We don't need standardized testing. It sounds like you have the definitive information.
Thanks
Kevin
The BIG low deflection Hype Campaign.
- Thread starter Kel_82
- Start date
We don't need standardized testing. It sounds like you have the definitive information.
Thanks
Kevin
That's just one test. Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder.
Besides, a lot of you obviously don't want to know the actual numbers. Nothing wrong with that. Just in my profession, we use a lot of numbers and collect a lot of data in order to control and perfect processes.
It's astonishing to myself that so many people just rather fire off some spastic sarcastic grumpy ass response than actually know.
What is missing, is not the shaft and the tip, but the shooters stroke.
The right equipment, but wrong stroke is still nogood.
Next is the ability to make changes or corrections for the different stroke.
By changing a tip to an either harder, softer, layered, non layered, larger-smaller radius, the cue can be tuned and adjusted to that user.
Last weekend I had some of NZ best players have a play with my new composite series shafts. Of the 4 different people that played with it, all liked different tips. All could not believe the difference in changing the the correct tip for them made.
Some found that with their stroke tip x seemed to have a high amount of deflection to what they were used to, but after finding the correct tip for them , found they were able to make shots that they had trouble making with their normal shaft tip combination and found the combination to be very low deflection.
What one person found to be a low deflecting tip, was not a low deflection tip for another person. The tip mass change is very minimal, the stroke of the individual is huge. That is the real difference.
For that reason, there is no one tip that suites everybody. People just have to try different things until they find what works for them.
Just to mess it all up, the same shaft but on different handles , had a different tip combination as well.
If we could all shoot like robots, then there could be real definitive setups. But we don't.
Neil
I beg to differ. I paid for one upfront, waited 7 weeks when he promised 4, it came with the wrong pin size, waited another 5 weeks. What I finally got was whippy and played like crap compared to the ob2 and z2.
RBC
Deceased
Badically, there is so much bullshit in the world of pool, that you can't get any accurate numbers.
I can't see where it would be that difficult, you said in another thread you have worked for a company thst has done it before.
I guess companies don't want people to know the actual numbers. They are all probably very close to one another. I know if I made shafts that claimed to have the best hit with the lowest deflection I would give supporting evidence.
Because obviously that's what any player would want, accuracy and control. You could corner the market.
But what's probably closer to the truth is a SS360 is right there beside you on deflection, has more feel. At half the price.
Kel
I have to say I'm surprised by your response.
I'm not actually sure how you took it. Whether you think I'm on the right side, or if you think I put out BS.
I'm open for any questions if you have any.
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
the data your looking for and trying to compare to guns is totally different....a gun can be set up in a stand set precisely at a single target and simply fired so yes there can be data provided...when looking at shafts your looking past the fact of a cue needs to be in a stroking motion and would need same stroke every time at same speed etc. and hit the cue ball in same spot every time to give results...guns are very consistent with a steady rest when being shot over and over unlike a ld shaft that is in motion and the slightest thing can change the data....a gun will shoot the same no matter how its held..upside down right side up tilted ..etc...a shaft will deflect differently by each 1mph stroke difference..
so how can a company give data on that?..will they say**** "at one tip inside english with 7mph stroke this shaft will deflect 30° off center"??****..the info your in search of is not there....shafts will be chosen by personal feel, hit, taper etc...
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2
so how can a company give data on that?..will they say**** "at one tip inside english with 7mph stroke this shaft will deflect 30° off center"??****..the info your in search of is not there....shafts will be chosen by personal feel, hit, taper etc...
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2
Last edited:
I've drawn my own conclusions on LD shafts.
I believe the lower deflection= less feel
More deflection = more feel.
Most people that like Predator think the feel is dead.
Other LD shafts might deflect more than Predator
but have more feel.
The only LD shaft that I've tried that almost has a pure maple feel
with LD properties is Jacobys hybrid LD shaft.
I believe the lower deflection= less feel
More deflection = more feel.
Most people that like Predator think the feel is dead.
Other LD shafts might deflect more than Predator
but have more feel.
