My thought on tourney tour and tight pockets

straightline said:
They'd have to be allowed as part of a sequence. Ok maybe not but the exception should be allowed.
Click to expand...
Talking specifically about the use of jump cues...?

Real easy... no rule against "jumping". That way the disciples of the DCC can have the relative full cue fix. However the "jump cue" itself can only be used during you first approach to the table for that inning.

That way you still get the excitement of a well played jump out of a weak safe, but don't have players rewarded after bad CB control during their pattern.

Only down side is what we saw with Little Ko during the later stages of the Open. Where he played jump shot shape specifically to develop the pattern.
 
Last edited:
iusedtoberich said:
Maybe the most in stroke match of all time was TAR 1 exposing Shane to the world. That was on standard Diamond pro cut pockets. What was Shane's highest package? A 7 I believe. Corey was widely considered to be #1 or #2 (Archer) in the USA at that time. What was his highest package on that table, maybe a 3 If I'm remembering.
Click to expand...
It was a 4 pack if I remember correctly. He had period of 10-15 racks where he just froze Corey out by only letting him see a kick. These packages tend to get exaggerated because the commentators sleep the first couple racks and say “what is he on now? A 14 pack?” And they say it in such a casual way too.

For me the issue with too big pockets isn’t the incidence of packages. It’s more about adding a touch more unpredictability. On the 4.5” pockets unforced errors are typically positional errors or safety errors. For the casual viewer those errors r aren’t nearly as shocking because they don’t always recognize when they happen. For them, they will always have more guttural reaction to a miss than traveling too far and needing to play safe.
 
L.S. Dennis said:
4" pockets are fine, getting rid of the jump cue and shot altogether would also make the game better my opinion which I know will not be shared widely on this forum. Also a mandatory 30 second shot clock on all matches would also be welcomed.
Click to expand...
30 seconds is still too long. I am always at a disadvantage because I suffer from a subconscious embarrassment (fear of ‘delaying‘) issue that usually causes me to rush my shot selection or position approach (before thinking through the situation adequately). A shorter time clock would thus ‘level the field’ for me 😁.
Re: ‘The Jump Cue’: An easy out, if your opponent sews you up with a skillfully played safety. Personally, I have always thus thought that when a MLB pitcher is up against a star home run hitter, he should be allowed to substitute, and throw a whiffle ball instead 😁.
 
justnum said:
ld push to say have the pocket angles reject balls more in addition to tighter pockets.

Pool tables you can bank off some pocket angles. Players that cant hit dead center should understand its a standard competition ability at world class level.
Click to expand...
Just buy an Olhausen or Just about any table other than Diamond and get shit 146 degree angles.
 
Atorontopoolplayer said:
So this hasn't gotten much traction , but something I do think needs to be done to keep the 'majors' special is to differentiate them somehow beyond where they are located.

All of the big open 256 player fields tournaments feel nearly identical as an online viewer. Having US open tightest pockets, and toughest conditions similar to golf is a good idea IMO.

I am uncertain though how one could come up with ways for the Spanish, German, Asian open e.t.c to be all slightly different and something unique at each in terms of format or conditions
Click to expand...
based on all the comments about the US open, having it be the 'one' with tighter pockets, and peak conditions, feels like a big ask :ROFLMAO:
 
The_JV said:
Talking specifically about the use of jump cues...?

Real easy... no rule against "jumping". That way the disciples of the DCC can have the relative full cue fix. However the "jump cue" itself can only be used during you first approach to the table for that inning.

That way you still get the excitement of a well played jump out of a weak safe, but don't have players rewarded after bad CB control during their pattern.

Only down side is what we saw with Little Ko during the later stages of the Open. Where he played jump shot shape specifically to develop the pattern.
Click to expand...
I think the player/payer should have the freedom to mix and match any sequence in a pattern. One could for instance push to a pattern that required a jump further downstream. <First inning only> would prevent any such ploy.
 
iusedtoberich said:
All these packages are vastly over-exxaggerated. Even in the Brunswick days players were not running out the sets with regularity. It was a once in a blue moon for a player to put up over a 3 pack. We have how many years of Pro Cut Diamond data? DCC started in 1999. What's been the highest package on the TV table? DCC even had a rule all the years it was race to 7, before the WPA bullshit sanctioning changed it to 9, that if a player runs out the set, the other player has the chance to do the same. In 20 years it has never happened once to run a 7 pack.
Click to expand...
Yup. I've posted in the past that I've never seen a player who was too good for a Diamond 9-footer with pro-cut (4½" corners) pockets. I think that is still true, but with one caveat. It shouldn't have brand new slidey cloth. I wish that new cloth in pro tournaments (even on pockets with mouths smaller than 4½") could be "pre-conditioned" somehow to prevent balls from going in that shouldn't. I wonder whether just rubbing the rail cloth with a ball a bunch of times would work. Maybe spend a couple minutes after the table is set up rubbing each rail by the corner pockets. I wonder whether that would do it. Or maybe some clever outfit, like Simonis, could devise some other way to eliminate that slide on new cloth.
 
