The softer the tip, the more spin you can get? is this accurate.

I've found as much as anything is the stroke and grip on the butt and where the hand is placed as much as anything else I've tried tips shafts and so on , for a power draw thu hours of practice with a long range shot , I've found and golfers might relate if I set mey hand forward at the back of the cue I'll call this like golf the forward pro press and not put a death grip on , I can draw the ball or follow the ball with much more English regardless of tip , if I'm playing one pocket, I gain more spin with the softer tip in tight quarters I've learned that in long shots I have to play closer to center than a hard tip or I'll over spin the cue ball

1

Theoretically, the softer material/tip would have a higher coefficient of friction than the harder material and would allow you to apply more spin to the cue ball. However, with that being said, with both tips covered with chalk, you are no longer looking at the coefficient of friction between a soft tip or hard tip and the cue ball. It's the coefficient of friction between a cue ball and chalk.

IbeAnEngineer said:

Theoretically, the softer material/tip would have a higher coefficient of friction than the harder material and would allow you to apply more spin to the cue ball. However, with that being said, with both tips covered with chalk, you are no longer looking at the coefficient of friction between a soft tip or hard tip and the cue ball. It's the coefficient of friction between a cue ball and chalk.

Click to expand...

The soft tip will conform more to the struck surface so same thing plus chalk. ?

PJ...ASS stands for angle (cue level), speed (how hard or soft you shoot), and spin (where you're striking the CB)...the ONLY three things we can control in a pool shot (the cuestick).

Scott Lee
2019 PBIA Instructor of the Year
Director, SPF National Pool School Tour

Patrick Johnson said:

Here's a handy memory-jogging acronym: Angle Spot Speed (ASS).

pj <- try to forget it now
chgo

Click to expand...

IbeAnEngineer said:

Theoretically, the softer material/tip would have a higher coefficient of friction than the harder material and would allow you to apply more spin to the cue ball. However, with that being said, with both tips covered with chalk, you are no longer looking at the coefficient of friction between a soft tip or hard tip and the cue ball. It's the coefficient of friction between a cue ball and chalk.

Click to expand...

Tip-2-ball contact time is SO short it doesn't make much difference what tip you use. I can spin a ball just as well with any tip but i prefer firmer feel. IMO people waaay overthink this stuff.

Scott Lee said:

PJ...ASS stands for angle (cue level), speed (how hard or soft you shoot), and spin (where you're striking the CB)...the ONLY three things we can control in a pool shot (the cuestick).

Scott Lee
2019 PBIA Instructor of the Year
Director, SPF National Pool School Tour

Click to expand...

So you like "spin" rather than "spot". What if it's not a spin shot?

Here's a post of mine about that acronym from a couple years ago:
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=6136472&highlight=acronym#post6136472

pj <- OK either way
chgo

Pat...Since we (the SPF Group) coined that phrase/acronym many years ago, I'd guess we know what it stands for...at least for what we use it for! :thumbup:

Scott Lee
2019 PBIA Instructor of the Year
Director, SPF National Pool School Tour

Patrick Johnson said:

So you like "spin" rather than "spot". What if it's not a spin shot?

Here's a post of mine about that acronym from a couple years ago:
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=6136472&highlight=acronym#post6136472

pj <- OK either way
chgo

Click to expand...

Scott Lee said:

Pat...Since we (the SPF Group) coined that phrase/acronym many years ago, I'd guess we know what it stands for...at least for what we use it for! :thumbup:

Click to expand...

We definitely agree on the principle - in strokes as in life, ASS rules.

pj
chgo

painfullyslow said:

I literally did address it in my previous response. Did you google that physics exercise? Of course not. The fact that you do not understand it does not make it any less relevant.

In any case, I am done here. Believe whatever it is that you need to believe to allow yourself to sleep at night.

Click to expand...

Got it. You finally answered the question in a roundabout way. The reason for your belief that slippage has to occur is your misunderstanding of some physics principles that you tried to google.

ShootingArts said:

My words are getting pretty wildly twisted particularly by a player. I'll quote my favoritest expert, me!

Click to expand...

This is pretty vague but it almost sounds like you are trying to make reference to me (my apologies if I misinterpreted that). If that is the case, I highly suggest you read posts 66 and 73 again because you have clearly misunderstood something.

As you restated again (quoted below), you believe there is slippage with any off center hits, and are open to the possibility that the slippage could even end up being as high as a minimum of 50% (per a previous post, and you are also open to the possibility that it is less than 10%). My questions are very simple. I just want to know what leads you to believe that 1) slippage always occurs and always has to occur, and 2) that an amount of 50% could be even remotely possible?

There has to be some reason for you to have those beliefs, otherwise you wouldn't have them. What evidence is it that are you looking at that you feel is strong enough to justify having those beliefs?

ShootingArts said:

Note I speculated about slippage factors of less than ten percent and as high as fifty percent.

There is slippage with any off center hit to the cue ball. How much is just one of the unknowns we deal with.

Click to expand...

I think this discussion might have gotten to the old "How do it know?" moment. If you hit the cue ball with a soft tip using a relatively slow stroke, the tip will compress about "x" amount. If you hit the cue ball with a hard tip using a relatively fast stroke, the tip will compress "x" amount. A logical conclusion would be that the two "x's" are about equal. What that leaves us with is that it doesn't matter what kind of tip you're using. What matters is whether or not you know what you are doing with what you got. How about that?

i'd say it does not matter as long as the tip is not dried out and is holding chalk.

did I get the answer right?

what did I win?

The point was we are dealing with unknown variables

Poolplaya9 said:

This is pretty vague but it almost sounds like you are trying to make reference to me (my apologies if I misinterpreted that). If that is the case, I highly suggest you read posts 66 and 73 again because you have clearly misunderstood something.

As you restated again (quoted below), you believe there is slippage with any off center hits, and are open to the possibility that the slippage could even end up being as high as a minimum of 50% (per a previous post, and you are also open to the possibility that it is less than 10%). My questions are very simple. I just want to know what leads you to believe that 1) slippage always occurs and always has to occur, and 2) that an amount of 50% could be even remotely possible?

There has to be some reason for you to have those beliefs, otherwise you wouldn't have them. What evidence is it that are you looking at that you feel is strong enough to justify having those beliefs?

Click to expand...

Suppositions are not the same thing as beliefs. It is quite common for suppositions to be taken to extremes to point out things that are less obvious with smaller differences.

As for some slippage when hitting a stationary object at an angle with a moving object, that is a basic mechanical property. Trying to claim that there will be absolutely zero slippage during contact between a cue tip and cue ball when using side is much like arguing gravity doesn't exist.

Slippage and/or tip distortion create different results when we hit out towards the edges of miscue limits with hard and soft tips. There are other variables too. Some cancel each other out to some degree, some are additive. If these variables have been isolated and quantified I haven't seen the paperwork.

I could trot out my background to justify my beliefs but I find people that don't believe these things more surprising than my knowing they are basic mechanical principles. I move between a chuckle and wanting to bang my head against the wall when people insist that the pursuit being discussed is outside the realm of physics and mechanical properties that govern the rest of the world.

Hu

I beat a league player once, low ranked, with a break cue for fun. as long as theres chalk between the tip and the cue ball youll get spin. soft tips eventually get harder as they mushroom. so they just gonna cause a headache sooner than a harder tip.

ShootingArts said:

As for some slippage when hitting a stationary object at an angle with a moving object, that is a basic mechanical property.

Click to expand...

I think this is wrong. While I think slippage can be a common occurrence in collisions between objects, I don't think that it has to occur. And I see no evidence that would give me reason to suspect it occurs in any significant amount with most pool shots (and in fact it seems to me quite the opposite, that the available evidence seems to pretty strongly support that significant slippage short of miscues does not occur). If you can point me toward any evidence that shows either of my last two sentences to be in error I would be very open to seeing it.

ShootingArts said:

I could trot out my background to justify my beliefs but I find people that don't believe these things more surprising than my knowing they are basic mechanical principles. I move between a chuckle and wanting to bang my head against the wall when people insist that the pursuit being discussed is outside the realm of physics and mechanical properties that govern the rest of the world.

Click to expand...

Completely agree, which is why I asked the questions I did. I find the beliefs that slippage must always occur, and that significant slippage is a distinct possibility, as being completely silly because they are not supported by evidence and fly in the face of science.

I still haven't seen you or anyone else present any evidence whatsoever (much less compelling evidence) to back up either of those assertions (slippage absolutely must always occur, and significant slippage is possible). If you have any actual evidence, please present it so that we all can learn, or can point out where you are simply mistaken about it actually being evidence. Thanks for the discussion.

Hi asbani, in a short answer: YES - The softer the tip the more spin you can get, thus increasing control also. , but, I don't use a super soft tip or a very soft tip because of quickly they wear out and need replacing, I use a Medium that is semi-soft. and still get plenty of spin and cue ball control, I also am such a cheapskate that after a couple weeks of non stop play with the same tip, I will start scuffing the tip between every few shots to make sure it never hardens and I can get maximum life out of it, as I am a hard hitter usually, I can play soft, but I prefer to practice working the cue ball around the table on every shot. ----
--- For a reference, I can draw the cue ball back with a spin fast enough to go the length of the table almost 3 times, not that i'm great or anything, i think it's just after many years i consistently hit the ball square.

thinking and knowing

Poolplaya9 said:

I think this is wrong. While I think slippage can be a common occurrence in collisions between objects, I don't think that it has to occur. And I see no evidence that would give me reason to suspect it occurs in any significant amount with most pool shots (and in fact it seems to me quite the opposite, that the available evidence seems to pretty strongly support that significant slippage short of miscues does not occur). If you can point me toward any evidence that shows either of my last two sentences to be in error I would be very open to seeing it.



Completely agree, which is why I asked the questions I did. I find the beliefs that slippage must always occur, and that significant slippage is a distinct possibility, as being completely silly because they are not supported by evidence and fly in the face of science.

I still haven't seen you or anyone else present any evidence whatsoever (much less compelling evidence) to back up either of those assertions (slippage absolutely must always occur, and significant slippage is possible). If you have any actual evidence, please present it so that we all can learn, or can point out where you are simply mistaken about it actually being evidence. Thanks for the discussion.

Click to expand...

Oddly enough, what you find not supported and flying in the face of science I find just the opposite, and I made a living using that science as a mechanical designer. I had typed up a long response I choose not to post. What you find silly I find to be fact. If we go much further at least one of us is going to get irritated.

Hu

Stickin2it said:

YES - The softer the tip the more spin you can get.

Click to expand...

Dr. Dave disagrees:

Cue Tip Hardness Effects:

"Tip hardness (within the typical range) should not have a direct effect on the amount of spin that can be applied."

pj
chgo