Who is known to make the most forward balanced cue "butt"??

jrctherake

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm curious, who makes forward balanced cue "butt"?

It can be production or full custom.

Most of the shafts I use are 3.5 oz to 3.8 oz. They are carbon fiber shafts.

Before going to carbon fiber I was use to shafts that weighed 4.3ish to 4.6ish range.

With the lighter carbon shafts the cues' balance just doesn't suit me feel wise.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LWW
I agree here for sure. No matter where the cue's balance point falls; it is up to the player to learn how to execute a correct stroke. I doubt the balance point affects a cue tip's "stability" - how a cue feels to someone in terms of balance point may affect their comfort level with a cue - the location of the balance point itself will not make a cue actually play better as a cue.
Only in extreme cases would it actually affect play. Usually only occurs when the player is quite short, or if they have a physical issue that affects how they can hold a cue. Balance point is purely preference. But that comfort can scratch one of those mental itches that can affect our games.
 
You’re welcome. I think cue manufacturers should be paying more attention to how the balance points on the cues are progressively moving backwards. This is fine if the population is tall, as the balance point moves further back, to accommodate for a larger wingspan. But shorter players will always be struggling with added rear weight. The reason a lot of players prefer custom cues is because the custom makers work more with balance points. Most good custom cues come in at around a 19” or slightly more forward, from the butt cap, for a 58” cue. Cues generally balance well around 39-40” measured from the tip. With one piece cores in modern cues, we lost a chunk of metal that used to be ahead of our grip hand. So, production cues have progressively become more rear balanced. Now, with CF shafts, you’re seeing a drastic change in balance points on the shafts. We’re talking inches. That can account for up to an inch difference in balance point for the entire cue. That’s a huge difference. I used to work on cues, and had a real knack for cue setup. I had a bag of 9 different butts, all with the same joint. I used to get players to play with 18.5, 19.5, and 20.5 oz cues. They also had balance points that were the same. 19” from butt end, 18” from butt end, and 17” from butt end. I’d ask them their feedback, but would also watch them shoot with all of the cues. You end up figuring out that balance point is more important to most players, over the cue’s actual weight. If I was fitting players these days, I’d be suggesting that if CF is in their future, figure out their balance point on the cue they like to play with. Get the CF shaft they like, and want to play with. And then try to find a butt that gives them that same balance. I really struggled with my choice between CF and wood, and I thought it had to do with the different material. When I went to the more forward balanced cue, suddenly CF was clearly preferred. The cue finally felt “right”.
Very interesting post. I agree this is a subtle issue that isn't discussed much, if at all. I personally prefer rear balanced cues, with balance point ideally in the 17-17.5" range (from buttcap). Most (but not all) CF shafts seem to be in the 3.5-3.7 oz zone and indeed the balance point of the CF shaft itself does tend closer to the joint due to lower mass front end, as compared to most maple shafts. My personal theory is that this is one reason why many folks like the feel of a CF shaft, not just the LD/CF properties of the material/design. Of course this may also be why some people just can't get used to them. Either way, most of the popular CF shafts do seem to push the total balance of a cue 1/2" to an 1" rearward and I think many folks may not even realize it.

Cheers,

P
 
I agree here for sure. No matter where the cue's balance point falls; it is up to the player to learn how to execute a correct stroke. I doubt the balance point affects a cue tip's "stability" - how a cue feels to someone in terms of balance point may affect their comfort level with a cue - the location of the balance point itself will not make a cue actually play better as a cue.
I played 30 innings of ghost style 14.1 with a rear balanced cue and my balls per inning average was 9. My high run during that session was 43.

Next day I played another 30 inning session with a forward balanced cue. My balls per inning average was 21 and my high run for that session was 62.

I was using the same cue for both sessions.

For the first session I had 2.1 oz of weight bolts in the cue butt.

For the second session I removed the weight bolts (2.1 oz) from the cue butt and added 2.1 oz of lead tape around the cue directly behind the joint.

To "me".... it made a huge difference.

In a classroom setting and on paper..... it doesn't make much difference, but us pool players...... especially the players that rely heavily on "feel" and "sound".... well, it can very well mean the difference between paying up or collecting.

I know it does for me.
 
Only in extreme cases would it actually affect play. Usually only occurs when the player is quite short, or if they have a physical issue that affects how they can hold a cue. Balance point is purely preference. But that comfort can scratch one of those mental itches that can affect our games.
I have found that forward balanced cues helps me in 14.1 and 1hole, but not so much in rotation games.

In 14.1 and 1hole we are more out to be forced to shoot off the rail or over a balls or pack of balls. IMO, that is when extra weight toward the joint helps by keeping the cue down.

Then again, it could just be me.... I dunno much, but I absolutely do better with a forward balanced cue.

Is it a mental thing? I don't know for sure. What I do know is:

It effects my wallet when I gamble for sure.
 
I have found that forward balanced cues helps me in 14.1 and 1hole, but not so much in rotation games.

In 14.1 and 1hole we are more out to be forced to shoot off the rail or over a balls or pack of balls. IMO, that is when extra weight toward the joint helps by keeping the cue down.

Then again, it could just be me.... I dunno much, but I absolutely do better with a forward balanced cue.

Is it a mental thing? I don't know for sure. What I do know is:

It effects my wallet when I gamble for sure.
Funny thing , but in one of Mizerak's books he states that he uses a heavier shaft for 14.1 than he uses for9 ball- similar theory of keeping the the front of the cue down- I think that it certainly is a comfort/mental thing more than a reality of physics.
 
Funny thing , but in one of Mizerak's books he states that he uses a heavier shaft for 14.1 than he uses for9 ball- similar theory of keeping the the front of the cue down- I think that it certainly is a comfort/mental thing more than a reality of physics.
I did not know that about the Mizz.

I feel better about my personal need for forward balance cues in 14.1 since someone like Mizerack felt the same way.

Thanks for the info.
 
I did not know that about the Mizz.

I feel better about my personal need for forward balance cues in 14.1 since someone like Mizerack felt the same way.

Thanks for the info.
Most 14.1 players stand more upright, vs rotation players. When you stand up higher, you tend to grab more forward on the butt. This is usually why most 14.1 players use forward weighted cues. In my experience, they also use a slightly heavier cue than rotation players. Miz used a nearly 21oz cue. Sigel used a 20oz.
Two ways to achieve this: Add a mid cue extension like I did or have a cue maker remove the pin and add a weight bolt behind the joint pin.
That changes the weight, as well as the distribution. He didn’t want a heavier cue. He wants a more forward balanced cue.
 
I did not know that about the Mizz.

I feel better about my personal need for forward balance cues in 14.1 since someone like Mizerack felt the same way.

Thanks for the info.
I actually got a message from Dennis Searing, years ago, that covered this exact topic. He was the guy that made Miz’s cues. I used to play with a lighter, phenolic jointed big pin cue. After hearing Dennis’ theories on cues, I switched to a SS jointed forward balanced cue, that was around the 19.5-20oz mark. I was picking up what he was putting down. Haven’t gone back.
 
Most 14.1 players stand more upright, vs rotation players. When you stand up higher, you tend to grab more forward on the butt. This is usually why most 14.1 players use forward weighted cues. In my experience, they also use a slightly heavier cue than rotation players. Miz used a nearly 21oz cue. Sigel used a 20oz.

That changes the weight, as well as the distribution. He didn’t want a heavier cue. He wants a more forward balanced cue.
Yes, my stance is more upright than most modern players.

Even when playing rotation games my chin will be 6 to 8 inches over cue.

In 14.1 my. Hin is probably 12+ above the cue unless I'm shooting up table.

And yes, I wanted the balance to move forward....not heavier.

Although I will accept a little extra weight if I have to in order to get the balance I'm wanting.

Good points sir
 
Most 14.1 players stand more upright, vs rotation players. When you stand up higher, you tend to grab more forward on the butt. This is usually why most 14.1 players use forward weighted cues. In my experience, they also use a slightly heavier cue than rotation players. Miz used a nearly 21oz cue. Sigel used a 20oz.

That changes the weight, as well as the distribution. He didn’t want a heavier cue. He wants a more forward balanced cue.
Also.... most of the better players will have a 20ish oz cue at 58" to 59" cue.

Most think svb's 23oz cue is heavy.... lol just imagine if the mizz had used a 65" cue. Lol.... it would have weighed 26+ oz.
 
According to the chart below brass is around 10% heavier than steel so if you replace steel with brass and the original material weighed .5 oz the brass equivalent would be .55 oz. From there, you would need to use weight measurements (balance point/overall weight) so you can determine how that will affect the overall weight. I.e. if balance point is X and you add .05oz to one end you can figure out the new balance point and overall weight.



For what it's worth - I have been trying to figure out how to go in the opposite direction so this stuff has been running around in my head for months. I have a cue that is a bit heavy for my current liking (doable, just not preferred) but it's WAY too forward balanced. The BP is about 2-3 inches above my preferred BP.
 
I actually got a message from Dennis Searing, years ago, that covered this exact topic. He was the guy that made Miz’s cues. I used to play with a lighter, phenolic jointed big pin cue. After hearing Dennis’ theories on cues, I switched to a SS jointed forward balanced cue, that was around the 19.5-20oz mark. I was picking up what he was putting down. Haven’t gone back.

I actually got a message from Dennis Searing, years ago, that covered this exact topic. He was the guy that made Miz’s cues. I used to play with a lighter, phenolic jointed big pin cue. After hearing Dennis’ theories on cues, I switched to a SS jointed forward balanced cue, that was around the 19.5-20oz mark. I was picking up what he was putting down. Haven’t gone back.
My mentor was a very strong player.

His peak was in the 1930's, and like a lot of players back then..... he used fake names so he could get action.

His real name was Ralf Henson.

He beat Kenneth James to death in everything they played.

