Small pockets ruining the game

[Flatfoot]

IMHO...smaller pockets are fine up to a point. However, 3.9 is ridiculous because it takes a decent chunk out of the artistry out of the game. When pockets can't be cheated more than a miniscule amount, and the player has to be much more careful to make each shot, their usage of crowd pleasing english and creative shot making will diminish substantially.
I certainly believe that the smaller the pockets, the more skill is needed to run out. But I have found that the players having enough leeway to cheat pockets and use english that may have to take them 3 or 4 rails is more entertaining. There is a critical balance and I'm not suggesting that I understand that balance enough to say how much the pockets should be cut down or not.
I just know that the main thing the powers that be in pool are trying to do is bring more fans to the game. Artistry is always entertaining!

 

[skogstokig]

The cream would rise to the top if it was 3-ball carnival game on 6” buckets

i don't think many players would want to travel half around the world only to lose because of a lag / unfortunate break scratch

 

[jsp]

because the players have become significantly better.

Of course players have become significantly better. But that doesn't exactly answer the question, unless we specifically want to see pros run out significantly less on wide open tables. Why adjust the tables such that the pros look like the above-average recreational pool player attempting to run out? If I want to see someone botch a wide open table layout with semi-regularity, then I'll go to my weekly 9-ball tournament. But maybe that is exactly what many want. I know I don't.

what is 12-ball?

Same basic rotation rules as 9 or 10 ball. Just add two more balls. More clusters so that the pros don't run out ALL the time, while upping the tactical/safety play due to the increased congestion. However, once the table becomes wide open, with 4.5" pockets the pros should be able to run the table out more times than not...even with 12 balls on the table. (But I know anything above 10-ball is a mere fantasy of mine.)

 

[jsp]

They don't want these guys running 7 racks. I thought the alternating breaks should solve that. They want more case games.

I'm perfectly fine with alternating breaks.

So a pro can rattle a ball or miss, then again, it will look bad for professional pool. People won't realize the pockets are smaller and think these guys are clowns for calling themselves professionals.

Yup. Not sure if this is what we really want.

 

[jsp]

Someone earlier ran down a list of "other" sports that don't change the game for sake of the amateur vs pro player. However they're only citing what supports their argument. Pro golf courses are much longer and have thinner fairways and a par score remains the same. The hole may be the same size but it's placed in my troublesome locations. These items were mentioned but for some reason the poster believes it doesn't make the game harder. Drop a 30 handicap on a course set up for pros from the black tees and see how they score. Probably as well as a APA 5 does a Diamond table with 4" pockets. Baseball fields are larger, the ball moves faster, and amateurs don't have to hit over 4 story walls 400yrds away. Tennis is a competitive sport. Players hit harder with more accuracy and your ability to succeed is directly proportional to the ability of the other player.

I understand the argument. I'm for making the pro game harder, but I don't think tightening the pockets indefinitely is the right way to go in order to grow the game. I'd much rather have the pros play a different game, like 12-ball or full rack rotation. To the casual observer, it's immediately obvious that running out with 12 or 15 balls on the table is significantly tougher than running out only 9 balls. But for pros shooting on a table with 3.9" pockets, it's not obvious at all to the casual observer how much more difficult running out is. They simply see a so-called pro once in a while missing a relatively simple cut shot due to the stringent pockets and think he's a hack.

 

[skogstokig]

Of course players have become significantly better. But that doesn't exactly answer the question, unless we specifically want to see pros run out significantly less on wide open tables. Why adjust the tables such that the pros look like the above-average recreational pool player attempting to run out? If I want to see someone botch a wide open table layout with semi-regularity, then I'll go to my weekly 9-ball tournament. But maybe that is exactly what many want. I know I don't.

lil ko literally blew yapp away in the US open semi final last year. perfect set. plenty BNRs and offensive play. and he continued with the same in the final. kaci vs filler in the UK open was maybe not tpa 1.000 but well above .950, it was almost a perfect set. raga vs alcaide in the european was also high octane and very entertaining, along with many other great matches last year. the stats posted here would show that too.

this UK open wasn't as entertaining and the stats showed that. but the difference wasn't 4.5" to 3.9", it was 4" to 3.9".

meanwhile the china open and qatar open with 4.25" and alternate break was boring as hell.

Same basic rotation rules as 9 or 10 ball. Just add two more balls. More clusters so that the pros don't run out ALL the time, while upping the tactical/safety play due to the increased congestion. However, once the table becomes wide open, with 4.5" pockets the pros should be able to run the table out more times than not...even with 12 balls on the table. (But I know anything above 10-ball is a mere fantasy of mine.)

i haven't tried it or even seen 12-ball. you may be right. are there any 12-ball matches out there?

