PDA

View Full Version : Gimmicks?


Monstermash
05-09-2009, 07:47 AM
I know this thread is going to elicit a lot of response but I'm willing to take the risk. So feel free to flame me but keep in mind it's just my opinion.

Why is everyone so hung up on all these gimmick shafts? I mean Predator this and OB that. And forget about the Meucci red/black dot shafts. What a joke that is. Come one guys, you need to recognise a sales gimmick when you see one. If there was really something to it you would see the top cue makers in the world using them. Maybe I'm way off base here but I have yet to see a Southwest, Schick, Bender, etc. come with a radially laminated shaft.

I'm sorry if I offended any of you with my comments but I'd like to hear what others think.

nancewayne
05-09-2009, 08:11 AM
There is a reason a large % of professional pool players use a low deflection shaft....it performs better! You can get more (english) with less (effort). You can get a more solid hit on the cue ball (don't have to go out as far on the cue ball with the tip) to get the same result as using a regular shaft. Plus IF you have to "juice" the cue ball severely, you can!

travis92
05-09-2009, 08:20 AM
I wouldn't say they are gimmicks, but I think they are drawn up to be more than they really are. People just need to find a cue that feels good to THEM and say f-it to everything else. Spend 200 dollars on table time not a cue, that will make you better.

Vinnie
05-09-2009, 08:22 AM
I've seen several custom cue makers selling their own laminated shaft designs.

One thing that I did notice is that the width of the shaft and the tip make a huge difference. I have an OB-1 and I love it. It is very consistent and has low deflection. The width is probably down to 12.5mm by now. I've been using it since 2006. Recently I purchased a new custom cue and the shaft is currently at 13.2mm because my cue maker wants to give it time before taking it down more. I noticed that the wider tipped shaft deflects more than my OB-1 and even more than the other regular shafts that I have that are just under 13mm. So I guess that when it comes to deflection, there is a little bit of hype going on out there, BUT, when it comes to feel and consistency, I think that the special shafts do stand out.

mosconiac
05-09-2009, 08:48 AM
Same discussion, different day.

The level of dogged ignorance that exists in pool is staggering. There are some shining examples in this very thread.

Collectors will spout off that their "high end", low volume cue is without parallel (such and such's cues hit a ton!)...yet brag later that the same cue has never been chalked!

These people faithfully ignore empirical evidence that proves that a lowly LD shaft outperforms their cue of choice. I guess it justifies their cash outlay.

I have a simple experiment that anyone can perform on their own to vividly demonstrate relative performance of their equipment. The following cuetable will give you the setup that you can replicate on your table of choice.

The cuetable is failing to show properly, so here's a screenshot.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v407/mosconiac/Pool%20Stuff/LDshaftcuetable.jpg

BTW, here's a post I made over a year ago that still illustrates my opinion on the subject of golf versus pool.

mosconiac
05-09-2009, 08:56 AM
...and another from a year before that.

I love the guys that hate on the low squirt shafts. Those same guys existed in the dark ages of golf. They were devotees to their trusty 'hickories'...solid wood drivers, center-weighted spoon irons, & brass blade putters with hickory shafts...while everyone else was outperforming them with metal shafts & cavity back irons. Time will slowly erase that mentality from pool as it did with golf.

http://www.golfforallages.com/images/asstdclubs1.jpg
http://www.golfforallages.com/images/bagger_vance.jpg

Monstermash
05-09-2009, 09:07 AM
There is a reason a large % of professional pool players use a low deflection shaft....it performs better! You can get more (english) with less (effort). You can get a more solid hit on the cue ball (don't have to go out as far on the cue ball with the tip) to get the same result as using a regular shaft. Plus IF you have to "juice" the cue ball severely, you can!

Pros play with whatever product sponsor PAY them to play with. Earl Strickland used a Cuetec at one point. Do you think thats a better cue because a pro used it?

Dead Crab
05-09-2009, 09:19 AM
The problem with the experiment above, is that it does not consider the pivot point, which is critical to actual performance.

I don't see how a low deflection shaft provides a superior alternative to someone using a standard shaft, bridging at the pivot point, and using backhand english.

Perhaps someone can explain how.

Monstermash
05-09-2009, 09:19 AM
...and another from a year before that.

This is just what I mean about gimmicks. "Lower squirt"? Lol. That all started as a marketing gimmick by Predator years ago.

With golf it's not that same thing. If you believe it is then consider this. The materials being used in golf clubs are considerably different than what was used even a few years ago. Through research they have found titinium and other materials to be far superior than that of wood for drivers and fairway clubs. Where with cues, it's wood. The best cues/shafts will almost always certainly be made of wood. Many have tried to use different materials and failed. Cuetec again is a good example with fiberglass and all those crappy cues that tried to use aluminum. Lol.

trustyrusty
05-09-2009, 09:20 AM
Pros play with whatever product sponsor PAY them to play with. Earl Strickland used a Cuetec at one point. Do you think thats a better cue because a pro used it?


folks have used that argument in golf for years....Pros DO NOT play with stock "of the shelf" stuff period. If I could go to the Cuetec factory and pick from thousands of cues, and/or have them make one EXACTLY the way I want it to play/feel....I'd play one too. There's a reason if you ever see pro issued "production" stuff for sale on eBay it costs more than something you could pick up at Dick's Sporting Goods (even if they say they are the exact same model - driver, putter, irons, etc.). I'm sure the same holds true in pool. Pros may get paid for playing a certain "brand/cuemaker", but their options within that brand are not the same as yours and mine in most cases.

