PDA

View Full Version : In praise of thinner tips


Cornerman
11-19-2006, 07:26 PM
I changed to 12 3/4 or smaller tip diameters a couple of years ago. And I haven't looked back. I recently got a cue that the cuemaker forgot to go down to 12 3/4. It plays great, but until I get it thinned down, I can't use it. I've honed in on the thinner tips and that's the way it's going to be.

Most people know that in snooker, they use the thinner tips. What a lot of player don't realize is that in carom billiards (3C, straight rail, etc.) the billiard cues also are typically thinner than pool cues. That is, the thickness of shaft diameter has nothing to do with the size of the ball, as some people might naturallly think. So, I think the tip thickness has everything to do with the person, and almost nothing to do with the balls.

What am I saying? Other than "let's have another drink," which sounds like a great idea... If you've thought that sticking with a 13mm tip diameter was good and proper just because of some crazy tradition, don't think that way. I have no idea at what point 13mm started becoming standard in pool, but snooker and billiard cues tell me that there's no reason for the 13mm tip to have ever been standard. Somebody duped us years ago.

I can't tell you the number of people I"ve seen immediately see positive results going to a thinner tip such that it's worth it to try it out.

HTH,

Fred

Ken Barlow
11-19-2006, 07:47 PM
Cornerman, interesting thread and glad to see that your game has improved for the better by making the change to a smaller tip diameter. Speaking to you as a snooker player myself, there is a trend amongst some of the top pro's in snooker, now, to go for larger tip diameters. The simple reasoning behind this is that it improves consistency and gives you a larger margin for error.

The narrower the tip, the more english you will put on the cue ball. If you are a fraction off centre when you strike the cue ball, you get unwanted throw and postition etc. Unless you are one of these players that hits the cue ball 100% perfect, every time you strike (of which there is no one out there who does) your consistency, in theory, should be reduced.

The one thing I will say for a narrower tip though, is it's a hell of a lot of fun for making the game more entertaining with some crazy draw and english shots to be made. :D

To summarize the point of my response: In theory, the bigger the tip the more consistent the outcome, the smaller the tip, the less consistent the outcome but a lot more fun.

Quesports
11-19-2006, 08:07 PM
I agree with both statements. I've got shafts that are from 13mm all the way down to my McDermott I/3 which is 11.75 mm and it can do some crazy stuff. The difficulty I had with the very small diameter shafts was on long shots and with my consistency. Recently I purchased a new Lambros with two 13mm shafts and wanted a 12.75 mm shaft for it. Mike was against turning down a 13 mm due to the possibility of it warping so he made me a new shaft at 12.75. I agree with you Fred but just for fun I shoot with some even smaller ones for the hell of it.
Dan

Koop
11-19-2006, 08:19 PM
What am I saying? Other than "let's have another drink," which sounds like a great idea... If you've thought that sticking with a 13mm tip diameter was good and proper just because of some crazy tradition, don't think that way. I have no idea at what point 13mm started becoming standard in pool, but snooker and billiard cues tell me that there's no reason for the 13mm tip to have ever been standard. Somebody duped us years ago.

I can't tell you the number of people I"ve seen immediately see positive results going to a thinner tip such that it's worth it to try it out.

HTH,

Fred

I'm all for another drink :D

Seriously though, I have been using a 13MM for about 5 months and, while it has treated me well, I had Mike make me a 13 and 12.75. I'm really looking forward to playing with the 12.75 because I have a feeling it is going to help with my english shots.

Take care,
Koop

8-ball Rat
11-19-2006, 08:34 PM
My diameter of choice is 12.75mm.....has been for about two years. I noticed an immediate improvement when I made the switch from the standard 13mm.

That said...I recently acquired a Scruggs cue with 2 shafts....one at 12.5 and the other at 12.6. I love them both equally....and doubt I'll ever use a standard 13mm again. If I buy a cue with one, I'll have 'em turned down (by the maker), or use a same-sized shaft with a smaller diam. tip.

Glad I'm not alone!!!

For the first time in my life, I feel like my smaller tip is just fine!!!! :eek: :eek: :D

Nick B
11-19-2006, 08:57 PM
I changed to 12 3/4 or smaller tip diameters a couple of years ago. And I haven't looked back. I recently got a cue that the cuemaker forgot to go down to 12 3/4. It plays great, but until I get it thinned down, I can't use it. I've honed in on the thinner tips and that's the way it's going to be.

