Pro Pocket Size TOO Small for 9 Ball

[skogstokig]

Have you ever played or watched top speed 9b bank pool? They run out from the break a lot. Up in Olathe i've watched Billy Thorpe run packages from the break. Sure there is some ducking but if they have any bank to look at they often run out. Seen Matlock run around 40 without a miss. That's what, 8 games worth? Lots of safety play.

billy ran 12 or something on the predator bank challenge. think those were their SAM tables, not the new predator tables. still stingy though.

i think banks and 14.1 is best with fairly soft pockets, even at pro level. but there's not a blanket solution for pro pool. i play on stock GC5's mostly. second tier pros like petri makkonen have come around and they make it look downright silly playing 9-ball. the lag can literally determine the match if there's two of them. then again these GC's are great for 14.1 and for lower level players. not so good for one pocket. the pockets are so big they even take away bank lanes you want to have in 1p.

i'm afraid there's no easy solution in the mainstream disciplines simply because the level at the top 50 is so high. they want it to be determinative, and there are only a few factors one can alter to achieve that. pockets, race length, shot clock. race length above 15 is probably a no go for programming. i'm all for shorter shot clock, but i still think pockets would be too easy with anything above 4.25", especially on new cloth. jmho.

 

[maha]

new cloth and new and or polished balls make the pro game so much easier.

so accept that or make real changes to correct it that do not end up changing the game for the average player, and those new entering the game.

 

[Frosty]

Any cue sport there are times no matter how good you are, the best option is to play a safety.

9 ball they are still going for the finishes 90% of the time. It's not like you have a drawn out safety battle at the start of every frame.

I like 9 ball because it suits my attention span. And I really don't get the complaint both because even with smaller pockets the times playing safeties is a very small percentage of the match, but also because I can't understand calling yourself a billiards fan and not appreciating a well executed safety.

And you say it's an offensive game, but you can win by causing your opponent to make 3 fouls in a row. That's pretty unique to 9 ball,no other game rewards a good safety as heavily as that.

You’re correct in that well played safeties ARE an aspect of 9 ball, in MODERATION. The 3 foul rule seldom comes into play so it’s really a non factor.

Sadly with the “changes” that have been implemented, I.E. racking 9 on the spot, break boxes, and 4” pockets, games have more safety play, far more than what was common in the past, if not for any other factor than players deciding a safety is a higher percentage play than taking on certain shots, with the mitigating factor of that decision being based on pocket size reduction lowering the percentage of pocketing the ball, or more often, being able to cheat the pocket and still pocket the ball and get shape, which WAS a big part of 9 ball. It has changed the style of play, and has made the game into something it wasn’t intended to be.

What I don’t get is the references in threads like this, that “it is boring” to watch players break and string racks in packages, which IS generally the justification given for changing the racking of the balls, 4” pockets and “break box” rules currently used in today’s game. I don’t find it boring to watch players demonstrate their well honed skills in this manner, as that is the goal isn’t it? I never heard players or fans bitch about it until Europeans became more prevalent as both players and fans.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if the “powers that be” that run the pro game don’t like 9 ball as it is intended to be played, then perhaps they should select a different game to feature, instead of tinkering with the rules and equipment to make it something it is not, nor intended to be. If 9 ball is too easy, then go to 15 ball “61 rotation” instead, just leave the damn game alone.

 

[westcoast]

I wouldn’t mind seeing the pros play on larger pockets with slower cloth like the 1980s or 90s- would be nice to see them have to power up to get the ball around the table

 

[highkarate]

I love the 4” pockets personally for gambling, especially one pocket but rotation too. Just had Ernesto do all the diamonds 4” at my local pool hall in SoCal. That’s kinda the standard for gambling in these parts. Makes it more exciting because no out is a toss in. I don’t really like to watch rotation of any sort personally, but for playing I think it’s great. It’s not a snooze fest like some are implying. I’m 680 Fargo and will beat the ghost in a short race here and there, so runout pool is still on the menu sometimes but you gotta lock in for sure.

If we’re just talking about watchability, is it really any more fun to watch filler run over svb 9-1 in 20 minutes on 4.5” pockets at derby? Not for me anyway. At least on 4” there’s a lot of play. 9-ball is boring regardless of the format imo

 

[maha]

watching pool in most cases is boring.

watching exciting players play pool is fun.

if you were ever around when guys like keith, ronnie, fats, red, beenie, crazy bruce, u.j. , earl, busti, mellon, nevel,miz, jersey red,scotty townsend,
mike seigal, etc, etc. were in a room or playing.

people would gather around the tables to watch and listen.

those kind of players made pool and brought new players in as it made pool something exciting to watch. and talk about.

