Why do certain pros like prefer Gold Crowns?

[Paul Mon]

Was this at one of the Joss events at CLASSIC? Cause if it was, i would agree.
Those GC's in the back were immaculate.
The Gandy's up front, they could have chucked into a bonfire for all i cared, but the GCs were spectacular.

Yes it was. The back room is gone all the GC's are in the main room now.

Paul

 

[tom mcgonagle]

Pool players never like the table the just missed on or lost on. It's that simple.

The older players favor the Brunswicks because they grew up playing on them.

Great players adapt to anything. As Mick likes to sing, "You can't always get what you want."

 

[Aaron_S]

I can't put it any better than RKC. Here's his answer from another thread on this very topic:



If you've played on a properly tightened table as opposed to one that has had the snot shimmed out of it, the difference is pretty obvious.

Hope this helps.

Exactly, and this is my only complaint about the older GC's. The pockets are just HUGE, to the point where it's almost impossible to miss on new felt, and it's costly to have the pockets reduced in the proper manner (extended subrails, new cushions, etc.). One other thing about shimmed pockets is that it creates a small chunk of "rail" that you can't bank accurately off of. If you have a nearly hanging ball that's still on the flat part of the cushion, it's hard to judge how it's going to act if it catches a part of that hard shim. I'm sure the new GCV plays a lot better with the 4.5" pockets, but for the money I'd choose the Diamond. Aren't the GCV's almost twice the price of a Pro Am?

Aaron

 

[sfleinen]

Valley Girl or Surfer Dude?

Thread title: Why do certain pros like prefer Gold Crowns?
[...]

Great posts thus far, but a sidenote about the thread title. When I first read it, I thought to myself, "Valley Girl!" or "Surfer Dude!"

"Why do certain pros, like, prefer Gold Crowns, dude?"
"Like, I was thinking, like, some pros may prefer Gold Crowns, but, like, I'm not sure, you know?"



j/k,
-Sean

 

[Island Drive]

Yeah, I've played on more goofy tightened-up Gold Crowns than I have Diamonds. They seem more consistent to me anyway...

One thing I have noticed about a Diamond is that I'm not as confident banking on them as I am on a Brunswick... maybe it's all in my head though.

I've always preferred Diamond to Brunswicks.. I love tight pockets and they just seem to play better to me.

I remember reading somewhere on this forum that Corey liked Brunswicks better so that's why I asked about him in particular...

I've always felt brunswick rails bank at a more natural angle and the two rail cross side free shot on a GC is three times easier than a Diamond, also the sound as a ball enters a pocket at speed on a GC is real and when your cutting a ball into a corner pocket with draw coming two rails cross side when the cue ball hits the second rail the angle coming off is waaaaaaay shorter than the GC, an unnatural feel to the shot.

 

[Bambu]

Valley Girl!" or "Surfer Dude!"

.....sounds like an easy decision for any red blooded heterosexual!


Seriously though, great thread. Thanks for the info guys.

 

[sfleinen]

Valley Girl!" or "Surfer Dude!"

.....sounds like an easy decision for any red blooded heterosexual!


Seriously though, great thread. Thanks for the info guys.

Methinks you might be confusing this thread with the "Don't date those waitresses...." thread.

But yes, very interesting viewpoints thus far between the two table choices!

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I was watching a DVD, the one by Capelle, Archer vs Reyes. One of the commentators said that the Brunswick table has extended rubber instead of shimmed pockets and it plays different.

What is the difference?

Not quite right. I have that DVD and have watched it about a million times. It is a *AMF* table they are playing on, which looks just like a Brunswick GC.

Lets say the corner pocket is 5 inches to start. Say you double shim it and get to 4 5/8". That means that the long rail "point" of the pocket is now comprised of a decent section of shim material. When a ball hits this point, it is dead as a doornail. It will play wrong. If instead you could just lengthen the rubber, you would not have to use as many shims to achieve the same width pocket. This means that a lesser portion of the point will be shim material as opposed to rail rubber. This means balls that hit near the point will have a higher chance of playing properly. This is exactly the solution offered by Brunswick with their "tournament" rails (or whatever they call it). They should give you 4.5" pockets without the need for extra shims.

