Taper and throw

[TornadoTed]

I recently saw a video on YouTube with Andy Hunter talking about a couple of cues he had bought. He said at one point that he was getting over an inch of throw but after thinning down the taper it was reduced to nothing, that appears around 2.45 in the video.

I read an American pool cue page where they say a cue with pro taper will give less throw but conversely a straight taper will give more energy transfer.

I already knew the principal of less end mass producing less throw.

I am making a break cue for English pool and I obviously want as much energy transfer as possible but also want as little throw as possible so I can hit the pack square as possible.

I have read a lot of topics on taper on here and there is lots of talk about the taper and 'playabilty' of a cue but I haven't read any mention of throw or power transfer in particular before.

I would be interested in getting some thoughts on these principals.

[TornadoTed]

Here is the link the the American pool cue page where they talk about squirt (throw) and power transfer.

[vmax]

Throw is something that happens when you don't strike the centre of the cue ball, the cue ball will 'throw' (deflection as we call it in snooker) to the opposite side of which ever side of the cue ball that is contacted by the tip of the cue.
This deflection is minimal over distance as the cue ball will be spinning and will come back onto line as it reacts to the friction of the cloth. However when close to the object ball or using a lot of power this deflection has to be compensated for by offset aiming.
This offset aiming is a minefield in snooker due to the nap of the cloth, pool tables generally have no nap so the offset is the same whichever direction the cue ball is travelling but the one way directional nap on a snooker table means the spinning cue ball reacts differently when spinning with the lay of the nap, against it, along it or across it.

There is no such thing as a cue that doesn't deflect the cue ball when using side, it's a question of basic physics that it always happens, there is also no such thing as a cue that deflects the cue ball when playing dead centre cue ball striking, if that happens then the strike wasn't as dead centre as the player was attempting.

If you have a cue that deflects the cue ball significantly then you can alter that with thinning the taper but why bother when all you need to do is get used to the deflection of your particular cue and allow for it when using side, when striking centre cue ball learn to cue straight and there will be no deflection.

These pool sites are simply selling something to players who can't cue straight and find difficulty in finding a 4 inch wide pocket from 3 feet away, and if you want a break cue for US pool to protect your playing cue then something really stiff is the road to go down as they generally use phenolic (same general material as the balls) tips or if it's for UK 8 ball then you really don't need one for that little cue ball.

[TornadoTed]

Throw is something that happens when you don't strike the centre of the cue ball, the cue ball will 'throw' (deflection as we call it in snooker) to the opposite side of which ever side of the cue ball that is contacted by the tip of the cue.
This deflection is minimal over distance as the cue ball will be spinning and will come back onto line as it reacts to the friction of the cloth. However when close to the object ball or using a lot of power this deflection has to be compensated for by offset aiming.
This offset aiming is a minefield in snooker due to the nap of the cloth, pool tables generally have no nap so the offset is the same whichever direction the cue ball is travelling but the one way directional nap on a snooker table means the spinning cue ball reacts differently when spinning with the lay of the nap, against it, along it or across it.

There is no such thing as a cue that doesn't deflect the cue ball when using side, it's a question of basic physics that it always happens, there is also no such thing as a cue that deflects the cue ball when playing dead centre cue ball striking, if that happens then the strike wasn't as dead centre as the player was attempting.

If you have a cue that deflects the cue ball significantly then you can alter that with thinning the taper but why bother when all you need to do is get used to the deflection of your particular cue and allow for it when using side, when striking centre cue ball learn to cue straight and there will be no deflection.

These pool sites are simply selling something to players who can't cue straight and find difficulty in finding a 4 inch wide pocket from 3 feet away, and if you want a break cue for US pool to protect your playing cue then something really stiff is the road to go down as they generally use phenolic (same general material as the balls) tips or if it's for UK 8 ball then you really don't need one for that little cue ball.

Thank you for the reply but I wasn't really after advice. I was more interested in the effect of tapering on throw and power transfer as those were principals I haven't seen discussed on here in any other threads about taper.

If as you say 'There is no such thing as a cue that doesn't deflect the cue ball when using side' What do you make of the claim by Andy Hunter that the cue went from over an inch of throw to no throw at all after tapering in the YouTube video I linked to. I found this claim pretty astonishing but I respect his opinion from the many videos of his that I have watched.

