Bar Box pool; Is it "real" pool?

[ceebee]

Playing on any Pool Table is REAL Pool. Playing on a Bar Box is sometimes all that is offered around here. Most all Toiurnaments are on Bar Boxes, because that's an accepted format. Many of the League Players or low-Intermediates won't play on a Big Table Tournament.

The two things I don't like about Bar Box Pool Tables, is the accepted alllowance for error & most Bar Boxes are covered with green burlap bags.

Having said that, I will offer up a common saying "both players have to compete on the same field of play.

 

[JPB]

Yes, pool played on a bar box takes skill. Yes some gamble on it. So what? It is bad for the game and not real pool.

When was pool good? When it was played on 10' tables in places where pool was the priority, not a vehicle to sell a few more drinks. The 9' table that we now play on really should be called a bar box, let alone the 7' table. Yes the bar box lets crappy places have pool. Yes a lot of people pump quarter in the things. So what?

Playing on a bar table in a bar is an inferior experience. The fact people defend it by saying it is the only way many people are introduced to the game may be a true statement, but it is a statement that the sport is in real trouble, at least in the US. If the only way it can survive is on the bar table, there isn't much worth saving, and the game will die when people figure out something else to amuse themselves.

harsh? Yep. But maybe it is because I wish there were a nice place to play not a terrible bar with a bad pool table. Spare me the stories of nice places with bar tables, I am sure there are a few out there. But oh for a real pool hall with 10' tables and no music, etc....

Also, there have been about 75 million threads on here about what is the more difficult sport, golf or pool. One thing that has not been discussed is what really separates the sports and is the basis for golf's stability and popularity. (And right now many of the problems in golf, but that is another issue) The issue is the playing field. Golf's strength comes from its courses. This is what adds a sporting element to the game and makes it something people want to devote a lot of time and money to play. If all golf courses were identical the sport wouldn't be that great. Think about it, there were threads where pool players really wanted to take the time and spend the money to go play a relatively lousy golf course like Firestone. A tough course but one without any real architectural merit; one that represents the real problems with boring penal midcentury golf architecture. Pool on the other hand, seems to celebrate and encourage shrinking tables and more mindless games. That is not the recipe for success in the long term. Sure, maybe it helps for a little while, but if pool is confined to bar pool there is a problem. granted, a pool table can never present the interest of a great golf course since pool is meant to be played on good, consistent equipment and golf is meant to be played in variable conditions. But you can't dumb things down to the lowest denominator and expect it to work forever. Pool needs a return to the pool hall. If that can't be accomplished then I guess it can't. But then we can recognize the game is gone.

 

[steev]

y'all are pretty lucky to even need to discuss this. in my town we have no choice, so if there's pool, it's on a barbox.

i'll play on anything. last night i played on a destroyed barbox in a crowded college bar. by crowded, i mean i had to move 1-3 people for every shot. still fun though...and a runout is a lot more satisfying.

-s

 

[ironman]

"Serious 9-ball money", no-way, never! But Cuetechasaurus was commenting on how 9-ball on a barbox "is a joke" and it's easy to run-out because of the pocket size. My disagreement lies in the "ease" of running-out on a 7' pro-cut Diamond barboxes compared to your typical Valley barbox. Two different challenges.

But serious money on a 7 footer, no way! Bigger the bet, bigger the table!

Where have you guys been?

 

[cheesemouse]

JPB,

Your post covers your butt pretty well but it also points out your purist/elitist thinking. As far as pool in America is concerned the barbox probably is responsible for keeping the game alive during the 60/70/80's. Your use of golf as a comparison fails to mention that the purist in Scotland still walk and carry; if it wasn't for the golf cart 90% of the golf courses in this country would still be cow pastures and the remaining 10% would most likely be private country clubs....while I prefer playing on the 9 footers( 10 footers...come on!!!) I still can be open minded enough to give credit where credit is due.......

