Tight pockets?

[PistolPat]

i have to agree that tight pockets are both good and bad for pool. tight tables are good for the fact that you learn to pocket precisely which means your fundamentals will get better in addition to your concentration and focus secondly a tighter table forces you to play smarter simpler position so that you arent stuck with tough shot after tough shot on small pockets. bad thing about tight pockets though is not being able to run consecutive racks due to difficult layouts with small pockets. i think pool is already hard just learning position play controlling the cb.....pool is built for position playing Snooker is for pocket playing. the smaller the pockets the less English you'll be using therefore taking away the true aspect of pool which is being able to move whitey around. i believe a happy medium can be had with it all.....if you want smaller pockets then do it for smaller tables like 7 footers..for me a perfect playing field thats tough but reasonable is a standard 9fter with 4.5 inch straight cut pockets that are 2.25 inches deep 860 Simmons hr cloth and Artemis rails..you get it all here....good pocket size but not a gimme at angles due to deep pockets so rattles wont fall so precision aiming is still needed and the fast cloth so you can rely on English to move around instead of forcing it and last Artemis rails so banks are always lively and true touch is needed to pocket em. again tight tables are fun to play on and its very possible to run a shit load of racks on em but you have to play only one way which is short position...i watched orcullo run 6 in a row on shaw in the final last swanee on table 1 at hardtimes...just watch how he plays each rack...same rack set up same break and almost exact same exact layout and run out....it was amazingly simple as well as amazingly boring at the same time...i guess im old school but bigger pockets are better. for any rookies of the game who read this...sure you gotta learn to pocket a ball first but its about setting yourself up for the next shot and the next after that etc and there no better way to learn how to move the ball around using English than on a nice open pocket table. if you choose to play small pockets then stick to center ball and heavily be aware of your tangents...just how i do it

Sent from my SPH-D710BST using Tapatalk 2

 

[Island Drive]

Is it hot/cold or just right


Ones things for Sure, it can get too large and it can be too small....Can't we all just get along ))).

 

[Paul Schofield]

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?

I have standard Gold Crown size pockets. The same pocket size of the boom years of the 80s and 90s of Sigel and Reyes; the same size as the golden era of the 60s and 70s of Mizerak and Lassiter; the same size as the wonder years of Mosconi and Crane of the 40s and 50s and the Centenial Table; the same size as the forgotten times of Greenleaf and Taberski.

This is the era marked by the shrunk down pocket (2000s & 2010s). Compare this to pool's best years (80s and 90s). How do you like it? IMO If we ever get out of this funk that pool is in, the pocket size is going to play a roll.

On the Valley thing: The target should be the same on every table, everywhere, no matter what size the table is and no matter who is playing on it. Pool should take it's cue from every other sport.

 

[Fatboy]

the real problem is the fast cloth, the pockets didnt get smaller until the fast cloth came along. So the ROOT OF THE PROBLEM ISNT POCKET SIZE ITS FAST CLOTH, get rid of that shit and pitty pat pool with snooker pockets will disappear.

 

[Neil]

I have standard Gold Crown size pockets. The same pocket size of the boom years of the 80s and 90s of Sigel and Reyes; the same size as the golden era of the 60s and 70s of Mizerak and Lassiter; the same size as the wonder years of Mosconi and Crane of the 40s and 50s and the Centenial Table; the same size as the forgotten times of Greenleaf and Taberski.

This is the era marked by the shrunk down pocket (2000s & 2010s). Compare this to pool's best years (80s and 90s). How do you like it? IMO If we ever get out of this funk that pool is in, the pocket size is going to play a roll.

On the Valley thing: The target should be the same on every table, everywhere, no matter what size the table is and no matter who is playing on it. Pool should take it's cue from every other sport.

Paul, hae you even looked at this thread ?http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=324408&page=11

You may just be shocked to find out what makes a pocket play tough, opening is not even the main factor. And, as you will see, there are antique tables out there with 4 1/2" pockets also.

You are wrongly fixated on the opening size of the pockets. You should put much more concern on the shelf depth and the pocket angles. And, as Eric stated, the type of cloth and how tight or loose the cloth is on the rails.

Oh yeah, nice "skirt" around my question. You never did say what size they are.

 

[Paul Schofield]

My appologies, Neil. I really did not think that I had to reference all the components of a pocket to make my point. In this circle , we all know what they are.

To satisfy you, I will word it another way. "It is harder to make a ball in 2013 than it was in 1993, 1983, 1973, 1963, 1953, 1943..."

OK?

 

[67tbird]

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."

Just a correction on one thing, the bowling quote... the pros have much tougher average conditions than the league players due to oil patterns.

The difference between bowling & pool is that the professional bowler must go for a strike regardless of the situation, there is no defense.

I believe 2 shot push out rules would revive this mentality in pool somewhat.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Neil]

My appologies, Neil. I really did not think that I had to reference all the components of a pocket to make my point. In this circle , we all know what they are.

