Table Difficulty Factor (TDF) for measuring table "toughness"

[SloMoHolic]

Thank you for posting. Are you sure it is an 8' and not a 7'? Please check the playing area dimensions (cushion nose to cushion nose) if you are not sure.

These are definitely 8' tables, not 7'.

I'll be happy to take a few more measurements from other pockets and tables when I visit again, next week. I was surprised, as it seems you were, at the 0.90 TDF. I still believe these tables play easier than that. These tables are like the "proverbial" "buckets."

Perhaps I was too brisk with my initial measurements.

-Blake

 

[dr_dave]

These are definitely 8' tables, not 7'.

I'll be happy to take a few more measurements from other pockets and tables when I visit again, next week. I was surprised, as it seems you were, at the 0.90 TDF. I still believe these tables play easier than that. These tables are like the "proverbial" "buckets."

Perhaps I was too brisk with my initial measurements.

-Blake

Let me know if you have any revisions.

Have you every played on a 7' Valley/Dynamo "bar box" that has a typical TDF close to 0.75? Those tables really play easy.

It would be useful if you would post specs for any other tables you play on that you think are tougher, for comparison.

Thank you for participating,
Dave

 

[SloMoHolic]

Let me know if you have any revisions.

Have you every played on a 7' Valley/Dynamo "bar box" that has a typical TDF close to 0.75? Those tables really play easy.

It would be useful if you would post specs for any other tables you play on that you think are tougher, for comparison.

Thank you for participating,
Dave

My league room has a couple of old Valley bar boxes. Let me run a 6-pack or two and take some measurements on them.

I'll get back to you next week.

Thanks again.

 

[CreeDo]

Pretty interesting concept.

Random thought... say you have 2 tables.
You set up a series of identical shots on each, identical meaning at the same diamond locations
for cue ball and object ball. For example cue ball on the head spot and OB on the foot spot.

You calculate how much margin for error you have on each shot, as a percentage.
i.e. "I can overcut or undercut this shot by 5% before it misses."

If I have a 25% larger table, is that effectively the same as a 25% smaller pocket?

 

[dr_dave]

Pretty interesting concept.

Thanks.

Random thought... say you have 2 tables.
You set up a series of identical shots on each, identical meaning at the same diamond locations
for cue ball and object ball. For example cue ball on the head spot and OB on the foot spot.

You calculate how much margin for error you have on each shot, as a percentage.
i.e. "I can overcut or undercut this shot by 5% before it misses."

FYI, I have this analysis done for cut shots of all angles and distances here:
TP 3.4 - Margin of error based on distance and cut angle

In general, the precision required on a shot is directly related to (proportional to) the distances between the balls and pocket (and hence the size of the table). For example, on average, if the table size increases by 10%, most shots will require about 10% more precision. It's kind of obvious if you think about it.

However, some things actually get easier on a larger table because there is less ball clustering, blocking, and traffic in general. On the other hand, some shots are tougher to reach on a bigger table, but a good player can minimize the effects of this with good position play.

If I have a 25% larger table, is that effectively the same as a 25% smaller pocket?

This obviously depends on the player, and it depends on how big the pockets are to begin with. When the pockets are very small, further tightening has a much bigger effect since the precision required will be pushing the limits for even the best players. And for big pockets, an increase might have very little effect for most shots where the precision required is well within the limits for even a mediocre player.

FYI, I've tried to capture these effects with the nonlinear and non-symmetric TSF and PSF scales; although, it is not easy. However, the numbers I have now seem much better than what I had first posted. Everybody's input was very useful in tweaking the system until the TDF results seemed to agree more with what people expected based on their playing experience on different tables.

Please post specs and comment on the results for any tables for which you are familiar. I am hoping others will also to test the system out even more.

Good random thoughts,
Dave

 

[dzcues]

2 more tables

Gandy Big G (built in approx 1980)
9':1.00 -- 5":.95 -- 7/8":1.10 -- 1 1/2":1.00 TDF: 1.05

Valley Bar Box (37 1/4" x 74 3/4")
7':.85 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 0:.94 -- 1/2":.95 TDF: .76

ratings seem right on in each case.

 

[BryanB]

Here's mine:
9ft 1931 Brunswick with double shimmed pockets

PSF = 1
PAF = 1.01
PLF = 1.00
TSF = 1.00

TDF = 1.01 avg

 

[dr_dave]

Gandy Big G (built in approx 1980)
9':1.00 -- 5":.95 -- 7/8":1.10 -- 1 1/2":1.00 TDF: 1.05

Valley Bar Box (37 1/4" x 74 3/4")
7':.85 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 0:.94 -- 1/2":.95 TDF: .76

ratings seem right on in each case.

Thank you for the data and feedback. FYI, I get slightly different numbers for the first:

dzcues Gandy Big G -- 9':1.00 -- 5":0.95 -- 7/8":1.05 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.98

Please check me on this.

Here's the latest list:


Data reported by AZB users in table difficulty factor (TDF) order, based on the table size factor (TSF), pocket size factor (PSF), pocket angle factor (PAF), and pocket shelf factor (PLF):

name -- TSF -- PSF -- PAF -- PLF -- TDF
tough 10' -- 10':1.10 -- 4":1.15 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 7/8":1.03 -- 1.33
dr_dave example "B" -- 9':1.00 -- 3 7/8":1.20 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 7/8":1.03 -- 1.24
Bonus Ball -- 9':1.00 -- 3 7/8":1.20 -- 1/8":0.97 -- 3/4":0.98 -- 1.14 (Bonus Ball table)
rexus31 -- 9':1.00 -- 4":1.15 -- 3/8":0.98 -- 1":0.98 -- 1.10
Qaddiction -- 9':1.00 -- 4 1/8":1.10 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 3/8":0.99 -- 1.11
cigardave -- 9':1.00 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 1":1.10 -- 1 3/4":1.00 -- 1.10 (typical Pro-Cut Diamond)
FatBoy -- 9':1.00 -- 4":1.15 -- 1/4":0.97 -- 1":0.98 -- 1.09
TATE -- 9':1.00 -- 4":1.15 -- 1/4":0.97 -- 7/8":0.98 -- 1.09
dzcues -- 9':1.00 -- 4 3/4":0.98 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 7/8":1.03 -- 1.01 (typical League-Cut Diamond)
SloMoHolic -- 9':1.00 -- 4 3/8":1.02 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 1.00
"standard" table -- 9':1.00 -- 4 7/16":1.00 -- 9/16":1.00 -- 1 5/8":1.00 -- 1.00 ("standard")
Sloppy Pockets -- 8'+:0.95 -- 5":0.95 -- 1":1.10 -- 1 3/4":1.00 -- 0.99
JC -- 9':1.00 -- 4 7/16":0.98 -- 9/16":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 0.96
12squared -- 9':1.00 -- 4 7/8":0.95 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.95 (typical Gold Crown)
mamics -- 9':1.00 -- 4 5/8":0.98 -- 13/16":1.05 -- 1 1/4":0.95 -- 0.98
dzcues Gandy Big G -- 9':1.00 -- 5":0.95 -- 7/8":1.05 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.98
rexus31 friend GC -- 9':1.00 -- 4 1/4":1.05 -- 1/4":0.94 -- 15/16":0.95 -- 0.94
Neil -- 7':0.85 -- 4 1/8":1.10 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.99 -- 0.93
iusedtoberich -- 9':1.00 -- 5 1/8":0.90 -- 1":1.05 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.93 ("loose" GC)
MSchaffer -- 9":1.00 -- 5 1/10":0.90 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 3/4":1.00 -- 0.92
SloMoHolic league table -- 8':0.90 -- 4 3/4":0.98 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 5/8":1.00 -- 0.90
BRussell -- 8':0.90 -- 5":0.95 -- 13/16":1.05 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.88
Dopc -- 8':0.90 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 1/4":0.95 -- 0.87
dr_dave -- 8':0.90 -- 4 3/4":0.98 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 0.86
dr_dave example "A" -- 8':0.90 -- 5":0.95 -- 1/2":0.98 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 0.82
dzcues Valley "bar box" -- 7':0.85 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 0":0.94 -- 1/2":0.95 -- 0.76
dr_dave Valley "bar box" -- 7':0.85 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 0":0.94 -- 3/4":0.95 -- 0.76 (typical Valley/Dynamo "bar box")

 

[dr_dave]

Here's mine:
9ft 1931 Brunswick with double shimmed pockets

PSF = 1
PAF = 1.01
PLF = 1.00
TSF = 1.00

TDF = 1.01 avg

Please post the measurements so I can include your table on the list.

