Diamond Pool Tables - Degree of Difficulty

mikemosconi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Recently moved here to Florida- been playing at a room called Diamonds in Cape Coral which features Diamond pool tables- my first real experience with these tables. they are nine footers, probably fairly old, look like 4 1/2 inch pockets ( 2 cue balls will not fit into them side to side) shelf depth seems rather deep. these tables seem to play much, much tougher than Gold Crowns that I have played on most of my life. pockets reject anything that touches a rail even slightly, and hitting a pocket point is pure doom!
So far still trying to adjust my game to these tables, but my initial observations are that the pockets seem to reject balls that REALLY should be a score given a REASONABLE allowance for aiming. any time the object ball needs to travel more than six feet to the pocket, only a slow to moderate slow speed seems to pocket a ball. Straight pool runs are a disaster on these tables, as balls that are run down along the cushions to the pocket are rejected with even the SLIGHTEST amount of off center clearance. Also break shots in 14.1 cannot be hit with the correct speed to open up balls, as most are rejected from the pockets. As for bank shots- these tables seem to bank much shorter than Gold Crowns or Olhausens - I need to ADD angle to side pocket bank shots to make a bank.
Is my experience unique, I doubt it as I am a fairly good player and am really struggling to make balls that previously required no thought. I can see these tables causing young people to forget about pool and try another sport as the difficulty factor would keep player satisfaction to a minimum. I look around me and see lesser players come in and seem to miss 75% of their shots - not good for their confidence or enjoyment of time spent on these tables. Curious as to what experienced players feel about these tables compared to "old standard" Brunswicks etc. BTW- I am up for this challenge, but at times I know that i hit a ball "right" and these tables still reject- a bit frustrating, to say the least. Is this really good for pool?
 

RiverCity

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Recently moved here to Florida- been playing at a room called Diamonds in Cape Coral which features Diamond pool tables- my first real experience with these tables. they are nine footers, probably fairly old, look like 4 1/2 inch pockets ( 2 cue balls will not fit into them side to side) shelf depth seems rather deep. these tables seem to play much, much tougher than Gold Crowns that I have played on most of my life. pockets reject anything that touches a rail even slightly, and hitting a pocket point is pure doom!
So far still trying to adjust my game to these tables, but my initial observations are that the pockets seem to reject balls that REALLY should be a score given a REASONABLE allowance for aiming. any time the object ball needs to travel more than six feet to the pocket, only a slow to moderate slow speed seems to pocket a ball. Straight pool runs are a disaster on these tables, as balls that are run down along the cushions to the pocket are rejected with even the SLIGHTEST amount of off center clearance. Also break shots in 14.1 cannot be hit with the correct speed to open up balls, as most are rejected from the pockets. As for bank shots- these tables seem to bank much shorter than Gold Crowns or Olhausens - I need to ADD angle to side pocket bank shots to make a bank.
Is my experience unique, I doubt it as I am a fairly good player and am really struggling to make balls that previously required no thought. I can see these tables causing young people to forget about pool and try another sport as the difficulty factor would keep player satisfaction to a minimum. I look around me and see lesser players come in and seem to miss 75% of their shots - not good for their confidence or enjoyment of time spent on these tables. Curious as to what experienced players feel about these tables compared to "old standard" Brunswicks etc. BTW- I am up for this challenge, but at times I know that i hit a ball "right" and these tables still reject- a bit frustrating, to say the least. Is this really good for pool?