To satisfy you, I will word it another way. "It is harder to make a ball in 2013 than it was in 1993, 1983, 1973, 1963, 1953, 1943..."

OK?

No, because you keep saying that 4 1/2" pockets are too tight. Yet, you fail to realize that those Valley table buckets are only 4 1/2"! Which happen to be the same size as what some call those brutal Diamond tables. I've seen 5" inch pockets that would not take anything that hit the facings. It's not the size of the opening that makes a pocket tough until you get down to below 4". It's mainly the angle of the facings and the depth of the shelf.

And, to your reference of the years, that all depends. Brunswicks today are basically the same as they were back then except for the cloth on them.

My point is that you keep trying to make mountains out of mole hills. Where has anyone stated that all tables need to be less than 4 1/2" ? And, 4 1/2" happens to be the "standard" size pocket. Below is the WPA rules on pockets:

9. Pocket Openings and Measurements
Only rubber facings of minimum 1/16 [1.5875 mm] to maximum ¼ inch [6.35 mm] thick may be used at pocket jaws. The WPA-preferred maximum thickness for facings is 1/8 inch [3.175 mm]. The facings on both sides of the pockets must be of the same thickness. Facings must be of hard re-enforced rubber glued with strong bond to the cushion and the rail, and adequately fastened to the wood rail liner to prevent shifting. The rubber of the facings should be somewhat harder than that of the cushions.

The pocket openings for pool tables are measured between opposing cushion noses where the direction changes into the pocket (from pointed lip to pointed lip). This is called mouth.

Corner Pocket Mouth: between 4.5 [11.43 cm] and 4.625 inches [11.75 cm]
Side Pocket Mouth: between 5 [12.7 cm] and 5.125 inches [13.0175 cm]
*The mouth of the side pocket is traditionally ½ inch [1.27 cm] wider than
the mouth of the corner pocket.

Vertical Pocket Angle (Back Draft): 12 degrees minimum to15 degrees maximum.

Horizontal Pocket Cut Angle: The angle must be the same on both sides of a pocket entrance. The cut angles of the rubber cushion and its wood backing (rail liner) for both sides of the corner pocket entrance must be 142 degrees (+1). The cut angles of the rubber cushion and its wood backing (rail liner) for both sides of the side pocket entrance must be 104 degrees (+1).

Shelf: The shelf is measured from the center of the imaginary line that goes from one side of the mouth to the other - where the nose of the cushion changes direction - to the vertical cut of the slate pocket cut. Shelf includes bevel.

Corner Pocket Shelf: between 1 [2.54 cm] and 2 ¼ inches [5.715 cm]
Side Pocket Shelf: between 0 and .375 inches [.9525 cm]

 

[Paul Schofield]

Just a correction on one thing, the bowling quote... the pros have much tougher average conditions than the league players due to oil patterns.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

I think you made my point. What bowling does is not unusual and is on par with every other sport. They adjust the playing field but they never mess with the target. Pin weight and placement never change.

Even home plate is the same size throughout all levels of baseball.

 

[67tbird]

I think you made my point. What bowling does is not unusual and is on par with every other sport. They adjust the playing field but they never mess with the target. Pin weight and placement never change.

Even home plate is the same size throughout all levels of baseball.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with your point. I was simply pointing out that the effective target for the professional bowler is usually significantly smaller. (Could easily be achieved with table size rather than pocket size)

However, bowling is coming back, and I believe that the USBC standardizing oil patterns has played an important part.

I think that a standard pocket size, shelf depth, and pocket cut angle would do the game some good, although we're a long ways from it I believe.

I think pockets that play easier (valleys with 4.5" pockets and shallow shelves play extremely easy) and a fast paced game that the audience can get into (either 7 ball or 9 ball) are needed.

Taking luck out of pool may be great for the players, but it certainly isn't great for the audience. (A professional bowler can miss his target and still get lucky, and it certainly adds a different dimension to the game.)

I apologize for getting off topic, but I feel that putting the excitement back into pool for the general public is very doable. And I believe that pocket size certainly plays a big part. An audience wants to see great shots, the cue ball spinning around the table, etc.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Paul Schofield]

To avoid the risk of aggravating people, and the fact that I would only be repeating myself, I will stop posting on this thread. This topic burns me out.

 

[67tbird]

At the risk of aggravating people, and the fact that I would only be repeating myself, I will stop posting on this thread. This topic burns me out.

I enjoyed your posts Paul, thank you. This thread is bound to go in circles, but it has inspired me to make some changes...

My buddy will be opening a pool hall shortly, and thanks to a lot of input here I have plenty of ideas to help make it successful

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Pidge]

Tight pockets don't make you a better player. They can help improve your accuracy, but the same can be achieved on tables with large pockets. You are limited to hitting either centre pocket or 1/2" either side when you can see the full pocket.

Tight pockets force you to leave "more" angle especially on shots close to a rail because you can't power the balls in.

