Huge pockets at WPC

[Keith Buck]

A very reasonable sentiment.
But i like the idea of some kid from a small town -with a good stroke -
shocking the pool world.
Moneymaker,very unheralded,did professional poker a big favor.

I think a kid can still come out of nowhere and vault himself into the top 25 in the world. If it happens too often it loses it's luster, though. Wu didn't win the 9-ball and 8-ball world championships in the same year because he got lucky.

I think the fact that poker is so well-suited to the internet had more to do with the explosion in poker than Moneymaker (though he did help, obviously). From what I have heard professional poker players don't really consider the winner of the WSOP Main Event to be the "world champ" anymore because it has become too much like a lottery.

 

[pt109]

I think a kid can still come out of nowhere and vault himself into the top 25 in the world. If it happens too often it loses it's luster, though. Wu didn't win the 9-ball and 8-ball world championships in the same year because he got lucky.

I think the fact that poker is so well-suited to the internet had more to do with the explosion in poker than Moneymaker (though he did help, obviously). From what I have heard professional poker players don't really consider the winner of the WSOP Main Event to be the "world champ" anymore because it has become too much like a lottery.

5 in. pockets,years ago,yielded few surprises.I just don't like it when
a long shot down a rail,with whitey near a rail,is considered a 'semi'
safety.On loose pockets ,when you play safe,you better be able to park
whitey on a dime.Often,on tight pockets,a man-hole cover does the job.

Good point on internet poker...uh,gotta go now...got top pair and bet
15% of my stack...the gentleman is pondering...!!! the #$%^&(* just
shoved all his chips.....

 

[KMRUNOUT]

So to take your example to the extreme, if the pockets were so big that a ball went in on the break every time and a C player could run out every game to the point where whoever won the lag won 99% of the matches, you would still call that a true 9-ball world championship? I would call it a lagging championship, lol.

Making 1 mistake and being down 7 games is 9-ball but I feel that should only happen if your opponent is playing well and shouldn't happen if your opponent is only playing OK.

Well stated, and a good example. IMHO, I always prefer to play on tighter pockets. At least then if I loose, it will be because my opponent could actually play.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

A very reasonable sentiment.
But i like the idea of some kid from a small town -with a good stroke -
shocking the pool world.
Moneymaker,very unheralded,did professional poker a big favor.

Are you implying that Wu is not a great ball pocketer? I think the shock to the pool world was due to his young age and unknown status at the time, not to the idea that he was able to win with sub-champion capability.

I don't think anyone is advocating micro-pockets or anything extreme, I just personally don't like the idea of the *World Championship* taking place on buckets. I think that a range of 4.25-4.5" is good. This isn't going to hurt a strong shooter too much. I find for myself that I tend to bear down and often shoot better on slightly smaller pockets. I get lazy on 5" pockets and miss sometimes because of it. Of course, my name doesn't appear on the WPC brackets, so my opinion may not be the most valuable lol! 9 ball is what I call "pure pool". In other words, it emphasizes the fundamental aspects of pool (shoot the ball in the hole, get position on next ball), while minimizing the strategic aspects (compared to 1hole, 8 ball, and 14.1). So technique and position patterns are what that game is all about. It is *not* only about ball pocketing, so making the pockets severely tight would not be appropriate. But ball pocketing is very important, so giant caverns is not appropriate either.

I don't know if anyone will successfully convince me otherwise of this idea: at the World Championship level, the conditions ought to favor the best players.

KMRUNOUT

 

[RunoutJJ]

Both players are playing on the same table. Sorry to tel you this but if the better player loses than he or she fricking lost!!! Dont cry about the pocket size!! It wasnt your turn to win it was yoru turn to lose. Simple as that.

I rather play a superior player on a 4" ball spitter but when your faced with a straight in length of the table draw shot for position down table??? Im willing to beat you'll be swearing under yoru breath about the mouse hole you have to make it in 5 feet away.

Play your heart out and if you lose at least you go down swinging. I rather lose having heart in my game than to lose and moan about how unfair it was

 

[mikeyfrost]

I like my pockets on a table the same way I like my women....TIGHT!

 

[nathandumoulin]

So to take your example to the extreme, if the pockets were so big that a ball went in on the break every time and a C player could run out every game to the point where whoever won the lag won 99% of the matches, you would still call that a true 9-ball world championship? I would call it a lagging championship, lol.

Making 1 mistake and being down 7 games is 9-ball but I feel that should only happen if your opponent is playing well and shouldn't happen if your opponent is only playing OK.

In my opinion, this comment trumps anything anyone else has said. Big pockets are an equalizer. In a short race to 9 using the magic rack, almost anyone can win. It's not right.

 

[Mike in MN]

In my opinion, this comment trumps anything anyone else has said. Big pockets are an equalizer. In a short race to 9 using the magic rack, almost anyone can win. It's not right.

