Get rid of jump cues for Mosconi Cup

[KMRUNOUT]

Careful there K-man...Your 2nd paragraph sounds almost as confusing as some of Barton's rhetoric! Are you trying to emulate him, or are you maybe one of his jump cue 'dealers'?.. :grin:



PS..Pretty accurate assessment SA, if you ask me!

View attachment 407151

Lol. No I'm not trying to emulate him or sell jump cues. My second paragraph says exactly what I wanted it to say. It points out a very important distinction. Try reading it a few times and you will probably get it. The idea is that many, probably most, people want to "be right". For some people "being right" means having an answer, potentially one that others will accept. For others, being right is about thinking that things are as they actually are. A absolute vs relative truth kind of idea. I happen to believe in absolute truths.

Thanks for keeping it light though! I sure didn't. Probably should have. Thanks for the post.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

If they charge good money for it, yes. If it was purely for the good of the industry, they'd make it available at a non-profit. I don't see JB running a charity, so first and foremost...he's a business. Do businesses fulfill needs? Sure. But first and foremost, they consider their own interests.

I could go into work on Monday, and sell everything at cost. I wouldn't be in business long.

JB wants a case back from me, has fired me as a customer, and wants to badmouth me on YouTube. I don't think that reflects the interests of the industry.

Damn! I sooooooo wanted to reply to this. But alas I said I wouldn't...

 

[KMRUNOUT]

9 ball isn't used to determine who the world's best player is, either. It's used to determine the world's best 9 ball player.

OMG...I said I wouldn't comment on anything else you say, but I must make an exception here.

*This* is a very logical and accurate statement. I love it. More please.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Happy New Year everyone. Hope you get a good jump shot into the new year!!!!

Thanks not at all John! I played a tourney tonight. I won the tourney. I attempted about 3 or 4 jump shots and missed all of them! I hit the ball every single time. Nope. I'm wrong. One time the interfering ball was about 3 feet away and the landing area was short. I was afraid and hit the blocker. I did however do many nice kick safes. My kicking was far superior to my jumping tonight. Guess I will have to actually *practice* my jumping. But I will wait until after this weekend when I play my American Rotation finals which doesn't allow jumping.

Thought I'd share. And Happy New Year to you too John and everyone else.

KMRUNOUT
(hopefully obvious I was kidding in my first line)

 

[SJDinPHX]

Okay Mr.KR, we are now over 600 posts, and what have we determined?..Just like CTE, TOI, (or countless other aiming system threads)..absolutely nothing!..And, until pool comes up with a 'governing body', we never will!..It appears we are all in agreement, that the BCA is a joke, and can not be counted on to make any decisions, regarding ANYTHING, much less a major decision like the use of 'jump cues'!..We need to address the this number one problem, before we can get anywhere at all!

PS..Can you name one sport or game, that does not have a governing body, including 'darts' and 'ping-pong'!.....
Pool seems to be very unique in that department!....How can we ever hope to get into the Olympics, like the exciting sport of 'Curling'? (ie; idiots with brooms, frantically sweeping ice !!! )

Maybe Obama, or this guy, (Mr. Personality)..can help us find a way out
of our dilemma?..Both seem to be very good [sic] at solving problems..

 

[JB Cases]

You mean no organization can be trusted IF they decide to allow something against your wish.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

I'm still laughing that someone posted their IQ in a thread on AZB. You can't make this stuff up

You'll be missed, KM. 150+, and didn't know the centre of a circle is the same size, no matter the size of the radius. You slay me. Grade 6 math. You must have aced the verbal questions on the test. Or took it when you were 12.

 

[12squared]

This topic is so 2015. Happy New Year everyone.

Dave

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

So-so I think.

The measle ball is not lighter. It weighs pretty damn close to the object balls. It may be heavier or lighter, based on the tolerances. And which set you use it with.

An oversized bar ball does not have a chunk of metal in the middle. It is intended to be used with a ball return system, and the way it is distinguished from a numbered ball by the table is its larger size. The magnetic balls you are thinking of tend to be the same size and weight (within the crappy tolerances of those ball sets).

I think what John was referring to though was differences between standard cue balls. For example, the red circle ball is a different composition than, say, the blue circle centennial ball. The red circle jumps like crazy.

I've never tried jumping with Snooker balls, but I bet it is very hard to hit the spot you are trying to hit with your jump cue tip.

John didn't mention, but the cloth makes a huge difference as well.

