A Closer look at L.D. Shafts

This is accurate from my experience and why a consistent shot speed is so important

Barioni Cues said:
Look at it this way. If a train was going ten miles an hour and hit a guy on a motorcycle it would knock the motorcycle over and probably propel it a few feet. On the other hand if the train was going 80 miles an hour it would propel that motorcycle a long way. When the shaft is coming at the cue ball at a higher rate of speed it knocks the cue ball harder and further off line. The same example could be made using two balls. A cue ball and an object ball. When a cue ball is shot soft doing a cut shot, the friction carries the object ball off line. This is sometimes referred to as drag. A harder shot has less drag and therefore the object ball stays truer to the tangent line. The tip is round just like the cue ball in this example. The better the chalk, the more friction. The more friction the more the cue ball at a slower speed wants to deviate off the tangent line. The harder or faster the speed the more the cue ball wants to go down the tangent line. This tangent line is the angle the contact points produce between the tip and cue ball.
Click to expand...

This is accurate from my experience and why a consistent shot speed is so important. If you favor one side of the cue ball every time except on straight in shots you increase your ability to judge and calculate what the cue ball is doing every time.

Favoring the inside part of the cue ball is even more essential to reducing unnecessary calculations. Less calculations also reduce the "human error" part of the game and allow you to fall into more of a "zone" which is also essential to maximize your natural ability.
 
Barioni Cues said:
Well, I have the results now. So I guess as for when I would say now. I would like this to be a good resourceful thread to help others and used as a reference. I have set this thread up just to do that. I am going to try to spend quite a bit of time working on this thread with great hopes that it will turn into something. Before I give out all my answers I would like to hear some of the Azer's input and thoughts. I would like to hear the opinion's of what people think the answers are before I give them all out. Or would you guys think this thread would be more useful for me to just list the answers now. I was thinking that every one put their 2 cents in that others might learn better from this thread. They would hear a lot of ideas and get a lot of different views. Then the final answer will be in the form of pics, video, with an explanation so their is facts and proof to support the answers. Let me know what you guys want or what way you think would be best to help others. As far as where, right here on this thread and on my website. Answers will be posted here first so no need to go to my website unless you are looking for more info and details regarding the subject.
As for what form, I would say factual and scientific in a myth busters approach. Some of the headings in this thread are already set up. Pics and video to present proof and facts to support the answers. I am doing this for the good of pool and to give something back to pool and all who love this sport as much as I do. Hopefully this thread goes the way it is intended. I may need help from all of you to make that happen.
Click to expand...

OK, here's one guess by me.

Stiff Cue versus flexible cue. All other things considered equal, I'm guessing a stiffer cue squirts the cue ball less and more consistently.

We're "listening".
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Other tests have shown that when swerve is eliminated squirt is unchanged by speed differences.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that for most shots that are made at a higher speed the effective "perceived" squirt is greater than at slow speeds because of the reduced swerve in shots at high speeds.
 
JoeyA said:
I'm guessing that for most shots that are made at a higher speed the effective "perceived" squirt is greater than at slow speeds because of the reduced swerve in shots at high speeds.
Click to expand...

Joey,

I understand you but PJ may not. You mean that there is less time for all of the built up 'potential' swerve to take effect. Hence there is less actual swerve before the cue ball makes contact with the object ball.

Correct?

Merry Christmas,
 
JoeyA said:
OK, here's one guess by me.

Stiff Cue versus flexible cue. All other things considered equal, I'm guessing a stiffer cue squirts the cue ball less and more consistently.

We're "listening".
Click to expand...


Joey,

My guess, all other things being equal, & I don't understand how they coud both have equal pivot points, but if they did, or if they were shot with the bridge at their pivot points, that the stiffer shaft would cause more CB squirt with more consistancy than a shaft that is more flexible, all other thing being equal.

Best Regards,
 
TATE said:
So I assume a shaft that measures 12mm all the way for 16" from the tip is pretty low squirt - exactly the kind of shaft I hate to play with!
Click to expand...

