LD shaft for one pocket?

[Ballistic Billiards]

Booooooooo

I've been reading these threads for years and I read a lot of Bob's
articles.

My point here is that cue physics is not simple, nor common sensical.
Especially if you don't exclude the USER.

HOW you hit the ball is CRITICAL if you want consistant data for your
tests.

Any outside influence, such as, constraining the natural flex of the cue,
will affect the results.

Like I said, VERY mysterious.

Before you get all huffy about being corrected (and get yourself even more publicly committed to the wrong ideas), maybe you should read some of the posts that have been made on this topic over several years. Everything you mention has been pretty thoroughly questioned and answered by pretty knowledgable people.

If you don't trust my opinion (who would?), maybe you'll listen to what Bob Jewett says. He's a columnist for Billiards Digest who writes extensively on these things.

pj
chgo

 

[SK Custom Cues]

I used a LD shaft when I only played 9ball or 8ball (predator and OB1). I decided Id rather just stay with good regular shafts, but its always in my head that maybe I shot a little better with the LD shafts. There are a few people around here that cant stand the idea of using a LD shaft for one-hole, but I cant for the life of me figure out why??? The only reason I can think of is maybe, and I mean maybe, there are a small amount of shots where the deflection might help whitey get outta the way doin some cross banks. Anyone have any ideas why a LD shaft might be bad for one-hole? Or why it might be good? Or a guess about any of it? lol.


Joe

I used a predator for a while and tried ob and they get the job done, but when it comes to feel, there is nothing like a normal maple shaft with the right taper / ferrule / tip..... pool is a very intimate thing. You have to become very sensitive to be a good player. The relationship between a player and his cue is a very personal one; however, physics is physics and I would have to agree with Pat and Bob.......

 

[Ballistic Billiards]

I figured this topic was about some of the banks that are really hard to beat the kiss which is why I opened it. I was sadly mistaken. This is one big duh of a thread. I really can't see why LD or conventional makes any difference based on the content of the posts.

LD shafts only influence the initial path of the cue ball.

This will make it harder to get around blocking balls.

Similar to the way a fade shot in golf starts left and then curves right, the
"standard" shaft will give you a better "fade".

Very low stick speed and maximum english will show you this effect most easily.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

LD shafts only influence the initial path of the cue ball.

This will make it harder to get around blocking balls.

Getting around blocking balls is no harder to do with an LD shaft - you just aim a little differently.

Similar to the way a fade shot in golf starts left and then curves right, the "standard" shaft will give you a better "fade".

Very low stick speed and maximum english will show you this effect most easily.

Curving the CB is also no harder to do with an LD shaft - you hit the CB the same way with either kind of shaft.

Do you have specific reasons in mind for these supposed differences?

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I've been reading these threads for years and I read a lot of Bob's articles.

Then you've missed the relevant parts.

My point here is that cue physics is not simple, nor common sensical.

Your point is mistaken.

Any outside influence, such as, constraining the natural flex of the cue, will affect the results.

How do you think a player can constrain the natural flex of the cue?

pj
chgo

 

[MVPCues]

How do you think a player can constrain the natural flex of the cue?

pj
chgo

I believe a short close bridge versus a long open bridge could constrain some of the natural flex of the cue. How much, I don't know, maybe it is neglible. Maybe Bob has determined how much, if any, bridge length and bridge style can change the natural flex.

Kelly

 

[Ballistic Billiards]

It's harder if the ball isn't swerving much, or at all.
You'll have to aim differently and masse.

Getting around blocking balls is no harder to do with an LD shaft - you just aim a little differently.


Curving the CB is also no harder to do with an LD shaft - you hit the CB the same way with either kind of shaft.

Do you have specific reasons in mind for these supposed differences?

pj
chgo

 

[Ballistic Billiards]

How do you think a player can constrain the natural flex of the cue?

pj
chgo

I think that when you understand the natural flex of a cue, it
becomes very obvious.

Please post back when you've come up with it.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Ballistic Billiards:
Any outside influence, such as, constraining the natural flex of the cue, will affect the results.

How do you think a player can constrain the natural flex of the cue?

pj
chgo

Ballistic Billiards:
I think that when you understand the natural flex of a cue, it
becomes very obvious.

Please post back when you've come up with it.

Not my job. If you can't support your own assertion, I guess readers will just have to draw their own conclusions about its credibility.

pj
chgo

 

[Ballistic Billiards]

Not my job. If you can't support your own assertion, I guess readers will just have to draw their own conclusions about its credibility.

pj
chgo

I can support my reasoning, pm me for paypal details.

You're the one that said this was common sensical, yet this small matter
of limiting cue flex eludes you?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Ballistic Billiards:
I can support my reasoning, pm me for paypal details.

LOL. I have a pretty good idea what your reasoning is worth, and like I said, other readers can decide for themselves. Let us know how much you collect.

pj
chgo

 

[mikeyfrost]

Are you guys going to have a d*ck measuring contest all day long or just agree to disagree...I need to know whether I need to subscribe to this train wreck or not. I only read horrible threads.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Are you guys going to have a d*ck measuring contest all day long

I don't think there's any need to drag it out that long. Here's mine:



pj
chgo

 

[Ballistic Billiards]

LOL. I have a pretty good idea what your reasoning is worth, and like I said, other readers can decide for themselves. Let us know how much you collect.

pj
chgo

Anyone else can just PM me.

I guess we can agree that cue physics isn't your best subject?

 

[Bob Jewett]

... On a cut shot using inside english, particularly when the ball is on the rail, I think I sometimes use a certain stroke to introduce a little swerve to compensate for squirt. Do you have a feeling for if this is common or likely, or would you suspect the end result of my stroke at point of impact is really me using a little back-hand english?

EDIT: I just reread your 2004 article on back-hand english. What I am describing you call in that article aim and swerve...and a recipe for disaster.

Kelly

Well, not necessarily disaster, but adding a "little something extra" to make shots work can get you into trouble, I think. Many players have learned subconsciously to do what it takes to make the shot. I think such players will have an especially hard time if they start thinking about the shot which tends to strangle their subconscious techniques.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I believe a short close bridge versus a long open bridge could constrain some of the natural flex of the cue. How much, I don't know, maybe it is neglible. Maybe Bob has determined how much, if any, bridge length and bridge style can change the natural flex.

Kelly

Mike Page has done an interesting experiment that suggests your bridge need to be very firm and less than 6 inches from the cue ball. Even then, the main expected result is an increase in squirt, which is usually not what players want.

 

[GetMeThere]

The tip stays in contact with the CB about the same amount of time.

That's one point that I'm not sure about (which may just be my own ignorance). I haven't seen a lot of REALLY precise data on that topic. From Dr.Dave I've read that contact lasts "about 1 ms. with leather tips and about 0.5 ms with phenolic." But:

1) I haven't ever seen any REALLY precise contact times: If one hit lasts 0.8 ms, and another lasts 1.2 ms, the second is a full FIFTY PERCENT longer--yet they're both "about" 1 ms.

2) I haven't heard of anyone even TRYING to get good measurements (down to about a microsecond would be needed to make really definitive conclusions, I'm imagining/guessing). The work I've heard about has been done with high speed photography (or video). To realistically get microsecond level data you would need instead to place sensors under the tip--I haven't heard of anyone doing that. EVENTUALLY, I'll get around to it--look for the data in 2-3 years

3) It COULD be claimed, perhaps, that the elastic realities of phenolic (balls) and leather (tip) are such that no "interesting" information can pass between tip and CB in the microsecond time frame; i.e., it just wouldn't MATTER if contact time were, say, 0.8 ms vs 1.2 ms. I'd be interested in Dr.Dave's thoughts on that issue.

4) I think I have to agree with Ballistic Billiards on the issue of billiard physics still being incompletely understood. I personally intend to investigate some of these issues myself over the next few years (btw, I DO have a PhD--but it's in molecular biology and not physics But I have invented and developed a microsurgery instrument by using my electronics knowledge in my spare time (I like to tinker), and I have significant experience with empirical science).

 

[MVPCues]

Mike Page has done an interesting experiment that suggests your bridge need to be very firm and less than 6 inches from the cue ball. Even then, the main expected result is an increase in squirt, which is usually not what players want.

Yes, exactly what I would expect.

Kelly

 

[MVPCues]

Well, not necessarily disaster, but adding a "little something extra" to make shots work can get you into trouble, I think. Many players have learned subconsciously to do what it takes to make the shot. I think such players will have an especially hard time if they start thinking about the shot which tends to strangle their subconscious techniques.

Yep, understood. I don't think I am gonna try and retrain myself on this particular shot, but neither would I try and teach it to someone.

Kelly

 

[snipershot]

I appreciate everyones enthusiasm here, lol. So from what some say, LD doesnt change anything about one hole, whil others think it does change a few shots just a bit. Mikey brought up a great point about the banks. Would it be easier to get the cueball outta the way on a bank where the object ball is frozen to the rail with a LD shaft? Being how there is less swerve or whatever you wanna call it, would that make it easier, harder or about the same?


Joe