Why does weight of a cue matter ?

[jrc750]

your a clever bunch on here ! - who's got a calculator handy to work out the deceleration ??

[checkSide]

See this video
http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_...ew/HSVB-40.htm

Yes this is interesting stuff.

However his graph clearly shows it's less than 40%.

Also when he moves on to analyse the faster paced shots, the percentage is even less.

Either way, it's still very interesting.

[RGCirencester]

I must admit I do not think it is as much as 40%... But in theory to continue accelerating for that 4mm or whatever, you would need to apply extra force to move cue and ball, then go back to the original force once the tip leaves the cueball.

My conclusion after much pondering was that as long as you cue the exact spot on the white for that small period of time, the rest of your technique should not matter. Of course good technique helps you get there, but its an interesting topic. How much does follow through effect the shot?

[CueAntW147]

I'll stick to what feels right......the science stuff is interesting but way over my head.......

[checkSide]

My conclusion after much pondering was that as long as you cue the exact spot on the white for that small period of time, the rest of your technique should not matter. Of course good technique helps you get there, but its an interesting topic. How much does follow through effect the shot?

Yes I totally agree with you!

I have often thought about this myself. After I discovered the cue was only in contact with the bcueall for 0.001 seconds.

Follow through has no effect on the shot whatsoever. All follow through does is encourage you to strike the ball positively.

All that matters is in that tiny split second, the cue applies the force to the centre of white in the exact direction you intend. This is obviously a lot harder than it sounds, as any form of cueing across the ball, i.e. not through the centre, will change its direction.

Alignment in hitting the white through its centre to create the potting angle.

[jrc750]

I'll stick to what feels right......the science stuff is interesting but way over my head.......

Thats just what i was thinking (i thought ide left school behind)

[jonnylovessn8ker]

OK, where does the force that moves the ball come from? maybe not 40% but its impossible to accelerate through the cueball as you would need to exert extra effort at the exact point of impact.

If your quoting doctor Dave I believe he is where I originally got the 40% figure from.

See this video
http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_...ew/HSVB-40.htm

He quotes 40%

This is something I've been thinking about lately, which makes sense to me.

ahh
you are right in there there has been a 40% loss in acceleration, but that isnt the cue ball, its the cue action.
the vid you showed, referring to 1:32s, of the "dip"

the top part of of the dip, is the moment where the cue tip hits the ball.
the cue ball gone at the bottom of that dip there.

snooker balls are quite frictionless in reality, so we take it our for simplicity's sake.
what matters is that in newton's f = ma
f actually means the total force. his law states that no energy can be created out of nowhere
so f means force of the cue + force of the ball
assuming total force to be 1
before impact
f = force of the cue + force of the ball
1 = 1 + 0
after impact
f = force of the cue + force of the ball
1 = 0 + 1
its quite impossible to lose 40% of force after impact, the deccleration is so great it would kill a human instantly in reality.

to explain why there is the 40% dip.
the simple way to say is that the cue action is still on going. the player was following through. he didnt make a stun shot where his cue action suddenly stops at the moment where tip hits ball. his cue action continued and went on. this is a separate event. because it occured after the impact.

that dip there shows that he had made contact with the ball, and his smooth cue action came to a sudden hault. but that doesnt mean that his acceleration of his cue action stop. it is actually a concept in physics where stationary movement doesnt mean there is stationary acceleration. acceleration and movement are 2 distinct concepts.

thats why if you check if the tangent of the red boxed section at 1:46. it is identical to the tangent at 1:27s. the tangent indicates the rate of acceleration.

i hope this helps. i apologize for the lengthy explanation. im trying to put this in layman terms here.

[CueAntW147]

Thats just what i was thinking (i thought ide left school behind)

Some were good at science.......some were good at sports.....( yes & some were good at both ) after this thread i know which i was best at........

[jrc750]

Ive just noticed Trevs 1 is watching this posting - hi Trevor - do you happen to know is there such a thing as a common asked for cue weight ?? or is it too varied to comment on ??

[CueAntW147]

Ive just noticed Trevs 1 is watching this posting - hi Trevor - do you happen to know is there such a thing as a common asked for cue weight ?? or is it too varied to comment on ??

Thats good i was about to say hopefully Trev, or Mike will come along & sort it out........

[jonnylovessn8ker]

Some were good at science.......some were good at sports.....( yes & some were good at both ) after this thread i know which i was best at........

girl hunting

wait, you call them birds over there right?

bird hunting then

[trevs1]

I think maybe this is being looked at too closely here.

Weight is only one aspect relating to why a cue does what it does. You could line up 30 different cues of the same weight and very similar specs, only to find that 6 of them were excellent, another 16 were very ordinary and 8 of them were complete garbage.

What can we deduce from weight then?

The simple issue for most players in relation to weight is one that provides a feeling of comfort when we are over the table addressing the ball. What happens when we strike the ball is often another story altogether, and, is in no way going to be definite and predictable performance simply due to the weight being 'correct' for our taste alone.

