PDA

View Full Version : Does a low-squirt cue help, and who does it help?



dr_dave
03-20-2007, 11:19 AM
Please carefully read the following paragraphs, select an option below, and click on the Submit vote button.

A low-squirt (AKA "low cue-ball deflection") cue creates less squirt (i.e., the cue ball heads closer to the stick's aiming line direction when struck). Therefore, not as much aim adjustment or compensation is required when using English with a low-squirt cue. However, the value of this is debatable ... hence this poll. I hope people from both sides of the argument will participate in the poll and add comments for discussion.


Thank you for participating,
Dave

Paul_Mon
03-20-2007, 11:35 AM
Dave,

I’m amazed at how often good players have no idea about cue ball deflection. These same players shoot real good with whatever they have in their hand, but mostly they have used the same cue for a long time. On a few occasions I’ve explained and demonstrated cue ball deflection and while they appreciate what they’ve just seen they have no inclination to change.


So what does this mean in regards to your poll? If you add “a player who understands squirt” to each of your options it would change the way I had voted.

Regards………Paul

Bob_Jewett
03-20-2007, 11:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Paul_Mon:</font><hr> ... I’m amazed at how often good players have no idea about cue ball deflection. These same players shoot real good with whatever they have in their hand... <hr /></blockquote>
I was at one trade show and Bob Meucci had his Myth Destroyer set up demonstrating squirt from various sticks. A champion (who I think was sponsored by Bob at the time), said "My stick does that?!?" He had no idea before he saw the test. And it's not clear that the test was helpful to him. Of course you always wonder whether such a player would play better with a lower-squirt stick, but it's impossible to do the test.

dr_dave
03-20-2007, 11:45 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Paul_Mon:</font><hr>I’m amazed at how often good players have no idea about cue ball deflection. These same players shoot real good with whatever they have in their hand, but mostly they have used the same cue for a long time. On a few occasions I’ve explained and demonstrated cue ball deflection and while they appreciate what they’ve just seen they have no inclination to change.

So what does this mean in regards to your poll? If you add “a player who understands squirt” to each of your options it would change the way I had voted.<hr /></blockquote>Paul,

Thank you for your comments. I actually prefer the answers the way they are worded. To me, they imply: "whether the player knows about or understands squirt or not."

Dave

Billy_Bob
03-20-2007, 01:32 PM
There is an old guy around here who has been playing for 40 plus years. He just got a Predator 314. He was missing his shots when using english with the Predator.

Then I showed him how to use it (front hand english).

Now he is making his shots. He likes it! But he is smart enough to know that he needs to aim differently when using the Predator.

So I voted helps beginner or intermediate most above. This is because we don't need to learn to compensate for squirt (depending on distance) like the old timers did.

The old timer can shoot just as well with a regular cue as with the Predator (now that he knows how to use it).

But I can only shoot well with the Predator since I have not learned how to aim for shots using english with a regular cue.

So sort of like a used "electronic gizmo" for sale at a second hand store which does not come with instructions. Might be useless for anyone without the instructions.

BRussell
03-20-2007, 01:51 PM
I didn't answer the poll because I just don't know. But I wanted to ask about this:
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> There is an old guy around here who has been playing for 40 plus years. He just got a Predator 314. He was missing his shots when using english with the Predator.

Then I showed him how to use it (front hand english). <hr /></blockquote> Can you explain this further? Are you saying that FHE is something that you should use on a low-squirt cue but not a regular cue? Why? And won't a low-squirt cue still be low-squirt even if you don't use use FHE?

dr_dave
03-20-2007, 02:10 PM
FYI, back-hand-English (BHE) is illustrated and front-hand-English (FHE) is described in my May '07 instructional article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/2007/may07.pdf). Check it out if you want to better understand how, why, and when they should be used.

Regards,
Dave
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BRussell:</font><hr> I didn't answer the poll because I just don't know. But I wanted to ask about this:
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> There is an old guy around here who has been playing for 40 plus years. He just got a Predator 314. He was missing his shots when using english with the Predator.

Then I showed him how to use it (front hand english). <hr /></blockquote> Can you explain this further? Are you saying that FHE is something that you should use on a low-squirt cue but not a regular cue? Why? And won't a low-squirt cue still be low-squirt even if you don't use use FHE? <hr /></blockquote>

Jal
03-20-2007, 04:03 PM
Dr. Dave,

I chose "any player at any level would be better with a low-squirt cue" with the assumption that they aren't deliberately using backhand english, and your premise that the low squirt cue produces half as much squirt. I'm sure you're aware that this premise is somewhat questionable since Predator's and Platinum Billiards' tests indicate that the amount of squirt reduction is considerably less than that (compared to a "typical" cue). On the other hand, some say that it's one-quarter as much so I guess the one-half figure is a good compromise.

Jim

dr_dave
03-20-2007, 04:58 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> Dr. Dave,

I chose "any player at any level would be better with a low-squirt cue" with the assumption that they aren't deliberately using backhand english, and your premise that the low squirt cue produces half as much squirt. I'm sure you're aware that this premise is somewhat questionable since Predator's and Platinum Billiards' tests indicate that the amount of squirt reduction is considerably less than that (compared to a "typical" cue). On the other hand, some say that it's one-quarter as much so I guess the one-half figure is a good compromise.<hr /></blockquote>Those are good points. I agree with your assessment and clarifications.

Regards,
Dave

cushioncrawler
03-20-2007, 07:39 PM
I didnt vote koz i can only really comment about 12' tables, english billiards (EB) moreso than snooker. But, for a 12' table, i would be tempted to vote that only a top player would benefit.

In general, a beginner shood start off with a stiff cue (EB here). A stiffy gives a better indication of what u are doing with the cue. A whippy will often give a beginner's brain the wrong message, ie a whippy will be "too forgiving" more often than will a stiffy.

In the end, for EB, whether a stiffy or whippy is better would depend on what sort of scoring method(s) the player prefers. Perhaps one shood change cues for eech shot as needed. madMac.

cushioncrawler
03-20-2007, 07:51 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> .....A low-squirt (AKA "low cue-ball deflection") cue creates less squirt (i.e., the cue ball heads closer to the stick's aiming line direction when struck). Therefore, not as much aim adjustment or compensation is required when using English with a low-squirt cue. However, the value of this is debatable ... hence this poll...... <hr /></blockquote>I think that most players can get more english and screw more eezyly with a whippy cue. But, i think that squirt etc are more varyable with a whippy cue. A stiffy is more consistent, ie less-lively -- u might havta make more allowance for squirt, but at least the squirt is more consistent. madmac.

dr_dave
03-20-2007, 10:03 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> .....A low-squirt (AKA "low cue-ball deflection") cue creates less squirt (i.e., the cue ball heads closer to the stick's aiming line direction when struck). Therefore, not as much aim adjustment or compensation is required when using English with a low-squirt cue. However, the value of this is debatable ... hence this poll...... <hr /></blockquote>I think that most players can get more english and screw more eezyly with a whippy cue. But, i think that squirt etc are more varyable with a whippy cue. A stiffy is more consistent, ie less-lively -- u might havta make more allowance for squirt, but at least the squirt is more consistent. madmac. <hr /></blockquote>The effect of a "whippy" cue has been discussed on this forum before. The problem is the definition of "whippy" is not very clear. For example, would you describe a Predator Z shaft and cue as "whippy?" Some people might, and some people might not. The shaft end certainly is "whippy" due to its small diameter and hollow core, but I don't know if most people would describe the entire cue (or shaft) as "whippy." The only thing that seems to be true is that if the end of the shaft is light, it will have less squirt.

Dave

cushioncrawler
03-21-2007, 01:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> .....A low-squirt (AKA "low cue-ball deflection") cue creates less squirt (i.e., the cue ball heads closer to the stick's aiming line direction when struck). Therefore, not as much aim adjustment or compensation is required when using English with a low-squirt cue. However, the value of this is debatable ... hence this poll...... <hr /></blockquote>I think that most players can get more english and screw more eezyly with a whippy cue. But, i think that squirt etc are more varyable with a whippy cue. A stiffy is more consistent, ie less-lively -- u might havta make more allowance for squirt, but at least the squirt is more consistent. madmac. <hr /></blockquote>The effect of a "whippy" cue has been discussed on this forum before. The problem is the definition of "whippy" is not very clear. For example, would you describe a Predator Z shaft and cue as "whippy?" Some people might, and some people might not. The shaft end certainly is "whippy" due to its small diameter and hollow core, but I don't know if most people would describe the entire cue (or shaft) as "whippy." The only thing that seems to be true is that if the end of the shaft is light, it will have less squirt. Dave <hr /></blockquote>I shood have said "nonstiff" -- to me, "whippy" mainly means "bends a lot", but i do have a "vibration" sort of test that perhaps tells me whether the cue is "whippy" in a slightly different way perhaps, never really thort this out fully.

The stiffest cue i have ever seen happens to be one of my cues, it is a tubular steel cue, possibly made in about 1970, wt = 15oz. I feel sure that the tip is very light, like the rest of the cue, but, i seem to recall that i couldnt uze it at all, too stiff, and hopeless if u want to uze lots of english, even tho the tip-end is very very light. Hencely, i am not entirely convinced that a light tip-end gives less squirt, or at least that it is all that simple, didnt seem to work for me (if i remember aright).

When i check-out a cue, i hold it vertically with the butt hard against the floor, and i hold the cue about 15" from the tip, and waggle (bend) the tip left and right. I have developed a feel for how bendy (whippy) any cue iz, based on how much it bends.

Then i might hold the cue near the butt, and bang the shaft against my other palm (wrist actually), about 18" from the tip, letting the cue bounce back and vibrate. I have developed a feel for the "whippyness" of a cue based on this vibration test. This might give a slightly different rezult from the simple "bend" test. But, my (whippy) feel would probably be fooled if i came across a hollow pool cue i suppoze.

I think that the only pool cue that i have ever held in my hand was a Predator Z, and i think that i did one or both of the above tests, but i karnt remember what my exact impression was. I think i was surprized at how bendy the shaft was, considering that to me the shaft was very fat (only 12mm actually i think) -- much "bendyr" than my own 11.25mm billiard cue. And, i had lots of trouble hitting the "Z" (Z1???) straight, koz of the long parallel taper, poison to me, i like a conical taper, but i could use a parallel taper ok if it had a good bend. It had a balance point well foreward, as do my own favorit cues (good). And it didnt have any of that linen etc wrap nonsense. And the shaft was birds-eye maple i think. The owner, Phil, has made a 141 snooker break with this cue on a 12' table. madMac.

DickLeonard
03-21-2007, 06:10 AM
Paul Mon add me to that list, I have never played with a predator shaft, In my early years I did use 14 mm shafts on my Rambow.

I had a system I used for aiming that allowed for the cueball moving right of left depending on the English used.####

DickLeonard
03-21-2007, 06:17 AM
Mad Mac have you ever divulged your high break? You seemed to have taken testing Vibration to a new level. Very intuitive thinking on your part. ####

Paul_Mon
03-21-2007, 08:11 AM
Butch,
When I wrote the post above I had Ernie Pavone in mind. He still regularly runs 30's and 40's. I actually have asked Ernie about squirt and compensating. He's not being elusive but his answer is something like "Well, I aim a little thicker or thinner depending on the english". I got an email from Pat Howey last week, he ran 111 the day before. He's another player who didn't seem to care about squirt. But he did have one of the thinnest shafts I ever saw. Pat regularly uses powder (he's a slip stroker) and sands the shaft. A few years back the original shaft on his Palmer was probably 9 mm or less. I would cringe because he was using it to break in 9 ball. That shaft was so whippy you could watch it resonate whenever he struck the cue ball. My feeling was that it was so thin that it probably was very low squirt. It has since broken and he had a new shaft made with the original Palmer rings. The new shaft being about 12.5 mm. Pat never missed a beat. While there certainly is benefit in knowing about and controlling squirt with equipment some of you guys (old timers /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif) seem to be extremely proficient regardless.

best regards..........Paul

dr_dave
03-21-2007, 09:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr>The stiffest cue i have ever seen happens to be one of my cues, it is a tubular steel cue, possibly made in about 1970, wt = 15oz. I feel sure that the tip is very light, like the rest of the cue, but, i seem to recall that i couldnt uze it at all, too stiff, and hopeless if u want to uze lots of english, even tho the tip-end is very very light. Hencely, i am not entirely convinced that a light tip-end gives less squirt, or at least that it is all that simple, didnt seem to work for me (if i remember aright).<hr /></blockquote>Comparing a steel cue to a wooden cue is like comparing apples and oranges. However, I bet a steel cue with a lighter shaft end will have less squirt than a similar steel cue with a heavier shaft end.

Regards,
Dave

SpiderMan
03-21-2007, 09:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr> I think that most players can get more english and screw more eezyly with a whippy cue. But, i think that squirt etc are more varyable with a whippy cue. A stiffy is more consistent, ie less-lively -- u might havta make more allowance for squirt, but at least the squirt is more consistent. madmac. <hr /></blockquote>

Ah findz dat ah skrewz mo eezyly wid de stiffy dan de whippy shaf. An ah gitz mo squirt!

English? Who carez? Long az dey hollerz!

SpiderMan

dr_dave
03-21-2007, 09:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr> I think that most players can get more english and screw more eezyly with a whippy cue. But, i think that squirt etc are more varyable with a whippy cue. A stiffy is more consistent, ie less-lively -- u might havta make more allowance for squirt, but at least the squirt is more consistent. madmac. <hr /></blockquote>

Ah findz dat ah skrewz mo eezyly wid de stiffy dan de whippy shaf. An ah gitz mo squirt!

English? Who carez? Long az dey hollerz!<hr /></blockquote>U gize R tuf to unda-stand. Werce dan reed'n a bunch uv fisics ekwashuns. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Is it too much to ask for standard English (or American, with no squirt /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif) on a pubic forum? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

I also think the English language sucks, and I wish spelling were more intuitive, but I am also realistic knowing that we can't change the world (at least until the Chindians [the Chinese and Indians] take over).

Dave

Billy_Bob
03-21-2007, 12:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BRussell:</font><hr> ...Are you saying that FHE is something that you should use on a low-squirt cue but not a regular cue?...<hr /></blockquote>

This all has to do with where the "pivot point" is on a particular cue (with a particular shaft).

Now "Front Hand English" works for me and others when using a Predator 314 and apparently it works for the old timer I know using a 314-2 shaft.

I have not read anything about other shafts from anyone, so I don't know. Some other manufacturers may say their shaft is "low deflection", but the "pivot point" might be different than my shaft.

Also there is disagreement as to where on a cue with a 314 shaft the pivot point is. It seems to me by my unscientific testing that the pivot point is way back near the butt. A couple of other people have posted on the internet (RSB) saying this as well.

Anyway FHE using a Predator 314 works for me. I don't know about other shafts.

Deeman3
03-21-2007, 12:26 PM
This is an honest to God question, not a smart a**ed comment I may be known for. Why is backhand English valuable? is it because it allows players who have not developed the skill or knowledge to use and allow for the normal physics of pool a shortcut to learn english or is it something superior to just knowing where you should hit it? Do you fel/know that players graduate from backhand english to a more traditional approach or do they graduate from traditional applications to Backhand english or does it just not matter?

Billy_Bob
03-21-2007, 12:29 PM
FYI - I found on RSB where "the man" says
"...Predator shafts usually have 50+" pivot points..."

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.billiard/browse_frm/thread/2418187e810fa452/749113e095df56ea?lnk=gst&amp;q=shepard+314+pivot&amp;rnum= 6&amp;hl=en#749113e095df56ea

Yet here they say something different...
http://www.platinumbilliards.com/rating_deflect.php

I agree with the first, that the pivot point is way back near the butt of the cue.

Billy_Bob
03-21-2007, 12:54 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> This is an honest to God question, not a smart a**ed comment I may be known for. Why is backhand English valuable? is it because it allows players who have not developed the skill or knowledge to use and allow for the normal physics of pool a shortcut to learn english or is it something superior to just knowing where you should hit it? Do you fel/know that players graduate from backhand english to a more traditional approach or do they graduate from traditional applications to Backhand english or does it just not matter? <hr /></blockquote>

My history is as follows...

I first learned that I could help object balls go into the pocket by using english.

Then one day I was playing on a large table and tried a long shot using english and noticed I could not make my ball. I noticed with a little testing that the cue ball was off from where I thought I was aiming (by the time it got way down there). Hummm... I learned there was a problem using english on long shots!

Then I learned about pivot points and backhand english. Cool! I could find the "pivot point" on my cue (10 inches back on the cue I was using by my own testing), then use this spot for my bridge, aim dead center, then move my backhand to apply english while keeping my front hand still.

This is "magic"! The cue ball goes to the same spot as a dead center hit! But there is a problem with this. What if the cue ball is near a rail? I can't make a 10 inch bridge!

Then I learned about low deflection shafts. I bought an [unnamed brand] cue which claimed to be low deflection but was not by my testing. Then I bought a Predator 314 and by my testing the pivot point was way back near the butt of the cue.

Bingo! I could now hold my back hand still, aim dead center, then move my front hand left/right to apply english. I did not need a 10 inch bridge. I could use this also when the cue ball was near a rail.

Works for me!

Jal
03-21-2007, 02:24 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr>...
The stiffest cue i have ever seen happens to be one of my cues, it is a tubular steel cue, possibly made in about 1970, wt = 15oz. I feel sure that the tip is very light, like the rest of the cue, but, i seem to recall that i couldnt uze it at all, too stiff, and hopeless if u want to uze lots of english, even tho the tip-end is very very light. Hencely, i am not entirely convinced that a light tip-end gives less squirt, or at least that it is all that simple, didnt seem to work for me (if i remember aright).<hr /></blockquote>Mac, the steel transmits the transverse wave down the shaft much faster than wood. So inspite of the light tip end, much more of the downstream cue will be pushed aside by the cueball, yielding more "endmass".

Jim

PS. Don't let the language nazis get to you. I understand you perfectly and that's all that counts, right? (Sorry Dr. Dave and Spiderman) /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

dr_dave
03-21-2007, 02:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>PS. Don't let the language nazis get to you. I understand you perfectly and that's all that counts, right? (Sorry Dr. Dave and Spiderman) /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif<hr /></blockquote>I was mostly joking with my comments, but I was partly serious. Sometimes it hurts my brain trying to read Mac's phonetic riddles. I would prefer English because that is what everybody else uses. I don't think this is too much to ask. I know Mac is capable of writing in English, because I have seen him do it before. Also, with today's software spelling and grammar checkers, it doesn't take much effort.

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
03-21-2007, 02:54 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> This is an honest to God question, not a smart a**ed comment I may be known for. Why is backhand English valuable? is it because it allows players who have not developed the skill or knowledge to use and allow for the normal physics of pool a shortcut to learn english or is it something superior to just knowing where you should hit it? Do you fel/know that players graduate from backhand english to a more traditional approach or do they graduate from traditional applications to Backhand english or does it just not matter? <hr /></blockquote>

My history is as follows...

I first learned that I could help object balls go into the pocket by using english.

Then one day I was playing on a large table and tried a long shot using english and noticed I could not make my ball. I noticed with a little testing that the cue ball was off from where I thought I was aiming (by the time it got way down there). Hummm... I learned there was a problem using english on long shots!

Then I learned about pivot points and backhand english. Cool! I could find the "pivot point" on my cue (10 inches back on the cue I was using by my own testing), then use this spot for my bridge, aim dead center, then move my backhand to apply english while keeping my front hand still.

This is "magic"! The cue ball goes to the same spot as a dead center hit! But there is a problem with this. What if the cue ball is near a rail? I can't make a 10 inch bridge!

Then I learned about low deflection shafts. I bought an [unnamed brand] cue which claimed to be low deflection but was not by my testing. Then I bought a Predator 314 and by my testing the pivot point was way back near the butt of the cue.

Bingo! I could now hold my back hand still, aim dead center, then move my front hand left/right to apply english. I did not need a 10 inch bridge. I could use this also when the cue ball was near a rail.

Works for me!<hr /></blockquote>Billy_Bob,

Excellent summary of some of the subtleties of FHE. In reply to Deeman: FHE or BHE helps some people play better, especially the people who never compensated for squirt before. As the player gains more experience, he or she might also gain insight into how and when to also adjust one's aim for swerve and throw for various cue stick elevations, shot speeds, shot distances, amounts of English and spin, and cut angle.

Now, an alternative is to just aim and adjust for squirt/swerve/throw naturally or intuitively, based on experience (i.e., lots of mistakes). Nothing beats great intuition and confidence built by years and years of successful practice and play.

Regards,
Dave

wolfdancer
03-21-2007, 03:45 PM
In Australia, the have replaced the reading primers with
"Hooked on Phonics"
Well, what can you expect from a country that built that nightmare Opera House in Sidney, and then think it's beautiful?
Frank Lloyd Wright, on a bad acid trip, could have done better.
You might even need to drop acid to put up with the promotion site:
web page (http://www.sydneyoperahouse.com/sections/tours/virtual_tour/vrtour2.asp)

dr_dave
03-21-2007, 03:51 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> In Australia, the have replaced the reading primers with
"Hooked on Phonics"
Well, what can you expect from a country that built that nightmare Opera House in Sidney, and then think it's beautiful?
Frank Lloyd Wright, on a bad acid trip, could have done better.<hr /></blockquote>I personally like the architecture of the Sydney Opera House.

Also, it is one of the most recognizable structures in the entire world, so maybe those Aussies are smarter than you think.

Dave

PS: How did you vote in the poll?

Deeman3
03-21-2007, 03:56 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> This is an honest to God question, not a smart a**ed comment I may be known for. Why is backhand English valuable? is it because it allows players who have not developed the skill or knowledge to use and allow for the normal physics of pool a shortcut to learn english or is it something superior to just knowing where you should hit it? Do you fel/know that players graduate from backhand english to a more traditional approach or do they graduate from traditional applications to Backhand english or does it just not matter? <hr /></blockquote>

My history is as follows...

I first learned that I could help object balls go into the pocket by using english.

Then one day I was playing on a large table and tried a long shot using english and noticed I could not make my ball. I noticed with a little testing that the cue ball was off from where I thought I was aiming (by the time it got way down there). Hummm... I learned there was a problem using english on long shots!

Then I learned about pivot points and backhand english. Cool! I could find the "pivot point" on my cue (10 inches back on the cue I was using by my own testing), then use this spot for my bridge, aim dead center, then move my backhand to apply english while keeping my front hand still.

This is "magic"! The cue ball goes to the same spot as a dead center hit! But there is a problem with this. What if the cue ball is near a rail? I can't make a 10 inch bridge!

Then I learned about low deflection shafts. I bought an [unnamed brand] cue which claimed to be low deflection but was not by my testing. Then I bought a Predator 314 and by my testing the pivot point was way back near the butt of the cue.

Bingo! I could now hold my back hand still, aim dead center, then move my front hand left/right to apply english. I did not need a 10 inch bridge. I could use this also when the cue ball was near a rail.

Works for me!<hr /></blockquote>Billy_Bob,

Excellent summary of some of the subtleties of FHE. In reply to Deeman: FHE or BHE helps some people play better, especially the people who never compensated for squirt before. As the player gains more experience, he or she might also gain insight into how and when to also adjust one's aim for swerve and throw for various cue stick elevations, shot speeds, shot distances, amounts of English and spin, and cut angle.

Now, an alternative is to just aim and adjust for squirt/swerve/throw naturally or intuitively, based on experience (i.e., lots of mistakes). Nothing beats great intuition and confidence built by years and years of successful practice and play.

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">Good answers and I'll take it from you guys that this stuff is great but I'll just keep rattling them in the pocket. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

wolfdancer
03-21-2007, 04:04 PM
I think the "old timers"...(and now I iz one, sans their cue skills) thought BHE and FHE were gimmicks....I didn't know there was an FHE, until I read this thread. I was taught the parallel shift method of applying english, and after some trial and error, a few thousand shots, washed down with ample parts tonic and lime.....the adjustment becomes "intuitive" (also didn't know pool players used them big words)
But whatever works...bhe, fhe, shift, etc...as the cueball and the object ball get further apart.....I think one needs to adjust with all these methods.....If my cue is pointing NNW, and I want the ball to just go N....I'd have to get my slide rule out to factor in the resultant forces

http://www.math.hmc.edu/calculus/tutorials/vectoranalysis/images/vector1.gif

dr_dave
03-21-2007, 04:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> This is an honest to God question, not a smart a**ed comment I may be known for. Why is backhand English valuable? is it because it allows players who have not developed the skill or knowledge to use and allow for the normal physics of pool a shortcut to learn english or is it something superior to just knowing where you should hit it? Do you fel/know that players graduate from backhand english to a more traditional approach or do they graduate from traditional applications to Backhand english or does it just not matter? <hr /></blockquote>

My history is as follows...

I first learned that I could help object balls go into the pocket by using english.

Then one day I was playing on a large table and tried a long shot using english and noticed I could not make my ball. I noticed with a little testing that the cue ball was off from where I thought I was aiming (by the time it got way down there). Hummm... I learned there was a problem using english on long shots!

Then I learned about pivot points and backhand english. Cool! I could find the "pivot point" on my cue (10 inches back on the cue I was using by my own testing), then use this spot for my bridge, aim dead center, then move my backhand to apply english while keeping my front hand still.

This is "magic"! The cue ball goes to the same spot as a dead center hit! But there is a problem with this. What if the cue ball is near a rail? I can't make a 10 inch bridge!

Then I learned about low deflection shafts. I bought an [unnamed brand] cue which claimed to be low deflection but was not by my testing. Then I bought a Predator 314 and by my testing the pivot point was way back near the butt of the cue.

Bingo! I could now hold my back hand still, aim dead center, then move my front hand left/right to apply english. I did not need a 10 inch bridge. I could use this also when the cue ball was near a rail.

Works for me!<hr /></blockquote>Billy_Bob,

Excellent summary of some of the subtleties of FHE. In reply to Deeman: FHE or BHE helps some people play better, especially the people who never compensated for squirt before. As the player gains more experience, he or she might also gain insight into how and when to also adjust one's aim for swerve and throw for various cue stick elevations, shot speeds, shot distances, amounts of English and spin, and cut angle.

Now, an alternative is to just aim and adjust for squirt/swerve/throw naturally or intuitively, based on experience (i.e., lots of mistakes). Nothing beats great intuition and confidence built by years and years of successful practice and play.

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">Good answers and I'll take it from you guys that this stuff is great but I'll just keep rattling them in the pocket. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color><hr /></blockquote>You apparently already have perfect intuition built by years of flawless play, so you don't need any silly systems or snake oil. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Lucky you.

Regards,
Dave

TennesseeJoe
03-21-2007, 04:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>PS. Don't let the language nazis get to you. I understand you perfectly and that's all that counts, right? (Sorry Dr. Dave and Spiderman) /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif<hr /></blockquote>I was mostly joking with my comments, but I was partly serious. Sometimes it hurts my brain trying to read Mac's phonetic riddles. I would prefer English because that is what everybody else uses. I don't think this is too much to ask. I know Mac is capable of writing in English, because I have seen him do it before. Also, with today's software spelling and grammar checkers, it doesn't take much effort.

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>


Dr. Dave I agree with you on this. It is unpleasant to read the so I just ignore. Not to offend anyone---but that is just me.

Jal
03-21-2007, 04:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>PS. Don't let the language nazis get to you. I understand you perfectly and that's all that counts, right? (Sorry Dr. Dave and Spiderman) /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif<hr /></blockquote>I was mostly joking with my comments, but I was partly serious. Sometimes it hurts my brain trying to read Mac's phonetic riddles. I would prefer English because that is what everybody else uses. I don't think this is too much to ask. I know Mac is capable of writing in English, because I have seen him do it before. Also, with today's software spelling and grammar checkers, it doesn't take much effort.

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>Dr. Dave,

Your request is of course understandable and maybe even justified. Yet I find his style refreshing and enjoy reading it. Between you and Spiderman that's two votes against. But I think I spend more than twice as much time exchanging posts with him than the both of you, so I'm afraid the yeas have it. (We'll vote again next year if you like.)

Jim /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

wolfdancer
03-21-2007, 04:49 PM
I'll only admit that it's interesting. I've made four trips to Sidney, but never got drunk enough to take the Opera house tour...lol.
Besides having to be pulled from the surf by a life guard at Bondi beach.....I seriously thought of immigrating there...great country. We took two families over there to live, but brought back another two that couldn't make the adjustment.
I kid Mac in pm's as well....
Beauty though is in the eye of the beholder...
Wait 'till you see what China has built for the next Olympics.....

cushioncrawler
03-21-2007, 04:49 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Mad Mac have you ever divulged your high break? You seemed to have taken testing Vibration to a new level. Very intuitive thinking on your part. #### <hr /></blockquote>Dick -- I have never given "bending" and "vibration" a lot of thort. I know that golf-shops have apparatus that tests a club's natural frequency, and that allso tests a player's natural (or best) frequency, and then makes $$$$ arranging a happy marriage. And i think that a posting a few weeks ago mentioned that this iz (can be) done for cues allso.

I think that my bend-test might tell me that some guy's cue iz "weak" and very bendy, and then if the vibration-test reveals a very low-frequency sort of vibration then this tells me that the shaft is comparatively heavy and weak (not meaning to imply here that any of this is bad news).

For example i "tested" the cue of the Ozz billiards &amp; snooker champ, i saw that the cue woz thinnish, and then i woz surprized to find that it woznt as "bendy" as it "looked", and then i woznt surprized to find that it had a very hi-frequency vibration -- this told me that this lump of ash in my hand probably had the highest strength-wt ration of any cue that i had ever tested (allowing for the effect of taper etc). At a later date i tested a cue belonging to a new chum at my club, he had brought the cue to Ozz from Sth Africa, it woz "off the scale" -- the shaft woz some sort of african hardwood.

One could say "why not just hit a damned ball with the cue". To me, how a cue hits a ball relyz too much on the behaviour of the leather tip (i like a hard tip). And, i like a cue with the center of wt nearer the tip, hence nearly everyone's cue feels like rubbish to me if i actually play a shot.

High Break -- In english billiards (12' table) i have never got past 147 in competition, i get about 200 in praktis, or 300 if u include runs of nursery cannons, 65 break in snooker (dont play snooker), dont play pool. madMac.

wolfdancer
03-21-2007, 05:02 PM
Mac, you seem to know something about wood? You mentioned a shaft made from Ash...any benefit using Ash wood?
It's interesting that more Major Leaguers are now using bats made from maple
Bats were made from 50 year old white ash trees, and only the top 10% of those trees.
Maple was too heavy to use for a bat, until new wood drying technology came along to reduce the moisture content.
But if they allowed aluminum bats in the majors, someone would hit at least 100 hr's, 50 would be the avg, and there would probably be a dozen pitchers a year killed by line drives.

cushioncrawler
03-21-2007, 05:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr>... The stiffest cue i have ever seen happens to be one of my cues, it is a tubular steel cue, possibly made in about 1970, wt = 15oz. I feel sure that the tip is very light, like the rest of the cue, but, i seem to recall that i couldnt uze it at all, too stiff, and hopeless if u want to uze lots of english, even tho the tip-end is very very light. Hencely, i am not entirely convinced that a light tip-end gives less squirt, or at least that it is all that simple, didnt seem to work for me (if i remember aright).<hr /></blockquote>Mac, the steel transmits the transverse wave down the shaft much faster than wood. So inspite of the light tip end, much more of the downstream cue will be pushed aside by the cueball, yielding more "endmass". Jim . PS. Don't let the language nazis get to you. I understand you perfectly and that's all that counts, right? (Sorry Dr. Dave and Spiderman) /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote>Jim -- I remember getting zero out of 20 for a spelling test in grade 4. I woz only 8yr young at the time, shood have been in grade 3. Yes, i allwayz say that everything affects squirt, the full wt of the cue, the wt of the grip, and the wt of the bridge-hand. I remember that the manufacturers of the steel cue tryd making it 2-piece which gave them the opportunity of fitting a "shock absorber", really just some plastic which allowed the cue to bend a bit, to give more "feel", ie give less squirt etc, but still no good . Pros were even paid to uze and promote the cue, but still no good -- too stiff, and steel duznt slide over the skin very well (it needed longitudinal groovz). But, the tubular cue did allow me to drill a hole throo the tip, and to fit a flashlight and battery and lens inside, to help check aim. Pity it needed a darkened room. madMac.