Most people know that in snooker, they use the thinner tips. What a lot of player don't realize is that in carom billiards (3C, straight rail, etc.) the billiard cues also are typically thinner than pool cues. That is, the thickness of shaft diameter has nothing to do with the size of the ball, as some people might naturallly think. So, I think the tip thickness has everything to do with the person, and almost nothing to do with the balls.

What am I saying? Other than "let's have another drink," which sounds like a great idea... If you've thought that sticking with a 13mm tip diameter was good and proper just because of some crazy tradition, don't think that way. I have no idea at what point 13mm started becoming standard in pool, but snooker and billiard cues tell me that there's no reason for the 13mm tip to have ever been standard. Somebody duped us years ago.

I can't tell you the number of people I"ve seen immediately see positive results going to a thinner tip such that it's worth it to try it out.

HTH,

Fred

Fred,
I play snooker and pool and like a 12.25mm for pool. I play with a Predator (sorry) but get down to that by thinning ferule and tapper only the top inch of the shaft (also common in snooker). Do you do it here or thin the whole shaft?

Nick

Cornerman
11-19-2006, 09:05 PM
Fred,
I play snooker and pool and like a 12.25mm for pool. I play with a Predator (sorry) but get down to that by thinning ferule and tapper only the top inch of the shaft (also common in snooker). Do you do it here or thin the whole shaft?

Nick
To me, the thinner feel is more important in the stroking area. Getting the cue through my hands easier is as important as seeing the clearer tip to ball contact.

With your Predator, 12.25 gets awefully small for their ferrule thickness. I think they told me that they didn't recommend going that thin.

Fred

steveL75121
11-19-2006, 09:06 PM
I have been around that block myself. I ended up having 13mm tips and turned down shafts and then reverted back to 13mm tips and had to buy more shafts..lol I feel the players that draw the cue ball, do it equally as well with either like myself. I have noticed a tendency to miscue abit more with the smaller tips on the cues though, especially in critical situations in a pressure match. I have at least 15 cues, everything from PFD, Phillipi, Madden,Frey sneaky,Schon, Predator, Schick sneaky, Cuetec, Mcdermott's Fury RP and so on. I have been playing at least 15 years. I believe side spin is abit easier but draw you can easily miscue quicker with smaller tips.

just my opinion,
Steve

Nick B
11-19-2006, 09:15 PM
To me, the thinner feel is more important in the stroking area. Getting the cue through my hands easier is as important as seeing the clearer tip to ball contact.

With your Predator, 12.25 gets awefully small for their ferrule thickness. I think they told me that they didn't recommend going that thin.

Fred

They void your warranty at below 12.25mm. I'm not a heavy hitter and spin them before power most times. Nevertheless over the last 8 years I have yet to have a ferule problem.

Nick

Jack Flanagan
11-19-2006, 09:34 PM
this may not make sense to most, but I find practicing with a snooker cue (9-1/2 mm) helps get me out of a sloppy shooting slump,,,I get really complacent/sloppy with a 13mm tip,,,the snooker cue makes me pay attention more and (at least in my mind) has improved my accuracy,,,,jmho

mjantti
11-20-2006, 06:30 AM
My diameter of choice is 12.75mm.....has been for about two years. I noticed an immediate improvement when I made the switch from the standard 13mm.

That said...I recently acquired a Scruggs cue with 2 shafts....one at 12.5 and the other at 12.6. I love them both equally....and doubt I'll ever use a standard 13mm again. If I buy a cue with one, I'll have 'em turned down (by the maker), or use a same-sized shaft with a smaller diam. tip.

Glad I'm not alone!!!

For the first time in my life, I feel like my smaller tip is just fine!!!! :eek: :eek: :D

Like you, my game improved quite a lot after buying a Scruggs cue with 12.5mm tip. Used to play with a regular 13.0 mm tip. Man that Scruggs hits sweet !! :cool:

Black-Balled
11-20-2006, 06:49 AM
I'm all for another drink :D

Seriously though...Take care,
Koop

What? YOur opening was in jest?!

FTR- I am in too...:D

ShootingArts
11-20-2006, 07:24 AM
Most of us, myself included, aim with the center of our stick but hit the cueball well off of the center of the tip much of the time. OK, I know that most of you are wondering how long it took that moron to figure this out but it is one reason that tip size and shape have a lot of impact on how we play.