Nope. :thumbup:
 

Bca8ball

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Recently moved here to Florida- been playing at a room called Diamonds in Cape Coral which features Diamond pool tables- my first real experience with these tables. they are nine footers, probably fairly old, look like 4 1/2 inch pockets ( 2 cue balls will not fit into them side to side) shelf depth seems rather deep. these tables seem to play much, much tougher than Gold Crowns that I have played on most of my life. pockets reject anything that touches a rail even slightly, and hitting a pocket point is pure doom!
So far still trying to adjust my game to these tables, but my initial observations are that the pockets seem to reject balls that REALLY should be a score given a REASONABLE allowance for aiming. any time the object ball needs to travel more than six feet to the pocket, only a slow to moderate slow speed seems to pocket a ball. Straight pool runs are a disaster on these tables, as balls that are run down along the cushions to the pocket are rejected with even the SLIGHTEST amount of off center clearance. Also break shots in 14.1 cannot be hit with the correct speed to open up balls, as most are rejected from the pockets. As for bank shots- these tables seem to bank much shorter than Gold Crowns or Olhausens - I need to ADD angle to side pocket bank shots to make a bank.
Is my experience unique, I doubt it as I am a fairly good player and am really struggling to make balls that previously required no thought. I can see these tables causing young people to forget about pool and try another sport as the difficulty factor would keep player satisfaction to a minimum. I look around me and see lesser players come in and seem to miss 75% of their shots - not good for their confidence or enjoyment of time spent on these tables. Curious as to what experienced players feel about these tables compared to "old standard" Brunswicks etc. BTW- I am up for this challenge, but at times I know that i hit a ball "right" and these tables still reject- a bit frustrating, to say the least. Is this really good for pool?

Pocket angle/degree is the key, regardless of pocket size.
It is possible that the table you are playing on have been modified over the years and now have bad angles/pocket openings.

Everyone that has been in the game for awhile knows when a ball should go verse a miss. The diamond tables I have experienced are a great piece of equipment.
My home table is a fast GCIII with 4 7/16 pockets. When I get the opportunity to play on Diamonds, it's clearly the shelf depth forces me to knuckle down a bit more.
 

Michael Andros

tiny balls, GIANT pockets
Silver Member
Recently moved here to Florida- been playing at a room called Diamonds in Cape Coral which features Diamond pool tables- my first real experience with these tables. they are nine footers, probably fairly old, look like 4 1/2 inch pockets ( 2 cue balls will not fit into them side to side) shelf depth seems rather deep. these tables seem to play much, much tougher than Gold Crowns that I have played on most of my life. pockets reject anything that touches a rail even slightly, and hitting a pocket point is pure doom!
So far still trying to adjust my game to these tables, but my initial observations are that the pockets seem to reject balls that REALLY should be a score given a REASONABLE allowance for aiming. any time the object ball needs to travel more than six feet to the pocket, only a slow to moderate slow speed seems to pocket a ball. Straight pool runs are a disaster on these tables, as balls that are run down along the cushions to the pocket are rejected with even the SLIGHTEST amount of off center clearance. Also break shots in 14.1 cannot be hit with the correct speed to open up balls, as most are rejected from the pockets. As for bank shots- these tables seem to bank much shorter than Gold Crowns or Olhausens - I need to ADD angle to side pocket bank shots to make a bank.
Is my experience unique, I doubt it as I am a fairly good player and am really struggling to make balls that previously required no thought. I can see these tables causing young people to forget about pool and try another sport as the difficulty factor would keep player satisfaction to a minimum. I look around me and see lesser players come in and seem to miss 75% of their shots - not good for their confidence or enjoyment of time spent on these tables. Curious as to what experienced players feel about these tables compared to "old standard" Brunswicks etc. BTW- I am up for this challenge, but at times I know that i hit a ball "right" and these tables still reject- a bit frustrating, to say the least. Is this really good for pool?


If this wasn't a pubic forum, I would say I *despise* Diamond tables. And, I would add, I can't believe most big tourneys these days are played on them, mainly due to, from what I've heard, Diamond is all about making them available to practically any tourney director / promoter putting on a tourney.

But, seeing as how this IS a public form, I won't say anything at all.