BTW, I could not and would not try playing Tigers clubs right out of his bag - we play a different game, but he could surely still shoot under par with my bag.....that's a whole 'nother post though.

It's their LIVELYHOOD, they need to win to get endorsements (including from their equipment manufacturer) - they won't play something that'll jeopardize that. Cuz in most cases the $$$ they get for playing said equipment isn't what pays the bills...winning is.

Cameron Smith
05-09-2009, 09:26 AM
I know this thread is going to elicit a lot of response but I'm willing to take the risk. So feel free to flame me but keep in mind it's just my opinion.

Why is everyone so hung up on all these gimmick shafts? I mean Predator this and OB that. And forget about the Meucci red/black dot shafts. What a joke that is. Come one guys, you need to recognise a sales gimmick when you see one. If there was really something to it you would see the top cue makers in the world using them. Maybe I'm way off base here but I have yet to see a Southwest, Schick, Bender, etc. come with a radially laminated shaft.

I'm sorry if I offended any of you with my comments but I'd like to hear what others think.

What is it that you feel is gimmicky about LD shafts? Are you saying that they do not work at all, and in fact deflect the same amount as your other shafts? Please elaborate.

Patrick Johnson
05-09-2009, 09:26 AM
There is a reason a large % of professional pool players use a low deflection shaft....it performs better! You can get more (english) with less (effort). You can get a more solid hit on the cue ball (don't have to go out as far on the cue ball with the tip) to get the same result as using a regular shaft. Plus IF you have to "juice" the cue ball severely, you can!

Low squirt shafts produce less squirt. That's all. They don't produce more spin.

But less squirt is a significant performance advantage.

pj
chgo

Monstermash
05-09-2009, 09:32 AM
Same discussion, different day.

This experiment (if you want to call it that) is not accurate. It doesn't take into effect the human element. There is no way possible to replicate the exact same stroke consistantly enough to provide conclusive results. Can you come close? Well maybe, if your an "A" player or someone with amazing talent. There is no way for this experiment to be performed by the average player with consistant results.


You also fail to mention the tip on the cue and what the rest of the cue is made with. What material is the ferrule? What kind of tip on each of the cues?

You could get a little closer to accurate results if you used the same butt section and switched shafts providing they had a ferrule of the same material and the tip was the same. But even then it's not conclusive because tips are made of leather and the consistancy cannot be verified either. And don't forget to take into account the diameter of the shaft and the taper. Are they exactly the same? I didn't think so.

Furthermore, becasue wood grows natural the consistency of each shaft can be called into question. As proof just look at all the different weights of shafts. They may have the same diameter and the same taper but the weight can vary over 1/2 oz. between each shaft.

Patrick Johnson
05-09-2009, 09:34 AM
"Lower squirt"? Lol.

I think you should try one of those new Luddite cues.

pj
chgo

Monstermash
05-09-2009, 09:42 AM
What is it that you feel is gimmicky about LD shafts? Are you saying that they do not work at all, and in fact deflect the same amount as your other shafts? Please elaborate.


Please see my last post.


Also, I didn't say they didn't have some advantages, just not what the exaggerated claims are. Forget anything to do with deflection in regrds to these shafts. The only benifit I can see is that they may have a better resistance to warping because of their construction. However, with that being said, if the wood is properly dried and aged you shouldn't have a problem with warpage.

I'm curious if you know why these shafts came about in the first place. The truth is that many production cue makers had a problem with shaft warping because they didn't have time to wait for a shaft to properly age and/or they didn't want to invest extra money in better shaft wood. The demand was too much for them and the laminated shaft was initially developed so that they could cut the shafts quicker and speed up production time.
If you listen to any good custom cue maker they will tell you they spend a great deal of time picking out shaft wood. A lot of what they buy gets thrown away because it isn't good enough for them.

Patrick Johnson
05-09-2009, 09:43 AM
The problem with the experiment above, is that it does not consider the pivot point, which is critical to actual performance.

The experiment shows what happens if you don't pivot, which is what it's meant to show. Showing that also shows where the pivot point is.

The pivot point isn't critical to the shaft's performance; it's simply a measurement of its performance. It can be critical to your own performance with that shaft if you use backhand english, but otherwise it isn't critical. What it measures (squirt) is always critical to your performance, of course.

pj
chgo

Patrick Johnson
05-09-2009, 09:45 AM
Forget anything to do with deflection in regrds to these shafts. The only benifit I can see is that they may have a better resistance to warping because of their construction.

