The only thing I found was in the conclusion section. He mentioned there was no measurable difference in deflection between different chalks. That's all I could find.
Chalk Experiment Results, with Video
- Thread starter dr_dave
- Start date
The only thing I found was in the conclusion section. He mentioned there was no measurable difference in deflection between different chalks. That's all I could find.
Perhaps the words "in my opinion" should have alerted you to the fact that my statement is not meant to be official at all.
How it is that that I can speak about this topic though is precisely because I have tackled this question in my shop. as you might guess I happen to have a lot of leather to play with and I have a lot of tips to play with.
when this question first came up on here, the assertion that chalking wears down tips I wanted to see it for myself. but no chalk I own was able to remove any leather even with much more vigorous rubbing them one uses when chalking a cue.
and your example of using leather to strop a razor should have clued you in that my point is valid because it is precisely because of the tough nature of veg tan leather that it makes an excellent material to sharpen blades. we use it to sharpen our swivel knives. with a bit of rouge though. leather strops can last for decades further disproving the idea that chalk, used properly can wear down leather tips.
perhaps you were exceedingly harsh when you were chalking.
tell you what though...I will change my mind....just get a gross of masters and a fresh tip and show us on video that you can wear the tip down. I will send you $100 if you don't get through 144 cubes before the tip is worn to the point it would need to be changed.
no need for us to argue....simply prove your side and get paid for your time.
Officious
- Merriam-Webster Online
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/officious
Merriam‑Webster
—used to describe an annoying person who tries to tell other people what to do
in a way that is not wanted or needed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
of·fi·cial
əˈfiSHəl/
adjective
1.relating to an authority or public body and its duties, actions, and responsibilities.
"the governor's official engagements"
synonyms: ceremonial, formal, solemn, ceremonious; More
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The internet is a terrible thing to waste.
Dale(google enabled vocabularist)
I don't think that's what Dr Dave meant. Its not the actual chalking the tip that wears a tip down. Its the impact of the tip/chalk on the cue ball that can potentially wear a tip. Of course I have no proof either.
Greg should thank you.. You finally defined him.... good work....
End it....
Gun to your head... you are straight in an have to draw your rock 32 inches from 3 feet away... Which chalk do you use?.... I trust mine.. how bout you?
Gun to your head... you are straight in an have to draw your rock 32 inches from 3 feet away... Which chalk do you use?.... I trust mine.. how bout you?
Its not my chalk. Master chalk is just fine. Its my stroke I trust. And I still haven't found the reference to deflection you mentioned. Except in the conclusion where he said there was no noticeable deflection between different chalks.
Thanks I was in a hurry and misread the word. See it's great when I have assistants to help me learn things.
I appreciate you taking the time to point out the proper defintion for us all and to alert me to the usage.
Now, as to the points I made. Those remain to be proven, by both Dr. Dave and Greg Cantrall. Neither of which is likely to undertake the project I bet. Still didn't stop Greg from assuming what I do or don't know.
You're more than welcome to step in and earn the $100 as well. 1 gross Master Chalk, 1 tip, video of you wearing out the tip by chalking alone.
Wear it out before the box is done and get the free $100.
Possibly, you would need to ask him to clarify it. But to me the chalk normally forms a layer and impact would drive it into the leather if it did any sort of deformation to the leather rather than would remove material from the leather.
Again, I could be wrong. I wasn't able to remove any leather but perhaps microscopically leather is removed by chalking and over time that adds up. Intuitively, given that I actually SAND leather with sandpaper and sometimes with a dremel and know how long it takes to get through a centimeter I doubt a human could wear out a tip with chalk alone in three months.
Also anyone who replaces tips by hand as I have done hundreds of times knows that you can sand for a LONG time on the sides of the tip with sandpaper that is much more abrasive than chalk and still not get the sides of the tip perfectly flush with the ferrule.
All anyone has to do is try this, take a piece of chalk and a new tip and put it on a lathe. Measure the starting tip height and put the chalk against the spinning tip with about the amount of pressure that you would use when chalking. Do that until the chalk is gone and measure the tip height. If there is a change then you have proven that chalk CAN remove leather and the debate is done.
In fact Mr. Officious above, PD Cues could have done that faster than the time it took him to erroneously assume that I didn't know the term officious.
I installed a Picone White Diamond by hand once. Never again! Wow! What a job it was! Sending shaft to someone with a lathe next time!
Dave, thank you for testing and showing us the results, as well as all the other research and videos you have done. I do have a methodology question...
Perhaps this is getting into the weeds, but I wonder about the method for applying chalk to the tip for each test (each brand) of chalk. Did you chalk using the same method for each brand, to the best of your ability? Or did you receive guidance from the manufacturers on how they recommend the chalk be applied (if they even have a recommendation)?
I am assuming it's the former, and I'm not confident the latter would make a difference. I'm also guessing that for the purposes of your test application the methodology should probably be constant. I am just curious how you did it, and any thoughts you may have on it, if any.
Thanks again.
Perhaps this is getting into the weeds, but I wonder about the method for applying chalk to the tip for each test (each brand) of chalk. Did you chalk using the same method for each brand, to the best of your ability? Or did you receive guidance from the manufacturers on how they recommend the chalk be applied (if they even have a recommendation)?
I am assuming it's the former, and I'm not confident the latter would make a difference. I'm also guessing that for the purposes of your test application the methodology should probably be constant. I am just curious how you did it, and any thoughts you may have on it, if any.
Thanks again.
On the subject of chalk wearing down a tip, it can and does indeed wear down a tip. Be it through chalking or a combination of chalking and play. I used to play moori tips, and when I was playing a lot 4-5 nights a week, I would get maybe 6-8 months out of a tip until it was down to less than a dimes thickness.
