shooting on 8ft. vs. 9ft.
Old
  (#1)
evergruven
AzB Silver Member
evergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 463
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Dec 2017
   
shooting on 8ft. vs. 9ft. - 07-16-2019, 06:13 PM

maybe this has been brought up before, but I'm curious what the 14.1 crowd thinks about shooting on 8ft. vs. 9ft.? do you consider it much different? why?

specifically, is john's 626 more/less/as impressive that he did it on 9ft. vs. mosconi 8ft.?


peace & love
  
Reply With Quote

Old
  (#2)
Positively Ralf
AzB Silver Member
Positively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond reputePositively Ralf has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: A little place called Westchester County
   
07-16-2019, 06:19 PM

Oh geez, let's not start this conversation again.

More impressive? Of course, it's on a bigger table. And he pocketed 100 more balls.

Less impressive? Of course, it was on better and well maintained equipment compared to what Mosconi did his run on.

Both tables had big pockets.

As for the question on hand, even though I'm a low level player, I find it much easier on an 8 footer. Less real estate to worry about.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3)
Bob Jewett
Northern California

Bob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond reputeBob Jewett has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 16,677
vCash: 1700
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
   
07-16-2019, 06:30 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by evergruven View Post
maybe this has been brought up before, but I'm curious what the 14.1 crowd thinks about shooting on 8ft. vs. 9ft.? do you consider it much different? why?

specifically, is john's 626 more/less/as impressive that he did it on 9ft. vs. mosconi 8ft.?
This has been discussed many times before. Search for posts by me that contain the word "caras" to find some of the previous threads.

I have played many, many hours on both sizes. 8-foot tables are easier.


Bob Jewett
SF Billiard Academy
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#4)
sjm
Sweating the 2017 Mosconi
sjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond repute
 
sjm's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 15,797
vCash: 525
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: May 2003
Location: New York, NY
   
07-16-2019, 06:38 PM

John's run is clearly stronger. On average, an eight footer makes it quite a bit easier, but the matter shouldn't be considered in a vacuum. After all:

1) The balls today are of much higher quality than those of 65 years ago.

2) The felt was much slower back then, so break shots had to be hit harder and some of the complex position play would have been more difficult.

3) The rails on the tables back then were of lower quality and didn't play as true.

4) John handpicked the table on which he attempted the record, whereas Mosconi had to play on whatever the room in which he was giving an exhibition chose to use for best viewing by onlookers.

Best to just say that Mosconi's run was the greatest exhibition run of his era and John's run was the best exhibition run of the current era and leave it there. To both, let's just say "well played".
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#5)
evergruven
AzB Silver Member
evergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 463
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Dec 2017
   
07-16-2019, 08:35 PM

thanks for the replies.

for the record, I was inspired to post thinking about john's run, but I wasn't trying to start a firefight about who's run was better-
I'm not experienced in 14.1 and am genuinely curious about the differences between 8 and 9ft.
I wouldn't assume just because the table's bigger, running would be more difficult; therefore I asked...

thanks again.


peace & love
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#6)
ThinSlice
Banned
ThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 344
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Oct 2018
   
07-16-2019, 09:49 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by evergruven View Post
thanks for the replies.



for the record, I was inspired to post thinking about john's run, but I wasn't trying to start a firefight about who's run was better-

I'm not experienced in 14.1 and am genuinely curious about the differences between 8 and 9ft.

I wouldn't assume just because the table's bigger, running would be more difficult; therefore I asked...



thanks again.


BIG BIG. Deference in 9 and 8 foot tables. 8’ is my table of choice for fun yet challenging fun. I wish I could play more 8’ tables. I wish we could see tournaments on 8’ tables. It would be an interesting game to watch.


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#7)
sjm
Sweating the 2017 Mosconi
sjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond reputesjm has a reputation beyond repute
 
sjm's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 15,797
vCash: 525
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: May 2003
Location: New York, NY
   
07-17-2019, 07:38 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinSlice View Post
I wish we could see tournaments on 8’ tables. It would be an interesting game to watch.
Barring the use of crazy-tight pockets, the eight footer just isn't a sufficient test of pro level skills today.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#8)
arcstats
AzB Silver Member
arcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond reputearcstats has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 160
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jul 2013
   
07-17-2019, 07:44 AM

A 9' table's actual playing surface is 100" x 50", meaning 5000 square inches of playing surface. An 8' table's actual playing surface is 92" x 46", meaning 4,232 square inches of playing surface. A 768 square inch difference. An 18.14% increase in table size.

Which table is easier to play on? The numbers tell it all.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#9)
ThinSlice
Banned
ThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond reputeThinSlice has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 344
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Oct 2018
   
07-17-2019, 09:23 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjm View Post
Barring the use of crazy-tight pockets, the eight footer just isn't a sufficient test of pro level skills today.


Tell that to the pros that play in 7’ tournaments


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums
  
Reply With Quote
8 ft vs 9ft
Old
  (#10)
mworkman
AzB Silver Member
mworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond reputemworkman has a reputation beyond repute
 
mworkman's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Minnesota
   
8 ft vs 9ft - 07-17-2019, 10:16 PM

I've practiced quite a lot of straight pool on various sized tables these past few years. My high run on a 7' is 75. I was playing really good 8ball when I did that. My high run on an 8' is 52 from my table at home which has tight pockets 3 3/4" corners. This is with thousands of attempts over the last few years. And my high run on a 9' which was during a league match is 37 on an old Brunswick with normal sized pockets.
I think if I had a 9' at home, I would get some runs in the 50's, but I'll never know as my room is too small for a 9'er. I only get to play on the big table about 10 times a year which is during competition during the straight pool league. I never really feel comfortable and confident. Hard to just play pool as everything seems so different.


I must continue my journey
  
Reply With Quote
generalize this
Old
  (#11)
Danny Harriman
AzB Silver Member
Danny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond reputeDanny Harriman has a reputation beyond repute
 
Danny Harriman's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 959
vCash: 500
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Join Date: May 2008
   
generalize this - 08-03-2019, 10:50 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinSlice View Post
Tell that to the pros that play in 7’ tournaments


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums
In other countries the Pro's - do not compete much at all on tavern tables. It's only here in the states that the some of the top players will demote their games to the tavern tables.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#12)
fiftyyardline
AzB Silver Member

fiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond reputefiftyyardline has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 74
vCash: 500
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Dallas, Tx
   
08-12-2019, 11:50 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by arcstats View Post
A 9' table's actual playing surface is 100" x 50", meaning 5000 square inches of playing surface. An 8' table's actual playing surface is 92" x 46", meaning 4,232 square inches of playing surface. A 768 square inch difference. An 18.14% increase in table size.

Which table is easier to play on? The numbers tell it all.
The size of a true 8’ table is even smaller at 88” x 44”. Only “oversized” or “commercial” 8’ tables are 92”x 46”.
  
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.