My review of Diamond Pro/Am table

iusedtoberich

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Last night I played on a 2 or 3 year old Diamond Pro/Am table. I played about 8 hours of a gambling one pocket session. I've been playing on Brunswick Gold Crowns 1 through 4 for my entire 15 yr pool career.

I can't believe how many of you guys love these tables. From a player's standpoint, I hated them.


Dislikes:
1. The frame kept getting in my way. My feet would often hit the table legs, forcing me to change my stance. And my lower leg would often hit the skirt of the table. I'm tall but this never happens on a Gold Crown. I noticed it immediately.

2. No ball storage. You can't play one pocket easily this way. We placed on the floor the ball tray for one guy and the rack for the other guy by each of our pockets. Of course they would occasionally get in our way, and it was not a "graceful" way to keep score.

3. Ball return. I keep hearing how great and fast and quiet the ball return is on these tables. Unfortunately, that is only half the story. Once the balls make their quick and silent trek to the ball gully, they are a pain to get out. The slope of the floor of the gully is so slight, that if you bump the balls with your fingers trying to get them out, they climb up the slight angle and take several long seconds to come back down.

4. The cushions. The cushions were way to fast. The ball picked up a lot more speed coming off the cushion. This was especially noticeable playing one hole with all the bank shots. I will say perhaps this was an installation issue, but I have heard other players mention this, including one of the pros on the Gabe/Tony 1 pocket thread where one guy refused to play on a diamond with artemis cushions because they are artificially fast.

There were a few likes I had:
1. The table seemed sturdier. When bumping it with my body there seemed to be absolutely no movement of the table.

2. The finish on the rails looked brand new. And these tables were 2 or 3 years old in a commercial environment.

Overall as a player, I was very disappointed with the tables ball reaction play and features that make playing easier.
 
iusedtoberich said:
Last night I played on a 2 or 3 year old Diamond Pro/Am table. I played about 8 hours of a gambling one pocket session. I've been playing on Brunswick Gold Crowns 1 through 4 for my entire 15 yr pool career.

I can't believe how many of you guys love these tables. From a player's standpoint, I hated them.


Dislikes:
1. The frame kept getting in my way. My feet would often hit the table legs, forcing me to change my stance. And my lower leg would often hit the skirt of the table. I'm tall but this never happens on a Gold Crown. I noticed it immediately.

2. No ball storage. You can't play one pocket easily this way. We placed on the floor the ball tray for one guy and the rack for the other guy by each of our pockets. Of course they would occasionally get in our way, and it was not a "graceful" way to keep score.

3. Ball return. I keep hearing how great and fast and quiet the ball return is on these tables. Unfortunately, that is only half the story. Once the balls make their quick and silent trek to the ball gully, they are a pain to get out. The slope of the floor of the gully is so slight, that if you bump the balls with your fingers trying to get them out, they climb up the slight angle and take several long seconds to come back down.

4. The cushions. The cushions were way to fast. The ball picked up a lot more speed coming off the cushion. This was especially noticeable playing one hole with all the bank shots. I will say perhaps this was an installation issue, but I have heard other players mention this, including one of the pros on the Gabe/Tony 1 pocket thread where one guy refused to play on a diamond with artemis cushions because they are artificially fast.

There were a few likes I had:
1. The table seemed sturdier. When bumping it with my body there seemed to be absolutely no movement of the table.

2. The finish on the rails looked brand new. And these tables were 2 or 3 years old in a commercial environment.

Overall as a player, I was very disappointed with the tables ball reaction play and features that make playing easier.
Click to expand...

Where was you upper leg when your lower leg was chasin that skirt.?:D I love my GC IV.
 
iusedtoberich said:
4. The cushions. The cushions were way to fast. The ball picked up a lot more speed coming off the cushion. This was especially noticeable playing one hole with all the bank shots. I will say perhaps this was an installation issue, but I have heard other players mention this, including one of the pros on the Gabe/Tony 1 pocket thread where one guy refused to play on a diamond with artemis cushions because they are artificially fast.
Click to expand...

This is a common complaint with most of the pros that I have talked to.
 
iusedtoberich said:
4. The cushions. The cushions were way to fast. The ball picked up a lot more speed coming off the cushion. This was especially noticeable playing one hole with all the bank shots. I will say perhaps this was an installation issue, but I have heard other players mention this, including one of the pros on the Gabe/Tony 1 pocket thread where one guy refused to play on a diamond with artemis cushions because they are artificially fast.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is, the Artemis rails are an IMPROVEMENT!
They are still way too fast though.