With a smaller tip we are hitting closer to where we are aiming. When using extreme english that makes a lot of difference. I recently started taking a 13mm shaft down remembering I once favored 12.5 or 12.75 tips. I was curious to find my best shaft diameter. I discovered that 12.25 is too small for my eyes and current skill level! Finishing a new personal shaft now. I think I will stop at 12.75. It does play quite differently from a thirteen.

Hu

JoeyA
11-20-2006, 07:42 AM
I changed to 12 3/4 or smaller tip diameters a couple of years ago. And I haven't looked back. I recently got a cue that the cuemaker forgot to go down to 12 3/4. It plays great, but until I get it thinned down, I can't use it. I've honed in on the thinner tips and that's the way it's going to be.

Most people know that in snooker, they use the thinner tips. What a lot of player don't realize is that in carom billiards (3C, straight rail, etc.) the billiard cues also are typically thinner than pool cues. That is, the thickness of shaft diameter has nothing to do with the size of the ball, as some people might naturallly think. So, I think the tip thickness has everything to do with the person, and almost nothing to do with the balls.

What am I saying? Other than "let's have another drink," which sounds like a great idea... If you've thought that sticking with a 13mm tip diameter was good and proper just because of some crazy tradition, don't think that way. I have no idea at what point 13mm started becoming standard in pool, but snooker and billiard cues tell me that there's no reason for the 13mm tip to have ever been standard. Somebody duped us years ago.

I can't tell you the number of people I"ve seen immediately see positive results going to a thinner tip such that it's worth it to try it out.

HTH,

Fred

It is easier to cut an object ball using a small diameter cue tip versus a larger diameter cue tip. I am sure that there are some things that a larger diameter tip can do better but just can't be sure what they are. I know that there are some rather good players who love a 13MM tip and play top speed.
JoeyA

Koop
11-20-2006, 09:06 AM
What? YOur opening was in jest?!

FTR- I am in too...:D

Nothing in jest about more drinks...;)

All you had to do was watch me at the Joss event. Never without my Sam Light and on some occassions, doubled up.

Flex
11-20-2006, 09:24 AM
I think I get my best play out of this combination:

Ed Young shaft, with his taper, that after repeated "cleanings" with a Scotch brite pad now has a tip size right at 12 mm, milk-dud Elkmaster tip.

This combination is great. By the way, the shaft does not have a pro-taper, but Ed Young's taper, someone called it a Kershenbrock taper. The wood is very dense, and this shaft is quite squirty, and powerful, to boot. The hit is rock solid, and with the milk-dud tip will draw the heck out of the cue ball. Is it hard to control? I suppose, but so what, it really performs.

Flex

xidica
11-20-2006, 11:40 AM
Fantastic thread. Rep points inbound for several of you folks! Thanks for the information!

twilight
11-20-2006, 12:37 PM
For me when I switched from a 13mm tip to a 12.75, I found I could get more actionn out of the cue ball. After a couple years, and several cleanings the shaft got down to 12.55mm and played just as if not better. I later got a new shaft at 12.75 and I couldn't get quite the same action but I was more consistent in getting less action. I got a couple new shafts not too long ago at full 13mm and wouldn't you know, I lost a bit more action, but I was far more consistent with getting shape. This just illustrates what everyone seems to have said already.

I'm think you should have different shafts for different games/tables. Maybe a small radius for something like 9ball where you need to really move the ball and a larger one for 1hole or straight pool where there's not quite as much movement (as 9ball) but shape is tighter. If golfers have different clubs for different shots, why shouldn't a pool player have different shafts for different games? I know that if you play with one shaft you'll be more consistent, but golfers swing with more clubs and they're pretty consistent... at using different clubs too.

In sum I don't necessarily think one small shaft is better than haveing 1 thick shaft or vice versa. I think different situations call for different tools.

Colin Colenso
11-20-2006, 02:53 PM
I've played US pool with a 10mm tip and it works all right. Seen some snooker players be very competitive with similar size tips.

Granted a 10mm tip, with accordingly narrow shaft will vibrate a bit on some draw shots or power english shots, but I wouldn't be the least bit concerned about playing with 11.5 to 12.0mm.

But still, it ain't no magic potion. AFAIC any cue is just a matter of learning the necessary adjustments. Also, consider that it's very rare that we require maximum english, except in the case of draw. When using side english, usually a tip is the most we ever need to use. The corresponsing amount of follow makes a much larger difference, though perhaps a smaller tip can help in this regard.