:winknudge: :groucho:
 

hang-the-9

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Recently moved here to Florida- been playing at a room called Diamonds in Cape Coral which features Diamond pool tables- my first real experience with these tables. they are nine footers, probably fairly old, look like 4 1/2 inch pockets ( 2 cue balls will not fit into them side to side) shelf depth seems rather deep. these tables seem to play much, much tougher than Gold Crowns that I have played on most of my life. pockets reject anything that touches a rail even slightly, and hitting a pocket point is pure doom!
So far still trying to adjust my game to these tables, but my initial observations are that the pockets seem to reject balls that REALLY should be a score given a REASONABLE allowance for aiming. any time the object ball needs to travel more than six feet to the pocket, only a slow to moderate slow speed seems to pocket a ball. Straight pool runs are a disaster on these tables, as balls that are run down along the cushions to the pocket are rejected with even the SLIGHTEST amount of off center clearance. Also break shots in 14.1 cannot be hit with the correct speed to open up balls, as most are rejected from the pockets. As for bank shots- these tables seem to bank much shorter than Gold Crowns or Olhausens - I need to ADD angle to side pocket bank shots to make a bank.
Is my experience unique, I doubt it as I am a fairly good player and am really struggling to make balls that previously required no thought. I can see these tables causing young people to forget about pool and try another sport as the difficulty factor would keep player satisfaction to a minimum. I look around me and see lesser players come in and seem to miss 75% of their shots - not good for their confidence or enjoyment of time spent on these tables. Curious as to what experienced players feel about these tables compared to "old standard" Brunswicks etc. BTW- I am up for this challenge, but at times I know that i hit a ball "right" and these tables still reject- a bit frustrating, to say the least. Is this really good for pool?

The older Diamond cushions did bank funny, so much in fact that they re-did the rails on ones after.

On the pocket size, if you are not used to 4.5" pockets, yep there will be missing. Most players miss a ton even on easy equipment so seeing people miss is actually common. Heck a lot of people I watch play have a hard time even hitting a ball never mind making one.

Our league plays in several places. One has 8 foot Diamonds with pockets about 4.25", probably some of the toughest table to play on in the state. Everyone that is a good player loves playing on those and even the lower level players appreciate them since it makes their pocketing actually count if they aim instead of missing and having a ball go it.

If you can't fit two balls in the pockets they are tough tables, and will reject some balls that most players see as hit good. Any small rub of the rail, it's a miss at anything past slow speeds.

Straight pool on tough pockets is not much fun I agree there. I think I read that Mosconi insisted his tables had 5" pockets when he played and did exhibitions but I could not point to the source.
 
Last edited:

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
The standard Diamond pocket size I've seen at Derby City is just enough to get two balls into the pocket on the flat face but not to the brink. I guess you could call those pockets slightly larger than 4.5 inches at the points and 4.5 inches at the middle of the facings. It sounds like the OP's pockets are smaller. Perhaps the room is infested by one pocket players.:wink:
 
Diamonds are very springy compared to GC’s. The balls come off the rails very fast and short. I suspect this is why 1 hole players love them. You can make shots or at least bank shots that cannot be made on GC’s. Diamonds change the game for sure. In my opinion it not a good change. But, considering the price (almost half that of a new GC) most rooms and home players go with them. I am not impressed with them nor enjoy playing on them. You have to adjust your game to the table.


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums
 

arnaldo

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I believe that in very recent years, Diamond began offering all customers (whether home-table potential owners, or any commercial room customers) the choice of two distinct pocket size options: their classic pro-cut (4 1/2" at the mouth) or their league-cut ones (4 3/4" at the mouth).

It would seem (to me at least) that -- except for commercial rooms that want to often host sanctioned tournaments with requisite pro-cut 4 1/2" corner pocket dimensions -- more wide-spread use of the league-cut 4 3/4" Diamonds might be better for the growth of the sport among the arguably large majority cohort of room-goers: players with substantially less than pro-level skills.

That would seem to be a better modern business model, especially with so many rooms closing because of countless other cultural factors besides the obviously discouraging possibility of overly-challenging pocket sizes.

(However, there's the complicating factor in some large city rooms of owners doing consistently well because they feature tight-pocketed tables that attract a dependable amount of highly-skilled players, plus enough players seriously dedicated to elevating their skills for years of future tournaments.)

