Tight pockets are NOT good for the game!

rexus31 said:
Tight but fair. Certainly not as tight as Matchroom’s tables.
Click to expand...
My one regret while adjusting my table isn't the 4.25 pocket size. ....but the adjustment of the facing angles. Going to 141 made the pockets very receiving. If the OB hits within the points. The odds are strong it's going to drop.

This of course is combined with shelf depth.
 
Ghost of OBC said:
The obvious endpoint of this evolution is Russian Pyramid. It is a crutch for the weak to believe a ball should be make-able in a given pocket from any angle on the table. We'll be able to use Stone Henge to time our league matches.
Click to expand...
Pryamid (lol) is an imperial fantasy. If you can't play pool onit, no good. Same with snooker and heyball. Can't do rail shots? Redicholas. Hence jawless, shelfless, 3" apertures for the corners. Everything from anywhere as long as you hit the opening.
 
rexus31 said:
I'm an advocate of tight pockets but do not feel pocket size is why we are behind the rest of the world . i think you mentioned it in an earlier post; it’s the bar box. Like you said, no 7’ tables in Asia. Bar tables may have made the game more accessible for Americans but it has negatively impacted the growth of the sport from a professional level. Imagine if everyone started out playing on 9’ tables and every league in American played on 9’ tables. I think we would be more competitive on the world stage. Just my opinion. I’m sure the bar table bangers who think they’re special because they can run a couple racks on a toy table will start bashing, so let it begin!
Click to expand...
I don't recall citing 7 footers as the source of incompetence (kidding). I like 7 footers - lucky thing since the last of the pool rooms here can't find a space to get restarted. As the more informed have stated on numerous occasion, the 'dead bread for a little bit of tough action' crowd (my words) is probably the reason for the decline of the American pool star.

To me pocket size is the culprit simply because pool is primarily marksmanship. Note, I'm not ignoring cue ball here. Tight lines make equally tight cue ball. The more adept you become at pocketing, the more mental resources you can devote to cue ball control. American attitude used to be enough until the Pinoy Nation got involved. Then you had to lose the BS and learn to play real winning licks. America never quite got the hang of that and before that even gets started turning, the rest of the world got in gear with the precision technique(s) to where the best are virtually freewheeling those precision lines. Tight pockets are vital to pool. They shows you the work in no uncertain terms. Granted, extreme equipment belongs in pool conservatories but the need for both is vital.
 
straightline said:
I don't recall citing 7 footers as the source of incompetence (kidding). I like 7 footers - lucky thing since the last of the pool rooms here can't find a space to get restarted. As the more informed have stated on numerous occasion, the 'dead bread for a little bit of tough action' crowd (my words) is probably the reason for the decline of the American pool star.

To me pocket size is the culprit simply because pool is primarily marksmanship. Note, I'm not ignoring cue ball here. Tight lines make equally tight cue ball. The more adept you become at pocketing, the more mental resources you can devote to cue ball control. American attitude used to be enough until the Pinoy Nation got involved. Then you had to lose the BS and learn to play real winning licks. America never quite got the hang of that and before that even gets started turning, the rest of the world got in gear with the precision technique(s) to where the best are virtually freewheeling those precision lines. Tight pockets are vital to pool. They shows you the work in no uncertain terms. Granted, extreme equipment belongs in pool conservatories but the need for both is vital.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree with your assessment of line play. It’s a very good observation but smaller pockets doesn’t affect the line because hitting the object ball are differentiated by millimeters therefore it becomes luck whether you hit it dead on or a millimeter off.

Which takes me to my previous statement that smaller pockets don’t have any affect on play. I’ve missed plenty of shots but it never rattles like some may think.

If anything it may affect how you play shape but the margin of error for shape is much bigger since you can get shape in many different ways.

While the pockets are smaller, it’s not small enough to change the game except for new or casual players. So from the sense of being an owner, it wouldn’t make sense to tighten them up for a few minority.

We’ve never said let’s not go to certain pool halls because the pockets are bigger. That’s nerd talk or for pool geeks and we’re in the minority.
 
straightline said:
I don't recall citing 7 footers as the source of incompetence (kidding). I like 7 footers - lucky thing since the last of the pool rooms here can't find a space to get restarted. As the more informed have stated on numerous occasion, the 'dead bread for a little bit of tough action' crowd (my words) is probably the reason for the decline of the American pool star.

