If you want tight pockets to teach the players to rise to the occasion for YOUR personal entertainment, then screw it, just make everyone play on the Joy Chinese 9ft 8 ball tables, then you'll get to see all the misses you want!
Pocket Size
- Thread starter Mole Eye
- Start date
I won't venture an opinion on this except to say there is not nearly the precision requirement in golf as there is in pool.
I wanted to like Cino8ball but my current stand on schnooker pockets is just that. schnooky. I valued snooker and golf pockets early on for the precision requirements and have no regrets about taking the time to develop precision pocketing. Beyond that, the pocket cut is stupid. All they have is that air of sophistication and that facade they call defense. They won't even bank anything. Snooker and Chinese Heyball are not exemplary of the future of pool.
That crap ventured, tight pockets helped produce I daresay ALL of the world beaters ever. Time for the field to get up to speed.
There is a problem that would need to be addressed...
If a player is up by one or two, and the time limit is getting close, what do you do to keep the player that's ahead from purposely dragging out the clock? Gaming the system so to speak.
We already have a decent solution.... its the shot clock.
Because the match time limes would only effect the slowest players in the tournament, everyone else will have completed their matches, while a few still need hours more, holding up the entire event!!
I'm still waiting to hear an answer on EXACTLY what the problem is, why it's a problem, and how a tighter pocket is the answer.
Please, somebody, anybody, tell me the exact problem, why it is a problem and why tighter pockets is the correct solution.
Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds have hit over 70 home runs but MLB didn't extend the outfield so only the top 10% of players could be able to hit it out of the park. Home runs put butts in the seats and $$ in pockets. Who the hell wants to see small ball all game long?
Please, somebody, anybody, tell me the exact problem, why it is a problem and why tighter pockets is the correct solution.
Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds have hit over 70 home runs but MLB didn't extend the outfield so only the top 10% of players could be able to hit it out of the park. Home runs put butts in the seats and $$ in pockets. Who the hell wants to see small ball all game long?
There isn't a "problem" only the argument the best players in the world should play on the toughest equipment in the world.
Poor examples of cheaters not to mention you are referencing dimensions that are variable across MLB. You think it was coincidence the Yankees built the original Yankee Stadium with a short porch in RF so Babe Ruth could hit more HR? Remember the Astrodome? Very deep fences. Because you brought up the example, Bob Gibon was so dominant in 1968, MLB lowered the pitching mound by 5 inches in an effort to equalize. The key on an NBA court used to be 6'. George Mikan was so dominant, they extended it to 12 feet until Wilt Chamberlin came along and it was extended to the now 16 feet. Chamberlin was also the driving factor in the NBA adoption the offensive goal tending rule. Pin placement in golf is different for professionals than it is for amateurs, etc. etc.
If there is no real identifiable problem, then why change anything? Who the hell does that? Who changes just to change? Logic prevails, or at least it should, that change should only occur after a specific problem has been identified.
People don't want to name it for what it is because the actual reason is laughable.
Here's really what it is: "Better" players don't like getting beat "lesser" players because the cream should ALWAYS rise to the top in a tournament, and tighter pockets are how we're going to accomplish that. All else be damned. Bigger pockets make it so every banger may have a chance against me and I just can't have that. What happens in competition will spill over to the rest of us bangers and here's what we got. A very boring and uninviting game which is becoming increasingly unappealing to the neophytes. Bravo pool, bravo.
/rant. Again.
People don't want to name it for what it is because the actual reason is laughable.
Here's really what it is: "Better" players don't like getting beat "lesser" players because the cream should ALWAYS rise to the top in a tournament, and tighter pockets are how we're going to accomplish that. All else be damned. Bigger pockets make it so every banger may have a chance against me and I just can't have that. What happens in competition will spill over to the rest of us bangers and here's what we got. A very boring and uninviting game which is becoming increasingly unappealing to the neophytes. Bravo pool, bravo.
/rant. Again.
You don't understand the point I'm making. What if a player is ahead, and PURPOSELY slow plays to run the clock out? Like taking a knee in football?
Jock talk. Tighter pockets stimulate the evolution of pool. The whole idea of sports has always been <more>. Higher, farther, faster, harder, heavier, BETTER... Always more.
I'm no slouch, but I very much doubt Shane (or any of the top 200 in the world) would fear losing to me in any tournament. The pockets could be six inches and I wouldn't stand a chance. I think you are missing the point of the argument. In a tournament like DCC where a majority of the participants are amateurs, the pockets should be 4.5", primarily in the interest of pace of play. That being said, for events featuring a majority of the field comprised of World Class players, such as invitationals or majors, the equipment should be tougher for the players. Again, I reference golf. Majors are played on the most difficult courses with the most difficult cup placements. What is your reason pool shouldn't do the same?
I recall a tournament (I think it was a Mezz West State event but I could be wrong) where Kaci ran a 10 pack playing 10B on either a Diamond or Gold Crown (can't recall) with 4.5" pockets. Daniel Busch of POV Pool was very excited about the feat and interviewed him post match. Kaci's reply (paraphrasing), "No big deal, I've done it before." World Class players are stupid good at pool. When they are competing against equally skilled players, it should be on tough equipment.
