Putting a Predator or OB-1 Shaft on custom?
- Thread starter 219Dave
- Start date
- Status
rhncue said:
Jim Buss? What a stupid idea?
Then again I say not. The guy once carried out projects for NASA.
You don?t expect someone like him to do something stupid.
In fact, inserting metal in shaft has been tried out by Harvey Martin ages ago, if I?m not mistaken.
Both trying to act stupid? I guess not. They must have known something we don?t.
BPG24
Banned
ridewiththewind said:
It has occurred to me that the results could be wrong, I have been in sales for most of my working life. I completely understand the marketing aspect.
Just because someone thinks that the test is wrong does NOT make it wrong.
Why can't you see that until it is proven to be wrong, there really is no debate. In America we prove things wrong when we feel that they are, not bring opinions about why it could be wrong.
If you understand that then what are you trying to prove?
Last edited:
BPG24 said:
You, my friend, a very proud man and high pride. Looking down on everyone here, especially cuemakers.
Now, whether or not you are using low deflection shaft? you still say low deflection shaft are accurate based on a site.
Based on the site as quoted below, they themselves dare not claimed it?s 100%. Why should you?
Quoted from the site you mentioned, ???.. is an independent company and has no affiliation with any billiard product manufacturer.
The performance information we provide is based on careful scientific testing and observation. We are highly experienced at testing the performance of cues and we believe that our methods are sound and accurate. However, we do not claim that our findings are absolute.?
Yet you make everyone here look like fool.
Is the chart BS?
NO
Is there something lacking in the chart?
YES.
Why?
1. A knowledgeable person can make a standard shaft play like a low deflection with a bit of adjustment, not by compensating a lot but as little as you would on a low deflection shaft.
2. Not all tips carried out on the test are the same.
3. Not everyone will play with bridge from 12~14 inches long (24-7). Unless you are a Shorty.
4. Why are they no other low deflection shaft stated in their chart? I know they are a few more.
5. Some of the low deflection shafts have closer bridge, almost like mined why is that?
6. Also only one method of playing English is used. Have they tried other method of playing English? NO. WHY?
You have said low deflection shaft is accurate. Yet you claimed you not using one now. State your reason.
You have very high respect for someone test yet haven?t carried out a simple test I requested.
If NO, WHY? What?s the REASON? ( Are you afraid to take the challenge?)
My test that I assigned you to carry out will proof you accuracy statement wrong. (Provided you know the trick).
My advice like I said before, pool has no limit. Anything is possible. You still got a lot to learn my friend.
Let me make it clear again for you as everyone has.
Less deflection does not mean 100% ACCURACY.
If you use compensation method to play English, you still need to compensate a little to play English. Errors still exist.
Now you tell me,
AM I WRONG TO SAY THIS?
BPG24
Banned
icem3n said:
I will perform that test next time that I get a chance...
Until then stop making idiotic claims about me bashing cue makers. I do not bash cue makers, and you have no right to claim that I do.
I have supported alot more cue makers with my money than the average pool player. If you learn to read my posts more carefully you would already know that.
dave sutton
Banned
im lost on what test you are trying to preform
its meaningless. you can not stroke the ball 2 times exactly the same. thats why they made a robot
be realistic
its meaningless. you can not stroke the ball 2 times exactly the same. thats why they made a robot
be realistic
dave sutton said:
Dave, I think you are right.
Why didn?t I think of that? All this while, I have been searching for the best cue in the world, looks like I need to look for a robot. Yeah. A robot? Any custom robot maker here?
P/s- Don't be realistic, cause at the end of the day it is the human that will be on the other end of the cue. Do you still think you need a robot to perform the test for you? Do you think Miserak, Wille, Fat ever bothered?
BPG24...you say that you want 'proof' that the Predator is not the most accurate shaft...but want no opinions.
I would submit that you coming here and posting that the tests alledgedly performed by Platinum Billiards claiming that the Predator shaft is the most accurate is also just a matter of opinion. Even an expert in the field's findings would still be but a matter of opinion, until the evidence of those findings submitted are corraborated by another independent study.
In other words, it's ALL opinion until all of the corraborated scientific findings are presented.
Since you cannot do that, well.......
It has become rather apparent to me that you would beat a dead horse until it rolls over and says to you....'I agree with you'. If you would spend half as much time trying to understand others points of view as you do trying to convince everyone that you're right, and that's that...well then perhaps your posts would have more value.
I apologize to anyone else if I may have offended...but I have grown very weary of this 'it's my way, or the highway' mentality.
Lisa
I would submit that you coming here and posting that the tests alledgedly performed by Platinum Billiards claiming that the Predator shaft is the most accurate is also just a matter of opinion. Even an expert in the field's findings would still be but a matter of opinion, until the evidence of those findings submitted are corraborated by another independent study.
