................................
Last edited:
................................
- Thread starter runout1961
- Start date
You need about 14×21 to clear the walls for every shot
at 14'4" you are at the smallest possible room for a 9 footer. you could do it, but you'd probably be happier with an oversized 8.
You need 19' x 14' 10"
14' 4" is not going to be a comfortable width
18' on the length will make you go ape$hit crazy on this board for not telling you.
18 x 14' 4" is beautiful for an 8' table; it's tight for an oversized 8. You'll still go ape$hit crazy.
Freddie <~~~ really wonders
You've been on AZ for almost 6 years...and have never seen or read a thread about this very subject??....wow
And the Cobra strikes again. Yow!!!You've been on AZ for almost 6 years...and have never seen or read a thread about this very subject??....wow
Agree 100%. Anything less and you *might*, *sometimes* need a shorty.
Its pretty easy to calculate... play area (length) + desired cue length (x2) + max. backswing (x 2)
100 + 114 + 14 = 228 inches length.
50 + 114 + 14 = 178 inches width.
mamics <------- Has a horrible stroke, but good math. :thumbup:
I have 19' 7" and only about 2" away from the wall at each side using a standard cue. So I believe that 19' 5" will be the minimum to play without affecting your game.
Just a side note, obstacles around the room will affect your game and playing experience negatively. So, I would say Just go with 8 footer or even smaller.
I've been here well under a year and even I have answered this question a half dozen times...probably differently each time but that's how engineers are.
A 9 footer's playing surface is 100 x 50. The table overall is 114 x 64. Worst case is your bridge at the edge of the table and a 58 inch cue. Add 116 (2 x 58) to overall size.
230 x 180 inches or 19' 2" x 15' is min to never worry about the wall.
If you really have 57 inch cues and are willing to cut it a little closer allowing 6 inch backstroke from edge of playing surface then 226 x 176 or 18'10" x 14' 8".
You have 216 x 173. Take away twice the 57" cue and twice the 6" stroke (126 total)and you can comfortably have a 90 x 47 inch max playing surface. A 9 footer would be a really bad idea.
An oversize 8 is a 92 x 46 playing field which would be very borderline and not something I'd want to live with
.An 8 footer is 88 x 44 so no problem there and the best choice....as long as you can live with chairs in the corners only.
A 9 footer's playing surface is 100 x 50. The table overall is 114 x 64. Worst case is your bridge at the edge of the table and a 58 inch cue. Add 116 (2 x 58) to overall size.
230 x 180 inches or 19' 2" x 15' is min to never worry about the wall.
If you really have 57 inch cues and are willing to cut it a little closer allowing 6 inch backstroke from edge of playing surface then 226 x 176 or 18'10" x 14' 8".
You have 216 x 173. Take away twice the 57" cue and twice the 6" stroke (126 total)and you can comfortably have a 90 x 47 inch max playing surface. A 9 footer would be a really bad idea.
An oversize 8 is a 92 x 46 playing field which would be very borderline and not something I'd want to live with
.An 8 footer is 88 x 44 so no problem there and the best choice....as long as you can live with chairs in the corners only.
Last edited:
Ask us which is better, we love answering that one just as much.
he he.. I wish I could have either.. :grin:
You've been on AZ for almost 6 years...and have never seen or read a thread about this very subject??....wow
or know how to use google or know how to use az search apparently lol
The chart you posted from Brunswick is a sales tool rather than useful, accurate information. As others have pointed out, it is bogus.
When I build my dream house, I'm going to have at least 15' x 20'.
I shoe-horned a 9' table in a space with obstacles thinking I would be moving soon or renovating the existing house to fit it. And besides, I thought, it's just for practice anyway... I can just move the cue ball if the pole gets in the way...
Yeah right... besides being unable to make myself move the cue ball when I get pole-hooked, you have no idea how :angry:annoying:angry: those obstructions get to be when they stop a run.
I don't regret buying the table but I'm chomping at the bit to get it into a bigger space.
I shoe-horned a 9' table in a space with obstacles thinking I would be moving soon or renovating the existing house to fit it. And besides, I thought, it's just for practice anyway... I can just move the cue ball if the pole gets in the way...
Yeah right... besides being unable to make myself move the cue ball when I get pole-hooked, you have no idea how :angry:annoying:angry: those obstructions get to be when they stop a run.
I don't regret buying the table but I'm chomping at the bit to get it into a bigger space.
I cant think of anything worse than playing pool on a table with obstructions or having to use a shorty cue. My friend has a 7 foot table that suffers both issues, I wont play there.
I had an 8 foot (snooker) table - no obstructions / never needed a shorty. Sold it to buy a 9 foot pool table - very rarely need to use a shorty (table ends to wall a little tight, table sides have got no space issues at all) - I think the 9 footer with very occasional shorty is awesome for me / my room compared to having my old 8 footer.
Horses for courses though...
Cheers.
Actually John, you could put a 9' table in there and play on it. You have barely the minimum sized space to do it. But forget about putting any furniture in that room. Even bar stools will be in the way. People sitting on them will have to get up and move to let you shoot. And you may have to move the stool out of the way. Now, as others have said a normal sized 8' table will work just fine with room for bar stools. A good eight footer is a nice compromise, especially if you also play on bar tables.
Lassiter used to practice on an 8' table, so he could work on his tight position play. It's a lot more crowded on that table. His quote when asked why he practiced on an 8' table, "So I can get my cue ball." He was only the best position player in the world back then! So I'm guessing that his practice on the 8' table worked for him.