The BIG low deflection Hype Campaign.

Kel_82 · Jun 21, 2014

1. I'm aware that some shafts produce less squirt than others.

2. I'm aware some shaftmakers are more consistent then others.

3. The difference in 1" is really big in pool, especially shooting at a ball far from the pocket.

What I don't understand, is how come there are no governing standards, or statistical numerical data provided by any shaft manufacturer.

Guns and Ammo makers have numbers to support why one is superior to the other etc.

LD shafts are marketed not on feel, but by deflection. I'm starting to think that if every shaft maker randomly had 15 shafts sampled, that some that don't claim to be LD, produce shafts that produce less squirt than some LD ones.

Regardless, I think a standard method of testing with results needs to be established. After that, the numbers can sort themselves out.

kvinbrwr · Jun 21, 2014

Kel_82 said:
Regardless, I think a standard method of testing with results needs to be established.

Cool, we'll just let Pool's Governing Organization know and they'll have numbers for us just as soon as they get done standardizing the tables and rules.

MitchAlsup · Jun 21, 2014

Kel_82 said:
What I don't understand, is how come there are no governing standards, or statistical numerical data provided by any shaft manufacturer.

The standards each cue has to meet are very lienient:
1) it has to look like a cue long thin and round
2) be more than 40 inches long
3) weigh less than 24 oz
4) have a animal hide tip
That's it!

There is no standard with respect to deflection because there is no need.

Could there be a standard? Sure, some physicist/engineer could spend 3 years and $5M to figure out how to adequately test and measure shafts, then write a 75 page manual on the developed testing procedure that would ensure no cheating on tests would go on.

But the average pool player would be no better off because any such serious standard would have to be based in physics, engineering, and calculus terms that 97% of pool players have long since forgotten.

Nor does it mater how much a pool cue deflects, this is one of those things the player with the cue learns and compensates for. Unless you can develop a cue with 0.000 deflection, you always have to compensate, the only question is how much. Good players can compensate for massive deflection, ot so good players not so much.

Then put yourself in the position of having to buy a new shaft:
would you buy the one with 14 milliNewton*Radians of deflection of 15mN*R ?
OR
would you buy the one with more advertizing or more professional players using?

naji · Jun 21, 2014

Kel_82 said:
1. I'm aware that some shafts produce less squirt than others.

2. I'm aware some shaftmakers are more consistent then others.

3. The difference in 1" is really big in pool, especially shooting at a ball far from the pocket.

What I don't understand, is how come there are no governing standards, or statistical numerical data provided by any shaft manufacturer.

Guns and Ammo makers have numbers to support why one is superior to the other etc.

LD shafts are marketed not on feel, but by deflection. I'm starting to think that if every shaft maker randomly had 15 shafts sampled, that some that don't claim to be LD, produce shafts that produce less squirt than some LD ones.

Regardless, I think a standard method of testing with results needs to be established. After that, the numbers can sort themselves out.

It depends how you aim and shoot, some shots are better hit with HD shaft and others with LD shaft; So some top players resist the change to LD like SVB, Earl Strickland, and others that makes it hard for the manufacturers to argue for a standards let alone LD shafts standards.

The Renfro · Jun 21, 2014

naji said:
It depends how you aim and shoot, some shots are better hit with HD shaft and others with LD shaft; So some top players resist the change to LD like SVB, Earl Strickland, and others that makes it hard for the manufacturers to argue for a standards let alone LD shafts standards.

Shane is playing the best he has ever played with the POS Cuetec he has.... It's an CT634 with you guessed it... an R360 Low Deflection shaft........

poolguy4u · Jun 21, 2014

:smile:

Before I make a shaft for a customer, I always ask how much deflection he wants.

Haven't had a complaint yet.:thumbup:

Kel_82 · Jun 21, 2014

MitchAlsup said:
The standards each cue has to meet are very lienient:
1) it has to look like a cue long thin and round
2) be more than 40 inches long
3) weigh less than 24 oz
4) have a animal hide tip
That's it!

There is no standard with respect to deflection because there is no need.

Could there be a standard? Sure, some physicist/engineer could spend 3 years and $5M to figure out how to adequately test and measure shafts, then write a 75 page manual on the developed testing procedure that would ensure no cheating on tests would go on.

But the average pool player would be no better off because any such serious standard would have to be based in physics, engineering, and calculus terms that 97% of pool players have long since forgotten.

Nor does it mater how much a pool cue deflects, this is one of those things the player with the cue learns and compensates for. Unless you can develop a cue with 0.000 deflection, you always have to compensate, the only question is how much. Good players can compensate for massive deflection, ot so good players not so much.

Then put yourself in the position of having to buy a new shaft:
would you buy the one with 14 milliNewton*Radians of deflection of 15mN*R ?
OR
would you buy the one with more advertizing or more professional players using?

Your completely missing the point, I'll try to simplify it for you.
If your marketing something under a guise, such as having low deflection. Why not have a standardized testing method and numbers to back it up.

If all shafts had to go through the same test, then you could actually compare.

Kel_82 · Jun 21, 2014

kvinbrwr said:
Cool, we'll just let Pool's Governing Organization know and they'll have numbers for us just as soon as they get done standardizing the tables and rules.

Nice sarcasm and trolling.

How's that been working for you?

Kel_82 · Jun 21, 2014

naji said:
It depends how you aim and shoot, some shots are better hit with HD shaft and others with LD shaft; So some top players resist the change to LD like SVB, Earl Strickland, and others that makes it hard for the manufacturers to argue for a standards let alone LD shafts standards.

This isn't a thread debating the effectiveness of LD shafts.

This is a thread asking why do shaft makers advertise LD, yet never provide any scientifically tested data or numbers using a standardized test to give and compare results by.

kvinbrwr · Jun 21, 2014

Kel_82 said:
Nice sarcasm and trolling.

How's that been working for you?

Nobody likes me.

Do you think that is why?

Hits 'em Hard · Jun 21, 2014

Kel_82 said:
Nice sarcasm and trolling.

How's that been working for you?

Well since you think that there can be a set number for determining how much a shaft must reduce deflection, I'd say you're losing and Kevin is winning.

A shafts deflection is defined as a parallel offset from center. Not many people use parallel offsets for applying english and there's a handful of ways to compensate for that deflection.

Guns and Ammo manufacturers have stats to show their benefits because currently, there is only one way to fire a bullet. Show me only one way to hold a cue and to shoot, with the stats to show its benefits. I'll make a bet too. My life versus your life, you're unable to provide the stats for pool, ever.

AtLarge · Jun 21, 2014

MitchAlsup said:
The standards each cue has to meet are very lienient:
1) it has to look like a cue long thin and round
2) be more than 40 inches long
3) weigh less than 24 oz
4) have a animal hide tip
That's it! ...

If you are talking about WPA equipment specs, some of what you said is not correct. Here are the actual requirements:

"17. Cue Sticks
Cue Sticks used at WPA competitions should comply with the following
during play at table:

Length of Cue: 40 inches [1.016 m] minimum / No Maximum
Weight of Cue: No minimum / 25 oz. [708.75 gm] maximum
Width of Tip: No minimum / 14mm maximum

The cue tip may not be of a material that can scratch or damage the addressed ball. The cue tip on any stick must be composed of a piece of specially processed leather or other fibrous or pliable material that extends the natural line of the shaft end of the cue and contacts the cue ball when the shot is executed..

The ferrule of the cue stick, if of a metal material, may not be more than 1 inch [2.54 cm] in length."

RBC · Jun 21, 2014

Kel_82 said:
1. I'm aware that some shafts produce less squirt than others.

2. I'm aware some shaftmakers are more consistent then others.

3. The difference in 1" is really big in pool, especially shooting at a ball far from the pocket.

What I don't understand, is how come there are no governing standards, or statistical numerical data provided by any shaft manufacturer.

Guns and Ammo makers have numbers to support why one is superior to the other etc.

LD shafts are marketed not on feel, but by deflection. I'm starting to think that if every shaft maker randomly had 15 shafts sampled, that some that don't claim to be LD, produce shafts that produce less squirt than some LD ones.

