really confused about this..

Neil said:
As good as you play, and as long as you have been on here, and you still think that makes any difference??
Click to expand...

Well Neil you know I will always be looking for anything that can improve my game. :D BUT this cuetec test of mine really helped me a lot in one thing: apparently I found a flaw in my aiming, I percieve the center of cueball about 6-7 mm to the left of the true center of the cueball...:angry: And this error in perception caused me to put unwanted spin on cueball which made me miss some tougher shots, especially when shooting to the left. :angry: Once I made the correction (which feels quite unnatural to my eyes at the moment) my potting percentage with Mezz went to the level achieved with cuetec...cutshots, jackup shots, off the rail shots...right NOW it seems like these troublemakers wont bugger me as much as before but it will take 2-3 weeks to be really sure, like I said I know the perils on testing something new where concentration plays big part.. ;)
 
Nostroke said:
When i was playing a lot, i found the 'secret' about twice a month. Sometimes it was a stick, sometimes the grip, sometimes the stance etc. If it lasted 2-3 days, that was a long time. Hope it's different for you.
Click to expand...

Very true, one has to be careful AND patient with these changes.. ;)
 
marek said:
I agree with you that "every shot I've ever missed was stroke/alignment error". But I dont agree with you about the cue, thicker tip really gives you bigger centerball hit on cueball so even if you dont actually hit perfect center of the cueball thicker tip will give you less sidespin than the slimmer tip. Try to shoot pool with snooker cue and you will be having hard time to play no sidespin unless you have perfect stroke/alignment... ;)
Click to expand...

Have you seen an OB-2 or Z shaft? These things are about as thin as a snooker cue. I also used to shoot pool with some snooker players that used snooker cues and they beat the $#$#^#@ out of me :D Those guys can really make some shots, even with a snooker cues so I disagree. If you shoot with a snooker cue for a year you would change your mind I'm sure
 
marek said:
Well Neil you know I will always be looking for anything that can improve my game. :D BUT this cuetec test of mine really helped me a lot in one thing: apparently I found a flaw in my aiming, I percieve the center of cueball about 6-7 mm to the left of the true center of the cueball...:angry: And this error in perception caused me to put unwanted spin on cueball which made me miss some tougher shots, especially when shooting to the left. :angry: Once I made the correction (which feels quite unnatural to my eyes at the moment) my potting percentage with Mezz went to the level achieved with cuetec...cutshots, jackup shots, off the rail shots...right NOW it seems like these troublemakers wont bugger me as much as before but it will take 2-3 weeks to be really sure, like I said I know the perils on testing something new where concentration plays big part.. ;)
Click to expand...

Sounds like you found one of those "secrets" It should go away soon :thumbup:
 
Pii said:
Have you seen an OB-2 or Z shaft? These things are about as thin as a snooker cue. I also used to shoot pool with some snooker players that used snooker cues and they beat the $#$#^#@ out of me :D Those guys can really make some shots, even with a snooker cues so I disagree. If you shoot with a snooker cue for a year you would change your mind I'm sure
Click to expand...

While Z-shaft/OB2 are 11,75mm snooker cues are in 8-10mm range so they are still MUCH thinner than Z/OB. And I play snooker quite often so I know the feeling, trust me. :grin: My view on this is that these specific diameters of pool (12-13mm) and snooker (8-10mm) cues are there for reason.. :) Snooker players beat the crap out of you because of their flawless fundamentals, not because they use thinner cues..:D Even Steve Davis admitted that he tried playing pool with his snooker cue and then came to standard pool tip diameters.. ;)
 
Neil said:
I guess I should have said so, but I was referring to the part of your post that I quoted that I put in red. The part about the follow through.
Click to expand...

Well if you remember my followthrough (or lack of to be more precise) was one of the most criticised part of my fundamentals when I posted videos of me shooting here so I tried to improve that.. :) You are one of the posters I listen really carefully to as your insight of the game is very valuable to any student of the game so probably that correction in aiming will help me much more than another 5 cm of followthrough..:grin:
 
Neil said:
It's easy enough to do, just over chalk your cue and use a numbered ball for the cb. You can tell by the numbers orientation exactly where you hit the "cb" by the chalk mark on it.
Click to expand...