If you go back about 7 or 8 years, when diamond first came out with the smart table, and they debuted them somewhere around the DCC of whatever year it was, those rails they had on THOSE tables were absolutely ridiculous.

Especially in the bank pool tournament.

If you hit anything with some pace, the angle would straighten out severely because of the messed up profile the rails had, and if you didn't know and were trying to straighten a bank out by hitting it with some pace, it might go airborne on the return visit after hitting the rail, and smash you in the face or off the table.

So, if you experienced those rails (which were changed to artemis either the next year or the year after that), you'd probably have a LITTLE different perspective. Not a whole lot, but just a little.

Although, i WILL agree that the artemis rail speed is much quicker then what i am used to as i too have played on GC's for most of my pool days.

Unless that is the pool room had upgraded to some faster rail on their GC's where i would also be wanting to kill myself after a simple "2 rail out of the corner" position shot sent me all the way down table nowhere near where i wanted to be.

They say that good players adjust to the equipment, but when it comes to rails that go crazy, you can't kill a ball every single shot when it scares you that it might pick up speed off the rail. That's just friggin too hard.

Your just going to have to play using extra rails, settling for longer shots and get used to the fact that your going to play more up and down position in situations where you think your just gonna bounce off the rail and hold the cue ball for position.

It sucks, but that's the only way to manage rails that go mach speeds.
 
iusedtoberich said:
Last night I played on a 2 or 3 year old Diamond Pro/Am table. I played about 8 hours of a gambling one pocket session. I've been playing on Brunswick Gold Crowns 1 through 4 for my entire 15 yr pool career.

I can't believe how many of you guys love these tables. From a player's standpoint, I hated them.


Dislikes:
1. The frame kept getting in my way. My feet would often hit the table legs, forcing me to change my stance. And my lower leg would often hit the skirt of the table. I'm tall but this never happens on a Gold Crown. I noticed it immediately.

2. No ball storage. You can't play one pocket easily this way. We placed on the floor the ball tray for one guy and the rack for the other guy by each of our pockets. Of course they would occasionally get in our way, and it was not a "graceful" way to keep score.

3. Ball return. I keep hearing how great and fast and quiet the ball return is on these tables. Unfortunately, that is only half the story. Once the balls make their quick and silent trek to the ball gully, they are a pain to get out. The slope of the floor of the gully is so slight, that if you bump the balls with your fingers trying to get them out, they climb up the slight angle and take several long seconds to come back down.

4. The cushions. The cushions were way to fast. The ball picked up a lot more speed coming off the cushion. This was especially noticeable playing one hole with all the bank shots. I will say perhaps this was an installation issue, but I have heard other players mention this, including one of the pros on the Gabe/Tony 1 pocket thread where one guy refused to play on a diamond with artemis cushions because they are artificially fast.

There were a few likes I had:
1. The table seemed sturdier. When bumping it with my body there seemed to be absolutely no movement of the table.

2. The finish on the rails looked brand new. And these tables were 2 or 3 years old in a commercial environment.

Overall as a player, I was very disappointed with the tables ball reaction play and features that make playing easier.
Click to expand...


I have owned a Diamond Pro-Am for nearly a year now and I would like to respond to your post.

#1. The issue with the table skirts. This is the first time I've ever heard this. The bottom of the skirts are 14" off the floor, more than enough room to put your foot under them. They have never gotten in the way of any player on my table, and no one has ever mentioned it being a problem to them.

#2. Regarding ball storage. I agree this is an important thing to have, especially playing One Pocket. Diamond does make a metal ball rack (rubber coated) that will easily hold 8-10 balls, on either side. It attaches to the table right under the ball tray. It works quite well and can be ordered with the table. I recommend it. On second thought, the ball rack should probably come standard with the table.

#3. The ball return system. It's about the best one I've seen on any table. Quiet and fast. It's true the angle of the ball tray is less than on a Gold Crown, but that's a good thing IMO. One of the things that makes it quieter when the balls come down. If you accidentally push a ball forward on the ball tray it will roll back to the front. It may take a second or two but I don't think it is any big deal.

#4. The biggest issue, the cushions. I've heard them called bouncy and springy. Yes, they do play different than a Gold Crown, and the angles tend to shorten up on banks. But if I have my choice between "live" rails and dead ones, I'll take live every time. To me it is all a matter of getting used to. And a good player should be able to make the adjustment. It took me a while to get the feel of the banks, but once I did, I liked them just fine. I think I can bank on a Diamond just as well as I can on a Gold Crown, which I have played on for 40 years.

One other thing. Greg Sullivan is constantly working to improve his table. He appreciates all the feedback he gets from players and has a lot of respect for their opinions. I have seen the quality of the Diamond table improve rapidly over the years and I think it is the equal of any other table out there. Most players are very happy to see them at a tournament site. At the last tournament I attended (The Players Championship), there were five Diamonds and ten older Brunswick Medalists being used. Almost to a man the players preferred to play on the Diamonds.
 
Last edited:
iusedtoberich said:
........Snipped

Overall as a player, I was very disappointed with the tables ball reaction play and features that make playing easier.
Click to expand...

I can't say I've played on Diamonds that much as a matter of fact not much at all. I how did like the cushions I was hitting the banks just right. Of course I do have an Olhausen with accu-fast cushions.

The one complaint I did have was the rail cushion height. I wasn't used to this so every time I had a shot with CB on the rail I skipped my tip over it and fouled. :angry:

Over all though I do like the look of the GC-V and love the ball storage too. But the Pro-cut pockets of the Diamonds are more fun tom play on.
 
GordonRamsay said:
Dymondwood = cheap veneers coated in resin


NO.........I'd rather have real solid wood ...thanks..
Click to expand...
There is no wood more solid then Dymondwood, veneers laminated and then impregnated with phenolic resin are not only as tough as it gets they are more warp resistant,and nearly scratch and dent proof. My Diamond pro is the triple nutz:D
 
iusedtoberich said:
Last night I played on a 2 or 3 year old Diamond Pro/Am table. I played about 8 hours of a gambling one pocket session. I've been playing on Brunswick Gold Crowns 1 through 4 for my entire 15 yr pool career.

I can't believe how many of you guys love these tables. From a player's standpoint, I hated them.


Dislikes:
1. The frame kept getting in my way. My feet would often hit the table legs, forcing me to change my stance. And my lower leg would often hit the skirt of the table. I'm tall but this never happens on a Gold Crown. I noticed it immediately.

2. No ball storage. You can't play one pocket easily this way. We placed on the floor the ball tray for one guy and the rack for the other guy by each of our pockets. Of course they would occasionally get in our way, and it was not a "graceful" way to keep score.

3. Ball return. I keep hearing how great and fast and quiet the ball return is on these tables. Unfortunately, that is only half the story. Once the balls make their quick and silent trek to the ball gully, they are a pain to get out. The slope of the floor of the gully is so slight, that if you bump the balls with your fingers trying to get them out, they climb up the slight angle and take several long seconds to come back down.

4. The cushions. The cushions were way to fast. The ball picked up a lot more speed coming off the cushion. This was especially noticeable playing one hole with all the bank shots. I will say perhaps this was an installation issue, but I have heard other players mention this, including one of the pros on the Gabe/Tony 1 pocket thread where one guy refused to play on a diamond with artemis cushions because they are artificially fast.

There were a few likes I had:
1. The table seemed sturdier. When bumping it with my body there seemed to be absolutely no movement of the table.

2. The finish on the rails looked brand new. And these tables were 2 or 3 years old in a commercial environment.

Overall as a player, I was very disappointed with the tables ball reaction play and features that make playing easier.
Click to expand...


So you lost, huh?
 
Diamond and Greg Sullivan are a big help in my business so I am sure it colors my opinion but even before that came about I always preferred Diamonds to Gold Crowns for one HUGE reason and that was no metal on the tables at all.

All of the metal (the older GC's especially) on Gold Crowns drives me nuts. The pockets are not flush to the top of the rail so you have to alter your bridge and those metal pocket surrounds always find a way to annoy me. I wont even get into the ones with ashtray's and ball counters. I do not have any experience with the GC V so maybe they changed it but most of the tables I see in rooms are the older ones.

Something else that means a lot to me is that IMO Diamond supports pro and amateur pool more than any other table manufacturer. Combine that with the fact Greg and his crew are always trying to innovate and improve and I will take a Diamond every time.

As for the cushions, all I usually play on are Diamonds so I guess I am used to it. To me Gold Crowns play a little funny. All comes down to what you are used to I guess.
 
jay helfert said:
I have owned a Diamond Pro-Am for nearly a year now and I would like to respond to your post.

#1. The issue with the table skirts. This is the first time I've ever heard this. The bottom of the skirts are 14" off the floor, more than enough room to put your foot under them. They have never gotten in the way of any player on my table, and no one has ever mentioned it being a problem to them.
Click to expand...

Jay,

Just to clarify......

He was referring to the legs of the table getting in the way of his feet and the skirts of the table getting in the way of his lower legs.