 

[JPB]

y'all are pretty lucky to even need to discuss this. in my town we have no choice, so if there's pool, it's on a barbox.

i'll play on anything. last night i played on a destroyed barbox in a crowded college bar. by crowded, i mean i had to move 1-3 people for every shot. still fun though...and a runout is a lot more satisfying.

-s

That is how it is here pretty much. But that is why I don't get out to play a lot. I am too old to bother with the conditions you describe. When I was 21 I did. So I am usually confined to the basement unless I get out of town. Granted there are probably more people who play in bars than vice versa, but I would guess I am not the only one who doesn't go to the bars for pool.

 

[JPB]

JPB,

Your post covers your butt pretty well but it also points out your purist/elitist thinking. As far as pool in America is concerned the barbox probably is responsible for keeping the game alive during the 60/70/80's. Your use of golf as a comparison fails to mention that the purist in Scotland still walk and carry; if it wasn't for the golf cart 90% of the golf courses in this country would still be cow pastures and the remaining 10% would most likely be private country clubs....while I prefer playing on the 9 footers( 10 footers...come on!!!) I still can be open minded enough to give credit where credit is due.......

I am much more of a purist than an elitist. Golf has problems in the US because of the golf cart and I oppose them. I favor a return to real golf played afoot. Golf as played in Scotland is better. I must admit I have not yet been able to get there yet, but I will. I walk and carry when I play, unless I am occasionally playing at one of those awful courses that requires carts. So yeah, I am a purist and unusual in that regard. I actually think golf would be much healthier in the US without the cart. We would have less expensive, less well-maintained courses, but more people would play. The problem golf faces, partially due to excessive expense to which the cart contributes, is that it loses a player for every player who takes up the game. So when I duiscuss golf with golfers I argue for more natural, minimalist course design and walking. Rich guys will hire a caddy who just might be a kid who can now afford the green fee at a local public course. There is a small movement back toward walking and minimalism brewing, but has not caught on completely yet. However, as Tom Doak's courses become more well known, Coore and Crenshaw's work is recognized, you never know. Maybe people will want to walk again. I dunno. At least the game has held on to enough support that change is possible. Or maybe crazies like me will just have to retire to Scotland, Ireland or Australia or somethng instead of Palm Springs. I have given the occasional thought to that. yeah, I am a nut. Purist, not elitist though. I don't think something has to be expensive to be good, although it doesn't always hurt. Nor do I condone any discrimination on race or gender, but I would love to be a member of a club that was careful who it selected based on attitude toward the game or skill. There are a few out there, like Champions that won't accept people with a handicap over 15 and encourages walking.

So I guess I have some of the same attitude about pool. I don't think it is a bad thing.

 

[cardsfan]

I am much more of a purist than an elitist. Golf has problems in the US because of the golf cart and I oppose them. I favor a return to real golf played afoot. Golf as played in Scotland is better. I must admit I have not yet been able to get there yet, but I will. I walk and carry when I play, unless I am occasionally playing at one of those awful courses that requires carts. So yeah, I am a purist and unusual in that regard. I actually think golf would be much healthier in the US without the cart. We would have less expensive, less well-maintained courses, but more people would play. The problem golf faces, partially due to excessive expense to which the cart contributes, is that it loses a player for every player who takes up the game. So when I duiscuss golf with golfers I argue for more natural, minimalist course design and walking. Rich guys will hire a caddy who just might be a kid who can now afford the green fee at a local public course. There is a small movement back toward walking and minimalism brewing, but has not caught on completely yet. However, as Tom Doak's courses become more well known, Coore and Crenshaw's work is recognized, you never know. Maybe people will want to walk again. I dunno. At least the game has held on to enough support that change is possible. Or maybe crazies like me will just have to retire to Scotland, Ireland or Australia or somethng instead of Palm Springs. I have given the occasional thought to that. yeah, I am a nut. Purist, not elitist though. I don't think something has to be expensive to be good, although it doesn't always hurt. Nor do I condone any discrimination on race or gender, but I would love to be a member of a club that was careful who it selected based on attitude toward the game or skill. There are a few out there, like Champions that won't accept people with a handicap over 15 and encourages walking.