Well that one would have worked for me IF my mind didnt play tricks on me and didnt force me to swerve my cue a little to correct this aiming flaw without my conscious control...I tried that test in the past but I hit the cueball very near the center on average. the thing was the consistency wasnt quite high as it was HEAVY dependent on perfect timing which was problem under the stress conditions. :(
 
Pii said:
I actually shoot with a Jeff Onley with a normal shaft and a JC with OB-2 shafts (you do consider them "Real LD" don't you) and I change back and for all the time and it doesn't bother me one bit and I don't find it night and day at all, sorry.

I take that back the only night and day part is that the OB-2's are much thinner but as far as hitting goes it doesn't make an once of difference to me which cue/shaft I use other than I'm a little more used to the Onley, which is a maple shaft.

Deflection is deflection you have to learn to compensate for it no matter how much or how little it is. If you can compensate for LD you can do it for a normal shaft with more deflection. Its all in your mind, if it wasn't then ONLY the LD shaft users would be winning and we know that isn't true.

Find me one stat that shows/proves you will win MORE with a LD than you will with a normal shaft. You can't because it doesn't.

Flame away! :grin:
Click to expand...

I never said they were "better!" I said there is Definitely a difference in deflection and squirt. Obvious they wont make anybody shoot better.. unless you are used to them like myself and goto use a regular shaft and have to over-compensate everytime I put side spin on a ball.. Hence why I stated there is a night and day difference.

I see people all the time switch between a couple playing cues and it seems retarded to me.. You have to get used to one stick and dial it in. You switching between an ob2 and a regular shaft in my opinion is not good for you.. Your cue ball control has to be so inconsistent.
 
softshot said:
yes I have. they are slightly different on a few shots..

not different in a better/worse kind of way

different in a not exactly the same kind of way

nothing more, everything else you "know" about LD is marketing
Click to expand...

I think radial consistency is more important than low deflection. Whatever the deflection is will be sorted out by a competent player in a short time. But it's the inconsistent deflection from side to side that makes the difference in SOME situations.

That was what impressed me the most about Predator. Not the low deflection claims.

No, it was seeing a shot set up and watching the robot make it time after time with the cue rotated each time using the laminated shaft. Then with a single piece shaft the shot would be made time after time as long as the shaft was NOT rotated. When the shaft was rotated the shot would not go and even more disturbing sometimes the cue ball would miss the object ball entirely. This really freaked me out as I had no idea that this would really be possible.

Up until that time I also thought that it was all nonsense and marketing.

Laminated shafts play differently. Radially consistent shafts play differently. Low deflection shafts play differently.

Rafael Martinez, who was NEVER paid by Predator, would only use a Predator shaft throughout the 90s. This is a guy who could get any shaft he wanted from anyone. He did 16 hours of instruction in my pool room and when he was asked about the Predator shaft and what he thought his answer was, the ball goes to where I point and I don't have to think about it when I use this shaft. He didn't elaborate more than that.

I don't want to make this a commercial for Predator but I do want to say that it's not all BS and marketing. Predator REALLY did put in the work, or I should say that Steve Titus and Allan McCarthy put in the work and "Predator" put in the marketing to bring the results of that work to the market.

They opened up a new side of the industry and that shouldn't be dismissed lightly.
 
It's very very possible that you shot better because you were trying something different which caused you to focus more. An example would be going from a 5" pocket table to a triple shimmed Diamond. You probably focused a lot more because you couldn't get away with shooting any other way. Because of this you shot better. You might not have had a better shooting percentage, but your stroke definitely felt better.
 
Thicker shaft(TIP) SEEMS to give you more accuracy. What is giving you more accuracy is, actually, your level of sighting/aiming focus.

Imagine a cue ball mounted on a wall, and you are throwing a BB (bead) with the goal of hitting the cue ball and having the BB bounce back such that you can catch it. Then, throw a ping-pong ball at the CB target. You should have a higher success rate with the ping-pong ball.

With the small BB, it's more difficult to hit the target, not because it's difficult to throw the BB, but because the contact surface area is smaller. When you are able to sight/aim and execute hitting a small surface area target accurately, then hitting a larger surface area target will feel a lot easier, and you will have higher probability of success....as long as you maintain the same level of focus as with the smaller target scenario.

TRAIN with a small tip, PRACTICE/COMPETE with a large tip.

Just my opinion, but what do I know. I'm just an amateur.
 
Right, hate to break this one to ya, but who ever is tellin you this garbage has zero clue, dump this loser from your life.

A thinner shaft is best, 11.75mm not 13.25 as joss puts out, or stift thick shafts, you need some flex from a pro taper. Now tell me the Z shaft and Lucasi hybrid is wrong.

You want a thin, soft ferrule low deflection, and a very hard tip, like a moori Q.

There is what you need to learn. :sorry:

Dont listen to those, who have no clue.
 
Curly Howard said:
Right, hate to break this one to ya, but who ever is tellin you this garbage has zero clue, dump this loser from your life.

A thinner shaft is best, 11.75mm not 13.25 as joss puts out, or stift thick shafts, you need some flex from a pro taper. Now tell me the Z shaft and Lucasi hybrid is wrong.

You want a thin, soft ferrule low deflection, and a very hard tip, like a moori Q.

There is what you need to learn. :sorry:

Dont listen to those, who have no clue.
Click to expand...

I m sure the most guys here could play with a 16 mm shaft against you and still could give you weight......
I really wonder how the guys in the past were able to pocket just one ball......without any knowledge and without any laminated ld shaft.
 
marek said:
Ok, I will provide some more info. I got used to LD shafts really quickly, to me position play is much easier when you dont have to count with the deflexion much. And you were right, i didnt tell if I used any english on those comparison shots...I actually didnt use any english, only draw or follow, no sidespin. That way I was able to say that I was really more accurate with cuetec, there wasnt any deflexion accounted in my little test.

P.s.: Just to get things in perspective I have been able to beat Ralf Souquet at European championships last year with my 314 so I could play a lick with it... :grin:
Click to expand...

I can imagine that a slightly larger ferrule/tip size could result in more accuracy on shots that you did not use side spin. Makes sense to me.

Now go try some of those shape shots where you use side spin and let us know if you stay with the Cuetec. I know you play well.... but don't think you will stay with the Cuetec.
 
JB Cases said:
I think radial consistency is more important than low deflection. Whatever the deflection is will be sorted out by a competent player in a short time. But it's the inconsistent deflection from side to side that makes the difference in SOME situations.

That was what impressed me the most about Predator. Not the low deflection claims.

No, it was seeing a shot set up and watching the robot make it time after time with the cue rotated each time using the laminated shaft. Then with a single piece shaft the shot would be made time after time as long as the shaft was NOT rotated. When the shaft was rotated the shot would not go and even more disturbing sometimes the cue ball would miss the object ball entirely. This really freaked me out as I had no idea that this would really be possible.

Up until that time I also thought that it was all nonsense and marketing.

Laminated shafts play differently. Radially consistent shafts play differently. Low deflection shafts play differently.

Rafael Martinez, who was NEVER paid by Predator, would only use a Predator shaft throughout the 90s. This is a guy who could get any shaft he wanted from anyone. He did 16 hours of instruction in my pool room and when he was asked about the Predator shaft and what he thought his answer was, the ball goes to where I point and I don't have to think about it when I use this shaft. He didn't elaborate more than that.

I don't want to make this a commercial for Predator but I do want to say that it's not all BS and marketing. Predator REALLY did put in the work, or I should say that Steve Titus and Allan McCarthy put in the work and "Predator" put in the marketing to bring the results of that work to the market.

They opened up a new side of the industry and that shouldn't be dismissed lightly.
Click to expand...

I recently spoke to Rafael and he is CURRENTLY using AN ORIGINAL Predator shaft.
(It hits quite well) He swears it hits better than the current Predator shafts just FTr.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top