Deflection...

[Zims Rack]

zim, what is the bsaca?

Billiard Sanctuary Academy of the Cueing Arts.
www.billiardsanctuary.com
Timothy White is full of knowledge about the movements of the body and cue, teaches the mental and physical aspects of the game in a way a 9 year old could comprehend and execute.

Give the BSACA a try!
Zim

 

[blud]

answers

Blud- The same speed, distance, stroke were all used. However, yes, you are correct- all shafts had LePro's, except the Z, it had a Moori tip. We did a simple test with the tools we had and came up with these results. Yes, wood has variations and no 2 shafts are going to be 100% the same, thus have a slightly different outcome for each shaft. I don't have a Bludworth shaft to conduct tests with, so I can't say how it would deflect.

When I mentioned deflection, I am referring to the bend in the shaft upon contacting the CB. While the CB is traveling to it's destination it has a certain amount of squirt (go off of aim line) on it, causing it to contact the rail in a different location (measured by chalk cubes).

Obviously this is not a 100% accurate test; however, it does give indication of the deflection and squirt caused by each shaft. Will I play with a Predator shaft 100% of the time, NO; am I more aware of why I'm over cutting long cut shots, YES; will I be able to compensate for the deflection and squirt, YES!

Zim

Hi Zimmer, you still have not answered my question.

[Did you use the same butt on all shafts, and did you use a piviot machine or some sort of jig to conduct these test].

Was it a player [person] who did the actual test? Anyone trying to stroke the same speed with each "cue", is impossible.

Are you just testing shafts? Are you testing a complete cue?
Please clear this up.

It's impossible to have a fair test on "SHAFTS", when your not using the same butt, for each shaft with each test.

It appears to me, your testing all differant cues?

If this is a fact, your not testing deflection of shafts, and comparing one shaft to the other.

You are in fact, testing one cue and comparing it to the others.

Again, butts and there shapes, weight, joints configerations, have a lot to do with defection of the cues shafts.

Just as shafts, tapers, size, type of ferrules,and weight has much to do with your test and your results.

WHICH IS IT? Testing shafts, with the same butt, or testing the entire cues, using several brands?

blud

 

[Michael Webb]

WHICH IS IT? Testing shafts, with the same butt, or testing the entire cues, using several brands?

blud

Hi Zim:
Besides what Blud has mentioned. What about different shaft weights.

 

[LAMas]

Will a 13mm diameter shaft deflect less than a 11mm one? Is it the mass of the shaft or the stiffness of the shaft that has the greatest effect? Can a shaft be light enough or flexible enough so as to impart no squirt?

 

[Railbird]

Will a 13mm diameter shaft deflect less than a 11mm one? Is it the mass of the shaft or the stiffness of the shaft that has the greatest effect? Can a shaft be light enough or flexible enough so as to impart no squirt?

I checked with my ol'lady and she reported back that it is both "the mass and stiffness" of the shaft that has the greatest effect, she also reported that when light and flexible there is no squirt produced.

Sorry, I just couldn't resist!

Jim

 

[Joseph Cues]

Will a 13mm diameter shaft deflect less than a 11mm one? Is it the mass of the shaft or the stiffness of the shaft that has the greatest effect? Can a shaft be light enough or flexible enough so as to impart no squirt?

The third question is a definite no. No such thing as a zero deflection shaft.
Imo, the shaft with flex point closest to the tip causes less cueball squirt.
Of course, I just opened a can of worms but pls put the lid back.
Other factors come in too. Imo, hard ferrules stagger the ball too as with hard tips.
Bob Jewitt here is more qualified to expound on your question.

 

[drivermaker]

[Did you use the same butt on all shafts,

It's impossible to have a fair test on "SHAFTS", when your not using the same butt, for each shaft with each test.

Again, butts and there shapes, weight, joints configerations, have a lot to do with defection of the cues shafts.

