Are Cues Less Than 58" Better........

just some thoughts

The further weight is away from a fulcrum or pivot point the more effect it has. On almost any mechanical device that is a bad thing. I haven't played with a greatly forward weighted cue but I have been wondering if the weight better balanced between the hands wouldn't be a good thing.

Actual length of cue needed varies more by playing style than actual height or wingspan. When I played many hours a week I played well with my hand near the end of the butt making wraps pretty much meaningless. Now that I play less I find I play better with my grip hand moved to a much more common position maybe eight to twelve inches ahead of where I once normally kept it.

No real conclusions here but I suspect from a purely mechanical standpoint shorter cues without that live weight behind the grip hand might be better. Alternatively lightening this area as much as possible might be a good idea.

Hu
 
Darth said:
I had a pro player friend of mine mention that a cue under 58 inches is more acurate and easier to control. His cue is 55 inches long and 19oz. He says that anything over 55" is wasted because if you are gripping the cue on the wrap area, you aren't getting the full weight of the cue on the cue ball. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
I'd bet $$ the guy that told you that is under 5'9" in height. Lots of shorter players use shorter cues, just like lots of taller players use longer cues.

I'd also question his logic. The weight of the cue is there, no matter where you grip it. It's not going to change. Your grip position is only going to affect the balanced feel of the cue.
 
WalkerInTN said:
I'd bet $$ the guy that told you that is under 5'9" in height. Lots of shorter players use shorter cues, just like lots of taller players use longer cues.

I'd also question his logic. The weight of the cue is there, no matter where you grip it. It's not going to change. Your grip position is only going to affect the balanced feel of the cue.
Click to expand...


This is correct. A short guy like me is fine with a 57" cue. If you're over 5'10" a 58" cue is probably better. And if you're real tall, like 6'4" than you might consider a 59" or 60" cue.

It is also true that the standard length for house cues (and custom cues) up until about 1980 was 57". One thing to remember, it is always good to be close to the cue ball, as in a shorter bridge. You want to bridge 12-15" from the cue ball. A long bridge only works if you're filipino and play like God!
 
Jimmy Reid had a formula for determining cue length on his web site.

For a person that is around 5'-10" a 58' cue is about right.

A shorter person needs a shorter cue and naturally it should weight less.

A ball park method: without a cue place your bridge hand on a table and get into your shooting stance with your upper arm about horizontal and forearm perpendicular to the table. Measure this distance. Take your normal or preferred bridge length ( distance from your bridge hand to the tip) and double this. Add the two numbers and you will be close to the cue length.
 
TheBook said:
Jimmy Reid had a formula for determining cue length on his web site.

For a person that is around 5'-10" a 58' cue is about right.

A shorter person needs a shorter cue and naturally it should weight less.

A ball park method: without a cue place your bridge hand on a table and get into your shooting stance with your upper arm about horizontal and forearm perpendicular to the table. Measure this distance. Take your normal or preferred bridge length ( distance from your bridge hand to the tip) and double this. Add the two numbers and you will be close to the cue length.
Click to expand...

Huhhhhhhhh :smile:
 
ShootingArts:
The further weight is away from a fulcrum or pivot point the more effect it has.
Click to expand...

This doesn't have anything to do with the force of the cue hitting the CB, which is a function of its mass and its speed. If you could grip it tightly enough to keep it level, you could hold your stick with one hand at either the butt end or the tip end and (assuming you moved it at the same speed) there would be no difference in the force with which it hits the CB.

But it could have a positive effect on the accuracy of your stroke because the cue is less likely to pivot offline during your stroke with the weight farther from the bridge (fulcrum). In that sense it would have more (positive) effect.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
My dad's early 80s Schon was custom to play snooker, 11mm tip and 62inches long. He told me, the reason for it being so long is so he can have better reach on a 12ft snooker table. My dad's not very tall either, around 5 feet 10 inches. I shot with it, and liked it a lot, the length definately played more comfortable. Just all personal preference, just like selecting a tip, tip size, tip hardness, alllllllll personal preference.

Chino
 
a gift?

pj,

You have a gift for responding to posts you don't comprehend. Everything that happens to a cue stick isn't straight line.

Hu


Patrick Johnson said:
This doesn't have anything to do with the force of the cue hitting the CB, which is a function of its mass and its speed. If you could grip it tightly enough to keep it level, you could hold your stick with one hand at either the butt end or the tip end and (assuming you moved it at the same speed) there would be no difference in the force with which it hits the CB.