Colin

Rich93
11-20-2006, 03:55 PM
I changed to 12 3/4 or smaller tip diameters a couple of years ago. And I haven't looked back. I recently got a cue that the cuemaker forgot to go down to 12 3/4. It plays great, but until I get it thinned down, I can't use it. I've honed in on the thinner tips and that's the way it's going to be.

Most people know that in snooker, they use the thinner tips. What a lot of player don't realize is that in carom billiards (3C, straight rail, etc.) the billiard cues also are typically thinner than pool cues. That is, the thickness of shaft diameter has nothing to do with the size of the ball, as some people might naturallly think. So, I think the tip thickness has everything to do with the person, and almost nothing to do with the balls.

What am I saying? Other than "let's have another drink," which sounds like a great idea... If you've thought that sticking with a 13mm tip diameter was good and proper just because of some crazy tradition, don't think that way. I have no idea at what point 13mm started becoming standard in pool, but snooker and billiard cues tell me that there's no reason for the 13mm tip to have ever been standard. Somebody duped us years ago.

I can't tell you the number of people I"ve seen immediately see positive results going to a thinner tip such that it's worth it to try it out.

HTH,

Fred

I have a theory as to why the various games - pool, carom, snooker - use different kinds of cues. Imitation and inertia. When starting out people imitate champions of the game or at least the better players around them. They stroke like they stroke, use cues like they do, etc. It only makes sense. But once they've learned to use a certain type of cue, other types of cues feel funny to them. If they even try them they soon give up because it doesn't "feel right".

For example, is there any good reason why carom players use a 12mm tip and a constant taper while pool players use a 13mm with a pro taper? If one type of cue works best in one game, why wouldn't it work best in the other? I think Ray Schuler felt this way - at least that's how he talked when he made my cue in 1982. As you might expect, he favored the carom approach - narrower tips and stronger tapers. He made lots of different tapers which he advertised as "tailored" to your game, but that was marketing, I think. In his heart he thought that a European or constant taper was best for pool as well as carom. He thought it provided better consistency and less squirt. He also preferred the small little ferrules you see on carom cues. The smaller end mass of the narrower tip and light ferrule was the reason for less squirt than standard pool cues had at the time - this was before robot experiments and Predator drilling holes.

It's interesting that the Predator Z shaft - their lowest squirt shaft - is pretty close to a "carom" type cue. Of course, they use their other techniques to lower squirt even more.

Anyway, to sum up, why is a pool cue different than a carom cue? I don't think there is any good reason - mainly just tradition. With one exception, length. Carom cues are shorter because they don't stretch for a shot. They'll shoot it a different way instead. Pool players can't avoid stretching.

Jal
11-20-2006, 04:34 PM
Am I confused here? A number of people have been suggesting that the smaller diameter shaft/tips produce more english. As far as I understand, it's not the shaft/tip diameter but the radius of the tip's curvature. For a given offset of the center of the shaft, a smaller radius of curvature yields more contact "point" offset. This amplifies unintended english a bit, but should not allow you to get more maximum english than with a larger radius of curvature. This is governed by something else (coefficient of friction).

What does the diameter of the shaft/tip have to do with this? As far as I know, nothing. Okay, you might get slightly less squirt by shaving off some of the endmass, but the "spin saving" you gain by reducing squirt is miniscule.

Or, maybe I'm neglecting something?

Jim

inthezone
11-20-2006, 07:26 PM
Am I confused here? A number of people have been suggesting that the smaller diameter shaft/tips produce more english. As far as I understand, it's not the shaft/tip diameter but the radius of the tip's curvature. For a given offset of the center of the shaft, a smaller radius of curvature yields more contact "point" offset. This amplifies unintended english a bit, but should not allow you to get more maximum english than with a larger radius of curvature. This is governed by something else (coefficient of friction).

What does the diameter of the shaft/tip have to do with this? As far as I know, nothing. Okay, you might get slightly less squirt by shaving off some of the endmass, but the "spin saving" you gain by reducing squirt is miniscule.

Or, maybe I'm neglecting something?

Jim
Yeah, according to Shepard's paper even a Z shaft which squirts about 30% less than the average cue, should only produce about 5% max more spin after adjusting for speed.

Steve

xidica
11-21-2006, 12:06 AM
Hey, different pokes, for different strokes, for different folks. Right? No? Fine I'll go play by myself :p

RSB-Refugee
11-21-2006, 12:46 AM
What does the diameter of the shaft/tip have to do with this? As far as I know, nothing. Okay, you might get slightly less squirt by shaving off some of the endmass, but the "spin saving" you gain by reducing squirt is miniscule.