 

[smiling_Hans]

If I want to see someone botch a wide open table layout with semi-regularity, then I'll go to my weekly 9-ball tournament. But maybe that is exactly what many want. I know I don't.

ROFL

 

[DynoDan]

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

If the pockets get REALLY tiny, they will have to equip the tables with some kind of audio reward (like pinball machines) when you finally get a ball to go in, in order to maintain interest (my very early Diamond Pro with metal ball return rails already does that).

 

[jsp]

lil ko literally blew yapp away in the US open semi final last year. perfect set. plenty BNRs and offensive play. and he continued with the same in the final. kaci vs filler in the UK open was maybe not tpa 1.000 but well above .950, it was almost a perfect set. raga vs alcaide in the european was also high octane and very entertaining, along with many other great matches last year. the stats posted here would show that too.

this UK open wasn't as entertaining and the stats showed that. but the difference wasn't 4.5" to 3.9", it was 4" to 3.9".

Hard to believe that 0.1" can make such a significant difference in play, but I guess I can't argue with the data if that's what it in fact shows.

i haven't tried it or even seen 12-ball. you may be right. are there any 12-ball matches out there?

Probably not. I've been advocating the pros playing 8-ball using 21 balls for years on this forum, so I'm a bit of an outlier with my opinions...lol.

 

[Maniac]

I'd much rather have the pros play a different game, like 12-ball or full rack rotation. To the casual observer, it's immediately obvious that running out with 12 or 15 balls on the table is significantly tougher than running out only 9 balls.

Can you please diagram or give some kind of visual of how a 12-ball rack would look on the table?

1-ball on the spot???

Need more info for this suggestion to be valid. How would the rules vary from say, WPA 10-ball?

 

[ShootingArts]

If the pockets get REALLY tiny, they will have to equip the tables with some kind of audio reward (like pinball machines) when you finally get a ball to go in, in order to maintain interest (my very early Diamond Pro with metal ball return rails already does that).

Normally I say great minds think alike. In your case and mine I think we happen to be warped about the same!

Now I want to put some of those round bell things in pockets that would ring every time somebody made a ball! Should be enough to cause insanity.

Hu

 

[Maniac]

Now I want to put some of those round bell things in pockets that would ring every time somebody made a ball! Should be enough to cause insanity.

Hu

We've already got enough annoying sounds in pool with those God-awful shot clocks winding down!!!

 

[1sttbone]

four and one half should be the standard as some sort of standard is needed to make this game legit. golf hole size has always been four inches and a change has never been considered. quite frankly it would raise the bar for everyone. the best players work the hardest and lets give credit to those top players.

 

[Flakeandrun]

Any other pro sport is played with almost the same equipment/field as amateurs play on.

'Most' or 'lot's of' - would be a more accurate and fair statement.

What if golf decided to make the hole smaller? They might lengthen the course, move the pin, and move the tee. 50 yards and a curve is nothing for a professional golfer. They can hit the ball better than amateurs. They don’t make it harder to “pocket” the golf ball, and they don’t narrow the course. Making the hole tiny would change the way players putt.

This analogy doesn't really hold up to me. Professionals hit pool balls a lot better than you or me, so let's make it tougher... sounds like they need smaller pockets, not a 20foot table lol

Tennis and baseball don’t change anything.

but...

All that basketball does is make a 3 pointer a bit longer. The rim is the same size. Football uses a slightly larger ball. They don’t narrow the goal posts.

So they do? And so do many other sports. Most sports are leveled in different ways... Initially targeting consumer interest, then hobbyist, then serious amateur who wants to see progression.

This subject probably depends on where you live too. In the UK snooker is popular. Maybe that’s why they made the pockets smaller for the UK Open. In America. Guess there is still the Predator tour. Matchroom didn’t get the memo from American sports if they do the same for the US Open. In America, they are pushing for more offense/action and higher scoring games. Someone else already mentioned that. It keeps America interested. Plus, a majority of US players don’t care for snooker. We play pool.

As far as I can tell, or have seen. There has been no universalization of a rule set for each game, let alone the equipment the game is played on. With such enormous variance, no wonder there has been such peaks and troughs in popularity throughout the years...

And what I am inferring with this comment is professionals are supposed to make the game look easy. That’s why they are professionals. No need to even have 4” pockets. They should be closer to normal at 4.25” minimum.

Jump on a table with 4" pockets, and I guarantee you will consider that they are making the game look easy by comparison.