The only LD shaft that I've tried that almost has a pure maple feel
with LD properties is Jacobys hybrid LD shaft.
Contacts for the major LD shaft makers, I'm thinking they would be the ones to check with. When they tell you, you can post why they do what they do. My guess is... marketing.
http://www.obcues.com/pages/Contact-Us.html
http://www.predatorcues.com/contact/
http://www.cueandcase.com/ <--- Lucasi and Players cues and shafts
Did you ask Coke or Pepsi whey they say their soda is the best when clearly only ONE can be the best? I'd like to know that one also.
Toyota also sings "it's simply the best" and BMW is "The ultimate driving machine". I'd think that anything "ultimate" would also be the "best". WTH man? Please talk to those two companies and sort things out.
If anything I broke your assumption that thinking there can be tests done. Tests cannot be done as there is no way to compare the data.
For a deflection test, you can gather numbers. What those numbers ultimately tell is bunk. There are an exponential number of ways to construct a shaft, and pairing that with no two pieces of wood will perform the same, your left with and un-quantifiable set of data. Too many tests to be done, producing too many numbers. Let alone trying to factor in the variances of climate conditions affecting the table.
The way you want to dream about being able to read a simple stat for deflection is absurd. There's no way you'l comprehend what I'm saying, but there's basically 5 dimensions that the data will be present in. Each dimension the exact same data is looked at in will produce a different result as to what's 'best'.
I tried to make it simple for you to read, but there is no way, zero, nada, zilch, 0 ways to gather this data and attempt to define what you're even looking at. Let alone trying to interpenetrate the data without having to show a bias to get a result. There are ways to show that for one particular scenario, XXXXXXX shaft will perform best. There is no ways to show that XXXXXXX shaft will perform best under all conditions though, and that's what you want. The reason that shaft does not exist, is for every gauntlet of tests you can run, there's one test it will just suck at. It will suck enough that the company has to deflect the issue, and promote something entirely else.
................................................................................................................
" Not many people use parallel offsets for applying english"
......................................................................................................
I would beg to differ - and if you throw out the 1% of players who read AZB
aiming threads, I would make it 97.38 % who do just that.
Dale
The test is actually fairly simple... The test Dr Dave did was just one option and while it would be adequate there are other setups..... Table conditions, individual strokes really have no real bearing on raw data if done correctly... The major issue is acquiring the shafts... Aside from Royce and possibly predator, getting the industry to submit shafts is going to be a huge hurdle....
It may be possible to can the test and put it out where with a small equipment expense people can show their results on youtube for the shaft they own.... Granted older shafts that are no longer the same size as new shafts may eschew things slightly but a micrometer reading will help with that......
I know I can do the testing here in Knoxville spending maybe $50-$60..But I can't get all of the shafts. IF enough people are interested I'll try and put something together next weekend that can be duplicated......
it would be nice to know the squirt of all of the shafts out there... Will that determine the best shaft?? Not likely........
Chris
It may be possible to can the test and put it out where with a small equipment expense people can show their results on youtube for the shaft they own.... Granted older shafts that are no longer the same size as new shafts may eschew things slightly but a micrometer reading will help with that......
I know I can do the testing here in Knoxville spending maybe $50-$60..But I can't get all of the shafts. IF enough people are interested I'll try and put something together next weekend that can be duplicated......
it would be nice to know the squirt of all of the shafts out there... Will that determine the best shaft?? Not likely........
Chris
I'd like to comment using the thread title as the basis for my thought. This is mostly hype. It is about selling things. I truly believe if players spent as much time playing, practicing and working on their game as they do shopping for whatever magic bullet they think is going to make them play better they will probably be better players over the long haul. I see it in the pool hall all the time, players, especially less skilled ones, talking constantly about this LD shaft vs that LD shaft or this new tip vs that new tip or this aiming system vs that aiming system, constantly changing their equipment looking for some magical thing that will suddenly help them breakthrough and become better players.
