Diamond Pool Tables - Degree of Difficulty

[franko]

Point

You want to complain about balls hanging? I had the opportunity to play on a very early Diamond once and the shelves were so deep you could freeze a ball to a corner pocket facing, freeze the CB to the same rail, and the OB was so deep you had to kick it in off the far pocket point to make it and not scratch.

I saw a video a while back where Greg explains the current Diamond pocket dimensions and shelf depth. Current shelf depth is such that if you freeze an OB as deep in the pocket as you can and freeze the the CB to the same rail, you can see exactly half the OB, meaning the tangent takes the cb across the pocket opening making the scratch impossible from that angle.

Personally, the tougher the table the more I like it...as long as the pockets aren’t tricky. Gaffy tables aren’t good for anything imo, which has little to do with pocket size and more to do with facing angles and down angles, as mentioned by others.

The table Garczar mentioned earlier is a perfect example. I’ve played on it many times. The corners are 3 7/8” and won’t accept anything that’s hit even the least bit sloppy, BUT you can still rocket a ball in down the long rail at hard speed as long as you hit it perfect. Very tough but fair,
IMO, there’s nothing wrong with a factory blue label Diamond. If a person is having that much of a problem on one (and it hasn’t been f’d up by a “mechanic” who didn’t know what they were doing), that person probably just needs more table time.

Well said and you also brought up a very important point about being set up properly. If you have a Diamond then by all means have a certified Diamond Mechanic set it up and do all work on it.
With my first Diamond a Red Label I made the mistake of letting our local Expert work on my table. It played like crap and I just attributed that to the table. A few years later I had Diamond mechanics re felt and level plus they pointed out what the local expert had done. I could not believe the difference in how well the table played when set up correctly.

Many rooms try to save $ by having a local work on their tables and run into problems especially if their tables are Diamonds.

 

[alstl]

I have an A E Schmidt with the same deep shelves as a diamond and a big problem with my table is the rails are old the the rubber in the pockets have become concave which causes the pockets to reject balls.

 

[Island Drive]

I have an A E Schmidt with the same deep shelves as a diamond and a big problem with my table is the rails are old the the rubber in the pockets have become concave which causes the pockets to reject balls.

Are they K66 rails?

 

[trentfromtoledo]

Right again Franko!!! You get what you pay for.

Putting Simonis on any table is a WASTE if it is not properly stretched.

Starrett 98 levels are a requirement across the board.

Well said and you also brought up a very important point about being set up properly. If you have a Diamond then by all means have a certified Diamond Mechanic set it up and do all work on it.
With my first Diamond a Red Label I made the mistake of letting our local Expert work on my table. It played like crap and I just attributed that to the table. A few years later I had Diamond mechanics re felt and level plus they pointed out what the local expert had done. I could not believe the difference in how well the table played when set up correctly.

Many rooms try to save $ by having a local work on their tables and run into problems especially if their tables are Diamonds.

 

[hang-the-9]

No, that is the eastern side of the state near the coast. We are in the northwest corner of the state in the mountains - likely around a 5 hour drive from there.

You you opened in the wrong place :grin:

I was in your area visiting my daughter and her husband. My son and I of course were looking for places to play. Being from MA my thought was "if it's in the same state, it's close enough to go to". But it's not LOL We went to a place called Little Reno's, quite a character was there running the place, had a big dog behind the counter.

 

[hang-the-9]

Interesting. Definitely don't know that place and it sounds like a hike for me. FYI Crows Nest recovered theirs and they are playing nice. Wish they didn't choose the puke blue (I think it's royal blue lol) given that they only have 7' table lights for their 8 footers, but they are playing great so I'm happy.

And yes, I love punishment lol. I actually don't care to *compete* on super tight pockets, but I love solo practice on them. I think table 15 at Snookers is the toughest. But I wouldn't call it crazy right. I think it's about 4.25 but it plays rather slow which makes it feel tougher. Table 1 is not quite so tight but much more lively so that is my preferred table to play on, also because it's the only one with good lighting.

Maybe I'll be in the area some time of the place you mentioned and check it out. Thanks for the info!

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

The tables at Beemers play as tough as the Snookers tables, although I only played on those two a few times each. Another bonus that they brought in a new chef and serve authentic South American food there. Going there Saturday to do a league practice session before we leave for Vegas Tuesday.

 

[lfigueroa]

Well said and you also brought up a very important point about being set up properly. If you have a Diamond then by all means have a certified Diamond Mechanic set it up and do all work on it.
With my first Diamond a Red Label I made the mistake of letting our local Expert work on my table. It played like crap and I just attributed that to the table. A few years later I had Diamond mechanics re felt and level plus they pointed out what the local expert had done. I could not believe the difference in how well the table played when set up correctly.