So I guess I have some of the same attitude about pool. I don't think it is a bad thing.

You're attitude is called "passion", nothing wrong with that!

 

[gregory]

if bar box play isnt pool than AFL or the CFL cant be football, only room for the NFL, right?

Actually, it's the CFL that plays on the full-sized field. The NFL is played on such a tiny field. You can't really call that football.

 

[Tommy-D]

> If you think about it,the table is still twice as long as it is wide,same number of pockets,and the object balls are still about the same size,so yes it's still real pool. We've been lucky enough here in my area that we've actually had bar tables with slick,fast,Simonis-type cloth for several years,but no 9-footers within a 2 hour drive. I'd much rather play on a fast but dirty bar box than an 8 footer with slow cloth and 20 yr old ball sets like the old men's pool room here. These fast bar tables here are the only thing that keep me playing,and that sucks,because the game consumes me like it has no one else in my area. I'm the only person within 30 miles that actually wants to play,as opposed to everyone else that just plays to have something to do while drinking or hiding from their wife. I've played on 7 foot Diamonds in Memphis that were NOT tight at all,so those must not be pro-cut pockets,they played just like a Valley. The ones in the tournament room at JOB's in Nashville are pro-cut,not as tight as the Pro 9 footer but about right. Tommy D.

 

[whiteoak]

Yes, pool played on a bar box takes skill. Yes some gamble on it. So what? It is bad for the game and not real pool.

When was pool good? When it was played on 10' tables in places where pool was the priority, not a vehicle to sell a few more drinks. The 9' table that we now play on really should be called a bar box, let alone the 7' table. Yes the bar box lets crappy places have pool. Yes a lot of people pump quarter in the things. So what?

Playing on a bar table in a bar is an inferior experience. The fact people defend it by saying it is the only way many people are introduced to the game may be a true statement, but it is a statement that the sport is in real trouble, at least in the US. If the only way it can survive is on the bar table, there isn't much worth saving, and the game will die when people figure out something else to amuse themselves.

harsh? Yep. But maybe it is because I wish there were a nice place to play not a terrible bar with a bad pool table. Spare me the stories of nice places with bar tables, I am sure there are a few out there. But oh for a real pool hall with 10' tables and no music, etc....

Also, there have been about 75 million threads on here about what is the more difficult sport, golf or pool. One thing that has not been discussed is what really separates the sports and is the basis for golf's stability and popularity. (And right now many of the problems in golf, but that is another issue) The issue is the playing field. Golf's strength comes from its courses. This is what adds a sporting element to the game and makes it something people want to devote a lot of time and money to play. If all golf courses were identical the sport wouldn't be that great. Think about it, there were threads where pool players really wanted to take the time and spend the money to go play a relatively lousy golf course like Firestone. A tough course but one without any real architectural merit; one that represents the real problems with boring penal midcentury golf architecture. Pool on the other hand, seems to celebrate and encourage shrinking tables and more mindless games. That is not the recipe for success in the long term. Sure, maybe it helps for a little while, but if pool is confined to bar pool there is a problem. granted, a pool table can never present the interest of a great golf course since pool is meant to be played on good, consistent equipment and golf is meant to be played in variable conditions. But you can't dumb things down to the lowest denominator and expect it to work forever. Pool needs a return to the pool hall. If that can't be accomplished then I guess it can't. But then we can recognize the game is gone.

JPB,You need to form an opinion one way or the other(just kiddin)M.S.

 

[Russ Chewning]

I am much more of a purist than an elitist.

I beg to differ.. It DOES come across as elitist..

I have been around some of the best barbox players in the states, (Portland, Oregon) and somehow, someway.. The better "barbox" player seems to always win the tourneys. That honor for the WA/OR area would fall to Dan Louie. He wins virtually every barbox tourney in that area. If it just comes down to luck, is it that the rest of the players are just that bad?