More often than not never committing enough time to these different panaceas they purchase to develop any consistency before they move onto the next, shaft, tip, glove or whatever in their quest. Meanwhile over in the corner there's the guy with the same cue he's been playing with for 20 years with a standard maple shaft & old school single layer tip laying racks to waste. Perhaps if the others invested their money and efforts into table time it would produce more dividends for them. You know the old adage, "it's not the arrow, it's the Indian", just a thought. I'm not saying you shouldn't look for something that gives you more confidence & consistency in your game but your commitment of time working on your game should far exceed the time & $ you expend in search of a magic solution. I mean this with all sincerity.
More often than not never committing enough time to these different panaceas they purchase to develop any consistency before they move onto the next, shaft, tip, glove or whatever in their quest. Meanwhile over in the corner there's the guy with the same cue he's been playing with for 20 years with a standard maple shaft & old school single layer tip laying racks to waste. Perhaps if the others invested their money and efforts into table time it would produce more dividends for them. You know the old adage, "it's not the arrow, it's the Indian", just a thought. I'm not saying you shouldn't look for something that gives you more confidence & consistency in your game but your commitment of time working on your game should far exceed the time & $ you expend in search of a magic solution. I mean this with all sincerity.
LD shafts will not magically make anyone a better player.
Speaking from experience, I played for almost 30 years with stiff hitting high squirt shafts, and never had a problem. I was used to adjusting with tuck and roll, and I hated the LD shafts with a passion when I first tried them. That said, I made a dedicated effort a few years back to give them an honest effort sticking with a predator for a couple of weeks. After relearning my aiming without worrying about squirt or twisting my back hand, I can honestly say the LD shafts are worth the money. For newer players it would be a huge advantage to learn how to aim with english and stroke straight as opposed to any back hand english when their stroke isnt grooved in yet.
So are they needed to play well? No of course not. Are they just hype? No, of course not.
Chuck
Deflection/Feel Standards
In I think it was CSI TAR 24 Podcast I believe John Schmidt mentions the fact that the Europeans....who have been winning.....does mention that they almost exclusively use the LD shafts.
He also states at the height of his career he was using a high deflection shaft.
Personally I find shaft in one of 3 categories although we all know each shaft deflects just a touch differently:
You have L D of some type
Then you have Long Pro Taper with various ferrule
Then you have the factory shaft wth
12 in taper with various ferrule
When I watch some good players get a hold of cue, then look at it and make some of the same spin shots with the 2 non LD shafts but have trouble with the LD. Its kind of funny. There mind just doesn't want to accept the fact they deflect that much less for awhile, but they knew the differences between the two basic types and knew how to allow for them.
I play with 12.80 mm 15 in pro taper shafts no ivory ferrules and my cue is what I like to refer to as in the middle of the road on deflection. I don't have a lot of trouble converting from LD to my cue but it is different. I would classify my cue as LD because no weight has been removed from the front of the shaft. I think the biggest adjustment I have to make and have not mastered is the application of 3 and 9 oclock English over a 4 to 5 diamond distance shot hard. Im not sure and LD would be a lot better but as the Europeans have proven....less is best or so it seems.
John Schmidt's advice was never switch. He said it took him out the major competition for 2 to 3 years getting used to the new shaft from everything he knew from his former. I think I could do it but just haven't really felt the need.
In I think it was CSI TAR 24 Podcast I believe John Schmidt mentions the fact that the Europeans....who have been winning.....does mention that they almost exclusively use the LD shafts.
He also states at the height of his career he was using a high deflection shaft.
Personally I find shaft in one of 3 categories although we all know each shaft deflects just a touch differently:
You have L D of some type
Then you have Long Pro Taper with various ferrule
Then you have the factory shaft wth
12 in taper with various ferrule
When I watch some good players get a hold of cue, then look at it and make some of the same spin shots with the 2 non LD shafts but have trouble with the LD. Its kind of funny. There mind just doesn't want to accept the fact they deflect that much less for awhile, but they knew the differences between the two basic types and knew how to allow for them.
