Pros or cons playing with light shaft (approximately 3.0 oz)

[Fore Rail]

I really don't see any parallels. The stance is different, the swing is different, the scale is slightly different, you only use one ball in golf.

I'd love to know what is similar besides a ball going into a hole, in which case it would be similar to foosball, basketball, hockey, soccer, lacrosse, pinball, ball-and-cup...

Just because it is one guy at a time hitting a ball with a stick doesn't make for any equipment or technique crossover.

I'll give your three right now & perhaps more as I have time to think clearly & come up with them.

1) When I'm putting, especially the short ones I keep my head down & listen for the ball to go in the hole. Works for pocketing an object ball as well.

2) When playing pool it is wise to keep the cue ball on the correct side of the next object ball as you play your pattern. In golf it is also pretty damn smart to try & position the ball to the correct part of the fairway to attack the pin.

3) In both golf & pool setup, aim, alignment etc is 100% crucial as a start to hopefully send the cue ball & golf ball on the best path.

 

[DeeDeeCues]

I'll give your three right now & perhaps more as I have time to think clearly & come up with them.

1) When I'm putting, especially the short ones I keep my head down & listen for the ball to go in the hole. Works for pocketing an object ball as well.

2) When playing pool it is wise to keep the cue ball on the correct side of the next object ball as you play your pattern. In golf it is also pretty damn smart to try & position the ball to the correct part of the fairway to attack the pin.

3) In both golf & pool setup, aim, alignment etc is 100% crucial as a start to hopefully send the cue ball & golf ball on the best path.

All the of those apply to when I was playing foosball. Head still when shooting, control the ball movement to where you want it, set up the shit or pass correctly.

That said, the similarity on 2 is a huge stretch.

I don't need an argument, but in some way 1 and 3 apply to most physical games and all high accuracy games like darts, bowling, shooting, etc..

 

[Fore Rail]

All the of those apply to when I was playing foosball. Head still when shooting, control the ball movement to where you want it, set up the shit or pass correctly.

That said, the similarity on 2 is a huge stretch.

I don't need an argument, but in some way 1 and 3 apply to most physical games and all high accuracy games like darts, bowling, shooting, etc..

Just out of curiosity what do you believe is a huge stretch?

 

[DeeDeeCues]

Just out of curiosity what do you believe is a huge stretch?

That navigating a golf course properly is the same as getting shape on a ball. I understand your premise, but I wouldn't say that they are similar.

Maybe our definitions of similar are different. I am talking about crossover techniques or using lessons from equipment from one support and applying it to pool.

I.e. darts is a great way to explain how to jump using the dart stroke (go figure, huh?), but it is also great to explain how to use the mechanical bridge.

I'm probably too pedantic on this one.

 

[Flakeandrun]

If you like how it feels for you, and you've tested it. Then there is no pro or con. If you're feeling good, then it's good.

 

[Flakeandrun]

Thanks for all the responses. I did buy the shaft.

I just got given a Hayakawa KW shaft, around 0.5 lighter than my previous playing shaft. Feels well balanced, and I am liking it so far after a few days play. Let a few players much higher level than myself have a hit with it, and the general consensus was that it's balanced well on my butt, and hits nicely. Most of them had positive things to say, only Delgado agreed with me that the tip sucked. the three or four other pros said the tip was fine.

 

[Bavafongoul]

So many posters miss the point……please think of it this way which is the correct way, IMO.

The weight of any shaft can certainly seem very heavy when you compare it with a lighter weight shaft.

The shaft weight relates to the balance, feel and energy transfer of your stroke. The shaft doesn’t need to be
heavy. I cannot be clearer. A shaft does not need to be 4 ozs. or heavier. Even a shaft as light as 3.25 oz., which
even my biggest pundits should concede is a relatively light weight cue shaft, can be a great match with the
right weight cue butt. I am not blindly endorsing heavy weight cue shafts. I’m referring to weight proportionality of
a cue’s two halves screwed together. And I will remain persistent that the best names in cue making built their cues
with the shaft and cue weights being proportionally matched and consistently within the % weight ratios I posted.

The premise involves the optimum weight match of a shaft to a cue’s butt weight. A 14.75 oz. cue butt will have a target weight range for a shaft that will vary slightly from a lighter 14 oz. butt or a heavier15.25 oz., 15..8 oz,, or 16.5 oz. butt.

A shaft doesn’t have to be 4 ozs. or heavier. Stop that nonsense because I never said it but some readers might have mistakenly inferred it from my thread about a heavier version Kielwood shaft I wanted built. The KW shafts I needed built
had to be at least 4 ozs. so they could match the orig. maple shaft weights my cue maker used when he built my cues.

 

[eg9327]

I've played with an open bridge for our most of my playing experience. I've found that lighter shafts tend to miscue more often. I've changed so that anywhere near the rail I use a closed bridge. Prefer a wooden shaft mostly for that reason.

 

[Poolplaya9]

So many posters miss the point……please think of it this way which is the correct way, IMO.

The weight of any shaft can certainly seem very heavy when you compare it with a lighter weight shaft.

The shaft weight relates to the balance, feel and energy transfer of your stroke. The shaft doesn’t need to be
heavy. I cannot be clearer. A shaft does not need to be 4 ozs. or heavier. Even a shaft as light as 3.25 oz., which
even my biggest pundits should concede is a relatively light weight cue shaft, can be a great match with the
right weight cue butt. I am not blindly endorsing heavy weight cue shafts. I’m referring to weight proportionality of
a cue’s two halves screwed together. And I will remain persistent that the best names in cue making built their cues
with the shaft and cue weights being proportionally matched and consistently within the % weight ratios I posted.