Or, maybe I'm neglecting something?

Jim
I think that a smaller diameter shaft can get more english, because it can strike the cue ball further off-center. Imagine an exagerated tip diameter of 30 mm. Since the center of the cue ball is closer to the player, than the outer edge, The tip would contact closer to the center of the ball than where the center of the tip is aiming. It is not what is on the shaft, but what is not on it. If you are cueing very low, with a small diameter shaft you can get lower, without the outer edge of the tip hitting the cloth.

I agree with your smaller radius tip curvature statement. It is easier to get a small radius curvature on a small diameter tip.

Tracy

Hambone
11-21-2006, 01:34 AM
I like a tip to be slightly smaller than 13mm. I have started using the tip to aim with and I can see my spot on the object ball better with a smaller tip.

xidica
11-21-2006, 01:38 AM
Agreed. 12.55-12.80ish is a pretty magical zone in terms of tip diameter.

For me anyways! :D

Captain Dan
11-21-2006, 02:29 AM
A little over a year ago I was looking for something different from the average snooker cue that is used here in Australia, so I decided to get a 9 Ball cue from the US (a Lucasi from Joe Rackem off ebay, great transaction!). I asked the forum what I should expect from a 13mm tip, and received many of the comments that have already been mentioned.

One point that I didn't realise at the time, but now love, is that 9 Ball cues are almost always heavier that snooker cues. My last cue was a Riley with a 9.5mm tip, and it weighed 16.5Oz. My Lucasi is 20Oz. What I have found is I let the weight of the cue do much of the work, and I don't have to impart as much power in the stroke to break or to make the cue ball follow on. This has lead to an improvement in the acuraccy of my shots, but for the first 3-4 months I was starting to believe some who said "you can't play with something that big!" (now they say I can play, but would be better with a snooker cue:) ). I play UK 8ball on the smaller tables (although I am starting to play some 9 Ball), but I can still impart as much english as with my previous 9.5mm tip, perhaps because I am more comfortable in my stroke. I am interested in what change a smaller tip would have, and am debating whether to get a new shaft (maybe a Z).

I'm only a local league player, but I love threads such as this one, as they add to my knowledge of the my passion.

Daniel:D

Sensation
11-21-2006, 02:39 AM
I recently started playing with a 12.75mm and I like a lot more than my regular 13.15-25mm Schon shaft.

Slides better in a closed bridge. Offers less deflection. Love it!
-------
Most pool low deflection shafts are around 12.5-12.75mm range... regular shafts are always 13mm and a bit over...

Why is that?

xidica
11-21-2006, 03:29 AM
Because you can always take the shaft down, but you can't build it back up ;)

It's just a fairly "standard" thing, why was 13 the magical number? Who knows.
It might have something to do with this though :

Several cue makers use a fairly large tenon under the ferrule, this makes a more sound, durable, and "warrantee" worthy cue. Ever seen a ferrule break? Not pretty nor fun ;)

Think about it, if the ferrule wall thickness is too thin, problems can occur with the tenon/ferrule combination. Especially after repeated use/abuse and hard shots.


That being said, if it is a piece of wood, has a tip, and is anywhere between 40 some inches and 68 some inches, I bet with enough practice I could get pretty good with it :D

TATE
11-21-2006, 05:33 AM
My tip is now at 12.25 mm. Basically, if I change to even a slightly wider tip, I find my fine cue ball control is challenged and there is a definite re-learning curve. I prefer a thinner tip and shaft diameter as well.

xidica
11-21-2006, 05:47 AM
It's really all about finding your comfort zone I suppose. People who think a different shaft, tip, cue, etc will save them are only practicing self-deception.

Because, in the end; it's not the stick, it's the "sticker".

If you are comfortable with the cue, stick with it. Later on when you are a more established player you may want to experiment, but as TATE pointed out; there's always that re-learning curve.

