Cyclops balls skid more?

Do the cyclops balls skid more?

  • Yes the cyclops balls skid more

    Votes: 19 33.3%
  • No they seem to play the same as the super aramith pro balls

    Votes: 38 66.7%

  • Total voters
    57

imissedthe9

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
So after reading someone's bca Las Vegas review. They mentioned that the cyclops balls seem to skid more. This was exactly what I had noticed. These balls skid so often on slow shots when cutting. Many times it was a slight skid which caused the ball to wobble in but I could see the skid. 1 big skid I had was during my advanced singles match with 2 easy balls left. About to go up 4-2and the big skid comes out. All well I heard from players that these balls are skidding everywhere. I only wondered if it was happening to the pros in the us open events. I had heard that the skids could be from the new cue balls and the measle ball was not causing skids. For anyone who played the bcapl national championships please give your feedback on these balls skidding. I play 30+ hours a week and could tell these balls are just not right when cutting slow shots. Everything else seemed ok I guess.
 

CreeDo

Fargo Rating 597
Silver Member
Not a fair poll. It limits everything to two choices when the reality is probably more complicated.

Maybe every single table was cleaned with the same cleaning product, which caused the skids.
Maybe all the balls were cleaned with the same cleaning product, which caused the skids.
Maybe the balls weren't cleaned often enough, which caused the skids.
Maybe excessive use of hand powder and chalk caused the skids.
Maybe humidity, static, or scuff marks from diamond's pockets caused the skids.
Maybe player error caused the skids.
Maybe half the "skids" are really just players making an excuse because they missed the ball.
Maybe players believe what they want to believe and will decide a 'normal' amount of skidding,
is actually abnormal.

This poll is a bit like saying "my car takes too long to come to a stop, is it because I'm using michelins?"
 

poolfreek

Registered
Answer: Yes and no

First of all let me say Hello to all here. This is a great community for pool players. I have been reading this forum for a long time but finally registered to respond to this post.

Warning!

This will be somewhat of a rant.

Let me start by saying I am not a pro or anything close to it. However, I have played for over 25 years and have competed in the BCAPL Nationals and APA masters for several years. I am an "advanced" player in BCA and have been on a 2nd place finishing team in the MOT division in recent years. I think I am somewhat qualified to respond to the subject at hand.

My first opinion was of the colors of the balls. Change is bad for my game, and most others I assume so I did not care for it. After 20 racks of practice I never looked back on that, it was fine except the edges of the pastel colored balls are harder to see at times.

The balls seem to play very well for me. They did roll very true and hits from object ball to other object balls were solid and I did not see any skids in that respect.

Saying that, I could not possibly hate a inanimate object more than I hate the Cyclop cue ball!

The eyeball logo on the ball is actually raised and you can feel it with your fingers sticking out. This ball does not play consistent at all. It also plays nothing like a red dot, red circle or an aramith ball. There is a shadow on both sides of the logo under certain angles that is distracting as well. I had 2 major skids of the three days of competition and they cost me those games. Also this cue ball throws the object balls a lot in my opinion, much more than I am used to even on 9 ft table with high quality ball sets.

I really never got the feel of it. I had a three ball out, with ball in hand and I felt out of control just trying to stay in line. I was finally starting to break and run racks on the third day after playing and practicing constantly from the time I arrived.

Now I will tell you that it got in my head and it may be fine after getting used to it but I am not happy with the BCA in it's decision to use it. For those of you who don't know, Diamond never wanted to make a coin table that used a different weight ball. They designed the "Smart Table" around the red circle cue ball because of it's translucency. An optic sensor energizes a solenoid to kick the cue ball to return it to the other end of the table. The cyclop ball works the same but definitely works the same way but to me is not the same. More shadows and a different look to the material suggests to me that the makeup of this cue ball is different and that, in my (one man's) opinion is what makes it play different.

They had a survey to fill out and return in our team packet on what we thought about the venue, equipment, etc. I would be very curious about the results. I did see them for sale online with a review that stated that they were used in the BCAPL and that they got "rave reviews", but i did my own polling as we played and with minor exceptions EVERYONE hated this cue ball. However, the few exceptions came from two players better than myself. One a master rated player and the other was a master player in his younger years. So how much is that the ball, me, or the difference in their ability to adapt.

All in all, I think bringing one more variable to the BCAPL nationals was not cool. I know everyone has to deal with the same conditions but if you are like me it is already a huge adjustment to go and play on Diamonds after playing on mostly junk bar tables all year. Are local hangouts actually have very decent tables with Simonis cloth and they are done well but it is no comparison to the Diamonds in Vegas.

So was it me or the ball?

Your opinions welcome.
 
Last edited:

thebaby

Jack of all trades
Silver Member
Not Broken, Why Change.

I find myself thinking when I first saw the change in balls at the BCA NATIONALS. Could this be the problem with the sport. If you took a vote right now, which balls should be the industry standard, I'm willing to bet that these set of balls would not get a lot of votes. And the aramith balls would be a overwhelming winner. We as a industry need to start making good decisions that unite the sport, and not always thinking about that it might work, and it might not. I find myself wondering if a lot of people in this industry are not thinking clearly. What was the pro's reaction to these balls ?, or how about the amateur's ? . Cuz we all know they are the 99.9 percent of the consumers who make up the industry.
 

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
The feeling among many was that the problem was the cue ball alone, which collected far too much chalk. Of course, this means that on every strike of the cue ball, there is an issue, and, of course, the chalk gradually gets on the object balls, too.
 
I was listening to the sales representative from the company that makes the ball and a representative of Diamond and these ball will also be manufacture in the traditional colors. Also, I thought they used the red circle cue ball and not the cyclop cueball for the tournament. Personally I like the new colors. I think it just takes some getting used to.
 

mooseman

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I know the cyclops CB did skid on me on one critical draw shot. Other than that everything else seemed ok.
 

8ballEinstein

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I was warned about these balls skidding when I got to the venue. But, while playing with them for a few days I didn't experience any skidding. Of course, slow cut shots rarely came up during my play. Still, I didn't witness any skidding by anyone else either.

All this talk of skidding is making me think there was some other factor in play.
 

CreeDo

Fargo Rating 597
Silver Member
There is a shadow on both sides of the logo under certain angles that is distracting as well.

Come on now. Not trying to be a jerk but this seems a bit weak. I'm gonna have a hard time keeping
a straight face if my opponent ever tries to say "the logo shadows made me miss".

Didn't they use measles ball instead of the cyclop cue ball, for all the USO events?
Was that decided beforehand or did other players also have problems with the cyclop CB?
 

Diamond69

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Come on now. Not trying to be a jerk but this seems a bit weak. I'm gonna have a hard time keeping
a straight face if my opponent ever tries to say "the logo shadows made me miss".

Didn't they use measles ball instead of the cyclop cue ball, for all the USO events?
Was that decided beforehand or did other players also have problems with the cyclop CB?

CreeDo,
Interesting you got that far before calling BS. I caught the line before that one...

The eyeball logo on the ball is actually raised and you can feel it with your fingers sticking out.

Wouldn't this suggest that the cueball wasn't completely spherical? I didn't play with them as I wasn't in Vegas. But I find that statement extremely hard to believe.
 

poolfreek

Registered
As I said, for me the balls played well but the cue ball was my trouble.

Just like if I practice with a weighted "bar" ball and then hit one break with a red circle I usually lose the lighter red circle off the table on the second ball break. Just the same, if I practice with an aramith and switch to a red circle, it takes an adjustment. It usually only takes a few racks for me to make the adjustment between those but the Cyclop ball does not play like anything else and I never fully got comfortable with it.

The cue balls all play differently, even ones of the same weight. Is has a lot to do with the what they are made of. These balls are made up of a higher content of phenolic resin than any produced before them and that makes all the difference in the way it reacts.
 

poolfreek

Registered
Come on now. Not trying to be a jerk but this seems a bit weak. I'm gonna have a hard time keeping
a straight face if my opponent ever tries to say "the logo shadows made me miss".

Didn't they use measles ball instead of the cyclop cue ball, for all the USO events?
Was that decided beforehand or did other players also have problems with the cyclop CB?
I said it was a distraction, I never said the shadows made me miss.