KMRUNOUT

"I've never tried jumping with Snooker balls, but I bet it is very hard to hit the spot you are trying to hit with your jump cue tip"

A primer:
https://youtu.be/vhRdDcKlyZo?t=142

He says he's aiming at the CENTER of the cueball, and then moves slightly below. Tom Simpson....certified instructor.

A pool ball is 2 1/4". A snooker ball is 2 1/16". Total difference is 1/16" in diameter. D=2r. So, the radius difference is 1/32". So the point I need to hit on a snooker ball to make it jump, if it isn't the exact centre of the ball, is only 1/32" different than a standard cueball.

Can you follow the logic, KM? I know it took a few steps, and some inference, but I think people with IQs lower than yours can see how I got from point A to point B.

 

[JB Cases]

This topic is so 2015. Happy New Year everyone.

Dave

Actually it's soooooo 1995.......

Because that's when the issue was settled where it matters.

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

Thankfully the value of credibility with you has been shown in this thread to be worth next to nothing, so I'm not the slightest bit upset to hear I lost credibility with you. Honestly, I think it is a good sign for me.

Who said anything about tip diameter? We are comparing a snooker ball to a pool ball. A snooker ball, you may be aware, is smaller. So let me ask...is it easier to hit a particular spot (relative to size and center) on a basketball, or a pea?

It *is* harder to hit the spot you wish on a snooker ball than a pool ball. That is a matter of fact. If you find something in the "tip diameter posts" that contradicts this, I will review it and my opinion on the matter.

KMRUNOUT

"So let me ask....is it easier to hit a particular spot (relative to size and center" on a basketball or a pea?"

"It *is* harder to hit the spot you wish on a snooker ball than a pool ball. That is a matter of fact."

The centre of a pool cue ball and a snooker cue ball are THE EXACT SAME SIZE. Mathematically proven. No need to debate. I don't even need to go into any sort of math to debunk what you said. Argument done.

You're hitting a sphere with a tip. So, your target on the ball is a circle that is the diameter of your tip. So you are aiming at a circle that is, for argument's sake, 13mm in diameter. Is a 13mm circle on a pool ball bigger than a 13mm circle on a snooker ball? I'm hoping you can see that the target is the exact same size, regardless of the diameter of the pool ball. So, is it harder to hit a 13mm target on a battleship, or a tennis ball? Answer: the target is the exact same size.

If you don't trust me, ask JB to explain it to you. Maybe if he says it, you will believe it.

Was that an IQ test from Facebook that gave you your score?

 

[one stroke]

Well, it is hard to see it if I take reality into account. Otherwise I suppose it is pretty easy to see it your way.

You seriously don't think Simonis cloth is a game changer? Worsted cloth compared to the old school shag carpet has nothing to do with "imperfections that cause misses". Where did you come up with that? It is radically easier to move the cue ball around the table. You never heard all the people saying "now, you don't need a stroke anymore".

If you choose to ignore this significant change in pool, well I can't help you there.

KMRUNOUT

I think your over rating the impact it had and its a pure assumption thinking that today's players can't stroke the ball with authority because they play on faster cloth ,, nonsense
The fact is the basic concept of striking the cue ball and rolling it on the table to get from point A to point B is still the same . Cues ,Chalks , Rails, Cloths, ,don't change the basic concept of how the game was designed to play



1

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

I think your over rating the impact it had and its a pure assumption thinking that today's players can't stroke the ball with authority because they play on faster cloth ,, nonsense
The fact is the basic concept of striking the cue ball and rolling it on the table to get from point A to point B is still the same . Cues ,Chalks , Rails, Cloths, ,don't change the basic concept of how the game was designed to play



1

No point in arguing with him. He's the enlightened one. Only he and JB have the logical arguments. Yet neither one of them have addressed what I think the issue is - the phenolic tip.

As was mentioned, the rules state that the tip must be pliable. I have two rods of phenolic and G10 here. They cannot even be bent. They will fracture. The Samsara tip as been known to split. Jump cues have been here since the 80s. They weren't nearly as proficient as they are now, until someone slapped a concrete-like tip on them. Argue advancement all you want - there is NO innovation in a jump cue. The shaft is the same length as a pool cue - 29". There is no special jump taper - it's a thick pro taper. The ferrule is a material that has been used on pool cues. It's just a shaft with a short handle. You put a phenolic tip on it, and it jumps incredibly well. You put an elkmaster tip on it, and it's just a short cue that can jump balls on certain shots only. Anyone remember the first Predator BK? It didn't jump well. At all. The BK2 and BK3 jump pretty well. Anyone care to point out the only change on these cues that allow them to jump better? Phenolic tips. That's all. Hardly innovation.

I can go to the pool hall right now, with my engineered Lucasi cue. 4 piece cored cue. Laminated shaft. Kamui brown tip. And I can try to jump balls all day long with no success. I can then grab a house cue, snap the tip off of it, and using the exact same stroke and technique as I did with my Lucasi, jump balls with ease. The technique didn't change. My skills didn't change. The cue changed.

The golf argument is dumb, regarding different clubs. The jump cue, in comparison, would be like carrying a chainsaw. You're behind a tree. Can't get around it. Cut it down. And before someone says anything about being able to hit the ball over a tree, we're talking about the normal flight path of a golf ball, and the normal rolling pattern of a pool ball. The intended path for a cue ball is in a horizontal direction. The table is level. Flat. The balls are round. They're meant to roll. If I hit a golf ball to a few feet behind a tree, I need to take my lumps, because I played a poor shot, and lose a stroke in returning my ball into the field of play. That's the intended spirit of the game.

I'm quite sure when pocket billiards was invented, that jumping wasn't considered part of the game, otherwise somewhere in those hundreds of years leading up to this century, we'd have found a jump mace or some other contraption. Some seem to think Texas Express rules have made the jump cue necessary. I'm sorry - you hook yourself, you shouldn't have the option of jumping out of it. If you get hooked, KICK. The table is flat. The rails are marked. $8 and an hour, and you can kick like Efren. The jump cue was one of the stupidest additions to the game of pool. Simonis cloth is within the intended purposes of the game - a truer rolling ball on a flat surface. Vulcanized rubber has made the rails more uniform, and created better rebound angles. Again, pertaining to balls travelling on their intended plane - horizontally. Chalk allows the ball to be spun, to travel in a direction - horizontally. Every single "advancement" that everyone keeps referring to when comparing jump cues apply in a single plane. Which is the intended plane of play for pool. The jump cue brings a vertical component into a game that was meant to be played in a horizontal manner.

If you want to shoot a jump shot, I'm fine with that. Shoot it with the cue in your hand. If you can do it, that's some serious skill, and should be rewarded. A 3 year old jumping balls with a shaft should show that it doesn't take a tremendous amount of skill to jump with the short stick.

 

[Banks]

"I've never tried jumping with Snooker balls, but I bet it is very hard to hit the spot you are trying to hit with your jump cue tip"

A primer:
https://youtu.be/vhRdDcKlyZo?t=142

He says he's aiming at the CENTER of the cueball, and then moves slightly below. Tom Simpson....certified instructor.

A pool ball is 2 1/4". A snooker ball is 2 1/16". Total difference is 1/16" in diameter. D=2r. So, the radius difference is 1/32". So the point I need to hit on a snooker ball to make it jump, if it isn't the exact centre of the ball, is only 1/32" different than a standard cueball.

Can you follow the logic, KM? I know it took a few steps, and some inference, but I think people with IQs lower than yours can see how I got from point A to point B.

1/4 = 4/16

I don't like jumping.

I don't practice jumping.

It's legal to jump.

I should practice jumping.

Edit: i couldn't jump for pooh with my z shaft, but that problem is gone

 

[Mezz'd up]

This topic is so 2015. Happy New Year everyone.

Dave

I agree - Happy New Year's everyone... :smile:

Was it Earl that started this thread?

 

[JB Cases]

No point in arguing with him. He's the enlightened one. Only he and JB have the logical arguments. Yet neither one of them have addressed what I think the issue is - the phenolic tip.

As was mentioned, the rules state that the tip must be pliable. I have two rods of phenolic and G10 here. They cannot even be bent. They will fracture. The Samsara tip as been known to split. Jump cues have been here since the 80s. They weren't nearly as proficient as they are now, until someone slapped a concrete-like tip on them. Argue advancement all you want - there is NO innovation in a jump cue. The shaft is the same length as a pool cue - 29". There is no special jump taper - it's a thick pro taper. The ferrule is a material that has been used on pool cues. It's just a shaft with a short handle. You put a phenolic tip on it, and it jumps incredibly well. You put an elkmaster tip on it, and it's just a short cue that can jump balls on certain shots only. Anyone remember the first Predator BK? It didn't jump well. At all. The BK2 and BK3 jump pretty well. Anyone care to point out the only change on these cues that allow them to jump better? Phenolic tips. That's all. Hardly innovation.

I can go to the pool hall right now, with my engineered Lucasi cue. 4 piece cored cue. Laminated shaft. Kamui brown tip. And I can try to jump balls all day long with no success. I can then grab a house cue, snap the tip off of it, and using the exact same stroke and technique as I did with my Lucasi, jump balls with ease. The technique didn't change. My skills didn't change. The cue changed.

The golf argument is dumb, regarding different clubs. The jump cue, in comparison, would be like carrying a chainsaw. You're behind a tree. Can't get around it. Cut it down. And before someone says anything about being able to hit the ball over a tree, we're talking about the normal flight path of a golf ball, and the normal rolling pattern of a pool ball. The intended path for a cue ball is in a horizontal direction. The table is level. Flat. The balls are round. They're meant to roll. If I hit a golf ball to a few feet behind a tree, I need to take my lumps, because I played a poor shot, and lose a stroke in returning my ball into the field of play. That's the intended spirit of the game.

I'm quite sure when pocket billiards was invented, that jumping wasn't considered part of the game, otherwise somewhere in those hundreds of years leading up to this century, we'd have found a jump mace or some other contraption. Some seem to think Texas Express rules have made the jump cue necessary. I'm sorry - you hook yourself, you shouldn't have the option of jumping out of it. If you get hooked, KICK. The table is flat. The rails are marked. $8 and an hour, and you can kick like Efren. The jump cue was one of the stupidest additions to the game of pool. Simonis cloth is within the intended purposes of the game - a truer rolling ball on a flat surface. Vulcanized rubber has made the rails more uniform, and created better rebound angles. Again, pertaining to balls travelling on their intended plane - horizontally. Chalk allows the ball to be spun, to travel in a direction - horizontally. Every single "advancement" that everyone keeps referring to when comparing jump cues apply in a single plane. Which is the intended plane of play for pool. The jump cue brings a vertical component into a game that was meant to be played in a horizontal manner.

If you want to shoot a jump shot, I'm fine with that. Shoot it with the cue in your hand. If you can do it, that's some serious skill, and should be rewarded. A 3 year old jumping balls with a shaft should show that it doesn't take a tremendous amount of skill to jump with the short stick.

Already addressed it years ago.

When you're ready to bet something let me know as then the points you want to make and the points I want to make will at least cost one of us real money.

Until then, sorry, takes lots of skill to jump accurately and consistently with ANY cue.

You have no clue what anyone meant for the game to be. Unless you're somehow clairvoyant with a direct line into Micheal Phelan's soul......you are dealing with the same history and evolution that we are.

anyway, I could repeat myself for the 50Th time in this thread and the 1000th time on this topic but it would be wasted. When you reach a money-where-your-mouth-is point on this step up. Otherwise.....1995 called to tell you that jump cues were ruled on then and they are a legal part of the game - thanks for buying 10+ of them since then.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Okay Mr.KR, we are now over 600 posts, and what have we determined?..Just like CTE, TOI, (or countless other aiming system threads)..absolutely nothing!..And, until pool comes up with a 'governing body', we never will!..It appears we are all in agreement, that the BCA is a joke, and can not be counted on to make any decisions, regarding ANYTHING, much less a major decision like the use of 'jump cues'!..We need to address the this number one problem, before we can get anywhere at all!

PS..Can you name one sport or game, that does not have a governing body, including 'darts' and 'ping-pong'!.....
Pool seems to be very unique in that department!....How can we ever hope to get into the Olympics, like the exciting sport of 'Curling'? (ie; idiots with brooms, frantically sweeping ice !!! )

Maybe Obama, or this guy, (Mr. Personality)..can help us find a way out
of our dilemma?..Both seem to be very good [sic] at solving problems..
View attachment 407197

Haha. Believe it or not, I have actually learned a decent amount from this thread. But you couldn't be more right. Pool is in a sad state. I think a legit governing body is something we can hope for in 2016. That would be something!

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I think your over rating the impact it had and its a pure assumption thinking that today's players can't stroke the ball with authority because they play on faster cloth ,, nonsense
The fact is the basic concept of striking the cue ball and rolling it on the table to get from point A to point B is still the same . Cues ,Chalks , Rails, Cloths, ,don't change the basic concept of how the game was designed to play



1

It is not my assumption that todays players don't have a stroke. I was just reporting what a lot of people said at the time. I was not one of those people. Mike Sigel, for example, was. Remember the whole IPT thing? Mike insisted on the old nap cloth because modern Simonis cloth made it so "you don't need a stroke anymore". Not my idea. Just saying what others said. Very similar to what they are saying about the jump cue. I understand the difference you are citing, but I see that difference as one of degree not quality. I disagree with you about the rails, chalk, etc. not making a difference. I think they all make dramatic differences.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

No point in arguing with him. He's the enlightened one. Only he and JB have the logical arguments. Yet neither one of them have addressed what I think the issue is - the phenolic tip.

As was mentioned, the rules state that the tip must be pliable. I have two rods of phenolic and G10 here. They cannot even be bent. They will fracture. The Samsara tip as been known to split. Jump cues have been here since the 80s. They weren't nearly as proficient as they are now, until someone slapped a concrete-like tip on them. Argue advancement all you want - there is NO innovation in a jump cue. The shaft is the same length as a pool cue - 29". There is no special jump taper - it's a thick pro taper. The ferrule is a material that has been used on pool cues. It's just a shaft with a short handle. You put a phenolic tip on it, and it jumps incredibly well. You put an elkmaster tip on it, and it's just a short cue that can jump balls on certain shots only. Anyone remember the first Predator BK? It didn't jump well. At all. The BK2 and BK3 jump pretty well. Anyone care to point out the only change on these cues that allow them to jump better? Phenolic tips. That's all. Hardly innovation.

I can go to the pool hall right now, with my engineered Lucasi cue. 4 piece cored cue. Laminated shaft. Kamui brown tip. And I can try to jump balls all day long with no success. I can then grab a house cue, snap the tip off of it, and using the exact same stroke and technique as I did with my Lucasi, jump balls with ease. The technique didn't change. My skills didn't change. The cue changed.

The golf argument is dumb, regarding different clubs. The jump cue, in comparison, would be like carrying a chainsaw. You're behind a tree. Can't get around it. Cut it down. And before someone says anything about being able to hit the ball over a tree, we're talking about the normal flight path of a golf ball, and the normal rolling pattern of a pool ball. The intended path for a cue ball is in a horizontal direction. The table is level. Flat. The balls are round. They're meant to roll. If I hit a golf ball to a few feet behind a tree, I need to take my lumps, because I played a poor shot, and lose a stroke in returning my ball into the field of play. That's the intended spirit of the game.

I'm quite sure when pocket billiards was invented, that jumping wasn't considered part of the game, otherwise somewhere in those hundreds of years leading up to this century, we'd have found a jump mace or some other contraption. Some seem to think Texas Express rules have made the jump cue necessary. I'm sorry - you hook yourself, you shouldn't have the option of jumping out of it. If you get hooked, KICK. The table is flat. The rails are marked. $8 and an hour, and you can kick like Efren. The jump cue was one of the stupidest additions to the game of pool. Simonis cloth is within the intended purposes of the game - a truer rolling ball on a flat surface. Vulcanized rubber has made the rails more uniform, and created better rebound angles. Again, pertaining to balls travelling on their intended plane - horizontally. Chalk allows the ball to be spun, to travel in a direction - horizontally. Every single "advancement" that everyone keeps referring to when comparing jump cues apply in a single plane. Which is the intended plane of play for pool. The jump cue brings a vertical component into a game that was meant to be played in a horizontal manner.

If you want to shoot a jump shot, I'm fine with that. Shoot it with the cue in your hand. If you can do it, that's some serious skill, and should be rewarded. A 3 year old jumping balls with a shaft should show that it doesn't take a tremendous amount of skill to jump with the short stick.

With a little tweaking, parts of this could actually be made into a rational argument.

Maybe Shawn is getting something out of this thread too.



KMRUNOUT

 

[one stroke]

It is not my assumption that todays players don't have a stroke. I was just reporting what a lot of people said at the time. I was not one of those people. Mike Sigel, for example, was. Remember the whole IPT thing? Mike insisted on the old nap cloth because modern Simonis cloth made it so "you don't need a stroke anymore". Not my idea. Just saying what others said. Very similar to what they are saying about the jump cue. I understand the difference you are citing, but I see that difference as one of degree not quality. I disagree with you about the rails, chalk, etc. not making a difference. I think they all make dramatic differences.

KMRUNOUT

1920s Brunswick you see any big difference because I sure don't ,, you can still get cues from that era and convert them , excellent playing cues even today
If you looked at the IPT numbers you don't see much of any statistics that backed up that the slower cloth was harder to play on
The only thing you will find now that you didn't then is a jump cue ,, and the only difference you will see in how the game is played is a ball being jumped

1