Tight pockets slow the game down.
Speed of play is exactly why Texas Express 9 Ball replaced straight pool, for "Professional" play.
In my opinion (since everyone seems to have one on the topic), it is far more exciting for "fans" to watch run-outs, than it is to watch misses and safes. That said, I see no reason to go any tighter than 4.5". In fact, if you want to make it really exciting, go back to slow cloth and cushions, and let's see big strokes make a comeback.
Want tighter pockets? Play Snooker or Chinese 8 ball.
Speed of play is exactly why Texas Express 9 Ball replaced straight pool, for "Professional" play.
In my opinion (since everyone seems to have one on the topic), it is far more exciting for "fans" to watch run-outs, than it is to watch misses and safes. That said, I see no reason to go any tighter than 4.5". In fact, if you want to make it really exciting, go back to slow cloth and cushions, and let's see big strokes make a comeback.
Want tighter pockets? Play Snooker or Chinese 8 ball.
My perception of the problem is entitlement . Same reason for changing the ball colors.
Maybe not for the ball colors, that could be marketing ?
Jock talk. Tighter pockets stimulate the evolution of pool. The whole idea of sports has always been <more>. Higher, farther, faster, harder, heavier, BETTER... Always more.
Tighter pockets have stimulated the DEVOLUTION of pool.
Tight pocket rooms turn to ghost towns. Regular rooms hang on by fingernails.
What aspect of pool, specifically has improved, when fewer and fewer people actually want to play the game. Harder equipment, more frustration, kids don't stick with it because it takes them 10 minutes before they make a ball. Ghost town, rooms close down. Pool already has enough competition in the 'something to do' arena already. Why make it even worse? What 18 year old is going to go to the room where it takes 5 minutes to make the first ball?
Pool NEEDS bucket tables in bowling alleys for kids and bars for date night. It needs rec tables with 5 1/2" pockets. It needs to be fun. It needs personalities. There will be no new blood, and right now, it is headed in the complete opposite direction.
You don't get a rat to the cheese unless there is a reward up front. Shock him 20 times before he gets a bite and see if he returns for more.
It's nothing more than a more sophisticated and accepted way to make a gaff table so the outcome is even more skewed than it already was to begin with. Let's just cut to it and make a 3 7/8" pocket for 'pros only' since smaller = better. Race to 10. I sure can't wait to see stop shot, stop shot, follow, and then a safety fest ensue. It may only take 3 hours, hopefully. It'll be sweet. It'll be unforgettable, alright.
I wonder how many views Efren's Z shot still gets? I bet it just may have inspired a few people to pick up the game, and probably still does.
But those were buckets.... so way too easy.
Tighter pockets have stimulated the DEVOLUTION of pool.
Tight pocket rooms turn to ghost towns. Regular rooms hang on by fingernails.
What aspect of pool, specifically has improved, when fewer and fewer people actually want to play the game. Harder equipment, more frustration, kids don't stick with it because it takes them 10 minutes before they make a ball. Ghost town, rooms close down. Pool already has enough competition in the 'something to do' arena already. Why make it even worse? What 18 year old is going to go to the room where it takes 5 minutes to make the first ball?
Pool NEEDS bucket tables in bowling alleys for kids and bars for date night. It needs rec tables with 5 1/2" pockets. It needs to be fun. It needs personalities. There will be no new blood, and right now, it is headed in the complete opposite direction.
You don't get a rat to the cheese unless there is a reward up front. Shock him 20 times before he gets a bite and see if he returns for more.
It's nothing more than a more sophisticated and accepted way to make a gaff table so the outcome is even more skewed than it already was to begin with. Let's just cut to it and make a 3 7/8" pocket for 'pros only' since smaller = better. Race to 10. I sure can't wait to see stop shot, stop shot, follow, and then a safety fest ensue. It may only take 3 hours, hopefully. It'll be sweet. It'll be unforgettable, alright.
I wonder how many views Efren's Z shot still gets? I bet it just may have inspired a few people to pick up the game, and probably still does.
But those were buckets.... so way too easy.
I'm somewhere in the middle of this debate. I'm on board with those who say that tight equipment is necessary, and, as several have noted, there's no question that the constant changing of table specs in recent years has been a negative in our sport.
Sports have to evolve with the skills of those that play it and the equipment available to them. On the PGA, the golf courses of 50 years ago tended to be 6700-6800 yards, but today that just wouldn't work because the equipment is better and there are more highly skilled players. A 6750 yard course might not present a sufficient challenge for the most elite players anymore. Today, the PGA tends to set up courses more in the 7000-7300 yards range, and this befits the current state of the game.
Pool is the same as golf as far as the development of equipment and a greater number of highly skilled players. The test must be stiff enough, so tight equipment has its place. How tight is too tight is a fair question, of course.
Golf is not standardized. At their majors, the rough tends to be longer and the fairways aren't as wide. The stiffer test befits the crowning of a major champion. I think Matchroom is doing the same, using tight pockets at their majors (WPC, UK Open, Spanish Open, European Open, US Open) but not calling for the use of those specs in other events that carry Matchroom points.
