Pocket size

[hang-the-9]

OK, so there are hundreds of rooms opening over the past several years- where? And hacks like me ( I guess) don't really know how to play- good for you! I am genuinely happy for you that anything more than 4 1/2 inn pockets frustrate you- but for the other 99.5% of the people in this country who might like to try this game - I have NO DOUBT that having rooms full of 4 1/2 pockets or less has helped kill this sport to the MASSES!

I try to look at it from the perspective of keeping the game alive for what would appeal to most- that must be hard for you to understand for some reason- maybe you are just too good at pool to get it. Congrats on being one of the greats! I am very happy to run a few racks of 8 or 9 ball and also get up a run 40 or so in 14.1 on a standard Gold Crown- and would love to see many more newcomers get to that level as well. That's ALL!

The theory that bad players won't play on tight pockets has one flaw, those players have no idea about how tables are setup in the first place. I have seen people use a half rack of snooker size balls and standard balls for an hour and not notice the size difference. All they would know is that they miss, they have no idea why they miss and won't really care. Since they miss most of the shots anyway, missing another 10,20% is not a big deal for them and I bet none of them would think "those pockets are too little or too big". When we see players look for coin slots on the tables that don't have them, slide the rack to the opposite side from where it is hung, hold cues like they are bats, stand 3 deep around the table getting in the way of everyone, never look at tip but have to roll every cue on a table and check the weight, pocket size is the last thing they are thinking about.

For anyone that is a B or an A player, playing on a tight house table is a badge of honor, you earned the right to get on that table, even if you miss more.

I agree with pretty much everyone about the 4.5" pocket size to be just right, it's small enough to make accuracy needed but large enough so we can shoot some pool and use spin/harder shots and cheating the pocket without being an 800 Fargo. In fact my ideal setup would be a hair over 4.5, maybe half a pinky width over.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Here are a couple posts from the late Mr. Bond that present a different picture of pocket sizes in the past:

https://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4868105&postcount=20

https://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4713913&postcount=50

I wish I had known about or remembered those posts during a recent discussion of pool ball size.

 

[mikemosconi]

Yes, maybe a Mosconi/Greenleaf tournament table had 4 1/2 inch pockets- the pocket shelves were probably much more shallow than a Diamond. I played for 4 years on a 1920s Brunswick Madison 9 foot table- I can assure you that Standard Brunswick tables made back then had huge corner and side pockets- each over 5 inches. You could cut a ball in the side from almost anywhere on those tables. Not saying that should be the standard today- just saying that Brunswick 4 1/2 inch pockets in the 20s were for top pro tournaments only and I have no problem with that today or back then.

 

[Geosnooker]

I assume AZ Blliards...the ‘A’ doesn’t stand for American.The most popular billiards game in the world today is Chinese eight ball. It’s also the fastest growing with a large viewing audience in the millions.

Thousands of pool halls throughout China.The pocket size is 3.5 inches using American size balls.

Russian Pyramid. Pockets about 3 inches .

Snooker...most lucrative and well established billiards game. Pockets around 3.7 inches.

I was in Brazil on a geology contract. Tables were packed and we played some game that made my Snooker pockets seem like basketball hoops.

Anyways. Millions of players dabble at billiards on tables with small pockets. Friends out for the evening, etc. Doesn’t seem they are discouraged from participating by smaller pockets.

 

[fastone371]

Originally Posted by mikemosconi
It was with the Diamond Tables for sure. Prior to that , and according to specs that used to be in the BCA Handbook, not sure if they still are, corner pockets were supposed to 4 7/8 to 5 1/8. Not only did the pockets shrink with the Diamonds, but the slate shelf into the pocket became deeper.

Everbody has their own opinion on this. Personally think it was the one of worst things for the game. Yes, nine ball as it had been structured for ESPN became too easy for pros who could play 5 or more hours a day. However, for the average Jack or Jill; and for the general promotion of the game to the public, and success of billiard halls, the discouragement caused by this revised set up with a much higher level of pocketing difficulty greatly diminished the interest of beginners and many casual players as well on 9 foot tables.

Brunswick should have fought much harder to retain their specs as the Gold Standard - but many corporate factors and of course $$$; entered into their decision to just fade away. I would rather have seen a game devised that could be brought to the masses and still maintain a decent level of difficulty even for the pros. Chasing off half the billiard audience by eliminating half the fun of playing proved to be a very poor decision for all except maybe Diamond Billiards and the very best pros we are left with today.

I know many on this site will argue with me over this, but WE HERE represent the very top of the heap in terms of interest in this game and time devoted to the game. Think of all those who started the way we did, pocketing balls is what makes the game fun, some decent level of success breeds interest; making it unreasonably difficult to have fun as novice breeds failure IMO.

Watch this match, and you'll know why tiny pockets is a terrible idea for pool. These are good players and if I remember correctly there was one or two break and runs in this entire long match. Multiply the problems by ten, and you'll have the average league player experience on such pockets. I do recommend watching the match for the excellent commentary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WK1MwRCXAM

I started playing pool when 4 1/2" pockets were the norm. My guess is that 4 1/2" pockets became the norm because of fast cloth. If you check a Valley you should notice that they are barely over 4 1/2", most of them that I see seem to be about 4 5/8", they just play easier because of the very shallow shelf. My GCI originally had 5" pockets but they could be tough because they had such a deep shelf, sometimes a ball could sit so deep in the pockets that you could not make the ball hitting rail first. Tightening up the pockets made a narrower opening but I also have a shalower shelf now. There are many reasons a table can play tough, incorrect corner miters can reject many balls and cause a table to play tough so its more than just opening width.

I thought the tables a Hard Times where the video of the pool match was recorded were 4" or 4 1/8" ???
As far as the

 

[garczar]

I assume AZ Blliards...the ‘A’ doesn’t stand for American.The most popular billiards game in the world today is Chinese eight ball. It’s also the fastest growing with a large viewing audience in the millions.

Thousands of pool halls throughout China.The pocket size is 3.5 inches using American size balls.

Russian Pyramid. Pockets about 3 inches .

Snooker...most lucrative and well established billiards game. Pockets around 3.7 inches.

I was in Brazil on a geology contract. Tables were packed and we played some game that made my Snooker pockets seem like basketball hoops.

Anyways. Millions of players dabble at billiards on tables with small pockets. Friends out for the evening, etc. Doesn’t seem they are discouraged from participating by smaller pockets.

Open a room in the US and fill it with 4" pocket tables and see how long you stay open. Most players are ball bangers and they will not keep coming back if they don't make balls. BTW, you do know that snooker balls are smaller, right??

 

[ChrisinNC]

Open a room in the US and fill it with 4" pocket tables and see how long you stay open. Most players are ball bangers and they will not keep coming back if they don't make balls. BTW, you do know that snooker balls are smaller, right??

A few have mentioned shelf depth, but no one has mentioned the pocket facing angle as being an even more important variable as to how tough a pocket plays than the mouth measurement.

5 inch corners with a 144 degree pocket facing angle will actually play significantly tougher than pockets with 4-1/2 inch corner mouth measurements with a 139 degree pocket facing angle. Ernesto altered (extended) rails/cushions that might have 4 inch corner mouth measurements but have a 138° pocket facing angle, may play extremely tight, but they play fair, as balls will not rattle and be spit out.

 

[DynoDan]

One thing I discovered re: the switch to decreased pocket size, is while slow shots into the corners may still drop, you soon give up on attempting those steeper angled shots toward the sides that you used to routinely make on a standard GC.

 

[mikemosconi]

One thing I discovered re: the switch to decreased pocket size, is while slow shots into the corners may still drop, you soon give up on attempting those steeper angled shots toward the sides that you used to routinely make on a standard GC.

Well you are correct on that - and so it changes the way you position for shots - from a side cut to a corner shot- especially in 14.1 where 90% of the game is side to corner- makes it really hard to run balls with proper patterns.

 

[straightline]

One thing I discovered re: the switch to decreased pocket size, is while slow shots into the corners may still drop, you soon give up on attempting those steeper angled shots toward the sides that you used to routinely make on a standard GC.

Well you are correct on that - and so it changes the way you position for shots - from a side cut to a corner shot- especially in 14.1 where 90% of the game is side to corner- makes it really hard to run balls with proper patterns.

@ Dyno Dan. Why give up? If you learn to shoot the object ball on its own line instead of 'at' a pocket, more stuff will go in.

@ mikemosconi. So modify your patterns to accommodate the reduced slop factor.

Easier said but innit about improving? As it is now progress is mostly measured in quantity. More racks, more balls - at the same old loose conditions. Pool is a performance thing. Seems easier to spend the time perfecting the basics and then zipping through the performance. Uh, like all those posers in the performing arts.

 

[maha]

its just a different game.

games take longer to play if not a run out player.

position is much different as you cant use intentionally cheating the pocket for position.

with faster cloth your stroke is different and a strong stroke isnt a real help anymore

with jump cues and no push out safety play is gone primarily so the being the smarter player loses out to the ball pocketer.

 

[Straightpool_99]

I'm glad I learned to play on old fashioned equipment, even if it was in the early 2000's. Back then, if you got too straight in on a ball along the rail, you could draw the ball 3 rails for position. Try that on the modern deep shelf pockets or super tight pockets...Yes if the cloth is brand new, it may go in, but mostly it will rattle. You could pound the ball along the rail, you could stretch out the angle with spin, even when the ball hit the rail at an angle. You don't really need spin anymore, the rails are so fast and sometimes spin won't even work properly.

Straight pool is just terrible on Diamond and newer Rassoon tables. You can slow roll the ball along the rail, and even with a terrible hit the pocket will suck the ball down like a vakuum cleaner. Then you try to draw it with spin, the pocket rejects even good hits, unless it's super soft. The game has become all rolling. Frequently the side pockets are also cut in a way that do not allow shooting into them other the almost perpendicular angles. I can't believe we allowed our game to get f-ed up this way.

I simply do not understand the philosophy of forcing people to roll balls along the rail. If that was what they wanted, they should have adopted rounded pockets, like in Blackball, Chinese 8 ball and snooker. At least those pockets are fair and consistent. And importantly, in these games, the side pocket is bigger. When you make the pockets play tight along the rail, and have narrow side pockets, you just stifle the game. Big, creative shots are taken out, and it's more rolling.

 

[ceebee]

IMHO If you configure the table, so a half dozen players in your Pool Hall can gamble on it, maybe you have shot yourself in the foot & knee, maybe both knees. If no one else enjoys it, you are in deep do-do. Those 6 players won't keep your Pool Room open, they won't pay for you to go have lunch at a Good Burger Place...

Being that I am 77, I have played on them all. We use to have a pool Room that had Valley Bar Boxes, Gold Crowns & one Diamond. When they had big tournaments (32 players), they started the players on the Gold Crowns, the One Loss side was played on the Bar Boxes & the Finals was played on the Diamond. I thought it was a good system, for our Pool Room with 15 tables, but then I won, once in a while....

 

[straightline]

I'm glad I learned to play on old fashioned equipment, even if it was in the early 2000's. Back then, if you got too straight in on a ball along the rail, you could draw the ball 3 rails for position. Try that on the modern deep shelf pockets or super tight pockets...Yes if the cloth is brand new, it may go in, but mostly it will rattle. You could pound the ball along the rail, you could stretch out the angle with spin, even when the ball hit the rail at an angle. You don't really need spin anymore, the rails are so fast and sometimes spin won't even work properly.

Straight pool is just terrible on Diamond and newer Rassoon tables. You can slow roll the ball along the rail, and even with a terrible hit the pocket will suck the ball down like a vakuum cleaner. Then you try to draw it with spin, the pocket rejects even good hits, unless it's super soft. The game has become all rolling. Frequently the side pockets are also cut in a way that do not allow shooting into them other the almost perpendicular angles. I can't believe we allowed our game to get f-ed up this way.

I simply do not understand the philosophy of forcing people to roll balls along the rail. If that was what they wanted, they should have adopted rounded pockets, like in Blackball, Chinese 8 ball and snooker. At least those pockets are fair and consistent. And importantly, in these games, the side pocket is bigger. When you make the pockets play tight along the rail, and have narrow side pockets, you just stifle the game. Big, creative shots are taken out, and it's more rolling.

I think rattling rail shots is a function of liver rails and faster cloth and not so much the missing half inch at the hole. It's not like snooker where the ball has to wiggle in. You just naturally shoot softer to keep in line and the transition to catastrophe is at a lower speed than on 60s public tables. Even those will bite in the same way if they're setup properly, just at a higher speed.

I prefer the new equipment. I haven't flattened a tip in eons; break with the player; no flaring nothing. There's a lot to be said for fast and tight.

 

[HNTFSH]

Got my GC1 set-up last week after playing on a local room Diamond for the last year. Been awhile since I'd played on a older Brunswick table. All I can say is the first thing I noticed were the generous pockets. :lmao: I was on fire!

