I have seen that match plenty of times. Of course Demi can play on the 7ft tables. He chooses to compete in big table events only.
Which table is easier if you had to beat the ghost for $1 million?
- Thread starter iusedtoberich
- Start date
good to know that you have seen it. I think his post on having to run out against SVB with a lot on the line says something about the absolute difficulty of executing a particular task on a 7’ vs. 9’. I play at a lower level but if I had to run out, I’d be more likely to on the 7’. I voted 7’ here as far as beating the ghost in 9 ball, which I can’t do. I do know I’d get more games on the 7’. I think it’s clear.
That said, in the other recent thread we discussed 9’ 8 ball vs 7’ 8 ball and I defended the bar boxes. much of that is because whether a particular run out is easier/harder/different doesn’t matter as much to me when the best players generally get there regardless. Like when people say race to 7 9 ball is no test, we need race to 6,425, but somehow the Derby was won by the same guys that would win a race to whatever, back when the Derby was races to 7. And as to the 8 ball, even if bar boxes are easier, there are challenges. Like the third game in that Demi vs Vilmos match. Maybe that is me contradicting myself. maybe it is that I don’t judge the games by the difficulty of beating the ghost. I also see why people have their preferences.
sudocrushms
Well-known member
It's not the sound, it's the edges that are never flush. When you try to make a ball with any pace from an angle and it catches that plastic, it'll never go. Also makes a terrible, distinct *clunk* when it happens.
Never had that happen in over 10 years of playing on my GCI.
if bar table pockets get 4 inches or smaller then I think the comparison is valid- otherwise it is definitely easier to runout on a bar table.
the type of cloth also matters- if the 9 footer has fast cloth it makes it much easier to move to cue ball around somewhat offsetting the difficulty of playing on a bigger table
the type of cloth also matters- if the 9 footer has fast cloth it makes it much easier to move to cue ball around somewhat offsetting the difficulty of playing on a bigger table
Last edited:
I've never seen or experienced that either, playing on tons of GC1s-GC6's over the years. Maybe there is something wrong with his pockets?
Actually, on my home GC4, I just added 1/4" thick adhesive rubber to the inside of the pocket around its entire perimeter to try to quiet it down (I live in an apartment). It quieted the pocket a lot. But when a ball hits the edge of the rubber, it now pops out of the pocket.
Paint buckets!!
That result makes me want to cry. Guess I'm out of touch w today's game they call pool.
sudocrushms
Well-known member
I don't have a table, and when I do it won't be Brunswick. I've seen it on most GCs I've played.
It's the worst on the GC3, especially with drop pockets. The 4 isn't as bad (i think the plastic insert is thinner and shaped into the cushion better), but still happens. Can grab a pic the next time I see one.
Just one more thought on this because I don't think this question really gets to the heart of why ANY 9 foot table is more difficult than a bar table. 9 foot tables are more difficult because most of the shots are longer, and longer shots increase the difficulty more than congestion increases it. The shots that really stand out though, are the 1st shot after the break or the first shot after your opponent leaves you safe. Like when you are playing real pool. When you're playing the ghost you lose these difficult shots. So I sort of think of the big table vs bar table thing a little differently under this circumstance.
Just in general though, if you tracked failures against the ghost and the two variables were missed shots and pattern errors (which included unrunable racks) I wouldn't be surprised if the higher up the food chain you went, you more rack failures were due to pattern errors. Like at the very top, would Jason Shaw fail more racks on the Gold Crown he ran 8 billion balls on or the smallest bar table you could find? I'm really not sure what the answer to this question would be but I wouldn't be surprised if the variables converged and then swapped at some point. Even if I'm right, it wouldn't necessarily mean that the bar table would be more "difficult", as we are just talking about a specific test and not really pool. So it's possible the bar table could be more "difficult" for some for this test, but not more "difficult" in general.
Fun thread.
Just in general though, if you tracked failures against the ghost and the two variables were missed shots and pattern errors (which included unrunable racks) I wouldn't be surprised if the higher up the food chain you went, you more rack failures were due to pattern errors. Like at the very top, would Jason Shaw fail more racks on the Gold Crown he ran 8 billion balls on or the smallest bar table you could find? I'm really not sure what the answer to this question would be but I wouldn't be surprised if the variables converged and then swapped at some point. Even if I'm right, it wouldn't necessarily mean that the bar table would be more "difficult", as we are just talking about a specific test and not really pool. So it's possible the bar table could be more "difficult" for some for this test, but not more "difficult" in general.
Fun thread.
