Best Hitting Shaft is...

[Cuedog]

Case of semantics

I guess I don't see the automatic connection between low squirt and "high performance." Lower squirt is simply lower squirt, not higher performance.

Take a look at both Universal Shaft flavors. Both are highly engineered to reduce vibration, but one is low squirt, while the other is normal squirt. Neither is "higher performance" than the other.

If you have to make an adjustment to a low squirt shaft, then that makes it no different than any other shaft. Once you get adjusted, you should be good to go.

The problem I had with low squirt shafts (and I tried one for a year and a half, well documented on these forums) was that the overall cueball path was so different than what I've honed into my game that I had to adjust more due to english, not less. Low squirt is fine for shots that do not have enough time or distance to swerve significantly. But, that's only half of the english shots. The other half have enough swerve that people will still miss shots if they don't compensate. People confuse the result with "more spin" or "more throw." That's not what's happening.

What's happening is the ball sweves the same amount for either low or normal squirt, but since there's less squirt with a low squirt cue, the end point is determined more by swerve, whereas in a normal cue, the squirt and swerve act in opposite directions, allowing you to aim closer to the natural contact point (for those shots). So, by that logic, a normal shaft is "higher performance" for shots that both squirt and swerve influence the shot.

Fred

I don't disagree with much of what you said here at all. But, let's not get so caught up in the language of it all. "High performance" is just a noun I thought up to categorize laminated shafts. What word should we use to categorize them Fred?

By the way...can we get back to the original topic? I simply wanted to know the opinions of what everyone thought was the best shaft out there. I was just hoping to have some fun with this, not produce a brain buster. Start another thread about squirt and swerve and I'll be more than happy to debate you on the points we don't agree on. But, from what I have read of your theory on that subject so far, that will be a short debate. Thank you for your post.

Gene

 

[Cuedog]

3 Taps

This Post has taken so many twist's and turns since it started I'm not sure where it's headed now. But I play with Predator products, and I will continue to play with Predator products PERIOD.

Six years ago when I started playing pool seriously, I started out with a decent starter cue for $100.00 dollars. I played ok with it about as well as any other normal novice, I could make 1-2 ball runs consistantly straight in shots. No english, or draw just if I could see the shot straight in I could usually hit it. At the time I was also reading about english and cue ball conrol and things of the nature but not having alot of success at least not consistantly.

Then one day I heard about Predator, got on the Web did some research read all the claims and promises, so I said what the heck and I purchased the 314 which at the time cost more than my whole cue put together, well it was money well spent. I immediately started my making more shots consistantly, and a draw shot appeared out of nowhere and I'm talking half a table length's worth (9ft.), and I also started to notice more action on the cue ball coming off of rails, (I later learned this was the english I was reading about). 3 weeks later I went directly from an APA skill level 2 to a skill level 4 locked.

Two years ago give or take, I got my first Z shaft, scewed the thing on and just playing regular no adjustments or anything I started making shots from a distance that I would only make 1/2 the time with 314 consistantly.

Six weeks or so ago I got the Z2, and once again I've noticed an increase in accuracy and another improvement in my game.

I'm not doing anything different than what I normally do, I put my 314 on about 2 months ago because the tip came off at a tournament that was the only backup shaft I had at the time of course didn't have the Z2 yet and starting out I missed 3 or 4 easy shots that I'd normally make, untill I adjusted back to the 314. And, it took tought and concentration.

So I know first hand that they work, and I've seen the same type of results for people that I've gotten to try.

So to make a long story short, for me the shaft of choice is the Predator Z2

Black Cat

TAP, TAP, TAP. Well said my friend.

Gene

 

[ndakotan]

Is it the shaft or the confidence that makes a good hit?

I've tried the schon shaft, 314 shaft, i-3, tiger X, schuler SX, and Schuler No-Squirt. All of these shafts are acceptable, but what affects the hit more than anything is the confidence/trueness of the stroke. I'd play well each time I tried a shaft for a couple of weeks then have an off day and it was tough to get my stroke back. After a couple of months, my teammate would find an newer fancier cue shaft and so I'd try that one for a couple of months. I'd play well with it for a while because the confidence was sold with the shaft. They were hyped up so I was sure I couldn't miss. Again after a couple of weeks I'd have a bad day and loose the confidence and start struggling on and off. I settled on the Schuler cue with Schuler's no-squirt shaft and couldn't be happier.

Now I plan to stick through with this shaft to get to a stroke that I am comfortable with every day and I don't plan to change. I've also tried a lot of tips (moori, molavia, sniper, talisman soft, and now porper's majestic tip). Again, the confidence is sold with the tip. If you are not playing with porper's majestic, you are truely missing out on a sweet hit.