There is a guy in Oregon that is always putting up 5 and 6 packs in 9 ball at those tourneys, but he rarely wins. Why? Because he has a loose cueball. Dan Louie would eat him for breakfast if they were gambling.

Also, Dan just might be the best big cue ball barbox player in the US. I've heard numerous stories of top players not wanting any of Dan playing with the big cue ball.

Barbox pool requires MUCH better cue ball position skills than 9 footers do. Cover a Valley table with Simonis, and see how you like it when you have a narrow position zone you have to move the cue ball to from 4-5 feet away.

And there is a Cali player that travels up to Oregon once in a while to play the barbox tourneys. Pat Schumacher. The guy won the US Barbox 9 ball Championship one year, over Davenprt, I think.

It's just funny. You think that barboxes equalize the playing field, and allows bad players to beat good players? Funny, I don't see it happening, usually. It just takes a different skillset.

You might say Davenport is the better player and should win unequivocally. But, I tend to think that their games are pretty even on a barbox.

Russ

Russ

 

[JPB]

I beg to differ.. It DOES come across as elitist..

I have been around some of the best barbox players in the states, (Portland, Oregon) and somehow, someway.. The better "barbox" player seems to always win the tourneys. That honor for the WA/OR area would fall to Dan Louie. He wins virtually every barbox tourney in that area. If it just comes down to luck, is it that the rest of the players are just that bad?

There is a guy in Oregon that is always putting up 5 and 6 packs in 9 ball at those tourneys, but he rarely wins. Why? Because he has a loose cueball. Dan Louie would eat him for breakfast if they were gambling.

Also, Dan just might be the best big cue ball barbox player in the US. I've heard numerous stories of top players not wanting any of Dan playing with the big cue ball.

Barbox pool requires MUCH better cue ball position skills than 9 footers do. Cover a Valley table with Simonis, and see how you like it when you have a narrow position zone you have to move the cue ball to from 4-5 feet away.

And there is a Cali player that travels up to Oregon once in a while to play the barbox tourneys. Pat Schumacher. The guy won the US Barbox 9 ball Championship one year, over Davenprt, I think.

It's just funny. You think that barboxes equalize the playing field, and allows bad players to beat good players? Funny, I don't see it happening, usually. It just takes a different skillset.

You might say Davenport is the better player and should win unequivocally. But, I tend to think that their games are pretty even on a barbox.

Russ

Russ

I think barboxes make the game worse. What it does in terms of identifying who is the better player between a small percentage of the pool playing population, i.e. top players, is relatively unimportant to me. I agree the best players often come out on top regardless. But I also know what is better to play, and it isn't bar pool. The fact Dan Louie can beat a lot of people is nice, but I already knew he could beat me on any table at any time. But I am a lot less likely to show up at a bar where he is playing than a pool hall. I also doubt that bar box nine ball is a better game for identifying hte best player than 14.1 on a 10' table. Yes Mosconi could learn the bar box I think.

 

[Russ Chewning]

I think barboxes make the game worse. What it does in terms of identifying who is the better player between a small percentage of the pool playing population, i.e. top players, is relatively unimportant to me. I agree the best players often come out on top regardless. But I also know what is better to play, and it isn't bar pool. The fact Dan Louie can beat a lot of people is nice, but I already knew he could beat me on any table at any time. But I am a lot less likely to show up at a bar where he is playing than a pool hall. I also doubt that bar box nine ball is a better game for identifying hte best player than 14.1 on a 10' table. Yes Mosconi could learn the bar box I think.

Okay.. By this reasoning, why don't we play 14.1 on a regulation snooker table? I mean, if 7 feet is awful, and 9 foot is decent, and ten foot is good, then wouldn't 12 feet be awesome?

