Bucking the 'trend' of extensions/longer cues...meet my 54"

Cadillac J

Cadillac J

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I noticed many recent videos of both pros and amateurs that look to have 4" to over 8" extensions either placed between shaft/butt or onto the butt itself. The longest cue I currently have is a 60" McDermott (58" butt w/ 31" shaft) and I can see why longer cues are attractive, especially playing on 9- or even 10-foot tables, as the length and balance help keep the line on longer shots.

After seeing many Snooker videos, my interest grew to try something new, so I decided to pick up a relatively inexpensive Riley that was about $150 to see how different it felt and to see how the small tip would fare in a pool game. Well, I was very surprised after getting used to it...the control, the feel, the power have a uniqueness compared to a regular cue. Once it became natural to use, I noticed that it helped ti improve my overall pool stroke. It also makes me wonder why no makers in pool have released an Ash shaft...any ideas?

About two years ago I purchased the PureX black 4-piece break/jump cue just to have something on hand; however, I have never liked the feel, shape, phenolic tip or the rubber sport grip. When normally playing, I don't practice breaking much at all...but I might have to start now that my 54" Mezz Power Break II w/ Deep Impact 2 shaft just arrived! The best part and my major reason for purchasing is that I had an extra WX900 shaft (my favorite shaft of all time) laying around with matching United Joint, so I thought this would be the closest way of replicating the shorter length of a snooker cue on a pool stick. Well, the results have been pretty great so far--hell, even played a few games using the DI2 break shaft with the Sonic tip and was surprised how well it shot.

Even though I don't see many people going this route, I encourage you to try out a snooker or sub-58" cue to see how it feels...maybe it will also help improve your regular pool stroke? It can't hurt to try!

2wojaeo.jpg
2h801kx.jpg



Mezz is my favorite overall brand...the quality is top tier for sure. Here is the new lineup with shorty blue on the left. The EX Pro was my first Mezz, followed by three others--all with WX900 shafts.
213omqo.jpg
 
Cadillac J --

Firstly, if I may, a hearty welcome to AZB.

Re your question: Pat Fleming (owner of Accu-Stats Video Productions and a longtime professional-level player himself) has been playing outstandingly with his 54-inch cue for several decades. He justifiably swear by it. When asked about why he plays all pool games with a cue that short, he always amusedly replies: "For me, it makes the game so easy -- it's like stealing!"

To watch how well he shoots with it, here are three clips permanently featured on the Accu-Stats Youtube site (parts 1, 2, and 3 of his excellent "Creative Edge" instructional video). A crystal-clear DVD of the entire instructional can be ordered at Accu-Stats.com

(Note: Each of the three parts has the identical short opening comments so don't be briefly confused by that.) They are all distinctly informative:

Part 1 -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XreMPj_a8t0

Part 2 -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXhnGwL6aBY

Part 3 -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTjC6uvEPeI

Helpfully intended to show that players can do wonders with a 54-inch cue and such cue-switching experimentation you're asking about is often worthwhile to try, (incidentally no matter what your height may be).

Arnaldo
 
ive got one, a 54 inch cue, its very nice length cue for straight rail
or atleast thats what i think, placebo affect or not, if it works for you it works
 
Last edited:
balance

Balance can replicate the feel of the different lengths. I play with a sixty inch cue. While balance point distance from the tip is what matters we measure it from the butt cap normally. Why I do not know!

I have a sixty inch main player with the balance point twenty-one inches from the bumper. While this seems forward weighted it is exactly the same balance point as a fifty-eight inch stick with a very common nineteen inch balance point when both are measured from the tip. Everyone that tries my cue notices immediately that it is light at 16.5 ounces but few notice it is long until I mention it.

Those that want to experiment can have the balance point on their cues moved around without committing to cutting up a cue or ordering a short one. If the new balance suits, then a short cue might suit also.

Welcome aboard, a nice thread to start a good discussion.

Hu
 
I find a shorter cue is better for my stroke. Perfect 90° elbow, no dumb wasted movements.

Longer cues give you more opportunity to flail around and pooch the stroke
 
arnaldo said:
Cadillac J --

Firstly, if I may, a hearty welcome to AZB.

Re your question: Pat Fleming (owner of Accu-Stats Video Productions and a longtime professional-level player himself) has been playing outstandingly with his 54-inch cue for several decades. He justifiably swear by it. When asked about why he plays all pool games with a cue that short, he always amusedly replies: "For me, it makes the game so easy -- it's like stealing!"

To watch how well he shoots with it, here are three clips permanently featured on the Accu-Stats Youtube site (parts 1, 2, and 3 of his excellent "Creative Edge" instructional video). A crystal-clear DVD of the entire instructional can be ordered at Accu-Stats.com

(Note: Each of the three parts has the identical short opening comments so don't be briefly confused by that.) They are all distinctly informative:

Part 1 -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XreMPj_a8t0

Part 2 -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXhnGwL6aBY

Part 3 -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTjC6uvEPeI

Helpfully intended to show that players can do wonders with a 54-inch cue and such cue-switching experimentation you're asking about is often worthwhile to try, (incidentally no matter what your height may be).

Arnaldo
Click to expand...


Thanks for posting this Arnaldo, I would of had no idea that anyone used such a short cue for regular playing. I've looked through all the cue websites but never even saw anything under the standard--except for carom cues, but I'm not sure of their taper.

By the way, I am 6' 3" and have a 75" reach/wingspan, so I am always gripping right at the butt end.

I love mustard and pepper on fries, lol (usually w/ ketchup too though)
 
ideologist said:
I find a shorter cue is better for my stroke. Perfect 90° elbow, no dumb wasted movements.

Longer cues give you more opportunity to flail around and pooch the stroke
Click to expand...
Ideologist: What length are the shorter cues you play with, and if I may ask -- where did you variously get them (assuming disparate sources)?

Arnaldo
 
Never tried a long cue I thought had a good feel. They all feel weak and strange. When you get down to 55/54 inches, the tendency is that you run out of cue on some shots if your wingspan is average and stance is low. An exception is the break cue, where you should naturally choke up on the grip, anyway. There is rarely any need for longer than 58 inch cues for average height people in regular play. I'm currently using a 13mm regular pool cue at 58 inches, a Chinese 8 ball cue at 57 inches and a snooker cue at 57 inches. I think for me, 57 inches is about right, as long as I have extensions available for reach shots.

A lot of peoples need for extremely long cues stem from unorthodox and IMO terrible stances and misunderstandings regarding potential benefits. The long cues are very awkward for rail shots, elevated shots and jump shots/masses. They tend to feel very springy and weak, when you're used to more compact cues, but that can be overcome. What cannot easily be overcome is the awkwardness such a cue leads to on the unorthodox shots, and the impact it can have on stance and stroke. You will either get a very long bridge, or an unusually long overhang behind your cue hand. Most cues are not balanced for that kind of hand placement. The cue will be butt heavy and in many cases will not feel properly balanced, as far as weight distribution is concerned, no matter if you have your grip extremely far forward or to the rear. Again, you can get used to it, but why would you want to? If your height is right for the cue, none of this applies. Those are the people who should have long cues and of course, shorter people should have somewhat shorter cues.
 
I am also 6'2 and get down low over the shot. I find I run out of cue with a shorter cue.

Elbow flairs out on my bridge arm, to compensate for shorter cues. I feel it. Don't really like it.

Cues need to be made for the user, I firmly believe this. Shorter cues equate shorter bridges,

and recently their was a post about the length of the bridge. So it is all tied in together.

I much rather be able to lengthen my bridge while maintaining form, than to run out of

cue and awkwardly bend my elbow anyway I am not used to.
 