Generally for snooker, as most will know, a cue needs to be somewhere between 16 and 19 ounces to offer us the ability to play most shots with a degree of ease, although this varies from cue to cue. Some actually like to use above 19oz's, while some can and do use below 16oz's. The problems that can arise through weight are probably most noticeable outside these extremes, but, it's not exactly so in every case.

Many believe that cues with more weight will offer more power, more ability to move the white ball about, and so on. This is an absolute myth and is just not true. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that cues above a certain weight, can and often do make a cue feel a little dead and lacking in response, especially when striking low in the white. Oddly enough, these same cues can tend to have the most incredible power when playing shots with lots of topspin, but again, it's not always the case.

The feel and response a cue can offer is much more to do with the 'overall' package, and not simply a question of how heavy a cue is.

As an exampe, if we had two ash cues of the same specs, length - thickness - weight, etc, then is it fair to argue that they'll behave the same?......no, it isn't.

But.....

I would bet that if one of these cues had a shaft which was made from very hard and heavy timber, and one was of much lighter softer timber, that the one with the softer timber would be more repsonsive than the one with the heavy, hard timber, especially when striking low in the cueball to create backspin.

This one element (shaft density) in one of these otherwise indentical cues, can show how weight is not the be all and end all of cue performance.

[CueAntW147]

girl hunting

wait, you call them birds over there right?

bird hunting then

Yes.......

and some were down the snooker hall when they should have been at school learning............

[RGCirencester]

ahh
you are right in there there has been a 40% loss in acceleration, but that isnt the cue ball, its the cue action.
the vid you showed, referring to 1:32s, of the "dip"

the top part of of the dip, is the moment where the cue tip hits the ball.
the cue ball gone at the bottom of that dip there.

snooker balls are quite frictionless in reality, so we take it our for simplicity's sake.
what matters is that in newton's f = ma
f actually means the total force. his law states that no energy can be created out of nowhere
so f means force of the cue + force of the ball
assuming total force to be 1
before impact
f = force of the cue + force of the ball
1 = 1 + 0
after impact
f = force of the cue + force of the ball
1 = 0 + 1
its quite impossible to lose 40% of force after impact, the deccleration is so great it would kill a human instantly in reality.

to explain why there is the 40% dip.
the simple way to say is that the cue action is still on going. the player was following through. he didnt make a stun shot where his cue action suddenly stops at the moment where tip hits ball. his cue action continued and went on. this is a separate event. because it occured after the impact.

that dip there shows that he had made contact with the ball, and his smooth cue action came to a sudden hault. but that doesnt mean that his acceleration of his cue action stop. it is actually a concept in physics where stationary movement doesnt mean there is stationary acceleration. acceleration and movement are 2 distinct concepts.

thats why if you check if the tangent of the red boxed section at 1:46. it is identical to the tangent at 1:27s. the tangent indicates the rate of acceleration.

i hope this helps. i apologize for the lengthy explanation. im trying to put this in layman terms here.

Very thought provoking post, but I'm still on the fence here. We need more samples at the exact moment the tip hits the ball. Of course the energy has to go somewhere, ie to the cueball, but I'm still not convinced any acceleration happens at the point of contact. momentarily after and before yes, but surely you will decelerate through the ball.

[CueAntW147]

I think maybe this is being looked at too closely here.

Weight is only one aspect relating to why a cue does what it does. You could line up 30 different cues of the same weight and very similar specs, only to find that 6 of them were excellent, another 16 were very ordinary and 8 of them were complete garbage.

What can we deduce from weight then?

The simple issue for most players in relation to weight is one that provides a feeling of comfort when we are over the table addressing the ball. What happens when we strike the ball is often another story altogether, and, is in no way going to be definite and predictable performance simply due to the weight being 'correct' for our taste alone.

Generally for snooker, as most will know, a cue needs to be somewhere between 16 and 19 ounces to offer us the ability to play most shots with a degree of ease, although this varies from cue to cue. Some actually like to use above 19oz's, while some can and do use below 16oz's. The problems that can arise through weight are probably most noticeable outside these extremes, but, it's not exactly so in every case.

Many believe that cues with more weight will offer more power, more ability to move the white ball about, and so on. This is an absolute myth and is just not true. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that cues above a certain weight, can and often do make a cue feel a little dead and lacking in response, especially when striking low in the white. Oddly enough, these same cues can tend to have the most incredible power when playing shots with lots of topspin, but again, it's not always the case.

The feel and response a cue can offer is much more to do with the 'overall' package, and not simply a question of how heavy a cue is.

As an exampe, if we had two ash cues of the same specs, length - thickness - weight, etc, then is it fair to argue that they'll behave the same?......no, it isn't.

But.....

I would bet that if one of these cues had a shaft which was made from very hard and heavy timber, and one was of much lighter softer timber, that the one with the softer timber would be more repsonsive than the one with the heavy, hard timber, especially when striking low in the cueball to create backspin.

This one element (shaft density) in one of these otherwise indentical cues, can show how weight is not the be all and end all of cue performance.

Excellent detailed post as ever..........& explaining the many other factors to consider & that are involved with cues.

I agree more weight doesn't mean more cue power........i find it kills my cue power the heavier a cue is........but interestingly when the cue balls tight on the cushion ......i can play these much better with a heavier cue.......