PDA

View Full Version : Which shaft produces more english



PoolFool
02-18-2002, 07:20 PM
I read in a previous post that when using a Preditor shaft
that you only have to use 1/2 the english as with a normal shaft. My question: Which shaft gives you more english; a stiff or flexable shaft? (Both have the same tip)
Thanks for any contributions.

PoolFool

Tom_In_Cincy
02-18-2002, 08:46 PM
Poll time.. ?

TonyM
02-18-2002, 09:32 PM
I don't believe that any shaft (including the Predator) gives you more or less English that any other. Spin is dependant only on the tip contact point and the speed, and since neither of these are determined by the shaft, then it cannot influence the outcome.

What can?

Weight - a light cue or a heavy cue can both produce the same amount of spin. But the lighter cue produces a bit less speed, so the spin/speed ratio is changed.

Tip curvature, and the ability of the tip to hold chalk.

Tip size, but only in the event that it might be possible to be more accurate with your tip contact point estimation (we can't see the actual tip contact point, so it is always a guess) with a smaller tip than a larger tip.

The shaft stiffness can have only one possible effect. If the shaft is very flexible, it might change the energy transfer efficiency (less cueball speed for a given cue speed). However, the amount of spin will remain the same, but the spin/speed ratio will be slightly reduced.

Many pool players operate under the mistaken notion that a flexible shaft can produce lots of "juice" on the cueball. Clearly these players have never seen a world class 3 cushion player spin a cueball with a very stiff carom cue!

Hit the ball in the right place, with the right speed, with a good tip, and you can get all of the spin that any cue (or player) can deliver.

Cheers!

Tony

02-18-2002, 09:54 PM
Well guys, after reading all the posts I still have to say a stiff shaft performs better. I have several shafts for my Schuler cue, most are of the same weight. Whenever I switch to a stiff shaft I feel more "grip" on the cue ball resulting in more spin. Billiard players use a lot of spin and seem to faver a stiff shaft.

cheesemouse
02-18-2002, 10:10 PM
I don't know much about the mechanics of the equiptment but I do know that when I switched from a whippy shaft to the Preditor I get more English with the same type stroke. I'm not questioning it I'm just using it. Now when I hit other shafts I think there broken.

Bob_in_Cincy
02-19-2002, 11:50 AM
trouble-maker :-)

Tom_In_Cincy
02-19-2002, 04:37 PM
Bob.. you know me.. always trying to stir things up and adding my 2 worth

02-28-2002, 11:03 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: TonyM:</font><hr> I don't believe that any shaft (including the Predator) gives you more or less English that any other. Spin is dependant only on the tip contact point and the speed, and since neither of these are determined by the shaft, then it cannot influence the outcome.

What can?

Weight - a light cue or a heavy cue can both produce the same amount of spin. But the lighter cue produces a bit less speed, so the spin/speed ratio is changed.

Tip curvature, and the ability of the tip to hold chalk.

Tip size, but only in the event that it might be possible to be more accurate with your tip contact point estimation (we can't see the actual tip contact point, so it is always a guess) with a smaller tip than a larger tip.

The shaft stiffness can have only one possible effect. If the shaft is very flexible, it might change the energy transfer efficiency (less cueball speed for a given cue speed). However, the amount of spin will remain the same, but the spin/speed ratio will be slightly reduced.

Many pool players operate under the mistaken notion that a flexible shaft can produce lots of "juice" on the cueball. Clearly these players have never seen a world class 3 cushion player spin a cueball with a very stiff carom cue!

Hit the ball in the right place, with the right speed, with a good tip, and you can get all of the spin that any cue (or player) can deliver.

Cheers!