AtLarge said:
Yup. I've posted in the past that I've never seen a player who was too good for a Diamond 9-footer with pro-cut (4½" corners) pockets. I think that is still true, but with one caveat. It shouldn't have brand new slidey cloth. I wish that new cloth in pro tournaments (even on pockets with mouths smaller than 4½") could be "pre-conditioned" somehow to prevent balls from going in that shouldn't. I wonder whether just rubbing the rail cloth with a ball a bunch of times would work. Maybe spend a couple minutes after the table is set up rubbing each rail by the corner pockets. I wonder whether that would do it. Or maybe some clever outfit, like Simonis, could devise some other way to eliminate that slide on new cloth.
Click to expand...
I imagine engaged players refrain from stacking racks. There's no economic sense to blowing your action or worse, selling out. Actually I don't know which is worse lol. Regardless, they seem quite content to accumulate the required quota of points by walking through dead outs. I do believe nobody in the top 20 should be a slave to 4" pockets.
Afterthought; tight pockets will confine the break to limited outcomes so there's that I suppose...
 
Last edited:
People want to see packages....and they keep messing with the break and pocket size to limit them. How these guys don't string more racks together is beyond me.
 
SBC said:
People want to see packages....and they keep messing with the break and pocket size to limit them. How these guys don't string more racks together is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Seems only a string of 7 ball outs will get strung. Guys who can fart 10 or 20 will stop at 4 or less if they lay funny.
 
AtLarge said:
Yup. I've posted in the past that I've never seen a player who was too good for a Diamond 9-footer with pro-cut (4½" corners) pockets. I think that is still true, but with one caveat. It shouldn't have brand new slidey cloth. I wish that new cloth in pro tournaments (even on pockets with mouths smaller than 4½") could be "pre-conditioned" somehow to prevent balls from going in that shouldn't. I wonder whether just rubbing the rail cloth with a ball a bunch of times would work. Maybe spend a couple minutes after the table is set up rubbing each rail by the corner pockets. I wonder whether that would do it. Or maybe some clever outfit, like Simonis, could devise some other way to eliminate that slide on new cloth.
Click to expand...
Yep. New slick cloth makes ANY table play way easier. Simonis needs to find a way to make a cloth that when new plays like its a month old. Now THAT would be the nuts.
 
garczar said:
Yep. New slick cloth makes ANY table play way easier. Simonis needs to find a way to make a cloth that when new plays like its a month old. Now THAT would be the nuts.
Click to expand...
Yeah, on new cloth, 4.5 plays like a generous 4.75 on broken in cloth and 4.25 plays like a generous 4.5 on broken in cloth. In a pool room with worn cloth, 4.25 is brutal for recreational players or even for weekly tournament amateur players.

For pro level tournaments always played on new cloth, 4.5 is just too big. 4.25 or even 4 is more of an appropriate test for their skill level.

What’s not mentioned here is the pocket facing angle. 142-143 degrees can be quite challenging (for rattling balls) for any size corners whereas 140 degrees in my opinion is a better, more forgiving angle, which I would recommend for pool rooms, but might prove too generous for pro competition.
 
Some years ago I posted a thread about having the pros play full rack rotation on 10' tables for the Major Championship Titles. I still like this because that game could be played on 4.5" pockets and still be very tough.
 
atlas333 said:
Some years ago I posted a thread about having the pros play full rack rotation on 10' tables for the Major Championship Titles. I still like this because that game could be played on 4.5" pockets and still be very tough.
Click to expand...
Somewhere on-line is a video of Efren playing Bustamante rotation. found it:
 
AtLarge said:
.... It shouldn't have brand new slidey cloth. I wish that new cloth in pro tournaments (even on pockets with mouths smaller than 4½") could be "pre-conditioned" ...
Click to expand...
I heard that Simonis HR cloth did not have near as much new-cloth slide but I have no first hand knowledge.

At major carom tournaments, it is common to have three or four days of qualifiers on the equipment before the seeded players show up. Some of the good players feel that's essential.
 
jtompilot said:
Just buy an Olhausen or Just about any table other than Diamond and get shit 146 degree angles.
Click to expand...
lol your not wrong. When I came back to the game a friend gave me an olhausen and even with my stroke not anywhere near where it was at my best I was running out easy and it just wasn’t fun.they make a well built table but it was definitely not for players. Fast forward a year and I got a diamond wit 4.25 pockets and for the first month I wanted to set it on fire 😂😂 but now I’m playing better then I maybe I ever have.
 
Bob Jewett said:
I heard that Simonis HR cloth did not have near as much new-cloth slide but I have no first hand knowledge.

At major carom tournaments, it is common to have three or four days of qualifiers on the equipment before the seeded players show up. Some of the good players feel that's essential.
Click to expand...
Looks like MR needs more people to hire: A.Referee's B. Cloth 'breaker-inners'. ;) I volunteer for B
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top