Ya, I hate these skinny shafts too. Keep in mind a few things here. Just because it's 12mm doesn't mean it is flexible. Before I made the stiffness tester I thought the same as you. But the fact is I turned down a shaft to 10.4mm thinking it would be super flexible. I would hate to play with this kind of shaft but I needed to see what extreme cases would do. Turned out this 10.4mm shaft had quite a bit of growth rings and was stiffer than my 13mm shaft. Of course my 13mm shaft is all hot rodded and lightened, it also only has 4 growth rings per inch. I my self like a thicker shaft, as stiff as It can be with out adding squirt. To stiff adds squirt but has the most power. To flexible has the least amount of squirt to a point. That point is when you achieve the minimum amount of cue ball deflection. When you go past this point you are just making the shaft more flexible with out any benefit and loosing power in the process. This is where shaft tuning comes in.
 
Here it is in a nut shell.

JoeyA said:
OK, here's one guess by me.

Stiff Cue versus flexible cue. All other things considered equal, I'm guessing a stiffer cue squirts the cue ball less and more consistently.

We're "listening".
Click to expand...

Well I wish I could say this was true. And for me being a cue builder, I really wish it was true because a stiffer shaft has less tendency to warp and can be turned faster. Flexible shafts have to be turned much slower with finer cuts and needs to be made out of the highest quality shaft blanks.
Stiff Cue versus flexible cue. All other things considered equal, a flexible cue squirts the cue ball less. As for being more consistently, this is a bit tricky. This depends much on other factors. This was a huge part of my study and one of the main reasons for the study. Many believe that a stiffer shaft is easier to control the cue ball. Well my study shows this is kind of true to a point. It is hard to explain but I will try. It is kind of like a double edge sword as it goes both ways. Lets first consider the stiff shaft. Because the fact that the stiff shaft does not move out of the way it causes more squirt. The shaft does not flex as much in the middle of the shaft either so the tangent lines between the contact points of the tip and cue ball is the direction the force stays truer to. It is hard to say a stiff shaft is more consistent when you factor in unintentional english. If your trying to hit center ball but you accidentally hit off center ball you are going to get some squirt causing you to miss the ball. How much squirt depends on the cue, mostly the shaft itself. Some cues with lower squirt you might rattle the ball. Other cues with higher squirt you might miss the pocket completely. I am making a video showing this difference now. The ball misses the pocket by more than a whole diamond. Ok lets look at the flexible shaft. It bends out of the way and also flexes in the middle. The ball has more forward motion and does not stay true to the tangent line of contact points between tip and cue ball. Therefore it produces less squirt. How ever the harder you hit the ball the more the shaft flexes. The more the shaft flexes the harder it is to control the speed of the cue ball. This takes some time to get used to but with time you can master it. For many it is easier to control the speed with a flexible shaft than it is to guess for compensation dealing with squirt. Also with unintentional english the cue ball goes straighter so you miss less balls. So it is a bit of a trade off. With my tuned shafts I make the shaft as stiff as it can with the least amount of squirt. let me explain. My main concern is the least amount of squirt. I don't want a 12mm tip so I have to achieve this differently. Then my next concern is power and control. There is a fine line for these three and changing one effects the other. When you have the max for all three of these you have the best playing shaft possible. It is hard to achieve this because the shaft wood is so different. Growth rings, density, radial consistency. A lot time and tuning is required to get the least amount of squirt with the most power and control.
 
duckie said:
There is a difference between product testing and scientific testing.

This is product testing in that all it shows is the difference's in performance of the different cues under the same test parameters. Product testing does not always reflect actual real world operating conditions. Such is the case in this testing.

Scientific testing would take into consideration all the variables that are encountered in the real world of shot making and not just one set of testing parameters.

Doing test at only one speed does not reflect what happens at various speeds that is used in shot making. In 14.1, slow rolls are key, yet, the testing here does not include these slow rolls.

What about bridge length? The distance from the bridge pivot and the cue ball. In this test, the same length is used unlike in the real world of shot making where the same bridge length can not always be used.

The result of this marketing is a person will buy a LD shaft thinking they need one, when in reality, they are just shooting too hard, are trying to do too much on a shot with a cue ball.

I've been playing a new player that got a LD shaft cue and is so proud of it. He can talk the lingo, but he is clueless about the real facts behind shot making. Instead of understanding the ins and outs of shot making, he bought into the hype of needing a LD shaft because of per marketing.

I find the biggest weakness of players is lack of knowing just how much speed is needed to do a shot. I notice most shoot harder than needed for the shot or not understanding how to make the CB work for you. So, they get a LD shaft thinking that's the answer and it might be for a short time only. No matter what shaft you use,until you master your speed control, you will only go so far.

And the only way to master speed control is table time and not equipment used.

Most on here will never get the level of feel needed to truly know what is going on between the CB and cue tip.
Click to expand...

Your statement above "Scientific testing would take into consideration all the variables that are encountered in the real world of shot making and not just one set of testing parameters" I could not agree more. You are absolutely right and that is just what we did. The only time I use the same variables is when I want to see the difference stiffness makes or how deep I drill the shaft or when I tune the shafts. If I am changing variables when doing this I would not know If the speed changed my results or drilling changed my results. So depending on what I am doing or trying to find out dictates my procedures.

In your statement "What about bridge length? The distance from the bridge pivot and the cue ball. In this test, the same length is used unlike in the real world of shot making where the same bridge length can not always be used." Where did you get that I used the same bridge length? Again I only use the same bridge length if I am testing one shaft to another for one purpose. In other words, when I test one shaft to another I keep the same variables for both shafts every think being equal. I do the tests at different variables but all things must be equal if you want to compare apples for apples. I do not have enough videos out that show this but they are recorded and I hope to post them soon when I get the time. Thank you so much for all your input. I think this format will work because a lot of readers might think the same thing and hopefully this clears up some of the confusion.
 
Barioni Cues said:
Ya, I hate these skinny shafts too. Keep in mind a few things here. Just because it's 12mm doesn't mean it is flexible. Before I made the stiffness tester I thought the same as you. But the fact is I turned down a shaft to 10.4mm thinking it would be super flexible. I would hate to play with this kind of shaft but I needed to see what extreme cases would do. Turned out this 10.4mm shaft had quite a bit of growth rings and was stiffer than my 13mm shaft. Of course my 13mm shaft is all hot rodded and lightened, it also only has 4 growth rings per inch. I my self like a thicker shaft, as stiff as It can be with out adding squirt. To stiff adds squirt but has the most power. To flexible has the least amount of squirt to a point. That point is when you achieve the minimum amount of cue ball deflection. When you go past this point you are just making the shaft more flexible with out any benefit and loosing power in the process. This is where shaft tuning comes in.
Click to expand...


When you moved the flex point closer to the tip, did it reduce the squirt?

Did laminated shafts perform differently than solid wood shafts?
 
ENGLISH! said:
Joey,

I understand you but PJ may not. You mean that there is less time for all of the built up 'potential' swerve to take effect. Hence there is less actual swerve before the cue ball makes contact with the object ball.

Correct?

Merry Christmas,
Click to expand...

Of course Pat understands this. It's important that the tester understands this and that he is aligned with all the previous work done.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Tests have shown that (at least within normal ranges) shaft stiffness doesn't affect squirt to a significant degree. For instance, I have a very stiff shaft that produces less squirt than any commercially available shaft because it has very low end mass. On the other hand, some very whippy shafts produce a lot of squirt because of very high end mass.


For the same contact point on the CB, the amount of squirt shouldn't affect the amount of spin to a significant degree. I've tested this myself, and it also stands to reason (given that both shafts must produce the same force vector through the cue ball in order for it to go in the same direction).


If the CB contact point is the same this shouldn't be true. To hit the same spot on the foot rail you'd have to change the setup - are you sure you hit exactly the same CB contact point (measured perpendicular to the CB's path)?


The nickel tip's center is farther from the CB's center, but since (as you say) the contact point is the same there should be no difference in the amount of spin or squirt.


Yes, these are difficult things to visualize and understand, and the facts often don't agree with what our intuition tells us.

I appreciate the time and effort you're putting into this and hope you'll take my comments in the constructive way I intend them.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

I spent couple of weeks shooting hard with english, using different cues, i have to admit PJ knows what he is talking about, and he is accurate. Remember, it is where the tip hit consistently is the main driving factor of the squirt shooting with high speed as well as the end mass.

For those who say otherwise have issues with their stroke, or not hitting hard enough to cancel swerve 100%, or they are elevated a bit higher than normal where swerve will dominate no matter what speed (or max speed allowed to keep CB on table), or maybe the cloth is very rough/dirty have high friction

Another issue i like to bring up with small shafts, their advantage IMO is the tend to make the pivot angle smaller which helps reduce squirt, and obviously end mass is much less than a 14 mm shaft

Pat, English, and all, a while back i was talking about my 11 mm cue that it has minimum squirt or none, after i corrected for some of the above issues it started to squirt a bit more than i know. Pat, Dr. Dave and other were correct.

Sorry English!!!!
 
Barioni Cues said:
Well I wish I could say this was true. And for me being a cue builder, I really wish it was true because a stiffer shaft has less tendency to warp and can be turned faster. Flexible shafts have to be turned much slower with finer cuts and needs to be made out of the highest quality shaft blanks.

Stiff Cue versus flexible cue. All other things considered equal, a flexible cue squirts the cue ball less.

As for being more consistently, this is a bit tricky. This depends much on other factors. This was a huge part of my study and one of the main reasons for the study. Many believe that a stiffer shaft is easier to control the cue ball. Well my study shows this is kind of true to a point. It is hard to explain but I will try. It is kind of like a double edge sword as it goes both ways.

Lets first consider the stiff shaft. Because the fact that the stiff shaft does not move out of the way it causes more squirt. The shaft does not flex as much in the middle of the shaft either so the tangent lines between the contact points of the tip and cue ball is the direction the force stays truer to.

It is hard to say a stiff shaft is more consistent when you factor in unintentional english. If your trying to hit center ball but you accidentally hit off center ball you are going to get some squirt causing you to miss the ball. How much squirt depends on the cue, mostly the shaft itself. Some cues with lower squirt you might rattle the ball. Other cues with higher squirt you might miss the pocket completely. I am making a video showing this difference now. The ball misses the pocket by more than a whole diamond.

Ok lets look at the flexible shaft. It bends out of the way and also flexes in the middle. The ball has more forward motion and does not stay true to the tangent line of contact points between tip and cue ball. Therefore it produces less squirt. How ever the harder you hit the ball the more the shaft flexes. The more the shaft flexes the harder it is to control the speed of the cue ball. This takes some time to get used to but with time you can master it. For many it is easier to control the speed with a flexible shaft than it is to guess for compensation dealing with squirt. Also with unintentional english the cue ball goes straighter so you miss less balls. So it is a bit of a trade off.

With my tuned shafts I make the shaft as stiff as it can with the least amount of squirt. let me explain. My main concern is the least amount of squirt. I don't want a 12mm tip so I have to achieve this differently. Then my next concern is power and control. There is a fine line for these three and changing one effects the other. When you have the max for all three of these you have the best playing shaft possible. It is hard to achieve this because the shaft wood is so different. Growth rings, density, radial consistency. A lot time and tuning is required to get the least amount of squirt with the most power and control.
Click to expand...

John,
You have apparently spent a great deal of time with this study and I would like to thank you for sharing some of this information with the forum.

Don't be disappointed if some of the things that you "discovered" are not true and are pointed out by members of this forum. They might be correct or not. You will get some feedback on some of your statements from some of us who have just learned from others and some who have actually spent time studying these effects.

It's really great to see how much information you have to share. I do have a little Christmas wish. I wish that in the future you would sectionalize some of your information like I attempted to, above.

While some members of this forum may abhor the mere thought of someone marketing their product in the Main Forum, I think it is the best place for the marketing to be done. The marketing provides grist for the mill (AZB discussion), information for its members and possible prosperity for the sellers in an industry poor with excess dollars to spend on promoting the sport.

Just remember that some of these members are learned scholars of the sphere and the rod and from time to time, you might think that one of them is aimed at your head. I see your posts from time to time and just wanted to encourage you to listen to what some of them have to say. Your study may be spot on in some areas and not so spot on in other areas. I've seen even the most correct guys on this forum, get it wrong every once in a while. :smile:

The bottom line is that you are putting in time to discover "secrets" that will help you and others, to attempt to build better cues. For that I commend you, as should others.

Previously, I thought the same as you about flexible shafts getting out of the way of the cue ball thereby squirting the cue ball less. The squirt of the cue ball happens FAST and others agree with me that all things considered equal, a stiff shaft squirts less than a flexible shaft but I am sure there are details that might be missing from our respective perceptions that lead us to the contrary opinions. You've got a study on your side. I've got a little experience playing with different equipment and I listen to those who claim to be in the know. :-)

Thanks again for posting your findings.
 
