Why would it be easier to draw with one cue over the other?

[Bigkahuna]

Dwell

I have used a term here that comes from the automotive world, Dwell.

Here is the Wikipedia definition...
Dwell angle, a term used in automotive context, indicating the degrees of rotation of the distributor cam during which the ignition contact breaker points in the distributor are closed.

It is basically the amount of time the ignition coil is energized or turned on. I think I can remember this term being used when reading about the amount of time the tip stays in contact with the cue ball. Been some time now so not sure where I got that from just thought I would further explain.

 

[alstl]

If I was going to guess I'd say the tip, shaft taper, weight of the cue, and maybe balance point are the factors affecting the ability to draw, follow, etc.

But them I'm just a banger.

 

[shankster8]

If I was going to guess I'd say the tip, shaft taper, weight of the cue, and maybe balance point are the factors affecting the ability to draw, follow, etc.

But them I'm just a banger.

Out of curiosity, how do you think cue balance affects draw (i.e. would more forward balance help or hinder draw)? (I'd also be curious about how balance might affect follow , and left/right english, but that might not fit this thread.)

 

[shakes]

the longer the tip stays in contact with the rock the more juice you get, the rest is just a bunch of minced up words that will get you right back to my statment.

Not trying to be argumentative, and I'm just thinking out loud, I have no idea of the answer, but wouldn't the opposite be true? It seems like if the tip is in contact longer, it would slow down the spin. Seems like more force applied over a shorter length of time would cause more spin. There's no drag like if the tip continued to be in contact with the ball. Seems like if the tip stayed in contact it would be like a car drum brake pad. Wouldn't a harder tip be better?

Again, just throwing the idea out there.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

JB:
...I can agree that two cues of disparate construction techniques would have the same spin/speed ratio when both cues strike the same point at the same speed if that's what you say has been observed.

That's what I say (with the additional caveat that they should have roughly similar squirt characteristics so they both hit the same spot at the same angle of approach).

To that I say then that the very real effect of differences in how cues actually perform in this regard have another reason then. Perhaps the person playing with a whippy Meucci and a hard Joss West is not really hitting the cueball in the same place with both cues although they are aiming at the same spot.

It could very well be that the taper is causing the tip to go somewhere other than where the shooter thinks it is. Thus the shooter may actually be hitting lower on the ball with a very thin tapered shaft (as has been theorized in this thread already) then they are with a thicker shaft taper.

Possibly. I think it's more likely that the player strokes differently with different cues for some psychological reason, but I grant you the possibilities you describe.

In any event the observation that cues do indeed "play" differently is very real and is much more than just the tip.

OK, but then we're talking about two distinctly different things: (1) the stick might change how the player strokes and therefore where the stick strikes the cue ball, and (2) the stick might change how the cue ball reacts when struck on the same contact point.

I don't believe #2 happens at all (except maybe with big squirt differences causing different angles of approach), but I think #1 certainly does. An obvious example is the well known "new cue syndrome" where you play like God for a week or two after getting a new axe, but then the newness wears off and you're back to banging rails again.

This is widely (and correctly, I think) attributed to the player simply paying more attention to the new cue and therefore increasing "stroke focus". That also explains why the effect goes away after a short while (about the time the newness of the cue begins to wear off).

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Me:
... There are no physical [stick] characteristics that matter [to how much draw you can get] (except tip condition, which isn't part of cue construction).

JB:
If what you say is true then there is absolutely no basis for Predator, Tiger, OB1, or any other so-called performance shaft to be on the market other than radial consistency.

The primary reason for those cues is low squirt. So there's a huge reason for them whether or not their claims of increased spin is true (I don't think they are true).

Do you want to go on record and say that the ONLY thing that affects the amount of spin imparted to the ball other than the stroke quality is the tip condition?

Unequivocally.

And if I'd known there was a record deal in it for me I'd have been saying it much louder.

Do you really believe that if the tip were taken out of the equation that two cues of equal weight but fairly different taper and balance would impart the same amplitude to the cue ball?

I'm not sure of your terminology, so I'll put it in my own words:

I'm virtually positive that two cues constructed as differently as you like (but with the same tips) will produce the same spin/speed ratio if they hit the cue ball on the same spot from the same angle of approach.

... as a person who has tested shafts with the same tip brand, shape and hardness (as measured with a Durometer), but with different construction techniques, like different tapers, different types and sizes of rods in the core, 4, 6, 8, and 10 splices, flat laminated, wood pin, G-10 pin, radial pin, and so on, I have to say that you're wrong that it's all in the tip.

You've probably had more opportunity than I have to try out different cues, but I'll bet I've tested mine much more carefully - more "scientifically". A test's usefulness is all in how you control the human variables, like the psychological factors I mentioned elsewhere.

pj
chgo

 

[shankster8]

PJ, I think you're right - too bad, I was getting my hopes up. TIP and STROKE! Talking about tips, you might check out this high speed video http://kamuitips.com/

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Fatboy:
the longer the tip stays in contact with the rock the more juice you get

I don't think this can be true for the following reasons:

1. The tip can't stay in contact longer. It "bounces off" the cue ball on impact, and even with a tight grip the soft skin of our hand can't bring it back up to speed before the ball is long gone. This has been shown with high speed video.

2. Even if we could make the tip stay in contact longer [say with a tight mechanical grip on a robot] it wouldn't do anything we couldn't do another easier way. With longer contact the tip might rotate farther from centerball while in contact and the final tip offset might be greater, which could result in more spin for the same initial tip contact point. But we could accomplish the same thing by simply striking the cue ball farther from center in the first place - the tip can't rotate past the miscue limit either way, so the maximum offset is the same.

pj
chgo

 

[shankster8]

If you look at that kamui high speed video, it looks like that tip compresses to half its height - looks like more than Dr. D's vids. Couldn't that increase contact time, and act like a compressed spring (giving more juice like fatboy suggests)? I personally find these tips to be so explosive that they easily overpower my shots, and I've had to severely lighten my cue so I don't overrun everything. Just my experience - being objective, I think.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

PJ, I think you're right - too bad, I was getting my hopes up. TIP and STROKE! Talking about tips, you might check out this high speed video http://kamuitips.com/

Thanks. I've seen that, and all of Dr. Dave's videos of similar stuff, and I even have an original copy of the high speed video made by Bob "Thriller" Jewett and the Jacksonville Five (with Bob's handwritten notes). Been there; done that. They all support the same conclusion: extended tip contact time may be a good mental image for producing a good stroke, but it doesn't actually happen and probably wouldn't matter if it did.

pj
chgo

 

[alstl]

Out of curiosity, how do you think cue balance affects draw (i.e. would more forward balance help or hinder draw)? (I'd also be curious about how balance might affect follow , and left/right english, but that might not fit this thread.)

Good question. You might want to ask on the cuemakers forum, those guys are a lot smarter than I am about cues. I would guess that slightly forward balanced would help draw, but that is purely a guess. I've been playing with the same cue (Schon stl-7) for about three years now, haven't tried anything else. The only thing I've changed is the tip.

 

[JB Cases]

Ok, so I have some questions then for the science guys who have the data.

1. If the tip makes all the difference then is a Kmart ramin wood cue as good as a Balabushka when it comes to performance as long as both have the same tip? To add to the question then what is the optimum tip characteristic to achieve the most spin humanly possible with the least amount of effort.

2. Is Predator's claims of generating 25% more spin complete bunk then? I assume when they say that then they mean 25% more spin when the ball is struck in the same place at the same velocity. (note, they don't seem to assign a value of how much more spin to this claim any longer)

Specifically, this claim http://www.predatorcues.com/predator_cues_shaft_demo.php

 

[Siz]

contact time

I don't think this can be true for the following reasons:

1. The tip can't stay in contact longer. It "bounces off" the cue ball on impact, and even with a tight grip the soft skin of our hand can't bring it back up to speed before the ball is long gone. This has been shown with high speed video.

2. Even if we could make the tip stay in contact longer [say with a tight mechanical grip on a robot] it wouldn't do anything we couldn't do another easier way. With longer contact the tip might rotate farther from centerball while in contact and the final tip offset might be greater, which could result in more spin for the same initial tip contact point. But we could accomplish the same thing by simply striking the cue ball farther from center in the first place - the tip can't rotate past the miscue limit either way, so the maximum offset is the same.

pj
chgo

I am not convinced.

