low deflection shafts

[RiverCity]

If you hit directly on the horizontal axis to apply side spin (english), then yes, there is a measurable difference in the amount of cue ball deflection ("squirt") experienced between a standard shaft and a LD shaft. But I have two problems with that: first, I don't consider 1/2-inch over a distance of 50 inches a significant amount of difference; and second, a cue ball is rarely struck directly on the horizontal axis when applying side spin. It is almost always struck above the horizontal axis, which sends it off rolling (instead of sliding) and almost entirely eliminates squirt (deflection).

I think it's the robot testing that has been presented by others that needs the revising.

Roger

Roger, I normally don't like to get involved with stuff like this, but I have to disagree with you here.... 1/2"????
I have regular shafts that I have to aim 2-21/2 BALLS off of the correct contact point to land the cue ball in the correct spot. With a LD shaft, it's a half ball or less adjustment with the same hit on the cue ball.
And as far as side spin combined with top or bottom not squirting the cb, that is just incorrect. I normally agree with you, but your statements here are not based on real world data.
I will agree that a person does not need a LD shaft to play well, and there is a lot of hype in the marketing. But the differences and advantages of a shaft like predator are pretty clear to anyone who plays with one for a little while vs hitting a few balls.
Chuck

 

[naji]

Roger, I normally don't like to get involved with stuff like this, but I have to disagree with you here.... 1/2"????
I have regular shafts that I have to aim 2-21/2 BALLS off of the correct contact point to land the cue ball in the correct spot. With a LD shaft, it's a half ball or less adjustment with the same hit on the cue ball.
And as far as side spin combined with top or bottom not squirting the cb, that is just incorrect. I normally agree with you, but your statements here are not based on real world data.
I will agree that a person does not need a LD shaft to play well, and there is a lot of hype in the marketing. But the differences and advantages of a shaft like predator are pretty clear to anyone who plays with one for a little while vs hitting a few balls.
Chuck

Thanks that makes two of us, thanks for taking the time to write it.

 

[scsuxci]

Its very easy,numbers don't lie.
Most Maple shafts have a high deflection ratio.
Most LD shafts do not.

The feel of an LD shaft may be worse or wood used or price
but as far as Deflection,your compensating a lot less.

Our Junior 9ball Champ plays with a Schon shaft which deflects
like there's no tomorrow.
When I asked him why he doesn't use Predator,he says he's to use to
compensating with his regular shaft that re-learning what he already
knows would be a waste of time.
In his case I would agree,since he's won a couple titles.
You have to be willing to take the time and learn whatever shaft
you play with.

 

[nrhoades]

I think that for those just starting out with the game, learning to apply spin using back-hand-english and front-hand-english (instead of moving the stick parallel to the line of aim) with the combination of an LD shaft, helps you quickly understand how squirt and swerve work. Once you've caught on to the feel, you're on your own to refine it for years and years with whatever equipment you want.

When you play at a high level, all of that nit-picky stuff people here argue about becomes second nature anyway. The only conscious thing you should be executing is maintaining a visual, mental, and physical connection to the object ball. Your training will solve the rest of the shot.

 

[Pathetic Shark]

Its very easy,numbers don't lie.
Most Maple shafts have a high deflection ratio.
Most LD shafts do not.

The feel of an LD shaft may be worse or wood used or price
but as far as Deflection,your compensating a lot less.

Our Junior 9ball Champ plays with a Schon shaft which deflects
like there's no tomorrow.
When I asked him why he doesn't use Predator,he says he's to use to
compensating with his regular shaft that re-learning what he already
knows would be a waste of time.
In his case I would agree,since he's won a couple titles.
You have to be willing to take the time and learn whatever shaft
you play with.

Am I alone in not getting this 'relearning' thing? How hard can it be to hit the OB where you are aiming? After all, this excuse is trotted out by experienced players, and I cannot see how an experienced player can struggle to aim directly at a contact point, whether using English or not.

Going from a LD shaft to a HD shaft is hard. Doing the reverse isn't.

 

[CreeDo]

It's simpler than people make it out to be.

Yes, deflection is a real thing and an LD shaft noticeably decreases it.
Videos like this make deflection very obvious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nx4r0NSsxqo

It's easy to test yourself and see the difference between, say,
a house cue and a predator Z2.

