The smaller pockets are helping the weak players, its very deep and people don't see it.

S

smoochie

NotLikeThis
I've said this years ago, probably the first time they introduced the smaller pockets into pool, then I've said it again in another post here a year or months ago I can't remember.

Now I'll say it again. The introduction of smaller pockets in pool is not good for the sport, it removes SPORT DOMINANCE where you have 2-3 players who can dominate because of their skill. This is absolutely removed and lifted and now its all about who gets the better rolls, literally.

People often don't think deeply about this because they think in a simple manner which would go something like this "Smaller pocket, means player must focus to pot balls, ergo better player wins" and this is veery very far from the truth. In fact smaller pockets will often yields to the winning of the weaker player and most of the time it is randomize. A better player can win if he gets the better end of things but its mostly up to the pool gods now.

We know in all circumstances that the pool gods play a huge part in pool even with larger pockets, but imagine that now with smaller pockets you added like 10x in the hands of pool gods. This is not good cause it will result in more randomness and what I said here you can literally see it in the pool brackets & results, literally I remembeer that one filipino guy who has fargo of 700 or even lower won a major event few months ago in this same small pocket situation, it wasn't like he got really good all of a sudden, but the randomness & rolls helped it because of those small pockets.

I still haven't explained how smaller pockets will add more randomness & luck, but ill leave you think about it deeply then ill post again to elaborate & explain whats happening....cause I don't want this one post to be long.

Just look for results, here's the thing...I am not a pro but if you ever asked me to play against jushua or shane etc, I will ask them to play me in a small pocket & ask for short race i.e. race to 2 or 3 - this will give me the highest chance of beating them. Just think about this
 
smoochie said:
This is absolutely removed and lifted and now its all about who gets the better rolls, literally.
Click to expand...
What's a roll? I don't think I've ever got one. 😇

smoochie said:
A better player can win if he gets the better end of things but its mostly up to the pool gods now.
Click to expand...
Pool gods? I don't recognize their existence.

Smaller pockets require more precision. If a "lesser" player can do that better than the pros then they deserve to win.

Small isn't bad to a certain point. That point is somewhere between 4 1/4-4 1/2" IMHO. Smaller than that and yeah, it's a circus table.
 
When the tournament table went from 10’ to 9’, the 14.1 game win score went from 125 to 150. Maybe today’s smaller pockets should reverse that (?).
In the ‘HUSTLER‘ movie, the script implies way too many 125 point straight pool games are played in the allotted time. Though Willie WAS tech. advisor, I don’t think even HE could play that fast (not to mention on today’s equipment).
 
I'll elaborate tonight about this, I am amazed that nobody can see the bigger picture in this & the big problem, even though the results are in front of your eyes. Statistics never lie....I'll explain later when I'm using a keyboard where I can type easier.
 
I'm dying to see where these facts/results are sourced from. You're going to have find matches won on rolls and what size pockets were used.Now, even if remotely successful at this you're still not going to prove that smaller pockets favor lesser players. Why? Shouldn't have to go to 'DEEP' to figure that out.
 
mikemosconi said:
Smaller pockets always favor the better player IMO. Whether you are a better ball pocketer, or a better position player ( getting easier shots). Just common sense- anything more challenging favors the more highly skilled- period!
Click to expand...
Exactly. Agree 100%. Lets say a road player plays in a local event with mostly mid-level talent. If he sees that the tables are tight/tuff he can pretty much eliminate at least a 3rd of the field before he hits a ball. He already shoots straighter and also knows how to plan his runs on tighter pockets. The weaker players miss a couple and start doggin it even worse. Its not rocket science folks.
 
smoochie said:
Play on small pockets & short race, its not guarantee win but you'll win more often.
Click to expand...
Believing that shit will keep a player BROKE. So you win 3 out of ten games instead of 2. You really like that math??? The difference in rolls will never be enough to win.
 
DynoDan said:
When the tournament table went from 10’ to 9’, the 14.1 game win score went from 125 to 150. Maybe today’s smaller pockets should reverse that (?).
In the ‘HUSTLER‘ movie, the script implies way too many 125 point straight pool games are played in the allotted time. Though Willie WAS tech. advisor, I don’t think even HE could play that fast (not to mention on today’s equipment).
Click to expand...

imo 14.1 should be played on big pocket GCs.. but when the american 14.1 championship went to diamond pro ams, people feared the play would suffer, and it didn't. ruslan won that year in a mesmerizing final. the next year filler won and ran the set out on albin, alex, and probably other victims. the pros are simply on another level, it's pointless to compare oneself to them
 
Let's say that a tight table makes everybody miss fifty percent more often than a loose table.

Player A makes 90/100 shots on a normal table. He will make 85/100 on the tight table.

Player B makes 80/100 and will fall to 70/100.

Player B is obviously worse off than player A.

The part about missing shape might be slightly arguable just due to a better players increased ability to cheat the pocket on a normal table, but that's probably not going to affect the outcome.

There's just no real way to figure that the original premise has any validity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top