High Technology Vs Custom Cuemakers

[mosconiac]

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.

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

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.

 

[2rgrbn]

i prefer southwest to any technological shafts or cues!!!

Ditto, I have seen cue builders put great efforts into developing shaft tapers and finding consistencies in shaft woods, in reality all the tech shafts are an effort to do the same thing. Cue makers are using technology it is just in a different form. There are man made diamonds and natural diamonds it is up to each individual to decide which one is for them.

 

[SCCues]

I think you should play with whatever you are more comfortable with. I thought LD shafts were just a gimmick when they first came out, but after I tried a Predator and an OB-1 I changed my mind.

I own 4 custom cues and I have the original shafts and Predator shafts for my cues and I like to use the custom cue butt with a Predator shaft.

James

 

[RRfireblade]

I disagree.

Pool equipment it's not just the cue, what about the balls and the table and the parts of the table - cloth, rails, slate.
If pool was so simple then people would have stopped playing it ages ago... there are many variable that comes to play and many of them can be easier to deal with with better equipment.

What technological advancements in the table or balls have made the game easier to play ? I'm going with . . . none.

Golf on the other hand . . . endless advancements beyond the club , which is staggering on it's own.

People still play tons of 'simple' games , I don't see what that has to do with new tech either.

Bottom line is there is far more help a player can get from golf equiptment then they will EVER get in a pool cue of any kind that remains legal for play.

But I will go ahead and add . . . . IMO.

 

[skor]

What technological advancements in the table or balls have made the game easier to play ? I'm going with . . . none.

Golf on the other hand . . . endless advancements beyond the club , which is staggering on it's own.

People still play tons of 'simple' games , I don't see what that has to do with new tech either.

Bottom line is there is far more help a player can get from golf equiptment then they will EVER get in a pool cue of any kind that remains legal for play.

But I will go ahead and add . . . . IMO.

Balls - Used to be made out of wood, ivory and other cheap plastic. The technology invested in pool ball created a ball that is (a) rounder, (b) better centered balance and (c) with a slicker finish. All these factors make the balls roll in a more "true" and accurate manner.
BTW, thanks to billiard balls we have industrial plastics in our life as it was Michael Phelan who offered back in the 1860's $10,000 to who ever comes up with a decent substitute for ivory, the rest is history.
You can still feel the difference in playability between pro level balls and $25 sets...

Tables - (a) rails - much more accurate today and return the ball with a more correct angle. (b) cloth - worsted cloth with no napping gave up a playing surface that allow a better roll of the ball and a much easier control over the balls. (c) Slates - are cut with a higher precision and have a better finish that also allow a more accurate response from the table.

Cues - (a) tip - beside the historical fact that in the beginning there were none.... there is a lot of technology going into tips to create a tip that will hold it's shape and hold chalk better and that will be more consistence. there were no layered tips 30 years ago... (b) shaft - low deflection shafts are the buzz word in the last 10 years. Like them or not they do make the game easier!!! (c) joint - the search still continues for a two piece cue that will feel as a one piece cue, if you ask me, it is irrelevant because the generation of players that played pro pool with a one piece cue is long gone. All today's players are used to play with a two piece cues. (b) butt - the butt construction and material used will affect the "feel" which in most cases is simply the feedback/vibration that the cue transfered to the player from the shot. Different constructions also contribute to the total stiffness of the cue and it will affect the cue ball deflection as well (although in a small amount). different butt construction also affect the chances of the butt warping. Radial splice butt and shaft construction also eliminate the "sweet spot" of the cue.

All these things made the game easier!!!

"Simple game" - is something that you brought up... pool is nothing butt simple, otherwise you would be able to run an infinite number of balls (playing 14.1) or infinite number of racks playing other games...

Bottom line is that there is room for technology in pool equipment, wood can be replaced in pool cues and there are many other aspects that can be improved.
The only thing that stops it (or delays it) are the players.... they are not ready to accept progress yet.
Just look at the resistance LD shafts get by so many players.... Now try to imagine a non wood cue, even if it will have the perfect weight with the perfect balance and transfer the shot energy and feedback in a perfectly manner, with zero CB deflection, with a tip that lasts a lifetime... Most people in here will not give it the time of day and will still swear by their Gus (if they have one).... I still belive that if Gus, Bushka, Spain and all the great CM were around this day they would be the #1 fans of Predator...


Sorry for the long post..

 

[Detlev Rackow]

I guess that the dynamics in a golf club which gets whacked perpendicular to it's axis make high-tech much more worthwile.

Pool is a sport/game where every force works in axis with the construction. This is much less demanding, and I don't see that much improvement from hightech.

Besides, what's available as high-tech:

Low-deflection shafts reduce the deflection around 25%, so it's still necessary to compensate for deflection, although not that much.

Butts or shafts cored with high-tech material like carbon seem to have not that much difference to standard gear, I have not heard of anyone who shot more accurately with those shafts. There is much more margin for error in the player's aim than in the accuracy of the cue. As long as people shoot out with slightly bent shafts, the accuracy in conventional gear seems be sufficient.

The real high-tech advancement in cues was the invention of good production machinery. However, this happened in the first decade of the last century ;-)

Regards,

Detlev

 

[Detlev Rackow]

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.

Interesting. Your illustration shows a reduction in deflection of about 75%, while Predator et al claim around 25%

 

[Nick B]

Interesting. Your illustration shows a reduction in deflection of about 75%, while Predator et al claim around 25%

Note on the shot shown he is way out there. Two tips from center. It's a function of pace, angle and friction of balls to cloth...as well as a bunch of other variables but I'll mention the most prevalent. I suspect with "most" conventional cues shot at 15mph or more you'll get about the same results.

I'm sure Predator did a lot of testing and came up with some sort of average as a base line for "normal".

 

[Flex]

Interesting. Your illustration shows a reduction in deflection of about 75%, while Predator et al claim around 25%

There's a factor that may skew the results.

It has to do with the actual cue ball speed when shot with the same butt but two different shafts. One may shoot with the same speed of stroke and get markedly different cue ball speeds. What this can mean when shooting a side spin shot is that the shot with the lower speed shaft will apparently squirt the cue ball less over a table length shot than the same shot with the higher powered shaft. I imagine that the Schon solid maple shaft is more powerful than an OB-1 or 314 shaft.

JMO/ ICBW.

Flex

 

[macguy]

I was thinking last night when playing what impact new technology makes on the game?

When doing a comparison in Golf for example, now all there clubs use very high technology....which is making the game easier than before.

In pool we have the same type of learning curve which is happening at the moment, however, i thought that if this technology was making the game much easier for players......why is it that not all players are moving over to this?

When i look at the top players in the world..... i see that a certain amount have adopted to high technology equipment whilst others have stuck with standard maple shafts.

I look at the top Asian players and in Taiwan most pro's will use Southwest or other high end cuemakers cues using original shafts.

Could you please share your opinions on this subject? i am interested on peoples point of view regarding this subject



Matty maybe you could offer some insight into why the Taiwanese love using custom cues so much?



Thanks



Roy

I don't think the demands of pool are such that there is much in the way of technology improvements needed. Tips may be the biggest advance. In the 60's the big deal was the French Champion tip. Today it would be crap.

 

[shankster8]

Actually, Predator's website claims a 51% deflection reduction for the Z-2 shaft, compared to conventional shafts. Could be more, I assume, for dense shaft woods, ivory ferrules etc..

Interesting. Your illustration shows a reduction in deflection of about 75%, while Predator et al claim around 25%

 

[shankster8]

:wink:
You don't see Tad, Gina, SW, Hercek, Black Boar, DS or Scruggs boring the front end of their shafts and using reallllly soft ferrule, do you? :wink:

Hey Joey, You seem possessed of some knowledge I've been unsuccessfully pursuing for some time. I've been trying to discover more about the Predator Z-2 ferrule material Titan. Your post implies that it is soft. My hunch is that soft tips and/or soft ferrules would increase deflection, because they would slightly increase contact time. My feelings are that the harder the tip/ferrule, the more quickly the cue tip can impart its action and get free of the cueball. Any extra contact time will simply go into pushing the cueball sideways. I suspect there is a tradeoff between a weightier, harder ferrule material (micarta) versus, the softer, lighter ferrule material Titan, and perhaps Predator optimized that parameter? (tip end mass more important than ferrule hardness). Any light you could shed on this would be very much apprediated. If you see this as a thread hijack, anyone let me know and I'll start another thread on this or do it by PM. By the way, much of the above is simply my hunch, and may be completely wrong, that's why I'm seeking input. TIA

 

[JB Cases]

What technological advancements in the table or balls have made the game easier to play ? I'm going with . . . none.

Golf on the other hand . . . endless advancements beyond the club , which is staggering on it's own.

People still play tons of 'simple' games , I don't see what that has to do with new tech either.

