Pursuit of the Perfect Table

BasementDweller

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
We really need a new thread to discuss the never ending pursuit of the perfect table. I know there was a time when we all played on less than "perfect" tables and somehow we all were perfectly happy playing on them. Actually there were more of us then too. Hmmm.

Now even if a player is happy playing on such a beast it must be because they are just an idiot that doesn't know any better. Nah -- it's not that. Some of us are just content walking along the local hiking trail. We really don't need to be constantly reminded that climbing Mt Everest is a much more worthy pursuit.

I paid 1100 dollars for an AMF Grand Prix several years ago from a room that closed :( A buddy and I got it into my basement and I got my hands on some 760 and set it up myself with the assistance of some things I learned on here. Now the table isn't "perfect" but I have really enjoyed it and all of my guests have been impressed with how well it plays. These are guys that play a lot of pool too.

The thing is -- pool is really a blue-collar thing, and most of us can't really justify the expense of having the perfect table. But what's worse is -- collectively when we walk into a room we expect to be greeted by a row of prestine tables with specific size pockets or the grumbling commences. This is in the midst of a declining population of interested players. It doesn't make sense.

I guess maybe I'm just a simple man but I don't get all the clamoring for the perfect table.
 
Last edited:

bradsh98

Bradshaw Billiard Service
Gold Member
Silver Member
It's all relative. How good is 'good enough'?
No table is perfect. There will ALWAYS be room for improvements. However, most improvements cost money. So, where do you draw the line?

Further, who's line is it to draw? Is it the consumer? The manufacturer? The guy who works on it?

In my opinion, a perfect table is one that is set up EXACTLY as the manufacturer designed it to be. Now, we all know that no commercially available table is perfect. However, poka-yoke in the design builds consistency of end-product. This is what it takes to develop the 'perfect state'.

In that regard, Diamond has it pretty close. Despite the known banking flaws, every table that is delivered is about as close to the 'perfect state' as we have seen thus far.

In my opinion, "the way a table should play" is all a matter of opinion anyway. What is the percentage of energy loss a ball "should" have on each cushion rebound. There is no standard. Further yet, I am not aware of any way to reasonably quantify it.

People, like myself, can modify tables, in accordance with our own beliefs of how they should play. But, do we have any right to say that our changes are actually improvements? In some cases, ABSOLUTELY. In other cases, I'm not so sure.

An example: depending on the type of cushion used, I may change the nose height, which has an effect on the rebound. In a perfect world, why wouldn't all cushions be mounted at the same nose height? Suppose one type of cushion plays slower than another. Instead of manipulating the rail, to accommodate for the speed of the cushion, why not leave it the same?

Another example: Suppose a manufacturer builds a table with a 143° pocket opening. Even though I feel that 141° will make a much better playing pocket, is it really an improvement to make the change? Or, should the table be left to play foolishly difficult, as the manufacturer designed it?

Without a governing body, there is no good answer.
 

De420MadHatter

SicBiNature
Silver Member
It's all relative. How good is 'good enough'?
No table is perfect. There will ALWAYS be room for improvements. However, most improvements cost money. So, where do you draw the line?

Further, who's line is it to draw? Is it the consumer? The manufacturer? The guy who works on it?

In my opinion, a perfect table is one that is set up EXACTLY as the manufacturer designed it to be. Now, we all know that no commercially available table is perfect. However, poka-yoke in the design builds consistency of end-product. This is what it takes to develop the 'perfect state'.

In that regard, Diamond has it pretty close. Despite the known banking flaws, every table that is delivered is about as close to the 'perfect state' as we have seen thus far.

In my opinion, "the way a table should play" is all a matter of opinion anyway. What is the percentage of energy loss a ball "should" have on each cushion rebound. There is no standard. Further yet, I am not aware of any way to reasonably quantify it.

People, like myself, can modify tables, in accordance with our own beliefs of how they should play. But, do we have any right to say that our changes are actually improvements? In some cases, ABSOLUTELY. In other cases, I'm not so sure.

An example: depending on the type of cushion used, I may change the nose height, which has an effect on the rebound. In a perfect world, why wouldn't all cushions be mounted at the same nose height? Suppose one type of cushion plays slower than another. Instead of manipulating the rail, to accommodate for the speed of the cushion, why not leave it the same?

Another example: Suppose a manufacturer builds a table with a 143° pocket opening. Even though I feel that 141° will make a much better playing pocket, is it really an improvement to make the change? Or, should the table be left to play foolishly difficult, as the manufacturer designed it?

Without a governing body, there is no good answer.

It's governed by the Cobra. He's watching, and saw your post ^^^. Be warned!!
 
Top