Hope this helps.

KMRUNOUT

 

[TATE]

I've heard Raj Hundal be pretty vocal about Diamonds being inferior to Brunswicks.... especially in this past year's Open. I think he said something to the effect of not liking the Diamonds and wishing they were playing on Brunswicks which he referred to as "real tables."

Anyone have any input on this? I think it might have something to do with the rails but I'm just curious...

I finally played on a Diamond at Sal Butera's place - they do play different but I thought they were good tables - it just takes some adjustment (as do all tables). It probably has to do with the pocket cut angle.

I will say I'm not a big fan of standard Gold Crown pockets - too big and sloppy. I hate shimmed Gold Crowns. Diamonds are tighter.

I have a very simple test for tables. See the diagram below.

My home table (Brunswick) has 4" corners cut by Ernesto Dominguez. You can fire a ball at the cut cushion very hard and if it hits cleanly inside the point as shown below, from any angle, the ball drops.

I tried the same thing on the Diamond and it spits the ball out. So do most shimmed Brunswick's and most tables that new rubber was added by many mechanics.

Some shots have to be hit hard to get shape, long draw shots for example, so there's a limit on what a player can do on some tables.

This is why I prefer tables set up by Ernesto. They may be tight but they're fair. If you aim the shot properly and fire it the ball drops. To me there's not much worse than making a good shot and watching the ball bounce back at you.

Try this test on your table and hit it hard - you might be surprised to see the results.

Chris

CueTable Help

 

[Island Drive]

It is a big part of why I preffer a GC. It is like I said above, a pocket should play consistently. Diamonds are inconsistent on ball pocketing in the corners dependent on object ball distance from the rail. The pockets on a Diamond are actually pretty generous on balls positioned in the center of the table off the rails, and on the shots on the rail one must suddenly aim at the outside horn and with a slower speed. Unless you are forced to hit it hard for shape and then you better hit an accurate pot that would go in on a snooker pocket from that same angle. Pockets should not actually encourage rolling balls in because they spit out everything but a perfectly hit ball down the rail if it has any pace at all.

Diamonds in this way play more like a 2-shot table, or any table that has round snooker cut pockets. The shots become more difficult to make down the rail and this actually affects strategy and the way you need to hit the ball. I have played great on Diamond tables but it took a whole new strategy and reworking of my game. There are "tricks" to making shots on a Diamond, while the Gold Crown really has no "tricks", it is fairly neutral to speed you hit the ball and realtively neutral to cheating the pocket to either side. The Diamond takes one side of cheating a pocket clear out of the equation on a ball near the rail, you spend all day cinching balls instead of stroking them. You start focusing alot more on angles you leave yourself and shelf the draw, follow, and cueball moves you might use the closer and closer that object ball gets to a rail.

On a Gold Crown you still have the same margin of error to a corner no matter how close to the rail the object ball is. A straight shot down the rail with the cueball 2 feet from the object ball and the object ball 3 feet from the corner is about as tough as a straight shot on a object ball in the center of the table with the cueball 2 feet away from the object ball and the object ball 3 feet from the corner.

All players get on the wrong side of the ball and its nice to have the stroke and the ability to go the other way. The great thing about a GC is you can force follow the cue ball and cut a ball down the rail (two diamonds from the pocket and an inch off the rail) with "force follow" and go four rails around and land on the bottom rail, can't be done consistent enough' on a Diamond, at least the top players will not risk the low percentage shot, they will shift to the saftey game and that detracts from the agressive style of 9-ball and the game itself. There was nothing better than seeing Sigel getting out of line and sending whitey forward instead of backwards twice the distance for shape and tearing your heart out when you thought you might get back to the table.