★ Skinny Shaft vs. ★ Fat Shaft

[Patrick Johnson]

IMHO, a bigger and flatter tip gives me a better control and a smoother ride. I think the little bit of flatness is noticeable and provides a degree of "forgiveness".

All of my custom cues have been made with 14mm shafts and I shape the tips like a nickel, instead of the dime shape that lots of other players use.

To show the magnitude of difference between tips of different widths and curvatures, here's a scale drawing with three cues (10, 12 & 14mm) superimposed on dime and nickel shapes.

As you can see, the difference in "flatness" is pretty small within the limits of shaft widths, at least until you're hitting near the edge.

pj
chgo

View attachment 18755

 

[Jonas1010]

I play a 'skinny' shaft not because I have small hands or anything, I am just used to playing a euro taper 11.3mm- 11.75mm all others feel very uncomfortable. Almost like I have a tree trunk in my hand. My girlfriend (who is constantly my playing partner) hates all my cues shafts and hates the feel of them, yet, it works for me. Pro taper is kinda whatever to me. I love my S-series Z shaft on my Joss which I was very reluctant to buy but figured i'd try it and I am happy I did. Took alot to get used too but I can easily swap between my Predator cue and my Joss.Or all the other ones I have.

I can easily swap shafts. Just need a few practice shots to get my flow back with it. Hate my regular Joss shaft(s). Hate my break cue (so I rarely use it). Hate my girlfriends Mcdermott. But she loves the thing. Yet I also hate (gasp) 314-2 it will be turned down shortly.

So I think it really is a matter of what you like and what you're used too. Just because I don't like something doesn't mean others love it. More power to anyone that plays with a big and heavy cue shaft. It really isn't for me. Not that I can't play it, It just isn't that enjoyable. Kinda like playing on a damn Valley...

 

[BlueCollarBar]

★ We're talking about 12.25mm and under for skinny shaft.
★★ And 12.75 and up for Fat Shaft.

It is becoming more and more clear to me that it is easier to cut balls and spin your cue ball with skinnier shafts than it is with fatter shafts. (not saying that you can apply more spin with either)

Also, it seems to be easier to shoot follow shots with fatter shafts (typical angle follow shots - not extreme cut shots).

Any thoughts or comments of why or why not?

JoeyA

I personally find that I spin shots much more accurately with a thin shaft but there is a point of diminishing return for me. 3 diamond length shot and in I have much better control of the cue ball but beyond that my shot making ability diminishes the further I get from the object ball.

I play with a lot of "feel" so having precise tip placement is difficult for me to obtain on a consistent basis. Ive come to the conclusion that on a 7' table a thinner shaft can be advantageous for me because it is much easier to get a shot with a short gap between the CB and OB and therefore my results tend to be very good. Frankly, it tends to boil down to the level of focus I am playing with that day. If I am hyper focused 11.75 is great for me because I have a very consistent stroke and I can hit a point on the cue ball very precisely.

However, for all around play, no matter my focus level, I much prefer a 12.75 to 13 shaft because if I am dialed in I can still spin the ball very well on shorter shots and I feel that my longer distance shots are more consistent in both pocketing the ball and achieving the shape I am going for. If I am not focused I tend to spin the OB out of the pocket on longer shots while playing with a thin shaft.

One thing I do think needs to be taken into account in this conversation is the length of the cue. Ive noticed that when I play with a 4" extension I play better with a thin shaft but without it my game is better fit to a thicker shaft. I have yet to play with a 61" cue but I think that it would be the optimal length for me if paired with a 12 mm shaft.

 

[JoeyA]

Don't have an elephant. My playing shaft is made of DymondWood.

JoeyA

speechless, personally I haven't seen maple shafts with a wood to wood joint weigh in that heavy.

I am a cue repair guy and a beginner in making cue's , I do buy the best shaft wood I can find.
I do have some shaft wood dowels that I have been sitting on sense 2002.

Extremely rare to find maple that dense. at least it is for me .

 

[JoeyA]

I personally find that I spin shots much more accurately with a thin shaft but there is a point of diminishing return for me. 3 diamond length shot and in I have much better control of the cue ball but beyond that my shot making ability diminishes the further I get from the object ball.

I play with a lot of "feel" so having precise tip placement is difficult for me to obtain on a consistent basis. Ive come to the conclusion that on a 7' table a thinner shaft can be advantageous for me because it is much easier to get a shot with a short gap between the CB and OB and therefore my results tend to be very good. Frankly, it tends to boil down to the level of focus I am playing with that day. If I am hyper focused 11.75 is great for me because I have a very consistent stroke and I can hit a point on the cue ball very precisely.

However, for all around play, no matter my focus level, I much prefer a 12.75 to 13 shaft because if I am dialed in I can still spin the ball very well on shorter shots and I feel that my longer distance shots are more consistent in both pocketing the ball and achieving the shape I am going for. If I am not focused I tend to spin the OB out of the pocket on longer shots while playing with a thin shaft.

