In retrospect, Darren would have probably had a much better chance playing Shane in 9 ball. He could have used his cut break and it would help to level the field.
TAR 30, and the winner is...
- Thread starter TATE
- Start date
In retrospect, Darren would have probably had a much better chance playing Shane in 9 ball. He could have used his cut break and it would help to level the field.
Cut break, nine on the spot, and Daz is a very solid favourite, IMO. One on the spot and it's a close match.
For the record, I don't think the tight pockets rattled Daz all that much. This is someone who played English 8 ball for years and had a lot of success doing it. The early scratches on the break, coupled with some bad rolls on the second day, threw him way off his game and he never really recovered from there.
You guys with these Ernesto 4" corner pockets just don't,get it
if I were to build a Diamond with 4" corner pockets and make the pocket angles parallel or almost parallel as to remove the funnel effect of the ball being funneled into the pocket, then slate shelf or no slate shelf...it would never come into play because the balls are deflected all the way to the back throat of the pocket, which makes the pocket BIGGER than 4 1/2" in the hallway the ball travels through. Hell, why don't we all just quit playing pocket pool and start playing Russian Pyramid to where the balls have to be forced through the jaws of the corner pockets in order to make them count. I don't agree with pockets tighter than 4 1/2" in the first place because all you're doing is changing the over all game from what it has always been. With all you 4" corner pocket players, you should ALL be wining world championships and knocking off the best players in the world that play on 4 1/2" pockets, I mean hell....YOU guys should NEVER miss a shot on a table with 4 1/2" pockets....right? I just don't understand why the world isn't just dominated by all the 4" pocket advcates...can you explain that?
You guys with these Ernesto 4" corner pockets just don't,get it
I just don't understand why the world isn't just dominated by all the 4" pocket advcates...can you explain that?
It is not about us never missing on 4 1/2 inch pockets, its that the pros rarely do. The game is too easy for them on those pockets which is why rotation on big pockets is boring to watch. This is just my opinion of course.
How do you measure "too easy" though? How often they run out?
Don't have the exact stats but I think in the last match, shane had a 3 pack and darren only broke and ran one. Seems to me, one runout out of 2 races to 25 is definitely too low.
Do you think shane's 3-pack is about the biggest package you'd want to see? If so then I guess the TAR table is fine as-is.
Too low.
They should be breaking and running out 20% of the time.
I hate the end rail pocket facing angle on Diamonds. I have table with that opening. It gets worse if the table gets old and when it's cold ( facing gets harder ).
BCA should take a good look at it .
Sorry, sorry, sorry.
You guys with these Ernesto 4" corner pockets just don't,get it
I just don't understand why the world isn't just dominated by all the 4" pocket advcates...can you explain that?
Glen:
Sadly, you STILL didn't answer the question, and instead took it as an opportunity to rant yet again, adopting an extremist stance of Russian Pyramid. It's a simple question, but let me see if I can rephrase, just in case.
What is the purpose of having a deep pocket shelf as the aperture of the pocket gets tighter and tighter? Don't you think one (tighter pocket aperture) makes the purpose of the other (deep pocket shelf) increasingly unnecessary? There comes a point when that deep shelf is no longer useful -- and in fact, inhibits game play or changes the game altogether. Yet you adopt a stance of "bragging" about a deep pocket shelf on e.g. Diamond tables (which I love, btw), or of the one-off chance that you get to mount Diamond slate onto a Gold Crown bed and frame.
Can you please explain why?
-Sean
This is where you're still missing the point I think. As you tighten the pockets, you remove the shelf where the ball sits, creating less slate shelf, meaning if the pocket miters on a 4 1/8" were parallel like on a Ernesto GC...there would be no ball rattle, the balls would simple just fall in. So, when comparing how a Diamond plays with a funneled pocket design against a pocket that has parallel miter angles is not comparing Apples to Apples, ALL table pockets rattle the ball in the OUTER half of of the pocket shelf...did you get that? Ball rattle on a stock GC and a ProCut Diamond take place in the SAME area, the OUTER have of the pocket opening. The only time a deeper shelf has an effect on a ball still sitting in the jaws of a pocket is when the ball drifts to a final resting place, which on a Diamond is only about 1/4" deeper than a GC.
On a stock GC with 5" corner pockets...believe it or not, the ball will sit as far back in the jaws of the pocket, which is about 60% of the ball in the pocket, no different than a Diamond with ProCut 4 1/2" corner pockets. So my feeling is that players that can't beat the Pro's on 4 1/2" corner pockets only scream about tighter pockets so that they feel like they at least have a CHANCE of hanging with the Pro, like it's an equalizer or something...or a handicapping system to try and give the lesser player a chance to at least win a few games before they get BEAT.
I'm not, and NEVER have bragged about the Diamond pocket shelves, I've only tried to explain the differences between how a Diamond plays a little different than a Gold Crown, and it's only about 10% pocket shelf, and 90% miter angles, down angles, pocket facings...and who in the hell worked on the pool tables...as in the table mechanic's in this country.
As far as STANDARDS go in this industry, at least I can say that almost all Diamond's have played the same no matter where they're located, red label to red label, and blue label to blue label, which is a LOT more than I can say about the 10's of thousands of Gold Crowns that have been built and sold to pool rooms throughout the world, it's even hard to find 2 alike in the same location for that matter.
