WPBL (Bonus Ball) - Pocket Cut

[nathandumoulin]

I think any pool player who has spent more than a couple of hundred hours on a pool table can tell how hard a pocket is in comparison to other pockets by watching a video.

The slate is not modified. Its literally identical to a GCV. The only reason the shelf is smaller in the corners, is because the smaller pocket and cut angle makes the shelf sit further out.

As such, the side pockets are identical to typical side pockets, except they're 1/2" smaller. Your imagination is simply running wild.

 

[JB Cases]

I think any pool player who has spent more than a couple of hundred hours on a pool table can tell how hard a pocket is in comparison to other pockets by watching a video.

Where is the shelf on the side pockets? On the table I use even a glancing touch of the point will keep the ball out of the side pocket. And I like it that way. It tells me whether or not my shots are accurate.

I would like to respectfully disagree. The other day I was watching a match between two top players and they were making the pockets look easy. Then two top women got on the same table and the pockets seemed tough. In the first match I thought boy those pockets are easy. Sometimes the perspective on the video shots doesn't tell the right story on the pockets.

I think that the jury is still out on what the optimal pocket configuration is.

 

[SJDinPHX]

Sometimes the perspective on the video shots doesn't tell the right story on the pockets.
I think that the jury is still out on what the optimal pocket configuration is.

I think Nathan has the unusual opportunity to somewhat control and experiment, with the pocket/angle situation, at least in 'BB'..
I view that as a positive.

As you know John, I am a 'little' [sic] old school, in my way of thinking..Here is the way it REALLY was, for years !...Since Brunswick began making tables, they have had a standard way of manufacturing their tables, as far as pocket design, and spec's, with very few changes over the years. Obviously, a GC 1, is a little different than a GC 5, in that regard..Obviously pocket opening, has shrunk a little !

What many do not take into consideration is, that as these tables age, and are recovered time and again, the room owner (especially if he is a good player) will make requests for changes, from the mechanic regarding just about. everything...single or double shim, etc..
Also, these mechanics, are RARELY top flight craftsman, (like RKC or Ernesto) so there is, and always will be, a big difference from one table (exact same model) to the next, after they've been re-worked a time or two !

Any 'good' road player (today or yesteryear) had better be able to spot those discrepancies pretty quick, or he may have a very short carreer !..I mean, how long should it take, to learn if you can 'slam' a ball down the rail, and have the pocket accept it ???....For the reasons I've stated "optimal pocket configuration" has, and will always be, as elusive as a good 'aiming system' wink ..and maybe even harder to achieve and maintain.

At least, thats what the player's of my era, had to deal with, and I see very little change (for the better) in modern times !..It ain't 'rocket surgery', You either figure them sucker's out (the tables) on your own, ASAP...or be prepared to spend a lot of nights in the 'Chevrolet' Hotel !..:boring2:

 

[flyvirginiaguy]

Maybe it's just me, but I never saw a problem with the Gold Crowns tournament sized 4 1/2" pockets and shelf. Worked for many years.
When players have to start limiting their play so much to where they play safeties more than being offensive on shots of this nature, then it is taking away what little excitement a general audience would find in the game, regardless what some pool "aficionados" think.

 

[bankoutallday]

You lost me here. These pockets make it so you can pocket more consistently without it jawing, meaning you can play the shot more firmly, and with more spin. That means players with great cue ball control can play better position, go 3+ rails, without fear of the ball spitting out.

It helps those with excellent position play, as well as pocketing.

Couldn't agree more. At home I have a Gold Crown 1 with 4.5 inch pockets and the facings are perfect. They have the facicng closer to paralell and a 15 degree downward angle on the facing that helps keep the object ball down, send in across the pocket and drop in the hole. I can do so many beautiful multirail shots home. When I go out I play the same Gold Crowns, with bigger pockets that reject so much when hit with pace. It takes away from my advantage as a player that knows how to play, but the table limits me. Every body want to see big time shots, from the best players.

The producton was very good, watched it last night. Not sure it will take off, but it seemed like a pretty cool game.

 

[holland]

The side pockets arent cut any different. Same angle, just 1/2" smaller.

Somewhat puts it into perspective of how hard it is to judge as a viewer, and how tough these pockets really are compared to what people *think* they are.