Tony <hr></blockquote>





Well, Tony some of your views are correct but some are kind of off. The tip of the cue is not the only factor in increased or decreased english on the cue ball. Along with some of your mentioned factors the shaft flex is very important in the amount of english you can put on a cue ball. The deflection of a shaft has more than you think to do with this. Predator shafts are supposedly one of the shafts made today with the least amount of cue ball deflection. Therefore the cuetip stays in contact longer in the point of contact. Which in turn gives you a more accurate shot and more english (or should I say the amount of english you put on the ball). If you shaft has a lot of deflection then your cuetip is not going to stay in contact with the ball in the point of contact but will in turn deflect off the ball in an undesired direction and put more or less english on the ball and make the shot less accurate since the tip did not stay in the desired point of contact for the proper amount of time to execute the shot correctly. Weight of the cue has some bearing on the matter. Momentum is higher in the heavier cue since there is more mass but on certain shots like the break for example. The lighter cue can put more speed on the ball because the lighter the cue the faster you can make it travel. This is why most break cues nowadays are around 18 oz. Vice being 22 or 23 oz. The thought process back in the day was that the heavier the cue the faster the ball can travel but in recent years this has been prove to be false. Hence the change to lighter break cues. Tip size does effect amount of english. The smaller the tip size the more english that is able to be imparted on the ball. A smaller diameter tip has a smaller contact point and therefore has less friction on the ball when struck. Smaller surface contact allows you to be able to make contact on more of the edge of the ball than a bigger diameter tip. Keep in mind we are taking about mm's. and not inches so these subtle differences might not be noticable to some people. However do this test to prove the tip size theory. Take a cue that is say 12.25 mm in shaft diameter and take a cue that is 13 mm and set up a cut shot, something with a good amount of angle. Use inside or outside english to make the ball. Now set it up again and hit the cue ball in the same spot as with the other cue. You will see the difference. On the lighter side of your comments I do agree with the last statement. If you hit the ball correctly and with the proper equipment you will have enough english to do the job. Familiarization with the cue you use is a big deal. If you know the limitations of your equipment then you can make adjustments for your game.

TonyM
03-01-2002, 01:44 AM
Shane wrote:

"Along with some of your mentioned factors the shaft flex is very important in the amount of english you can put on a cue ball."

Well Shane, I know of no physical effect that can explain how shaft flex can affect the amount of english that is possible to put on a ball. As I mentioned, the flex can effect the spin/speed ratio (due to a slight change in energy loss), but not the actual amount of spin.
If you believe this to be true, you will have to suggest a mechanism for it to work. I have seen pool players claim that a flexible shaft can induce more english, and 3 C players who claim that a stiff shaft can juice the ball better. Both cannot be correct. In fact, neither are.

"Predator shafts are supposedly one of the shafts made today with the least amount of cue ball deflection. Therefore the cuetip stays in contact longer in the point of contact."

Predator shafts do indeed produce less squirt than many other production shafts. But this in no way means that the cuetip stays in contact with the ball longer! Why would you think that it does?

In fact, since the contact point and speed at contact are the same for a shaft with high or low squirt, the spin speed ratio cannot be affected. The contact time will remain the same. Ron Shepard in his paper on squirt does indeed state that a very low squirt shaft might produce slightly more spin that a high squirt shaft, but the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with contact time. The reason is that the high squirt cue loses more energy during the collision by moving the cuestick and the ball to the side. However, the amount is basically insignificant.

Your points on break cue weight are irrelevant to the discussion about english, but are basically correct.

You are incorrect regarding the issue of tip size versus spin however. Draw a diagram for yourself, or do the geometry. The contact point is affected only by the curvature of the tip, not the diameter. For tips of equal curvature a change in diameter only, does not change the contact point at all!

So a small tip with a nickel curvature will have the same contact patch size (area) as a large tip with a nickel curvature. Again, make a simple sketch to satisfy yourself!

By the way, I have studied these issues for years and have done many experiments, as well as corresponded with many other researchers. My comments are not merely speculation.

Regards,

Tony

Fred Agnir
03-01-2002, 09:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: PoolFool:</font><hr> My question: Which shaft gives you more english; a stiff or flexable shaft? (Both have the same tip)
Thanks for any contributions.<hr></blockquote>

If you mean spin/speed ratio, then I'm of the camp that says that the shaft stiffness (and tip hardness) is insignificant.

If you mean simply more spin, then I say the more energy return, the more spin, and that would mean a harder tip. But the more spin comes more speed, since the spin/speed ratio is still the same. But, that could mean the difference between getting and not getting more *spin* with a certain stroke, if for some reason absolute spin (rotational velocity) was your only concern.