The important phrase there is "that I can see".

pj
chgo

Patrick Johnson
05-09-2009, 09:46 AM
...the laminated shaft was initially developed so that they could cut the shafts quicker and speed up production time.

Lamination has nothing to do with low squirt. You're mixing apples and oranges.

pj
chgo

Monstermash
05-09-2009, 10:00 AM
Lamination has nothing to do with low squirt. You're mixing apples and oranges.

pj
chgo


I must be confused then. I thought that was the whole premiss behind the Predator marketing.

Monstermash
05-09-2009, 10:03 AM
Low squirt shafts produce less squirt. That's all. They don't produce more spin.

But less squirt is a significant performance advantage.

pj
chgo

Just curious, what exactly defines a "low squirt shaft"? Is it taper? Construction method? Denseness of the wood?

Patrick Johnson
05-09-2009, 10:10 AM
I must be confused then. I thought that was the whole premiss behind the Predator marketing.

Are you talking about marketing or performance? You seem to be using them interchangeably, but of course they're not the same thing.

Predator markets lamination for its "radially consistency". Laminated shafts may be slightly more radially consistent, but that doesn't seem to matter much to a shaft's performance, so that's mostly gimmick.

Predator does other things (primarily hollowing the shaft) to reduce squirt, and they work for that purpose. Reduced squirt is not a gimmick, although it matters more to some than to others.

pj
chgo

Patrick Johnson
05-09-2009, 10:13 AM
Just curious, what exactly defines a "low squirt shaft"? Is it taper? Construction method? Denseness of the wood?

Squirt is reduced by reducing the mass (amount or density of material) near the tip. That's usually done by hollowing the shaft (Predator), reducing its width or reducing the size of the ferrule (which is denser than the wood).

This is discussed over and over again here. You can learn a lot about it by searching the forum archives.

pj
chgo

CreeDo
05-09-2009, 11:57 AM
I am a very skeptical person about sticks too. I shot with a house cue for years and I probably will never spend 200 bucks or more on a cue.

With that being said, I tried a low deflection predator shaft and noticed the difference immediately. It wasn't my imagination and it wasn't that I fell for their marketing hype. The shaft is different and the result when you hit the cueball with sidespin is different. It's not a tiny subtle difference either, it's enough that you might miss the entire ball on a long shot with loads of sidespin.

With the low deflection shaft, the cue ball pretty much went exactly where I aimed despite all the english I put on it. I aimed the shot like a centerball hit. If you've played for a while without this kind of shaft, then it might be labelled a matter of preference. Do you want to make the shot by compensating an inch or two in your aiming line, or do you want to make it by just aiming where you want the cue ball to go? Right now I can do either about equally well because of years of experience accounting for deflection. But if I could start again and relearn pool from scratch I'd want to do it with an LD shaft.

Pushout
05-09-2009, 12:05 PM
With the low deflection shaft, the cue ball pretty much went exactly where I aimed despite all the english I put on it.

My experience was the exact opposite. I was very lucky to ever get the cue ball where I wanted it, no matter how I hit it.

Cornerman
05-09-2009, 12:45 PM
I must be confused then. I thought that was the whole premiss behind the Predator marketing.
If this is what you're basing you're entire thread, then I suggest that you either graciously bow out or read/ask what makes them different.

Fred

CreeDo
05-09-2009, 04:16 PM
My experience was the exact opposite. I was very lucky to ever get the cue ball where I wanted it, no matter how I hit it.

Really? Weird, which shaft was it?
Do you think it was definitely shoving the ball somewhere different? Or were you still compensating somewhere in the back of your head for deflection... so even though you think you're aiming straight at the ball you're actually cutting a little more or less?

Pushout
05-09-2009, 05:09 PM
Really? Weird, which shaft was it?
Do you think it was definitely shoving the ball somewhere different? Or were you still compensating somewhere in the back of your head for deflection... so even though you think you're aiming straight at the ball you're actually cutting a little more or less?

314. Didn't seem to matter how I compensated, I simply could not run balls with it. Center ball or with english. I'd either miss or make the ball and not come close to where I wanted to be. It was a real disappointment. I have to admit I'd be willing to try one again, but due to the financial situation, it won't be for a while, I'm afraid.
I've posted before, elsewhere in other threads, that I have since played with a Meucci Black Dot and had no problems. The Black Dot didn't perform any better than my custom cues, of which I had three or four at the time, so I sold it. But I played better with it than the predator.
Note: I do play with smaller shafts than some, 12 1/2 mm. I wasn't aware of it being any easier to apply english.

Rich93
05-09-2009, 05:13 PM
To the OP: I admire your willingness to stick your neck out.

My advice is to read Professor Kingsfield's posts, er, I mean Patrick Johnson's posts, and you'll learn something. One of these days I expect PJ will say "Here's a dime. Call your mother. Tell her you will never become a real pool player." [This ancient reference is for my fellow old-timers who remember John Houseman and that 1973 movie].