I will try a short cue if I come across one. I think it’s all extremely subjective to the person and style of play, regardless of height..to a point. I’m 5’7 and played with a 65” for a while. I always gripped my regular cue at the very end and it started feeling awkward, I put an 8” extension on the back and then I was gripping a few inches in front of my old grip spot, with almost a foot hanging back behind and my game jumped up steadily over the next year. The cue just felt so perfect and balanced. Even on those short bridge rail shots it felt right. As my game improved eventually the long 23 oz started feeling sluggish and I took the extension off the back and it was like I was a giant with a perfectly controlled toothpick in my hands and I started playing like damn Kim Davenport on a hot streak. Not quite but better than ever before. Maybe some time I’ll feel the need to morph again
 
arnaldo said:
Ideologist: What length are the shorter cues you play with, and if I may ask -- where did you variously get them (assuming disparate sources)?

Arnaldo
Click to expand...

Grab a vintage cue, many of them are 56"-57"

If my fingers touch the buttsleeve, it means my back hand is wavering and I stand up to fix my stance.

Has made a world of difference in my shot making

A Willie Hoppe, turned down thinner to suit your grip is a low-cost way to find out
 
The big question is, how well do you play, using it?
I can shoot with a 5 foot long, 1x2 from Home Depot , and probably beat some league players with it.
But I won't be winning any major tournaments, with, or without it .
 
Is there a reason you have the car at the bottom of your posts?


Cadillac J said:
Thanks for posting this Arnaldo, I would of had no idea that anyone used such a short cue for regular playing. I've looked through all the cue websites but never even saw anything under the standard--except for carom cues, but I'm not sure of their taper.

By the way, I am 6' 3" and have a 75" reach/wingspan, so I am always gripping right at the butt end.

I love mustard and pepper on fries, lol (usually w/ ketchup too though)
Click to expand...
 
noMoreSchon said:
I firmly believe this. Shorter cues equate shorter bridges,

and recently their was a post about the length of the bridge. So it is all tied in together.

I much rather be able to lengthen my bridge while maintaining form, than to run out of

cue and awkwardly bend my elbow anyway I am not used to.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I don't have this issue at all, and I am known to have a longer than average bridge length. There must be something I like about holding the end of the cue, I don't know what it is.


u12armresl said:
Is there a reason you have the car at the bottom of your posts?
Click to expand...

My car pic is in my signature, so it keeps showing up with every post...might need to shrink it a bit. Does it bother you--is there a reason you asked?
 
I love short cues.
They're awesome.
You have so much control.
It's no wonder that so many of the top snooker players use a 57" cue.
 
9Ballr said:
I love short cues.
They're awesome.
You have so much control.
It's no wonder that so many of the top snooker players use a 57" cue.
Click to expand...


I’m kind of confused. Ronnie uses a 58” cue, which as far as I know is pretty standard. I used a 58.5”

What makes me more confused is that when I started playing pool and bought a pool cue, I was always bothered by the linen wrap placement. I always wondered why anyone would hold the cue so high up. Then I started watching US pool matches and realized a bunch of players grip the cue very high. Maybe they are the older players who didn’t get so low to the cue, and the modern player gets lower to the cue, thus the grip is farther back on the cue.

This is completely going from memory of watching hundreds of snooker and pool matches, but I’m pretty sure you’ll find most snooker players grip the cue farther back than pool players do due to them generally having their chin on the cue.

Obviously it’s relative to cue length, but I’m pretty sure there isn’t really that big a difference between pool cue and snooker cues. Isn’t the standard pool cue 58”? This is basically the standard for a snooker cue too.
 
9Ballr said:
I love short cues.
They're awesome.
You have so much control.
It's no wonder that so many of the top snooker players use a 57" cue.
Click to expand...


You are right, my Snooker cue is 57"...it just feels smaller due to the significant taper to the tip.

As I play around a bit more with this Mezz, I do wish it was more like 56"...that would be perfect (I think they sell a 2" Mezz extension, so maybe I can make this reality).
 
Quite the opposite for me... my game went up a notch when I started playing full time with a 6 inch butt extension.

I still hold the cue with my back hand in the correct position for any shot that isn't a stretch, but the benefit to me is to be able to not have to EVER stretch for a shot... quick hand/bridge change and I'm shooting comfortably.

Seems to be the same way that SVB and Shaw use the cue...

I play mostly on 9' tables...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top