Pocket size

Players get conservative on difficult conditions; preferring to let the opposition mess up. Well don't cheat yourself by applying this rationale to your practice. The principles of play aren't rocket science. Do that separately.

Get on a 12 footer and learn how the cuts lean. (CIT) You'll find the lean is predictable over the whole range of speed and distance. So what if half of them jaw. None of those will be stopped by a pool pocket. You may just find you have acquired a range object ball vectors that will go out to infinity. Think Dr. Dave's peace sign. It's around half of that + or -...
 
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.
I see your point. It can be argued that the 7 foot table already addresses this issue. My 2 cents...You start out on the kids table and work your way up. We played on a 12 foot snooker table with pockets only about 3/8 of an inch extra space for one ball! It's really just perspective and what you are accustomed to. If you start on a 7 foot and work up it should really not be a problem for those who are struggling with 4.5 inch pockets. Train on tougher equipment and learn snooker and billiards. Then 9 foot tables don't seem nearly as intimidatng. Maybe the pockets seem small because you remember what it was like with the old big pockets and a shallow shelf. I don't really think pockets are too tight unless the ball won't actually fit. But variety is the key and working your way up. Europe is dominating the usa and we don't need to dumb the standards down, just the opposite. And the usa should get the club scene going where clubs compete. And get the young involved while they are school age. Like we do with swimming, baseball and piano lessons. This would start to make it more of a legitimate game/ sport. Then the sponsors and prize money would follow.
 
Last edited:
I disagree with most of this. From my travels around the Country the hacks that play regularly, that think the know how to play, all jump on the toughest tables in the house. It’s frustrating to go to some room that only has one or two tougher tables and some hacks are on them. I’ve seen it from California to New York to Florida, to Texas, and everywhere else. Now to some couple that want to drink and have a good time, I don’t think they would even know if a table had 5” or 4.5” pockets, they’re just banging balls around.
100%
 
Back
Top