Tight Pockets vs Big Pockets

Does everyone prefer playing one pocket on very tight table or an easier table with bigger pockets?

Still relatively new to One Pocket I feel it depends on my opponent. If I'm the stronger player then I prefer the bigger pockets, but if I'm the one being spotted several balls from a stronger player, I want the tighter table.

My style of play varies greatly when these conditions change. If I'm playing a weaker player and on an easy table, I try to spread the rack out to make it easier to run balls. But If I'm playing on a tight table, I don't spread the rack out as much and I play more safes while only moving 1 ball at a time.

Tables I have available to me near by:
Diamond Pro Am - 9 foot - not shimmed
Brunswick Gold Crown - 9 foot - triple shimmed
Diamond - 9 foot - shimmed (once I thin- not too tough)
Connely's - 9 foot - BIG BUCKETS (shoot anywhere near the pocket and it drops)
Plus other tables are kim steels, olhausen, and brunswicks.

You've got it backwards - as a stronger player, you would prefer the smaller pockets. You can then use your skill to run out while watching the weaker player hang balls up.

straightback said:

You've got it backwards - as a stronger player, you would prefer the smaller pockets. You can then use your skill to run out while watching the weaker player hang balls up.

Click to expand...

Really? I practiced last night on a triple shimmed that plays very very tough and the best I ran was 7. Other than the 7, I wasn't running more than 3 at a time. I feel much more confident firing balls in and playing shape on the bigger pockets. I start playing more conservative on the tight table so that I don't hang up balls. This limits the runs I can do.

Right now I'd rate my one pocket skills in order of strongest to weakest: Running Balls, Banking then Moving.

straightback said:

You've got it backwards - as a stronger player, you would prefer the smaller pockets. You can then use your skill to run out while watching the weaker player hang balls up.

Click to expand...

With big spots, like 12-5, I don't think this applies. On an easy table, the weaker player will miss fewer shots but will still screw up shape pretty often, so the loose pockets help but not all that much. But tight pockets can end more runs for the stronger player. In other words, the benefit of looser pockets is smaller for the weak player because he's going to blow shape anyway.

If I'm playing a champion and getting, say, 11-6, I want tight pockets. That gives me 2-4 sellouts in a game as I try to get my 6. With loose pockets, I get 0-2 sellouts. Also, tight pockets help the weaker player get away with weak uptable safes.

If the gap is small, like 9-7, then it probably could go either way.

What I like is when my pocket is loose and the other one is tight.

Cory in dc said:

What I like is when my pocket is loose and the other one is tight.

Click to expand...

Where do you have this table? And wouldn't your opponent take that pocket when its their break?

I see what you mean with the bigger spots, how on the tighter table its more of a grind for the better player. Then the Tight tables give more opportunities to the lower rank.

Playing on easy tables, I have a couple people I play against that the games might go 8 to 1 or 8 to 2... and then the next game it could go the complete opposite. Matchups like this make it hard to handicap one way or the other. Some days I may get some rolls and win 4 or 5 in a row, then the next week the same matchup could be even or close to it.

Good question about tight or lose pockets. For me I prefer tight pockets but for the only reason that it's easier to dig balls out of tight pockets. Using the points of the pocket and kissing the balls out is much easier with tight pockets. On the bigger pockets I concede balls that I would normally take out.

Looser pockets are better for the better player.

I give up 12 to 5 and sometimes more and on my regular Diamond 4 3/8" it is hard to run more than 10 in one inning. On a regular Gold Crown it is easy.

Tighter pockets are better for the weaker player because they prevent the better player from freewheeling.

It is always better to practice on looser pockets because it is rhythm and confidence that you need to develop. You can always move closer to center ball when you have to play on tighter pockets. It limits what you can do with the cue ball though.

Bill S.

bstroud said:

Looser pockets are better for the better player.

I give up 12 to 5 and sometimes more and on my regular Diamond 4 3/8" it is hard to run more than 10 in one inning. On a regular Gold Crown it is easy.

Tighter pockets are better for the weaker player because they prevent the better player from freewheeling.

It is always better to practice on looser pockets because it is rhythm and confidence that you need to develop. You can always move closer to center ball when you have to play on tighter pockets. It limits what you can do with the cue ball though. Bill S.