Agreed, as opposed to most of us here, for a top player like Shaw, the 9’ GC would likely play easier than the 7’ Diamond playing against the ghost, as not only the pockets are more forgiving but the position zones are bigger and the chances of getting balls tied up is considerably less on the 9’ table.
Did you see Bergman run 23 or so racks (without BIH) in a 9 ball 7’ Diamond match? He’s not even a top pro, on the world level. Gorst or Filler would not run 23 racks on a 9’ Gold Crown if you gave them 100 years of a fountain of youth.
I just went through the 2024 Ghost thread and added up my 9 ball ghost scores on 9' and 7' tables. Races to 7.
I played 53 sets on my home 9' GC4 with 5" factory pockets. This was spread out through the whole year.
I played 9 sets on a 7' Diamond with pro-cut pockets. This was all in one day in July at the local pool hall. My goal this day was to beat the ghost, as I had not the whole year on my 9' table.
Similar conditions on both tables as far as cloth, balls, template rack, etc.
9' GC
Won 0 sets. Lost 53 sets.
Won 98 games. Lost 366 games.
Won 98 games of 464 total played.
Won 21.1% of total games played.
7' Diamond
Won 1 set. Lost 8 sets.
Won 30 games. Lost 58 games.
Won 30 games of 88 total played.
Won 34.1% of total games played.
34.1% is 61% better than 21.1%
My FargoRate is 572 with 1100 robustness. For me, it was not even in the same planet how much easier the 7' Diamond was.
Again, both of these tables have the same TDF.
I played 53 sets on my home 9' GC4 with 5" factory pockets. This was spread out through the whole year.
I played 9 sets on a 7' Diamond with pro-cut pockets. This was all in one day in July at the local pool hall. My goal this day was to beat the ghost, as I had not the whole year on my 9' table.
Similar conditions on both tables as far as cloth, balls, template rack, etc.
9' GC
Won 0 sets. Lost 53 sets.
Won 98 games. Lost 366 games.
Won 98 games of 464 total played.
Won 21.1% of total games played.
7' Diamond
Won 1 set. Lost 8 sets.
Won 30 games. Lost 58 games.
Won 30 games of 88 total played.
Won 34.1% of total games played.
34.1% is 61% better than 21.1%
My FargoRate is 572 with 1100 robustness. For me, it was not even in the same planet how much easier the 7' Diamond was.
Again, both of these tables have the same TDF.
Justin Berman was using a template and soft breaking. Do you really think he couldn't do something similar on a 5" Gold Crown if allowed to use a template and given time to figure out how SOFT he could break? I think you may be underestimating his skill level here. Years ago I racked for a really good player as he ran out 13 racks against the ghost, while playing on a tightly shimmed table, using a wooden rack, and getting truly random spreads.
There's no surprise that players around your speed lose to the ghost more often because of misses than pattern failures. That's true for most of us, most of the time.
Again, I don't even really know what "playing the ghost" really means anymore because it can be setup as a complete gaff if allowed. If playing the ghost meant you had to actually break the balls like you would in a WNT event then maybe I'd have a different view.
I picked “playing the ghost” as the measuring stick as it’s something concrete that most have tried before. Rather than ask “which table is harder”.
The main point was trying to find a way to measure which table is “actually” harder in real life. I don’t agree with the TDF assigning both tables the same number. It gives more weight to the pocket than the table size. That’s how these two tables ended up with the same number.
Last edited:
Yes, Bergman could NOT do the same on a 9' GC. No way in hell.
We saw the best pattern racker in the world, vs the best player in the world do this with 9 ball on a 9'. Donnie Mills vs SVB on an early TAR match. I don't think either of them ran more than a 6 or 7 pack. The table was of course tougher than a 9' GC, it was a 9' Diamond with Pro-cut pockets.
And the rack used was...???
Lots of people thought nobody could best Mosconi's high run. Then Schmidt did. Then that lasted for what? A year maybe, before Shaw beat it.
The point is -- just because players don't try to do something, doesn't mean they can't.
Tell top players they could get a million dollars if they could run +21 racks against the 9 ball ghost, racking and breaking any way they choose, while playing on that Legends 14.1 table and it would be done in a week!
Anyway - I agree with the ultimate point you're making about the TDF. That was worth pointing out as table size trumps pocket size in my book too.
@iusedtoberich
Still think Shaw or a multitude of other top players couldn't run +21 racks against the 9 ball ghost on an easy Gold Crown?
Still think Shaw or a multitude of other top players couldn't run +21 racks against the 9 ball ghost on an easy Gold Crown?
