Any thoughts on the "correct" forward weight

Rak9up

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Where a stick balances on your finger is means nothing. I have an opinion on this matter that where you hold your cue is like the fulcrum there is a weight in front of your hand and behind. If a player only used a closed bridge and middle or low englishes there would be little or no need for forward weight(because your fingers are controling the tip at impact). But with an open bridge and topspin "like shooting over a ball" the only thing thats keeps the tip of the cue on the cue ball is the friction of the tip and the "downward" or forward weight. I have done experiments with lots of the production cues and think many of them are over engineered with too much forward weight (that way it covers the bulk of the buying public since you don't know where the fulcrum will be for an individual customer). A cue ball only weighs 6 to 6 1/4 ounces I have looked at many of the old threads and some of the high speed videos but they cover deflection with side spin a completely different subject than at what forward weight a cue stops skipping of a cueball. As "custom" cuemaker if you build say an 18 ounce cue what is your thoughts on the "correct" weight distribution for example 11 behind the hand 7 in front.
 
Rak9up said:
Where a stick balances on your finger is means nothing.

It does mean something! It is a standardized measurement, used by anyone to compare the balance of one Q to another. If you want to fix the balance point to where your bridge hand or rearward hand is affixed to the Q, you have a problem. Since There can be many grip distances variing from player to player, there is no standard to make comparisons with. Once you have balanced a Q on your finger & make a mental note of that distance & that feel, you have a base to compare all others with. No more, no less...JER
 
I was always taught, and it seems to be pretty accurate when studing it, is to find the 'finger' balance, then go 1 hand's distance towards the butt end, and that should be where the front of your rear handhold should start. I've played with my share of cues and have found this method,IMO, to be the most consistant method. Some adjustment may be needed to accommodate longer, or shorter armspreads, but for the average size, this seems to work.
Dave
 
don't care about comparisons or what the standard "is" and I mean no disrespect, but science is science. Most people agree at the point where the tip just touches the cueball your rear arm should be perpendicular. This establishes rear hand position or (fulcrum) and yes it varies from player to player. For an Experiment IF you were to hold a cue at the balance point and stroke an open bridge topspin shot it just skips right off the cueball. As you move your hand reaward the "skipping" decreases. At some point you get to much forward weight (overkill). If cueball weighs 6 ounces I'm guessing you need at least 6 ounce of forward or downward force in front of your hand to counter act the cueball's mass. I have been designing a personal CUSTOM CUE That is why I'm asking "custom" cuemaker not production ones
 
The theory of having your back hand at the same place on every shot does not work with the fulcrum stroke because playing pool you will need various bridge lengths all the time, and therefore you will have various back hand positions when holding the cue. It all depends on the shot and where it is on the table. Sometimes you may be at the front of the wrap area right near the balance point and other times you may have your hand on the buttsleeve. You cant just pick a point on the cue and say I am only ever going to hold it here.

The balance point determines how the cue feels in your back hand. Thats all. Many use a metal pin at the front and a weight screw at the back to get to the desired weight and balance. Two cues with completely different construction but with the same balance point will not necessarily play similar at all but will feel similar in your back hand. Its all about whats most comfortable to you. 18.75" from the butt feels best to me.

Using an open bridge will never make the tip "skip" up unless you grip at or forward of the balance point, which doesnt work.

good luck with your cue!
 
fullsplicefiend said:
The theory of having your back hand at the same place on every shot does not work with the fulcrum stroke because playing pool you will need various bridge lengths all the time, and therefore you will have various back hand positions when holding the cue. It all depends on the shot and where it is on the table. Sometimes you may be at the front of the wrap area right near the balance point and other times you may have your hand on the buttsleeve. You cant just pick a point on the cue and say I am only ever going to hold it here.

Very well said. 100% i agree.

fullsplicefiend said:
Using an open bridge will never make the tip "skip" up unless you grip at or forward of the balance point, which doesnt work.

That also depend on how light the front is. :D
 
Fullsplicefiend thank you for your responce agreed your hand does change postions for different shots. I rarely "choke up" on on an open brige topspin shot but your right the bases should be covered just in case the shot arises. So therefore the furthest point forward where my rear hand may be on the wrap would be my starting point. So as I move my hand back to the "normal" shooting position (which you probably use 80% of the time) I will have more forward weight than what is actually needed but in this case I guess more is better. So this brings me back to my original question what is the minimal amount of mass needed to counter act the "skipping" of a cue or the mass of a cueball. Is it 6 ounces 1/2 tip above center 7 ounces 1 full tip 8 ounces 2 full tips high of center so forth there is a science involved its more than just feel any data on this.
 
