Low Deflection Shaft
- Thread starter RD123
- Start date
Pubo Huang, who has the nice high-speed camera. We filmed stuff together recently with Venom:
This is what i was trying to say.you said it better, it really doesn't matter. But most, would have you believe different.
Sorry dave, i was actually referring to the OP, current cue.
I think you're one of the few that got what I was trying to say. I had a $100 Dufferin cue and was quite happy with it. I had gotten used to it and had adjusted to the cue without even knowing I had. I knew nothing about deflection until I started playing seriously about 7 months ago. It was one of those things that just made sense to me without thinking about it. If you hit the ball on the right side it would move to the left and vice versa, so you had to adjust. Never really thought about it. To spend many $100's to make it less never really made sense to me. Now you just have to adjust to a different amount of deflection, it's still there and will never go away completely, but have spent a lot of money to do so.
It's a Konllen cue. My kids bought it for me Xmas. It's a sharp looking cue and feels really great, but I would have never spent that kind of money in my own. Didn't Efren play and win many high level tourney's with a cheap ole high deflection cue? I seem to recall an interview where he mentioned this.
Yes he did, all his early ones, were mostly made from, old maple bowling ally wood. Other than a meucci, all his cues where customs. compared to whats used today. Thay would be considered high deflection. He is very superstitious, and he knew what he liked.
Your old dufferin cue, you could of got real lucky. And found a real nice one. It happens once in a while. I can see why you would think, having an expensive gift, like a j flowers konllen cue, compared with your old one, You would expect more.
Here's the thing... Yes the more simplistic way to put it is that LD merely lowers the amount of squirt you'll generate on the CB, but what is being glazed over is the dampening of the correction factor. Hopefully that makes sense.
If you were to consider that the range of zero english to max english relative to tip placement on the CB went from 0-10. Then for sake of argument we'll also say that each increment on that scale warrants an aim adjustment for squirt, relative to the number. If a LD shaft adhered to that theory, then a solid maple (or non-LD) would have multiples of aim adjustments for each increment. So rather than deal with 10 max adjustments. You're now faced with 30.
Now that's only true because we have a margin of error on the OB path to the pocket. If pocket openings were near perfect to OB dimension then we'd be forced to be incredibly accurate with our aim regardless of the shaft used. However once you have room for error. Then you can hit the OB incorrectly and get away with it. There's less potential for pot missing error with a LD shaft. So it's not simply just a matter of knowing that max english with LD is this, and that with non-LD. It's a matter of intimately knowing all the increments of adjustment from zero to max. LD has less which allows cueing/aim errors to be more readily forgiven.
So can someone grow accustomed to either type of shaft...?..., most certainly. Will one shaft do something the other can't...?..., nope. Is playing with a non-LD shaft more difficult...?..., yep.
You can go even deeper and include game type variables. 9 ball for instance requires harder strikes and more english then say 14.1. So you can expect a more difficult adjustment if you main game is 9b, and probably a simpler transition if 14.1 was your focus.
Hope that makes sense.
Very well put JV, its also alot easier if you have been used to a certain shaft for meny years. And never used anything else. Once you switch over to LD, the bubble is burst so to speak.
If you try and go back, of course its going to be different. The pro shaft i brought several months back, even though its a solid maple, it was definitely lower deflection. i found the opposite with these, compared to my old one, no wear near as forgiving. Very accurate shaft.
I think another thing should be taken into account is type of stroke you use. That will also make a difference.
As you said, all these types shafts, not matter what you use, all have differant amounts. You will have to acount for. The less swicthing you do, the better off you will be i think.
100%...
There's a reason snooker pros commonly hold on to their cues for the duration of their careers, if can be helped at all.
Tip swapping is also the hidden bane to many player's development/success. Although most don't like the feel of it. The best course of action with tips is to use something already hard and leave it there until it's absolutely necessary to replace.
I can see how it seems that way, but...
The effect of tip placement error is greater, not smaller, with LD, because the average bridge is farther from the shaft's pivot point on an LD shaft, which means greater squirt correction error for the same tip placement error.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
For those who own the carbon fiber shafts, regardless of the brand, what is the weight range of each shaft
from low to high in ounces including the decimal amount?
from low to high in ounces including the decimal amount?
Zerksies
Well-known member
4.0 both shafts
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
Depends. If you are sloppy with your bridge placement, the LD shaft will hide it. If you are sloppy with your back hand, a standard shaft's pivot length is probably closer to your bridge so the LD shaft would exacerbate the problem.
I switched to an LD shaft when I was beginning to use sidespin, so I hadn't developed my sidespin game very much with a standard shaft. That said, I think it's easier to compensate with the LD shaft, using my bridge hand to set the amount of English and then compensating with my back hand. With a standard shaft, I would set the amount of English with my back hand and then compensate with my bridge. On many shots, compensation is not necessary.
At the end of the day, I think someone's preferences and technique can outrun the characteristic of low deflection. On the other hand, I have found the characteristic of low deflection to work well with my preferences and technique.
Considering how much prize money is available at snooker, I think that's the wrong way to go. There are several stories of players losing their long-time cues and being crippled by the loss. I think a safer path is to have two identical butts and several identical shafts, probably CF. By identical shafts, I mean they are set up for identical squirt. Squirt can be adjusted on a shaft if needed by adding mass.
That gets pretty expensive, especially for non-pros whose games are always evolving or devolving.
Where? Butt or shaft? With what?
When it comes to amateurs at many different levels, how does one know if it's the cue or the imperfect and ever-changing stroke? Are most players going to blame the cue or themselves when the answer lies within "themselves"?
Maybe some BHE lessons (aka angled "pivot") and work with it at the table needs to be done instead of spending all of that dough on shafts and butts whether its CF or wood cues.
Last edited:
I always wondered about the nuances of trying to carry multiples of the same equipment.
I'm currently as close as I've ever been to having matching playing shafts. I bought the second but have been waiting some time for the work to be done to it. Here's the problem that I see. Do I continually switch between shafts to balance the tip compression that comes over playing time..? I think I mentioned it in this thread, but I tend to keep my tips in use over the course of years. There's zero question that their density is vastly different then they are when first installed.
I can't speak for pro snooker players, but I do know that I would 'one side' my playing tips. I personally made a habit of holding my snooker cue by the butt notch. This would index the cue in the same rotational grip and my tip would compress differently. Switching tips/shafts would present me with a different physical hit beyond just density based feel.
While it sounds good on paper to have interchangeable equipment. There's something to be said to be 100% dialed in and comfortable to the minute differences you're always going to have on some level.
Assuming a player stretches out their bridge when playing with LD. Just because they should to maximize the LD functionality, doesn't mean they do.
You'll have to explain this a bit further for me though. Regardless of bridge length. If equal... A non-LD shaft has more points of correction then it's LD counterpart. If the bridge is set further back when using a LD, (not sure how we'd quantify that) then the low squirt benefit is enhanced so hit correct factors would be more dampened, not worse. It would be more difficult to hit the CB tip placement sure, but that's not a variable when discussing squirt generating characteristics of shafts, but more so a players ability to use the equipment.
Totally willing to be wrong
It assumes the bridge length is the same for both (the "average" for all players), which is closer to a typical HD pivot point than to a typical LD pivot point.
If the LD player "stretches out" their bridge (makes it longer than average), the effect of stroke (tip placement) error would be smaller, not greater, because the player's bridge would be closer to the shaft's LD pivot point.
pj
chgo
That's what I thought... So now I'm even more confused as to why you suggested that LD would be more difficult to use. I believe your assumption is that those with a LD are generally not placing their bridges close to the correct pivot point...? Which still wouldn't make it any worse than squirt from a non-LD shaft.
Pretty sure we're on the same page.... ...I think