Position Of 3/4 Joints

[Oldgit]

I have just received my latest cue from Trevor White and the joint is at 17in which I asked for on purpose so that the cue would fit inside my old specially made Cheddar Classics case.

The joint is at 17in and the (maple shafted) cue only weighs 17.25 oz which is what I asked for and nicely balanced at about 17.25 in so I wondered what influenced cuemakers to position their 3/4 joined cue joints?

I have seen joins at 12in, 14in, 16in, 17in and even higher. Maybe Trevor White or Mike Wooldridge can answer this question.

Is is cost (higher the join, the more expensive ebony etc)? Balance? Weight? Looks? Just be interested to know from a cue makers perspective?

My own choice is for a join to be as high as possible so that the case can be as small as possible!!

Oldgit

[trevs1]

next cue.....centre joint???

[Oldgit]

next cue.....centre joint???

Well, here was I thinking 'I wish that the great man himself, the famous Trevor White' would answer this very serious question.....and then......!!

Yes, I suppose I asked for that but the reason that the centre join cues were once so popular and have now been superseded by the 3/4 join cues is due to the superior playing attributes of a 3/4 joined cue.

So come on, 'oh wise one' why did nearly all the cuemakers settle on putting the join at 16in rather than, say, 15in or 17in..........?

Oldgit

[Oldgit]

by the way, I noticed that the new cue that Mark Williams is using at the moment (Parris????) has got the join above the splicings actually on the shaft of the cue, like Ronnie tried a couple of seasons ago. (the cue he gave away to the young lad at the Crucible)

[gloveman]

joint position

well oldgit its probably down weight distribution and 16 inches being where most players prefer a bit of extra weight for balance. i suppose at the end of the day its all down to personal preference.

[trevs1]

Well Mike,

I'm just sorting a few deliveries right now, but I'll send you a mail later with my thoughts on it.

If anyone else is interested in my thoughts on it, I'll also post something here later.

Ta.

[poolqjunkie]

Yes, I am very interested, if you would please. thank you.

About the joint being placed above the points. Does the line up of the ash grains go off line over time?

It is a bit off topic, but I also wonder why does most cues I have seen have even points if you look at the tips of the points, but the lower parts of the points are not even?

Why is the hand splicing method used more often or valued more than butterfly splicing? I notice that with butterfly splicing cues, the points seem to be quite even both top and bottom.

[fudgeflaps]

I'll just post a theory; I don't know the DEFINITE answer from a cue-maker's perspective.

One-piece is the ideal situation in terms of uniformity and straightness of a cue.

I think 3/4, as opposed to central joints, allow for more/ a greater length of the business end of the cue to be uniform, straight and composed of the same material ie all wood an no 'butt', and thus replicating the one-piece cue a bit more faithfully. With the joint, portability is, obviously, endowed too.

I hope the above makes sense!

The variability in the position of 3/4 joints maybe down to the relative length of 'pure wood' to 'butt' composition of the overall cue.

Nonetheless, it would be good to hear the answer behind it.

[poolqjunkie]

I have heard many times that a one piece cue is the ideal. But is it necessarily so?

Isn't the balance and taper of a cue the key to the hit? If so, then how about a well balanced two piece half jointed cue, like lots of cues made in the US? Are they not as good of a player as a one piece if they were to be made into a one piece?

Some people also suggest that wood to wood joint is the best in the US, and they do not like a joint that is completly made of metal, such as a brass joint used on most snooker cues. The theory is similiar to that of a one piece being the best--they think wood to wood contact allows better feedback, even though wood to wood joint is more vulnerable to moisture and temperature variation and move more.

I have been wrong many times before, and I could be wrong again here. But I think if a cue is well balanced, with a nice taper (butt and shaft), then whether it has a metal joint, 3/4, 1/2 or whatever should not really matter.

I suspect the length of the butt piece is adjusted for good balance of the cue. I also think perhaps some believe that a longer piece of ebony will enforce the integrity of the cue as a whole--but then, a shorter butt piece with longer point length can also achieve that, can it?

[fudgeflaps]

I have heard many times that a one piece cue is the ideal. But is it necessarily so?

Theoretically, I would say it is the ideal case but in practical terms of today's cue advances, your 3/4 is easily as straight as a one-piece.

Two-piece cues were introduced in the mid-70's with John Spencer using a two-piece (central joint); these days, though, the proof is in the pudding that there is something in 3/4 being superior in some way to centre joint, as most professional players who have converted from one-piece, or, for that matter, MOST or ANY professional snooker players use 3/4 joints. There must be something significant in that, IMO.

Also the fact that there are a lot of central-joint 2-pieces in professional pool, which leads me to think that either there is greater accuracy (albeit small) with 3/4, or it has something to do with the impact upon striking the ball as pool balls are much heavier to strike. It may also boil down to the thickness of the shaft with respect to weight distribution; pool cues are thicker at the tip, and bulkier in general.

Who knows?

[poolqjunkie]

If looking at what most pros play with is an indication, as most of them are playing with 3/4 joints, then why are so many people saying one piece is the best?

On the other hand, most pro players could be using what they are used to, or what they were told to use, or what their idol used when they started playing, it does not necessarily mean that 3/4 is better than 1/2 because most pros are using them. Besides, who is to say they would not switch to a 1/2 if one that hits great is to be presented to them. Is there any UK cue maker known to specialized in making great hitting 2 piece cues? I am not awared of any. Is it possible to build 1/2 cues that plays excellent? I would think so.

John Spencer played with a 2 piece, but I do not believe him to be the first pro. Before him, Joe Davis also converted to using a 2 piece from his one piece after meeting George Chenier from Canada. Cliff Thorburn, Kirk Stevens, and Bill Webernuk (sp?) all played with a 2 piece when they were competing in the UK.

Actually, I am not trying to start an agrument for the sake of aguring. I just want to know is there any proven science behind the belief that one piece offers the best hit?

[fudgeflaps]

Actually, I am not trying to start an agrument for the sake of aguring. I just want to know is there any proven science behind the belief that one piece offers the best hit?

Sure, I'm with you, nor am I looking for pointless argument.

I'm merely putting forward what I think, which may be total garbage- we need a post from one of the cue-makers.

According to Clive Everton, John Spencer was the first pro to convert to 2-piece and use it in pro competition; the Canadians followed soon after (for snooker).

[poolqjunkie]

You are probably right. I remember reading about Joe Davis meeting George Chenier and changing to a 2 piece cue. It could be from Joe davis's book, or some other articles--but I could be wrong, as I have been many times before.

Yes, I would like to hear what the expert cue makers think.

[Aussie8Ball]

I'd be very interested to hear opinions on this particular topic, how much the joint position changes the way the cue plays.

I've only ever used a centre jointed cue, mainly because I own a Mini and I can't get anything else in the boot. I don't think it would affect the play too much - a good centre jointed cue should play better than a poorly made one piece. I think what it affects the most is the balance of the cue, and if you're used to something (centre, 3/4 or one piece) you'll probably get the best results from sticking to what you're used.

[Oldgit]

I think a lot of the top pros who play with one piece cues have been playing with the same cue for so many years that they would never risk putting a joint in as then they could change the characteristics.....which is what happened to Ronnie a couple of seasons ago. Pros who have used the same (one piece) cue for most of their careers or just prefer one piece cues are Peter Ebdon, Shaun Murphy, Graham Dott (the Andy Gibb cue that he achieved success with), John Higgins, Ding Junhui, Stephen Maguire, Joe Swail and of course Ronnie Osullivan.

Oldgit