To me pocket size is the culprit simply because pool is primarily marksmanship. Note, I'm not ignoring cue ball here. Tight lines make equally tight cue ball. The more adept you become at pocketing, the more mental resources you can devote to cue ball control. American attitude used to be enough until the Pinoy Nation got involved. Then you had to lose the BS and learn to play real winning licks. America never quite got the hang of that and before that even gets started turning, the rest of the world got in gear with the precision technique(s) to where the best are virtually freewheeling those precision lines. Tight pockets are vital to pool. They shows you the work in no uncertain terms. Granted, extreme equipment belongs in pool conservatories but the need for both is vital.
Click to expand...
While I've never been to the Philippines, I'd wager there aren't many bar boxes around.
 
Pockets barely larger the ball is a stupid idea. Sry to be that guy but there's more to pool then how straight you can shoot.

Guessing anyone saying otherwise has never developed any real ability moving the CB around.

Pyramid is a great example of a sterile game that's 90% potting and 10% CB. It's nearly a rarity to see multiple balls dropped in a single inning.
 
rexus31 said:
While I've never been to the Philippines, I'd wager there aren't many bar boxes around.
Click to expand...
That's probably true. I think the difference between sizes is familiarity. 9 foot players have the proportions burned in as do small table players.
shooter_Hans said:
I have to disagree with your assessment of line play. It’s a very good observation but smaller pockets doesn’t affect the line because hitting the object ball are differentiated by millimeters therefore it becomes luck whether you hit it dead on or a millimeter off.

Which takes me to my previous statement that smaller pockets don’t have any affect on play. I’ve missed plenty of shots but it never rattles like some may think.

If anything it may affect how you play shape but the margin of error for shape is much bigger since you can get shape in many different ways.

While the pockets are smaller, it’s not small enough to change the game except for new or casual players. So from the sense of being an owner, it wouldn’t make sense to tighten them up for a few minority.

We’ve never said let’s not go to certain pool halls because the pockets are bigger. That’s nerd talk or for pool geeks and we’re in the minority.
Click to expand...
Let me clarify I don't GAF what a room is in business for. If their model dictates 10" pockets as optimal, wish them all the millions they deserve. lol.

As for pool accuracy, it _should_ be about lines. You teach yourself to shoot the lines as consistently as you can. It's not about one millimeter or the one next to it. Snooker guys prove you can hit most shots consistently and perfectly. Well, for the requirements, practically perfectly. FWIW contact geometry gives you the best start on hitting shots perfectly because it diagrams the basic shot exactly. It's the ghost ball method that'll give you the problems tightening the lines to minimum aperture. Anyway its how you apply yourself to the work, not the work.
 
Everyone seems fascinated, pro and con, with tight pockets that definitely challenge and discourage some pool players, especially newbies or just recreational players where competing and playing better isn’t their motivation or important.

Stronger players aren’t bothered by a pool table’s pocket size since their opponent is competing with the exact same conditions. Naturally, there comes a point where pocket size can get too small (4” or less) and at that point, might as
well switch to playing snooker on a 10’ or 12’ table. So there is a point where pocket size can become too tight, IMO.

One of the other issues that affect pool play is when you play on a table with mismatched object ball weights and the
cue ball. Keep in mind that every ball in the set, including the cue ball, can vary in weight by approx. 14 grams or 1/2
ounce. And when there’s a significant weight variation, the physics can vary shot to shot, especially if the cue ball was
1/2 oz. lighter than the object balls. The official rules of pool allow for weight differences so owning your own cue ball
can come in handy despite that there’s always a possibility of mismatched object ball weights. It’s why I have a few sets
of Brunswick Centennials and I always bring a set to any pool hall in case I don’t like the condition of the pool balls.

I can’t change the pocket size on the tables but I sure as heck can play with the best pool balls, IMO…..Centennials.
Fortunately, the pool hall where I am a member doesn’t have any tables with CP pockets larger than 4.5” and several
of the 9’ Diamond tables use 4.25” CP. So I’ve found paradise and I posted photos of Fresno’s newest and best pool
room. Regardless, I have a set of Centennial pool balls either parked adjacent to my cue case or else in my car’s trunk.
 
The_JV said:
Pockets barely larger the ball is a stupid idea. Sry to be that guy but there's more to pool then how straight you can shoot.

Guessing anyone saying otherwise has never developed any real ability moving the CB around.

Pyramid is a great example of a sterile game that's 90% potting and 10% CB. It's nearly a rarity to see multiple balls dropped in a single inning.
Click to expand...
Yes….there is a point where too small can occur….but the pool ball is 2.25”…….CP of 4.5” are twice as wide…..OMG.
2” more space seems more than adequate but admittedly, a table plays much more challenging with 4.25” CP & seems
overly generous with 5” CP. When a corner pocket (4.5”) is twice as wide as a pool ball, that’s more than sufficient, IMO.
 
I love tight pockets!

