Whats everyone opinion on a Sardo the 3000 original and the new version. Worth the $$ or NOT?
Sardo Rack Opinions
- Thread starter RDCustomCues
- Start date
This thread will open up a can of worms. A lot of people do not like the sardo rack. They don't like the rack because of the predictable nature with which the balls break, and the fact that you generally have to train your cloth which can create divots in the cloth. I have the rack, and do like it. I did not train my cloth, but the rack still works well. It does take longer to rack with it, so I only use it when I have people over.
RDCustomCues said:
Be prepared to hear a lot of negative opinions on it. For anyone who gives a thumbs down, please specify under what conditions the rack was used. For poolhall use, it is probably not going to work.
I've also read some opinions that it's great, as long as you use it from the get-go when the cloth is brand new, and as long as everyone who is using it knows how to use it. So far, I've had a table set up at home for 2 months. I've used the Sardo exclusively. So far, it's the nutz!
I spent a little time training it (softly making small divots for the balls to rest on) on day 1. Around the 2nd or 3rd week, something went wrong, and suddenly a couple of the balls weren't sitting where they were supposed to. This may have been due to roommates not checking where the rack was placed (blame someone else, that's what I say.
).After about a week like that, in my case, the balls have now settled back to where they should be, and for the past month I've been getting a perfect rack, every time, in under 10 seconds.
I'd like to hear from other home-table owners who have had it longer, but for me, after 2 months, I'm very very happy with the Sardo M-5000.
Regarding the divots, I haven't tested intentionally slow-rolling balls over the rack area yet to see what would happen. I also have only played about 10 games of 1-pocket on the table, but no roll-offs in those 10 games. The tapping I did to set the balls was way more gentle than the force created by a typical jump shot, IMO. I will try to remember to test that out tonight and see if I can get a ball to change direction off a divot.
Last edited:
Well the search button use on occasion would of prevented me from posting this stupid post. I think I decided for a better wood rack. Any suggestions where to buy the best one. I would like something for daily use at the house. I bough 2 recently from local shop i bought my table from and the both suck. I ordered a composite from one of my suppliers and it sucks.
RDCustomCues said:
LOL. Some of the threads on the Sardo make it sound like complete garbage. Here's one that makes it sound like garbage at first, but then there are counter-points towards the end. Make sure to read post #35:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=14316
Here's an interesting thread about wood racks:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=60130
Good luck!
Yeah, I guess I should add that at some point, I may try a quality wood rack (Diamond), even though I love the Sardo. I just miss the sound and feel of a wood rack.
The thing is, I'd probably want to hide it from my roommates. The Sardo, once you know how to use it, just seems fool-proof, as long as the user cares enough to line up the dots. You just line up them up and the rest is almost a no-brainer.
If I try a wood rack, I will definitely mark the cloth so that I can put it in the exact same spot every time, ala Sardo, but it seems more prone to error with the casual pool player (who doesn't necessarily check the rack).
The thing is, I'd probably want to hide it from my roommates. The Sardo, once you know how to use it, just seems fool-proof, as long as the user cares enough to line up the dots. You just line up them up and the rest is almost a no-brainer.
If I try a wood rack, I will definitely mark the cloth so that I can put it in the exact same spot every time, ala Sardo, but it seems more prone to error with the casual pool player (who doesn't necessarily check the rack).
The problem with the Sardo rack in pro tournaments is that the players have found a way to make the wing ball on every break, even breaking from within the "box". I played Buddy Hall a couple of years ago in a UPA event using Sardo racks and he made the corner ball on every break, and played shape on the one off the break. Needless to say, he was unbeatable in that set. I felt like I was the only player in the tournament that didn't know how to make the wing ball.
I think the Sardo rack could work for a full rack of balls, though.
The other problem I have with the rack is that the balls have to be pounded into the cloth in order to freeze to each other. After a few racks of nine ball after pounding the balls you don't even need a rack. They just fall into place.
Danny K
I think the Sardo rack could work for a full rack of balls, though.
The other problem I have with the rack is that the balls have to be pounded into the cloth in order to freeze to each other. After a few racks of nine ball after pounding the balls you don't even need a rack. They just fall into place.
Danny K
Cuebacca said:
OK, I'd been meaning to test this, and just now I did. I slow-rolled more than 50 balls through the rack area on my table, at such a speed where the balls stopped either in the rack footprint, or just past it. I did not witness a single noticeable change in direction. In my opinion, based solely on my limited personal experience, the divots are a non-issue if the rack is set up correctly.
I think that tables that have significant divots probably had the balls pounded in too hard as described in the thread I linked to above. Or, perhaps such tables had huge monster breakers break many many many racks, which caused the divots, but this would have nothing to do with what rack was used. There will be divots no matter what because of the downward force created by the cueball. The biggest one will be on the spot, under the lead ball. Again, these are just my opinions and I cannot prove this.
Regarding the Sardo making the wing ball, I think that is more of a problem with the diamond-shaped 9-ball rack than the Sardo rack itself. Joe Tucker, in his "Racking Secrets" book/DVD, explains this very well with diagrams showing how the energy flows through a 9-ball rack from the 1-ball through to the wing ball.
When a perfect rack is obtained, the wing ball is pretty much wired to go in the corner, if the 1-ball is hit right. The Sardo is simply a tool to give a perfect rack, which I think should be the goal. I am guessing that before the Sardo, it was a lot harder to get a consistently perfect rack, so perhaps the wing ball was never widely discovered to be an issue.
Now that we know that a perfect rack equals an easy wing ball, I think that the solution is not to put imperfections into the rack, unless there is a consistent way to do that which would be fair to both players. Instead, I think the pros should move towards 10-ball, where the wing ball is a non-issue.
Just my opinions. I could be wrong.
I have the second generation Sardo, and it works great, ESPECIALLY for 14.1.
The best part about a Sardo is it keeps the other guys hands off the rack! there is no slug racking, tilting, second guessing etc. Do you need it at home? not really. You ever play a guy who you suspect is racking you?....bring the Sardo!
Gerry
The best part about a Sardo is it keeps the other guys hands off the rack! there is no slug racking, tilting, second guessing etc. Do you need it at home? not really. You ever play a guy who you suspect is racking you?....bring the Sardo!
Gerry