One thing I do think needs to be taken into account in this conversation is the length of the cue. Ive noticed that when I play with a 4" extension I play better with a thin shaft but without it my game is better fit to a thicker shaft. I have yet to play with a 61" cue but I think that it would be the optimal length for me if paired with a 12 mm shaft.

Is your 4" extension connected to the shaft or the butt?

Thanks,
JoeyA

 

[KMRUNOUT]

No, although it's a common impression. A flatter one may be, but not by much.

pj
chgo

A larger diameter shaft may fit into the bridge in such a way as to reduce the available space to allow for movement to the sides. In other words, it is certainly possible for certain hand and bridge anatomies for a smaller shaft to be easier to move around, and hence off the shot line. This *may* be where the concept that a larger shaft is more forgiving comes from. Who knows?

KMRUNOUT

 

[HawaiianEye]

A larger diameter shaft may fit into the bridge in such a way as to reduce the available space to allow for movement to the sides. In other words, it is certainly possible for certain hand and bridge anatomies for a smaller shaft to be easier to move around, and hence off the shot line. This *may* be where the concept that a larger shaft is more forgiving comes from. Who knows?

KMRUNOUT

I prefer a fatter shaft for that reason also.

I use a closed bridge on the majority of my shots and I like a snug grip and I can't get the grip I want using a thin shaft.

 

[JoeyA]

It's true though. The curvature of the tip matters but the diameter of the tip doesn't, until you get to thsee miscue limit of the smaller tip which comes sooner than the larger diameter tip.

Beleive it or not.

I've actually created graphics that show this but the don't have easy access to them right now. I think I've posted it before.

Here's one graphic to scale: (Red shows 11mm tip & blue shows 13mm tip.

Well, it is drawn to scale. Looks a tad larger than 57.15mm.
JoeyA

 

[Patrick Johnson]

A larger diameter shaft may fit into the bridge in such a way as to reduce the available space to allow for movement to the sides. In other words, it is certainly possible for certain hand and bridge anatomies for a smaller shaft to be easier to move around, and hence off the shot line. This *may* be where the concept that a larger shaft is more forgiving comes from. Who knows?

KMRUNOUT

That makes sense, and could be a distraction at least, but I wonder if it really matters. Lots of pros use open bridges...

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Here's one graphic to scale: (Red shows 11mm tip & blue shows 13mm tip.

Good visual, Joey. They help a lot in conversations like these.

Yours reminded me of this one I posted before. It shows 10mm & 13mm tips with 3mm "chalk marks" where the contact point is for different amounts of English.

Notice that the 10mm tips, and their contact points, are exactly the same as the inner parts of the 13mm tips. The only difference is with maximum English, where the smaller tip is hitting right on its edge but the larger one has a more comfortable margin.

pj
chgo

View attachment 24310

 

[9Ballr]

I heard that Earl Strickland uses a small shaft 9,10 and 11 mm tips ?
I do not know this as a fact !

Earl is at 12.75 or 12.85 something like that.
Efren is at 12.75 with his tips.
If I remember correctly Appleton is at 12.75 too.
All seem to do ok with this width.

 

[HawaiianEye]

Earl is at 12.75 or 12.85 something like that.
Efren is at 12.75 with his tips.
If I remember correctly Appleton is at 12.75 too.
All seem to do ok with this width.

If my memory is correct, Rodney Morris told me his tip was 12.78 and he used a Triangle. That was a couple years ago when I last saw him.

 

[cubswin]

I've got a cue with a skinny shaft, and a cue with a fat shaft. Both cues weigh about the same, both balance at the same spots, and both have milk dud tips.

I can spin the ball far more with the fat shaft, so much so its been a longer adjustment to that cue than I normally have.

The taper on the fatter shaft is a fairly stiff taper. I suspect the difference is in the ferrule and newer tip on the fatter shafted cue.

 

[Bavafongoul]

The 1/3 max tip (1 Tip) for the 10mm illustration starts off center and is already to the right more than one full tip.......presuming all else is accordingly drawn from that scale, then the MAX 3 tips max should have some more cue ball contact remaining since it should be positioned more to the left as well. In the drawing it is positioned on the same circle rim, however, in reality, one full tip from center would place the image a little more to the left of the circle rim than it shows.

So in reality while the 13mm tip moves one full tip in the illustration, the 10mm tip truly moves more than one full tip from the center as positioned. All the tips are placed on the circle rims in the illustration but the 10mm tip actually should not start there for only one full tip's movement. It should not directly align underneath the 13 mm and is mispositioned, Ergo, every tip position thereafter should be slightly moved to the left to remain true for the genuine tip measurements.........the last 10mm 3 Tips from center image should be placed slightly more to the left to my way of thinking which would result in a bigger surface area difference than illustrated.

I think there's more likely an optical illusion since the center of the tip isn't being used as the contact point in the illustrations for the tips. The apex point of the spherical shape of the nickel or dime shape of the tip should be used as the contact point & the tip perimeter more for the application of extreme english. IMO, the illustrations in reply #70 impart an incorrect impression of this matter.

Matt B.