It will be much friendlier for casual players for sure and that's a good thing. It'll also mean I'll beat them quicker should I intend to. :woot:

Takes a little getting used to.

 

[mikemosconi]

Not sure what the pocket specs used to be, but I believe the pockets got a little smaller when they switched from 10' tables to 9' tables some 65 years ago.

Actually, according to Greg Sullivan, 4 1/2" pockets are too tight by existing BCA guidelines. He mentioned it in his BCA Hall of Fame speech last autumn as an example of the lack of standardization in the sport and the industry's inability to change with the times.

Agreed! Every older BCA rules/ spec book from older days 70 s 80s etc had corners at 4/78 to 5 1/8 as acceptable. I never attended or played in any 70s 80s 90s and even up to 2006 tournament with pockets as small as 4 1/2

 

[Bavafongoul]

I think everyone should seek and find the table size and pockets that make them feel good.
My preference is to play strictly on 9’ tables and hopefully, never any with 5” corner pockets.

Gosh, that would mean the side pockets would be a 1/2” bigger which just seems way too big.
A pool ball is 2.25” in diameter and a corner pocket twice as wide as a pool ball seems adequate.

Here’s the truth and it hurts the egos of a lot of pool players who aren’t being candid with themselves.
Bigger pockets help lesser skilled players whereas tighter pockets distinguish a better skilled player.

Indeed, a stronger player should always run more balls with bigger pockets, at least I always have. But
a less skilled opponent will also and that can be the difference in a match when a stronger player misses.

Simple solution …..don’t miss but we all will despite big pockets like 5” corners. Playing on a basketball
court with 8’ baskets, like in elementary school playgrounds, is really a whole lot easier than on a 10’ basket.

I’ve done it with my kids when they were young but it was more enjoyable as they got older and we played with
the correct size hoop height of 10’. I don’t want to make pool easier. I like it to be challenging. It motivates me.

4.25” is the smallest I’d want on a pool table and several Diamond tables where I play are 4 1/4”. All the other tables
are 4.5” which seems perfectly fine. 5” pockets would seem like slopping balls in pockets in comparison with 4.25”.

As I stated earlier, you should play for your own personal satisfaction and recreation. I do not enjoy easy pool tables
as much as tougher tables. I want to be tested to make a break and run instead of doing it more easily. Hard is better.

 

[Ghost of OBC]

Simple solution …..don’t miss but we all will despite big pockets like 5” corners. Playing on a basketball
court with 8’ baskets, like in elementary school playgrounds, is really a whole lot easier than on a 10’ basket.

I’ve done it with my kids when they were young but it was more enjoyable as they got older and we played with
the correct size hoop height of 10’. I don’t want to make pool easier. I like it to be challenging. It motivates me.

There's a bit of a contradiction with table/field difficulty. You were probably more likely to beat your kids on the 8 foot hoop than the 10. If I were doing a free throw shooting contest with Steph Curry, I'd want to play on the highest imaginable hoop. At 10 ft he shoots 91% and I'm lucky to shoot 60%. Bring that hoop up to 70 ft and he's still definitely better than me, but my 5% average getting hot and beating his 20% gone cold, especially over a short race, is much more likely.

Tight pockets flatten the game. Safeties are easier, recovery shots are a lot less likely to work, odd layouts are much less likely to be run out, breakouts are more likely to be run-ending. A lot of the high-knowledge parts of the game get subsumed under pure shot making. It is the advice we give to all low ranked players playing stronger competition: "Slow the game down. Jam it up. Insist on hand racking for each other. Do whatever you can to make the game harder and luckier."

 

[Bavafongoul]

Tight pockets invite more challenging long distance cut shots and position becomes even more important
because cheating the pocket is understandably harder. It requires more deliberate shot selection and smart
safety play is a strategic choice when shot probability diminishes. It’s akin more to playing chess than checkers.
It’s not for everyone. if you can’t run a rack in 14.1 or at least 10 ball, just stick to bigger pockets until you improve.

 

[InsertCleverNameHere]

The tightest table I have access to is an 8 foot Global with 4.25" corners. The table leans a little and the pockets are typically bar table shallow but I don't play to hang balls. The small apertures are what counts. There's a place nearby with 4 perfectly level GCs but the pockets are so loose, I can't even stay interested. !5, 20 minutes and apathy sets in. I think object ball accuracy is fundamental and should be refined to picture perfect.

bet higher