should pocket size be standardized?

If there was a standard pocket size, what should it be?

  • Total voters
    64
  • Poll closed .
Franky

Franky

woman I said NO!!!
Silver Member
5 inch buckets versus 4 inch soul-crushers. Why is there so much variance? I can understand why some people like a tight table for one pocket (myself included to a degree), but entire rooms of 4.0-4.25 inch pockets seems a bit ascetic to me. Its a drastic change from the buckets of Mosconi's day.

If we had to pick a standard pocket opening size at the pocket points given parallel pocket facings, what would be your choice? I'd choose 4.5".
 
Franky said:
5 inch buckets versus 4 inch soul-crushers. Why is there so much variance? I can understand why some people like a tight table for one pocket (myself included to a degree), but entire rooms of 4.0-4.25 inch pockets seems a bit ascetic to me. Its a drastic change from the buckets of Mosconi's day.

If we had to pick a standard pocket opening size at the pocket points given parallel pocket facings, what would be your choice? I'd choose 4.5".
Click to expand...

Well that would be pretty cool if there was a standard pocket size. I'd also opt for 4.5" pockets. That's a fair size that doesn't take away from the game. I know it sounds big to some people, but you CAN miss balls on 4.5" pockets. I think the game is changed, in a negative way, when the pockets start to get smaller than that. Even 4.25" is negotiable, but it starts to get a little absurd when the pockets are smaller than that. That size is okay for practice, imo, but I'd rather not compete on 4" pockets.

Funny thing is, if I were to answer this question two years ago I would have probably said 4" or 4.25". My opinion on the subject has changed since straight pool became my favorite game.
 
Its like Golf to me.... I like having the courses that tiger gets 28 under par, but I also enjoy Augusta courses where the winner shoots par. I think variance is good for the game.


Ian
 
Franky said:
5 inch buckets versus 4 inch soul-crushers. Why is there so much variance?
Because 5 inch buckets accept more balls on the 3X6 quarter hogs, making more money for the tavern owner.;)

I can understand why some people like a tight table for one pocket (myself included to a degree), but entire rooms of 4.0-4.25 inch pockets seems a bit ascetic to me. Its a drastic change from the buckets of Mosconi's day.
That's the truth.:)

If we had to pick a standard pocket opening size at the pocket points given parallel pocket facings, what would be your choice? I'd choose 4.5".
I'd settle for 4.5 inch pockets for the rest of my life.
Click to expand...
..............................
 
This is a good thread. I agree that pocket size should be standardized. It's not like NBA players play with larger/smaller buckets from game to game. 4.5 sounds reasonable to me.:)
 
I also agree that 4.5 is about right, as it's right on the 50 yard line of pockets widths andso, you're getting pockets that aren't too big, but aren't overly tight also :)

Willie
 
I'll go with anything if they standardize it... standardizing is a good thing. We could stand to do that for some rules too.
 
Sensation said:
Just to make sure: pocket's size measures at the lips?
Click to expand...

Yes, since the I'm talking about parallel pocket facings, you can measure this at the points of the pockets.

I watched some of the Blackwidow marathon on TV today and was once again reminded of how big some pockets actually are. It appeared to me that roughly a third of the pocketed shots I watched wouldn't even have rattled in the jaws on 4.25 inch pockets with cloth that had lost its slide.

Additionally, its hard to compare professional performance with your own, or anyone else's, with such a drastic difference in table play. I suppose that is the main reason I'd like to see standardization (aside from the odd one pocket table).
 
The pool hall I play at there is a table with pockets about 4.25.That is the table I perfer.I do tend to play one pocket most of the time.I voted for 4.50 inch pockets as I think this would be a happy middle.I don't really care what size the pockets are I just adjust my game a little.
 
I think if you were going to standardize pocket sizes it would be interesting to do it something along the lines of 4" on a barbox, 4.25" on 8 footers, and 4.5" on 9' tables.
 
4.5" is dam near stock on a 9 footer remember it needs to made tight the right way and not triple or quadruple shimmed. So you need to extend the rails the right way. I personaly play on 3-7\8" pockets at home and 4" at the pool hall hard to play straight pool but easy for 9 ball & one pocket once you get used to them, you will have no fear on a big pocket table again other then the fact that more balls slop in an a big pocket table which could hurt you with rookis players.

Once you go tight you wont want to go back to loose pockets for the cheese.

Craig
 
CreeDo said:
I'll go with anything if they standardize it... standardizing is a good thing. We could stand to do that for some rules too.
Click to expand...

YES!!! somebody else gets it!

We need standard tables, standard cloth, standard pockets, standard balls, and most importantly standard RULES!!.....

IMO that is one of the main things holding pool back from the mainstream....everywhere you go, you get a different game..different equipment and different rules..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top