Just bringing up what seems, to me, to be the relevant post in this thread. It's from someone who has played on a similar table.

FWIW Ernesto just did rails for me that are about like the BB table as it is now and it's tough action. I just spent 2 months playing on 4 3/4" pockets in Germany and I have causght my self walking more than once, hitting the point when i thought i made the ball.

 

[SJDinPHX]

Couldn't agree more. At home I have a Gold Crown 1 with 4.5 inch pockets and the facings are perfect. They have the facicng closer to paralell and a 15 degree downward angle on the facing that helps keep the object ball down, send in across the pocket and drop in the hole. I can do so many beautiful multirail shots home. When I go out I play the same Gold Crowns, with bigger pockets that reject so much when hit with pace. It takes away from my advantage as a player that knows how to play, but the table limits me. <---Agreed sir, did you by chance miss post #117 ???

.......mmmm !...Sometimes I wonder, if anyone reads back, beyond the post they respond to ? Thats a good way to miss a LOT !

 

[CreeDo]

You lost me here. These pockets make it so you can pocket more consistently without it jawing, meaning you can play the shot more firmly, and with more spin. That means players with great cue ball control can play better position, go 3+ rails, without fear of the ball spitting out.

It helps those with excellent position play, as well as pocketing.

Yes, thank you. When a table keeps rattling out balls, then it becomes a shotmaking contest. You have to leave yourself thinner on every ball and try to move the CB with spin rather than speed. Or you leave yourself straight because of the fear of missing, but end up settling for a longer or thinner cut on the next ball.

We can pretend all day that every player should be able to send the OB to a specific 3 inch patch of the pocket on every single shot. But even pros have limits. Forcing them to settle on their position because of how the table plays is not allowing them to show off their full range of skills, just their shotmaking. It might be more entertaining for the fans but that shouldn't always be priority 1.

 

[Magog30]

Good Discussion!!
I would really like to hear what Greg from Diamond point of view is. Earl Strickland POV on this would be interesting too as I am sure he has spent many nights dreaming of the "perfect pocket"!

My POV:

1. Big Pockets with a small shelf are the worst!!
2. Balls going in down the rail when hitting the diamond - Does not look good on TV!
3. Tighter looking pockets make the game of Bonus Ball look harder to the casual viewer - which is good for their business - (also: UK is a huge market they may be going after and snooker fans HATE big pockets!)
4. Different pocket sizes and cuts are more suitable to different games. Input please!
5. It should be harder to pocket balls when using more speed, but they should still go in when hit with accuracy. My reasons follow:
-More chance of getting safe if you miss when hitting harder, hit a pocket speed and more risk of leaving it over the pocket
-Shape: Getting the correct angle on the ball allows you to hit ball softer and get shape
-Spin: Using spin to get shape can allow you to use less force but affects accuracy
-SKIDS and rolling off

So there are many risks of playing the ball with softer speed, the trade off is that it can be easier to pocket the ball

Pool has always been and should always be a game of spin, angles, accuracy and strategy. It should not be turned into just a game just of accuracy. (We have snooker for that) lol

 

[Underclocked]

I was not fooled by the video. Ask Johnny Archer. Twice he scratched when the cue ball hit the tit on the side pocket and promptly fell in the pocket. I dare say those balls would not have made it into the side pocket on any decently maintained GC I've ever played on.

Johnny's visible reaction confirmed my thinking (at least to me).

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

OK. What brand of table do you have that has a deeper shelf than a Diamond? Every table I've ever see has a more shallow shelf- Brunswick, Olhausen, Global, Valley, Hollywood, you name it.

A. E. Schmidt.

Here's some photos showing what's up with my table (excuse the lousy cell phone shots, my table isn't really that color). The shot in the upper left is a screen capture of Slo-Mo's Diamond. The lower left shows where a shot riding one of my rails will hit the corner pocket facing. The upper right shows pocket depth to be 1 3/4" from a 5" long wooden block that spans the points.

The other photos are kinda self-explanatory, showing how far in the balls can lie before falling off the edge of the shelf. Greg Sullivan says the pros want about 40% of the ball showing beyond the rail, which is just about what I have showing.