Play on what ever tables you are going to be competing on. If your local tourney plays on diamond pros, then practice on diamond pros. I set up my table at home to the specifications of the GB9 and Euro tours just because its pointless playing on a table with slow cloth and 5" pockets when I'm never going to compete on a table like that.

 

[Island Drive]

Home plate should have two boundary sizes. One that's smaller so more batters get walked and get on base. And another, wider boundary, say 3' wide, so that more runners can score. That would increase the excitement. No one wants to see batters getting struck out so much and then getting tagged out at home plate because it's so tiny.

Or maybe not.

Hockey changed in the past five years, and it definitely made a difference.

 

[vincentwu817]

Tight pockets don't make you a better player. They can help improve your accuracy, but the same can be achieved on tables with large pockets. You are limited to hitting either centre pocket or 1/2" either side when you can see the full pocket.

Tight pockets force you to leave "more" angle especially on shots close to a rail because you can't power the balls in.

Play on what ever tables you are going to be competing on. If your local tourney plays on diamond pros, then practice on diamond pros. I set up my table at home to the specifications of the GB9 and Euro tours just because its pointless playing on a table with slow cloth and 5" pockets when I'm never going to compete on a table like that.

In my opinion, tight pockets is a good learning tool. It requires much more precision in both pocketing and pattern play. You will learn to get on the correct side of balls and make the run out simpler instead of relying on cheating the pocket to get back in line.

 

[PocketSpeed11]

I was joking but how has professional hockey changed? I did some searches but they describe proposed changes rather than previous changes.

I think it has to be kept in mind whether or not pool can ever really be a spectator sport like some other sports. Would more people want to watch chess or gymnastics if they were easier? I don't think so.

http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/cba/rules_changes072205.html

There have been other changes since, but these major changes were made prior to the '05-'06 season.

As for my opinion on tight pockets: I still have lots to learn, so for now I will continue to practice on a table with standard pockets. I do think tight pockets are best for advanced players. Intermediates, in my opinion, will enjoy a better learning curve if they only move to tighter pockets after they are capable of putting packages together. I don't hold the same opinion if these intermediate players have to compete on tables with tight pockets (which I do not).

 

[Pidge]

In my opinion, tight pockets is a good learning tool. It requires much more precision in both pocketing and pattern play. You will learn to get on the correct side of balls and make the run out simpler instead of relying on cheating the pocket to get back in line.

I agree with what you say, but...

Whether you make a ball on 3" pockets or make a ball into a 3" section on 3ft pockets...it takes the same amount of accuracy and skill. Whether you leave yourself the perfect angle on 3" pockets or need to cheat the pocket to get the same angle...its still the same and one is not better for learning IMO.

How many times have we potted balls and wondered why the CB didn't travel along the tangent line but instead ended up 6 inches away from the tangent line? You can clearly see the measles CB sliding upon impact and yet its defied physics! A friend of mine wondered this exact same thing and it was simple...he saw the OB go in, but didn't pay attention to where it went in. His tangent line was set up for centre pocket but it crept in the side of the pocket. Tight pockets make this clear because the shot would be missed but it doesn't mean someone can't learn just as much on a loose table.

I'm not in favour of any pocket size, like I said you should play and practice on what ever you will be competing on, or if you don't compete whatever you enjoy the most.

 

[Ty Arnold]

An average player giving the ghost games on the wire 10 ball with 4 inch pockets. Yeah and i want to be a pimp from oakland or count trackula but this aint halloween.

 

[Pidge]

That isn't what happens in the real world. When the pockets are looser you will shoot looser. You will unconsciously adjust to what the pockets will accept.

The times when you will consciously aim for a specific target within the throat of the pocket aren't that common and become mostly unnecessary when you can hit the rail from a diamond or more away and still make the ball.

I'd say the opposite...

I always aim for a specific section of a pocket regardless of the pocket size and even in snooker.

I always play shape to pocket the ball centre pocket to get the angle I need, but when I don't get that shape its nice being able to hit the rail half a diamond up to get the same angle I need.

I do however draw the line at being able to hit the rail 1-2 diamonds out and still make the ball. I'd be a pro golfer if I was trying to get the ball into an asteroid crater.

 

[Island Drive]

Too Tight

When I first watched great players during the Johnson City days and the period of time when pocket sizes and equipment were different, if a player got on the wrong side of the ball he was Often, able to go another way with follow or draw. As a beginning player, seeing this aspect of play happen quite often, helped me understand the game much better and from a different perspective. Current New table conditions don't allow or completely take away this aspect of play. Players of high caliber prefer conditions that benefit ''them'' but in turn is it helping or hurting the game? If the best putters on the PGA tour had it their way, the cup size would be smaller. In our sport here in the states, its ''every man for himself''. The score is more important than the game or anything else. This type of skewed thinking is inherent in our country and without a pro tour, it will perpetuate. Since the markets target is 95% homeowners, why in the heck would the mfg. change their tooling? In golf your able to use whatever ball you want. In pool, why do we always have to use the cue ball they choose? On my break we'll use the red circle, on your break, we'll use the blue circle. Is there a rule against that?