 

[highkarate]

watching pool in most cases is boring.

watching exciting players play pool is fun.

if you were ever around when guys like keith, ronnie, fats, red, beenie, crazy bruce, u.j. , earl, busti, mellon, nevel,miz, jersey red,scotty townsend,
mike seigal, etc, etc. were in a room or playing.

people would gather around the tables to watch and listen.

those kind of players made pool and brought new players in as it made pool something exciting to watch. and talk about

What does that have to do with 4” pockets?

 

[maha]

i dont know where your here is but my here is and are's have barren pool rooms except for the regulars.

 

[mikemosconi]

watching pool in most cases is boring.

watching exciting players play pool is fun.

if you were ever around when guys like keith, ronnie, fats, red, beenie, crazy bruce, u.j. , earl, busti, mellon, nevel,miz, jersey red,scotty townsend,
mike seigal, etc, etc. were in a room or playing.

people would gather around the tables to watch and listen.

those kind of players made pool and brought new players in as it made pool something exciting to watch. and talk about.

These guys were fun to watch bc the GCs that they played on were 4.75 to 5 inch pockets and you could free stroke and make balls - not today with 4 or 4+. You need super disciplined strokes to pocket and get next close position - robots- basically.

I love my new GC3 with 4.75, new 860, and a new set of Dynaspheres with a ball cleaning machine and TAOM chalk. It is super clean, reasonably fast, fun to play , esp. 14.1, and Anyone can enjoy a day in my home room. I play 10-15 hours a week , not 40 hours or more like young pros.

I like watching balls pocketed, I like the game with some level of personality in the players, The larger pockets give you more of both- I never saw that as a bad thing for pool.

Why have so many commercial rooms in America gone to 7 footers- bc 9 foot smaller pocket tables are just not fan friendly for the masses to reasonably enjoy the game unless they can devote 25+ hours a week to the game - which 99+% cannot!!

 

[Island Drive]

Cost for a 9' is more, they take up more room area so your rent in higher with less tables. Drinkers and food pay the rent these days not full time pool player, and operation costs a Big.

 

[highkarate]

i dont know where your here is but my here is and are's have barren pool rooms except for the regulars.

I’m in Southern California. And I’m guessing the pool rooms are barren not for lack of players but because you could probably draw a straight diverging line since the 40s with pool room popularity and income inequality. Lots of raging action spots here in SoCal tho. Here’s a pretty regular scene at aloha in Orange County tho. 4” pockets too:

 

[mikemosconi]

Cost for a 9' is more, they take up more room area so your rent in higher with less tables. Drinkers and food pay the rent these days not full time pool player, and operation costs a Big.

The cost difference is not that great over time at all. You need adequate room around any table for patrons to enjoy and 3 1/2 vs 4 1/2 feet width does not give you a significant number of additional tables if you are not squeezing people together

Drinks and food have nothing to do with pocket size - you get more people in 7 footer rooms only bc the tables are easier than 9 foot Diamonds- so more people = more drinks = smaller tables because folks can enjoy them more.

You are correct drinks and food Trump pool - it is no longer 1965- and the only way to sell a lot of drinks is to have smaller tables — THAT is bc 9 foot tight tables Won’t Draw in most rooms in America.

 

[Hungarian]

I always thought you could open a good old style Ice House and buy a couple old beat up 9 foot GC's, make the pockets as wide as you can, make them free play. You could stick a few of them around, maybe one on the patio. It would make drinking more fun. Ok, back to your regularly scheduled programming.

 

[straightline]

You’re correct in that well played safeties ARE an aspect of 9 ball, in MODERATION. The 3 foul rule seldom comes into play so it’s really a non factor.

Sadly with the “changes” that have been implemented, I.E. racking 9 on the spot, break boxes, and 4” pockets, games have more safety play, far more than what was common in the past, if not for any other factor than players deciding a safety is a higher percentage play than taking on certain shots, with the mitigating factor of that decision being based on pocket size reduction lowering the percentage of pocketing the ball, or more often, being able to cheat the pocket and still pocket the ball and get shape, which WAS a big part of 9 ball. It has changed the style of play, and has made the game into something it wasn’t intended to be.

What I don’t get is the references in threads like this, that “it is boring” to watch players break and string racks in packages, which IS generally the justification given for changing the racking of the balls, 4” pockets and “break box” rules currently used in today’s game. I don’t find it boring to watch players demonstrate their well honed skills in this manner, as that is the goal isn’t it? I never heard players or fans bitch about it until Europeans became more prevalent as both players and fans.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if the “powers that be” that run the pro game don’t like 9 ball as it is intended to be played, then perhaps they should select a different game to feature, instead of tinkering with the rules and equipment to make it something it is not, nor intended to be. If 9 ball is too easy, then go to 15 ball “61 rotation” instead, just leave the damn game alone.

