Because we know what that measurement is on this table. It's the facing angle that's unknown.
pj
chgo
Eagle Eye Takes Aim at 14.1 High Runs
- Thread starter lfigueroa
- Start date
pj
chgo
Everone on here is saying it, they're just not as blunt. lolI'd bet you a $100 you wouldn't say that to my face standing in front of me
Whatever the mouth opening is, 142-143° facing angles dictate a 3/4" reduction in size from mouth to throat. There's no math error - if the mouth is 5" wide, then the throat must be no more than 4 1/4" wide or the angles are not 142-143°.
pj
chgo
kanzzo
hobby player
yes, but because of the size of the pockets the table wouldn't qualify for "recommended equipment specifications" from WPA anyhow. So if the angle is just 138° instead of 142°, I don't see how it changes things. Yes, this table plays easy. I posted this before...
Some people are questioning his pace of Play as being way too fast, but I would say if he was not playing as fast as he was, he wouldn’t of had so many chances at high runs.
Think about it, as soon as a run ended, he was able to get right back to 200+ in less than 40 minutes! Simply amazing!
I can’t wait to hear how long it took him to run the 714. My guess is it was under 2 1/2 hours!
I forgot to quote the post but someone brought up crainfield 768. On the stream the guy Deon said jayson got the world record, then he talks to Bobby for a minute and comes back saying never mind maybe it’s not the world record.
I heard mention of the 768 during that side conference so it seems like that’s still considered the one to beat in general - to be top runner dawg of the world and all time till next time - but as far as I’m concerned it’s the bee’s knees cuz I seen it happen!
I heard mention of the 768 during that side conference so it seems like that’s still considered the one to beat in general - to be top runner dawg of the world and all time till next time - but as far as I’m concerned it’s the bee’s knees cuz I seen it happen!
5" corner pockets are at least common. Parallel facings aren't.
And, again, the pocket width has been clearly shown, avoiding questions and suspicion about that.
pj
chgo
kanzzo
hobby player
on wpapool.com they don't say, tables have to be like this. The say "recommended equipment specifications"
this is from Table Difficulty Site from Dr. Dave, so there must be tables with Pocket Angle of less then 141°
I agree that if would be fair to provide all the relevant table specifications for the table so the runs are better comparable. And a Pocket Angle of 138° does make the pocket more forgiving, then 142°.
But it's not enough for an asterix for the world record in my opinion.
There are but those are generally tight pocket tables not 5" buckets.
I am going to do something that rarely happens around here. I will admit you are right. I just measured my double shimmed gold crown pockets and they are almost exactly 3/4 smaller at the back. Also the two balls will barely fall at the same time. I was not considering that the poket edges sit higher than center on the balls thus making the opening a little wider at the center ball height. It took the extra shim on each side of my pockets on my table to make them 5 inches at the opening. All the Brunswick bowling alleys around here in the 70s and 80s had pockets like mine had before I tightened them up.
kanzzo
hobby player
table was made on purpose as easy as possible to enable huge runs and one was accomplished.
Has the full quality version been posted yet? Sorry if I missed it I’m at dayjob. Watching the low quality version live was amazing!
kanzzo
hobby player
I have no idea why the organisators don't provide the exact measurements. I had guessed from the photos that the angle is around 137-138°
(135° would made for absolutely parallel facings, so the angle must be a little above 135° but probably less then 142° that are normally on a Brunswick table. I had a GCIII for 5 years and owe a GCV and the angle is 142° on my table at home)
Dr Dave provided a nice system with TDF to compare, how different variations in pocket measurements change the difficulty of the table.
The 5'' pockets make it 9% easier
The flat shelf makes it 5% easier
The pocket angle makes it 3% easier.
Combined (since you have to multiply the numbers) it makes for an 16% easier table. So the pocket angle is a relevant factor but it's the smallest one.
Last edited:
If only we knew those specs as well. That's really why I think critiquing this table is pointless. If we're happy pretending the John S. table was in "spec" (whatever that is) without actually knowing the numbers, then why do we care this time around...?
Easy is relative. It's still a very hard game. Shane, one of the best on the planet didn't break 400 on the same table. I'd like to see the pocket angles as well just to satisfy my own curiosity but it would by no means place an * next to his run. 714 is incredible and for the sake of pool, I hope it gets a lot more publicity that 626. Lie I said, most here on AZB couldn't run 51 balls on that table let alone 51 racks. Amazing.
id take that betI'd bet you a $100 you wouldn't say that to my face standing in front of me
I don't much care - but it makes all this high run stuff just entertainment, not really setting "records".
pj
chgo
The pocket castings on a GC have a throat opening of 4 5/16"s and its at that point on both side of the pocket casting that the miter angles swing out wider in oder to make the mouth bigger than the throat. If you start with the mouth of the pocket being 5" and open the throat of the pocket, all you're going to end up doing is creating a step from the end of the facing in the throat being wider than the pocket casting, which is clearly visible in the picture I posted. No camera angle can change that view, clearly showing the throat of the pocket being wider than the pocket casting as well as the pocket liner itself too. If you tighten the pockets, to say around 4 1/8" - 4" then you have to open the throat of the pocket up, so the miter angles defect the balls deeper in the throat making it possible to pocket balls, if you don't open the throat up with 4" pockets you won't be pocketing shit, and will even have a hard time reaching in the drop pocket to get the balls out, because you won't have any room for your hand to hold and balls and pull them out.
But the pockets were stock pockets for that Rebco table, thats the difference.