Looking at the table, my question is this. Are they using the Artemis Intercontinental 66 cushions? If these are the 66 cushions, are they the pro cut ones? The pocket sizes on screen appear larger than the DCC pockets.
Looking at the table, my question is this. Are they using the Artemis Intercontinental 66 cushions? If these are the 66 cushions, are they the pro cut ones? The pocket sizes on screen appear larger than the DCC pockets.
In my conversations with Kevina from Rasson, he said they use Artemis Pool 66.
Procut pockets= 4.5" 141 degrees, 5" 102 degrees. the shelf is not as deep as a diamond of course.
Just my $0.02
Trent from Toledo
IMO their shelves are not deep enough unless they change the angles and pocket size.
I've hit a few balls on that particular set-up and to me, it's just not difficult enough considering their "expected" level of play.
If a banger like myself can tell a "slight" difference in pocketing balls, lol..., a touring pro will notice a "HUGE" difference.
Rake
Shots dropping that should be misses is a common occurrence at the Mosconi.Looking at the table, my question is this. Are they using the Artemis Intercontinental 66 cushions? If these are the 66 cushions, are they the pro cut ones? The pocket sizes on screen appear larger than the DCC pockets.
Shots dropping that should be misses is a common occurrence at the Mosconi.
I'm sure this table is more accepting then most other tournament tables.
I also thought the pockets looked large on the overhead camera.
I took a screenshot of a ball very close to the pocket. Then opened in a graphics program, traced around that ball, then copied that tracing and
moved both to the corner pocket opening.
Result = 4.5 inch corner pockets, like my Diamond.
The shelf looks only slightly shorter.
The overhead camera has a slight fish-eye effect that distorts.