jnwilliams said:

Not sure I was surprised that the smaller pockets played bigger with the geometric change of the pocket facing. Those older pocket shapes made 5-6 speed + down the rail very difficult (for me). Are the rails still Accufast?

Click to expand...

Yes. The cushions are still the standard Olhausen AccuFast.

Here's the latest summary of all data reported to date:

Calculate your Table Difficulty Factor (TDF) to determine how tough it plays relative to other tables. Only three pocket measurements are required, and you can use the TDF calculator or TDF spreadsheet to get your results.

username - table size, pocket mouth size, mouth-throat difference, shelf depth - TDF (table description)
Side Pocket - 10', 4 1/4", 1 1/4", 2 1/4" - 1.48 (1920s Brunswick)
CaptiveBred - 10', 4 1/8", >143.5°, 1 1/2" - 1.43 (Brunswick Anniversary)
Flakeandrun - 9', 4", 1/4", 1 1/8" - 1.41 (Diamond)
Flakeandrun - 9', 4 1/8", 9/16", 1.5" - 1.37 (Aileex)
Bob Dixon - 9', 4", 145°, 1 5/8" - 1.37 (Diamond)
gregcantrall - 10', 4", 5/8", 1 1/2" - 1.31 (Diamond)
SKILLZELITE - 9', 4 1/8", 144°, 1.5" - 1.30 (GC3)
Ricky Sy - 9', 3 3/4", 1/4", 5/8" - 1.25 (money table)
TEAM SLO - 9', 3.85", 0.6", 1.5" - 1.24 (Diamond)
acedonkeyace - 9", 4", 1/2", 2" - 1.22 (gamble table)
ChrisinNC - 10', 4 1/4", 11/16", 1 5/16" - 1.22 (Gabriel Sentinel)
8cree - 9", 4.125", 0.813", 1.562" - 1.21 (Diamond)
Bonus Ball - 9', 3 7/8", 1/8", 3/4" - 1.19 (Bonus Ball table)
Marc Vidal - 9', 4 1/8", 13/16", 1" - 1.18 (Brunswick Tournament)
takechiyo - 9', 10cm, 1.2cm, 3.5cm - 1.18 (GC5)
chevybob20 - 9', 4 1/8", 7/8", 1" - 1.18 (Centennial)
Baxter - 9', 4 1/4", 143°, 1 1/8" - 1.18 (AMF Grand Prix)
Qaddiction - 9', 4 1/8", 3/4", 1 3/8" - 1.16 (Diamond)
angluse - 8'+, 3 13/16", 9/16", 7/8" - 1.16 (1935 Brunswick Challenger)
Tom Cruise - 9', 4", 1/8", 1 3/8" - 1.15 (Golden West)
ChrisinNC - 10', 4 3/8", 11/16", 1 5/16" - 1.15 (Gabriel Sentinel)
rexus31 - 9', 4", 3/8", 1" - 1.15 (1950s AMF)
FatBoy - 9', 4", 1/4", 1" - 1.14 (GC)
TATE - 9', 4", 1/4", 7/8" - 1.14 (GC)
Phreaticus - 9’, 4.25”, 0.76”, 1.30" - 1.14 (GC6 Tournament Edition)
Mikjary - 9', 4", 9/16", 1 5/16" - 1.13 (Brunswick Centurion)
ChrisinNC - 9', 4 1/8", 5/8", 1 1/4" - 1.13 (Gabriel Signature)
rexus31 - 9', 4.125", 0.505", 1.125" - 1.12 (GC)
Cardigan Kid - 10', 4.5", 0.88", 1.5" - 1.12 (GC)
Ralph Kramden - 9', 4 5/16", 1", 1 3/4" - 1.12 (GC)
pocket - 9', 4 3/16", 7/16", 1 7/8" - 1.12 (unknown)
Justaneng - 8', 4", 7/8", 1 1/2" - 1.12 (Olhausen)