So the question is, is this something you want?
Is it "worth it"? I guess that depends on if you have a job and what it pays.
200 bucks is not an impossible investment for most AZers.

All you're buying is a line of aim that is closer to where you're pointing the cue.
You're not buying better spin, super draw, or any other mythical advantage.
Just a different line of aim. For me, that was worth 200 bucks.

For certain shots, like shots struck hard with inside spin at longer distances,
the line of aim looks "right" with an LD shaft and "very wrong" without.

Yes, there was an adjustment period. Yes, you still have some deflection on an LD
shaft and you'll need to compensate on some shots. It's not literally point'n'shoot.
You don't actually aim where you would with center ball on EVERY shot.
Just on more shots than you used to.

 

[Grinder313]

Looks like a low squirt shaft would give you a larger target area due to less deflection compensation. Less chance missing the contact point compensating for 1 ball deflection vs. 2 ball deflection...

 

[dr_dave]

What is your overall impression of low deflection shafts vs standard shafts. pros/cons?

FYI, all pros and cons of low-squirt (AKA low cue-ball deflection or LD) shafts are listed here:

low squirt (low deflection or LD) shaft resource page

Do they adversely affect back-hand english?

... only if your bridge length is not well-matched to the shaft squirt. For more info, see:

backhand english (BHE) and front-hand english (FHE)

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Here I thought LD shafts were more rigid, but you are saying they actually flex more, not less. That is an important difference to know!

What makes a shaft "LD" is being lighter in the 5-8 inches closest to the tip. For much more info on this topic, see: LD shaft endmass and stiffness. Usually, an LD shaft is whippier (less stiff) at the end. Therefore a low-deflection shaft actually "deflects" (bends) more during an off-center hit shot, resulting in less "cue ball deflection." That's why many of us prefer the term "squirt" instead of "deflection;" because with a low-squirt shaft, the shaft actual "deflects" more and the cue ball "deflects" less. This can be confusing. To avoid confusion, I think it is better to use the term "squirt" or phrase "cue ball deflection" so people don't confuse it with shaft "deflection."

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Are because those shafts ARE hollow. A lot of the ld tech is based on hollowing out the shaft to reduce end mass. As far as the shaft glancing off on contact. I think you need to review that high speed photography again. Shafts do not bend away from the cue ball until after contact ceases and it is due to pressure being released that was incurred in the opposite direction from the mass of the cb creating pressure on the side of the shaft that is making contact with the cb.

Jaden,

You are correct that most of the "deflection" (bend) of the shaft away from the CB occurs well after the CB is gone. This can be clearly seen in the super-slow-motion videos on the cue deflection and vibration resource page.

However, it is not the flex of the shaft during or after tip contact that contributes mostly to squirt (cue ball deflection). The main cause for squirt is the fact that the endmass of the shaft is being pushed sideways when the CB starts to turn while the tip is still in contact with the CB. For a more detailed explanation of this, backed up by video evidence, see what causes squirt.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

I was surprised how much a Dr Dave's Z2 deflected during his testing of Jaden's LD tips. He reckoned on over 1.5 inches.

I never adjust when playing with my Z shaft and only rarely notice any deflection, let alone 1.5 inches.

You can easily duplicate the results yourself. Just do what I did in the video. Here it is:
NV D.15 - Cue and Tip Testing for Cue Ball Deflection (Squirt)

Now, for shorter-distance and slower-speed shots, squirt can be less of a factor. Also, for certain shot speeds, tip contact points, cloth conditions, and cue elevations, squirt can be completely cancelled by swerve, and no aiming correction will be required. For more info, see:
NV B.70 - Squirt (cue ball deflection), swerve, and throw, from VEPS II

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

There many more variables at play than just squirt.

Dave's test isolated squirt which doesn't account other factors in regular play.

You are correct that squirt isn't the only factor that must be considered when compensating aim for shots with english. All of the squirt, swerve, and throw effects come into play differently for different types of shots. That's one thing that makes pool so challenging and fun.

Now, when testing cue shafts or tips, I believe that the factors not directly related to the cue shaft or tip should be eliminated as much as possible; otherwise, it becomes too difficult to interpret the results of the experiments.

If the cue is not level, swerve (CB curve) is a factor, and the amount of swerve will depend on shot speed, cue elevation, tip contact point, and the friction between the CB and cloth. If you want to measure the properties of a shaft or tip, you should eliminate swerve effects as much as possible. This can be done by keeping the cue as level as possible and by using fast speed, as I did in my recent shaft/tip squirt-testing video.

Also, when testing shafts and tips, an OB should not be involved because that would introduce throw into the results, which has nothing to do with the shaft and tip.

FYI, more advice concerning how to do careful measurements when testing shafts and tips, see the bullets on the robotic squirt-testing resource page.

Regards,
Dave

 

[mel_smOg]

I feel they are more forgiving, if amateur misses the center of cue ball cue ball does not go out of straight line too much to miss the shot

 

[dr_dave]

If you hit directly on the horizontal axis to apply side spin (english), then yes, there is a measurable difference in the amount of cue ball deflection ("squirt") experienced between a standard shaft and a LD shaft. But I have two problems with that: first, I don't consider 1/2-inch over a distance of 50 inches a significant amount of difference; and second, a cue ball is rarely struck directly on the horizontal axis when applying side spin. It is almost always struck above the horizontal axis, which sends it off rolling (instead of sliding) and almost entirely eliminates squirt (deflection).

Roger, anytime the CB is hit off center there is squirt. Now, if the cue is not level (as is the case with most pool shots), there is also swerve (CB curve) which "deflects" the CB in the opposite direction than squirt. With some shots (e.g., slow-speed follow shots with sidespin), the swerve happens very fast and can cancel the squirt exactly (for certain combinations of shaft squirt, cue elevation, shots speed, and cloth conditions). In this case, it can appear that the CB heads in a straight line, parallel to the direction of the cue. In this case, people can be lead to believe there is no squirt or swerve. Instead, there is no "net CB deflection" (AKA squerve, or the combination of squirt and swerve). I think the squirt/swerve video demonstrates the separate effects, and how they can combine in different ways, fairly well.

Now, if you hit a sidespin shot the exact same way with an LD shaft and a large-squirt shaft, the CB will not head in the same direction. This will be true for any type of shot, assuming the shot is hit the exact same way with both shafts. This is easy for anybody to demonstrate for themselves.

I think it's the robot testing that has been presented by others that needs the revising.

Roger, I am honestly a little disappointed you would make such a statement based on all of the time, effort, care, and consideration that has gone into robotic cue testing over many years. Please see my relevant reply to Jaden.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

What if we come up with a standard test that can be done on a barbox and everyone can post their results. Sure everyone has a different stroke or even how they apply english. Maybe some players with their Ld shaft will still have their maple shaft and that would be the best test. Same player, same stroke and same english applied. We can all list our cue, shaft and tip with the results. I think it would be interesting to hear the results.

Great idea. For consistency, I recommend that everybody uses the procedure described and demonstrated in the following video:

NV D.15 - Cue and Tip Testing for Cue Ball Deflection (Squirt)

Regards,
Dave

 

[Roger Long]

Roger, anytime the CB is hit off center there is squirt. Now, if the cue is not level (as is the case with most pool shots), there is also swerve (CB curve) which "deflects" the CB in the opposite direction than squirt. With some shots (e.g., slow-speed follow shots with sidespin), the swerve happens very fast and can cancel the squirt exactly (for certain combinations of shaft squirt, cue elevation, shots speed, and cloth conditions). In this case, it can appear that the CB heads in a straight line, parallel to the direction of the cue. In this case, people can be lead to believe there is no squirt or swerve. Instead, there is no "net CB deflection" (AKA squerve, or the combination of squirt and swerve). I think the squirt/swerve video demonstrates the separate effects, and how they can combine in different ways, fairly well.

Now, if you hit a sidespin shot the exact same way with an LD shaft and a large-squirt shaft, the CB will not head in the same direction. This will be true for any type of shot, assuming the shot is hit the exact same way with both shafts. This is easy for anybody to demonstrate for themselves.

Roger, I am honestly a little disappointed you would make such a statement based on all of the time, effort, care, and consideration that has gone into robotic cue testing over many years. Please see my relevant reply to Jaden.

