I think you have them mixed up.
Measles is easier on the follow and harder on the draw.
Red circle is slightly opaque in color. Sometimes smaller than Centennial or Aramith pro balls. Easy to draw and harder to follow.
Don't agree. It's adequately the same weight. I actually contend it's more difficult to draw OR follow. It's just a sh1tty product. It has one gimmicky claim to fame... and I'd only regard it useful when the people who're watching are mesmerized by spin. Pool players know the spin based on the reaction to the rails.... this is for the people who see a 4 ball spinning after a break and are wowed.
I've heard a claim made that the weight of the ball is more towards the outer portion on a measle ball, and the inner portion on a red circle, and others.
RARELY EVER are people in 9 ball trying to make the cue ball travel precisely at parallel tangent. And even when you are playing a billiard or weaving through traffic, 92 degrees or whatever it is, is a worthwhile exchange for to avoid the absolutely unprecedented behavior of this retarded measle ball. In a game where you may be jacked up, straight in and table length as your opponent leaves you... who needs an adversarial ball??
Difficult to draw.
DOESN'T 'TORQUE' when spun of the rail like the red circle.
Once it's traveling, it runs.
I believe to get it to spin much off the rails, you have to spin it harder for equivalent response... which requires managing more swerve (slow(er) spin exacerbates swerve).
Pool is tough enough!
Playing at hard times with 4" (if that) pockets and a cue ball that's goofier than hell, humidity galore... pool feels miserable. I've been trying to deal with this stupid ball for a month and assumed that by now, I must be a little more adapted to the measle turd than the red circle. However, the second I use a red circle it feels like home.
Please southern california... for eff's sake -- 4.5 inch parallel cut corner pockets, flair the sides a little and make them 5 inches (parallel is ridiculous) ... and the red or blue circle.
I challenge anyone to come up with a better paradigm;
Better equipment and better rules more accurately measure differences in skill at ALL levels.
If the equipment or rules are obscuring the reality of who's better... it's time to reevaluate the equipment.
Wasn't the fun of pool being able to say, "I was down 8-5 and ran the set out!" ... or... "did you see ______ run a 6 pack?" Now it's "did you see them nip and tuck and safe and kick and bunt for 2 hours? It was awesome!"