Archer's View on Diamond tables
- Thread starter tryhonesty07
- Start date
I think the shot was just plain missed
Many times if I am playing hard and miss a shot that I should make I will try to blame it on something, lord knows it could not have been my fault.
Johnny is a great player but there was plenty of pocket to the north
.
Archers View
I have stated here a few times that I wished they had just kept making and playing on Gold Crowns because they were the tables I learned to kick and bank on and Diamonds played so much different I didn't think I would ever get used to them.
After a year or so of playing more on the Diamonds than the GCs I find that some of it is the table but some of it was my being lazy with mechanics.
I can get away with playing a lot looser on a GC than I can on Diamonds.
Now that I figured out how much is my fault I have also found that I can bank balls that are impossible on GCs and that I can be just as accurate on my running English kicks or no English.
I am still struggling with the reverse English banks and kicks because they take so well, but I am sure if I ever figure it out I will be glad I can have those shots in my arsenal.
I never did have much faith in most 2 rail back up banks on GCs , maybe it was just the tables I was playing on but they were very inconsistent and some tables just flattened out no matter what you did with speed, English or stroke?
Everyone has a moment after a critical miss when they can't believe what happened .
I would hope that we as a major pool group understand that better than anyone and don't decide to crucify Johhny or Earl or anyone who is frustrated especially if it was just a mutter and not a 10 page scathing dissertation about the equipment.
I have stated here a few times that I wished they had just kept making and playing on Gold Crowns because they were the tables I learned to kick and bank on and Diamonds played so much different I didn't think I would ever get used to them.
After a year or so of playing more on the Diamonds than the GCs I find that some of it is the table but some of it was my being lazy with mechanics.
I can get away with playing a lot looser on a GC than I can on Diamonds.
Now that I figured out how much is my fault I have also found that I can bank balls that are impossible on GCs and that I can be just as accurate on my running English kicks or no English.
I am still struggling with the reverse English banks and kicks because they take so well, but I am sure if I ever figure it out I will be glad I can have those shots in my arsenal.
I never did have much faith in most 2 rail back up banks on GCs , maybe it was just the tables I was playing on but they were very inconsistent and some tables just flattened out no matter what you did with speed, English or stroke?
Everyone has a moment after a critical miss when they can't believe what happened .
I would hope that we as a major pool group understand that better than anyone and don't decide to crucify Johhny or Earl or anyone who is frustrated especially if it was just a mutter and not a 10 page scathing dissertation about the equipment.
This is true if the static itself caused the force, but what if the static just made more chalk cling to the cue ball? The only viable theory for the cause of skid/cling/kick/bad contact is chalk at the contact point, but static could be a contributing factor. Cloth could also be a factor if some kinds of cloth were less efficient at removing chalk during rolling.
I have seen conditions in which the cue ball seemed to collect a lot of chalk spots. Like maybe 20 to 30. Sometimes this was just after a thorough cleaning.
As for the opinion above that kick is due to players doing the wrong thing at the wrong time, I suppose it's true if you can expect a good player to know where all the chalk spots on the cue ball are relative to the contact point on each shot, but I doubt there is any player who knows that. There are some players who consider where the spot from the current shot will be or at least whether it is a potential problem.
I think I was keeping score on that run and I'm pretty sure it skidded. I'm also pretty sure the table was not at fault.I think the shot was just plain missed
I read the post you linked and as you said, you did not do an extensive test. What you seemed to not incorporate into the test is whether the matter picked up by the balls (pocket dye or whatever) would attract more chalk dust, hair/fiber at the spot of the smudge. It is very reasonable that any dust clinging to the smudge could cause a skid rather than the smudge itself.
I got mine at the local Tru-Value hardware. Check here for a retailer in your area:
http://www.brillianize.com/Pages/lookup.html
You can also buy it directly from them online. Click on the "Store" tab.
Last edited:
Prestine equipment, carpeted floor, heated room and one miss after 146 balls ?
Sorry, Willie Mosconi won't be griping over the equipment.
Sorry, Willie Mosconi won't be griping over the equipment.
i heard he cursed pool rooms over their equipment and refused to play on tables that didn't have 5" pockets. from what i've read there were some serious tantrums thrown by him
I'll just be damned ....
I never even thought about this but if you have basic electronic knowledge and study the design of the diamond to the GC this is solid science.
I never even thought about this but if you have basic electronic knowledge and study the design of the diamond to the GC this is solid science.
Dennis, it must have been that damn static electricity. Few people understand or know of this phenomenon. Static electricity is transferred from the carpet to the cloth. It is made worse by the players walking on it, and ultimately effects the balls. Toss in those European players showing up and playing in wool sweaters, and you have a big problem on your hands. This is especially true on Diamond tables, which are highly conductive and not well grounded. Over the years, this has caused me to miss thousands of shots - shots that shoulda went.
:killingme:
The older I get, the more pride I take in my creativity for blaming everything but myself.