Double-Dave - 6', 3.55", 0.3", 1" - 1.12 (Maxima)
Jaden S - 9’, 4 1/4”, 3/4”, 1 3/8” - 1.11 (Olhausen)
ShaneVanNothin - 9', 4 1/4", 1", 2" - 1.10 (Brunswick)
Neil - 7':0.85, 4 1/8", 1 1/4", 1 3/8" - 1.10 (Valley)
MahnaMahna - 10', 5 1/2", 2", 2 1/2" - 1.09 (converted from snooker table)
tjlmbklr - 8'+, 4", 141°, 1 1/4" - 1.09 (unknown)
grobbs - 9', 4 1/4", 0.625", 1.5" - 1.09 (GC2)
Cardigan Kid - 9', 4 1/4", 0.45", 1 5/16" - 1.08 (GC2)
bbb - 9', 4 1/4", 5/8", 1" - 1.08 (GC)
kanzzo - 9', 4 1/4", 5/8", 1" - 1.08 (GC5)
Pubo - 8’, 4”, 1/4”, 1 1/4” - 1.08 (Rasson)
MSchaffer - 9', 4 7/16, 15/16", 1 5/8" - 1.07 (GC2)
cigardave - 9', 4 1/2", 1", 1 3/4" - 1.07 (Diamond)
peppersauce - 9', 4 1/4", 3/8", 1 1/4" - 1.06 (GC3)
Oilheadoug - 10', 4.5", 4.0", 0.5", 1.5" - 1.06 (Brunswick Anniversary)
Side Pocket - 10', 4 7/8", 1", 1 1/2" - 1.05 (1920s Brunswick)
Pool Hustler - 9', 4 1/4", 1/4", 15/16" - 1.05 (GC)
IbeAnEngineer - 9', 4.5", 1.0", 1.5" - 1.05 (GC)
JC - 9', 4 7/16", 143°, 1 3/8" - 1.05 (GC3)
TheGrandWazoo - 8', 4.15", 0.65", 1.5" - 1.05 (rebuilt Beach)
Banger - 9', 4 1/2", 7/8", 1 3/4" - 1.04 (GC3)
pw98 - 8.5', 4.25", 0.75", 1.0" - 1.04 (custom)
Jimmorrison - 7', 3 7/8", 7/16", 3/4" - 1.03 (Ruxton)
laedco58 - 9’: 4.5", 0.75": 1.75" - 1.02 (Diamond)
SloMoHolic - 9', 4 1/2", 7/8", 1 3/8" - 1.02 (Diamond)
jondrums - 9', 11.9cm, 2.5cm, 4.2cm - 1.02 (Diamond)
pw98 - 10', 5.0", 1.0", 1.0" - 1.02 (Brunswick Regent)
CoreyClark - 9', 5", 1", 2 1/8" - 1.02 (GC)
bignick31985 - 9', 4 3/8", 0.475", 1.5" - 1.01 (GC4)
"standard" table - 9', 4 7/16", 9/16", 1 5/8" - 1.00 (average-difficulty table)
DeadStick - 9', 4.5", 0.625", 1.75" - 1.00 (1958 Brunswick Centennial)
BRKNRUN - 9', 4.3", 0.4", 1.5" - 1.00 (GC1)
Tennesseejoe- 9', 4.25", 1/4", 1 3/8" - 1.00 (1912 Brunswick Saratoga)
coxcol15 - 7', 4.25", 1", 1.25" - 1.00 (Valley)
Goldball - 8', 12.2cm, 4cm, 5.4cm - 1.00 (Heiron & Smith)
pw98 - 8.5', 4.25", 0.5", 0.75" - 0.99 (Gandy Miss America)
dr_dave - 9', 5", 1 1/8", 1.5" - 0.99 (Olhausen)
dr_dave - 9', 5", 1 1/8", 1 3/8" - 0.99 (GC2)
Call_me_Tom - 7', 4", 1/2", 1" - 0.99 (Valley)
MVPCues - 9', 4 1/2", 1/2", 1 5/8" - 0.98 (1902 Brunswick Jefferson)
oldschool1478 - 9', 4 1/2", 0.625", 1.5" - 0.98 (Diamond)
freds - 8'+, 4.9", 1.1", 1.8" - 0.98 (Gandy Big G)
cjr3559 - 9', 4 1/2", 3/4", 1 1/4" - 0.97 (GC5 - Tournament)
Cardigan Kid - 9', 4 1/2", 3/4", 1 1/16" - 0.97 (GC3)
Korsakoff - 9', 4 3/4", 3/4", 1 3/4" - 0.97 (Diamond Paragon)
wigglybridge - 9', 4 1/2", 5/8", 1 1/2" - 0.98 (rebuilt GC)