cushioncrawler
03-21-2007, 05:16 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr> I think that most players can get more english and screw more eezyly with a whippy cue. But, i think that squirt etc are more varyable with a whippy cue. A stiffy is more consistent, ie less-lively -- u might havta make more allowance for squirt, but at least the squirt is more consistent. madmac. <hr /></blockquote>Ah findz dat ah skrewz mo eezyly wid de stiffy dan de whippy shaf. An ah gitz mo squirt! English? Who carez? Long az dey hollerz! SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>I reckon that a stiff cue iznt far behind the best cues (for screwing/draw), but a very bendy cue is hopeless at longish range (not enuff backbone). madMac.

cushioncrawler
03-21-2007, 05:38 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Mac, you seem to know something about wood? You mentioned a shaft made from Ash...any benefit using Ash wood? It's interesting that more Major Leaguers are now using bats made from maple. Bats were made from 50 year old white ash trees, and only the top 10% of those trees. Maple was too heavy to use for a bat, until new wood drying technology came along to reduce the moisture content. But if they allowed aluminum bats in the majors, someone would hit at least 100 hr's, 50 would be the avg, and there would probably be a dozen pitchers a year killed by line drives. <hr /></blockquote>Woolfy -- I enjoy reading the websites of CueSmiths, all that stuff re wts and strengths and modulii etc of different woods in different directions etc. I read that Ash is a bit "better" than maple in some ways. Personally, i think that maple is better than ash. Trouble with ash is that it uzually bends with age (but i like a bent cue). Re ash, some say that the growth lines are best tight together (makes sense to me), but some (Walter Lindrum) say that wider growth lines are best. I held Wally'z cue in my hand (tautology alert) -- the shortest, lightest (14-1/2oz), bendyest cue i have ever held. Parallel taper, dead straight. An 1898 Alcock, ebony butt, ash shaft, one piece, very fat butts. I own 2 allmost exactly like it -- these were too bendy to uze. But, after seeing Wally'z cue, i dusted them off and tryd to uze them for one year, hopeless, not so much that they were too bendy, its just that i karnt stand the parallel taper, poizon.

Personally, i reckon that type of wood (ash, maple etc) iz all over-rated. I reckon that every cue iz better than every other cue, for some sort of shot, somewhere, sometime.

Re baseball bats -- this iz all rubbish. The "e" for a balltobat collizion depends allmost entirely on the ball. Its like golf. The explanations re the trampoline effect for a steel driver are all rubbish. Its simple. The e for a ball is lower than e for steel. Hencely, if u take some of the deformation from the ball, and give it to the steel, then the balltodriver e will be closer to 1.00.

However, in baseball, and golf, i have a feeling that there is some sort of frequency matching stuff possibly happening. I think that a ball might have a natural freq, and likewize a bat (or driver head/face). Hencely, there is some scope for a happy marriage. Dont know. madMac.

cushioncrawler
03-21-2007, 05:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr>The stiffest cue i have ever seen happens to be one of my cues, it is a tubular steel cue, possibly made in about 1970, wt = 15oz. I feel sure that the tip is very light, like the rest of the cue, but, i seem to recall that i couldnt uze it at all, too stiff, and hopeless if u want to uze lots of english, even tho the tip-end is very very light. Hencely, i am not entirely convinced that a light tip-end gives less squirt, or at least that it is all that simple, didnt seem to work for me (if i remember aright).<hr /></blockquote>Comparing a steel cue to a wooden cue is like comparing apples and oranges. However, I bet a steel cue with a lighter shaft end will have less squirt than a similar steel cue with a heavier shaft end. Regards,Dave <hr /></blockquote>Dr Dave -- For sure a heavier shaft end would have more squirt. I think that that steel cue actually had a terrible leather tip, too hard, even for me. Perhaps i might have uzed it (for english billiards) if it had had a good tip, and if steel slid throo the bridge nicely. madMac.

wolfdancer
03-21-2007, 11:11 PM
I did a little reading up on COR....interestingly enough, while I was trying to find the data on the springboard effect of the thin faced drivers...i found this first:
An example of a COR of 0.000 would be one piece of very sticky chewing gum colliding with another similar piece. In such a collision, the two pieces of gum would stick together and not move forward, thus indicating that all of the energy of the impact was absorbed and lost. The closest example in the sports world to a COR of 1.000 would be in pool or billiards, when the cue ball collides squarely with a target ball of the same size and weight (mass).
There are a lot of sites on COR as it applies to golf. This one has a little on the flexible club face
web page (http://books.google.com/books?id=MnC60GN8PJ4C&amp;dq=coefficient+of+restitutio n+of+a+golf+ball&amp;pg=PA486&amp;ots=p03tD1QOcS&amp;sig=SMedj eFgQvwA10to1PUC1OQ7L1A&amp;prev=http://www.google.com/search%3Fq%3Dcoefficient%2Bof%2Brestitution%2Bof%2 Ba%2Bgolf%2Bball%26start%3D0%26ie%3Dutf-8%26oe%3Dutf-8%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=print&amp;ct=result&amp;cd=1)
For me though, Hooke's Law often produced a slice.....

wolfdancer
03-21-2007, 11:15 PM
Without knowing anything about collision physics.....I believe that when you strike a ball off center...something's gotta give...either the cue shaft, or the ball. seems like it's better if the shaft flexes??? In many ways Bob Muecci was way ahead of the time with his ideas about shafts...

Rod
03-22-2007, 12:26 AM
There could be convincing arguments pro and con for every answer in this poll. In the grand scheme of things all we have here is a meaningless poll. Does it really make a difference what others think? Do you suppose some will actually put aside a regular shaft in favor of a supposed low squirt shaft or vise versa? Well, I already know the answer, yes some will. I'll tell ya its amazing.

Rod

cushioncrawler
03-22-2007, 01:49 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> I did a little reading up on COR....interestingly enough, while I was trying to find the data on the springboard effect of the thin faced drivers...i found this first:
An example of a COR of 0.000 would be one piece of very sticky chewing gum colliding with another similar piece. In such a collision, the two pieces of gum would stick together and not move forward, thus indicating that all of the energy of the impact was absorbed and lost. The closest example in the sports world to a COR of 1.000 would be in pool or billiards, when the cue ball collides squarely with a target ball of the same size and weight (mass).
There are a lot of sites on COR as it applies to golf. This one has a little on the flexible club face
web page (http://books.google.com/books?id=MnC60GN8PJ4C&amp;dq=coefficient+of+restitutio n+of+a+golf+ball&amp;pg=PA486&amp;ots=p03tD1QOcS&amp;sig=SMedj eFgQvwA10to1PUC1OQ7L1A&amp;prev=http://www.google.com/search%3Fq%3Dcoefficient%2Bof%2Brestitution%2Bof%2 Ba%2Bgolf%2Bball%26start%3D0%26ie%3Dutf-8%26oe%3Dutf-8%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=print&amp;ct=result&amp;cd=1)
For me though, Hooke's Law often produced a slice.....
<hr /></blockquote>Woolfy -- There is a lot of good stuff out there re the trampoline effect of a steel driver face, but most of it is rubbish. For example, your quote sez "a target ball of the same size and weight (mass)".

Nooooooo -- It duznt havtabethesamesizeandweight. The equations for "e" take into account any non-same-size and non-same-wt. I dont enjoy reading that sort of skoolkid error, but that is a genius's lot i guess (just joking). Actually, by accident, that author haz hit on a slightly relevant factoid (i think) -- i reckon that a slight difference in size and/or wt would affect "e". Koz, the thing is, a substance (ie bakelite) duznt have an "e". And, a ball duznt have an "e". Only a collizion can have an "e". Put it this way -- if an ivory ball with e = 0.85 (based on hitting another ivory ball) hits a bakelite ball with e = 0.85 (based on hitting another bakelite ball), the rezulting e for this "mixed bakelite/ivory collision" will allmost certainly not be 0.85, even if the wts and diameters are identical. Can u see what i meen?????

