14.1 Easier on a 10' than a 9'?

[Johnnyt]

Since most agree that playing 14.1 on a 7' table is harder than playing it on an9' because of so many clusters I got to thinking that a 10' table could be easier than a 9' for 14.1. My thinking is good 14.1 players rarely need to shoot long shots back to the head of the table. Probably 85% of their shots are in the foot corners and about 10% in the sides, plus there is more room to get around balls and more of an angle to the sides. Anyone agree? Johnnyt

 

[banged up]

not a 14.1 player by any means but the biggest records for long runs were set on smaller tables. Most older players agree that the 10 footers were considerably tougher than 9 foot.

 

[sfleinen]

Could our barbox JT be stepping outside the box?

Since most agree that playing 14.1 on a 7' table is harder than playing it on an9' because of so many clusters I got to thinking that a 10' table could be easier than a 9' for 14.1. My thinking is good 14.1 players rarely need to shoot long shots back to the head of the table. Probably 85% of their shots are in the foot corners and about 10% in the sides, plus there is more room to get around balls and more of an angle to the sides. Anyone agree? Johnnyt

JT:

I would have to agree with "banged up" -- although yes, there would be less clustering on a 10-footer due to the balls having more horizontal real estate to move around, the distances involved are much greater. When moving from a 7-footer, to an 8-footer, to a 9-footer, to finally, a 10-footer, the slate real estate increases exponentially, and so do the shot distances.

I shot a couple times on an old Brunswick 10-footer that a friend had in Norfolk, VA (where I was stationed in the U.S. Navy in the mid-1980s). This old Brunswick even had cigarette ashtrays built-in to the "steel catcher's mitt" outside the corner pockets (they were molded-in right from the factory). I gotta tell ya, even though I'd been "raised" on a 9-footer, that 10-footer threw me for a loop for a while, until I bore-down and focused on my fundamentals and aiming. It was not unlike the "shock" I experienced when I shot on a snooker table for the first time.

I can definitely see why Earl Strickland is a staunch advocate of "weeding out the real pros" (his phraseology) by having them play on a 10-footer, like he supposedly owns. Me personally, I would *LOVE* to own one of those old Brunswick 10-footers with the nostalgic cigarette ashtray cut-outs in the corner pockets' steel catcher's mitt. I'd have to completely clean out my garage for it, but hey, ya gotta do what ya gotta do for a prize like this!

-Sean

P.S.: I'm seeing more and more threads by you asking first about the differences between a barbox and an 8-footer, then the differences between an 8-footer and a 9-footer, and now this one -- asking about the differences between a 9-footer and a 10-footer. Could our barbox Johnny be thinking about stretching his wings into ever larger tables? (J/K, of course.)

 

[Johnnyt]

JT:

I would have to agree with "banged up" -- although yes, there would be less clustering on a 10-footer due to the balls having more horizontal real estate to move around, the distances involved are much greater. When moving from a 7-footer, to an 8-footer, to a 9-footer, to finally, a 10-footer, the slate real estate increases exponentially, and so do the shot distances.

I shot a couple times on an old Brunswick 10-footer that a friend had in Norfolk, VA (where I was stationed in the U.S. Navy in the mid-1980s). This old Brunswick even had cigarette ashtrays built-in to the "steel catcher's mitt" outside the corner pockets (they were molded-in right from the factory). I gotta tell ya, even though I'd been "raised" on a 9-footer, that 10-footer threw me for a loop for a while, until I bore-down and focused on my fundamentals and aiming. It was not unlike the "shock" I experienced when I shot on a snooker table for the first time.

I can definitely see why Earl Strickland is a staunch advocate of "weeding out the real pros" (his phraseology) by having them play on a 10-footer, like he supposedly owns. Me personally, I would *LOVE* to own one of those old Brunswick 10-footers with the nostalgic cigarette ashtray cut-outs in the corner pockets' steel catcher's mitt. I'd have to completely clean out my garage for it, but hey, ya gotta do what ya gotta do for a prize like this!

-Sean

P.S.: I'm seeing more and more threads by you asking first about the differences between a barbox and an 8-footer, then the differences between an 8-footer and a 9-footer, and now this one -- asking about the differences between a 9-footer and a 10-footer. Could our barbox Johnny be thinking about stretching his wings into ever larger tables? (J/K, of course.)

Oversized 8 is the longest that will fit on my patio. When I see a deal on one I'll be stepping on up town. Johnnyt

 

[Mr441]

There's no comparison, the 10 footer is much tougher to play on. I've run over a 100 a few times on a 9 footer, I don't think I ever ran more than 50 on a 10 footer. Just look at the record runs and you'll see the difference. I believe the highest ever on a 10 footer is Mosconi's 353. Meanwhile a lot of players have run over 400 on a 9 foot table.

 

[markpatrick]

My friend runs 50-60 on a 10 footer all the time

There's no comparison, the 10 footer is much tougher to play on. I've run over a 100 a few times on a 9 footer, I don't think I ever ran more than 50 on a 10 footer. Just look at the record runs and you'll see the difference. I believe the highest ever on a 10 footer is Mosconi's 353. Meanwhile a lot of players have run over 400 on a 9 foot table.

My friend plays exclusively on a 10 footer and has consistant ball runs of 50-60 on that table. He should have a good chance at the DCC? But I think he is only playing banks there. Dont think they have a 14.1 competition?

 

[Mr441]

My friend plays exclusively on a 10 footer and has consistant ball runs of 50-60 on that table. He should have a good chance at the DCC? But I think he is only playing banks there. Dont think they have a 14.1 competition?

They do have a straight pool challenge at the DCC, it's run bob Bob Jewitt.

 

[Cameron Smith]

You may get fewer clusters, but you would have to be playing tight position. Players wouldn't be able to shoot themselves out of as many traps on a 10 footer as they do on 9 foot table.

 

[rbpwrd240]

Since most agree that playing 14.1 on a 7' table is harder than playing it on an9' because of so many clusters I got to thinking that a 10' table could be easier than a 9' for 14.1. My thinking is good 14.1 players rarely need to shoot long shots back to the head of the table. Probably 85% of their shots are in the foot corners and about 10% in the sides, plus there is more room to get around balls and more of an angle to the sides. Anyone agree? Johnnyt

Judging by your new photo and your mentoning of a bar box both in your sig and your post Im thinking maybe your playing alot more on 7 footers or you got your butt kicked on a 7 footer and your realizing they aint no joke. LOL

Get a guy form a 7 footer on a 9 and you can rob him, let him take you over there and he might just rob you. "road player"