TATE said:
When you moved the flex point closer to the tip, did it reduce the squirt?

Did laminated shafts perform differently than solid wood shafts?
Click to expand...

No, surprisingly it did not. I thought moving the flex point closer to the tip would reduce squirt. I tried it in inch increments from the tip back to 24".
What happens is the bridge is so close to the tip and makes this area stiff as a board. Want a flexible shaft to play stiffer, just shorten your bridge. The best testing pivot point is about 12 inches but it is slightly different from one shaft to another. also the forearm in the butt of the cue and the joint play a part. I would say as much as 20%. A more flexible forearm would allow you to have a stiffer shaft with out adding squirt.
 
TATE said:
When you moved the flex point closer to the tip, did it reduce the squirt?

Did laminated shafts perform differently than solid wood shafts?
Click to expand...

You can't stereo type laminated shafts or solid wood shafts. Every laminated shaft and solid wood shaft play and test different. You can however find a solid wood shaft and make it play just like a laminated shaft or vise versa.
 
John,

You are one of the few people who has gone to the trouble and expense of building a robot to test shafts.

Maybe instead of theroy, people should just send you their design to test.

My preference is as this: as long a shaft has a reasonable amount of squirt, I can play with it if it's other characteristics are what I want. If it's on the high end squirt spectrum I don't want to have to deal with it.

Chris
 
JoeyA said:
John,
You have apparently spent a great deal of time with this study and I would like to thank you for sharing some of this information with the forum.

Don't be disappointed if some of the things that you "discovered" are not true and are pointed out by members of this forum. They might be correct or not. You will get some feedback on some of your statements from some of us who have just learned from others and some who have actually spent time studying these effects.

It's really great to see how much information you have to share. I do have a little Christmas wish. I wish that in the future you would sectionalize some of your information like I attempted to, above.

While some members of this forum may abhor the mere thought of someone marketing their product in the Main Forum, I think it is the best place for the marketing to be done. The marketing provides grist for the mill (AZB discussion), information for its members and possible prosperity for the sellers in an industry poor with excess dollars to spend on promoting the sport.

Just remember that some of these members are learned scholars of the sphere and the rod and from time to time, you might think that one of them is aimed at your head. I see your posts from time to time and just wanted to encourage you to listen to what some of them have to say. Your study may be spot on in some areas and not so spot on in other areas. I've seen even the most correct guys on this forum, get it wrong every once in a while. :smile:

The bottom line is that you are putting in time to discover "secrets" that will help you and others, to attempt to build better cues. For that I commend you, as should others.

Previously, I thought the same as you about flexible shafts getting out of the way of the cue ball thereby squirting the cue ball less. The squirt of the cue ball happens FAST and others agree with me that all things considered equal, a stiff shaft squirts less than a flexible shaft but I am sure there are details that might be missing from our respective perceptions that lead us to the contrary opinions. You've got a study on your side. I've got a little experience playing with different equipment and I listen to those who claim to be in the know. :-)

Thanks again for posting your findings.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the kind words Joey. You are welcome to believe what you want as well as others. But if you come down here I can prove to you a stiffer shaft does produce way more squirt. Yep, I said way more. Bob Meucci is correct when he says this. I thought he was full of it but it turns out he is right and I can prove it. I will show a stiff shaft in the dyno, Not 1 but 5,6,7 or how many you all want me to try. Then we will put any flexible shaft in the dyno and it will beat it. By this I mean it will produce less squirt.
 
Roger Long said:
Patrick, could you please explain why low end mass produces less squirt?

Roger
Click to expand...
When the CB is struck offcenter it rotates while the tip is in contact with it, pushing the tip aside in one direction and itself (the CB) aside in the opposite direction. The CB pushing itself aside is squirt.

Imagine yourself and another person standing on roller skates facing each other. If you push that person in the chest you'll both roll backwards away from each other (the same "opposite reaction" we see with the CB and tip). If he's small and light, he'll go farther than you will - but if he's big and heavy you'll go farther. In the same way, a heavier tip resists the CB's push more, causing the CB to push itself farther aside (producing more squirt).

Why "end mass"? Because of the speed that the "shock waves" travel along the shaft when it hits the CB, only the weight (mass) of the first several inches of the shaft are "felt" by the CB.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top