Not the skirts of the table getting in the way of his feet.

:)

Russ
 
Thanks for the responses guys. And yes, I did end up losing, lol. But that did not influence my opinion of the table.

I also know the Diamond company is a great help with the current pool scene, and definitely appreciate that.

1. This room also had GC4's and when I looked at the tables more closely it looks like the reason the table frame kept colliding with my feet and legs is it seems to be closer to the perimeter of the table than on the GC. And the GC does not have a skirt/apron like the Diamond does. I'm 6 foot 3 so my body and stance will be different on the table than many other people. I'm not making it up that the frame kept getting in my way.

2. The ball storage sounds like a good idea. I wish it were standard. This room had maybe 12 Diamonds and 8 GC and none of the diamonds had this storage option. I would imagine if given the choice few room owners would spend the money for it, unless they are one pocket or bank players themselves. That said, from a players perspective, it would be nice if it was standard equipment.

3. Regarding the pocket gully, it would be an easy fix (I think) to ramp up the floor just the last few inches. That is if others besides me think it is an annoyance. I will say you can't just blindly reach down to grab a ball from it. I had to look for the ball and then grab it, to prevent from pushing it away. This may be petty but after playing on the table for 8 hours it was definitely an annoyance to me, and I'm not one that is easily annoyed. This might only be an annoyance to one pocket and bank players where you are grabbing one or two balls each inning, as opposed to 9 ball players who grab the whole rack at the end of the game.

4. The cushion difference was the biggest difference to actual play, wheras the above were convenience issues. I'm no pro by any means, but I am a decent intermidiate level player. I play most games, including one pocket, banks, 9 ball, and 3 cushion. The perfect cushion in my opinion is one that will return the ball at the same speed it entered the cushion. In other words, the cloth on the BED of the table is the only thing that will change the speed of the ball. The cushion will neither speed it up, or slow it down. The Diamond cushion I played on definitely increased the speed of the ball after contact. the Brunswick cushion does not.

Now just to clarify, just as Diamond has made improvements in the past, so has Brunswick. The table I played on was a new Pro/Am. Bought within 2 or 3 years ago when this room opened up. If you are going to compare it to a brunswick, make sure it is a GC4 or GC5 that is properly set up. Cause I too have come across JUNK GC's.
 
GordonRamsay said:
Dymondwood = cheap veneers coated in resin


NO.........I'd rather have real solid wood ...thanks..
Click to expand...


In my many complaints on the table, I thought the appearance of the wood was spectacular. The room's Diamonds rails looked brand new.

Look at any vintage GC, and the rails won't look anywhere near as good, after just 6 months of use. I'm fairly sure that the GC's rails are a plastic laminate like a kitchen counter. So that is not "real solid wood".

Please keep in mind also I'm talking about commercial tables, not home furniture tables that are solid wood.
 
the ball return system on the Diamond tables is the best ever. there are good and bad things both tables, Diamond is the future of pro-pool it seems.
 
tjlmbklr said:
Over all though I do like the look of the GC-V and love the ball storage too. But the Pro-cut pockets of the Diamonds are more fun tom play on.
Click to expand...

The GCV (and I believe some other Brunswick commercial models like the Metro) are finally available with a "Tournament Edition" pocket setup which seems to me to be directly aimed at the popularity of Diamond tables in Professional tournaments. I believe they have 4.5" corners and 5" side pockets, but I have no idea if the geometry is similar to Diamonds.

Does anyone have direct experience of the new GC V pocket setup in comparison to Diamonds?
 
AuntyDan said:
The GCV (and I believe some other Brunswick commercial models like the Metro) are finally available with a "Tournament Edition" pocket setup which seems to me to be directly aimed at the popularity of Diamond tables in Professional tournaments. I believe they have 4.5" corners and 5" side pockets, but I have no idea if the geometry is similar to Diamonds.

Does anyone have direct experience of the new GC V pocket setup in comparison to Diamonds?
Click to expand...
I can't tell you about the pocket geometry but I have played on a 5. The table was amazing looking, and played similar to other Gold crowns. I was disappointed that the tournament edition (pro cut) was a additional grand.:eek:
 
I still don't get how players think a cushion can make a ball speed up after hitting the rail unless you're talking about english speeding it up.

Where does the extra energy come from?
 
technically, you are right. The ball can't come off faster than it came in, just from the rubber.

But, if the rubber lifts the ball off the cloth, or if it creates an over spin, then it would appear to speed up because it would not slow down as much as it would from other tables.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top