Tips & Spin- Soft vs Hard who gots the most!?

rhncue said:
[/COLOR]

Actually they are not perceived events. In the late 90's or early 2000's Bob Jewett, Ron Stewart and 3 other physicists and cue sports officiatoes and predator cues rented a high speed camera from Kodak to check cue ball deflection. During their tests they discovered that harder tips actually applied a slight more amount of spin than the softer tips as the harder tip released the cue ball quicker than a softer tip. At the time they sold VHS tapes of their experiments.

A soft tip will give more juice to a player with a poor stroke as they are more forgiving than a harder tip. With a soft tip you can go a little beyond the radius for a stroke with no mis-cue. If you will watch players who keep complaining that they can't draw the cue you will see that it makes no difference how low they are stroking the cue, when they complete the shot their tip comes up and hits center ball. They have mis-cued so often that their subconscious prevents them completing the stroke as intended. With the use of a softer tip there are less mis-cues so the subconscious allows the use of a lower stroke.

Dick
Click to expand...

I was just joking about facts and opinions, but those are some more good info you bring up and more of what I was looking for when starting this thread. I felt that hard tips would be able to get a bit more spin, but I have no factual basis other then my idea that because hard tips tranfer the energy faster and to a more precise contact point. the tests you are talking about is exactly what I was hoping had been done being that I am smart enough to understand(well understand enough to get the point anyway) what they write but no where near smart enough to do it my self lol. I would love to see one of those VHS tapes of there experiments. Thank you for the post.
 
Last edited:
http://www.billiards.colostate.edu/threads/cue_tip.html

About half way down the page;

Here are some relevant factors:

-A hard tip holds its shape better over time, in general.

-Tip hardness (within the typical range) should not have a significant or direct effect on the amount of english that can be applied.

-The amount of english is limited by the tip offset that creates a miscue.

-A tip not "treated" (e.g., scuffed) properly, will not hold chalk very well, and miscues will be more likely at smaller tip offsets. A harder tip might require more attention in this regard.

-Soft tips seem to hold chalk better than hard tips, in general.

-A soft tip will give the cue a softer "feel" (less impact in grip hand) and have a different sound than a hard tip. Some people prefer some sounds and "feels" more than others
Click to expand...

There is a ton of info and videos on this site.
 
Thomas Wayne said:
With all due respect, your imaginary scenario is a textbook example of "begging the question" - as that phrase is formally defined, rather than the way it is commonly (though mistakenly) used. Here is an easily understood article explaining what that means: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_questionhttp://

A simple, if transparent example of begging the question might be: "People who steal are bad people because stealing is bad so only bad people ever steal. This proves that people who steal are bad people."

In the instant case you've posited that duration of tip/ball contact is irrelevant to how much spin is imparted, and your supporting evidence contains statements such as "The instant it contacts the ball, it ricochets off while imparting tremendous spin" and "...It's also telling the ball how fast to spin and because of it's contact-time, will not allow the ball to spin any faster than the stroke speed." Neither of these evidentiary claims is supported by any "proof" (within your argument), and both are intrinsically included in your primary [implied] assertion that tip/ball contact duration is irrelevant to the amount of spin created.

Cue ball spin is directly related to friction, and the scientific study of friction - with all it's attending physics - is almost absurdly complex. From what tiny little kernels of that science I "understand" I stand by my assertion that there is a causal relationship between the duration of tip/ball contact and the amount of ball spin produced - however, as I qualified (and you acknowledge) earlier, "all other things being equal". Unfortunately it's pretty much impossible to set up testing conditions in which all other things would be equal between two shafts... relegating the entire issue to being little more than a "thought experiment".

In the real world, a possible test of my statement would be to experiment with only ONE shaft and tip, find a way to chalk it identically between test shots, and device a machine that could precisely vary tip-contact duration by some known or measurable amount. THEN we would need to witness and measure that contact duration and resulting ball spin, probably using ultra-high-speed photography. I would bet against that happening any time soon - especially since that which is considered known physics (of friction) supports my contention.

However, if you want a real-world example of my argument - greater contact time = greater spin - we need only go to the racetrack, where it's already known that a given car/tire combination will accelerate faster and longer if the tires DON"T "burn out" against the pavement - the equivalent of the cue tip losing contact with the ball.

TW
(PS: nothing I've said claims (or implies) that a soft tip will impart more spin than a hard tip; my assertion is that any particular tip will impart more spin if it remains in contact with the ball longer - tip speed, contact point, and a butt-load of other variables being identical.)
Click to expand...

