Try playing with a Cuetec fiberglass coated shaft.LoGiC said:
Low deflection isn't always a good thing
- Thread starter softshot
- Start date
StevenPWaldon said:
Good point.
but it still boils down to knowing your shaft. and that can be a long and difficult process especially for beginners.
To be honest the cue nuts who buy several a year would likely be the best at adapting to a house cue or any other cue.. but its the old jack of all trades master of none syndrome.
A lot of good pool players don't wanna mess with the voodoo they are not going to change a good thing once they have it down.
they are not the ones that will buy a shaft to change their game. the guy looking for a change is either in a slump (which you have to shoot your way out of regardless) or someone who can't shoot in the first place.. he may be halfway home with his old shaft but gets frustrated that its not progressing fast enough. Even though the shaft isn't the most important thing for his game at this point, but he sees an ad and buys a new LD shaft and has to start the whole process from the beginning again. adding more frustration...
I see LD shafts as making bad players worse. and the good players don't really need it in the first place.
knowing your deflection is more important than changing your deflection.
Last edited:
BPG24 said:
They are different... and LD shafts for the most part do what they say they do..
To some deflection can be an advantage a minor masse type effect allowing a higher deflection shaft to squeeze past a ball that a LD shaft won't. therefore I can make a few shots that you can't make. there may be a few that you can make that I can't (given equal skill) but I'm not convinced and would need a couple examples..
I see it as a difference not as an advantage.
I might have given my 314 a longer test run but at the end of the day I hate the varnish. its not as smooth as the bare wood on my McDermott I'd consider having it turned.. but doesn't that void the warranty?
if I did that and still don't like it.. then I can't even sell it.
but thats unlikely I have had my McDermott for a little over a year. I've got it pretty well dialed in.. so I'm not messing with the voodoo.
if I did that and still don't like it.. then I can't even sell it.
but thats unlikely I have had my McDermott for a little over a year. I've got it pretty well dialed in.. so I'm not messing with the voodoo.
I didn't want to open a new thread, but I see you guys talkin about shafts, i'd like to ask one thing... I recently bought a 314-2 predator shaft. which is nice.. it is 12.75mm shaft, I'd like to make it 12.50mm is it possible to do it by myself, or even a guy who know how to do it? because yesterday i asked some friends.. and they said that i cannot make predator shafts go thinner... and they say some funny thing too, they said that a predator 314 is unique and that it can be thinner and thinner by itself.. the more you use it, the thinner it will be.. is that true?
Squirt is OK.
My theory is a little radical and I have met only one other person who plays well that agrees with me.
I don't tell a lot of people about my theory because most simply think I'm Jeff'n
It is my belief that some deflection in a shaft is a good thing. If you play in low humid conditions and great equipment (meaning new or clean cloth & clean anmd/or polished balls) you don't have to worry about swerve that much. While swerve isn't really significant on most short distant shots, the longer the distance the cue ball has to travel, the more important swerve becomes especially on surfaces that provide increased friction.
My radical theory is that if you are playing on older cloth, dirtier cloth, dirty balls etc as which is found in many pool halls around the country, you may be better off playing with a shaft that has enough deflection in it to cancel out the effects of swerve. That being said, I have moved toward traditional smaller diameter maple shafts to avoid the large amounts of squirt that can often be found in many larger diameter, solid, non low-deflection shafts.
If I were to go back to a low deflection shaft I would probably go back to the OB-1 shafts because I had some good experience with them. When playing nine ball I had some difficulty dealing with the swerve and lack of significant deflection on particular power shots using low-outside spin.
My $.02.
JoeyA
softshot said:
My theory is a little radical and I have met only one other person who plays well that agrees with me.
I don't tell a lot of people about my theory because most simply think I'm Jeff'n It is my belief that some deflection in a shaft is a good thing. If you play in low humid conditions and great equipment (meaning new or clean cloth & clean anmd/or polished balls) you don't have to worry about swerve that much. While swerve isn't really significant on most short distant shots, the longer the distance the cue ball has to travel, the more important swerve becomes especially on surfaces that provide increased friction.
My radical theory is that if you are playing on older cloth, dirtier cloth, dirty balls etc as which is found in many pool halls around the country, you may be better off playing with a shaft that has enough deflection in it to cancel out the effects of swerve. That being said, I have moved toward traditional smaller diameter maple shafts to avoid the large amounts of squirt that can often be found in many larger diameter, solid, non low-deflection shafts.
If I were to go back to a low deflection shaft I would probably go back to the OB-1 shafts because I had some good experience with them. When playing nine ball I had some difficulty dealing with the swerve and lack of significant deflection on particular power shots using low-outside spin.
My $.02.
JoeyA
Must be the ultimate low deflection shaft.LoGiC said:
This is nonsense. There is no shot that either kind of shaft can make that the other can't.
pj
chgo
i agree, with higher deflection there is more variation between strength of the shot. the pivot point takes care of the angle at any amount of spin but is still different depending on how hard it is hit. it is the same percentage variation, however, when appling that percentage to a smaller deflection, the overal deflection variation is smaller as well, which is the key.crappoolguy said:
this is not an issue of compensating for squirt, that is done with the pivot point or whatever method you use.
i used someone's z2 shaft today and i didn't like the feel compared to my bare wood fury.
Last edited:
START(Patrick Johnson said:
%Ao2F8%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%IL7O4%JK6M5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pf8L0%Up8E6%Vd8M0
)END
http://cuetable.com/WeiTable/
With low def shaft, you are liable to scratch on that shot ( high parallel left english ).
???
There is no shot that "you are liable to scratch on" because of a low squirt shaft. If you think so, explain why.
pj
chgo
JoeyInCali said:
deflection simply changes where the cue goes in relation to the cue stick. if you line it up so the cue ball hits the 1 ball in the same place (different angles with the cue stick depending on deflection) with the same amount of spin, the result is the same. the only thing deflection does is change where you must aim the cue stick to get the cue ball to go. there is other things like swerve and english throw depending on how much english is put on it, which i guess can vary through different amounts of deflection and tip size.
The low def shaft would make that cueball less likely to squirt the cueball to the right. If you apply too much sidespin, you might miss too as it would grab the ob to the direction of the english.Patrick Johnson said:
THis is how ex world class player Wayne Nocross tests deflection at Danny K's.
Then you just aim it more to the right. Low squirt shafts are aimed differently - that's the point of them.
Low squirt shafts don't apply any more sidespin than other shafts.
That's nice, but it doesn't have anything to do with your assertions.
pj
chgo