In my OPINION, the players need to adjust their game to play on a Diamond, I don't feel like Diamond should have to change their standards to please so few who don't win the major tournaments anyway. Diamond is NOT in the business of building tables that handicap the better players so the weaker players have a chance to win, if anyone wants that, they can go join the APA and all be equal. I'm sick and tired of seeing the direction pool has taken with all the "Loser breaks" "rack the 9 on the spot" "perfect rack systems" "jump cues" "break cues" "short races" "one foul ball in hand" "break boxes" "players not getting paid" and "I wanna play with the Pro's and have a chance to win or I'm not paying my entry fee" and all the other bullshit that is killing this game I love so much...it's getting to the point that it's NOT POOL ANYMORE!!!
Glen, the "REALKINGCOBRA"
I'm so hot right now, I'll tell you one more thing. YA"LL better hope and pray I don't get in controll of what I'm working on right now, because if I do...there's only going to be 64 Professional players in the world listed to play in "PRO"S ONLY" events, and getting paid even if they LOSE! leaving the rest of the world crying..."Why can't I play too"
Glen
Glen
I don't thin kyou get it Glen....
If a ball hits the pocket, it SHOULD drop...
Well struck balls should fall, poorly struck balls should MISS...
On that note, a ball that hits the rail a diamond up from the pocket shouldn't hit the facing... That's where a tight pocket is good...
There shouldn't be a rattle for a ball that hits the facing... IT should FALL...
Jaden
If a ball hits the pocket, it SHOULD drop...
Well struck balls should fall, poorly struck balls should MISS...
On that note, a ball that hits the rail a diamond up from the pocket shouldn't hit the facing... That's where a tight pocket is good...
There shouldn't be a rattle for a ball that hits the facing... IT should FALL...
Jaden
And hopefully you have already picked out someone besides yourself to do the PR work.
I don't know about your experience. But I can tell you for sure that if you hit a ball 1 diamond up on the rail on my standard diamond pro then it does not fall, period...you've missed!
You guys with these Ernesto 4" corner pockets just don't,get it
I just don't understand why the world isn't just dominated by all the 4" pocket advcates...can you explain that?
It's not true. The opening is only 4" - and so is most of the hallway. The only time your pockets come close to Ernesto's opening is at the very back of the pocket, which is not in play. You 4.5" pockets play like BUCKETS compared to Ernesto's. I've played on Sal's tables - they're way easier than mine.
I don't need to be a pool table mechanic to know that.
Jaden:
Thank you! Finally, someone gets the point of the question. It was really just a simple question about the purpose of a deep pocket shelf -- because, after all, it is Glen "sporting" the pictures of how deeply a ball sits in the pocket without falling. (The pics of the GC he recently retrofitted with Diamond slate being the latest example.)
Yet, somehow, we get pulled in the direction of what Glen thinks of pros who can't play on a Diamond (and how he thinks they shouldn't/wouldn't be pros if it were up to him), and how a fellow table mechanic (Ernesto) uses parallel miter cuts on a pocket which shuttle the ball to the back of the pocket regardless of how that ball enters the pocket... you get the idea. All of which have nothing to do with the question of why have a deep shelf with ever-tightening pocket apertures.
The net-net of the question is just as you write, Jaden. Thanks for helping to boil it down, and perhaps using a better explanation than I did.
-Sean <-- confused as to why this is so hard to explain
Jaden, you're missleading the ball coming off the rail one diamond up and going into the pocket like it's not suppose to go, I do agree how ever that if that ball going down the rail towards a corner pocket coming into contact with the rail one diamond away...when it started out 12 inches from the long rail in the first place...not going in. But if that same ball comes into contact with the long rail one diamond out and falls in the pocket...but started out half way up the table and an inch or two from the long side rail and was shot at pocket speed...it SHOULD go in, that's called cheating the pocket with POCKET SPEED buddy!
Make ALL tables with 4" corner pockets, and the WORLD would QUIT playing pool...then all of you 4" pocket advocates could play each other for fun...because the days of playing pool in tournaments would be over! Check out the poll about tight pockets JCIN started, the majority of people playing and watching pool don't AGREE with you
I agree here with Glen on his explanantion of the shelf and pocket miters.
When a shelf is shallow, the way the pocket is cut matters less - because the ball falls quickly. The tables I've played on that Glen has set up, the pockets drop fine. I've got no problem playing on Diamonds. I've played on some pretty crappy butchered up tables and I know what those are and what they do.
What I disagree with is his origingal inference that a 4.5" diamond plays like a 4" Brunswick. The Brunswick simply rejects the missed shot without the ball entering the pocket at all. The Diamond will funnel in a bad shot and at lower speeds easily take the ball.
To me, the pocket sizes should be measured at the edge of the shelf. So a 4.5" Diamond might play 4.25" for example, where the 4" Brunswick will play 4".
All pockets should take a frozen down-the-rail shot hit very hard on both sides of the pocket.
Chris
Last edited:
Glen,
no disrespect but that TAR poll is compromised of APA players rated 6 or less for the most part.
This poll would be alot better to ser with say 50 top players. I guarantee they dont want 4.5" pockets to gamble on.
Im sure they would prefer the TAR table the way it is. It is a wonderful table.
no disrespect but that TAR poll is compromised of APA players rated 6 or less for the most part.
This poll would be alot better to ser with say 50 top players. I guarantee they dont want 4.5" pockets to gamble on.
Im sure they would prefer the TAR table the way it is. It is a wonderful table.
Last edited: