When is a pool pocket too tight?

Straightpool_99

Straightpool_99

I see dead balls
Silver Member
This post will take into account that most games today are either 9 or 10 ball. While the video shows chineese 8 ball, that is not my main issue.

This shows the Chineese 8 ball pocket:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swAeREom0_k

I'm going to compare now to rifle shooting. Let's say that a given rifle barrel has a spread of about 2.5 inches and you make the target 1.5 inches. No points, only hit or miss is recorded. Lets say you shoot only 3 shots. Now you must be phenomenally skilled to hit the target 3 times, only the worthyest winners will do so, right? Wrong! While you may be skilled, the target is so small as to not differentiate between shooters as much as depend heavily on luck. You may be dead on target, yet miss one or more shots. So equally skilled shooters may have wildly different results.

Chineese 8 ball is pushing the boundary of what is in fact the "barrel spread" of human players, when you consider all shots are supposed to be possible to make. Remember also that in 8 ball you can choose your shots, so as to bypass the problems. Pyramid has smaller pockets, but some shots cant be made, so it doesnt' count. For games other than 8 ball, the Chineese 8 ball table has passed that boundary to a certain extent. You could easily set up a 10 ball rack that would require multiple attempts (even without clusters) for the very best players in the world. Is this what you want pool to be? Runouts coming once every blue moon?

I sincerely hope that we never get to the point where this table becomes the standard pool table. This is coming from a snooker player btw.
 
Last edited:
You can't keep hitting the long rail first, and always expect to pocket the OB.
Check out 3 shots at 1:40. My table plays the same if hit 1/2 way up the rail.

.
 
Last edited:
Pockets Too Tight?

I feel that we should be making pockets smaller.
We need to make it harder to play Pool, not easier!
This will bring in more new players.
People will watch more Tournaments because they know the pockets are harder to play.

4-12" is a Bucket IMHO.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1219.JPG
    IMG_1219.JPG
    78.4 KB · Views: 2,557
  • IMG_1220.JPG
    IMG_1220.JPG
    70.2 KB · Views: 2,393
Straightpool_99 said:
This post will take into account that most games today are either 9 or 10 ball.
Click to expand...

I just wanted to post another lament on this fact. I love all of the pool games, but I really hate watching 9 or 10 ball. Please, please just go on and let's have some full rack rotation!

As for tight pockets, I will say it a million times...the Diamond Pro pocket represents the best balance for playing the suite of pool games. I have no interest in Chinese 8 ball, pyramid, etc. Playing all of the pool games is enough for this guy.

I do like snooker and 3 cushion too, but we have none of those tables within a reasonable drive from my area, so those are only wishful thinking...
 
Top View of Chinese 8 Ball Pocket

Top View of Chinese 8 Ball Pocket.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1221.JPG
    IMG_1221.JPG
    14.8 KB · Views: 2,294
IMO 3 3/4" is too tight. Straight in shots would be OK.. but shallow angles off the rail will rattle.
4 1/4" to 4 1/2" would be the tightest I'd make a pocket unless One Pocket was my only game.

.
 
mchnhed said:
I feel that we should be making pockets smaller.
We need to make it harder to play Pool, not easier!
This will bring in more new players.
People will watch more Tournaments because they know the pockets are harder to play.
Click to expand...

Just wanted to say that I feel the opposite to each of these points literally, lol. Not trying to be snarky or difficult, but it's rare that I disagree so thoroughly, lol. :D
 
Agreed and

Straightpool_99 said:
This post will take into account that most games today are either 9 or 10 ball. While the video shows chineese 8 ball, that is not my main issue.

This shows the Chineese 8 ball pocket:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swAeREom0_k

I'm going to compare now to rifle shooting. Let's say that a given rifle barrel has a spread of about 2.5 inches and you make the target 1.5 inches. No points, only hit or miss is recorded. Lets say you shoot only 3 shots. Now you must be phenomenally skilled to hit the target 3 times, only the worthyest winners will do so, right? Wrong! While you may be skilled, the target is so small as to not differentiate between shooters as much as depend heavily on luck. You may be dead on target, yet miss one or more shots. So equally skilled shooters may have wildly different results.

Chineese 8 ball is pushing the boundary of what is in fact the "barrel spread" of human players, when you consider all shots are supposed to be possible to make. Remember also that in 8 ball you can choose your shots, so as to bypass the problems. Pyramid has smaller pockets, but some shots cant be made, so it doesnt' count. For games other than 8 ball, the Chineese 8 ball table has passed that boundary to a certain extent. You could easily set up a 10 ball rack that would require multiple attempts (even without clusters) for the very best players in the world. Is this what you want pool to be? Runouts coming once every blue moon?

I sincerely hope that we never get to the point where this table becomes the standard pool table. This is coming from a snooker player btw.
Click to expand...

I agree the Chinese 8 ball is a bit extreme but I think the premise is noted.
Professionals should play to a higher standard but perhaps not so high for television or for the public but it does make the competition harder.

I'm lucky enough to have a table close by in another town that has 3 and a half inch pockets that I can go practice on and I really enjoy it. I don't think that its too tight and would make for a good level of tightness between pro players because its playable but you have to have everything in your game right to be able to run a 2 pack or beyond.
 
336Robin said:
I agree the Chinese 8 ball is a bit extreme but I think the premise is noted.
Professionals should play to a higher standard but perhaps not so high for television or for the public but it does make the competition harder.

I'm lucky enough to have a table close by in another town that had 3 and a half inch pockets that I can go practice on and I really enjoy it. I don't think that its too tight and would make for a good level of tightness between pro players because its playable but you have to have everything in your game right to be able to run a 2 pack or beyond.
Click to expand...

There's not all that many 3 + packages at the pro level on any table, IMO. AZB'er Atlarge's stats time and time again don't support the notion that tightening pockets does anything appreciable to enhance the game, IMO. Your mileage may vary.
 
Like the video mentioned, if you hit it into the center of the pocket and even with very high speed, the pocket will take it. It is however too tight in my opinion for viewability. Every Chinese 8-ball event I've been to is ghost town to a point where I genuinely felt depressed. Guys who are promoting the game at Crucible keep telling me that it'll grow, but I seriously doubt it.

I prefer tighter practice tables at 4"-4.25" with deep shelfs, but for tournaments, I think Diamond 4.5" pro cut is ideal. Pro pool tournaments almost always start with brand new cloths. As deep as some of those pockets are, tables play quite a bit easier. IIRC, Albin (or someone else) had a non-frozen rail-cut shots in the WCOP, missed it by 3 diamonds, and the pocket still took it. I don't know how deep those Rasson pockets are, but shots like those should definitely be missed.
 
mchnhed said:
I feel that we should be making pockets smaller.
We need to make it harder to play Pool, not easier!
This will bring in more new players.
People will watch more Tournaments because they know the pockets are harder to play.

4-12" is a Bucket IMHO.
Click to expand...

So I wonder just what size pockets you play on, and what games you play, where you feel the game is no longer a challenge to you,,,,,,,,,,

Making pockets so small that beginners are almost never successful at pocketing balls will make them want to go back to their free cornhole matches.

The game should be standardized to where pockets are the same no matter where you play. It has served snooker pretty well I think, and even to the point they use the same standard for other forms of european and even chinese games, all with the same pocket templates.

The skill in American pool is not to make the equipment so hard it confines the opponent, but rather for a players skill to control the cue ball in a better defensive position, whether playing offensively or defensively
 
Last edited:
I think he was being faccious about smaller pocket size.

I myself think we should go back to True 5" Pockets with the Angles Corrected.

jalapus logan said:
Just wanted to say that I feel the opposite to each of these points literally, lol. Not trying to be snarky or difficult, but it's rare that I disagree so thoroughly, lol. :D
Click to expand...

mchnhed said:
I feel that we should be making pockets smaller.
We need to make it harder to play Pool, not easier!
This will bring in more new players.
People will watch more Tournaments because they know the pockets are harder to play.

4-12" is a Bucket IMHO.
Click to expand...
 
Straightpool_99 said:
This post will take into account that most games today are either 9 or 10 ball. While the video shows chineese 8 ball, that is not my main issue.

This shows the Chineese 8 ball pocket:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swAeREom0_k

I'm going to compare now to rifle shooting. Let's say that a given rifle barrel has a spread of about 2.5 inches and you make the target 1.5 inches. No points, only hit or miss is recorded. Lets say you shoot only 3 shots. Now you must be phenomenally skilled to hit the target 3 times, only the worthyest winners will do so, right? Wrong! While you may be skilled, the target is so small as to not differentiate between shooters as much as depend heavily on luck. You may be dead on target, yet miss one or more shots. So equally skilled shooters may have wildly different results.

Chineese 8 ball is pushing the boundary of what is in fact the "barrel spread" of human players, when you consider all shots are supposed to be possible to make. Remember also that in 8 ball you can choose your shots, so as to bypass the problems. Pyramid has smaller pockets, but some shots cant be made, so it doesnt' count. For games other than 8 ball, the Chineese 8 ball table has passed that boundary to a certain extent. You could easily set up a 10 ball rack that would require multiple attempts (even without clusters) for the very best players in the world. Is this what you want pool to be? Runouts coming once every blue moon?

I sincerely hope that we never get to the point where this table becomes the standard pool table. This is coming from a snooker player btw.
Click to expand...

I think perhaps there will be no such thing as a 'standard pool table', I think for 8-Ball Chinese tables make a lot of sense, but for 9-Ball, 10-Ball (and probably all other games thinking about it) a 'standard American' table is a better choice.

That said straight pool could be interesting as an experiment on a Chinese table...
 
The place I shoot most often has Ernesto Dominguez as the table mechanic.
3 and 5/8th's inches on the player tables, and 4 inches on the rest of them.
All straight cut pockets with hardly any angle. Medium speed Simonis cloth.
You either shoot into the heart of the pocket, or slow roll the ball using english for position.
I've seen many bar box sharks look like flapping guppies on a 9ft GC with tight pockets.
Can be a very humbling experience.
 
Last edited:
My table pockets (Cheaper old Brunswick) have very short shelves. I had my sub-rails extended and the pockets are now 3 3/4". This may look tight but given the shelf depth I assure you it is no where near as torturous as playing on a 4" Diamond. Just helps keep me honest when practicing.

IMG_20170428_183624_zpsjxhaecwa.jpg
 
mchnhed said:
I feel that we should be making pockets smaller.
We need to make it harder to play Pool, not easier!
This will bring in more new players.
People will watch more Tournaments because they know the pockets are harder to play.

4-12" is a Bucket IMHO.
Click to expand...

Couple of points:

A) people pick up pool (that is play rather continuously over their life) because they enjoyed their first several games. Making pockets so small that people do not enjoy their first few games is a sure way to loose players.

B) People watch Snooker because there is a minimum of 36 shots per game. I don't think I have ever seen a 9-ball game with that many shots in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top