What is the reasoning behind removing two pockets from a pool table?
Four Pocket
- Thread starter Island Drive
- Start date
Earl and his greatest player ever mentality.
I think the reason is to make the game less appealing to watch. Pool players have a natural aversion to monetary success. Maybe the green dye in the currency itself causes them to break out in hives?
I think it's interesting. There is an element of showmanship to the whole thing, but I don't see that as a bad thing. It will be enjoyable to watch two of the best ever challenge themselves. I'm not quite sure it will catch on and become some kind of movement or anything, but it will be fun to see other pros match up on this thing in the future.
If earl wins, however the only thing that will ever come out of his mouth is how they shouldn't even make tables with side pockets anymore.
If earl wins, however the only thing that will ever come out of his mouth is how they shouldn't even make tables with side pockets anymore.
Last edited:
I don't think this match is going to drive away the masses. No matter what the game is or what the table looks like, average people are just not that interested in watching pool. That is just a fact.
Like Earl trapping SVB on the ten footer and ca$hin' in, it might be more of the same from my perspective. Because of Earls incredible raw pocketing power of his play style this table might be perfect for him. If that plays out, then the only advantage his opponent has is he's younger.
How about one pocket with only side pockets?
I suppose it would be the exact opposite reasoning of adding 2 more pockets :ignore::shrug::scratchhead::rotflmao1:
less pockets to empty when racking :wink:
You got it. Earl explains it in the linked interview.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=424206
I doubt these tables will take over. But it is an interesting experiment.
It won't drive me away... I won't even know it's going on.
Earl is an outstanding Player, but he may be out standing in the rain, as far as I know.
Get 6 guys in a "$100 a ball" 9-Ball Ring game ($3000.00 buy-in)... that will draw some attention.
There are two main reasons:
1) Break Shots - It takes away the advantage to those who are able to consistently sink the one-ball. And...It gives an advantage to those who usually sink the cue ball on the break.
2) Table Manufacturers Conspiracy- Taking away the two side pockets makes the tables less expensive to produce. It's like taking sugar out of a product, calling it 'lite', and then telling the consumer that it is better for them.
I agree that ring games are more fun to watch, promotors should do more of these, IMO.
For me, it's less chance of pocketing the cue ball.
On second thought, it probably wouldn't work anyway....
Seems dumb to me. They should take all 6 pockets out and play billiards like civilized people. :angel2:
