IPT banning tip/ferrule combo?

onepocketchump said:
I absolutely agree. Which is why the use of jump cues is more fair than the concept of one cue for all shots. Today's jump cues are all within very close performance parameters. This means that everyone steps to the table with the same equipment and the resulting shot is solely the result of the skill of the operator. As it stands now, a player who tries to jump a shot using a Predator shaft is at a large disadvantage against one who uses a Tim Scruggs cue.

John

This is the primary place where we disagree I guess. I know that it's near impossible to jump with a Predator. BUT, that's your tradeoff in how you decided to play the game. If you really feel that you need/like/want the Predator, learn how to kick and accept that you won't be able to jump. In tennis it would be like deciding whether you want to play serve and volley or be a baseliner.

You're also trying your best to legitimize the jump cue as a piece of equipment that everybody needs and assuming from there that they are all the same so that skill dictates. I feel that nobody needs a jump cue and simply banning them will allow skill to dictate regardless.
 
Mungtor said:
OK, this goes against most of your arguements that a jump shot takes some degree of skill. You're saying the no matter how good you are, equipment can make you "better". While that may be your belief, I have to believe that you are dead wrong. The better player is always the better player given comparable equipment.

Ban jump cues and nothing will change for the vast majority of players. Only the ones who have decided to invest effort in learning to jump as their only option will be at a disadvantage, and frankly they probably would have been anyway. Every week I watch a guy in my local league spend 15 minutes practicing jump shots when the primary reason he needs them is because his position play sucks ass. Obviously there are exceptions, but since we are talking about pool in general I feel that I can generalize about the players too.



And that's a strange analogy at best, and a completely defective one IMHO. It's like baseball..... If I'm supposed to hit a ball with a bat, shouldn't I be allowed to use any bat I want? Umm.... no. Not even remotely. There have to be limits on what is legal and what isn't regardless of what the ultimate goal is. Otherwise it simply becomes a contest of equipment rather than a contest of skill. For an excellent example of that, check out SCCA racing. It's the people with ludicrous money that win because they have equipment good enough to cover their deficiencies. Michael Schumacher in a Ford Tempo still loses to your average douchebag in a Camaro.

Pool should be a contest of skill and strategy, not equipment. Choose 1 cue and use it, and that's your strategy. If you feel you can win with a jump cue as your primary shooting cue, that should be OK too, but realize the tradeoffs you are making. A small minority of people can make it work, but generally it isn't worth it.


No, I am saying that a cue that has the characteristics to be a good jump cue will be more effective in the hands of one who has that skill and a cue that has the characteristics that are poor for jumping will be much less effective in the same hands. No cue makes any player a "better" player. No jump cue teaches a person how to jump, nor does any jump cue make a jump shot by itself.

The person in your league who practices jump shots instead of his position play is a perfect example of someone who focuses on one skill over another to the detriment of their game. Why does he need to practice the jump shot though if he has a cue that does it for him? The answer is that he knows that the jump cue does not make the shot by itself so he has to achieve the level of feel to be able to make some kind of accurate judgement in order to have a good chance to execute the jump shot successfully. Would this person's position play get any better if the jump cue were banned? Probably not if he is prone to neglecting that part of his game. A truly dedicated player practices all aspects of the game.

As for comparing sports, let's not. We are talking about pool on a pool table. A jump cue does not make the shot, the player does. The jump cue does not make the game unplayable. On the contrary, it makes the game more exciting as it adds a plethora of new shots to the game without the need to change anything else about the game or the equipment. Imagine that, more shots, more skill, NO DOWNSIDE.

A corked bat requires larger fields and all kinds of new logistic changes as do drivers and balls that make 500 yard drives possible. So these are things where a restriction makes sense. Want to know an "innovation" in pool that has recently caused equipment and rule changes but has been accepted with open arms? The Sardo Rack. Yep, in the last five years we have seen all kinds of rules and equipment changes surrounding this innovation with a tiny fraction of the debate surrounding jump cues. Got anything to say about that?

And thank you for making my point. The better player is the better player given comparable equipment. Right on! My point exactly. So let the jump cues be used and let the better players show off their skill with them.

John
 
Mungtor said:
This is the primary place where we disagree I guess. I know that it's near impossible to jump with a Predator. BUT, that's your tradeoff in how you decided to play the game. If you really feel that you need/like/want the Predator, learn how to kick and accept that you won't be able to jump. In tennis it would be like deciding whether you want to play serve and volley or be a baseliner.

You're also trying your best to legitimize the jump cue as a piece of equipment that everybody needs and assuming from there that they are all the same so that skill dictates. I feel that nobody needs a jump cue and simply banning them will allow skill to dictate regardless.

I don't need to legitimize the jump cue. It is already a legitimate piece of equipment. It's need is clear. The whole jump cue vs. learning to kick is such a weak argument. People do not buy jump cues in order to avoid kicking, they buy jump cues to enhance a skill they already have or wish to learn. Any serious player learns all the skills they need to succeed.

I think we agree more than you know. Players have always chosen cues that fit their playing style. It is only when it come to jumping that the anti-jump cue crowd seems to feel that jumping a ball with a full cue is some sort of skill that is the same no matter which full cue is used. The truth is that just about any kick shot that comes up and is makeable can be made with nearly every pool cue that exists while the same is not true of jump shots.

John
 
Mungtor said:
Stupendeously fair if he is playing pool. Everything is about playing on a "level" field, within the limitations of personal preference. Tennis players don't have to use the same string tension or grip size, but there are still limits to the length and surface area of the racket. It should be the same with pool.


So, although a billiard cue fits perfectly within the parameters of a "real" and "normal" cue, would you ban Semih Sayginer from using one to play pool because with one, he could do more with it than with a pool cue?

John
 
Mungtor said:
I know that it's near impossible to jump with a Predator. BUT, that's your tradeoff in how you decided to play the game. If you really feel that you need/like/want the Predator, learn how to kick and accept that you won't be able to jump.

Do you really think that your proposition is more fair than allowing ALL players to use the jump cue of their choice?

So if a player is deciding if he should use a low-squirt cue, he should choose between that and having a jump shot in his arsenal?

Your argument defeats itself. Yes, the baseline tennis player chooses his own style of play...but unless he is banned from approaching the net, the analogy does not stand.

-Roger
 
onepocketchump said:
Point well taken, now, if a player were to approach the table with a masse' cue would he be allowed to use it or not?

John

John, I don't know the definitive answer to that question, maybe Deno knows for sure. But I would "guess" no, or I believe I would have seen it by now. I have been to 4 tournaments with world-class players and have never seen that happen. If you are really curious, I can ask Jerry Karsh, owner of Shakespeare's Billiards in Denver and current president of the USBA. Just let me know if you want me to persue this with him.

Dave
 
Leather tip only for Break cue????

Deno,

Did I miss something in this post? If so, please forgive me. Does this leather only tip rule hold true for the break cue also?

Dave
 
onepocketchump said:
So, although a billiard cue fits perfectly within the parameters of a "real" and "normal" cue, would you ban Semih Sayginer from using one to play pool because with one, he could do more with it than with a pool cue?

John

Nope, but it should be the only cue that he can use. And, of course, his oppenent should be able to use one too or anything else that falls within the rules.

I also have trouble with your assertion that "he could do more with it than a pool cue". More what? I honestly have a hard time understanding it when you go down this route. You claim that "the cue doesn't make the shot" but then come up with a situation where equipment obviously makes a significant difference in play. You can't have it both ways.
 
buddha162 said:
Do you really think that your proposition is more fair than allowing ALL players to use the jump cue of their choice?

It isn't any more or less fair. It's exactly the same. Equal footing for equipment generates fairness. I (obviously) think that the jump cue is a piece of equipment that should be eliminated. Hell, I havn't even brought up that I think the jump shot should be eliminated entirely.

So if a player is deciding if he should use a low-squirt cue, he should choose between that and having a jump shot in his arsenal?

If that's the way the physics works out, then yes. If you find you need to jump, learn to deal with squirt.

Your argument defeats itself. Yes, the baseline tennis player chooses his own style of play...but unless he is banned from approaching the net, the analogy does not stand.
-Roger

It isn't self defeating. Players can still jump with a regular cue, ie approach the net. They just can't go get a racket with 200 sq in of head area because they decide they want to volley. They are still limited to the 110 max, just like everybody else.
 
onepocketchump said:
I don't need to legitimize the jump cue. It is already a legitimate piece of equipment. It's need is clear.

Obviously, it isn't clear. Otherwise we wouldn't be here. :)

The whole jump cue vs. learning to kick is such a weak argument. People do not buy jump cues in order to avoid kicking, they buy jump cues to enhance a skill they already have or wish to learn. Any serious player learns all the skills they need to succeed.

So we're back to the "is it the cue or is it the player" arguement. If they already have the skill, and people are kept on equal footing with equipment why do they need additional equipment to "augment" their play? Wouldn't their skill translate to any type of cue?

Where we stand is that there are 2 facts:

1. You can jump a ball with a full size cue.
2. A jump cue can allow a player to make shots that are not possible with a full size cue.

The question is whether fact #2 is relevant or important enough to the game of pool at the professional level. Obviously, I think that while #2 is true it is irrelevant and mostly uninteresting.

I think we agree more than you know. Players have always chosen cues that fit their playing style.

We do agree quite a lot I think on what pool should be. Where we disagree is on how to approach what it is. Maybe I am a luddite. :)

But, if we ever played and I suggested that you put away the jump cue and we play push-out 9-ball I doubt you would have any issues with that. You might even prefer it. I also wouldn't stop playing if you decided you would rather keep using the jump cue. I would probably admire your skill at using it, but I would still think that it was an unneccessary skill.

It is only when it come to jumping that the anti-jump cue crowd seems to feel that jumping a ball with a full cue is some sort of skill that is the same no matter which full cue is used. The truth is that just about any kick shot that comes up and is makeable can be made with nearly every pool cue that exists while the same is not true of jump shots.
John

Confused again. If every kick shot is makable using nearly every pool cue, why does Semih Sayginer need a billiard cue to play pool? How does it allow him to "do more"?

(edit for spelling and some punctuation)
 
Mungtor said:
Obviously, it isn't clear. Otherwise we wouldn't be here. :)



So we're back to the "is it the cue or is it the player" arguement. If they already have the skill, and people are kept on equal footing with equipment why do they need additional equipment to "augment" their play? Wouldn't their skill translate to any type of cue?

Where we stand is that there are 2 facts:

1. You can jump a ball with a full size cue.
2. A jump cue can allow a player to make shots that are not possible with a full size cue.

1. Should read, jumping balls with a "normal" cue is more or less difficult depending on the skill of the player and the construction of the cue.
2. True. As compared to a cue with a chalked tip allows players to make shots that are not possible with an unchalked tip.

No, as I have patiently explained, skill does not translate to any type of cue. As you have admitted it is very difficult to jump with a Predator cue. So, Shawn Putnam will have a harder time jumping the same shot with a Predator than with another cue that is more suited to the dynamics of a jump shot. However, if Shawn were to use a jump cue then the cue would be optimal for the dynamics of the jump shot and the starting point would be the same for him as for me and the results wouod be strictly based on our respective skill.


The question is whether fact #2 is relevant or important enough to the game of pool at the professional level. Obviously, I think that while #2 is true it is irrelevant and mostly uninteresting.

We do agree quite a lot I think on what pool should be. Where we disagree is on how to approach what it is. Maybe I am a luddite. :)

But, if we ever played and I suggested that you put away the jump cue and we play push-out 9-ball I doubt you would have any issues with that. You might even prefer it. I also wouldn't stop playing if you decided you would rather keep using the jump cue. I would probably admire your skill at using it, but I would still think that it was an unneccessary skill.

I wouldn't. I actually travel with just one cue. I kick 99% of the time. Once in a while I will borrow a jump cue. As I did two weeks ago in a Scotch Doubles tournament where I jumped a ball using the bridge and a jump cue, and drew the ball back for perfect shape on the eight. Sorry, but that was pure skill. The shot was possible because of the jump cue but it was made by me and my accurate hit. In this instance there was no kick shot that would have given us any chance of winning, so the skill I developed was the difference between winning and losing. Quite neccessary and useful in that situation. On top of that the shot brought the house down.

Confused again. If every kick shot is makable using nearly every pool cue, why does Semih Sayginer need a billiard cue to play pool? How does it allow him to "do more"?

(edit for spelling and some punctuation)


- sigh - I used Semih Sayginer because Deno knows that he has one the largest arsenals of masse' shots in the world. A pool cue would cut his ability to make a lot of those shots consistently if at all. This has nothing to do with kick shots. I said most kick shots, which is true since most kick shots are comprised of propelling the cueball into the first rail at the right spot with the correct speed and spin to achieve the desired effect. Just about any pool cue and any billiard cue, even most flea-market cues, are sufficient for this purpose given a few moments to adjust to the properties of the cue. On the contrary though, every pool cue is not suited to the masse' shots in billiards. So, a pool playing Semih Sayginer would have every kick shot and every masse' he knows available to him when using his billiard cue and less than that when using a pool cue. Semih with his billiard cue and a jump cue........well let's just say that Efren might not have to like it :-))

Does that clear it up?

John
 
Snapshot9 said:
..., and I think that any cue considered
legal in the normal Pool world should be permitted. ...

Scott, therein lies the rub, defining "normal" so that everybody is happy.
 
12squared said:
Deno,

Did I miss something in this post? If so, please forgive me. Does this leather only tip rule hold true for the break cue also?

Dave
Yes, I believe if you re-read the beginning posts in this thread you'll find that it is stated all tips must be leather.
 
quotes moved out of order, just to be clear.

onepocketchump said:
... two weeks ago in a Scotch Doubles tournament where I jumped a ball using the bridge and a jump cue, and drew the ball back for perfect shape on the eight. Sorry, but that was pure skill.

Undoubtedly it was. And I'm not trying to take that away from you. I might question what lack of skill left you in a position where that was the only available option tho.

onepocketchump said:
No, as I have patiently explained, skill does not translate to any type of cue.
AND
onepocketchump said:
So, a pool playing Semih Sayginer would have every kick shot and every masse' he knows available to him when using his billiard cue and less than that when using a pool cue. Semih with his billiard cue and a jump cue........well let's just say that Efren might not have to like it :-))

So, the fact that a certain type of cue allows a player to perform certain shots that are not possible with other cues is seperate from the fact that "skill does not translate to any type of cue". I am clear that the cue can't make the shot unless the weilder has the skill, but there are obviously things that can't be done with some equipment regardless of skill.

If, for example, Semih was allowed to play Efren using his billiard cue, would there be any provision that stops Efren from using a billiard cue as well? If both are allowed billiard cues and Semih wins, does it unequivocally mean that Semih is a better player than Efren? Is the upper bound of the game who has the most skill given no equipment restrictions, or is it who plays the best game with a mostly standard set of tools?

I think I understand that you are looking at it from the direction of everything that it is possible to do with a cue ball on the table, and then what equipment will best allow you to acheive those results. Personally, I think that turns somewhat into an arms race of equipment where everybody needs to have the newest, best, fastest, whatever. I think it dilutes the spirit of the game.

IMO, you should learn to master one piece of equipment to the point that you don't need anything else except a solid strategy. The game isn't _just_ about putting balls into pockets. You only have to lead one lap to win a race, but it has to be the right one. Few people win by going balls-out for the entire distance.

Anyway, I think I've made my points relatively clear and I don't want to push it into anything antagonisitc. For my part, this has been a fun discussion and I think I detect your patience with it wearing thin. I'm OK with that and don't want there to be any hard feelings about it. Peace.

-Jeff
 
You guys can argue these points untill doomsday but Deno & KT have decided against jump cues and thats that.On to the next topic.
 
The only statement I'm making on the subject is this.... If only playing cues can be used to jump then Loree Jons got problems, cause the only time I saw a Meucci used to jump the ferrule cracked. She better change her ferrule now.

Terry

Edit- Does "Jumpin" Sammy Jones know about this and does he use a Meucci?
 
Last edited:
catscradle said:
Yes, I believe if you re-read the beginning posts in this thread you'll find that it is stated all tips must be leather.

Thanks, my bad (as they say in the hood:p )
 
Tbeaux said:
Edit- Does "Jumpin" Sammy Jones know about this and does he use a Meucci?

Sammy "Jumpy" Jones worked with the Meucci company back in the late 80's & if I remember correctly he was sponsored by them at one point. I don't know if he's still playing with a Meucci or not as I believe he was retired or semi-retired before this IPT thing started up.
 
Mungtor said:
quotes moved out of order, just to be clear.



Undoubtedly it was. And I'm not trying to take that away from you. I might question what lack of skill left you in a position where that was the only available option tho.


AND


So, the fact that a certain type of cue allows a player to perform certain shots that are not possible with other cues is seperate from the fact that "skill does not translate to any type of cue". I am clear that the cue can't make the shot unless the weilder has the skill, but there are obviously things that can't be done with some equipment regardless of skill.

If, for example, Semih was allowed to play Efren using his billiard cue, would there be any provision that stops Efren from using a billiard cue as well? If both are allowed billiard cues and Semih wins, does it unequivocally mean that Semih is a better player than Efren? Is the upper bound of the game who has the most skill given no equipment restrictions, or is it who plays the best game with a mostly standard set of tools?

I think I understand that you are looking at it from the direction of everything that it is possible to do with a cue ball on the table, and then what equipment will best allow you to acheive those results. Personally, I think that turns somewhat into an arms race of equipment where everybody needs to have the newest, best, fastest, whatever. I think it dilutes the spirit of the game.

IMO, you should learn to master one piece of equipment to the point that you don't need anything else except a solid strategy. The game isn't _just_ about putting balls into pockets. You only have to lead one lap to win a race, but it has to be the right one. Few people win by going balls-out for the entire distance.

Anyway, I think I've made my points relatively clear and I don't want to push it into anything antagonisitc. For my part, this has been a fun discussion and I think I detect your patience with it wearing thin. I'm OK with that and don't want there to be any hard feelings about it. Peace.

-Jeff

It was my lack of skill that left my partner in a positiion where it was likely that the cueball would end up hooked. Luckily, I had the skill and the tool to overcome it. Despite that however, I could have just as easily been left that same position intentionally or accidentally by our opponents and my choices would have been the same.

I don't want pool to turn into an arms race. The game has certainly evolved in terms of equipment and rules in the last 150 years and it just seems that the players are expected to have their abilites curtailed because some people have a notion that there was a time when pool was at it's pinnacle in terms of the balance between equipment and skill.

If there are playing instruments that allow for a greater range without fundamentally changing the game, then allow them. That is the basis for the statement that if jump shots are allowed then a cue should be allowed that facilitates that shot. Watching a professional match where the players have every legal shot available to them that they can execute would be exciting. I don't care who you are, if you are watching a match for a $100,000 and one player executes a one inch jump shot and gets perfect shape you will remember that shot as one of the greatest shots you ever saw in your life.

When Tiger Woods sinks a fantastic putt, no one says that his putter did it.

Every player finds the cue that works best for him in the most situations. I think that most players have an instinct about which shots are tricky using the equipment they are using. So they do develop a strategy of play based on their ability and the characteristics of the cue. There will never be a cue that is perfect for all shots, and switching cues for all different shots will never be a practical way to play. In this instance we are talking about rules that allow a particularly hard shot, harder than kick shots, and penalties for fouls that pretty much guarantee a loss, and a genre of cues that have been developed by a lot of talented people to address that situation/need. Not gimmicks, but real cues designed really well.

That is essentially my point every time I hear someone dismiss jump cues as gimmicks. The people that have really worked their asses off to develop them and promote them and teach people a new skill on the table are being disespected unfairly. If jump cues had been developed in the 20's, 30's 40's, the so-called golden era of pool then they would not only be allowed everywhere they would be respected as a valuable tool in every pool player's arsenal.

I bet, that if we could go back in time, that we would see that there was furious debate about the introduction of the leather tip, chalk, plastic balls vs. ivory, rubber bumpers and so on.

I would prefer to see all pocket billiard games played in such a manner as to have all shots called and all safeties. I would not allow both to be called at the same time, you either pocket a ball or play safe and give up ball in hand when you fail to do what you called. To me, those would be rules that truly reward the skill and eliminate any reward for luckily leaving someone in a very bad position. I don't think that a match should be decided on luck but as near to absolute skill as possible. All players would be forced to become better players overall. I would prefer that no jump shots be allowed. Miscues should automatically be a foul because it has been proven that they are double hits.

Anyway, I digress. Let the fractured state of billiards continue so that our sport will never truly be regarded as such. I am tired of pool anyway, too many nits. I am going back to chess. Clearly defined rules, lots of good competition, don't need to worry about equipment, I can play it onine and matching up is fairly easy.

Nice talking to you Jeff. Should we play, let's switch cues just for fun.

John
 
bobroberts said:
You guys can argue these points untill doomsday but Deno & KT have decided against jump cues and thats that.On to the next topic.

Sure, just move to the next thread when you want to move on. All these discussions go where they go and end when everyone has their fill. We know we are not likely going to change Kevin's or Deno's mind about this but it does no harm to state our opinons anyway. Maybe the next person who starrts a tour will look at these discussions and agree with the pro-jump cue rationale.

Besides that, everything that the IPT or anyone else who is in the public spotlight does is open for comment.

And, thank you Deno for being an active participant in this and other IPT discussions. We appreciate the feedback, even if we don't agree. :-))

John
 
Back
Top