I used to play with a house branch and triangle chalk in the early 70s lately. I’ve been using masters gray chalk because the light gray chalk doesn’t show up on your Cue Stick or any cloth you play on. PS I used to draw the cue ball straight back just above the side pocket around the table 7 rails along with Melvin Taylor back in circa 1971 Merguards bowling and Poolroom Cincinnati Ohio !
Premium Chalks – Are They Worth It?
- Thread starter dr_dave
- Start date
As you know, I aim to swerve.
I’m going to insist on taking this literally and recommend you watch some of @dr_dave’s videos, a little bit better cue ball control and you might not have to swerve so much.
As you know, I aim to swerve.
... but when you need to swerve, the Coriolis aiming system here can be helpful:
I see a contradiction in your summaries. Taom "persists less" (measured visually only?), yet leaves enough on the CB from a single center ball hit to create the same amount of skid as those that "persist" more.
Were the persist tests center ball hits also?
Do you see a persist change at different offsets? Like all are the same on CB hits, but some leave less with more offset? A test suggestion here would be redo the skid test but don't use center ball to make the chalk mark.
Is this all a visual illusion? Taom leaves an almost invisible mark, but that is enough chalk still to create the same amount of cling?
Also, I always thought it was pronounced like "toum" or "tau mmm".
Finally, count me in the camp that believes Taom is making all of these latest ones.
Were the persist tests center ball hits also?
Do you see a persist change at different offsets? Like all are the same on CB hits, but some leave less with more offset? A test suggestion here would be redo the skid test but don't use center ball to make the chalk mark.
Is this all a visual illusion? Taom leaves an almost invisible mark, but that is enough chalk still to create the same amount of cling?
Also, I always thought it was pronounced like "toum" or "tau mmm".
Finally, count me in the camp that believes Taom is making all of these latest ones.
No. Watch that part of the video again. The chalk-mark-persistence test was done with 3 consecutive follow shots with a cut angle, with the CB going off 3 rails. The marks don’t persist after all this motion as well as with a single center-ball hit stop shot.
That’s a fair suggestion. I’ve done these tests differently in past videos if you want to check them out on the chalk testing resource page.
I think it is “tay-om.”
Yes, but it really doesn’t solve the issue of eliminating skid unless both players are using the Taom chalk.
Yes, but it really doesn’t solve the issue of eliminating skid unless both players are using the Taom chalk.
Predator Cues now offering their new chalk individually.
23DenaliBDE
Well-known member
It might not stand out as much but it's there. Grey Masters comes off in tiny chunks. I can play all day using grey Great White and as soon as my dad shows up and breaks out the grey Masters......
You can’t totally eliminate cling/skid/kick. But if one player uses a clean chalk, the frequency will be reduced, especially if you wipe the CB when you can (before every break and ball in hand), and keep your opponent in their chair as much as possible. And if both players use clean chalk, the frequency will be reduced even more.
Seems legit, I'm going to write that down.
Pubo
Active member
Here is a possible explanation for why the miscue limit is half the radius: I wonder if it is simply because the coefficient of friction between chalk and the ball is very close to 0.5?
Since the miscue limit is half the radius, this means the cue line makes an angle of 60 degrees with the ball's surface at impact. So if we imagine the tip just sitting on an inclined plane made with the same material as CB, the equilibrium point is when the inclined plane makes an angle of 30 degrees with the ground. Then any external force applied to the tip will cause it to slide down the plane inevitably. In the case of playing billiard, a miscue results.
Since the miscue limit is half the radius, this means the cue line makes an angle of 60 degrees with the ball's surface at impact. So if we imagine the tip just sitting on an inclined plane made with the same material as CB, the equilibrium point is when the inclined plane makes an angle of 30 degrees with the ground. Then any external force applied to the tip will cause it to slide down the plane inevitably. In the case of playing billiard, a miscue results.
Last edited:
Badpenguin
Well-known member
Unfortunately, it is taking diamond 8-10 months to deliver my new table. It will be a while ;(It is your idea. Maybe you should do it.
I'm done with chalk testing for a while. I've already done my fair share of work on this topic.
It's most meaningful to me that the ball's surface is sloped 30° from the "flat" surface of a centerball hit (vs. 60° from the cue's line).
pj
chgo
Pubo
Active member
Yes, that's a better way to put it.
Pubo
Active member
oh I see, That's a typo in my post, I'll fix it
Great post. Wouldn't this then imply that if the coefficient of friction can be increased above 0.5 that the miscue limit can be pushed farther out?
And, if so, why hasn't that happened? Sounds like a marketing/sales bonanza for all those who really want a chalk to give them "more spin." Maybe nothing short of mixing in super glue will accomplish that?
(Perhaps it's obvious, but I am not an engineer and have no idea how hard it is to increase a coefficient of friction. I've only dealt with those concepts in the abstract.)
Pubo
Active member
Right, but on the other hand, it seems that increase in friction doesn't help at all. I remember Dr.Dave said that from observations it seemed any increase in friction at this point doesn't prevent a miscue. So the reason might not be as simple as what I guessed.
Pretty sure its pronounced " suh-ker".
just kiddin. use what you like. i've owned one piece of hi-end round chalk. don't recall the brand as i found it on the poolhall floor. i too dropped it and afaik its still rolling. 
Well, Dr, Dave, you did it to me again. First it was low deflection shafts. After 30+ years of being perfectly happy with a Schon and an early Joss West, you convinced me to break down and get a low deflection shaft. Now it’s outrageously expensive Taom V-10 to keep my table clean and help prevent skid. Next thing you know, you’ll be changing pool tables, and I’ll have to trade in my Olhausen.
Seriously though, thank you so much for your contribution to pool. Love your videos, and recommend them to new players all the time.
Seriously though, thank you so much for your contribution to pool. Love your videos, and recommend them to new players all the time.