smiling_Hans
Well-known member
This from a few days ago
Small pockets ruining the game
- Thread starter smiling_Hans
- Start date
In with the .02.
The field would rise to it. Didn't kill snooker. I think Feijen still has a foot in education. Hurts his competitive endeavors.
The field would rise to it. Didn't kill snooker. I think Feijen still has a foot in education. Hurts his competitive endeavors.
I think sneaking up on things is silly! Go ahead and tighten the pockets to three inches, maybe three and a quarter. Then read up on American snooker rules. No sense even pretending you are playing pool anymore.
Hu
Hu
Right now the options are limited to conservative but that's human error. Players can easily learn to shoot more precisely. They need to do that anyway.
Flakeandrun
Well-known member
People moaning about small pockets is ruining the game.
I think it offers levels of measurable attainment from 4.5 - 4.25 - 4 for the consumer/average players wanting to progress their game. It allows them to more easily see the difference between what the pros can do, and what they can. Different aspects of the game can be taken to different tables in practice, but culminate in a set standard of 4" at the top flight.
I don't think much adjustment is needed for Pro-level players. The ones who see the playing field levelled will be the ones bitching and moaning.
It's not even making it similar/comparable to Chinese-8... it is simply changing the mouth of the pocket to a marginally smaller size.
Marginally. It seems a bigger change now as players adjust, or simply psych themselves out at a time when it is 'new' to them. gives them a good reason for bottling something they should have nailed...
I think it offers levels of measurable attainment from 4.5 - 4.25 - 4 for the consumer/average players wanting to progress their game. It allows them to more easily see the difference between what the pros can do, and what they can. Different aspects of the game can be taken to different tables in practice, but culminate in a set standard of 4" at the top flight.
I don't think much adjustment is needed for Pro-level players. The ones who see the playing field levelled will be the ones bitching and moaning.
Yeah, I am not sure how making it slightly smaller resembles or has anything to do with snooker either. Maybe it's just to people who have not ever actually played snooker, but have watched a little, or been part of discussions/read other peoples comments about snooker.
It's not even making it similar/comparable to Chinese-8... it is simply changing the mouth of the pocket to a marginally smaller size.
IMO it ruins aggressive run-out style pool. Leads to 'cinch' pool and endless safety battles. I've watched pro pool on super tight tables and to me its boring to watch. You like the sound of your own voice bud. Too many words to not say much. Bye-bye.
At what point should we stop reducing pocket size? You okay with 3.5" pockets?
Flakeandrun
Well-known member
4" should be the set standard... Which is what I assumed MR are trying to do (and hope that they are). Who said anything about making them smaller and smaller? Let's make all the equipment smaller? Let's play with marbles and chopsticks?
3.9" on these UK open tables.. tbh, just looked like someone couldn't hold a tape measure straight... but a fixed, regulated template would be the solution to this problem.
For each of the pocket sizes... 4.5, 4.25 and 4 - Each should have it's own template, and why not host amateur and intermediate tournaments on 4.5/4.25. Anything to do with universalisation I'm all for. What I am not all for, is constant flip-flopping and pointless moaning back and forth...
hahahaha Just enough words to say what I wanted to say? Good banter from you as per
I quite enjoy the safety battles, and I think there was still plenty of entertaining shot making in the UK open. I think the players are still in the balance of the psychological adjustment period.
They switched the TV competition tables here to 4" whether Rasson, Aileex or Diamond. Quite happy to jump on and look forward to figuring them out.
Last edited:
There are basically two main knobs that can be adjusted to make American pool more "challenging" for the pros. The first knob is modifying the table. The other knob is changing the rules or picking a new game. I'd much rather change the rules/game than mess with the table (otherwise at some point it no longer resembles American pool). That means going from 9-ball to 10-ball...or even 12-ball...or heck even full rack rotation.
Personally, it's much more fun watching full rack rotation with 4.75" pockets compared to 9-ball with 3.75" pockets.
Problem with Matchroom is that for some reason they've defined their brand as being strictly 9-ball. Why purposely choose to limit themselves?
Personally, it's much more fun watching full rack rotation with 4.75" pockets compared to 9-ball with 3.75" pockets.
Problem with Matchroom is that for some reason they've defined their brand as being strictly 9-ball. Why purposely choose to limit themselves?
To grow. MR can't be all things right now. First they have to establish one main brand of pool internationally. It's tough enough to make money and expand with 9 ball, never mind 10-ball, 8-ball, women's pool.
IF MR succeeds, I suspect it will broaden out eventually. But "eventually" could be a long time.
I think Feijin is entirely correct. Some say, what's the big deal going from 4 to 3.9 (really 3 7/8 based on Karl's measurement).
Well, at some point, the pocket shrinking does change the game. If just by eliminating cheating the pocket.
Is the point of no return 3.9, 3.8, 3.7 ... could be any of those.
Whatever the case, I found MR tourneys on 4-inch pockets to be plenty tough and enjoyable. While I like some safety battles, I don't like too many. They lengthen the game to lengths that are already too long for the average fan.
