Teaching my son-in-law and deflection (loaded topic)

Chopdoc

Chopdoc

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yesterday I went to the pool hall to play with my future son-in law. I recently gave him a JOSS cue and he got off the bar tables.

I haven't been shooting much. Just a rare occasion on a bar table with horrible house cues. But I began teaching my future son-in-law that way. It was a Monday evening thing for us. Now we moved up in equipment and teaching. So my playing sucks but I can still teach him some. Really it is consistency I lack from lack of practice, but I think there is still a lot of "muscle memory" there and I understand the fundamentals.

Yesterday I took up the conversation of cue ball deflection. After seeing a video posted here of a demonstration I decided to show him. (The video The guy hase a "steering" stroke but that's another conversation.) I took his JOSS and hit a ball on the opposite rail dead center, full length of table. I then showed him two tips left and two tips right english without trying to compensate. The shot missed by almost two ball widths in each direction. Point made. That's when I told him about modern shafts like Predator and what they do. I traded my Predator so I couldn't show him that but we discussed it. The next part got more interesting.

I had my block letter JOSS with me and a 1981 Huebler. The shafts for my JOSS are Stroud JossWest shafts. I had the original shaft for the Huebler plus two ivory ferrule Scruggs shafts that fit it.

I showed him the same demonstration with each of my cue/shaft combinations. The Huebler deflected less than his modern (2003) JOSS. It probably deflected close to 50% less.

Then I showed him with the Huebler and the Scruggs shafts. It deflected maybe half a ball over the length of the table with two tips of english. Pretty darned good I would say.

Then I showed him my JOSS with the Stroud shafts. Well worn. Dirty. With very old tips. It demonstrated zero deflection. Zero. I hit the ball dead on several times across the 9 foot table using two full tips of english. No deflection. I promise.

I couldn't show the Scruggs shafts on the JOSS because of the 14 versus 18 thread issue.

I totally neglected to try the old Stroud shafts on his modern JOSS. Maybe I'll remember next time we go.

I had him try the combinations himself so he could feel and see the tremendous difference. He did notice quite well.

In the end, he still likes his JOSS. I encouraged him to practice with it and study the matter substantially before considering any kind of shaft upgrade.

So I have to say "What the ****?!" How in the hell did I get zero deflection with my JOSS? I swear I tried to just shoot without any kind of compensation! Really!

Was it "muscle memory"? Was I compensating in spite of trying not to? I have shot with that cue over 30 years. In light of everything I have learned about the matter "unintended" compensation seems to be the reasonable explanation.

But...

I remain suspicious that the great cue makers knew/know a thing or two about cutting a shaft.

Opinions?

Thoughts?

Am I crazy?

I promise I am not making it up. It happened.



.
 
Last edited:
I have a modified 314 CAT that if not hit perfectly to keep all swerve out of the picture would cross the line.

I'll be damned if I can detect ANY squirt from it even though I know that there must be some.

It's been taken down to 12 mm at the tip & about 11 mm or maybe a bit less for about 6 inches with 3 on each side of the 15 inch point & then the parallel taper extended way up toward the joint.

I picked it up as the 'extra shaft' when buying an Adam Balabushka Cue from an acquaintance that needed the quick cash. I actually do not use it on 9' tables as I can not get use to the ball crossing the line on the long shots with diagonal english, but I love it on coin tables.

As for your 'thing' Are you sure you were making a parallel shift & not a BHE move.

Just a thought.

Best 2 Ya & Welcome Back,
Rick
 
There are two main parts to the equation (many others but these two can explain it). When you first hit with sidespin the cue ball will veer off course. The spin will cause the cue ball to go back towards the original aiming line. These are referred to as squirt and swerve. Given the right conditions, the cueball can swerve back to the original sight line (sometimes across it). Dr Dave could explain better but that is the basics of it.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
 
caff3in3 said:
There are two main parts to the equation (many others but these two can explain it). When you first hit with sidespin the cue ball will veer off course. The spin will cause the cue ball to go back towards the original aiming line. These are referred to as squirt and swerve. Given the right conditions, the cueball can swerve back to the original sight line (sometimes across it). Dr Dave could explain better but that is the basics of it.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Have you hit on the equator with a level cue or very slightly above with a slightly angled cue?

With any real speed of shot there is no "swerve" that comes into play.

Picture a ball spinning in place. Does it roll off as the spin wears down or does it just slowly come to a stop in place?

Best Wishes,
 
ENGLISH! said:
Have you hit on the equator with a level cue or very slightly above with a slightly angled cue?

With any real speed of shot there is no "swerve" that comes into play.

Picture a ball spinning in place. Does it roll off as the spin wears down or does it just slowly come to a stop in place?

Best Wishes,
Click to expand...
Troll away good sir

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
 
Probably curve like caffeine said. Try it fast vs. slow. You'll see more apparent deflection when you hit fast than slow, because it doesn't curve back as much when you hit it fast.
 
Chopdoc...There's no such thing as zero deflection, so I think your brain just automatically 'compensated' without you realizing it! A good player can shoot accurately with any cue really...we just have certain things we like better. I'm with you, in that I prefer some LD shafts to others, but I can take the same shot and shoot it with a natural wood shaft and and an LD shaft and pocket the ball both ways easily. Lots of players have trouble switching, and can't make it work without lots of practice. I'm no doubt in the minority to be able to shoot with either shaft with no change of pace or aiming. Aiming is perceptual, and humans are perceptual beings. I find more students who can't move the cue in a straight line (especially under the pressure of competition), than really have problems aiming, whether it's with a normal shaft or an LD shaft. JMO

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com
 
Then I showed him my JOSS with the Stroud shafts. Well worn. Dirty. With very old tips. It demonstrated zero deflection. Zero. I hit the ball dead on several times across the 9 foot table using two full tips of english. No deflection. I promise.
Click to expand...
Physically impossible .
Never mind that you will never need two tips of english ever . 1 inch off-center ?

The tip must be flat and is hitting the ball from the edge.
 
Joey...a "tip" of english is 1/8" or 3mm...so max is 3 tips or less than 1/2 inch. Anytime you're shooting off center you're striking the edge of the CB with the edge of the tip, whether the tip is flat or round. :D

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

JoeyInCali said:
Physically impossible .
Never mind that you will never need two tips of english ever . 1 inch off-center ?

The tip must be flat and is hitting the ball from the edge.
Click to expand...
 
caff3in3 said:
There are two main parts to the equation (many others but these two can explain it). When you first hit with sidespin the cue ball will veer off course. The spin will cause the cue ball to go back towards the original aiming line. These are referred to as squirt and swerve. Given the right conditions, the cueball can swerve back to the original sight line (sometimes across it). Dr Dave could explain better but that is the basics of it.
Click to expand...
Here's a good demonstration of important squirt and swerve effects:

NV B.70 - Squirt (cue ball deflection), swerve, and throw, from VEPS II

and much more info, with many other demonstrations, can be found via the supporting links in the numbered list under the videos and illustrations here:

squirt, swerve, and throw effects

Enjoy,
Dave
 
Last edited:
caff3in3 said:
There are two main parts to the equation (many others but these two can explain it). When you first hit with sidespin the cue ball will veer off course. The spin will cause the cue ball to go back towards the original aiming line. These are referred to as squirt and swerve. Given the right conditions, the cueball can swerve back to the original sight line (sometimes across it). Dr Dave could explain better but that is the basics of it.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


I have read his work. Iv'e read a lot on the matter around here.

I get it, sort of, I think.

But what I saw didn't reflect that. This leads me to believe that what I saw was an aberration of my observation.


.
 
BRussell said:
Probably curve like caffeine said. Try it fast vs. slow. You'll see more apparent deflection when you hit fast than slow, because it doesn't curve back as much when you hit it fast.
Click to expand...



I will try it, thank you.

For the record, I didn't slam it.

It was sort of medium speed attempts, which is subjective itself as I didn't try to clock the speed.



.
 
Scott Lee said:
Chopdoc...There's no such thing as zero deflection, so I think your brain just automatically 'compensated' without you realizing it!
http://poolknowledge.com
Click to expand...


That's what I am thinking.

I don't really believe zero deflection is possible without violating the laws of physics.

There seems to be aberration in my observations. And more than just that, I don't think I did exactly what I think I was doing.

Thank you for your input.



.
 
JoeyInCali said:
Physically impossible .
Never mind that you will never need two tips of english ever .
Click to expand...


I don't disagree. :smile:

I doubt both what I did and what I saw.

Though extreme off center might be needed for some shots, most of such things are in billiards games or trick shots.



.
 
Last edited:
The good thing is you're back, and it seems the obsession for this god-forsaken pastime has returned to your conscious. Could be desire, could be the randomness of the cosmos. But, good to have you back.

Technical part. No such thing as zero deflection, but if the Joss West shaft has a very long straight taper, that does lower deflection somewhat, though not quite like cored end with light ferrule.

All the best,
WW
 
WildWing said:
The good thing is you're back, and it seems the obsession for this god-forsaken pastime has returned to your conscious. Could be desire, could be the randomness of the cosmos. But, good to have you back.

Technical part. No such thing as zero deflection, but if the Joss West shaft has a very long straight taper, that does lower deflection somewhat, though not quite like cored end with light ferrule.

All the best,
WW
Click to expand...


Thanks, good to be back.

I think it's more of a disease than an obsession. LOL!


Yes, it is a long straight taper JW. Of course. ;)


In the end I think that I just have to admit that I didn't do exactly what I thought I did, and I didn't see exactly what I thought I saw.

Perhaps this is the source of many differences of opinion on the matter? Often times people swear by what they did and what they saw but is it reliable?

In addition there are many things in the world that apparently "make sense" until you break it down to the numbers. This is the territory of observation in sciences and technology. Often times a person will feel that something is "common sense" yet it is proven to not be so. In such circumstances it is often impossible to convince them that their "common sense" is in error.

I know I have seen amazing things done with a cue stick and some pool balls, but I have yet to believe that anybody has violated the laws of physics.

Still, it was an interesting experience. Honestly it was surreal.

Whether I am right or I am wrong in what I think I am doing or what I think I am seeing only one thing essentially matters. The balls must go where I intend them to go.



.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top