Calling All Pool Scientists

[HawaiianEye]

I was reading up on some shafts and happen to come across this page.

I see the fattest shaft (Big Boy) with the hardest tip supposedly holds contact with the cue ball longer.

Then I see their thinnest shaft with the SUPER soft tip holds contact with the cue ball longer.

Then some of the pool scientists on here say "the tip and shaft size doesn't matter as far as tip contact time on the cue ball (or something similar to that).

Come on, boys....which is it?


http://www.mcdermottcue.com/mcdermott_intimidator_ishafts.php

The i-1 Big Boy is the most powerful shaft in the Intimidator series. It uses a 13.25mm impregnated hard leather tip that holds contact with the cue ball longer. This makes the i-1 Big Boy ideal for breaking and jumping with extreme control.
Tip: Samsara Ultra-Hard Leather Tip
Break/Jump Tip
9 layer laminated calf skin
Ultra-hard with cue ball grip

The i-3 is performance at its highest level. It is designed for incredible spin and finesse. With a 11.75 mm tip, the i-3 is engineered for highly-skilled players who have great control of their stroke mechanics and are looking for more cue ball action.
Kamui Black Super Soft Tip
Highest elasticity of the Black tips
Maximum contact time between the cue ball and tip
Generates more spin with a lower stroke speed

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Regarding the parts highlighted in blue below:

http://www.mcdermottcue.com/mcdermott_intimidator_ishafts.php

The i-1 Big Boy is the most powerful shaft in the Intimidator series. It uses a 13.25mm impregnated hard leather tip that holds contact with the cue ball longer. This makes the i-1 Big Boy ideal for breaking and jumping with extreme control.

The harder the tip the shorter the contact time.

Tip: Samsara Ultra-Hard Leather Tip
Break/Jump Tip
9 layer laminated calf skin
Ultra-hard with cue ball grip

Whatever that means. "Cue ball grip" is about chalk, not tip material.

The i-3 is performance at its highest level. It is designed for incredible spin and finesse. With a 11.75 mm tip, the i-3 is engineered for highly-skilled players who have great control of their stroke mechanics and are looking for more cue ball action.

No shaft or tip gives "more cue ball action".

Kamui Black Super Soft Tip
Highest elasticity of the Black tips
Maximum contact time between the cue ball and tip
Generates more spin with a lower stroke speed

Assuming "highest elasticity" means "softest", this tip would produce longer contact times than harder tips, but of course that contradicts the first claim above.

No tip creates "more spin with a lower stroke speed". Harder (not softer) tips produce more RPMs at the same stroke speed, but RPMs aren't "more spin" in pool terms.

It looks to me like all of the claims above are false to one degree or another. Most manufacturers do this - probably just because they don't know any better.

pj
chgo

 

[HawaiianEye]

Regarding the parts highlighted in blue below:


The harder the tip the shorter the contact time.


Whatever that means. "Cue ball grip" is about chalk, not tip material.


No shaft or tip gives "more cue ball action".


Assuming "highest elasticity" means "softest", this tip would produce longer contact times than harder tips, but of course that contradicts the first claim above.

No tip creates "more spin with a lower stroke speed". Harder (not softer) tips produce more RPMs at the same stroke speed, but RPMs aren't "more spin" in pool terms.

It looks to me like all of the claims above are false to one degree or another. Meucci is known for this.
pj
chgo

This isn't Meucci...this is McDermott.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

This isn't Meucci...this is McDermott.

My bad. I'll correct that (I already added a more generalized statement).

pj
chgo

 

[HawaiianEye]

My bad. I'll correct that (I already added a more generalized statement).

pj
chgo

So you are saying our AZB scientists are smarter than the McDermott and Meucci scientists? I'm getting confused.

If we are going to now speak in "generalities", then we aren't using "specifics" anymore. Specifics deal with facts.

Are you saying that scientists differ on their views of the "facts"? Or are their no facts? To me it kind of sounds like the opposing scientists views when it comes to Global Warming?

Maybe it is all what we want to believe and "damn the facts" if it works for you.

 

[Scott Lee]

The Jacksonville Project, performed 20 years ago by Bob Jewett and others, determined that dwell time between tip and CB was 1/1000th of a second (a quarter of the time it takes to blink your eye as a reflex). Jewett mentioned that a soft tip might possibly increase the dwell time to 2/1000th's...still insignificant. No type of shaft or stroke can significantly affect this. It's still all about how a particular shaft or tip "feels" to the individual.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

 

[ElCorazonFrio]

The Jacksonville Project, performed 20 years ago by Bob Jewett and others, determined that dwell time between tip and CB was 1/1000th of a second (a quarter of the time it takes to blink your eye as a reflex). Jewett mentioned that a soft tip might possibly increase the dwell time to 2/1000th's...still insignificant. No type of shaft or stroke can significantly affect this. It's still all about how a particular shaft or tip "feels" to the individual.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

On what planet is a 100% increase, or doubling anything 'insignificant'?

 

[ElCorazonFrio]

So you are saying our AZB scientists are smarter than the McDermott and Meucci scientists? I'm getting confused.

If we are going to now speak in "generalities", then we aren't using "specifics" anymore. Specifics deal with facts.

Are you saying that scientists differ on their views of the "facts"? Or are their no facts? To me it kind of sounds like the opposing scientists views when it comes to Global Warming?

Maybe it is all what we want to believe and "damn the facts" if it works for you.