That, to me, is one of the biggest obstacle to widespread spectator enjoyment. Matches should not exceed two to two and a half hours in length. It's one reason I think all final and semi-final races should be capped at 11 except for perhaps the Premier League of Pool (the elite of the elite battling it out).
Well, at some point, the pocket shrinking does change the game. If just by eliminating cheating the pocket.
Is the point of no return 3.9, 3.8, 3.7 ... could be any of those.
Whatever the case, I found MR tourneys on 4-inch pockets to be plenty tough and enjoyable. While I like some safety battles, I don't like too many. They lengthen the game to lengths that are already too long for the average fan.
That, to me, is one of the biggest obstacle to widespread spectator enjoyment. Matches should not exceed two to two and a half hours in length. It's one reason I think all final and semi-final races should be capped at 11 except for perhaps the Premier League of Pool (the elite of the elite battling it out).
Last edited:
A Google search for "world pool championship prize money yields this:
US Open 9-Ball Championship Prize Fund Increases To $375,000
By changing my Google search to world snooker championship I get:
ELEVEN Zimbabwe pool players are in China for the Joy Cup World Heyball Masters Grand Finals 2024, battling for the first prize money of about US$700 000. Heyball is a Chinese variant of the standard American eight-ball pool, with pocket openings and cushions similar to those used in snooker.
Edit: I forgot the Sarcasm tag.
[Sarcasm]Kind of obvious the damage that tighter pockets can do to the game.[/sarcasm]
US Open 9-Ball Championship Prize Fund Increases To $375,000
| 97th | $1,000 |
|---|---|
| Quarter-Finalists | $7,750 |
| Semi-Finalists | $15,000 |
| Runner-Up | $30,000 |
| Winner | $60,000 |
- The winner receives £500,000.
- For the runner-up, there is the consolation of £200,000.
- Semi-finalists earn £100,000 and quarter-finalists £50,000.
- Players knocked out in the first round collect £20,000, while £30,000 goes to players beaten in the last 16.
ELEVEN Zimbabwe pool players are in China for the Joy Cup World Heyball Masters Grand Finals 2024, battling for the first prize money of about US$700 000. Heyball is a Chinese variant of the standard American eight-ball pool, with pocket openings and cushions similar to those used in snooker.
Edit: I forgot the Sarcasm tag.
[Sarcasm]Kind of obvious the damage that tighter pockets can do to the game.[/sarcasm]
Last edited:
OK, just to clarify things, I practiced daily on snooker tables for several years. When I could get somebody to play with me I played fifty-six and stop first or second inning of every game. This was on an old table set up for golf. Made Riley championship tables look like shooting at buckets. I could handle tighter pockets than pool players will ever see in my prime. I didn't start out on those pockets though, I went to the snooker table after I was a fairly accomplished pool player.
My issue isn't with one change to smaller pockets, as my first post pointed out, it is the constant creep to smaller and smaller pockets I object to. When we go to smaller and smaller pockets we are hurting position play. More importantly, we are killing the game for newcomers. Want to grow the game? Regulate the pocket size at four and a half inches. Pro's will still run out some and miss some, beginners will still make a few balls and run a few balls now and then.
Pool should have standardized pockets decades ago.
Hu
My issue isn't with one change to smaller pockets, as my first post pointed out, it is the constant creep to smaller and smaller pockets I object to. When we go to smaller and smaller pockets we are hurting position play. More importantly, we are killing the game for newcomers. Want to grow the game? Regulate the pocket size at four and a half inches. Pro's will still run out some and miss some, beginners will still make a few balls and run a few balls now and then.
Pool should have standardized pockets decades ago.
Hu
This is true! Brings to mind a comparison of pool vs snooker. I think it was Stephen Hendry but might have been another snooker champion that said, "the comparison is like put put golf compared to The Masters."
Was his opponent and the other players playing on different equipment? I'm a fan of Niels and he usually takes the high road, but he's coming off as a whiney man bitch here. The conditions are the same for everyone. If you don't like it, don't play. Matchroom has done faaaar more good for pro pool than hurt it and I don't think tight equipment for the world's best is ruining the game. We aren't seeing packages in Matchroom events because the 9B is on the spot and the break box is small. There's no wired wing ball and you can't control the 1B and the CB. I saw Dennis run a 10 pack, I believe at Hard Times Bellflower on a sub 4" Gold Crown. He was soft breaking, 1B on the spot and running out like tap water. Dennis probably spins the ball more than Niels too. Stop complaining about pocket size. There are other factors in play
Feijin wasn't making excuses for losing or being a whiner in my view.
He has taken issue with certain changes by MR now and then, and I think he has every right. Players should speak up if they think a change in the game is for the worse. Feijin has earned the right to speak up, and unlike younger players, he feels he can speak more freely because he is nearing the end of his career.
Yes, MR has been good for the game, but not every change they make is for the better. The only way they will know if they've created a problem if it players speak up, like Niels did.
From what Karl Boyes indicated, other players also complained anonymously about the 3.9 inch pockets. It came up an interview with Frazer, too.