I agree with Nathan. A world championship should have equipment that is at a world-class standard.

 

[JAW725]

We should all just quit this Banger's game and turn to Snooker, then we can work on getting those pockets tightened. BTW if some of you are so sporty get your asses in line for the next World 9Ball and maybe you can win ( with some luck ) :smile: Just sayin.

 

[JB Cases]

Well, they used to play on 10" tables with 4.25" pockets to determine world champions.

Has anybody determined the actual pocket sizes at the WPC? Watching the video between Holger Gries and Efren it appears as if Holger is freewheeling against Effy.

I was once told that if a better player is giving a spot then they want to play on loose pockets and not tight ones. I think that this discussion has been on here more than once.

Here is what's funny though, I have been to World Championships where all the players are complaining about the pockets being too tight.

When Chia Ching Wu won his title the pockets were playing tight. Down 17-12 he wins the game to go 17-13 and then runs five racks to win the title 17-18. With tight pockets.

I think it's clear from a shot making perspective that the numbers favor loose pockets. As such it's also relatively clear that this means weaker players will win more games than they would on tables with tighter pockets. Whoever said make the races longer probably has the best formula.

From my perspective as a decent amateur, tight pockets make me more nervous and make me tense. BUT I prefer to play on tables that are decently, not overly tight.

In our little local tournament we have four Gold Crowns with 4.25" pockets and 16 Brunswick knockoffs with 4.75" pockets. I refuse to play on the buckets. With races to five it's ridiculous the way the bangers get out sometimes. I really have to adjust my game to outplay them by keeping them away from any shots at all because the tables play so loose that they are able to slop balls in from everywhere.

However the CREAM does rise to the top anyway. Looking at the Bar Table championships it's usually top pros that snap it off and not top amateurs.

At the end of the day the world 9 ball champion will be the player who mastered the conditions and himself and outplayed everyone else.

 

[jay helfert]

Well, they used to play on 10" tables with 4.25" pockets to determine world champions.

Has anybody determined the actual pocket sizes at the WPC? Watching the video between Holger Gries and Efren it appears as if Holger is freewheeling against Effy.

I was once told that if a better player is giving a spot then they want to play on loose pockets and not tight ones. I think that this discussion has been on here more than once.

Here is what's funny though, I have been to World Championships where all the players are complaining about the pockets being too tight.

When Chia Ching Wu won his title the pockets were playing tight. Down 17-12 he wins the game to go 17-13 and then runs five racks to win the title 17-18. With tight pockets.

I think it's clear from a shot making perspective that the numbers favor loose pockets. As such it's also relatively clear that this means weaker players will win more games than they would on tables with tighter pockets. Whoever said make the races longer probably has the best formula.

From my perspective as a decent amateur, tight pockets make me more nervous and make me tense. BUT I prefer to play on tables that are decently, not overly tight.

In our little local tournament we have four Gold Crowns with 4.25" pockets and 16 Brunswick knockoffs with 4.75" pockets. I refuse to play on the buckets. With races to five it's ridiculous the way the bangers get out sometimes. I really have to adjust my game to outplay them by keeping them away from any shots at all because the tables play so loose that they are able to slop balls in from everywhere.

However the CREAM does rise to the top anyway. Looking at the Bar Table championships it's usually top pros that snap it off and not top amateurs.

At the end of the day the world 9 ball champion will be the player who mastered the conditions and himself and outplayed everyone else.

The last two sentences say it all, especially the final one.

 

[nathandumoulin]

At the end of the day the world 9 ball champion will be the player who mastered the conditions and himself and outplayed everyone else.

Good post JB.

Although the final statement is true, it does not justify having sub-professional equipment and standards.

On a relate note, I'm not certain if it's been discussed already, but Archer's players organization should certainly consider creating equipment standards as part of their requirements..

 

[kevpull]

Big Pockets

No question that tighter pockets are an advantage for the more skilled players. Conversely, looser pockets are great equalizers for the lesser skilled players. And that's the name of that tune. :smile:

What he said!!!!!!!!!!

 

[JB Cases]

Good post JB.

Although the final statement is true, it does not justify having sub-professional equipment.

True. However what is the equipment like at the WPC? I have not yet seen anyone who has said what the pocket size actually is.

The WPA has certain standards. I am sure that the pockets are at least 4.5". It goes the other way too, I remember the American players complaining about pockets being too tight.

I am watching the Reyes/Gries match and both players have missed balls which I would feel that they should make on any table.

And what is professional equipment anyway? Pool professionals play on whatever is set up in the arena.

Just a month ago Johnny Archer was talking about the new organization that he is heading is going to demand standardized rules (he didn't mention equipment specs).

Gries was up 4:1 in alternate break format - now it's 6:6 - it's kind of like he said "holy crap I am beating Efren" and then fell apart.