Golf is nowadays fond of a specially heat treated amorphous (ie non-crystaline) steel face, koz granular steel haz a lower "e", koz there is a lot of slippage along any grain boundaryz (ok). And, golf is fond of a thin steel (or titanium) face, koz the less wt then the less the energy loss (ok). But, i bet that i could beat u by simply uzing my 3-wood all day. madMac.

cushioncrawler
03-22-2007, 01:59 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Without knowing anything about collision physics.....I believe that when you strike a ball off center...something's gotta give...either the cue shaft, or the ball. seems like it's better if the shaft flexes??? In many ways Bob Muecci was way ahead of the time with his ideas about shafts... <hr /></blockquote>Woolfy -- But what about when u want to hit the qball dead-center and dead-straight. madMac.

DickLeonard
03-22-2007, 07:48 AM
Paul give my best to Pat and Ernie, we go back to the 60-70s in fact the last time I played with them was in a tournament at Syracuse Cue Club in 1975.

In fact Syracuse's Babe Cranfields ghost ball system sent me in pursuit of the system of aiming with inside and outside English. All it takes is moving your point of aim bit by bit till you pocket the ball then let your bodys systems take over. Somewhere I read that your body is geared towards success that is how babies learn how to walk. Most people don't want to take the time to take babysteps.

Where is everyone playing these days?

I still have my Palmer/imatation Balabuska. Its years since I ran a hundred but its years since I've played more than once week. Now I play with a foursome of friends from the old poolroom I ran in Troy. It is so funny that I think its concept could be made into a sitcom. I never realized how funny Mr. Leonard run of one could sound.####

SpiderMan
03-22-2007, 08:33 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>
PS. Don't let the language nazis get to you. I understand you perfectly and that's all that counts, right? (Sorry Dr. Dave and Spiderman) /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif
<hr /></blockquote>

I think you misunderstood me - my response was one of amusement, not censorship. I just gave in to a perfect opportunity for off-color humor that I'd normally save for the NPR board.

I will admit, however, that I seldom read Cushioncrawler's posts because it's too much work to translate. I respect Mac's right to spend his time adding odd dialect, but I'm usually more interested in Kontent than Kewl /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

SpiderMan

SpiderMan
03-22-2007, 08:46 AM
I think if I had a low-squirt cue as a beginner, it would have made some shots easier by reducing the need for compensation (less to worry about).

Now, I don't necessarily see an advantage in low-squirt over predictable-squirt. And maybe predictable-squirt has an advantage if it puts the pivot point for best compensation near your natural bridge. My cue seems pretty close to that. Though I usually judge compensation rather than use BHE, sometimes I do go through the motions of BHE during setup in order to reinforce that I'm aiming correctly.

Of course, if the pivot point of a low-squirt cue is near your back hand (or somewhere you can briefly position your back hand), you can do the same pre-shot comparison by offsetting the front hand. Should we call this FHE?

But FHE wouldn't work for the old-school "swoop-as-you-shoot" players. Can't be swooping the bridge hand!

SpiderMan

wolfdancer
03-22-2007, 09:21 AM
why would you want to do that????
If you hit it dead nuts center....then you only have compression forces to deal with....and wood has pretty good compression strength??
Now, see, you got me reading stuff like Youngblood's modulas....and I skipped engineering the day they taught it in school..I didn't know there was so many forces acting on the shaft...parallel to the grain, perpendicular to the grain (what's grain?)...compression, torsion, and I have the force of tension working on me, while having to limit my stroke so that I don't exceed the yield strength (probably why all my shafts are bent....but at least they are bent downwards)
http://www.auf.asn.au/const_images/stress_strain.jpg web page (http://www.auf.asn.au/scratchbuilder/wood_strength_values.html)

dr_dave
03-22-2007, 09:58 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr>There could be convincing arguments pro and con for every answer in this poll.<hr /></blockquote>I agree. That's why I was hoping people would not only answer the poll, but also provide their arguments for each perspective.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr>In the grand scheme of things all we have here is a meaningless poll.<hr /></blockquote>Thank you for your candid opinion. I disagree, and I hope others do also.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr>Does it really make a difference what others think?<hr /></blockquote>Yes, to me anyway. That's why I posted the poll. I wanted to find out what other people thought.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr>Do you suppose some will actually put aside a regular shaft in favor of a supposed low squirt shaft or vise versa?<hr /></blockquote>That's not the point or purpose of the poll.

Dave

Snapshot9
03-22-2007, 10:17 AM
Nobody ever talks about the other factor a 314 shaft affects.
You get a custom cue or a production cue that is right for you in every respect, and then you put a 314 shaft on it because you can't seem to aim the balls in, and all of a sudden you have a butt heavy cue, where it wasn't before. Now, you feel that 'imbalance' on every single stroke you deliver, and that bothers me more than any aiming problem.

Rod
03-22-2007, 10:40 AM
Sorry Dave, I'm not trying to give you a hard time. It appears I was but its just the way I view certain aspects of the game. At any rate my vote was for = any player at any level would be just as good with either type of cue. It seemed like an ok choice given the other options.

Thats not what I really think but then it really doesn't matter. That is, no amount of text would convince me of any choice since there really isn't a correct answer for everyone.

Rod

dr_dave
03-22-2007, 10:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr> Sorry Dave, I'm not trying to give you a hard time. It appears I was but its just the way I view certain aspects of the game. At any rate my vote was for = any player at any level would be just as good with either type of cue. It seemed like an ok choice given the other options.<hr /></blockquote>Thank you for clarifying.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr>Thats not what I really think but then it really doesn't matter. That is, no amount of text would convince me of any choice since there really isn't a correct answer for everyone.<hr /></blockquote>Fair enough.

Regards,
Dave

Jal
03-22-2007, 11:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>
PS. Don't let the language nazis get to you. I understand you perfectly and that's all that counts, right? (Sorry Dr. Dave and Spiderman) /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif
<hr /></blockquote>

I think you misunderstood me - my response was one of amusement, not censorship. I just gave in to a perfect opportunity for off-color humor that I'd normally save for the NPR board.

I will admit, however, that I seldom read Cushioncrawler's posts because it's too much work to translate. I respect Mac's right to spend his time adding odd dialect, but I'm usually more interested in Kontent than Kewl /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>"Nazi" is a strong term and hardly the way I perceive you or Dr. Dave (though I don't know what you guys are up to away from the board.) I was kidding too and hope you didn't take any offense Spiderman.

Jim

Billy_Bob
03-22-2007, 12:16 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> ...I will admit, however, that I seldom read Cushioncrawler's posts because it's too much work to translate... <hr /></blockquote>

I like it when publications hire a new writer fresh out of college. In college these people learn all sorts of "big" words, and they have learned to write using these "big" words.

So the new writer writes this...

"There is ample evidence in literature to support the predictions that the next generation of advanced information technologies have the potential to make a profound impact in consumer's lives and all areas of healthcare"

Then the editor rewrites it something like this...

"New computers may improve healthcare."

Then the editor lectures the new writer about writing in a style that the *reader* can most easily understand. Don't use "big" words, because many people will not understand what you are trying to communicate.

Over time the new writer learns this...

-I am writing for *all* the readers (customers) of the periodical.

-*Every* person reading my writing should be able to easily understand what I have written. (Including those who can not read very well and have a limited vocabulary.)

-The reader is easily able to read what I am writing.

-I am communicating my thoughts to ALL readers.

wolfdancer
03-22-2007, 12:20 PM
You wouldn't have a chance if your 3 wood, is wooden.
My "Big Bertha" knockoff is the best driver I've ever had, and my 2-ball, knockoff putter....I just have to point at the hole...it factors in slope and speed for me.
But my real strength is from the 6 iron down.....
Hey, I've actually played some golf in your country. I used to take my clubs with me when I was in the Merchant Marine(3rd Engineer)....even played in Viet-Nam.....during the war...

Deeman3
03-22-2007, 01:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> You wouldn't have a chance if your 3 wood, is wooden.
My "Big Bertha" knockoff is the best driver I've ever had, and my 2-ball, knockoff putter....I just have to point at the hole...it factors in slope and speed for me.
But my real strength is from the 6 iron down.....
Hey, I've actually played some golf in your country. I used to take my clubs with me when I was in the Merchant Marine(3rd Engineer)....even played in Viet-Nam.....during the war... <hr /></blockquote> <font color="blue">

All of a sudden...visons of the MASH 4077...Hawkeye, not Wolfdancer, smacking 'em across the helopad... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif </font color>

SpiderMan
03-22-2007, 03:18 PM
Very true. Back when I worked for TI, they had an in-house class simply entitled "business writing". It taught written-communication techniques for getting your point across to managers, customers, and peers.

