Tip diameter comparisons?

[Gogafem]

Most cues I've tried have a 13 or 12.75 tip diameter. My venom shaft has a 13.
I know that smaller tip diameter means more spin control, but less accuracy(Unforgiving) and a bigger tip diameter means more accuracy, but less spin control... But can someone go into more depth on this?
Have you played an extensive period of time with both a 12.75/13 mm shaft and a 11.75 mm shaft? How different is 12.75 and 13? What about 11.75 or lower?
Predator 314 2 vs Z 2?

 

[Pidge]

I don't understand what you mean by more spin control. I've played with 11-14mm tips and they each provide the same control and accuracy as each other. The curvature of the tip will either be a dime or nickel so the contact area remains the same regardless of size. You won't strike the ball more accurately with a larger tip, either. What I've found is that a smaller tip makes it more visable to where you are aiming on the CB, so that, and the fact I like a conical taper is why I play with an 11.5mm shaft.

 

[Ratta]

11.75 with same shape like 12.75 <----

then you hit the cueball the same way, the same spot, and with same *amount of tip*. Physically no difference, except the deflection.

 

[Luther Blissett]

I play with a Z² shaft, which has an 11.75mm tip.

It's a good choice for me because I spent five years playing English pool before I moved countries and ended up having to get used to eight-ball on nine foot tables with bigger balls and wider cues.

Although this forum regularly sees debates about the whys and wherefores of tip widths with relation to spin and ease of potting, for me that's not the important thing. I like the narrower shaft because it feels closer to the narrower cues that I used to use in the UK.

The only real down side of regularly using a narrower shaft though (as far as I'm concerned) is that if you go somewhere without your cue and suddenly find yourself in a bar with a pool table, it's pretty much impossible to just pick up a cue with a 13mm tip and play your best game.

Since getting used to my Z², rail shots in particular seem to get totally screwed up if I switch to a wider shaft now.

Love the Z² though. Can't see myself ever buying another shaft ...unless perhaps Predator bring out a Z³.

 

[RADAR]

All comes down to playing ability and playing correct angles. Guarantee you average player will miss less balls with 13mm than any size less! Back in 60s & 70s 13 1/4 to 1/2 was common! Watch how they played. Correct angles & center ball hit more often than today! Spin to win is not the answer to consistent pool in my opinion! Pool thinking has changed today in terms use of english simplifying the game at least in most peoples mind, i don't agree!

 

[ceebee]

Here is simulation of grip vs tip radius. These illustrations are for a 13mm dia, but may relate to any diameter tip with the same radius.

Hope this helps.

 

[Raggedy Andy]

Tip Diameter

I posted on another thread about this subject. I have been playing for 40 years. Over that time, I've learned much watching better players. Many years ago, most of the pros were playing with 13mm or 13&1/4mm. A few really good players, including Tony Anigoni, played bigger....like I do. I play now, and for the last 25 - 30 years, with a 13&1/2mm shaft. The shafts I use have a pro taper, so it feels like 13&1/2 for most of my stroke. But, in my travels what I learned about tip contact size is this: It boils down to PSI.....pressure per square inch. A smaller tip contact point exerts more pressure to the point of contact on the cue ball than a larger tip. Hence, more grab. That is why it seems easier to juice the cue ball with a smaller tip. For some players, this is an advantage. Not so, for me. I like being able to hit the balls a little harder, without having the cue ball "over react" to what I am applying to it. I also enjoy the advantage of much less deflection with the larger shaft. When I need to draw the ball a long way..........I just have to use a good stroke with good follow through. Isn't it interesting how personal preference differs among players?

 

[Raggedy Andy]

See....I'm not the only one.

All comes down to playing ability and playing correct angles. Guarantee you average player will miss less balls with 13mm than any size less! Back in 60s & 70s 13 1/4 to 1/2 was common! Watch how they played. Correct angles & center ball hit more often than today! Spin to win is not the answer to consistent pool in my opinion! Pool thinking has changed today in terms use of english simplifying the game at least in most peoples mind, i don't agree!

My sentiments, exactly. Jimmy Caras once said you would have better cue ball control with a tip the size of a dime. Although I don't fault, nor do I judge players using thinner shafts, it is my opinion that almost all players have more accuracy using a bigger shaft. For a variety of reasons......less deflection being one of them.

 

[Badbeat13]

I posted on another thread about this subject. I have been playing for 40 years. Over that time, I've learned much watching better players. Many years ago, most of the pros were playing with 13mm or 13&1/4mm. A few really good players, including Tony Anigoni, played bigger....like I do. I play now, and for the last 25 - 30 years, with a 13&1/2mm shaft. The shafts I use have a pro taper, so it feels like 13&1/2 for most of my stroke. But, in my travels what I learned about tip contact size is this: It boils down to PSI.....pressure per square inch. A smaller tip contact point exerts more pressure to the point of contact on the cue ball than a larger tip. Hence, more grab. That is why it seems easier to juice the cue ball with a smaller tip. For some players, this is an advantage. Not so, for me. I like being able to hit the balls a little harder, without having the cue ball "over react" to what I am applying to it. I also enjoy the advantage of much less deflection with the larger shaft. When I need to draw the ball a long way..........I just have to use a good stroke with good follow through. Isn't it interesting how personal preference differs among players?

Spot on in my opinion. I prefer a 13-13.1 mm shaft and I'm far more consitent with it. To each his on, but if a shaft is 12.75 or less I seem to rattle more balls due to a little more unintended spin.

 

[RADAR]

spot on in my opinion. I prefer a 13-13.1 mm shaft and i'm far more consitent with it. To each his on, but if a shaft is 12.75 or less i seem to rattle more balls due to a little more unintended spin.

your right due to the fact of a smaller tip diameter! Accuracy dissipates!

 

[Luther Blissett]

This is pretty ridiculous. You are assuming a larger compression area depending on the shape of the tip, but then assuming the same amount of compression?

Doesn't work like that.

dld

I suppose there will be more compression occurring with more curvy tips, as there's a smaller contact point concentrating the same force into a smaller area, but still, you're only ever going to reduce the grip diameter (and never increase it) by having a more curvy radius.

I suppose different tip materials will produce different compression curves too (oh sorry, just then I meant 'curves' in the sense of the line on a graph, not to be confused with the curvaceousness of the tip itself - as I should make clear :smile.

 

[ENGLISH!]

I don't understand what you mean by more spin control. I've played with 11-14mm tips and they each provide the same control and accuracy as each other. The curvature of the tip will either be a dime or nickel so the contact area remains the same regardless of size. You won't strike the ball more accurately with a larger tip, either. What I've found is that a smaller tip makes it more visable to where you are aiming on the CB, so that, and the fact I like a conical taper is why I play with an 11.5mm shaft.

Pidge,

I agree.

What shaft are you using? I want a small tip LD shaft. I'm leaning toward the OB Classic Pro or maybe the McDermott i3.

I'd appreciate any insight you might have.

Thanks In advance & Best Regards,

 

[MitchAlsup]

Here is simulation of grip vs tip radius. These illustrations are for a 13mm dia, but may relate to any diameter tip with the same radius.

Hope this helps.

Thanks for the image, but there is a basic problem with the "math".

Tips with smaller radii of curvature will compress more than flatter tips--because the smaller radius has less leather making contact for the same energy transfer.

