Does a 'good' hit actually matter or is it all hype?

Matt said:
The way I understand it, the "hit" of a cue is a subjective measure of the feedback it delivers to your hand after you strike the cue ball. Given that the cue ball is only affected by the properties of the tip, ferrule and the first several inches of the shaft, there is a lot of extra wood, a joint and a wrap in between the part of the cue that really matters and your hand....
Click to expand...

Matt,

If what you say in bold above is true, how do you account for all of the different cue ball squirt amounts in Bob Meucci's robotic tests with the same Meucci black dot shaft on all of the different butt/handles?

Thanks in advance for your reply & Best Wishes,
Rick
 
Bavafongoul said:
ENGLISH.....thanks for your comment.....I was more expecting to be besmirched by some Azers I've cultivated as my nemesis.
It seems like these same assholes invariably turn up and take a dump on any post I write or a new thread.........Thanks again.

Matt B.
Click to expand...

Matt,

You are more than welcome. I know of the type people of which you speak.

Stay Well,
Rick
 
Last edited:
I think most of the ideas in this entire thread can be summarized by the following:

1.) Some cues hit harder than others (i.e., they provide more CB speed for the same stroke effort). This effect is called cue and tip efficiency.

2.) Some people care about the "feedback" a cue provides based on how it feels and sounds during and after a hit. For others, seeing what the CB does is "feedback" enough.

Concerning 1 above, a cue with a hard tip will generally have a higher efficiency (providing more CB speed for a given stroke effort). With a higher efficiency cue, it can be easier to hit shots that require more power (e.g., power draw shots) since slightly less effort will be required and since one's power stroke is usually more accurate with less power. For a break cue, you want high efficiency (e.g., with a stiff cue and phenolic tip) to get the fastest CB speed possible. With a finesse game, or really slow-speed shots, a low-efficiency cue (e.g., with a soft tip) can offer more control since a larger range of stroke efforts is required to create a wide range of CB speeds. With a high-efficiency cue, it can be difficult to accurately control slow-speed shots since a small change in stroke effort makes a bigger difference in CB speed.

For more information and resources dealing with all of these topics, see the cue "feel," "hit," "feedback," and "playability" resource page.

Regards,
Dave
 
ENGLISH! said:
Matt,

If what you say in bold above is true, how do you account for all of the different cue ball squirt amounts in Bob Meucci's robotic tests with the same Meucci black dot shaft on all of the different butt/handles?

Thanks in advance for your reply & Best Wishes,
Rick
Click to expand...
Sorry, I didn't type what I meant. Here's the amended version. I will correct my original post as well.

"Given that the cue ball squirt is primarily affected by the properties of the tip, ferrule and the first several inches of the shaft..."

I realize that doesn't actually answer your question. As far as the butt of the cue affecting squirt, I don't think that the Bob's test directly measured squirt if they are the ones I've seen. I believe they also measured throw and swerve by observing the resulting line of the object ball, both of which can be affected by the weight of the cue or speed of the stroke.
 
Matt said:
"Given that the cue ball squirt is primarily affected by the properties of the tip, ferrule and the first several inches of the shaft..."
Click to expand...
If people want proof, it can be found here:

squirt "endmass" and stiffness resource page
what causes squirt resource page

Matt said:
I realize that doesn't actually answer your question. As far as the butt of the cue affecting squirt, I don't think that the Bob's test directly measured squirt if they are the ones I've seen. I believe they also measured throw and swerve by observing the resulting line of the object ball, both of which can be affected by the weight of the cue or speed of the stroke.
Click to expand...
Excatly. For more info related to this, see the bullets under the video on the squirt "robotic testing" results resource page.

Regards,
Dave
 
dr_dave said:
I think most of the ideas in this entire thread can be summarized by the following:

1.) Some cues hit harder than others (i.e., they provide more CB speed for the same stroke effort). This effect is called cue and tip efficiency.

2.) Some people care about the "feedback" a cue provides based on how it feels and sounds during and after a hit. For others, seeing what the CB does is "feedback" enough.
Click to expand...

Nailed it. The pair of cues I was going to produce were to prove point number one, but apparently there's no need. Point number two acknowledges that SOME people are indeed aware of the phenomenon and are acute enough to realize the impact it has on the game. Glad to see there's already some science to lean on.
 
Matt said:
Sorry, I didn't type what I meant. Here's the amended version. I will correct my original post as well.

"Given that the cue ball squirt is primarily affected by the properties of the tip, ferrule and the first several inches of the shaft..."

I realize that doesn't actually answer your question. As far as the butt of the cue affecting squirt, I don't think that the Bob's test directly measured squirt if they are the ones I've seen. I believe they also measured throw and swerve by observing the resulting line of the object ball, both of which can be affected by the weight of the cue or speed of the stroke.
Click to expand...

Matt,

Yes, I too left a few words out. Yes it was the net of squirt & swerve, if any swerve, that was measured.

My point is that the same shaft was put on different butt/handles & yielded different results while being hit by the same force of the robot with the same tip offset, etc.

I thought that the butt handles were all of the same weight but I could be wrong. Perhaps someone else can confirm or deny that.

As I have stated before, I think that the Adam Balabuska butt gave Mr. Meucci the idea about his Power Piston Butts & perhaps even his new & 'improved' ferrule.

Stay Well,
Rick
 
qbilder said:
Nailed it. The pair of cues I was going to produce were to prove point number one, but apparently there's no need. Point number two acknowledges that SOME people are indeed aware of the phenomenon and are acute enough to realize the impact it has on the game. Glad to see there's already some science to lean on.
Click to expand...

I just wondered. Would you build a cue differently depending on whether the client wanted & intended to use a soft or hard tip?
 
qbilder said:
Nailed it. The pair of cues I was going to produce were to prove point number one, but apparently there's no need. Point number two acknowledges that SOME people are indeed aware of the phenomenon and are acute enough to realize the impact it has on the game. Glad to see there's already some science to lean on.
Click to expand...

I agree mostly with you except for one point.

I am aware of minute differences in hit across different cues. I do not however feel that it attributes to how the cueball reacts off the cue itself and therefore do not look fo the best hitting cue when I try cues out. I look for the cue that best controls the cueball itself. I find this misleading however since a given butt can make a cue react differently based on the shaft, tip hardness, and tip shape used.

I also have always felt that given enough time you can adapt to any cue and above a certain level of construction quality you should just choose the cue that looks the best.

I think people choose cues based on their past experiences with cues and what they are used to which is what makes it so subjective but that is misleading. What you may feel is the best hit a cue can have isn't necessarily the best performing cue you can buy.
 
zpele said:
I am aware of minute differences in hit across different cues. I do not however feel that it attributes to how the cueball reacts off the cue itself and therefore do not look fo the best hitting cue when I try cues out. I look for the cue that best controls the cueball itself. I find this misleading however since a given butt can make a cue react differently based on the shaft, tip hardness, and tip shape used.
Click to expand...

As the Doc pointed out, some cues hit more powerfully with less stroke, making shots like draw and follow easier to execute. To extend on this, given the same shaft, one butt could increase the power while another butt decreases the power. Even the shaft itself can vary greatly. One shaft may transmit more power than another. As a cue maker, I have always wanted to find the happy medium, the pinnacle playability. Too powerful and it's uncontrollable. Too weak and it's uncontrollable. I work with this stuff every day, so it isn't anything I wasn't aware of. This is why cue makers talk about their favorite woods, debate construction techniques, etc. There's a very real science behind a cue, whether a person believes in it or not.
 
Everyone has fair points, so I'll go with the obvious, earl Strickland, fisher and vanboeing all won hundreds of titles and tournaments with a cuetec. That answers the question of the op. Simply put, cuetec is the best cue ever built in the history of mankind.
 
trinacria said:
Everyone has fair points, so I'll go with the obvious, earl Strickland, fisher and vanboeing all won hundreds of titles and tournaments with a cuetec. That answers the question of the op. Simply put, cuetec is the best cue ever built in the history of mankind.
Click to expand...

Earl had a custom made shaft for that Cuetec.
Shane used to shoot with his mom's Joss cue.
His shaft now is not stock afaik.
 
JoeyInCali said:
Earl had a custom made shaft for that Cuetec.
Shane used to shoot with his mom's Joss cue.
His shaft now is not stock afaik.
Click to expand...

I guess then you are calling Shane a liar because I seem to remember that in a TAR interview he specifically said that he plays with a stock Cutetec.

And in fact others chimed in to say that they tried Shane's Cuetec and found that it hits pretty good.

What's the pin size on a Cuetec?
 
JB Cases said:
I guess then you are calling Shane a liar because I seem to remember that in a TAR interview he specifically said that he plays with a stock Cutetec.

And in fact others chimed in to say that they tried Shane's Cuetec and found that it hits pretty good.

What's the pin size on a Cuetec?
Click to expand...
It's metric.
You must have missed the AFAIK.

Was Early lying what he said about Cuetec after he lost his endorsement ?
Was Allison telling the truth about the fiberglass coating makes the shaft have lower deflection ?

You're making a mountain out of a mole again. You're a forever *****.

I bet all athletes eat their Wheaties too.
 
Last edited:
Well Joey.....you made a statement that could cost Shane his sponsorship. So back it up or retract it.

Shane stated clearly that he uses a stock cuetec. Do you have proof otherwise?

I have no idea about what Allison said except that she also stated she played with a stock cuetec.

As for Earl. He won his championships while sponsored by cuetec so either they ruined his career or they didn't if what you say is true and he used a different shaft. Now I happen to know someone who knows and the answer is that earl played with a cuetec shaft that had been retapered. That is how I knew the shafts could be sanded and retapered.

And um no I didn't miss the AFAIK. It's the coward's twin tool to IMO when someone wants to defame without being called on it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top