westcoast - 7', 4", 0", 1.5" - 0.98 (Valley)
BryanB - 9', 4 1/2"0, 3/4", 1 1/4" - 0.97 (1931 Brunswick)
Poolmanis - 9', 10.9cm, 1cm, 3.1cm - 0.97 (SAM)
Vahmurka - 9', 12.5cm, 20mm, 45mm - 0.97 (Brunswick Metro)
mamics - 9', 4 11/16", 143°, 1 3/16" - 0.97 (no-name)
Will Maynard - 9', 4 3/4", 1", 3/4" - 0.97 (1904 Brunswick Narragansett)
dzcues - 9', 4 7/8", 11/16", 1 15/16" - 0.96 (Diamond)
dr_dave - 9', 4 5/8", 9/16", 1 3/4" - 0.95 (modified Olhausen)
follownoone - 4.75", 0.75", 1.5" - 0.95 (GC4)
jviss - 9’, 4.98”, 0.76”, 1.625” - 0.95 (GC)
Hercus - 9’, 5”, 1", 1.5” - 0.95 (Brunswick Avalon II)
logical - 9', 5", 7/8", 1 3/4" - 0.95 (GC2)
dzcues - 9', 5", 15/16", 1 1/2" - 0.95 (Gandy Big G)
Sloppy Pockets - 8'+, 5", 1 1/8", 1 3/4" - 0.95 (A.E. Schmidt)
44Runner - 8', 4 3/8", 3/4", 1" - 0.94 (Diamond)
jtaylor-996 - 8'+, 4.5", 0.5", 1.625" - 0.93 (Diamond)
Corwyn_8 - 9', 4 3/4", 1 3/4", 1 1/4" - 0.92 (Gandy Winchester)
Jedco - 9', 4 3/4", 3/4", 1 1/4" - 0.91 (GC)
beetle - 9', 13.1cm, 2.2cm, 4.3cm - 0.91 (Olhausen York)
frigopie - 9', 11.5cm, 138.7°, 3.5cm - 0.91 (Eurotour Dynamic III)
12squared - 9', 4 7/8", 3/4", 1 1/2" - 0.91 (GC)
iusedtoberich - 9', 5 1/8", 1":, 1 1/2" - 0.90 (GC)
MSchaffer - 9', 5 1/8", 3/4", 1 3/4" - 0.89 (GC2)
mfinkelstein3 - 9', 5 1/8", 7/8", 1 1/2" - 0.88 (GC3)
StraightPoolIU - 9', 4 7/8", 3/4", 1 1/4" - 0.88 (GC)
Vahmurka - 9', 5 1/8", 7/8", 1 1/2" - 0.88 (GC)
Dopc - 8', 4 1/2", 3/4", 1 1/4" - 0.87 (Connelly)
SloMoHolic - 8', 4 3/4", 3/4", 1 5/8" - 0.87 (Brunswick Medalist)
RobMan - 9', 5", 3/4", 1.5" - 0.86 (GC)
ljump12 - 8'+, 4 7/8", 4 1/8", 1.5" - 0.86 (GC)
sniggihs - 7', 4 1/2", 5/8", 1 3/4" - 0.85 (Diamond)
SloMoHolic - 8'+, 4 7/8", 7/8", 1 1/4" - 0.85 (Brunswick Medalist)
buckshotshoey - 8', 4 3/4", 3/4", 1 1/2" - 0.85 (American Heritage)
nateobot - 7', 4 3/8", 1/2", 1 3/4" - 0.85 (custom)
angluse - 8'+, 4 5/8", 7/16", 1 3/16" - 0.84 (1935 Brunswick Challenger)
dr_dave - 8', 4 3/4", 5/8", 1 3/8" - 0.84 (Connelly)
BRussell - 8', 5", 13/16", 1 1/2" - 0.83 (Olhausen)
Lovepool - 9', 13cm, 1cm, 3.5cm - 0.82 (home)
jtaylor996 - 7', 5 1/8", 146°, 1.51" - 0.82 (Legacy)
loggerhead12 - 8', 5", 13/16", 1 1/4" - 0.81 (Brunswick Manchester II)
kanzzo - 9', 5 1/8", 139°, 1 1/4" - 0.80 ("Legends of Pocket Billiards" GC3)
Mooneye - 7', 4 7/8", 3/4", 1 5/8" - 0.79 (Brunswick Ranchero)
dzcues - 7', 4 1/2", 0", 1/2" - 0.77 (Valley)
dr_dave - 7', 4 1/2", 0", 3/4" - 0.77 (Valley)
SloMoHolic - 6', 4 1/2", 0", 5/8" - 0.77 (Valley)

