I dont know if it's just me...when I practice on a brunswick in my home pool room...I feel fine..able to run balls..but when I'm playing in my league in the city where everytable is a diamond table..I struggle and struggle..maybe its still mental...maybe not?..but does playing on a diamond table vs. a brunswick table make a world of difference?...then again if you are indeed a great player, it shouldn't make a difference right?
14.1 on diamond vs brunswick table
- Thread starter BigAL
- Start date
Brunsw. vs Diamond
FIRST!
(always wanted to do that)
I'm in a dilemma (not unlike you Al) that has forced me to play on both GC's and Diamonds. And yes, playing straight pool on a Diamond is more difficult given all variables being even - same cloth type, same pocket opening width, etc. My dilemma is that there are 2 rooms nearby that have 20-22 GC's. However, the room owners really don't take professional care of the tables. ie unlevel tables, uneven rails, rails still covered with 80/20 felt while the bed is Simonis, no ball polisher, no lines on the table for 14.1 players. In addition to this, these rooms don't have a daily rate. So playing 20 hours of pool a week at 4.50 an hour comes to 4.5 x 80...carry the 1...360 samolians a month. They're recreational rooms for high school kids and bangers mainly.
Now there's a 3rd room nearby that offers an $8 daily rate from 11-6 everyday, the tables are in 95-99% shape all the time. Here's where the dilemma comes in...they're Diamonds! So, I bit the bullet for the longest time and shelled out thousands to play on GC's until about 3 months ago. Hey, I have bills too, so instead of continuously handing over a good portion of my check to the GC room owners, I started playing on the Diamonds. When I say this I mean it - I HATED Diamond table up till about 3 weeks ago. You really have to spend a few months getting used to playing on them after a lifetime of playing on GC's, but when you do they're not too bad. You won't play as well as you did on a GC. Won't have as high a run on them, but they're not 100% bad. This is only MY opinion of them, but there has been many other discussions of a similar nature in other rooms.
The differences that I see; the pocket shelf is a little deeper. A ball that would barely drop on a GC will sit in the jaws and smile back at you on a Diamond. A second difference is the cushion angle is different from a GC to a Diamond, causing balls to come off the cushion at a different angle. Diamond has finally offered a "fix" for this and if you're interested seek out RealKingCobra on AZ as he's a table mechanic that performs these fixes. And no, it's not something you can do yourself - it requires special tools and the process is top secret. I believe if you're allowed to see the fix process take place you have to sign paperwork stating you won't divulge the method. I'm totally serious. And I think that's about it. But there's a whole lot of threads in the Main Forum that have addressed this difference and a lot of knowledgeable folks who have chimed in, so if you're curious just do a search.
High run on a GC: 80
High run on a Diamond: 54
Although I did have a 53 on a double shimmed Diamond yesterday. And that's like a 200 on a GC!
Ron F
FIRST!
(always wanted to do that)
I'm in a dilemma (not unlike you Al) that has forced me to play on both GC's and Diamonds. And yes, playing straight pool on a Diamond is more difficult given all variables being even - same cloth type, same pocket opening width, etc. My dilemma is that there are 2 rooms nearby that have 20-22 GC's. However, the room owners really don't take professional care of the tables. ie unlevel tables, uneven rails, rails still covered with 80/20 felt while the bed is Simonis, no ball polisher, no lines on the table for 14.1 players. In addition to this, these rooms don't have a daily rate. So playing 20 hours of pool a week at 4.50 an hour comes to 4.5 x 80...carry the 1...360 samolians a month. They're recreational rooms for high school kids and bangers mainly.
Now there's a 3rd room nearby that offers an $8 daily rate from 11-6 everyday, the tables are in 95-99% shape all the time. Here's where the dilemma comes in...they're Diamonds! So, I bit the bullet for the longest time and shelled out thousands to play on GC's until about 3 months ago. Hey, I have bills too, so instead of continuously handing over a good portion of my check to the GC room owners, I started playing on the Diamonds. When I say this I mean it - I HATED Diamond table up till about 3 weeks ago. You really have to spend a few months getting used to playing on them after a lifetime of playing on GC's, but when you do they're not too bad. You won't play as well as you did on a GC. Won't have as high a run on them, but they're not 100% bad. This is only MY opinion of them, but there has been many other discussions of a similar nature in other rooms.
The differences that I see; the pocket shelf is a little deeper. A ball that would barely drop on a GC will sit in the jaws and smile back at you on a Diamond. A second difference is the cushion angle is different from a GC to a Diamond, causing balls to come off the cushion at a different angle. Diamond has finally offered a "fix" for this and if you're interested seek out RealKingCobra on AZ as he's a table mechanic that performs these fixes. And no, it's not something you can do yourself - it requires special tools and the process is top secret. I believe if you're allowed to see the fix process take place you have to sign paperwork stating you won't divulge the method. I'm totally serious. And I think that's about it. But there's a whole lot of threads in the Main Forum that have addressed this difference and a lot of knowledgeable folks who have chimed in, so if you're curious just do a search.