Just as shafts, tapers, size, type of ferrules,and weight has much to do with your test and your results.

blud

What kind of blasphemy is this to suggest that butts, weight, joint configurations, and shapes have anything to do with affecting a test? The scientists say that once you get past the shaft, NOTHING matters. Have you gone stark raving mad in your old age? Their theory is that you can place a Predator on a Pamela Anderson cue and have the same result as you would on a Szamboti, Balabushka, or Bludworth cue. It's all in the shaft.

It was suggested a couple of years ago on RSB amongst the scientists that butt weight could have an impact on deflection and overall accuracy. The person that made that suggestion was laughed at and ridiculed for making such a stupid comment. Personally, I've been playing for over 4 decades with a lot more than just a casual interest or with a recreational/league players experience and I know damn well that a butt has something to do with it, just from close observations of what the CB is doing. A couple of years ago to test this, I ordered over 100 weight bolts for various production cues which I then cut to be 1-2 grams or .05 oz. from each other and then screwed each one in and out of the cue and shot hundreds of shots at each weight to see what I would get. The cues weighed from 17.50 - 21.50 oz. depending on which bolt was installed. All I can tell you is, there IS a difference in results just from butt weight alone! Is it because the varying weights affected MY tempo or timing which caused the differences, or is there a weight in itself that is more conducive to improved results for all players? I can't answer that. However, the individual that made his own jig on RSB to test deflection, DID in fact find that varying butt weights did skew his results. And this person was one of the original ones that did the ridiculing years ago when weight was suggested for improvements in accuracy.

Blud also states that shafts, tapers, sizes, and weight also play a role in results. Mike Webb wanted to know about the weight of the shafts used.
Yet, I've NEVER seen one person that bought a Predator shaft, who is doing an Irish Jig over his supposed overnight success in improved play, mention ANYTHING about weight matching the shaft to his cue. NEVER!! They just take what they get sent to them and slap it on their butt. When a custom cue maker starts making a cue, the first thing they do is to weigh the wood to be used for the butt and shaft based on it's density to match up to the overall cue weight that is desired and to affect the balance. I've seen Predator shafts come in weighing between 3.2 oz. and 4.1 oz. and NOBODY on this planet can tell me that a cue plays exactly the same regardless of the shaft weight discrepency. IT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN! You get different results! I have over 20 shafts that weigh from 3.7 oz. to 4.8 oz. in 1/10 oz. increments in between and I'll get totally different results putting them on the same butt, and even more different results placing the same shafts on different butts that are thicker or thinner, weighted differently, or with different joint materials.
There has to be some weighing of the shaft to get it in line with the butt being used for total weight and balance along with different styles of play. Ralf Souquet is one of those individuals that MUST have his shafts weighing in at a specific weight along with the butt. And when I say specific, I mean to the 1/1000!

In my opinion, it still comes down to the sum total of the entire cue, so this shaft craze/hype all by itself is a phenomenon that can only be loved no greater than by the owners of the Predator company because they're probably putting more money in their pockets than anyone in the history of cue making. And it's from genius, absolutely genius marketing techniques. I must give them credit for that.

 

[Joseph Cues]

In my opinion, it still comes down to the sum total of the entire cue

How can you say that?
One expert opined here that 80% of the hit of a cue is in the shaft.
Don' ask me how that figure was arrived at.
I believed it was some pythagoras theorem factored in with bored hole and light ferrule.
OK, no flame pls. I'm just babbling.
Drivermaker is the expert. He can beat the 3-ball ghost on a Valley table.

 

[blud]

cue

D'maker,
Thanks for the feedback. It just SUCKS having to twirl your cue each shot to find the plane of the cue that is straight. If they don't fix it I'm going to have a custom built (I've been thinking of Blud and Jacoby) - any suggestions (money is no object as long as it's straight).

Williebetmore? sure he will.

Call me and we can discuss what your looking for.

Jacoby, I helped him get started many years ago. I sent him my VEE point cutting jig. Good guys, that Jacboy bunch.
blud
830-232-5991

 

[drivermaker]

Drivermaker is the expert. He can beat the 3-ball ghost on a Valley table.

No I can't....who told you that story?

 

[blud]

yep

What kind of blasphemy is this to suggest that butts, weight, joint configurations, and shapes have anything to do with affecting a test? The scientists say that once you get past the shaft, NOTHING matters. Have you gone stark raving mad in your old age? Their theory is that you can place a Predator on a Pamela Anderson cue and have the same result as you would on a Szamboti, Balabushka, or Bludworth cue. It's all in the shaft.

It was suggested a couple of years ago on RSB amongst the scientists that butt weight could have an impact on deflection and overall accuracy. The person that made that suggestion was laughed at and ridiculed for making such a stupid comment. Personally, I've been playing for over 4 decades with a lot more than just a casual interest or with a recreational/league players experience and I know damn well that a butt has something to do with it, just from close observations of what the CB is doing. A couple of years ago to test this, I ordered over 100 weight bolts for various production cues which I then cut to be 1-2 grams or .05 oz. from each other and then screwed each one in and out of the cue and shot hundreds of shots at each weight to see what I would get. The cues weighed from 17.50 - 21.50 oz. depending on which bolt was installed. All I can tell you is, there IS a difference in results just from butt weight alone! Is it because the varying weights affected MY tempo or timing which caused the differences, or is there a weight in itself that is more conducive to improved results for all players? I can't answer that. However, the individual that made his own jig on RSB to test deflection, DID in fact find that varying butt weights did skew his results. And this person was one of the original ones that did the ridiculing years ago when weight was suggested for improvements in accuracy.

Blud also states that shafts, tapers, sizes, and weight also play a role in results. Mike Webb wanted to know about the weight of the shafts used.
Yet, I've NEVER seen one person that bought a Predator shaft, who is doing an Irish Jig over his supposed overnight success in improved play, mention ANYTHING about weight matching the shaft to his cue. NEVER!! They just take what they get sent to them and slap it on their butt. When a custom cue maker starts making a cue, the first thing they do is to weigh the wood to be used for the butt and shaft based on it's density to match up to the overall cue weight that is desired and to affect the balance. I've seen Predator shafts come in weighing between 3.2 oz. and 4.1 oz. and NOBODY on this planet can tell me that a cue plays exactly the same regardless of the shaft weight discrepency. IT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN! You get different results! I have over 20 shafts that weigh from 3.7 oz. to 4.8 oz. in 1/10 oz. increments in between and I'll get totally different results putting them on the same butt, and even more different results placing the same shafts on different butts that are thicker or thinner, weighted differently, or with different joint materials.
There has to be some weighing of the shaft to get it in line with the butt being used for total weight and balance along with different styles of play. Ralf Souquet is one of those individuals that MUST have his shafts weighing in at a specific weight along with the butt. And when I say specific, I mean to the 1/1000!

In my opinion, it still comes down to the sum total of the entire cue, so this shaft craze/hype all by itself is a phenomenon that can only be loved no greater than by the owners of the Predator company because they're probably putting more money in their pockets than anyone in the history of cue making. And it's from genius, absolutely genius marketing techniques. I must give them credit for that.

Yes sir, It's kinda like have a golf club that weights 2oz's more than normal.

Will it affect the club's swinging motion and how it delivers the ball.Sure will.

Or change tires on your car for better milage, handling, so on and so forth, same car, but you get differant results. Same car, 40 sets of differant tires....40 differant results.

blud

 

[blud]

good move

I checked with my ol'lady and she reported back that it is both "the mass and stiffness" of the shaft that has the greatest effect, she also reported that when light and flexible there is no squirt produced.

Sorry, I just couldn't resist!

Jim

Hey Rail, best thing I've read today. Just can't figure why you on az and not in the sack?

Miss one piece today, get two tomorrow, your still one behind.
blud

PS, your nuts, but a great guy..

 

[Pigcarver]

Glad to see someone as well versed in building a cue agrees (somewhat with my opinion). Thanks Blud.

The whole package produces the effect including the player. Tip down to handle....the butsleeve and bumper are just along for the ride in my op. Though that X-1 bumper sure sounds like they know what they're talking about....I still have not been able to figure out how the hell changing your bumper is going to make for a better playing cue.

 

[blud]

package

Glad to see someone as well versed in building a cue agrees (somewhat with my opinion). Thanks Blud.

The whole package produces the effect including the player. Tip down to handle....the butsleeve and bumper are just along for the ride in my op. Though that X-1 bumper sure sounds like they know what they're talking about....I still have not been able to figure out how the hell changing your bumper is going to make for a better playing cue.

Hi pig, It takes the whole package to round it out. Some just don't see it that way.
Blud

 

[Zims Rack]

The shafts were not used on the same butt, and one person shot all of the cues. It is not possible to have 100% the same stroke speed every time, but one can come within a ball distance consistently. It's all in your stroke mechanics!
I'm not trying to argue that Predator is the only way to go, was just passing on the info that I had after we conducted this test. Is it 100% accurate, NO, is it a good place to start when trying to determine how shafts are performing, YES!
Someone wrote something about Meucci shafts play perfect on their Robot and Predator shafts play perfect on their Robot. Of course they are going to play perfect on THEIR Robot, but people are not Robots! What kind of tests have been done on Pechauer shafts, Balabushka shafts, Bludworth shafts, Mike Webb shafts, Chris Hightower shafts, etc. (just to name a few). Each player has to develop the knowledge of what/how their shaft performs and adjust, it's just easier to adjust if there is less deflection in the shaft and less squirt applied to the CB.
Blud- I'm am by all means not saying that you're wrong and I'm right, but I'm also not saying that I'm wrong and you're right. I'm sure that the butt design will make a slight difference in how the shafts perform.

Thanks,
Zim

 

[blud]

no problem

The shafts were not used on the same butt, and one person shot all of the cues. It is not possible to have 100% the same stroke speed every time, but one can come within a ball distance consistently. It's all in your stroke mechanics!
I'm not trying to argue that Predator is the only way to go, was just passing on the info that I had after we conducted this test. Is it 100% accurate, NO, is it a good place to start when trying to determine how shafts are performing, YES!
Someone wrote something about Meucci shafts play perfect on their Robot and Predator shafts play perfect on their Robot. Of course they are going to play perfect on THEIR Robot, but people are not Robots! What kind of tests have been done on Pechauer shafts, Balabushka shafts, Bludworth shafts, Mike Webb shafts, Chris Hightower shafts, etc. (just to name a few). Each player has to develop the knowledge of what/how their shaft performs and adjust, it's just easier to adjust if there is less deflection in the shaft and less squirt applied to the CB.
Blud- I'm am by all means not saying that you're wrong and I'm right, but I'm also not saying that I'm wrong and you're right. I'm sure that the butt design will make a slight difference in how the shafts perform.

Thanks,
Zim

Hi Zimmer,

No problem.

The cues butt does make a huge differance. "Slight" differance is an understatement, to say the least.

Also having a player do the testing, is not a true test. He or she will "not" hit the ball the same each time.

You say the shafts were not used on the same cue butt. Not a true shaft test.

So, all you did was test an entire cue, instead of shafts. [ which is the way it should be, unless your just selling shafts].

Most people say there cues, have less deflection than others. Some do, some don't, however, none of you folks are testing one shaft to another. Your just testing cues in a very crude manor. Any player, can not hold, hit, and or deliver the ball the same two times in a row. IMPOSSIBLE....

As pointed out, Predator claims they have the best shaft as bob meucci claims his cues are better. Predator is not testing there shafts, there testing the entire cue, as bob is doing. You mentioned several brands of cues [mine included] but you fail to prove anything with your findings ...[the human factor involved and you actually test the whole cue.]..

[TESTING DEFLECTION ON SHAFTS], no way, your testing cues, and there shafts at the same time. There is a huge differance in testing cues as oppossed to testing just shafts. These guys have not tested there shafts and made a comparision with other shafts, using the same butt for all "shaft" test.

Defeliction, testing of complete cues! Now this would be a test.

Building a jig for this is fairly simple. [$600.00 or $700.00 bucks], and two days work.Long days..

Build an up right stantion and base, with a pivot [ housed bearing], arm coming down, with a joint [ bearing here also],for the wrist section, and a clamping afair for the hand holdng a cues butt, and a steady rest for the shaft, [bridge]. Place the arm at a given angle, on the back side of the triger, so all cues are drawn to the same lenght each time, keeping this test fair. Make the jig as so the cues are all the same elevation and distance from the table, the same position for the "hand clamp" when stricking the CB. When the tip stricks the CB, he "arm" should be straight down.All the cues would all deliver the CB at the same speed. Then there would be "no human" factor built in, the screw things up.

Have a triger, too release the arm and cue, hitting the ball. Have a built in jig, placing the cue ball in the same spot each time. Now this would be a fair test of the entire cue for over all deflection.

No one to date, that I'm aware of, has tested differant "shafts" using the same butt with each brand of shafts. Only, the testing of the entire cue.

Many folks, continue to use the term, shaft deflection, in these so called test.
Yes, deflection per that cues butt attached to it's shaft.
Guys, your only testing the entire cues deflection.

It all amounts to this, you have not tested one shaft to another, only cues.

You mentioned players, your correct, as I've said many many times before, the player will make his or her adjustments, no matter what cue he or she is using.

blud

 

[Zims Rack]

Any player, can not hold, hit, and or deliver the ball the same two times in a row. IMPOSSIBLE....
blud

I have to disagree with this one Blud! I've seen it done with my own two eyes and more than two times. I know, I know, you find it nearly impossible to believe, but it's true. Sometimes the old saying is true..."You can't teach an old dog new tricks!"

I agree with the rest of the post. (well about 95%)
Zim

 

[Joseph Cues]

Zim, are you bleeding yet?
Discussing deflection/squirt in any pool forum is like opening Pandora's box.
There are too many variables in arriving at some conclussion/s.

 

[Zims Rack]

I've still got a few more rounds in me! haha!!

Zim, are you bleeding yet?
Discussing deflection/squirt in any pool forum is like opening Pandora's box.
There are too many variables in arriving at some conclussion/s.

 

[CaptainJR]

I've been reading this and hesitating to add to this because I really don't care to be augmentative very much. (<----fibber)

But I do have an example that will explain that nothing done here means much at all if it was done by a person rather than a machine.

Tests like this have been done by machines in several sports (tennis, golf, etc.) because a person can't be consistant enough. Both of these examples have more moving body parts than pool. So talking about them could be argued that a person could do it easier in pool. So it took me a moment to think of the sport has less human moving parts than pool. Rifle target shooting came to mind. All they have to move is their trigger finger and it's a rarity to have the bullet go through the same hole. They are very happy if they can put them all in the bulls-eye.

So why can't they put it through the same hole? Well you might say there could have been one more grain or powder in the shell. And that is probably true, but one grain more of powder isn't going to make that much difference. A few things that could make a difference are - His feet were 1/8 of an inch farther apart, breathing out a little slower while pulling the trigger, his trigger finger was placed on the trigger 1/128 of an inch off to the left of where it was the last shot (ooohhh, now that is a good one). What I would say is, it would be very unlikely that a person could hold the cue the same two shots in row let alone hit the ball the same two shots in a row.

JR