Room size for a 9 ft Brunswick Goldcrown

D

Dubois

Alex
Hello,

I'm a new member on this forum, living in Belgium and i've found this magnificant poolforum via google.
I have a question regarding my new home pool room.

Having an available room size 16,4 x 18,5 ft, with no obstructions, i read that this normaly should be no problem with an 58 " cue but i'm not quite sure....

I also read a lot on this forum about this issue but now i'm planning to buy a table myself i want to make sure i'm making no mistakes to buy the 9 ft Goldcrown.

So, please let me know if i should go fot the 9 ft or better surch for a smaller table.

When my pool room project is complete, i will post some pictures.
 
Dubois said:
Hello,

I'm a new member on this forum, living in Belgium and i've found this magnificant poolforum via google.
I have a question regarding my new home pool room.

Having an available room size 16,4 x 18,5 ft, with no obstructions, i read that this normaly should be no problem with an 58 " cue but i'm not quite sure....

I also read a lot on this forum about this issue but now i'm planning to buy a table myself i want to make sure i'm making no mistakes to buy the 9 ft Goldcrown.

So, please let me know if i should go fot the 9 ft or better surch for a smaller table.

When my pool room project is complete, i will post some pictures.
Click to expand...

Its gonna be tight for sure on the length-Normally you need 15 x 20.
 
Dubois said:
Hello,

I'm a new member on this forum, living in Belgium and i've found this magnificant poolforum via google.
I have a question regarding my new home pool room.

Having an available room size 16,4 x 18,5 ft, with no obstructions, i read that this normaly should be no problem with an 58 " cue but i'm not quite sure....

I also read a lot on this forum about this issue but now i'm planning to buy a table myself i want to make sure i'm making no mistakes to buy the 9 ft Goldcrown.

So, please let me know if i should go fot the 9 ft or better surch for a smaller table.

When my pool room project is complete, i will post some pictures.
Click to expand...


18'5 doesn't leave much for a back-swing if your shooting off the rail.
Only about 2 1/2 inches if the table is perfectly centered in the room.
I think about 19' would be the minimum. Maybe you should go with an over-sized 8'.
If you are in Belgium I would definitely go with a Gabriels over the Brunswick.
 
Tex said:
18'5 doesn't leave much for a back-swing if your shooting off the rail.
Only about 2 1/2 inches if the table is perfectly centered in the room.
I think about 19' would be the minimum. Maybe you should go with an over-sized 8'.
If you are in Belgium I would definitely go with a Gabriels over the Brunswick.
Click to expand...

Your figures are pretty much right, only 3" from the playing surface to stroke. The thing is, unless you are playing a tournament it will be fine. Only with the cue ball frozen to the rail and shooting straight away would it come into play and with the cue slightly elevated as it usually is you actually have about 5". I think the value of having a 9 footer over a smaller table is too great to let such a little and rare inconvenience stop you. I have played in pool rooms where you had to use a shorter cue at times and it hardly came up and when it did made very little difference.

I knew one guy who had the table shifted almost against a wall and just practiced on three sides. You have to do what you can sometimes. having your own table to practice on is big. You go to the pool room to match up or league in dead stroke. I hear the sour grapes all the time by people who don't have a table how they would rather play in the pool room and would get board. Yea, right, there is nothing like having your own 9 foot table at home you can use any time.
 
Tex said:
18'5 doesn't leave much for a back-swing if your shooting off the rail.
Only about 2 1/2 inches if the table is perfectly centered in the room.
I think about 19' would be the minimum. Maybe you should go with an over-sized 8'.
If you are in Belgium I would definitely go with a Gabriels over the Brunswick.
Click to expand...

I can buy a second hand 9 ft Gabriel for about 2500 euro (2,500.00 EUR = 3,555.04 USD)
For me, this is way too expensive for a second hand table and also I don't like the looks of a Gabriël so much...

Regarding the room size, I'm planning to use a 55" cue when I'm playing at home. When I go out to play I usually play with my 58" cue.
My home room is not for competition, just for (serious) fun. :wink:

Even with the 55" cue I don't have a great deal of space in lenght but I think the advantage of playing on a 9 ft table gives me more satisfaction.

In Belgium, finding a second hand oversized 8 ft pooltable is not so easy to find.
I can buy the Goldcrown 3 (30 years old) including new Simonis 860 and delivery + set up for approximately 1500 euro. (1,500.00 EUR = 2,133.39 USD)
 
Dubois said:
I can buy a second hand 9 ft Gabriel for about 2500 euro (2,500.00 EUR = 3,555.04 USD)
For me, this is way too expensive for a second hand table and also I don't like the looks of a Gabriël so much...

Regarding the room size, I'm planning to use a 55" cue when I'm playing at home. When I go out to play I usually play with my 58" cue.
My home room is not for competition, just for (serious) fun. :wink:

Even with the 55" cue I don't have a great deal of space in lenght but I think the advantage of playing on a 9 ft table gives me more satisfaction.

In Belgium, finding a second hand oversized 8 ft pooltable is not so easy to find.
I can buy the Goldcrown 3 (30 years old) including new Simonis 860 and delivery + set up for approximately 1500 euro. (1,500.00 EUR = 2,133.39 USD)
Click to expand...
That Gabriel may have 2" slates and really play well. I have played in Belgium by the way, at "Mr. 100's".
 
