Speaking of tight pockets I like 'em for the required precision; filtering pool competition, not so important. Although, if somebody is getting good rolls on me I can always take comfort in thinking I'd toast 'em on tighter pockets.
Why the Best Players Want Tight Pockets
- Thread starter brunswick1901
- Start date
L.S. Dennis
Well-known member
Speaking of Buddy, I heard him saying people complain about big pockets should just bet a little higher and the pockets tighten right up!
Related to giving up a spot regardless of the pocket size, I asked Hawaiian Brian, who ofter gave up big spots, about what happens when he gives up a spot that is too big.
Brian said,
If I play good and you play good, I win.
If I play bad and you play bad, I win.
If I play good and you play bad, I win.
If I play bad and you play good, you might win.
Brian said,
If I play good and you play good, I win.
If I play bad and you play bad, I win.
If I play good and you play bad, I win.
If I play bad and you play good, you might win.
Last edited:
Willowbrook Wolfy
Going pro
The only advantage for a higher level player is if they are used to the tight pockets they are playing on. If pro a is an 800 fargorate always practicing/playing on 4.5” pockets and player b is a 750 always practicing on 4-1/4” pockets player b now has a better chance to win that match on a 4-1/4” table. Until player a gets adjusted to them.
Just like how a strictly barbox player usually has advantage on a strictly 9’ player on a barbox when they anre close in speed. And vice versa. If the 800 plays a 500 and both are used to 4.5” pockets there is no advantage to the 800 by playing on tighter pockets. They both will have to adjust. Pocket size is just smoke and mirrors. Once adjusted to them a player will miss the same percentage of shots as they would on a bit bigger pockets in comparison to their opponent. Over the course of a long race the outcome would be really close no matter the pocket size.
Just like how a strictly barbox player usually has advantage on a strictly 9’ player on a barbox when they anre close in speed. And vice versa. If the 800 plays a 500 and both are used to 4.5” pockets there is no advantage to the 800 by playing on tighter pockets. They both will have to adjust. Pocket size is just smoke and mirrors. Once adjusted to them a player will miss the same percentage of shots as they would on a bit bigger pockets in comparison to their opponent. Over the course of a long race the outcome would be really close no matter the pocket size.
Last edited:
Willowbrook Wolfy
Going pro
anyway, I’m gonna call bullshit on the original post here. Pro is going to want to play on whatever they practice on or larger.. if they practice on 4 1/2 inch pockets that’s what they’re gonna wanna play on if they practice at 4 1/4 inch pockets that’s what they’re gonna wanna play on or bigger. Why wouldn’t they? That’s what they’re used to. I am yet to meet one player that preferred to play a match on tighter pockets then they are used to.
Maybe pros would prefer they start playing on tighter tables, but if they changed all the tables tomorrow I’ll bet you have just as many or more pros bitching than happy about it cause some of them haven’t had time to get adjusted to the new conditions before playing on them.
Maybe pros would prefer they start playing on tighter tables, but if they changed all the tables tomorrow I’ll bet you have just as many or more pros bitching than happy about it cause some of them haven’t had time to get adjusted to the new conditions before playing on them.
Last edited:
He also ate 16 eggs and a pound of bacon and a loaf of bread and a fistful of uppers for breakfast.
Not sustainable.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
I've wondered about that. If we set up a shot on a table with 4" pockets and we both shoot 60%, and then set up the same shot on a table with 5" pockets and I shoot 90% will you also shoot 90%? If shot spread follows standard distribution then it should. I think there are 2 factors to shot accuracy, aiming accuracy and stroke accuracy. I'm not sure how two factors with standard distribution interact.
A better test is see how many tries it takes you to run 4 racks, just scatter the balls, on a 9’ table with 5” pockets and then repeat this with 4 1/4” pockets. Which table yields the highest run avg. pocketing 60 balls; how many shots attempted?
There will be a big difference in how you perform. The bigger side pockets (5.5” vs. 4.75”) start looking like canyons.
The 5” CP will accept so many more OB that might have rattled with 4.25” pockets. Overall, the game is a little easier.
In the final analysis, pool players should play and enjoy the game. If bigger pockets floats your boat, you are not alone.
4.5” pockets on a Diamond table seem very popular and is almost used as a norm but I do prefer a smaller pocket size.
There will be a big difference in how you perform. The bigger side pockets (5.5” vs. 4.75”) start looking like canyons.
The 5” CP will accept so many more OB that might have rattled with 4.25” pockets. Overall, the game is a little easier.
In the final analysis, pool players should play and enjoy the game. If bigger pockets floats your boat, you are not alone.
4.5” pockets on a Diamond table seem very popular and is almost used as a norm but I do prefer a smaller pocket size.
