F=ma Applied to a Billiards Cue

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tmlesko
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Applied Billiards F=ma
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the application of the formula F=ma to the physics of using a billiards cue, particularly in the context of breaking a rack of billiards balls. Participants explore whether the weight of the cue affects the force applied to the cue ball and consider various factors that may influence performance, including player strength and biomechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the weight of the cue does matter when breaking, as a heavier cue may apply more force to the cue ball, but question whether other factors also play a role.
  • Others argue that the optimum weight of the cue depends on the player's strength and ability to generate speed and momentum, suggesting a balance between cue weight and player biomechanics.
  • A later reply suggests that the question may be more about biomechanics than pure physics, emphasizing the importance of player capability in using different cue weights effectively.
  • Another participant introduces the idea of analyzing the situation from a kinetic energy perspective, noting that the energy transfer from the cue to the cue ball is significant.
  • One post mentions that while lighter cues may allow for more control in finesse shots, heavier cues could provide more speed with less effort, though this is subjective and varies by individual.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the importance of cue weight and its effects on performance, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence on individual player characteristics, such as strength and technique, and the potential influence of cue design features like endmass and squirt, which remain unresolved in the discussion.

tmlesko
Messages
2
Reaction score
1
TL;DR
Is it correct to apply F=MA to answer the question: can a heavier cue stick apply more force in breaking a rack of billiards balls? Assuming all material factors remain the same, there any other factors involved?
Many years ago, I was asked if the weight of a billiards cue matters when breaking a rack of billiards balls. I.e. does a heavier cue apply more force to the cue ball. (typically the range of a break cue is 18-25 oz.) So, probably obviously, I used the formula F=MA as an explanation. RecentlyI was asked that question again, and I am left wondering, given that the materials and other elements remain constant, if I am correct? Would any other factors enter in?

Thanks, new member here.

Tom L.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
:welcome:

I suggest there is an optimum weight of cue depending on the strength of the player and their power and speed characteristics.

If a cue is too light, then it may be difficult to give it sufficient momentum. And if it's too heavy, then the player may struggle to move it quickly enough.

Any sophisticated model would have to take the player's biomechanics into account.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jbriggs444, berkeman, russ_watters and 1 other person
It's not really a physics question here, it's a biomechanics question, because the question depends on how well you can use a heavier versus lighter cue.

The outcome you want is that the cue ball travels faster, but without sacrificing precision. A heavier cue will probably be better as long as you are strong enough to accelerate it to the same speed as the lighter one, with the same precision, and the cue is similarly rigid. A great big gorilla of a bloke is going to see more improvement from a heavier cue than a lightly built kid because he'll be able to accelerate it fast while the kid might struggle to provide the power accurately.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe, rather than F=ma, the problem could be viewed from a kinetic energy perspective. The energy of the cue is transferred to the cue ball, that is then shared or cascaded to many balls on the table.
 
Somebody studied the physics of it. There is a URL at the end of the document that explains in more detail the impact of the physiological factors and personal techniques involved.

https://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2015/oct15.pdf said:
For your main playing cue, you should use whatever weight feels most comfortable. Different weights can produce slightly different results; but with practice, one can get accustomed to a cue of any weight. You will learn to adjust your stroke as necessary to achieve the range of cue speeds appropriate for different shots. The only shots for which cue weight can make a significant different are power shots (e.g., an extreme power draw, or the break shot), as discussed later in the article.

In general, a lighter cue will allow more control over finesse shots, and a heavier cue will allow more cue ball (CB) speed with less apparent stroke effort. A heavier cue might also be easier for some people to keep on line during the stroke, but this is a very individual thing. Also, a heavier cue might tend to have a shaft with more endmass (the weight of the portion of the shaft closest to the tip); although, this isn't necessarily the case. If it is, the heavier cue will create more squirt (AKA "cue ball deflection"), which can have both advantages and disadvantages for different people.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman, russ_watters, anorlunda and 1 other person
PeroK said:
:welcome:

I suggest there is an optimum weight of cue depending on the strength of the player and their power and speed characteristics.

If a cue is too light, then it may be difficult to give it sufficient momentum. And if it's too heavy, then the player may struggle to move it quickly enough.

Any sophisticated model would have to take the player's biomechanics into account.
Thank you, much appreciated.

Tom L.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
837
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 96 ·
4
Replies
96
Views
15K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K