Since gravity doesn't push the cue sideways, maybe you're feeling its inertial resistance to some sideways pressure in your stroke - maybe it's helping, not hurting.
pj
chgo
physical consequences of cue balance point location
- Thread starter evergruven
- Start date
pj
chgo
Interesting. My grip is with thumb down providing resistance from rolling left, my balance finger is the middle finger not index.
I hold the cue super light, I don't like to use linen wrap as cue feels like it will fall out of my hand.
My preference is for wrapless, as it feels like it steadies the cue in my hand, offering good hold.
Don't take my word for it. Are you sure those were my words? I don't know what normal balance point differences are. What are they?
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
I vary my back arm based on stroke length (kinda like having different clubs in the bag). But I will say that there is a point on the wrap I don't feel comfortable going forward beyond because I get that same feeling you describe and feel like I have significantly less control over the cue. My favorite grip position on any cue is where it swings most freely...it is too far forward for my 6'3" long armed frame but I will often use a bent bridge arm just so I can play from there without feeling cramped.
Even on severely back weighted cues, the balance point and bulk of the weight will be in front of the wrap. If you have the feeling of the cue pushing sideways perhaps the cue's natural at rest position relative to your body is more to the side of where it is aligned in your current stance. Just a thought as I also like to play a stroke that falls and my hand holds on and comes along for the ride, but since I'm letting it fall, I have to make sure that I'm aligned such that the way it wants to fall will be on the line of the shot. This can be incorporated into your stance/setup in a number of ways and I'm sure you have some of your own, but hey, if all it takes is a front weighted cue for you and u can forget about it, just do that lol.
Old Meucci article on BP. http://www.articlesfactory.com/articles/sports/proper-cue-balance.html Any takes on BM's stance?
I thought about your answer and I think that 'normal' isn't the right word. Maybe 'original' would be a better word. I can recall adding a weight ring to the butt of a cue because I felt the cue was a little too forward-weighted, sometimes for myself and sometimes for a student. That increased the overall weight of the cue and shifted the balance point slightly, but did it suddenly become abnormal?
I used to experiment a lot with Ray Schuler. My preferred cue weight was 19 3/4 to 20 oz. One of our experiments was with back weight. He'd give me two cues, one 18 oz and one 19 oz cue, and add weight bolts in the back to bring the weight up to 20. Then I'd play with them and give him feedback. Eventually, I found that what worked best for me was to start with a cue a half ounce lighter with the Schuler standard balance point and then add a half ounce of weight directly to the butt. The reason for that as opposed to just making me a cue with a heavier butt overall was that I preferred the 1/2 ounce of weight concentrated at the back end of the butt. I played better. It was as simple as that.
Last edited:
I don't know how many here are old enough to remember Bob Meucci holding court at tournaments in the mid 80's, explaining his new Meucci cue and debating with the pros. It was right at the time when we were switching most of our tournaments to 9 ball from 14.1. He won nearly everybody over, including myself. Because of 9 ball, we were now shooting more big shots with spin, and his cues felt like a breath of fresh air with the lighter plastic joint and ferrule, and the shaft that would bend when you blew on it, but significantly cut down cue ball squirt.
Maybe it was due to the lighter shaft or maybe it was intentional, but his cues had extra back-weight, and it felt great compared to the steel jointed cues most of us were coming from, which were mostly forward-weighted.
In this article, he sticks to his basic premise of a balance point as far back as possible without making the cue any heavier, and holding the cue as far back as possible. But I do think the second part is dependent on the arm span and bridge length of the player.
I think Bob Meucci belongs in the BCA Hall of Fame. He was a true innovator and he turned the face of the game around with his cues. Suddenly the best players in the world were all switching from Balabushkas to plastic. That's quite an achievement.
Last edited:
That works.
If it's true, it probably kept him in business when others jumped on the plastic bandwagon. Competition was tough in the 90s
I always preferred light cues. Back when the USBA held their Natl Championship at the Derby City, Dennis Dieckman brought a nearly finished 14oz cue. I fell in love with it but it was already sold. A couple years later I had him make me one. As time went by I decided to add an ounce. About that time I was helping my son build a Pinewood Derby car and noticed at the Hobby shop they had packs of 4 carbide 1/4-20 threaded weights. Dennis used a threaded bumper so my cue was already tapped. Later I added a 3rd weight.
I told Dennis what I did and he said if he were to add weight, he would put it right where I grip the cue.
Harry Sims told me its easier to generate power with a butt heavy cue. His theory was you're stronger when pulling things than pushing things, so put the weight behind you. Who knows.
I imagine a cue suspended on 2 strings. Pull it back and let gravity take over. What would balance point matter then?
I told Dennis what I did and he said if he were to add weight, he would put it right where I grip the cue.
Harry Sims told me its easier to generate power with a butt heavy cue. His theory was you're stronger when pulling things than pushing things, so put the weight behind you. Who knows.
I imagine a cue suspended on 2 strings. Pull it back and let gravity take over. What would balance point matter then?
WobblyStroke
Well-known member
Simple physics backs up the claim of more power for back weighted cues. Since the back of the cue goes up slightly and not just straight back, the more mass you have in the back, the higher the potential energy once the butt is raised, and therefore you get more power as the cue is dropped and that potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. So, your suspended cue would work like a swing in the park, the further back you take it, the higher you take it. Assuming you take it back (and up) the same amount with each cue, the one with more mass in the back will have a higher center of gravity and therefore will effectively be swinging from a higher position than the lighter cue despite visually appearing to be in the same spot. The more incline you have in the cue (the more jacked up u are), the greater the effect, but as soon as you are at all above dead horizontal (like 99.9% of shots) the more back-weighted a cue is, the more it aids in generating power. Seems like it would be a trivial difference but it sure can feel substantial when you compare cues back to back.
I've been experimenting with light cues, and am interested in investing in a lightweight custom
do you have any feelings about how heavy a shaft should be? in general/on a light cue
and was the light cue you admired average length, 58 inches? shorter or longer?
To tell you the truth I really don't get into specifics of cue design. It drove Dennis mad that I couldn't tell him what I wanted with numbers. He had to translate from my words.
I think 57 or 58. I'm short and he asked how long. What ever he offered I chose the inch longer version.
I'll have to weigh my shafts but I'll tell you that he had a customer Adrian Viguera (sp??) ordered the lightest shafts Dennis could provide. Adrian lost his cue somehow but Dennis had his collection of light shaft blanks.
He fitted them to my cues.
Allegedly my shafts are very light.
Don't know the numbers but will try.
Some of my shats, I'm positive are not from the Adrian inventory.
I have a few made for Geo Ashby, those are probably a little heavier.
thanks for the reply
I think overall balance is more important than the weight of individual parts
that said, I like the shaft to have a little heft to it, so that it stays down in my bridge
the exact weight depends on a few things, but 4.5ish seems to work ok
would be curious to know what "very light" means in your world