Makes sense statistically and probably a good guide for the percentage people. There's a big component missing and that's the actual competency of the players. If the stronger player is 100% (can't avoid those percentage things) competent on the tighter pockets there should be no difference in the test results. I think it's likely that a significant number of players however, might be comfortable on tight pockets and still guessy touchy feely on 'em.
Alternate break? That doesn’t belong in pool and those that think it does are from the everybody gets to play, everybody gets a trophy generation.
I'd rather have alternate break then handicaps, and I'd sooner smash a bottle on your throat with my bare foot then hand you a participation ribbon.
Can't think of another "sport" (used loosely) that promotes the notion that your opponent may never getting an opportunity to play as viable competition. To be clear, I'm not 'anti-winner break' but it is a dumb way to play the game at the pro level with loose equipment and rule sets that promote ease of play. The MR 4" pockets and break rules make winner break a decent game.
Last edited:
Doesn’t matter if you can think of another sport that is like it in that matter. It creates the dynamic that makes it the greatest and cruelest of sports. Pool has always been a game where it is your inning until you miss foul or play a safety. It tests and reveals a players mettle in their ability to both maintain their composure in the chair, and to be able to respond and control the table when given the opportunity.I'd rather have alternate break then handicaps, and I'd sooner smash a bottle on your throat with my bare foot then hand you a participation ribbon.
Can't think of another "sport" (used loosely) that promotes the notion that your opponent may never getting an opportunity to play as viable competition. To be clear, I'm not 'anti-winner break' but it is a dumb way to play the game at the pro level with loose equipment and rule sets that promote ease of play. The MR 4" pockets and break rules make winner break a decent game.
2 of the most exciting matches I ever witnessed in person were in the 1999 World Championships. Reyes down 7-3 to Ralf Souquet, then he ran 8 racks. In his next match against Bustamente, Reyes was down 3-1 when Busti scratched on the break and Efren then ran 9 racks, which our own Jay Helfert described as the best pool he’d ever seen played in his commentary on the match. This is the game pool is and that shouldn’t be changed. One of my favorite videos to watch is Jason Shaw wiping the floor with Mika Immonen in 20 minutes flat at Turning Stone. Not only for the beauty of Jason’s play, but for watching Mika pout and throw his cue at one point like a recalcitrant child “because he didn’t get a turn”. Being as he was one of the original crybabies whining for alternating breaks years ago made it that much more satisfying.
At the end of the day it isn’t like people weren’t aware of this facet of pool when they took up the game. If they aren’t mentally suited for it then perhaps they should take up golf or tennis.
Last edited:
lol... enough said
Bolded my favorite part. Get ready to catch some heat for that one around here.I'd rather have alternate break then handicaps, and I'd sooner smash a bottle on your throat with my bare foot then hand you a participation ribbon.
Can't think of another "sport" (used loosely) that promotes the notion that your opponent may never getting an opportunity to play as viable competition. To be clear, I'm not 'anti-winner break' but it is a dumb way to play the game at the pro level with loose equipment and rule sets that promote ease of play. The MR 4" pockets and break rules make winner break a decent game.
Easy fix is to do what the carom games do. Allow an equalizing inning in some situations. I would only do it if the set is run out off the opening break, which is rare. Opponent gets to break and try to run the set too. Any miss = loss. If it is tied then you have to decide what you want for the tiebreaker. In 3C they are doing an equalizing inning in games to 40, but not 50. In the series games where they can run out from the break I don't know if they only do it from the break or in other situations. Yeah, you can say to lag better, but I think the equalizing inning is better as that is a more legitimate "opportunity to play" as you say above. Makes for a more viable competition.I'd rather have alternate break then handicaps, and I'd sooner smash a bottle on your throat with my bare foot then hand you a participation ribbon.
Can't think of another "sport" (used loosely) that promotes the notion that your opponent may never getting an opportunity to play as viable competition. To be clear, I'm not 'anti-winner break' but it is a dumb way to play the game at the pro level with loose equipment and rule sets that promote ease of play. The MR 4" pockets and break rules make winner break a decent game.
meh, bring it.... I got AZB combat certified years ago.Bolded my favorite part. Get ready to catch some heat for that one around here.
Elvis faked his death and hustled 9 ball
Ever see Buddy and Elvis in the same room? Me neither.
Actually, believe it or not. I happen to think Predator has gotten real close to the best professional format that appeases nearly everyone. Imagine this..:
- Winner break
- 3 short sets, to 4 or 5
- Lag to determine first set breaker, alternate first break each set.
- 3rd set must be won by a margin of 2.
For those who pay attention to more than pool, may see the similarities to tennis.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
Maybe because I played a little tennis, I like the multiple set format.