In the other thread it seemed as if you were making too much of the difference in kinetic energy for the two cues. But here you indicate it may be the result of rounding off the numbers. That's of course correct since the same force applied over the same distance will yield exactly the same kinetic energy, regardless of the mass being accelerated.
In order to figure optimal cue weight - and there is an optimum for each individual - you have to include the mass of the player's arm (and whatever else gets put into motion) during the stroke. This is because the forces being generated by the muscles are moving more than the cue. Unfortunately, that's very hard to determine. You also have to include the collision dynamics and the fact that once the tip makes contact, body mass (arm plus whatever) is no longer relevant because of "soft tissue coupling," as Bob Jewett puts it. But it is relevant during the acceleration phase.
If you do the above and assume "reasonable" values for arm mass based upon typical weight preferences for normal playing cues (under the assumption that they're at least near optimal), and then plot cueball speed vs. cue mass, you'll probably find that weight is indeed not very critical, as per your overall conclusion. That is, the curve tends to be relatively flat in the area of the maxima (optimal weight). (As an aside, optimal weight does vary with tip offset, decreasing considerably at large offsets.)
There are, however, other things to consider, such as how the generated forces may vary with different cue weights because of the relative proportions of fast and slow twitch muscles, per Dr. Dave's remarks in the other thread.
The only easy way to find out is to try out different cues with the same tip or similar characteristics.
Jim
Last edited:
