True IUTBR but his Ball picture does not align with the ruler pic.
GC5 Tournament Edition pocket sizes
- Thread starter wealmostlostdetroit
- Start date
Ball pictures lie. He has gaps on all sides. Camera angle can distort. Unknown how close to center of the ball the ball was placed. When there is a ruler picture, that “must” be trusted way more than a ball picture.
I trust the ruler pic but there is something off with that ball pic and I don't think it is real. Can't think why someone would fake that but....
its just bad photography. no AI or manipulation. its obvious that that the angles/distances shot at are not consistent.
Beautiful table!!!! I would love to have that one, I'm jealous. But the picture of the balls made me puke in my mouth a little, those gotta be the worst looking balls ever made.
They look like 2 1/8" balls.
But I asked and the OP confirmed they are 2 1/4" balls and the pocket is the same one in the ruler picture.
Weird indeed.
Yours are not stock though. A mechanic did that, and put whatever miter angles he wanted.
Not true. The balls touch under the tops of the points due to the downward angle that keeps the balls from hopping up. It’s slight but makes a difference.
The ruler does not lie. (Except for parallax errors in a picture). Brunswick specifies their pockets tit to tit, which is how it’s always been.
Diamond changed that on their tables and calls a 4.5” pocket where the ball touches the facing. Sullivan (or someone else at Diamond, I forget) has an old video on YouTube showing that.
Here is another stock picture. In this picture, both balls are as far as they will go before they fall into the pocket. Still a decent sized gap. If the OP did this, the balls would jam in the pockets. He has a normal Tournament Edition table. He didn't get a bad one.
If the points are the outer most part of the rail, how would the balls touch an area inward from there first?
4.5" should be 4.5" regardless if it's across the equators of two spheres measuring 2.25" in diameter or across the span of a 4.5" measuring device.
Yep. It can't be any simpler. How people don't get this is beyond me.
Do you mean on my pic with the green cloth???? Balls wont fit in the opening.
You had a picture earlier that showed the balls sitting at an angle in the pocket. To properly use balls as meas. tools the line thru the centers needs to be parallel to a line across the pocket points. Look at rexus31's pics. that's how balls are used to measure pocket size.
I don't think they are "whatever he wanted", I believe the miters are correct for the pocket size. Josh at Club Billiards who was recommended by RKC (also taught by RKC I believe) is who worked on my rails. The pic still makes the valid comparison about the cushion points as I was trying to point out, they appear somewhat rounded on the GCVI.
Badpenguin
Well-known member
These reflections? (camera lens?) look a little weird, is that what you are referring to?
I was mainly focusing on the rounded points on the GCVI, I wasn't using my pic for pocket size reference. Since the balls don't actually fit between the points its a guess as to what actual pocket size is, unless I use smaller balls I suppose.
Those look like the tops of the pockets in the reflection. Is it possible its the rim of a lens of a regular camera, like a 35mm?? (not sure what they call the digital version of a 35mm body camera)
Badpenguin
Well-known member
It's still called a 35mm camera
digital '35mm' is called 'full-frame'. the image sensor produces same size image as a 35mm film camera.It's still called a 35mm camera