 

[Marky Mark]

There might be something with skinny shafts or it could just be preference but it is worth mentioning that the greatest person to play the game (arguably the greatest) has been using a 12 mm shaft for quite some time now. Also, another player who happens to be in his prime now. This guy has taught the world how to break in 10-ball (already considered by some to be an all-time great) is using a 12 mm shaft as well. It would be nice to get their take on this subject & why they prefer it.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

The 1/3 max tip (1 Tip) for the 10mm illustration starts off center and is already to the right more than one full tip.......presuming all else is accordingly drawn from that scale, then the MAX 3 tips max should have some more cue ball contact remaining since it should be positioned more to the left as well. In the drawing it is positioned on the same circle rim, however, in reality, one full tip from center would place the image a little more to the left of the circle rim than it shows.

So in reality while the 13mm tip moves one full tip in the illustration, the 10mm tip truly moves more than one full tip from the center as positioned. All the tips are placed on the circle rims in the illustration but the 10mm tip actually should not start there for only one full tip's movement. It should not directly align underneath the 13 mm and is mispositioned, Ergo, every tip position thereafter should be slightly moved to the left to remain true for the genuine tip measurements.........the last 10mm 3 Tips from center image should be placed slightly more to the left to my way of thinking which would result in a bigger surface area difference than illustrated.

A "tip" isn't the same for everybody - it's whatever the player thinks it is. The drawing is just one example using 1/3 of max English per "tip".

I think there's more likely an optical illusion since the center of the tip isn't being used as the contact point in the illustrations for the tips. The apex point of the spherical shape of the nickel or dime shape of the tip should be used as the contact point & the tip perimeter more for the application of extreme english. IMO, the illustrations in reply #70 impart an incorrect impression of this matter.

Except for a centerball shot (no side spin), it's impossible to hit the CB with tha apex (center) of the tip.

pj
chgo

 

[M.G.]

I'm not sure if this has been talked about.

Tips require regular maintenance so the tip stays round and does not get flat spots, usually in the middle.
Whenever my game is off usually my tip is off so that the middle is flat and not perfectly round anymore.
Reshaping the tip to a prefect round (nickel or dime, doesn't matter) helps me to regain my usual best aiming.

Note however that I employ a Carom stroke which mean my cue is very level and I am not stroking towards the table.

Cheers.

 

[JoeyA]

Patrick,
Your chalk marks illustrate your point quite well but I am curious how the positions of your chalk marks came to be?

I wish that I could be convinced further that a centerline aim on the quarter line of the cue ball does not change the amount of English that is applied to the cue ball.

At first I thought maybe if I saw a CAD program visual of a 2 1/4" where it was contacted on the quarter line with a 10mm tip and a 13mm tip; perhaps that would convince me. But then I started thinking about those chalk marks and wondering just how important your proposed positions are, even if they are correct.

Not to beleaguer your perspective but a chalk mark does not demonstrate the first point of contact with the cue ball, CORRECT? It only demonstrates how much chalk the tip FINALLY transfers to the cue ball. Secondly, while I agree that the difference in the location of a contact point from a 10mm tip and a 13mm tip is just not that large of a difference, but different locations of initial contact points must matter?

So my final question is, is it the first point of contact of the cue tip to the cue ball that is the most important (to amount of spin applied to the cue ball) or is it the chalk mark which is as you demonstrated much greater size than the first contact point?

Thanks,
JoeyA

Good visual, Joey. They help a lot in conversations like these.

Yours reminded me of this one I posted before. It shows 10mm & 13mm tips with 3mm "chalk marks" where the contact point is for different amounts of English.

Notice that the 10mm tips, and their contact points, are exactly the same as the inner parts of the 13mm tips. The only difference is with maximum English, where the smaller tip is hitting right on its edge but the larger one has a more comfortable margin.

pj
chgo

View attachment 24310

 

[JoeyA]

Good visual, Joey. They help a lot in conversations like these.

Yours reminded me of this one I posted before. It shows 10mm & 13mm tips with 3mm "chalk marks" where the contact point is for different amounts of English.

Notice that the 10mm tips, and their contact points, are exactly the same as the inner parts of the 13mm tips. The only difference is with maximum English, where the smaller tip is hitting right on its edge but the larger one has a more comfortable margin.

pj
chgo

View attachment 24310

Nevermind, I didn't read your post carefully enough. I see that the larger image is not the chalk mark but the tip itself. The darker image dot is that of the 3mm chalk mark that you mentioned in your reply.

Still, it is hard for me to imagine that there is no difference in location of the chalk marks for 1 to 2 1/2 tips on 10mm and 13mm cue tips.

Thanks anyway.
JoeyA

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Still, it is hard for me to imagine that there is no difference in location of the chalk marks for 1 to 2 1/2 tips on 10mm and 13mm cue tips.

Maybe this will help. Here's a 13mm cue touching the CB with a 10mm cue superimposed on it (dotted lines). Since they both have the same tip curvature, they both contact the CB at the same distance from their respective centerlines - in fact, it's the same tip +/- some extraneous outer material.

pj
chgo

View attachment 75521