Custom Cue Mythology

[Grilled Cheese]

Bola,

The important factor that you seem to be totally ignoring in this discussion is the "feel" of the cue. A machine stroking the cue is not likely to report back on how it "felt" to hit the ball. Every pool player uses a cue. When they pick up a cue, they become a complex, interactive system for pool shooting. The feel of the hit provides feedback to the shooter, which influences *their* performance, which I'm sure we all agree is the most important part of that system. Lets look at some simple examples of things that make a huge difference in how a cue feels, but would likely provide absolutely no data to any scientific test or robot device:

balance: lets say I handed you a cue that had an *extreme* rear balance. You think that cue will perform as well for a given shooter as one that is balanced the way they like? Humans are pretty sensitive instruments...we can detect even small variations in balance. This make a very big difference in the delivery of the stroke, the feel of the hit, and perhaps most importantly the confidence that cue inspires in the hands.

wrap or wrapless: This makes a big difference to me. Lets say I hand you a cue with my new teflon grip. Slick as hell and falls out of your hands when you try to hold it. How well would you play with that? There's the extreme example again, but refer to the "humans are sensitive" idea.

We could list other things but I think you get the idea. Here is a *fact* for you: when I bought my 2nd cue (the first was a $96 Brunswick), I didn't know anything about cues or custom makers. I tried out a million production cues: Viking, Pechauer, McDermott, etc. I didn't really care for the hit of any of them. Then I hit with a couple of custom cues and immediately felt a clear difference. Remember, I was a D player and didn't know anything at the time...I had no preconceived notions about cues. Certainly had never heard of AZB. The customs I tried were plain jane cues, certainly not as "fancy" as some of the production cues I tried. No real placebo effect there. However, there was a certain quality, perhaps solidness or something, that I immediately recognized and preferred. Explain that please.

Are there decent production cues? Of course. The simple *fact* is that my experience says that on average a decent custom cue hits better than the average production cue. The net result of putting a cue in *my* hands that feels better to *me* is an improvement in overall performance, most noticeably with respect to speed control, but also many other aspects not worth going into.

KMRUNOUT

For starters, thanks for participating in this thread, even as opposition to my position - without resorting to childish flames. I appreciate it.


Earlier in this thread, I addressed the "feel" and "hit" issue. Those are highly subjective. I hope we can agree on that. What feels solid to one person, isn't to another. This is based on how different people perceive feedback from the cue differently.

However, the point I made was - how a cue feels to you, does not alter, whether it be enhance or degrade the CUES performance.

Certainly and without question it's balance, weight, wrap, dimensions all lead to YOU the player playing better. Even the subjective and impossible to quantify "hit" and "feel" can make you play better if it leads to you having a sufficient level of satisfaction with those qualities or if they convince you of being a quality that enhances performance.

The reason for this is because any time a player's personal preferences are met - they will obviously have greater comfort and familiarity as well as less distraction or discomfort.


That doesn't mean the quality production cue plays worse and it doesn't mean the custom plays better.


While you're 100% right that a pool playing robot would offer zero information about "hit" or "feel" ...that is the exact reason why a pool playing robot would be so valuable. Not only does it eliminate human error, but subjectiveness is also removed from the equation.

All that matters in determining whether or not a custom cue plays better is whether or not it exceeds the performance of quality custom cues through it's interaction with the cue ball.

What kind of criteria would constitute superior performance? Well, that's up to us the players. I can suggest a few things. Greater accuracy (consistency in driving the ball forward), more spin on cue ball, more cue ball speed for a given amount of energy used.....


Say a tough cut shot is set up with such a robot or machine. Is there a difference between the custom vs. the production in how consistently and accurately it can deliver the cue ball over the course of X number of shots? Is there a difference in how much speed the custom can generate in the cue ball? How about spin?


