Bar Table Myths? - What are your thoughts?

This is a very interesting thread to me. I play three times a week. Twice on 9 footers and once on the barbox. My winning percentage is lowest on the barbox. I always blamed it on the poor playing conditions but in light of some of the comments made here I think I need to adjust my playing style. Tonight is barbox night. I think a firmer more aggressive game may help my play. We'll see.
 
Andrew Manning said:
First of all, you can't just smash clusters and assume you'll get position, ... I think insurance balls are just as necessary on the bar box,

Also, you mention Danny D's ideal of playing position short and sweet, as if it were as easily done as said. .... Maybe you never bump a ball you were trying to squeeze past and hook yourself, but I do.

Furthermore, even though the pocketing is easier, this ease is mitigated by the ease of scratching.

But the bar table does have difficulties all its own that do need to be acknowledged.

-Andrew
Click to expand...

Drew-man,
You bring up very good points; I am in total agreement with all of them.

Insurance balls are a GOOD THING, but not as necessary on the small table (in other words, the penalty for ignoring this principle is less on the small table, but definitely still present to some degree as you point out).

The "short game" as played by Danny D. is DEFINITELY achieveable by anyone that wants it as part of their arsenal. It's not difficult, just rarely practiced. He can set a cue ball and object ball about 6 inches apart, then draw the cue ball back 1/4", or 1/2", or 3/4", or 1". I think anyone could learn this in a few days if they tried. Navigating the traffic is a necessary skill in straight pool and all games. There are ways to improve proficiency at this; I wonder how many players work actively on it. In straight pool, we NEVER touch another ball unless we mean to (failing frequently and suffering the consequences:) ).

I hadn't had problems with the "scratching issue", I always try to play so I don't have to let the cueball go (another straight pool foible); and I always try to predict the path of whitey; erring on the side of not scratching. The side pocket scratches you describe are DEFINITELY more of an issue on the bar table than on the big table. The best solution I've found is the "half-masse' drawshot". Just elevate the butt of the cue 20 or 30 degrees, cut the object ball in the side with draw, and watch whitey curve away from the scratch. The slow cloth helps a bunch, and just a few tries will show the proper speed so that the curve will take before the scratch. This shot works on most "scratch shots" in the other pockets and also works even on fairly thin cuts as well; and saved my bacon a bunch of times. I doubt I pocket scratched 3 times in a hundred games this year (I can't remember more than one offhand; but this Alzheimers is a biatch).

P.S. - I am also not implying that I'm some super-bar-player; I'm just relating my experience. I definitely had a fairly high degree of success in this league; but I REALLY have no idea how good these players are - maybe satman will weigh in on the strength of the league - he knows the Valley scene better than anyone.
 
Williebetmore said:
I would love to hear everyone's input on this subject; The "congestion factor" is myth #2.

MYTH #2 - Small table "congestion" makes things tough.

Actually, I think it makes things much easier - at least for someone with a straight pool orientation. Yes, there are many clusters to deal with, BUT they are so close together that it is virtually always possible to break them (this is definitely NOT the case on the 9-footers).

In addition, you do not have the same requirement for "insurance balls" when you are breaking clusters on the bar table - just smash into them and you will usually leave yourself some sort of shot or safety. This strategy does NOT work in 14.1 on a 9-footer, but it is a viable strategy on the 7-footer. It took me half the season to convince myself to go into a cluster without an insurance ball (but I still prefer having one).

Also, because of the size of the table, there are substantially fewer "trouble balls" in any rack (those balls that are not clustered, but require a heroic shot to make in a distant pocket). On the small table, there are no heroic shots (as far as pocketing is concerned). If there is a pocket for it anywhere, it is easily makeable.

Yes, there is more "traffic", but good position play has always rewarded those that move the cue ball the least. Danny DiLiberto is a champion of "close position", learning to move the cue ball very short distances with precision, and keeping travel to a minimum. On a bar table, his principles make the game pretty easy. If you can't do this, then you will not be very good on a bar table (and your straight pool on the big table will not be that great either).
Click to expand...

