Balance Point- How to measure correctly?
- Thread starter atthecat
- Start date
The balance point, as usually quoted, is the distance from the bottom of the butt (ignoring any bumper) to the point where the full cue (with shaft) balances. Typically, this will be in the range of 18" - 21".
The bumper is ignored, even though it is adding weight to the cue, just as cue lengths are typically stated without including the bumper.
Some people also measure the balance point of the butt alone.
The bumper is ignored, even though it is adding weight to the cue, just as cue lengths are typically stated without including the bumper.
Some people also measure the balance point of the butt alone.
Point #1...do you play with half a cue.
Point #2...the only time I've ever heard of anyone caring about where the BP is(if at all) is when he describes where he grips the cue in relation to it. Other than that, no one cares how the BP measures from either end of the cue because it essentially says nothing meaningful. And cuemakers will rarely ever note where the BP is when describing their cue.
But if you really need an answer, measure the BP from the butt because (of point #2).
Point #2...the only time I've ever heard of anyone caring about where the BP is(if at all) is when he describes where he grips the cue in relation to it. Other than that, no one cares how the BP measures from either end of the cue because it essentially says nothing meaningful. And cuemakers will rarely ever note where the BP is when describing their cue.
But if you really need an answer, measure the BP from the butt because (of point #2).
Thanks, that helps a lot.
i check the balance point of every cue i've ever owned (almost every cue anyway). it's helped me figure out what fits my game best.
I measure balance point from the tip.The reason is because everyone references their play position and resulting hand postion from the cue ball.
I have never seen anyone look at the cue butt then decide that is where they have to hold the cue.
To find the balance point, I place a pencil on the table, place the cue to the balance point,then get a tape measure.
For a long time cues were about 57 inches long, and so some one measued it from the back.Most likely from a point of being an easier shorter distance to measure with a yard rule.
I have never seen anyone look at the cue butt then decide that is where they have to hold the cue.
To find the balance point, I place a pencil on the table, place the cue to the balance point,then get a tape measure.
For a long time cues were about 57 inches long, and so some one measued it from the back.Most likely from a point of being an easier shorter distance to measure with a yard rule.
I care! IMO, the balance point greatly affects the feel of the cue to me. For example, a cue which balances forward will stay down on the bridge better. I like this in a break cue. A player, feels better with as much weight as possible in my back hand. That said, too far back and it will feel too light and unstable on your bridge, especially with hard shots. So, I prefer center of the handle about 6" behind the BP. funny, Willie Mosconi said the same in his book, but that is often written off by people for some reason.
On a related note, I find gripping roughly in the middle of the grip right for me, even at 6'3". I do this by having my chin off the cue, a med length bridge and I'm about 93deg instead of 90. Under 90 feels awkward, so I try to hold my cue slightly over 90 at contact. I think is clear. Basically hand slightly forward.
Sorry Bob Mucci but where a cue balances means nothing its a stupid arbitrary point in space.
What is important is the weight of the cue from your back hand to the tip.
Lets say you have 2 cues with the same balance point. One cue could have 15 ounces of weight to the tip the other have 3 ounces to the tip.
There are to many varibles like the cues actual weight,construction method,butt taper,joint type or material,the shaft taper,shaft construction method etc.
I reconmmend shooting a few balls not letting go of your cue then holding as lightly as possible(like with 2 fingers) and resting the tip on a digital scale. Its not exact but it does give you some idea of your cues balance weight.
I would rather see the cue makers all agree on a point lets say 47 inches from the tip and give the weight from there to the tip.
Therefore before buying a cue you would know
1.Total weight
2.Balance weight
So if I hold a cue say 46 inches from the tip due to my arm span
I would have some idea of how a cue balances before I buy it.
Not the old buy and hope method currently used by most cuemakers today.
Requiring you after purchase to shoot some balls to find out how a cue ACTUALLY balances.
I personally think a forward weighted cue adds control to an open bridge topsin shot (seems to add control through the shot less skipping action)
Now for the record these are my views an not those of the AZ Billiards Moderators or the NFL any use of this thread without their written consent is strictly forbidden :smile:
What is important is the weight of the cue from your back hand to the tip.
Lets say you have 2 cues with the same balance point. One cue could have 15 ounces of weight to the tip the other have 3 ounces to the tip.
There are to many varibles like the cues actual weight,construction method,butt taper,joint type or material,the shaft taper,shaft construction method etc.
I reconmmend shooting a few balls not letting go of your cue then holding as lightly as possible(like with 2 fingers) and resting the tip on a digital scale. Its not exact but it does give you some idea of your cues balance weight.
I would rather see the cue makers all agree on a point lets say 47 inches from the tip and give the weight from there to the tip.
Therefore before buying a cue you would know
1.Total weight
2.Balance weight
So if I hold a cue say 46 inches from the tip due to my arm span
I would have some idea of how a cue balances before I buy it.
Not the old buy and hope method currently used by most cuemakers today.
Requiring you after purchase to shoot some balls to find out how a cue ACTUALLY balances.
I personally think a forward weighted cue adds control to an open bridge topsin shot (seems to add control through the shot less skipping action)
Now for the record these are my views an not those of the AZ Billiards Moderators or the NFL any use of this thread without their written consent is strictly forbidden :smile:
Well, the technically correct way to compare the balance points on cues is from the tip to the balance, since that is what the player will experience in position. If two cues have the same measurement for that, they will feel the same when shooting even though one is 55 inches and one is 60 inches, provided that the grip is in the same place relative to the tip. This means that the effective balance will change with different shaft lengths on the same butt.
I find that the balance has the most effect for me on power shots. If I have to break with a cue that is balanced differently than I'm used to, I have a problem.
its more about distrubution of weight....
but balance point is important otherwise billiard cues/pool cues/snooker cues would all be balanced the same.....yet they are not, as the weight distribution and balance has an effect on how the cue drives the ball.
but balance point is important otherwise billiard cues/pool cues/snooker cues would all be balanced the same.....yet they are not, as the weight distribution and balance has an effect on how the cue drives the ball.
Monte,
The common measurement people give is with the cue screwed together, then it's the fulcrum point measured from the end of the buttcap.
Strangely, I've had several cues with the same weight and balance point, yet each cue has a completely different sense of inertia when stroked.
Like Greyghost says, what we feel has lot has to do with the actual distribution of the weight , which is not necessarily consistent in a cue because of the inner parts, cored out areas, hollow spots, and artifical weighting.
Chris
Tate,
Exactly my point...maybe its time to update the thinking on the balance point issue.
A standardized method to measure a cue's actual weight distribution is what is needed.
I recommend putting a fulcrum in the wrap area 50 inches from the tip
placing the tip on a digital scale.
This will give a good idea of the cues actual weight distribution.
Its just a suggestion...there's some very smart people here that could help develop a standardized way to get a cue's actual weight distribution which is a useful statistic.... unlike the balance point.
Weight.....Balance Point.......Length......Weight Distribution.....They ALL play a roll.
Some top notch cue makers can make a cue without a weight bolt and the balance point is what it is. Some are even able to customize wood selection, other materials and construction method to get the weight distribution just right for the customer.The use of a weight bolt can be deceiving, how many players have you seen buy a cue and say it doesn't "feel right" then go out and buy a new cue that is same weight and balance point as the first cue but does "feel right"? That is the weight distribution that actually "feels better" for them.
Some of the old time players believed in gripping the cue at the balance point. Mosconi was an exception to that. Most players today do not follow that old rule and prefer a balance slightly forward of the grip like Mosconi.
Some top notch cue makers can make a cue without a weight bolt and the balance point is what it is. Some are even able to customize wood selection, other materials and construction method to get the weight distribution just right for the customer.The use of a weight bolt can be deceiving, how many players have you seen buy a cue and say it doesn't "feel right" then go out and buy a new cue that is same weight and balance point as the first cue but does "feel right"? That is the weight distribution that actually "feels better" for them.
Some of the old time players believed in gripping the cue at the balance point. Mosconi was an exception to that. Most players today do not follow that old rule and prefer a balance slightly forward of the grip like Mosconi.
The easy way to find the balance point is to hold out both of your hands with your index fingers pointing straight ahead as if you are pointing at something. Lay the cue on top of those two fingers and then slide both hands together. The cue will slide across the two fingers into it's balance point.
Wouldn't measuring the balance point from the tip determine the weight distribution?
Let me try to explain something. If you tell me total weight of a cue, balance point, and where you want to place your fulcrum, I can tell you the weight on the scale. That is just math. It has nothing to do with distribution or materials. Still, I do agree that weight is important, but also directly related to balance point.
Now, I do think weight and strength distribution and weight play a role because, roughly speaking. . .mass(weight on earth related) x stroke speed at impact (including some tip hardness factors) determine the force imparted on the cueball at the point of impact. This force and the direction it is applied tells you where the cb goes and with how much spin is applied. For example, draw actually hits upward slightly and could jump the cb off the table surface slightly, if the shaft/tip don't deflect down enough and absorb most of that vertical energy.
If that hit is off center(spin), the cues longitudinal stiffness(resistance to 3 point bending) and dampening characteristics seriously affect hit. Longitudinal stiffness is related to materials used and taper mostly. IMO, this is why most small diameter or long pro taper shafts feel less than inspiring when juicing a big draw stroke. Dampening is how you feel those vibrations. Having a pin point load like a SS joint collar or a weight bolt dampens the cue in some way. Rubber bumpers also do this by absorbing vibrations. That is why a cue without point loads feel more lively. Conical tapers feel stiffer, but at the expense of feeling like they are rising through your stroke a speading your bridge early. Also conical tapers move mass and stiffness forward which seems to worsen deflection.
The issue is that what imparts feel to your back hand on a center ball stroke, is axial stiffness. A cue would be much more axially stiff than longitudinally. So, it would have varying feel depending on spin and speed. Not sure about you, but most people like same or confidence inspiring hit.
This is where it all gets hard. We need some engineering student, grad student, preferably and a custom cuemaker to team up to define and perfect hit per some process. I think the process is get some cues from something like the AZ build off. Have them ranked in hit by serious cue aficionados. Define which ones are poor, good, OK, best and then using a jig of some sort, run these tests until you can define why good was good. Build something you think is good and add it back into the mix of test cues and send them back to the experts for confirmation.
Last, be prepared for the inevitable result of feel performance. . .sometimes good is undefinable with current tools, scientists or is not repeatable. Still it would be fun and most mechanical engineering departments would love to do it as one or many senior/grad projects. Money. . .Hmm, that is always the trick, but someone must care about column impact analysis enough to give you $100k or so, right? Predator, McDermott, Meucci?, some joint effort?
Now, I do think weight and strength distribution and weight play a role because, roughly speaking. . .mass(weight on earth related) x stroke speed at impact (including some tip hardness factors) determine the force imparted on the cueball at the point of impact. This force and the direction it is applied tells you where the cb goes and with how much spin is applied. For example, draw actually hits upward slightly and could jump the cb off the table surface slightly, if the shaft/tip don't deflect down enough and absorb most of that vertical energy.
If that hit is off center(spin), the cues longitudinal stiffness(resistance to 3 point bending) and dampening characteristics seriously affect hit. Longitudinal stiffness is related to materials used and taper mostly. IMO, this is why most small diameter or long pro taper shafts feel less than inspiring when juicing a big draw stroke. Dampening is how you feel those vibrations. Having a pin point load like a SS joint collar or a weight bolt dampens the cue in some way. Rubber bumpers also do this by absorbing vibrations. That is why a cue without point loads feel more lively. Conical tapers feel stiffer, but at the expense of feeling like they are rising through your stroke a speading your bridge early. Also conical tapers move mass and stiffness forward which seems to worsen deflection.
The issue is that what imparts feel to your back hand on a center ball stroke, is axial stiffness. A cue would be much more axially stiff than longitudinally. So, it would have varying feel depending on spin and speed. Not sure about you, but most people like same or confidence inspiring hit.
This is where it all gets hard. We need some engineering student, grad student, preferably and a custom cuemaker to team up to define and perfect hit per some process. I think the process is get some cues from something like the AZ build off. Have them ranked in hit by serious cue aficionados. Define which ones are poor, good, OK, best and then using a jig of some sort, run these tests until you can define why good was good. Build something you think is good and add it back into the mix of test cues and send them back to the experts for confirmation.
Last, be prepared for the inevitable result of feel performance. . .sometimes good is undefinable with current tools, scientists or is not repeatable. Still it would be fun and most mechanical engineering departments would love to do it as one or many senior/grad projects. Money. . .Hmm, that is always the trick, but someone must care about column impact analysis enough to give you $100k or so, right? Predator, McDermott, Meucci?, some joint effort?
No it would not. Think of two cues with the exact same weight and the exact same balance point. First cue has a very heavy joint collar and stainless pin, the second has a lighter weight plastic type collar and a fiberglass radial pin. The first cue has a large portion of the forward weight located at the joint, the second cue may have heavier wood in the forearm or a heavier shaft. If both cues weigh 20 oz. then 10 oz is forward of the balance with the first cue having 1/3 of that 10 oz located over about 1 1/2" at the joint, the second cue has the weight more evenly distributed over the forward part of the cues wood.
For a straight stroke the distribution of weight, except in the front part of the shaft, has no effect on how the stick hits the ball. At least that's what physics seems to say for those who listen to physics. The distribution will have some effect on how the stick rings after impact, but the ball will already be gone.
The actual experiment is hard to do, since you need sticks that look alike and have the same balance point, but have significantly different weight distributions.
The actual experiment is hard to do, since you need sticks that look alike and have the same balance point, but have significantly different weight distributions.