Pockets are cut at a measured 144º. Trust me, it's a lot tougher than its 5" pocket openings would indicate.

 

[realkingcobra]

A. E. Schmidt.

Here's some photos showing what's up with my table (excuse the lousy cell phone shots, my table isn't really that color). The shot in the upper left is a screen capture of Slo-Mo's Diamond. The lower left shows where a shot riding one of my rails will hit the corner pocket facing. The upper right shows pocket depth to be 1 3/4" from a 5" long wooden block that spans the points.

The other photos are kinda self-explanatory, showing how far in the balls can lie before falling off the edge of the shelf. Greg Sullivan says the pros want about 40% of the ball showing beyond the rail, which is just about what I have showing.

Pockets are cut at a measured 144º. Trust me, it's a lot tougher than its 5" pocket openings would indicate.

They're not as deep as Diamond's are. If the pockets on your table were 4 1/2" ProCut most of the slate shelf would be gone, and only about 40% of the ball would be in the pocket. Imagine how much slate shelf would be exposed if Diamond made their pockets 5" with the slate shelf they have right now.

So, no...yours are not as deep shelf as Diamond's....that's my professional observation of the pockets on your table.

Glen

 

[JB Cases]

I vote that all the table makers fund a study where Blake goes around and films the balls going towards the pockets from every angle on every combinations of pocket construction that can be thought of. Use that footage to come up with a standard pocket that is optimal.

Of course I know that this will never happen.

So in liu of that Nathan, here is another suggestion for you. Post a contest where two decently good players from AZB can go to the studio and play a full session of Bonus Ball. If the pockets are truly easy they ought to put up some good scores. If not we will see a lot of misses.

 

[smoooothstroke]

This was mentioned in another thread, so I figured I'd just start a new one. Pocket cuts are like aiming systems as it seems people are very defensive about them, but I figured I'd explain my take on them, as I feel it's a very important element of what we're doing here at the WPBL arena.

I've been a firm believer that the current pocket cut in North America is one of the reason why pool is suffering here. Sounds a bit harsh, and maybe it is, but hopefully I can explain why. I've had an idea of how to improve this for a few years, and proposed it back in a thread last year.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=255620&highlight=pocket

Unfortunately I was met with nearly universal resistance, but I stuck with it anyway. Bonus Ball finally offered me the chance to put my ideas into action.

The issue is that the current pocket standard is penalizing the better players by opening the faces. It jaws balls, and forces players to play pocket speed, thus making the pocket play "phony". A player can slop a ball in softly if rolled in, but a well hit shot done firmly will be rejected. Its terrible for the better players, and even worse for TV, as players often opt to play safe instead of taking on a shot where a ball needs to be pounded in down the rail. I feel a player should be able to pound balls in with speed, with as much spin as possible, and the pocket should always accept it provided the shot was accurate. The aggressive guys who are willing to play dramatic shots should be rewarded, and this new cut does exactly that.

The trick is to shrink the pocket, push the facings back towards parallel so they're around 138 (rather than 141-142), and then ditch the shelf. A ball either goes in, or it misses entirely. No more pocket speed or jawed balls. If you put the ball into the tiny opening, it goes in. If you miss, it leaves the pocket area entirely, thus eliminating jawed balls almost entirely.

It's basically doing the exact opposite of what everyone else has been doing.

I called Ernesto, and had him cut the pockets the way I wanted. To my surprise, he agreed and said that he's done this before, and thinks its the way a pocket should be cut. Sure enough, as players trickled in during opening week, they all agreed. The result is what all the pros here are now calling "a true pro cut". As far as I know, the support is unanimous.

You have to be accurate as hell, but the balls take as they should. Its the best of all worlds, and I'm a firm believer that this will become the new standard, as I know that Rasson over in China is already testing this cut, and may make it the new standard in Asia (albeit 4.25" inch for amateurs, which plays like a 4.5"). Time will tell whether it takes, but from what I've seen this far, the pros may be hesitant to go back to the old cut style.

Please keep in mind that I'm just doing what I feel is best for the game. Not everyone will agree, but whats important to me is that its best for TV, and what the players now agree they want.

