JA and Earl confirm it, 5x10 tables are a must.

Wags said:
I agree with Sherm. Done that been there. Rooms are the lifeblood of the sport. Leagues and bar boxes are currently the lifeblood of the pool room.

For challenge matches/gambling, I don't care what they play on.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind, this is solely a discussion about what the professionals should play on in tournaments and challenge matches.

Amature players can keep on playing on the bar boxes and the pool halls can keep their 9-foot tables for the amatures to play and practice on. When you hit the big leagues though? The field gets bigger and the game gets tougher.

This is all about the pro game and what would serve it best as a viable sport.
 
Wags said:
I agree with Sherm. Done that been there. Rooms are the lifeblood of the sport. Leagues and bar boxes are currently the lifeblood of the pool room.

For challenge matches/gambling, I don't care what they play on. The table that is played on now seems to be part of the negotiations. Heck, if you want a real challenge maybe they should play on an ocean table using 2.25" balls, 2.75 inch openings, v-rails but leave the round instead of points at the pocket entry. Is that where pool is headed? Wouldn't that be the ultimate challenge to see who is best?

The 14.1 exhibition that those two put on was nothing short of spectacular. There is no way Earl would have tried some of those thin cut break shots at speed into a 3 7/8" pocket much less that table length 8-ball? break shot. Players just aren't going to take that chance. So what you get is a bunch of safeties and kicks.

That 14.1 match confirmed to me that 4.5 x 9's with 4.5 pockets are perfect. They aren't good for growing the sport, but they are good for a great match.
Click to expand...

I agree, only adding that 9' should continue to be used in professional tournaments. As if it isn't hard enough on room owners, if all professional pool went to 10 footers even fewer people would want to come in to play on the "non-regulation" 9 foot tables. And they would have a hard time selling them to upgrade their rooms since the values would drop substantially.

For the odd challenge match, fine. And even then, it seems while it is getting a lot of attention here the few pros talking about playing on a 10 footer are doing so only in connection to playing one guy, Strickland. I really think the appeal of the ten foot table is being blown out of proportion.
 
Celtic said:
People wanting the sport to better test the skill of the top level players should not amaze you, it should be common sense. As I said, noone wants to watch poker pro's play "Go Fish", noone wants to watch Kasparov play Checkers, and noone wants to see pro golf switch from the courses they play on to mini-putt. Why anyone would think that dumbing down professional pool to equipement and games that no longer properly test the professional skill level is the proper thing to do in this sport and yet sounds so absurd in every other sport amazes me.

This sport USED to be played on 5x10 tables, and guess what it was almost exactly when they swtiched from those to 9 footers that pool also started to see a decline as a spectator sport. Did you know that world championships used to get hundreds of people watching the competition live, lots of press compared to today?

This sport will never be as popular as the NBA as a spectator sport, and noone is suggesting that it will be. But that is not a reason to throw in the towel completely and not aim to better the sport and increase the amount of people that might want to watch it. People on this forum often act as if the World Championships need to get viewership like the superboawl or we might as well not bother trying to fix anything. It is freaking absurd. This sport needs to change some stuff up, it needs to get more respect, it needs more fans, it needs more sponserships. We don't need it all overnight and we don't need to be right there with the huge sports, but any increase pool can manage is a positive and should be strived for.

Rest assured, the people clammoring for change and hoping for a better tomorrow hate this sport a hell of alot less then the apathetic group of people who don't care and think everything should just stay the way it is, with no pro tour, few pros making a living, and little respect or even awareness of this sport beyond a very small community of pool players.
Click to expand...

And how many checkers tournaments has Kasparov played in? How many go fish tournaments are pro poker players playing? And how many putt putt tourneys had Tiger won? Now how many pool tournaments have any current pros played in on a 5x10? I understand wanting to make the conditions tougher, but pool will not rise in popularity just because a tournament is being played on a 5x10.

Pool had a good resurgence after TCOM and there weren't many 5x10s floating around then either. Another resurgence most likely lies in American media these days and not in the size of the table.
 
As Nick Varner said, it's silly to contemplate moving to 10'ers when the real struggle is keeping the whole nation from switching to barboxes. IMO, bigger tables is not what we need. We need tougher games (9-ball is a joke for pros to play when the wing ball flies in every time and most shortstops beat the 10-ball ghost) and we need tighter pockets. I don't know anything about this bonus ball game, and I'm sure that johnny was just plugging for his sponsor to a certain degree, but I'm gonna look into it just because I think we need a tougher game that isn't so taxing on patience (one-pocket) and isn't such a bore for spectators (straight pool).

Aaron
 
Aaron_S said:
As Nick Varner said, it's silly to contemplate moving to 10'ers when the real struggle is keeping the whole nation from switching to barboxes. IMO, bigger tables is not what we need. We need tougher games (9-ball is a joke for pros to play when the wing ball flies in every time and most shortstops beat the 10-ball ghost) and we need tighter pockets. I don't know anything about this bonus ball game, and I'm sure that johnny was just plugging for his sponsor to a certain degree, but I'm gonna look into it just because I think we need a tougher game that isn't so taxing on patience (one-pocket) and isn't such a bore for spectators (straight pool).

Aaron
Click to expand...

Nick agreed that the game would be better on 5x10 tables. He said exactly that. His comment the keeping the game on 9 foot tables is a struggle itself just goes to show the completely wrong direction the game is going.
 
this is crazy if you want to kill pool go to 10 footers then the us open will have 40 players instead of 256 the best player will always win .the short stop will not bother entering the the money wont be there.just make alternating break and enjoy the slug fest on 9 footers at the masters in virginia and the pro event at SBE the pros broke and ran less then 20% on the TV tables that dont sound so easy to me for challenge matches thats fine if thats what the players want just MOI.
 
my point is without the shortstops in the tournament there wont be a pro event other than world events.Im not talking the luck factor just me personally if I catch a gear I can knock off a couple top players on a 10 footer not so much. and if we dont attend they dont have enough players to make a good tourny beleive me the Earls, MIKA ,and Shanes need us in the tournament
 
Celtic said:
god forbid the sport finally be a proper represntation of skill...

The best player SHOULD win, this is not poker and anyone who thinks it should be is wrong.
Click to expand...

And here I've been thinking professional pool was a proper demonstration of skill all these years. Now turns out all these great players I've been watching were just lucky. I stand corrected. :rolleyes:
 
DogsPlayingPool said:
And here I've been thinking professional pool was a proper demonstration of skill all these years. Now turns out all these great players I've been watching were just lucky. I stand corrected. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Actually, it was lucky that the guy who made the last ball won.
 
Wags said:
Actually, it was lucky that the guy who made the last ball won.
Click to expand...

That is 100% correct, it is usually luck that led to a person making a ball on that last break, or having their opponent coming up dry. It is luck when the person makes the 1 on the break and manages to come up with a shot instead of having no shot off the break. And that luck is usually what decides the outcome of matches because at the top level of this sport for the top 30 or so players they ALL run out the current tables this sport is played on with about the same success. It is not because they are all just as good as each other, it is because the tables are easy enough that they can all get out, so the lucky swings become the difference maker in a match.

Johnny and Earl's match in the 14.1 is a prime example, a skid on a ball and an unlucky scratch on a breakout were what determined the swings in the match, not missing shots or inability to play shape. Unlike the Earl vs Shane match on the 10-footer, that match was won and lost due to superior shape play and shooting.

Superior shooting should determine the winner, not which player fades more bad luck. In the 10-foot match skill decided the outcome, on the 9-foot in that 14.1 match rolls did.
 
Celtic said:
Nick agreed that the game would be better on 5x10 tables. He said exactly that. His comment the keeping the game on 9 foot tables is a struggle itself just goes to show the completely wrong direction the game is going.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree in the slightest that the game is better on the 10 footer. I used to have access to a 10' gold crown and I loved playing on it. My point is just that right now we are somewhere between 7 and 9 and moving the wrong direction, so I view discussions on going to 10'ers being moot at this point (which is how I interpreted what Nick said). Plus it just doesn't seem realistic when you consider that no major table manufacturers are currently even trying to market a 10' table (at least that I'm aware of).

