Joint opinions
- Thread starter peteypooldude
- Start date
Nothing has really changed. That test is still valid today. The joint is not the main, if any, indicator of how a cue hits/feels. They still use law and medical books that are 200yrs old. They no good as well??
You read that part wrong, ~79% did identify a wood to wood joint and regardless if it was preference or not, identity was made. But that was not the joint PIN. That wasn't a valid test as 16 different sticks were used, which invalidates all findings, but again you still have that curious 79% making the identity of the entire joint design.
Of all the common joint PINS, only the Uni-Loc Quick-Release stands apart as the actual pin part (pilot) does little to nothing for the binding. That said, it might be the most durable and if you determine that you want a lot of weight right there in the middle, it's a great choice (which renders the titanium version near useless).
Edit: Here's the quote (55/70 = .078571...)
"Of the 70 players, nearly 55 liked the hit of two cues with different
numbers:
When the two were exposed, they both were sneaky petes, wood to wood joints,"
Again though, this wasn't a valid test by any means.
Last edited:
Maybe you are the one who needs to reread the McChesney thread.
There's too many expectations of mind reading on this forum, just point out what you're trying to state. What am I missing?
“In closing, our experiment asked which cue the players liked best:
Of the 70 players, nearly 55 liked the hit of two cues with different
numbers:
When the two were exposed, they both were sneaky petes, wood to wood joints,
(one a Scruggs and the other a Huebler); both about 19 oz., both about 13
1/4mm and
tended to be on the stiff side of "hit". *By the way, the 55 who liked the
hit of these two cues:
more than half thought they would be steel jointed.”
It does not say that 55 of 70 participants identified these two cues as wood/wood. It just says that 55 of the 70 participants people chose one or the other as having the best hit.
It says that both cues were wood/wood jointed sneaky petes.
It then says that more than half of the 55 who liked them thought the cues were steel jointed, which is really guessing wrongly. We don’t know how many people guessed correctly, but the choices of wood or plastic would be divided among the remaining <50%.
Of the 70 players, nearly 55 liked the hit of two cues with different
numbers:
When the two were exposed, they both were sneaky petes, wood to wood joints,
(one a Scruggs and the other a Huebler); both about 19 oz., both about 13
1/4mm and
tended to be on the stiff side of "hit". *By the way, the 55 who liked the
hit of these two cues:
more than half thought they would be steel jointed.”
It does not say that 55 of 70 participants identified these two cues as wood/wood. It just says that 55 of the 70 participants people chose one or the other as having the best hit.
It says that both cues were wood/wood jointed sneaky petes.
It then says that more than half of the 55 who liked them thought the cues were steel jointed, which is really guessing wrongly. We don’t know how many people guessed correctly, but the choices of wood or plastic would be divided among the remaining <50%.
O.K. I think you're misunderstanding how I'm using the word "identity", if so, sorry for that.
How about this...
55 out of 70 times wooden joints were chosen based on the identity of wood, not human perception, which was proven to be far less accurate. Nothing else about this survey has any real value and even that 79% is very questionable. I do find it curious though that once the metaphorical curtain was pulled back, wooden joints were significantly associated with a "good hit". Regardless though, clearly 79% could differentiate between joint types.
Is there something there? I don't know, but I'm curious that if this same survey was done again, but the shaft and butt were both made of glass, would a glass to glass joint become associated with a "good hit"? I wouldn't be surprised if a pattern would emerge, but who knows.
Last edited:
Although I dont agree with the way you stated it, I do agree with the underlying meaning.
Garczar.... if everything has already been covered already, why do we have a forum? Let's just make this a FAQ format, and type your questions into the search engine. No need for new posts.
Maybe you could take a little of your own advice..... you didnt have to respond. There was no need to say "Here we go again.
No offense but this has been covered here a lot". But to your credit, you did add some info for the poster.
I'll add that I think the shaft diameter, taper, ferrule, and tip are bigger "transmitters" of how a cue feels. The joint, be it stainless steel, or wood faced (be it all wood, or wood face with collar) will affect the forward balance of a cue. But that can be neutralized or accentuated by adding or subtracting weight in the butt.
Last edited:
Same thing i said before, feel free to put me on your "Ignore" list. Its an open form and last time i checked neither your or that other guy make the rules. I'm gonna respond the way i see fit. You can skip my posts or use the "Ignore" feature.
Last edited:
I still support using the search format first, then post if you can't find a thread. Or post in clarification of a thread. MOST of the time it IS laziness when people don't.
Online "community" is not unlike "in person community". Try and fit in 1st, don't be lazy, take some ownership. Just in the short time here I've noticed this weird thing where some apparent "newbie" goes from asking simple questions to resident expert in no time flat. Or, they just seem really needy.
Odd.
Online "community" is not unlike "in person community". Try and fit in 1st, don't be lazy, take some ownership. Just in the short time here I've noticed this weird thing where some apparent "newbie" goes from asking simple questions to resident expert in no time flat. Or, they just seem really needy.
Odd.
I've used the search function many times, and more often then not, it ends up being old information. Technology's change... Opinions change. Maybe a fresh view on the topic is in order?
And no one can say that a poster didnt use the search before they posted. They are by default,
"lazy". Many on AZ think they are mind readers. If you find a topic as being monotonous or tedious, skip it. Dont answer. No need to be rude to the poster.
And no one can say that a poster didnt use the search before they posted. They are by default,
"lazy". Many on AZ think they are mind readers. If you find a topic as being monotonous or tedious, skip it. Dont answer. No need to be rude to the poster.
Last edited:
I'm drawing from experience as an Admin on another site. For example, we'd painfully built "sticky's" or permanent threads at the top of every forum for the most frequently asked topics by newbies. One in particular was on "dog training" and newbies asking "what program is best".
Well, first I personally hate the "best" question because it's 100% subjective and there's usually not nearly enough info provided for what would be "best" for the OP.
But that aside - 90% of newbies looking for all the information we gathered and posted for dog training programs COMPLETELY overlooked the sticky's. So A. they were too lazy to take some time to understand the forum offerings and B. a search would have lead them to what's in plain site.
So the post was going to require someone else to copy the hyperlink and re-post to the new poster.
Again - take some ownership, don't expect to be handed things you MUST KNOW have been discussed before.
Lastly - at least search and re-post the thread with SPECIFIC questions to keep it fresh. That way original contributors are heard again and anyone wanting to add or update can.
There's no reason to start anew on every question.
Last edited:
Sticky worthy post. Agree 100%.
No need to open a post that is repetitive. Ignore it
In contrast, I find newbies asking questions refreshing. I like new perspectives and not the same repetitive groupthink of past answers.
More posts the better. Like tv channels, one doesn’t need to click on them. And if checking past posts...answers are often pontificating BS.
In contrast, I find newbies asking questions refreshing. I like new perspectives and not the same repetitive groupthink of past answers.
More posts the better. Like tv channels, one doesn’t need to click on them. And if checking past posts...answers are often pontificating BS.
The best ones come from Jamaica.
I always find it funny when peeps reference to that testing/survey where players couldn't tell what joint was on the taped over cue.
Well, they were different cues.
You think SW would hit like a SW if it had steel joint and small screw ?
Would a half-joint Searing hit the same if it had 3/8 10 and polymer collar ?
I always find it funny when peeps reference to that testing/survey where players couldn't tell what joint was on the taped over cue.
Well, they were different cues.
You think SW would hit like a SW if it had steel joint and small screw ?
Would a half-joint Searing hit the same if it had 3/8 10 and polymer collar ?
Last edited:
I open repetitive posts mainly to read the replies from folks that get the red ass about them then waste their time replying instead of ignoring. Some funny shit goes on in forums. lol
Last edited:
So.... then someone says, ".....why are you dragging up a post from 5 years ago". Been there.... done that....seen it here many times.
Every possible topic in pool has now been discussed. The exception was when carbon fiber shafts came out. Now that is reaching the point there is no need for discussion. It's been covered. Do a search. That's all that is needed.
Could you imagine how little activity would be on this site if it was your way or the highway? If it bothers you so much to answer questions that have been answered before, the simple solution is dont answer. Ignore it.
Last edited:
That's the point of asking for clarification on the points made in another thread. It indicates you've read it (for some reason) and have a legit question about it. Those posts don't suffer the same consequence you describe for the most part.
My position isn't about asking questions. My perspective is doing it with purpose and not being a lazy ass. Most of us check new posts to see if they're at all interesting and worth contributing to. This is about newbies and lazy ass people wasting others time.
Some will slip through the cracks and ignoring is easy, I think people do that ALL THE TIME. But pointing newbies in a direction is better than suffering the same crap over and over.
Nothing wrong with asking people to put in a little effort. That's the point. :thumbup2:
And if it weren't for a little snark - who'd even use forums?