To sum, I favor tight pockets at the majors but find them completely unnecessary year round in pro pool.
Sports have to evolve with the skills of those that play it and the equipment available to them. On the PGA, the golf courses of 50 years ago tended to be 6700-6800 yards, but today that just wouldn't work because the equipment is better and there are more highly skilled players. A 6750 yard course might not present a sufficient challenge for the most elite players anymore. Today, the PGA tends to set up courses more in the 7000-7300 yards range, and this befits the current state of the game.
Pool is the same as golf as far as the development of equipment and a greater number of highly skilled players. The test must be stiff enough, so tight equipment has its place. How tight is too tight is a fair question, of course.
Golf is not standardized. At their majors, the rough tends to be longer and the fairways aren't as wide. The stiffer test befits the crowning of a major champion. I think Matchroom is doing the same, using tight pockets at their majors (WPC, UK Open, Spanish Open, European Open, US Open) but not calling for the use of those specs in other events that carry Matchroom points.
To sum, I favor tight pockets at the majors but find them completely unnecessary year round in pro pool.
I don't care, with a shot clock in use, then in the last 30 minutes of a match, don't allow an extension, and if a player runs the shot clock out, then give the player another 30 seconds, but award the opposing player 1 win for the player stalling! Keep doing that, until the match time limit runs out, or the player has had 3 penalties and is penalized the lose of the match for unsportsmanlike conduct!!!
Jocks have devolved pool. The heyday is passed.
Serious rooms will lose the fun/poser/jock crowd for sure. No question. That's a people/mass marketing thing. Making the equipment easier by the same token will keep you supplied with those fun/poser/jock people until the novelty wears off. Part of the problem is the novelty has long since worn off. Play, players, and pool itself will continue to stagnate until self motivated pool achievers flood the streets. I'm not holding my breath.
Competition, Heart, and Knowledge makes players improve and evolve, not conditions. The innate feeling of 'you won't beat me, ever.' Or you robbed me 2 years ago, but you're not going to like any of it today. It's heart. With equipment and conditions being equal, it's all about those 3 components.
Say on a 4 1/2" table player A can run out 4 racks on the regular, well, player B better figure out how to run out 5. A breaks like king kong. B better figure out how to break like Godzilla, or figure out a move that A doesn't know.....yet. Decreasing the pocket size only makes A's 4 rack average 2 and B's 5 a 2.5. All it does is shift the curve. Nothing improves. Heart, talent and knowledge drive improvement.
I want to see what B looks like in the electric chair. I want to see B dog it after after sitting for 20 minutes. I want to see B kick in what was a lock down safe from that MF'er after sitting for 3 straight racks, get position, and make 4-1 turn in to 4-5... and see that look in his face that says he's about to crush A's soul. That's heart, that's entertaining, and that's pretty much gone. That used to be high end pool, until it was blown up, sadly.
Regardless of the equipment or conditions, on average, the cream will rise to the top. People find ways to up their game by having the innate fire, talent and knowledge, not because the pockets keep getting smaller.
And for the record, I'm really enjoying this conversation and am not trying to be overtly argumentative if it comes across that way.
Say on a 4 1/2" table player A can run out 4 racks on the regular, well, player B better figure out how to run out 5. A breaks like king kong. B better figure out how to break like Godzilla, or figure out a move that A doesn't know.....yet. Decreasing the pocket size only makes A's 4 rack average 2 and B's 5 a 2.5. All it does is shift the curve. Nothing improves. Heart, talent and knowledge drive improvement.
I want to see what B looks like in the electric chair. I want to see B dog it after after sitting for 20 minutes. I want to see B kick in what was a lock down safe from that MF'er after sitting for 3 straight racks, get position, and make 4-1 turn in to 4-5... and see that look in his face that says he's about to crush A's soul. That's heart, that's entertaining, and that's pretty much gone. That used to be high end pool, until it was blown up, sadly.
Regardless of the equipment or conditions, on average, the cream will rise to the top. People find ways to up their game by having the innate fire, talent and knowledge, not because the pockets keep getting smaller.
And for the record, I'm really enjoying this conversation and am not trying to be overtly argumentative if it comes across that way.
Competition, heart, character (whatever the f character's supposed to be) all contribute to refining the mix.
Problem is it's not enough to just go through the process and expect a world class mix. US vs World has already proven this. The US invented and polished pool and went to bed on it. World kept their noses to the wheel and made many, many, many refinements. All the details the US couldn't be bothered with, now cost the home boys.
Preparation is everything.
Problem is it's not enough to just go through the process and expect a world class mix. US vs World has already proven this. The US invented and polished pool and went to bed on it. World kept their noses to the wheel and made many, many, many refinements. All the details the US couldn't be bothered with, now cost the home boys.
Preparation is everything.
Pretty much my first year. You grow up. Most leave and do something more rewarding. I grew into the challenge of learning pool. I still don't consider myself a player. Grinding the dog show circuit is probably the least attractive thing about pool.
Consider Europe has snooker, pyramid , kaisa, and probably other forms of super tight pool equipment. America has the right to 5" pockets and will defend that right to the death...