You see my point? The production cue might not "feel" or "hit" solid to you, but there's nothing wrong with it or inferior which would cause it to perform worse than a custom cue, nor is there anything superior about a custom cue to have it perform superior. Not unless someone can come here with some actual proof, or evidence or at least some kind of reasonable argument as to why the custom cue has superior performance. Then the question will be, in what form? Since how something performs isn't magic or voodoo, it has to be traced back to materials and construction. Something in the physical world.


I think some people get upset to hear their custom doesn't have some special undefinable properties about it that makes it play better. They shouldn't be. They have great cues that play very well and consistently. They are also custom tailored to their liking, which as I said for the reasons above, makes the playerplay better.

Preferences and comfort are factors separate from performance of the cue. Preferences and comfort have to do with player performance, a different factor entirely. An awful lot of people can't separate those two things in their mind.

 

[hivoltg]

No, my opening of this thread is not the a making of a claim - instead, it is a response to a popular claim that exists in the pool world that custom cues have superior performance over quality production cues.



On that, we agree. :smile:

I see that we can definitely agree on some things, and definitely not agree on others. I'm cool with that.:thumbup:

Good luck on your quest. I believe you have a long row to hoe on this one

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I'm going to have to side with the OP on this one and suggest that you change your highlighted line from "Played like" to "felt like" because that's all there is to it. Your Scruggs, SouthWest, Joss etc... etc... don't PLAY or make balls better than a 50 dollar bar cue. Now, those cues will FEEL a helluva lot better and have higher quality wood and most likely better balance, but the cue doesn't make the balls, that is all up to you. Hey, I'm not jabbing you, man. I have a James White, Tim Scruggs, 2 Paul Mottey's and a Thomas Wayne so I'm just as guilty as the next person as far as buying high end cues goes. But, I'm well aware that those cues don't make me play better. I went a number of years where I was in my "Earl Strickland" mode and I shot with a plain white Cuetec like he used to shoot with back in the day. I won a lot of tournaments playing with that cue. I still have that cue and use it every once in a while. My main player is the Jim White though. I just like the way it feels. Plus, it was custom made for me by Jim and he made it 59 inches so it fits me better, I'm tall.
MULLY

I'm gonna have to suggest that you change the whole sentence. Cues don't play at all. Ever. They are inanimate objects. Likewise, people do not play pool without cues. So it is equally erroneous to say it is all the player, not the cue. (OK Mike Massey does a pretty impressive finger pool routine...) The point is that playability is never a quality of a cue. It is an "emergent property" of the highly complex system of a human being, a cue, and the perceptions of using that cue. For those who are not aware, an "emergent property" is a quality of a system that cannot be reduced to any of the parts of that system. For example, consciousness is an emergent property of human beings. There is no part of a person that can show consciousness. It can't be shown in any organ (not even the brain...yet), any cell, or any part of the body. It is a quality that can only be discussed with respect to the whole person. Likewise, "playability" is not a quality of the cue or the shooter. It is only a quality of the whole, which in this case is the shooter holding a specific cue.

Anyone get what I'm saying here?

KMRUNOUT

 

[manwon]

Seems that the "custom cues play better" crowd is big on words, little on proof, substance or evidence. Heck, not even a single reasonable argument. Nothing.

Only childish flames and "because it is" statements.

Well done advancing your point fellas. Real champions of fact and reason.


Aside from the fact that many of you are subscribing to complete logical failure by demanding that I provide proof of why YOUR unsubstantiated claims are false - you never take a moment to provide any evidence supporting your position. Nothing.

This is the same thing as a defendant having to prove their innocence. Doesn't work that way (or at least it shouldn't, but that's not a pool related subject) It's your side that makes the claim that custom cues perform better. The burden of proof rests on you to back up your claims. Not on me, who is a skeptic of such claims.

It's sad that this thread has gone so far without any substance by those who claim custom cues perform better than production cues.


Too much noise, not enough signal. You folks are better than that. Act like it.

Too much noise, not enough signal


On this statement we certainly agree, but hey it was your choice to live under a bridge, so lighten up your starting to get upset!!!!!


Aside from the fact that many of you are subscribing to complete logical failure by demanding that I provide proof of why YOUR unsubstantiated claims are false - you never take a moment to provide any evidence supporting your position. Nothing.

