Is it camera or does rail on the right extent further than the one on the left?
Gold Crowns and the term Diamonized
- Thread starter olgoat
- Start date
Interesting, your protractor is set at 142 in that picture. Or 38 if you read it the other way.
Lets see a closer picture of it on the corner angle?
I have a similar protractor!
TFT
I agree. Tuff but fair. I'm no mechanic so i have a question: why would anyone want a tight opening and nearly parallel jaws? I've played on one ED set-up table and it was ok but the pockets just seemed weird for lack of a better word. 4.25/141 plays really good imo. It seems on a table with less than 140deg you have to make the mouth super narrow in order to play ok.
I don' know of ANYONE who does it that way. I am interested to see Joey's protractor on the angle of the pocket. It is reading very close to 141 in his picture.
TFT
The bonus ball table was set up with tight mouth and parallel facings. The idea was your accuracy had to be good to get it in the jaws, but once in, it would fall. I believe the play was liked by the pros from reading about it here. Then again, it seems like that was almost 10 years ago. Memory might be bad.
I'd wager Ernesto set that table up.
I think Nathan who was a regular here and part of the bb crew came up with the idea and had it done. Or, it might have been fast Lenny. One of those two. Whichever one, they posted lots of picture and specs at the time. From memory, it was either 4.0 or 4.25” mouth, and 135 deg (parallel) faces.
135deg???? Sounds crazy to me.
Those look pretty close to 140ish to me.
I don't know, but after playing on my new rails set at 4.5 *141 I think I can see why Ernesto wanted to decrease that angle for his pockets that go down to nearly 4 inch corners. Tight pockets are murder when it comes to making balls froze on the rail shot at a decent speed and the 138 would seem to help the situation some. I'm not saying it's right, or should be the standard, just thinking about the rationale behind the angle change.
So a smaller throat(straighter jaws) angle would help offset a tighter opening? I still think that 4.25-4.5 and 141 is really tough to beat.
Boom.
Head shot.
NO. You are funny, because ONE person agrees with you??
Lets get to the core of this: Show us the protractor on your pocket angles. As I said before, looks like its REALLY close to 141...
TFT
You can call West State Billiards hired mech.
He remembers my rails.
Trent, I'm not the only one who requests this oddity.
And if you walk in Hard Times, you'll see the tournament room tables with even more odd angles.
Yes, I think straighter jaws (smaller throat) would help to offset the tighter openings on shots down the rail. Reducing the angle would tighten the pocket at the front of the shelf and open up the pocket at the back of the shelf. I'm still happy with what I have (4.5 and 141), but I could see changing the angle to give a more realistic target down the rail for the Ernesto size pockets (4 to 4.25).
You need to own a home table with those pockets.
Then start watching balls get spit out and then you start thinking if they really should be spit out or you get the end rail cushion angled in a little.
4.25" corners with those angles are for pros and good shortstops.
I think 4 7/16" at 139* play better and more realistic .
Not quite Ernesto's 4" 135*.
And not quite Diamonds'.