Sorry Don, but I have to disagree with you here, and agree with Andrew. Two conditions that make playing on a 7' table more difficult than playing on a 9' table are: 1) congestion: 30% less playing area means that the POSSIBILITY of hooking yourself is substancially increased. Most barbox players do NOT have a 14.1 orientation, and as such, are more prone to this problem cropping up; 2) potential to scratch: the balls are the same size, but the playing area is significantly smaller. The pockets are the same size (for the most part). Therefore, there is less rail area to catch the CB...meaning that the potential for scratching is elevated. What do these two things mean? They mean that you'd better have your position play and stroke down pat, or fall victim to these two unchanging differences.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
 
Scott Lee said:
Sorry Don, but I have to disagree with you here, and agree with Andrew. Two conditions that make playing on a 7' table more difficult than playing on a 9' table are: 1) congestion: 30% less playing area means that the POSSIBILITY of hooking yourself is substancially increased. Most barbox players do NOT have a 14.1 orientation, and as such, are more prone to this problem cropping up; 2) potential to scratch: the balls are the same size, but the playing area is significantly smaller. The pockets are the same size (for the most part). Therefore, there is less rail area to catch the CB...meaning that the potential for scratching is elevated. What do these two things mean? They mean that you'd better have your position play and stroke down pat, or fall victim to these two unchanging differences.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...
Scott,
Certainly your opinion counts more than mine. I think all barbox players would do well to work on this part of the game. Yes, there is more congestion; but each individual layout could easily occur on a big table, and you must develop proficiency in avoiding scratches and navigating traffic whatever size table you prefer. I will say that I have always believed that scratching is the fault of the player; precautions MUST be taken.

P.S. - I guess I also forgot to mention that I believe I am a much, much, much better and stronger player on the barbox than on the bigger table; even though I have played exclusively on 9 footers since taking up pool 6 years ago and have played on the barboxes once a week for about 6 months.
 
Scott Lee said:
Two conditions that make playing on a 7' table more difficult than playing on a 9' table are: 1) congestion: 30% less playing area means that the POSSIBILITY of hooking yourself is substancially increased.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...

Scott,
Oooops, I forgot one more thing. If I have to send whitey between two balls, I would rather have them one foot away than 2 feet away. I think accuracy of travel is easier to achieve in the small spaces of the bar table - but I didn't say it was easy to achieve.
 
Scott Lee said:
Nope...we're all equals here, my friend! :D See you next week!

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...
Scott,
Yes, but some are "more equal" than others (to paraphrase George Orwell).:) :) I just happen to value your opinion more than mine. It is this rational analysis that separates us from the animals (and from breakup).
 
Scott Lee said:
Sorry Don, but I have to disagree with you here, and agree with Andrew. Two conditions that make playing on a 7' table more difficult than playing on a 9' table are: 1) congestion: 30% less playing area means that the POSSIBILITY of hooking yourself is substancially increased. Most barbox players do NOT have a 14.1 orientation, and as such, are more prone to this problem cropping up; 2) potential to scratch: the balls are the same size, but the playing area is significantly smaller. The pockets are the same size (for the most part). Therefore, there is less rail area to catch the CB...meaning that the potential for scratching is elevated. What do these two things mean? They mean that you'd better have your position play and stroke down pat, or fall victim to these two unchanging differences.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...

Excellent analysis Scott. No question in my mind that congestion is a factor in bar table Eight Ball. You are constantly playing tight position and bumping balls. More clusters appear on a small table as well. Straight Pool skills do not always convert to good bar table play.

I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but Danny D. could not and did not beat the top bar table players of his era. And he tried. There is a reason that top bar table players would beat the top big table players who tried to play them. Only a few excelled at both. Buddy is the first that comes to mind.

Godzilla wouldn't have wanted to play a young Keith on a bar table. Let alone Jim Rempe, Nick Varner, Allen Hopkins, Mike Sigel or Steve Mizerak. They couldn't have beaten Dan Louie or Dave Matlock either for that matter. Just a few facts to digest.

There aren't too many of the current champions that want to tangle with Jason Kirkwood on a small box, let alone Jesse Bowman.
 
Last edited:
jay helfert said:
I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but Danny D. could not and did not beat the top bar table players of his era. They couldn't have beaten Dan Louie or Dave Matlock either for that matter. Just a few facts to digest.

There aren't too many of the current champions that want to tangle with Jason Kirkwood on a small box, let alone Jesse Bowman.
Click to expand...

JH,
No bubble bursting has occurred. I did not say that Danny D. was a bar table whiz; just that the big table straight pool skills he advocates REALLY help in bar table play.

Do you think bar tables are in general easier or tougher than 9-footers? I would like to remind everyone I never said that EVERYTHING was easier on a barbox; just overall easier in my opinion. We all know there are pluses and minuses to both. Enquiring minds want to know.:)

A former roadie of my acquaintance thought Dave Matlock was the toughest barbox player he ever saw. It's a shame the IPT did not pan out, it would have been great to see some of these guys come out of hiding for some high level pool.
 
I've always known that Bar boxes are much easier to play on that nines for one simple reason.

...Shot making is easier...

Short shots and big pockets make up for alot of poorly hit shots...


Whenever this subject comes up, we get seperated into two groups. The group that thinks 7' is harder fails to realize that the number 1 problem for 99.9387903% of all pocket billiard players in the world is shot making...

They all talk about clusters and position like they never miss the bottom of a pocket :) But the truth is shot making is the most important part of a run out. No matter what you do you still have to pocket balls to be able to win.



Big pockets and short shots makes a huge difference. Such that it overshadows any disadvantages a small surface are will present...




I also agree on the clusters. Breaking them out is pretty simple on the smalll tables. If you can get your CB anywhere near a cluster on a 9', you are going to smash it open on a 7'...


9 is much harder than 7. never was a doubt in my mind.
 
Williebetmore said:
JH,
No bubble bursting has occurred. I did not say that Danny D. was a bar table whiz; just that the big table straight pool skills he advocates REALLY help in bar table play.

Do you think bar tables are in general easier or tougher than 9-footers? I would like to remind everyone I never said that EVERYTHING was easier on a barbox; just overall easier in my opinion. We all know there are pluses and minuses to both. Enquiring minds want to know.:)

A former roadie of my acquaintance thought Dave Matlock was the toughest barbox player he ever saw. It's a shame the IPT did not pan out, it would have been great to see some of these guys come out of hiding for some high level pool.
Click to expand...

I've always said it is easier to go down (from 9' to 7') than to go up. That being said, at the highest levels, there are certain skills that bar box specialists have that allow them to beat big table champions who try to adjust downward, to the "easy" tables.
 
bsmutz said:
Precision position just isn't possible in some areas on some bar tables. Some tables have that thick, crappy cloth combined with dead rails that makes it impossible to get the cue ball to the other end of the table when it would be uber easy on 860 and responsive rails. Also it makes the cue ball and object balls take funny turns at the last second that can ruin a well-played position shot. Then you have the tables that are also unlevel so that a slow rolled cue ball ends up an inch or more to the right or left of where you sent it. I remember one table I played on where I tried to slow roll the cue ball up to an object ball near the head cushion. I aimed for the middle of the object ball and missed it completely. Our first playoff match, I was playing a very good player and both of us either missed shots or got hooked several times because everything was rolling to one side of the table and you couldn't really predict how much roll you were going to get as it varied from one place to another. Of course, the empty table right next to the one we were playing on played darn near perfect.
Click to expand...

I had to look at the poster to see if this wasn't one of my posts. I could have written this myself, as I too have had experiences exactly like the ones mentioned above. Even the one where we play on a crappy table while the unused one right next to us is almost perfect. The table at my "home" bar we ALWAYS play on I have nicknamed the NASCAR table because of all the hard left turns the balls take :D :D :D !!!

Maniac
 
steev said:
Learn to love stun/stop/draw, no slow rollers unless the shot is VERY short, and ALWAYS leave an angle (a hard cut is easier than shape from straight in in many cases). This is just a case of the right stroke/shot for the conditions. So your fancy-pants simonis/big table shots don't work. There are ways to play well on crap, go find them. Hopefully it'll cost ya less than 20 a rack to find a good teacher :D

p.s. I love simonis and big tables so don't think I'm insulting anyone.

-s
Click to expand...

