-Opinions on the TAR table-

[brandoncook26]

After watching three matches on this table, I have mixed feelings about the table setup in the TAR studio.

Having the smaller pockets with worn cloth changes the dynamic of the game. It reminds me of watching the 10 foot match with Earl and Shane in the respect that the player's thinking changes and they are playing safe in situations where they would normally be trying to run out. Watching Oscar and Raj play was pretty painful at times.

When I look at these matches compared to Shane vs Alex (action challenge 3) on a "normal" Diamond, I feel like the smaller pockets might be less exciting for the spectators. The last two matches were completely different formats, yet the highest package in both was 2-3 racks.

I enjoy the moving and strategy associated with the smaller pockets. I think this table setup favors certain players over others. However, it takes something away from the game when some of the best players in the world seem almost afraid to shoot at the pocket.

Perhaps TAR could use the smaller pockets when the cloth is new and then go to a bigger pocket when the cloth wears a little.

Curious to get other people's thoughts and ideas on how the table has affected these three matches (Shane/Alex, Shane/Earl, Oscar/Raj), and possibly what changes if any you would like to see to the table/matches in the future.

 

[mikeyfrost]

The fact is all players think they like tight pockets especially for money. In reality most of them don't shoot straight enough to get an advantage from the tighter pockets.SVB and Earl were running out consistently on the tight equipment. Raj and Oscar not so much.

My opinion, tighter pockets make for a better match to watch. As goofy as this sounds, I lost money too on Raj, but I absolutely like to see them miss shots. It also makes me appreciate a run out ten times more cause you know they earned every ball.

To each his own though. There's no right answer here.

 

[mnShooter]

I don't think the pockets were too tough, they could maybe be 1/8" bigger. New cloth makes a huge difference.

The reason Earl and Shane weren't running packages is because the 9 was racked on the spot and they were playing break from the box. If you can't make a ball on the break and have a shot afterwords you can't run out.

When Alex and Shane played last time with the same pockets they were running out from everywhere.

Raj looked like he's never played on any pockets smaller than 4 1/2. Many of his shots would have went in on standard pro cut.

 

[BasementDweller]

I've said before that I thought it was too tight. I still like watching matches played on it but I'm a zealot so I'll watch just about anything. I think there is a certain rhythm to rotation games that we have all grown to expect and when they are playing on those tight tables that rhythm goes out the window. There's no way these events could ever be marketed to the masses.

I'm starting to shift over to Celtic's position on this subject. As much as I don't really like 8 ball - I'm starting to think that 8 ball played on really tight tables may be the way to go for the pros. That would be more marketable to the amateur players.

 

[Slh]

SVB run a 7 pack against Earl. Simply OD and RH are not the same caliber of SVB, Alex, Earl, etc
Also the players are not used to the tight pockets they need some time to get used to them.

 

[jalapus logan]

Tight pockets take some of the more elegant positional shots away from the game in my opinion. Perhaps we should just all play snooker????

 

[JasonCrugar]

The fact is all players think they like tight pockets especially for money. In reality most of them don't shoot straight enough to get an advantage from the tighter pockets.SVB and Earl were running out consistently on the tight equipment. Raj and Oscar not so much.

My opinion, tighter pockets make for a better match to watch. As goofy as this sounds, I lost money too on Raj, but I absolutely like to see them miss shots. It also makes me appreciate a run out ten times more cause you know they earned every ball.

To each his own though. There's no right answer here.

I agree there is no right answer. TAR has done some cool stuff with tight tables. I think it's time they opened the pockets back up and lets see some crazy 10 packs with some insane outs. IMO Big pockets put almost as much pressure on you cuz if you miss the guy is out and is gonna get out a few more times on ya. 1 miss on a super tight table MIGHT cost you the game, 1 miss on a loose table and you could be sitting for awhile. Don't get me wrong I dig both styles of play.

 

[TATE]

After watching three matches on this table, I have mixed feelings about the table setup in the TAR studio.

Having the smaller pockets with worn cloth changes the dynamic of the game. It reminds me of watching the 10 foot match with Earl and Shane in the respect that the player's thinking changes and they are playing safe in situations where they would normally be trying to run out. Watching Oscar and Raj play was pretty painful at times.

When I look at these matches compared to Shane vs Alex (action challenge 3) on a "normal" Diamond, I feel like the smaller pockets might be less exciting for the spectators. The last two matches were completely different formats, yet the highest package in both was 2-3 racks.

I enjoy the moving and strategy associated with the smaller pockets. I think this table setup favors certain players over others. However, it takes something away from the game when some of the best players in the world seem almost afraid to shoot at the pocket.

Perhaps TAR could use the smaller pockets when the cloth is new and then go to a bigger pocket when the cloth wears a little.

Curious to get other people's thoughts and ideas on how the table has affected these three matches (Shane/Alex, Shane/Earl, Oscar/Raj), and possibly what changes if any you would like to see to the table/matches in the future.

In my opinion, this is the type of equipment all pro players should be competing on. In fact, I thought the primary difference in the match was the tight pockets. Not so much that Raj doesn't shoot straight - he definitely does -but because he didn't pay enough mental attention to each and every single shot.

I might be wrong, but I really don't think Oscar would play Raj on a regular Diamond. By always practicing on tight pockets, Oscar has trained himself to focus on center pocket every time and also to avoid cheating pockets. Raj carelessly missed some shots - enough to cost him the match. In fact the last big miss was a simple combo ( I think it was a 1-8 hanger) and it was just a visibly rushed shot.

Tight tables require tons of confidence and constant mental focus. Eventually that will wear a player down. It was a close match, but I think Oscar edged Raj in the stretch with the help of the table.

Chris

Ps. It's hard to compare Shane's 10 ball game to other players because of the awesome productivity of his break, which nobody else seems to be able to match.

 

[Charlie Hustle]

I agree there is no right answer. TAR has done some cool stuff with tight tables. I think it's time they opened the pockets back up and lets see some crazy 10 packs with some insane outs. IMO Big pockets put almost as much pressure on you cuz if you miss the guy is out and is gonna get out a few more times on ya. 1 miss on a super tight table MIGHT cost you the game, 1 miss on a loose table and you could be sitting for awhile. Don't get me wrong I dig both styles of play.

I agree with this. Also, MikeyFrost only likes them tight pockets and shit because thats how his home table is set up. :wink:

 

[cleary]

SVB run a 7 pack against Earl. Simply OD and RH are not the same caliber of SVB, Alex, Earl, etc
Also the players are not used to the tight pockets they need some time to get used to them.

There was no 7pack ran when Shane played Earl. Not eve sure if there was a 3 pack.

 

[realkingcobra]

When I look at these matches compared to Shane vs Alex (action challenge 3) on a "normal" Diamond, I feel like the smaller pockets might be less exciting for the spectators. The last two matches were completely different formats, yet the highest package in both was 2-3 racks.

Curious to get other people's thoughts and ideas on how the table has affected these three matches (Shane/Alex, Shane/Earl, Oscar/Raj), and possibly what changes if any you would like to see to the table/matches in the future.

Shane/Alex action challenge 3 played on the same table, with the same pockets as the Shane/Earl and Oscar/Raj match, in case I'm not understanding what you're saying.

Glen

 

[JCIN]

I have yet to hear a pro player say "I want looser pockets". Just like Mikey said everyone seems to think they want pockets tighter than a gnats ass. I guess because it sounds cool, I don't really know. More than a few who want tight pockets probably shouldnt as they really dont play on truly tight pockets all that much if they are travelling playing tournaments all the time.

I like to see guys have to really focus to make a run out. I like the drama of not knowing if that ball on the rail is going in or not. Shane ran a 7 on the same table that Oscar and Raj had trouble running two on. It's not the table, there are just different levels of play. The table we have now just makes those levels much easier to see.

We are changing tables this week. The coin op with Fatboys rails is leaving and a new Pro-Am with the first ever set of Diamond factory cut rails with 4 1/8" pockets is coming in. They actually modified the CNC program used to cut the rails at the factory for this rail set. Something cool is now they have the 4 1/8" pocket cut profile saved so theoretically if someone wanted 4/18" from the factory it could be done.

 

[brandoncook26]

Shane/Alex action challenge 3 played on the same table, with the same pockets as the Shane/Earl and Oscar/Raj match, in case I'm not understanding what you're saying.

Glen

Shane and Alex's most recent match was played on the same table. The action challenge 3 match I am referring to was their race to 100, played in May of 2008. Sorry if that was unclear.

