Tight pockets?
- Thread starter Socopool79
- Start date
Hurray! Somebody gets it.
The 4.5" pocket is "Johnny come lately" and is too small. Our sport has become increasingly less popular since the advent of the smaller and smaller pocket. The smaller pocket has further fractured and fragmented an already scattered sport that is all over the place. One golf hole size for all! One hoop size for all! One goal post size for all! One home plate size for all! One net size for all! And yes, one pocket size for all! You want to mess with the playing field, go ahead but leave the target alone.
The target size is FRAGILE. It makes or breaks a sport.
Last edited:
I'm sure, since he traveled around putting on exhibitions, I'm sure he wanted the biggest pockets. I was only talking about practicing on tight pockets would improve your game.
Does your logic suggest only one size table as well?
No. Like I said " You want to mess with the playing field, go ahead but leave the target alone."
If you want to have a 12' table, that can make some sense. Shrink the pockets to ruin pool. Everyone misses a lot more. Good players duck a lot more. That is no fun to play or watch. Make the pockets what they used to be and people make more balls and good players take more chances. That makes pool more fun to play and more fun to watch. One size for all. 4.5" is too small.
An athlete should trust that his target is the same no matter what venue he plays at. Every other sport has that. Why not us?
Last edited:
Force Follow
Gone are the days when a player like Kim Davenport....could and did often, hit a Center ball High cueball, and hop whitey and travel 3 rails round and back down to the foot of the table. Current table conditions make this shot too risky.
Gone are the days when a player like Kim Davenport....could and did often, hit a Center ball High cueball, and hop whitey and travel 3 rails round and back down to the foot of the table. Current table conditions make this shot too risky.
Are you seriously saying that can't be done on a Diamond table with 4 1/2" pockets? That it's not likely to go?
Neil, Are you saying that you don't understand that the percentages on every shot change if you make the pockets smaller? Are you saying that you do not understand that the change in percentages can change the logic for shot selection?
I do understand and I am for pool being more fun and more exciting. We are doing recreation (novices and pros alike).
Last edited:
No, what we're saying is, once a player gets good enough on a tight table (tight within reason - down to 4" corners) , their shot selection doesn't change much, because they can pocket all the same shots they can on those baskets you call pockets.
It's simple: Big pockets make some players feel good about their game. Anybody can get out on an easy table. It takes real skill to get out consistently on a tough table.
A lot of sports took off because they had a dominant, clear-cut top player that emerged as a legend. However, these days the average skill level in pool is so high that pretty much anyone in the field can win at any given time. That makes it tough for the top guys to earn a living and many champions have quit the game completely. How is that good for pool?
The pro game has become a roll of the dice, where a won lag or a one mistake or two can cost a player an entire match. It's tough to fade it when any shortstop and his brother can run packages at any given time on the current equipment. Make it tougher and you'll see the cream rise to the top every time.
The pro game has become a roll of the dice, where a won lag or a one mistake or two can cost a player an entire match. It's tough to fade it when any shortstop and his brother can run packages at any given time on the current equipment. Make it tougher and you'll see the cream rise to the top every time.
I have read this attitude on this forum many, many times. "Billy, you just ran a rack and you think you are good. You suck. Play on this table over here and you will find out how bad you really are." This does not sell anywhere. It is destructive, wrong minded, and a product of pool's failures.
Our sport needs people to participate. A 30' jumper is the same for a high school player as is for an NBA player. A 50' putt is the same for a weekend player as for a touring pro. A strike by a local league player is the same as a strike by a bowling pro. An amateur's run-out needs to be on par with a pro's run-out. He needs the recognition for it like every other sport in order for our game to be viable.
I will say it again: "Alter the playing field if you must but don't mess around with the target."
I'm curious what size the pockets are in your room? Do you realize that those easy 7' Valley bar boxes only have 4 1/2" pockets on them? Which, to you, are way too small?
Pockets shouldn't be too small or too big.
4.5" pockets are fine for competition, no need for anything else, not even for practice which is good to be under tournament conditions with the player having a strict thinking process about her/his results.
There has been a lot of cases around the globe all these years with people practicing in 3.5" pockets without any significant results in altering their game status, there are quite a few pros that do not recommend them.
For commercial reasons you need 5" pockets, no need to frustrate people, we need to make more people enjoy the game in order to promote it.
The legendary Mosconi was right about this, and I really doubt that he couldn't play well in small pockets, everybody knows that he was a champion that "played everywhere".