If you're not dead on, a Diamond will exploit that or any other weakness quicker than any other table - and Diamonds don't discriminate. They care if your name is Efren, Corey, Earl, Shane, or Johnny - if you don't bear down on every shot, you'll pay for it.
I have not read the complete thread nor have I viewed the entire video but to me it felt like he may have still been steaming over the fact he didn't have enough pace on the cue ball entering the pack from a shot from the head rail moving two rails down table,two shots before the skid.Maybe his issue is more the Diamond table dictating the need to cinch balls rather than the ability to play a little loose and create opportunities.The skid just put him over the top.
I still believe there are some strange skid issues but they are related to cloth,ball composition and polishing compounds.
I like Diamond tables and I like Diamond as a company for the way they continue to listen to their users and keep trying to improve their product.
I still believe there are some strange skid issues but they are related to cloth,ball composition and polishing compounds.
I like Diamond tables and I like Diamond as a company for the way they continue to listen to their users and keep trying to improve their product.
Last edited:
Solid science?
I don't think so. A "solid science" investigation of this phenomenon would have to BEGIN with the question of how much charge COULD be stored on the surface of billiard balls. I have the feeling that the answer is: very little.
Very little charge means very little effect. Furthermore, differences in the table might be expected to change the RATE at which a charge might build up on the balls, but (at least given the same type of cloth) it shouldn't affect the FINAL extent of the build up.
And I couldn't see table construction mattering much--unless one had actually GROUNDING STRAPS on the cloth, and the other didn't--and even then it's still an open question without knowing about the conductance of the cloth and other factors.
As I stated earlier in the thread, if static charge is part of the equation, it's a matter of a small charge causing chalk dust to cling more to the balls--and that's probably more a function of the BALLS (and their finish, and what they were cleaned with, etc.) than it is of the table.
If it IS the table, then it's a "quirk." Perhaps different rubber on the rails, for example. Something that would collect charge (from the air) and impart it to the balls at different rates between different tables. It would still be small, however--if only because the balls are small and charge is collected and stored only on the surface of them. The fact remains that the practical limit on HOW MUCH charge the balls can hold is a function of the BALLS (and what's on their surface)--and, if in general the environment of tables can supply charge to balls, the only difference between tables will be the RATE at which the charge collects, and not the MAGNITUDE of the charge.
That's how I see it...and I've been thinking about it half the day :frown:
Just for fun, somebody oughta try this: If you think you can get a lot of static on your balls and your table, try to load them up with static the best you can, turn all the lights off and give your eyes a few minutes to adjust to the darkness, then slowly push one ball that you think has a high charge close to one that doesn't (because you just "grounded it" say, by touching it to a water pipe), and see if they make a tiny spark when they get extremely close.
I've heard the same thing. I prefer GCs. I don't like the way Diamonds bank and the way the cue ball comes off the rail with high english.
Not sure about the skid issues with Diamond. I've had my Brunswick Anniversary set up for 3 years now and I've miss maybe 7 balls due to skid. Is it more on Diamond table in that period of time?
OK - I read the whole thread.
Several interesting points. BTW - any skid has nothing to do with the table - it is a cloth and ball relationship (obviously).
I watched the video. The missed shot was shot rather hard. The 2nd time was shot much softer. He DID make contact with the 11 ball on the missed shot. Bob Jewett says he thinks the ball might have skidded. At the speed he hit it I don't think it could have skidded. I agree that most skids occur on soft shots.
But I did notice a couple of things. JA, in many of the previous shots was chalking 2- 4 times on each shot. That is building a lot of chalk up onj the tip. I believe he hit it 'funny' and is just did not seem as 'crisp' as he normally hits, almost a punch and not a smooth stroke. He played much faster on early part of match and really was slowing down at the end. It is possible all of the chalk on the tip had some affect on the outcome.
I am not totally convinced that chalk at the contact point is the culprit - but it could be. I think the culprit here is that the excess chalk + a punchy stroke did not have the cue ball rolling properly and it reacted with the object ball. If JA had overcut the ball a touch, it still would have gone it. So it is a combination of hitting the ball too full also.
As far as skidding, my belief is that most of it is caused by 'not enough friction' because of new cloth. more friction (used cloth and balls) will cause the ball to grab much faster - and go where it should. Have an object hit another object on a very slick surface - like ice - and you will see the hit object start off by sliding.
I am convinced that Aramith has done something to the finish of the red circle. It used to have a harder finish and would not scar up like the newer balls do.
Steve Mizerak used to complain about the Super Aramith Pros being skid prone (with the red circle) back in 1996 or 1997. (Senior event at JOB's)
JMHO
Mark Griffin
Several interesting points. BTW - any skid has nothing to do with the table - it is a cloth and ball relationship (obviously).
I watched the video. The missed shot was shot rather hard. The 2nd time was shot much softer. He DID make contact with the 11 ball on the missed shot. Bob Jewett says he thinks the ball might have skidded. At the speed he hit it I don't think it could have skidded. I agree that most skids occur on soft shots.