Arnaldo
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
As a general statement, regular players in poolrooms strangely seem to love tighter pockets. Their thought process is that they think it makes them a better player and gives them an advantage when they go to another room to play, or other players from other rooms come to their room to play. Not only do they like tight pockets, but they seem to like tough angle cuts in to the pocket. That is the spec that most determines how brutal corner pockets will play. I somewhat disagree with this myth that tighter pockets are of any benefit to an average player, unless we're talking about a very good player to start with.

Parallel angles on the facings in to a corner pocket measure 135 degrees when using a protractor placed along the adjacent cushion nose to measure them, which even on a table with 4-1/2" corner pocket openings at the mouth would make them play extremely player friendly - probably too easy by the opinion of most here. Roughly 142-143 degrees is considered average rail to facing angles (as measured with a protractor) on most standard corner pockets. Diamond tour cut pockets are cut 4-1/2" across at the mouth, with a 143 degree rail to facings angle. The combination of both these factors is why they play brutally tough on harder paced shots - particularly down the rails.

A qualified mechanic can tighten pockets by extending the sub rails, and at the same time, if requested, they can alter the the rail to facings angle to whatever the customer specifies. In my opinion, 139-140 degrees would make a big difference in allowing any size pockets to play more forgiving but certainly not too forgiving - fairer in the opinion of many including it sounds like yourself. However, as with anything, it is impossible to please everyone.

I'm sure some of our resident table mechanics / fitters will chime in with their opinions as well. I am certainly not one, but I understand all the concepts of what makes a pocket play tough as a result of operating a poolroom for many years and picking the brains of various reputable mechanics who have worked on and altered our pool table pockets over the years.
 
Last edited:

Straightpool_99

I see dead balls
Silver Member
Recently moved here to Florida- been playing at a room called Diamonds in Cape Coral which features Diamond pool tables- my first real experience with these tables. they are nine footers, probably fairly old, look like 4 1/2 inch pockets ( 2 cue balls will not fit into them side to side) shelf depth seems rather deep. these tables seem to play much, much tougher than Gold Crowns that I have played on most of my life. pockets reject anything that touches a rail even slightly, and hitting a pocket point is pure doom!
So far still trying to adjust my game to these tables, but my initial observations are that the pockets seem to reject balls that REALLY should be a score given a REASONABLE allowance for aiming. any time the object ball needs to travel more than six feet to the pocket, only a slow to moderate slow speed seems to pocket a ball. Straight pool runs are a disaster on these tables, as balls that are run down along the cushions to the pocket are rejected with even the SLIGHTEST amount of off center clearance. Also break shots in 14.1 cannot be hit with the correct speed to open up balls, as most are rejected from the pockets. As for bank shots- these tables seem to bank much shorter than Gold Crowns or Olhausens - I need to ADD angle to side pocket bank shots to make a bank.
Is my experience unique, I doubt it as I am a fairly good player and am really struggling to make balls that previously required no thought. I can see these tables causing young people to forget about pool and try another sport as the difficulty factor would keep player satisfaction to a minimum. I look around me and see lesser players come in and seem to miss 75% of their shots - not good for their confidence or enjoyment of time spent on these tables. Curious as to what experienced players feel about these tables compared to "old standard" Brunswicks etc. BTW- I am up for this challenge, but at times I know that i hit a ball "right" and these tables still reject- a bit frustrating, to say the least. Is this really good for pool?

IMO they're terrible for pool, and that's coming from a Chinese 8 ball player. At least on a C8 table, the ball goes in if you hit the pocket. That's not true of all Diamonds. Also, they seem to gobble up balls along the rails, only when hit softly. So it becomes a slow rolling game. Short banks, way to fast rails....These tables are not made for straight pool, only rotation games and one pocket. If I get a flat angle on a C8 table, I feel completely confident in absolutely S L A M M I N G the ball in the pocket. On a Diamond or shimmed table, I have to consider the distance to the rail and sometimes pass such a shot up, because the pocket rejects the ball if I hit it square in the facing. You can always tell when a table is set up for one pocket or mediocre rotation players who want tight tables..Do you know how? Just look at the side pockets! When the side pockets are so tight they are practically taken out of the game, you know that an idiot set up the table (or at least the guy took orders from idiots). That completely changes the table when it comes to straight pool! It would be very interesting to see what angles are possible into the side on various brands of tables...I think you'd then realize why straight pool becomes so tough on some and not others. I absolutely love that the sides are so big on c8 tables. It makes more shots possible and create more interesting ways of playing position.

In my experience the people who are most vocal in their support of tight tables are mediocre players. They know that the tight tables can slow down the runouts of the better players and give them an occational easy out when a ball is missed unexpectedly. They feel like they're in the game more, but they still lose. They falsely believe that a tight table makes their strokes better. That is wrong, all it does is to make them timid and tight. They learn which shots cannot be made, so if a guy comes in that is completely green they can outsmart him, by shooting safe instead.

Tight tables punish aggressive players with big strokes. They favour passive players with no stroke at all (relatively speaking and only short term, until the better players wise up). Realistically the better player wins anyway, because they can adjust just as well, and can make more shots. So all the tight pocket table does is to slow down and change the game.

I sometimes play on a shimmed GC and it has a lot of the same problems. It even has super bouncy rails like a Diamond, so it's not that much of a transition to go from that to a Diamond table. But I have to say, even if the Chinese 8 ball table is the tightest table ever made, at least it's fair. It doesn't reject good shots like shimmed GC's and Diamonds. That's why I'm slowly transitioning over to the Chinese tables (along with me preferring the all wool cloth and rails that are not all that responsive, but at least bank true)
 
Last edited:

mikemosconi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Appreciate the comments. I will go on record as saying that I do NOT like these Diamond tables. I think that as far as a factor contributing to the lack of pool enthusiasm in younger folks, these types of tables would certainly be a contributing factor. Many years ago as a young person, I began to really enjoy this game, as Brunswick home tables in the 1960's with larger pockets allowed one to get fairly proficient and thus have a sense of enjoyment and satisfaction in playing the game. I have stayed with it my entire life because of that. I think that most young people being introduced to the game on tables such as these would quickly walk away from the game because it would just not be fun at all to watch balls constantly rattle in the pocket jaws. I remember pool halls would usually have just ONE table up front near the desk with tighter pockets - there was a reason for having only one - the other 15 tables kept people coming BACK to the ROOM! For myself, a seasoned player, this is now a new challenge, I doubt that I would be playing and contributing today if my first experiences were on a table like these Diamonds.
 

mikemosconi

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Thank you Straight Pool 99, you make some great points that I completely agree with you in your assessments.
 

maha

from way back when
Silver Member
yep its not the really good or persnickety players that make the room money. its those that have fun and keep coming back. if you cant make lots of balls pool isnt fun.

since almost all pool room owners are poor business people they make major mistakes that cost them their whole success chances.

the nof course they arent there any more like old times. they hire a person at minimum wage who hates being there to be their ambassador. who gets paid the same if he is having a full pool room or an empty one. which do you think he prefers.
 

Island Drive

Otto/Dads College Roommate/Cleveland Browns
Silver Member
Appreciate the comments. I will go on record as saying that I do NOT like these Diamond tables. I think that as far as a factor contributing to the lack of pool enthusiasm in younger folks, these types of tables would certainly be a contributing factor. Many years ago as a young person, I began to really enjoy this game, as Brunswick home tables in the 1960's with larger pockets allowed one to get fairly proficient and thus have a sense of enjoyment and satisfaction in playing the game. I have stayed with it my entire life because of that. I think that most young people being introduced to the game on tables such as these would quickly walk away from the game because it would just not be fun at all to watch balls constantly rattle in the pocket jaws. I remember pool halls would usually have just ONE table up front near the desk with tighter pockets - there was a reason for having only one - the other 15 tables kept people coming BACK to the ROOM! For myself, a seasoned player, this is now a new challenge, I doubt that I would be playing and contributing today if my first experiences were on a table like these Diamonds.