Regards,
Dave

We've been all through this before, Dave, and you have never acknowledged the fact that the tip placement, in relation to the horizontal axis, is a key factor in controlling squirt. I will agree that squirt is present anytime the CB is hit off center, but if the CB can be hit in such a way that swerve cancels out squirt, then there really is no need to have a LD shaft solve the "problem" for you. And if the friction between the ball and cloth (which is the main contributing factor in producing squirt and swerve) can be so drastically reduced by hitting above the horizontal center line, then the whole argument in favor of low-deflection shafts loses a drastic measure of credibility.

No disrespect intended, Dave, but I've watched your slow-motion videos regarding this subject over and over, and it appears to me that your tests were not done with a robot; which is to mean that inconsistencies in execution must have been present. One of the main inconsistencies I seemed to notice was in the amount of tip offset used in comparing a standard shaft to a LD shaft. When you struck the cue ball with the standard shaft, it appeared (to me, anyway) that the tip was offset more (more English applied) than when you used the LD shaft. Also, the view of the shots was from above, so it could not be seen where the tip was contacting the CB in relation to the horizontal axis, or if the elevation of the cue was consistently the same. I was also not able to tell if the speed of each shot was consistently the same. Therefore, I feel that those particular tests have insufficiently demonstrated that a significant benefit can be derived from the use of a LD shaft.

As far as robotic testing goes, I was not referring to testing done by you, or any other independent testing agents; I was referring to robotic comparisons that were conducted at trade shows by Predator and Meucci about 10 or 12 years ago. If you recall, the Predator robot always showed the 314 shaft producing less cue ball deflection (squirt) than all other shafts (including the Meucci Black Dot), and Meucci's robot always showed the Black Dot shaft producing less squirt than all other shafts (including the Predator 314). How could that be? Could it have had something to do with where the tip was aimed at the horizontal center line?

Roger

 

[BogeyFree]

One of the main inconsistencies I seemed to notice was in the amount of tip offset used in comparing a standard shaft to a LD shaft. When you struck the cue ball with the standard shaft, it appeared (to me, anyway) that the tip was offset more (more English applied) than when you used the LD shaft. Also, the view of the shots was from above, so it could not be seen where the tip was contacting the CB in relation to the horizontal axis, or if the elevation of the cue was consistently the same. I was also not able to tell if the speed of each shot was consistently the same. Therefore, I feel that those particular tests have insufficiently demonstrated that a significant benefit can be derived from the use of a LD shaft.



Roger

This is exactly my problem with Dominic Esposito in that when he demonstrates a shot with a 314 or Z and then demonstrates the "same" shot with the prospective customer's shaft more often than not he is not stroking the ball the same and it's obvious he's doing it to magnify the difference which is both unfair and misleading.

 

[dr_dave]

We've been all through this before, Dave, and you have never acknowledged the fact that the tip placement, in relation to the horizontal axis, is a key factor in controlling squirt.

The tip position relative to the horizontal axis affects both swerve and squirt. I explain and illustrate this very clearly in the following article:

"Squirt - Part VIII: squerve effects" (BD, March, 2008)

and on my tip contact height effects resource page.

I will agree that squirt is present anytime the CB is hit off center

I'm glad.

but if the CB can be hit in such a way that swerve cancels out squirt, then there really is no need to have a LD shaft solve the "problem" for you.

Agreed. However, the amount of cue elevation you need to do this for a given shot speed will vary with shot distance and conditions. This is difficult to control consistently.

And if the friction between the ball and cloth (which is the main contributing factor in producing squirt and swerve)

Friction between the ball and cloth has nothing to do with squirt; although, it has everything to do with swerve.

No disrespect intended, Dave, but I've watched your slow-motion videos regarding this subject over and over, and it appears to me that your tests were not done with a robot; which is to mean that inconsistencies in execution must have been present. One of the main inconsistencies I seemed to notice was in the amount of tip offset used in comparing a standard shaft to a LD shaft. When you struck the cue ball with the standard shaft, it appeared (to me, anyway) that the tip was offset more (more English applied) than when you used the LD shaft. Also, the view of the shots was from above, so it could not be seen where the tip was contacting the CB in relation to the horizontal axis, or if the elevation of the cue was consistently the same. I was also not able to tell if the speed of each shot was consistently the same. Therefore, I feel that those particular tests have insufficiently demonstrated that a significant benefit can be derived from the use of a LD shaft.

