Scientific Reviews of Break Cues

M

maxeypad2007

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
So has anyone actually done any work in this area? Basically I'd love ot see a non-biased scientific review of the major break cues on the market and what makes them better than others.

Are there any machines out there like Iron willie that are not owned by Predator that could be used in the testing.
 
maxeypad2007 said:
So has anyone actually done any work in this area? Basically I'd love ot see a non-biased scientific review of the major break cues on the market and what makes them better than others.

Are there any machines out there like Iron willie that are not owned by Predator that could be used in the testing.
Click to expand...


To answer your question, Platinum Billiards performed a study, but in my honest and humble opinion, you'll be hard pressed to find anything better than a Varney J/B.

Good luck in your search and I hope the link helps you.
Craig
 
Unless I'm reading this wrong they weren't using the same force with each cue and measuring the end speed.

IE X force produces this speed with this cue
 
EDIT: I'm removing my comments as I incorrectly interpretted Platinum's dialogue on their test procedure. Sorry for the misunderstanding, Shane!
 
Last edited:
mosconiac said:
You are correct. As it reads, they just kept mechanically increasing cue speed until no more CB speed resulted. In essence, they are testing for the physical limit of the cue to further accelerate the CB. This is not a measure of energy transfer efficiency, but a pragmatic effort to deterimine the ultimate transfer capability of the cue.

In other words, its like taking a series of automobiles and putting more and more powerful engines in them until each reaches their respective top speeds. This does not tell you how fast the individual cars will go at a given power level or how quickly they will get to that top speed, just how fast can they go.
Click to expand...


Actually, this is incorrect :)

When we test Break Cue speed, the SAME speed of stroke is used every time with every cue. The mention of multiple hits with dead center until the tip fully compresses is exactly that. At a given speed of stroke, the first shot will almost always result in slower cueball speed than the 2nd as the tip has compressed after the first shot resulting in a faster cueball speed on the 2nd shot. For some cues/tips, max speed for that cue/tip might be achieved with 4 shots with the robot, for other cues/tips max speed might take 8 shots. But in each case the speed of stroke of the robot is the same for every cue tested, we just want to report the fastest speed achieved by a particular cue with a particular tip at a consistent and precise stroke speed so we keep shooting the test cue at the same speed of stroke until the cueball speed stops increasing and reaches its max speed for that speed of stroke.

I hope this makes sense.

Let me know if you have any questions.
 
Last edited:
thing it's it's impossible to do a review of which cue is better because a lot of it is subjective. not everybody has the same body, mind, or stroke, so why should one cue be the best for everybody.

depends on style of break so much tbh. i can break in a different way better way with my old fury than i can with my varney for example.

so to sum up, i would say that any 'scientific' research would not be too useful, and a Varney break/jump cue is the best and the way to go. :D Seriously.
 
are you applying the same amount of energy to the cue to propel it forward or making i go at the same SPEED.

I see what you mean beef, but this is all valuable data that will help us understand the dynamics of what break cues work best for each player
 
maxeypad2007 said:
are you applying the same amount of energy to the cue to propel it forward or making i go at the same SPEED.

I see what you mean beef, but this is all valuable data that will help us understand the dynamics of what break cues work best for each player
Click to expand...

We apply the same amount of energy to the cue to propel it forward.
 
worriedbeef said:
thing it's it's impossible to do a review of which cue is better because a lot of it is subjective. not everybody has the same body, mind, or stroke, so why should one cue be the best for everybody.

depends on style of break so much tbh. i can break in a different way better way with my old fury than i can with my varney for example.

so to sum up, i would say that any 'scientific' research would not be too useful, and a Varney break/jump cue is the best and the way to go. :D Seriously.
Click to expand...

I agree, it is impossible to do a review of which cue is 'best'

It is wrong to say that a particular brand is 'best' unless there are agreed upon parameters by all players that define what 'best' is (which isn't happening). For some people, the 'best' for them might be the cue that generates the most cueball speed, for others it might be the cue that produces the least amount of cueball deflection, for others it might be the heaviest cue they can find, for others it might be the cue with the thickest handle, for others it might be the cue with 17.65 inch balance point :) Everyone wants something different and some want a combination of several factors.

For the purpose of our tests, we are not measuring the 'best' we are simply measuring which break cue is fastest (cueball speed produced) as this is information that many many players have asked me for over the last 11 years and I felt it was time to find out.

We will keep doing these tests for as long as people want to read the results.
 
I'd be really interested in seeing what are the key parameters in matching a break cue to the player and how that correlates to strong performance.

It would be great if you could map those factors out to the level that golf clubs can be matched to the player now.
 
maxeypad2007 said:
I'd be really interested in seeing what are the key parameters in matching a break cue to the player and how that correlates to strong performance.

It would be great if you could map those factors out to the level that golf clubs can be matched to the player now.
Click to expand...

I would be interested to see that too! ;)
 
shanesinnott said:
I would be interested to see that too! ;)
Click to expand...

As would I, but ... there are known measureable phenomena in a golf swing and in a golf club that must be matched to each other, there are no such known phenomena in pool from what I can see, other than that be-all-and-end-all-and-wtf-is-it parameter of "hit". ;) ;) ;) ;)

Dave, still appreciates the measurements and efforts to perform scientific analysis on pool stuff , and working on a hittin' machine other than himself now and then, check back next year
 
Last edited:
I agree, it is impossible to do a review of which cue is 'best'

It is wrong to say that a particular brand is 'best' unless there are agreed upon parameters by all players that define what 'best' is (which isn't happening). For some people, the 'best' for them might be the cue that generates the most cueball speed, for others it might be the cue that produces the least amount of cueball deflection, for others it might be the heaviest cue they can find, for others it might be the cue with the thickest handle, for others it might be the cue with 17.65 inch balance point Everyone wants something different and some want a combination of several factors.

For the purpose of our tests, we are not measuring the 'best' we are simply measuring which break cue is fastest (cueball speed produced) as this is information that many many players have asked me for over the last 11 years and I felt it was time to find out.

We will keep doing these tests for as long as people want to read the results.
Click to expand...

cheers for the response. although it appears i must have misread the thread somehow in a hurry. i though somebody wanted to know the 'best' cue and wanted proof by scientific research. oh well!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top