But I did notice a couple of things. JA, in many of the previous shots was chalking 2- 4 times on each shot. That is building a lot of chalk up onj the tip. I believe he hit it 'funny' and is just did not seem as 'crisp' as he normally hits, almost a punch and not a smooth stroke. He played much faster on early part of match and really was slowing down at the end. It is possible all of the chalk on the tip had some affect on the outcome.
I am not totally convinced that chalk at the contact point is the culprit - but it could be. I think the culprit here is that the excess chalk + a punchy stroke did not have the cue ball rolling properly and it reacted with the object ball. If JA had overcut the ball a touch, it still would have gone it. So it is a combination of hitting the ball too full also.
As far as skidding, my belief is that most of it is caused by 'not enough friction' because of new cloth. more friction (used cloth and balls) will cause the ball to grab much faster - and go where it should. Have an object hit another object on a very slick surface - like ice - and you will see the hit object start off by sliding.
I am convinced that Aramith has done something to the finish of the red circle. It used to have a harder finish and would not scar up like the newer balls do.
Steve Mizerak used to complain about the Super Aramith Pros being skid prone (with the red circle) back in 1996 or 1997. (Senior event at JOB's)
JMHO
Mark Griffin
I agree with you totally. A well hit ball with speed should drop and they just don't with that pocket angle.
Since the great Mosconi is mentioned, I never had the opportunity to watch him live but from people that have I think he got much more respect when he played compared to today's champions. Part of this has to do with the fact that he demanded this respect more... An old friend told me that in two occasions that he did watch him play you could not hear anything at the club except the sound of balls struck at this table.
I refer to this in order to repeat that today's champions don't get the respect they deserve..
Maybe today's champions should change their approach and stop being so easy to talk to...
If Johnny Archer with the character he has displayed over the years says the ball skidded then it did!
There is no reason why a guy like him would complain after an excellent brake of 146 on no logical basis.
He has left the best of impressions in Europe as well on numerous occasions..
You can watch the video, you can be in the room a few feet away from the table but still noone can know better than the player who actually sees the position from close.
For the third time: Any table company makes millions because champions like Johnny Archer bring people to the sport. People who buy their tables.
No table company has ever supported pool for free. It's all for the benefit of their buisness.
Therefore criticism can only be good for the sport.
They have the funds and the equipment, they should look into this thoroughly and present detailed arguments in their answer to the matter.
Petros
I refer to this in order to repeat that today's champions don't get the respect they deserve..
Maybe today's champions should change their approach and stop being so easy to talk to...
If Johnny Archer with the character he has displayed over the years says the ball skidded then it did!
There is no reason why a guy like him would complain after an excellent brake of 146 on no logical basis.
He has left the best of impressions in Europe as well on numerous occasions..
You can watch the video, you can be in the room a few feet away from the table but still noone can know better than the player who actually sees the position from close.
For the third time: Any table company makes millions because champions like Johnny Archer bring people to the sport. People who buy their tables.
No table company has ever supported pool for free. It's all for the benefit of their buisness.
Therefore criticism can only be good for the sport.
They have the funds and the equipment, they should look into this thoroughly and present detailed arguments in their answer to the matter.
Petros
Last edited:
I would say that the skids stopped b/c the cotton glove is a better wiping or cleaning material than nylon........nylon is not absorbant like cotton
a nylon glove will just smear the oils on the CB's surface around........the cotton will actually remove it...........
BUT HERE IS THE REAL ANSWER TO THE BALLS GAINING STATIC...........
Phenolic resin by design is a NON-CONDUCTIVE MATERIAL!!!!!
Conductive particles such as copper must be added to it for it to be a conductor.
A 100% solids phenolic material, shows minimal shrinkage during its thermal curing process. Minimal material shrinkage maintains exceptional tolerances in the material surface. The absence of conductive particles permits greater density and higher aspect ratios.
Non Porous and Non conductive......the material has high impact and shock ratings as we all know........the first kind of Phenolic product was BAKELITE by the way........phenolic is one of the most if not the most STABLE man made material in many categories such as thermal expansion and contraction, electrical insulation, resistance to breakdown by friction/heat/pressure etc, no porous makes it great for medical use also.....
What this is saying is b/c the phenolic resin has no conductive particles it permits the molecules in the resin to be closer together upon curing. Because of this extremely tight setting relationship of the molecules in the material its non existent conductive properties are reduced even further as the electrons are not capable of moving as is required for electric charge.
Second static electricty as stated before has much to do with the surface area..........being that we now know that phenolic resin has super low thermal expansion and contraction coupled with the fact that its high density of non conductive particles makes for as perfect a surface that can be obtained.
Further more being that the materials are very bad electrical conductors, upon collision even if a charge was somehow present it would not transfer from ball to ball which means it couldn't affect the shot.
with that info anyone should be able to firmly state that STATIC ELECTRICTY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BALL SKID!
MYTH BUSTED,
-Grey Ghost-
Last edited:
a pro-cut diamond (4.5"ish pockets) accepts balls hit down the rail just fine.
You just have to hit them well.