For many (perhaps most) shots, your furthest rearward foot is beyond the butt of the cue on the back stroke. When playing from an end of the table, placement of your feet is likely to be as much or more of a problem as is the available stroke distance.
 
The playing surface should be 50" x 100".

Add to that a 58" cue with a 4" back stroke and the needed space is
174" x 224" or
14'-6" x 18'-8"

But, I would rather have a 9ft table and occasionally use a short cue than have an 8ft table and always use a long cue. (That's me.)
 
Minimum of 5 feet from the playing surface on each side. So figure 15'x19' to be safe. When the cue ball is on the rail you really don't have more than a couple of inches or so of backstroke since your bridge hand is only about that far from the cue ball, perhaps unless you bridge with you fingertips on the outside edge of the table and the rest of the hand hanging off. If this is the case you need a little more space but it would only be a problem when you are backstroking straight into the wall, not on an angle.

Your room is cutting it real close length-wise, a couple inches short of the bare minimum. If you need to cheat a little bit I'd say put the head end a couple of inches closer to the wall and give yourself the extra room at the foot end. When breaking you probably never place the cue ball on the end rail, but somewhere near the head string. If it were me I'd go with the 9' table and get a slightly shorter cue to use on the rare occasions the wall is in the way. Best of luck whatever you decide.

If you use a cue longer than 58" adjust accordingly.
 
Last edited:
looks like your question has been answered. you might want to check out brunswickbilliards.com nonetheless. room size requirements and a cool room design program are on there.
 
A lot of good information here, so I don't need to repeat the recommended room dimensions.

I will say though that I have a 9 foot Brunswick GCII in a room that is not quite large enough. One corner is obstructed by a fireplace sticking out and I need about 2 inches more along each side.

We use a shorter stick if stuck on the side rail with a straight out shot and I have a really short stick I sometimes have to use if stuck in the blocked corner. The side rail issue rarely comes up.

To me it was worth it to go with the 9 footer, since that is what I play in leagues and most tournaments, and your room will handle it better than mine.
 
I agree with having a shorter stick available. You won't need it on 99% of the shots but it's nice to have the short stick just in case you are stuck on the rail and need to stroke the ball some. It's not really much of a compromise and I would go with the 9 foot table.

You could even cheat the table to the back of the room by a couple of inches (up to 100 mm) if you wanted a little more space at the head of the table.

You have more than enough room on the sides of the table with the 16' dimension.
 
Here is a chart of standard table sizes and suggested room dimensions.

Keep in mind these dimensions are for using a standard 58" 2 piece cue. If you use a shorter cue you will be able to use a smaller space.

Source: http://www.billiards.com/article/pool-table-room-size [Retrieved 5 April 2011]
 

Attachments

  • Pool Table Size.JPG
    Pool Table Size.JPG
    12.1 KB · Views: 5,565
JAM said:
Here is a chart of standard table sizes and suggested room dimensions.
Click to expand...

The problem with that chart - which every pool table peddler swears is gospel - is that it's put out by the table peddlers; their interests are different from yours. A 4.5x9 in a room that's 18'4"x14'6" does not make for comfortable play. You may have to put up with it, but I guarantee you won't be really happy with it. You won't even be able to fit a chair in a corner without it being in the way of your feet.

The best rule is to add 5' to the nominal dimensions of the table to get a minimum size that's ok for playing, and add a foot to the length and 6" to the width to get a size that's actually comfortable. That makes it 15x20 for a 9' table, which isn't spacious but play will be comfortable and you'll have room for a few amenities. You can put chairs/stools in a couple of corners, a cue rack in another, and you won't have stuff in the way of your feet.
 
Derek said:
...You could even cheat the table to the back of the room by a couple of inches (up to 100 mm) if you wanted a little more space at the head of the table...
Click to expand...

Personally, I would prefer to cheat the other way if I had to, leaving more room at the foot end. In my experience that's where I'm more likely to need it. For one thing, all the balls are down at that end to begin each rack.
 
Tight

Ideally you would like to have five foot from each side. Take some cardboard and tape it together the size of the table. Put it on some two by fours on saw horses and try it out in your space. If you can get a decent stroke from all angles, go for it. If it is for repetitive drills, you don't need all the space. A tight table space is to your benefit when inviting others over for a friendly game of fifty dollar one pocket.
 
I agree with the poster who said leg room is as much of an issue as stroking room, but I'd still rather fight that space than settle for an 8' table.

If your room is partitioned with sheetrock, you may be able to gain another 3 1/2 inches on each side with a hammer. :thumbup:
 
DogsPlayingPool said:
Personally, I would prefer to cheat the other way if I had to, leaving more room at the foot end. In my experience that's where I'm more likely to need it. For one thing, all the balls are down at that end to begin each rack.
Click to expand...
I agree, if you are playing one pocket or straight pool you will want the room.
 
it will be just fine. only rarely will you have to adjust. and if you are mostly playing for practice no problem at all. if you hare having lots of people over and and worry about bumping a wall dont get a pool table.
 
I have a 9' GC

I am currently taking out a load bearing wall at my new place and installing a beam so I have a space at least 16' wide by 20' long . Trust me anything less than this is going to be too tight and not enjoyable for long hours of play
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top