The premise involves the optimum weight match of a shaft to a cue’s butt weight. A 14.75 oz. cue butt will have a target weight range for a shaft that will vary slightly from a lighter 14 oz. butt or a heavier15.25 oz., 15..8 oz,, or 16.5 oz. butt.

A shaft doesn’t have to be 4 ozs. or heavier. Stop that nonsense because I never said it but some readers might have mistakenly inferred it from my thread about a heavier version Kielwood shaft I wanted built. The KW shafts I needed built
had to be at least 4 ozs. so they could match the orig. maple shaft weights my cue maker used when he built my cues.

Essentially you are just saying that there is a narrow range of balance points that is "correct" for all cues and pool players. Your "proof" is that you say that the cue makers that you are the most fond of tend to build their cues within this narrow range of balance points.

That's all nonsense. The correct balance point for any player is the one that after some experimentation they find that they shoot best with and that they most prefer, because it is just that, a preference preference thing. The balance point that Bavafongoul, any other players, or any other cue makers end up preferring for themselves is immaterial.

 

[Bavafongoul]

Essentially you are just saying that there is a narrow range of balance points that is "correct" for all cues and pool players. Your "proof" is that you say that the cue makers that you are the most fond of tend to build their cues within this narrow range of balance points.

That's all nonsense. The correct balance point for any player is the one that after some experimentation they find that they shoot best with and that they most prefer, because it is just that, a preference preference thing. The balance point that Bavafongoul, any other players, or any other cue makers end up preferring for themselves is immaterial.

No, I am not basing it on cue makers I am fond of….just start paying attention to for sale listings……you can do the math in your head….it’s easy…….I’m not just referring to a few dozen cue makers……down through the decades, the best cue makers adhered to this……..it wasn’t just coincidence……..I’ve followed for sale listings for over 20 years double checking this…….it is not just cue makers I like or admire….start tracking I cue sales which most of us like to do. Hopefully, before I expire, you’ll post there is something to this besides ironic coincidence and eBay is not a reliable source for cue sales tracking. This website is or the sites operated by reputable cue dealers that post on this Forum.

p.s. I never mentioned balance point in any of my posts or explanations. Too many cues use a weight bolt which are usually an afterthought by the cue maker. Naturally, there is a balance relationship between the shaft and butt. It is interesting to observe how some folks don’t stick to the issue I raised instead of embarking on their own inferences.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I've found that lighter shafts tend to miscue more often.

Sounds logicalish, but I doubt it. Miscueing is pretty well understood to be a function of the slope of the CB’s surface where the tip contacts it compared to the stick’s direction of motion: more than 30 degrees (the slope at the half ball miscue limit) = scratch.

pj
chgo

 

[Poolplaya9]

No, I am not basing it on cue makers I am fond of….just start paying attention to for sale listings……you can do the math in your head….it’s easy…….I’m not just referring to a few dozen cue makers……down through the decades, the best cue makers adhered to this……..it wasn’t just coincidence……..I’ve followed for sale listings for over 20 years double checking this…….it is not just cue makers I like or admire….start tracking I cue sales which most of us like to do. Hopefully, before I expire, you’ll post there is something to this besides ironic coincidence and eBay is not a reliable source for cue sales tracking. This website is or the sites operated by reputable cue dealers that post on this Forum.

p.s. I never mentioned balance point in any of my posts or explanations. Too many cues use a weight bolt which are usually an afterthought by the cue maker. Naturally, there is a balance relationship between the shaft and butt. It is interesting to observe how some folks don’t stick to the issue I raised instead of embarking on their own inferences.

You missed my point completely. It wouldn't matter if every cue maker in the world preferred the balance to fall within the parameters you laid out. It wouldn't matter if every other pool player in the world preferred the balance to fall within the parameters you laid out. If, after some experimentation, you find out that you play better with something different than these parameters you are championing, then those parameters are wrong for you and you should play with something else. Period.

Your preferred parameters are not "correct/best" for all cues and players as you are inferring if not outright claiming. Butt and shaft weights and how a cue balances are just personal preference type things, and what you (or some cue maker/s no matter who they are) might play best with will not be what somebody else plays best with.

If you feel you have some empirical data that says otherwise then go ahead and share, but you are going to have an uphill battle arguing against "the cue you play best with is the cue you play best with".

As far as you never having said balance point, you did, just using other words. You were saying things like "the right shaft weight for the weight of the butt that it will be used with," and how there needs to be a certain ratio between the two, aka a certain balance, and you even used the word balance. Balance point is a function of and a way to measure the balance to which you refer. You and your formula didn't say anything that would lead me to believe you were talking about any more granular a look at the weight distribution than what the balance point could measure, and since the balance point is the more common way of denoting a certain balance in pool cues than your formula is, not to mention simpler and quicker to use and discuss, that is what I used.

 

[Bavafongoul]

You are striving to split hairs because balance involves tactile feel and balance point is the fulcrum point on a pool cue.

I know facts are difficult because you can’t alter what history has already extensively documents. This confronts readers
each and every day on this site’s for sale threads. The math part is so simple you can do it without a calculator.

Get a sheet of paper and make some notes on the cue makers that built their cues the way I’ve described and those that failed to do it unless a customer requested a lighter weight shaft. The information stares you in the face every day.

So for the sake of others that don’t want to read this dribble…..yours or mine…….how about we put each other on ignore which is a simple thing to do. You seem earnest and sincere but let’s not waste each other’s time debating this.

Best of luck to you, enjoy a great life, play pool as much as you can and let’s go our separate ways……but do pay more attention to cue sale listings because the data is available for anyone to view and then decide for themselves.