Just change the pockets to a normal cut 4 1/2 pocket, and we're good to go. I don't get your argument that the bigger table is necessarily better.

Why? The bigger the table, the less need for cue ball control.

Are you saying you favor the ability to make a hard shot over the ability to execute a complicated position play? Over the ability to accurately draw a light cue ball 1 1/2 inches?

And your argument that Mosconi could learn the barbox doesn't mean anything. Of course he could, because he had very very fine position skills. This isn't always consistent with being the better player at executing tough shots.

I have been watching some Johnny Archer matches, and I love him as a player, but he just does not play position as well as Efren or Buddy. In his prime, he might have come with the tougher shot more often than either, tho.

I really don't understand the argument that a bigger table with tougher shots is automatically better. Explain it to me.

Use small words, so I can understand.

Russ

 

[Island Drive]

I have seen a bunch of times where people like to belittle or bash the bar box players (3 1/2X7' table), when, in fact, they make up the vast majority of todays pool scene.

IMO bar boxes present many challenges that a big table do not. To name a few, small side pockets, many clusters, rail shots, shooting over balls becomes more common, caroms and billiards are more frequent, as well are banks.

Sound like those that 'speaketh' this dialogue have nothing better to do. All games help all games, Dave Matlock, know as one of the best bar box players for the past 30 years did pretty good in the last IPT event, 30k I think. Sounds like the booze is talking in the bar and the BS is always not far behind. Samo Samo............................

 

[cardsfan]

Sound like those that 'speaketh' this dialogue have nothing better to do. All games help all games, Dave Matlock, know as one of the best bar box players for the past 30 years did pretty good in the last IPT event, 30k I think. Sounds like the booze is talking in the bar and the BS is always not far behind. Samo Samo............................

LOL! A proper ending to a good thread!

 

[Da Poet]

Big money is gambled on bar boxes from Ohio to Florida and everywhere in between. At Valley Forge during the SuperBilliardsExpo, there is some serious bar box action anywhere from a sawbuck to several dimes. SEVERAL DIMES.

When I lived in Tennessee, every pool hall I went to had more bar boxes than bigger tables. And there was action all day.

And South west Ohio (Cincy to Dayton). Bar box capital, baby. And Ohio has no shortage of high action.

If it's a regional thing, it's a pretty big region.

Fred

That's really cool. I trust what you are saying. Sounds like a big region alright! Sometimes us cityfolk think we're the center of the universe. I do believe I learned something new today!

 

[JPB]

Okay.. By this reasoning, why don't we play 14.1 on a regulation snooker table? I mean, if 7 feet is awful, and 9 foot is decent, and ten foot is good, then wouldn't 12 feet be awesome?

Just change the pockets to a normal cut 4 1/2 pocket, and we're good to go. I don't get your argument that the bigger table is necessarily better.

Why? The bigger the table, the less need for cue ball control.

Are you saying you favor the ability to make a hard shot over the ability to execute a complicated position play? Over the ability to accurately draw a light cue ball 1 1/2 inches?

And your argument that Mosconi could learn the barbox doesn't mean anything. Of course he could, because he had very very fine position skills. This isn't always consistent with being the better player at executing tough shots.

I have been watching some Johnny Archer matches, and I love him as a player, but he just does not play position as well as Efren or Buddy. In his prime, he might have come with the tougher shot more often than either, tho.

I really don't understand the argument that a bigger table with tougher shots is automatically better. Explain it to me.

Use small words, so I can understand.

Russ

OK, I will give it a shot. First it is not ONLY table size. If pool were played in proper pool halls on Diamond 7' tables this might not be the issue it is. I do think pool requires more skill on a bigger table, but pool is a game that requires a variety of skills. It should somehow blend the pocketing skills of snooker with the cueball movement and control of billiards. The balls are middling in size and the table should probably be about the size of a billiard table. So 10 feet is good, nine OK. The pockets should be somewhat tight but not ridiculously so. A player should be able to cheat a pocket and move the cueball around.