TheOne
11-21-2006, 06:13 AM
Just get a z shaft! :D

tedkaufman
11-21-2006, 07:47 AM
I think whether to go to a thinner shaft is a matter of comfort. Larger diameters are more forgiving of slight miscentering on the cueball. I play with 12.5mm parabolic, which is my preferred shaft. I had it made that way because my fingers are relatively short and the thinner diameter makes it easier to make a secure closed bridge. I also use a 12.75mm pro taper for games requiring a longer stroke, which is equally comfortable. A 13mm is simply less comfortable. That said, however, I must be careful where I hit the cueball with the thinner shaft. You might not think 1/2mm would make that much difference, but it does. It's a lot easier to apply unexpected spin to the cueball if care isn't taken to find the center when using a smaller diameter.

inthezone
11-21-2006, 08:18 AM
I think whether to go to a thinner shaft is a matter of comfort. Larger diameters are more forgiving of slight miscentering on the cueball. I play with 12.5mm parabolic, which is my preferred shaft. I had it made that way because my fingers are relatively short and the thinner diameter makes it easier to make a secure closed bridge. I also use a 12.75mm pro taper for games requiring a longer stroke, which is equally comfortable. A 13mm is simply less comfortable. That said, however, I must be careful where I hit the cueball with the thinner shaft. You might not think 1/2mm would make that much difference, but it does. It's a lot easier to apply unexpected spin to the cueball if care isn't taken to find the center when using a smaller diameter.
Just curious Ted - what do you mean when you say "parabolic" - I assume that refers to the taper?

Steve

tedkaufman
11-21-2006, 08:46 AM
Just curious Ted - what do you mean when you say "parabolic" - I assume that refers to the taper?

Steve

Parabolic is a constant taper--think cone. This taper makes for a stiffer playing shaft. An extended taper, or "pro taper," has an extended length from the ferrule with minimal taper for 8-12", then it tapers out gradually to the joint. This design makes for a springier shaft that produces more action, at the expense of feel and precise control.

Jal
11-21-2006, 01:27 PM
I think that a smaller diameter shaft can get more english, because it can strike the cue ball further off-center. Imagine an exagerated tip diameter of 30 mm. Since the center of the cue ball is closer to the player, than the outer edge, The tip would contact closer to the center of the ball than where the center of the tip is aiming. It is not what is on the shaft, but what is not on it. If you are cueing very low, with a small diameter shaft you can get lower, without the outer edge of the tip hitting the cloth.

I agree with your smaller radius tip curvature statement. It is easier to get a small radius curvature on a small diameter tip.

TracyI like your 30 mm thought experiment. It always helps to exaggerate when it's difficult to see what the underlying trend is like. But I still have to disagree with your conclusion. If two cues have the same tip curvature, then given the same shaft offset they will contact the cueball at the same point regardless of their diameters. And if two tips have different curvatures, you can always increase the shaft offset on the one that's flatter to get the same maximum english.

I agree about the draw shot. It's possible that at maximum offset and with a lot of cue speed, the tip can hit the bed before the end of contact, or at least come very close.

Your point about it being easier to put a smaller radius on a thinner shaft/tip probably does explain what some of the posters have been describing. It seems more natural to go with the smaller radius too. Thanks.

Jim

PunchOut
11-21-2006, 03:19 PM
For 12.75 and smaller i would reccomend for someone that uses a lot of english, 3 rail leaves etc.

13mm would be much better for a buddy hall style of play, strait forward and simple.

personally i am much more consistant with a 13mm mainly because with a smaller tip you have more variations of english that you can use that will greatly effect your shot. with a 13mm you are somewhat limited which suits my style of play fine. if i could shoot 9 center ball shots shots in a 9ball rack i wouldnt be complaining.

PunchOut

Handsumm
11-21-2006, 03:58 PM
As people become more fine tuned in their skill at shotmaking, and they have a need for heavy spin english, they shold start to decrease the size of their shaft. A 13mm shaft is a tip diameter that is suitable for most people, including beginners, but as mentioned earlier, does not allow for extreme spin. Granted, there is more margin for error, so there has to be some settling point for people.

I once tried a very thin shaft, and thought the thinner the better, but I found that shotmaking became very difficult as I got smaller. I had my 12.75 Jackson shaft turned down to 11mm!

At first, I thought it was perfect, but I soon realized that I would be more consistent with a larger diameter.

For me, a crossover closed bridge shooter, I still like a small diameter, but not so small it imparts extreme, sometimes unnecessary, spin.

I had a shaft made by Greg Sowder at 11.75 and with a more "european" taper to it, as opposed to a pro taper. It has the same play and feel of a Predator Z, but doesn't impart as quite as much spin with my Triangle tip.

Hand me a 13mm, and I won't miss, but I have no cue ball.
Hand me an 11, and I will pull 5 rail shape and draw two table lengths, but struggle with shotmaking.

Everyone must find their own personal target diameter; all depending on bridge, bridge length, shotmaking ability, and how much English (side) they like to use to get shape.