This is the same thing as a defendant having to prove their innocence. Doesn't work that way (or at least it shouldn't, but that's not a pool related subject) It's your side that makes the claim that custom cues perform better. The burden of proof rests on you to back up your claims. Not on me, who is a skeptic of such claims.


I truly hope your not serious, like I have said multiple times there is no way to prove or disprove some ones opinion and a only a very big fool would try!!!!

Oh and by the way, I am only having a little fun at your expense like many many others who have posted to this thread, you really do not get it not that is amazing.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Actually there is. But it varies from cue to cue and you have to have a higher level of play to discern the differences as well as have experience with many brands of cues.



There is a definite scientific basis why one cue would "perform" better than another one. It's called the coefficient of restitution and you can read more about it here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_restitution



Not true. Some custom cue makers do in fact use unique or special technology that they feel improves playability. Mike Lambros, an engineer, certainly feels that his UltraJoint improves playability. Theirry Layani believes the same thing about his conical joint. Bill Stroud has experimented with all sorts of things such as piezoelectric cloth embedded in the cue. Joe Gold pioneered the use of G-10 glass epoxy pins among other things. The Radial Pin is a piece of technology that was invented to improve the surface contact between the wood and the pin. You can look back through the patents over the last hundred years and find many patents related to improving the "playability" of cues.



Production cue makers can and so source wood from the same suppliers and can afford to by more of it.



As I said above it varies from cue to cue. I agree with the premise that a custom cue is not automatically better than any particular custom cue, within certain parameters and standards in construction.



This is true BUT origin and brand exist as indicators for a consumer to start with.



Well certainly HIT is subjective. Conversely, hand your $10 flea market special to SVB and put him in the box against Johnny Archer and see how he does.



In Germany they say "a new broom always sweeps better". But this is not the placebo effect because you can't put everyone in the same box. Many people on here report that they don't in fact play better with their new cue. People talk all the time about "learning" a new cue, getting used to a new cue, the difficulty of going from a flexible shaft to stiff one, etc....



There is no doubt that some people are constantly trying to buy a better game. But this does not apply to everyone and certainly doesn't apply to those who are good enough to simply be in tune with how their cue performs and how they prefer it to be.



You are mixing things here. This last paragraph is the true sentiment you wish to convey but you have use some unreasonable logic to get there.

There are definite and measurable performance differences in cues. While any given cue may not elevate a person's game much it is certainly true that some cues can handicap a person's game. This is easily proven and has been discussed many times here.

In any sport some people fall prey to the idea that equipment will "make" them better. This is a lot different than the idea that one should use the best equipment that one can. Notice I didn't say the highest priced or most prestigious.

Take two players and both play with house cues. One may only be concerned that the cue is straight with no clue about the ferrule and the tip. So he picks a straight cue that is very butt heavy with a soft plastic ferrule and a crappy tip.

The other player takes a little more time and using his experience picks out a straight cue with nice medium hard tip and a very good ferrule that is forward balanced.

Both players being relatively equal in skill the one with the "better" cue will simply miss less, make more and win the majority of the games because he doesn't have to fight the cue.

Superb Post! Very well articulated. I am going to come to the Sterling Booth and shake your hand sir!

KMRUNOUT

 

[Grilled Cheese]

like I have said multiple times there is no way to prove or disprove some ones opinion

Obviously

Thankfully, there's a difference between opinion and fact.

Also, performance isn't opinion based. Imagine NASCAR or F1 making their choices in parts or modifications based on opinions. LOL. :wink: "um, I think that's faster, I felt it was!" ...."man, that engine sounds solid, it will be faster than our last one" :smile: Who needs timers? Just go by arbitrary subjective opinion! That's how we get progress!

There are some things that can be measured. Break cues can be measured for how much CB speed they generate. So can tips. Or various types of ferrules. Individual parts can be tested by having various controls and isolating the variable.


Science is a beautiful thing. There are too many flat-Earthers here.


Too many people here are being hypocrites. They wouldn't go doctor that thought like they did. Going by hunches, feel and not being able to prove anything.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

In other words, a pro won't miss a ball switching from his custom to a Schon because there is something inherently wrong or inferior with the Schon. He might miss because he is not used to the weight or balance, that's different. That's not the cue. That's an issue of familiarity with the weight/balance. If he was familiar with that weight or balance, he would be equally as good with the Schon.

Is this because of the exacting tolerances and consistency on the human being production line? You know, the CNC machine where they mill all of us humans? Are you seriously claiming that a particular pro would play all aspects of pool (cueing, accuracy, speed control, etc.) just as well once they got familiar with a particular weight/balance/etc. ? So as long as I give SVB a little time (lets say 5 years) to adjust, he will play just as good with a 30 oz. cue with severe rear balance? No offense but that sounds fairly ridiculous to me. What I *will* agree with is that if you gave SVB that same crazy setup from a custom maker or a production maker, he would be *equally* screwed!
I'm wondering why you keep coming back to "missing a ball"? You play pool of course. Do you evaluate the quality of your game based only on whether or not you miss? What about speed control? It seems to me that the speed would be HUGELY affected by balance, feel of hit, and other differences that you wish to dismiss because they are "just the cue". Are you claiming that the very small but perceptible differences in vibration and sound (which is pretty much what people are talking about when they talk about "hit") are not important to the net play of a particular person with that cue? Let's not even get into cueball deflection...

Here's the bottom line: Cues don't play pool. People don't play pool without cues. You can try all you like to separate out the concepts of a cues "playability" and a persons capability. However, these isolated concepts are fairly meaningless. The "playability" of a cue is a product of the qualities of that cue and the specific "construction" of the player using it. For some, a production cue will be best. For others, not.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

The difference between a Schon/Joss/Meucci vs. some custom is not extreme

That is true.

- in fact, there's no difference.

That is not true.

. No one has provided not a shred of evidence as to why custom cues allegedly play better, are allegedly more consistent, allegedly make you more balls etcetera over say, a quality, non-defective production cue.

Nor has anyone alleged this. At least I don't remember seeing it anywhere but in your posts. (in this thread anyway...)

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I was hoping someone would come along and make a scientifically or at least, a logically sound argument as to why the custom is superior in performance over a production.

Curious...*why* were you hoping for that?

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Obviously you didn't read this:







But seriously, is that all that you can resort to?

Ok Bola, now you are essentially saying that you have taken one side in a ridiculous debate. You say that you cannot prove the existence of God, and also that you cannot disprove it. Granted. So which part of the analogy corresponds to your position? We read your post about that-it was not overlooked. It just doesn't function the way you might have wanted it to. You are attempting to evade the question. You are attempting to use "logic" to accomplish this, but your logic may not have the quality you think it does.


Why won't you address GoTulane's question? *YOU* made the claim. Your claim is that there is no difference. That is really the only claim we are discussing here. You are the one who conjured up the viewpoint that you claim people have that there *is* a difference.

Let's make it even simpler for you. Could you please answer this:

Are there differences between the *feel* of different cues? Nevermind whether they are custom or not. Let's just start with this basic question. If I went downstairs to the Expo and arbitrarily selected one production cue and one custom cue, would there likely be a difference?

Let's try another one: Let's say we took all the custom cues downstairs and numbered them. We then selected at random one number, and thus one custom cue. Then we do the same for the production cues. So we now have one randomly selected custom cue, and one randomly selected production cue. Now you can't sell it, and for the sake of this argument we will not consider looks. You get to choose one to be your playing cue for the next 10 years. You don't get to see which cues were randomly selected. Which one would you choose?

I've now given you two very straightforward questions. The first requires only a yes or no answer, and the second requires only a "custom" or "production" answer. Interested to see how you tackle these.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Manwon,

It's unfortunate that your feelings got hurt and you had to default to throwing a temper tantrum.

Perhaps the questions posed in this thread are too much for you. They obviously have shaken your comfort zone.

There's not much I can say to reply to you since you posts are void of information or facts, and they just sling a lot of venom at me.


I never thought that saying a Schon/Joss/Viking/Meucci plays as well as a custom would cause people so much distress.


One word for you folks: RELAX

Bola,

I recommend you reread this post of yours and give it some thought. Funny how you took Manwon's post so totally differently than I did. You even made up a mood for him and everything. Interesting...

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Seems that the "custom cues play better" crowd is big on words, little on proof, substance or evidence. Heck, not even a single reasonable argument. Nothing.

Only childish flames and "because it is" statements.

Well done advancing your point fellas. Real champions of fact and reason.


Aside from the fact that many of you are subscribing to complete logical failure by demanding that I provide proof of why YOUR unsubstantiated claims are false - you never take a moment to provide any evidence supporting your position. Nothing.

This is the same thing as a defendant having to prove their innocence. Doesn't work that way (or at least it shouldn't, but that's not a pool related subject) It's your side that makes the claim that custom cues perform better. The burden of proof rests on you to back up your claims. Not on me, who is a skeptic of such claims.

It's sad that this thread has gone so far without any substance by those who claim custom cues perform better than production cues.


Too much noise, not enough signal. You folks are better than that. Act like it.

Bola, you are really raising hypocrisy to an art. I will defer to your judgement on that topic.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

It's sad that this thread has gone so far without any substance by those who claim custom cues perform better than production cues.

It' seven sadder that after all these pages you are still clinging to the idea that *anyone* has made that claim. Only you sir. Though if you keep believing that someone has made that claim, I guess you don't really have to defend you claim ever, huh?

I think we are all stuck on your claim that there is *no* difference.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

No, my opening of this thread is not the a making of a claim - instead, it is a response to a popular claim that exists in the pool world that custom cues have superior performance over quality production cues.



On that, we agree. :smile:

Apples are no better than oranges. Is this a claim or not?

Ok, let's try it this way: custom cues are no better than production cues. Is this a claim or not?

Since it sound like you might need a little help here: (copied and pasted from dictionary.com)
Claim
-verb
to assert or maintain as a fact: She claimed that he was telling the truth.

-noun
an assertion of something as a fact: He made no claims to originality.

So let's try one more time. Are you asserting or maintaining as fact that custom cues are no better than production cues? (yes or no answer please)

KMRUNOUT

 

[manwon]

Obviously

Thankfully, there's a difference between opinion and fact.

Also, performance isn't opinion based. Imagine NASCAR or F1 making their choices in parts or modifications based on opinions. LOL. :wink: "um, I think that's faster, I felt it was!" ...."man, that engine sounds solid, it will be faster than our last one" :smile: Who needs timers? Just go by arbitrary subjective opinion! That's how we get progress!

There are some things that can be measured. Break cues can be measured for how much CB speed they generate. So can tips. Or various types of ferrules. Individual parts can be tested by having various controls and isolating the variable.


Science is a beautiful thing. There are too many flat-Earthers here.


Too many people here are being hypocrites. They wouldn't go doctor that thought like they did. Going by hunches, feel and not being able to prove anything.

Too many people here are being hypocrites

Ah!!!!! Now you get it my little Troll, I knew for certain you would come around and see the light. So since you started this thread and you claim that your theory can be tested please tell us how you would do that. Please do not include any personal opinions, only proven scientific facts that can be quantified or that have been quantified by a reputable source in this industry. If you can not do that at least give the forum readers your personal back ground. This will help everyone understand how you have come to this conclusion, I mean it is really up you to do this you started this thread, so prove your point!!!!!!

It is OK if you sleep on it, and please do not take this as a personal attack it is not, I am only trying to understand what you are trying prove, or what your trying to learn. In most cases people start threads to identify a problem or to give others useful information, now I am not saying that this is not your intent so please prove your point!!!

Take care

 

[KMRUNOUT]

For starters, thanks for participating in this thread, even as opposition to my position - without resorting to childish flames. I appreciate it.

My pleasure. That's what the forum is for right?

Earlier in this thread, I addressed the "feel" and "hit" issue. Those are highly subjective. I hope we can agree on that

.

We do.

What feels solid to one person, isn't to another. This is based on how different people perceive feedback from the cue differently.

No question.

However, the point I made was - how a cue feels to you, does not alter, whether it be enhance or degrade the CUES performance.

Absolutely true, but I wonder why anyone would care about this. The cue really has no performance whatsoever on its own. It just lies there until a *person* picks it up.

Certainly and without question it's balance, weight, wrap, dimensions all lead to YOU the player playing better. Even the subjective and impossible to quantify "hit" and "feel" can make you play better if it leads to you having a sufficient level of satisfaction with those qualities or if they convince you of being a quality that enhances performance.

No doubt. However I disagree that "hit" and "feel" are impossible to quantify, or at least describe. Nonetheless I think we agree here.

That doesn't mean the quality production cue plays worse and it doesn't mean the custom plays better.

While you're 100% right that a pool playing robot would offer zero information about "hit" or "feel" ...that is the exact reason why a pool playing robot would be so valuable. Not only does it eliminate human error, but subjectiveness is also removed from the equation.

Also eliminated are any reasons why I would care about the results of such an experiment. Subjective experience is the principle basis for a well reasoned pool cue purchase, regardless of what you buy. After all, will *I* be using the cue or a robot?

All that matters in determining whether or not a custom cue plays better is whether or not it exceeds the performance of quality custom cues through it's interaction with the cue ball.

You will see why in my upcoming posts, but I totally disagree with this statement. And I'm pretty sure you meant to say "exceeds...quality production cues".

What kind of criteria would constitute superior performance? Well, that's up to us the players.

Umm...this is the opposite of your previous claims. This would be subjective, no?

I can suggest a few things. Greater accuracy (consistency in driving the ball forward), more spin on cue ball, more cue ball speed for a given amount of energy used.....

I can't imagine why any cue, or any object at all with a tip like object on the end of it for that matter would offer any change in your use here of "accuracy". I mean, if you stick a whiffle ball bat in your robot, with a tip on the end of it, would it be any less accurate? I guess maybe if the robot swung it hard enough to flex it laterally, but I think you get what I'm saying here. As for more spin, hasn't this already been disproved ad nauseum?

Say a tough cut shot is set up with such a robot or machine. Is there a difference between the custom vs. the production in how consistently and accurately it can deliver the cue ball over the course of X number of shots? Is there a difference in how much speed the custom can generate in the cue ball? How about spin?

No there isn't. So lets eliminate those as candidates for the reason why people might prefer one cue over another.

You see my point? The production cue might not "feel" or "hit" solid to you, but there's nothing wrong with it or inferior which would cause it to perform worse than a custom cue, nor is there anything superior about a custom cue to have it perform superior.

Um...yeah, there is. The fact that it doesn't "feel" or "hit" solid to me would be a problem. That would be a MAJOR reason for choosing one cue over another.

Not unless someone can come here with some actual proof, or evidence or at least some kind of reasonable argument as to why the custom cue has superior performance.

I don't think you need that. You just supplied a good reason yourself. "feel" and "hit" are the *PRINCIPLE* measures of differences in pool cue performance.

Then the question will be, in what form? Since how something performs isn't magic or voodoo, it has to be traced back to materials and construction. Something in the physical world.

Yup. I think several people on this thread have attempted to provide insight into the differences in materials and construction. I am fairly certain those differences exist in the physical world.

I think some people get upset to hear their custom doesn't have some special undefinable properties about it that makes it play better. They shouldn't be. They have great cues that play very well and consistently. They are also custom tailored to their liking, which as I said for the reasons above, makes the playerplay better.

For sure. However, I didn't really perceive a single post in this thread as implying that the poster was "upset".

Preferences and comfort are factors separate from performance of the cue.

Really? Would you advise people make a purchase based on preferences and comfort, or based on this abstract concept of "performance"? I say abstract because again, the cue is nothing without the shooter. With that in mind, preferences and comfort *IS* the definition of the performance of the cue.

Preferences and comfort have to do with player performance, a different factor entirely. An awful lot of people can't separate those two things in their mind.

There are two reasons for this. First, some people simply do not have the cognitive capacity to think this way. Second, some people believe that an attempt to separate these qualities is a fallacy, and creates an essentially meaningless concept, "performance". Try this. Select your favorite production cue. Put it down on a pool table with all the balls out. You can even lean it against the table if you wish. Now leave the room. Record how many balls the cue pockets while you are gone. Sounds pretty ridiculous, huh? That is why your initial post got the reaction it did.

I sincerely hope you don't take my many responses as insulting or rude. I very much enjoy philosophical debates like this. I am extremely relaxed and have a big smile on my face. I am really enjoying your thread. Thanks!!

KMRUNOUT

 

[Grilled Cheese]

Too many people here are being hypocrites

Ah!!!!! Now you get it my little Troll, I knew for certain you would come around and see the light. So since you started this thread and you claim that your theory can be tested please tell us how you would do that. Please do not include any personal opinions, only proven scientific facts that can be quantified or that have been quantified by a reputable source in this industry. If you can not do that at least give the forum readers your personal back ground. This will help everyone understand how you have come to this conclusion, I mean it is really up you to do this you started this thread, so prove your point!!!!!!

It is OK if you sleep on it, and please do not take this as a personal attack it is not, I am only trying to understand what you are trying prove, or what your trying to learn. In most cases people start threads to identify a problem or to give others useful information, now I am not saying that this is not your intent so please prove your point!!!

Take care

No no, YOU PROVE that MY claim is untrue. Go for it! :wink::wink::wink:


LOL, how's that for a taste of your own medicine?


Have a good night.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Obviously

Thankfully, there's a difference between opinion and fact.

Indeed

Also, performance isn't opinion based. Imagine NASCAR or F1 making their choices in parts or modifications based on opinions. LOL. :wink: "um, I think that's faster, I felt it was!" ...."man, that engine sounds solid, it will be faster than our last one" :smile: Who needs timers? Just go by arbitrary subjective opinion! That's how we get progress!

Actually Bola, I'm fairly certain that the input of the driver is a major factor in the decisions Nascar and F1 crews make. Afterall, speed doesn't matter if the guy crashes. The "feel" of stability and handling characteristics, while in and of themselves may not contribute to greater speed, certainly may end up creating more speed due to an increase in the drivers confidence level. This analogy works well for the cue topic.

There are some things that can be measured. Break cues can be measured for how much CB speed they generate. So can tips. Or various types of ferrules. Individual parts can be tested by having various controls and isolating the variable.

Science is a beautiful thing.

This is true, but I caution you against getting stuck on the science. I saw on Platinum Billiards website that chart of all the break cue speeds. Thing is, if one of the "very fast" cues feels horrible to me, due to any of the "subjective" factors like balance, taper, etc., I will be unable to realize the speed potential of that cue, which makes it rather meaningless info. Just as there are some things that can be measured, there are some things that can *NOT* be measured. Our inability to measure them does not mean that they do not exist, nor that they are invalid submissions to an argument. I can't "measure" my beliefs, nor can you yours. But they still are worth saying, no? Otherwise, why start this post in the first place?

Too many people here are being hypocrites. They wouldn't go doctor that thought like they did. Going by hunches, feel and not being able to prove anything.

Once again, I think just for fun you should carefully reread some of your posts and realize that just maybe you have overlooked these same qualities in yourself.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

No no, YOU PROVE that MY claim is untrue. Go for it! :wink::wink::wink:


LOL, how's that for a taste of your own medicine?


Have a good night.

Bola,

Come on now..."I know you are but what am I?" Is this a rather evasive way of you admitting that you cannot prove your point? Surely you can do better. That's dodge # 2 I think...

 

[conetip]

I see this thread as a kin to a rolls royce is no better than a chevy coblt.I mean they are both cars.