Going from a 7 ft table to a 9ft table!

[richiebalto]

Why is it much harder to go from an 7ft table on to a 9ft table?

Why is it easier to go from a 9ft table to a 7ft table?

I think I know the correct answer, but I would like to see what the rest of my Brothers and sisters here at AZ think!

I know probably one of the most stupidest thread ever at AZ.

 

[Neil]

Why is it much harder to go from an 7ft table on to a 9ft table?

Why is it easier to go from a 9ft table to a 7ft table?

I think I know the correct answer, but I would like to see what the rest of my Brothers and sisters here at AZ think!

I know probably one of the most stupidest thread ever at AZ.

Having played both for many years, the biggest differences I see is this- on the bigger tables you have to allow for being able to reach the ball. That sometimes means you take a longer shot. On a barbox, you have to tighten up your position. Other than that, it is 90% mental. Think about it, a long shot on a barbox is still a long shot on a 9' table. You aren't really moving the cb around that much farther at all.

 

[Busboy]

Pockets tend too be tighter as well on big table

 

[Neil]

Pockets tend too be tighter as well on big table

Valley to a 9' for sure. Not so on Diamond 7' to 9'.

In reality, the pocket opening is the same size on a Valley. But the short shelf makes them play like they are much larger.

 

[The Saw]

Why is it much harder to go from an 7ft table on to a 9ft table?

Why is it easier to go from a 9ft table to a 7ft table?

I think I know the correct answer, but I would like to see what the rest of my Brothers and sisters here at AZ think!

I know probably one of the most stupidest thread ever at AZ.

The rails and how the ball comes off rails different on each table. Bar table, even from identical tables with the same or similar rubber like Diamonds, the rails on the small table seem to bounce harder.

Plus, I think that the middle of the table on a 9'er plays slower.

 

[Derek]

Well, there is 40% more table area on a big table. Doesn't take much of a stroke to play on a small table but you better be able to stroke it on a big table.

Doesn't mean there are not any good platers on a barbox but just about anyone can be a hero on a small table. Definitely not the case on a 9 footer.

Playing on a small table is like playing poker. Get ready for a lot of bad beats.

 

[poolguy4u]

On a 7 foot table you never have a long shot.

And if you are old, you don't have to walk as far.:thumbup:

 

[Neil]

Anyone know how to figure out the margin of error difference on pocketing a ball from 5 1/2' vs. 7 1/2'? (6" off rail for cb, one foot to ob from cb. That leaves 7 1/2' to the pocket at the longest normal procedure long shot)

 

[Dunnn51]

Why is it much harder to go from an 7ft table on to a 9ft table?

Why is it easier to go from a 9ft table to a 7ft table?

I think I know the correct answer, but I would like to see what the rest of my Brothers and sisters here at AZ think!

I know probably one of the most stupidest thread ever at AZ.

It's the cloth mannnnnnn !!
I know. I had this problem too going from a 7ft to a 9 ft in 2 different leagues. You go from that nappy 300 royal or Mali cloth to some well run-in 760, 860/860 HR, and it plays with you.
That 300 cloth probably is dirtier than a 12yr old's jeans after a motocross too !

Pockets and cushions aside; once you get the felt down its smooth sailing :wink:

 

[pdcue]

Anyone know how to figure out the margin of error difference on pocketing a ball from 5 1/2' vs. 7 1/2'? (6" off rail for cb, one foot to ob from cb. That leaves 7 1/2' to the pocket at the longest normal procedure long shot)

I do.

Dale

 

[mamics]

I do.

Dale

Aww c'mon Dale - ur not being very helpful...

Anyone know how to figure out the margin of error difference on pocketing a ball from 5 1/2' vs. 7 1/2'? (6" off rail for cb, one foot to ob from cb. That leaves 7 1/2' to the pocket at the longest normal procedure long shot)

Neil, I have crunched the numbers for you, the resultant computations = "Significant".

Cheers.

 

[Neil]

Aww c'mon Dale - ur not being very helpful...



Neil, I have crunched the numbers for you, the resultant computations = "Significant".

Cheers.

Well, would you mind putting them up here?