High run on a GC: 80
High run on a Diamond: 54
Although I did have a 53 on a double shimmed Diamond yesterday. And that's like a 200 on a GC!
Ron F
Last edited:
Very interesting topic. I have noticed a difference as well, although I rarely get to play on a Diamond, but I agree with Ron's observations. I play mostly on GC's, and an occasional Gandy Big G. The few times I played on Diamonds, I actually liked the way they played. They seemed very consistent, but getting used to the a fore mentioned pocket issues, would take some getting used to for sure.
I will defer to others who have more experience with Diamonds. I have been a bit afraid to play on them down at the Derby because they are so much more difficult than the loose Gold Crowns and Anniversaries that I usually play on. The first day down at Derby this year, with new cloth, they were very nice to play on. I started thinking it would be nice to play on these all the time. They were by no means as easy as my usual tables, but they were not too bad.
I play on both GC3's and a Diamond Pro. I rattle more balls in the end pockets on the Diamond, but it teaches me to be more exacting on long "up table" shots. The pockets are tighter on the Diamond Pro, I cant cheat the pocket nearly as much to achieve position. I like the GC3's mainly because of the score counters and auto ball returns. However I do think playing on the Diamond Pro forces me to concentrate more on every shot and not take anything for granted however basic of a shot might seem. Then when I get back to the GC3 I get some carryover from lessons learned.
-Dennis
-Dennis
Diamonds are harder. It took me along time to get used to them, but now I prefer them to BGCs.
Most of my straight pool runs end on missed shots, that if made would have continued the run. This is very frustrating because it basically shows that I'm playing the game correctly, but unable to make the "critical' shot. I don't have that problem as much on a GC, as a result my confidence it increased and the probability of a higher run goes up.
Ideally, I would like to play on an easier table occasionally. Unfortunately, that is not possible for me.
When it comes to one pocket, the Diamond table is definately preferable to a GC in my book.
Most of my straight pool runs end on missed shots, that if made would have continued the run. This is very frustrating because it basically shows that I'm playing the game correctly, but unable to make the "critical' shot. I don't have that problem as much on a GC, as a result my confidence it increased and the probability of a higher run goes up.
Ideally, I would like to play on an easier table occasionally. Unfortunately, that is not possible for me.
When it comes to one pocket, the Diamond table is definately preferable to a GC in my book.
Diamonds and GC's play have certain differences in their playing characteristics, it's a matter of preference and not fact as to which is better. For Straight Pool I prefer Gold Crowns. Given the same pocket size, say the 4.5" that is the standard Diamond pocket, it just seems to me that the deep shelf on the Diamonds just don't allow for the proper amount if wiggle room to cheat the pocket for proper 14.1 play that a Gold Crown does. Anything smaller than 4.5'' and you really can't play proper straight pool on a Diamond at all.
This is obviously just one player's opinion. They are the two best tables on the market, some just prefer one over the other.
This is obviously just one player's opinion. They are the two best tables on the market, some just prefer one over the other.
The only time I play on Diamonds is the DCC or the US Open 1pocket event and I always suffer trying to adjust. For me, it's mostly the boingie rails and not so much how tough they are, because I usually play on a pretty finicky GC. The other thing is the balls being relatively new (bigger/heavier) and clean/polished. To me, that is the key adjustment to be made.
Lou Figueroa
I agree with your point about a player being able to cheat/work the pocket a bit. There is no point to making a table too tough because that's not pool, it is something else when you lose the ability to work your position based upon what side of the pocket you're playing. I'm not saying they should be big honking pockets, but as I told Mark Griffith, after watching several pro players in Vegas last year miss the same shot over and over because they needed to work the pocket for position, a table can be unfair.
Lou Figueroa
Absolutely, Lou. Particularly in 14.1 it is essential that you can work to portions of the pocket, including sometimes part of the point on certain shots. Many players just don't understand how integral this is to playing straight pool properly, the way it was meant to be played at the expert level. I run across the same thing when asked why pockets need to be bigger for straight pool than other games such as 9 Ball. The ability to cheat the pocket is integral to straight pool when expertly played.
Last edited:
As a general comparison, IMHO Diamonds demand a finer level of mechanical execution. Having owed a D/P since the middle 90's, my average runs have never equaled those on my GCI owned the prior twenty years. But, I believe a Diamond will ulimately force you sharpen all aspects of your execution. And, that's a good thing.
I'm torn. I kinda see the point of a table having pockets big enough to cheat; however, if you get on the correct side of the ball to begin with, you wouldn't have to cheat anything.
That's the thing, in straight pool yes you do. You can be on the correct side of the ball and you still need the ability to play to certain portions of a pocket. Position play in straight pool is a lot more demanding than simply getting on the correct side. While you can run out most racks of 9 or 10 ball by simply falling on the correct side for each shot, that's not enough to get you very far in straight pool. Additionally, in 14.1 very often the only way to "fall on the correct side" for the next shot is to be able to cheat the pocket.
Last edited:
All I do is play 14.1 --- it's the only thing I play. Believe me when I tell you this:
You guys are arguing a moot point because the last time I checked--- everyone plays on the same table.
If the pockets were just over 2.25" wide--- the best player is still going to win. If you can't cheat the pocket in order to do X, Y or Z--- big deal--- take what you get and then send your opponent to the short rail under the rack or the opposite position in the kitchen.
Yeah - diamonds are harder. Some golf courses are also tougher than others. Some bowling alleys are also oiled with a tougher pattern. Some might think they could have made that serve return in tennis if the court were grass instead of clay.
If you can't cheat a pocket--- big deal--- neither can your opponent so it cancels out.
Spider, even with 4" pockets the table is the same for both players. I mean, every table, whether the pockets are 5", the cloth is nappy and the rails dead, is the same for both players. But what we are discussing here is each person's opinion or preferences on which table is better suited to their vision of how 14.1 should be played.
Just because the table is the same for both players doesn't mean it is the correct set up for straight pool. Frankly, IMO pockets that are too small/shelf too deep to work give a certain advantage to the lesser player in that it takes away some of the better player's ability to play pinpoint position. In my vision of 14.1 it is essential to be able to work the pockets to some extent to play the game properly.
Just because the table is the same for both players doesn't mean it is the correct set up for straight pool. Frankly, IMO pockets that are too small/shelf too deep to work give a certain advantage to the lesser player in that it takes away some of the better player's ability to play pinpoint position. In my vision of 14.1 it is essential to be able to work the pockets to some extent to play the game properly.
Last edited:
Tight
Practicing on a tight table makes sense, of course. But playing a straight pool match on one doesn't to me. It changes the dynamics of the game from offense-driven to defense-driven. It inhibits confidence and risk, which is what leads to exciting matches with long runs. 3 balls...safe....4 balls...safe...safe....safe...2 balls....safe isn't my idea of a fun, interesting or entertaining way to get to 100 or 150. That's just my opinion. If the logic is that whatever the pocket dimensions are, it's equal for both players, why not have them bigger and have an offensive slugfest?
This brings up something I witnessed yesterday at the poolroom. Where I play there are 3 front tables that have tight pockets. #1 is 4", #2 is triple shimmed and #3 is double shimmed. A group of 4 guys always plays partner straight pool on #3 every Saturday. Yesterday, however, their table was taken so they played next to me on a table with unshimmed pockets. All day long one guy was whining about how big the pockets were, referring to them as sewers, among other things. And all day long he'd make a few balls and then miss. Any idea why someone who can't pocket balls well would want to play on a tight table and complain about loose pockets? Isn't that the definition of masochist?
Ron F
Practicing on a tight table makes sense, of course. But playing a straight pool match on one doesn't to me. It changes the dynamics of the game from offense-driven to defense-driven. It inhibits confidence and risk, which is what leads to exciting matches with long runs. 3 balls...safe....4 balls...safe...safe....safe...2 balls....safe isn't my idea of a fun, interesting or entertaining way to get to 100 or 150. That's just my opinion. If the logic is that whatever the pocket dimensions are, it's equal for both players, why not have them bigger and have an offensive slugfest?
This brings up something I witnessed yesterday at the poolroom. Where I play there are 3 front tables that have tight pockets. #1 is 4", #2 is triple shimmed and #3 is double shimmed. A group of 4 guys always plays partner straight pool on #3 every Saturday. Yesterday, however, their table was taken so they played next to me on a table with unshimmed pockets. All day long one guy was whining about how big the pockets were, referring to them as sewers, among other things. And all day long he'd make a few balls and then miss. Any idea why someone who can't pocket balls well would want to play on a tight table and complain about loose pockets? Isn't that the definition of masochist?
Ron F
I am not so sure I would go so far as to say you should be able to cheat the pocket -- but I would say that you should be able to hit anywhere inside the pocket, at speed, and have the ball drop.
Lou Figueroa
Yes, it will make you more precise. But then playing with pool balls on a snooker table would that too, no? It is a delicate balancing act.
Lou Figueroa
ah, yeah, BUT: no one really plays perfect pool. You are always playing the percentages and playing two-way shots and leaving yourself insurance balls and figuring speed based upon missing the balls you're trying to run into.
It is far more than being on the right side of the ball. Sooooo much more.
Lou Figueroa
Both player playing on the same table is not the point. You could both be on a snooker table -- so what? That is not pool and certainly not 14.1. It is something else.
Lou Figueroa