Diamond ProAm vs. Brunswick Gold Crown

[RackemBilliards]

GC5 ball box

I vote for the GC5 tournament edition. This table plays great . The only drawback I can find is the back of my hands sometimes get scraped on wood when getting the balls out of the ball return. Only other problem is finding someone in southeast Va. who knows how to properly set this table up. Mostly cosmetic issues..

I agree. One of the first things I noticed about the GC5 was that it was hard to put your hands in the ball box, grab balls, and get them out. The box is way to narrow. That would be an easy fix, if anyone is listening

 

[14oneman]

If you listed the Diamond "Professional", instead of the Pro-Am, I may have gone with it but, I'd take Gold Crown over the Pro-Am any day.

 

[jalapus logan]

If you listed the Diamond "Professional", instead of the Pro-Am, I may have gone with it but, I'd take Gold Crown over the Pro-Am any day.

You are probably right. I should have asked if you could pick ANY table by the above manufacturers, but oh well.

In any event, this poll is only academic and intended to be only in good humour. I'm really glad that I purchased my Diamond pro three years ago, as in my city, there is not one single 9' pro table OR gold crown (of any size) around, period. The lone remaining pool hall has mostly 4 X 8' furniture style Olhausens. BOO!

 

[jalapus logan]

One other thought about Brunswick is this: even if they actually do make a superior table (which I don't personally believe they do), why should I care. Almost 100% of the tables that are used in the tourneys that I follow are Diamond tables. If I were an aspiring pro, why would I even consider purchasing another table to practice on? After all, I would always rather practice what I compete on.

I really don't understand why Brunswick does not sponsor tourneys or otherwise try to develop their market. It seems really shortsighted to me. Then again, maybe they have a certain method to their madness after all. Perhaps the Diamond tables cater to a group of "hard core" players and Brunswick caters to the casual player dominating furniture style tables? Just guessing.

 

[mdavis]

This is why I am comparing stock tables. I've never heard of anyone having to "correct" the way a Diamond Pro Am plays. $ for $, to me, I can't see how anyone could buy a better table new than a Diamond Pro Am or Pro table.

When I was trying to decide on which table to purchase, I quickly narrowed my search down to between the Gold Crown and either the Diamond Pro or Pro Am. After playing for years on each, I already had decided that the Diamond tables played better and had better consistency between tables. When I saw that the Gold Crown actually cost substantially MORE than the Diamond, my decision was easy. I mean, why would I pay MORE for a table that doesn't play as well???

I wouldn't say substantially more, but more...Consider dealer discounts on Brunswick, and delivery cost on Diamond...It quickly makes it much closer.

$4900 + $1500 (delivery) = $6400 for Diamond
$10k (GCV) - $2500 (dealer discount) + $0 delivery = $7500
...or something like that.

 

[mdavis]

If you listed the Diamond "Professional", instead of the Pro-Am, I may have gone with it but, I'd take Gold Crown over the Pro-Am any day.

There are technical advantages to the Pro-Am vs. Pro...

1. The wedge system (let Glen explain it)
2. The stability of the table...legs on edges, weight, etc.
3. Ball return

Depending on config:
4. The single-piece slate (well, you can probably get a Pro with that now?)
5. Dymondwood


Advantages of Pro over the Pro-Am:
1. Looks, this is admittedly a big one for many...
2. Pockets don't mark up the balls
3. Easier to ship/deliver/etc?

What did I miss? I'm not sure whether both tables have the extended size slate that extends below the rails??

 

[jalapus logan]

I wouldn't say substantially more, but more...Consider dealer discounts on Brunswick, and delivery cost on Diamond...It quickly makes it much closer.

$4900 + $1500 (delivery) = $6400 for Diamond
$10k (GCV) - $2500 (dealer discount) + $0 delivery = $7500
...or something like that.

FYI for anyone looking to purchase either table - check the USED market first. For $3000 on ebay, I picked up a two year old 9' Diamond Pro table with georgeous Dymondwood rails (3 pc. slate), Pro table cover and a set of Super Aramith balls. Granted, I did move it myself, but I did break down and have a professional install it (install was $450 including the price of the tourney blue Simonis 860 - Sweet!).

I'v had this table now for over 3 years and it plays just as great as any of the new Diamond pros or pro ams out there. Pretty cool. Though I do everything on a budget, this is one of my favorite investments ever.

Also, I can't praise the Dymondwood rails enough. After wiping them down with nothing more than a wet towel they look brand new all over again. Pretty great stuff.

 

[mdavis]

FYI for anyone looking to purchase either table - check the USED market first. For $3000 on ebay, I picked up a two year old 9' Diamond Pro table with georgeous Dymondwood rails (3 pc. slate), Pro table cover and a set of Super Aramith balls. Granted, I did move it myself, but I did break down and have a professional install it (install was $450 including the price of the tourney blue Simonis 860 - Sweet!).

I'v had this table now for over 3 years and it plays just as great as any of the new Diamond pros or pro ams out there. Pretty cool. Though I do everything on a budget, this is one of my favorite investments ever.