Regardless, I think a standard method of testing with results needs to be established. After that, the numbers can sort themselves out.

Kel

As one of the actual manufacturers of the cue shafts you're talking about, I can give you some perspective from my point of view.

First, the term LD or low deflection is really referring to low cue ball squirt. It is real and it does make a substantial difference. By your post, I don't think you disagree with this part, so I'll move on.

Ok, now about testing and publishing results. I, for one, would love to see an independent organization acquire and test all claims of low cue ball squirt (LD). I would love to see them report it to the public. I feel very good about how my products would test against the others. But, it would have to be an independent organization. Obviously, if the one doing the testing and publishing is also a company who makes competing products, the results would be questioned as to their authenticity. We've already seen this. I've seen tests that could possibly show negative deflection, which is obviously not possible. I've read claims of reducing deflection by 150%, which is also obviously not possible. So for it to be beyond reproach, it would have to be an independent of some sort.

So, who out there would invest the time and money to do an independent test, document it properly so that it would withstand the scrutiny it would most certainly receive, and do it with no return for their time or money? There just isn't any organizations out there to do such a thing.

Now, how about moving in a different direction.

If you take a look at any of the ads we've recently placed for our new OB+ shafts, you will see something a little different. Our claim is that we reduce the "Tip End Mass" by approximately 13%. This is a mathematical thing. We can take the average specific gravity of each of the components involved, calculate the volume of each, and come up with a real tangible number. It's a number that is justifiable, and supportable. It's just too easy for anyone to claim "LD" because, as you stated, there is no standard. We will continue in this direction, and as time permits, we plan to publish the actual numbers of our calculations. We would welcome other manufacturers to do the same, and may even make some comparisons of ours to others. But for now, we will make comparisons to our previous products.

While I know that "Tip End Mass" isn't all that there is when it comes to cue ball squirt, it certainly is the predominant factor. A good read on this is Dr. Dave Alcitore's article in the June issue of Billiard's Digest.

Well, I hope that sheds some light on how we think about it anyway.

By the way, feel is very important to us. We actually build 2 different types of performance shafts, and the difference between them is all about the feel. The original OB's with the laminated ferrule are a softer quieter hit, whereas the newer white ferruled models have a much stiffer, more firm hit. Designed specifically to give our customers a choice. The same is true with our new OB+ shafts.

Shoot Straight!

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com

LHP5 · Jun 21, 2014

The Renfro said:
Shane is playing the best he has ever played with the POS Cuetec he has.... It's an CT634 with you guessed it... an R360 Low Deflection shaft........

I think its been mentioned before that he changed the ferrule out on the cuetec he has. Not sure if that makes it any less ld than before. Others have also suggested that the r360 doesn't really deflect anymore than a regular shaft that much anyways.

Kel_82 · Jun 21, 2014

kvinbrwr said:
Nobody likes me.

Do you think that is why?

In a few years it won't matter lol.

Kel_82 · Jun 21, 2014

Hits 'em Hard said:
Well since you think that there can be a set number for determining how much a shaft must reduce deflection, I'd say you're losing and Kevin is winning.

A shafts deflection is defined as a parallel offset from center. Not many people use parallel offsets for applying english and there's a handful of ways to compensate for that deflection.

Guns and Ammo manufacturers have stats to show their benefits because currently, there is only one way to fire a bullet. Show me only one way to hold a cue and to shoot, with the stats to show its benefits. I'll make a bet too. My life versus your life, you're unable to provide the stats for pool, ever.

Thank you for strengthening my point. You can use a robot, set up different speeds, pivot points, and tip offsets.

These setting can be applied to all shafts and numbers measurements can be taken.

Kel_82 · Jun 21, 2014

RBC said:
Kel

As one of the actual manufacturers of the cue shafts you're talking about, I can give you some perspective from my point of view.

First, the term LD or low deflection is really referring to low cue ball squirt. It is real and it does make a substantial difference. By your post, I don't think you disagree with this part, so I'll move on.