Another part of the problem is something that Chad Vilmont mentioned to me. He plays in barbox tournaments almost exclusively, but not because he doesn't like the big tables. Most of his practice is on big tables, and I think he prefers them, but, as he put it, a guy can win every barbox tournament in the country and still be considered an amateur in many places. As long as this situation persists, where a player could actually lose opportunities/money by placing high in big table tournaments, I expect the migration to 7'ers to continue.

Aaron
 
Poolwiz99 said:
this is crazy if you want to kill pool go to 10 footers then the us open will have 40 players instead of 256 the best player will always win .the short stop will not bother entering the the money wont be there.just make alternating break and enjoy the slug fest on 9 footers at the masters in virginia and the pro event at SBE the pros broke and ran less then 20% on the TV tables that dont sound so easy to me for challenge matches thats fine if thats what the players want just MOI.
Click to expand...

No one is talking about (much less expecting) tournaments of any size going to 10-footers. It's pretty well documented that such a move would be cost prohibitive for the rooms, not to mention finding that many tables in the first place.

But would it be good for pool to have a single ten-foot table available in more places, and to be used in challenge matches.... hell yes!

For crying out loud, I'm an awful player and I'd like to play on such a table. I'm sure there are many others who would enjoy the challenge, as well.

Watching the best play on such a table was indeed a treat. Hopefully we'll see more of it in the future.
 
Williebetmore said:
snip...I think Celtic is right; rotation games on a 9 footer will almost always be decided by luck (luck of the break, luck of the layout, luck of the skid) among players with similar skill levels. Bravo for those promoting the 10 footer.
Click to expand...

And how does that change on a 10 footer?

Still have to break on the 10 footer, still have a lucky layout, still have skid. I don't understand what you are saying.

Sounds to me like luck is there all the time if that's the definition of luck.
 
Wags said:
And how does that change on a 10 footer?

Still have to break on the 10 footer, still have a lucky layout, still have skid. I don't understand what you are saying.

Sounds to me like luck is there all the time if that's the definition of luck.
Click to expand...

What you're saying is partially true, but the difference is that on a 9 footer any of the top pros, if he has an open layout should run out, this is not true on the 10 footer.
 
Celtic said:
Keep in mind, this is solely a discussion about what the professionals should play on in tournaments and challenge matches.

Amature players can keep on playing on the bar boxes and the pool halls can keep their 9-foot tables for the amatures to play and practice on. When you hit the big leagues though? The field gets bigger and the game gets tougher.

This is all about the pro game and what would serve it best as a viable sport.[/QUOTE]

Actually, I believe using a 10 foot table with 4 inch pockets would make the field smaller producing less revenue for the professional. There would NOT be the shortstops playing as much because they know they wouldn't have a chance. Less entries, less revenue. Sponsorship would be less simply because the numbers aren't there. Less sponsors, less money.

The pro game on a 10 foot would not make it a viable sport with only a small number of pro players and no real base except for AZ's pool elitists.

I think you are way off base here.
Click to expand...
 
cuesmith said:
What you're saying is partially true, but the difference is that on a 9 footer any of the top pros, if he has an open layout should run out, this is not true on the 10 footer.
Click to expand...

What is wrong with the top pros running out? Are you really rooting for them to miss? Does that make the game better if they miss more?

I really don't understand this!? Please explain.

As I stated earlier, I don't care what they do in challenge matches, but, to try to move the 10 footers into the tournament arena will absolutely be the death of the professional game. Listen to Nick Varner, he is correct about that.
 
Celtic said:
snip...Johnny and Earl's match in the 14.1 is a prime example, a skid on a ball and an unlucky scratch on a breakout were what determined the swings in the match, not missing shots or inability to play shape...snip...
Click to expand...

I don't know how you call those events luck. Skids mostly happen when slow tops is applied. A scratch happens when the cueball isn't controlled.
Those both sound like player error to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top