No, Most people do not want to play pool on big pockets.

For players and not home recreational bangers: Pro Cut Pockets or Buckets?

  • Total voters
    167
realkingcobra said:
Your math is off. You're comparing the throat of a snooker pocket to the mouth of a pool pocket. Measure the throat of a Pro cut poll pocket and you'll find it's much tighter than the pocket opening is.
Click to expand...

And it doesn’t matter how tight you make a pocket if the shelf of the slate at the pocket doesn’t extend past the points. A GC with pro cut pockets is still easier than a Diamond with pro cut pockets. This whole argument is starting to turn silly. Five factors determine how tight or lose a pocket will play. This whole thread focus’s on one of the five.
 
BC21 said:
Doing the math....

On a 12 x 6 snooker table with 3.5" corner pockets, the margin of error for an ob sitting in the center of the table is +/- 0.5°. In order for an ob sitting on the center spot of a diamond barbox to have the same margin of error, the corner pockets would have to be 3.0".

Numbers used: Center spot to corner pocket on snooker table is 76". Snooker ball 2.07" diameter. Pool table center spot to corner is 44.7". Pool ball is 2.25" diameter.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the effort. That would be a table I don't want in my home!
 
ShootingArts said:
Since Trent himself says the thread has ran it's course I'll divert to an earlier subthread here, snooker vs pool.

For starters, Ronnie O may be the best snooker player ever. He didn't set the IPT pool world on fire with a snooker or pool cue. He slapped around pool saying it was like playing miniature golf, he also said it would take him five years to play it at the same level he plays snooker or words to that effect. I think the truth is somewhere in between.

Not too long ago, a decade or two, snooker players often had flat mushroomed pieces of leather for a tip that looked like they came from an old belt or shoe. Now you are more likely to see very well shaped and manicured tips although some still favor letting the tip mushroom so they are playing with a tip a few millimeters larger than the snooker cue's shaft. Watching old snooker video and new, it is obvious that snooker players use side spin much more than they used to.

While it would have seemed more reasonable for pool to become more like snooker the opposite has happened, snooker has became more like pool. If watching top players of either sport, I think you are more likely to see snooker players use huge side spin today.

Comparing pocket sizes isn't easy since snooker is a half table or even end table game. Of balls pocketed, I suspect 75% or more of snooker balls are pocketed in the bottom two pockets when playing the full rack game. Then to finish the player is usually looking at the same "drill" they have played countless times before, all of the numbered balls are sitting on their home spot. Perhaps we should consider snooker to be played mostly on a six foot surface, the width of the table and the distance from end to side pocket. If we were to consider the percentage of shots played cross side vs the number of shots played up and down the table it would vastly change calculations of degree of difficulty I believe.

With two tables sitting side by side I would almost always choose to play snooker. On a nine or ten foot pool table, tight pockets change the game played, the style of play. On seven footers, tight or loose doesn't much matter. Somebody mentioned a five foot table earlier in this thread I believe. I didn't know such a thing existed without bumpers. Four inch pockets might be buckets on it!

We are pretty much comparing apples to oranges. The closest game comparison would be one pocket to snooker. One Pocket players generally like tight pockets and I can't remember ever seeing it played on a seven foot table.

Just some thoughts and things to think about.

Hu
Click to expand...

Hu,

I didn't go into as much detail as you did earlier in the thread. I wasnthe one that said snooker was apples and pool is oranges after someone tried to say their pocket size/shape were a good comparison....lol...not enough close.

Good post Hu...as usual sir:thumbup:

Jeff
 
So far, this is not even close. I am satisfied that most players would rather play on a table with Pro Cut Pockets! A couple of room/ bar owners added some extra data and with my customer base data and all the people I asked that I shoot with seals the deal for me. Thanks for all the participation and even to the haters who are gonna hate no matter what anyone else says. :)

Trent from Toledo

P.s. I know this does not prove anything to be a fact and I understand it is a small sample of players. :thumbup:
 
Finnish kaisa tables have buckets! You barely have to force the ball through the jaws of the pocket!!! Tighten them up 1/2 inch so they stop taking shots that should never go.