But tight pockets don't encourage people to run out, especially if you don't have to. Which is my least favorite thing about tight pockets.

If you have a low probability shot in front of you. You end up just playing safe.

Just like in snooker or English 8 ball. You rarely see someone shoot a ball down the rail. And that's something I like to do in pool.
 
I think what people fail to realize is it’s not about the 2 to 1 ratio of pocket to ball. 2 basketballs can go in a rim too.

In pool, the angles drastically decreases and the proverbial window gets drastically smaller.

Making a tough cut shot is great and all but you won’t be playing shape. A perfect example is playing golf on a snooker table. There are cut shots that are eliminated in those pockets versus a regular table. My point is smaller isn’t necessarily better or improve play. Even on many shots you cannot distinguish the pocket because every degree decreases the size of the window. Golf has actually made me worst and pockets are smaller too.

What’s stopping someone from having 3” pockets then? Just think of Laws of diminishing returns.

In regards to line play we are taught to sink the ball dead center. 5” pockets? Send it dead center.

If you want to go off center, then they have a term for that and it’s called “cheat the pocket” and it’s seldom used because it’s much more easier manipulating a cue ball than it is cheating a pocket.
 
The best Russian pyramid players in the world aren't running racks on those tables. The game has become so hard that you just try and leave your opponent a tough shot and hope he sells out.
 
rexus31 said:
Time to make the bucket huggers cringe.

49603456301_eb11f9090c_h.jpg
Click to expand...
Are these pockets about 4 1/4?
Thanks
 
rexus31 said:
I'm an advocate of tight pockets but do not feel pocket size is why we are behind the rest of the world . i think you mentioned it in an earlier post; it’s the bar box. Like you said, no 7’ tables in Asia. Bar tables may have made the game more accessible for Americans but it has negatively impacted the growth of the sport from a professional level. Imagine if everyone started out playing on 9’ tables and every league in American played on 9’ tables. I think we would be more competitive on the world stage. Just my opinion. I’m sure the bar table bangers who think they’re special because they can run a couple racks on a toy table will start bashing, so let it begin!
Click to expand...
Your not wrong buy what can you do. Pool halls just can’t make money in my town. They only place you find a 9 foot table is a private club. so bar tables it is. Fortunately in the last years a lot of bars got rid of their valleys for diamonds so we at least have that.
 
just my 2 cents but only the pros should play on tight pockets. As a former room owner I found out that the public is not on board with tight pockets. They like to see the ball go in the hole. I had 1 tight table for gambling matches and the public had no interest in using it.
I do feel that it is necessary for the pros however, they have become too accomplished for big pockets. Tight pockets add at least a little drama.
 
shooter_Hans said:
If you want to go off center, then they have a term for that and it’s called “cheat the pocket” and it’s seldom used because it’s much more easier manipulating a cue ball than it is cheating a pocket.
Click to expand...
I missed this before the recent bump.

Cheating the pocket is seldom used...??? Think this may be another comment that requires qualification with skill level.

It's infinitely easier to cheat a pocket in an effort to move the CB around then it is to do with with english. The application and correction of english is very thing that increases potting difficulty.
 
Last edited:
The_JV said:
I missed this before the recent bump.

Cheating the pocket is seldom used...??? Think this may another comment that requires qualification with skill level.

It's infinitely easier to cheat a pocket in an effort to move the CB around then it is to do with with english. The application and correction of english is very thing that increases potting difficulty.
Click to expand...
Cheating the pocket is to compensate for the inability to shape. While I do cheat the pocket, I seldom do it unless it’s a straight shot.

Cheating the pocket is already a low percentage shot and does little to get shape. Try cheating the pocket on cut shots when the window is small. You’re not taking that chance to miss.

The main focus and play is still shape and mailing the ball dead center.
 
jtompilot said:
I thought it was 4 pocket sizes. 4 3/4 or 4 1/2. Custom sizes 4 1/4 and 4 1/8.
7’ 8’ 9’ and 10’ tables. 16 combinations.

When I get a house it will be 9’ with 4 1/4
Click to expand...
I'm curious, will you change out your cloth yearly or at regular intervals so as to keep the playing conditions new or new-ish? Just wondering, because my home table is a 9' diamond pro with 4.5" pockets and I've always allowed the cloth to wear in. I'm not willing to budget for paying for brand new simonis 860 HR on a regular basis. Therefore, playing conditions on my table get what some will consider brutal over time. I'm not complaining, I don't mind either way and whenever I feel like recovering the cloth, I make it happen. I just think that recovering factors into these discussions of pocket size etc.

But yeah, as some have said, it's just a game every time....so it's of minimal importance either way one chooses to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top