Tight Pockets

the game definitely changes with tighter pockets. i practice on a triple shimmed crown and stricking the cue ball with bad/excessive english hit causes more misses. i find it when playing on tight pockets, ball speed is more important. i find it to be an excellent training tool...while some of the older/more experienced players tell me it doesnt benefit anyones game to play on the lil pockets. can someone tell me if this a a true statement?

also, i think i can scratch playing 3-cushion.haha

john
 
If the table is properly set up, I don't think there are many shots that become unavailable with smaller pockets (for the level of player being given as an example... for me, there are many shots that are out of the question). What few shots ARE taken away (due to eyesight, probability of success, etc) will be managed by the superior player by virtue of experience... decision making based on probability and the knowledge of one's own ability will ultimately win the match. Put plainly, if the poor old pro feels like the pockets are too tight, they'll win with safety play instead of superhero shot making. Boring, but that's the adjustment.
 
jcs003 said:
the game definitely changes with tighter pockets. i practice on a triple shimmed crown and stricking the cue ball with bad/excessive english hit causes more misses. i find it when playing on tight pockets, ball speed is more important. i find it to be an excellent training tool...while some of the older/more experienced players tell me it doesnt benefit anyones game to play on the lil pockets. can someone tell me if this a a true statement?

also, i think i can scratch playing 3-cushion.haha

john
Click to expand...

It's not the table or the pockets that makes a player a world champion, it's the will and determination to practice and play that does that:grin:
 
I have a table at home with the same pocket demensions as the one used for the SVB vs Alex match. These pockets play nicely. They accept balls very well. It's not as tough as it sounds. The pockets get bigger (perception) after an hour of practice. Actually, I like these pockets far better than the Olhausen pockets. Please reserve judgement until you get to try the 4 1/8" pocket out.
 
DogsPlayingPool said:
Unless you are the opponent begging from your chair, in which case the CB never seems to fall. How many times have you gotten up out of your chair to watch the cue ball fall in the side only to see it hit the knuckle and fall perfectly on the next ball? :(
Click to expand...

Ying and Yang, you both are Sooooooooo right....
 
Allot of great points,
but someone, somewhere find me any player, anywhere in the world, playing in a pro type event, with 4 1/8 or 4 1/4'' pockets, with an object ball three diamonds out from the head rail, an inch off the rail and have whitey come five rails around and land on the other end rail in match play, even hitting the fourth rail would be close enough. This shot I'm telling you NO longer exists in tight conditions, is that ok for the game? If this is ok for the game of rotation 9 or ten ball, then tell me why its ok to remove this shot from the game?
 
Island Drive said:
On my am jog a very important aspect of our game came to mind, one that's not been discussed but should be as our rotation games seem to be evolving with every passing month.
As I look at the comparative, the PGA, it's very exciting to see Tom Watson, or Fred Couples be in the hunt, in either the British Open or the Masters at Augusta.
I think we and our spot also deserve this aspect of our game to be prevalant, as we all know Knowlege and experience, like in golf is VERY important.
If the pocket size for pro play is TOO small, the 40 yr old and the 50ish Efrens, their chances diminish greatly, the game itself looses an aspect that has GREAT value to us as players, too the public audience and historians alike.
Too small of pockets makes the game more for the younger players in their teens and twenties where eyesight and other factors are key elements of our game as we're ALWAYS dealing with infintesimal amounts when it comes to winning or losing a match.
I would like to see greats such as Mike Sigel be in the hunt, late in a pro event, but when certain factors like pocket size ''rear their head'' who loses the most?
When strategy is a KEY factor in our game, why make pocketing a difficult shot, with a small hole MORE important when knowlege, like Efren is JUST as important.
Click to expand...

Isn't the hole diameter the same for all holes and courses in professional golf?

Why wouldn't this apply to pool?
 
Island Drive said:
Allot of great points,
but someone, somewhere find me any player, anywhere in the world, playing in a pro type event, with 4 1/8 or 4 1/4'' pockets, with an object ball three diamonds out from the head rail, an inch off the rail and have whitey come five rails around and land on the other end rail in match play, even hitting the fourth rail would be close enough. This shot I'm telling you NO longer exists in tight conditions, is that ok for the game? If this is ok for the game of rotation 9 or ten ball, then tell me why its ok to remove this shot from the game?
Click to expand...