Bottom line is there is far more help a player can get from golf equiptment then they will EVER get in a pool cue of any kind that remains legal for play.

But I will go ahead and add . . . . IMO.

Tables have been improved with consistent rubber rails with proper profiles. Slate is now cut to super accuracy using high tech machinery.

Balls are nearly 100% and consistent in performance and not subject to climate.

Cloth is now sheared almost perfectly flat nearly eliminating pilling and making for a consistent surface.

On one hand it was far more challenging to play pool in the old days. Slow nappy cloth that absorbed moisture like a sponge, ivory balls that change with the weather and get our of round quickly, slates that were mismatched, inconsistent rubber rails. Can you imagine how tough it must have been to run out on that equipment?

 

[ratcues]

Take this into consideration;

1. Average income of a golfer compared to average income of a pool player.
2. Amount of research and development involved in getting a tech product in the consumer's hand.
3. The return on that R+D.
4. Mass appeal of each sport and TV coverage.

Yes, I see a need and a trend but can you get a substantial return on your investment? There is a reason Nike makes golf clubs, shoes,golf balls, bags....etc, not cues, shafts, or billiard balls, even though, nation wide, there are probably more avid pool player than avid golfers. The golfers are more willing to spend the money for high tech equipment.

 

[Detlev Rackow]

There's a factor that may skew the results.

It has to do with the actual cue ball speed when shot with the same butt but two different shafts. One may shoot with the same speed of stroke and get markedly different cue ball speeds. What this can mean when shooting a side spin shot is that the shot with the lower speed shaft will apparently squirt the cue ball less over a table length shot than the same shot with the higher powered shaft. I imagine that the Schon solid maple shaft is more powerful than an OB-1 or 314 shaft.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=1267649&postcount=59

Dr_Dave, who's done lots of testing to proof theories about pool, found no connection between the speed of a shot and the deflection (he calls it squirt). In contrast, he found that in all his measurements the deflection for a given cue and a given contact point was the same regardless of the speed, which he could test up to 8mph.

Regards,

Detlev

 

[RRfireblade]

Sorry for the long post..

No problem , I got a pretty good laugh from it.



I guess we'll just have to agree that we're never going to see eye to on this one and bid each other a good day.

 

[RRfireblade]

Tables have been improved with consistent rubber rails with proper profiles. Slate is now cut to super accuracy using high tech machinery.

Balls are nearly 100% and consistent in performance and not subject to climate.

Cloth is now sheared almost perfectly flat nearly eliminating pilling and making for a consistent surface.

On one hand it was far more challenging to play pool in the old days. Slow nappy cloth that absorbed moisture like a sponge, ivory balls that change with the weather and get our of round quickly, slates that were mismatched, inconsistent rubber rails. Can you imagine how tough it must have been to run out on that equipment?

In my opinion , none of that has had any impact to pool for maybe 50 years or more. Golf equiptment has lept and bounded in the last 5 years alone , never the less the last 10.

I've played some of my best pool on GC's dating from the 60's and 70's.

 

[Flex]

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=1267649&postcount=59

Dr_Dave, who's done lots of testing to proof theories about pool, found no connection between the speed of a shot and the deflection (he calls it squirt). In contrast, he found that in all his measurements the deflection for a given cue and a given contact point was the same regardless of the speed, which he could test up to 8mph.

Regards,

Detlev

Yes, I'm aware of Dr. Dave's research. I'm sorry for not being sufficiently clear in my response. The reason why a slower shot may produce a different result is not so much in the squirt as in the swerve of the ball as it goes down table. There are shots where the cue ball is so close to the object ball that the difference may not be noticed, but on a shot where the cue ball travels 6 or 7 diamonds before it hits the object ball the swerve can be tremendous.

Someone above mentioned balls shot at 15 mph. That is a very hard shot. Shoot the shot at lag speed and see what kind of results you get. Theoretically, if the cue is perfectly level and the tip strikes perfectly on the equator of the cue ball and goes through it perfectly on the original plane, there should be no swerve. However, when playing it's usually necessary to elevate the butt of the cue, if ever so slightly, and this will produce a slight masse effect upon the cue ball. The greater the elevation of the butt, the greater the swerve. Compensating for the swerve is a major problem, and slower cloth will make things even worse; ditto for humid cloth.

Flex

 

[softshot]

I'm sure Predator did a lot of testing and came up with some sort of average as a base line for "normal".

more likely predator did a lot of testing and only published the results that made them look good and the rest of the results simply disappeared...


don't believe everything you read... especially online....

just sayin