I play with 12.80 mm 15 in pro taper shafts no ivory ferrules and my cue is what I like to refer to as in the middle of the road on deflection. I don't have a lot of trouble converting from LD to my cue but it is different. I would classify my cue as LD because no weight has been removed from the front of the shaft. I think the biggest adjustment I have to make and have not mastered is the application of 3 and 9 oclock English over a 4 to 5 diamond distance shot hard. Im not sure and LD would be a lot better but as the Europeans have proven....less is best or so it seems.
John Schmidt's advice was never switch. He said it took him out the major competition for 2 to 3 years getting used to the new shaft from everything he knew from his former. I think I could do it but just haven't really felt the need.
I'm going to quote your OP because I am in complete agreement. I have made a similar point in previous posts.
1. A few simple stats could be measured and published for every cue made:
A. Weight
B. Length
C. Tip diameter
D. Tip hardness (need a numerical value)
E. Pivot point in inches
Or, squirt on a standardized test
F. Vibratory dampening
G. Balance point (never understood why this is important, but some players think it is)
2. The lack of current performance standards is no impediment. The first decent sized manufacturer to start measuring their cues and publishing the results will set the defacto standard.
3. It will be a boon to some suppliers, and a bane to those who just want to make unsubstantiated claims.
4. Players will be able to better experiment with and specify characteristics in the kind of cue they like.
5. Cause and effect between physical characteristics and performance will be better understood, advancing the science of cue design. If my current cue has a slightly short pivot point, the exact tweaks necessary will be known to get it where I want it.
Personal anecdote:
I have an LD cue with a pivot point longer than I like. I added a few wraps of lead tape near the ferrule and "tuned" it exactly to my desired pivot point length. Works great, but not the best look. I would prefer to specify a shaft with the exact pivot point length at the outset.
Last edited:
more grade school education here, *sighs*
such data certainly can and should be posted how do you think pred and ob develop their stuff?
often the manufacturer will open himself up to all kinds of criticism regarding testing methodology so they keep it quiet, in other instances the data does not support the marketing i.e. if the world's lowest deflection cue just barely barely deflects less than the competition then the title of "worlds lowest deflection" no longer means as much
Golf equipment manufactueres reign supreme in this regard, kings of marketing and bs (I'm soon myself about to switch to a skinny bag and 4 club set)
at day's end though, we need data, Royce himself has posted such data in the past sans testing methodology and if I'm not mistaken will be doing so again
such data certainly can and should be posted how do you think pred and ob develop their stuff?
often the manufacturer will open himself up to all kinds of criticism regarding testing methodology so they keep it quiet, in other instances the data does not support the marketing i.e. if the world's lowest deflection cue just barely barely deflects less than the competition then the title of "worlds lowest deflection" no longer means as much
Golf equipment manufactueres reign supreme in this regard, kings of marketing and bs (I'm soon myself about to switch to a skinny bag and 4 club set)
at day's end though, we need data, Royce himself has posted such data in the past sans testing methodology and if I'm not mistaken will be doing so again
Finally a few that see where I'm going with this.
We're all aware that everyone shoots differently, and then you have the guys saying quit looking for magic bullets etc. there is nothing wrong with my stroke. Just a science guy looking for some numbers.
Like I told Royce, I would buy an American made shaft before foreign regardless of the deflection. I'm just curious to see how today's crop of shafts stack up against each other. I've heard of bowling alley shafts, I've heard of ivory ferrules deflecting more, I've heard of 140 year old wood, hollowed fronts, short ferrules, wood ferrules, different drying processes etc. just curious.
I'm also aware Efren use to use $15 cue and dominate.
We're all aware that everyone shoots differently, and then you have the guys saying quit looking for magic bullets etc. there is nothing wrong with my stroke. Just a science guy looking for some numbers.
Like I told Royce, I would buy an American made shaft before foreign regardless of the deflection. I'm just curious to see how today's crop of shafts stack up against each other. I've heard of bowling alley shafts, I've heard of ivory ferrules deflecting more, I've heard of 140 year old wood, hollowed fronts, short ferrules, wood ferrules, different drying processes etc. just curious.
I'm also aware Efren use to use $15 cue and dominate.