But it could have a positive effect on the accuracy of your stroke because the cue is less likely to pivot offline during your stroke with the weight farther from the bridge (fulcrum). In that sense it would have more (positive) effect.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
 
Hu:
You have a gift for responding to posts you don't comprehend. Everything that happens to a cue stick isn't straight line.
Click to expand...

If you actually want to be comprehended, I don't think getting even more cryptic is the way to go about it.

I explained myself clearly. You might try that.

pj
chgo
 
i didnt see anyone touch on that it also depends on how long of a bridge you prefer and how tall you are. im 6' and im usually at the end of the wrap if im using a wrapped cue of course. if you are short and prefer a short bridge then you can get away with using a shorter cue.

id like to use the bridge less often, but if i played good position i probably wouldnt need it would i.....if i had a 55"cue id have a bridge in my case too.
 
Cue length is 100% impossible to quantify. Each player has particular needs & has his/her own unique pinnacle weight, length, balance, diameter, etc. 99% of players don't even know what their's is. Worse yet, it changes as the player varies in skill & age & body type, so it's a constant variable. What works for you today may not work so great tomorrow. There simply is no perfect cue. The best we cuemakers can do is meet a medium, try to keep it between the lines so the cues work well for everybody, though likely not perfect for anybody. It's no mistake that it is 57-59", 12-13mm, 19-20oz. & balance between 18.5"-19.5". Of all the hundreds or even thousands of cuemakers, the vast majority of us build very similar cues. Yes, some guys like 60"+ cues & some like sub 57" cues, but most players need something inbetween. It would be wise to figure your own self out instead of blindly believing somebody else who tells you what you need.
 
I did, twice

Patrick Johnson said:
If you actually want to be comprehended, I don't think getting even more cryptic is the way to go about it.

I explained myself clearly. You might try that.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

pj,

I explained myself quite clearly in the first post. As usual you want to contest simple facts. After that I have no interest in telling you the same thing six times in six different ways only to read that you are still not comprehending it or simply continuing to argue because you think it is far more important to "win" an argument than to learn anything. If you can't understand that there is a difference between weight between your two hands and weight outside your two hands I can not be of any help to you. It is that simple. You have already proven on multiple occasions that many pages of explanations won't help you grasp the obvious. I have no interest in derailing yet another thread because you wish to argue.

Hu
 
There are two seperate and distinct claims being made here.
Darth said:
I had a pro player friend of mine mention that a cue under 58 inches is more acurate and easier to control.
Click to expand...
I do know that many players have a strong preference for a particular cue length, but whether their preferred cue length just "feels" better or whether it actually performs better for them in a measurable way, I can't say with certainty. I suspect that the ideal cue length varies based on a person's armspan.
Darth said:
He says that anything over 55" is wasted because if you are gripping the cue on the wrap area, you aren't getting the full weight of the cue on the cue ball.
Click to expand...
This is absolutely false. Assuming the same tightness of grip and bridge, and the same forward speed of the cue, it doesn't matter where it is being held. The same "weight of the cue" will get to the cue ball regardless of grip position. The rear grip hand position can affect the speed with which you can swing the cue though.
 
ShootingArts said:
pj,

I explained myself quite clearly in the first post. As usual you want to contest simple facts. After that I have no interest in telling you the same thing six times in six different ways only to read that you are still not comprehending it or simply continuing to argue because you think it is far more important to "win" an argument than to learn anything. If you can't understand that there is a difference between weight between your two hands and weight outside your two hands I can not be of any help to you. It is that simple. You have already proven on multiple occasions that many pages of explanations won't help you grasp the obvious. I have no interest in derailing yet another thread because you wish to argue.

Hu
Click to expand...

Seems to me it would have taken less effort to simply explain what you meant. Unless you couldn't.

Oh well...

pj
chgo
 
At 5'5 I shoot with a 59 inch cue, I find the extra length helps greatly.

It really depends on the shooter though, if a person tends to have a 6 inch stroke from their bridge hand to the cue ball on their normal everyday shot like Allen Hopkins in his prime then a normal length or even shorter cue is probably going to be good for them. On the other hand if they are more like a Fransico Bustamente or Mika Immonen type of stroke where you use a longer stroke and have more cue between the bridge hand and cueball contact then you are going to benefit from a longer cue to allow the proper stroking arm position at contact.

It also depends on the game and table, if you are playing bar-box 8-ball that game can benefit from a more chippy short stroke due to the table size and the type of shape play in that game. On the other hand 9-ball on a 9-foot table is far more a "stroke" game where the longer stroke can help put the extra spin on the ball and move the cueball the distance that is often required in that game.

Long story short? It depends on the player, and can also depend on the game. There is no one correct answer that covers all the players and all the games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top