USPPA ban on jump cues
Bob Johnson
"The USPPA & The Sands Regency are pleased to announce that Jump Cues will
no longer be allowed in any USPPA or Reno Open Events for the forseeable
future. While Jump Cues will continue to be allowed on the premises for
match play games that are private in nature, all Novelty Cues will no longer
be allowed in Tournament Play.
Players are encouraged to shoot jump shots with their playing cue or break
cue only. The USPPA Plans to implement this system wide after the December
'04 Events. Independent Tournament Directors have had the right to do so at
all times and may begin to do so at their discretion.
Regards
USPPA Management "
Where it says "players are encouraged to shoot jump shots with their playing
cue or break cue only" does it mean a jump/break combination cue is now
illegal, and considered a novelty cue? Can you not use a combination cue at
all, or can you use it but not in jump configuration?
--
Bob Johnson, Denver, Co.
bo...@cris.com
JAM
Jump Cues will no longer be allowed in any USPPA or Reno Open events for the
foreseeable future...."
After reading scores of posts and seeing several polls on the topic of jump
cues, why is this?
Some pool players who have been playing professionally for more than 10 years
are of the opinion that it takes more skill to play WITHOUT a jump cue than it
does to play WITH one.
It is thought in some circles that when a good player screws up, jump cues ruin
perfect safetys, and the luck factor comes into play as opposed to genuine
skill.
JAM (Two-shot/push-out on the come?)
lfigueroa
hey, John.
You're up.
Lou Figueroa
"JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20040204170509...@mb-m15.aol.com...
John Barton
cue ARE part of the game. They will change their minds when the players
demand the cue. Even the US Open last year allowed jump cues.
It's not my fight anymore. I won't pay a dime to any organization that
completely discounts a legitmate part of the industry so the USPPA and the
Reno tournaments will never get any of my business.
It's funny how they will "allow" people to use them in action games (as if
they could stop it) but not in the tournament. Stupid, stupid stupid.
There is not ONE tournament director or league that has given even ONE good
reason for not allowing jump cues. Not one. Oh, they THINK their reasons
are good but every one I have ever heard is easily refuted. I can only
imagine the reasoning here.
Screw them. There are lots of businesses that make all or part of their
revenue from jump cues. Bunjee has put approxiamately $30,000 back into
pool over the last four years. The USPPA is a small time operation with
small minded people at the helm if they think that this decision is
signifigant.
This is my OPINION. I ain't concerned about getting customers. I don't sell
jump cues for a living anymore. The PLAYERS will buy the jump cues because
they know that today's jump cues are essential to a complete game. They
know that having a jump cue adds another range of shots to their arsenal.
They know that small-minded TD's and league ops aren't part of real pool and
real pool includes jump cues.
So USPPA, I hope that this post firmly entrenches you to the idea of banning
jump cues permanently. It just shows that you are out of touch with real
pool and real pool players and eventually that ignorance will unravel your
league.
Sincerely,
John Barton - whose jump cues have been used to win hundreds of thousands of
dollars in professional and amateur play. Including $50,000 by Fong Pang
Chao in the Challenge of Champions and $65,000 in the World Championships.
Whose jump cues are not good enough for the USPPA. And one last little
thing, your two-time Reno Open Champion John Horsfall uses a jump cue.
Must've been the novelty cue that won and not him.
(howzzat Lou?)
"lfigueroa" <lfig...@att.net> wrote in message
news:mweUb.55627$6O4.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Dan White
news:zOydnYUupe-...@centurytel.net...
> There is not ONE tournament director or league that has given even ONE
good
> reason for not allowing jump cues. Not one. Oh, they THINK their reasons
> are good but every one I have ever heard is easily refuted. I can only
> imagine the reasoning here.
>
My comment here is probably really more about jump shots than jump cues, but
fewer jump cues means fewer jump shots attempted, so it goes hand in hand.
