The point is that the flexing (or not) of the pool cue doesn't contribute as much to the power as a tennis racket or golf club shaft. I don't have to be empowered to have an opinion. Whatever can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence, as Christopher Hitchens famously said. I've seen zero evidence that carbon shafts or cues have anywhere NEAR the same effects as changing a tennis racket into carbon from wood. So I don't have to be especially "empowered" by the high council of pool cue fanciers to dismiss claims of that nature. If evidence were to be provided, I'd test the claims, then revise or keep my opinion. So far, nothing but opinion and anecdotal evidence have been provided, so I provide my own, which you are likewise free to dismiss.
I'm far from demeaning pool cues, in fact I'm standing up for them.
Of course, you’re entitled to your opinion as is everyone even when it might be informed or even uninformed.
That’s the very nature of an opinion. It reflects what you think of feel. It does not make it right nor wrong. It’s just
what you think. However, what you did was entirely dismiss out of hand without any remarks why my example of
tennis rackets wasn’t valid & then referred to sticks with tips. So naturally I challenged the abrupt dismissal of my
comparison of CF shafts with the evolutionary changes in tennis rackets. I already offered an example of golf drivers.
You just want to drive your point home regardless of any observations that might otherwise contradict your opinion.