The softer the tip, the more spin you can get? is this accurate.
- Thread starter asbani
- Start date
The flex of the shaft is also a factor. Many pros use ridiculously long bridges. Besides being able to frame the cueball and stick as part of the shot, the added bridging length allows higher resolution of speed estimation than with a shorter "more accurate" stroke and bridge length. The biggest revelation to me after many years of over hitting, was with the long bridge, the shaft flexed more and added some spring to the cueball. By stroking slowly, it's possible to "press into" the ball allowing a very efficient transfer of stroke energy. Easily much quicker than the mechanics of your arm allow.
I played that way too
For a lot of years I played with a flat tip with just the edges rounded. Played just fine and that is how house cues were tipped too. Got into this nickel and dime thing when I came back to pool but I have a suspicion I would be as well off with a flat faced tip. Not as touchy hitting dead center of a cue ball and still able to spin a cue ball with no problem. Leather moves a lot, particularly softer leather, some ferrules move a lot, I think some of this tip shaping is more from theory and looking at things in two dimensions than from actual play.
Whatever gets us through the night works and I think a lot of people would be happy with flat faced tips if they tried them. They hear the pro's use a dime, a dime must be best. Pro's use a long bridge, must be best so many use a bridge too long for their abilities.
Pretty sure most would be better off simplifying their equipment and their playing style.
Hu
For a lot of years I played with a flat tip with just the edges rounded. Played just fine and that is how house cues were tipped too. Got into this nickel and dime thing when I came back to pool but I have a suspicion I would be as well off with a flat faced tip. Not as touchy hitting dead center of a cue ball and still able to spin a cue ball with no problem. Leather moves a lot, particularly softer leather, some ferrules move a lot, I think some of this tip shaping is more from theory and looking at things in two dimensions than from actual play.
Whatever gets us through the night works and I think a lot of people would be happy with flat faced tips if they tried them. They hear the pro's use a dime, a dime must be best. Pro's use a long bridge, must be best so many use a bridge too long for their abilities.
Pretty sure most would be better off simplifying their equipment and their playing style.
Hu
painfullyslow
Registered
I realize that I am new here but this seems like a whole lot of 'voodoo magic' to me.
The physics of this are very simple. The object to achieve maximum spin (at any tip position) is to have the largest contact patch between tip and cue ball. This means that given tip placement, the optimal shape is one that allows this to occur.
Meaning if you are at the extreme edges of the cue ball, a more rounded tip (and smaller diameter one as well) will get better contact. If you are closer to a center hit, a flatter tip (and larger diameter tip) will get more contact...and thus more spin.
If I had to take a guess, and this is simply my opinion so please keep your flames to yourself, is that people like the amazing Mr. Reyes is that he rarely has to resort to extreme edges of the cue ball to make position. It does not take a genius to realize that adding spin to a cue ball is a variable. The more extreme the spin, the larger the variable. Why take the risk?
In any case, the best tip shape is the one that works for you and your game so why freaking argue over it?
Personally, I prefer a more rounded tip, and a smaller diameter one. Not because it makes me magic, or elitist, or super-special...but because *I FEEL* that the smaller diameter of the tip allows me to be more precise with my tip position when hitting the cue ball. Is this true? I DON'T CARE! It gives me confidence to shoot this way, and confidence is the one thing that matters a hell of a lot more than your freaking tip shape.
The physics of this are very simple. The object to achieve maximum spin (at any tip position) is to have the largest contact patch between tip and cue ball. This means that given tip placement, the optimal shape is one that allows this to occur.
Meaning if you are at the extreme edges of the cue ball, a more rounded tip (and smaller diameter one as well) will get better contact. If you are closer to a center hit, a flatter tip (and larger diameter tip) will get more contact...and thus more spin.
If I had to take a guess, and this is simply my opinion so please keep your flames to yourself, is that people like the amazing Mr. Reyes is that he rarely has to resort to extreme edges of the cue ball to make position. It does not take a genius to realize that adding spin to a cue ball is a variable. The more extreme the spin, the larger the variable. Why take the risk?
In any case, the best tip shape is the one that works for you and your game so why freaking argue over it?
Personally, I prefer a more rounded tip, and a smaller diameter one. Not because it makes me magic, or elitist, or super-special...but because *I FEEL* that the smaller diameter of the tip allows me to be more precise with my tip position when hitting the cue ball. Is this true? I DON'T CARE! It gives me confidence to shoot this way, and confidence is the one thing that matters a hell of a lot more than your freaking tip shape.
I don’t believe “shaft flex” is a thing that (1) changes with bridge length or (2) affects the hit.
pj
chgo
no contradiction pat. the cloth is stationary, cue ball moves. a slick cloth lets the cue ball slide forward. the cue ball needs some grab to stop and come back.
a slick cueball slides easily along the cloth and when it hits the object ball and stops it can reverse and when it does it has little resistance/friction from the cloth and comes back farther.
a slick cueball slides easily along the cloth and when it hits the object ball and stops it can reverse and when it does it has little resistance/friction from the cloth and comes back farther.
Think of your bridge hand as a node. The closer the bridge is to the tip of the cue, the higher the harmonics. As your bridge moves away from the cueball; 16 or more inches say, the frequency of flex drops to say an arbitrary one wiggle per contact. This wiggle is more than lateral vibration. It's the actual compression and release of the shaft against the ball. Like I said you have to stroke slowly and press into the ball; legally of course. The effect is instantaneous but more profound than you can produce with the standard follow through. You easily produce follow shots at center ball or lower. Usable left and right can be had as well by simply biasing the stroke in the desired direction.
