Low deflection rant
- Thread starter cheapcues.com
- Start date
I recently got contacts, mainly for shooting pool. They were a huge disappointment. There is some educated guessing that goes into contact lens prescriptions. The ones I had were OK for distance, but lousy for the 3-8' range critical for pool. So, you may find yourself having to tweak an Rx for pool playing lenses, and need another set for things like driving. That was more hassle than I wanted, so I stuck with glasses modified for pool. Talk to your ophthalmologist about what your expectations are prior to getting the lenses.
I know what you said, and I said eccentric. I don't think you're really comprehending me. But it doesn't really matter--if you're not interested you're not interested. I'm not going to try to argue the matter because I don't KNOW what would happen. If you feel you do know, then I congratulate you.
Thanks. That's good advice. Maybe I'll also look into getting some goofy "pool glasses." Does anybody have any suggestions for where to purchase these?
Thanks,
Dave
Reply to Dr. Dave's query about pool/snooker glasses
I ordered a pair of special glasses a few years ago by email from Gordon Harrison Opticians and purchased a new pair more recently after the prescription for my regular glasses had changed. I've been very pleased with them. You can find out more at:
http://www.billiard-eyeglasses.com/
where there are testimonials from Grady Mathews and others.
P.S. I would not recommend paying extra for the ultra-thin lenses option.
I ordered a pair of special glasses a few years ago by email from Gordon Harrison Opticians and purchased a new pair more recently after the prescription for my regular glasses had changed. I've been very pleased with them. You can find out more at:
http://www.billiard-eyeglasses.com/
where there are testimonials from Grady Mathews and others.
P.S. I would not recommend paying extra for the ultra-thin lenses option.
Dave, I was reacting to what pt109 says in post #90 after I asked him to define what he meant by cross stroking. What he defined in #90 is BHE (without the swoop).
Also, the swoop has long been viewed by some people as just one form of BHE, with the back-hand pivot occurring "on the fly" rather than as a separate step prior to the final stroke.
Cross-stroking = stroking across your line of sight, right? So can you get the same effects by leaving your stroke in the same place and moving your head around until you're looking across it?
This is a serious question - meant to illustrate that a stroke is a stroke and the fact that it doesn't match your line of sight doesn't give it any special abilities.
pj
chgo
I'll jump in here only because tip size has been mentioned. The smaller tip does have some advantage. I can get to parts of the ball a larger tip can't, particularly if cb is near the rail. On the downside I can get a lot lower than a player using a 13 mm. causing a miscue. as someone mentioned the contact point remains the same size regardless of tip diameter, and I believe it. I also believe it is just a matter of what feels right to the individual.I rarely read anything if it starts out with the word squirt of deflection, Words used by manufactures to sell cuesticks. Get used to whatever you have and forget about it, there are no magic shafts.
hey, that might be a good name for the next great thing: Magic Shaft. We can make a fortune
steven
I play with a 10 mm tip btw.
hey, that might be a good name for the next great thing: Magic Shaft. We can make a fortune
steven
I play with a 10 mm tip btw.
I'll say I've shot with many different cues. From Players, Cuetec, Lucasi, Viking, etc. Never any customs.
I bought a Predator SP and loved the way it hit more than anything. I notice a slight bit of change in amount of deflection, but I will usually play with a house cue after league, and there is very little change in my game. So I wont attribute my pocketing balls to my 314-2. It just feels better while shooting. So I like that cue. Changed the Everest to an Elkmaster as well.
I have tried a Tiger LD shaft and it felt whippy to me. Did not like the feel of hitting the cue ball with it at all. G/f uses that now and she digs it.
I bought a Predator SP and loved the way it hit more than anything. I notice a slight bit of change in amount of deflection, but I will usually play with a house cue after league, and there is very little change in my game. So I wont attribute my pocketing balls to my 314-2. It just feels better while shooting. So I like that cue. Changed the Everest to an Elkmaster as well.
I have tried a Tiger LD shaft and it felt whippy to me. Did not like the feel of hitting the cue ball with it at all. G/f uses that now and she digs it.
Correct pool glasses need two things: a) correct pantoscopic tilt, and b) elevation off the nose. Good luck finding commercial versions that do both.
1. Take an old pair of glasses (90's style oversized lenses work best)
2. Remove temple pieces
3.Go to Home Depot and get a 1/8" brass rod. You can also get a tubing bender for around $10, but it is not essential.
4. Cut off a section of rod a bit longer than the length of the temple piece.
5.. Using temple pieces as a guide, bend the part that goes behind the ear.
6. Trim the bent rod after matching it to the temple piece.
7. Put a 25 degree upward bend at the glasses-end of the rod, about 1.25 - 1.5" from the articulation with the frame.
8. Grind the glasses end of the rod to whatever shape it needs to be to articulate with the lens frame and drill a hole to accept the eyeglass screw
9. Use some solid copper wire (perhaps 16-18AWG) to fashion a bridge piece to get 1-2cm elevation off your nose.
Cost: Parts, about $2. Labor, about 40 min.
Some pics would be nice, if you have any.
Thanks so much for the link!
Are we still talking about cues?
My girlfriend doesn't even get this kind of treatment:smile:
A little fear and trembling here.
A tricky subject (for me) and I feel I'm responding to a formidable poster.
When I was a kid I pictured removing the rail and drawing with a level
cue.Seems to me that the cue action would want to lift the cue ball.
And if I hit the ball above center with a level cue the cue ball would
be pinched between the tip and the cloth.
So I addressed the cue ball dead center and and let the cue slant
downward for draw and up for high english.I feel this action gives
the shot a 'kind' hit.
So I decided to apply the same thinking to side spin.
It seems to work for me 'cause under heat I don't back off a tricky
spin shot like some guys I have gambled with.As I said in a former
post,I'm not recommending this to anyone else but I won't be
changing anytime soon.
The way I aim is more akin to how I judge a golf shot.A lot more
factors than mere lining up.
It's also related to reading comphrehension.You get very little from
reading one word at a time,your mind is racing ahead so you can fit
the meaning and even the pronounciation into the gist of the sentence.
I usually avoid these subjects because sometimes we diminish what
we can do by explaining it.
But I wouldn't mind a response 'cause you might draw a little sense
out of this.
I've always felt that aiming is understanding,not lining up.
regards pt
LOL. After that intro I'd better not screw this up.
I think both of these are true.
I'm guessing you mean a hit with no side effects like lifting or pressing down on the CB. Slanting the cue can accomplish that in one way (the same way angling the cue can compensate for squirt), but it also adds another side effect: hitting up or down on the CB causes missed shots if you happen to hit the CB a little to the side rather than dead center - because the CB curves. This is the "swerve" that always accompanies sidespin shots. But this is off your topic...
It's very common to think that angling your cue across your line of sight can produce "extra" sidespin - because it does produce more spin than hitting that same spot on the CB from straight on. The reason is that you're hitting farther from center when viewed from the new cue angle - but it doesn't increase the maximum amount of spin you can get from straight on. You can get the same amount of spin by hitting from straight on but a little farther from center - but then you'd miss the shot because of squirt.
Angling the cue doesn't increase the amount of spin you can get; it just compensates for the squirt caused by hitting offcenter. Some players do this by angling the cue and also changing their head position so their line of sight remains along the cue (they "aim" and stroke at the new angle); others do it by angling the cue without moving their head, so they're stroking across their line of sight (they "aim" straight but stroke angled). But both players (assuming they're using the same cue and hitting the same spot on the CB) have to angle the cue exactly the same amount or they'll miss the shot.
When you angle the cue without moving your head you're just using the common technique called Back Hand English - moving your back hand sideways to apply sidespin and automatically compensate for squirt. Other players might angle their cue a conscious amount or "by feel" and move their head along with it or not, but they're all making the same compensation (changing their cue to the same angle) - and no extra sidespin is produced by anybody.
In this case, it's really all in how you look at it.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
I would have to say that even if that were true....
Even if that' true (which I don't doubt) you would also have to compare how much speed and power was put into the movement of the cue for each cue and shot to know if it is easier to get more spin out of different cues...
Jaden
Even if that' true (which I don't doubt) you would also have to compare how much speed and power was put into the movement of the cue for each cue and shot to know if it is easier to get more spin out of different cues...
Jaden
In order for the CB to travel the same distance with more sidespin, the power transmitted by the cue stick would have to be:
1. more in total
2. allocated differently between forward motion and sidespin (although hitting the same CB spot)
Of course one cue (or stroke) can transmit more total power than another, but how do you propose that a greater proportion of the power gets allocated to spin?
pj
chgo
Thanx for responding to my 'plea m'.
Something to think about.I've found that the more I understand,the
better I get at guessing.
I'll continue to 'fiddle' around on each shot till it 'seems' right but the
more info one has,the better the guess.
Even in logic oriented games like chess or backgammon I have found
some of my best moves by turning the board in my mind and thinking..
...if I was my opponent,what's the last move I want to see?....
Maybe it's a crazy way to look at......uh,got to go now....
...they're shoving my food under the door....
regards....pt
I'm glad I started this thread, have learned a lot!