Kenneth James was one of Mizerack's closest friends from his college days. Kenneth owned a pool room in Athens Alabama. Steve spent a LOT of time in that room just hitting balls with Kenneth.

When the Mizz was in college, he and Kenneth became very close and spent many, many hours playing together in Athens and surrounding areas.

Ralf never got to play the Mizz. By the time the Mizz came alone, Ralf's game had fell a lot due to health reasons and age. He was 34 years older than the Mizz.

I watched Ralf spot Kenneth the 6-out in 9 ball and beat him like a rented mule for a good amount per game.

Kenneth told me the Mizz gave him the 7-out and stayed close. That tells you just how strong Ralf was.

Ralf had a bad drinking problem.... really bad. If not for the drink, I seriously believe that Ralf Henson would be known as one of the greats from yesteryear.

As we know, most players back then didn't eat or have a place to sleep if they didn't win. Ralf didn't miss a meal and more or less never had a job till his health got bad. At that point he had no choice... his game was a lot weaker.

Anyways, point is..... Ralf told me that if a player was really good at "straights" (as he called it), you could pretty much bet they preferred forward balanced cues.

We have to remember though, what they considered forward balanced was a 57" cue that weighed 20ish ounces that had an 18ish" balance point.

Today, they would have gravitated closer to a 20ish" balance point due to equipment changes.

Those huge diameter butts paired with metal/ivory-piloted joints and ferrules played a huge role in the total weight being on the heavy side compared to today's cues.

Having said that, I know some guys back then used butt heavy cues, but I truly believe that "most" of the stronger players used 18"+ balance points in 57" cues that weighed 20+ ounces.

Dennis, like most other builders and players of his time and especially of his caliber knew exactly what he was talking about and were:

AHEAD OF THEIR TIME

You was extremely fortunate to get to speak with Dennis and did well by listening to what he said.

Dennis "the mouth" Searing is one of my favorite players to watch. Especially in 14.1. As we all know, he was a monster and sharp as a tack.

Sorry for the long post, but I feel that players like Ralf deserve to be mentioned from time to time.

Have a good evening.
 
According to the chart below brass is around 10% heavier than steel so if you replace steel with brass and the original material weighed .5 oz the brass equivalent would be .55 oz. From there, you would need to use weight measurements (balance point/overall weight) so you can determine how that will affect the overall weight. I.e. if balance point is X and you add .05oz to one end you can figure out the new balance point and overall weight.



For what it's worth - I have been trying to figure out how to go in the opposite direction so this stuff has been running around in my head for months. I have a cue that is a bit heavy for my current liking (doable, just not preferred) but it's WAY too forward balanced. The BP is about 2-3 inches above my preferred BP.
What's the balance point of the cue?

If you don'tmind me asking, and moreso don't mind going through the trouble:
.
Butt weight?
Butt length?
Diameter at butt cap?
Diameter at joint?
Pin/collar size and type?
.
Also, what is the weight and length of the shaft?

I know that's a lot of questions to answer, but I appreciate it.

If for whatever reason cannot answer any or all of the questions, I understand completely.

Either way, thanks for your time and input.

EDIT:

I forgot to ask what woods the cue had.
 
What's the balance point of the cue?

If you don'tmind me asking, and moreso don't mind going through the trouble:
.
Butt weight?
Butt length?
Diameter at butt cap?
Diameter at joint?
Pin/collar size and type?
.
Also, what is the weight and length of the shaft?

I know that's a lot of questions to answer, but I appreciate it.

If for whatever reason cannot answer any or all of the questions, I understand completely.

Either way, thanks for your time and input.

EDIT:

I forgot to ask what woods the cue had.


It's cue #2. I believe the balance point is close to 21" as I'm pretty confident the balance point on the #1 cue is around 19". I'll have to double check when I get home, if I remember :)

 
According to the chart below brass is around 10% heavier than steel so if you replace steel with brass and the original material weighed .5 oz the brass equivalent would be .55 oz. From there, you would need to use weight measurements (balance point/overall weight) so you can determine how that will affect the overall weight. I.e. if balance point is X and you add .05oz to one end you can figure out the new balance point and overall weight.



For what it's worth - I have been trying to figure out how to go in the opposite direction so this stuff has been running around in my head for months. I have a cue that is a bit heavy for my current liking (doable, just not preferred) but it's WAY too forward balanced. The BP is about 2-3 inches above my preferred BP.
What cue is it? Pin type? Sometimes you can change out pins and inserts to reduce weight of cues at the front, and add it to the back.
 
It's cue #2. I believe the balance point is close to 21" as I'm pretty confident the balance point on the #1 cue is around 19". I'll have to double check when I get home, if I remember :)

I would be proud to own any one of your cues.

Nothing modest about your cue collection sir.

Going by what I saw, several of your cues look to be awesome players.

Then again, I prefer to play with a plain Jane or Merry Widow.

The best player's are almost always the simple but classy looking cues.
 
Back
Top