PDA

View Full Version : Aiming for deflection w/anti-deflection shafts?



Soflasnapper
02-12-2010, 06:25 PM
I've been using the anti-deflecting (or reduced deflection) shafts from several manufacturers for maybe 5 years or so. I rarely if ever aim differently for shots that would normally deflect using a more traditional shaft.

Am I missing something? How much, if at all, do others who have one of the now many lowered deflection shafts change their aiming to account for (a slight) deflection?

Bambu
02-12-2010, 06:34 PM
To me, the difference is considerable. Tough to put a number on it, but I'd say 30% less squirt adjustment. Are you able to switch back and forth between L/D and regular shafts without adjustment? I can still shoot with my old schon, but I need time to adjust to the different feel.

Rich R.
02-13-2010, 06:14 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've been using the anti-deflecting (or reduced deflection) shafts from several manufacturers for maybe 5 years or so. I rarely if ever aim differently for shots that would normally deflect using a more traditional shaft.

Am I missing something? How much, if at all, do others who have one of the now many lowered deflection shafts change their aiming to account for (a slight) deflection?

</div></div>
Just as you say, they are "reduced" or "lower" deflection shafts. They are not "no" deflection shafts. Just as you have to get used to the deflection of any normal shaft, you have to get used to the lower deflection of any of these shafts. Your stroke, or lack there of, plays a part in how much adjustment is necessary for any shaft. I think a lot of the adjustment for any shaft is done subconsciously as you get used to a particular shaft and there is no set amount of adjustment. In other words, no one can tell you how much to adjust.
This is JMHO with no scientific basis.

pooltchr
02-13-2010, 07:59 AM
Rich. That makes sense to me. The adjustment for squirt is not a huge change in aiming point anyway. So while percentage wise, the difference between standard and LD shafts might be a good bit, the actual adjustment would be minimal.
Our brains are pretty sophisticated. They will allow you to learn what to expect pretty quickly.

Steve

JoeW
02-13-2010, 08:10 AM
The short answer is that I think that shafts with different characteristics require different aim points when English is used. While I agree that it can be learned out of normal awareness it helped my game if I studied the effects and then let my mind incorporate as needed.

I think that the aim compensation is something that is learned as you use the shaft. I compared a few shafts and found that my Z2 is still the best for my game. Here is how I found out.

Place the one ball on the foot rail on the diamond. Place the two and three balls on either side and leave some predetermined width between the one and the other balls. The width depends on your shooting ability. You can use anywhere from a credit card space to the thickness of a wooden ruler (about .25"). Remove the one ball.

Place the cue ball on line with the same diamond from the other end of the table one dimamond off the head rail.

Shoot the cue ball with center ball using a medium stroke and hit the diamond where the one ball was placed. Continue shooting this shot until you can make it three times in succession without hitting the two or the three balls going in or coming out.

Now shoot the same shot with side spin about half way to the outside of the cue ball. Alternate left and right spin and see how often you hit the two or the three ball on the way to the rail.

You can get a better estimation of the amount of deflection by having the two and the three balls about two inchs off the foot rail. When deflection causes the cue ball to hit the two or the three ball you can measure the angle the two or the three takes for a fairly good measure of deflection.

I found the Z2 was the stick that I played the best with and I have since learned how much deflection I can expect on a length of table shot. In my game there is a substantial difference between the aim points for the Z2 and some of the other shafts. This aiming accuracy and compensation is important to me for longer runs where I get in trouble and miss position.

I have found that once I learned about my shaft and its characteristics I had to play with it and the new aim points with side spin etc for about a week of practice before I felt comfortable with knowing where to aim and consistently make the shot, given that everything else was as it needed to be.

BTW I also learned that with th Z2 it is best (for me) to use Joe Tucker's version of simultaneous front and back hand offsets. Keeping the rear of the stick closer to the cue ball line of travel reduces the deflection produced by any shaft.

