1990 US Open Sigel & Varner - 5 Inch Pockets

[iusedtoberich]

Go to 6:45 or so. Grady calls it a "tough-pocketed table" and that Sigel's shot down the long rail was very missable.

And of course, Sigel hits it with tons of body movement and uses ALL of the pocket. Would have missed by a mile on a modern WNT table.

Weird, maybe he had a mental slip or something? Grady was used to playing on triple shimmed GC's because his main game was one pocket.

I think Sigel's shot at 6:45 would have went on Emily's Diamond tables, however, in tournament new cloth/ball conditions.

 

[iusedtoberich]

Can anyone figure out what this rack area is? Looks almost like two spots? I'm lost what I'm seeing.

 

[Billard puzzle]

Gehen Sie ungefähr zu 6:45. Grady nennt es einen „harten Tisch“ und dass Sigels Schuss an der langen Bande sehr leicht zu übersehen war.

Und natürlich trifft Sigel ihn mit enormer Körperbewegung und nutzt die GANZE Tasche. Auf einem modernen WNT-Tisch hätte er ihn meilenweit verfehlt.

Sigel on his Prime, will be the World Number 1 Today.

 

[skogstokig]

Speaking of pocket size.............

They played this match on a GCIII with 5 inch pockets. Grady Mathews mentioned how they were 5 inch pockets. And then he called them tight pockets. I couldn't believe how big they were, almost buckets!

Was this the norm for tournaments back around 1990? If they played on this nowadays would anybody ever miss???

r/DCP

i did not watch the clip but grady was known for his deadpan comedy. one time he referred to the GC pockets as "cavernous apertures"..

 

[skogstokig]

true, but that was almost 20 years ago

have you seen any contemporary gambling matches from the philippines? cloth that looks like it's been flipped ten times, talcum piles on the rails, humid as fk.

 

[DrCue'sProtege]

Can anyone figure out what this rack area is? Looks almost like two spots? I'm lost what I'm seeing.

If you watch the match when they scratch on the break the 1B is spotted just above the 9B. That's why they had two spots. They played safe off the 1B about three times during the match. Must have been a rule for the 1990 US Open.

 

[mikemosconi]

Standard for Brunswick factory pockets on all tables mfg. from day one over 150 years ago has always been 4 7/8 corner minimums - they could be found up to 5 1/8 corners and that was what everybody played on as standard until Diamond pro cuts.
Anything less in pocket size before Diamond pro cuts were just purposely made smaller by room owners or TDs - this was true of Gandys , AESchmidt, Murray, Olhausen, etc. Etc.

Great players of any era would have adjusted - smaller standardized pockets just insure that most youngsters who might show up probably won’t enjoy it as much and may not take to the game- any doubt- open your eyes at most rooms that are left in America — when you locate one.

 

[T411]

I have a feeling that Grady would be amazed at the pool being played today.

I also think Grady would still be regarded as the same player if he grew up playing on the today’s tables. - great players adjust.

 

[DeeDeeCues]

I also think Grady would still be regarded as the same player if he grew up playing on the today’s tables. - great players adjust.

Oh absolutely. I was just imagining him being dropped into the current game without seeing the years of progression leading up to it.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Can anyone figure out what this rack area is? Looks almost like two spots? I'm lost what I'm seeing.

View attachment 846393

The far spot looks like it's the foot spot. The nearer heavy spot is a mystery. It's too close to the foot spot for a second spotted ball. You can see all of the positions of the nine ball rack. I wonder if they were tapping/training the table.

 

[garczar]

Go to 6:45 or so. Grady calls it a "tough-pocketed table" and that Sigel's shot down the long rail was very missable.

And of course, Sigel hits it with tons of body movement and uses ALL of the pocket. Would have missed by a mile on a modern WNT table.

So what?? Had 4" pockets been the standard back then the same players would have been champions. You adapt to what is the standard of the time. You can't compare 80's and 2020's pool on equal terms. Sigel is one of the straightest shooters to ever play. His own peers said that about him. Had little wickets been standard then he would have been a monster then too.