Fred

03-01-2002, 10:09 AM
Fred, Glad to see you posting here! Your comments are always interesting........... Greg

Fred Agnir
03-01-2002, 10:33 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Greg in C'ville:</font><hr> Fred, Glad to see you posting here! Your comments are always interesting........... Greg <hr></blockquote>

Okay, I'm confused. Which Greg are you, and what is C'Ville?

Fred &lt;~~~ thinks Greg needs to register

stickman
03-01-2002, 10:50 AM
I don't know anything about physics, but only what works for me. I have two sticks with the same tip (Le Pro). One is a 12mm and the other a 13mm. Both are a standard shaft design. I'm able to use considerably more english with the smaller diameter stick. Now my guess would be that the smaller diameter stick is more flexable, but again, I'm not into physics, just results. I have a friend with an expensive Predator. We've been friends and playing together long enough that I'm sure he'll let me try his stick. I don't know what I can do with it, but having played with him for several years, I can tell you that I don't see many that can get more english on a ball than he can. What this tells me? Find someone who will let you try out the stick designs you are interested in and choose the one that feels most comfortable to you.

TomBrooklyn
03-01-2002, 11:17 AM
What is the practical effect of the spin/speed ratio? I am fairly familiar with discussion on and the use and effect of spin, but not spin/speed ratio.

Fred Agnir
03-01-2002, 01:10 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: TomBrooklyn:</font><hr> What is the practical effect of the spin/speed ratio? I am fairly familiar with discussion on and the use and effect of spin, but not spin/speed ratio. <hr></blockquote>

When someone says that such and such "gives more spin", there needs to be some quantifier to what "gives more spin" means. I think that means that for a given speed, there's 'x' amount of spin. Bob Jewett and others have called this "spin-to-speed ratio."

Is there a practical use of this knowledge? Well, for example, in the one-pocket break, I like to hit the cueball not too slow to break balls out, while maintaining a very high amount of inside english to kill the cue at the second diamond up. That is, I shoot the one-pocket break with a fairly high spin/speed ratio. I accomplish this with a fairly large tip offset. I think most one-pocket players do.


Fred

03-01-2002, 01:18 PM
My name is Greg Salberg and I live in Charlottesville Va. Posted sporadically on the Billiard digest board but mostly just lurk and absorb.
Truthfully, as many others have done, I have started to go to Playpool.com. My shortcut to take me there is right under the one for Billiard digest message board and I thought I was on the new (playpool) board when I saw a post from you. Since I was happy to see you had discovered the new board and have always enjoyed your input I thought I would post. After I posted I saw I was on the wrong board! LOL...... sorry to confuse you Greg

Rod
03-01-2002, 01:52 PM
Quote,
I read in a previous post that when using a Preditor shaft
that you only have to use 1/2 the english as with a normal shaft. My question: Which shaft gives you more english; a stiff or flexable shaft? (Both have the same tip)
Thanks for any contributions.

PoolFool


Use 1/2 the english as compared to a normal shaft.
My question is what's normal? People play with all sorts
of shaft sizes, flexes, and tip hardness including the
pro's. It's really a matter of preference. Personally
I play with a fairly stiff shaft, and can't stand the feel
of a of a limp piece of wood. My conical tapered shaft
is 13 1/4mm, once again my preference.

I think a stiff shaft has a very slight advantage, but
even if it did I certainly don't think it's anything to write home about. Also the idea of smaller tips can
create more english is way overrated.
I'd look to where the real answer is, and thats who's
holding the cue and how accurate there stroke is.
The Predator has lowered the squirt issue, and if that
makes one feel more confident then they "may" stroke through
the ball better. Given that they might also "feel" that it
takes less english or effort. Better equipment is fine
but I think peoples games will see far more improvement
if they focus on the basic fundamentals, and how to
deliver the cue for a specfic shot.
Sorry I know this wasn't asked for, but I believe it is
the better part of the equation.