I have found that one must fiddle with many things to find the best way to use a particular stick.

cushioncrawler
02-14-2010, 04:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've been using the anti-deflecting (or reduced deflection) shafts from several manufacturers for maybe 5 years or so. I rarely if ever aim differently for shots that would normally deflect using a more traditional shaft. Am I missing something? How much, if at all, do others who have one of the now many lowered deflection shafts change their aiming to account for (a slight) deflection?</div></div>Wouldnt Colin Colenso say that u need to find the friendly bridge length for a cue -- and, uzing that bridge, u dont need to compensate.
madMac.

acuerate
02-16-2010, 02:03 AM
If you are testing out a shaft for deflection you should obviously test it on screw shots. Cue ball physics is not difficult to understand : the lower you hit the ball, the more it will deflect the cue ball. This is because by hitting the cue ball below the center, it will partly 'lift' the ball from the table, which obviously lowers it's resistance to deflect. I'm sure if you hit a deep screw shot with average side spin with a traditional shaft (from a reasonable distance from the object ball) that the deflection will be massive ! More then a few inch. With a good performing ultra low deflection cue you might reduce this to less then 50%).
Hitting 'smooth' might also help a bit, but this is marginal compared to the reduction caused by a low deflection cue.

Further : a heavy cue will have a tendency to create more deflection as it's mass will push away the cue ball more on impact.

Enjoy the game,

Johan

02-16-2010, 10:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've been using the anti-deflecting (or reduced deflection) shafts from several manufacturers for maybe 5 years or so. I rarely if ever aim differently for shots that would normally deflect using a more traditional shaft.

Am I missing something? How much, if at all, do others who have one of the now many lowered deflection shafts change their aiming to account for (a slight) deflection?

</div></div>

Phil,

I tried using a 314 shaft for a lil less than a year, when they first came out. I used it exclusively to try to adapt and here's my personal experience:

The low deflection shafts do as advertised. They seem to perform notably better for inside english shots hit with a medium to firm/hard stroke. Squirt also seemed to be reduced on outside english shots too, with the same range of strokes.

Here's where the problem comes in; soft to medium soft spin shots. Any shots that required a softer stroke and spin required a big adjustment in aim because you had less squirt but much more swerve. For example, if a meduim soft stroked, inside spin w/ low shot was attempted, the CB wound up hitting the OB much thicker than I would expect. One shot that comes to mind is where you have the OB on the end rail that you are trying to cut into the corner pocket, with inside spin and low, while trying to not let the CB go too far back up table.

Half masse shots needed a lot of "new" adjustment too, but those shots don't come up as often.

IMO, you need to know how to adjust for which ever shaft you choose. Each shaft has it's own charactoristics, that need it's own type of adjustments.

I went back to regular shafts and use a long bridge.


Eric

dr_dave
02-16-2010, 08:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've been using the anti-deflecting (or reduced deflection) shafts from several manufacturers for maybe 5 years or so. I rarely if ever aim differently for shots that would normally deflect using a more traditional shaft.

Am I missing something? How much, if at all, do others who have one of the now many lowered deflection shafts change their aiming to account for (a slight) deflection?</div></div>Short answer: it depends on shot speed, object-ball distance, amount of English, and table conditions.

For more info (i.e., the long answer, with video demonstrations), see:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/English.html#BHE
and
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#compensation

Regards,
Dave

JoeW
02-17-2010, 10:23 AM
Dr Dave said, "Short answer: it depends on shot speed, object-ball distance, amount of English, and table conditions."

I think this is true and I think the player needs a heuristic, or benchmarks from which to estimate these changes in conditions.

dr_dave
02-17-2010, 12:07 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JoeW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dr Dave said, "Short answer: it depends on shot speed, object-ball distance, amount of English, and table conditions."

I think this is true and I think the player needs a heuristic, or benchmarks from which to estimate these changes in conditions. </div></div>Good point. FYI, the links provided in my last message do point to many videos and other resources that help provide the insight (e.g., list of important effects) and benchmarks (e.g., BHE for short and/or fast shots vs. FHE for long and/or slow shots) to help one improve in this area.

