Thank you for this... tight pockets cripple 14.1 play.
It's not about providing potting forgiveness to the shooter. It's about allowing the shooter to work the CB through the pattern with a wider range of carom angles.
The Siberian Express is About to Roll
- Thread starter lfigueroa
- Start date
It's not about providing potting forgiveness to the shooter. It's about allowing the shooter to work the CB through the pattern with a wider range of carom angles.
Regarding Thomas Engert’s 491 ball run, I referred to it as on a Diamond because I had read that somewhere, so you very well may be correct that it was not. I also read it was on 4.5 inch pockets, but would like for someone in the know to verify both the pocket size and the type of table. Thanks in advance for any clarification.
post #6
Highest run
Does anyone know what the highest run on a table with 4.5” pockets is? Charles
forums.azbilliards.com
Re pocket configurations, the proof of the pudding can be found in the eating. There's video so far of what, about 4000 shots? While these guys hit the center of the pocket almost every time, it's not every time. Anybody remember any balls rattling? I vaguely recall seeing one shot (I think RC*) that I thought wouldn't have gone on any Gold Crowns I usually play on. (Yes I should go back and try to find that. But I'm not going to.)
* Ruslan Chinakhov
What are all the pocket dimensions? What was done to the table the players are using?
Thanks in advance
dynamic is a common table in germany, they are 4.5 but not as deep shelves.
i don't think the diamond table ruins straight pool on an elite tournament level. both 2019 and 2020 american 14.1 championship showed some excellent play on diamonds.
Depends on what you mean. Can you run 100, 200 or even 300 on a Diamond table? Yes, I think so. I believe the record is close to 300. Unfortunately, the table is not condusive to record high runs and it does put limitations on certain shots, along the rails especially. So in my opinion it does change the game, and not for the better. With even tighter pockets put on, it definitely destroys the game.
Unfortunately, amateurs insist on using pro equipment, and will have a crap exerience as a result. If you can't consistently link racks together, straight pool becomes a boring grind that nobody can enjoy.
I've spent a lot of time on tight pocket tables, playing straight pool and I'm an above averagely interested amateur. I've got to say, I think it killed a lot of my passion for the game. Too much of my time was spent on a table, on which during over a decade of some great players (not myself obviously, but several players at 700+ fargo) playing on it, I think the high run was below 100 balls for most of the time and never got far beyond. Tight pockets that rejected balls along rails, super bouncy cushions etc..WTF is even the point of that? It was a giant waste of time to play on that. Should have played snooker instead, or straight pool on a normal table, made for enjoyment of the game.
Hear me out on this, whats the most balls you need to pocket to break any record in 14.1? The answer is 14 and have a break shot to continue into the next rack. If JF can run 285 balls on a Diamond with 4 1/2" pockets, and others who've ran 300+ on Diamonds with 4 1/2" pockets before they missed, NO ONE can say they can't run more than that, because they can. Record breaking high runs are not a right to be able to break, they're a challenge for the absolute best there is. You all act like no one can run more than a 100 balls on a Diamond with 4 1/2" pro pockets, when thats absolutely NOT TRUE!
If the pockets were the set back to being able to put together high runs, you'd see those results in the first 14 balls of the rack, but to run 280 balls, 20 racks without a miss, then why miss then, did the pockets put an end to running more balls, or did the player screw up his shot position therefore ENDING HIS RUN!!!
If the pockets were the set back to being able to put together high runs, you'd see those results in the first 14 balls of the rack, but to run 280 balls, 20 racks without a miss, then why miss then, did the pockets put an end to running more balls, or did the player screw up his shot position therefore ENDING HIS RUN!!!
If there was a million dollars on the line to break JS's 626 record, on a Diamond with Pro pockets, JS's record would fall with in 6-12 months, because that's the incentive level, reward to break it, not because of a gaff pool table!!!
For a million, there’s no way it would take that long
many of the older tables like the anniversay and centennial tables and early gold crowns had standard 4.5 to 4.75 inch wide pockets. but the balls did rattle if you fudged them with any real speed. so they are slop pockets to compared to a 4 1/8 one pocket table but those are not standard and are special order or modified. so dont count.
plus if trying to recreate the older conditions as said. then using 760 cloth does away with that pledge. as the old tables all were very slow and the balls being never polished even if did wouldnt break open easily.
that was the reason players didnt break hard to try to scatter the balls as you got into more trouble than keeping them down table and in control.
plus if trying to recreate the older conditions as said. then using 760 cloth does away with that pledge. as the old tables all were very slow and the balls being never polished even if did wouldnt break open easily.
that was the reason players didnt break hard to try to scatter the balls as you got into more trouble than keeping them down table and in control.
Me too. First he can do it as himself and then he can shoot as xradarx. Who would run more? Then we can have a round table discussion with snake man leading the panel to discuss the state of pool, pockets, angles and anyone’s new hair brained scheme to fix pool.
Or we can just sit back and enjoy some good straight pool and every once in a while tip our hats to the folks who made it happen.
If there was a million dollars on the line to break JS's 626 record, on a Diamond with Pro pockets, JS's record would fall with in 6-12 months, because that's the incentive level, reward to break it, not because of a gaff pool table!!!
Brunswick's stock pocket opening has always been 5" corners and 5 1/2" sides, from the days before the anniversary and centennial up to the GC5, which was the first time Brunswick offered tighter pockets, being 4 9/16" corners.
The table had been in storage for many years so the rails were replaced and of course the table recovered.
Lou Figueroa
Attachments
I don't think Diamonds ruin 14.1 tournament play at the professional level -- but it's not so good for uber high runs and for amateurs in general.
Lou Figueroa
amateur
I've had a similar experience.
On a GC with 4 1/2" pockets I'd run 100 a few times each year. On a Diamond with 4 1/2" pockets I'm lucky to occasionally hit the 50-70 range. It takes the wind out of your sails.
Lou Figueroa
Just curious: what is your 14.1 high run?
Lou Figueroa
no unedited
video required
Maybe I’m thinking outside the box here, but why does straight pool HAVE to be on a looser table?
I get that the pocket sizes enable a large range of possibilities to manage the table, but that is true for all cuesport games.
The main reason I keep hearing that straight pool is a dead game is that no one wants to sit for an hour waiting for a shot or that people lose interest after consistent 20-30 minute innings.
It seems to me that the solution is to have the top players compete on 4” or 4.25” pockets to slow them down a little.
In other similar high run games like English Billiards and snooker they use tougher equipment to slow down the top players. Why not 14.1?
I get that the pocket sizes enable a large range of possibilities to manage the table, but that is true for all cuesport games.
The main reason I keep hearing that straight pool is a dead game is that no one wants to sit for an hour waiting for a shot or that people lose interest after consistent 20-30 minute innings.
It seems to me that the solution is to have the top players compete on 4” or 4.25” pockets to slow them down a little.
In other similar high run games like English Billiards and snooker they use tougher equipment to slow down the top players. Why not 14.1?