If the CB "has little resistance/friction from the cloth", what do you suppose it "grabs" in order to come back?
Cloth slickness and CB slickness have the same effect on the friction between them. Which one moves is irrelevant - they both "move" in relation to each other.
pj
chgo
Your fleshy bridge doesn't hold the shaft stationary enough to have that effect on the cue.
I doubt that's true either.
pj <- lots of pseudoscience around here these days - reader beware
chgo
Siliconed cue balls??? WTF are talking about?? Cue balls are not siliconed. Where do you get this shit? I've seen 3c players silicone slow cloth to get more speed/action but never heard of or seen a siliconed cueball. Are your statements/beliefs based on any test or just guesses? How do know a cue that is "lightweight at the tip" will draw less? I can draw the ball just as easily with a friends fly-weight 15oz cue as i can with my 20.5oz cue. Awful lot of guessing on this issue.
Last edited:
You're right it isn't common in regular play, but don't trick shot performers "juice" the CB with silicone?
pj <- not defending the misguided post you responded to
chgo
Many know about Semih Sayginer's amazing trick shots. Massés, huge draw shots, piqués :thumbup: Many years ago he was watching a show by Roberto Rojas at a big US tournament, and he made some quiet comment about how Roberto had greased the balls (silicone liquid is the standard tool for that). Up until then Semih had been making all his shots without chemical assistance. Within a few years Semih had his special cleaning cloth. On new cloth you might not need the slipperiness the silicone adds, but on two-week-old cloth some of the amazing shots that have become standard are difficult without help and the audience loses patience after the fifth miss.
Here is Semih playing one of the shots introduced by Rojas and he actually introduces Rojas (who was at the exhibition) before shooting it:
https://youtu.be/KMkOPDRfGro?t=597
The start time for the shot is 9:57 for those whose browsers don't follow time stamps.
I've been waxing or siliconing the cue ball for years. I pranked one of my regular practice partners (Napa Jack at Star Billiards in Santa Rosa so it must have been around 1977) by slipping in a waxed cue ball on a table with fairly old cloth. I bet him that he could not play a stop shot on a ball by a foot pocket shooting from behind the line. He kept drawing the cue ball back two or three feet.
In one 3-C match after the lag my opponent got out his special cleaning cloth and greased up his cue ball. We got a different set of balls.
Some rooms apply wax as part of the the normal ball cleaning. I think that's a bad idea because the wax wears off after a few racks and during that time how the balls play changes. It's a bad idea even for object balls because it changes how the balls bank.
Trivia: It was Jack "Napa Jack" Leavitt who coined the term "squirt" or at least he is the first person I heard use the term.
Last edited:
We used to have an old Brunswick 3c table at our room. Un-heated and not super fast. Don Brink(former owner of Raytown Rec. in KC and a top 3c guy)was in town and one of the regulars sprayed silicone on it. I could not believe the difference, it was beyond night-n-day. They were making shots like it was a heated Gabriels. They didn't spray the CB but i'm sure it picked some up from cloth. After a few shots they'd wipe off CB 'cause it got too slick for tip to grip.If you just sprayed CB i don't think you'd get much spin at all. The silicone is put cloth on to increase speed more than anything so CB will have spin after more than one rail and play a little longer.
Last edited:
all those ball polishes are silicone based. same as almost all of the car wax nowadays.
so thats why all of you can draw so well and play position, and think the old timers arent as good as the new breed of player. years back you had to have a great stroke to draw back the table length.
so thats why all of you can draw so well and play position, and think the old timers arent as good as the new breed of player. years back you had to have a great stroke to draw back the table length.
I don't think the Aramith ball polish has any silicone.
States on the site that their liquids are silicone-free. Meguiar's PlastX is another top ball cleaner/restorer that has no silicone. A lot of car waxes/polishes have silicone but i wouldn't use them on pool balls.
Last edited:
One of the worst things you can do to you ball set is too use an abrasive buffing wheel. It quickly creates porosity allowing balls to pick up dirt Quickly.
I played in a room in MN years ago, might of been Wetch's room.
They buffed each ball set when then were returned from play, every time. I was playing a guy, and in one hour, I could take my finger across the OBJECT ball and create a finger path of clean, with dirt very visible on each side of my finger wipe, WOW.
Never use anything abrasive, it will ruin your ball set every time.
I played in a room in MN years ago, might of been Wetch's room.
They buffed each ball set when then were returned from play, every time. I was playing a guy, and in one hour, I could take my finger across the OBJECT ball and create a finger path of clean, with dirt very visible on each side of my finger wipe, WOW.
Never use anything abrasive, it will ruin your ball set every time.
If you use an open bridge and fingertip grip, perhaps not.
I clean the shaft and use clear synthetic car polish right on the wood. With no glove and using a loop bridge I can squeeze the shaft without too much drag. Not that I do but adding the glove would solve any stability vs friction issues. Anyway, wielding a cue in this manner, you can use it like a prybar if you had to. Something about the instability of poking at a shot with 16" of cueshaft makes ball spin easier to produce. This is TECHNIQUE not physics 101.
You do any experiments with the air conditioning off? Varying humidity? Can you open the windows in your area?