Here is the new TDF data for my modified table:

dr_dave - 9', 4 5/8", 9/16", 1 3/4" - 0.95 (modified Olhausen)

My experience with CF is that it imparts more energy into the cue ball than wood.

I believe it does generate more spin.

I use the Mezz Ignite shaft and I have no problems with feed back issues.

Some wood shafts warp in my experience but most don't.

I drives me crazy if there are dings in a wood shaft.

The CF is super easy to maintain and it doesn't ding.

After play I just wipe down with alcohol on a paper towel.

CF is super smooth.

The Ignite shaft is not cheap.

Heat combined with humidity is gonna effect wood.

Touring pros play in air-conditioned rooms.

If you are playing in an open to the outdoor room in the PI, then I think that would be different..........

When a cue butt warps that is a sad day indeed..........

dr_dave said:

Was anybody surprised by the results, and do you think it will change much after the cushions break-in and become less slick?

Click to expand...

Not sure I was surprised that the smaller pockets played bigger with the geometric change of the pocket facing. Those older pocket shapes made 5-6 speed + down the rail very difficult (for me). Are the rails still Accufast?

Thanks! Great info. Been looking forward to watching this.

maha said:

yea that people with money want to go to a fitting place with food available and other things to do as well.

rather than a dump of a casino with no food and none around for miles in bad weather.

Click to expand...

I think one of the main considerations is how much the venue will kick back to the guys putting on the show. My sister-in-law who just passed away used to put on conventions and that was always number one.

dr_dave said:

FYI, I just posted a new video that shows the installation of my new rails and pockets, uses the Table Difficulty Factor (TDF) system to compare the modified table to the previous one, and performs a set of tests to measure the effective sizes of the pockets at different angles and speeds to see how the toughness compares to the original table. Check it out:

Login to view embedded media ​

Contents:
0:00 - Intro
0:28 - Table Conversion
2:42 - TDF Comparison
4:17 - Pocket Testing
---- 5:25 - results summary
6:45 - More Info

As always, I look forward to your feedback, comments, questions, complaints, and requests.

Enjoy!

For reference, here’s the previous video:

Login to view embedded media ​

Click to expand...

Was anybody surprised by the results, and do you think it will change much after the cushions break-in and become less slick?

poolscholar 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...

The important piece you are missing is understanding how little the shaft flexes during the incredibly brief tip contact time with the CB. Most of the flex happens after the CB is gone. It might help to do a little more "homework:"

I know you said you read everything at the last link, but I doubt it based on your beliefs. Please check out all the info, explanations, illustrations, videos, articles, analyses, and links on that page if you want to improve your understanding. It doesn't help to keep spouting off anecdotes and idle challenges if you don't first have an understanding of the important principles.

cueball2010 said:

So your saying that the majority of 12+ ring wood shafts are better (feel/stability) than the majority of 314-3 shafts?

Interesting what you said toward the end. Maybe in pool they should run Wood or CF only tourneys. or Ferrule length mins. Synthetic tip only. Not to say equipment is not already regulated by Full length cue minimum, tip diameter max, break cue max weight, No jump cues, jump cues over 40" only, etc

Click to expand...

Better feel as far as old school players are concerned. I have been at this game over fifty years. I have hit a little with a handful of 314's don't care for the feel. Stability in all conditions is probably a little better with the 314 simply because the glue lines provide radial reinforcement, something growth rings don't do. My opinion, the growth rings are more important to how a wooden shaft plays, the glue lines more important to how a 314 plays.

Plain wooden shafts are always an unknown. We can see obvious waves and curves in the wood grain but we can't see the stresses that were in the wood when it was part of a tree. That is why it took a bare minimum of two years and about eight turnings for me to trust a blank. This was for blanks that were supposedly already properly aged. Eight turnings got a blank down to ready for a few final turning passes for the particular taper wanted. Have to admit that I started offering two tapers, mine and what I called a european taper, a modified straight taper that tapered at a constant rate from the tip to beyond typical bridge length then at a faster rate to match the butt.

One problem, everyone uses their own terminology, often using the same terms to mean different things. Especially when discussing the polyarc shafts. My polyarc or multiconic shaft can be totally different from someone elses. For awhile I would copy a taper but if a cue builder is still in business I prefer the customer to go back to the original builder if you want their shaft.

Hu

I found youtube: