Balance point?

Lou...I'm 5'7", and I stood easily several inches over Mosconi. He was 5'3"...the same height as my dad. I know he did not hold his cue where we teach to hold it.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

I don't recall him being that short -- reference please. (Maybe like 5' 7".)

AND Mosconi held the cue "grip forward," and not where his grip hand fell directly under his elbow.

Lou Figueroa
 
Lou...I'm 5'7", and I stood easily several inches over Mosconi. He was 5'3"...the same height as my dad. I know he did not hold his cue where we teach to hold it.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com


You must have been in heels :-)

From "Willie's Game" his co-authored autobiography, page 86 (BTW, we argued all this out years and years ago on RSB):

"Like DiMaggio and Joe Louis, he (Mosconi) carried himself with a courtly dignity. Friendly, but formal, he wore a suit or a sports coat even when playing in exhibitions. At five-foot-seven and 140 pounds, he was trim and well-proportioned..."

And oh yeah: why teach what, arguably, the greatest straight pool player in history used :-o

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:
Rak9up said:
What does matter is the downward weight at the tip when stroking an open bridge topspin shot.
For and experiment hold your cue on the balance point and stroke a ball with an open bridge topspin shot and see how much cue control you have after the shot an the amount of spin created.
Sorry, but there's just no way that the tiny amount of weight difference at the tip has any practical effect on this.
Agreed. For an explanation and demonstration why, see:
Regards,
Dave
 
Definitely personal preference for the balance point. However, I have consistently noticed that tall players with long arms tend to hold the cue back farther than shorter players, regardless of cue length, probably favoring a shorter balance point. However, again, exceptions to the rule are present too. I've seen plenty of short players who try to adopt long strokes with the hand farther back, and they may prefer a shorter balance point as a result. That may indicate it depends more on the preferred length of stroke rather than size, etc.
 
Agreed. For an explanation and demonstration why, see:
Regards,
Dave

I highly respect Dave I've been through all his videos. I couldn't find
any videos showing a side view level open bridge topspin shot.
One showing say 10 oz of mass as measured at the tip from the rear hand or varying masses like say 2 ozs. It would be very easy get an extremly rear weighted cue this would make the cue at the tip very light. After each shot you can add mass by wrapping lead tape around the joint. the video could show "if" the skipping action of the tip off the cueball is reduced. And if the varying masses effect downward deflection into the felt and or cueball spin.
The reason I ask is I had a unique cue made with a straight line taper in the butt (I like a certian diameter where I hold the cue it doesn't get fatter at the back). Well due to the reduced weight behind my rear hand my cue is more forward balanced, but I could swear I have more control and get slightly more topspin. High speed video doesn't lie plus I can't exactly duplicate two identical strokes to see if all things being equal if it does change the outcome.
Pool may evolve like golf... one day you may have cue designed for breaking, one cue designed for jumping, one for shooting, one for shooting over balls with no skipping action who knows.
Daves the expert not me I dare not go toe to toe.
 
Dave,

I did see the one very short footage of a topspin shot in part 2...what was the forward balance of that particular cue to the tip..for that matter later in the video when you show the the side spin shot and the cue deflecting and the deflection not reaching the bridge hand till the ball was gone. What was the shaft diameter 13, 12, 11 and what was the type of taper on that shaft used on that shot was the wood ash or maple.
All are factors effecting the shot and the cues reation.
I again relate to golf... on the blade edge of a golf club significant research went into allowing the club head to cut through the grass.
Even though at the point of impact its not important and the golf ball is long gone the blade was improved to help with the follow through finishing the shot.
In pool I know the cueball is long gone but control of the cue after impact is still important..plus were other sticks tested and spin checked and post shot cue reactions quantified.
 
Does the balance point that is good for you have anything to do with your size( tall long arms or short with short arms). Is it just a personal preference?

Thanks

Excellent question. 19 to 19 1/2 inches work best for me and I'm around 6 feet tall.
 
Lou...Well I won't argue with ya, but people shrink as they age. Both times I played Mosconi (in the 70s) I stood at least 3 inches taller than he did...so if he WAS 5'7" I'm Elvis. LOL

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

You must have been in heels :-)

From "Willie's Game" his co-authored autobiography, page 86 (BTW, we argued all this out years and years ago on RSB):

"Like DiMaggio and Joe Louis, he (Mosconi) carried himself with a courtly dignity. Friendly, but formal, he wore a suit or a sports coat even when playing in exhibitions. At five-foot-seven and 140 pounds, he was trim and well-proportioned..."

And oh yeah: why teach what, arguably, the greatest straight pool player in history used :-o

Lou Figueroa
 
Lou...Well I won't argue with ya, but people shrink as they age. Both times I played Mosconi (in the 70s) I stood at least 3 inches taller than he did...so if he WAS 5'7" I'm Elvis. LOL

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com


I saw him give his exhibition at least four times in the early 70's. No way he was that short and others recall the same. Plus, there is still the autobiography :-) Sooooo, my only question is: are you the young thin Elvis or the old fat Elvis?

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:
Back
Top