Forward weighted cue.
- Thread starter Fitzz47
- Start date
all cue use is mostly a personal thing. so what feels best is what you should use. and not try to emulate other players you admire or have seen do well.
any custom cue can be made with the balance point to your liking.
and any cue review is largely subjective and worth only what you paid for it.
any custom cue can be made with the balance point to your liking.
and any cue review is largely subjective and worth only what you paid for it.
Since I’m 78 years old any one I’d emulate is dead. I would like to hear anyone’s take on a forward heavy shaft. Before I spend or don’t spend my money. I don’t need a lecture.
Cicerone88
Active member
Forward weighted cues are good for touch and spinning the ball at low speed. This helps with finesse shots, allowing for better cue ball control in tight spaces. Good for games like one pocket or straight pool.
Last edited:
When I was playing around with cue weights and taking things to extremes I put a chunk of steel in the joint of a cue. It didn't play as well as a standard cue but I don't remember if it was because of the weight or balance. That experiment was over fifty years ago.
You might go to the hardware store or parts house and buy a half dozen or so fender washers they are called. Large diameter with a small center hole to go over your pin or pilot. This would let you hit with a forward weighted cue for under ten dollars before investing more serious dollars.
Hu
dquarasr
Registered
Purpose-built joint weights are available if you want to experiment See link below. The link is for 0.35 oz weight. I have one @ 0.5 oz (14g). EDIT: I don’t know why the link renders as “Robot or human” but it is a link to a product offered by Walmart.
@Fitzz47, if you want it I will send you mine. I will never use it. DM me your mailing address and I will put it in the mail tomorrow.
Huh??? Forward weighting has ZERO effect on amount of spin you can generate. Were do people hear this shit???
Its just another thing they make up to sell something for more than it should sell
the times ive used it i hated it.
95 percent of all cues are rear weighted, if forward weight made people make more balls then theyd all be like that
the times ive used it i hated it.
95 percent of all cues are rear weighted, if forward weight made people make more balls then theyd all be like that
Cicerone88
Active member
Im not hearing it anywhere it’s my own and others experience.
At soft speeds, having a forward weighted cue with a heavier shaft and soft tip feels like it sticks to the ball a little longer (even if its a fraction of a second) and helps push it through the cueball. If I have a really touchy shot and im tinkering my way through a rack, having a cue with more weight at the front gives better feedback and control than say a LD shaft with low front end mass and a harder tip where it feels like the ball bounces off the tip. Like all cues your mileage may vary, but for those reasons that can be a potential advantage for some.
Pagulayan has a forward weighted cue he uses for one pocket for the same reasons.
Last edited:
dquarasr
Registered
I had bought a joint weight because I have two vintage Adam cues: one with a plastic joint, the other metal.
The balance point on the one with the plastic joint is 1.75” back from that of the metal joint. I tried the weight to see if I could get the balance points closer together between the two cues (in spite of the extra 1/2 oz it added to the overall weight.)
It was fun to experiment but in the end I concluded the balance points didn’t make a hill of beans difference at my skill level. I suck with whatever cue I’m using. No, seriously, I do like the more forward weighted cue especially when I use an open bridge.
dquarasr
Registered
I don’t think anyone has a true forward weighted cue. But a cue can have a balance point an inch or two different from other cues, maybe closer to the joint (forward biased), maybe farther back (rear biased), relative to “most” cues.
I like cues that are a bit front-weighted but not too much. I like the balance point to be at 18.5 inches from the butt cap; this will be my perfect cue if the total weight is 18.5 oz (yes, 18.5 is the magic number for me). I have a few cues that hit that spot or are really close to it.
I have a Zinzola cue that really feels front heavy; the balance point is at 20.3 inches. It plays awesome, but it's too front heavy for me, and the butt is a little too slim, but it's one of the nicest cues in my small collection.
I have a Zinzola cue that really feels front heavy; the balance point is at 20.3 inches. It plays awesome, but it's too front heavy for me, and the butt is a little too slim, but it's one of the nicest cues in my small collection.
It is possible to have a forward weighted cue, one with the balance point forward of where you would ever normally grip. A weight bolt can be put behind the pin instead of from the butt cap end. Weight can be added to the shaft behind the insert or the insert itself too. The joint collar and pin are both places to manage weight also. Even the decorative features can be chosen to move weight forward.
I hate a cue that wants to float out of my bridge. Other than that balance doesn't seem to matter much. My cue is balanced at twenty-one inches from the butt. Sounds forward weighted but it is a sixty inch cue so the balance point measured from the tip which is what matters despite the fact we call out the balance point from the rear of the cue. The balance point on my cue is the same as a 58" cue with a 19" balance point. Everyone that tries my cue notices it is light at 16.5 ounces. Nobody notices the length or balance point.
Hu
60" at 16.5??
Like Hu, I like a cue with just enough nose weight to hold the shaft in my bridge (never requiring any stroke-hand tension to set the cue in the bridge.)
60" at 16.5??
I have an over 100 year old piece of cabinet wood that will make a still lighter sixty inch cue or may be part of my three piece sixty-six inch cue. I would like three even 22" pieces for a cue although it probably won't ever happen. CF will rule if somebody starts making what I want, a shaft that is sturdy enough with a diameter of 12-13mm in the bridge area.
The most wicked weapon I ever swung was a twelve ounce sixty inch one piece cue. Put a dud on it and at the time had less than twenty-five dollars in my cue. I wasn't putting in the hours playing so it took several months to make that cue work. When I got it to working it led to eventually being able to play off the wall with the same sick precision. On eighties cloth if I was shooting my usual close in style I sometimes came off a rail and rocked a ball sideways a little to settle back in the slight dimple it was resting in. A bullet proof trap when the cue ball was less than a ball way from the one I had rocked.
Hu
Depends on how you hold the cue and how you go into the ball ie stroke. Most players are all about their technical defaults.
Cicerone88
Active member
Correct. In the video I posted, Alex mentions that he holds the very back of the cue. And since he’s short, he tends to stretch more than the average player, giving him less of a backswing. Some extra weight at the front probably feels better on his bridge keeping his cue down. As well as the extra front weight and soft tip, like I mentioned, it helps spin the cueball better when using a soft hit in finesse games like one pocket.
Last edited:
IF you so hit the ball. This argument never gets clarified. Yes the hit is a hit is a hit. Getting it there consistently and reliably is the players domain.