The point I was making was that the tight pockets make it much harder to put packages together and change the way the game is played. The first race to 100 had multiple packages and run-outs sprinkled in throughout. To date that is one of the most exciting matches I have watched.

I guess the feel of the tight table is totally different. I am not sure if different is necessarily better or worse. That was the point of this thread, to see how others feel about the difference and what they prefer.

The more I think about it, while the moving is a change of pace, I like the freedom that the bigger pockets give the players. I can appreciate someone grinding out the match (one pocket is my favorite game), but I like the fire power that rotation offers. With the smaller pockets, you often don't get that same fire power. I love one pocket for the moving but rotation games offer something different and with all of the recent grinding it kind of feels the same.

I guess I like the change of pace from one game to the other and the small pockets make them seem much more similar than they normally do.

 

[brandoncook26]

I have yet to hear a pro player say "I want looser pockets". Just like Mikey said everyone seems to think they want pockets tighter than a gnats ass. I guess because it sounds cool, I don't really know. More than a few who want tight pockets probably shouldnt as they really dont play on truly tight pockets all that much if they are travelling playing tournaments all the time.

I like to see guys have to really focus to make a run out. I like the drama of not knowing if that ball on the rail is going in or not. Shane ran a 7 on the same table that Oscar and Raj had trouble running two on. It's not the table, there are just different levels of play. The table we have now just makes those levels much easier to see.

We are changing tables this week. The coin op with Fatboys rails is leaving and a new Pro-Am with the first ever set of Diamond factory cut rails with 4 1/8" pockets is coming in. They actually modified the CNC program used to cut the rails at the factory for this rail set. Something cool is now they have the 4 1/8" pocket cut profile saved so theoretically if someone wanted 4/18" from the factory it could be done.

I agree that it is easier to see who is on what tier with the current set-up. I also like the fact that the player's concentration has to be there the entire time to play on that table.

It really makes it a different game. Not better or worse, but the changes give the matches an entirely different feel compared to the standard cut 4.5" pockets. I really like both, but it is nice to see someone catch a gear and start putting on a clinic.

 

[iusedtoberich]

I watched day 2 and 3 of this match. I didn't think the table changed the player's style. They both went for the runout when they could, and for safeties when they messed up position and were forced to. I didn't see any backing away from a tough shot, unless the shot was such that position couldn't be obtained. When this type of shot came up, it would be passed if playing on 6" pockets.

Anyway that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it

 

[sjm]

I'm in the middle of the debate here. For TAR matches, whatever the players want is OK in a challenge match situation.

Still, I've long contended that supertght equipment is highly inappropriate for most pro events, but that very tough equipment should be in use when the most prestigious titles are up for grabs. This would follow golf's lead, where the courses are set up a little tougher for the major championships.

Like Justin observed, there's no denying that the supertight pockets show the strong pedigree of the straightest shooters. My only real problem with supertight pockets is that they slow matches down, and I feel that races should be shorter if supertight equipment is in use. The other observation I'll make is that using the rules that ban the two way shot, which I find objectionable on any equipment, is even more objectionable on a supertight table. Shane and Earl played this way, while Raj and Oscar did not, and, in my view, it made the Raj vs Oscar match far more interesting from a tactical standpoint.

 

[Celtic]

When I look at these matches compared to Shane vs Alex (action challenge 3) on a "normal" Diamond, I feel like the smaller pockets might be less exciting for the spectators.

Alex vs SVB on the last TAR was on the exact same tight pocket table that Earl vs Shane was and Raj vs Oscar.

The table that SVB ran a 7-pack and 2 6-packs against Alex? Yeah, that was on the TAR table with the Fatboy rails. And that kind of firepower on that table is exciting as hell.

Earl vs SVB in the last match was a gong show based on racking rules, the actual game rules, and Earl's antics causing both players to lose their form at times.

Raj vs Oscar is simply a match between two players who were clearly shown to be a step (or three) below the top teir that Alex and SVB are at. Alex and SVB both shot great on that table after they settled in, Raj and Oscar shot as you would expect a club pro golfer to play on Augusta from the pro tees as it is set up for the Masters, they were out of their league.