Also, I can't praise the Dymondwood rails enough. After wiping them down with nothing more than a wet towel they look brand new all over again. Pretty great stuff.

Well...to nit pick...it probably doesn't have the new sub-rail angles aka. (Diamond blue)? So, technically, it doesn't play as well as the New Diamond tables...but I see your point.

Used market...you'll probably find a lot more GC Vs...there are probably a lot more of them out there....I think resale value is better on Diamond, but my sample set is not very large.

Good find on the Diamond Pro.

-mark

 

[mdavis]

One other thought about Brunswick is this: even if they actually do make a superior table (which I don't personally believe they do), why should I care. Almost 100% of the tables that are used in the tourneys that I follow are Diamond tables. If I were an aspiring pro, why would I even consider purchasing another table to practice on? After all, I would always rather practice what I compete on.

I really don't understand why Brunswick does not sponsor tourneys or otherwise try to develop their market. It seems really shortsighted to me. Then again, maybe they have a certain method to their madness after all. Perhaps the Diamond tables cater to a group of "hard core" players and Brunswick caters to the casual player dominating furniture style tables? Just guessing.

Tournament table consistency is a good and very valid addition. Very important if that is your thing. I may add that. There are some tourney's on GC Vs though, right? I wonder if someone has the list of the top 10 tourney's and what tables they are using somewhere? Open was Diamond. DCC is Diamond.

 

[jalapus logan]

Well...to nit pick...it probably doesn't have the new sub-rail angles aka. (Diamond blue)? So, technically, it doesn't play as well as the New Diamond tables...but I see your point.

Used market...you'll probably find a lot more GC Vs...there are probably a lot more of them out there....I think resale value is better on Diamond, but my sample set is not very large.

Good find on the Diamond Pro.

-mark

Yes, regrettably I could not travel into the future and buy one of the newly redesigned Diamond tables five years ago - ha ha! Seriously though, I am curious to see what changes were made in person. I'll check 'em out at the DCC IN TWO DAYS - HOOT HOOT!!!

 

[mdavis]

Yes, regrettably I could not travel into the future and buy one of the newly redesigned Diamond tables five years ago - ha ha! Seriously though, I am curious to see what changes were made in person. I'll check 'em out at the DCC IN TWO DAYS - HOOT HOOT!!!

I can't wait to hear the reports from the DCC banking stuff.

You can always get Glen to update your table too...Might have to wait a decade to see him though .

 

[jalapus logan]

Tournament table consistency is a good and very valid addition. Very important if that is your thing. I may add that. There are some tourney's on GC Vs though, right? I wonder if someone has the list of the top 10 tourney's and what tables they are using somewhere? Open was Diamond. DCC is Diamond.

Well let's see, the recent Mizerak tourney was played on Diamond Pro Ams, as will the Super Billiards Expo in March. When I went out to vegas for the BCA nationals several years ago, there were Diamond bar boxes there as well. Additionally, I just tuned in last night and saw a live stream of Hennessee playing D Smith onepocket at Henny's new room, which is stocked with new Diamonds. Oh yeah, didn't John Schmidt just outfit his new room with Diamond Pros as well? Hmmm, makes one wonder...

 

[jalapus logan]

I can't wait to hear the reports from the DCC banking stuff.

You can always get Glen to update your table too...Might have to wait a decade to see him though .

I actually asked Glenn about that. Here's the thread from the ask the mechanics section:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=210713

 

[mattb]

Professional

I vote for the GC because I flat out do not like the way the proam plays. Now if there was a vote for the professional it would have changed my vote. I did not take pocket sizes into account on either, those can be changed.

On a side note I actually preferred the older professionals from 10 years ago or so. I just liked the way they played even with their short comings. This is all a preference and a feel thing to me.

 

[fd_colorado]

If it were new vs. new then I'd go with the Diamond.

But when I am thinking used GC vs new or used Diamond, then I would vote GC...because:

Grew up playing on GC
GCs seem to be better balanced, nothing too great & nothing too awful
Asthetically superior...approaching iconic
Lots of these tables out there

I'd be inclined to change my vote to Diamond if:

Diamond had somebody (maybe an Italian?) put some design in their tables
I actually got to play on a fixed Diamond

 

[jalapus logan]

I vote for the GC because I flat out do not like the way the proam plays. Now if there was a vote for the professional it would have changed my vote. I did not take pocket sizes into account on either, those can be changed.

On a side note I actually preferred the older professionals from 10 years ago or so. I just liked the way they played even with their short comings. This is all a preference and a feel thing to me.

I personally can not tell a difference between the way a Diamond Pro and Pro Am plays. To me, they are identical in play. As I stated earlier, I have the Diamond Pro, not Pro Am at home, which I love. I just can't see how you could go wrong with either one. Also, just curious, but what do you not like about the Pro Am and how is it different on the Pro table?

Lastly, I notice that you are in the Louisville area. Do you happen to be referring to those older early generation Diamond Pro tables at Bank Shots by chance?

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

...I really don't understand why Brunswick does not sponsor tourneys...

You really should check out the Mosconi Cup sometime. It is one of the premier events and there are some excellent players with some great pool being played.

