Best shafts ever produced.

[maha]

most pros in all sports endorse and play with what they get paid the most from a sponsor.

just because a pro uses something that doesnt mean a less player will benefit. it may even hurt them. in golf most of the advances have come from the balls.

in pool the equipment is better from the cloth and balls.

the standard pool cue has survived and the records it has made havent been broken despite the improvement in players.

using english good players learn to adjust to its idiosyncrasies where weak players dont. so a low deflection shaft may help weaker players until they have to some times use a different cue then they are lost.

i believe its always better to use more standard equipment as you become a better well rounded player.

if you are not gambling then use what makes the game the most fun for you.

 

[Jimbojim]

Mezz ExPro shaft is the best one in my opinion.

 

[marek]

I think the playability difference of any quality shaft (regardless of brand or material) is purely psychological. Most “experts” confuse myth and bias for fact because their identity depends on it. Feel and hit are subjective. One cue doesn’t impart more spin than another. LD doesn’t play better than standard deflection.

You are very wrong sir

 

[jrctherake]

I'm still waiting for a Revo user of my skill level to do shots that I can't do just as easily and consistently with my maple shafts, ANY of my maple shafts. And I get the benefit of that "feel" and "hit" with my maples.

Hey Johnny,

Do you know a bank pool player that plays at bumpers by the name Robert? He usually plays from opening till around 6 or 7. He does not stay late. He always plays 9' table on right hand side of bar as you walk in.

He uses a 12.9 revo on one of the 3k predator butts. He is a super nice fellow and banks pretty sporty as well. He can show you at least one cross side and cross corner bank that is extremely hard with standard maple (unless you are a very strong player) but easier with his revo.

I was same way until he set them up. I don't remember exact positions of CB and O.B. or I would just tell or show you.


He is the reason I bought the revo in first place.


Rake

 

[14.1'er]

I have to say, "you are sadly mistaken".... sir.

I think the playability difference of any quality shaft (regardless of brand or material) is purely psychological. Most “experts” confuse myth and bias for fact because their identity depends on it. Feel and hit are subjective. One cue doesn’t impart more spin than another. LD doesn’t play better than standard deflection.


Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)

 

[jrctherake]

If pool players could practice instead of looking for gear. Pool halls would be filled with better players.

not really. most have no idea how to practice. most think that "playing pool" is practice.

1 hour of organized practice is worth many, many hours of "playing".

 

[jrctherake]

After spending more than 50 years playing, with a variety of custom and production cues, I think I've came to somewhat of a conclusion.

I think you can mass produce a lot of carbon fiber shafts that hit as well as the best custom wooden shafts, but I don't think you can produce as many custom or production wooden shafts that hit as well as the best carbon fiber shaft.

When I play, the ONLY thing I'm concerned with is the "hit" and how well the shaft performs and allows me to control the cue ball. I think the Becue carbon fiber shafts can compete with any shaft made.

I am with you on that.

I've hit as many cues as most alive and I have played very few wood shafts that "perform" as well as the becue and revo.

There are several people I play from time to time that will "ever now and then" say something smarta55 about my cf shaft, while I'm putting it together. Most of them play will cues such as BB, SW, JW....etc..etc. Sure, their cues are very pretty, valuable, collectible etc...etc but, "to me", their performance is below my cue in many ways other than...........maybe at best............the feel or sound.

I like feel/sound too but I'm more interested in watching OB's get drilled to pocket and the CB stop on desired location time after time.

Having said that, lol..........they "always" have nothing to say while paying off. That is usually when I let them know I too have and have had cues such as theirs that are worth several k.

 

[MattPoland]

I have to say, "you are sadly mistaken".... sir.

So you have.


Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)

 

[marek]

Matt,
you are definitely right saying that feel and hit are subjective. But are you really convinced that lets say Mezz Ex Pro shaft, Southwest maple shaft and Predator Revo shaft do play the same and that any difference between them is purely psychological??? That they impart the same amount of spin??? Like REALLY???
Or maybe I just didnt understand your prior statements properly and i am just confused....

 

[pinkspider]

Hey Johnny,

Do you know a bank pool player that plays at bumpers by the name Robert? He usually plays from opening till around 6 or 7. He does not stay late. He always plays 9' table on right hand side of bar as you walk in.

He uses a 12.9 revo on one of the 3k predator butts. He is a super nice fellow and banks pretty sporty as well. He can show you at least one cross side and cross corner bank that is extremely hard with standard maple (unless you are a very strong player) but easier with his revo.

I was same way until he set them up. I don't remember exact positions of CB and O.B. or I would just tell or show you.


He is the reason I bought the revo in first place.


Rake

On the flip side, it's more challenging to do something like a mild masse shot; but not something that you can't overcome I guess.

Because of how the cue ball behaves some things are easier some things are harder. But generally, I think for most people the Revo will make things easier because they vastly reduce the combined variance of swerve and deflection.