I'm not sure about the specific video to which you are referring. Please give me a link. If you are referring to the recent shaft/tip squirt testing video, I can assure you that the cue elevation, aim, and tip contact point were fairly consistent for all of the tests. That's why we went through all of the trouble with the Elephant Practice Ball and donuts. Also, the two people not shooting were helping to verify both the tip contact point and cue alignment for each shot. Now, there might have been slight differences from one person to the next, but each person was fairly consistent with each of his shots during all of the tests.

As far as robotic testing goes, I was not referring to testing done by you, or any other independent testing agents; I was referring to robotic comparisons that were conducted at trade shows by Predator and Meucci about 10 or 12 years ago. If you recall, the Predator robot always showed the 314 shaft producing less cue ball deflection (squirt) than all other shafts (including the Meucci Black Dot), and Meucci's robot always showed the Black Dot shaft producing less squirt than all other shafts (including the Predator 314). How could that be? Could it have had something to do with where the tip was aimed at the horizontal center line?

Sorry, but I was not at these trade shows, nor have I seen videos or reports to claim what you are suggesting. However, what you describe would not surprise me. There are many ways to "cheat" results with robot tests (intentionally or not), based on the bulleted info on the robot squirt testing resource page.

Companies sometimes make "marketing claims" that are not true, and they might sometimes be dishonest with "experiments" (intentionally or not) to help "support" their claims.

Regards,
Dave

 

[naji]

We've been all through this before, Dave, and you have never acknowledged the fact that the tip placement, in relation to the horizontal axis, is a key factor in controlling squirt. I will agree that squirt is present anytime the CB is hit off center, but if the CB can be hit in such a way that swerve cancels out squirt, then there really is no need to have a LD shaft solve the "problem" for you. And if the friction between the ball and cloth (which is the main contributing factor in producing squirt and swerve) can be so drastically reduced by hitting above the horizontal center line, then the whole argument in favor of low-deflection shafts loses a drastic measure of credibility.

No disrespect intended, Dave, but I've watched your slow-motion videos regarding this subject over and over, and it appears to me that your tests were not done with a robot; which is to mean that inconsistencies in execution must have been present. One of the main inconsistencies I seemed to notice was in the amount of tip offset used in comparing a standard shaft to a LD shaft. When you struck the cue ball with the standard shaft, it appeared (to me, anyway) that the tip was offset more (more English applied) than when you used the LD shaft. Also, the view of the shots was from above, so it could not be seen where the tip was contacting the CB in relation to the horizontal axis, or if the elevation of the cue was consistently the same. I was also not able to tell if the speed of each shot was consistently the same. Therefore, I feel that those particular tests have insufficiently demonstrated that a significant benefit can be derived from the use of a LD shaft.

As far as robotic testing goes, I was not referring to testing done by you, or any other independent testing agents; I was referring to robotic comparisons that were conducted at trade shows by Predator and Meucci about 10 or 12 years ago. If you recall, the Predator robot always showed the 314 shaft producing less cue ball deflection (squirt) than all other shafts (including the Meucci Black Dot), and Meucci's robot always showed the Black Dot shaft producing less squirt than all other shafts (including the Predator 314). How could that be? Could it have had something to do with where the tip was aimed at the horizontal center line?

Roger

I disagreed with you before, but if you intentionally raising the butt to cancel squirt that is good way and a gree with it for shots where cb is at least 2 feet or more apart to allow distance for swerve to develop, the other thing elevation varies a lot to speed, and will introduce the elevation variable. Certainly possible but hard. I'd rather elevate when I have no choice

 

[Pidge]

Have any tests been done with snooker cues? I've done my own, and found that my cue caused a huge amount of cue ball deflection. 2 tips of parellel english from the foot spot to middle diamond on the short rail was around the 3 inch mark.

It has a very small diameter tip at 9.5mm but is very rigid, and has almost no flex in the shaft. The brass ferrule adds extra un-needed weight to the end of the shaft to give it low squirt characteristics.

This really pushed home the idea that a small tip doesn't necessarily mean low squirt.