In other words, it's ALL opinion until all of the corraborated scientific findings are presented.
Since you cannot do that, well.......
It has become rather apparent to me that you would beat a dead horse until it rolls over and says to you....'I agree with you'. If you would spend half as much time trying to understand others points of view as you do trying to convince everyone that you're right, and that's that...well then perhaps your posts would have more value.
I apologize to anyone else if I may have offended...but I have grown very weary of this 'it's my way, or the highway' mentality.
Lisa
Last edited:
ridewiththewind said:
I sure have to disagree with your statement. Predator has a mechanical machine ( Iron Willie ) that exactly repeats every test on different brands of shafts for every test. The machine can be set for different stroke speeds, different tip off-sets (english) or straight in shots. The follow through length can be set also. Once set, every shaft that is mounted into the machine gets tested under the exact same conditions as the shaft before it, and, the shaft after it. It is the only way that anything can be tested, all external deviations are eliminated. There have been thousands of people watching and participating in these tests. What could be a better or fairer test?
What the arguments here seem to be about is what shaft or technology is the most accurate and who or what determines that accuracy. This is not about which shaft plays the best in your hands, nor the shaft that has the best feed back nor the shaft that YOU can make the most balls with. None of these have anything to do with the most accurate shaft. The only thing that determines the most accurate is the shaft that inherently sends the cue ball in the straightest line when contacted with or with out the use of english. In your hands you may not like the feed back from the shaft so you may jerk or not follow through so that you miss balls but that is not the shafts fault as other, outside forces, caused the miss. Low deflection shafts are not for everybody. Many don't like the size, feel or hit of low deflection shafts so they certainly won't help making balls in those cases.
As far as tests. Iron Willie and I believe Meucci has a machine that is supposed to make each test identical. I think this is what BPG24 is trying to get across to everybody is that Predator has a mechanical test that demonstrates their deflection claims and most others have no tests that would fulfill their claims but only opinions and he keeps saying that if you believe that their tests are false, then why don't you step forward and say that Predator is "lying".
Dick
BPG24
Banned
rhncue said:
Thank you very much...
It is nice to see that someone else can understand what I am saying.
I don't play with a Predator, or any other low deflection shaft, but I understand the advantages that they provide... I don't use them because I don't believe that they put the best materials in their shafts, I can only imagine how they shafts would play if they did...
Until someone that thinks the the tests that have already been done are biased does something to disprove them, than the data found on the tests are true. Opinions on the subject don't matter...
If you don't like them, don't buy them. Pretty simple
rhncue said:
Dick, in the science and medical fields, you will never find one study as being the 'gospel'. It is considered opinion until there have been many independent studies done, by experts in the field, with corroborating data before it is accepted as fact.
As far as the Predator goes, this has not been established, to date, that I am aware.
As I have previously stated, I have nothing against the Predator, or any other aftermarket shaft. I am not saying they are better or worse than a shaft from a custom cuemaker. I do know that they're not for me...but may work very well for someone else...and that's cool.
With that said...I think that there were many here that felt it was a pretty bold statement to just come out and say that because so-and-so said so, the Predator shaft is the most accurate shaft available. I do not happen to share that opinion. Again, I feel that ultimately, the most accurate shaft/cue is that which is held in the hands of he/she that has the best cueing skills. I know quite a few players who play with a Predator shaft or cue, that can't hardly buy a pocket; equally, I know a few players who play with a lesser known custom cuemaker's shaft/cue that couldn't miss the pocket if they tried.
I believe it is all relative.I have to say that I hope that I never see the day when the technology with pool equipment becomes such that it takes the 'game' out of the game.
Lisa
Dick,
Your comments about the robot hitting different speeds was interesting. I used to play exclusively with predators and have done a bit of testing and I found that at soft and medium speeds, I could discern very little difference in a regular shaft versus predator. At firm and hard speeds its was obvious tha the predators deflected less. Is that how the robot tests came out?
Another point to throw in this discussion is that the less end mass a shaft has, the chance of miscues increase when using english IMHO.
Your comments about the robot hitting different speeds was interesting. I used to play exclusively with predators and have done a bit of testing and I found that at soft and medium speeds, I could discern very little difference in a regular shaft versus predator. At firm and hard speeds its was obvious tha the predators deflected less. Is that how the robot tests came out?
Another point to throw in this discussion is that the less end mass a shaft has, the chance of miscues increase when using english IMHO.
dave sutton
Banned
Sheldon said:
you are right real life results will differ.
however. there has to be a start. there has to be a common. by testing with a robot like this it can show what the most accurate shaft is.
thats a start. what you do with it is up to you.
i say just play with what you like. if its a 45$ players SP or a 5000$ szamboti. if youre better than you opponent you should win
BTW... my predator shaft with the ivory ferrule plays great!!!!!
- Status