 

[nahog99]

Just thinking of it from a physics stand point, a smaller shaft diameter should have absolutely no effect on what the cue ball does assuming that the tips are exactly the same in every way. If a 10mm tip is the exact same curvature and the same material as a 14mm tip there will be no difference in the shot as long as the contact point on the cue ball is the same. Obviously this is just from the TIPS perspective. The shaft may bend or something at the point of contact creating a slightly different angle for the energy transfer. Anyway, lets just assume both shafts are infinitely rigid, one is 10mm one is 14mm. Both tips are the same material and have the exact same ratio of radius to diameter. In this case if the cue ball is struck in the exact same spot in the exact same way with both shaft/tip combos the cue ball in ideal situations would do exactly the same thing both times. Remember that the cue ball and the tip are round and there is an infinitesimally small initial point of contact between the two. After this instant the tip compresses. Now I'm sure there is some tiny difference in the compression characteristics of a 10mm tip and a 14mm tip but that is way too complicated for me. I assure you though that the differences would be negligible. The actual amount of surface area between the tip and the cue ball is almost exactly the same in both situations so this whole "smaller contact point" argument for smaller tips is really stupid. Every single shot regardless of the tip starts with an infinitely small point of contact and after that compression increases the surface area. So really as far as the "point of contact" aspect of the shot the softness of the tip makes more of a difference than the tip diameter. Softer tip == more surface area, harder tip == less surface area. In a perfect situation with a tip of infinite hardness and a cue ball of infinite hardness the point of contact would be just that, a single point, with a surface area of effectively zero(infinitely close to zero).

I think what is really happening 99% of the time someone tries a really thin shaft vs their bigger shaft they are simply hitting the cue ball in a different spot. Think about it like this. Say I'm doing a draw shot with a 10mm shaft. I pick a spot on the cue ball with my eyes and i hit it, the cue ball draws back, great. Now try doing the same shot with a 6 inch diameter shaft. It is actually physically impossible because your point of contact can never be underneath the center of the cue ball. Now scale it back a little bit to a 14mm shaft. You are AIMING at the same exact spot as you did with the 10mm shaft, but in reality, if you are most likely contacting the cue ball slightly above where you did with the 10mm shaft. Adjust your aim a little bit so that the actual point of contact(NOT your aiming point) is the same and i guarantee you the shot reacts the same way.

Bottom line is fat shaft, skinny shaft, doesn't really matter. You can perform all of the same shots with both. What it really comes down to in the end is what you like and what works for you(as with everything else in pool). Some people like the feel of a skinny shaft and the increased visibility when looking down them. Some people say like the feel of a fat shaft. I won't agree with people saying that fat shafts are "more consistent" because well, they aren't. The inconsistency comes from the player not the shaft(snooker anyone?). Fat shafts aren't "more forgiving" either. Like i said earlier when putting extreme english on the ball with a fat shaft you are in actuality striking the cue ball more towards the center than with a skinny shaft. Therefore less chance of a miss cue. People that miss cue all the time with a skinny shaft are aiming too far out on the cue ball, bring it in a bit. In the end just get what feels good for you, but if you are really trying to get a tip that theoretically puts the most juice on a ball, get a hard tip and work on your stroke. Harder tips will have a smaller point of contact and therefore a "cleaner" transfer of energy to a specific spot on the cue ball. Miss cues are more common with hard tips but a nice stroke makes up for that.

 

[Luther Blissett]

Thanks for the image, but there is a basic problem with the "math".

Tips with smaller radii of curvature will compress more than flatter tips--because the smaller radius has less leather making contact for the same energy transfer.

My point exactly.

 

[scratchs]

11.75 with same shape like 12.75 <----

then you hit the cueball the same way, the same spot, and with same *amount of tip*. Physically no difference, except the deflection.

this is my thought as well..

 

[Gogafem]

Just thinking of it from a physics stand point, a smaller shaft diameter should have absolutely no effect on what the cue ball does assuming that the........................................................................................

Very detailed explanation. I think you are right about all this. Guess it all comes down to skill and personal preference.

 

[nahog99]

Thanks for the image, but there is a basic problem with the "math".

Tips with smaller radii of curvature will compress more than flatter tips--because the smaller radius has less leather making contact for the same energy transfer.

