View Full Version : Something Fred mentioned about Connelly pockets

08-22-2005, 01:36 PM
In a recent post from Fred regarding his finish in the NH 8-ball tourny he mentioned how the Connelly pockets were tight. I have a 7' Connelly that replaced an entry level Brunswick 7' and the first thing I noticed was a dif in the pcokets. To me it looked as if the Connelly pockets were at a different angle, like if you were looking down the side rail there was less pocket to see. I didn't ask for, or not for, any shimming of the pockets. Does anyone know if Fred's observation holds true for the smaller Connelly 7's.

I was wondering because at home my game is mediocre at best, but is better on a bar box outside of the house.


08-22-2005, 04:35 PM
My 8 footer Connelly is pretty tight (two balls don't fit in the corner pockets). I would assume 7' are tight too.

08-23-2005, 09:06 AM
I don't know about 7 footers, but there is a nine foot Connelly in the pool room where I play and it's a pain in the ass. Much tighter than the 9ft. Brunswicks in the same room. It's more the cut of the pockets rather than the opening width.

08-23-2005, 12:32 PM
Thanks for the info on your 8'. As soon as I read your post I checked if 2 balls would pass the corners on my table. No dice. I Should've of thought of that test to begin with, feel like one of those Warner Brothers cartoons when the charactor suddenly developes a donkey head.

08-24-2005, 01:03 AM
Yeah, I belive balls are 2.25 in. in diameter so the pockets are <4.5 in at the opening which is pretty tight. I like it though because they're good for practice but nothing ridiculous. I don't know about tournaments though...