Japan Open pocket sizes, are they nuts?

[hang-the-9]

Maybe it's just the camera angle, but they look to be playing their tournament on under 4" pockets. I tried to capture the 10 going in and it looks like the opening is maybe 1.5 - 1.75 balls wide.

Is that normal pro pocket size in Japan?

 

[Celtic]

I would guess in Asia they see the benefit of tighter pockets at the pro level and the reality that it is the only way to truly separate the best from the pack and let the cream rise to the top. Pool is actually doing pretty well in Asia and seems to be increasing in respect and popularity and it is good to see that they are doing things like this in the game over there. Here in America where people think the game should be played on buckets and all of the players should run out with ease after a good break the game is in it's ever increasing downward spiral and people remain oblivious as to the reasons why.

The professional game needs to be played on equipment that can separate the top player in the world and the 20th best player in the world and a 4.5 inch 9-foot table certainly is not going to do it in normal tournament length races. This game needs to have the chance to see a "Tiger Woods" or a "Roger Federer" rise up above the rest of the field, and atm it simply does not allow this to take place due to the fact that the game is easy enough that the top 25 or so people on this planet can play on a 4.5 inch pocket 9-foot table at exactly the same speed after the break. So you are left with "the most effective breaker wins the match" scenarios for each match, and that is lame.

 

[Jaden]

I couldnt agree more...

I would guess in Asia they see the benefit of tighter pockets at the pro level and the reality that it is the only way to truly separate the best from the pack and let the cream rise to the top. Pool is actually doing pretty well in Asia and seems to be increasing in respect and popularity and it is good to see that they are doing things like this in the game over there. Here in America where people think the game should be played on buckets and all of the players should run out with ease after a good break the game is in it's ever increasing downward spiral and people remain oblivious as to the reasons why.

The professional game needs to be played on equipment that can separate the top player in the world and the 20th best player in the world and a 4.5 inch 9-foot table certainly is not going to do it in normal tournament length races. This game needs to have the chance to see a "Tiger Woods" or a "Roger Federer" rise up above the rest of the field, and atm it simply does not allow this to take place due to the fact that the game is easy enough that the top 25 or so people on this planet can play on a 4.5 inch pocket 9-foot table at exactly the same speed after the break. So you are left with "the most effective breaker wins the match" scenarios for each match, and that is lame.

One thing I'll add though is that there is the perception that with the dead money, the tournaments can't survive and that without easier conditions, the dead money disappears.

Me, I say bring on the tight conditions, I love them...

If every table could play like table 1 at hardtimes, I would be loving life.

Jaden

 

[playpool2]

"The professional game needs to be played on equipment that can separate the top player in the world and the 20th best player in the world and a 4.5 inch 9-foot table certainly is not going to do it in normal tournament length races. This game needs to have the chance to see a "Tiger Woods" or a "Roger Federer" rise up above the rest of the field, and atm it simply does not allow this to take place due to the fact that the game is easy enough that the top 25 or so people on this planet can play on a 4.5 inch pocket 9-foot table at exactly the same speed after the break. So you are left with "the most effective breaker wins the match" scenarios for each match, and that is lame."

Odd.... I watched Roger Federer play in the US Open with a multi million dollar prize fund up for grabs, and I'm pretty sure the tennis courts are normal regular size courts.

Do you think somebody made a mistake? I also think Tiger Woods plays on the same links as all the other pro's. Whats up with that?

 

[hang-the-9]

So you are left with "the most effective breaker wins the match" scenarios for each match, and that is lame.

The guy that sets up the best usually wins in most sports/games.

Best kick off, best serve, having the first move in chess, etc...

Has tennis tried to slow down the 6' 6" guys with a gazillion mile serve? I remember when tennis was a lot of moving and play, the last time I watched it seems it was Huge Serve - other guy hits the ball back barely - server hits an easy winner. I did not like that much, I have not watched tennis in a long time due to how I see the game changing. What I do like in pool is 10 ball and not making the equipment harder. Although the top few pool players have made the 10 ball break almost as automatic as the 9 ball break, it's not nearly the same as 9 ball where I see B level players knocking in 1-2-3 balls every time.

I'd rather see 4.5" pockets or close to it, why setup the game so only the top few players win all the time? They don't tighten the net up in basketball to make it hard to make shots so only the top 10 players in the NBA can score 20 points or more a game.

 

[CJ Wiley]

they did do something about the serve....they made the tennis ball heavier.

The guy that sets up the best usually wins in most sports/games.

Best kick off, best serve, having the first move in chess, etc...

Has tennis tried to slow down the 6' 6" guys with a gazillion mile serve? I remember when tennis was a lot of moving and play, the last time I watched it seems it was Huge Serve - other guy hits the ball back barely - server hits an easy winner. I did not like that much, I have not watched tennis in a long time due to how I see the game changing. What I do like in pool is 10 ball and not making the equipment harder. Although the top few pool players have made the 10 ball break almost as automatic as the 9 ball break, it's not nearly the same as 9 ball where I see B level players knocking in 1-2-3 balls every time.

I'd rather see 4.5" pockets or close to it, why setup the game so only the top few players win all the time? They don't tighten the net up in basketball to make it hard to make shots so only the top 10 players in the NBA can score 20 points or more a game.

Actually they did do something about the serve....they made the tennis ball heavier.

If you watched Wimbledon this last year the players don't "serve and volley" anymore, they stay back and hit ground strokes. You use to see the grass at Center Court worn down around the net and a path coming in from the service line.....not anymore.

Too much advantage on the first shot definitely makes the games less appealing. They've also changed the rough on the PGA courses.....Hank Haney told me if they really want to take the advantage away from the long hitters they should take the rough OUT, not make it higher.....this way a drive hit poorly will travel clear out of play instead of getting caught (and saved) by the rough.

 

[GaryB]

One thing I'll add though is that there is the perception that with the dead money, the tournaments can't survive and that without easier conditions, the dead money disappears.

Me, I say bring on the tight conditions, I love them...

If every table could play like table 1 at hardtimes, I would be loving life.

Jaden

Table 6 is no walk in the park either.

 

[Jaden]

Yeah...

Table 6 is no walk in the park either.

I almost said, either table 1 or table 6 but most of the people in AZ land will only have seen what it's like from the streams and most of the streams were of table 1.

Jaden

 

[Masayoshi]

Usually tournaments in Japan are played on relatively easy equipment. I wasn't in attendance this year, maybe they made the final arena tables tougher than previous years.

 

[jalapus logan]

Though I understand the argument for tighter pockets, I still must disagree. Maybe if rotation based games were the only pool game then perhaps it would make sense. Unlike, say, snooker where there is really only one game and everyone under the sun understands what the game is, pool is a collection of games requiring different skill sets. Mastering these diverse skills is what allows the cream to rise, not just ball potting.

 

[Petros Andrikop]

4.5" pockets are fine both for competition and practice too. Part of pool's beauty comes from precise position played by cheating pocket, and this has to do also with variety of strokes used.
Position in pool is much more essential that pocketing balls (food for thought against any "over-mechanical approach" of the game...), this has been also proven by the difference between Snooker and Pool players when competing in Pool. Most of the Snooker players could not compete against the pro Pool players, not only due to the brake...

 

[elvicash]

As to the dead money, add enough money and there will be new higher quality talent and the current dead money will be unneeded to fill a tourney.

If and when pool is on TV it will not be well served by thimble sized pockets with lots of missing. Safety play is one thing but missed ball after ball will get make the public think that is how I play too so these guys ain't all that.

As for tourneys with tight pockets it will separate the levels of play and the cream will rise to the top. I think they play 8 ball in china on tables with rounded fairly tight snooker type pockets.

Fairs fair for all, play it however you like, add money players will come. They know that in China, Qatar and Japan. We need more big added money events in pool and until the advertisers see a value out of adding the money in the US then US pro pool is in trouble, retirements will continue.

 

[spktur]

Comparing tennis with pool and golf is like apples and oranges. In tennis you're playing your opponent, in pool and golf you should be playing the table or course, you're opponent is on the side lines.

 

[Pidge]

Tight pockets on the TV and tournament tables the pros play on aren't so much of a big deal for them. The cloth is so quick and the rails are so responsive that they float most balls in anyway, and rarely have to hammer a ball in to gain position.
On a bar table with beer soaked cloth and dead rails you would come to hate the game pretty quickly.

In snooker there is a big difference between TV tables, club tables and even amateur event tables. The gulf between the top 16 in snooker and the rest, upto the top amateurs is huge. Compare that to pool and you have maybe 5 players in 9b that are way ahead of everyone else and everyone else is fair game.