This isn't the best example, but an example all the same.
And forgiveness in golf is far more critical. Some, not
many, but some golf pro's still use the old irons from
the 60's and 70's. They are not forgiving clubs by any
measure compared to the new cavity back irons of today.
But they still use them for there personal reasons.
Appearance, feel, ability to shape the shot etc.
My thoughts are that they still hit the ball on the sweet
spot of the club almost always. And that is directly
related to there basic fundamentals.
Thanks for listening.

Fred Agnir
03-01-2002, 02:38 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Greg in C'Ville:</font><hr> After I posted I saw I was on the wrong board! LOL...... sorry to confuse you Greg <hr></blockquote>

LOL!!! Copy and paste your post to Playpool.com. I'm sure you'll find at least one of my posts over there.

Fred

Alfie
03-01-2002, 05:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: TomBrooklyn:</font><hr> What is the practical effect of the spin/speed ratio? I am fairly familiar with discussion on and the use and effect of spin, but not spin/speed ratio. <hr></blockquote>
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=shepard-1401981906210001%40macrls.tcg.anl.gov

http://www.omniscium.com/artsy/ShotArchive/ShowShot.asp?ShotID=16

03-01-2002, 09:42 PM
One way to think of spin/speed ratio is that when the cue ball is rolling smoothly on the cloth, the spin/speed ratio is 1.00, since the speed of the surface relative to the center is equal to the speed of the center of the ball.

You can get this much side spin by hitting the cue ball on the equator and 40% of the way towards the edge from the center. As soon as the ball leaves the tip, however, it will start to slow down as it picks up follow, and spin/speed ratio actually increases until the ball is rolling smoothly on the cloth.

Spin/speed is also referred to as the "quality" of the shot. For example, think of someone who tries to draw the cue ball the length of the table but they have to hit it 100 MPH to get any back spin, and then remember the smooth strokers who can get the same draw with a relatively soft hit. The difference between these two shots is the quality of the spin they apply, which is usually determined by how far off center they can hit the cue ball.

On a draw shot, it is possible to start the cue ball with slightly more than a 1.0 spin/speed ratio, but this is rubbed off by the cloth, and when it is sliding, as for a stop shot, the spin/speed is 0.

Bob Jewett

Rod
03-02-2002, 05:09 PM
Tom, what I find interesting is that some people still believe that a shaft or cue is responsible for more or less english. No possible way it could be the stroke. Meucci and Predator sure have a lot of people brainwashed. And they
never laid any claim to the issue of more english.

Scott Lee
03-02-2002, 07:20 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Bob Jewett:</font><hr>

Spin/speed is also referred to as the "quality" of the shot. For example, think of someone who tries to draw the cue ball the length of the table but they have to hit it 100 MPH to get any back spin, and then remember the smooth strokers who can get the same draw with a relatively soft hit. The difference between these two shots is the quality of the spin they apply, which is usually determined by how far off center they can hit the cue ball.



Bob...Please clarify to all readers here that you are being facetious, when you say they will hit the CB at "100 miles an hour"! As you are well aware, the top speed of these wild, high-flying break contests rarely exceeds 30+ miles per hour. The stroke you describe would need a hard stroke to accomplish, but I would guess it required something in the neighborhood of 20 mph...certainly nowhere NEAR 100 mph!
Just thought that should be made clear for anyone who thought it might be possible to hit a pool ball 100 miles per hour.

Scott Lee

03-03-2002, 12:28 AM
Actually, in some of the earlier Predator ads, they did indeed claim that their shaft could produce 20% more spin. They have since backed off from that claim!

Also, I've seen some of the Meucci ads that claim to add more power and spin than other shafts. So it is no wonder that the uninformed consumer would ask such questions.

Yes there are still many people out there that think that a cue can give you extra spin for less effort!

Tony
(I think P.T. Barnum had something to say about this!)

03-03-2002, 01:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: TonyM:</font><hr> Shane wrote:


Well Shane, I know of no physical effect that can explain how shaft flex can affect the amount of english that is possible to put on a ball. As I mentioned, the flex can effect the spin/speed ratio (due to a slight change in energy loss), but not the actual amount of spin.
If you believe this to be true, you will have to suggest a mechanism for it to work. I have seen pool players claim that a flexible shaft can induce more english, and 3 C players who claim that a stiff shaft can juice the ball better. Both cannot be correct. In fact, neither are.

"Predator shafts are supposedly one of the shafts made today with the least amount of cue ball deflection. Therefore the cuetip stays in contact longer in the point of contact."

Predator shafts do indeed produce less squirt than many other production shafts. But this in no way means that the cuetip stays in contact with the ball longer! Why would you think that it does?

In fact, since the contact point and speed at contact are the same for a shaft with high or low squirt, the spin speed ratio cannot be affected. The contact time will remain the same. Ron Shepard in his paper on squirt does indeed state that a very low squirt shaft might produce slightly more spin that a high squirt shaft, but the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with contact time. The reason is that the high squirt cue loses more energy during the collision by moving the cuestick and the ball to the side. However, the amount is basically insignificant.

Your points on break cue weight are irrelevant to the discussion about english, but are basically correct.

You are incorrect regarding the issue of tip size versus spin however. Draw a diagram for yourself, or do the geometry. The contact point is affected only by the curvature of the tip, not the diameter. For tips of equal curvature a change in diameter only, does not change the contact point at all!

So a small tip with a nickel curvature will have the same contact patch size (area) as a large tip with a nickel curvature. Again, make a simple sketch to satisfy yourself!

By the way, I have studied these issues for years and have done many experiments, as well as corresponded with many other researchers. My comments are not merely speculation.







Well, Tony the definition of deflection is; The deviation of a shot or ball from its true course. So how does the tip stay in contact with the ball in the desired contact point if there is significant deflection? Please elaborate? Go to meucci's website and read up on the reports and tests done on shaft deflection. Robert Meucci explains the theory pretty well. He even has a mechanism for proving the point called the "myth destroyer". www.meuccicues.com (http://www.meuccicues.com) . I can also find players who can "juice it with a stiff shaft and those who can't with a flexible one. What is your point?


Have you tried the cut shot experiment I suggested? If you did you would know what I am talking about. You can draw curves of a larger and smaller size making contact with a ball all you want. Anything can be made to look good on paper. I am telling you fact. Do the experiment. Theory and reality are quite a difference in results. The curvature on the tip is going to change when it make contact with the ball. Which means the bigger tip when compressed will have more of the tip in contact with the ball than the smaller tip. Come on man. Maybe you should study physics instead of these obscure pool myths and inaccurate facts.


Give Robert Meucci a call or e-mail him and he will explain these simple physics problems to you. Please reply with your ammunition of falsities.


Peace

Fred Agnir
03-03-2002, 08:50 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Shane_in_VB:</font><hr>
Well, Tony the definition of deflection is; The deviation of a shot or ball from its true course<hr></blockquote>

Here's where your argument starts to go downhill. Your definition of "deflection" isn't what other people think of as "deflection." By your definiton, swerve could be deflection.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Shane:</font><hr>Which means the bigger tip when compressed will have more of the tip in contact with the ball than the smaller tip. Come on man. Maybe you should study physics instead of these obscure pool myths and inaccurate facts. <hr></blockquote>

If the tip curvature is the same, the contact patch after compression of different diameter tips would be the same. You are assuming that somehow the larger tip compresses more in order to take advantage of its larger diameter. I think the material is going to compress a certain amount not related to its overall tip diameter.


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Shane:</font><hr>Give Robert Meucci a call or e-mail him and he will explain these simple physics problems to you. <hr></blockquote>

Of course he will. But Bob Meucci doesn't understand it himself.

Fred &lt;~~~ not knocking Meucci cues

03-03-2002, 01:28 PM
Shane baits with:

"Come on man. Maybe you should study physics instead of these obscure pool myths and inaccurate facts. "

Actually Shane, I have studied the physics of these issues for yesars in much more detail than I would care to admit. You seem to have read an innacurate Meucci website, and now you are an expert!

I feel that it is you that are spouting old myths regarding tip diameter not me. I have both done the math required, as well as actual experiments, some of which measured accurately the actual contact point on the cueball.

Believe me or not, the tip diameter has no affect on contact point. Only the curvature does. To believe otherwise is an old wives tale that I thought was disproved years ago.

Tony