Where Does Pool and Snooker Converge?

B

BasementDweller

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
With Diamond building 10 foot tables and there being talk about some invitational tournaments on them and after watching the match a while back between Earl and SVB on the ten footer - I have been wondering at what point would snooker players have an advantage over pool players?

My thinking on this is if you are playing on a tight ten foot table and you can find a way to minimize the importance of the break, than the snooker players would be able to jump up and compete.

A 10 foot table with 4" pockets would be really tough (maybe even 4.25"). Is the TAR table 4.25? With pockets that small it would become harder to make balls on the break and the players wouldn't bank balls nearly as much, so pool players would lose those two advantages. It's at this point that I think the snooker players would be able to jump right over the 2nd tiered pool players. Only a few elite pool players would even be able to compete with them. The pool players would still have the advantage when it came to kicking and overall position play, but when it becomes a chore to pocket the balls I don't believe those advantages could still get them over the finish line.

Now, I'll admit that I've become a bit of a snooker fan. I've been watching a lot of it lately and their fundamentals are so rock solid. I would love to watch a matchup on a tight ten footer between SVB and Ronnie O'Sullivan. Man, if only O'Sullivan could break the balls I think he would have a chance. Unfortunately, I've seen him break at 9 ball and it isn't pretty. Maybe he's gotten better.

Anyway, this may seem to be just a pointless hypothetical question but as pool continues down the road of more difficult equipment (tighter pockets & bigger tables) I wonder at what point the two disciplines would meet up. I think those ten foot tables could shake things up a bit, or a lot.
 
One huge difference IMHO between snooker and pool is that there is no BIH in snooker (well, not anywhere on the table like it is in pool). This makes a huge difference with tight pockets. Also, up until the very end of the rack, in snooker, you can play positition on a ball you know will spot up at a very specific spot, which makes general position play easier in snooker. You really don't need to run centuries in snooker to win frames. Really, I believe it's pocketing ability which sets snooker apart for the most part. I want to say that pool demands more positional play from day to day (as in more cueball movement is required).
 
From what I've seen on Utube this is probably a great question for Lee Brett to answer !
 
Last edited:
Houstoer said:
From what I've seen on Utube this is probably a great question for Lee Brett to answer !
Click to expand...

There is a lot more to pool than first meets the eye, and i was one who fell into that trap. The positional side to pool is a lot tougher, as you only have one ball to play on for each shot and need to learn how to spin balls in. Saying that if pool goes to 5 x 10 i will certainly be very very happy, as my snooker background will certainly jump me up a few levels and the pool players will then imo have to learn stronger fundamentals.

The pool players will have the advantage over the snooker players, but on a 5 x 10 the game would be a lot closer, the likes of Chris Melling would relish a 5 x 10 i'm sure, also Earl i know would want this a lot. For the fat boy challenge we are trying to make it the best 16 players in the world play in the event to see who will be the 1st champion on the bigger table.

Only time will tell, but there is a lot to learn at pool. I'm just starting to feel comfortable at the game, it takes a long time to adjust like doing your education all over again.
 
lee brett said:
There is a lot more to pool than first meets the eye, and i was one who fell into that trap. The positional side to pool is a lot tougher, as you only have one ball to play on for each shot and need to learn how to spin balls in. Saying that if pool goes to 5 x 10 i will certainly be very very happy, as my snooker background will certainly jump me up a few levels and the pool players will then imo have to learn stronger fundamentals.

The pool players will have the advantage over the snooker players, but on a 5 x 10 the game would be a lot closer, the likes of Chris Melling would relish a 5 x 10 i'm sure, also Earl i know would want this a lot. For the fat boy challenge we are trying to make it the best 16 players in the world play in the event to see who will be the 1st champion on the bigger table.

Only time will tell, but there is a lot to learn at pool. I'm just starting to feel comfortable at the game, it takes a long time to adjust like doing your education all over again.
Click to expand...
what about straight pool on a 5x10? I think straight pool is more similar to snooker ( a lot of nuance in common)...
 
Slh said:
what about straight pool on a 5x10? I think straight pool is more similar to snooker ( a lot of nuance in common)...
Click to expand...

I agree, straight pool is the closest to snooker.

But to get pool pockets as tight as a snooker table, they would have to be 3.625 inches.

It's tight pockets and long distance potting on that big table that magnifies the precision required for snooker.

There are flukes in snooker, but there is no slop. :D
 
a tight pocket is a tight pocket - but a rounded cushion (at the pocket) changes the whole dam game...

and a snooker sized scratch penalty in a 14.1 game would really change the strategy
 
There have been some pro snooker players that tried to play pool at the pro level I believe. Have not heard of them doing that well. Of course if a pool player tried to play snooker at the pro level, I doubt you would hear about them much either.

The only thing similar IMO is they are both played on a table with balls, cushions, and pockets. Strategies and actual play at the pro levels are completely different. I personally love both games, and love watching at the pro level in either.
 
Great question. There's got to be a current top 16 snooker player that would get involved in a challenge match on a 10 x 5 against SVB. I don't think Ronnie would be the best choice though. Selby, Robertson or Trump would all be more hungry for the challenge imo.
 
Great question. There's got to be a current top 16 snooker player that would get involved in a challenge match on a 10 x 5 against SVB. I don't think Ronnie would be the best choice though. Selby, Robertson or Trump would all be more hungry for the challenge imo.
 
Scaramouche said:
I agree, straight pool is the closest to snooker.

But to get pool pockets as tight as a snooker table, they would have to be 3.625 inches.

It's tight pockets and long distance potting on that big table that magnifies the precision required for snooker.

There are flukes in snooker, but there is no slop. :D
Click to expand...

I wouldn't like to see straight pool played on 3,6 in pockets. I think 4,5 in pockets on a 5 x 10 is ok. Also in snooker usually when a ball is near the cushion is considered safe and you need to develop it or play safe and I don't want to see that in straight pool.
 
Suggestion to TAR guys:

Ask Shane and Trump to play eachother.

Omfg, that would be a match of the decade :D
 
As I was saying on another thread, I think in some ways the smaller balls in snooker make potting a little easier, but of course the rounded pocket points and smaller pockets make that a little moot. Aim small, miss small; aim big, miss big. Snooker players are just as surprised when the try pool out at a top level as pool players are when trying out snooker. They really are different games...almost as different as curling is to shuffle board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top