Low Squirt Cues

[nutscrewsandbolts]

I have heard about someone trying to experiment with a cue which induces minimum squirt when side is applied. Ideally you wouldn't have to compensate for squirt. Any idea if this is true?

[gettingbetter]

Hey. Considering that you are new to the forum I'll be the first to say that you may get some unwarranted posts.

But to help you, just go use the search option above and type in Acuerate, Gravity or Squirt - Acuerate will give you the most results. Also, if you go there website, they have the inforamtion there about the technology they use on there cues.

[nutscrewsandbolts]

Thanks

[1lawyer]

I would say that any cue can be made to throw less and I think its a nonsense to claim one may throw less than another because I have had a number of cues from a number of makers and even antique cues that did not throw much. These claims have not been tested properly because they have not been tested against all makes of cues.

Another thing is a player gets used to the throw of any cue over time anyhow and adjusts accordingly so it ain't such a big thing and I reckon it would be just as hard for me to get used to one that did not throw compared to one that did.

All cues throw including the Acuerate but good luck with finding out. I had a JP with a 9.1 mill tip and that did not throw, I also had a Trevor White with a 9.3 mil tip and that did not throw much either same with other makers like Wooldridge etc.,

So I would not put this point down as anti throw cues only being Acuerate because it simply is not true.

[eaoin11]

and I reckon it would be just as hard for me to get used to one that did not throw compared to one that did

I can second that point. I've played snooker, UK pool and American pool with a lot of cues over the years and never had any trouble playing with side.

But I tried the American brand Predator with the famous 'low deflection' 314-2 shaft and found that I could not pot a ball, it was very strange. With time I might have come to like the cue but I couldn't figure it out in the short time that I had it. The hit didn't feel very solid due to something they put in the ferrule.

I'm not really sure how similar Acuerate's technology is to Predators', but I would want to try one out before I bought it.

I think that cues with shafts made of well seasoned wood tend to be both more responsive and throw (squirt, deflect) less.

[ADR147]

the amount of deflection or squirt is not important - what matters is that it reacts the same way every time on a similar shot so you can predict it and get used to it.

[Mike P]

When Predator first came out with their low squirt shafts, they claimed it was due to the lamination. After the shafts were examined it was found that they had hollowed out the shaft near the tip. The lighter the business end of the shaft, the less the cue ball will squirt. In the last few years they have been using a ferrule made of lighter and softer material. I believe the ferrule buckles a bit when using side, instead of causing the cue ball to squirt. I read through the Acuerate technology pertaining to their cues producing less deflection(squirt) on the cue ball, than others. At no point do they give an explanation to why this happens. I know that it would be expensive to just cut the shaft a few inches below the ferrule. I am wondering if anyone (cue makers) has made repairs to an Acuerate shaft, i.e. change a ferrule? It would be interesting to know if they have hollowed the tip end of the shaft, the way Predator has. I guess an xray would also tell the tale.

I believe the laminated shaft provides the consistency that Andrew speaks of. Oldtimers used to sometimes put an identifying mark on their shafts. This provided consistency, because they always had the grain turned the same way.

Mike

[ADR147]

I have cut one up shaft is solid just a slightly different shape.

[RGCirencester]

How satisfying was that

[ADR147]

How satisfying was that

very - but not as much fun as popping it in the wood burner afterwards.

[Mike P]

What do you mean by a different shape, not round? What type of material was the ferrule? I am assuming their claim to the results when using the robot, are accurate. Perhaps one slanting of the results is, they do not state what other brand of snooker cues, the test was performed on. Was it a BCE cue??

Mike

[ADR147]

its straight at the end simple as that - everything else is the same.

[felipecocco]

If you're willing to put in the work to understand it, this seems to explain the reasons behind it really well - and supports the notion that a lighter tip-end of the cue will produce less throw:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/physi...ard_squirt.pdf

[1lawyer]

the amount of deflection or squirt is not important - what matters is that it reacts the same way every time on a similar shot so you can predict it and get used to it.

As I and ADR147 have said you have to get used to the throw of any cue, even one that claims not to throw as much so I feel this is just a marketing gimmick and it has not been tested against cues like Parris, Trevor White, Wooldridge etc etc all of whom can and do make cues with little throw also.

What matters is what ADR147 says and that is the cue reacts the same way every time. All cues throw a little and It would be just as hard getting used to one with no throw as it would with one that did.

[nutscrewsandbolts]

If you're willing to put in the work to understand it, this seems to explain the reasons behind it really well - and supports the notion that a lighter tip-end of the cue will produce less throw:

http://billiards.colostate.edu/physi...ard_squirt.pdf

Wow felipecocco, that is some serious mathematics!


I think i'm just going to stick my mastercue. I attempted 10 long straight blues from the baulk line and potted six, in which i followed the cue ball to the pocket twice. I think I'm just starting to get used to my 4 month old cue after practising almost every day. Will think about spin some other time i guess. Thanks for all your replies.