Clearing Up The Cue Ball Weight Issue

[THE SILENCER]

sorry, i just had to start a new thread, i didn't want this to get "lost in the sauce" sort of speak. i don't know about the colors, red dot, or blue, but i do know about the models, the centenials are without a doubt lighter, and the pro from aramith are without a doubt, heavier. i prefer the centenials, because they are easier to draw.

 

[Frank_Glenn]

sorry, i just had to start a new thread, i didn't want this to get "lost in the sauce" sort of speak. i don't know about the colors, red dot, or blue, but i do know about the models, the centenials are without a doubt lighter, and the pro from aramith are without a doubt, heavier. i prefer the centenials, because they are easier to draw.

I find just the opposite. Here's a post from RSB a while back, maybe it will clear up some of the confusion:

In article <20040217130437.22671.00002075@mb-m18.aol.com>,
jamalloy@aol.comnojunk says...
:|:Shawn Putnam claims he "grew up on the red-circle cue-ball," and he likes it
:|:because it is lighter than the blue-dot.
:|:
I have a digital postal scale, so here is what I get:

OZ GM
5.6 161 red circle (older)
5.7 164 red circle (old, but not as old as the other red)
5.8 167 blue circle (oldest)
5.7 163 no circle Arimeth (newest)
5.9 168 plugged (bar box ball)
5.8 166 1 ball Arimeth
5.9 168 1 ball centennial
5.8 165 9 ball Arimeth
5.9 168 9 ball Centennial

I bought the Centennials in 1998, I bought the red circles at
different times after that (as well as the plugged, which I do not
use much, if ever). I bought the Arimeth green box set last year
around September or so. The blue and red balls are obviously made of
different material and are different color. I have seen posts about
different resins before. I think it was Tom Simpson who posted this
after asking Saluk about it.

Conclusions:
The older, more used red circle weighs less, it's worn, most likely

The newer red circle and the Arimeth weigh pretty close

The blue circle weighs a little more than the other cueballs, but
about the same as the Centennial balls

The Arimeth cueball and ball set weigh about the same

The Arimeth set weighs less than the Centennials

Whether the cueball is lighter than the rack balls may well depend on
which brand of balls you use, and in any case, the differences are
small.

 

[THE SILENCER]

informative post, youv'e done your homework. all i know, is my friend will carry his own ball set from time to time to the pool hall when we play. it's the aramith pro set, not the super pro set. the balls roll further, longer, and feel heavier than the centenial balls, the pool hall uses. am i wrong or is the blue dot, the old standard cue ball, and the red aramith logo, newer?

 

[Frank_Glenn]

informative post, youv'e done your homework. all i know, is my friend will carry his own ball set from time to time to the pool hall when we play. it's the aramith pro set, not the super pro set. the balls roll further, longer, and feel heavier than the centenial balls, the pool hall uses. am i wrong or is the blue dot, the old standard cue ball, and the red aramith logo, newer?

The balls in the pool hall are worn. They are out of round and weigh less than they used to when new. This is common.

 

[blud]

weight

The balls in the pool hall are worn. They are out of round and weigh less than they used to when new. This is common.

Hi Frank, nice post. The balls do get smaller over time, but in my opinion, they do not loose weight.

Several month's ago I, ask this question on AZ, and it refered to used balls.
Which ball is the smallest out of the whole set.

Cue ball, no,

it's the one ball. it gets hammered on 99.99/100% of the time. One cue ball hitting it head on and two balls backing the one ball. 9-ball or 8-ball, it's up front most of the time.

Weight they don't loose. This I have found to be true, weighing balls after much abuse, over several years. They do compress, and become a bit smaller. If they chip, sure they loose a little weight, but for the most part with my experance, they just compress.

I built a jig for measuring the balls for dia., and roundness. I used it while taking care of the Pro-Billiards Tour years ago. Worked for me.
blud

 

[Colin Colenso]

Hi Frank, nice post. The balls do get smaller over time, but in my opinion, they do not loose weight.

Several month's ago I, ask this question on AZ, and it refered to used balls.
Which ball is the smallest out of the whole set.

Cue ball, no,

it's the one ball. it gets hammered on 99.99/100% of the time. One cue ball hitting it head on and two balls backing the one ball. 9-ball or 8-ball, it's up front most of the time.

Weight they don't loose. This I have found to be true, weighing balls after much abuse, over several years. They do compress, and become a bit smaller. If they chip, sure they loose a little weight, but for the most part with my experance, they just compress.

I built a jig for measuring the balls for dia., and roundness. I used it while taking care of the Pro-Billiards Tour years ago. Worked for me.
blud

I don't agree with anything you said her Blud.

Polymers compressing?...I doubt that would be significant.

The cue ball is involved in a collision EVERY shot, including the break so I'm sure it WEARS OUT much more quickly than the 1 ball even taking into account that the 1 ball gets wedged between three balls one hit per game.

I have weighed used cue balls from snooker and they definitely become lighter than the other balls. This is proven not only by weighing but by testing the deflection for a natural scratch shot. Old lighter balls deflect wider and draw back with more easily, and follow through less.

If they were smaller with the same weight, the deflection and draw and follow would remain the same according to the law of conservation of momentum.

Oh I forgot...you don't like physics talk

If you've ever seen a miscroscopic photo of the surface of a polymer billiard ball you can see it is very rough with points, ledges and valleys. Small particles are always breaking off during collisions. These are too small for the eye to see, but they have mass, and so the weight of the ball gradually decreases. After 100,000 collisions (1000 hours play) it may lose about 1 gram. That means about 0.01 milligrams comes off on most collisions. (These are estimates to help understand the process. Note that a drop of water weighs around 5 milligrams. Also note that chalk is actually an abrasive so may play a considerable role in cue ball wear.)

 

[Frank_Glenn]

Hi Frank, nice post. The balls do get smaller over time, but in my opinion, they do not loose weight.

Well, I won't argue, but mine lost weight. YMMV If they get smaller, it is because they are losing pieces on each collison, not because they compress and stay that way. No disrepect meant, we just disagree.

 

[blud]

I don't agree with anything you said her Blud.

Polymers compressing?...I doubt that would be significant.

The cue ball is involved in a collision EVERY shot, including the break so I'm sure it WEARS OUT much more quickly than the 1 ball even taking into account that the 1 ball gets wedged between three balls one hit per game.

I have weighed used cue balls from snooker and they definitely become lighter than the other balls. This is proven not only by weighing but by testing the deflection for a natural scratch shot. Old lighter balls deflect wider and draw back with more easily, and follow through less.

If they were smaller with the same weight, the deflection and draw and follow would remain the same according to the law of conservation of momentum.

Oh I forgot...you don't like physics talk

If you've ever seen a miscroscopic photo of the surface of a polymer billiard ball you can see it is very rough with points, ledges and valleys. Small particles are always breaking off during collisions. These are too small for the eye to see, but they have mass, and so the weight of the ball gradually decreases. After 100,000 collisions (1000 hours play) it may lose about 1 gram. That means about 0.01 milligrams comes off on most collisions. (These are estimates to help understand the process. Note that a drop of water weighs around 5 milligrams. Also note that chalk is actually an abrasive so may play a considerable role in cue ball wear.)

Colin, I don't give a damn what you think. I have done all that I stated. I have my proff, by doing these test for years........your smart-assed remark, was and is uncalled for, You don't like physics".

Not so, I disagree with yours for sure. It seems to me any time someone replys to a post you stick your physics $.02 worth in. I could care less what you think, or think you know.
This is just another way of your talking down to me or someone who disagrees with you, because we don't have a sheep skin saying "PHYSICS" written all over it. .

The first time you sir, pissed me off was your degrading those of us who do not have a degree, as you. You bitched about spelling and grammer.
Talked down to me I think in general.I sent you a PM about this, however you never replyed.....

Your all wet when it comes to [field experance].Your attitude is, The hell with what we , me or anyone else has tested, your way is correct. BULL SHIT, PAL.

Just like mashing a car, if you use 20 tons, it gets small, use 30 tons and it gets smaller yet. Same as balls.It won't loose weight, neither does a cue ball.

I have completed test on what I posted. Your correct, I don't know about physics, but I do no this, the "ON" ball is smaller than the cue ball after many many days or perhaps years of play. You claim to be a player, so be it. Your a physics man, I guess, but your sure as hell not a proffesinal at setting up tournaments, tables, equipment, and measuring balls for the last 30 plus years, making the playing conditions the best they could be, for the true proffesinals of our game. Hell ,I'll bet you couldn't get in the door.....and if you did you would most likely get disqualified for stalling while using your slide rule on your next shot...

I for one don't give a shit what kind of rag is hanging on your wall. Your degrees don't come close to what were talking about, Mr. Right, or is it fast larry?

blud

 

[blud]

no problem

Well, I won't argue, but mine lost weight. YMMV If they get smaller, it is because they are losing pieces on each collison, not because they compress and stay that way. No disrepect meant, we just disagree.

Hi Frank, no worry about fussin with you, sir.
Colin is the guy who knows all but never done what i 've done for a living. I took care of 20 sets of balls for 30 years, none of the balls, that I took care of, lost weight. The One ball got smaller. The cue ball did not. It hits the 1,and it hits the next two. We call this "bucking up" meaning a back up when using a sledgehammer. The cue ball, hits an object ball and doing that, isn't getting mashed as the one ball.does.............

I don't think anyone else has had my experance taking care of all the equipment for our pro's. This doesn't make me right or wrong, I just know what my finding were and are. I don't lie, Colin. My finding are true.......
blud

 

[drivermaker]

We call this "bucking up" meaning a back up when using a sledgehammer. The cue ball, hits an object ball and doing that, isn't getting mashed as the one ball.does.............

Aaaaahaaaa.....I think I just found my answer as to why the men in the movies who get into these big fights with someone and blasts the other guy with a monster head butt, the guy getting tagged gets knocked down, rolls all over the floor and bleeds, while the guy doing the butting never even gets a tiny goose egg on his noggin and is still ready to rock and roll.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I don't think anyone else has had my experance taking care of all the equipment for our pro's. This doesn't make me right or wrong, I just know what my finding were and are. I don't lie, Colin. My findings are true.......
blud

Well, they may be true for the balls you took care of, but they are very, very untrue for the balls in the typical pool hall. All you have to do is look at the typical 5-year-old "red circle" cue ball to see that it has turned into a "faded pink circle" from the wear it's seen. Also, all the pool balls where I play are smaller than regulation even though they were right when first purchased.

As far as balls changing size, you do sometimes see nearly new balls with bulging eyes. I assume that the ball was machined round at one point, but the plastic of the eye and body cured differently after the rounding.

I think the idea of "shrinking by being pounded down" is very unlikely to be true, but we need a plastics expert.

 

[gumbocue]

Bob,

I agree about the plastic expert and I also agree with Colin

gumbocue

 

[Colin Colenso]

Colin, I don't give a damn what you think. I have done all that I stated. I have my proff, by doing these test for years........your smart-assed remark, was and is uncalled for, You don't like physics".

Not so, I disagree with yours for sure. It seems to me any time someone replys to a post you stick your physics $.02 worth in. I could care less what you think, or think you know.
This is just another way of your talking down to me or someone who disagrees with you, because we don't have a sheep skin saying "PHYSICS" written all over it. .

The first time you sir, pissed me off was your degrading those of us who do not have a degree, as you. You bitched about spelling and grammer.
Talked down to me I think in general.I sent you a PM about this, however you never replyed.....

Your all wet when it comes to [field experance].Your attitude is, The hell with what we , me or anyone else has tested, your way is correct. BULL SHIT, PAL.

Just like mashing a car, if you use 20 tons, it gets small, use 30 tons and it gets smaller yet. Same as balls.It won't loose weight, neither does a cue ball.

I have completed test on what I posted. Your correct, I don't know about physics, but I do no this, the "ON" ball is smaller than the cue ball after many many days or perhaps years of play. You claim to be a player, so be it. Your a physics man, I guess, but your sure as hell not a proffesinal at setting up tournaments, tables, equipment, and measuring balls for the last 30 plus years, making the playing conditions the best they could be, for the true proffesinals of our game. Hell ,I'll bet you couldn't get in the door.....and if you did you would most likely get disqualified for stalling while using your slide rule on your next shot...

I for one don't give a shit what kind of rag is hanging on your wall. Your degrees don't come close to what were talking about, Mr. Right, or is it fast larry?

blud

Blud,
Maybe it sounded rude for me to say I didn't agree with anything you wrote. I was just stating a fact, not trying to attack you, though I should know better about your sensitivity.

As for your statement about me complaining about people's grammar and denouncing people without high education, that is a lie or a complete misinterpretation of what I have ever said.

I challenge you to find where I have said these things here.

All you'll find is a statement that having a BSc allowed me to understand and critique the errors in the physics of squirt report (which has been used as a bible of billiard knowledge), and another post where I criticised a post that attacked Fast Larry as being incoherent and illogical which it was.

I will take your evidence in mind regarding your experience with balls over many years. It just seems to contradict my own and other's observations.

My comment about your not liking physics was meant to be tounge in cheek. I've no grudge with you.

That said, I will try to improve my tact in future.

Best regards

 

[jer9ball]

Silencer: You didn't clear up a thing. Post facts, not opinions.

Frank: Nice post with the weights and all.

 

[jer9ball]

Blud: How can cueball weight be a matter of opinion? You said that in your opinion, they don't lose weight. How can you argue with a scale?

 

[emankov]

sorry, i just had to start a new thread, i didn't want this to get "lost in the sauce" sort of speak. i don't know about the colors, red dot, or blue, but i do know about the models, the centenials are without a doubt lighter, and the pro from aramith are without a doubt, heavier. i prefer the centenials, because they are easier to draw.

Hello to all,
I just wanna say my opinion
Be VERY CAREFULL with the different ball sets out there even if they come from certified companies.
Brunswick and Aramith are DIFFERENT balls at least regarding the weight..
Choose and examine carefully the ball sets that u practice with.
I believe that the heavier the ball the easiest to execute some shots like force follow...
Try practice for 3 months with brunswicks and go play to a tourn with aramiths..u will trail 3-4 racks before u say "mamma"

...they want us to be consistent and they provide us with different tools...