Thanks,
Dave

 

[dzcues]

FYI, I get slightly different numbers for the first:

dzcues Gandy Big G -- 9':1.00 -- 5":0.95 -- 7/8":1.05 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.98

Please check me on this.

In my original calculation, I used 1.05 for PAF but it varied from 7/8" to 1" so I changed PAF to 1.10 & copied the wrong number to my post. PAF probably should be 1.10.

PLF is weird on this table because there is a large chamfer on the shelf radius rather than a clean drop. Because of this, I used 1.0 as the PLF. However, once the ball reaches the beginning of the chamfer, it's going to drop anyway so your PLF of .98 is probably more accurate.

New numbers should be: 9':1.00 -- 5":0.95 -- 7/8":1.10 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 1.024

Does this make sense?

 

[dr_dave]

In my original calculation, I used 1.05 for PAF but it varied from 7/8" to 1" so I changed PAF to 1.10 & copied the wrong number to my post. PAF probably should be 1.10.

PLF is weird on this table because there is a large chamfer on the shelf radius rather than a clean drop. Because of this, I used 1.0 as the PLF. However, once the ball reaches the beginning of the chamfer, it's going to drop anyway so your PLF of .98 is probably more accurate.

New numbers should be: 9':1.00 -- 5":0.95 -- 7/8":1.10 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 1.024

Does this make sense?

Yes. FYI, I've updated your line to read:

dzcues Gandy Big G -- 9':1.00 -- 5":0.95 -- 15/16":1.10 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 1.02

Thanks again for posting,
Dave


Data reported by AZB users in table difficulty factor (TDF) order, based on the table size factor (TSF), pocket size factor (PSF), pocket angle factor (PAF), and pocket shelf factor (PLF):

name -- TSF -- PSF -- PAF -- PLF -- TDF
tough 10' -- 10':1.10 -- 4":1.15 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 7/8":1.03 -- 1.33
dr_dave example "B" -- 9':1.00 -- 3 7/8":1.20 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 7/8":1.03 -- 1.24
Bonus Ball -- 9':1.00 -- 3 7/8":1.20 -- 1/8":0.97 -- 3/4":0.98 -- 1.14 (Bonus Ball table)
rexus31 -- 9':1.00 -- 4":1.15 -- 3/8":0.98 -- 1":0.98 -- 1.10
Qaddiction -- 9':1.00 -- 4 1/8":1.10 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 3/8":0.99 -- 1.11
cigardave -- 9':1.00 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 1":1.10 -- 1 3/4":1.00 -- 1.10 (typical Pro-Cut Diamond)
FatBoy -- 9':1.00 -- 4":1.15 -- 1/4":0.97 -- 1":0.98 -- 1.09
TATE -- 9':1.00 -- 4":1.15 -- 1/4":0.97 -- 7/8":0.98 -- 1.09
dzcues Gandy Big G -- 9':1.00 -- 5":0.95 -- 15/16":1.10 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 1.02
dzcues -- 9':1.00 -- 4 3/4":0.98 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 7/8":1.03 -- 1.01 (typical League-Cut Diamond)
SloMoHolic -- 9':1.00 -- 4 3/8":1.02 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 1.00
"standard" table -- 9':1.00 -- 4 7/16":1.00 -- 9/16":1.00 -- 1 5/8":1.00 -- 1.00 ("standard")
Sloppy Pockets -- 8'+:0.95 -- 5":0.95 -- 1":1.10 -- 1 3/4":1.00 -- 0.99
JC -- 9':1.00 -- 4 7/16":0.98 -- 9/16":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 0.96
12squared -- 9':1.00 -- 4 7/8":0.95 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.95 (typical Gold Crown)
mamics -- 9':1.00 -- 4 5/8":0.98 -- 13/16":1.05 -- 1 1/4":0.95 -- 0.98
rexus31 friend GC -- 9':1.00 -- 4 1/4":1.05 -- 1/4":0.94 -- 15/16":0.95 -- 0.94
Neil -- 7':0.85 -- 4 1/8":1.10 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.99 -- 0.93
iusedtoberich -- 9':1.00 -- 5 1/8":0.90 -- 1":1.05 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.93 ("loose" GC)
MSchaffer -- 9":1.00 -- 5 1/10":0.90 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 3/4":1.00 -- 0.92
SloMoHolic league table -- 8':0.90 -- 4 3/4":0.98 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 5/8":1.00 -- 0.90
BRussell -- 8':0.90 -- 5":0.95 -- 13/16":1.05 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.88
Dopc -- 8':0.90 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 1/4":0.95 -- 0.87
dr_dave -- 8':0.90 -- 4 3/4":0.98 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 0.86
dr_dave example "A" -- 8':0.90 -- 5":0.95 -- 1/2":0.98 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 0.82
dzcues Valley "bar box" -- 7':0.85 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 0":0.94 -- 1/2":0.95 -- 0.76
dr_dave Valley "bar box" -- 7':0.85 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 0":0.94 -- 3/4":0.95 -- 0.76 (typical Valley/Dynamo "bar box")

