Straight Pool- Run equivalent to old equipment???

atthecat

atthecat

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've been playing a lot of straight pool lately. Only problem is my GCI has 4 inch pockets and Simonis 860!!! It's not as easy as I remember it. Hard to spin balls in.
My question is what would be the equivalent runs compared to the old school 5 inch pockets with a nappy cloth? We gotta come up with some kind of conversion! LOL. Please, for my sanity!

What would the percentage be? I would think runs would be 30-40% higher on old equipment. ??? Curious what everyone thinks.
 
I think with 860 and 5" pockets you'd have to convert in the other direction.
 
I think it's a Wash

The 5" pockets definitely give you a great benefit. The "Old School" Mali 70/30 ( 70% Wool-30% Nylon) that was used is definitely a negative. Where today with Simonis 860 you can hit a break shot with medium speed and the balls spread nicely. With Mali 70/30 you had to have secondary and tertiary break shots to get the balls opened up. So IMHO it is a wash.

Wedge
 
.



The best way to find out is to find a place or someone that has one of those old tables and see what your runs are. You will also find that the balls also make a difference.



.
 
I guess 4" pockets may help your aim a little, at the expense of your confidence, or ego (which would that be). I wouldn't want a table with less than 4 1/2 corners, as thats the minimum regulation size, as I understand it anyway.
 
Renegade_56 said:
I guess 4" pockets may help your aim a little, at the expense of your confidence, or ego (which would that be). I wouldn't want a table with less than 4 1/2 corners, as thats the minimum regulation size, as I understand it anyway.
Click to expand...

I've never heard of a regulation size pocket. I really like the 4'' for everything but straight pool. I got the 4'' so that when I go out to tournaments the pockets seem like buckets. I'm more relaxed at tournaments now because of it.
 
Wedge said:
The 5" pockets definitely give you a great benefit. The "Old School" Mali 70/30 ( 70% Wool-30% Nylon) that was used is definitely a negative. Where today with Simonis 860 you can hit a break shot with medium speed and the balls spread nicely. With Mali 70/30 you had to have secondary and tertiary break shots to get the balls opened up. So IMHO it is a wash.

Wedge
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input. Within my first 2 years of playing pool my high run was 49. Now with the new tight equipment I'm lucky to get in the 40's all these years later!
I feeling like I'm playing the best pool of my life, that's why I was wondering.
 
Other Opinions

atthecat said:
Thanks for the input. Within my first 2 years of playing pool my high run was 49. Now with the new tight equipment I'm lucky to get in the 40's all these years later!
I feeling like I'm playing the best pool of my life, that's why I was wondering.
Click to expand...

Wish some straight pool players that have played on both types of equipment would chime in. This is an interesting thread!
 
Its not just that you have to be more accurate. There are combos, shots out of the pack, throw shots that not only are easier with the larger pockets, but also just possible. There are plenty of shots that were possible on the old equipment that just don't go no matter what you do on the new equipment.

I kinda see something like Shane's 7 pack of 10 ball on that super tight Diamond under pressure conditions to be on a par with Mosconi's 526 on a 8 footer with 5 inch pockets in an exhibition.

Kevin
 
In 1963 or so on a Brunswick table with large pockets -slow cloth and the old clay balls that you had to hammer the rack to get them to spread I ran 101 balls, on modern tables with tighter pockets-fast cloth and modern balls I never ran a 100 again. Lots of 50-60 and some 80s but never a 100. And I think straight pool is easier with modern equipment.
 
The reason (sadly) you have never heard of a regulation pocket size is that there is no unified governing body in pool. The reason for that begins with no successful dominant pro tour. Want to know how high the rim should be ? Measure an NBA hoop. How far from base to base ? MLB.

Kevin
 
kvinbrwr said:
Its not just that you have to be more accurate. There are combos, shots out of the pack, throw shots that not only are easier with the larger pockets, but also just possible. There are plenty of shots that were possible on the old equipment that just don't go no matter what you do on the new equipment.

I kinda see something like Shane's 7 pack of 10 ball on that super tight Diamond under pressure conditions to be on a par with Mosconi's 526 on a 8 footer with 5 inch pockets in an exhibition.

Kevin
Click to expand...

I agree. 7 racks of 10 ball on a tight Diamond!
 
measureman said:
In 1963 or so on a Brunswick table with large pockets -slow cloth and the old clay balls that you had to hammer the rack to get them to spread I ran 101 balls, on modern tables with tighter pockets-fast cloth and modern balls I never ran a 100 again. Lots of 50-60 and some 80s but never a 100. And I think straight pool is easier with modern equipment.
Click to expand...

So you're saying the cloth and balls make it easier, but the 4'' pockets are the reason why you can't get to 100 any more?
 
atthecat said:
I agree. 7 racks of 10 ball on a tight Diamond!
Click to expand...

I know. I was 1/2 asleep and figuring all those guys that were saying that the tight pockets were going to ruin the match by turning it into a safety battle were right when Shane did that. Don't forget he stopped because his 7th rack was 35 and they were done for the night. The guy might still be running out rack after rack. He's got a gear that nobody can fade.

Kevin
 
kvinbrwr said:
I know. I was 1/2 asleep and figuring all those guys that were saying that the tight pockets were going to ruin the match by turning it into a safety battle were right when Shane did that. Don't forget he stopped because his 7th rack was 35 and they were done for the night. The guy might still be running out rack after rack. He's got a gear that nobody can fade.

Kevin
Click to expand...
He has such a unique style too. He's not robotic like a lot of pros these days.
I love how he breaks. It barely looks like he puts much into it and then the balls scatter back and forth a few times. Awesome.
 
Wedge said:
The 5" pockets definitely give you a great benefit. The "Old School" Mali 70/30 ( 70% Wool-30% Nylon) that was used is definitely a negative. Where today with Simonis 860 you can hit a break shot with medium speed and the balls spread nicely. With Mali 70/30 you had to have secondary and tertiary break shots to get the balls opened up. So IMHO it is a wash.

Wedge
Click to expand...

I agree, and when you toss in better cues today and air conditioning which wasn't always the case in the old days, I don't think today's players have anything to complain about.

If the old timers had an advantage it was they played more 14.1 back then and had more knowledge.
 
I'm not one to judge mosconis abilities because I've never seen him play. Well there is a recent thread with a video he did, but we all know it was scripted. It's pretty obvious he didn't "get tired". This leads me to question everything everyone has said about anyone I've heard from our history, even a legend.

Today's equipment is much harder to control cueball. Again this is just speculation, we would need a pool player of both generations to get the pudding. Nappy cloth makes it easy to whack balls pocket it and still get the rock to a parameter intended....and 5" buckets on nap is nothing compared to smaller pockets now days. The idea that someone can shoot without relying on a slight margin of error for cueball mobility, is like believing bigfoot exists.

Like other sports there are greats of an era but the can't compare to the guys of today. Todays players are monsters. Conditions have evolved making better players. Competition and the need to have to win just to eat has made some really good players all over the world.
 
atthecat said:
So you're saying the cloth and balls make it easier, but the 4'' pockets are the reason why you can't get to 100 any more?
Click to expand...

I think its easier to control the cue ball and spread the rack but the tighter pockets make running balls a little harder. And as another poster pointed out that balls in the rack that would be dead on larger pockets will not go on tighter pockets. The tables I play on now 2 balls will not fit so I really don't know the size in inches but now i will measure them
this saturday just to see.
Also I don't play much straight pool anymore as most of the players here in Denver just don't play the game.I just have not tried for a high run in years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top