If a player has to make that kind of shot to impress you, then you fail to understand the fact that he was out of line in the first place on the shot, and has to try and make up for it...that is unless he plays safe first as to avoid taking that kind of chance to get position on the next shot. Seldom will a Pro send the cue ball all over the table to get position on the next shot. That kind of shot making is reserved for amateurs!
 
realkingcobra said:
If a player has to make that kind of shot to impress you, then you fail to understand the fact that he was out of line in the first place on the shot, and has to try and make up for it...that is unless he plays safe first as to avoid taking that kind of chance to get position on the next shot. Seldom will a Pro send the cue ball all over the table to get position on the next shot. That kind of shot making is reserved for amateurs!
Click to expand...


God, your annoying, go play in another area where your condescending commenst are appreciated....
 
Neil said:
Sounds like it might be time to get some glasses!:D Seriously though, to me, the bigger problem is the cloth. Why mechanics feel they have to stretch it as tight as they possibly can is beyond me. I've seen bartables that were faster than the billiard tables in the same room! I once saw a fly by the table, and I swear half the balls rolled a little when that little sucker farted.

The cloth today doesn't need a stroke. It requires just a rolling cb to get around the table. Bring back slower cloth! It doesn't have to be napped, just not stretched so blame tight.:mad:
Click to expand...

This is so true. I remember the first time I saw simonis on a bar table - I laughed out loud. Now it's expected that even bar tables will have the fast cloth on them.
 
realkingcobra said:
Let me tell you something Island Drive, I was a player long before I was a table mechanic. My high run in 14.1 is 163, so I think I can hold a conversation with pretty much anyone about the subject of playing pool. Here's another thing for you to consider, eye sight or not, not having to wear glasses because you're 18 to 20 years old playing pool, DON'T may you any smarter than that 50yr old you like to refer to as pretty much over the hill because of age.

The MAIN reason why the older players fade away to younger players, is because they've been to the top of the mountain and seen what's up there far more than ANY young player has, so it's an old story trying to get back up there to see the SAME THING again, a world championship with out being able to make enough money to say, "I think I'll skip the next tournament, buy a house with my prize money and retire" while the younger players, all cocky as hell, who've never been to the top, have all the drive and determination to GET there for the FIRST or SECOND time, only to find out later in life, trophies on the wall don't pay the bills in retirement.

With the OLDER players as you like to put it, it's all about needing a REASON to get back up to the top, as they've been there so many times already.

With the YOUNGER players, it's all about, I just want to get recognized for once! And in time, if they stick with it, they will. I'll tell you something else about the younger players. They fade away from the game much faster than the older players ever have, as a lot of them find out early in their career, this is a hard road to travel to get to the top, so I'm just going to get a job, and play pool on the side!!!

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

Glen
Click to expand...

I almost hate to say it but - I'll smoke that, but only if I won't get arrested or lose my job if I have to take one of those tests.

Makes a lot of sense to me.
 
I have enjoyed the back and forth on the whole pocket size topic. I just want to add one last thing:

Ultimately what the pros in the U.S. want isn't even going to matter. In the next 10-20 years, pocket dimensions are going to be determined by what the Asian players are accustomed to. My prediction is they will be dominating pool for the foreseeable future, so if they want to play on 3 inch pockets eventually everybody else will have to do the same.

Put that in your coffee and pour it on your lap!


**I just had to edit out the "lab". I didn't want to be held responsible for someone pouring coffee on their dog.
 
Last edited:
the real issue I believe

I don't think almost any pocket size within reason is an issue. What does change how players shoot is changing from more forgiving pockets to very unforgiving ones for whatever reason. Watch a few snooker matches and it becomes obvious that they pocket balls and juice the cue ball pretty good these days when they need to get around the table, even on 6x12 championship Riley tables. Thing is that they play on the same tables all the time and are used to shooting on these tables. Tighten the pockets another quarter inch and they would no doubt freak until they got used to the new dimensions.