 

[nine_ball6970]

Let me know if you have any revisions.

Have you every played on a 7' Valley/Dynamo "bar box" that has a typical TDF close to 0.75? Those tables really play easy.

It would be useful if you would post specs for any other tables you play on that you think are tougher, for comparison.

Thank you for participating,
Dave

Somebody needs to measure table one at Hard Times to see how the toughest table anywhere stacks up.

 

[dr_dave]

Somebody needs to measure table one at Hard Times to see how the toughest table anywhere stacks up.

That sounds great. Hopefully, somebody who frequents Hard Times is listening.

Good idea,
Dave

 

[MahnaMahna]

Hi Dr. Dave,

Here is my pool table dimensions and some pictures. If you could check my calculations I would much appreciate it, also a few questions.

The table is a former snooker table, Brunswick Gold Crown 3.

5ft by 10ft

Mouth: 6.5 or 6.25, I am having a hard time figuring out the right place to measure but it shouldn't make any difference with your formula (right?)

Throat: 4.75 or 4.5, I am having a hard time figuring out the right place to measure but it shouldn't make any difference with your formula (right?)

Shelf: 4.00 or 3.75, the 1st measurement is from the tru back of the shelf, the 2nd measurement is from the point where the shelf starts to curve down into the pocket which forces a ball to fall at this point.

TSF: 1.10
PSF: 0.85
PAF: 1.07
PLF: 1.03

TDF: 1.0304635

Yes, I have a jacked up table, I know. The owner before me bought it as a snooker table and just straight cut off the bends and put some rubber shims or something on the corners.

This table plays super tough, it will rattle out anything but a perfect shot, and definitely favors rolling shots in.

Thanks Dr. Dave.

 

[dr_dave]

Hi Dr. Dave,

Here is my pool table dimensions and some pictures. If you could check my calculations I would much appreciate it, also a few questions.

The table is a former snooker table, Brunswick Gold Crown 3.

5ft by 10ft

Mouth: 6.5 or 6.25, I am having a hard time figuring out the right place to measure but it shouldn't make any difference with your formula (right?)

Throat: 4.75 or 4.5, I am having a hard time figuring out the right place to measure but it shouldn't make any difference with your formula (right?)

Shelf: 4.00 or 3.75, the 1st measurement is from the tru back of the shelf, the 2nd measurement is from the point where the shelf starts to curve down into the pocket which forces a ball to fall at this point.

TSF: 1.10
PSF: 0.85
PAF: 1.07
PLF: 1.03

TDF: 1.0304635

Yes, I have a jacked up table, I know. The owner before me bought it as a snooker table and just straight cut off the bends and put some rubber shims or something on the corners.

This table plays super tough, it will rattle out anything but a perfect shot, and definitely favors rolling shots in.

Thanks Dr. Dave.