I could never imagine taking more than 2 frames off Ronnie O'Sullivan in a race to 10, but in pool, I'd fancy taking atleast 4 or 5 frames from SVB in 9b with alternate breaks on a table with 4.5" pockets. Not saying SVB isn't as good as Ronnie (I'm sure if SVB was born in the UK he would have been one of the great snooker players of the modern era) its just the game of 9b makes it easier for no bodies to win against great players if the pockets aren't severely reduced.

 

[Celtic]

Odd.... I watched Roger Federer play in the US Open with a multi million dollar prize fund up for grabs, and I'm pretty sure the tennis courts are normal regular size courts.

Do you think somebody made a mistake? I also think Tiger Woods plays on the same links as all the other pro's. Whats up with that?

Do you really? You thing the courses and conditions that Tiger plays on in a US Open or Masters are anything close to what you are playing on when you wack a golf ball around on your local golf course?


And as far as Tennis goes there is a VERY big distinction between Tennis and Pool, and that is Roger Federer's opponent has to deal with returning every single shot that Roger hits and every shot that opponent hits is dealt with by Roger. Pool is completely unlike Tennis in that it is a game played by one person at one time and only when they miss does the opponent then get to take sole control of the table. The difficulty of tennis when you are playing Roger Federer is not the court itself, it is Roger himself, he gets to answer every single shot you take and has an effect on every single move you make in a match. Pool is rarely ever like that but for in very rare safety battles.

You might as well say Mike Tennis fought in the same boxing rings, it was not the difficulty of the ring that led people to get knocked out when they faced Mike Tyson, it was the fact you had to deal with the attack from Mike Tyson himself every moment you are in that ring.

Pool and golf are different, as are bowling, darts, and other games where opponents have only a limited ability to affect their opponents performance and in those sports the difficulty thus cannot be created by the opponent itself and must be created by the field of play. Snooker is another such game, and they largely have it figured out and that is why Ronnie O'Sullivan is a more internationally famous name then any pool player today.

 

[west9622]

While I'll accept that to practice on 4" pockets on new cloth or just for ball pocketing is sometimes fun, I don't agree that 4" pockets are good for the game. Who wants to watch SVB miss. The average pool hall isn't going to be able to keep new cloth on the table all the time and having to shoot a ball down a rail on a table with 4" pockets is hard enough, let alone if you have to do anything with the cue ball on slower/worn cloth.
I also agree that on a 4.5" pocket it could be possible for the better then average player to take a few games off of SVB, you still aren't likely to beat him, and if you do then you earned it. An above average snooker player could very likely take a few games off Ronnie O., but that player still isn't likely to beat him.
Remember if the better player always won, then there would be no reason to play the game.

 

[Johnnyt]

U.S pro players are too spoiled, always playing on perfect tables with perfect balls and adjustable room temp/humidity. Anything that's not perfect they ***** and complain about like little babies. That's why players from the PI come over here and get the speed of any table condition down fast. Johnnyt

 

[Bella Don't Cry]

I would guess in Asia they see the benefit of tighter pockets at the pro level and the reality that it is the only way to truly separate the best from the pack and let the cream rise to the top. Pool is actually doing pretty well in Asia and seems to be increasing in respect and popularity and it is good to see that they are doing things like this in the game over there. Here in America where people think the game should be played on buckets and all of the players should run out with ease after a good break the game is in it's ever increasing downward spiral and people remain oblivious as to the reasons why.

The professional game needs to be played on equipment that can separate the top player in the world and the 20th best player in the world and a 4.5 inch 9-foot table certainly is not going to do it in normal tournament length races. This game needs to have the chance to see a "Tiger Woods" or a "Roger Federer" rise up above the rest of the field, and atm it simply does not allow this to take place due to the fact that the game is easy enough that the top 25 or so people on this planet can play on a 4.5 inch pocket 9-foot table at exactly the same speed after the break. So you are left with "the most effective breaker wins the match" scenarios for each match, and that is lame.

HERE HERE... some valid points.

 

[poolmouse]

The professional game needs to be played on equipment that can separate the top player in the world and the 20th best player in the world and a 4.5 inch 9-foot table certainly is not going to do it in normal tournament length races.

With all due respect I'm calling bullshit on that one. If pool "pros" wants to be respected, they've got to respect established standards.

 

[Celtic]

Who wants to watch SVB miss.

Who wants to watch him never miss? Who wants to watch a professional player going through the motions and never being tested and never really having much of a chance of missing after a decent break? Is it really that interesting when the announcer says "well after that break I would venture to say he is out", and every time they are right. Is that really that interesting to watch someone who is simply going through the motions and not really being put to a test of the peak of their true skill?