smashmouth said:
True but even more so for one more reason . . . Trampoline effect.
A good Alu bat is full of it , especially in Alu softball bats , probably the number one engineered aspect.
Wooden bats , pretty much little to none.
WTF! 27oz break cue!
- Thread starter TheNewSharkster
- Start date
True but even more so for one more reason . . . Trampoline effect.
A good Alu bat is full of it , especially in Alu softball bats , probably the number one engineered aspect.
Wooden bats , pretty much little to none.
Here are
the WPA rules on equipment (for cues):
17. Cue Sticks
Cue Sticks used at WPA competitions should comply with the following
during play at table:
Length of Cue: 40 inches [1.016 m] minimum / No Maximum
Weight of Cue: No minimum / 25 oz. [708.75 gm] maximum
Width of Tip: No minimum / 14mm maximum
The cue tip may not be of a material that can scratch or damage the addressed ball. The cue tip on any stick must be composed of a piece of specially processed leather or other fibrous or pliable material that extends the natural line of the shaft end of the cue and contacts the cue ball when the shot is executed..
The ferrule of the cue stick, if of a metal material, may not be more than 1 inch [2.54 cm] in length.
the WPA rules on equipment (for cues):
17. Cue Sticks
Cue Sticks used at WPA competitions should comply with the following
during play at table:
Length of Cue: 40 inches [1.016 m] minimum / No Maximum
Weight of Cue: No minimum / 25 oz. [708.75 gm] maximum
Width of Tip: No minimum / 14mm maximum
The cue tip may not be of a material that can scratch or damage the addressed ball. The cue tip on any stick must be composed of a piece of specially processed leather or other fibrous or pliable material that extends the natural line of the shaft end of the cue and contacts the cue ball when the shot is executed..
The ferrule of the cue stick, if of a metal material, may not be more than 1 inch [2.54 cm] in length.
RRfireblade said:
that too, correct
Actually, no...since the swing is about speed and weight, using ONLY the weight of the cue (or golf club), and only enough grip pressure to keep the cue/club from flying out of your hands, strength doesn't play that major a role. Fitness, on the other hand, plays an enormous role in both sports...with the player being able to stay strong mentally and physically for hours at a time.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
TheNewSharkster said:Now I am no physics major but wouldn't the strength of the person swinging a cue stick translate into amount of speed generated. Furthermore wouldn't a stronger person be able to transfer more energy to the cue stick hitting the cue? In other words it should be a little easier to generate speed (not accuracy) the stronger you are.
I honestly believe it is both strength and stroke. Having more muscle should generate more power and club speed (or stick speed in this case).
Again, I am not expert on this. Just trying to have a good conversation
Rather than argue with you, google who the current "long drive" champion is. He is not "ripped", not tall, and has quite a gut on him. He DOES, however, possess perfect timing, and uses a gigantic driver.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
RRfireblade said:
I will only throw this out for discussion sake...or..."Things that make you go Hmmmm"
If you take a sampling of your super duper fast as lighting runners...I think it interesting to note that they may very well not be considered the strongest guys around...
I think speed muscles and strength muscles are two different things...
To a degree strength and body mass will generate some speed on a cue or golf club....
However....I think swing speed and cue speed are similar to a fast runner......
You can train me to have the best mechanics known to man on the break, and I still won't be able to generate the same cue speed as some people...
Just like you could train me on the correct way to run super fast...and I still will be slower than those with the natural gift for speed...
So...I wonder....Is Club Head Speed, Cue Speed, Running Speed related?
DISCLAIMER:...I have no tests, no experience, no scientific studies or publications that I know of to back this up....This is only a initial hypothosis of where "cue speed" comes from...feel free to discredit me or attempt to make me appear as an idiot at your descretion....
If you take a sampling of your super duper fast as lighting runners...I think it interesting to note that they may very well not be considered the strongest guys around...
I think speed muscles and strength muscles are two different things...
To a degree strength and body mass will generate some speed on a cue or golf club....
However....I think swing speed and cue speed are similar to a fast runner......
You can train me to have the best mechanics known to man on the break, and I still won't be able to generate the same cue speed as some people...
Just like you could train me on the correct way to run super fast...and I still will be slower than those with the natural gift for speed...
So...I wonder....Is Club Head Speed, Cue Speed, Running Speed related?
DISCLAIMER:...I have no tests, no experience, no scientific studies or publications that I know of to back this up....This is only a initial hypothosis of where "cue speed" comes from...feel free to discredit me or attempt to make me appear as an idiot at your descretion....
A player at my club uses one of theese babies. He breaks better with it for sure. I myself do not.
For some players they will add power, but they really should break more and concentrate on loosing up the back arm instead.
But I promise, they can add some power, and I understand the 25oz limit.
For some players they will add power, but they really should break more and concentrate on loosing up the back arm instead.
But I promise, they can add some power, and I understand the 25oz limit.
Mike Dobbyn is like 6'8" 300lbs.
His size is most definitely a major factor in how far he hits the ball.