Regards,
Dave

cushioncrawler
02-17-2010, 03:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JoeW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dr Dave said, "Short answer: it depends on shot speed, object-ball distance, amount of English, and table conditions." I think this is true and I think the player needs a heuristic, or benchmarks from which to estimate these changes in conditions.</div></div>Joe -- Colin Colenso had a system where he recommended that each player calibrate their (their cue's) natural deflection -- ie when uzing english.
This method i think uzed full power and a biggish range to the Objekt'Ball.
Then one thunk arithmetikally to "calculate" what woz needed for the shot in front of u.
But i think that calculation iznt a good idea -- i prefer feel.
But feel would of course need benchmarks of some sort -- or at least feel would benefit from a benchmark(s).
madMac.

dr_dave
02-17-2010, 03:03 PM
FYI, Colin's system is described here:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/aiming.html#compensation

See the section under "from Colin Colenso"

Regards,
Dave

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JoeW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dr Dave said, "Short answer: it depends on shot speed, object-ball distance, amount of English, and table conditions." I think this is true and I think the player needs a heuristic, or benchmarks from which to estimate these changes in conditions.</div></div>Joe -- Colin Colenso had a system where he recommended that each player calibrate their (their cue's) natural deflection -- ie when uzing english.
This method i think uzed full power and a biggish range to the Objekt'Ball.
Then one thunk arithmetikally to "calculate" what woz needed for the shot in front of u.
But i think that calculation iznt a good idea -- i prefer feel.
But feel would of course need benchmarks of some sort -- or at least feel would benefit from a benchmark(s).
madMac. </div></div>

wolfdancer
02-17-2010, 03:16 PM
Joe, I haven't seen "heuristics" used in a sentence, since my days of studying B.A.S.I.C. (the sum and total of my I.T. expertise)
"Heuristic" was mentioned in a "if,then" ( or, "maybe, if" ..it's been awhile) problem solving program, entitled "a drunkard's walk".
His problem was finding his way home, in a neighborhood where most of the houses look alike....kind of like the development that I live in...which is why I have both a 2 drink max, and a 2 drink min, limit, when playing in a pool tournament (you probably thought my reply was non-pool oriented?)
I am pleased to report that, I worked out that algorithm on my TI-80 computer....top of the line, then....jes never could get the damn thing online....maybe, because Al Gore, hadn't invented the internet, yet?

doncartmill
02-18-2010, 02:33 AM
Obviously you can't ever get away from feel,as table conditions ,humidity,dirty balls all change or may be different from table to table. It is amazing to me how much info with regard to the above,that our brain processes without our having to consciously tick off each line item ,and that is what we call feel. There are other characteristics that can and do affect the reaction/direction of a struck cue ball ( and while these characteristics will be affected as well ,and will require as certain amount of feel) The reactions of the basics are LARGE w regard to the amount of change due to "conditions" mentioned above. A beginer/newbie/novice can get a good appreciation
for the use of english, if he is aware of where the pivot point lies on his cue,and shown that under an ideal situation ( he can bridge at PP ) if he aims at an object ball thru the center of the cue ball and the moves his rear hand right or left so that cue tip will hit outside of center ,not only will he impart english to the cue ball ,but the cue ball will hit the original point of aim, At the same time discuss throw and if you are going to shoot inside english ,then aim for the near side of the pocket. Before I ever knew about "cueball deflection/squirt" .had very good control of outside english( My mind made the adjustment over a period of time) I wasn't even aware that I was compensating for my off center hit. I was shooting a decent stick ,but was completely unaware of CBD/or Squirt. I ask what is now a silly question on one of the pool forums, Re inside english,and why I could never pocket a ball with inside. WOW what an eye opener.

Qtec
02-18-2010, 09:16 AM
Dave, what about the effect of SIT and CIT with low deflection shafts? I know we had had this discussion here on the CBB before but can you summarise or do you have a link to such a thread?

As I remember, the claim was that low deflection cues produced more spin and less squirt.

Found this old vid of me playing a few shots with a rack cue......ie extreme squirt........as you can see on the second shot.

vid (http://members.multimania.nl/agli2/squirt.wmv)

Q ..sssssssssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhh......don't tell anybody....for your pleasure, some rare footage [ bootleg video ] of the IPT, remember that? mika/Manalo...........not an easy run out (http://members.multimania.nl/agli2/IPTMnMcomplete.wmv)

dr_dave
02-18-2010, 10:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dave, what about the effect of SIT and CIT with low deflection shafts? I know we had had this discussion here on the CBB before but can you summarise or do you have a link to such a thread?

As I remember, the claim was that low deflection cues produced more spin and less squirt.</div></div>SIT and CIT depend on the amount and type of English. A low-squirt shaft might be able to produce more English than a high-squirt shaft, but the difference is very small. I think the main reason people think the amount of spin is significantly greater might be because they use "tips of English" to measure how much English they are applying. For more info, see:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/cue.html#spin
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/squirt.html#miscue
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/English.html#max

Regards,
Dave

wolfdancer
02-18-2010, 01:45 PM
I couldn't get some of the vids to open, and the one that did open....I lost my lunch after watching Earl, with his usual display of sportsmanship.....( he must be a republican ) /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif
I think the other vids are just slow to open...and I'll try again later.....

wolfdancer
02-18-2010, 03:45 PM
Drs. Dave & Joe, you might enjoy reading/viewing:

pool, old style (http://untoldstoriesbilliardshistory.blogspot.com/2010/02/mcgirrs-pool-room.html)
A Free Willie video (http://untoldstoriesbilliardshistory.blogspot.com/2010/02/ralph-greenleaf-willie-mosocni-rocket.html)

wolfdancer
02-18-2010, 04:14 PM
I have friends, long time players, that still are afraid to use "inside"

Fran Crimi
02-18-2010, 05:31 PM
Here's my simplistic answer: You probably forgot how you used to aim before because it's been 5 years since you used the other type of shaft.

I've been using those types of shafts for at least 10 years now and I did have to make a major aim adjustment. I did it through trial and error and that process worked fine for me. It wasn't even all that painful if I can remember that far back.

Fran

doncartmill
02-18-2010, 11:23 PM
This thread has discussed some pretty sophistacated stuff,and the people discussing have a grasp of what is being said and probably for a long time have incorporated much of the discussed topics in their own game. Your comment about your friend a long time player, who is still afraid to use inside english is afflicted with a problem that is much more wide spread than is apparent to the casual observer. There are many I would guess ,who are just like your friend,they play a decent game,handle outside english and can draw the ball to a degree. They have never taken a lesson,but have learned by observation,trial and error and thru years of shooting pick up games and by a small degree .. practice. They never ask we never tell. I discovered years ago that we do not all think alike. Afriend had asked if I would help him study for an inspectors job at an industrial plant. Yes, if I can be of any assistance. I was a 2nd or 3rd year Engineering student at the time. Well,he had some sample tests ,that were provided and the math was so very basic...actually common sense,but he could not make the transition from the written question to a math/common sense solution. He was not a dummy,but just one who was not interested in math and immediately gagged when presented with a written math problem. It was at that time I realized everyone doesn't see things the same way. yet they can still operate day to day and in a reasonably efficent manner. I think many of our shooters out there are in that same boat ...they can operate in a reasonably efficient manner and no one knows the difference. Just a little knowledge coupled with some practice could greatly improve their game and provide a lot of excitement as they realized/capitalized on their new found knowledge. What I am saying is: never assume the questioners skill and knowledge is really up to the skill level of the question. Man I got carried away ...can you imagine how long this would have been if I could type vs being a hunt and pecker

acuerate
02-22-2010, 06:15 AM
It's my experience with high deflection shafts that it's much more difficult to adapt to changing conditions as well as getting the feel where to aim to compensate for deflection. This is because the 'spread' of deflection is much wider and therefor the slightest change of one parameter will have an impact on the direction of the cue ball.
Example : try to play a deep screw shot with power and with a bit of side spin! If you play with a high deflection cue, then your cueing will need to be extremely accurate because the slightest trace of extra spin will result in much more deflection which will result in missing the shot.
If you play with an ultra low deflection shaft or cue which is much more 'forgiving' then you will get away with your technical weaknesses most of the time.
It was only after I was playing snooker for 20 years that I was explaind cue ball physics by my current partner Chris Henry (coached Stephen Hendry, Jimmy White, Peter Ebdon, and other famous snooker players) ...
I will post soon on this issue.

Enjoy the game,
Johan

Qtec
02-22-2010, 09:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <u>I will post soon on this issue.</u>

Enjoy the game,
Johan</div></div>

Can't wait.