On contact, the tip compresses and does stay in contact for a discernable length of time. The high speed videos show this. For as long as there is contact, the tip can exert a force on the c.b. and increase its rotational speed. Put another way, it takes time for the striking tip to overcome the rotational inertia of the ball; and a good stroke might just give it more time than a poor one.

Of course this is just speculation - or minced up words. But I should think that is would be fairly easy to test and demonstrate (one way or the other). A job for Dr Dave?

 

[Masayoshi]

Ok, so I have some questions then for the science guys who have the data.

1. If the tip makes all the difference then is a Kmart ramin wood cue as good as a Balabushka when it comes to performance as long as both have the same tip? To add to the question then what is the optimum tip characteristic to achieve the most spin humanly possible with the least amount of effort.

2. Is Predator's claims of generating 25% more spin complete bunk then? I assume when they say that then they mean 25% more spin when the ball is struck in the same place at the same velocity. (note, they don't seem to assign a value of how much more spin to this claim any longer)

Specifically, this claim http://www.predatorcues.com/predator_cues_shaft_demo.php

I dont have all the data as you say, but...

1)In terms of how much spin you can get out of it, there probably isn't really any significant difference besides personal preference (if you feel confident with one cue you will probably stroke better with it). Didn't Efren use an el cheapo cue before it got stolen? The tangible difference between a Balabushka and K-mart is the craftsmanship and quality (and resale). The optimum tip characteristics are that it is well shaped, not too hard, and holds chalk

2)More than likely just a sales pitch as Meucci had similar claims.

 

[JoeyInCali]

Ok, so I have some questions then for the science guys who have the data.

1. If the tip makes all the difference then is a Kmart ramin wood cue as good as a Balabushka when it comes to performance as long as both have the same tip? To add to the question then what is the optimum tip characteristic to achieve the most spin humanly possible with the least amount of effort.

2. Is Predator's claims of generating 25% more spin complete bunk then? I assume when they say that then they mean 25% more spin when the ball is struck in the same place at the same velocity. (note, they don't seem to assign a value of how much more spin to this claim any longer)

Specifically, this claim http://www.predatorcues.com/predator_cues_shaft_demo.php

2. It's a bunk imo. How could a shaft that is designed to deflect off a cueball faster than conventional shaft have more spin? If that were the case, all 3-c players would be getting their shafts bored.

 

[Flex]

Ok, so I have some questions then for the science guys who have the data.

1. If the tip makes all the difference then is a Kmart ramin wood cue as good as a Balabushka when it comes to performance as long as both have the same tip? To add to the question then what is the optimum tip characteristic to achieve the most spin humanly possible with the least amount of effort.

2. Is Predator's claims of generating 25% more spin complete bunk then? I assume when they say that then they mean 25% more spin when the ball is struck in the same place at the same velocity. (note, they don't seem to assign a value of how much more spin to this claim any longer)

Specifically, this claim http://www.predatorcues.com/predator_cues_shaft_demo.php

I just took a look at those claims.

IMHO, there are a few factors that aren't often mentioned that likely bear on the ability of a cue to draw the rock.

While I have four shafts with a small tip diameter, anywhere from 11 mm down to about 10.25 mm, all with milk dud tips I made, there is an interesting thing about the differences between the shafts. One of them is definitely stiffer, even with a 15 inch straight taper, than the others. All of them have 15 inch straight pro-tapers. But the one with a very high ring count, about 23 per inch, definitely has more spine than the others and draws and follows the ball more powerfully.

The other day, a friend was showing me some extreme english shots; he was using a Predator 314. I tried to duplicate the amount of english he got with his Predator when shooting two rail extreme spin shots. With one of my 11 shafts, I was able to do it with difficulty. However yesterday, I switched shafts and shot the same shot with the stiffer, 23 ring count per inch shaft. Guess what? It was WAY easier to accomplish what he did with his Pred shaft, and my results were actually better than his.

By the way, that shaft does draw the cue ball somewhat better than the other shafts, and way outdraws my OB-1 shaft with the same tip on it.

When I spoke with Royce some time ago and asked how thin an OB-1 shaft could be taken down, if memory serves he told me 12.25 mm, not as thin as I'd like. Suffice it to say, my OB-1 usually has a very nice resting place in my case... Anybody want to buy an OB-1 with the 5/16 X 18 joint?

Flex

 

[Bigkahuna]

Hitting low is it just that simple?

I don't think this can be true for the following reasons:

1. The tip can't stay in contact longer. It "bounces off" the cue ball on impact, and even with a tight grip the soft skin of our hand can't bring it back up to speed before the ball is long gone. This has been shown with high speed video.

pj
chgo

I would like to see other high speed video, but, the Kamui video certainly gives no indication that the cue JUST "bounces off" the cue ball. There certainly seems to be other things like shaft deflection and tip compression that could perhaps play a role.

From a feel standpoint I can feel the cue stick bouncing off of the cue ball when I shoot, (especially with the slip stroke grip), so I can agree with the analogy you are providing. However, I am not sure how to describe it but when I get my best draw I just do not feel that same bounce. I guess this is because I am hitting much lower on the mass sort of grazing it. I also think it may have something to do with the amount of shaft deflection as seen in the Kamui video provided in the earlier post.

From what you are saying given the same tip a stroker vs poker and a bushka vs Kmart it is all the same and it is simply how low you hit the ball. I just do not see that outside the science lab.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...is a Kmart ramin wood cue as good as a Balabushka when it comes to performance as long as both have the same tip?

Yes.

...what is the optimum tip characteristic to achieve the most spin humanly possible with the least amount of effort.

Friction + hardness.

... Is Predator's claims of generating 25% more spin complete bunk then?

Yes.

pj
chgo

 

[shankster8]

Bunk or no bunk?

2. It's a bunk imo. How could a shaft that is designed to deflect off a cueball faster than conventional shaft have more spin? If that were the case, all 3-c players would be getting their shafts bored.

Recently I sent my two playing shafts (Z-2's with Kamui H) to KJ Cues to have them converted to radial pin. While they were gone, I shot with a conventional shaft I borrowed from a friend - it had an Everest tip, which is my second favorite tip (I thought). I shoot daily at a senior center, so nothing much changed during this interval, except the equipment I was using. Long story short, what a weak combination a solid maple shaft is with an Everest tip. That thing couldn't hit itself out of a wet paper sack, IMO. I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but I'm just relating my experience, objectively I believe, searching for the same answers others are in this thread. When my shafts got back, I immediately realized what a sweet combination I had. I know alot of the difference is the tip - perhaps all, like the scientists claim, but I just can't believe that the Kamui outshines the Everest that badly. I posted above suggesting (asking) perhaps the tip compression might act like a spring. But now, after watching that Kamui video over and over, I think I might see another compression occurring in the feral also. Am I seeing things, or am I seeing the lower portion of the feral deforming? Perhaps the plastic Predator uses also serves as a spring? Just throwing ideas out there as to how a shaft might contribute to more spin.

 

[JB Cases]

Well Pat I guess we will have to agree to disagree then. Without more effort than I am willing to expend on this I can't disprove the speed/spin findings that you say are proven.

I also certainly can't say for a fact that I myself hit the cueball in the same spot with the exact same speed when using shafts/cues of differing characteristics. I know what I observe though as a player. I know that other players observe the same thing.

I will never be convinced that it's all in the tip. It would be great if it were. Maybe someday I will be able to show you all the shafts that have the exact same taper, same ferrule, same tip, same amount of pie splices, btu have different sized cores of phenolic rod. When all of these shafts are put on the same butt they all play differently. Some feel great, others are nearly unplayable. With some it's very easy to move the cue ball around while with others it's very difficult.

So, seeing as how I have had the benefit of this experience which I doublt many others have had, I have to maintain that the rest of the cue below the tip definitely plays a part.

In fact, here is another example I can give you that perfectly illustrates the point. Once at Mike Gulassy's booth I was trying to make a jump shot with one of his Sledgehammer cues. I couldn't get the shot to go at all no matter how I varied my stroke. So I went to my booth and got a Fury Jump Break and was able to jump it effortlessly. Now I know that Mike's cue and the Fury are very close so I asked Mike what was different on this particular cue. He pointed out that it was 12mm and tapered thinner. So I grabbed one of his other cues with his normal break/jump taper on it and sure enough, the jump shot was effortless. And both Gulyassy cues had the same material on the tip.

Again though I cannot say with absolute certainty that I was hitting the shot in the same exact spot with all three cues. I think it was close enough though. And Mike himself observed the same thing and he is definitely a World Class player.

Saying that it's all tip to me is like saying that the only difference in car performance is all tires.