While it may be true that tips with more curvature compress more(i doubt it) your reasoning for it is wrong. The point of contact is no smaller with a more rounded tip. If you were to hit a perfect sphere with a perfectly flat object you would contact the sphere in EXACTLY one spot. It's not physically possible contact a sphere with a flat or slightly convex surface at more than one point. The only way to contact a sphere at more than one point is if you hit it with a concave surface that perfectly matches the curvature of the sphere. In this case it would contact the sphere at all points within the concave at exactly the same time.

What may make a difference however is HOW the tip compresses. If you hit a ball with a perfectly flat tip it will compress into a concave shape, kind of making a "crater" in the tip if you will. With a highly curved tip however that "crater" made by the ball pressing into it should theoretically be much smaller due to the fact that the cue ball has to press through more of the tip to create the same diameter "crater". If you can imagine a perfectly flat, easily compressible cylinder of lets just say a 13mm diameter with a sphere pressing down on it. It wouldn't be that tough for a cue ball to compress the center of that cylinder all the way down until it is contacting the entire top surface of the cylinder, making the entire thing concave. If we take the same 13mm cylinder and give it a very curved top the cue ball would require much more energy to flatten and spread out that surface. In order to touch the entire surface area of the top of this cylinder it would have to compress the entire thing down until it becomes concave in order to touch those very outside edges of it. This would require a lot more energy than in the flat top cylinder.

So basically a more rounded tip should theoretically compress less, at least when hitting the middle of the tip.


EDIT: Just wanted to add, watch some of Dr. Dave Billiard's high speed footage on youtube. He talks quite a bit about how a cue tip strikes the cue ball and where the limits are for a miscue. It also is just a really nice visual representation of what is actually happening when you hit a cue ball.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Fat shafts aren't "more forgiving" either. Like i said earlier when putting extreme english on the ball with a fat shaft you are in actuality striking the cue ball more towards the center than with a skinny shaft. Therefore less chance of a miss cue. People that miss cue all the time with a skinny shaft are aiming too far out on the cue ball, bring it in a bit. In the end just get what feels good for you, but if you are really trying to get a tip that theoretically puts the most juice on a ball, get a hard tip and work on your stroke. Harder tips will have a smaller point of contact and therefore a "cleaner" transfer of energy to a specific spot on the cue ball. Miss cues are more common with hard tips but a nice stroke makes up for that.

I only scaned your post til I saw this. What you say here is only true if the point of reference is the center line of the shaft/tip. If not, with right english one should be concerned with the left edge of the tip, or more pecisely the left side point of the tip that will be contacting the cue ball.

As to the hard tip putting more spin on the CB, all other things being equal, I would tend to agree, but it will also put more foward momemtum on the CB than a soft tip, all other things being equal. In other words, on many shots, it's as much about the Speed to Spin Ratio. IMHO a soft tip allows a higher spin to speed ratio with ALL other things being equal.

I am not trying to get into an arguement, so I will say that all of the above is JMHO & I have no scientific studies or facts to support my opinion.

Regards,

 

[joelpope]

Consider this

Imagine a pinpoint contact point on the radius between your tipmand the cue ball. Given different radius tips, the flatter the tip the further from center you need to hit to place the pinpoint on the radius at the same place on the cue ball.

The further out you hit, the more deflection. Regardless of the shaft being standard or lower deflection, the further from center the more deflection, which, is more variable.

Understanding that, why would a flatter tip, requiring more extreme off center hits for the same spin transfer, ever be preferred?

As far as shaft diameter is concerned, the dime radius on an 11.75mm tip is the same as the dime radius on a 13mm tip. The radius defines the curvature, not the diameter.

Pretty straight forward stuff...

I won't even get in to the concept that a good stroke, dime radius and close to center hit makes the standard solid maple shaft superior to a glued together pie of wood that is almost as much glue as it is wood. Oh shit... I went and did it there.