DEGAMO88
11-21-2006, 04:23 PM
For 12.75 and smaller i would reccomend for someone that uses a lot of english, 3 rail leaves etc.

13mm would be much better for a buddy hall style of play, strait forward and simple.

personally i am much more consistant with a 13mm mainly because with a smaller tip you have more variations of english that you can use that will greatly effect your shot. with a 13mm you are somewhat limited which suits my style of play fine. if i could shoot 9 center ball shots shots in a 9ball rack i wouldnt be complaining.

PunchOut

Billiardcue.com has one of Buddy's personal cues for sale right now. It's a Meucci with 3 shafts- 11.7 mm, 12.3 mm, 12.3 mm.

http://www.billiardcue.com/cues.php?view=1&search_letter=m

PunchOut
11-21-2006, 05:31 PM
Billiardcue.com has one of Buddy's personal cues for sale right now. It's a Meucci with 3 shafts- 11.7 mm, 12.3 mm, 12.3 mm.

http://www.billiardcue.com/cues.php?view=1&search_letter=m

ummmm....ok, my statement still stands.

3kushn
11-21-2006, 08:18 PM
This is all speculation but IMO it seems that miss cues with a smaller tip are simply flaws in stroke (or tip grooming) and more english with smaller tips is psycological.

If the radius is the same for all tip diameters tested it seems that the contact area between tip and CB is the same. I think the difference is, with a smaller tip is that it's easier to see exactly where the tip will (should) land on the CB but when aiming for extreme english it's a double edge sword. You may know where to hit the CB but since you're now swinging a more accurate tip size you need a more accurate stroke. A larger tip gives you more room for error against miscueing. But with an extremely accurate stroke you will be able to apply the same amount of english with a 13mm as a 10mm tip given the same radius. The advantage with slightly small than 13 mm tips is being better able to pinpoint or see where the tip lands. If we all had a perfect stroke all we would need is a tip size equal to whatever the contact diameter between tip and CB is. Maybe 2 mm? Just think how perfect we could be if we could control that!!

zeeder
11-21-2006, 10:09 PM
A 13mm shaft is a tip diameter that is suitable for most people, including beginners, but as mentioned earlier, does not allow for extreme spin.

I don't know about that. I play with a 13mm tip and I can execute the following shot pretty consistantly and I would consider this to be extreme spin:

START(
%Aq3I0%Po0P6%UP6G8%VL5C5%Wp7J7%Xo3O6%Yj3Z6%Zp9I7%[D2L6%\i9[2
%]K5D1%^C4L1%eC4b4
)END

RSB-Refugee
11-22-2006, 01:56 AM
And if two tips have different curvatures, you can always increase the shaft offset on the one that's flatter to get the same maximum english.

Does reduced end mass allow greater offset, without a misscue? I know, it gives less squirt. Reduced squirt, it seems to me, would be a conservation of energy. Could it be the conserved energy, is put towards greater spin to speed ratio? I have no idea, so I am interested to see if, you think it might be possible.

Tracy

Jal
11-22-2006, 06:03 AM
Does reduced end mass allow greater offset, without a misscue? I know, it gives less squirt.If two shots are made with a high and low squirt cue, and with both tip offsets exactly the same and near the miscue limit, I would think that the lower squirt cue would have a slightly greater chance of a miscue. With the lower squirt cue, the force on the cueball is directed more straight ahead and less toward the center of the cueball. Imagine this force as being comprised of two components: one directed exactly toward the center of the cueball (compression), and the other tangentially to its surface (friction). The ratio of the latter to the former is the static coefficient of friction. As you go from a center ball hit to larger and larger tip offsets, this ratio becomes ever larger until the materials involved cannot maintain the necessary value and the tip begins to slide (miscue). The lower squirt cue needs a higher value to be maintained at any given tip offset since the force it produces has a larger tangential component relative to the compressive component, because it is more forward directed.

Reduced squirt, it seems to me, would be a conservation of energy. Could it be the conserved energy, is put towards greater spin to speed ratio? I have no idea, so I am interested to see if, you think it might be possible.Hmmm...I'll have to think about that or take a closer look at Ron Shepard's paper on squirt. Both a high and low squirt cue could, in principle, obey the conservation of mechanical energy law equally well. That is, they could, ideally, lose no mechanical energy during the shot, or lose equal amounts (to sound, heat and permanent deformation). Before applying the conservation laws (energy and momentum), you have to assume some tip offset, which gives you a first approximation to the spin/speed ratio, and a very good one. From there it's a matter of refining it by some method of successive approximations to account for the endmass momentum and energy. Like I said, I have to think about it more, but I believe you're basically right in that the endmass's energy takes away more spin than linear speed. Perhaps one of the other technical persons can provide a better answer.

