Will 4 inches pockets be the future of US pool, bar box and big table?
- Thread starter JCL
- Start date
Ghost of OBC
Well-known member
I don't really have strong feelings among the various options, but I think it would help the game in the US to have a standard and stick to it. It seems during the ESPN era of the late 90s and early aughts, those Olhausen tables played pretty loose, but it didn't ruin the professional game. Though, the current tournaments played on tighter tables seem fine too. What is a pain, is going to a room and having a whole variety of different combinations of shelf depth and pocket width. For normal players, and even advanced players, it is really annoying to have a shot go and then not go from one table to the next. It is even more annoying to have to keep buying different equipment or refurbish older equipment because the fashion has changed.
"Oh, you bought that table back in 2007 because that was the official tournament table? Too bad, we've decided a new brand is the thing and your practice on that old table might be worse than useless"
It is really annoying.
"Oh, you bought that table back in 2007 because that was the official tournament table? Too bad, we've decided a new brand is the thing and your practice on that old table might be worse than useless"
It is really annoying.
Minnesota Phat
Active member
I agree that it will benefit your game, much like shooting baskets on a smaller hoop will benefit your basketball shot.
From what I've seen, newer players shy away from even the lowest level of tournaments already - force them to play on four inch pockets in their first tournament, and that'll really intimidate them out of giving it a go. Heck, if all tables start converting to smaller pockets, even more people will be discouraged from playing pool at all.
I don't see the pros making a lot of two-rail kick shots, masse shots, or full-table-length jump shots - smaller pockets will make intriguing shots like that even more rare.
New player will always have options, I don't see bars changing to a little pockets, but I see more professional tournaments in the future playing with 4", and pros practicing in their tables with it.
Ghost of OBC
Well-known member
I think this is a mistake. Golf has been resisting limiting the pro golf ball distance for many many years. The logic is that spectators' appreciation for the game is connected to being able compare their own games, apples to apples, to the pros. Attempts to bifurcate the game end up with amateurs playing pro equipment, which is bad for game development (and in the case of golf also bad for facility owners because it would slow the game).
Oddly, professional Pickleball is currently doing its best to bifurcate the amateur game from the pro game through their service rules. It is already turning into a bit of a disaster with some amateur events using pro rules, and others not, and then plural sanctioning bodies etc. Basically, all the things that have made pool in the US a mess.
For spectator sports that are largely followed by people who play the game, it seems especially important to let casual players compare themselves to the pros.
I think pockets should be bigger! 6 inches!
Can A Bigger Hole Save Golf? Top PGA Tour Pros Follow The Masters With Bold Experiment
Much has been written in recent years about the slow, steady decline of golf as a participant sport in this country. The usual rationale for the lack of new participants in the game follows a two-tiered thought process. First, it is argued that golf takes too much time in an [...]
www.google.com
Hard enough to get decent players to play on 4.5 inch holes.
Going to 4 inch standard will slow development of pool players. Plus how jmany rooms can afford to just dump their 8k diamonds for new 9k 4 inch ones?
Anything under 4.5 inch limits ones ability to move the cueball....leads to more safeties and less running out, which is not what the public wants.
Going to 4 inch standard will slow development of pool players. Plus how jmany rooms can afford to just dump their 8k diamonds for new 9k 4 inch ones?
Anything under 4.5 inch limits ones ability to move the cueball....leads to more safeties and less running out, which is not what the public wants.
Last edited:
Ghost of OBC
Well-known member
Those were fun days. They actually still have one of the giant holes installed on the practice green at my local course. They never made it to the course as far as I know. That idea, playing up, ready golf, and a bunch of other ideas have failed to catch on. The hackers still insist on playing form the tips, gaming ProV1s, and playing 9* drivers and 60* wedges.Can A Bigger Hole Save Golf? Top PGA Tour Pros Follow The Masters With Bold Experiment
Much has been written in recent years about the slow, steady decline of golf as a participant sport in this country. The usual rationale for the lack of new participants in the game follows a two-tiered thought process. First, it is argued that golf takes too much time in an [...]
