Cue fitting 101

Cue fitting 101

Post by Mountain Mik » Sun, 17 Jan 1999 04:00:00


Some have advised me not to start this thread. They may be right, but hell,
fear and common sense never stopped me before. So here goes:

Is the reluctance of production cues to offer only limited options in regard
to fitting self-serving? I don't know, but this I do know.

1. 20 years ago George Archer had to play with off the rack clubs. One size
fits all. All great players were 5'9'', 160 lbs or so. (Nickalaus went to
the McGregor factory for fitting early on.)  Experts today say Archer could
have been one of the best with clubs that fit. Today not ONE pro plays with
off the rack clubs.

2. Snooker players use a different cue than pool players. I understand
they're made of ash and use a thinner tip and longer shaft. True? Why?

3. If the above is true (my analogy could be a reach, mind you) then
shouldn't a player use a cue spec'd to his/her size, ability, specific
playing conditions, tempo, and strenght's (and to overcome weaknesses)?

This is not my opinion here mind you, I'm only asking the question. There
are plenty of experts here at RSB that should be able to answer this one
definitely. Thanks. MM^^

 
 
 

Cue fitting 101

Post by Jimbo » Mon, 18 Jan 1999 04:00:00

Hey Mike I will take a stab at it, I have noticed that many players use what
you would think of as unusual cues. For example, it's not uncommon to see a big
guy with a 18 oz cue or a short guy with a 58 inch cue. I think the reasons for
this have to do with a personal feel of the cue. I for one have had cues built
to my specs, I am a tall guy 6'2" and I have my cues built 59 to 60 inches, the
reason being I hate to hold my cue behind the wrap and with shorter cues I find
myself doing this. This being said I have a few expensive cues that I had made
this size and I love to shoot with them, but if all the marbles are on the line
I will grab my Southwest that I bought" off the rack" as you put it. I have
tried to have cues made the same dimensions and weight, but nothing feels the
same. So I say to you that no wood ever acts the same and no cue is ever
balanced the same, and most of all no cue ever hits the same. So I think it
comes down to many things all going into the way a cue FEELS, and if the cue
that you love the feel to is 57 1/2 inches then that's what you will play with.
When you deal with a Human working with organic materials you can never
duplicate FEEL. I know you have ordered a cue and I hope you really like what
you get but again you can never tell how it will feel till you get to hit balls
with it. Good luck with the cue.

Jim <-------Pretend expert.

 
 
 

Cue fitting 101

Post by Jimbo » Mon, 18 Jan 1999 04:00:00

One point I left out of my last post was that most people learn to shoot with a
house cue or an off the rack cue, so they adjust to the universal size. They
never know if they need it longer or shorter or heavier they just learn to
adjust. Then when they buy their first cue they buy a McDermott or a Meucci and
they all come one size again they adjust because this is what they learned to
play pool with. By the time they can afford or justify the cost of a custom
made cue they are set in their ways and just buy what they have been using for
the past few years.

Jim <--Thinks cues aren't like shoes.

 
 
 

Cue fitting 101

Post by Mountain Mik » Mon, 18 Jan 1999 04:00:00

cues aren't like shoes.

Thanks for the input Jimbo. Sound reasonable to me. Don't know why we
haven't heard from the cue makers, though. It's either a boring question
or...............they are protecting their johnsons. Remember, "no pain, no
gain." MM^^

 
 
 

Cue fitting 101

Post by CSmith47 » Mon, 18 Jan 1999 04:00:00

Quote:
>2. Snooker players use a different cue than pool players. I understand
>they're made of ash and use a thinner tip and longer shaft. True? Why?

I would think that snooker players use a smaller diameter shaft because the
cueball is smaller. It would seem that if you used a smaller shaft on a smaller
cueball, parts of the cueball would not be *hidden*.  

Some snooker cues are known as 3/4 cues.  The advantage of this is that the
player can lengthen the cue by simply unscrewing it and using a longer butt.

Clark Smith
Clark Custom Cues
Tacoma, WA

 
 
 

Cue fitting 101

Post by Mountain Mik » Tue, 19 Jan 1999 04:00:00


Quote:
> Mike V wrote;
>>Snooker players use a different cue than pool players. I understand
>>they're made of ash and use a thinner tip and longer shaft. True? Why?

. The snooker shaft is conical as opposed to straight tapered, because

Quote:
>thats the way it's supposed to be. [stab at humour]

Exactly my point. why?
 
 
 

Cue fitting 101

Post by Trubbels » Wed, 20 Jan 1999 04:00:00

 Mike V wrote;

Quote:
>Snooker players use a different cue than pool players. I understand
>they're made of ash and use a thinner tip and longer shaft. True? Why?

Mike,
Traditionally snooker/english billiard cues were constructed from ash, spliced
into a four point hardwood butt, brass ferrule and one piece. Ash produces a
superb "feel" hit. The tip could range from as little as 7 or 8mm [billiards]
to 10.5mm [snooker] [the balls are noticeably smaller though denser] As
supplies of quality aged European ash declined, North American maple was
introduced. As i understand, ash does not fair too well when humidity/temp. are
high. With maple and ease of transport in mind two piece cues were introduced -
no joint ala sneaky pete's. Players weren't too keen on the visible join line
and the three quarter cue with added extension for the 12x6 reach shots became
popular. The snooker shaft is conical as opposed to straight tapered, because
thats the way it's supposed to be. [stab at humour]
 
 
 

Cue fitting 101

Post by Trubbels » Wed, 20 Jan 1999 04:00:00

Quote:
>> Mike V wrote;
>>>Snooker players use a different cue than pool players. I understand
>>>they're made of ash and use a thinner tip and longer shaft. True? Why?

>. The snooker shaft is conical as opposed to straight tapered, because
>>thats the way it's supposed to be. [stab at humour]

>Exactly my point. why?

Mike,
'cause the balls are smaller &  lighter and tapering the shaft is not necessary
for an open bridge.  Did i leave that out?  I'm not going back.