It is clear, however, that from a force point of view, a lower squirt cue does produce a higher spin/speed ratio. Not much, hardly at all as a matter of fact, but some. It does this because the more forward directed force yields a greater effective tip offset, or moment, from which the spin/speed ratio is directly determined.

Jim

predator
11-22-2006, 06:04 AM
Interesting that most people here consider 12.75mm thin. I play with 11.75mm and don't think it is that thin. Now when I occasionally try 12.75mm shafts, they look (and feel) huge.

Cornerman
11-22-2006, 07:24 AM
Interesting that most people here consider 12.75mm thin. I play with 11.75mm and don't think it is that thin. Now when I occasionally try 12.75mm shafts, they look (and feel) huge.

I don't know about anyone else, but I know I said "thinner," meaning less than the 13mm that has become some kind of standard, furthering the idea that going thinner isn't a bad thing.

Fred

inthezone
11-22-2006, 07:48 AM
It is clear, however, that from a force point of view, a lower squirt cue does produce a higher spin/speed ratio. Not much, hardly at all as a matter of fact, but some. It does this because the more forward directed force yields a greater effective tip offset, or moment, from which the spin/speed ratio is directly determined.

Yeah, Ron's paper enlightened me on this very point.
By my calculations then, assuming a Zshaft causes 30% less squirt than an "average" shaft (Platinum's #'s), and all other things being equal, the Zshaft should produce a mere 5% more spin for the same forward speed.

It does seem from all the above observations of greatly increased spin from thinner shafts that there may be something else happening...

Jal
11-22-2006, 09:18 AM
...By my calculations then, assuming a Zshaft causes 30% less squirt than an "average" shaft (Platinum's #'s), and all other things being equal, the Zshaft should produce a mere 5% more spin for the same forward speed.I get similar numbers to yours. When I wrote the post I was actually thinking smaller, but you reminded me of the 5% figure, which I briefly double checked. It's interesting that you're using 30% for the Z-shaft reduction. At Predator's site they were saying 50% the last time I checked, but if you look at their data, it is about 30% (they used some funky arithmetic.) I'm wondering how you arrived at that number?

It does seem from all the above observations of greatly increased spin from thinner shafts that there may be something else happening...Maybe, but I have my doubts. I don't dismiss the experience of players lightly, even if it contradicts simple physics, which may be too simple. But I think RSB_Refugee's explanation is more plausible at this point: people may tend to use a smaller radius on the thinner shafts. All else being equal and to a first approximation, for a given shaft offset a dime radius will produce almost 9% more spin than a quarter radius. Also, players might feel more comfortable going out farther on the ball with the smaller shafts? And several posters have indicated, if I read them right, that they don't feel that they get any noticeably less spin with a thicker shaft.

But if you have any additional theories....

Jim

inthezone
11-22-2006, 11:00 AM
I get similar numbers to yours. When I wrote the post I was actually thinking smaller, but you reminded me of the 5% figure, which I briefly double checked. It's interesting that you're using 30% for the Z-shaft reduction. At Predator's site they were saying 50% the last time I checked, but if you look at their data, it is about 30% (they used some funky arithmetic.) I'm wondering how you arrived at that number?

I'm not sure now where I got the 30% - Platinum says 23.3% less than "average". At any rate I used 30% and I believe the 5% is quite close for this example. But 5% only means 5 more inches on a length of the table draw shot....?

Maybe, but I have my doubts. I don't dismiss the experience of players lightly, even if it contradicts simple physics, which may be too simple. But I think RSB_Refugee's explanation is more plausible at this point: people may tend to use a smaller radius on the thinner shafts. All else being equal and to a first approximation, for a given shaft offset a dime radius will produce almost 9% more spin than a quarter radius. Also, players might feel more comfortable going out farther on the ball with the smaller shafts? And several posters have indicated, if I read them right, that they don't feel that they get any noticeably less spin with a thicker shaft.

But if you have any additional theories....

Jim

That 9% number is pretty interesting - I checked it myself and get the same - may be a good way for some to get more control out of low squirt shafts...
I like RSB_refugee's thought too - seems natural to do that.

Still seems a bit of a mystery though:confused:

Steve