Please re-check your measurements, noting that your ruler starts at 1, not 0!

From the photos, the best I can approximate is:

mouth: 5 1/2"
throat: 3 1/2"
shelf (to lip edge): 2 1/2"

Let me know if you agree after you check again.

FYI, I just made some additions (and slight changes) to the factor tables to better deal with extreme situations like yours. This is what I come up with based on the numbers above and the new factor tables:

10':1.10 -- 5 1/2":0.85 -- 2":1.15 -- 2 1/2": 1.15 -- 1.24

I've added it to the list, but please check my work.

Thank you for posting such an unusual table,
Dave


Here's the latest updated list:

Data reported by AZB users in table difficulty factor (TDF) order, based on the table size factor (TSF), pocket size factor (PSF), pocket angle factor (PAF), and pocket shelf factor (PLF):

name -- TSF -- PSF -- PAF -- PLF -- TDF
tough 10' table -- 10':1.10 -- 4":1.15 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 7/8":1.03 -- 1.33
MahnaMahna -- 10':1.10 -- 5 1/2":0.85 -- 2":1.15 -- 2 1/2": 1.15 -- 1.24
dr_dave example "B" -- 9':1.00 -- 3 7/8":1.20 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 7/8":1.03 -- 1.24
Bonus Ball -- 9':1.00 -- 3 7/8":1.20 -- 1/8":0.97 -- 3/4":0.98 -- 1.14 (Bonus Ball table)
rexus31 -- 9':1.00 -- 4":1.15 -- 3/8":0.98 -- 1":0.98 -- 1.10
Qaddiction -- 9':1.00 -- 4 1/8":1.10 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 3/8":0.99 -- 1.11
cigardave -- 9':1.00 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 1":1.10 -- 1 3/4":1.00 -- 1.10 (typical Pro-Cut Diamond)
FatBoy -- 9':1.00 -- 4":1.15 -- 1/4":0.97 -- 1":0.98 -- 1.09
TATE -- 9':1.00 -- 4":1.15 -- 1/4":0.97 -- 7/8":0.98 -- 1.09
dzcues Gandy Big G -- 9':1.00 -- 5":0.95 -- 15/16":1.10 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 1.02
dzcues -- 9':1.00 -- 4 3/4":0.98 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 7/8":1.02 -- 1.00 (typical League-Cut Diamond)
SloMoHolic -- 9':1.00 -- 4 3/8":1.02 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 1.00
"standard" table -- 9':1.00 -- 4 7/16":1.00 -- 9/16":1.00 -- 1 5/8":1.00 -- 1.00 ("standard")
Sloppy Pockets -- 8'+:0.95 -- 5":0.95 -- 1":1.10 -- 1 3/4":1.00 -- 0.99
JC -- 9':1.00 -- 4 7/16":0.98 -- 9/16":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 0.96
12squared -- 9':1.00 -- 4 7/8":0.95 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.95 (typical Gold Crown)
mamics -- 9':1.00 -- 4 5/8":0.98 -- 13/16":1.05 -- 1 1/4":0.95 -- 0.98
rexus31 friend GC -- 9':1.00 -- 4 1/4":1.05 -- 1/4":0.94 -- 15/16":0.95 -- 0.94
Neil -- 7':0.85 -- 4 1/8":1.10 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.99 -- 0.93
iusedtoberich -- 9':1.00 -- 5 1/8":0.90 -- 1":1.06 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.93 ("loose" GC)
MSchaffer -- 9":1.00 -- 5 1/10":0.90 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 3/4":1.00 -- 0.92
SloMoHolic league table -- 8':0.90 -- 4 3/4":0.98 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 5/8":1.00 -- 0.90
BRussell -- 8':0.90 -- 5":0.95 -- 13/16":1.05 -- 1 1/2":0.98 -- 0.88
Dopc -- 8':0.90 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 3/4":1.02 -- 1 1/4":0.95 -- 0.87
dr_dave -- 8':0.90 -- 4 3/4":0.98 -- 5/8":1.00 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 0.86
dr_dave example "A" -- 8':0.90 -- 5":0.95 -- 1/2":0.98 -- 1 3/8":0.98 -- 0.82
dzcues Valley "bar box" -- 7':0.85 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 0":0.94 -- 1/2":0.95 -- 0.76
dr_dave Valley "bar box" -- 7':0.85 -- 4 1/2":1.00 -- 0":0.94 -- 3/4":0.95 -- 0.76 (typical Valley/Dynamo "bar box")

 

[dr_dave]

FYI, I just made some additions (and slight changes) to the factor tables to better deal with extreme situations like yours.

