Sorry, I gotta call BS. 4.25" pockets should not be difficult for above pro level speed players unless they are cut goofy and do not play properly.
8ft versus 9ft Diamond Pro am (room 17'6" x 14')
- Thread starter thenaturalpoolplayer
- Start date
thenaturalpoolplayer
Active member
The 4 1/4" you see boasted about at various tournaments have little or no shelf, so they play easy. My pockets were custom cut at diamond and the shelf is deep so yeah they are tough. I think a 5 pack of 9 ball (with the magic rack) was the record by a player that has a 750 fargo. My record is a 3 pack of 9 ball and a 2 pack of 10 ball.
ACL
Well-known member
This is my opinion as well. I have an 8' and I have very little trouble going from it to 9'. I also agree that the clusters on the 8' help with straight pool and the few times I play on 7'. 8' is a nice middle ground.
That chart is not quite accurate and will result in some limitations. We tell our clients 17’6” x 13’6” for an 8 foot table and 18’6” x 14 for a 9 foot table, and even that is pushing it just a little bit, requiring a very short backstroke if the cue ball is near frozen on the cushion, especially on the width, where you’d really like to have 14’6” width for a 9 foot table.
MurrayNevada
Well-known member
I had the same dilemma and chose the 8' Pro-Am. I've played too many games in homes where short cues were necessary. Somebody said earlier in this thread that shorties become annoying really quick. I agree with that 100 percent.
thenaturalpoolplayer
Active member
Why is it so hard to find a 54" pool cue? That would be the perfect shorty cue size for the space.
Last edited:
Predator now makes a shorter cue.
BSellers22
Member
It was a typo... supposed to be 570
its not when you look for one
dquarasr
Registered
Wouldn’t that be splitting the difference between a 7ft and an 8ft?
were splitting diamonds here fellas
The Diamond 8’ (45x90) splits the difference between a standard 8’ (44x88) and an oversized (pro) 8’ (46x92).
dquarasr
Registered
Ok, thanks for clarifying. My ignorance was showing and I’m happy to be corrected.
Here's the math for all three sizes above. "Minimum Stroking Room" is for a 58" level cue with the CB against the rail shooting perpendicular to the rail.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
phreaticus
Well-known member
Agreed. The numbers in the OP are way off and actually I think your numbers are fairly aggressive also. Most of the charts you see online are based on the playing surface size + 2x 58" cue size, which is clever marketing but leaves no margin for stroke and stance, when the CB is right on the rail. I think using 64" (6" margin on the 58" typical cue) as the standard - is whats required to have a truly comfy table that won't need kid cues and won't have you jammed up against walls and furniture. I consider 19' x 14'8 to be the minimum true size needed to comfortably house a 9' table. Thats derived from 100+64+64 & 50+64+64. For casual recreational play, shorties aren't that big a deal and anyone can make their own decisions how much cramping they can tolerate for their own home situation, but basing the core sizing around a 58" cue with no additional margins - is pretty silly IMO.
As for playability of an 8 ft vs 9, etc, I'll be a bit of a dissenter here. I play almost exclusively on 9 and 7 ft tables, but my buddy has a small poolhall with 8 ft tables and when I've visited him and played on them for a few days at a time, I've made a clear observation about 8ball. I haven't played a ton of 8 ft tables, but there is also one bar near me that has an 8ft valley barbox that I've played on a few times and same seems true on it. So my view is this - 8 ft tables are sort of "optimal" for the game of 8ball, it seems much easier a game vs playing on both 9ft and 7ft barboxes. My personal largest packages in 8b were done several times on 8ft tables. My theory for why this is, is that 8' tables have much less clustering than barboxes, but also don't have the longer shot making distances of 9 ft tables. Most 8 ft tables also tend to have generous sized pockets compared to most 9 ft tables. So in reality playing 8b on an 8ft table is sort of like taking the easier aspects of a barbox play minus the major challenge of barbox 8ball (clusters) - thus making it the easiest of the 3 sizes. I'm not much of a 14.1 guy, but I imagine the issues might be similar there also.
For what it's worth, I also have a tight difficult 9ft table at home and no casual player really enjoys playing on it, and I get annoyed by it also at times. For a general purpose social home table an 8ft with generous pockets is obviously going to be the most comfy and fun choice for anyone except the more serious player crowd. No perfect answer, can't please all the folks all the time...
Just some thoughts...
Last edited:
Last edited:
Diamonds 8’ table is actually 45x90. It’s what I have. My room is 18x14.5.
I would hate a 9’ in my area. My 8’ Diamond is perfect size for a normal cueing action anywhere around the table.
I to like playing straight pool and 1pk, both can be done on the table. Sure, that as well as an 9’, but not too shabby either.
Best thing, I feel like 7’ table are small now and 9’ tables are not a big jump when I play on them. Best of both worlds imo.
Good luck.
I would hate a 9’ in my area. My 8’ Diamond is perfect size for a normal cueing action anywhere around the table.
I to like playing straight pool and 1pk, both can be done on the table. Sure, that as well as an 9’, but not too shabby either.