I opened up a room in Denver early nineties. We were the first room in CO to have Diamond 9 footers. Welllllllllllllllll, they sucked. Tony of Tonys Hustlers set em up and did a great job, I think we had 16 and a four pack of bar tables and a snooker. Name was Rack Em, and they are still open. I did design the room for ''play''. Anywho, the shelfs were too deep, there were no holders for the rakes, we needed beads at every table for scoring, and the balls banked COMPLETELY different than all the tables in the last century or more. They have come a looooooooooooooong way since then and being at DCC this past year, I actually played on one that played better than any table I have ever played on since the early sixties. They finally got the rails, the pocket shelfs right and they at least have baskets for their alleged ball box area. :) the Artemis intercontinental 66 cushions play perfect. They bolt up to GC I's and on.
 

Michael Andros

tiny balls, GIANT pockets
Silver Member
In all fairness to Diamond, I will say, I have played on them more than a few times. And before playing on one the first time, I had heard both good and bad things about them, essentially in equal measure. My first impression was not particularly good. I did not like the rails. At all. They seemed to bank short. I didn't care for the way it rolled, although that may've simply been the cloth. I didn't like the pockets. Not because they were too tight, really, but more due to balls being spit out at times when pocket tightness really wasn't in play, such as down the rail at moderate speed. It was almost as if the corner rails had snooker-table-tendencies. I'm not really sure just what it was and I know I'm not articulating it very well but suffice to say I just did not have a very positive experience with it. Each subsequent time I played on one, my first impression merely became that much more set in stone. First impressions certainly do last. So all in all? No Diamonds for me. I'll stick with GCs.
 

ShortBusRuss

Short Bus Russ - C Player
Silver Member
In all fairness to Diamond, I will say, I have played on them more than a few times. And before playing on one the first time, I had heard both good and bad things about them, essentially in equal measure. My first impression was not particularly good. I did not like the rails. At all. They seemed to bank short. I didn't care for the way it rolled, although that may've simply been the cloth. I didn't like the pockets. Not because they were too tight, really, but more due to balls being spit out at times when pocket tightness really wasn't in play, such as down the rail at moderate speed. It was almost as if the corner rails had snooker-table-tendencies. I'm not really sure just what it was and I know I'm not articulating it very well but suffice to say I just did not have a very positive experience with it. Each subsequent time I played on one, my first impression merely became that much more set in stone. First impressions certainly do last. So all in all? No Diamonds for me. I'll stick with GCs.

Sounds to me like you have played on mostly Red Label Diamonds, before the rail downangle was fixed. This would explain every symptom you are describing.
 

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Sounds to me like you have played on mostly Red Label Diamonds, before the rail downangle was fixed. This would explain every symptom you are describing.
I agree here. Have played on both old, new and old modified to new specs and really like the newer ones. The standard pro-cut pockets are fine but you can't wipe-ur-feet when pocketing. That deep shelf makes the pockets seem tighter than they really are. Hit a few at DCC and those tables play really good.
 

Black-Balled

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Got to love talk to text... What a godsend Damn it!
damn it!
damn it!
damn it!
Damn it!
Damn it!
Damn it!
Damn it!
damn it!
damn it!
Damn it!
Damn it!
Damn it!
Damn it!
Enter a couple times...
Damn it!
Damn it!
damn it!
damn it!
damn it!
Damn it!
Enter a couple times...
damn it!
Enter a couple times...
Damn it!
Enter a couple times...
damn it!
Enter a couple times...
Damn it!
Enter a couple times...
Damn it!
Enter a couple times...
Damn it!
Enter a couple times...
Damn it!
Enter a couple times...
damn it!
Enter a couple times...
Damn it!
Enter a couple times...
Damn it!
Hit enter a couple times enter dinosaur definitely tougher than gold per ounce. I have my much easier to go from Diamond to Gold Crown come and go drown in the other way around
 
Top