Now, I recognize the destructiveness of continually changing shafts and tips. I don't plan to change anytime soon because I know that when I am not playing well it is my stroke and confidence, not the stick, shaft, or tip.

There is also something to say for playing with equipment that matches your ability. Beginners should play with more forgiving shafts and tips, pro's should shoot with harder tips and more consistent shafts.

Jump in and let us know which shaft you feel has the best hit. Do you like the laminated shafts or do you get a better hit from the standard shaft of a particular cuemaker?

By the way, no need to bash any of the shafts out there, just let us know what you like. Repeats are encouraged if you like one that someone else has chosen.

I couldn't find another thread dedicated to this subject. Good to bring this up again anyway.

I'll start it off with a standard shaft from Judd. I've only hit with two of his cues but both were consistent and hit a ton.

The new laminated Tiger "X" Shafts are excellent and seem to keep getting better and better. Comes complete with one of the best hitting tips on the market...a Sniper Tip. Class act out there in Magnolia, California.

Thanks


Gene

 

[Cornerman]

Start another thread about squirt and swerve and I'll be more than happy to debate you on the points we don't agree on. But, from what I have read of your theory on that subject so far, that will be a short debate.

There would be no debate. I don't have any "theories" on the subject.

Fred

 

[Cuedog]

No theory?

There would be no debate. I don't have any "theories" on the subject.

Fred

Sorry. I just thought that post #50 was theory driven. Maybe I'm reading it wrong. Thanks for your "opinion".

Gene

 

[desert1pocket]

Hey buddy,

I am glad that you love predator, and it fits your style of play. I believe every instructor in here will tell you that the predator didn't help you develop your draw shot. On a normal draw shot it is all about your stroke. If you don't have a good stroke then you won't have a draw shot. Yes the tip plays a factor too, but a shaft that has less deflection will not help you have a better draw shot. A shaft with less deflection is for left and right english to help you from driving the ball off line. You can see that directly on Predator's website.

I think the reason your draw came from out of no where is because you got better as a player, and your stoke improved. You were just more consiously focused on it because you had a new shaft. That happens to all of us.

Maybe your site picture is better for predator than a normal shaft, this is because you don't have to make as much adjustment. Everyone sees differently, and lining up looks a little different to everyone. Maybe your eyes are more suited for the Predator, and the reason you like the Z is because it has even less deflection. Meaning you don't have to adjust as much.

You can believe what you want, and you can use what you want. I won't tell a man or woman not to use a product. The only thing a predator shaft will do is have less deflection. It doesn't make you a better player though.

I have to disagree here. Lower deflection shafts do increase the amount of draw from the same stroke as a biproduct of having less deflection. It is not a huge difference, and the tip most likely played a part in why he was drawing the ball further also. Nevertheless, when shooting a draw shot with a low deflection shaft, the shaft bends away from the ball, which keeps the tip in contact with the cue ball longer, which puts more backspin on the ball. These same mechanical principles work for side and top spin as well. This info is also on predators website.

 

[mikepage]

I have to disagree here. Lower deflection shafts do increase the amount of draw from the same stroke as a biproduct of having less deflection. It is not a huge difference, and the tip most likely played a part in why he was drawing the ball further also. Nevertheless, when shooting a draw shot with a low deflection shaft, the shaft bends away from the ball, which keeps the tip in contact with the cue ball longer, which puts more backspin on the ball. These same mechanical principles work for side and top spin as well. This info is also on predators website.

And it's wrong there too.

mike page
fargo

 

[ScottR]

Universal Smart Shaft . . . . And I just happen to have one for sale.

 

[Koop]

And it's wrong there too.

mike page
fargo

You beat me to it.

 

[desert1pocket]

So all of those tests done with iron willie doing sidespin stop shots and draw shots were all faulty? I wish they still showed that footage on the predator website instead of the cheesy diagram they replaced it with. I have trouble believing that you have tried a Z shaft and did not notice the extra english it puts on the ball. Whether or not you prefer a low deflection shaft is a matter of taste, but the added english is a fact, not speculation. If you don't believe the mechanical physics of it, just compare a Z to a higher deflection shaft side by side, and it becomes pretty obvious. The only reason I say use the Z, is becaause it is the most dramatic example of these principles.

