Patrick Johnson said:

I played with Predators the first couple of decades I played, and since then with a custom shaft that's even lower deflection.

Click to expand...

jeephawk said:

... a natural to take all that into consideration ...

Click to expand...

Bob Jewett said:

I can see several posts like #44 from a deleted member. Were there others?

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Stiffness does matter. The original 11.8 mm Revo was flexible and deflected a lot. The newer version is much stiffer and has close to zero deflection.

My theory is that because as shaft flexes it will push the cue ball offline in the opposite direction before it completely leaves the tip. If you've ever hit with an old graphite shaft you can really feel this flexing and increase in deflection

If you have an original 11.8 mm Revo. Try grabbing it at the joint and tip and flexing it. Very flexy vs 12.9 or newer 11.8 revo

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

You're wrong. It matters a lot

2 reasons why people don't feel it. One they aren't good enough at pool to notice. Two they didn't use enough sidespin. This goes for testing as well. Really need to get closer to 2 tips of side with a smooth firm stroke to generate max deflection

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Find an old and new 11.8 revo and you'll have proof. You're not always correct

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

That's a theory but you need sophisticated experiments to prove this

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Yes if you have two shafts which are similar build but vary in flexibility. Then you can learn something potentially

Hopefully with more than 2 but it's tough. Science is hard

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

You admit flex affects deflection but nobody understands how much.

Posting old articles doesn't prove anything, nor does making one video or having a phd. We need carbon fiber shafts of various flexibility and a robot. Testing anything with a human shooting is suspect and definitely not science

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

I posted my experience with 11.8 revos... Relating to this thread. Did you read it?

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Yes a robot is required for accurate testing. Dr Dave isn't even close to pro and even a pro isn't consistent

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Nobody properly understands how shaft flexibility or lack of it affects deflection.

We're where golf was 20 years ago. If you're going to do human testing at least use more than 1 human

not to mention basic sample size issues... we're not in high school science fair are we

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Still waiting Dave

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Whatever you guys are smoking I want some

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

I have personally generated way more deflection with 12.4 Revo than 12.9 which contradicts Dave's video. The reason is because the 12.9 is a stiffer shaft

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Until a robot or multiple humans test the same shaft with various shaft flexibilities, we don't understand the dynamics of deflection fully.

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

My point is we don't know. But y'all think dr Dave is correct with sloppy science

Did you know Einstein didn't believe in black holes

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Look at the progress in the world the last 20 years and tell me we know everything about pool shafts and nothing matters

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

It's because everyone is winging it... exactly why the first version of the 11.8 Revo was high deflection. They didn't understand that the flexibility was a factor. Then sometime a year later they fix the design because obviously the first one was incorrect. Of course predator changed the design without telling anyone because they don't want to look incompetent

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

t's a combo of end mass and how much the shaft flexes at impact and possibly other factors. We need real studies which control variables properly, which we don't have. It's amateur hour out there

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

If something flexes it will push the opposite direction. This is very obvious if you've ever hit with an old graphite bar cue

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

This is incorrect. The following is from Dr Dave and explains a stiffer tip deflects less. Same applies to the shaft

Now, the more the tip compresses and flexes sideways, the longer the tip will tend to stay in contact with the CB. This would certainly result in more squirt (CB deflection) because effective “endmass” is larger with a longer contact time. Also, the more the tip flexes sideways, the more the endmass of the shaft moves sideways, which would also tend to create more squirt. A harder tip compresses and flexes less and results in a shorter tip contact time. Therefore, a harder would be expected to produce less squirt, assuming it is not heavier than the tip to which it is being compared

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

This is a theory, not reality

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Where does sideways force come from which pushes a cue ball offline? Think of a diving board, if it's too rigid...then you don't get the force to jump high

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Anyone interested in the truth instead of parroting others, read through my replies and Dr Dave's and you will find it. The truth is we don't know how much flex affects deflection but likely more flex means more deflection. This makes intuitive sense and I also have practical experience supporting this

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

I don't make reality, like I said. Dr Dave needs to do some serious science

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Think about a diving board. Why does it need to flex and what happens when it's too stiff

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

I'm not the PhD in the forum. But I do have my own evidence. Just because I'm not doing science doesn't mean I can't judge the lack of science or understanding. There's obviously room to improve our knowledge of shaft physics but God only knows why everyone has their head in the sand

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

Do some real science Dave come on lol

Click to expand...

Deleted member 66136 said:

There's peer review in science. Try that on any video on YouTube

If anyone does any real testing and science be sure to use close to miscue point to generate maximum deflection. Most players aren't comfortable using maximum side spin. With a high deflecting cue you should be able deflect 4 inches at least

Click to expand...