I still think halls that cater 4.5" to newbies, 4.25" to those wanting to improve, and 4" for those who want to taste the top level, is a good thing.

There are amateur leagues in numerous sports that alter rule sets, playing area or equipment. The difference is the standardization of expectation

So are soccer goals when comparing them to hockey goals.

I am confused why people are comparing a slight tightening of a pocket to snooker in the first place to be honest.

 

[Flakeandrun]

The cream would rise to the top if it was 3-ball carnival game on 6” buckets, or 15 ball rotation on 4” diamond pockets. It makes no difference.

would the cream rise to the top? Or would the people with the finance to continue playing such a luck based game, be the ones who persisted enough and could afford to make a name for themselves?

The root question imo should be what makes the game most exciting to viewers.

Pretty new to watching, and I found it really entertaining (but then I do have cue sports background in snooker, and the pace or tactical side of a game has always been of point of admiration and interest, I will admit that).

9 ball pool imo is way more exciting than Snooker, on the game level itself. I think the only reason snooker has a following is Barry Hearn. If he had chosen 9 ball 40 years ago the two sports would probably be reversed right now. And snooker organizers today may have been looking at ways to make the pockets more for aggressive play.

Yes, snooker is in an interesting place I feel. They have heavily relied on the Arab world for the dollars ever since the match-fixing scandal saw many Chinese players fall off the tour, and the popularity of snooker in China decrease substantially. There are far less snooker tables in Shanghai these days, which was full of them 5 years ago.

WPA/Chinese-8 ball vs MR 9ball is very much an obvious thing here right now. Lots more participation in both American and Chinese table. A couple of companies held tight and resisted the urge to pile Chinese-8 tables, even when covid meant interest in American tables diminished. Those companies are the ones profiting and putting a lot of money into hosting American table events in the coming future.

 

[Flakeandrun]

i don't think many players would want to travel half around the world only to lose because of a lag / unfortunate break scratch

The ones who could afford it would. You'd have a small brigade of Tyler Styer's wet-eyeing their way around the world.

 

[Willowbrook Wolfy]

'Most' or 'lot's of' - would be a more accurate and fair statement.

This analogy doesn't really hold up to me. Professionals hit pool balls a lot better than you or me, so let's make it tougher... sounds like they need smaller pockets, not a 20foot table lol

but...

So they do? And so do many other sports. Most sports are leveled in different ways... Initially targeting consumer interest, then hobbyist, then serious amateur who wants to see progression.

As far as I can tell, or have seen. There has been no universalization of a rule set for each game, let alone the equipment the game is played on. With such enormous variance, no wonder there has been such peaks and troughs in popularity throughout the years...

Jump on a table with 4" pockets, and I guarantee you will consider that they are making the game look easy by comparison.

I still think halls that cater 4.5" to newbies, 4.25" to those wanting to improve, and 4" for those who want to taste the top level, is a good thing.

There are amateur leagues in numerous sports that alter rule sets, playing area or equipment. The difference is the standardization of expectation


I am confused why people are comparing a slight tightening of a pocket to snooker in the first place to be honest.

I’m surprised anybody reads my full posts anymore

 

[Flakeandrun]

I’m surprised anybody reads my full posts anymore

You underestimate just how little attention I want to give my job while at my desk

 

[Willowbrook Wolfy]

Here is another way to look at things also. When does shrinking the pockets start rewarding crappy safety play? Every time it goes down it gets easier and easier to play safe. When is it to the point where you start getting worse players that are pros? Sometimes regulations can become so stringent they make worse players look like better players. Because it doesn’t require a full skill set anymore. I mean even 4 inches is to the point where players can probably leave a hard bank as a safety. Even the best bankers aren’t going to take the shot. Same with leaving a kickshot but the cb isn’t tied up because you hit it too soft. The pockets are getting so small players are being rewarded for that already.

 

[Flakeandrun]

Here is another way to look at things also. When does shrinking the pockets start rewarding crappy safety play? Every time it goes down it gets easier and easier to play safe. When is it to the point where you start getting worse players that are pros? Sometimes regulations can become so stringent they make worse players look like better players. Because it doesn’t require a full skill set anymore. I mean even 4 inches is to the point where players can probably leave a hard bank as a safety. Even the best bankers aren’t going to take the shot. Same with leaving a kickshot but the cb isn’t tied up because you hit it too soft. The pockets are getting so small players are being rewarded for that already.

I don't think the intention is to forever shrink the pockets. As I mentioned earlier. I think the objective is to standardize 4" - this was just shoddy workmanship on their part.