I say that McD and Meucci don't actually have scientists. They have never shown any science that I am aware of. They have snake-oil salesmen.

 

[BRussell]

So you are saying our AZB scientists are smarter than the McDermott and Meucci scientists? I'm getting confused.

If we are going to now speak in "generalities", then we aren't using "specifics" anymore. Specifics deal with facts.

Are you saying that scientists differ on their views of the "facts"? Or are their no facts? To me it kind of sounds like the opposing scientists views when it comes to Global Warming?

Maybe it is all what we want to believe and "damn the facts" if it works for you.

It looks to me like you've found some marketing materials, not some scientific analyses. (The global warming analogy is a perfect one, but in the opposite way from how it sounds like you see it. )

 

[dr_dave]

Marketing claims on manufacturer or supplier websites often have little to due with scientific fact. For the currently-known scientific fact on these topics, see:

cue tip contact time
cue tip hardness effects
cue tip size and shape effects

Enjoy,
Dave

I was reading up on some shafts and happen to come across this page.

I see the fattest shaft (Big Boy) with the hardest tip supposedly holds contact with the cue ball longer.

Then I see their thinnest shaft with the SUPER soft tip holds contact with the cue ball longer.

Then some of the pool scientists on here say "the tip and shaft size doesn't matter as far as tip contact time on the cue ball (or something similar to that).

Come on, boys....which is it?


http://www.mcdermottcue.com/mcdermott_intimidator_ishafts.php

The i-1 Big Boy is the most powerful shaft in the Intimidator series. It uses a 13.25mm impregnated hard leather tip that holds contact with the cue ball longer. This makes the i-1 Big Boy ideal for breaking and jumping with extreme control.
Tip: Samsara Ultra-Hard Leather Tip
Break/Jump Tip
9 layer laminated calf skin
Ultra-hard with cue ball grip

The i-3 is performance at its highest level. It is designed for incredible spin and finesse. With a 11.75 mm tip, the i-3 is engineered for highly-skilled players who have great control of their stroke mechanics and are looking for more cue ball action.
Kamui Black Super Soft Tip
Highest elasticity of the Black tips
Maximum contact time between the cue ball and tip
Generates more spin with a lower stroke speed

 

[BRussell]

On what planet is a 100% increase, or doubling anything 'insignificant'?

You know how those coupons have a cash value of 1/20 cent? How about I give you two instead of one. :thumbup:

 

[Patrick Johnson]

So you are saying our AZB scientists are smarter than the McDermott and Meucci scientists?

What McDermott and Meucci scientists? If they exist, then yes, AzB's are smarter (or more honest).

If we are going to now speak in "generalities", then we aren't using "specifics" anymore. Specifics deal with facts.

I responded individually to each specific claim of fact. The only generality was that McDermott isn't the only manufacturer that puts sales before facts.

Maybe it is all what we want to believe and "damn the facts" if it works for you.

If you can't distinguish between marketing puff and facts when they're presented side by side, maybe so.

pj
chgo

 

[Scott Lee]

...on a planet where contact between the CB and cuetip is far less than a blink of an eye. Even Bob said it had an insignificant change or effect on the dwell time...and he's the pool physics guru here, imo.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

On what planet is a 100% increase, or doubling anything 'insignificant'?

 

[HawaiianEye]

The Jacksonville Project, performed 20 years ago by Bob Jewett and others, determined that dwell time between tip and CB was 1/1000th of a second (a quarter of the time it takes to blink your eye as a reflex). Jewett mentioned that a soft tip might possibly increase the dwell time to 2/1000th's...still insignificant. No type of shaft or stroke can significantly affect this. It's still all about how a particular shaft or tip "feels" to the individual.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

Other than Bob Jewett, who were the other "scientists" involved?

Was it like the Manhattan Project?

 

[Scott Lee]

For that information you'd have to view the you-tube video, or ask Bob himself.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

Other than Bob Jewett, who were the other "scientists" involved?

Was it like the Manhattan Project?

 

[dr_dave]

Other than Bob Jewett, who were the other "scientists" involved?

Was it like the Manhattan Project?

Information about the "Jacksonville Project" can be found on the Jacksonville Project resource page.

Enjoy,
Dave

 

[BasementDweller]

I don't get the point of this thread. Were you just trying to get the "AZ Scientists" to out themselves so you could show them how stupid they really are?

If so, good luck with that.

 

[HawaiianEye]

On what planet is a 100% increase, or doubling anything 'insignificant'?

I think that is why they are in such a hurry to get to Mars. Kamui tips work better on Mars.

 

[Jaden]

You just called 100% more insignificant...

The Jacksonville Project, performed 20 years ago by Bob Jewett and others, determined that dwell time between tip and CB was 1/1000th of a second (a quarter of the time it takes to blink your eye as a reflex). Jewett mentioned that a soft tip might possibly increase the dwell time to 2/1000th's...still insignificant. No type of shaft or stroke can significantly affect this. It's still all about how a particular shaft or tip "feels" to the individual.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

You DO realize that you just called a 100% difference insignificant???

If it changed from 10/10000th of a second to 12/10000ths of a second, you might be able to say that's a negligible difference, although it's still 20%, but a 100% difference is NOT negligible.

Jaden

 

[Ron Swanson]

You DO realize that you just called a 100% difference insignificant???

If it changed from 10/10000th of a second to 12/10000ths of a second, you might be able to say that's a negligible difference, although it's still 20%, but a 100% difference is NOT negligible.

Jaden

It is on a negligable amount.