If the counter balance point is NOT anywhere near your hand than it's irrelevant....

That's why it must be within a few inches of your hand no matter where you are on butt of that cue...

Case in point... I give you that on the complete length of the wrap building the cue around your hand from the middle of the wrap out.... and the formula works !

I will argue the simple physics logic and balance point issues with anyone !!!

For anyone to hold the cue and balance it on 1 finger and than grip 6 inches behind it is moronic... becasue the cue will not fit our stroke lengths and armspands comfortably, I have yet to see a player grip the front of the wrap on his/her avg. shot... which again confirms that avg. built cues with avg. balance points are NOT for everyone !!!!

This is why we have custom fitted golf clubs, bowling bowls etc....


- Eddie Wheat
 
Last edited:
WheatCues said:
If the counter balance point is NOT anywhere near your hand than it's irrelevant....

That's why it must be within a few inches of your hand no matter where you are on butt of that cue...

Case in point... I give you that on the complete length of the wrap building the cue around your hand from the middle of the wrap out.... and the formula works !

I will argue the simple physics logic and balance point issues with anyone !!!

For anyone to hold the cue and balance it on 1 finger and than grip 6 inches behind it is moronic... becasue the cue will not fit our stroke lengths and armspands comfortably, I have yet to see a player grip the front of the wrap on his/her avg. shot... which again confirms that avg. built cues with avg. balance points are NOT for everyone !!!!

This is why we have custom fitted golf clubs, bowling bowls etc....


- Eddie Wheat

Not to try and start an argument but I have a small armspan and I'm short to boot so on about 65% of my shots my grip position is at the very front of the wrap (one of the reasons I'm having a custom cue built for me now). The actual science behind this stuff would be interesting, but I think there are way too many variables. It would be difficult to determine what the minimal top weight would be because the actual "skipping" is determined based on too many factors: chalk, tip, shaft diameter, temperature of equipment, etc...

Now if all of these could be controlled and an experiment was to be performed I think even then the data would be irrelevant to the game of pool. Scientific analysis and experiments only go so far in a game like pool. Some of the greatest players play unorthodox and it's only because pool is essentially a game of feel (mechanics wise atleast). It all boils down to what allows the player to feel his/her way around the table as well as how it feels when he/she strokes and what he/she is comfortable with.

anyways, my 2 cents...
 
I think 90% of the people out there are fine with 18.5-19.0 from the bottom of a 58" cue.
The other 10% might be googans, tinkerers or just odd.
Joey~Keeps it simple~
 
WheatCues said:
For anyone to hold the cue and balance it on 1 finger and than grip 6 inches behind it is moronic... becasue the cue will not fit our stroke lengths and armspands comfortably, I have yet to see a player grip the front of the wrap on his/her avg. shot... which again confirms that avg. built cues with avg. balance points are NOT for everyone !!!!

This is why we have custom fitted golf clubs, bowling bowls etc....


- Eddie Wheat

Well, I guess then, I'm 'moronic' as about 60-70% of my shooting is done with my hand right at the front of the wrap! My armspan is 68" from fingertip to fingertip, my ' grip span' on a cue during an average shot is 40-41". It works for me, without any formulas, as I am alot like most people who go with what feels good, not what a calculator says. I agree with Nick_S, WAY too many variables are involved. The main formula that matters, IMO, is good bridge + smooth stroke X aim / by ability to interpet how round objects contact each other = great pool:D No stick, custom fitted or otherwise will outweigh that!
Dave
 
Dave38 said:
Well, I guess then, I'm 'moronic' as about 60-70% of my shooting is done with my hand right at the front of the wrap! My armspan is 68" from fingertip to fingertip, my ' grip span' on a cue during an average shot is 40-41". It works for me, without any formulas, as I am alot like most people who go with what feels good, not what a calculator says. I agree with Nick_S, WAY too many variables are involved. The main formula that matters, IMO, is good bridge + smooth stroke X aim / by ability to interpet how round objects contact each other = great pool:D No stick, custom fitted or otherwise will outweigh that!
Dave

I'm curious Dave. when you are in the address position, is you back arm straight down at a 90 degree angle to th floor? Or is it slightly bent forward?...JER
 
As far as a scientific approach to finding the correct fw weight you must first figure out what force the cue ball is hitting back with and the coefficient of static friction is between the ball and tip. With that being said I don't know if there "IS" a correct scientific fw weight. Shoot with a cue if you like how it feels measure it out and see what you get. I used to have arguements with my physics prof in college. About friction mass and momentum. Stated in his class a fully loaded tractor trailer takes 30% farther to stop than a yugo from 60 mph. Sorry it doesn't work that way. Too many variables to take into account. Same is true about pool. How much chalk what type of tip how hard of a stroke. This is where "feel" comes into play. When the feedback you get says hey the tip was sliding ie. miscue too much english now you try to take into account which way the grain was facing on the shaft hmm nother variable..... The list goes on and on. "FEEL" is so taboo but put a lugwrench in a jack mans hands and see what happens. May all of your dreams be about high english miscues......... weeeeeeee 0.02$ from the Rocketman....
 
