Ban pockets.
Corners and especially the sides.
Corners and especially the sides.
Pro Pocket Size TOO Small for 9 Ball
- Thread starter Island Drive
- Start date
9 Ball was way more exciting in the 90s. Give me 5" pockets, rack for your opponent in the standard way. I want to see that wing ball flying in when the "sweet" spot is found, and packages put together.
If I could run some of the pool world:
9 ball, banks, and straight pool would be played on 9 ft old school Gold Crowns with buckets.
One Pocket and banks on 4.5" Diamonds.
No carbon fiber shafts.
No jump cues.
If I could run some of the pool world:
9 ball, banks, and straight pool would be played on 9 ft old school Gold Crowns with buckets.
One Pocket and banks on 4.5" Diamonds.
No carbon fiber shafts.
No jump cues.
Last edited:
BEST era of 9 ball.
BuffaloSlim
Active member
I just watched this match about 4 days ago and thoroughly enjoyed it
I don't disagree with the general sentiment that pockets too tight take away the cheating of the pocket and make players play more conservative but I think they didn't really have a choice. Players today are so strong, most of them have perfect technique, great pre-shot routine and such a high shot making percentage that you kind of need a discriminating factor.
I presume that it's either to make the game more interesting for the viewers as not everything will be run out after run out or it's because the highest tier of players cried that the pockets should be tighter to make it harder for the lower tier players to beat them.
As a spectator I think going to 4 inchers was a tad too extreme. I think it'd be more interesting with 4.25 but on slower cloth so it requires a stroke to move the cueball around. The harder you hit the worse your flaws in your fundamentals are gonna come through.
I presume that it's either to make the game more interesting for the viewers as not everything will be run out after run out or it's because the highest tier of players cried that the pockets should be tighter to make it harder for the lower tier players to beat them.
As a spectator I think going to 4 inchers was a tad too extreme. I think it'd be more interesting with 4.25 but on slower cloth so it requires a stroke to move the cueball around. The harder you hit the worse your flaws in your fundamentals are gonna come through.
Jim, maybe the snooker players should make their pockets 1/8'' smaller....
I't likely their mind set (once they purchased US Open 9 ball from the Behrman family) likely set our games current pocket size this way.
If it's so important for the Europeans to have them smaller, why aren't the women pros playing under these conditions?
In professional golf all players use the same size putting cup size, tho women golf pros course conditions in majors are not as difficult as the men.
I't likely their mind set (once they purchased US Open 9 ball from the Behrman family) likely set our games current pocket size this way.
If it's so important for the Europeans to have them smaller, why aren't the women pros playing under these conditions?
In professional golf all players use the same size putting cup size, tho women golf pros course conditions in majors are not as difficult as the men.
It makes for less aggressive play, if you like safety play small pockets are great, I like when the player has to decide between a shot or a safety, when a player at least has a chance to try a "hero" shot, it's more exciting, the game has turned into chess with balls on a table, you might actually see it on TV again if it was more exciting
I agree with this, in fact, the tighter the pocket is, the more luck-based the game becomes. I've had a long discussion a very long time ago about this, people mostly didn't agree but I still believe it.
At a pro high-end level, the tighter pocket will give more leverage for the weaker pro player, because you added more luck into the game by allowing the game to decide who wins, sometimes the better wins, sometimes the weaker wins....some people couldn't grasp this. My idea is that there are a few areas where luck comes into play.
A) the break, due to the layout and how hard it is.
B) When a ball is missed, the luck comes after the missed ball because nobody knows what will happen next...will it favor player B, or will the guy who missed come back one inning later smelling like roses? If the later situation occurs this is unlucky for the player who was seated in the chair and extremely lucky for the player who missed. Or alternativaly a player misses and the ball wiggles and sit inside the pocket, which in this case may favor the other player who might be weaker.
Anyways, my idea is with smaller pockets, both players may miss, which leads to leaving everything to the hands of pool gods. It's really bad enough to have extreme luck in the break whether the pockets are small or large, now you added this? It's not good long term.
Let the dominant players dominate the weaker ones by running some packs. The weaker pro player will still miss, the extreme top nutch pro will miss less and thats how pool is played, by running 6 packs.
Imo, remove alternative breaks in rotation too, thats another topic, its boring as hell.
Also leave the pockets at pro size, thus removing the extreme luck that occurs after players miss a shot.