I think you could argue legitimately against jump cues on philosophical
reasons. Pool is a "two dimensional" game (ok, ok, you get my point don't
be too technical) in that it is really meant to be played on the surface of
the table. I think of it a little like standard chess vs that gimmicky 3-D
chess where you have 3 chess boards suspended one above the other, and you
can move your pieces from one board to another, adding a 3-D element to a
traditionally 2-D game.
I just think the game is more interesting when played on the surface of the
table. Another analogy comes to mind in that old video game with the
spaceship and the asteroids (I guess it was called "Asteroid.") When your
spaceship is about to be hit by an asteroid you just hit the hyperspace
button, and you jump magically to another part of the screen...a get out of
jail free card, if you will. That's the jump shot.
I know people's professions and livelihood come into play when tournaments
start banning certain equipment, but I don't think that has any bearing on
the legitimacy of any particular tournament either allowing or disallowing
jump cues. This assumes they are not just doing it to hold a grudge against
somebody, of course.
JMO,
dwhite
Tjander Nathoeni
> I think you could argue legitimately against jump cues on philosophical
> reasons. Pool is a "two dimensional" game (ok, ok, you get my point don't
> be too technical) in that it is really meant to be played on the surface of
> the table. I think of it a little like standard chess vs that gimmicky 3-D
> chess where you have 3 chess boards suspended one above the other, and you
> can move your pieces from one board to another, adding a 3-D element to a
> traditionally 2-D game.
>
> I just think the game is more interesting when played on the surface of the
> table. Another analogy comes to mind in that old video game with the
> spaceship and the asteroids (I guess it was called "Asteroid.") When your
> spaceship is about to be hit by an asteroid you just hit the hyperspace
> button, and you jump magically to another part of the screen...a get out of
> jail free card, if you will. That's the jump shot.
In snooker where jumpshot that are meant to clear impeding balls are
illegal, people like Alan 'Angles' McManus are famous for their ability
to get out of snookers. Alain Robidoux is pretty good too. I once saw a
5
cushion escape with half of the balls on the table!
BTW, a REALLY good safety blocks all possible shot even jump shots...
and THAT is so challenging about the game of pocket billiards, it either
being pool or snooker. I'm not much of a player but it just gives me
a rush when safety's and escapes work well for me.. that's the beauty of
the game.. those finesses.
Not that I am against jumps. In pool the rules deliberately state that
you are allowed to make the cueball jump as long as you hit on the top
half. It is the same as playing 'wrong-handed', no rule prohibits it
so it is legal... even if some people think it is unfair.
Cheers,
Tjander
9b4me
> Bob Johnson posts: On the AZBilliards website - '...pleased to announce that
> Jump Cues will no longer be allowed in any USPPA or Reno Open events for the
> foreseeable future...."
>
What about a not so perfect safety when the shooter missed his shot
and just plain got a lucky roll and hooked his opponent where there is
no reasonable kick shot available. I think that jump shots add quite
a bit of excitement to 9 ball especially to the spectators who are not
pro players and are just watching good pool.
I don't shoot with a short jump cue because I learned to shoot jump
shots with my break cue using a phenolic tip. I like kick shots and
i've gotten descent at them over the years, but sometimes when a ball
is near a pocket I have a better chance of making the next ball with a
jump shot versus kicking at the ball.
Jholly
Steve.
> It's funny how they will "allow" people to use them in action games (as if
> they could stop it) but not in the tournament. Stupid, stupid stupid.
>
Well, of course John, that's the point they can't stop them there so
they don't. The Sands I suppose could restrict them from the property,
but the sanctioning body couldn't restrict them form non-sanctioned
events.
> There is not ONE tournament director or league that has given even ONE good
> reason for not allowing jump cues. Not one. Oh, they THINK their reasons
> are good but every one I have ever heard is easily refuted. I can only
> imagine the reasoning here.
They don't need to give a reason! It is their tournament and they can
do as they damn well please, just as you can damn well choose not to
attend.
> They know that small-minded TD's and league ops aren't part of real pool and
> real pool includes jump cues.