 

[Koop]

So all of those tests done with iron willie doing sidespin stop shots and draw shots were all faulty? I wish they still showed that footage on the predator website instead of the cheesy diagram they replaced it with. I have trouble believing that you have tried a Z shaft and did not notice the extra english it puts on the ball. Whether or not you prefer a low deflection shaft is a matter of taste, but the added english is a fact, not speculation. If you don't believe the mechanical physics of it, just compare a Z to a higher deflection shaft side by side, and it becomes pretty obvious. The only reason I say use the Z, is becaause it is the most dramatic example of these principles.

I think my point is just that, with a good stroke and good tip, you can do whatever you want with the cueball regardless of low-deflection or not.
Hell, I've seen guys (not me ), who could draw a cueball two table lengths with a regular old maple shaft.

Regards,
Koop

 

[Chris]

Whether or not you prefer a low deflection shaft is a matter of taste, but the added english is a fact, not speculation. If you don't believe the mechanical physics of it, just compare a Z to a higher deflection shaft side by side, and it becomes pretty obvious.

Could you please elaborate on the mechanical physics principles that allow the Z shaft to give the cue ball extra spin?

 

[desert1pocket]

Could you please elaborate on the mechanical physics principles that allow the Z shaft to give the cue ball extra spin?

The difference between a regular shaft and a low deflection shaft, is that a low deflection shaft is lighter in the front end, and has a flexural pivot point at a specific length from the tip. These two things allows the shaft to bend out of the way of the cueball, rather than pushing the cue call to the side (deflection). One of the side effects is that because the shaft is bending along the surface of the ball, the tip stays in contact with the ball longer, which adds more spin. Of course the cue does have to follow through for this to take place, and if you don't follow through with the stroke, you might as well be shooting with a broomstick.

[QOUTE=Koop]I think my point is just that, with a good stroke and good tip, you can do whatever you want with the cueball regardless of low-deflection or not.
Hell, I've seen guys (not me ), who could draw a cueball two table lengths with a regular old maple shaft.[/QUOTE]

I absolutely agree that a good stroke is the key to english, and the tip plays a big part, but the shaft also plays a part. I know a pro in Phoenix who plays with a stiff shaft, and he does so because he is accustomed to the deflection and feel. He has shot with low deflection shafts, and is the first to admit that he can put more english on the ball with one, but that is not necesarily a good thing. He jokingly said that he should carry around a predator shaft for the rare cases wheh he needs more english than his super-stroke can provide. I can draw the ball about 1.75 table lengths with a house cue, and over two table lengths with my new Z2, but that is not why I use the Z2. I use low deflection shafts for just that, lower deflection. Something I still wrestle with is accidentaly putting to much stuff on the ball and getting out of line. This happens because the tip placement on the cue needs to be so much more precise; if I accidentaly put an extra 1/4 tip of running english, the ball flys off two feet further than where I wanted it.

My point is, that for better or for worse, low deflection shafts DO put more spin on the ball.

 

[Koop]

I absolutely agree that a good stroke is the key to english, and the tip plays a big part, but the shaft also plays a part. I know a pro in Phoenix who plays with a stiff shaft, and he does so because he is accustomed to the deflection and feel. He has shot with low deflection shafts, and is the first to admit that he can put more english on the ball with one, but that is not necesarily a good thing. He jokingly said that he should carry around a predator shaft for the rare cases wheh he needs more english than his super-stroke can provide. I can draw the ball about 1.75 table lengths with a house cue, and over two table lengths with my new Z2, but that is not why I use the Z2. I use low deflection shafts for just that, lower deflection. Something I still wrestle with is accidentaly putting to much stuff on the ball and getting out of line. This happens because the tip placement on the cue needs to be so much more precise; if I accidentaly put an extra 1/4 tip of running english, the ball flys off two feet further than where I wanted it.

My point is, that for better or for worse, low deflection shafts DO put more spin on the ball.

Point taken and this very well could be true. To me, it's just a gimick but to a lot of people; they swear by them. To each their own.

Regards,
Koop

 

[Chris Byrne]

I would be curious to see what would happen if someone could take one or a few of each type shaft that people would like compared and have them stained black so no one can tell which is which. Then have a group of cuemakers, pro players, spectators ect... shoot with them and see who likes which shaft(s) the most.
I think the results would be spread fairly evenly across the board. There are just so many preferences out there that there cannot be a best shaft. Maybe just a best selling one. However, ford sold alot more escorts than ferrari sold cars but I still think the ferari is a far better car.
Another thing is white wood. How many times have you heard I want a shaft that plays like the cues made in the old days. Then you show them a air dried shaft and you hear how they cant play with a dark shaft like that. I think it is generally accepted that naturally dried wood is more structurly sound than vaccum kiln dried wood. Just a thought. Chris.

