$100 Spin Challenge

gunzby said:
You would actually need a machine to do this. It would need a machine to set parameters as far as exact striking point and stroke power is concerned. A human cannot actually definitively prove this.

It would take two shafts of exactly equal weight, taper and tip diameter with the exact same tip which is shaped exactly the same with the same exact amount of chalk. You would then have to aim that shaft at the exact same spot on the CB at the exact same angle.

$100 just isn't worth the trouble.


*edit* Ooops forgot that both shafts would need the exact same ferrule as well.
Click to expand...

You're making this way too complicated. I've posted (more than once) a simple test that anybody can do on any pool table with no special equipment. It would just have to be done carefully so that the controls and results could be verified on video.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
If $100 is meaningless to you, put it up with mine. It's for science!

pj
chgo
Click to expand...


$100 is not worth the effort for anyone in their right mind to take this challenge.

If you seriously want someone to try it, you need to post up a decent chunk of change, and put the money in escrow so that the panel will decide and you have no veto power if you personally don't like the results.

Otherwise, why would anyone bother?
It's a complete waste of time.
 
SUPERSTAR said:
$100 is not worth the effort for anyone in their right mind to take this challenge.

If you seriously want someone to try it, you need to post up a decent chunk of change, and put the money in escrow so that the panel will decide and you have no veto power if you personally don't like the results.

Otherwise, why would anyone bother?
It's a complete waste of time.
Click to expand...

OK, I'll put you in the "don't care" bin. Thanks for letting us know.

pj
chgo
 
Patrick Johnson said:
OK, I'll put you in the "don't care" bin. Thanks for letting us know.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

If you find someone that is willing to exert the effort needed to do this experiment for $100, i will be quite surprised.

If the price went way up, I'm sure you'd find more people that "care", but for $100, your going to be hard pressed to find that.
No malice intent.
Just an honest observation.

Peoples time is worth money, and odds are, that $100 isn't going to cut it.
 
OK, I'll put you in the "don't care" bin. Thanks for letting us know.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
If you find someone that is willing to exert the effort needed to do this experiment for $100, i will be quite surprised.

If the price went way up, I'm sure you'd find more people that "care", but for $100, your going to be hard pressed to find that.
No malice intent.
Just an honest observation.

Peoples time is worth money, and odds are, that $100 isn't going to cut it.
Click to expand...

OK, I'll put you in the "don't care" bin again. Thanks again for letting us know again.

pj <- again
chgo
 
iusedtoberich said:
This is one way you can do it for free...

Shoot from the spot to the middle diamond on the end rail with maximum english. Record where the cueball hits the side rail. Compare with several shafts.

To attempt to standardize strokes used among several shafts...
1. Use the Jim Rempe training ball on the advanced side. Only accept results that hit the same mark on the cue ball.

2. Right in front of the end rail place a strip of paper on the bed with two lines 2.5 inches apart. Use video and or witnesses to verify the ball passed through the lines. Only accept results that had the cue ball passing through these two lines.
Click to expand...

This won't be accurate, as each shaft has a different deflection and thus won't be hitting the end rail in the exact same place. This will make your side rail spot invalid.
 
SUPERSTAR said:
If you find someone that is willing to exert the effort needed to do this experiment for $100, i will be quite surprised.

If the price went way up, I'm sure you'd find more people that "care", but for $100, your going to be hard pressed to find that.
No malice intent.
Just an honest observation.

Peoples time is worth money, and odds are, that $100 isn't going to cut it.
Click to expand...

Hey Superstar -

You have authored 2,442 posts to this forum. If you spent a modest average of 5 minutes per post reading a post you're replying to, thinking about your reply, and constructing and sending your reply, that's 12,000 minutes (over TWO HUNDRED hours) just in making contributions to the forum. That doesn't count all the time you've spent reading but not contributing.

I don't think the "time is money" argument really holds a lot of water for this particular group of people.

And besides, proving Patrick wrong certainly in itself has value for some people. I can see getting Patrick's $100 by proving him wrong having a value of --oh I don't know--- $900? --to some people. For them it's a $1,000 deal!
 
predator makes a shaft with a higher end mass to show how u can create deflection by adding weight to the front thus reduce deflection by lowering that weight. its sent to dealers for demonstration purposes only. so if your cue is deflecting the ball into the rail in the opposite direction you are trying to spin to, lets say on a 1 rail kick where u must spin the ball to make a good hit. the angle in would be deflected in the opposite direction u want to spin creating a steeper approach angle and thus a steeper angle out. its hard to explain i hope i made this understandable. it proves that low deflection shafts spin more than non. but with the reduction of tip end mass it in many different companies..ie predator, ob1, universal. i cant tell u which ones spin more.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
If you expect me to watch a half hour Meucci ad to find out what you're talking about, you'll have to send me $100.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

And there we have it, ladies and gentlemen. He has no intention of being "proven wrong", or paying up, even when proof is shoved in his face.

I think we can lock this thread now. It doesn't get any clearer than this.

Russ
 
PJ, Get The Next $100 Ready

The PJ truth-squad is only scratching the surface. Over in the Ask The Cuemaker forum there is the following post.

I recently had a full-splice cue butt made from rosewood and tulipwoood. (forearm was the tulipwood half) The cue feels so much different than the previous butt which was constructed of a maple pie-cut piece. I had to completely adjust my aiming because the cue hits a lot stiffer and puts waaay more english on the ball. (I am using the same shafts on both butts and both of them have the same stainless steel schon-style joints.)
Click to expand...

What's more, the cuemakers are agreeing with him, kinda.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=124621
 
mikepage said:
I don't think the "time is money" argument really holds a lot of water for this particular group of people.
Click to expand...

Now that is funny!

(I resemble that remark! lol)
 
Russ Chewning said:
And there we have it, ladies and gentlemen. He has no intention of being "proven wrong", or paying up, even when proof is shoved in his face.

I think we can lock this thread now. It doesn't get any clearer than this.

Russ
Click to expand...

You've been on this forum longer than me so you should know that you can't prove Patrick the genius wrong. You could bring Einstein and Patrick will still prove him wrong :rolleyes:

Devindra
 
...even when proof is shoved in his face.
Click to expand...

If you'll tell me where in that half hour ad the "proof" is, I'll be glad to look at it. Did you bother to look at it to see if any proof exists before tossing accusations around?

pj
chgo
 
devindra said:
You've been on this forum longer than me so you should know that you can't prove Patrick the genius wrong. You could bring Einstein and Patrick will still prove him wrong :rolleyes:

Devindra
Click to expand...

One thing we know for sure: saying it can't be done won't do it. But I guess you gotta go with what you got...

pj
chgo
 
Rich93 said:
The PJ truth-squad is only scratching the surface. Over in the Ask The Cuemaker forum there is the following post.

I recently had a full-splice cue butt made from rosewood and tulipwoood. (forearm was the tulipwood half) The cue feels so much different than the previous butt which was constructed of a maple pie-cut piece. I had to completely adjust my aiming because the cue hits a lot stiffer and puts waaay more english on the ball. (I am using the same shafts on both butts and both of them have the same stainless steel schon-style joints.)
Click to expand...

What's more, the cuemakers are agreeing with him, kinda.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=124621
Click to expand...

If it's proof when somebody says it's true, isn't it proof when I say it's false?

Let's reach deep within ourselves, rummage around, and try to find at least a grain of common sense.

pj
chgo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top