Most of these matches on supertight pockets are the player's choices however they seem to be bad choices. Both Alex and Shane seemed like they let the table get in their heads at times according to the reports I have read. Slightly tighter pockets or a ten foot table might have been a good idea, tighter pockets and a ten foot table seem like they combined to have an undue influence on the game with both players going into a funk at times.

I don't think it would matter a whole lot if pockets were only 3-3/4" if that were what people played on day in and day out. Jumping around between substantially differently playing pockets does affect the player's style of play though. I'd much rather see players comfortable on a table than shooting timidly due to a lack of confidence because a table is playing much tougher than they are used to.

Hu
 
The complete opposite of the OP is in fact reality. Looser pockets are better for the power game of pool, the huge break and big stroke. Tighter pockets diminish the offensive power of the huge breakers to a degree and offer the older players a chance to let their finesse game shine. One of the BEST tight pocket players in the USA is Jose Parica, he is definately getting up there in years but his accuracy makes him more of a threat on a tight pocket table that diminished the offensive power game of his opponent and limits packages.

You use Augusta as an example, Augusta is absolutely the golf equivalent of a tight pocket table, and that is WHY Fred Couples and Watson can actually compete on the thing. They can play the finesse shots and accurate game that the course requires. Where they CANNOT compete is a course that is extremely long with large fairways because that course benefits people with the huge drives and power game, and THAT is the equivalent of a loose pocket table and it kills the older players because they simply cannot play that power game anymore like the younger players can.
 
Celtic said:
.
You use Augusta as an example, Augusta is absolutely the golf equivalent of a tight pocket table.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this line of thinking. If you want to make pool harder, make the table bigger. Go to a 10' or even 12" table. That is what they do in golf. They lengthen the course. They don't shrink the hole. Leave the pocket size alone.

You guys philosophize the pocket size too much. It is so simple. Smaller pockets mean you miss more...and that's it.
 
I think they do "shrink the pocket"

Paul Schofield said:
I disagree with this line of thinking. If you want to make pool harder, make the table bigger. Go to a 10' or even 12" table. That is what they do in golf. They lengthen the course. They don't shrink the hole. Leave the pocket size alone.

You guys philosophize the pocket size too much. It is so simple. Smaller pockets mean you miss more...and that's it.
Click to expand...

Not that I know much about golf but from what I understand they do move the hole on golf courses for the premier events, even from day to day at some events. When the hole is near the middle of a putting green or in a relatively safe area the course plays far easier than when the hole is much nearer hazards or steep inclines. This is very similar to playing on a pool table with smaller pockets. There is a much smaller safe area to hit the golf ball into when trying to get it close to the pin.

Smaller pockets and/or bigger tables both make play tougher. Looking at the harsh reality of the cost of square footage I'm thinking that seven foot or smaller tables may be the future of pool. Not saying that is what I want or like, just what pool halls may well be forced into for economic viability. If this happens smaller pockets, different rails, or different pocket designs might be the only options for making tables play tougher. I hope I am wrong but of the nicer pool halls I know of opening in the area recently two feature eight foot tables with a single nine footer and the other has seven foot tables exclusively. I'd like to see nine foot tables come back strong and even ten foot tables with slower playing cloth so a stroke is required once again. I think for that to happen rates would have to go up drastically without a huge loss of playing hours. I can't see that happening at typical pool halls and bars with six or more tables.

Hu
 
I have two issues with tight pockets. Disclaimer originally a snooker player and can still hit a ball or two on a 6x12.

1. Most pool halls do not have tables level enough to make very tight pockets reasonable. The drift vs required accuracy is a killer and makes play impractical. Todays fast cloth further exasperates this issue.

2. Tight pockets with slick new-newish cloth play good. Now take the shine off and balls that should go get rejected. This is fine for major tourneys with fresh equipment but the kind of play that most pool halls get between re-clothing doesn't make this piratical. Tables play great for 3 weeks followed by 8 months or more of rejected balls. Now add issue 1 to issue 2 and they table plays poorly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top