I made all my new hires take that class. So many good engineers fail to achieve recognition because they can't effectively present their work.

SpiderMan

Bob_Jewett
03-22-2007, 03:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> ...
But FHE wouldn't work for the old-school "swoop-as-you-shoot" players. Can't be swooping the bridge hand!

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>
Well, it might not be a good idea, but you can see a fair number of players flinch their bridge hands as they shoot. I assume it is either a last-minute aiming correction or squirt compensation or both.

cushioncrawler
03-22-2007, 03:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> why would you want to do that????
If you hit it dead nuts center....then you only have compression forces to deal with....and wood has pretty good compression strength?? Now, see, you got me reading stuff like Youngblood's modulas....and I skipped engineering the day they taught it in school..I didn't know there was so many forces acting on the shaft...parallel to the grain, perpendicular to the grain (what's grain?)...compression, torsion, and I have the force of tension working on me, while having to limit my stroke so that I don't exceed the yield strength (probably why all my shafts are bent....but at least they are bent downwards)
http://www.auf.asn.au/const_images/stress_strain.jpg web page (http://www.auf.asn.au/scratchbuilder/wood_strength_values.html) <hr /></blockquote>Woolfy -- Even the straightest stiffest cue u can buy will bend sideways during a straight dead-center hit. Mostly, u wont know where that "sideways" is going to be. Thats another reason why a slight bend iz good -- koz the "sidewayz" will allwayz be "with" the bend. And, u can uze the bend to help any english or draw action, or, like me, ucanuzethebend to correct bad aim. madMac.

cushioncrawler
03-22-2007, 04:10 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> You wouldn't have a chance if your 3 wood, is wooden. My "Big Bertha" knockoff is the best driver I've ever had, and my 2-ball, knockoff putter....I just have to point at the hole...it factors in slope and speed for me. But my real strength is from the 6 iron down..... Hey, I've actually played some golf in your country. I used to take my clubs with me when I was in the Merchant Marine(3rd Engineer)....even played in Viet-Nam.....during the war... <hr /></blockquote> My 3 wood is a Jack Nicklaus wooden driver, filed to 4W elevation. Best club i ever had. My mates wouldnt bet with me in the end. U would have liked my irons, shankless, made them myself, koz no shankless irons were made after WW1, not counting Dean Martin's set of "all-wood" shankless clubs. madMac.

jingle
03-23-2007, 11:57 AM
I responded any player at any level would be just as good with either shaft. This was based on my own personal experience. As I posted on another website, here is what led to my switching back to standard shafts after using Predator for 6 years. I had ordered an OB-1 shaft for my new Coker and while I was waiting for it to arrive I decided to give the standard Coker shaft a legitimate try. So, I shot with nothing but the standard shaft for 2 weeks solid. I loved the "feel" compared with the 314 &amp; Z I'd been using for the past 6 years, and the shotmaking was there too. Over the next month or so I tracked my results in the Q-skill test and a 9-ball test using the standard shaft, the 314 and the OB-1. (I shot for a while with each one to get re-acclimated before logging any results). In summary, I shot nearly the same with all 3 shafts, with possibly a small scoring edge going to the standard Coker shaft. I found that there were some shots I could perform better with the OB-1 &amp; 314 shaft, but there were just as many I could perform better with the standard shaft. However, my position play was much more predictable/controlled with the standard shaft, and I LOVED the "feel" of it in comparison to the others. So, I have been using a standard shaft ever since (almost a year now) and haven't regretted it at all. I think it really just comes down to each individual's comfort level as to which shaft is best for them.

dr_dave
03-23-2007, 01:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote jingle:</font><hr> I responded any player at any level would be just as good with either shaft. This was based on my own personal experience. As I posted on another website, here is what led to my switching back to standard shafts after using Predator for 6 years. I had ordered an OB-1 shaft for my new Coker and while I was waiting for it to arrive I decided to give the standard Coker shaft a legitimate try. So, I shot with nothing but the standard shaft for 2 weeks solid. I loved the "feel" compared with the 314 &amp; Z I'd been using for the past 6 years, and the shotmaking was there too. Over the next month or so I tracked my results in the Q-skill test and a 9-ball test using the standard shaft, the 314 and the OB-1. (I shot for a while with each one to get re-acclimated before logging any results). In summary, I shot nearly the same with all 3 shafts, with possibly a small scoring edge going to the standard Coker shaft. I found that there were some shots I could perform better with the OB-1 &amp; 314 shaft, but there were just as many I could perform better with the standard shaft ...<hr /></blockquote>Could you describe some of those types of shots and maybe explain why you think one type of shaft is more appropriate than the other with each shot? I'm not questioning your results (because I know cue selection and "feel" can be quite personal), I just want to know what you are claiming and why you think it is true.

Thanks,
Dave

wolfdancer
03-23-2007, 01:22 PM
I'd take a guess, and say that for extreme inside english shots, the OB1 shaft is the best. I couldn't believe some of the shots, even i could hit with it. A top player tried mine out, and claimed it hit like his Z shaft? I ended up loaning the shaft out....and the guy is playing so good with it, I don't want to ask for it back. (I guess you can't buy natural talent)
I play with a 314 and it outplays (for me) any other shaft that I've played with.....and I have hit a few $3k Joss cues, and some nice Schuler cues.
BUT...with different tips....my shaft plays different. The shaft seems to prefer either triangle, or everest tips, and balks if I put anything else on it....resuses to draw,etc.

jingle
03-23-2007, 01:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> /quote]Could you describe some of those types of shots and maybe explain why you think one type of shaft is more appropriate than the other with each shot? I'm not questioning your results (because I know cue selection and "feel" can be quite personal), I just want to know what you are claiming and why you think it is true.

Thanks,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I'll do my best. The shot that the 314/OB-1 really shined for me was a medium to hard stroke with high inside english. Those were no problem with a 314/OB-1, and I still have to think about those more today when using a standard shaft. That is really the only shot that still can give me fits sometimes with the standard shaft (so I try to avoid using it). On the flip side, I found the standard shaft made it easier (for me) 1) to pocket ultra-thin cut shots 2) I began using follow english much more as the pocketing results were better, and more importantly, the cueball path after contacting the object ball seemed much more predicatble/consistent than it was with the 314/OB-1. (I know that you being a physics guru may disagree, but in my experience it seems the cueball reacts differently after contacting the object ball with the standard vs. 314/OB-1 shafts. Basically, the standard shaft produced a cueball path after contact that "made more sense" to me, which leads to my next point) 3)My overall cueball control is better with a standard shaft vs. a 314/OB-1. This is probably due to the fact I think it's easier for me know exactly how the CB is going to react after contacting the OB 4)It's easier for me to "use" the standard shaft's squirt to my advantage (very slight masse shot's etc.) I always had trouble with that using a 314/OB-1. 5) the last thing, also pertaining to CB control, with the 314/OB-1 I would inevitably "overcook" a shot from time to time (whether follow or draw) and I do that with much less frequency with the standard shaft. Sorry this was so long, but you asked. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

dr_dave
03-23-2007, 01:49 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote jingle:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> /quote]Could you describe some of those types of shots and maybe explain why you think one type of shaft is more appropriate than the other with each shot? I'm not questioning your results (because I know cue selection and "feel" can be quite personal), I just want to know what you are claiming and why you think it is true.

Thanks,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I'll do my best. The shot that the 314/OB-1 really shined for me was a medium to hard stroke with high inside english. Those were no problem with a 314/OB-1, and I still have to think about those more today when using a standard shaft. That is really the only shot that still can give me fits sometimes with the standard shaft (so I try to avoid using it). On the flip side, I found the standard shaft made it easier (for me) 1) to pocket ultra-thin cut shots 2) I began using follow english much more as the pocketing results were better, and more importantly, the cueball path after contacting the object ball seemed much more predicatble/consistent than it was with the 314/OB-1. (I know that you being a physics guru may disagree, but in my experience it seems the cueball reacts differently after contacting the object ball with the standard vs. 314/OB-1 shafts. Basically, the standard shaft produced a cueball path after contact that "made more sense" to me, which leads to my next point) 3)My overall cueball control is better with a standard shaft vs. a 314/OB-1. This is probably due to the fact I think it's easier for me know exactly how the CB is going to react after contacting the OB 4)It's easier for me to "use" the standard shaft's squirt to my advantage (very slight masse shot's etc.) I always had trouble with that using a 314/OB-1. 5) the last thing, also pertaining to CB control, with the 314/OB-1 I would inevitably "overcook" a shot from time to time (whether follow or draw) and I do that with much less frequency with the standard shaft. Sorry this was so long, but you asked. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <hr /></blockquote>No need to apologize. That's exactly what I was looking for.

Thanks,
Dave

Deeman3
03-23-2007, 02:10 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote jingle:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> /quote]Could you describe some of those types of shots and maybe explain why you think one type of shaft is more appropriate than the other with each shot? I'm not questioning your results (because I know cue selection and "feel" can be quite personal), I just want to know what you are claiming and why you think it is true.

Thanks,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I'll do my best. The shot that the 314/OB-1 really shined for me was a medium to hard stroke with high inside english. Those were no problem with a 314/OB-1, and I still have to think about those more today when using a standard shaft. That is really the only shot that still can give me fits sometimes with the standard shaft (so I try to avoid using it). On the flip side, I found the standard shaft made it easier (for me) 1) to pocket ultra-thin cut shots 2) I began using follow english much more as the pocketing results were better, and more importantly, the cueball path after contacting the object ball seemed much more predicatble/consistent than it was with the 314/OB-1. (I know that you being a physics guru may disagree, but in my experience it seems the cueball reacts differently after contacting the object ball with the standard vs. 314/OB-1 shafts. Basically, the standard shaft produced a cueball path after contact that "made more sense" to me, which leads to my next point) 3)My overall cueball control is better with a standard shaft vs. a 314/OB-1. This is probably due to the fact I think it's easier for me know exactly how the CB is going to react after contacting the OB 4)It's easier for me to "use" the standard shaft's squirt to my advantage (very slight masse shot's etc.) I always had trouble with that using a 314/OB-1. 5) the last thing, also pertaining to CB control, with the 314/OB-1 I would inevitably "overcook" a shot from time to time (whether follow or draw) and I do that with much less frequency with the standard shaft. Sorry this was so long, but you asked. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">Oh my God. Now I've gotta buy a golf bag to carry all those different cues with different shafts for different shots! Could we please have the common decency to name these sticks in an appropriate manner so those of us too dumb to go out and buy them can make an easier reference to them. Dr. Dave could head this up.

I'd like to recommend a couple of names for a few of them. Maybe, a Mashie, a Niblik, a Spoon, a...... </font color>

wolfdancer
03-23-2007, 03:26 PM
that's a great summary on the shafts...the hi/inside english using the OB1 impressed me.....but it seemed to "cut" a little different, and have a little different CB carom angle...for me.
Switching back and worth with my reg 314...didn't help.
I think if I stayed with the OB1....once I was used to it...I think it would have helped my game....as it seems to have helped a lot of others here.
In the same token...players had to get acclimated to the 314, and then swore by it.
However I have to agree with Deeman....there should be a 14 shaft limit like the USGA imposes on golf clubs

cushioncrawler
03-23-2007, 05:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Billy_Bob:</font><hr> .....I like it when publications hire a new writer fresh out of college. In college these people learn all sorts of "big" words, and they have learned to write using these "big" words. So the new writer writes this...

"There is ample evidence in literature to support the predictions that the next generation of advanced information technologies have the potential to make a profound impact in consumer's lives and all areas of healthcare"

Then the editor rewrites it something like this...

"New computers may improve healthcare."

Then the editor lectures the new writer about writing in a style that the *reader* can most easily understand. Don't use "big" words, because many people will not understand what you are trying to communicate.

Over time the new writer learns this...

-I am writing for *all* the readers (customers) of the periodical.

-*Every* person reading my writing should be able to easily understand what I have written. (Including those who can not read very well and have a limited vocabulary.)

-The reader is easily able to read what I am writing.

-I am communicating my thoughts to ALL readers. <hr /></blockquote>Billy Bob -- It is a good thing that editors didnt exist in the oldendayz. Else the rewrite might have looked something like this...

"Niwe circolwyrde *** gaeaoelian haeling caru."

Me, myself, i never ever played around with a word that woznt arseking for it. madMac.

cushioncrawler
03-23-2007, 09:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote jingle:</font><hr> I responded any player at any level would be just as good with either shaft. This was based on my own personal experience. As I posted on another website, here is what led to my switching back to standard shafts after using Predator for 6 years. I had ordered an OB-1 shaft for my new Coker and while I was waiting for it to arrive I decided to give the standard Coker shaft a legitimate try. So, I shot with nothing but the standard shaft for 2 weeks solid. I loved the "feel" compared with the 314 &amp; Z I'd been using for the past 6 years, and the shotmaking was there too. Over the next month or so I tracked my results in the Q-skill test and a 9-ball test using the standard shaft, the 314 and the OB-1. (I shot for a while with each one to get re-acclimated before logging any results). In summary, I shot nearly the same with all 3 shafts, with possibly a small scoring edge going to the standard Coker shaft. I found that there were some shots I could perform better with the OB-1 &amp; 314 shaft, but there were just as many I could perform better with the standard shaft. However, my position play was much more predictable/controlled with the standard shaft, and I LOVED the "feel" of it in comparison to the others. So, I have been using a standard shaft ever since (almost a year now) and haven't regretted it at all. I think it really just comes down to each individual's comfort level as to which shaft is best for them. <hr /></blockquote>Jingle -- I have a feeling that many players are aware that different cues are best for different shots, but players karnt make up their minds as to which sort(s) of shot(s) or games they want to favor.

Take Walter Lindrum. He started off, az a kid, uzing a cut-down american pool cue, with an ivory ferrule. In his teens, he worked his way up to a very stiff and heavy (18-1/4 oz) cue with an 11.25mm tip (tips have allways been measured in mm). When he died at age 61 (food poizoning), he was uzing a short and light (14-1/2 oz) bendy cue with a 10mm tip. In other words, he could play ok with any lump of wood. The biggest shock to me woz the size and shape of the tip that he uzed on his 14-1/2oz cue -- like nothing i have ever seen before or since. madMac.

cushioncrawler
03-23-2007, 09:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> that's a great summary on the shafts...the hi/inside english using the OB1 impressed me.....but it seemed to "cut" a little different, and have a little different CB carom angle...for me. Switching back and worth with my reg 314...didn't help. I think if I stayed with the OB1....once I was used to it...I think it would have helped my game....as it seems to have helped a lot of others here. In the same token...players had to get acclimated to the 314, and then swore by it. However I have to agree with Deeman....there should be a 14 shaft limit like the USGA imposes on golf clubs <hr /></blockquote>Woolfy -- I once added wt to my cue to make it 32oz, and played competition with it, i found that this wt woz very good for judging soft ticklish screwy stunny shots. Then (same cue) i took wt out to make it 14-1/2oz, and played competition with it, i found that this wt woz very good for judging soft ticklish screwy stunny shots. madMac.

Jager85
03-27-2007, 12:02 PM
Cues are all a personal preference. A low squirt cue would increase the amount of throw placed on a ball and cause the shooter to compensate for throw. Everbody sees shots differently it all depends on your style and what you prefer.

Curtis

dr_dave
03-27-2007, 10:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr>Cues are all a personal preference. A low squirt cue would increase the amount of throw placed on a ball and cause the shooter to compensate for throw.<hr /></blockquote>
I don't think it is this simple. Your statement is true for certain types of shots, but it is wrong for other types of shots. Throw depends on cut angle, type and amount of English, amount of top or bottom spin, and speed. There's also the small matter of swerve, which varies with cue stick elevation, speed, and distances between the CB and OB. All of these topics and effects are covered in my recent series of instructional articles (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/index.html).

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jager85:</font><hr>Everbody sees shots differently it all depends on your style and what you prefer.<hr /></blockquote>No disagreements here.

Regards,
Dave