Cyclop balls Not good for TV!!!

lfigueroa said:

The cost may be cheaper but: Cyclop balls have a higher percentage of phenolic in them, which makes them harder, so they can take a higher degree of polish, which makes them stay cleaner longer. And, they are coming out of the factory in sets that measure to better tolerances in terms of consistency of weight and size, which means they play truer.

Lou Figueroa

Click to expand...

lfigueroa said:

The translucency of the original Cyclop CB was part of an effort to make the CB more distinguishable to the Diamond Smart Table optical density sensor. And yes, the ball played differently than a red circle, which plays different from a measles CB.

Now there is the Cyclop red dot which is better matched and plays very near a red circle. You should try it. Manufacturers are usually trying to improve their product. GCs went from the GC1 to the GC5. Diamond went from the Red label to the Blue label and even Blue labels will have changes in the future.

Look at all the generations shaft makers have gone through, and for that matter, pool cue makers in general. Over the course of time they learn things about their product and player preferences.

As to the opinion of pros, take a look a tournament results. The same guys seem to do fine with the Cyclop balls.

Lou Figueroa

Click to expand...

JC said:

IMO the reason the balls were hard to discern on the stream was because Lenny chose to over expose the table in favor of making the room visible. The trouble wasn't the color but the inability to tell the spots from the stripes due to the overexposure.

As far as the balls playability sucking I would advise all you keyboard world beaters to check the mirror. I watched Sky Woodward play for about 6 straight hours without missing a ball or getting out of position. The problem with your game isn't the balls.

JC

Click to expand...

West Point 1987 said:

I believe that the "TV" color balls thing is a mistaken reference to what were originally designed for color blind players...someone looked at these balls and not knowing any better, assumed the color differences were for ability to better discern the differences on TV, which is demonstrably untrue. I'd always heard the color change was done to help color blind players (and if I'm not mistaken, color blindness is much more prevalent in Asia) see the different solid colored balls better, often mistaking the blue, red and green balls. The "TV" balls' colors are more about the intensity of the shade of color. Marketers have gone with the TV excuse, since more people would give them a try if they were for TV (where the big dogs play) as opposed to something that helps color blind players differentiate balls better.

I play with the standard color Cyclop balls and the original translucent CB on my table at home and have no problems...I love them. The CB is much more lively than the measle ball, but that's just fine by me. I play equally well with Aramith and measle CB, either works well for me.

Click to expand...

Johnnyt said:

Funny, but I know I heard Mark G from CSI state on AZB or the TAR podcast that Aramith had raised there price and got too expensive. I'm not going searching for it. Johnnyt

Click to expand...

j_zippel said:

I agree. When I reference cheaper it's cost only, not the product itself being cheap. I've heard Greg from diamond mention what you said in terms of phenolic percentage. I'm certainly not bashing Aramith or Brunswick, I hold both products in high regard I'm just not a fan of people disregarding the quality of cyclops because of early defects in their product or not being able to adapt to the change in colour (skittles set). Buy the standard set then. At the end of the day everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I myself have no problem playing with any set of balls. The most noticeable difference in play is the different cueballs out there. I play mostly 8 ball so the argument of colour confusion doesn't really apply to me.
Some folks don't like change, that's fine, but unless you have a factual opinion it's just a bunch of worthless noise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

lfigueroa said:

... Cyclop balls have a higher percentage of phenolic in them ...

Click to expand...

ChicagoJoe said:

I've always thought they play fine, but i can't stand that cue ball with the transparent outer layer.

Click to expand...

lfigueroa said:

There is a new Cyclop CB introduced at the DCC that has one large red dot (same size as on a measles ball). If the new CB has a transparent layer I can't see it.

Lou Figueroa

Click to expand...

Nick B said:

I will try new cueball but it's not a problem I need to resolve myself. As per CG5 being and improvement. Not in my mind GCII is/was the pinnacle.

Click to expand...

AtLarge said:

Not according to Ivan Lee of Simonis/Aramith: http://www.azbilliards.com/news/sto...c-balls-for-billiards-pool-and-all-cuesports/

Click to expand...

AtLarge said:

Yeah, we should call that a red spot rather than a red dot.

Click to expand...

djkx1 said:

I'm red/green color blind and the skittles balls are much, MUCH harder to tell apart than the traditional colors. The more "pastel" colors are, the more difficult it is for most color blind people to differentiate.

Click to expand...

lfigueroa said:

Sooooo, the Aramith TV set with the pastel pinks and browns -- harder to differentiate?

Lou Figueroa

Click to expand...

djkx1 said:

I'm red/green color blind and the skittles balls are much, MUCH harder to tell apart than the traditional colors. The more "pastel" colors are, the more difficult it is for most color blind people to differentiate.

Click to expand...