Ok, now about testing and publishing results. I, for one, would love to see an independent organization acquire and test all claims of low cue ball squirt (LD). I would love to see them report it to the public. I feel very good about how my products would test against the others. But, it would have to be an independent organization. Obviously, if the one doing the testing and publishing is also a company who makes competing products, the results would be questioned as to their authenticity. We've already seen this. I've seen tests that could possibly show negative deflection, which is obviously not possible. I've read claims of reducing deflection by 150%, which is also obviously not possible. So for it to be beyond reproach, it would have to be an independent of some sort.

So, who out there would invest the time and money to do an independent test, document it properly so that it would withstand the scrutiny it would most certainly receive, and do it with no return for their time or money? There just isn't any organizations out there to do such a thing.

Now, how about moving in a different direction.

If you take a look at any of the ads we've recently placed for our new OB+ shafts, you will see something a little different. Our claim is that we reduce the "Tip End Mass" by approximately 13%. This is a mathematical thing. We can take the average specific gravity of each of the components involved, calculate the volume of each, and come up with a real tangible number. It's a number that is justifiable, and supportable. It's just too easy for anyone to claim "LD" because, as you stated, there is no standard. We will continue in this direction, and as time permits, we plan to publish the actual numbers of our calculations. We would welcome other manufacturers to do the same, and may even make some comparisons of ours to others. But for now, we will make comparisons to our previous products.

While I know that "Tip End Mass" isn't all that there is when it comes to cue ball squirt, it certainly is the predominant factor. A good read on this is Dr. Dave Alcitore's article in the June issue of Billiard's Digest.

Well, I hope that sheds some light on how we think about it anyway.

By the way, feel is very important to us. We actually build 2 different types of performance shafts, and the difference between them is all about the feel. The original OB's with the laminated ferrule are a softer quieter hit, whereas the newer white ferruled models have a much stiffer, more firm hit. Designed specifically to give our customers a choice. The same is true with our new OB+ shafts.

Shoot Straight!

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com

Badically, there is so much bullshit in the world of pool, that you can't get any accurate numbers.

I can't see where it would be that difficult, you said in another thread you have worked for a company thst has done it before.

I guess companies don't want people to know the actual numbers. They are all probably very close to one another. I know if I made shafts that claimed to have the best hit with the lowest deflection I would give supporting evidence.

Because obviously that's what any player would want, accuracy and control. You could corner the market.

But what's probably closer to the truth is a SS360 is right there beside you on deflection, has more feel. At half the price.

JoeyInCali · Jun 21, 2014

LD shafts are marketed not on feel, but by deflection. I'm starting to think that if every shaft maker randomly had 15 shafts sampled, that some that don't claim to be LD, produce shafts that produce less squirt than some LD ones.

Let's just make it simple.
Let's have one distributor/retailer buy all of them.
Saw off the first 6 inches then weigh all of them .
Compare the total weight and ratio per MM.

Kel_82 · Jun 21, 2014

JoeyInCali said:
Let's just make it simple.
Let's have one distributor/retailer buy all of them.
Saw off the first 6 inches then weigh all of them .
Compare the total weight and ratio per MM.

At least that would be numbers :grin:

I have did Dr.Daves test with my 12.25 mm Joss Shaft vs a 13 mm poison shaft.

The Joss squirts less. The 12.50 Joss also squirts less. These do not claim to be low deflection shafts. Dan made me two sizes when he made my cue because I didn't know what I wanted, just knew my fingers were little.

ELBeau · Jun 21, 2014

Kel_82 said:
At least that would be numbers :grin:

I have did Dr.Daves test with my 12.25 mm Joss Shaft vs a 13 mm poison shaft.

The Joss squirts less. The 12.50 Joss also squirts less. These do not claim to be low deflection shafts. Dan made me two sizes when he made my cue because I didn't know what I wanted, just knew my fingers were little.

Squirts less than what? I 12.25 mm shaft will generally deflect less than a 13 mm shaft because it has lower end mass.

The BIG low deflection Hype Campaign.

AzB Silver Member

Skee Ball Monster Playa

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Outsville.com

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Skee Ball Monster Playa

AzB Silver Member

AzB Gold Member

Deceased

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Maker of Joey Bautista Cues

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member