Max Spin... and tip hardness

[00john]

This question needs to be qualified. Are you keeping the center of the shaft in the same position relative to the center of the cue ball for both diameters of tip? For example, imagine a 60mm nearly flat tip. with the center of the shaft at the edge of the cue ball -- where a normal shaft would surely miscue -- the monster tip would hit almost center-ball. (This is also an argument for a flat break tip.)

If instead you mean that the tip will contact the cue ball the same distance from center, then there is very little change in the spin/speed ratio.

One way to think of this is that the distance from center that the tip contacts gives you a certain lever arm for applying torque to the cue ball. A longer lever arm gets you more torque for the amount of forward force which gets you proportionally more spin for the speed.

This topic has always interested me. I believe a hard tip imparts more spin on a cue ball than a softer tip. I have heard the old wisdom that the soft tip adheres longer changing shape to actually grip the cue ball giving the grippy spring like effect.
From my experience hard and soft tips being made of the same material, similarly manicured will Have measurably different results when struck with a similar stroke and hit point on the cue ball. I think the hard tip imparts more friction.
When i play with a soft tip i notice i have to hit the cue ball harder to achieve my cue ball position. I must admit I am having some difficulty understanding some of the qualifications from the respected experts in this thread. Does a hard or soft tip put more spin on the cue ball please? Thank you!

 

[Kim Bye]

This question needs to be qualified. Are you keeping the center of the shaft in the same position relative to the center of the cue ball for both diameters of tip? For example, imagine a 60mm nearly flat tip. with the center of the shaft at the edge of the cue ball -- where a normal shaft would surely miscue -- the monster tip would hit almost center-ball. (This is also an argument for a flat break tip.)

If instead you mean that the tip will contact the cue ball the same distance from center, then there is very little change in the spin/speed ratio.

One way to think of this is that the distance from center that the tip contacts gives you a certain lever arm for applying torque to the cue ball. A longer lever arm gets you more torque for the amount of forward force which gets you proportionally more spin for the speed.

Yes your correct in what you`re saying. I`m thinking more in practical terms. Lets compare a standard 13mm tip with the most popular small diameter shaft, Predator Z2, wich has a 11.75mm tip diameter. Lets assume both tips are equal in hight, density and tip shape.
As long as we try to keep within the limits of miscuing, would tip size now have any practical effect on the CB?
A 11.75mm shaft must have slightly less end mass, than a 13mm shaft, but I`m not sure how that transfers to physics...

 

[Kim Bye]

This topic has always interested me. I believe a hard tip imparts more spin on a cue ball than a softer tip. I have heard the old wisdom that the soft tip adheres longer changing shape to actually grip the cue ball giving the grippy spring like effect.
From my experience hard and soft tips being made of the same material, similarly manicured will Have measurably different results when struck with a similar stroke and hit point on the cue ball. I think the hard tip imparts more friction.
When i play with a soft tip i notice i have to hit the cue ball harder to achieve my cue ball position. I must admit I am having some difficulty understanding some of the qualifications from the respected experts in this thread. Does a hard or soft tip put more spin on the cue ball please? Thank you!

From watching slow motion video capture, you can clearly see the difference in compression between a soft and a hard tip.
Other than that. I think the only way to really know is to conduct an experiment in a enviroment where we would be able to controll as many factors as possible.
The first thing that needs to be taken out of the equation is the human factor. We would need some kind of machine that we could dial in excately every time. We would need multiple cues and shafts, with as little variation as possible.
We would also need to define clear parameters for a tip hardness scale.
If we could design such testing equipment. I think many of the questions in regards to pool equipment would be answered with alot more accuracy.
If the science was good enough, I can even see a certification program for shafts and tips.
Imagine how cool it would be if we just by reading the specs of a shaft or tip, we would have a clear idea of the performance, relative to our expectations and playing style

 

[nineballsafety8]

Alright, I am going to jump back in here, I have been watching all the back and forth without saying much, but I have to interject.

I think it was misconstrued that people thought I was saying that a hard tip "grabs more", and that is not the case. I whole heartedly agree with Dr. Dave. The hardness of your tip has negligible affects on your ability to spin the ball, regardless of condition. Any tip that holds chalk will perform to the limits of the person holding the cue. I am of firm belief that in ALL CASES, every tip you could possibly put on a shaft will perform better than any human is capable of achieving. No ones stroke is flawless, and those that are close cannot duplicate the level of perfection will true consistency.

Humans are flawed, there for there will always be differences in results of test that involve humans as a control.

The point that I was trying to make... is don't let the hype and advertising persuade you that X brand tip will make you play better.


Find a tip that you like, stick with it... and PRACTICE

if you want the max amount of spin, then hit a million balls with the same tip and have confidence in the ability that you have attained with that tip.

that is all

 

[ShootingArts]

one tip may be better than another

Alright, I am going to jump back in here, I have been watching all the back and forth without saying much, but I have to interject.

I think it was misconstrued that people thought I was saying that a hard tip "grabs more", and that is not the case. I whole heartedly agree with Dr. Dave. The hardness of your tip has negligible affects on your ability to spin the ball, regardless of condition. Any tip that holds chalk will perform to the limits of the person holding the cue. I am of firm belief that in ALL CASES, every tip you could possibly put on a shaft will perform better than any human is capable of achieving. No ones stroke is flawless, and those that are close cannot duplicate the level of perfection will true consistency.

Humans are flawed, there for there will always be differences in results of test that involve humans as a control.

The point that I was trying to make... is don't let the hype and advertising persuade you that X brand tip will make you play better.


Find a tip that you like, stick with it... and PRACTICE

if you want the max amount of spin, then hit a million balls with the same tip and have confidence in the ability that you have attained with that tip.

that is all

There are trade offs with hard tips and soft tips. If we did some very indepth testing, the kind of thing that companies with a multi-million dollar R&D budget can do, we might one day be able to say conclusively that this tip and this ferrule gives the best result. Ferrule plays a far larger part than is generally credited so without using the optimal ferrule for each tip the testing may be invalid. It might even be necessary to use the optimal shaft for each tip.

However lacking this kind of budget and organization you are absolutely correct I believe. A person should find what they are comfortable with and get the best from that equipment. The equipment isn't what holds us back. Every noteworthy performance I ever had in pool came when playing with a cue off the wall, pretty ratty cues at that. However I spent many hours a week for years playing with cues like that.

Some equipment is certainly easier to play with than other equipment. Yet when the sponsorship dollars get right we see that people can play world class pool with any cue. I suspect the same is true with any tip that will hold it's shape fairly well and even that may not matter. Look at the totally ridiculous looking tips on many of the snooker player's cues. Might as well take a piece from an old leather belt and make it fairly round and stick it on the end of a cue. Mushroomed badly, no discernible crown radius to them, yet they do some of the finest cueing in the world with those tips. It would be a mistake to think that modern snooker players don't use a lot of side fairly often too. That is one place pool has snuck into snooker and modern players don't hesitate to really juice the cue ball.

If a tip stays on a stick, accepts chalk, and somewhat holds it's shape, I doubt it is a serious hindrance to anyone's game. Constantly changing tips looking for the magic bullet can hinder someone's development though.

Hu

 

[dr_dave]

I had him shoot three shots with one cue, then three with the other, then back to the first one, etc. Later I just handed him a cue randomly for each shot, and he didn't know what he had. Those are the circled results.

Marks more to the left are the good ones. Zero is the best. When I average the results, I get 9.2 (inches) for S (Kamui Super Soft) and 9.3 for H (Kamui hard). So on average, for all these attempts for maximum "action," the two tips performed the same.

But I noticed two things.
(1) 6 of the 7 "best" outcomes were from the soft tip, including the best three "blind" outcomes.

(2) I wish in retrospect I counted miscues for each tip. My perception is there were MANY more miscues for the hard tip, even though we chalked carefully and scruffed the tips frequently.

he was trying for the limit, and overall I'd say he miscued about one in three times (which is what we want).

In the second half of the experiment, the blind half, I gave him a random cue after a miscue. So even if he was a little shy following a miscue, it should affect the results equally.

These results are preliminary, but they suggest the miscue limit may be tighter for a hard tip.

So the preliminary conclusion is hard tips and soft tips appear to give the same spin-to-speed ratio, and the miscue limit may be more liberal for a soft tip.

I'll try to get some more results, making them all blind next time and recording the miscues for each tip.

Once again, I used identical cues (brand, length, weight, markings) both with new Kamui tips (Super Soft and Hard) cut down to the same size and both shaped with the nickle on a cue cube.

Mike,

Thank you for doing this and for sharing the results with us. It is always interesting to see results of careful and objective experiments to help put "anecdotal claims" in perspective.

It would be interesting to do a dedicated miscue-limit experiment over a wide range of tip hardnesses and brands to see if there is a consistent correlation between tip hardness and miscue limit. I'll add this to my "list" for the next time I get together with my cue technician friend (unless you feel motivated to do it). I would probably do something similar to what I did to compare the miscue limits resulting from various chalk types in NV F.1 - Pool Chalk Experiment - Does the brand really make a difference? unless you or others had suggestions for a better approach.

Thanks again,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

I've come to the conclusion that if I put up a post that said "I believe I play better after eating asparagus" that Dr. Dave would immediately reply with a link to his studies and slow motion videos of the "affects of eating asparagus on pool play".

This isn't a knock, you have a reply for everything, which is great!

All I have to say about that is:

asparagus makes some people's pee stink

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Question for Dr_dave.
A hard tip transfers more energy.

This may be true more often than not, but it doesn't NEED to be true. It's really about the efficiency of the collision, i.e, whether energy is lost. It's possible to have soft tips that transfer energy well, and hard tips that don't.

I agree with Mike on this. Generally, a harder tip (especially phenolic) will create a more efficient collision than a soft leather tip, but there could be exceptions.

Bob Jewett and I did a limited set of experiments with a few tips showing the difference and how to measure it. Here it is:

HSV B.42 - Tip and cue efficiency, with Bob Jewett

Regards,
Dave

 

[ENGLISH!]

From watching slow motion video capture, you can clearly see the difference in compression between a soft and a hard tip.
Other than that. I think the only way to really know is to conduct an experiment in a enviroment where we would be able to controll as many factors as possible.
The first thing that needs to be taken out of the equation is the human factor. We would need some kind of machine that we could dial in excately every time. We would need multiple cues and shafts, with as little variation as possible.
We would also need to define clear parameters for a tip hardness scale.
If we could design such testing equipment. I think many of the questions in regards to pool equipment would be answered with alot more accuracy.
If the science was good enough, I can even see a certification program for shafts and tips.
Imagine how cool it would be if we just by reading the specs of a shaft or tip, we would have a clear idea of the performance, relative to our expectations and playing style

That's very much how it is with golf shafts & even tennis rackets & baseball bats to some degree. The science is there but pool is so far down economically there is no motivation to invest & do anything of substance in the pool 'industry' & I dare say many would not want it if it were to come into existence.

Best Wishes,
Rick

 

[dr_dave]

A soft tip compresses more, but grabs the CB better, which also must affect spin.

I don't know what people mean when they say a soft tip "grabs more." Assuming there is no miscue, then a soft tip and a hard tip "grab" the same.

Again, I agree with Mike.

As long as a tip grabs enough to prevent a miscue, then there is no slip between the tip and the CB during the hit.

In comparing a non-miscue hit with a soft tip to a non-miscue hit with a hard tip, both with the same tip contact point on the ball, they are both "grabbing" the same amount (regardless of the brand of chalk) and they will both produce the same amount of spin (for a given CB speed).

Now, if a tip has the ability to grab better at large tip offsets from center, the miscue limit might be different (as Mike's experiment apparently showed), and this would allow for a larger tip offset and correspondingly more spin.

Regards,
Dave

 

[dr_dave]

Question for Dr_dave.
...
does tip diameter have measurable effect at all on spin?

This question needs to be qualified. Are you keeping the center of the shaft in the same position relative to the center of the cue ball for both diameters of tip? For example, imagine a 60mm nearly flat tip. with the center of the shaft at the edge of the cue ball -- where a normal shaft would surely miscue -- the monster tip would hit almost center-ball. (This is also an argument for a flat break tip.)

If instead you mean that the tip will contact the cue ball the same distance from center, then there is very little change in the spin/speed ratio.

One way to think of this is that the distance from center that the tip contacts gives you a certain lever arm for applying torque to the cue ball. A longer lever arm gets you more torque for the amount of forward force which gets you proportionally more spin for the speed.

I agree with Bob.

The amount of spin imparted to the CB (as a percentage of CB speed) depends only on how far from center the tip contacts the CB.

Now, if you use "tips of english" or don't visualize the effect tip curvature has on the tip contact point, tips of different size and shape can result in different amounts of spin. For much more info and illustrations relating to this, see:

cue tip shape and size effects

Regards,
Dave

 

[ENGLISH!]

Alright, I am going to jump back in here, I have been watching all the back and forth without saying much, but I have to interject.

I think it was misconstrued that people thought I was saying that a hard tip "grabs more", and that is not the case. I whole heartedly agree with Dr. Dave. The hardness of your tip has negligible affects on your ability to spin the ball, regardless of condition. Any tip that holds chalk will perform to the limits of the person holding the cue. I am of firm belief that in ALL CASES, every tip you could possibly put on a shaft will perform better than any human is capable of achieving. No ones stroke is flawless, and those that are close cannot duplicate the level of perfection will true consistency.

Humans are flawed, there for there will always be differences in results of test that involve humans as a control.

The point that I was trying to make... is don't let the hype and advertising persuade you that X brand tip will make you play better.


Find a tip that you like, stick with it... and PRACTICE

if you want the max amount of spin, then hit a million balls with the same tip and have confidence in the ability that you have attained with that tip.

that is all

And I actually agree with you.

My contention is that with ALL else & I mean everything else being exactly equal, it is MHO based on my experience that a soft tip can put more spin on the ball in every direction & not just draw spin for the resulting speed that cue ball gets from the exact same stroke.

A hard tip may very well be able to put more spin on the ball than a soft tip but a resulting increase in travel speed will tag along for the ride.

The bottom line is the speed to spin or spin to speed ratio & what a lower speed to the same spin allows one to do with it.

Someone commented that they can move the ball around the table better with a hard tip. Well is he moving it with the spin or the speed?

Dr. Dave says I'm incorrect. Well if I am, I don't really want to 'realeyes' it because I have a definite difference in capability with a soft tip vs a hard tip.

I can still draw the ball fine with a hard tip, even a break tip but the technique is a bit different to get what would be nearly the same result as with the soft tip.

An example would be in one pocket where you want to send a ball up table & draw the CB back to the foot rail & not have the ball come back down table. The different technique is in the cue elevation so that the table absorbs some of the speed of the cue ball.

With a soft tip one does not need to elevate the cue & IMO can be more accurate.

Again I agree with you. I just don't think the results for a soft tip vs a hard tip are exactly the same for the spin to speed ratio given ALL & Everything else being Exactly the same.

Best Wishes to You & Everyone Else,
Rick

PS I also find it interesting that pro players & 3 rail billiards players that spin the ball as I do seem to mostly use softer tips while players like CJ that wants spin to be a minimum seem to use harder tips. I guess it's like someone said relating it to bowling. You need a ball or tip that fits your style of play. BUT how can you get that if there is no difference in the results of the ball or the tip?

 

[ENGLISH!]

There are trade offs with hard tips and soft tips. If we did some very indepth testing, the kind of thing that companies with a multi-million dollar R&D budget can do, we might one day be able to say conclusively that this tip and this ferrule gives the best result. Ferrule plays a far larger part than is generally credited so without using the optimal ferrule for each tip the testing may be invalid. It might even be necessary to use the optimal shaft for each tip.

However lacking this kind of budget and organization you are absolutely correct I believe. A person should find what they are comfortable with and get the best from that equipment. The equipment isn't what holds us back. Every noteworthy performance I ever had in pool came when playing with a cue off the wall, pretty ratty cues at that. However I spent many hours a week for years playing with cues like that.

Some equipment is certainly easier to play with than other equipment. Yet when the sponsorship dollars get right we see that people can play world class pool with any cue. I suspect the same is true with any tip that will hold it's shape fairly well and even that may not matter. Look at the totally ridiculous looking tips on many of the snooker player's cues. Might as well take a piece from an old leather belt and make it fairly round and stick it on the end of a cue. Mushroomed badly, no discernible crown radius to them, yet they do some of the finest cueing in the world with those tips. It would be a mistake to think that modern snooker players don't use a lot of side fairly often too. That is one place pool has snuck into snooker and modern players don't hesitate to really juice the cue ball.

If a tip stays on a stick, accepts chalk, and somewhat holds it's shape, I doubt it is a serious hindrance to anyone's game. Constantly changing tips looking for the magic bullet can hinder someone's development though.

Hu

Hu,

I agree. But...certain equipment can make certain shoots easier or better, A hard tip for the break, a lite short cue for jumping, etc.

A while back I was warming up for a match & I shot a tight cut back bank along the foot rail & missed it. I set it up again & missed it. I did this about 6 times & I knew that I should not be missing this shot. Finally it dawned on me that I had a red circle cue ball. I grabbed a logo ball from off the Diamond table & made the shot 3 times in a row. Equipment does matter & can at times require an adjustment.

Best of Everything to You,
Rick

 

[ENGLISH!]

I agree with Bob.

The amount of spin imparted to the CB (as a percentage of CB speed) depends only on how far from center the tip contacts the CB.

Now, if you use "tips of english" or don't visualize the effect tip curvature has on the tip contact point, tips of different size and shape can result in different amounts of spin. For much more info and illustrations relating to this, see:

cue tip shape and size effects

Regards,
Dave

Dave,

I just wanted to say thanks for all that you do to try to help others learn & play better.

I guess my mind's eye just sees some things differently.

Perhaps my subconscious 'mind' is lying to my conscious brain to allow me to do what I intend to do with english/spin. It has rejected a hard tip for certain shots.

I think I & other players could not care less about the science when on the table & confronted with certain shots. All we care about is executing the shot & if that takes seeing or believing something that is not real then that is what we will do. Sort of like Mike Segel saying the cue ball does not squirt or swerve whichever it was. It is certainly not like me to live dishonestly & I would certainly like to know the truth.

Perhaps I will be convinced beyond a shadow of doubt when the scientific community does conclusive robotic tests that are beyond reproach or... perhaps I will then be shown to be correct.

However, until then I'm sticking to what my experience has told me about how things 'are'.

Anyway...

Best Wishes to You & an early Merry Christmas,
Rick

 

[mikepage]

Mike,

Thank you for doing this and for sharing the results with us. It is always interesting to see results of careful and objective experiments to help put "anecdotal claims" in perspective.

It would be interesting to do a dedicated miscue-limit experiment over a wide range of tip hardnesses and brands to see if there is a consistent correlation between tip hardness and miscue limit. I'll add this to my "list" for the next time I get together with my cue technician friend (unless you feel motivated to do it). I would probably do something similar to what I did to compare the miscue limits resulting from various chalk types in NV F.1 - Pool Chalk Experiment - Does the brand really make a difference? unless you or others had suggestions for a better approach.

Thanks again,
Dave

That sounds good... I would like to see you do that.