I don't think you were insulting anyone either, but your advice to "learn" how to play on a crap table doesn't hold water in all instances. An example: I was playing eight-ball. It is my shot. When I came to the table all my balls were still up. I was down to my last two object balls. My opponent had 4 or 5 balls on the table. I had a shot where I needed to go two rails for position on my last object ball, with the eight-ball near the last object ball. If I did everything right, it was an easy out. A road map. I made the shot. The cueball came off the second rail and was headed for the space between the dot on the long rail next to the side pocket and the side pocket. Perfect shot. Perfect speed. I relaxed, knowing that this game was in-the-bag. Suddenly the cueball started hooking and scratched into the side pocket :eek: . With ball in hand, my opponent ran out and won the game :mad: .
You can't "learn" how to deal with this problem. It was a fu**in' by the table, pure and simple. I had to shoot the pattern this way because of the position of my opponents balls. I did everything right. It just turned out wrong through no fault of mine.
There are just gonna be instances where a slow-rolled shot is in order for the run-out. I, like bsmutz, have completely missed a ball I was trying to hit ever so lightly to complete a "lock-up" safety because of the bad table roll. Believe me, a crap table can sure put the coitus on your plans :D .
I hope you, or anybody else for that matter, NEVER has to shoot on a table like the one in my "home" bar!!! To use a quote from Fat Bastard (Austin Powers movie): "It's cr-r-rap, man"!!! :D :D :D

Maniac
 
Slider said:
Players with lesser skills have a better chance to win with an easier game or under easier conditions.

Ken
Click to expand...


I won't get into the bar box vs. big tables debate, but I will chime in on this part. A strong argument can be made that the easier the table, the more advantage goes to the better player, not the worse player.

Sure, an easier table will allow a weaker to player to win a game that he might not have won on a tough table, but a strong player will be able to string together racks much easier on an easier table. The weaker player won't be able to string them together at the same rate. That is, an easier table allows the better to use all of his skill advantages, where a tougher table takes away from those advantages.

That being said, if the game is a movers game rather than a pocketers game, then tougher conditions favor the stronger mover.

Fred
 
Williebetmore said:
Do you think bar tables are in general easier or tougher than 9-footers?
Click to expand...

I think everyone that says that a 9' table is harder are looking at it from a shotmaking perspective, whereas everyone that says that a bar table isn't really easier is looking at it from a cueball travel perspective.

IMO, everyone should admit that there are issues with both that need a stronger focus. Anyone who dismisses the pitfalls of either size table will get stung by it. That's a guarantee on any level.

And furthermore, the definition of "easier" must include the guy hitting back. Is bar table competition easier? I think from a mental aspect, bar table competition is by far more brutal. It just looks so simple.

Fred <~~~ if it were really that simple, there would be no need to compare to Kirkwood, Bowman, Van Boening, Matlock, etc.
 
Cornerman said:
I won't get into the bar box vs. big tables debate, but I will chime in on this part. A strong argument can be made that the easier the table, the more advantage goes to the better player, not the worse player.

Sure, an easier table will allow a weaker to player to win a game that he might not have won on a tough table, but a strong player will be able to string together racks much easier on an easier table. The weaker player won't be able to string them together at the same rate. That is, an easier table allows the better to use all of his skill advantages, where a tougher table takes away from those advantages.

That being said, if the game is a movers game rather than a pocketers game, then tougher conditions favor the stronger mover.

Fred
Click to expand...

Excellent point, Fred! It's kinda like the argument I have with my APA league teammates about playing lower skill level opponents (myself being a SL5).
My argument is that I feel I have a better chance of winning ANY game that I get to the table 5 or 6 times in any one game, which a SL2 or SL3 is surely, in most cases, going to afford you. Yes, they get lucky or hot every now and then, but in the long run, the better shooter needing less innings to get out is going to prevail. My teammates don't suscribe to this theory.
In fact, for the most part, in any handicapped scenario, I believe the ball is always in the court of the better player because of their run-out capabilities.

Maniac
 
It's the same, only different.

Williebetmore said:
Scott,
Oooops, I forgot one more thing. If I have to send whitey between two balls, I would rather have them one foot away than 2 feet away. I think accuracy of travel is easier to achieve in the small spaces of the bar table - but I didn't say it was easy to achieve.
Click to expand...

