Will 4 inches pockets be the future of US pool, bar box and big table?

[phreaticus]

I t

I think you never have play before in 4" pockets, did you see the pool masters? I don't think the game change much, and yes I have a bar box with 4" in my house, it change my live

I play all around lots of places, various tables, sizes and styles, and yes I watched a few of the recent world masters matches. Place right near where I live has 2 tight tables - one has mouths that are slightly tighter than 4.0", perhaps 3-7/8" the other has 4-1/8", my home GC6 TE has 4.375" (4-3/8") mouths and 3.625" throats (3-5/8"), and plays super tough. I personally find that < 4.125" (4-1/8") with large ish pocket angle angles seems to be quite a marked difference, for any game except 1p. For myself and any decent shot maker I think the difference manifests more in how you have to adapt your CB control in terms of margins to create angles from the cheating the pockets, and speed control. Pocket facing angles (ie mouth to throat ratio) is just as big (if not bigger) impact than just pocket mouth size, but the facing angle issue is not as easy to measure/eyeball and not as widely understood. Also, slate shelf depths, but those seem to be more standard among the main manufacturers, Diamond, BW, etc. My home CG6 has very lively rails and 144 degree pocket facings and plays about same as the 4.0" table at the local hall - super tough and a bit annoying for rotation games, rattles balls that are made clean but hit the inner facing with heavier speed. I'm pretty sure I'd like it a lot better if the PFA's were 140-141 ish. These issues have been discussed a lot in threads around here and I don't think my perspectives are anything new or unusual. It might be interesting to know what the facing angles are on your home table with 4" pockets, I'm guessing they are 140 ish.

At the end of the day, different strokes for different folks!

Cheers

 

[middleofnowhere]

What evedence is there that 4" pockets are the salvation of pool? If anything, if they found their way into mainstream pool, it may be the total death of it.

The people who actually make up the main economy of pool, average players, would find something else to do. They already don't like 9 foot tables.

 

[King T]

At the last American 14.1 tournament i watched they used ProCut Diamonds. Didn't slow those guys down one bit. Here's Filler TORTURING Alex:

Filler shoots straighter than anybody in the world, well he and Shaw so you can't use him as a fair example.

 

[JCL]

I play all around lots of places, various tables, sizes and styles, and yes I watched a few of the recent world masters matches. Place right near where I live has 2 tight tables - one has mouths that are slightly tighter than 4.0", perhaps 3-7/8" the other has 4-1/8", my home GC6 TE has 4.275" pockets. I personally find that < 4.125" (4-1/8") with large ish pocket angle angles seems to be quite a marked difference, for any game except 1p. For myself and any decent shot maker I think the difference manifests more in how you have to adapt your CB control in terms of margins to create angles from the cheating the pockets, and speed control. Pocket facing angles (ie mouth to throat ratio) is just as big (if not bigger) impact than just pocket mouth size, but the facing angle issue is not as easy to measure/eyeball and not as widely understood. Also, slate shelf depths, but those seem to be more standard among the main manufacturers, Diamond, BW, etc. My home CG6 has very lively rails and 144 degree pocket facings and plays about same as the 4.0" table at the local hall - super tough and a bit annoying for rotation, rattles balls that are hit quite clean but hit the inner facing with too much speed. I'm pretty sure I'd like it a lot better if the PFA's were 140-141 ish. These issues have been discussed a lot in threads around here and I don't think my perspectives are anything new or unusual. It might be interesting to know what the facing angles are on your home table with 4" pockets, I'm guessing they are 140 ish.

At the end of the day, different strokes for different folks!

Cheers

Not sure about the angle but mouth is 4" and jaws are 3.75 angle seems to be very similar to a diamond, I love the challenge in my table, remember something your practice should be harder than your competition, once you play for a long time in this pockets I assure you when you play 4.5 I will be hard to miss

What evedence is there that 4" pockets are the salvation of pool? If anything, if they found their way into mainstream pool, it may be the total death of it.

The people who actually make up the main economy of pool, average players, would find something else to do. They already don't like 9 foot tables.

Player are the ones that decided to go with smaller pockets, for the average player, don't worries you can decide where to play

 

[King T]

The Great Buddy Hall said the Pool should never come down to who shoots the straightest, it should always be about who plays the best.

 

[JCL]

If he said so, I believe him.

 

[JCL]

Filler shoots straighter than anybody in the world, well he and Shaw so you can't use him as a fair example.