There are a lot of marketing gimmicks when it comes to cues. Check out the big colorful spreads in Billiards Digest to see them. Low deflection shafts, however, are not one of them. They do lower cue ball squirt.

mtdsports
05-09-2009, 05:34 PM
i think one thing to keep in mind about the LD shafts is the fact that a lot of these pro's will be playing with damn near a different cue at every tournament. one thing that these shafts can provide to them is the consistency required to keep playing top level even with a new cue. or maybe i'm just way off point here.

kaznj
05-09-2009, 06:45 PM
advances in technology. new machinery, new ways to reduce deflection, these are not gimmicks.

qbilder
05-09-2009, 11:20 PM
What happens when the shaft becomes an immovable object, say in the hands of a tense player who keeps a tight closed bridge & compact stroke? Has there been any unbiased & very thorough tests? I understand the physics behind deflection. It's a science but not a rocket science. They certainly favor the long fluid stroking players. But for the guys who play a tight, compact game, they seem to serve little to no advantage. Either the cueball deflects or the end of the shaft deflects. It's simple. In a perfect world with no variables, we can assume the object with the least mass will deflect the most. This is where the science of the LD shafts comes into play. But somewhere in the grey mist is the player. Where he bridges & how tight his bridge is & how stiff his shaft is will have at least as much influence on deflection as tip end mass. Without this very real & evident variable being included in the marketing propoganda that appears as if it's concrete science, then it leans toward the LD shafts being gimmic. I tense, compact stroking player could most definitely try one & then feel dissapointed & think it was a gimmic.

That said, I don't beieve the LD shafts are gimmic. They do indeed lower deflection in "some" players' game by having lower tip end mass than the typical shaft. There's lots of engineering & technology involved in the splicing. For certain, the shafts will be warp resistant & have a higher degree of uniformity in the 360 degree flexural strength. So if nothing else, they don't warp often & they are pretty dang consistent 360 degrees. The radial consistency alone can certainly enhance a player's game, even if only minute.

pwd72s
05-10-2009, 12:04 AM
I wouldn't say they are gimmicks, but I think they are drawn up to be more than they really are. People just need to find a cue that feels good to THEM and say f-it to everything else. Spend 200 dollars on table time not a cue, that will make you better.

Extremely well said! I too, searched for that magic cue...the one that never missed. It's funny how I recently discovered that the more I shoot, the more I concentrate, the less I miss. Too bad I'm not all that good, but really it's about table time. The more time I spend, the more likely I am to see improvement.

Monstermash
05-10-2009, 09:13 AM
If this is what you're basing you're entire thread, then I suggest that you either graciously bow out or read/ask what makes them different.

Fred

No offence to you but I do know what makes them "different". I have had many discussions with custom cue makers in the past with one just yesterday just as a refresher.

The funny thing is that the Predator shaft has a hole drilled in the end and a light weight ferrule and thats the big technological breakthrough. Lol.

It's all about physics. The "lighter" of the two objects will deflect when they collide thus reducing deflection. In theory that is what the Predator shaft is designed to do. It would have been completely the opposite without the light weight ferrule and the hole drilled in the end as the lamination would have made the shaft stiffer thus increasing deflection. Now that have this "fat shaft" in addition to their other products. So how exactly is that supposed to work? Do they drill an ever bigger hole?

In the interest of privacy I won't say which cue maker said it but here is a quote from our conversation....

"if you want to make your own “low deflection shafts” drill the hole and use a very short thin wall ferrule on a thinner diameter shaft."

WOW! What a huge technological break through! And to think you can get all that for around $200. ROFL.

CreeDo
05-10-2009, 09:18 AM
qbilder: I might be wrong on how the physics works here... but I think the player's grip and even his bridge length doesn't have anything to do with it... at the moment of impact the tip his the ball with a certain amount of force, and the shaft then bends or doesn't bend.

What happened before that (like how much his closed bridge chafed while he brought the stick forward, or he uses a very short bridge like Hopkins) doesn't matter. If there's enough force to make the ball and get shape then the stick will 'deflect' the same no matter what bridge the player chose to use. You can't put a death grip on the stick and somehow stop the shaft from bending, stifling all vibration and preventing the shot from having reduced squirt. The shaft has to be 'free' and not 'gripped' when stroked fully enough to do that 3-rail-position shot or whatever it is you're shooting.

So, I'd say the low deflection properties are there no matter kind of funky compact bridge and stroke you use. I'll admit I may not fully understand it, that's just what intuition is telling me.

And monstermash, you look down on this innovation because it seems so simple, but the fact is a LOT of major innovations are so incredibly simple when you boil them down... little improvements in everything from airplanes to automobiles to atom bombs. Just because it's simple doesn't mean it doesn't work or it's easy to implement. If it's that easy, please go a get a makita drill and a house stick and make your own low deflection shaft. Let me know how that works out for you.