Dennis Orcullo
Thorsten Hohmann
Ralph Souquet
Chris Melling
Johnny Archer
Alex Pagulayan
SVB
Ching Shun Yang
Chia Ching Wu
Lee Van Corteza
Mika Immonen
Ronnie Alcano
Darren Appleton
Francisco Bustamante
Earl Strickland
Corey Deuel
Jung Lin Chang
Neils Feijen
Roberto Gomez
Nick Van Den Berg
Po Cheng Kuo
Pin Yi Ko
Antonio Lining

all of those guys have the natural ability and game such that they would play VERY strong on that table after an initial period of becomming accustomed to it. That is honestly a large list of pro pool players and it is by no means complete. All of those guys would be close to the level of play we saw from SVB, Alex, and Earl.

The guys who cannot play at the high level on that table? The guys below the calibre of the players on that list, they do not deserve to get an easier table that makes it more likely for them to upset one of the above players who had the superior skill. The guys who have more natural talent and the guys that practice more to fine tune their skills to a higher level are the ones that deserve to win, and tables with loose pockets that let the second and third teir guys upset the first teir guys do to the ease of the equipment are not good for the game.

There are plenty of guys in the world that can play GREAT pool on the TAR table with those fatboy rails, if a person cannot maybe they don't deserve to be there yet. Not everyone gets to play at Augusta.

 

[Celtic]

Shane ran a 7 on the same table that Oscar and Raj had trouble running two on. It's not the table, there are just different levels of play. The table we have now just makes those levels much easier to see.

Well said. This is exactly as I have always said on AZB, for years. Get the equipment right and we will see the true cream rise to the top. We always knew SVB was better then Oscar, but how much better? Oscar beat SVB in the US Open 9-ball in a race to 11, does that mean they are close with SVB having only a slight edge? Nope, the TAR table has shown us the edge that SVB truly has on Osscar when it comes to ball pocketing and pinpoint shape and it is not a small difference, SVB is WAY better then Oscar. It takes equipment like the Fatboy rails to know this stuff, without TAR and those rails we would still be in the dark over this.

Raj has a HUGE 10-ball break. You throw him onto a table with buckets and he is a threat to beat anyone in the world because that break and the loose pockets will allow him to run big packages and keep his opponent off the table. You put him onto the TAR table? Now his huge break is moot because the guy does not SHOOT good enough to get out. Raj vs Alex or SVB in a race to 11 on a loose Brunswick table in a race to 21 might have a 30% chance to win. On a 4 1/8 pocket Diamond? He might have a 10% chance if lucky. That table REALLY showed the difference in just how well SVB, Earl, and Alex shoot compared to Raj and Oscar, the skill difference is huge. And as a sport, that skill difference needs to be what decides matches, and it takes a table like the TAR table to do it.

We are changing tables this week. The coin op with Fatboys rails is leaving and a new Pro-Am with the first ever set of Diamond factory cut rails with 4 1/8" pockets is coming in. They actually modified the CNC program used to cut the rails at the factory for this rail set. Something cool is now they have the 4 1/8" pocket cut profile saved so theoretically if someone wanted 4/18" from the factory it could be done.

I knew you were losing those rails, I was very worried that a new standard Diamond table with 4.5 inch pockets was being brought in. I am super happy to hear that we are getting another table with the 4.125 inch pockets in there so we can continue to see who the top players really are.

 

[Nick B]

Look guys the table might have been the same but not really. I suspect that SVB/Alex match was the first time that FB's rails went on that table. They probably had some slide left in them. Fast forward 60 hours of play and the sheen is gone and things get tough. The bottom right pocket (as seen on the stream) would burp and take the ball. Top right would simply give you the finger and trap the ball.

60 hours of play (plus who knows how much practice time) +
Different weather conditions = super tough and probably too tough

I grew up playing snooker. Tight doesn't scare me. Some shots from certain angles simply won't go. Pool is not meant to be that way.

Nick

 

[brandoncook26]

Alex vs SVB on the last TAR was on the exact same tight pocket table that Earl vs Shane was and Raj vs Oscar.

The table that SVB ran a 7-pack and 2 6-packs against Alex? Yeah, that was on the TAR table with the Fatboy rails. And that kind of firepower on that table is exciting as hell.

For the second time, the Action Challenge 3 was the match played in May of 2008. It was the first race to 100 between Shane and Alex.

While the table set-up has been the same for all three matches, the continual wear has made it much tougher to play on than it was 3 months ago when Shane was putting packages together.