Then again there is Jason Zuback who is only 5'10" & around 200lbs.
His size is most definitely a major factor in how far he hits the ball.
Then again there is Jason Zuback who is only 5'10" & around 200lbs.
Scott Lee said:Rather than argue with you, google who the current "long drive" champion is. He is not "ripped", not tall, and has quite a gut on him. He DOES, however, possess perfect timing, and uses a gigantic driver.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Last edited:
Hey, I actually have a couple of these left here at our place. $75 each shipped CONUS if anyone wants to try one. PM me.
I am with Scott here.. he's right on the money
IME if you can contact the the point where the head ball and the long string meet consistently you can scatter the balls with a medium speed stop shot. enough to send a ball to every rail. and more often than not drop something in the process.
leave the cue ball in the middle of the table and send a ball to every rail.. hitting harder than that IME knocks more balls heading to a pocket off line than hit an off line ball into a pocket.
Monster breaks are nothing but hype and testosterone.... this game is about accuracy not power...
IME if you can contact the the point where the head ball and the long string meet consistently you can scatter the balls with a medium speed stop shot. enough to send a ball to every rail. and more often than not drop something in the process.
leave the cue ball in the middle of the table and send a ball to every rail.. hitting harder than that IME knocks more balls heading to a pocket off line than hit an off line ball into a pocket.
Monster breaks are nothing but hype and testosterone.... this game is about accuracy not power...
I have a cue that weighs between 22 and 23 oz. absolutely beautiful from a guy in Mississippi that has norwal ivory for a joint and ferrule. and a waterbuffalo tip.
I can't imagine a harder hitting cue than that.
But there is no was in the world I could even attempt to break with it.
I just hit a couple of balls with it when I got it last year and haven't touched it since.
I get good control, and a good enough spread on my breaks with my 17 oz break cue.
My favorite though....an old meucci without the weight. Super light, super fast, and great control on the rock.y
I can't imagine a harder hitting cue than that.
But there is no was in the world I could even attempt to break with it.
I just hit a couple of balls with it when I got it last year and haven't touched it since.
I get good control, and a good enough spread on my breaks with my 17 oz break cue.
My favorite though....an old meucci without the weight. Super light, super fast, and great control on the rock.y
softshot said:
in 9-ball, this is true. however, could a medium speed stop shot create the same results in 8-ball or 15 ball rotation ?
Monster Breaks are likely unnecessary in 9 ball. but I don't entirely believe that they are nothing more than a hype or no use at all in other pocket billiards game. In other billiard games, accuracy is not enough.
Voodoo Daddy
One Pocket 101
poolhall maven said:
Are we that old? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
For the record, I still use a 20.4 oz break cue on the big table but I do like the lighter pole on the BarBox.
Last edited:
Scott Lee said:Rather than argue with you, google who the current "long drive" champion is. He is not "ripped", not tall, and has quite a gut on him. He DOES, however, possess perfect timing, and uses a gigantic driver.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Does'nt mean he's not above average in strength in the right parts of his body.
I'm not arguing , just stating facts as it pertains to LD Golf f. I did also add 'usually' for a reason.
Not sure who particularly your talking about tho , I compete in LDAs competitions only. There are always excpetions but look at the average biggest hitters , Champions and record holders are far more often than not exceptional strong in the right areas and/or posses above average leverage.
And one last FYI , we all use USGA approved clubs , it's the number one rule of LDA.
07' OPen Champ . . . light weight
http://www.longdrivers.com/documents/mikedobbyn/
Last edited:
softshot said:
This and the many posts like it show a pattern among many people on forums like these. For some reason people seem to want to latch on to one variable in a complex interaction of variables...I don't know why...
It is a simple fact that if the balls are moving faster after the break there will be more collisions, the balls will roll farther, and the chance that one will fall in a pocket is greater. That is a statistical fact. Another fact is that changes in the speed you hit the rack will change the trajectory of the balls as they scatter away from the rack. You can hit with the exact same cue location, exact same contact with the head ball, and vary ONLY the speed and achieve a different angle of trajectory for the head ball and the corner ball (in 9 ball). This means that changes in break speed can be a very valuable tool in pocketing a ball on the break. It is very possible that on a given table a 17 mph break will not pocket the corner ball but a23 mph break will. Another thing to consider is that if someone can hit the rack accurately at 25 mph, and you are claiming that, say, 17 mph is sufficient, then the 25mph guy can more EFFORTLESSLY hit the rack at 17 mph. This means that there is a good chance he can hit the rack more consistently and accurately at this speed. So the time he spent working on the 25mph break speed pays off in the 17 mph break by not having to try so hard and being smoother.
A very useful concept to embrace is that accuracy IS power. Accuracy allows a full hit on the head ball and will yield a better spread than a glancing hit. This is because more power is transfered to the rack, regardless of cueball speed. People are talking about strength etc. There are really only 3 things that determine the speed of the cueball. This is the velocity of the stick at impact, the weight of the stick, and the hardness of the stick (meaning tip, ferrule, etc.). Of these, the velocity by far has the greatest impact. The main reason why a very heavy cue might not produce as fast a cueball speed is that you simply can't accelerate it to the same velocity as a light cue. Someone who is very strong, however, might not experience as much of a slowdown in the heavy cue. Assuming they are able to swing the heavy cue at the same speed without sacrificing their stance and mechanics to do this, then they will definitely break harder.
I can't get over how much difficulty people have in discussing these issues without confusing points considerably. This thread could be about any of the following:
1) What weight cue yields the fastest cueball speed?
2) Can a strong person break faster than a person who is not as strong?
3) What weight cue yields the most effective break?
4) Is a medium speed break as good as a very hard break?
These questions interrelate quite a bit. Here are some considerations:
1) The cue that can be moved in such a way that it yields the greatest combination of high mass and fast speed yields the fastest cue ball speed. If you can swing a light cue very fast, thats great. If you can swing a heavier cue the same speed, that's even better. If you can swing a heavier cue a little slower, it might be equal.
2) If all aspects of accuracy are assumed to be the same, a strong person may be able to break faster than a weak person. It comes down to whether the strong person can move his arm (and the cue) as FAST as the weak person. It might be reasonably assumed that the strong person would be better able to maintain his maximum swing velocity with a heavier cue. This means that the stronger person would be more likely to be able to swing a very heavy cue at a very fast speed. The big assumption here though is that the strong person can move his arm as fast as the "weaker" person. This might not be the case at all.
3) the most effective break will be achieved with the cue weight that allows a consistently accurate hit on the head ball at a wide range of speeds, and also offers the consistent ability to achieve those speeds at will. This will vary considerably from person to person.
4) A medium speed break will offer more predictable results and more consistency. This is mainly because any errors will not be as magnified as with a very hard break. However, it might not pocket as many balls or pocket balls as frequently. My experience says that both a medium and a hard break can spread the balls effectively, but a medium speed break keeps them spread better, whereas the very hard break often results in the balls travelling far enough to cluster together more. With 8-ball the very hard break tends to spread the balls better all over the table--it really depends on the cloth and the quality of the rack. With a less than ideal rack and slow cloth on a 9' table playing 8-ball, I sure do want access to that monster break that is supposedly for show only...
Sorry for the long post,
KMRUNOUT
ok, its all about physics.
It's like in softball or baseball. If you can swing a a 26oz softball bat, at 98mph but also swing a 28oz bat at 98mph, your going to get more energy from the 28oz bat.
Same with a baseball bat, some of the bigger guys use a heavier bat cuz when they make contact they will get more power from it.
So the same goes for a pool cue, if you can swing a 22oz cue just as fast as a 18oz cue you'll get more energy from the 22oz cue.
I use a 20oz J&J break jump and can crush the racks, its just sick!!!!! I actually get more power and control from this cue, than my old Elite break cuz that was a 18oz.
It's like in softball or baseball. If you can swing a a 26oz softball bat, at 98mph but also swing a 28oz bat at 98mph, your going to get more energy from the 28oz bat.
Same with a baseball bat, some of the bigger guys use a heavier bat cuz when they make contact they will get more power from it.
So the same goes for a pool cue, if you can swing a 22oz cue just as fast as a 18oz cue you'll get more energy from the 22oz cue.
I use a 20oz J&J break jump and can crush the racks, its just sick!!!!! I actually get more power and control from this cue, than my old Elite break cuz that was a 18oz.
KMRUNOUT said:
I was counting on your long post. have the same science that you have in mind. the correlation between weight and speed and also break cue composition are undeniable and could affect the outcome of the break. consistency on accuracy and speed varies from person to person. the weight remains constant, same as that of the cue composition. that's what some people forget to consider. they might have thought that their accuracy and speed are constant variables at varying cue weights. which brings them to the conclusion that a heavy cue doesn't have much of a positive effect on the break.
here is a physics experiment that I read a few weeks ago regarding such case. I was not able to save or bookmark the website, but all was clear in my mind on what the article was trying to imply. so please bear with me.
1. increased weight x constant speed x constant 100% accuracy = Far effect.
2. constant weight x increased speed x constant 100% accuracy = Farther effect.
3. increased weight x increased speed x constant 100% accuracy = Farthest effect.
* take note: if Accuracy is compromised, Neither Weight Nor Speed would make any significant difference.
Some are saying a lighter cue will make more noise regardless...
It is actually the other way around. If you can not swing fast, then tou get more power with a heavy cue.
Like the beginners in my club. me, I get way more power with a lighter cue. Stop the Physics lesson and try it. I promise.
Was really surprised myself when I saw and heard the power beginners could generate. Not rockhard, but for a beginner... The 25oz limit is valid.
It is actually the other way around. If you can not swing fast, then tou get more power with a heavy cue.
Like the beginners in my club. me, I get way more power with a lighter cue. Stop the Physics lesson and try it. I promise.
Was really surprised myself when I saw and heard the power beginners could generate. Not rockhard, but for a beginner... The 25oz limit is valid.