Cornerman
05-10-2009, 10:52 AM
No offence to you but I do know what makes them "different". I have had many discussions with custom cue makers in the past with one just yesterday just as a refresher.

The funny thing is that the Predator shaft has a hole drilled in the end and a light weight ferrule and thats the big technological breakthrough. Lol.

It's all about physics. The "lighter" of the two objects will deflect when they collide thus reducing deflection. In theory that is what the Predator shaft is designed to do. It would have been completely the opposite without the light weight ferrule and the hole drilled in the end as the lamination would have made the shaft stiffer thus increasing deflection. Now that have this "fat shaft" in addition to their other products. So how exactly is that supposed to work? Do they drill an ever bigger hole?

In the interest of privacy I won't say which cue maker said it but here is a quote from our conversation....

"if you want to make your own “low deflection shafts” drill the hole and use a very short thin wall ferrule on a thinner diameter shaft."

WOW! What a huge technological break through! And to think you can get all that for around $200. ROFL.
I can't seem to see any focus of your post.

First you were discussing lamination as the big secret (which the rest of us already knew it is not). Now you are discussing the hole, as if you knew it all along, but then bring back the lamination (which tells me you really don't know what's going on). If you don't know, that's cool.This is a good place to find out.

You told us to flame away. I'm not flaming away. I'm telling you that you could use more information. You're either not getting all the information from your cuemaker friend, or you're not understanding him. We can help, if you're really asking for information. If you're not really asking for information, then that's too bad.

Then you mock the products by saying that you can get that all for $200 (and then you roll on the floor laughing).

How much do you think a good shaft costs? Considering the additional work on the shaft, is $200 too high in your world? Some cuemakers are selling their shafts for that much or higher with nothing more than their attention to quality.

And if you wanted find out how to make your own low deflection shaft, we've known here on this board so long that many cuemakers found out from reading these boards. That's right. If it wasn't for discussion on these boards, 99% of all cuemaker wouldn't have a clue as to what make "lower squirt."

Fred <~~~ doesn't think "talking to a cuemaker" means anything more than getting an opinion

Nostroke
05-10-2009, 11:02 AM
I know this thread is going to elicit a lot of response but I'm willing to take the risk. So feel free to flame me but keep in mind it's just my opinion.

Why is everyone so hung up on all these gimmick shafts? I mean Predator this and OB that. And forget about the Meucci red/black dot shafts. What a joke that is. Come one guys, you need to recognise a sales gimmick when you see one. If there was really something to it you would see the top cue makers in the world using them. Maybe I'm way off base here but I have yet to see a Southwest, Schick, Bender, etc. come with a radially laminated shaft.

I'm sorry if I offended any of you with my comments but I'd like to hear what others think.

Gimmick shafts? says who?

What evidence have you found that these shafts do not perform as well as a standard shaft?

Cornerman
05-10-2009, 11:09 AM
What happens when the shaft becomes an immovable object, say in the hands of a tense player who keeps a tight closed bridge & compact stroke? Has there been any unbiased & very thorough tests? .

Yes, there have been. The Jacksonville Project showed that if the cuestick was held rigidly by a robot, then lower mass at the end of the shaft didn't matter. I could go through the physics, but that's been done. Key terms are false increased contact time and speed of transverse wave.

What they did theorize was that the human hand and its flesh could never approach the rigidity of a robot hand. So, they used a buffer of bubble wrap between the stick and robot to isolate the cuestick.

That being said, has there been a test that truly tried to mimic a rigidly held human hand. I don't believe so. It would be an interesting thing if we could get that human gel stuff that the Myth Busters use to mimic human flesh. My guess is the same as those that did the Jacksonville Project: that the human hand's flesh can't be considered rigid ever, regardless of how tight it's being used. It will act as a spring.

But, that's just theory.

Fred

Patrick Johnson
05-10-2009, 12:01 PM
the lamination would have made the shaft stiffer thus increasing deflection

A stiffer shaft doesn't appreciably increase deflection. This stuff has all been tested extensively.

"if you want to make your own “low deflection shafts” drill the hole and use a very short thin wall ferrule on a thinner diameter shaft."

WOW! What a huge technological break through! And to think you can get all that for around $200. ROFL.

And yet yesterday you knew nothing about it.

pj
chgo

Dead Crab
05-10-2009, 12:08 PM
Why are these LD shafts sold without instruction books?

What is the optimal way to use them?

and.....(I ask once again)...how is an LD shaft superior to someone using a standard shaft, bridging at the pivot point, and using backhand english?

Provide a good answer for the last question, and I'll buy one of them.

Cornerman
05-10-2009, 02:09 PM
Why are these LD shafts sold without instruction books?

What is the optimal way to use them?

and.....(I ask once again)...how is an LD shaft superior to someone using a standard shaft, bridging at the pivot point, and using backhand english?

Provide a good answer for the last question, and I'll buy one of them.

IMO, they're not superior.

