Balance point

[denja]

Each cue has a balance point does this mean that there is a optimum point of grip and bridge hand when the cue will be performing at its best ? eg grip hand father down the butt bridge hand nearer or father away from tip maybe someone could give a insight into balance point. how much influence does it have on your technique ???.

[cueman]

No the balance point is merely the point at where a cue balances if you hold the cue on one finger (be careful) and find the point where the cue balances, this is the position that alters how the cue feels on your bridge hand and in the grip hand. On average most cues balance between 16-18 inches from the butt end, this is seen as the ideal position though its not completely uncommon to find cues at 14-15" or 19-20" though these are not going to feel good for the majority of players, its just what you get used to.

A cue that balances at around 16.5 or less is going to be heavier in feel in the grip and feel fairly light on the bridge hand, the further back that BP is will mean its going to feel much heavier in the grip and even lighter on the bridge hand, this can mean keeping the cue on the bridge is difficult when using power and extremely difficult to cue tight off the cushion.

Conversely a cue that balances around 18" or more is going to feel lighter in the butt end and heavier on shaft and bridge hand. I've not used a cue with a BP at more than 17.5" so I can't really comment at the problems with this type of cue but I should imagine that the feel and touch of the shot are going to be difficult to judge. Really though the BP of any cue is down to preference and is something you try and adapt to. The problems mainly come when you've used a cue for years at a specific BP and then change dramatically from 18 down to 16, its quite a big difference and its often a very overlooked specification when ordering a cue.

[denja]

No the balance point is merely the point at where a cue balances if you hold the cue on one finger (be careful) and find the point where the cue balances, this is the position that alters how the cue feels on your bridge hand and in the grip hand. On average most cues balance between 16-18 inches from the butt end, this is seen as the ideal position though its not completely uncommon to find cues at 14-15" or 19-20" though these are not going to feel good for the majority of players, its just what you get used to.

A cue that balances at around 16.5 or less is going to be heavier in feel in the grip and feel fairly light on the bridge hand, the further back that BP is will mean its going to feel much heavier in the grip and even lighter on the bridge hand, this can mean keeping the cue on the bridge is difficult when using power and extremely difficult to cue tight off the cushion.

Conversely a cue that balances around 18" or more is going to feel lighter in the butt end and heavier on shaft and bridge hand. I've not used a cue with a BP at more than 17.5" so I can't really comment at the problems with this type of cue but I should imagine that the feel and touch of the shot are going to be difficult to judge. Really though the BP of any cue is down to preference and is something you try and adapt to. The problems mainly come when you've used a cue for years at a specific BP and then change dramatically from 18 down to 16, its quite a big difference and its often a very overlooked specification when ordering a cue.

So is it right to assume that the further back the grip hand the more weight is put on the bridge hand and vice versa the less shorter the grip and at the balance point would be equal weight on butt and bridge I remember lessons on the fulcrum many years ago at school.

[Particle Physics]

There are very good reasons why you would wish to have the mass of the cue as far up front as possible. However, you also have to operate the cue, so if it's butt light, it's not going to feel right at first. The ideal situation would be to have more mass at the front of the cue, some in the middle and some at the back. This would be a really good mass distributed cue. The actual balance point refers only to tipping point, not how well distributed the mass is. Mass at the front of the cue would help the tip go through the cue ball easier, reduce judder and vibration. Mass in the centre and rear would help the cue balance and feel right and aid total mass to be the right amount for the shots each player intends to play. Of course, such a cue wouldn't be made of wood and would feel totally different.

[denja]

There are very good reasons why you would wish to have the mass of the cue as far up front as possible. However, you also have to operate the cue, so if it's butt light, it's not going to feel right at first. The ideal situation would be to have more mass at the front of the cue, some in the middle and some at the back. This would be a really good mass distributed cue. The actual balance point refers only to tipping point, not how well distributed the mass is. Mass at the front of the cue would help the tip go through the cue ball easier, reduce judder and vibration. Mass in the centre and rear would help the cue balance and feel right and aid total mass to be the right amount for the shots each player intends to play. Of course, such a cue wouldn't be made of wood and would feel totally different.

I always cue better with my grip further back on the cue and a longer bridge length the cue feels that it sort of flows better. Thanks for your in depth reply.

[Particle Physics]

I always cue better with my grip further back on the cue and a longer bridge length the cue feels that it sort of flows better. Thanks for your in depth reply.

Cheers. I have this idea to ask Ron Dennis at Mclaren to build the ultimate tech cue. Not sure it would play better in the hand, but from an engineering point of view, it would be F1 in design and performance (if a robot used it! lol)

[eaoin11]

There are very good reasons why you would wish to have the mass of the cue as far up front as possible. However, you also have to operate the cue, so if it's butt light, it's not going to feel right at first. The ideal situation would be to have more mass at the front of the cue, some in the middle and some at the back. This would be a really good mass distributed cue. The actual balance point refers only to tipping point, not how well distributed the mass is. Mass at the front of the cue would help the tip go through the cue ball easier, reduce judder and vibration. Mass in the centre and rear would help the cue balance and feel right and aid total mass to be the right amount for the shots each player intends to play. Of course, such a cue wouldn't be made of wood and would feel totally different.

In so many threads recently, you really are making an art form of trying to sound authoritative with long-winded posts that say nothing useful at all. Less is more...

[Gerry Armstrong]

Cheers. I have this idea to ask Ron Dennis at Mclaren to build the ultimate tech cue. Not sure it would play better in the hand, but from an engineering point of view, it would be F1 in design and performance (if a robot used it! lol)

F1 is already in snooker - MW's new joints!!

[Particle Physics]

In so many threads recently, you really are making an art form of trying to sound authoritative with long-winded posts that say nothing useful at all. Less is more...

You need to study some physics to understand why this makes sense. Think of an F1 car. They use weights to balance the car as best they can. A snooker cue is not evenly distributed.

[stejohn]

I don't think its the physics that need to be understood, its the fact that building an F1 car and building a cue are two totally different concepts

[Gerry Armstrong]

Only Tony Drago's cue needs to be built with speed in mind, and that's just him walking around the table!!

[stejohn]

lol, or unless you going to use it as a javelin

[Gerry Armstrong]

I've seen a few cues used as javelins over the years

[sanman]

In so many threads recently, you really are making an art form of trying to sound authoritative with long-winded posts that say nothing useful at all. Less is more...

said quiet well

[Particle Physics]

lol, or unless you going to use it as a javelin

Not far off, the principles are the same. It's a wooden javelin with a tip, travelling through two planes (ideally).