Qtec /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

cushioncrawler
02-22-2010, 02:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: acuerate</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's my experience with high deflection shafts that it's much more difficult to adapt to changing conditions as well as getting the feel where to aim to compensate for deflection. This is because the 'spread' of deflection is much wider and therefor the slightest change of one parameter will have an impact on the direction of the cue ball.
Example : try to play a deep screw shot with power and with a bit of side spin! If you play with a high deflection cue, then your cueing will need to be extremely accurate because the slightest trace of extra spin will result in much more deflection which will result in missing the shot.
If you play with an ultra low deflection shaft or cue which is much more 'forgiving' then you will get away with your technical weaknesses most of the time.
It was only after I was playing snooker for 20 years that I was explaind cue ball physics by my current partner Chris Henry (coached Stephen Hendry, Jimmy White, Peter Ebdon, and other famous snooker players) ... I will post soon on this issue. Enjoy the game, Johan</div></div>Johan -- I think that this stuff depends a lot on how u/i/we get side'spin.
Some might uze back'hand'pivot -- some front'hand'pivot.
Some might uze parallel'offset -- probly with special hoik (swoop) to enhance the spin.
I hav a natural hoik in my action -- i often get nonwanted left spin (for skrews) -- and i karnt get much right'hand spin unless i uze a different cueing aktion.

Another thing -- my stiffer'n'heavyr cues are thicker (at the tip), and the leather tips are uzually wider and flatter. Hencely, if i uze pivot, i find that i havta swing the stiff cue around further on the Qball to get the needed offset (kontakt) for the needed spin -- hencely, i tend to find that there iznt much difference (in aim etc) tween a hi'deflection and low'deflection cue (for me) -- here i am talking about when uzing FHP, for shortish range shots (ie Qball close to Oball).

I suspekt that pool players prefer hoiking -- snooker players praps avoid hoiking.
madMac.

Soflasnapper
02-22-2010, 04:02 PM
Fran, I do remember when I first learned to compensate for the deflection typical of my off-the-shelf Helmstedter (sp?)shaft on harder English shots.

It was 'scosh' over (a technical term, LOL!, of maybe 1/4 ball difference) on the aim, either thicker or thinner depending.

I actually found it easier than aiming exactly, 'cause I'd just 'get close' (TM) to a proper aim line, move over a 'scosh' and overhit the ball on purpose. But I figured this was NOT a reliable way to play, and then I got my first P-314 shaft, and stopped doing that at all.

When I cracked the original 314's ferrule into two pieces and had to wait for a replacement, I briefly went back to an Adam shaft that fit the Helmstedter, and immediately found it easy to compensate again.

So I remember the slight thicker and thinner parameters (totally a feel thing but it worked), and I do NOT do that at all with the Predators and now the OBs I've been using.

Oddly, to my way of thinking, I handle a semi-masse very easily with the OB now (it's a diamond short difference aim line), and with the particular stroke and angle I use, I find that very reliable and consistent.

So I guess I DO have one deflection situation I aim for, but that is not what I'm talking about-- more the standard stroking type shots that have power and English involved.

1Time
03-03-2010, 01:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dr_dave</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Short answer: it depends on shot speed, object-ball distance, amount of English, and table conditions.</div></div>
Right, and a few other variables.

But to answer the OP's question more directly, yes, you are missing something.

doncartmill
03-05-2010, 11:09 PM
I posted this on another thread "Deflection" . .
This site discusses Pivot point cancelling squirt ,how to detirmine the natural PP of your cue.etc
http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/cue.html#pivot
utilizing the natural PP is and excellent starting point for a newby. I had a second post in that same thread ,which was quite long ,as I tried to reproduce a chart I had copied and saved from a site that no longer exists. I will only mention that many cue shafts were tested RE: squirt/CB deflection,and that the best tested a Predator Z produced a Squirt of 1.35 inches R or L, at 50 inches down table, utilizing about 9 mm of english. i.e.about what you have if you were to use say the 8 ball as the cue ball...line the white spot straight up table, and address the 8 ball R or L with cue tip centered on the edge of the white, This data was collected on a table that had the felt stripped and an aluminum serface provided ,to take swerve out of the mix. That 1.35 was the best
A Scorpian break cue had 2.02 in,and a Schon had 1.76 in There is a lot of data in that post ,and it can be read,but while I spent a long time getting it in tabular form...when it posted it was garbled to an extent.