Nyquil
Well-known member
Minnesota Phat
Active member
I think that if they want to go in that direction, they should play professional pool tournaments on Snooker tables.
Increasing the difficulty of games like 9-ball or 8-ball by having them be played on a snooker table would provide a visible and obvious signal to players that this is something different from the game being played at bars and billiard halls.
Decreasing the size of the pockets on a pool table fundamentally changes the game of pool into a slightly different game. Someone who is good at bank and kick shots will be at a disadvantage to someone who is precise and tactical. If they are OK with changing the pool table that much, they should just change to an entirely different table, and leave our pool tables alone!
phreaticus
Well-known member
I agree with this view.
In my mind, the general concept that already exists in the industry of having two specs BCA (recreational) and WPA (pro) specs - is a good idea, and how those specs are laid out, pocket size, facing angle and shelf depth - is great, as we know that mouth size is only one of the key variables. Seems to me that the core problems with pool pocket sizes are: (in random order)
1) Both BCA and WPA specs have too much +/- tolerance/variation in them
2) There really is no effective "governing/sanctioning" body in pool that anyone really pays attention to, despite WPA theoretically being such an animal.
3) Pool is somewhat unique in that we don't actually have a single game of pool, we have lots (8b, 9b, 10b, 1p, 14.1, banks, etc), each with its own nuances related to pocket performance. This is probably one major reason why the snooker template example doesn't really hold water for the pool scenario.
Ideally, the WPA or pro industry would specify a single standard set of specs with no tolerance, and manufacture and promoters would align to that for pro events. I'm personally in the camp of 4.25" with PFA's of 141 degrees or so for a pro spec - but care more about about having a single standard for pro specs vs any particular size/shape. IMHO, super tight pockets that play in the 4.0" range change the game too much in terms of CB control, and are really only ok for 1p snobs who prefer to take away the easy banks. Barboxes and recreational tables are probably always better off with larger pockets for obvious reasons and can just do whatever they want based on business goals.
BTW, as it relates to pocket size, soccer might be a better analogy than golf. Soccer has a basically uniform shape/concept of the playing field, unlike golf courses, but is played in a few other formats and surfaces. FIFA specifies a single standard international pro goal size, but there are variations for indoor, youth, etc. And there is no +/- BS on their specs, in fact off the top of my head I can't think of any pro sports spec that have tolerances. Just specify a number and quality manufacturers/mechanics will build to it or not, IMO variances should be a natural selection process, not a standard.
If anyone does get around to actually ratifying new pro specs, please don't forget to also mandate classic ball colors!
Last edited:
I t
I think you never have play before in 4" pockets, did you see the pool masters? I don't think the game change much, and yes I have a bar box with 4" in my house, it change my liveI agree with this view.
In my mind, the general concept that already exists in the industry of having two specs BCA (recreational) and WPA (pro) specs - is a good idea, and how those specs are laid out, pocket size, facing angle and shelf depth - is great, as we know that mouth size is only one of the key variables. Seems to be the core problems with pool pocket sizes are: (in random order)
1) Both BCA and WPA specs have too much +/- tolerance/variation in them
2) There really is no effective "governing/sanctioning" body in pool that anyone really pays attention to, despite WPA theoretically being such an animal.
3) Pool is somewhat unique in that we don't actually have a single game of pool, we have lots (8b, 9b, 10b, 1p, 14.1, banks, etc), each with its own nuances related to pocket performance. This is probably one major reason why the snooker template example doesn't really hold water for the pool scenario.
