What is wrong with deflection?

dr_dave said:
Did it just "seem" that way (maybe because it had much less CB deflection than expected), or did it actually have negative squirt? I'd like to see that.

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

I think it’s personal and situational, Doc.
I was asked to try an original Z shaft at a show once.
So my test shot was to park the 9-ball on the end rail, 1.5 diamonds from the corner.
I set the 8-ball about the same distance from the other corner pocket..same rail...
..straight out towards the side pocket...put whitey in the kitchen, left myself a half ball cut.

The shot is to load it with inside english and hold it for the 9-ball....
...so the 8-ball needs to be made pocket weight.

I hit it on the wrong side and went in-off...:eek:
With my caromish tapered 12mm Joss, I eat that shot alive.

Couple months later, Alex dropped in...he was raving about the Z shaft...
...was running 100s with it at straight pool....so I set that same shot up.....
...he hit the 8-ball dead on....:eek:
He wanted to shoot it again..told him...I only took one shot, that’s all you get..
...if you’re playing for your life...they’re already digging your grave.

So if you regularly play with a Z shaft, you have to allow for masse rather than push.

A cue should be user friendly, for you.
...strangely enough, I could run 100 at snooker with the Z shaft.
 
MattPoland...While you're technically correct, better instructors train their students to understand that deflection refers to the stick, and squirt to the CB. It's something like sidespin. Some players like the terms inside and outside, but that may be confusing to some, so again, better instructors use the terms right and left.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

MattPoland said:
Even that’s not entirely true.

“Squirt” and “Cueball Deflection” mean the same thing: how much an off center hit will send the cueball off the shooting line. This affects the outcome of the shot.

“Cue Stick Deflection”, “Stiffness” and “Flex” mostly mean the same thing: How much the shaft will deviate off the shooting line after impact with the cueball. This affects the feel of the shot.

“Low Deflection Cue” is a term introduced to market a cue that imparts low squirt. It does not have anything to do with stiffness. Because cue manufacturers marketed sticks this way so successfully, “Deflection” (without specifying cueball vs. stick) always means “Squirt” and is referring to the cueball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
 
What's wrong with it? Nothing, really.

All super ld cues have some sort of drawback to them, IMO. Predators feel like crap, carbon fiber feels dead, etc. etc. I just want a normal 12mm cue with a stiff carom/snooker style conical taper and a fairly short carbon ferrule. That's what I prefer. Does it deflect? Yes, but not as much as some other cues. The Z2 i used to play with would swerve more than it deflected on some shots. To me that was trickier to get used to than a cue with high deflection. Plus it felt like crap. That I could never get used to.

I need for my cue to feel "strong" when I shoot at the ball. That inspires confidence when I play. When I feel the cue buckle like most ld shafts, click, vibrate excessively or even feeel nothing but a dead, lifeless hit..that makes me nervous. Mezz cues are ok to me, but I still prefer a solid maple over them. You can't get it both ways. To get the hit and action I desire, I must put up with some deflection. I'm ok with that.
 
Straightpool_99 said:
What's wrong with it? Nothing, really.

All super ld cues have some sort of drawback to them, IMO. Predators feel like crap, carbon fiber feels dead, etc. etc. I just want a normal 12mm cue with a stiff carom/snooker style conical taper and a fairly short carbon ferrule. That's what I prefer. Does it deflect? Yes, but not as much as some other cues. The Z2 i used to play with would swerve more than it deflected on some shots. To me that was trickier to get used to than a cue with high deflection. Plus it felt like crap. That I could never get used to.

I need for my cue to feel "strong" when I shoot at the ball. That inspires confidence when I play. When I feel the cue buckle like most ld shafts, click, vibrate excessively or even feeel nothing but a dead, lifeless hit..that makes me nervous. Mezz cues are ok to me, but I still prefer a solid maple over them. You can't get it both ways. To get the hit and action I desire, I must put up with some deflection. I'm ok with that.
Click to expand...
Sounds like we could borrow each other’s cue.

...pt...fibre ferrule
 
I think the advantage of my early Predator LD cue is the way it tends to limit the extent of deflection in relation to the force of hit. I appreciate knowing, that at the maximum stroke force I am likely to ever use, I never have to allow for more than a half-ball of deflection (table length shot). ‘Consistancy’ is thus better (IMHO) than with any of the high-end traditional/vintage cues I used to own.
 
Matt_24 said:
What’s wrong with deflection? Most of the best players I’ve known used normal shafts. Go.
Click to expand...

Nothing, if you can play better than with an LD shaft. Most newer players I see that went to an LD shaft early in their playing got better faster since they don't have to train their aim to compensate when they can barely pocket a ball and think about position without anything else in their heads.

Nothing wrong with liking fish more than beef either. Aside from being a weirdo that likes fish more than a steak.

It's not that you can't play as good with either, but it is easier to start out with an LD shaft and learn to use spin than to use a standard shaft. It's probably also easier to go from a standard shaft to an LD shaft for most players.
 
Matt_24 said:
What’s wrong with deflection? Most of the best players I’ve known used normal shafts. Go.
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with deflection. It's not broken, it still does the same thing it always did.

If your asking why some players prefer LD shafts while others prefer Highrr Deflection shafts, well, the answer is "PREFERENCE".

Rake
 
One thing I've learned on AZB is that without the following two subjects, some on here would be left with very little to do:

Cue Deflection

Aiming Systems

EDIT:

If people spent as much time hitting balls, posting their ghost vids, drills etc.... this site would have a lot more stronger players that it currently does instead of having mostly a bunch of theories with way less "proof"....

Rake
 
Last edited:
I always thought the terminology should either be lower deflection or consistent deflection. All shafts have varying levels of deflection. The manufacturing methods Predator and OB uses allows them to produce shafts with consistent deflection.
 
Last edited:
ctyhntr said:
I always thought the terminology should either be lower deflection or consistent deflection. All shafts have varying levels of deflection. The manufacturing methods Predator and OB uses allows them to produce shafts with consistent deflection.
Click to expand...
Do you think other shafts produce inconsistent CB deflection?

pj
chgo
 
Pool is about fundamentals and feel, not aiming techniques, precise pivot points and things of that nature.

With that being said, if you are used to low deflection and don't use it as an excuse, stay low deflection. If you are an old timer with your super duper maple shaft that you will never ever budge on and hiss at the thought of any new technology, stay standard maple shaple. Deflection isn't going to make or break your game, unless you played low deflection your whole life and at the beginning of a new tourney, you picked up a standard deflection shaft. It comes down to what you are used to and how well you can feel where you're putting the cueball.
 
Stop comparing things to what Pro's did. Who cares what Mosconi used to play with. Major league baseball players MUST use wood bats. We used metal bats for decades. We could use wood, and there was always one guy, every now and then, that would use wood.

Oh, we'd shout out he's got a "woody" so the outfielders knew to come in 15 or so feet.

Nobody ever said, and I mean nobody said "hey but Hank Aaron used wood" Who cares, we are NOT Hank Aaron and nobody on this forum (or planet) is Mosconi :)
 
Derek7646 said:
Pool is about fundamentals and feel, not aiming techniques, precise pivot points and things of that nature.

With that being said, if you are used to low deflection and don't use it as an excuse, stay low deflection. If you are an old timer with your super duper maple shaft that you will never ever budge on and hiss at the thought of any new technology, stay standard maple shaple. Deflection isn't going to make or break your game, unless you played low deflection your whole life and at the beginning of a new tourney, you picked up a standard deflection shaft. It comes down to what you are used to and how well you can feel where you're putting the cueball.
Click to expand...
WELL SAID PARD ..to much theory will drive you nuts but it is hyped up here alot...
 
skankhammer said:
If I was shooting in the same crosswind each time I shot , I would adjust.
Click to expand...

But you’d have to adjust for distance, which varies on every shot.

I’d rather have the ball go on a line as close to the line I’m looking at. There’s already enough other factors like swerve and throw when you’re using English, if you can reduce one, why not?
 
Earl Strickland, Buddy Hall, Efren Reyes...and others who have had the best strokes, power and touch or a combination of all three in pool history - none played with or even liked LD shafts, despite having plenty opportunity to play with them.

LD is more forgiving on mishit shots to a degree. However, this comes with the direct consequence of making a player's stroke a little sloppier over time (not an issue for pros who have "earned" solid fundamentals). That is, slight errors in hitting the CB do not result in as many missed shots - thus, the player loses the feedback (the consequence of the less than perfect hit on the CB, which would be a missed shot).

I appreciate all the pool science geeks and nerds. But when it comes to LD, I believe while they have some valid insight and data, the story is incomplete.

I prefer the wide consensus among skilled players, and my own personal experience. While I have no machine evidence (and neither do they), I believe LD produces less spin/power on the ball than a traditional shaft. I get more action on the ball with an old fashion shaft. Could be all in my head. Whatever, that's what I know. BTW, played with a Predator since 2001'ish ...so I'm familiar with those. Anytime I pick up a regular shaft, whether a Meucci or McDermott or whatever, and I run various drills - I get more action with less effort on my part. Doubt it is placebo effect, as I've done this time and time again, and I have *wanted* the Predator to be more efficient. It should be the LD shaft that has the placebo effect.


The same reason it is harder to masse or jump with an LD, that applies to regular shots on a level plane. Not sure why pool, with all the physicists, engineers and experts applies a different standard contradictory to the rest of world. Heavy SUV hits lightweight compact car - which one moves more? Only in pool does a shaft that deflects away more from a CB than a regular shaft, somehow magically puts more speed and spin and energy into the CB.

I opened a thread recently asking if anyone has tested the latest generation of LD shafts via machine. Mixed results on that. Turns out, even the science guys and engineers who put much value on the machines, are quick to point out the flaws in machine testing.


I think there's just not enough money in pool to get proper results via a variety of tests. Sorry, but I cannot trust Predator's Iron Willie or Meucci's Myth Destroyer. Had pool had the cash flow that golf does -- we'd see independent testing too, via much more elaborate, higher tech testing methods.


Experiments could be run to truly determine which shaft, tip or combo generates the most speed, the most spin. Maybe someday in the future - some high quality testing will be done. Better robots that better stroke the cue. Lasers to measure speed and spin. All that good stuff. But it would cost a lot.

Only ones interested in that are those with an inherent bias. Such as Predator and others. Who of course want to use the results for marketing purposes. Yes, I know - they agreed to the results no matter if positive or negative. What a load. Depending on what you're objective is, you can test to get such results. Everyone makes the claim of objectivity and neutrality. Automotive industry and many others. Nothing unique to pool. BS is BS anywhere.
 
Earl Strickland, Buddy Hall, Efren Reyes, who came up before the widespread availability of LD shafts. Sure, of course. But what about today’s top players?
 
Grilled Cheese said:
I believe LD produces less spin/power on the ball than a traditional shaft. I get more action on the ball with an old fashion shaft. Could be all in my head.
Click to expand...
Easy enough to test.

1. Use a striped ball as your "CB" with the strip vertical and facing you.

2. Hit the ball on the edge of the stripe (maximum side spin), aiming it straight across the table (diamond to diamond) - put a target, like a piece of chalk, on the far rail to easily see if you're hitting straight across.

3. Hit it just hard enough to rebound to the near rail. Mark the spot it hits on the near rail.

3. Check the chalk mark after each shot to be sure you hit right on the edge of the stripe.

4. Don't count any shot if (1) you didn't hit the far rail target, (2) the chalk mark isn't exactly on the edge of the stripe, or (3) the speed is different.

Do this with a LD and a regular shaft to see if they return the "CB" to different spots on the near rail.

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