It is too bad though that all these events lately have some sort of asterisk beside them - sloppy pockets, players barred due to politics, goofy rule changes, etc....

 

[driven]

If big pockets make it easier for an "unskilled" player to run out, imagine what it does for the skilled player.

C'mon, now. Crying about the size of the pockets is cry-baby crap. Last time I checked, everyone plays on the same table. As for making 1 mistake and being down 7 games - that's pool and that's 9ball. Don't like it, well-- don't make that mistake. Just my opinion.

here is my take on pocket size fwiw

the better player is making his shots on even the tightest of pockets, think Ronnie O'Sullivan. while the lesser player is certainly missing a good pct. the larger pockets make no difference to the better player, he is making everything anyway, but even things up quite a bit for an average one.lots of the shots he will miss on a tight table are now going to go in.
steven

 

[poolnoob]

Here is my take. I am all for smaller pocket. But I don't think I agree with players who cries about it when they lose. You lose and that's it ,period.

 

[sarahrousey]

Keep in mind that even though the pockets are huge....it was still alternate break. That means everyone had a chance to make the wing ball "95%" of the time. It wasn't like they were using the magic rack and winner breaks. Then I can see the argument that you could possibly not get to the table and the pockets are so big anyone can run out.

*I'm not sure if it stayed alternate break for the final 64 and on*

Sarah

 

[Johnnyt]

here is my take on pocket size fwiw

the better player is making his shots on even the tightest of pockets, think Ronnie O'Sullivan. while the lesser player is certainly missing a good pct. the larger pockets make no difference to the better player, he is making everything anyway, but even things up quite a bit for an average one.lots of the shots he will miss on a tight table are now going to go in.
steven

I agree with the above.
I wish they would make corner pockets 4 1/2" standard for sanctioned and the larger inderpendent tournaments. Anything under 4 1/2" is not pool anymore, it's a gaff table for one group that plays on it all the time IMO. Johnnyt

 

[JoeyA]

Well said!!!

WOW Cheez Dawg! Not to hijack the thread but I REALLY like the looks of your cue. That's unique and attractive!

Who made your cue?

How about some specs on the materials in the cue? I don't get very excited about cues because I like cues for their playing ability rather than their looks but yours is SPECIAL!

 

[JoeyA]

Good post JB.

Although the final statement is true, it does not justify having sub-professional equipment and standards.

On a relate note, I'm not certain if it's been discussed already, but Archer's players organization should certainly consider creating equipment standards as part of their requirements..

Nathan,
Table conditions isn't the problem. It's really all about the money and how there isn't enough to go around. It's all about whose ox is getting gored.

We wish there was some live streaming...

Not wanting to hijack the thread but there are lots of problems and some of them can be fixed by the professional players themselves.

I'm not privy to any of the players' organization but I'm sure the top players have discussed tables and equipment standards and are leaning toward more "difficult" or "tighter" pockets versus looser equipment.

Here's the catch-22: As the players' organization forces their "professional standards" and rules that favor the most elite players, many players that are not the elite, will simply quit supporting the professional tournaments. While the top players may want to keep the top players in the winner's circle, this perspective could create a circle of increasing despair.

"Insuring" that the same top players are always in the winner's circle is a SURE way to insure the fledgling, professional tournament circle's demise.

If there were huge advertising dollars being thrown at our sport, it would make great sense to make the equipment more difficult but even in golf there are courses that are more & less difficult with different conditions and terrain.

I think for the moment, professional players would be wise to support less stringent conditions since their tournaments purses are directly related to the number of participants.

The more players at these tournaments, the more sponsors are going to be willing to provide added money. If you have 16 pro players and 32 fans showing up to play and watch a "PROFESSIONAL" pool tournament, you can EXPECT tournament promoters and sponsors to look for another avenue to invest their money.

Thank goodness that the Seminole Tribe has chosen to continue supporting men's professional pool like they have. The pros should take up one of the tribe's charities and provide some free entertainment at one of their events to reciprocate.

Luckily too we still have people like Mark Griffin trying to help the professional players succeed.

While I'm on the soap box, did any of you notice that Charlie Williams and Rodney Morris were investing their time entertaining the U.S. TROOPS in the Middle East? Professional players need to be doing more of this sort of reciprocation if they want to be viewed as professionals. An increase in GENUINE appreciation of the lesser skilled opponents and those other philanthropic people like tournament directors, referees, presenters, commentators, fans, live streamers and the like, both privately and publicly could do wonders for the "professonal pool players".

I may be in the minority but I don't believe a superior level of skill at any sport is what dictates whether you are a professional or not.

Each professional pool player needs to be looking for ways to give back to the public, the fans and the world in general. With this perspective and attitude they may be able to begin to define themselves as true professionals. Until that time, their skill level will only carry them so far.

Hopefully, one day, we can have a oil gusher of sorts like this one pumping money/oil into pool rather than into the Gulf of Mexico.