I have many cues with all sorts of joints. None of my cues play exactly the same. I can tell the difference it hit with all of them. That said, I've done my own tests with shafts from the same maker piloted and flat faced. I believe I can "feel" the difference in the ones which have a compression fit..Some may not be able to feel any difference and that's fine. Either way I still contend that more contact leads to a more complete transfer of vibration.
Think of it this way, when you attach a handle to a forearm why not leave the handle tenon undersized so the tenon doesn't touch the inner wall of the forearm and use glue only on the screw and faces? I mean the faces will still meet flush and it will screw in and bottom out so why use glue on the handle tenon. Well we all know why glue is used. Obviously for an eventual all around better mating of the two pieces.
The compression pilot is the next best thing to glueing for temporary joining IMO.
And YES this is a fun topic and one I am strongly opinionated..:smile:
Skins
Thanks for chiming back in!
I too have hit with many cues, and at one time I shared your position.
As Sheldon has mentioned, 2 cues built perfectly identical will almost always play differently. It's the nature of wood and natural materials. The only way I know to really test this objectively, would be to have a large group of cues all made with the same materials and all made as close to the same as possible excepting the piloted joint. Other than the joint pilot fitting tight, all other things must be as equal as possible. Externally, the cues must not be visibly detectable as to which has the pilot and which do not. This should be done with at least a dozen cues, 6 of each.
These cues would then be given to a group of players, all with medium to high skill levels, for evaluation. They must not ever be told which cues are which, nor should they ever be allowed to take them apart to see for themselves. They are only to hit balls with them to determine which ones they think are which. Also, they should not be able to visit with each other about any particular cue. They are only to state which cues they think are piloted and which are not.
This test would reasonably deal with the variances in materials as well as the variances in skills and perceptions. It would also eliminate the possibility of the influence of perception. No player will hit with a cue thinking, "this one is piloted so I know it's going to be more solid than that other one".
If this test is actually performed, I think the findings would surprise most. Not only would the group most likely have difficulty telling which cues were piloted and which were not, but I don't think they would even come close to agreeing on which cues actually played to the best. They might even fight over it! lol.
I'm quite certain your test and conclusions are honest and with full conviction. I'm also quite certain that I don't think they had a large enough sampling to out run normal variations in the cues as well as eliminate the possibility that your existing belief's affected your conclusions. Please don't take this as an insult. It certainly isn't intended as such. It's pretty much impossible to remain that objective in testing your own conclusions.
I really don't think this difference in opinion will ever be resolved. I also don't necessarily think that it should. I think it would be a great thing for both pool and this forum to learn to accept that others have different opinions about things. And that is OK. I respect your position. I don't necessarily agree with it, but I most certainly respect it. I also respect you for voicing it. These types of discussions are healthy for all of us as long as they remain respectful of both sides.
Royce