However... if you are going to scale the scenario down, then those two balls are going to be closer together than they would have been on the 9' table. ;)
 
Maniac said:
I don't think you were insulting anyone either, but your advice to "learn" how to play on a crap table doesn't hold water in all instances. An example: I was playing eight-ball. It is my shot. When I came to the table all my balls were still up. I was down to my last two object balls. My opponent had 4 or 5 balls on the table. I had a shot where I needed to go two rails for position on my last object ball, with the eight-ball near the last object ball. If I did everything right, it was an easy out. A road map. I made the shot. The cueball came off the second rail and was headed for the space between the dot on the long rail next to the side pocket and the side pocket. Perfect shot. Perfect speed. I relaxed, knowing that this game was in-the-bag. Suddenly the cueball started hooking and scratched into the side pocket :eek: . With ball in hand, my opponent ran out and won the game :mad: .
You can't "learn" how to deal with this problem. It was a fu**in' by the table, pure and simple. I had to shoot the pattern this way because of the position of my opponents balls. I did everything right. It just turned out wrong through no fault of mine.
There are just gonna be instances where a slow-rolled shot is in order for the run-out. I, like bsmutz, have completely missed a ball I was trying to hit ever so lightly to complete a "lock-up" safety because of the bad table roll. Believe me, a crap table can sure put the coitus on your plans :D .
I hope you, or anybody else for that matter, NEVER has to shoot on a table like the one in my "home" bar!!! To use a quote from Fat Bastard (Austin Powers movie): "It's cr-r-rap, man"!!! :D :D :D

Maniac
Click to expand...

Actually, there ARE ways to compensate for tables with BADDDDDDDDDDDDD rolls on them. When I used to play pretty sporty on the barboxes, I used to use a different stroke for precise position shots on a bad table.. It was what I called a "slow draw drag".

I used to practice for hours killing the cue ball with JUST enough speed to pocket the object ball consistently. By that, I mean that I practiced using a draw drag stroke with whatever speed would keep the OB on track to the pocket at that particular angle.

I don't remember how I came up with that particular method, but it allowed me to get almost pinpoint position on tables that had pretty serious rolls to them.

Oh, and another thing. Play position for center table on barboxes, if at ALL possible. Can't scratch playing position for center table unless the table has 2 FEET of roll to it, heh heh.

Also, a lot of barbox specialists play much different patterns than those that play on 9 footers. Granted, on good equipment, both players get out in the rack. But the barbox specialists have a way of playing position that somehow seems to negate the inferior quality of the equipment.

TRUST me on this.. I have watched Barry Emerson, Glenn Atwell, Dan Louie, and a few others play on the barboxes. Barry won the U.S. Bartable championship one year, Glenn is always high up in the national barbox tournies, and Dan is universally acknowledged as a barbox monster. No pro alive today will play Danny even up with a big cue ball, if Danny's been playing.

All these guys TO A MAN, played position on certain shots just a tad different than you'd assume, from watching big table play.

I can't say for sure what it is that makes barbox specialists so much better at the short table game, but it's not an illusion. They ARE better for a reason.

Russ
 
Cornerman said:
And furthermore, the definition of "easier" must include the guy hitting back. Is bar table competition easier? I think from a mental aspect, bar table competition is by far more brutal. It just looks so simple.
Click to expand...

That's true... There's a weekly 8-ball tournament in a bar near here that draws a lot of top talent. At first, I wondered what these elite players were doing, messing around on crummy bar tables. I ran more racks than I usually did on 9-footers, but over time, I noticed that if I didn't make a ball on the break, that was usually the last shot I got.

Ken
 
And one more point on barbox play...

A common position route from one end of the table to the other is cutting an OB in and going three rails when playing position off a ball near a corner to a ball in the middle of the end rail.

Now, on a 9 footer, you have a HUGE area to land on, and get GREAT position...

Now, go to a barbox and try to consistently play that position route and end up with a good angle on that ball in the middle of a 3 1/2 foot rail. Without scratching.

Note: It's easy if that is the 9 ball in the middle of the rail.. Just get any shot on the 9 and bang it in. But what if it is the 8? And the 9 ball is in the middle of the other end rail? If you get really thin on that 8, you are looking at having to execute a VERY precise 4 rail up and down the table position shot to get on the 9. Either taht, or a soft spin cut that offers both a tougher shot and tougher position.

I have watched a lot of barbox 8 and 9 ball. To beat a champion barbox player, you better not get out of position ONCE in an hour. You also better not miss one runout in an hour. I get the idea some of the people on here have never really seen barbox play at the highest level.

Russ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top