Many rooms try to save $ by having a local work on their tables and run into problems especially if their tables are Diamonds.

Well, shoot.

I guess the room I play at will just have to get someone else besides Greg Sullivan and Paul Smith.

Lou Figueroa

 

[trentfromtoledo]

Well, shoot.

I guess the room I play at will just have to get someone else besides Greg Sullivan and Paul Smith.

Lou Figueroa

???? Sounds like you have EXACTLY the right people! Lucky guy you are. I bet those tables play excellent. I have worked with Paul and he is very precise. Greg is also very very concerned that people who work on Diamonds know what they are doing. I have met Greg a couple of times and that was his main focus in the conversation: "Are you making sure you are leveling the tables right???"

Trent from Toledo

 

[VonRhett]

To the OP - if you are used to 5" pockets then you will not enjoy shooting on a "proper" table, like a Diamond Pro or Pro-Am with 4.5" holes.

With large holes, you can skim off the rail 2 diamonds from the pocket and still make it, provided right speed and angle. It's also very (very) easy to create angle. Again, much more difficult on 4.5" holes and difficulty increases as the hole gets smaller.

As others wrote, larger holes are better for the weaker player. They can miss by several inches and still see the ball drop.

However, as a rule more skilled players do NOT like anything over 4.5" and most prefer smaller. The Filipino players will tell you anything over 4.0" is too big.

Also, Diamonds have a deeper shelf, as others mentioned. This has as much to do with how "tight" a table plays as the actual pocket opening width.

My home table is a Diamond Pro with holes a tad below 4.25". It's perfection - not loose by any means, but certainly not too tight. I have no problems running racks or making balls at high velocity, even with power draw.

To claim one must slow roll balls in order to make them on 4.5" holes is preposterous.

Sounds like you would hate it, simply because you like big loose holes where slop (or ill-aimed shots) will fall, helping you to make more balls, win more games and overall feel better about your game.

But make no mistake - Diamonds are the preferred table for most Professional players for a reason.

As your skills improve, you should appreciate better playing tables and hopefully, will stop knocking the best tables on the planet simply because you can't make a ball on them.

-von

 

[mikemosconi]

Recently moved here to Florida- been playing at a room called Diamonds in Cape Coral which features Diamond pool tables- my first real experience with these tables. they are nine footers, probably fairly old, look like 4 1/2 inch pockets ( 2 cue balls will not fit into them side to side) shelf depth seems rather deep. these tables seem to play much, much tougher than Gold Crowns that I have played on most of my life. pockets reject anything that touches a rail even slightly, and hitting a pocket point is pure doom!
So far still trying to adjust my game to these tables, but my initial observations are that the pockets seem to reject balls that REALLY should be a score given a REASONABLE allowance for aiming. any time the object ball needs to travel more than six feet to the pocket, only a slow to moderate slow speed seems to pocket a ball. Straight pool runs are a disaster on these tables, as balls that are run down along the cushions to the pocket are rejected with even the SLIGHTEST amount of off center clearance. Also break shots in 14.1 cannot be hit with the correct speed to open up balls, as most are rejected from the pockets. As for bank shots- these tables seem to bank much shorter than Gold Crowns or Olhausens - I need to ADD angle to side pocket bank shots to make a bank.
Is my experience unique, I doubt it as I am a fairly good player and am really struggling to make balls that previously required no thought. I can see these tables causing young people to forget about pool and try another sport as the difficulty factor would keep player satisfaction to a minimum. I look around me and see lesser players come in and seem to miss 75% of their shots - not good for their confidence or enjoyment of time spent on these tables. Curious as to what experienced players feel about these tables compared to "old standard" Brunswicks etc. BTW- I am up for this challenge, but at times I know that i hit a ball "right" and these tables still reject- a bit frustrating, to say the least. Is this really good for pool?

......


Appreciate the comments. I will go on record as saying that I do NOT like these Diamond tables. I think that as far as a factor contributing to the lack of pool enthusiasm in younger folks, these types of tables would certainly be a contributing factor. Many years ago as a young person, I began to really enjoy this game, as Brunswick home tables in the 1960's with larger pockets allowed one to get fairly proficient and thus have a sense of enjoyment and satisfaction in playing the game. I have stayed with it my entire life because of that. I think that most young people being introduced to the game on tables such as these would quickly walk away from the game because it would just not be fun at all to watch balls constantly rattle in the pocket jaws. I remember pool halls would usually have just ONE table up front near the desk with tighter pockets - there was a reason for having only one - the other 15 tables kept people coming BACK to the ROOM! For myself, a seasoned player, this is now a new challenge, I doubt that I would be playing and contributing today if my first experiences were on a table like these Diamonds./QUOTE]

Six pages later, I've but one question: Is that your real name?