 

[X Breaker]

The hollow front end does allow the player to apply more side english, it is because the front end sort of "rub" the cue ball by bending away from the cue ball. I notice it on side english shots with Z shaft, 314 shaft, and the Schuler shaft. I think if you try it you will feel that, too.

Perhaps the smaller tip diameter allows a lower strike on the cue ball to give the impression that more draw is possible with the Z shaft? I am not convinced that a hollow front section can offer more draw. I believe the taper and the tip is crucial.

I do not understand why a shaft with low deflection is more "accurate" and have "high performance." I do agree it is more forgiving on some shots, but why is more forgiving on some shots making a shaft more accurate in general?

I think forgiveness is just one aspect of being accurate. The other aspect is the stability aspect, which I find to be lacking with these hollow shafts.

Another part that I find to be ignored consistently is consistency. Does the shaft deflect the same amount everytime with the same shot? If it doesn't, then how can it be more accurate? I notice that Predator shafts have different "hit" and "deflection" from one shaft to another. The hit also tends to change over time.

With regard to the percentage of deflection, the object ball curves when english is applied on the cue ball, especially on very soft siding shots, some adjustments have to be made to compensate for such curves. It is not true that you can just shot straight on all your English shots with a hollow shafts. It depends on the speed, distance, and amount of English.

With soft english, I actually find a soild shaft to "deflect" less than a hollow shaft. With these hollow shafts, I have to compensate for the throw on the object ball while the cue ball does not really curve on this types of shots. In this sense, I feel that the percentage of deflection is being generalized and is perhaps misleading.

I find that it is not easy for me to control the cue ball in small areas with very short movement of the cue ball with these hollow shafts as compared to a solid shaft. The cue ball tends to run too much unless I am very careful with it.

I could be wrong here and I would like to hear everyone's opinion, I think the hollow front end muffles the feedback especially on very soft shots, making these shots harder to control.

To make my point clearer, with a solid shaft, I feel that I can have say 10 different degrees of hitting the ball, 1 being the softest, and 10 being the hardest; with these hollow shafts, I feel that I have may be only 6, and most of them are on the heavier side, with the heaviest degree bigger than the 10 from the solid shaft, and the lightest about 3 or 4 on the solid shaft scale.

In other words, I find these hollow shafts less sensitive on finese shots.

The cue ball also seems to follow a different path coming off the object ball.

For me personally, in terms of overall performance, I like a Southwest or DPK shaft. The hit is very sensitive, feedback being very consistent, and the power is very focused. It gives me exactly what I want.

Bill McDaniel's shaft is amazing with draw shots in my opinion, I can draw the best with his shaft for some reason.

With center ball and stun shots, I like Tad's shaft. They hit like a steel bar.

About moving the cue ball around without much effort, I would say Samsara's shaft are really outstanding. I can hit the ball very soft, and the ball will just spin around the table.

With regard to squirt, I like Layani's shaft. It is just a solid shaft but is so lively and has lesser squirt than any solid shafts I have tried. His wood is also very white, tight, and dense.

Judd's shaft also has very little squirt and offers an amazing amount of spin on the cue ball. You can smoothly throw all the balls in the pocket with his shaft.

If the shaft deflects the same amount everytime with the same shot, why would you want to have lower deflection in order to perform better?

Thank you.

Richard

 

[Chris]

The difference between a regular shaft and a low deflection shaft, is that a low deflection shaft is lighter in the front end, and has a flexural pivot point at a specific length from the tip. These two things allows the shaft to bend out of the way of the cueball, rather than pushing the cue call to the side (deflection). One of the side effects is that because the shaft is bending along the surface of the ball, the tip stays in contact with the ball longer, which adds more spin. Of course the cue does have to follow through for this to take place, and if you don't follow through with the stroke, you might as well be shooting with a broomstick.

Where is the flexural point on a Z shaft exactly? Where is it on a normal shaft? It's a nice idea, but seems to have more to do with marketing than actual Physics.

The lower end mass has been proven to have a minor effect on cue ball squirt, about a 25% reduction. The claim of a low deflection shaft increasing the amount of spin has thus far been unsubstantiated, at least in this thread and on Predator's website.

I believe stroke plus tip size and shape play a far more crucial role in the amount of english that can be applied to the cue ball than does the amount of flexibility in the shaft.

 

[mikepage]

The difference between a regular shaft and a low deflection shaft, is that a low deflection shaft is lighter in the front end, and has a flexural pivot point at a specific length from the tip. These two things allows the shaft to bend out of the way of the cueball, rather than pushing the cue call to the side (deflection). One of the side effects is that because the shaft is bending along the surface of the ball, the tip stays in contact with the ball longer, which adds more spin.

This is not true. The contact time is determined by effective mass of the whole stick (not the endmass), the effective mass of the ball, and the shape and characteristics of the tip (softer tip = longer contact time, shorter radius of curvature , e,g., dime over nickel, = longer contact time. I say "effective" mass of the cueball because the mass of what the stick's pushing is lower for spin shots than for centerball shots (so longer contact time).

During a typical sidespin contact, the tip may move a couple mm forward and a couple mm sideways while in contact with the ball. All of the acceleration of the ball happens during this perhaps 2 ms contact. This acceleration starts small, gets bigger and gets small again during this 2 ms.

The spin to speed ratio (what we really often mean when we say spin)is determined by the average tip offset during this collision. So if the tip starts contact at a 10 mm offset and finishes contact at a 12 mm offset, then the average offset might be 11 mm, and the spin-to-speed ratio is characteristic of this number.

For that same stroke and contact point, a harder tip is expected to lead to slightly less spin because the contact is faster. There might be an average offset of 10.5 mm. instead of 11 mm.

If there is any effect of the low endmass tip getting out of the way faster, it would be to cut off some of the larger-offset tail of the contact period, and that would lead to less spin, not more. But I think these are small subtle effects, and the claims of "superspin" are supermyth.

Of course the cue does have to follow through for this to take place, and if you don't follow through with the stroke, you might as well be shooting with a broomstick.

This too is untrue. There is no effect of what you're hand is doing during that ms or two. And the follow thru happens after the ball is gone. The reason follow through is important is our intent to do it it helps us to hit that correct spot in the first place.

[...]
My point is, that for better or for worse, low deflection shafts DO put more spin on the ball.

Count me as unconvinced.

mike page
fargo

 

[X Breaker]

Where is the flexural point on a Z shaft exactly? Where is it on a normal shaft? It's a nice idea, but seems to have more to do with marketing than actual Physics.

The lower end mass has been proven to have a minor effect on cue ball squirt, about a 25% reduction. The claim of a low deflection shaft increasing the amount of spin has thus far been unsubstantiated, at least in this thread and on Predator's website.

I believe stroke plus tip size and shape play a far more crucial role in the amount of english that can be applied to the cue ball than does the amount of flexibility in the shaft.

The Z shaft does offer more spin than a normal regular shaft from my experience. But you have a point. The extra spin could also be the result of a number of other things, such as the taper, the ferrule, the tip size, and so on.

I find the Z taper to be very soft actually. What I mean by "soft" is that it flexes a lot when I hit off center, or hit the ball with power.

As we all know, a softer and longer taper do produce more spin on the ball than a shorter and stiffer taper.

They said on their web site that the Z features a European taper but it looks to me like a pro taper with a gradual increment along the first few inches. What is an European taper anyway? It certainly is not a 3 cushion taper or conical taper.

I am not a big fan of these hollow shafts because I think the most important thing about this game is cue ball control.

Cue ball control has to do with good feedback, and consistency. A hollow front end is not going to give you better feedback, and it cannot give you a consistent hit.

If I want to be "accurate" with my cue ball positioning, I need to be able to feel the cue ball, in order to control it.

A hollow shaft tends to run the cue ball all over the place, so I find it harder to control especially on tight positioning shots. If I cannot be "accurate" with my cue ball positioning, how can I say the shaft performs better?

For beginners, may be the hollow shafts can shorten their learning curve, so they can make more "fancy" shots. But when you come to a certain level, you need to be able to learn how to control your cue ball, and the "deflection" percentage is really not the main issue here.

You need a shaft that can offer you a very sensitive feedback and a consistent response, so it will feel like an extension of your arm. You need to feel like you can move the cue ball anywhere you want with your cue as if you were placing it with your hand. When you can do that with a shaft with ease, you will run out more, and win more matches. You then have a shaft with high performance.

I cannot see how a hollow shaft with a long taper and a soft ferrule can be the determining factor in this regard.

Just my 2 cents.

Richard
.

 

[Slasher]

The dilema with a shaft like the Z is that it will exagerate every reaction of the cue ball, where you may have used 1/2 tip of english before a 1/4 will get the same reaction. The first few hours had me pulling my hair out, but once you adjust , whoa!
It will also allow the cueball to travel straight even if you do not strike center ball, making it harder to tell if you have hit off center. I don't see this as a lack of "feel" at all you just don't get the immediate swerve off line that visually tells you what happened. It demands and rewards a pure stroke imho, I would not recommend this type of shaft to a beginner