Do some shafts produce more spin draw and follow

[ENGLISH!]

Didn't bother to go through the 6 pages.
There is no need to argue physics.

If you've played enough pool with enough cues & tips & shafts, you should know the answer without asking. It's pretty self-explanatory.

Would you care to elaborate with a simple declarative informative statement of some kind?

 

[JB Cases]

So out of 20 posters who responded to this question so far, l'd say at least 15 (75%) believe the shaft makes a big difference in the amount of spin that can be produced.

I'll bet the actual percentage among the pool playing population is even higher.

pj
chgo

Amount of spin produced without adjustment. Same player different cues can produce different results.

I have been present lots of times for cue testing days at Fury where cues were identical in appearance and numbered. Pros were asked to test them and rank them for performance and feel.

I can attest that some cues certainly outperformed others clearly during those tests.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Amount of spin produced without adjustment. Same player different cues can produce different results.

I have been present lots of times for cue testing days at Fury where cues were identical in appearance and numbered. Pros were asked to test them and rank them for performance and feel.

I can attest that some cues certainly outperformed others clearly during those tests.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

A while back I wrote of my experience talking about cues with John Schmidt at SBE. He told me that the Fury shaft he was using allowed him to get maximum draw with much less effort. He bent it violently in his hands, saying, "It's just like spaghetti". Then he showed me what he meant by having me place object balls a few inches from a lower corner pocket while he easily got a full table length of draw shooting from behind the head string. He said it was impossible for him to get that much draw that easily with any other shaft he'd ever used, and that the extreme flexibility of the shaft made it possible by getting "loaded up" by his stroke.

I'm pretty sure Schmidt doesn't know Isaac Newton from a Fig Newton, but he sure knows how to hit a CB, so his opinion means twice as much as a book full of physics formulas.

 

[iusedtoberich]

No one has the balls to check the chalk marks. Instead everyone likes to argue up and down xyz shaft or abc tip spins the ball better. What's so hard about using a stripe as a CB and checking the mark? Then trying it with another shaft? If the chalk marks don't match there is your answer. If they do, then we have something to discuss. It just blows my mind ppl don't do this before claiming it's the equipment.

 

[SUPERSTAR]

No one has the balls to check the chalk marks. Instead everyone likes to argue up and down xyz shaft or abc tip spins the ball better. What's so hard about using a stripe as a CB and checking the mark? Then trying it with another shaft? If the chalk marks don't match there is your answer. If they do, then we have something to discuss. It just blows my mind ppl don't do this before claiming it's the equipment.

Been there done that.
Tip can make a difference. (Not all the difference)

 

[The Renfro]

Been there done that.
Tip can make a difference. (Not all the difference)

Tip, Shaft, and the combination of the 2..... Treating the impact of the tip and ball as a solid impact is flawed.. As is saying the contact time is too short for for anything to be done by the player because the ball is already gone.. Maybe not in reaction but that's why we practice. To rehearse and gain that ability to alter things during contact..

Granted stone hands and a closed mind likely won't allow it to be even considered..... Those guys are going to be B- and Under for life.... But don't worry they can still try and tell you all about why you are wrong and refer to the models that treat contact time as nothing when in reality it is eternity..