Whether someone is dominating running packs or there is a well thought out safety battle, the vast majority of people are not going to think it's exciting. I like playing a lot but I don't think watching that's exciting. If were to choose I'd rather watch players have a good safety battle than players slop balls into 5 inch pockets.It makes for less aggressive play, if you like safety play small pockets are great, I like when the player has to decide between a shot or a safety, when a player at least has a chance to try a "hero" shot, it's more exciting, the game has turned into chess with balls on a table, you might actually see it on TV again if it was more exciting
Someone with a good safety game knows how to control the cue ball. That's pool and most of us could learn something watching it.
True, but it's the masses that don't play the game that need to be ''led to water''.
They don't want to learn, they want to enjoy the show.
More viewers, more money and in turn more great players.
No billiard room owner wants pro cut 4 1/4'' diamond bar tables for the drinking/socializing patrons, for Obvious reasons.
AI.... is change, I don't like it but who's to say I'm right?
Pool is boring for the general public, as is chess, but making it exciting by changing/Evolving how can that be bad.
It's almost like your saying the public would love to watch one pocket matches....
thats a VERY SMALL POCKET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hell no. I don't think the public will regularly watch pool no matter how it's played. Like chess, bowling etc., it's got limited viewer potential. This is nothing new. ESPN did a lot of it in the 80s and 90s, wide world of sports before that. If it was going to catch on with the public, I think it would of happened by now. I can understand why it doesn't, if I didn't play I wouldn't consider watching it any sooner than watching a corn hole match.
uk_9_ball_convert
Active member
But if you watch professional pool, the best players can still run out regularly. I'd say smaller pockets doesn't make much difference to the best players, but those a level below them struggle more.
Bigger pockets means you're more likely to slop a ball in somewhere by accident if you hit it hard and miss (not that pros are hitting with excessive power, but definitely happens with weak amateurs).
I sort of get your logic that if you miss with smaller pockets your a tiny bit less likely to leave your opponent a shot. Everyone is complaining pool is more defensive due to the smaller pockets, but if you had a significantly higher chance of leaving it safe when missing, wouldn't smaller pockets encourage people to be more attacking by your logic as they'll probably get lucky and not leave anything?
I'm another enthusiast who has little interest in watching.
I have the solution for increasing spectators. No BS, it came to me in a dream! Just a quick flash, two pros playing pool. The only obvious difference from today is that the cues had batteries in them. They would deliver one of four levels of shock if you screwed up. Think from just a bit more than a tingle for not getting as good of shape as you should to Holy Mother of Jesus cattle prod for a major mistake!
I think it could go big!
Hu
you kinda missed my point entirely
For pros on fresh cloth 4” seems fine to me or at a push 4.25”. For clubs I agree a little larger compensates for old cloth, unevenness, humidity etc.
My experience playing in Southern Japan. The serious competition tables at our club have 4” pockets with one at 3.9”. I ran a 3-pack only twice last year.
However, I mostly play 14.1 on the “generous” tables with roughly 4.375” pockets. My top score is only 67 so I truly think switching to a 4.9” corner-pocket table as Shaw used for his record would enable me to get over 100 pretty quickly. On rainy days, if I get a couple of scores over 20 an hour, I consider it good as the balls stick together no matter what break I use.
My experience playing in Southern Japan. The serious competition tables at our club have 4” pockets with one at 3.9”. I ran a 3-pack only twice last year.
However, I mostly play 14.1 on the “generous” tables with roughly 4.375” pockets. My top score is only 67 so I truly think switching to a 4.9” corner-pocket table as Shaw used for his record would enable me to get over 100 pretty quickly. On rainy days, if I get a couple of scores over 20 an hour, I consider it good as the balls stick together no matter what break I use.
okay rich, here is the question.
would you rather all 14.1 tables in pool rooms be less than 4.5 inches that are open to the public to play.
or even all the tables you play on be these pockets of 4.1 or so.
what shaw did was incredible but on a table the likes of which you do not find anywhere in public for the most part.
although i believe they made it the standard for world record high runs.
would you rather all 14.1 tables in pool rooms be less than 4.5 inches that are open to the public to play.
or even all the tables you play on be these pockets of 4.1 or so.
what shaw did was incredible but on a table the likes of which you do not find anywhere in public for the most part.
although i believe they made it the standard for world record high runs.