Ps. What’s the best cue/table/tip to buy and practice with if I wanna become a pro in 3 months? And how can I guarantee that I make all my banks on any table?

Pps. I hope yousa wins the Mosconi cup day 2. Every. Match.
 
realkingcobra said:
Your math is off. You're comparing the throat of a snooker pocket to the mouth of a pool pocket. Measure the throat of a Pro cut poll pocket and you'll find it's much tighter than the pocket opening is.
Click to expand...

I was referring to a ball located in the center of the table. From this spot on a standard or pro cut Diamond table, a pool ball just has to clear the 4.5 inch opening and it's going to fall into the hole, regardless of throat size. On a snooker table with 3.5 inch pockets, the 3.5 inches is not the throat. The throat is smaller. But still, the ball is shot from the center of the table and just has to fit cleanly within this 3.5" window in order to drop into the pocket.
 
BC21 said:
I was referring to a ball located in the center of the table. From this spot on a standard or pro cut Diamond table, a pool ball just has to clear the 4.5 inch opening and it's going to fall into the hole, regardless of throat size. On a snooker table with 3.5 inch pockets, the 3.5 inches is not the throat. The throat is smaller. But still, the ball is shot from the center of the table and just has to fit cleanly within this 3.5" window in order to drop into the pocket.
Click to expand...

Then in that case, a Russian pyramid pool table pockets make the snooker pockets look like buckets....right??
 
realkingcobra said:
Then in that case, a Russian pyramid pool table pockets make the snooker pockets look like buckets....right??
Click to expand...

Wow! Never saw one. Had to look it up! Bigger balls, tighter pocket opening. With a 68mm ball (about 2 11/16") and corner pockets only 3mm wider than the ball, it looks tough. Compared to snooker with a 0.5° margin for error, a ball on the center spot of a 12ft Russian pyramid table would need an accuracy of +/- 0.04°. That's ridiculously tight, even compared to a tough snooker table. Of course, if there's no shelf you can be a little sloppy and still make shots. But I'm basing numbers the margin of error simply on getting the ball into the pocket opening cleanly.
 
BC21 said:
Wow! Never saw one. Had to look it up! Bigger balls, tighter pocket opening. With a 68mm ball (about 2 11/16") and corner pockets only 3mm wider than the ball, it looks tough. Compared to snooker with a 0.5° margin for error, a ball on the center spot of a 12ft Russian pyramid table would need an accuracy of +/- 0.04°. That's ridiculously tight, even compared to a tough snooker table. Of course, if there's no shelf you can be a little sloppy and still make shots. But I'm basing numbers the margin of error simply on getting the ball into the pocket opening cleanly.
Click to expand...
Various types of pyramid. Here's one. TINY wickets! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6nYB4r-kt8
 
trentfromtoledo said:
Guess this thing is over.
Thanks for participating:thumbup:
Click to expand...

It probably is, but I'm still calling "foul" on the title and conclusion regarding "most" players or people - still think it's most really, really good players? ;-)

I'm guessing the poll is a little skewed because of the high quality of players on the forum (which I am definitely not)?

Anyway, enjoying the discussion and watching the Cup has me appreciating the value of a little tougher table, but I'll leave it to those who know more to opine about how tough it is or isn't.
 
Hits 'em Hard said:
And it doesn’t matter how tight you make a pocket if the shelf of the slate at the pocket doesn’t extend past the points. A GC with pro cut pockets is still easier than a Diamond with pro cut pockets. This whole argument is starting to turn silly. Five factors determine how tight or lose a pocket will play. This whole thread focus’s on one of the five.
Click to expand...

Very true. Once the ball is passed the pocket opening, facing angle and shelf depth come into play. But the tighter the opening of the pocket is, the more accurate you have to be at shooting the ob into it if you expect a nice clean shot. Shelf and facing angle make no difference if the ball misses the opening by a quarter inch.
 
LOL 130 players

Your going to find larger pockets across the US win the day. A poll on AZ or similar type site will naturally want smaller pockets. I'd like to see some #'s from manufacturers on what they are selling retail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top