Ideally, the WPA or pro industry would specify a single standard set of specs with no tolerance, and manufacture and promoters would align to that for pro events. I'm personally in the camp of 4.25" with PFA's of 141 degrees or so for a pro spec - but care more about about having a single standard for pro specs vs any particular size/shape. IMHO, super tight pockets that play in the 4.0" range change the game too much in terms of CB control, and are really only ok for 1p snobs who prefer to take away the easy banks. Barboxes and recreational tables are probably always better off with larger pockets for obvious reasons and can just do whatever they want based on business goals.
BTW, as it relates to pocket size, soccer might be a better analogy than golf. Soccer has a basically uniform shape/concept of the game, unlike golf courses, but is played in a few other formats and surfaces. FIFA specifies a single standard international pro goal size, but there are variations for indoor, youth, etc. And there is no +/- BS on their specs, in fact off the top of my head I can't think of any pro sports spec that have tolerances. Just specify a number and quality manufacturers/mechanics will build to it or not, IMO variances should be a natural selection process, not a standard.
If anyone does get around to actually ratifying new pro specs, please don't forget to also mandate classic ball colors!
So, you walk for 3 minutes between each shot in pool ?
Pool pockets have flags in them ?
A player can use up to 14 different pool sticks for different shots ?
The pool player and golfer pay green fees, but only the golfer pays for balls.
Then again, I've never seen a 300 yard pool shot--roughly 80 rails in a single shot.
Golf is played in daylight, pool at night.
Never seen a pool ball land in water or a player have to take his shoes and socks off to hit a shot in pool.
A round of golf takes roughly 4 hours, a set of pool how long ?
You hit a pool ball with the stick almost rubbing your hip.
You hit a golf ball standing several feet away and swing the club from shoulder to shoulder.
How exactly is golf like pool in the slightest ??
If you mean CP pockets under 5”, for example 4 7/8”, maybe but still not very likely.
Popularity of pool is based on enjoyment which means easier is just more attractive.
Not everyone has the desire, aptitude or abilities to play at a highly competitive level.
Look at golf. How many golfers are single digit players, let alone a handicap under 3?
People play golf for fun, recreation, and competitively with generous handicap allowance
for amateurs. My point is people play golf because it is enjoyable & 4” pockets in pool isn’t.
I am a dinosaur. I want tight pockets. 4 1/4” - 4 3/8” are my preferred sizes with 4 1/2” being
the largest CP size with a 1” shelf. But most players find that unappealing because it’s not fun.
Popularity of pool is based on enjoyment which means easier is just more attractive.
Not everyone has the desire, aptitude or abilities to play at a highly competitive level.
Look at golf. How many golfers are single digit players, let alone a handicap under 3?
People play golf for fun, recreation, and competitively with generous handicap allowance
for amateurs. My point is people play golf because it is enjoyable & 4” pockets in pool isn’t.
I am a dinosaur. I want tight pockets. 4 1/4” - 4 3/8” are my preferred sizes with 4 1/2” being
the largest CP size with a 1” shelf. But most players find that unappealing because it’s not fun.
Ghost of OBC
Well-known member
I think there are two ways the games are importantly similar. 1. They are both games where most of the fans are also players. 2. They are both games where fans/players are invested in comparing themselves to the pros. No one watches a NFL game and then goes outside and sets up the 3rd and goal on their lawn to see if they can run the QB sneak through a 350 lbs lineman. But pool players will watch a tough shot in a match and then go set it up on their home table or in the pool room and see how many tries it takes to pot the shot (there are some popular YouTube people who pretty much just do this.) Likewise, golfers go to the range, compare their 7i distance to Rory, or set up a flop shot on the practice range, and "hit it like the pros."
Similarly, if you are invited to go play a course that hosts a tournament, you might play from the tips, score 120 and really appreciate how good that 63 was that Phil shot last year.
I think we all, when we play the ghost, remember when Corey Deuel ran a 4 pack back in some tournament. I might not be able to play like Corey, but I can understand what it would be like much more than I can what it would be like to be Joe Montana.
Being able to play on the same field as the pros is a cool part of both games that I think a lot of folks value it.