Does the hardness of the tip effect the amount of english applied to the cue ball? From my point of view the softer tip grabs the cueball better than a harder tip..?? There are many things to consider, but the concept of hard vs. soft tip and which applies more english..:scratchhead:
Does the hardness/softness of the tip effect the amount of english applied?
- Thread starter mmomike79
- Start date
No.
If you hit the CB in the same spot, (proven by the chalk mark), the CB will have the same spin.
We had a few lengthy debates on this and experiments. I personally tried the experiment set up, and used 5 or 6 different cues, ranging from elk master tips to phenolic jump cues.
The result was the CB had the same spin for all shots.
If you hit the CB in the same spot, (proven by the chalk mark), the CB will have the same spin.
We had a few lengthy debates on this and experiments. I personally tried the experiment set up, and used 5 or 6 different cues, ranging from elk master tips to phenolic jump cues.
The result was the CB had the same spin for all shots.
What he said ^^^^^
But, with soft tip your CB will be slower ( with the same spin)
But, with soft tip your CB will be slower ( with the same spin)
Only difference is in the speed. Backspin? You can draw CB further with phenolic i assure you 
Only chalk well to avoid miscue :thumbup:
Only chalk well to avoid miscue :thumbup:
I don't know of maximum, we did not test that. We tested hitting the CB at exact same mark, but adjusting speed and direction to account for different cues deflection properties and energy transfer to the CB. I'll see if I can find the thread and you can read about the experiment and results, and even try it yourself. All you need is a centennial OB (the aim point for chalk mark is the tiny triangle in the circle area).
Maybe there are small differences. As long as you don't miscue, I think most tips will play almost the same. If someone does say there are significant differences, they should describe how to demonstrate the differences and say how much differences they have observed. That is, they have to put numbers on their observations or it's all just subjective mumbling.
Below is a test that Patrick Johnson set up from a thread in 2008, and the results when I tried it below. Sorry the cuetable diagram is broken and doesn't show the picture correctly anymore, but if you read PJ's setup, you can duplicate the test easily and try for yourself.
Place a numbered Centennial ball (your "cue ball") on the foot or head spot with the number upright, centered and facing you, and with the little triangles at the equator (see the accompanying picture), aligned straight across the table (pointed at the second diamond on the side rail).
Shoot the "cue ball" directly at the second diamond on the far side rail (so it would bounce straight back at the spot if you hit it without side spin). Position two balls on either side of the diamond as "blockers" to ensure the cue ball hits the rail at the diamond (touching either blocker ball invalidates the shot). To get the spacing right, freeze a third ball between the two blockers, move the blockers apart to create a 1/4" gap on each side of the middle ball, then remove the middle ball.
Hit the ball right on the edge of the circle and on a triangle (on the equator) with just enough speed to bounce off the far side rail and barely reach the near side rail. Wipe the ball clean before each shot and check the chalkmark after each shot to see where you're actually hitting the ball. Be sure the tip is well groomed and well chalked for each test shot.
Mark where the ball stops at the near rail (put a coin or a piece of chalk there).
Only count shots that you hit just right. If any of the following things doesn't happen, don't count the shot:
- You don't hit the "cue ball" exactly on the edge of the circle at the triangle (equator).
- You don't hit the second diamond on the far side rail exactly.
- The ball stops more than an inch short or long of the near side rail.
You can't replicate these things exactly every time, so hit enough "good" shots so that you can use the average result - say ten "good" shots with each shaft you're testing. If your results for any one shaft aren't closely grouped, then they're not reliable results.
If you want to try more forceful shots, then choose a target distance somewhere after rebounding from the near side rail, say at the middle "long string" or at the far side rail again. Mark the target distance with a coin or piece of chalk and reject any shot that doesn't stop within an inch of it.
pj
chgo
A few weeks ago I tried playing some racks with my break cue. It has a Samarsa break tip which is probably the hardest leather tip on the market. I also tried some draw-drills (straight-in shot, two diamonds from the pocket and three diamonds between OB and CB).
I didn't notice any difference in "spin-ability". I was able to draw back two diamonds which is about my usual max from that distance. It felt like the CB moved faster with less effort, but no difference in spin. (Regular tip is a Kamui Soft Black, so they're pretty much worlds apart)
I didn't notice any difference in "spin-ability". I was able to draw back two diamonds which is about my usual max from that distance. It felt like the CB moved faster with less effort, but no difference in spin. (Regular tip is a Kamui Soft Black, so they're pretty much worlds apart)
I have read all the debates, seen all the arguments and watched all the tapes even since the rec.sport.billiard days. The experts say no difference, or it isn't measurable.
I disagree. I can't prove it, nor measure it. But from my personal experience I can get more spin on the ball with a freshly installed Elkmaster than with a Triangle that has been fully broken in. It's not placebo effect. It's not me doing anything different. I've done this on the same cue, same shaft.
I don't know if it is because the softer tip stays on the ball longer, or if it just grips it better during the same duration of contact. No idea. I don't even care. I just go by the results. I was a skeptic of my own observations for 20 years. I can't sit back and believe the "science" of it when it runs contrary to my personal observation. Can't do it anymore. I think certain ideas that are prevailing ought to be challenged.
I disagree. I can't prove it, nor measure it. But from my personal experience I can get more spin on the ball with a freshly installed Elkmaster than with a Triangle that has been fully broken in. It's not placebo effect. It's not me doing anything different. I've done this on the same cue, same shaft.
I don't know if it is because the softer tip stays on the ball longer, or if it just grips it better during the same duration of contact. No idea. I don't even care. I just go by the results. I was a skeptic of my own observations for 20 years. I can't sit back and believe the "science" of it when it runs contrary to my personal observation. Can't do it anymore. I think certain ideas that are prevailing ought to be challenged.
Isn't that the theory behind Kamui tips....they flex more, regardless of hardness, "gripping" the ball longer and conforming to the shape of the ball...providing more tip on the ball?
There is some science behind the shape of the ball and the shape of a tip....and the effects of spin and English on a cue ball. I think it seems to be minimal so often because everyone is a bit different in their stroke.
My curiosity was peaked with this thread!! So I just did my own experiment!!! I placed object ball a few inches from corner pocket and Que ball opposite end, about 8 feet away!!! My playing cue is a joss with a 30" old 314 shaft with a beat up triangle!!! I drew the ball back to me! My break cue is a poison cue with phenolic tip!!! I was able to almost draw to the rail to me!!! I think its the same!!! That was a cool experiment! I never would of thought that would happen!!! Thanks
more like 20 or so
No offense, but if you "can't prove it, nor measure it" how can you believe it?
My curiosity was peaked with this thread!! So I just did my own experiment!!! I placed object ball a few inches from corner pocket and Que ball opposite end, about 8 feet away!!! My playing cue is a joss with a 30" old 314 shaft with a beat up triangle!!! I drew the ball back to me! My break cue is a poison cue with phenolic tip!!! I was able to almost draw to the rail to me!!! I think its the same!!! That was a cool experiment! I never would of thought that would happen!!! Thanks
Your new name is "Mr. Exclamation points" (lol) :slap:
More than anything else, I think the primary difference you'll get with various tips is feel.
Great point...which leads to the idea of going with how it works for you! Everyone is gonna be a bit different on this, and if you can find a level I'd consistency that provides the desired result...go with it...don't worry about what the next guy has.
As Lord Kelvin (the temperature guy, among other things) put it:
I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be.