FYI, here are the new factor tables:

And for those who have a printed copy of the The Table Difficulty Factor (TDF) document, you might want to replace it with the new version.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Man, those are some funky looking pockets!

I tried to true things up best as I could, and there are surely some slight line positioning errors, but I think this is close enough for country:

Table Size = 10'
Pocket Mouth = 5 1/4"
Pocket Throat = 3 7/8"
Pocket Angle Factor = 1 3/8"
Pocket Shelf = 2 1/8"

TDF = 1.10 x 0.90 x 1.15 x 1.03 = 1.17

Plenty tough, I'll bet it plays harder than the numbers indicate.

BTW I did a careful drawing at the bench with a fine-line pen and a precision protractor and came up with the fact that every 1/8" difference between pocket throat and pocket mouth measurements equates to roughly 1º in pocket facing angle (it's close enough that any slight deviation isn't worth worrying about over the average range of pocket angles). I believe RKC posted about this in the past. That means that if you start at a 135º cut (parallel pocket facings), the angle will increase on each facing by 1º for every 1/8" difference.

Mahna's photo shows that that pocket is 1 3/8" wider at the mouth. That adds 11º to 135º, which gives 146º. That is a big reason why balls on his table need to be slow-rolled in. This factor is not being given it's proper weight in the equation IMO. A table that allows both hard-hit balls and slow rollers to drop is tons easier than a table that only permits shots made at pocket speed, all other factors considered.

It also appears from his photo that the pocket facing down angles are buggered pretty bad, and distorted from wear. Down angle has been claimed by several expert mechanics to be a crucial aspect of pocket-ability, and should not be neglected.

 

[dr_dave]

Man, those are some funky looking pockets!

I tried to true things up best as I could, and there are surely some slight line positioning errors, but I think this is close enough for country:

Table Size = 10'
Pocket Mouth = 5 1/4"
Pocket Throat = 3 7/8"
Pocket Angle Factor = 1 3/8"
Pocket Shelf = 2 1/8"

That's close to what I got by just "eye-balling" it. Maybe MahnaMahna can verify things after taking the measurements more carefully.

TDF = 1.10 x 0.90 x 1.15 x 1.01 = 1.15

Plenty tough, I'll bet it plays harder than the numbers indicate.

Check out my previous post. I think his current TDF=1.24 is probably closer to reality, but it is tough to tell without actually playing on it, since it is so far outside the range of most people's experiences.

Thanks for showing again how to measure things carefully.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Mahna's photo shows that that pocket is 1 3/8" wider at the mouth.

BTW, I think your throat line should be farther down in the drawing per the following image:

Do you agree?

Thanks again for your efforts and feedback,
Dave

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

BTW, I think your throat line should be farther down in the drawing per the following image:

Do you agree?

Thanks again for your efforts and feedback,
Dave

You're pretty observant! :wink:

Yeah, it was hard to tell exactly where to place it. If I put it right at the seams of the cloth and both rails it would not have been even close to parallel to the line across the points at the mouth. The photo was confusing to me, so I fudged it a bit. These things are almost impossible to get right from a photo, anyway, because of lens distortion, angle of shot, parallax, etc.

Best change would be to get a wider view taken from way above using a long focal length lens. Tall order for one guy at home with a cell phone, which is how most folks are going to do it today. lol

I forgot to mention that the two lines along the tape were drawn at the correct spots and nudged to that position using the "Move Tool" in Photoshop. I placed them in areas along the tape than made them easier to get an accurate measurement without having to cut pieces of paper and hold them up against the screen, or other makeshift methods of approximation. They were both supposed to be in green, but I goofed and got the colors of the throat lines reversed and was too lazy to redo it. I hope it helps him, though.