Any pool on buckets is boring, especially if pros are playing. There's also viewer anxiety generated by all the errors they make anyway.
I suppose in threads like this, you have experts who would be nowhere without tight pockets and generously defer to the needs of the many. (buckets) Me, I could GAF. I'm a student of pool and to me, maximum accuracy is fundamental.
Had to refresh that thought...

 

[maha]

pic of a tournament going on not everyday playing.

 

[Frosty]

Any pool on buckets is boring, especially if pros are playing. There's also viewer anxiety generated by all the errors they make anyway.
I suppose in threads like this, you have experts who would be nowhere without tight pockets and generously defer to the needs of the many. (buckets) Me, I could GAF. I'm a student of pool and to me, maximum accuracy is fundamental.
Had to refresh that thought...

No one said anything about “buckets”. A standard Diamond is 4 1/2”, I agree that with new cloth and polished balls in tournament play, on the pro tour, this should be reduced to to 4 1/4”, or say 4 1/8” as the new cloth and polished balls mitigate that reduction a bit.

As others have mentioned, that kind of reduction on club tables for everyday play is kind of unrealistic. Where I play, all the tables have been left at 4 1/2” with the exception of 2 tables tightened to 4 1/8” for one pocket for a small group of us. Of that small group of players, only the owner and I are fond of rotation as well and play it on those 2 tables as well. I’m a “well seasoned” player, as is the owner. Playing rotation on those tables is challenging after the cloth has received several weeks of play. As noted in my previous post, it limits cheating the pocket, which limits positional options.

You say you could “GAF”, but inevitably, in every thread on this subject, you’re quick to point out your views on “maximum accuracy”. You don’t seem to get that “maximum accuracy” is required to divide the pocket into 3 segments and accurately hit those individual sections consistently to get the required position on the following ball. I can hit the center of the pocket every time, but in rotation, that limits positional play, and changes the game, that seems lost on you.

 

[straightline]

No one said anything about “buckets”. A standard Diamond is 4 1/2”, I agree that with new cloth and polished balls in tournament play, on the pro tour, this should be reduced to to 4 1/4”, or say 4 1/8” as the new cloth and polished balls mitigate that reduction a bit.

As others have mentioned, that kind of reduction on club tables for everyday play is kind of unrealistic. Where I play, all the tables have been left at 4 1/2” with the exception of 2 tables tightened to 4 1/8” for one pocket for a small group of us. Of that small group of players, only the owner and I are fond of rotation as well and play it on those 2 tables as well. I’m a “well seasoned” player, as is the owner. Playing rotation on those tables is challenging after the cloth has received several weeks of play. As noted in my previous post, it limits cheating the pocket, which limits positional options.

You say you could “GAF”, but inevitably, in every thread on this subject, you’re quick to point out your views on “maximum accuracy”. You don’t seem to get that “maximum accuracy” is required to divide the pocket into 3 segments and accurately hit those individual sections consistently to get the required position on the following ball. I can hit the center of the pocket every time, but in rotation, that limits positional play, and changes the game, that seems lost on you.

4.5 doesn't do it for me. I learned on Murreys and snooker tables. The Murreys were about Diamond deep but you could hit all over the pocket without rattling anything. Last place I had access to had AMFs at probably 4.5 converging to somewhat less and not full ball depth. Those became normal and still freewheelable. The lost point is, an angle is an angle. Why just three portions? You could just move the center of aim to the approximate the area you need. (?) lol...

 

[Cue Alchemist]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if the “powers that be” that run the pro game don’t like 9 ball as it is intended to be played, then perhaps they should select a different game to feature, instead of tinkering with the rules and equipment to make it something it is not, nor intended to be. If 9 ball is too easy, then go to 15 ball “61 rotation” instead, just leave the damn game alone.

great post frosty, This is the way they chose to do it, why it couldn't just Be left alone, until everyone else catches up, it was only going to benefit the European players, and few others, who already had the proper fundamentals in place. Would be interesting to see them go back to a slower cloth, see how that would change things!

 

[straightline]

great post frosty, This is the way they chose to do it, why it couldn't just Be left alone, until everyone else catches up, it was only going to benefit the European players, and few others, who already had the proper fundamentals in place. Would be interesting to see them go back to a slower cloth, see how that would change things!

Catch up to the past? Sounds archaic. The Euros learned a better way and so far, continue to bring it.

Interestingly, they didn't bother coming up through American ranks. That says a lot for the Murkin way. That almost says the experience will keep you a loser. (?)

 

[Cue Alchemist]

Catch up to the past? Sounds archaic. The Euros learned a better way and so far, continue to bring it.

Interestingly, they didn't bother coming up through American ranks. That says a lot for the Murkin way. That almost says the experience will keep you a loser. (?)

ralf souquet being a good example of that, but this is way after, My point being they already have the better fundamentals. Its not about experience will keep you down, they just got an edge.