 

[middleofnowhere]

4” is great for 1P, sucks for banks.

Not entirely, defense is nothing more than up the table cuz you can't make nothing. And if a guy does get a ball close there's nothing to getting it out of such a small pocket.

 

[garczar]

Filler shoots straighter than anybody in the world, well he and Shaw so you can't use him as a fair example.

There were quite a few good runs in the event. My point is that 14.1 CAN be played at a high level with 4.5" corners. Any smaller and the game is totally ruined imo.

 

[middleofnowhere]

I can give you a real world example of why it's bad in a pool room. I've owned several pool rooms and I would have people come in who were new to the pool room but played in a local bar.

They play for a while and when they come up and pay they were totally conscious of how many games they managed to play on these big tables compared to playing on a bar table where you don't pay by time but by the game.

If these games take them forever to play they see it as like really a ripoff.
They already hate it that they got to pay for time while they're sometimes standing around not playing much less they can't even get the balls in the holes. It would be the death of Pool as far as pool rooms go.

Let the pros do what they want leave the pool rooms alone.

 

[garczar]

I can give you a real world example of why it's bad in a pool room. I've owned several pool rooms and I would have people come in who were new to the pool room but played in a local bar.

They play for a while and when they come up and pay they were totally conscious of how many games they managed to play on these big tables compared to playing on a bar table where you don't pay by time but by the game.

If these games take them forever to play they see it as like really a ripoff.
They already hate it that they got to pay for time while they're sometimes standing around not playing much less they can't even get the balls in the holes. It would be the death of Pool as far as pool rooms go.

Agree 100%. See it everyday where i play. Pockets at Magoo's are tight for good players much less recreational bangers. Having a couple tightened up is one thing but not all of them.

 

[phreaticus]

Not sure about the angle but mouth is 4" and jaws are 3.75 angle seems to be very similar to a diamond, I love the challenge in my table, remember something your practice should be harder than your competition, once you play for a long time in this pockets I assure you when you play 4.5 I will be hard to miss

Not sure if this conversation is devolving or evolving. You seem determined to convince me that tighter pockets make the game more difficult and improves your game. No real argument from me, other than to point out that "tighter" pockets is sort of a misunderstood issue and discussing the topic in term of mouth size only - is not enough to really capture what a "standard" should be, and in my personal opinion at some point, specs that are too tight change the overall style of the game, particularly for rotation & 14.1 games where speed, patterns and rhythm are more pronounced aspects of the game.

I had a typo in my last post, regarding specs of my home table. I edited it for more clarity. Actually your table specs sort of highlight my point. So your corner pockets are 4.0" mouths and 3.75" throats, which means a .25" difference. As a comparison, my home table's corner pockets have 4.375" mouths and 3.625" throats, a difference of .75" - meaning my pocket facing angles are a full 1/2" steeper than yours. Said another way, your pocket facings are much more parallel than mine - I'm too lazy to do the detailed math, but that roughly equates to 3-4 degrees of angular difference. If you go with very narrow mouths like yours, to get the table to still play well one should have less steep pockets, like yours - sounds like its very nicely done and I think I would also enjoy the play of your table. Such pockets will definitely force the shooter to hit much cleaner shots as in not hitting rails or brushing tits on the way into the pocket - but will still accept cleanly hit balls that are not smack dead center pocket and/or with more speed - where mine will spit them out more, even though the mouths are .375" bigger. On my table, I have to concede elements of CB control - in minor differences on angle and speed for a given shot, as opposed to other mainstream pro tables, even those with tighter pockets. I don't find this necessarily beneficial for my game.

If you've never dug into it, Dr Dave's TDF system of comparing table play difficulty using all 3 elements of pocket shape (size, angle, shelf depth) is about the best way to judge a table's play that I've seen.

Hope this makes sense. Cheers

 

[JCL]

Not sure if this conversation is devolving or evolving. You seem determined to convince me that tighter pockets make the game more difficult and improves your game. No real argument from me, other than to point out that "tighter" pockets is sort of a misunderstood issue and discussing the topic in term of mouth size only - is not enough to really capture what a "standard" should be, and in my personal opinion at some point, specs that are too tight change the overall style of the game, particularly for rotation & 14.1 games where speed, patterns and rhythm are more pronounced aspects of the game.

