9ft table in 14ft wide room

[daphish1]

Would like to get others thoughts on putting a 9ft table in a 14ft room. The room is really 14'5" but theres a rock fireplace that sticks out 4.5".

I currently have an 8' table centered in the space minus the fireplace but would really like to upgrade to a 9' table. Length of the room isn't a problem have about 24'

The picture is where my 59" cue hits the fireplace/wall and is 3 inches from the playing surface. So where the edge of the playing surface would be on a 9' table.

Anyone have a 9' table in a smaller space and switch to a shorter cue? Would like to hear your thoughts, regret putting the table in, etc.

 

[maha]

minimum is ten feet more than the table playing surface. so 14.5 just gets it. most shots wont be close just those that are straight across.

 

[genuino]

Hmm, a little tough. My room is 15.5' wide so I have about 68" clearance on both sides, my cues are 58". 14' should give you at least 60" on both sides. All based on my 9' Diamond Pro Am table, which is wider than most, since the sides extends 7" from the cushions. I'm want to say that it will be a little tight but without problems. If you cues are 58" or might good, remember that shooting frozen from the cushions your stroke will be not too long. At home I had to tear down a wall that used to be a closet, that how I got 15.5' wide, used to 13.5. This is a situation that needs to be considered carefully .
Hope I helped.

 

[Mikjary]

My room is the same size. I just jack up slightly. The only time it's even an issue is when I shoot straight across, which doesn't happen too often.

Get the 9 footer. You'll be fine with the room size.

Best,
Mike

 

[Ken_4fun]

Get the 9 footer.

You are at the minimum, but okay.

Ken

 

[3andstop]

Curious, what kind of wall is on the other side.

 

[pdcue]

14 feet = 168 inches.
nose to nose = 50 inches

168 - 50 = 118 inches

118/2 = 59 inches

I have done the Math

Dale

 

[DallasHopps]

I have a 9' GC3 in a room between 14-14.5 feet wide. My only regret is not getting a Diamond; the 1% of short stroke or jacked up shots I have to take because of the walls doesn't take away from the game.

 

[krupa]

Anyone have a 9' table in a smaller space and switch to a shorter cue? Would like to hear your thoughts, regret putting the table in, etc.

I have a Gold Crown in a space that is way too small for it. Two load-bearing poles and a staircase get in the way; also the idiot installers put the bare minimum clearance on one end, even though there was plenty of space to move the table away from that wall. So if the cue ball is on the foot rail, I have less room than you do in your picture for a backswing.

Anyway... I don't regret buying the table for a second; it's great for practice. However, I don't invite people over to play because there are just too many obstructions. Someday, I may get around to remodeling a little-used room in the house to fit the table... or just move.

If I were in your position, I wouldn't change tables. Hell, I'd probably go the other way, and get a nice 7' Diamond and have good clearance all the way around.

 

[Cornerman]

Would like to get others thoughts on putting a 9ft table in a 14ft room. The room is really 14'5" but theres a rock fireplace that sticks out 4.5".

I currently have an 8' table centered in the space minus the fireplace but would really like to upgrade to a 9' table. Length of the room isn't a problem have about 24'

The picture is where my 59" cue hits the fireplace/wall and is 3 inches from the playing surface. So where the edge of the playing surface would be on a 9' table.

Anyone have a 9' table in a smaller space and switch to a shorter cue? Would like to hear your thoughts, regret putting the table in, etc.

Do it.

My table in a room 14" 3", smaller than the ideal 14' 10" width. No issue. Yeah, you'll have the occassional tight shot, but you're never going to complain.

You can get a balanced short cue, but you probably won't use it.

Freddie <~~~ just do it

 

[ChicagoJoe]

14 feet = 168 inches.
nose to nose = 50 inches

168 - 50 = 118 inches

118/2 = 59 inches

I have done the Math

Dale

How are you getting 50 inches nose to nose? Playing surface on a 9 footer shoot be 54 inches, which would leave 57 inches on both sides. Not seeing how he could be that distance with a 59 inch cue.

 

[AF pool guy]

How are you getting 50 inches nose to nose? Playing surface on a 9 footer shoot be 54 inches, which would leave 57 inches on both sides. Not seeing how he could be that distance with a 59 inch cue.

WPA specifies 50x100 inches playing area.
http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/WPA_Tournament_Table_Equipment_Specifications


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Cornerman]

How are you getting 50 inches nose to nose? Playing surface on a 9 footer shoot be 54 inches, which would leave 57 inches on both sides. Not seeing how he could be that distance with a 59 inch cue.

Nope - 50" X 100"

 

[ChicagoJoe]

Nope - 50" X 100"

Don't mean to hi-jack the thread, but where do you start measuring then? You'd think you'd lose the same amount of inches in length and width, but that's not the case. 9 x 4.5 is 108 x 54, but playing surface is 100 x 50.

 

[daphish1]

Curious, what kind of wall is on the other side.

The other wall is the exterior of the house

 

[AtLarge]

Don't mean to hi-jack the thread, but where do you start measuring then? You'd think you'd lose the same amount of inches in length and width, but that's not the case. 9 x 4.5 is 108 x 54, but playing surface is 100 x 50.

You can "make sense" of the nominal 4½ x 9 nomenclature this way:

The playing surface is 50" wide. Add 2 inches on each side for the cushions and you have 54", or 4½ feet.

If you butted two 50x50 half-tables, with 2" cushions (but no rails other than the cushions), up against each other, you'd have 54" + 54" = 108" = 9 feet. Then eliminate the two cushions in the middle to create a real table, and you are down to 104", or the playing surface of 100" plus the two 2" cushions.

So there is a real 4½' measurement on the finished table but only sort of a nominal 9' measurement.

[Note: And it's possible that some cushions aren't precisely 2" wide.]

 

[Cornerman]

Don't mean to hi-jack the thread, but where do you start measuring then? You'd think you'd lose the same amount of inches in length and width, but that's not the case. 9 x 4.5 is 108 x 54, but playing surface is 100 x 50.

The term "9' table" or "9 x 4.5" aren't really supposed to match up with any real dimensions. However, the 4.5 "dimension" is close to the measurement of the width of the cloth including the cushions.

Freddie <~~~ it's all in the green

 

[ChicagoJoe]

You can "make sense" of the nominal 4½ x 9 nomenclature this way:

The playing surface is 50" wide. Add 2 inches on each side for the cushions and you have 54", or 4½ feet.

If you butted two 50x50 half-tables, with 2" cushions (but no rails other than the cushions), up against each other, you'd have 54" + 54" = 108" = 9 feet. Then eliminate the two cushions in the middle to create a real table, and you are down to 104", or the playing surface of 100" plus the two 2" cushions.

So there is a real 4½' measurement on the finished table but only sort of a nominal 9' measurement.

[Note: And it's possible that some cushions aren't precisely 2" wide.]

Get it now, thanks.

Don't feel so bad about this being confusing anymore.

 

[pdcue]

Don't mean to hi-jack the thread, but where do you start measuring then? You'd think you'd lose the same amount of inches in length and width, but that's not the case. 9 x 4.5 is 108 x 54, but playing surface is 100 x 50.

There was a hint in the phrase 'nose to nose'.

If that is unfamiliar to you - the "inside" edge of the cushion - ie the part the balls contact, is referred to as the 'nose'

HTH
Dale