 

[mamics]

Sure, No Probs.

42

:thumbup:

 

[Straightpool_99]

...................

 

[icucybe]

I find 9ft usually more consistent and better manatined. They are more predictable than the avereage Valley you find at a bar, also on a 9ft you dont have to be so precised on position like 7ft.

Now I observed is usually harder for player to adjust from 7ft to 9ft because they lack that big stroke for position. Sometimes you need that big stoke to move the cue ball on a 9ft, you can get away with not having a big storke more on a 7ft. You have to move the que ball more on 9ft, now the cloth is usually faster on 9ft so speed is another issue when you are used to a slow cloth.

If you have a nice streight stroke on a 7ft you wont have an issue with long streight in shots on a 9ft, maybe only with long range 1/2 ball or more angle shots.

Another thing is most 7ft in my area pockets are way bigger and more forgiving than the 9ft.

 

[Poolshootindon]

Interesting

Why is it much harder to go from an 7ft table on to a 9ft table?

Why is it easier to go from a 9ft table to a 7ft table?

I think I know the correct answer, but I would like to see what the rest of my Brothers and sisters here at AZ think!

I know probably one of the most stupidest thread ever at AZ.

I found it to be just the opposite. Having played on 9's for so long and being able to let the stroke out it was difficult for me to adjust to the 7's and have to move the cue ball in such a confined area. Especially playing 8 ball.

Don

 

[asmith74]

For me switching from a bar table to a nine foot table was just a matter of time spent on the larger table. All of the angels are basically the same. Twice as long as wide, but you defiantly need a better stroke with the added distance and larger shelf. Also it seems that you need to be more aware of scratching pitfalls on a bar table. The only way I can wrap my head around that one is that the pockets are the same size on both but the percentage of the area that the pocket controls is higher on a smaller table. If that makes sense.

 

[Bambu]

Why is it much harder to go from an 7ft table on to a 9ft table?

Why is it easier to go from a 9ft table to a 7ft table?

I think I know the correct answer, but I would like to see what the rest of my Brothers and sisters here at AZ think!

I know probably one of the most stupidest thread ever at AZ.

Mostly the distance, but reach becomes a factor too. Depending on what youre used to, the cue ball itself would also matter alot. The cloth, the rubber. Less throw too on the big table, assuming big tables are cleaner, with better maintained ball sets.

 

[Icon of Sin]

Why is it much harder to go from an 7ft table on to a 9ft table?

Why is it easier to go from a 9ft table to a 7ft table?

I think I know the correct answer, but I would like to see what the rest of my Brothers and sisters here at AZ think!

I know probably one of the most stupidest thread ever at AZ.

Well for me... its the pocket size/design and the length that makes the 9 footer so tough.

Most barboxes around us (Maryland) are Valleys. You will find the occasional Diamond (in the rough) here and there though.

The pockets on a valley are a just insanely easier then a 9 foot gold crown. The width, the shelf... everything on the big table makes it more difficult for the ball to go in, not to mention the extra 2 feet on the a long straight in.

The big table keeps people more honest. I have seen way lesser skilled players break and run 9ball on a valley that have no chance of doing it on a 9 foot gold crown.

 

[dr_dave]

Anyone know how to figure out the margin of error difference on pocketing a ball from 5 1/2' vs. 7 1/2'? (6" off rail for cb, one foot to ob from cb. That leaves 7 1/2' to the pocket at the longest normal procedure long shot)

Neil (and anybody else who is interested),

Equations and plots for determining shot margins for error for various CB-OB distances, OB-pocket distances, and cut angles can be found here:

[URL="http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/cut.html"]cut shot margin for error resource page[/URL]

Margin for error depends directly on distance (CB-OB or OB-pocket). If assuming everything else is the same in the comparison (pocket geometry and conditions), since 7.5' is about 36% longer than 5.5', the longer shot is about 36% more difficult.

Now, a good player might not think the longer shot is much more difficult because they can make either of them a high percentage of the time. Howerver, a player that has less precision with their aiming, alignment and stroke, the 36% increase in difficulty can be significant.

Regards,
Dave