HA HA! NO it is NOT my real name - I use it here to keep the name alive in honor of the greatest who ever played this game IMO- growing up in Italian neighborhoods in the 50s and early 60s there was a great sense of pride- Mosconi, DiMaggio, and Marciano - all considered the very best at their chosen sport- yes my name ends in a vowel as well. Everybody played pool back then, and the very best pool players held some status in the neighborhoods, It was a great time and yes, most tables in the Northeast were Brunswicks and AMFs that played loose enough to allow for UNIVERSAL enjoyment of the sport - my dad bought me and my two older brothers a home Brunswick when the Hustler was released in the early 60s and I got very good at a very young age- still banging them pretty well 50+ years later. Sad to see the state of the game here in the U.S. today - I now have to travel almost an hour to find a decent room in SW Florida and the tables are these older Diamonds that IMO, play like garbage.

 

[Ralph Kramden]

To the OP - if you are used to 5" pockets then you will not enjoy shooting on a "proper" table, like a Diamond Pro or Pro-Am with 4.5" holes.

With large holes, you can skim off the rail 2 diamonds from the pocket and still make it, provided right speed and angle. It's also very (very) easy to create angle. Again, much more difficult on 4.5" holes and difficulty increases as the hole gets smaller.

As others wrote, larger holes are better for the weaker player. They can miss by several inches and still see the ball drop.

However, as a rule more skilled players do NOT like anything over 4.5" and most prefer smaller. The Filipino players will tell you anything over 4.0" is too big.

Also, Diamonds have a deeper shelf, as others mentioned. This has as much to do with how "tight" a table plays as the actual pocket opening width.

My home table is a Diamond Pro with holes a tad below 4.25". It's perfection - not loose by any means, but certainly not too tight. I have no problems running racks or making balls at high velocity, even with power draw.

To claim one must slow roll balls in order to make them on 4.5" holes is preposterous.

Sounds like you would hate it, simply because you like big loose holes where slop (or ill-aimed shots) will fall, helping you to make more balls, win more games and overall feel better about your game.

But make no mistake - Diamonds are the preferred table for most Professional players for a reason.

As your skills improve, you should appreciate better playing tables and hopefully, will stop knocking the best tables on the planet simply because you can't make a ball on them.

-von

Folks that don't like tight pockets might be over spining the cue ball for position.
The CB squirts and the OB hits the tighter pocket points. Balls would go into a
looser playing pocket. Moving the CB with follow and draw for position is better.

.

 

[mikemosconi]

To the OP - if you are used to 5" pockets then you will not enjoy shooting on a "proper" table, like a Diamond Pro or Pro-Am with 4.5" holes.

With large holes, you can skim off the rail 2 diamonds from the pocket and still make it, provided right speed and angle. It's also very (very) easy to create angle. Again, much more difficult on 4.5" holes and difficulty increases as the hole gets smaller.

As others wrote, larger holes are better for the weaker player. They can miss by several inches and still see the ball drop.

However, as a rule more skilled players do NOT like anything over 4.5" and most prefer smaller. The Filipino players will tell you anything over 4.0" is too big.

Also, Diamonds have a deeper shelf, as others mentioned. This has as much to do with how "tight" a table plays as the actual pocket opening width.

My home table is a Diamond Pro with holes a tad below 4.25". It's perfection - not loose by any means, but certainly not too tight. I have no problems running racks or making balls at high velocity, even with power draw.

To claim one must slow roll balls in order to make them on 4.5" holes is preposterous.

Sounds like you would hate it, simply because you like big loose holes where slop (or ill-aimed shots) will fall, helping you to make more balls, win more games and overall feel better about your game.

But make no mistake - Diamonds are the preferred table for most Professional players for a reason.

As your skills improve, you should appreciate better playing tables and hopefully, will stop knocking the best tables on the planet simply because you can't make a ball on them.

-von

NO problem RUNNING RACKS on 4.25 inch deep shelf Diamond pockets??? I have never seen any player consistently run multiple racks - from the break on this type of set up, you must be the very best player in the state of FL. , perhaps the world! You sure that you are not setting up the balls next to each pocket? Come on NOW- 4.25 inch deep shelf pocket multiple rack run consistency- come on!

 

[Straightpool_99]

To the OP, this is my opinion:

1. 9' diamond pro-am 4" to 4 1/4" pockets are "perfect" for skill levels from weak "A-" to pro level players.

2. 9' diamond pro-am 4 3/8" to 4 1/2" pockets are about right for skill level "B-" to "B+" players.

3. Coupled with today's felt, cushions etc..etc... any table that has pockets larger than 4 1/2" plays to easy for most any player that is above "C+" skill level.

To me, large pocket tables are bad for the serious pool player........but GREAT for a business owner that has coin op tables or the like where casual players are their customer base.

Again, that is my opinion.

What do you mean "about right"? That they won't run a rack more than once in maybe 10 games? Above 4 1/2" is too easy for B players? :rotflmao1: Let's do a little experiment. You find yourself a B- player and let him play a race to 20 games against the pro ghost (ghost without ball in hand) in 10 ball on a Diamond league cut (since you only got Diamonds over there apparantly). Now, lets see how many games he gets. I'd be surprised if he even got 5....Winning would be pure Science fiction, even at 9 ball with the same rules.

Too easy would imply that they're stringing racks, regularly. That aint happening. Above or exactly 4.5 inch pockets are too easy for THE PROS and SEMI PROS. Nobody else. I'm not seeing all that many 5 and 6 packs from even A-players on "easy" equipment.

 

[Straightpool_99]

NO problem RUNNING RACKS on 4.25 inch deep shelf Diamond pockets??? I have never seen any player consistently run multiple racks - from the break on this type of set up, you must be the very best player in the state of FL. , perhaps the world! You sure that you are not setting up the balls next to each pocket? Come on NOW- 4.25 inch deep shelf pocket multiple rack run consistency- come on!

He should try Chinese 8 ball. But that may still be too easy, maybe Pyramid playing one handed would be a decent challenge?

 

[lfigueroa]

Video would be good.

Lou Figueroa

 

[garczar]

Folks that don't like tight pockets might be over spining the cue ball for position.
The CB squirts and the OB hits the tighter pocket points. Balls would go into a
looser playing pocket. Moving the CB with follow and draw for position is better.

.

You got that right. I've found on tight-a^* tables that side-spin CAN be(and usually is) your enemy.

 

[Straightpool_99]

Pool players are like bad gamblers. They only remember the racks they ran and the wins. They don't remember the 100 racks they didn't run or the 500 hands they lost. Woo-hoo I ran a rack on <insert absurdly sized pocket>, ok that's great. Now lets see you play 10 racks, 100 racks and lets see the percentage. 10% or below isn't going to cut it, buddy. That makes games unbearable to watch and even to play.

Let's say the pros break and run 30-40ish percent of the time, depending on the game. I'd say a decent rule of thumb for an amateur would be to play on tables where he is at least 15% break and run (if he's even capable of that on any table, obviously the lowest skill levels don't factor in here). That makes it possible to run a rack or 2 often enough that he gets the experience, and still gives him/her something to shoot for. That's the way pool is meant to be played. Not 2 balls and safe, like some seem to think.

 

[lfigueroa]

You got that right. I've found on tight-a^* tables that side-spin CAN be(and usually is) your enemy.

You obviously don’t know about “get-in” english

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

Pool players are like bad gamblers. They only remember the racks they ran and the wins. They don't remember the 100 racks they didn't run or the 500 hands they lost. Woo-hoo I ran a rack on <insert absurdly sized pocket>, ok that's great. Now lets see you play 10 racks, 100 racks and lets see the percentage. 10% or below isn't going to cut it, buddy. That makes games unbearable to watch and even to play.

Let's say the pros break and run 30-40ish percent of the time, depending on the game. I'd say a decent rule of thumb for an amateur would be to play on tables where he is at least 15% break and run (if he's even capable of that on any table, obviously the lowest skill levels don't factor in here). That makes it possible to run a rack or 2 often enough that he gets the experience, and still gives him/her something to shoot for. That's the way pool is meant to be played. Not 2 balls and safe, like some seem to think.

All quite true.

Anutter thing about uber tight tables is that it changes the nature of the game, as you alluded to. In my travels I have come across some ridiculously tight tables and heard all the talk about how a proper pool table should be set up.

That’s all baloney.

Pool players should be able to use english and work the ball. And, as has already been stated, when the pockets are too tight, that aspect of the game goes out the window.

Lou Figueroa

 

[garczar]

All quite true.

Anutter thing about uber tight tables is that it changes the nature of the game, as you alluded to. In my travels I have come across some ridiculously tight tables and heard all the talk about how a proper pool table should be set up.

That’s all baloney.

Pool players should be able to use english and work the ball. And, as has already been stated, when the pockets are too tight, that aspect of the game goes out the window.

Lou Figueroa

Yep. It turns into a "cinch-n-safe" game. The ability to cheat the pocket and play position is part of the game. I'm not advocating buckets but there is a point that pocket size changes the game and not for the better.