Predator 314 or Original Shaft?

[tedkaufman]

This has to be a joke topic.

Anyone that would put any aftermarket mass produced junk shaft on a Southwest cue or any other well made cue needs to stick with a "Lucassi" or some other junk cookie cutter cue butt.

65% of what Pros and in what world use predator shafts? Because it's not the same tours I play. Not that many use them unless they have a Predator cue.

(I just bought a Scruggs for $180 because it didn't have the original shaft...some brain surgeon replaced it with a Predator shaft and made the cue close to worthless )

just my beliefs.

FL Dave

Absolutely correct in all you said. I've also wondered where this 65% figure comes from. I know quite a few pros and I can't think of one who uses a Predator shaft, to tell the truth. I know two who use Tiger's shaft, but no pros who use Predators. I guess those players who are sponsored by Predator do.

 

[Cornerman]

But wait...How many times do you shoot 50 inch shots HARD with full side english? Not very often.

This is a self-feeding or self-fulfilling anectdote. A person will not shoot this type of shots if they don't know how to adjust for squirt. If a person knows and can adjust for squirt, you'll see them shoot this shot more often. For whatever it's worth, heavy inside or outside english comes up often enough for me.

And some top pros and teachers will tell you that they almost never use more than a single tip of side and often not more than a half tip.

They lie. Actually, for the pros, maybe they don't pay attention to themselves. For the teachers, maybe they give this advice to keep beginners focused on improving their stroke.

Pros are pros because the CAN shoot and make balls with any and all insane types of spin. I think any dedicated time spent wathching professionals just to see how far they go off center easily dismisses this saying.

Fred

 

[Cornerman]

There are two factors regarding composite (low deflection) shafts that aren't given enough mention.

1) Feel -- Whether a laminated shaft does or doesn't reduce reflection, what none of them have is the feel of a solid, well designed solid wood shaft. That feel provides feedback that affects one's touch and control of the cueball.

I disagree with this, by a lot. Lamination doesn't have anything to do with deflection. And plenty of laminated shafts have the feel of a solid wood shaft. Maybe you're confusing Predator's hollow end with the lamination???

2) Stroke fluidity -- No matter what shaft is used, deflection (squirt) is dramatically reduced by a smooth, fluid delivery of the cue.

And I obviously disagree with this.

I believe laminated shafts are wonderful for lower tier players because it helps them overcome the complexities of applying english and the attendant corrections required..

And again, lamination has zippo to do with applying english and correcting for it.

Fred

 

[Cornerman]

how does the Predator compare with the Universal shaft, which also claims anti-squirt technology?

Only the Universal Smart Shaft LS claims low squirt. The regular shaft, regular squirt RS makes no such claim. When I tested out an LS, it had low squirt, very comparable to Predator 314's.

Fred

 

[tedkaufman]

Quote:
Originally Posted by tedkaufman
There are two factors regarding composite (low deflection) shafts that aren't given enough mention.

1) Feel -- Whether a laminated shaft does or doesn't reduce reflection, what none of them have is the feel of a solid, well designed solid wood shaft. That feel provides feedback that affects one's touch and control of the cueball.

I disagree with this, by a lot. Lamination doesn't have anything to do with deflection. And plenty of laminated shafts have the feel of a solid wood shaft. Maybe you're confusing Predator's hollow end with the lamination???

Maybe you should tell Tiger, Meucci, OB-1, among others, your beliefs. They all seem to believe there is some benefit to laminating their low deflection shafts.

Quote:
2) Stroke fluidity -- No matter what shaft is used, deflection (squirt) is dramatically reduced by a smooth, fluid delivery of the cue.

And I obviously disagree with this.

Really? Fred, do you actually play pool?


Quote:
I believe laminated shafts are wonderful for lower tier players because it helps them overcome the complexities of applying english and the attendant corrections required..

And again, lamination has zippo to do with applying english and correcting for it.

So, are you saying using a Predator or OB-1 shaft, et al, has nothing to do with correcting for english? Why exactly do you think they were created? Again, I wonder, do you actually play pool, or just write about playing?


Fred

 

[Andrew Manning]

Really? Fred, do you actually play pool?

So, are you saying using a Predator or OB-1 shaft, et al, has nothing to do with correcting for english? Why exactly do you think they were created? Again, I wonder, do you actually play pool, or just write about playing?

I'm with Fred on this one. The Predator and OB-1 shafts et al. have much to do with correcting for english. Yet the lamination is not a critical factor in the amount of squirt. They laminate for radial consistency, and they hollow out the front end for squirt.

And your "smooth fluid stroke" decreasing deflection is misdirected. The CB does not know whether your stroke was fluid. It does, however, know how hard you hit the ball. You're confusing "smooth and fluid" with "significantly softer". When you have a good, smooth stroke, you can place the tip very accurately on the edge of the CB without miscuing, and thus produce spin and move the CB without using as much speed. A jerkier stroke means you'll need a lot of muscle to move the CB around, which means you hit the ball harder and get more deflection. So while there's a relationship between a smooth stroke and deflection, the relationship is not causal.

-Andrew

 

[JoeyInCali]

So, are you saying using a Predator or OB-1 shaft, et al, has nothing to do with correcting for english? Why exactly do you think they were created? Again, I wonder, do you actually play pool, or just write about playing?

More stable/less prone to warpage shafts compared non-laminated shafts.
I don't buy the radial consistency b/c I've seen it tested where it proved any shaft has a softer side.

 

[MOJOE]

To each, his own!

I am getting a Jeff Olney cue with a 3/8 x 10 pin and one shaft. Should I get the Predator or stick with the originalshaft? I hear his shafts fit very snug and they play very well. Also, I have 2 Southwest cues on order and a Hercek (8+ year wait). Should I get Predators for them as well? Right now I shoot with a Meucci PP2 with a red dot shaft.

thanks,
dean

I also shoot with an Olney although I could with an Olney cue and love the way that it hits with his shaft. However, I normally use a Predator 314 because I have gotten so used to the lack of deflection that I get with the 314. To be honest, I prefer the feel of the Olney shaft, I just prefer the results of my 314.. You will get MANY MANY different opinions on this topic, go with what works for you and don't worry about what everyone else thinks.. Everyone has their preference...IMHO

 

[tedkaufman]

And your "smooth fluid stroke" decreasing deflection is misdirected. The CB does not know whether your stroke was fluid. It does, however, know how hard you hit the ball. You're confusing "smooth and fluid" with "significantly softer". When you have a good, smooth stroke, you can place the tip very accurately on the edge of the CB without miscuing, and thus produce spin and move the CB without using as much speed. A jerkier stroke means you'll need a lot of muscle to move the CB around, which means you hit the ball harder and get more deflection. So while there's a relationship between a smooth stroke and deflection, the relationship is not causal.

-Andrew

Pretty good, Andrew. First you disagree, then you explain by rephrasing what I said as your own--as if it were information.

You might be a valuable asset to KT!

 

[Andrew Manning]

Pretty good, Andrew. First you disagree, then you explain by rephrasing what I said as your own--as if it were information.

You might be a valuable asset to KT!

Re-read my last sentence. I disagree with you because you claimed there was a causal relationship between having a smooth stroke and not experiencing as much squirt. There's no direct causality there. A smooth stroke may HELP one to hit the balls softer and still get the desired results, but the variance in deflection is due to stroke speed, and not smoothness as you claim.

-Andrew

 

[Cornerman]

So, are you saying using a Predator or OB-1 shaft, et al, has nothing to do with correcting for english?

Of course they reduce squirt. But it's not the lamination. As I said. As most everyone else will say.

Why exactly do you think they were created?

The radial lamination was for radial consistency. Lamination in general can make a stronger product by cross graining. You can also build good shafts from what would be otherwise less desirable pieces of wood. Care to know anything else?

Again, I wonder, do you actually play pool, or just write about playing?

I'm amazed that after so many years of discussion on this subject, you Mr. Kaufman seem to be one of the very few who are completely clueless on what lamination is for. There's a lot on the subject. I suggest some research, if you care to read about it (which you obviously have not). I doubt there are 10 people on this board who have put in more time on the study of Predator shafts that I have.

And remember this: when the crow comes, open wide.

Fred

 

[buddha162]

I'm with Fred on this one. The Predator and OB-1 shafts et al. have much to do with correcting for english. Yet the lamination is not a critical factor in the amount of squirt. They laminate for radial consistency, and they hollow out the front end for squirt.

I only have one problem with the above paragraph: "I'm with Fred on this one." This sentence might suggest that this POV is somewhat controversial, and it's not.

The lamination has nothing to do with squirt, and neither does a "smooth stroke." LOL.

-Roger

 

[tedkaufman]

I'm amazed that after so many years of discussion on this subject, you Mr. Kaufman seem to be one of the very few who are completely clueless on what lamination is for. There's a lot on the subject. I suggest some research, if you care to read about it (which you obviously have not). I doubt there are 10 people on this board who have put in more time on the study of Predator shafts that I have.

And remember this: when the crow comes, open wide.

Fred

Fred, I will concede you know more about laminated shafts than I do, or I care to. Clearly you've made a study of it.

What I am still unsure of, though, since you addressed other points but consistently dodged the question I asked TWICE: Do you actually play pool? My hunch is you are a self-proclaimed authority who sits on the sidelines but doesn't actually play pool.

 

[X Breaker]

Fred plays pool.

I have never played Fred, but I have seen his break. When Fred came to my booth in Valley Forge, he tried the X breaker for the first time, and made 5 balls off the break, with 2 other hanging on the lip of the pockets.

I have spoken to Fred quite a few times. There is no doubt that he is a great student of the game. He loves pool, pool cues, cue makers, and he truly studies the game. Fred is just truly passionate about all aspects of the game of pool.

Fred, I could be wrong, but I think when Ted referred to laminated shafts, he was using the term "lamination" very loosely. It appears to me, when I read his posts, that he was using this term to generalized all the "low deflection" shafts.

Just my 2 cents.

Richard

 

[Koop]

how does the Predator compare with the Universal shaft, which also claims anti-squirt technology?

I have a Universal Regular Squirt model and love it. I guess there were some problems in the beginning but apparently they were fixed going forward.

These things are accurate as anything. My only recommendation is to change out the tip unless you prefer a soft hit. It came stock with a Triangle but because of the piezo-electric material it really dampens the hit. Triangles normally have a hard feel to them but not on this shaft.
I put a Hercules Hard tip on and now I absolutely love the hit and feel.

 

[Cornerman]

Fred, I will concede you know more about laminated shafts than I do, or I care to. Clearly you've made a study of it.

What I am still unsure of, though, since you addressed other points but consistently dodged the question I asked TWICE: Do you actually play pool? My hunch is you are a self-proclaimed authority who sits on the sidelines but doesn't actually play pool.

I don't proclaim to be anything except a student of the game.

Dodging your question? It wasn't even relevant.

Do I play pool??? I've posted several thousand posts over the years. And I've met 50 or more people on these boards and have played most of them. Surely your question was answered previously. It doesn't take much reading at all. I'm shocked that anyone who reads these boards would even ask that.

How 'bout you? Do you even play this game?

Fred

 

[TATE]

Re-read my last sentence. I disagree with you because you claimed there was a causal relationship between having a smooth stroke and not experiencing as much squirt. There's no direct causality there. A smooth stroke may HELP one to hit the balls softer and still get the desired results, but the variance in deflection is due to stroke speed, and not smoothness as you claim.

-Andrew

Hi Andrew,

Just a side note that I was pretty impressed in an earlier thread that you mentioned you now take into account spin as part of the difficulty factor in weighing your options.

Chris

 

[av84fun]

Tedkaufman...<<2) Stroke fluidity -- No matter what shaft is used, deflection (squirt) is dramatically reduced by a smooth, fluid delivery of the cue. Accordingly, there is much more deflection from a hard, abrupt hit. >>

I would be interested in your source of information concerning the above scientific theory. I am prepared to stand corrected but IMHO, the cue ball does not know how "abruptly" it is struck. Rather, it is struck at a given speed..reglardless of whether the cue is accelerating or decelerating at the instant of impact...and it is that speed the produces the FORCE which, combined with the amount off off-center cue tip impact that results in deflection.

Again, I genuinely would appreciate any scientific evidence you have to the contrary.

<<I believe laminated shafts are wonderful for lower tier players >>

Then how do you account for the fact that such a huge percentage of top pros use low deflection shafts??? Or do you believe that Predator is engaging in false advertising regarding the number of top pros who use their cues??

Regards,
Jim

 

[av84fun]

Pooltchr...<<I'm still trying to figure out why someone would order a nice custom cue, and then consider putting a production shaft on it! >>

Hi Steve. I posted the same question as below to Ted.

Then how do you account for the fact that such a huge percentage of top pros use low deflection shafts??? Or do you believe that Predator is engaging in false advertising regarding the number of top pros who use their cues??

The facts seem irrefutable that a LOT of pros do exactly what you find difficult to understand.

The sub-question is why, if the composite shafts are better...FOR SAKE OF ARGUMENT... don't the premier custom cue makers build them. There are two possible answers (other than they don't think the composites are better, of course.)

1. Patents. I would be VERY difficult and VERY expensive to design a shaft so different from the existing low deflection cues that would not violate existing patents.

2. Manufacturing expense. The machines...tools...equipment and plain old fashioned "know how" to use them correctly and effeciently would quite likely be WAY beyond the real world economics of custom or even semi-custom cue makers.

You seem to associate "custom" with some fundamental superiority over "production." But that simply is not true. Try building a semi-conductor from scratch on a custom basis....or bowling balls...or pool balls.

For SURE...I am not demeaning the ART and CRAFTMANSHIP of the many legendary custom cue makers...past or present. But IMHO, their superiority can be found from the joint back...not from the joint forward.

All IMHO.
Regards,
Jim

 

[Cornerman]

Fred, I could be wrong, but I think when Ted referred to laminated shafts, he was using the term "lamination" very loosely. It appears to me, when I read his posts, that he was using this term to generalized all the "low deflection" shafts.

Could be. Or he really thought it was lamination got caught by surprise that everyone else didn't think the same thing.

And let's not be so grandiose. It was 4 balls and 3 hanging, two of which hit each other right in front of the side pocket. {insert some winky thing here}

Fred