However, for those that haven't gotten a hold of a pivoting or systematic approach to adjusting for squirt, a low deflection shaft might be perfect for them. Also, for those starting out, they might get to a point of "using english" at a quicker pace than with a normal shaft. I'm not saying this is desirable or not desirable. It just is.

All that being said, there used to be lot of professionals that used a low squirt shaft that have returned to a normal shaft. However, there are also a lot of professionals who have stayed with the lower squirt shafts and swear by them today.

To each their own... different strokes for different folks... whatever floats your boat... etc.

Fred

Patrick Johnson
05-10-2009, 04:12 PM
...how is an LD shaft superior to someone using a standard shaft, bridging at the pivot point, and using backhand english?

Why does one have to be generally superior? They can each be advantageous to the users who choose them.

Backhand english isn't an exact science. Rarely is a shaft's pivot point exactly at its user's bridge distance (there is no "standard" shaft in this respect), and because of swerve the "effective pivot point" is different for almost every shot anyway. This means that the player is constantly estimating the amount of "adjustment" needed to make backhand english work, pretty much just like a non-backhand english user does.

Backhand english gives the higher-squirt shaft user a starting point that's closer to accurate, and so does a lower-squirt shaft compared to a higher-squirt shaft. I don't think it can be said which is objectively better or worse - it's probably, as Fred says, a matter of personal abilities and preference.

pj
chgo

Eruditass
05-10-2009, 04:17 PM
Just curious, what exactly defines a "low squirt shaft"? Is it taper? Construction method? Denseness of the wood?

please do some more research before bashing something. and then once you learn about it don't pretend you're a guru to the people that informed you.

JoeyA
05-10-2009, 06:10 PM
Low squirt shafts produce less squirt. That's all. They don't produce more spin.

But less squirt is a significant performance advantage.

pj
chgo


I've been thinking about low squirt shafts producing more spin and I think MAYBE, that since the shafts produce less squirt, the cue ball simply seems to swerve (curve) more when side spin is applied.

The lower amounts of squirt with a low squirt shaft(which sends the cue ball in opposite direction as swerve does) allows the cue ball to effectively curve more than a standard maple shaft (high deflection shaft) since there is less squirt to "cancel" out the swerve and maybe this is where people (including myself) have gotten the impression that some low squirt cues/shafts produce more spin.

I'm curious as to what you and others think about my dangerous thoughts.

JoeyA

Patrick Johnson
05-10-2009, 10:27 PM
I've been thinking about low squirt shafts producing more spin and I think MAYBE, that since the shafts produce less squirt, the cue ball simply seems to swerve (curve) more when side spin is applied.

The lower amounts of squirt with a low squirt shaft(which sends the cue ball in opposite direction as swerve does) allows the cue ball to effectively curve more than a standard maple shaft (high deflection shaft) since there is less squirt to "cancel" out the swerve and maybe this is where people (including myself) have gotten the impression that some low squirt cues/shafts produce more spin.

I'm curious as to what you and others think about my dangerous thoughts.

JoeyA

I can see how it could make it seem that way.

There's also a reasonable theory that squirt actually reduces spin because the direction of squirt force is opposite to the direction of spin. But I don't think anybody believes it's enough of an effect to be noticable.

pj
chgo

thefonz
05-10-2009, 11:49 PM
i had been a LD shaft user for almost 16 years (started playing with them-ps. predator weren't the first ones) and have recently gone back to regular shafted cues. i think that you just have a better sense of feel and control with them. if you have a great stroke it doesn't matter what you play with, you can get used to it. i think a lot of mainstream LD shafts have more of a benefit to the beginner/intermediate player than the advanced amature or professional.

just my two cents worth anyways...

Monstermash
05-11-2009, 08:07 AM
Wow, you guys are tough. I knew that I was going to get some backlash but holy crap! Lol.

Here's the thing. When I started this thread I stated this was my opinion. And it still is. I think it's completely stupid that they charge $200 or more for a shaft because they drill a hole in the end. To me it's a gimmick. Do I claim to be the formost expert? No, I never claimed that. But I am a very good player and I know what I like and what I don't like. I've played with a Predator shaft on many occasions and to me they are a complete waste of money, period.

I know you're all experts ;), so there's no way I'm going to change your opinion but IMO you've all just fallen into the marketing hype of these shafts. And really, thats what it is. And the problem is they have done a good job at it. So good that they have you all convinced that this is the end all be all and there is nothing else. I don't say this because I think I'm a better player or I know more, but the truth is most players will look for anything that they think will give them an advantage whether it's perceived or real. And that includes falling for marketing hype from a company that tell them they are going to play better because of this new "technology". I'm guilty of it as well. I know when I first started playing seriously I looked for the "golden cue". You know the one.... the one that is so great that it plays by itself and you can't miss with it. Remember when you were a little kid and you got a brand new pair of sneakers and suddenly you could run so much faster? It's basically the same concept. This new design comes along and with the right marketing it has a lot of people convinced that it will help you play better. The truth is it's not the shaft or the cue. It's the person holding it. Are there advantages to playing with good equipment? Of course. If you buy a decent cue it will help you play better than if you just go to Walmart and buy something in their sporting goods department. But there is a huge difference between something you buy at Wally World vs. a cue that was made with better materials and workmanship. The difference between the laminated shafts and the regular old straight maple shaft is far less dramitic

You guys seem to conveniently ignore some points I've made such as the best cuemakers not using this type of shaft. I'll ask the question again. If they are so great, why don't the best cuemakers in the world offer them as standard on their cues?

