ernesto, and good cloth. Great playing tables.
To me, as a player, pocket size is a set-up thing. Given the rooms I frequent (Hard Times and Hollywood Billiards in SoCal) it is Diamonds that have the huge buckets, not Brunswick Gold Crowns.
If you are saying Diamonds are better because you don't have to pay to tighten the pockets on a new table, that is a statement made from a owner's viewpoint, not a player.
Lastly, the same goes for if the table is level or not. That's almost entirely on the mechanic and not usually a reflection of the table manufacturer. Yes, the specific tables made by Diamond that come with one piece slates will never have an issue with seams coming apart etc. but again that to me is a maintenance issue. If I'm in a pool hall playing on a table that rolls off or worse, has slates not fitted properly, to me that's a reflection on the management of the room.
In the end, from a player's perspective, you can't compare a Gold Crown with ill fitting corner castings and dead rails to a brand new Diamond set up by Glen or Donny. As a player, I'm just saying that both brands, when properly set up, play great with some differences between them, such as the deep shelves and the shape of the rails.
Don't get me wrong, from the limited table time I've had on Diamonds I like them, a lot. But from my own personal perspective,
as a player, I don't necessarily think they play better than GC's, just different in certain ways. In some ways I prefer Diamonds, but in other ways I prefer Gold Crowns. But these differences are more a matter of personal preference and not things that make one table factually better playing than the another.
). To descibe exactly the technical things unfortunatly my english wold be a bit too low and i don t want to write someting wrong caused by conversion problems. 
He's nice enough to have our BCA team members and other friends over occasionally and most have to be shown the door, so he can get some sleep.:wink:
