Will one shaft spin the cb better than another? Will one tip miscue more than another

Adaptablilty trumps percentages

I think that there is plenty of anecdotal evidence of good players picking up any cue and playing lights out.

No matter what cue is used it is still an inert object until put in motion by a person. The characteristics of the the cue don't change when it is transfered from person to person.

So the percentage of difference really doesn't matter as much as the adaptability of the player. On that we agree I think.

I am not saying that any particular cue construction is inherently better than any other. I am saying that the differences between two cues in how they feel and hit can be significant and this can be a significant difference as expressed in percentages.

Where one player may be able to adapt fairly easily to disparate cues another may not. That doesn't change the fact that both cues react differently.

Scott said that JAL said the percentage wouldn't be enough to affect one's game. I don't think this is true. It seems to me that an x-% reduction in performance equals an x-% increase in effort to achieve the same result. Therefore a 10% difference could be huge if the target is small where you want to place the cue ball.

Anecdote #3. Corey Duell vs. Scott Frost in One Pocket. Corey was playing well and doing amazing Corey things but Scott Frost was clearly off his game missing critical position and missing shots that are out of character for a player of his caliber. Because of this Corey was getting more opportunities. Scott said that his cue was stolen and he was playing with a different one that he was not adjusting to well. Perhaps this could have been just an excuse but it seems to be likely that it's a valid reason why a professional would miss position more often. I saw this after hours match-up at Derby City 3 years ago.
 
Scott Lee said:
[...] If you can spin the CB with one shaft, you'll be able to with another. As JAL pointed out (and he's a physics person), the difference in spin percentages (he called it speed/spin ratios) will be minimal, and imo not enough to make significant changes in your pool game. [...]
Click to expand...


I agree with this. The practical answer is that JimS is right. All sticks produce the same amount of spin.

If you like thinking about some subtle nuances about all this, read on. If not, just listen to Scott Lee's advice, imo.

***

The deflection effect JAL mentions is correct, i.e., there is a real effect. But it's small and subtle and imo not really what the superspin proponents mean when they say "gets more spin."


Here's a way to think about that effect. Take a (hypothetical) no-squirt stick, and point it exactly north contacting a ball with a 10 mm offset of right english. The ball will travel north and will have what I'll call a normal spin-to-speed ratio characteristic of a 10 mm offset.

Now take a squirty stick and do the same thing. Even though the stick is pointing north, the ball will travel slightly west of north, by a few degrees. How much spin will it have? Will it have a normal 10 mm offset worth of spin? No, it will have a little less. To understand this think about how you would achieve this exact same cueball path with a no-squirt stick. You would have to contact the cueball at the same point but with the no-squirt stick pointing slightly west of north rather than pointing north. This contact point was at a 10 mm offset relative to a north-facing stick. But relative to a slightly-west-of-north facing stick, it might be at a 9 mm offset. Thus the spin from this stick (and from the original north-facing squirty stick) will be a normal spin-to-speed ratio characteristic of a 9 mm offset rather than a 10 mm offset. So the squirty stick gets slightly less spin. I say the offset is 10 mm and the effective offset is 9 mm.

What's unclear is whether a squirty stick will have a miscue point further from center. That's an experiment I haven't done yet. I have a hunch a miscue occurs when the effective offset reaches a certain limit. If so, then the actual offset at miscue is larger for a squirty stick. The signifcance of this is that if true, the same range of spins is possible with a squirty and a no-squirt stick, but for the squirty stick the range of offsets is wider and consequently the resulting spin is less sensitive to small errors in tip placement. The downside, of course, is that the squirty stick is somewhat harder to aim because of the squirt compensation.

A second issue with different spins for different sticks has to do with the tip. Bob Jewett and others have argued that a soft tip will give a little more spin than a hard tip. Suppose a hard tip has a contact time of 0.8 miliseconds, and a soft tip has a contact time of 1.6 miliseconds, and suppose each contacts a ball at a 10 mm offset. As the tip rides on the ball (with no slipping) during the contact time, the hard tip might be at 11 mm by the time the contact is over, and the soft tip might be at 12 mm by the time the contact is over. The hard tip likely produced a spin-to-speed ratio characteristic of the average of 10 mm and 11 mm, i.e., an effective offset of 10.5 mm. And the soft tip likely had an effective offset of 11 mm (average of 10 mm and 12 mm.) So soft tips produce a little more spin.

Interestingly, though, I think this is a plus for hard tips, not soft tips. The reason is I think hard tips have a little greater maximum spin and miscue point. Here's my reasoning. To avoid a miscue, contact must not exceed, say, a 15 mm offset. With the soft tip the player must then not exceed a 13 mm initial offset (to get a 14 mm effective offset). With a hard tip the player can go out to a 14 mm initial contact (to get a 14.5 mm effective offset).

The cueball basically has no clue whether the shaft is stiff or whippy. People who say shaft flexibility affects spin are, imo, just plain wrong, no matter how good they shoot.
 
Mike,

What if you had a ball suspended with a taut fishing line with ball bearings on each side of it. And then you had a way to place a cue so that it would move forward at the exact same rate each time and exactly straight. So the offset could be set and would then be the same regardless of taper or tip size.

Do you think that in this situation that all cues would produce the exact same rpms when the ball is struck with the same offset and speed?

I don't. I think that the cueball does "know" if a shaft is whippy or not, if a tip is hard or not in how it reacts.

This can be seen by trying to put a tip on a piece of steel or on phenolic rod.

It's physically impossible for many different combinations of materials and tapers to produce exactly the same results. The range of difference is however in debate I think. Is is noticeable, significant, worth worrying about or not?
 
If there were a cue that spins the ball 30% better, as in John's post, I'd buy that sucker but that's not the case.... as far as I know... but that's probably becaue I'm not a good enough player to be able to discern the subtle nuances. Seems though that some sellers would like to convey the message that there is a huge difference and their their cue/shaft will make the cb spin a bunch more than another.
 
Last edited:
John barton Has hit the nail on the head!!!i was hoping at least some1 was gunna tell it how it REALLY is.its all do do with flex points also....the further back the flex poin the more spin/power created...e.g a 314 is so flexable its crazy where is say a southwest cue is stiff and the flex point is higher up the shaft resulting in more control and less power/spin.

watch the speeds people like wu chia ching with a southwest play there shots...they play using more speed but more consitency as a result of less spin being induced onto the c/b he is using his stroke vs spinning the shots up. efren included..

where is a 314 is using alot more spin/power on the c/b causing un natural track lines and less consitency as a result of too much room for error because of unnessary spin etc

all of this is based around a Master player who uses his stroke

A person with less skill and cant move the c/b with his stroke would benfit from 314 etc

If you want to no if you use your skill/stroke see if you can learn to play all the shots with a house cue......???

Efren can...........................
 
John Barton said:
Mike,

What if you had a ball suspended with a taut fishing line with ball bearings on each side of it. And then you had a way to place a cue so that it would move forward at the exact same rate each time and exactly straight. So the offset could be set and would then be the same regardless of taper or tip size.

Do you think that in this situation that all cues would produce the exact same rpms when the ball is struck with the same offset and speed?
Click to expand...

Here's the reason people talk about spin-to-speed ratio rather than rpms (just spin). In your scenareo, a heavier stick will produce more rpms than a lighter stick. But it will produce more speed in the same proportion. We think of these as the same spin, just like we think of someone who gets a $2000 paycheck every other week as getting paid the same as someone getting a $1000 paycheck every week. There it's the pay-to-time ratio that matters. To answer your question, exact is a word I won't use, because there are subtleties like those I discussed. But they will be for all practical purposes the same.

John Barton said:
I don't. I think that the cueball does "know" if a shaft is whippy or not, if a tip is hard or not in how it reacts.
Click to expand...

The hardness of the tip the cueball feels. The cueball will experience different force versus time curves for the different tips. For either tip the force will start out at zero, rise to a maximum, and then diminish to zero, like one hump of a sine curve. The hard tip has a narrow and tall hump, while the soft tip has a broad and shorter hump. The things we care about pretty much depend not on how high or broad it is but rather on the area under the hump. And that is the same for the two different tips.

It's like I don't really care whether you deposit $50 each hour into my bank account for 10 hours or ou deposit $50 each half hour for five hours. The effect on my bank account is for all practical purposes the same.

John Barton said:
This can be seen by trying to put a tip on a piece of steel or on phenolic rod.

It's physically impossible for many different combinations of materials and tapers to produce exactly the same results. The range of difference is however in debate I think. Is is noticeable, significant, worth worrying about or not?
Click to expand...

fair enough.
 
Its like golf graphite vs steal stiff shafts....
One is for people who struggle to create power and distance and the other is for some1 who has all the shots and power regardless and wants consitency...
 
IMO the changes in pool cues cannot come close to the changes in golf clubs.
There have been huge advantages built into modern day golf clubs...some of which are outlawed in professional play, but are utilized by amateur players every day. The same cannot be said for pool cues.

Scott Lee
 
Scott Lee said:
IMO the changes in pool cues cannot come close to the changes in golf clubs.
There have been huge advantages built into modern day golf clubs...some of which are outlawed in professional play, but are utilized by amateur players every day. The same cannot be said for pool cues.

Scott Lee
Click to expand...
I agree with that without question, to compare golf clubs to pool cues is ludicrous. Golf clubs flex in the air before they get anywhere near the golf ball and that has a huge effect on what happens to the golf ball. Cue sticks do not flex before hitting the cue ball. Totally different animal.
FWIW, as far as the general question about cue shafts, I agree with the school of thought expressed by Scott and Mike, the shaft stiffness does not have a significant effect on the spin imparted on the cue ball.
 
Scott Lee said:
IMO the changes in pool cues cannot come close to the changes in golf clubs.
There have been huge advantages built into modern day golf clubs...some of which are outlawed in professional play, but are utilized by amateur players every day. The same cannot be said for pool cues.

Scott Lee
Click to expand...


Then why are some tournaments outlawing phenolic tips? LOL

In fact some tournaments are only allowing leather tips.

I don't think it is so much because the phenolic is an advantage as much as it is about not damaging the pool balls! LOL
 
I think the shaft affects the spin. If you play with enough different cues you can tell the difference. Like varney said earlier.. if you shoot with a meucci and a joss you'll see the difference. It's really obvious. A guy said when I was starting out that I was crazy to be learning with a Meucci since it's so whippy I wont ever learn to control the cue ball and it'll fly all over the place. That it's like learning to shoot your first pistol and be accurate with a snubnose 357.

Both however have pros and cons. If you get the stiff as a board broomstick cue then you do have more consistency. But a whippy cue while it gives you more ability is harder to control. I preferred the harder to control whippy sticks because I like having the most ability available to me. I would rather not be limited by a cue and take the challenge and risk of putting too much on something.
 
John Barton said:
...
On a scientific level - I have been present a few time where cues were put into machines designed to have the human variables controlled to be 100% repeatable each time. The facts are that different cues produce different results beyond any doubt. How much difference there is between cues of similar construction is of course debatable, but a difference definitely exists.
.....
Click to expand...

Had these scientific experiments been well structured, completed, and reviewed, then there would no longer be any debate as to the differences.

John, how was the ball spin and speed being measured in these machine-hit experiments you saw ?

Dave
 
DaveK said:
Had these scientific experiments been well structured, completed, and reviewed, then there would no longer be any debate as to the differences.

John, how was the ball spin and speed being measured in these machine-hit experiments you saw ?

Dave
Click to expand...

Spin was not measured. Ball speed was calibrated using a radar gun. The experiments were designed to measure deflection. I did not comment that the cues tested under these conditions generated more or less spin than any other. I only commented that they produced differing results.

And yes perhaps with a large enough sample of all possible working configurations (i.e. those that are considered to be of suitable construction to play the game), and the proper execution, documentation, and verification, the questions we all debate may very well have been answered to a much greater degree. However I doubt that the debate would stop. :-)
 
txplshrk said:
Then why are some tournaments outlawing phenolic tips? LOL

In fact some tournaments are only allowing leather tips.

I don't think it is so much because the phenolic is an advantage as much as it is about not damaging the pool balls! LOL
Click to expand...

Phenolic tips do not damage the pool balls. I have several hundred thousand jump shots and countless exhibition and teaching experience to back this up.
 
Shafts, Tips, QBall Spin...

Scott Lee is incorrect. Shafts make a difference.

If instructors want to focus strongly on us students improving our stroke then I'm onboard. I work on my stroke every time I step into a smokey pool room to play a few games. Without practice and patience, you won't go from being a banger to a rack runner by picking up a Paul Dayton cue.

Remember, every pool cue plays different. No two pieces of wood are identical. Get that straight, people. I know. You should know too.

In fact, my primary reason for always insisting on pool players who love the game to go with a custom cue is because the custom cuemaker takes special care to pick the best pieces of wood for his creation.

This is also the primary argument against production cues. Some production cues hit great and are a great buy, but the exact same model that comes off the line next may hit like it was made of cardboard. Yet, they are the same price.

Buy a custom cue, if you love the game.

From the desk of the One-Eyed Jack!

Encouraging all pool players to develop a proper love of the game and to demonstrate that love...

The Woim
 
mikepage said:
Here's the reason people talk about spin-to-speed ratio rather than rpms (just spin). In your scenareo, a heavier stick will produce more rpms than a lighter stick. But it will produce more speed in the same proportion. We think of these as the same spin, just like we think of someone who gets a $2000 paycheck every other week as getting paid the same as someone getting a $1000 paycheck every week. There it's the pay-to-time ratio that matters. To answer your question, exact is a word I won't use, because there are subtleties like those I discussed. But they will be for all practical purposes the same.

And this is the reason I don't talk about spin/speed ratios. I am talking about an experiment that tests the spin produced at exactly the same speed. You are saying that only the tip can affect the amount of spin generated.

What would happen then if you had ten shafts of varying construction and tapers, all with the same tip on them - or even no tip, and they were tested under the scenario that I described?

I can believe that a heavier cue would produce more spin at the same speed as you said. But IF that is the case then it merely proves the question that the original poster posed. Of whether differing shafts produce more spin than others. Under your premise that weight and tip are the prime factors then the effect of getting more spin with the same speed is definitely a real thing that can be felt and experienced.

I still believe however that two shafts of the same weight and using the same tip can produce differing amounts of spin. I further believe that the whole cue plays a part in the shot - not just the shaft. Putting a Joss West shaft onto a K-Mart butt does not give a cue Joss West performance.


The hardness of the tip the cueball feels. The cueball will experience different force versus time curves for the different tips. For either tip the force will start out at zero, rise to a maximum, and then diminish to zero, like one hump of a sine curve. The hard tip has a narrow and tall hump, while the soft tip has a broad and shorter hump. The things we care about pretty much depend not on how high or broad it is but rather on the area under the hump. And that is the same for the two different tips.

It's like I don't really care whether you deposit $50 each hour into my bank account for 10 hours or ou deposit $50 each half hour for five hours. The effect on my bank account is for all practical purposes the same.



fair enough.
Click to expand...

Well all I do is deposit to your account, sometimes after five games, sometimes after seven, the effect is the same - me less - you more :-)

I don't know about sine humps. I would like to see something concrete that we can agree on answers the spin question. Until then I guess we'll have to disagree and your superior knowledge of sine humps will continue to make withdrawals in my bank account.

But since you believe you can produce the same amount of spin with any cue - next time we play I get to choose your cue ok? ;->

Take care Mike I hope we can match up again soon.
 
subjective tip test

I changed out my Moori Medium tip today for a Moori Quick. I only played with it about twenty minutes but it was obvious adjustment will be required. This tip gives more spin but also has more squirt when shooting at the same place on the cue ball. That makes sense but squirt wasn't really a factor I had considered.

I changed tips right before a week long road trip like a dummy so I will either learn to love the tip in the next week or cut it off and try a Moori Slow when I get home. There wasn't anything wrong with the Moori Medium except this one had delaminated and was a bit short however testing different hardness tips seemed entertaining. I may cut myself an oddball shaft or two when I get a little time and see how they perform too.

Hu
 
John Barton said:

Well all I do is deposit to your account, sometimes after five games, sometimes after seven, the effect is the same - me less - you more :-)

I don't know about sine humps. I would like to see something concrete that we can agree on answers the spin question.
Click to expand...


Do you remember Ron Shepard's challenge spin shot? It was a particular shot set up to compare different sticks. I don't remember the exact setup.

John Barton said:
Until then I guess we'll have to disagree and your superior knowledge of sine humps will continue to make withdrawals in my bank account.

But since you believe you can produce the same amount of spin with any cue - next time we play I get to choose your cue ok? ;->

Take care Mike I hope we can match up again soon.
Click to expand...

You scare me man. First it was the triple shimmed bar box. Then the flourescent circus cloth. And I've heard of you playing with a jump cue. But yes I'll play you, provided we each bring a cue and swap the two cues after every game ;-).
 
I'm going with NO! Now, I will admit that under some type of scientific measure, you may find some tiny difference, but for all real-world applications you will never be able to tell the difference...therefor, the simplest answer is no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top