Before you answer, please keep in mind who I mean by the best cuemakers. I'm not taking anthing away from anyone because there are quite a few good makers out there that do offer these types of shafts on their cues. I'm talking about the best of the best. Have you ever seen a Southwest come standard with a laminated shaft? Don't worry, I'll answer that for you. The answer is no. If they are so much better than a regular shaft why wouldn't it be a no-brainer? Isn't SW known for a great hit and playability? Shouldn't they be using this technology if it's so far superior?


The defense rests you Honor.

Pushout
05-11-2009, 08:14 AM
Wow, you guys are tough. I knew that I was going to get some backlash but holy crap! Lol.
.

I don't know whether you lurked before joining or how long, but you might have expected it. Some people like low deflection shafts and are quite vocal about. I don't and am quite vocal about it:D This type of post almost always gets heated discussions which will sometimes become serious arguments. I would personally be willing to try one again but it won't be any time soon, due to cost.
Have a nice day!

Rich93
05-11-2009, 08:17 AM
Wow, you guys are tough. I knew that I was going to get some backlash but holy crap! Lol.

<snip>

You guys seem to conveniently ignore some points I've made such as the best cuemakers not using this type of shaft. I'll ask the question again. If they are so great, why don't the best cuemakers in the world offer them as standard on their cues?

Before you answer, please keep in mind who I mean by the best cuemakers. I'm not taking anthing away from anyone because there are quite a few good makers out there that do offer these types of shafts on their cues. I'm talking about the best of the best. Have you ever seen a Southwest come standard with a laminated shaft? Don't worry, I'll answer that for you. The answer is no. If they are so much better than a regular shaft why wouldn't it be a no-brainer? Isn't SW known for a great hit and playability? Shouldn't they be using this technology if it's so far superior?


The defense rests you Honor.

Others would know more than me, but I'm pretty sure that Predator and others have patented their innovations. Cuemakers who copied them would get sued, and a small operation (the best of the best, as you put it) can't afford to fight that legal battle. Someday those patents will expire, however, and then you may see it.

Patrick Johnson
05-11-2009, 09:05 AM
there is a huge difference between something you buy at Wally World vs. a cue that was made with better materials and workmanship. The difference between the laminated shafts and the regular old straight maple shaft is far less dramitic

What are the "huge differences" between Wally World cues and those made with better materials and workmanship? Are there greater physical differences between these cues than between "normal" cues and laminated? Between "standard" cues and low squirt? Describe the physical differences and explain why one kind of difference is more dramatic than another. If you can't, you're just blowing air.

why don't the best cuemakers in the world offer them as standard on their cues?

What are "them"? Who are "the best cuemakers in the world"? How do you know they don't offer "them"?

You make a lot of careless proclamations.

pj
chgo

pooltchr
05-11-2009, 09:12 AM
folks have used that argument in golf for years....Pros DO NOT play with stock "of the shelf" stuff period..

Maybe sometimes, but not always. I remember when Kelly Fisher( I think she would qualify as a "pro")was first playing with a Fury cue. Fury was her sponsor, and she went back to the shipping room, picked out one she liked, at the weight she wanted, and went out and started winning. There was nothing about her cue that was any different from all the other Fury cues we shipped out.

Steve

Monstermash
05-14-2009, 09:38 PM
What are the "huge differences" between Wally World cues and those made with better materials and workmanship? Are there greater physical differences between these cues than between "normal" cues and laminated? Between "standard" cues and low squirt? Describe the physical differences and explain why one kind of difference is more dramatic than another. If you can't, you're just blowing air.



What are "them"? Who are "the best cuemakers in the world"? How do you know they don't offer "them"?

You make a lot of careless proclamations.

pj
chgo

Careless proclamations? Alrighty then....

Lets see. I mentioned Southwest by name. I dare anyone to contest that they are not one of the best in the world. Do you want me to make a list of who I think are the best? Okey dokey......

In no particular order and by no means a complete list.

Mike Bender*
Thomas Wayne*
PFD*
Gina
SW*
Dick Black*
Joel Hercek*
Joe Gold
Bill Schick*
Paul Mottey*
Bill Stroud*
David Kikel*
Black Boar*

Those with the asterisk I have personally owned at one point or another. I have played with at least one cue from all the makers mentioned plus hundreds of others.

And what I said was, "they do not offer them as standard"

But apparently you again didn't bother to actually read what I wrote. And how do I know they they don't offer them as standard? Because I've looked at thousands of cues for sale and I have never seen any of the above mentioned makers offer a laminated shaft as standard coming with their cues. Also, I know several of the above mentioned makers personally and have had many, many discussions regarding cues, their construction, and what makes one better than another.

Here's the thing. If a product comes along that completely changes the market for something specific, whether it be billiards or electronics or any other product and it IS better than what is currently available then it will always replace whatever the current product it.

The electronics industry is a great example. When something new and improved comes along and is better than what is currently available all the manufacturers scramble to adopt the technology or they get left behind. Take for example televisions. Just a few years ago we were all going gaga over DLP tv's. Now they don't even make them any more. But all the manufacturers made them didn't they? Was it patented technogoly? Yes it was. But because it was the newest thing and it WAS BETTER then was was currently available it was offered by all the makers and they had to pay to use that technogoly if they wanted to keep up in the market. It's called licensing. Look at all the new technology in tv's. Up until recently it was Plasma and LCD and now the LED's are coming to market.

Back on the subject of the post. If the laminated shaft technology (and the gimmick hole in the shaft and thin walled ferrule) was so much better then what was currently offered, believe me, EVERYONE would be using them. They would be stupid not to.

And just to make sure I don't forget any of you're points.....

What makes a custom cue better than the Wally World special? I'm actually offended that you would think I don't know the answer to this. The problem is where to start because there are so many differences.

Lets start with materials. West Systems is arguably the best epoxy on the market for cue construction. Do you actually believe that the crappy Walmart cues are using anything even remotely resembling glue of that quality. I would venture to guess not. Not to mention a gallon of WS 105 costs more than ANY Walmart cue so........ you can do the math right?

Additionally, take a look at the shafts on the WM cues. You are lucky if they are straight right off the rack. So forget that the maple they use (if it is even maple) it's nowhere near the quality of what you would find on a custom cue. What about how the shafts are made? Do you think they make lots of small cuts on the shafts over a long period of time? Do you think the wood is aged properly? Do you think the wood is dried properly? I'm guessing not.

Lets move on to the wrap. Irish Linen? Nope, just cheap nylon thats usually not even glued on very well. How about the actuall finish on the cue? Think thats the same quality automotive clearcoat that most of the top cue makers are using? PPG? HOK? Dupont? Ummmmm.... nope. Just look at a WM cue wrong and there's a dent in the finish.

Finally, lets talk about the overall contruction. Are the butt sections made using three seperate peices like most high quality custom cues? Nope. They are usually just one peice of very poor quality wood that has been painted and made to look like they have points (if that is the design theme intended) with more paint or decals.

So, there we have it. A quick comparison of Walmart cues vs. custom cues. Any questions?

Do yourself a favor Patrick. Never accuse someone who you don't know of "blowing hot air" because you end up looking pretty silly if they end up knowing more than you thought. Or even better, if they know more than you do. Don't think for a second because I'm still somewhat new here that I don't have a clue.

I'm just curious, what kind of cue/shaft do you play with?

Cornerman
05-14-2009, 11:13 PM
I've been thinking about low squirt shafts producing more spin and I think MAYBE, that since the shafts produce less squirt, the cue ball simply seems to swerve (curve) more when side spin is applied. Yes, at least if you consider it as overall effect from swerve. For example, if a normal shaft on a certain shaft has X squirt to the left and Y swerve to the right, then the same shot with a low deflection shaft will be dominated by the swerve. This has been my biggest knock on lower deflection shafts: the swerve variable (which in my opinion is the tougher variable) has a higher effect and can wreak havoc with players who have played successfully for years with a normal shaft.



I'm curious as to what you and others think about my dangerous thoughts.

JoeyA
My opinion on your thoughts here Joey is that I've been saying this for years and years online. So, great minds, yes, but it's also been written about, so you're either safe or among the insane. Your choice.

Fred <~~~ dangerous and insane

Cornerman
05-14-2009, 11:20 PM
I know you're all experts ;), so there's no way I'm going to change your opinion but IMO you've all just fallen into the marketing hype of these shafts. And really, thats what it is. And the problem is they have done a good job at it. So good that they have you all convinced that this is the end all be all and there is nothing else.
I know you won't read this, but the problem here is that.... you haven't read your own thread! That's no way to have a conversation. You might want to actually read the responses. Most of the responders who have told you that it's not a "gimmick" are the same responders who know that it's not an "end all be all." Since you're not reading this either, your universe won't suffer some made up conundrum explosion.

They do what they claim. Some people will swear by low deflection shafts. Many others don't swear by them. Why don't you seem to understand that?
The defense rests you Honor.I don't think you even understand what your case is. Maybe if I make it to Country Club, we can talk about it, since it's obvious you're not quite getting it on here.

Fred <~~~ knows it's not gimmick but knows it's not an end all

CreeDo
05-15-2009, 09:55 AM
I think this is one of those cases where a guy posts as a 'question' but really he's not asking for other's opinions.

He just wants to make sure everyone knows his and he's in no danger of debating it intelligently or altering it.