Again, with balls of 2.25" size I challenge anyone to practice in 2.3" pockets for a significant period and prove the "the smaller the better" theory.
I seriously doubt any significant outcome around this.
4.5" pockets are fine for competition, no need for anything else, not even for practice which is good to be under tournament conditions with the player having a strict thinking process about her/his results.
There has been a lot of cases around the globe all these years with people practicing in 3.5" pockets without any significant results in altering their game status, there are quite a few pros that do not recommend them.
For commercial reasons you need 5" pockets, no need to frustrate people, we need to make more people enjoy the game in order to promote it.
The legendary Mosconi was right about this, and I really doubt that he couldn't play well in small pockets, everybody knows that he was a champion that "played everywhere".
Again, with balls of 2.25" size I challenge anyone to practice in 2.3" pockets for a significant period and prove the "the smaller the better" theory.
I seriously doubt any significant outcome around this.
One size target for all, like every other sport on the planet.
One standard.
One standard.
People that play once in a while with friends can't play in 4.5" pockets, no need to make it tough for them.
Young kids may love the game if they have the proper conditions, no need to frustrate them.
After that, if they decide to go into tournaments they will practice and progress with tournament size pockets.
Big for commercial use, normally small for tournament use and practice which is good to resemble tournament conditions.
Young kids may love the game if they have the proper conditions, no need to frustrate them.
After that, if they decide to go into tournaments they will practice and progress with tournament size pockets.
Big for commercial use, normally small for tournament use and practice which is good to resemble tournament conditions.
................
Last edited:
I'm so sick of this tight pocket nonsense.Every time the pockets are shrunk, some guy in a room somewhere comes along and says "Those pockets are buckets, back in our room the pockets are -insert ridiculous pocket size-" I'd like to visit one of these rooms someday, where 4.5 or even 4 inch pockets are so easy that you only get one or two innings in a race to 10 of ten ball. I must really suck, I guess. I guess its good for bragging rights to say that you ran two racks on 3,75 inch shimmed pockets, but I don't care. I like to see racks beeing run, not bunting and ducking.
At what point are the pockets small enough? When nobody can run a 3-pack? When the high run of the best player in the room in straight pool is 50 balls? When you have to roll everything in pocket speed or only shoot shots diagonally into the corner pockets? I'm getting so sick of this, I might go back to snooker. At least there a 50 break on a club table is still feasible for someone like me. The pockets in snooker are predictable. You will rarely be suprised by a miss in snooker. If you miss you miss.
If you compare snooker and pool pockets you will see that certain shots (along the rail) that are never shot in a snooker match, are actually physically possible to make on a snooker table. The good players make them in practise sometimes. The reason they are almost never tried is that they have no margin for error and is too low a percentage. This is what will happen in pool as well. People argue that such and such a shot along the rail is physically possible if you line the shot up for half an hour and hit it absolutely perfectly, therefore the pocket is good. But if the shot has no margin for error at all you'd have to be an idiot to shoot it when everything is on the line and the top players are not idiots.Pro pool will be even more boring to watch if they make the tables play like that, in that case I'd much rather watch snooker.
To the point...
Pocket Meter
There should be a Meter that allows a length of table shot one diamond out from the corner pocket, to hit the out side tit....then inside facing and drop, @ 16mph. Pretty simple eh?
There should be a Meter that allows a length of table shot one diamond out from the corner pocket, to hit the out side tit....then inside facing and drop, @ 16mph. Pretty simple eh?
I'm so sick of this tight pocket nonsense.
At what point are the pockets small enough? When nobody can run a 3-pack? When the high run of the best player in the room in straight pool is 50 balls? When you have to roll everything in pocket speed or only shoot shots diagonally into the corner pockets? I'm getting so sick of this, I might go back to snooker. At least there a 50 break on a club table is still feasible for someone like me. The pockets in snooker are predictable. You will rarely be suprised by a miss in snooker. If you miss you miss.
If you compare snooker and pool pockets you will see that certain shots (along the rail) that are never shot in a snooker match, are actually physically possible to make on a snooker table. The good players make them in practise sometimes. The reason they are almost never tried is that they have no margin for error and is too low a percentage. This is what will happen in pool as well. People argue that such and such a shot along the rail is physically possible if you line the shot up for half an hour and hit it absolutely perfectly, therefore the pocket is good. But if the shot has no margin for error at all you'd have to be an idiot to shoot it when everything is on the line and the top players are not idiots.Pro pool will be even more boring to watch if they make the tables play like that, in that case I'd much rather watch snooker.
This is the best post in this thread.