I followed your wikepedia link to a page that informed me that the page I was seeking did not exist.
I then played with the URL and got to the page I believe you are referring to.
Remove the 'http://' from the end of your link and it works. It happens.
Apparently we have different uses for the phrase: "begging the question".
Apparently, so does wikepedia. If you want to define my position as circular logic, I have no problem with
that other than that was not my intent. I was offering a position HOPING to get a convincing counterpoint.
As yet, I don't have it. An analogy about soft rubber and asphalt isn't proof. Way too many variables.
I can contemplate certain actions of the example but have to dismiss most of it
due to the tire maintaining contact with the ground the length of the track, slipping or not.
Cue tips are comprised of leather and players don't do pre-shot burn-outs.

I like your use of the word 'posited' here because that was exactly what I was doing;
1. To assume the existence of; postulate. (and) 2. To put forward, as for consideration or study; suggest.
You can posit an idea or opinion. It's not a statement of fact until it's proven.
So far, neither of us has done that.

The basis for my position/opinions would be the Jacksonville study though their research was primarily regarding deflection.
What's shown in the videos is informative. I think the term ricochet was a good choice in describing the action of the tip.
I do agree with your statement that "Cue ball spin is directly related to friction".
So the question then becomes; which tip offers the greater degree of friction, a hard tip or a soft tip? Suede vs boot leather?
Vaseline not included unless you're going to apply it to both.

My extreme examples were not presented as facts nor were they intended to be.
I chose them to present imagery for the reader, mental illustrations for consideration.
My statements are meant to be argued. If everyone is in agreement, there is nothing new to learn.
I'm here to learn. I agree, the definitive conclusion would be difficult to prove.

KJ
 
KJ Cues said:
I followed your wikepedia link to a page that informed me that the page I was seeking did not exist.
I then played with the URL and got to the page I believe you are referring to.
Remove the 'http://' from the end of your link and it works. It happens.
Apparently we have different uses for the phrase: "begging the question".
Apparently, so does wikepedia. [...]
Click to expand...

Apparently this website added the extra characters at the end of the URL; I copied and pasted exactly what was in the address bar when I pulled up the Wikipedia article.

If you've been using the phrase begging the question to mean the same as "raising the question" then you have misused (and misunderstood) the phrase. No matter how common that misuse may be - and it is becoming increasingly common - it is still "officially" incorrect according to virtually all authoritative sources.

KJ Cues said:
As yet, I don't have it. An analogy about soft rubber and asphalt isn't proof. Way too many variables.
Click to expand...

An analogy is never proof. It's simply a way of helping the reader better relate to the author's position.


KJ Cues said:
I can contemplate certain actions of the example but have to dismiss most of it
due to the tire maintaining contact with the ground the length of the track, slipping or not.
Click to expand...

From this should I conclude you dispute my statement: "...a given car/tire combination will accelerate faster and longer if the tires DON"T "burn out" against the pavement"?

KJ Cues said:
Cue tips are comprised of leather and players don't do pre-shot burn-outs.
Click to expand...

No, but players occasionally do "out-and-back" masse shots, which are kind of the equivalent of a "burn-out"... and are a GREAT example of longer tip/ball contact producing more spin.

TW
 
Thomas Wayne said:
No, but players occasionally do "out-and-back" masse shots, which are kind of the equivalent of a "burn-out"... and are a GREAT example of longer tip/ball contact producing more spin.

TW
Click to expand...


Doesn't the spin from a masse have more to do with the trajectory then the lenght of the tip contact time? I think the masse would be more the equivalent of doing a doughnut or a rockford, where as when a player presses the QB to the rail and spins it with their hand before the break to clean it for grip would be the burnout.
 
Probably being a little generous here, but.....
spin.jpg
 
I get more spin and more accuracy with a hard tip.......... I can't hit the cue ball as far from center without miscueing as I can with a soft tip but I like the hard tip better.

Kim
 
Greatly appreciate your input here Sheldon.
Could you please elaborate a little on what we're looking at and where it came from?
Also, what would you conclude from this drawing?