Usually, I find that the easiest way to get people to see what the shaft does well is to get them to do a slow drag shot loaded with lots of sidespin. the difference between the Revo and regular/LD shafts is as clear as night and day

 

[MattPoland]

Matt,

you are definitely right saying that feel and hit are subjective. But are you really convinced that lets say Mezz Ex Pro shaft, Southwest maple shaft and Predator Revo shaft do play the same and that any difference between them is purely psychological??? That they impart the same amount of spin??? Like REALLY???

Or maybe I just didnt understand your prior statements properly and i am just confused....

I believe shafts can vary in deflection. We need to train our brains to that amount of deflection. So the sticks can play different from how our brains are trained but that still doesn’t mean one is the better choice than the other. It just means you should pick one and stick with it or perhaps experiment a little to see what fits your brain (and then stick with it).

I firmly believe that the amount of spin is purely how good your stroke is paired with where you address the cueball. The closer to the miscue limit you can hit, the more spin you’ll get. I think the tip and chalk have a better chance of expanding the miscue limit and letting you spin the ball more than the shaft itself. At best, a thinner shaft might trick some into addressing the tip closer to the miscue limit since contact is made at the edge of the tip with extreme english.

But when someone says “I can really whiz the ball with this stick”, I think they’re embroidered in myth.

Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)

 

[marek]

I believe shafts can vary in deflection. We need to train our brains to that amount of deflection. So the sticks can play different from how our brains are trained but that still doesn’t mean one is the better choice than the other. It just means you should pick one and stick with it or perhaps experiment a little to see what fits your brain (and then stick with it).

I firmly believe that the amount of spin is purely how good your stroke is paired with where you address the cueball. The closer to the miscue limit you can hit, the more spin you’ll get. I think the tip and chalk have a better chance of expanding the miscue limit and letting you spin the ball more than the shaft itself. At best, a thinner shaft might trick some into addressing the tip closer to the miscue limit since contact is made at the edge of the tip with extreme english.

But when someone says “I can really whiz the ball with this stick”, I think they’re embroidered in myth.

Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)

As far as deflection goes we are on the same boat. The rest...not so much. According to your statement Z3 11.75 shaft should be able to draw cueball much better than Revo 12.9 purely because with Z3 you would be capable to get closer to the miscue limit. Right?
In reality while it is true that with Z3 you can get closer to the miscue limit than with Revo 12.9 the result of such comparison goes HUGELY in Revo shaft favour (or in Southwest maple shaft favour for that matter). Both full maple shaft and Revo have MUCH better energy transfer than LD shafts like Z3 or 314. Hell..even my old Cuetec with SST fiberglass shaft had WAY better energy transfer than wooden LD shafts have.
Oh..and I am not alone with such experience, even Predator has such info on its website: https://www.predatorcues.com/shafts/predator-low-deflection-shaft/

 

[MattPoland]

As far as deflection goes we are on the same boat. The rest...not so much. According to your statement Z3 11.75 shaft should be able to draw cueball much better than Revo 12.9 purely because with Z3 you would be capable to get closer to the miscue limit. Right?

In reality while it is true that with Z3 you can get closer to the miscue limit than with Revo 12.9 the result of such comparison goes HUGELY in Revo shaft favour (or in Southwest maple shaft favour for that matter). Both full maple shaft and Revo have MUCH better energy transfer than LD shafts like Z3 or 314. Hell..even my old Cuetec with SST fiberglass shaft had WAY better energy transfer than wooden LD shafts have.

Oh..and I am not alone with such experience, even Predator has such info on its website: https://www.predatorcues.com/shafts/predator-low-deflection-shaft/

I’m not saying shaft width actually gets you closer to the miscue limit. 11.8mm, 12.4mm, 12.9mm and 13mm are all capable of hitting the miscue limit. They all can hit it with the edge of the tip. But visually it will look different with different shafts. So if you don’t calibrate to that visual, you can find yourself delivering less spin than the cue is capable of or more spin than you usually do. Even then, maximum spin is rare to use and not what people hit when testing a cue.

Energy transfer seems like one of those terms like feel and hit that get thrown around but I never see them used in ways that connect the dots to more or less spin. It seems to me the cue mass/weight, cue speed and tip hardness are going to determine energy transfer. Cue weight/mass is better controlled with the cue butt rather than the cue shaft, IMO. And all cue stick variances pale to the range of control available in the speed of your stroke. I am capable of hitting the cueball much harder than I ever will in play. Like calibrating my brain to deflection, I can equally calibrate my arm to energy transfer differences.

In terms of the Predator site, those are marketing materials feeding into the same ethos I’m calling myth because it sells, not because it’s necessarily true. I’d more believe if Dr. Dave had a page dedicated to how different shafts spin the ball more than other shafts.

I know I’m not definitive on the subject and may have gaps in my understanding but this feels a lot more well thought (and matching my experiences) than those that test hit a shaft on an unfamiliar table a couple times and make a judgment on the playability based on hit, feel, and perception of whizzing whitey. I’m not insisting I’m right and anyone else is wrong. I can accept the difference of opinion. I just wanted to share the rationale behind my statements that the playability between any two high quality sticks is purely a subjective testimony about the calibration between that player to that stick and not an objective statement about the superiority of the stick in general.


Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)

 

[Johnny Rosato]

I believe shafts can vary in deflection. We need to train our brains to that amount of deflection. So the sticks can play different from how our brains are trained but that still doesn’t mean one is the better choice than the other. It just means you should pick one and stick with it or perhaps experiment a little to see what fits your brain (and then stick with it).

I firmly believe that the amount of spin is purely how good your stroke is paired with where you address the cueball. The closer to the miscue limit you can hit, the more spin you’ll get. I think the tip and chalk have a better chance of expanding the miscue limit and letting you spin the ball more than the shaft itself. At best, a thinner shaft might trick some into addressing the tip closer to the miscue limit since contact is made at the edge of the tip with extreme english.

But when someone says “I can really whiz the ball with this stick”, I think they’re embroidered in myth.

Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)

Very well stated!

 

[MalibuMike]

The Meez ExPro plays as well as the Revo!

The Mezz ExPro is awesome and is at least wood on the outside!
I HAVE 2!
Also this new Jacoby Ultra needs to be taken seriously! It is right up there!
And next Tiger Products until now has never upgraded thier LD shafts like Ped, OB, Jacoby etc.
Well I got an advanced new 2nd Gen. Pro-X tip 12.0 mm (up from 11.75) also the conical or European taper now starts way up near the joint!
This shaft is out of sight! I put a Zan Med on it and its up there as well!

and I've tried them ALL!

 

[Althair]

"I firmly believe that the amount of spin is purely how good your stroke is paired with where you address the cueball. The closer to the miscue limit you can hit, the more spin you’ll get. I think the tip and chalk have a better chance of expanding the miscue limit and letting you spin the ball more than the shaft itself. At best, a thinner shaft might trick some into addressing the tip closer to the miscue limit since contact is made at the edge of the tip with extreme english. (Matt)"

Fairly certain the physics is incorrect above. Many players here are better than I am, so take this with a grain of salt, but my knowledge is fairly extensive. Sadly beyond my execution! Anyway, Robert Byrnes definitely says (and proves) that going beyond 7/10th of high ball cannot add additional follow no matter how well stroked. And I believe he says same, essentially, about side spin. The best max sidespin is about 1/4 from center or less. Think about the curvature of the object ball and the cue tip. The further out you go the more the side of the object ball is receding away from you at a steep angle and your cue tip is making less and less contact as well. At 70% you get the benefit of better contact on a surface that is flatter relatively than say at 80%. I'd think a tip in great condition (not compressed and shiny) with a good radius (dime) and good or superior chalk will give better results with a great stroke than searching for the miscue limit. I personally like to woodpecker my tip with multi-point tool to improve follow, draw, and sidespin. Suggest you look into this.



Sent from my SM-A600U using Tapatalk

 

[mikemosconi]

I tried a predator shaft once about 15 years ago and did not like it. I have stayed with higher end custom cues and their mated maple shafts my whole playing career. At 66 I feel too old to start experimenting again. MY goal now that I will concentrate again on the game a bit more in retirement is to know that I will move my game over the next two years from a B/B+ TO AN A LEVEL- I WILL NEVER BE OPEN OR PRO LEVEL. TO ME NOW, My goal MEANS JUST KNOWING I WILL pocket any reasonable open shot 95%- that I am running at least one 3 pack of 9 ball and / or 30 balls in 14.1 within EVERY 2 hour practice session. These are reasonable goals for me on 4 3/4 inch pockets. I do not think that changing shafts at this point will help much. Just don't want to upset my progression by throwing in another variable at this stage of my life in this game- not knocking the new equipment- just happy with what got me to where I am now.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Robert Byrnes definitely says (and proves) that going beyond 7/10th of high ball cannot add additional follow no matter how well stroked. And I believe he says same, essentially, about side spin.

I doubt that Byrne says the same about side spin, because they're apples and oranges.

7/10 (actually more like 8/10) of maximum follow tip offset is the spin/speed ratio that produces "instant natural roll" - any "overspin" above that is almost immediately gone because of friction between the "overspinning" ball and table surface.

The same limitation doesn't apply to side spin because there's no ball/surface friction limiting it. Side spin increases continuously up to 100% of maximum tip offset (miscue limit) with no reduction because of ball/cloth friction.

pj
chgo

 

[maha]

its mostly the balls that have changed golf more than the clubs.

most though not all equipment changes are in the mind rather than real.

do you really think the newer players with artificial shafts play better than players of old because of the newer cue equipment. i think its mostly the cloth has changed and we all have air conditioning.

 

[Kickin' Chicken]

Best shafts ever?

They have won more than any other shaft.

Been around with an excellent track record spanning centuries.

M ade
A nd
P layed
L ike
E xcellence


The best part?

No one ever spams AZBilliards with them, we don’t need to.

Maple sells itself, Thanks and you're welcome.

M y goodness
A re
P eople
L eery of your
E xplanation?