Carom Billiard Tapers and Squirt

[Rich93]

I wonder if the lessons we've learned about squirt in pool cues (pro taper cues) apply equally as well with carom tapers. My guess is that the robot (Iron Willie, etc) experiments and other experiments have been done with a standard pro taper, not with a carom taper. The experiments have shown that the lower the mass of the last five inches or so of the shaft, the less squirt the cue will have. Also, our technical types who opine on the subject seem to think that stroke speed has little effect on squirt. I also suspect they feel that it doesn't matter much whether the stroke is a draw, center ball, or follow stroke. Finally, I imagine they expect the same squirt with a smooth follow-through as with a short punchy stroke (after all, the end mass is the same and the cueball leaves the tip immediately).

I've only played with a carom taper (Schuler European - 12mm), and my observations don't agree with some of the conventional wisdom. I've observed that stroke speed has a tremendous effect on squirt. The harder the stroke, the more squirt. I know the response to that is there's less swerve with a harder stroke, but I'm pretty confident (well, positive, actually) that that's not the explanation. Could it be that the effect of speed on squirt is different for carom tapers than for pro tapers?

Second, I observe significantly more squirt with a draw stroke than with center ball, and more with center ball than with follow (holding speed constant). If nobody else has noticed this, could it be because of my carom taper? If anything, our swerve fans would expect less effect with a draw stroke because the cue is more elevated and therefore more swerve to counteract the same squirt.

Finally, I seem to get less squirt with a smooth follow-through than without one. This seems inconsistent with the observation that the tip is only in contact with the cueball for such a short time that follow-through has no effect. Could this have something to do with taper?

Of all that I've questioned, the effect of speed is the one I'm most positive about. If others don't experience this effect, I wonder if it could be my stiff shaft making the difference.

 

[whitey2]

Question for you

Question for you... When you say you seem to notice more squirt using center-ball, than
follow, I assume you mean you are using a lot of side with it, right?

And, are you going left (or right) as much on each of those?

I mean, measured from the exact center of the cue ball. In other words 1 tip of left
english in one case, and then 1 tip of high left english in another case? Or when you
hit high left, would you be 1 tip from the center of the cue ball, in which case you are
not 1 tip to the left? Do you understand what I mean? Because in the second case you
would be cos(45)*1 tip off to the left, or 70.7% of one tip off to the left.

EDIT: Several corrections.

 

[Rich93]

Question for you... When you say you seem to notice more squirt using center-ball, than
follow, I assume you mean you are using a lot of side with it, right?

Yes, using side as well.

And, are you going left (or right) as much on each of those?

I mean, measured from the exact center of the cue ball. In other words 1 tip of left
english in one case, and then 1 tip of high left english in another case? Or when you
hit high left, would you be 1 tip from the center of the cue ball, in which case you are
not 1 tip to the left? Do you understand what I mean? Because in the second case you
would be cos(45)*1 tip off to the left, or 70.7% of one tip off to the left.

EDIT: Several corrections.

I'm trying to use the same amount of side in all these cases. By one tip of high left english, I mean one tip to the left of the vertical axis of the cue ball, and some distance (unspecified) above the horizontal axis.

 

[whitey2]

I may have an explanation

I may have an explanation. As I mentioned in another post, to this day I still do not fully
understand *all* the factors involved in the phenomenon of squirt. I am getting pretty good
at learning about it, and experimenting with it, but I suspect only some cuemakers have put
in the time, effort, and of course money to research it in detail.

The only explanation I can come up with for explaining why you see more squirt with
draw, less with center, and even less with follow, is as follows:

When using draw and side, the cue ball is deflected up as well as to the side. This is
reducing the frictional forces from the ball's mass against the cloth, allowing the cue
ball to be deflected more to the side, than when using center with side. The converse
is then true for using high with side. The cue ball is being deflected down into the cloth,
and thus the frictional force is being increased, and therefore the cue ball is being deflected
less to the side.

I hope some other folks will come forth with agreement or criticism of my theory. I think
I need to write a book or something soon. I'm spending way too much time thinking about
things like this, participating on this board, on order to get my mind off the ever-toughening
job market for computer graphics specialized software engineers. and

 

[Rich93]

I may have an explanation. As I mentioned in another post, to this day I still do not fully
understand *all* the factors involved in the phenomenon of squirt. I am getting pretty good
at learning about it, and experimenting with it, but I suspect only some cuemakers have put
in the time, effort, and of course money to research it in detail.

The only explanation I can come up with for explaining why you see more squirt with
draw, less with center, and even less with follow, is as follows:

When using draw and side, the cue ball is deflected up as well as to the side. This is
reducing the frictional forces from the ball's mass against the cloth, allowing the cue
ball to be deflected more to the side, than when using center with side. The converse
is then true for using high with side. The cue ball is being deflected down into the cloth,
and thus the frictional force is being increased, and therefore the cue ball is being deflected
less to the side.

I hope some other folks will come forth with agreement or criticism of my theory. I think
I need to write a book or something soon. I'm spending way too much time thinking about
things like this, participating on this board, on order to get my mind off the ever-toughening
job market for computer graphics specialized software engineers. and

You know, this makes sense to me. But if it's right, then most players would have noticed the phenomenon (more squirt with draw, etc.). My stroke is as level as most.

Good luck with the job market. I have to say, it's nice to be retired.