Click to expand...

I agree with your assessment, Bill. Building confidence in practice is very important, as long as the difference in the competition table isn't night and day. FWIW, Eddie Robin was a big proponent of practicing on easier pockets (which is the opposite of common opinion).

Putting aside the weaker/stronger player distinction, I personally prefer 4.5" pockets on clean equipment. I think it suits the game of 1P much better than do other pocket sizes. Ridiculously tight pockets (e.g. 4" or less) to me are silly; as are 5" pockets.''

I look at some of those old Gandy's or whatever they used at some of the Johnston City events, and wonder how anyone ever missed! Even up into later years at some of Grady's early events and others, the pockets looked pretty loose.

In golf, the hole is always 4 inches. It does not vary from course to course, nor according to player preferences. Different sports, same concept.

~Doc

I agree with Billy Stroud, playing on loose pockets is easier for the better player. His run outs will over whelm the weaker player. But for a tough match, I agree with the Barber in that tight pockets makes for a better game and extends the innings. A lot of moving will be going on with tighter pockets. I think pocket sizes should be no larger that 41/2" or smaller than 4 1/4". This sizing allows for the right amount of offense and defense.

Imo, the size of the pocket that favors the better player varies depending on the speed of his opponent. The ideal pocket size for the better player is a pocket that he feels comfortable with, and one his opponent must respect. When you can out manage your opponent to play on a table where the pockets are fine with you, but a little too tough for your opponent, then that's the pocket size that favors the better player...Sometimes their fairly tight, and other times fairly loose pockets favor you, as the better player.

Bill Incardona

xxxxxxxxxxxx

What I do know is, when the pockets are loose and the banks are flowing, you might as well take full advantage of relatively easy banks whether they are "free" or not -- i.e. you can really open up if you are comfortable on an easy table. If the opponent tries to still play the tight waiting style of game on an easy table, the more aggressive player is going to run away with it, from what I have seen.

I was playing a guy 10/7 on a very snug GC1. The pool hall closed, where I play now I can't give the same guy 9/7 on these loose pocket tables. It's hard to make a couple or three balls for him and still win. There's no removing hangers on these tables. :frus
Rod.

prefer "tight" myself....but have been told that the "champion" player will figure out a way to turn the pocket size and table conditions to his advantage no matter what type of conditions.

Red Shoes said:

prefer "tight" myself....but have been told that the "champion" player will figure out a way to turn the pocket size and table conditions to his advantage no matter what type of conditions.

Click to expand...

This is correct. I've watched Jersey Red play weaker players on loose tables, he'd run so many balls it was unbelievable.
Rod.

this is a link to adiscussion on pocket size from the archives
http://www.onepocket.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4929

Tight ......

Tight ......

....pockets favor better players.Its all about confidence and lesser players dont get it on 4.5" and down.Funny how so many good players disgaree on this.Usually its common ground on most tech subjects....cool,James

I think the strongest point is that it does depend on the level of the "better player", meaning the situation may be different between a C and a C+ player and two shortstops.

I think to get to the answer you need to dissect it a little more, because this question does get confusing. If you just look at the offensive aspect of it, if you average the number of balls run for a very strong player on bigger pockets, it will not shoot up as much imo (I know, in contrast to what all the smart money is saying here). This is because their cb is about as strong either way, and they will simply get about the same amount of balls either way, relatively speaking.

A weaker player's average will shoot up considerably more with big pockets imo. And, his innings can be drastically different, eg 8 and outs, where that would simply never happen on the tight pockets. The skill level was just not there for it.

You could also factor in lucking in balls, which would favor the weaker player, but that does not really apply in one pocket.

In short, in general I think the bigger the pockets get, the more chance a weaker player has, but there is no steadfast rule. In 100 races to 3 playing even, where will you lose more to a guy you give 10 to 5 to, on big or small pockets? It will be the big pockets for sure. You can look at it as like a leveling of the playing field imo.

From my experience, I'd rather play a champion on tight pockets. On buckets they might never miss. Heck, they might run 400 balls or more. On tight pockets like 4&1/8 they still think they can make everything and they will sell out or at least not make everything.