I had a kamui ss clear tip put on at the Billiard Shop/cheapcues.com nearby maybe 5-6 months ago. The tip that was on it was about half a dime on the side wall. Jim asked me how much I scuffed my tip, my reply was that I dont. The Moori that was on there had been installed by me before I left Alaska, it was shaped at the time it was installed and that was the last time any tool touched the tip.
Now, onto the kamui that was installed. It has already lost 2-3 layers through chalking and play. Zero scuffing/shaping has been done to this tip since the install. It was left tall when it was put on, and the pic below is where it is now. Again, this is 6 months or less of play, and thats only 1-2 nights a week with some weeks in there where. I didnt play at all.
Im not posting this to argue with anybody, but saying that chalk doesnt wear down a tip is false. And FWIW I chalk normally IMO, I dont the cue into the chalk. If you chalk very lightly and carefully the results might look different, dont know. But thats my experience with chalk and tips.
Chuck
I had a kamui ss clear tip put on at the Billiard Shop/cheapcues.com nearby maybe 5-6 months ago. The tip that was on it was about half a dime on the side wall. Jim asked me how much I scuffed my tip, my reply was that I dont. The Moori that was on there had been installed by me before I left Alaska, it was shaped at the time it was installed and that was the last time any tool touched the tip.
Now, onto the kamui that was installed. It has already lost 2-3 layers through chalking and play. Zero scuffing/shaping has been done to this tip since the install. It was left tall when it was put on, and the pic below is where it is now. Again, this is 6 months or less of play, and thats only 1-2 nights a week with some weeks in there where. I didnt play at all.
Im not posting this to argue with anybody, but saying that chalk doesnt wear down a tip is false. And FWIW I chalk normally IMO, I dont the cue into the chalk. If you chalk very lightly and carefully the results might look different, dont know. But thats my experience with chalk and tips.
Chuck
Attachments
So I just watched the video on tip testing and the conclusion was that tip type doesn't matter much when in fact the paths the balls took varied considerably.
I don't know how Dave can conclude that a 1/8" difference in cue ball path to the first rail and resulting several balls difference in landing point on the second rail are not significant.
This is a game where being a few millimeters off on the hit can result in a miss so why is it not significant when tips types are resulting in varying degrees of deflection?
From what I saw the harder tips produced MORE deflection and each tip was consistent from shot to shot and for each shooter's stroke style. Which would tend to bear out that a tip should be consistent from shot to shot.
But if it's important to know that different tips deflect differently the real takeaway here is that a player should have a way to test his tip out to know exactly what it will do with varying degrees of sidespin and speed. That's what I got out of it, not that the differences are not significant. I would tend to think that the tip which deflects least would be the one a player would want as theoretically it should reduce the amount of estimation the player needs.
OR
Perhaps a tip that deflects MOST gives a player more to work with.......
But to say that all tips are relatively equal is certainly not proven in this video nor for a wide range of tips. Why were the most prolific tips in the world, Le Pro and Triangle not tested?
With the layered tips, it is easy to tell whether the chalking alone wears down leather tips, since the glue rings on the surface will move outwards when the top layer get thinner.
Judging the tip wear by height only can not rule out compression by play.
I can see the leather particles being gauged by abrasives on a tip surface using a microscope.
Judging the tip wear by height only can not rule out compression by play.
I can see the leather particles being gauged by abrasives on a tip surface using a microscope.
Last edited:
I hate to disagree with you. But given that you're a leather guy and an even better one than me....I will defer to you and resolve to try my proposed lathe experiment when I am in OKC and have easier access to a lathe, assuming someone wants to put up with the resulting chalk dust.
You guys are just not comprehending what you watched. The only time deflection (squirt) was mentioned was in the conclusion (19min 35sec). And he said deflection did not vary with chalk type. And he wasn't testing different tips, he was testing different chalks. Where are you guys coming up with this? Deflection is not even part of this story. It was amount of cling/skid/kick caused by a chalk mark.
As for the second rail contact point you mentioned (JB), It was obvious to me the speed was off a little on some of the shots. That will definitely affect the kick off the first rail. Its pool 101 to me. Should be to you too.
As for the second rail contact point you mentioned (JB), It was obvious to me the speed was off a little on some of the shots. That will definitely affect the kick off the first rail. Its pool 101 to me. Should be to you too.
Last edited:
Its all good, just wear a dust mask and use a shop vac..... :thumbup:
I do want to add that comparing veg tan to the leather tips are made out of isnt a proper comparison. Vegetable tanned leather is full grain, with the top surface being the epidermal layer. That layer is tougher than the corium that lies beneath. Thats what makes it good for stuff like saddles and strops etc. Just like when its still on the cow, its the toughest part of the hide. Chrome tanned leather which are what most tips are made from are splits/corium that are softer and more easily abraded than the full grain hide that includes the epidermis.
Also, the wear that Ive witnessed is not compression. The layers clearly visible from the side show the wearing down process. When layers disappear, that isnt compression, thats loss of material.
Chuck
We are actually talking about two different videos at this point
I understood Dave's tests. I find value in them. I don't think that they tell the whole story though. But I am a firm believer in something being better than nothing if for no other reason than to provide something to analyze and discuss.
I agree with the veg tan comparison, which is why Cantrall's strop example isn't relevant.
However....while I agree about the type of tanning and even the type of leather being different I still want to see it for myself conclusively before I give up on this point
As for layers disappearing I am going to guess that it's possible that the thin layers of pigskin are more susceptible to impact wear and disintegration than would be a single layer tip. I could see that happening as essentially each strike pounds an already thin piece of skin eventually simply pulverizing it.
And FWIW I simply find the discussion fascinating and if I am wrong I will be very happy to report that I am wrong because it will mean that I know for sure something that I did not know before finding out conclusively that I am wrong.
Agree 100% here !