I generally agree with RKC,he knows what hes talking about.I got to go with Nathan on this one.Make the pocket facings parallel and then you can change the "tightness"of the table by reducing or increasing the pocket opening size.You can also change the way a table plays by reducing or increasing the amount of shelf.

A bit of shelf doesn't bother me but all these different angles that the rail ends are cut at,in combination with the other variables,makes a pocket not a pocket but a ****ing safari.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

They're not as deep as Diamond's are. If the pockets on your table were 4 1/2" ProCut most of the slate shelf would be gone, and only about 40% of the ball would be in the pocket. Imagine how much slate shelf would be exposed if Diamond made their pockets 5" with the slate shelf they have right now.

So, no...yours are not as deep shelf as Diamond's....that's my professional observation of the pockets on your table.

Glen

I think you are correct, Glen. I never came out and said they were as deep, just that they play a lot harder.

I did a little "work" on my pockets to see what would happen if they were shimmed to 4 1/2". I goofed a little and chose 1/4" stock, but I forgot to account for the increased length of the mitered face (damn Pythagoras), so they actually came out to 4 3/8" across the points an can be seen in the photo below.

So, no, not 60% showing beyond the rails, more like 50%. And that's with them cut 1/8" narrower than the standard Diamond pockets. Also, you can see that a ball no longer can sit on the center of the shelf without interfering with a 4 3/8" block placed across the points. It drops in the hole first. But there's still WAY more shelf than on the Bonus Ball table.

Here's the kicker, though. I set that same rail shot with the five ball combo like I mentioned in an earlier post. I placed a 3/32" shim between the last ball and the side of the rail, creating a shot that's wired for just outside of the center of the pocket facing. Where before the ball got violently spit out every time, with the new shims it goes every time, no matter how hard I hit it! Facing angles are now 140º, 4º closer to parallel than they started.

Then I decided to try to make some cut shots from the center of the table. I saw no difference in shotmaking percentage, even though the pocket openings were 5/8" narrower. Center pocket is center pocket, ya know? If you don't have to cheat the pocket, the balls go in just fine. That's the biggest advantage I can see with the wider pockets, creating an angle on close shots when you fall straight on the ball. Otherwise, I think the standard Diamond pockets have it all over what I got, especially for rotation games where you really need to move the rock.

 

[Hungarian]

I vote that all the table makers fund a study QUOTE]

No need for a study since Nathan has already developed the new state-of-the-art pocket standard with his Asian table.

Thanks Nathan!!

 

[qfans]

Bar Table

Hey Nathan, its Todd in KC. A friend here wants to refurbish his bar table and is thinking about ordering Ridgeback Rails. He wants it to play tough but not to where you are stating that harder shots will rattle. Pose this question to Ernesto if you would about a good compromise on a Valley table. Me I prefer being able to hit the rail at the last diamond and still pocket the ball!!! Thanks for the info

 

[catpool9]

You lost me here. These pockets make it so you can pocket more consistently without it jawing, meaning you can play the shot more firmly, and with more spin. That means players with great cue ball control can play better position, go 3+ rails, without fear of the ball spitting out.

It helps those with excellent position play, as well as pocketing.

I agree, I like the cut, thats way it shoulkd be., it's alot better for the players to be able to let their stroke out, and the spectator's get to see some awesome pool played!


David Harcrow

 

[catpool9]

You lost me here. These pockets make it so you can pocket more consistently without it jawing, meaning you can play the shot more firmly, and with more spin. That means players with great cue ball control can play better position, go 3+ rails, without fear of the ball spitting out.

It helps those with excellent position play, as well as pocketing.

I agree, I like the cut, that's the way it should be., it's alot better for the players to be able to let their stroke out, and the spectator's get to see some awesome pool played!


David Harcrow

 

[raven5000]

I liked this thread a lot! Learned a lot! I play on a gold crown with 4" pockets with parallel facings at my local pool room. I have to say all though tighter i think they do accept balls down the rail to easy. For people who say they can't fire a ball down rail on a diamond I think they are very slightly hitting the rail before entering the pocket. Ive done it before and didn't even notice I hit the rail at times. Anyway my feeling is that diamonds play tighter and are more challenging and I like that! I also believe that not every table plays the same and great players now how to adjust. Remember both players are on the same table so it is a equal playing field.