One thing I disagree on is the use of a break cue for English pool and I found it out the hard way. The bottom of my John Parris wore a flat patch in the end after rubbing over the metal strip on the cushion when breaking for 15 years with it.

[vmax]

If as you say 'There is no such thing as a cue that doesn't deflect the cue ball when using side' What do you make of the claim by Andy Hunter that the cue went from over an inch of throw to no throw at all after tapering in the YouTube video I linked to. I found this claim pretty astonishing but I respect his opinion from the many videos of his that I have watched..

I also watched a video on youtube about Predator cues with low deflection shafts. A certain pro showed a supposed 'normal' cues deflection by addressing the tip to the cue ball parallel to the line of aim, and yes the deflection was clear. He then played a shot using the new super duper low deflection Predator cue and addressed the tip of the cue to the cue ball by pivoting the cue in his bridge so that it followed the line of deflection and not the line of aim and therefore looked like it went straight.

As for Andy Hunters claim, he obviously isn't a physics major, if anyone strikes the cue ball off centre the tip will push the cue ball off the straight line, the cue ball will be carrying side spin and will curve as the spin reacts to the cloth and can come back onto line or go beyond the line as in a swerve shot.
Is he claiming throw by cueing centre cue ball ? if he is then he can't cue as straight as he thinks he is or he pivots the cue when playing with sidespin.

One must understand that the cue ball when stuck off centre will first spin horizontally until it grips the cloth and finishes its initial swerve, it will then roll forward spinning at an angle that is pretty much adjacent to the tilt of the earth's axis. You can try this with a striped pool ball struck at 3 or 9 o'clock on its face with the stripe horizontal or vertical and watch as it makes this transition, the reason why severe swerve shots are played by striking down on the cue ball off centre is to magnify this effect and give maximum swerve.

[itsnoteasy]

I am very wary of videos on cueing trying to prove any point because of confirmation bias. Subconsciously because you are trying to prove a point you will cue so that the outcome proves your point. It's not deliberate and it's not cheating or trying to fool people, it's just the way we are made, everyone does it.
I'm also curious as to pace and distance of these type of experiments. Can we cue at exactly the same pace(let alone trying to strike the cue ball exactly the same) and if I play from the brown spot and hit directly behind the black spot using side, is that showing no deflection? Or is that showing a ball that been deflected and came back on line over the distance? Struck exactly the same does it cross the blue spot on it's way down as a zero deflection cue should do that, as a plain ball shot would, I doubt it but id like to see it.

[Siz]

Energy transfer (Efficiency)
A significant factor is the tip. Harder tips tend to be more efficient, and dedicated break cues often come with super hard phenolic tips. (You can only use these for breaking, not playing.)

As far as the cue goes, when I started playing years ago, there was a general agreement that you should use a heavy cue for breaking, on the basis that you would get more momentum into the cb. But at some point, the consensus flipped in favour of light cues. The argument was that a player could get a lighter cue moving more quickly.

Personally, I think that the most important thing is that the cue is one that you feel comfortable with, in particular one that you can control. The number 1 priority in breaking is to get a good solid crunch on the head ball. Assuming balls are going in off the break, the number 2 priority is to squat the white in the middle of the table. You will not be able to do either of these if you do not have good control of the cue.

This is not easy to do consistently. I find that it is a real test of my cuing: If I break, hit the head ball absolutely flush and stop the white a few inches away, then I know I am cuing well. A big, flattish, tip can help. I use a 11mm cue with a hard Talisman layered tip, which doubles up as a playing cue for 9-ball. But it is really about technique.

I would be very skeptical of any claims linking taper with efficiency (particularly from a commercial site). In theory a stiffer shaft will transmit more energy into the cb if you hit the cb off-centre. But as I have argued above, if you cannot control your break and hit the cb on the centre line, you will never be able to break well. If you find that the cb keeps flying off the side of the head ball - and it happens to us all - then you need to work on your break. If you expect to find the answer in a 'low deflection cue', you will be disappointed.