Best thing, I feel like 7’ table are small now and 9’ tables are not a big jump when I play on them. Best of both worlds imo.
Good luck.
thenaturalpoolplayer
Active member
Agreed. The numbers in the OP are way off and actually I think your numbers are fairly aggressive also. Most of the charts you see online are based on the playing surface size + 2x 58" cue size, which is clever marketing but leaves no margin for stroke and stance, when the CB is right on the rail. I think using 64" (6" margin on the 58" typical cue) as the standard - is whats required to have a truly comfy table that won't need kid cues and won't have you jammed up against walls and furniture. I consider 19' x 14'8 to be the minimum true size needed to comfortably house a 9' table. Thats derived from 100+64+64 & 50+64+64. For casual recreational play, shorties aren't that big a deal and anyone can make their own decisions how much cramping they can tolerate for their own home situation, but basing the core sizing around a 58" cue with no additional margins - is pretty silly IMO.
As for playability of an 8 ft vs 9, etc, I'll be a bit of a dissenter here. I play almost exclusively on 9 and 7 ft tables, but my buddy has a small poolhall with 8 ft tables and when I've visited him and played on them for a few days at a time, I've made a clear observation about 8ball. I haven't played a ton of 8 ft tables, but there is also one bar near me that has an 8ft valley barbox that I've played on a few times and same seems true on it. So my view is this - 8 ft tables are sort of "optimal" for the game of 8ball, it seems much easier a game vs playing on both 9ft and 7ft barboxes. My personal largest packages in 8b were done several times on 8ft tables. My theory for why this is, is that 8' tables have much less clustering than barboxes, but also don't have the longer shot making distances of 9 ft tables. Most 8 ft tables also tend to have generous sized pockets compared to most 9 ft tables. So in reality playing 8b on an 8ft table is sort of like taking the easier aspects of a barbox play minus the major challenge of barbox 8ball (clusters) - thus making it the easiest of the 3 sizes. I'm not much of a 14.1 guy, but I imagine the issues might be similar there also.
For what it's worth, I also have a tight difficult 9ft table at home and no casual player really enjoys playing on it, and I get annoyed by it also at times. For a general purpose social home table an 8ft with generous pockets is obviously going to be the most comfy and fun choice for anyone except the more serious player crowd. No perfect answer, can't please all the folks all the time...
Just some thoughts...
I find the wall is more of an issue for my stance than the cue....I rarely need the shorty, but will have my butt against the wall more often...probably any straight out shot that is 6" off the rail or less. The easy math is you want to have 5 feet all around the table so 19' x 14'6"
Last edited:
You got it right assuming 14.1 is quite a challenge on a 7’ table. Shotmaking and setting up a break ball is no problem, but the clusters and keeping the cue ball out of trouble on the break out shots is a crap shoot. Running more than 2-3 consecutive racks without running in to an issue is just about impossible.Agreed. The numbers in the OP are way off and actually I think your numbers are fairly aggressive also. Most of the charts you see online are based on the playing surface size + 2x 58" cue size, which is clever marketing but leaves no margin for stroke and stance, when the CB is right on the rail. I think using 64" (6" margin on the 58" typical cue) as the standard - is whats required to have a truly comfy table that won't need kid cues and won't have you jammed up against walls and furniture. I consider 19' x 14'8 to be the minimum true size needed to comfortably house a 9' table. Thats derived from 100+64+64 & 50+64+64. For casual recreational play, shorties aren't that big a deal and anyone can make their own decisions how much cramping they can tolerate for their own home situation, but basing the core sizing around a 58" cue with no additional margins - is pretty silly IMO.
As for playability of an 8 ft vs 9, etc, I'll be a bit of a dissenter here. I play almost exclusively on 9 and 7 ft tables, but my buddy has a small poolhall with 8 ft tables and when I've visited him and played on them for a few days at a time, I've made a clear observation about 8ball. I haven't played a ton of 8 ft tables, but there is also one bar near me that has an 8ft valley barbox that I've played on a few times and same seems true on it. So my view is this - 8 ft tables are sort of "optimal" for the game of 8ball, it seems much easier a game vs playing on both 9ft and 7ft barboxes. My personal largest packages in 8b were done several times on 8ft tables. My theory for why this is, is that 8' tables have much less clustering than barboxes, but also don't have the longer shot making distances of 9 ft tables. Most 8 ft tables also tend to have generous sized pockets compared to most 9 ft tables. So in reality playing 8b on an 8ft table is sort of like taking the easier aspects of a barbox play minus the major challenge of barbox 8ball (clusters) - thus making it the easiest of the 3 sizes. I'm not much of a 14.1 guy, but I imagine the issues might be similar there also.
For what it's worth, I also have a tight difficult 9ft table at home and no casual player really enjoys playing on it, and I get annoyed by it also at times. For a general purpose social home table an 8ft with generous pockets is obviously going to be the most comfy and fun choice for anyone except the more serious player crowd. No perfect answer, can't please all the folks all the time...
Just some thoughts...