Joey, I agree and would add that for slightly heavier cues, the range would extend to about 19-1/4". Some makers go for a forward balance up to 19-3/4". I would consider any custom cue that balanced beyond 20" or less than 17-3/4" to be a mistake unless ordered that way. JMO.

Martin


JoeyInCali said:
I think 90% of the people out there are fine with 18.5-19.0 from the bottom of a 58" cue.
The other 10% might be googans, tinkerers or just odd.
Joey~Keeps it simple~
 
nick_s said:
Not to try and start an argument but I have a small armspan and I'm short to boot so on about 65% of my shots my grip position is at the very front of the wrap (one of the reasons I'm having a custom cue built for me now). The actual science behind this stuff would be interesting, but I think there are way too many variables. It would be difficult to determine what the minimal top weight would be because the actual "skipping" is determined based on too many factors: chalk, tip, shaft diameter, temperature of equipment, etc...

Now if all of these could be controlled and an experiment was to be performed I think even then the data would be irrelevant to the game of pool. Scientific analysis and experiments only go so far in a game like pool. Some of the greatest players play unorthodox and it's only because pool is essentially a game of feel (mechanics wise atleast). It all boils down to what allows the player to feel his/her way around the table as well as how it feels when he/she strokes and what he/she is comfortable with.

anyways, my 2 cents...


As I stated previously....


The avg. balance and avg. length isn't for EVERYONE.... so there are those that are an exception as well as those who do NOT fall into the category at all !!!!

Once again, since joeyincali and dave 38 or on my ignore list I cannot see there slanderous retorts but I can explain my logic in great detail if anyone is interested in hearing the explaination and it IS tangible !!!!!!

Let's face it.. I CAN hit the back rail and will offer the last 3 in 9-ball to just about anyone who thinks a 61-1/4 inch cue is ridiculous and absurd and WIN !!!!

THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING...........



- Eddie Wheat
 
Last edited:
WheatCues said:
As I stated previously....


The avg. balance and avg. length isn't for EVERYONE.... so there are those that are an exception as well as those who do NOT fall into the category at all !!!!

Once again, since joeyincali and dave 38 or on my ignore list I cannot see there slanderous retorts but I can explain my logic in great detail if anyone is interested in hearing the explaination and it IS tangible !!!!!!

Let's face it.. I can play and will offer the last 3 in 9-ball to just about anyone who thinks a 61-1/4 inch cue is ridiculous and absurd !!!!





- Eddie Wheat
You can see my " slanderous retorts" because Jazznpool quoted it.
:rolleyes:
Joey~Hates it when people lie and pull the victim card~
 
Once again I AM NOT TRYING TO START AN ARGUEMENT BUT ARE WILLING TO PUT MY MONEY WHERE MY MOUTH IS AND WILL GIVE THE LAST 3 IN 9-BALL TO JUST ABOUT ANYONE, WITH MY 61-1/4 INCH CUE AND THAT INCLUDES MY 15000.00 align-rite CNC if anyone is interested becasue I CAN prove my jargon !!!!!



- Eddie Wheat
 
Last edited:
I'm confused Eddie.
I was going to post on this topic but I'd like to know first;
1. Am I going to be involved in an arguement or not?
2. If I am, will I be billed for it?
-cOOp

WheatCues said:
post #1
I will argue the simple physics logic and balance point issues with anyone !!!

post #2
Once again I AM NOT TRYING TO START AN ARGUEMENT BUT ARE WILLING TO PUT MY MONEY WHERE MY MOUTH IS AND WILL GIVE THE LAST 3 IN 9-BALL TO JUST ABOUT ANYONE, WITH MY 61-1/4 INCH CUE AND THAT INCLUDES MY 15000.00 align-rite CNC if anyone is interested becasue I CAN prove my jargon !!!!!



- Eddie Wheat
 
coopdeville said:
I'm confused Eddie.
I was going to post on this topic but I'd like to know first;
1. Am I going to be involved in an arguement or not?
2. If I am, will I be billed for it?
-cOOp

I meant that in a serious manner not so much as a direct arguement !!!

in other words I want to hear your thoughts and views torward the subject without feeling discriminated against for your efforts !!!!


- Eddie WHeat
 
Back
Top