Throw
As I have suggested, this should not be a relevant factor when choosing a break cue. However for what it is worth, the throw characteristics of a cue depends on the 'end mass', broadly the mass of the last 6" or so of the cue. This can be reduced by

1. Changing the taper from a standard conical shape to a straight taper (also called a 'pro taper' in the US)
2. Using a smaller diameter tip
3. Hollowing out the end of the shaft and filling with some low density material
4. Using a lighter ferrule (shorter, thinner or made of some material of lower density then the traditional brass

In practice, the only thing I would bother doing is changing the ferrule. Changing the tip size may mess up your game and the other changes do not make much difference

[TornadoTed]

In the end I decided to go with a straight taper, starting at 10mm at the tip and rising 1mm every 3" to 29mm at the butt. I am really happy with how it turned out especially the titanium ferrule I fitted by hand which looks pretty much perfect. The most hair raising bit was drilling out the butt for a weight as I know ebony is so brittle, I didn't like that at all. I shall report back with how it plays once I've had a chance to use it.

[vmax]

I've never played pool on a US table but when I played UK 8 ball I always broke from the centre of the D to hit the head ball 3/4 ball to the left with bottom left hand side. I potted balls off this break nine times out of ten and the cue ball stayed relatively in the middle of the table after coming off the side cushion with left hand (check) side. A controlled break shot, not hit with maximum power but very hard nonetheless and to allow for the deflection I aimed to hit the left edge of the head ball. I used an old 11mm tipped machine spliced billiard cue with no ferrule and a pro taper, dowelled at 11mm from the tip to about 12 inches before rising to the butt, and no, the cue didn't split at the end despite having no ferrule and it must have been twenty years old before I got hold of it in 1982 when the club held a sale of unclaimed cues that were hanging around the wall of the matchroom in metal cases, paid a fiver for it

[Siz]

...I decided to go with a straight taper, starting at 10mm at the tip and rising 1mm every 3" to 29mm at the butt....

In case it causes confusion, I should say that 'straight taper' conventionally refers to a cylindrical shape during the 8" or so at the tip end. It originates from the US, where in days gone by all the expert players used a loop bridge. The cylindrical taper allows the cue to follow through without jamming in the finger loop. The loop bridge was regarded as more difficult to use than the 'open bridge' that us brits are used to, and was referred to as the pro-bridge. Hence the straight taper is also known as a 'pro taper'.

The most hair raising bit was drilling out the butt for a weight as I know ebony is so brittle

If you are modifying a cue and adding significant weight in the butt, then I would be interested to know whether you find a hard or soft tip to be better for breaking. As I said in my earlier post, most people use hard tips, but if you have added a big weight in the butt end, then there is a theoretical argument that a very hard tip might not work so well. No clue whether or not experience bears this out though...

[Siz]

..when I played UK 8 ball I always broke from the centre of the D to hit the head ball 3/4 ball to the left with bottom left hand side. I potted balls off this break nine times out of ten and the cue ball stayed relatively in the middle of the table after coming off the side cushion with left hand (check) side. A controlled break shot, not hit with maximum power but very hard nonetheless and to allow for the deflection I aimed to hit the left edge of the head ball. I used an old 11mm tipped machine spliced billiard cue with no ferrule and a pro taper, dowelled at 11mm from the tip to about 12 inches before rising to the butt...

Sounds to me that your breaking success came from skill, not the cue; and that the only real contribution your break cue made was to protect your playing cue / tip from damage. But correct me if I am wrong - did your breaking improve significantly when you got that cue / deteriorate when you stopped using it?

[TornadoTed]

In case it causes confusion, I should say that 'straight taper' conventionally refers to a cylindrical shape during the 8" or so at the tip end. It originates from the US, where in days gone by all the expert players used a loop bridge. The cylindrical taper allows the cue to follow through without jamming in the finger loop. The loop bridge was regarded as more difficult to use than the 'open bridge' that us brits are used to, and was referred to as the pro-bridge. Hence the straight taper is also known as a 'pro taper'.



If you are modifying a cue and adding significant weight in the butt, then I would be interested to know whether you find a hard or soft tip to be better for breaking. As I said in my earlier post, most people use hard tips, but if you have added a big weight in the butt end, then there is a theoretical argument that a very hard tip might not work so well. No clue whether or not experience bears this out though...

I haven't added that much weight in the butt. I bought a half finished cue from Woods which has the splicing done and an oversized taper, around 32mm at the butt and 14 mm at the tip. I planed it down to close to my finished size and then did loads of sanding. To giver you an idea of how much material I removed it was 18 oz when it arrived and finished up at around 14.7 oz once finished with a balancing point at 18.5". My playing cue is 16.7oz with a balancing point at 16.5" so I added a 2oz weight which bought it up to the same weight as well as the same balancing point. It is still a relatively light cue compared to the average snooker cue.

I have been using an ADR147 hard layered tip on my breaking cue, I used an ADR147 soft on my playing cue. I thought I would try a Samsara break tip which I am on the fence with. I think I might fit an ADR147 hard to the new break cue I made so I can go back and forward to the Samsara which is on my old break cue.

To be honest the whole break cue thing is marginal, the simple fact of the matter is that it is probably 90% timing and technique. I use one because I wore a flat patch on the bottom of my old John Parris cue from rubbing over the metal strip that runs around the table and I also seemed to to be changing my tips too often. When I got my new playing cue I got a break cue so it didn't suffer the same fate. I admit I played more back then but I'm now changing my tip every 18-24 months compared to every 2 -3 months back then. I think maybe psychologically I did hold back a little when breaking with my playing cue especially if my tip was coming to the end of it's life where I don't worry about giving it everything with the break cue.

[vmax]

Sounds to me that your breaking success came from skill, not the cue; and that the only real contribution your break cue made was to protect your playing cue / tip from damage. But correct me if I am wrong - did your breaking improve significantly when you got that cue / deteriorate when you stopped using it?

It was my playing cue, I'm of the opinion that a break cue isn't needed to break a pack of little balls on a UK pool table and I stand by this due to my experience of ten years of UK 8 ball using a cue with no ferrule, 11mm tip and all the side, screw and power was there when and if I needed it.

I simply found a way to break that worked 90% of the time with no need to launch my body and soul at the cue ball, basically I didn't rely on making as many balls from the break as I could as I was pretty confident that if I made just one then a clearance was on, didn't always make one of course but always went for it, I never mucked about with blocking pockets and roll up snookers for two visits.
Yes the rules have changed now and I'm unaware of them but when I played pool the game moved into ultra tactical and frames were lasting up to an hour sometimes which is the reason I stopped. Today I don't play because it doesn't test me and I wonder at the pool players in our club who sweat over a three foot straight pot for game when there's a snooker table in the next room that will improve their technique no end if they had the courage to knuckle down and improve.

[Siz]

...always went for it, I never mucked about with blocking pockets and roll up snookers for two visits. Yes the rules have changed now and I'm unaware of them but when I played pool the game moved into ultra tactical and frames were lasting up to an hour sometimes which is the reason I stopped.

Yes, those old EPA rules were a nightmare in competition and even worse in team matches.

[the lone wolf]

Throw is something that happens when you don't strike the centre of the cue ball, the cue ball will 'throw' (deflection as we call it in snooker) to the opposite side of which ever side of the cue ball that is contacted by the tip of the cue.
This deflection is minimal over distance as the cue ball will be spinning and will come back onto line as it reacts to the friction of the cloth. However when close to the object ball or using a lot of power this deflection has to be compensated for by offset aiming.
This offset aiming is a minefield in snooker due to the nap of the cloth, pool tables generally have no nap so the offset is the same whichever direction the cue ball is travelling but the one way directional nap on a snooker table means the spinning cue ball reacts differently when spinning with the lay of the nap, against it, along it or across it.

There is no such thing as a cue that doesn't deflect the cue ball when using side, it's a question of basic physics that it always happens, there is also no such thing as a cue that deflects the cue ball when playing dead centre cue ball striking, if that happens then the strike wasn't as dead centre as the player was attempting.

If you have a cue that deflects the cue ball significantly then you can alter that with thinning the taper but why bother when all you need to do is get used to the deflection of your particular cue and allow for it when using side, when striking centre cue ball learn to cue straight and there will be no deflection.

These pool sites are simply selling something to players who can't cue straight and find difficulty in finding a 4 inch wide pocket from 3 feet away, and if you want a break cue for US pool to protect your playing cue then something really stiff is the road to go down as they generally use phenolic (same general material as the balls) tips or if it's for UK 8 ball then you really don't need one for that little cue ball.

Throw will also happen even when the cue contact the cue ball centrally.

Throw also depends on materials, width of taper against the weight at the butt of the cue
.

I tested and experimented (for one of the main American cue manufacturers and can't type too much because of NDA).

That aside. If one were to fit a polymer ferrule instead of brass on a cue with a 10mm taper. If the butt has a weight of 18oz plus, this will cause the cue ball to throw. Perhaps not in the way you may think, but it will throw.

It will also happen with a tradition brass ferrule, but with a thinner taper and more weight at butt end. ☺️