Thanx Much, KJ
 
This has been a very interesting thread.
It probably goes a long way to explaining why on the same cue, different people like different tip types and radii.
I am thinking that the biggest factor is the stroke ability of the player is the real variable that is uncontrolled.
Neil
 
Greatly appreciate your input here Sheldon.
Could you please elaborate a little on what we're looking at and where it came from?
Click to expand...
It's a pie chart I made with my computer.
Also, what would you conclude from this drawing?
Click to expand...
That people sometimes place too much focus on minor things, and don't focus enough on the major ones. Take miscues for example. I see many people furiously scuffing, picking, or otherwise mangling their tips, over and over again after miscues. When they should be tightening up their bridge, and smoothing out their strokes.... :wink:
The "which tip makes me play better, or spins the ball better" isn't much different. Of course we should all get the best tip for our playing style, or preferences. But it's sometimes awkward to deal with people expecting miracles from a tip change. ;)
 
It is my understanding that the tip and ball are in contact only until the tip is compressed as much as it is going to on the given shot, at which time the ball makes a hasty get away at a speed considerably greater than the tip because the average cue weighs around 3 times the average cue ball. This difference, IMHO, prohibits the tip's continued contact with the ball. Furthermore, a skidding cue ball will stop dead upon impacting the center of another ball. If a tip were to maintain contact with a ball for anything more than the instantaneous contact I believe happens, the ball's rotation would be stopped by continued contact. As for hard vs soft. If there is an appreciable difference, I believe it could come from the softer tip compressing, creating a wider contact area with the ball which would include more of the center of the ball and less of the eccentricity of the ball, creating slightly less spin. I think tip curvature is critical. A very round tip will impact the ball closer to the center of the tip, where most people actually aim through. It's not that you can't hit the same spot with a flat tip, you just have to aim farther from the center of the ball to actually hit the same spot. A harder tip allows you to shape the tip to a rounder curvature than a soft tip, thereby allowing you to hit the spot on the cue ball that you are actually trying to hit with less mental and physical adjustment. Conversely, a flatter tip makes it easier to hit the cue ball with little or no spin. That's my 'spin' on this subject. Your mileage may vary.
 
To me, its about stroke. I made my first 3C cue about 15 years ago. I brought it into a Pool Room in Wilton Manors Florida and waited hours for the owner to come in. I asked if he would hit some balls, tell me what he thought. He chalked the cue, bent over, hit a white ball and danced back to the same rail 5 times to hit the red and said it hit fine.

I learned something that day, the making of a cue from the bumper to the tip has no meaning to a person who has that kind of stroke. :)
 
Lexicologist71 said:
It is my understanding that the tip and ball are in contact only until the tip is compressed as much as it is going to on the given shot, at which time the ball makes a hasty get away at a speed considerably greater than the tip because the average cue weighs around 3 times the average cue ball. This difference, IMHO, prohibits the tip's continued contact with the ball. Furthermore, a skidding cue ball will stop dead upon impacting the center of another ball. If a tip were to maintain contact with a ball for anything more than the instantaneous contact I believe happens, the ball's rotation would be stopped by continued contact. As for hard vs soft. If there is an appreciable difference, I believe it could come from the softer tip compressing, creating a wider contact area with the ball which would include more of the center of the ball and less of the eccentricity of the ball, creating slightly less spin. I think tip curvature is critical. A very round tip will impact the ball closer to the center of the tip, where most people actually aim through. It's not that you can't hit the same spot with a flat tip, you just have to aim farther from the center of the ball to actually hit the same spot. A harder tip allows you to shape the tip to a rounder curvature than a soft tip, thereby allowing you to hit the spot on the cue ball that you are actually trying to hit with less mental and physical adjustment. Conversely, a flatter tip makes it easier to hit the cue ball with little or no spin. That's my 'spin' on this subject. Your mileage may vary.
Click to expand...

That is my exact feeling on the subject.
 
Sheldon said:
It's a pie chart I made with my computer.
That people sometimes place too much focus on minor things, and don't focus enough on the major ones. Take miscues for example. I see many people furiously scuffing, picking, or otherwise mangling their tips, over and over again after miscues. When they should be tightening up their bridge, and smoothing out their strokes.... :wink:
The "which tip makes me play better, or spins the ball better" isn't much different. Of course we should all get the best tip for our playing style, or preferences. But it's sometimes awkward to deal with people expecting miracles from a tip change. ;)
Click to expand...

I agree completely as far as the tip not being anywhere near as important as the stroke or overall game. Which is why I didn't write a the thread about what gets more spin the tip or the stroke, I am pretty sure we all agree that it's not the equipment it's what the player does with it. I have just herd so many people talk about soft tips getting the most spin like it was a fact and then herd people say hard gets the most spin , so I was curious which really gets more. not because I think it is going to change my game knowing, but because it's one of those things I just want to know and because I have my own thoughts on the subject and wondered how they stack up to the people that actually know. I think the only difference between minor and mojor things is a person's perspective.
 
I certainly don't have answers but food for thought concerning influence of contact time and quantity of spin.

Think of what is done to spin a ping pong ball or tennis ball vs no spin, and contact times with the paddle or racket.
 
It's too bad that I posted a link to a site with all the answers, including video evidence, and there are still questions...










<~~can lead a horse to water...:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top