That said, have you ever known any serious player who came up playing only bar tables where he had to pay quarters each time? Is that possible? I don't think so. I think any good player at some point had to go to a pool hall, pay time, and hit a lot of balls on a real table. You can't do drills, play straight pool, etc... if you are pumping in quarters every time. And how can you really practice in a bar? You can't. So how many players out there who only play bar pool since it is so popular can't really play? If there is not a real pool hall available to them they won't progress much. How strong can the support for the game be when a big chunk of players never really gets proficient?

OTOH, what if everybody who picked up a cue had the chance to go to a pool hall, take some lessons by a competent instructor, and hit balls for hours? Some won't like it, but others will and will become better players. Right now, neither situation is true. Bar players can often find a pool hall to learn at, and pool halls don't exactly have great instruction in many cases. But if the only pool around is at bars I think you will have a game that is a million miles wide and an inch deep. My ranting is to hope for greater depth. maybe it won't happen, probably won't happen. But bar pool isn't that great for the long term health of the sport. Maybe nothing can help. What I am saying is that bar pool is a symptom of the disease, not a cure for it.

 

[Jack Madden]

Playing on any Pool Table is REAL Pool. Playing on a Bar Box is sometimes all that is offered around here. Most all Toiurnaments are on Bar Boxes, because that's an accepted format. Many of the League Players or low-Intermediates won't play on a Big Table Tournament.

I think the only big tables in western Montana are at the University of Montana's student union - all the pool rooms/bars that had big tables now have all bar boxes. But there are couple businesses that seem to be doing well selling the big tables for home use! If you don't have your own table, you play on a bar box.
Jack
www.johnmaddencues.com

 

[Russ Chewning]

OK, I will give it a shot. First it is not ONLY table size. If pool were played in proper pool halls on Diamond 7' tables this might not be the issue it is.

Elitist. Who are you to say what a "proper" pool hall is? What? One that can't pay it's bills because it only has 20 "players"? But it shore is quiet, and it shore is perty! I happen to enjoy playing with some music going on. I can concentrate through it.

That said, have you ever known any serious player who came up playing only bar tables where he had to pay quarters each time? Is that possible? I don't think so. I think any good player at some point had to go to a pool hall, pay time, and hit a lot of balls on a real table.

Yeah... ME. I "started" with bar pool. I had some natural talent, and a raw hatred for losing. "Pumping quarters" had nothing to do with it. I played a lot in a popular club with Valley tables. If I lost a game, I sat down for two hours because the waiting list was so long. Did absolute WONDERS for my mental game. I rarely spent more than $1.00 a night. The waiting list was so long, that if I lost one game, waited two hours for the next game, and then was done for the night if I lost.

OTOH, what if everybody who picked up a cue had the chance to go to a pool hall, take some lessons by a competent instructor, and hit balls for hours? Some won't like it, but others will and will become better players. Right now, neither situation is true. Bar players can often find a pool hall to learn at, and pool halls don't exactly have great instruction in many cases.

Funny. I have never had a problem finding friendly, talented players who liked to teach, in MY pool halls. Only players who truly want to excel will seek out instruction, and they will definitely find it within 20-25 miles in most regions in the US.

I don't think you get it. Players START in bars, and FIND OUT there that they love the game, because they have the chance to play weak, confidence building opponents. Anyone with true ambition will move on from there to a real pool hall. Either that, or they will be in a region where the majority of "real" players play on the 7 footers. Doesn't really mattter which happens. In an area dominated by 7 footers, the level of play on the 7 footers will be just as high as with 9 footers. Same players laying down 6 or 7 packs, etc.

I sense you have a real dislike for bars, and you feel that pool tables should not be in them. If you take away pool from bars, you take away the social setting that forms most players.

I can only imagine what my like/dislike would have been if the first players I had to play were good players on the 9 footers. That would have been pretty demoralizing, to get so thoroughly dominated, as I would have, back in the day.

Russ