I had a typo in my last post, regarding specs of my home table. I edited it for more clarity. Actually your table specs sort of highlight my point. So your corner pockets are 4.0" mouths and 3.75" throats, which means a .25" difference. As a comparison, my home table's corner pockets have 4.375" mouths and 3.625" throats, a difference of .75" - meaning my pocket facing angles are a full 1/2" steeper than yours. Said another way, your pocket facings are much more parallel than mine - I'm too lazy to do the detailed math, but that roughly equates to 3-4 degrees of angular difference. If you go with very narrow mouths like yours, to get the table to still play well one should have less steep pockets, like yours - sounds like its very nicely done and I think I would also enjoy the play of your table. Such pockets will definitely force the shooter to hit much cleaner shots as in not hitting rails or brushing tits on the way into the pocket - but will still accept cleanly hit balls that are not smack dead center pocket and/or with more speed - where mine will spit them out more, even though the mouths are .375" bigger. On my table, I have to concede elements of CB control - in minor differences on angle and speed for a given shot, as opposed to other mainstream pro tables, even those with tighter pockets. I don't find this necessarily beneficial for my game.

If you've never dug into it, Dr Dave's TDF system of comparing table play difficulty using all 3 elements of pocket shape (size, angle, shelf depth) is about the best way to judge a table's play that I've seen.

Hope this makes sense. Cheers

No trying to convince anyone here just sharing my experience with 4", and certainly benefit my game, also understand people that said that it does not for them, can't be the same for everybody and I totally respect that.
I understand your criteria in order to determine playing difficulty, thanks for adding to the forum, but the reason matchroom is changing pocket size is because player wanted that way, after watching pool master and my own experience don't think the game change much, just make it more interesting . ( your table angles are brutal, not even the pros are playing with such angles, would you consider changing it?)

 

[middleofnowhere]

No trying to convince anyone here just sharing my experience with 4", and certainly benefit my game, also understand people that said that it does not for them, can't be the same for everybody and I totally respect that.
I understand your criteria in order to determine playing difficulty, thanks for adding to the forum, but the reason matchroom is changing pocket size is because player wanted that way, after watching pool master and my own experience don't think the game change much, just make it more interesting . ( your table angles are brutal, not even the pros are playing with such angles, would you consider changing it?)

How did it benefit your game?

 

[JCL]

How did it benefit your game

Forces my stroke to be more consistent, force me to concentrate more and properly aim, but more important, help me understand the pocket sizes better for example shooting to all 3 areas of the pocket, of course none of this is easy but you will notice a big difference when you play anywhere else.

 

[TrxR]

Here is a video that shows the pockets from the world pool masters. He doesn't say the exact measurements of the side pocket but uses two cue balls for reference and shows the 4" corner pockets as well. This is shown starting at about 10:20. What's your guess at the side pocket size according to the video?

I don't think a 4" pocket is good for many other than professionals, too tight and frustrating for alot of players. I'm debating between 4.25 and 4.5 for a personal table .

 

[sjm]

The Great Buddy Hall said the Pool should never come down to who shoots the straightest, it should always be about who plays the best.

Bravo! It's amazing how often on AZB posters confuse the two. Shot-making is just one of the skills needed to win, but the best players are the ones with complete skill sets. Not a surprising remark from the best position player in the history of pool.

 

[garczar]

Bravo! It's amazing how often on AZB posters confuse the two. Shot-making is just one of the skills needed to win, but the best players are the ones with complete skill sets. Not a surprising remark from the best position player in the history of pool.

BTW Buddy said he thought Sigel was the straightest shooter he'd ever seen. J. Shaw and Filler imo co-own that title these days.

 

[middleofnowhere]

Forces my stroke to be more consistent, force me to concentrate more and properly aim, but more important, help me understand the pocket sizes better for example shooting to all 3 areas of the pocket, of course none of this is easy but you will notice a big difference when you play anywhere else.

I apologize for tricking you. I knew I would get you to say that. I had pocket liners as a training device and it does work
. You don't really want to play the game in general on such tight pockets though. It would become no fun at all in a very short time.

 

[JCL]

Here is a video that shows the pockets from the world pool masters. He doesn't say the exact measurements of the side pocket but uses two cue balls for reference and shows the 4" corner pockets as well. This is shown starting at about 10:20. What's your guess at the side pocket size according to the video?

I don't think a 4" pocket is good for many other than professionals, too tight and frustrating for alot of players. I'm debating between 4.25 and 4.5 for a personal table .

Side pockets should be 4.75