Well let's see, the recent Mizerak tourney was played on Diamond Pro Ams, as will the Super Billiards Expo in March. When I went out to vegas for the BCA nationals several years ago, there were Diamond bar boxes there as well. Additionally, I just tuned in last night and saw a live stream of Hennessee playing D Smith onepocket at Henny's new room, which is stocked with new Diamonds. Oh yeah, didn't John Schmidt just outfit his new room with Diamond Pros as well? Hmmm, makes one wonder...

As for why ANY professionally promoted event uses a particular brand of table, it is not just about the quality of the table but also about the financial arrangement. Heck, I've seen plenty of events played on Connellys, Olhausens, even Fusions for gosh sakes. As far as the BCA Nationals go, the owner of that league is a shareholder in Diamond. Having said that, even with my very limited bar box experience it seems pretty well understood that Diamond makes the best bar box out there and I'm sure that is the biggest part of the equation for Mark (who I have the utmost respect for). The biggest league (APA) does not use Diamonds for its Nationals, so is that an indicator that Diamonds are the inferior table? Obviously no. Again, whether misguided or not, it is probably a financial/strategic decision partly based on the fact that the owner of their main competition has an interest in Diamond. For whatever reason, Diamond has made the professional scene an integral part of its marketing strategy while Brunswick has not. It certainly appears to be working for Diamond so perhaps this is a mistake by Brunswick, but it has little to do with one table being better than another.

Suffice to say that Brunswick and Diamond are the two best tables on the market. There are some differences in the way they play but most of that is a matter of preference (not fact) as to which is better.

Out of the box I would take a Diamond simply because 5" pockets are too big for my tastes. Other than that, while I think Diamond is a great table I prefer the way a well set up Gold Crown plays (and looks). So even though I haven't played on a new GC5(T) yet, based on the specs I think I would take the GC5(T).

But again, this is just my preference, not meant to say it is a better table.

 

[jalapus logan]

If it were new vs. new then I'd go with the Diamond.

But when I am thinking used GC vs new or used Diamond, then I would vote GC...because:

Grew up playing on GC
GCs seem to be better balanced, nothing too great & nothing too awful
Asthetically superior...approaching iconic
Lots of these tables out there

I'd be inclined to change my vote to Diamond if:

Diamond had somebody (maybe an Italian?) put some design in their tables
I actually got to play on a fixed Diamond

I think that it is noteworthy that a players history with one table or another can shape the view of that player. I have been playing now for going on 15 years, and most of those years have been spent on a Diamond.

Now, I'm not contradicting you here, as opinions are just that, but observe the reasons that I prefer Diamonds:

Grew up playing on Diamond
Diamonds seem to be better balanced, and certainly more sturdy than GC's
Asthetically superior...approaching iconic, at least in the tournament room
Lots of these tables out there in tourneys and new pool halls

 

[themack]

I'd have to say the reason the Brunswick is leading the pool, is a lot of the older guys that have played for many years and grew up and played their whole lives on GC's are diehards. A lot of them probably havn't even played on a Diamond. I started on GC's but the first time i EVER hit a ball on a Diamond i said "WOW". Take this poll again in a few years and probably Diamond will blow it away. I'm as unbiased as they come and i love GC's but in terms of playability the Diamond is easily better (to me).

 

[jalapus logan]

You really should check out the Mosconi Cup sometime. It is one of the premier events and there are some excellent players with some great pool being played.



As for why ANY professionally promoted event uses a particular brand of table, it is not just about the quality of the table but also about the financial arrangement. Heck, I've seen plenty of events played on Connellys, Olhausens, even Fusions for gosh sakes. As far as the BCA Nationals go, the owner of that league is a shareholder in Diamond. Having said that, even with my very limited bar box experience it seems pretty well understood that Diamond makes the best bar box out there and I'm sure that is the biggest part of the equation for Mark (who I have the utmost respect for). The biggest league (APA) does not use Diamonds for its Nationals, so is that an indicator that Diamonds are the inferior table? Obviously no. Again, whether misguided or not, it is probably a financial/strategic decision partly based on the fact that the owner of their main competition has an interest in Diamond. For whatever reason, Diamond has made the professional scene an integral part of its marketing strategy while Brunswick has not. It certainly appears to be working for Diamond so perhaps this is a mistake by Brunswick, but it has little to do with one table being better than another.

Suffice to say that Brunswick and Diamond are the two best tables on the market. There are some differences in the way they play but most of that is a matter of preference (not fact) as to which is better.

Out of the box I would take a Diamond simply because 5" pockets are too big for my tastes. Other than that, while I think Diamond is a great table I prefer the way a well set up Gold Crown plays (and looks). So even though I haven't played on a new GC5(T) yet, based on the specs I think I would take the GC5(T).

But again, this is just my preference, not meant to say it is a better table.

I watched all of the Mosconi cup and loved it. Wish more of these team events would happen. It was a great, high profile event.

As far as aesthetics are concerned: De gustibus non disputandum est. In other words, to each their own. I happen to like the simplicity of Diamonds design. I will say though, that I do not like the bold lettering on any table. A simple name plate on the rail is tolerable though.