I also made it clear that this cue ball got in my head.
 

poolfreek

Registered
Calling BS on my post

Re: Calling BS on my post

As with most message boards there are always people that will look only for fault in what you post and not honestly analyze the content and give just an opinion of what they think.

As a fellow pool player I was truly looking for what you all though about the subject and to bring a collective of information to the table, not to get in a pissing match, but thank you for the warm welcome to the community.

You know I could say something at this point like, "maybe your not at a level in your game where you realize there is even a difference in cue balls".

Oh, wait, maybe I did just say that.
 

Okie

Seeker
Silver Member
CreeDo,
Interesting you got that far before calling BS. I caught the line before that one...

The eyeball logo on the ball is actually raised and you can feel it with your fingers sticking out.

Wouldn't this suggest that the cueball wasn't completely spherical? I didn't play with them as I wasn't in Vegas. But I find that statement extremely hard to believe.

When I read this before going to Vegas I thought it was BS too. But there was a very slight "bump" where the logo is. I made the determination that while it was there it was inconsequential. It is very slight.

Who knows...maybe some of the skidding happens when the logo hits the object ball instead of another part of the cue ball surface. I doubt it but who knows.... lol

Ken
 

filluptieu

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I think there should be a third choice that says "No they do not skid more and they play better then aramiths"
 

Ponytail

...it's about consistency
Silver Member
I don't think they "skidded" more, but they did seem to react a bit different. And in less than a weeks worth of play, you could see on both cue balls and numbered balls abrasions on them.

When brand new, as in the first day with them, they played pretty well. By the middle of teams, they started playing differently. Some of the skidding could be from the abrasion marks I was seeing.

Anyone weigh a ball to see how much if any difference they were to Aramiths? Just curious.
 

bwally

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I was at the BCAPL for the entire event, 12 days. During that time I only encountered 1minor skid. Although I am not a big fan of the colours I purhased a set for personal use. I took them over to a friends house who has multiple tables. We played the Cyclop balls on one table and the Aramith balls on the other. Not one skid from the Cyclop balls all nite and at least one per game from the Aramith. Also IMO you get a truer and finer cut from the Cyclop balls as well. So again, IMO performance wise the Cyclop balls are superior.
 

CreeDo

Fargo Rating 597
Silver Member
Re: Calling BS on my post

As with most message boards there are always people that will look only for fault in what you post and not honestly analyze the content and give just an opinion of what they think.

That's what I did, honestly analyzed the content and gave you my opinion.
You just didn't like the opinion :)

I wasn't looking to bust your balls, it's just that bit about the shadow of the logo just seemed a bit over the top.
Like maybe you were determined to find fault in the cyclop cue ball, where no fault existed.
I didn't really find anything objectionable about the rest of what you wrote, so I didn't mention it.

But actually, there is one other thing I gotta get off my chest.
I think a lot of players have a giant misconception about skid, and throw. Not specifically directed at you,
but at anyone reading about these skids.

To the best of my knowledge throw has nothing to do with the composition of the balls.
Doesn't matter if it's made of phenolic resin, ivory, stone, or steel.

Throw is a result of the friction on the ball surface. This is how Dr. Dave defines it in his articles:
Throw is the change in object ball (OB) direction due to sliding friction forces between the cue
ball (CB) and OB during impact.


So when people are talking about "This ball throws more than the other", the only way that happens
is if the ball is 'stickier' or has a rougher surface than the others. It's NOT because cyclop uses
a slightly different phenolic resin formula than aramith. If it's happening at all (and not just confirmation bias),
the first place to look is at the surface of the ball, look at the chalk (both hand chalk and cue chalk),
look at the cleaner used on the balls, look at the cleaner used on the tables. It's nothing to do
with whatever's under the surface of the ball.

As a fellow pool player I was truly looking for what you all though about the subject and to bring a collective of information to the table, not to get in a pissing match, but thank you for the warm welcome to the community.

Welcome to the community, sorry your first exchange with people on here sucked.
I'd like to say it gets better but it pretty much doesn't. Almost anything anyone says on here
can and will be disagreed with, no matter how carefully researched or how articulate or polite you are.
You need thick skin to post here.
 
Top