"Real pool", what is that? "Real pool" is in the mind of the beholder
and for some people "real pool" doesn't include jump cues.
> ... Whose jump cues are not good enough for the USPPA. And one last little
> thing, your two-time Reno Open Champion John Horsfall uses a jump cue.
> Must've been the novelty cue that won and not him.
>
Don't take everything so personal John, a very good argument can be
made that jump cues change the nature of the game and depending on
your point of view that change can be good or bad.
Just imagine, if you will, MLB allowing aluminum and/or ceramic
baseball bats. Christ every little .225 hitting 2nd baseman would
become a significant home run hitter and true power hitters would be
crushing the ball every time at bat. Don't you think that would hurt
the game of baseball. But by your argument the sactioning body of MLB
should not have the right to ban any type of bat.
I think the game of pool ("real" or otherwise) is better without jump
cues. Now you feel otherwise, that's fine, but man your "holier than
thou" attitude can be real irritating sometimes.
Steve. <- Can jump pretty good with my Mike Webb break shaft.
JAM
without jump cues."
I remember when the guy who made the Sledgehammer pulled KM aside at the Open
and handed him this break/jump cue stick and said, "Come on over to this table
and try it, Keith."
Now, previous to this life-defining moment for KM, he would grimace and growl
every time an opponent would reach into their case and pull out this magic wand
and ruin his safeties.
Keith placed a couple of balls close to the side pocket and then took aim on
the cue-ball. He made it first try, and immediately grinned from ear to ear
and said, "I've got to get me one of these." Then, like a kid, KM contined to
jump and jump and jump like he had just discovered a new toy. He didn't want
to leave the tournament room, even though they were breaking down the tables,
because he was enjoying this Sledgehammer and the fact that he could jump the
ball so easily.
Most of the anti-jump cue rhetoric I hear comes from older pool players who
enjoyed the two-shot/push-out rules and being able to make a spot shot and
getting perfect leave. Because KM grew up in this era, he was not very
receptive to the advent of the jump cue.
Having said that, every time somebody leaves KM a safety which provides a
jumping opportunity, he now runs to his case and grabs his Sledgehammer and,
still grinning from ear to ear every time he uses it, he successfully pockets
the ball, I'd say, about 80 percent of the time. He loves his jump cue.
I am puzzled by the USPPA ban. Why are they prohibiting jump cues, but
allowing one to jump with their break and/or shooting cue?
Do the jump cue cause damage to the equipment? It's baffling that they are
going to allow one to jump balls, but not use a jump cue. This is what is
confusing (IMO) about the ban.
If pool were to return to the two-shot/push-out way of life, KM wouldn't mind
it a bit, but if a tournament is going to allow one to jump balls, why can't a
player use an instrument, i.e., a jump cue, that is designed to do such?
What is the purpose of banning jump cues if one is still allowed to jump balls?
That is what is baffling (IMO).
JAM
lfigueroa
Lou Figueroa
forced to buy a jump cue
purely out of self defense
"John Barton" <inst...@instroke.com> wrote in message
news:zOydnYUupe-...@centurytel.net...
John Barton
"Dan White" <dwh...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:4021ed52$0$8375$61fe...@news.rcn.com...
The analogy doesn't fit. With Asteroids you NEVER knew where the ship was
going to end up. You could hyperspace right on top of another asterroid.
The jump shot is like any other shot in the game, an element that can be
controlled to achieve the desired results.
>
> I know people's professions and livelihood come into play when tournaments
> start banning certain equipment, but I don't think that has any bearing on
> the legitimacy of any particular tournament either allowing or disallowing
> jump cues. This assumes they are not just doing it to hold a grudge
against
> somebody, of course.
When a tournament or league disallows a perfectly good piece of equipment
that does NO harm to any other piece of equipment and gives no unfair
advantage (i.e. does not measure, aim or take the shot) over the opponent
then why ban it? I have a Tim Scruggs sneaky pete that jumps balls up to
about six inches away, it is just one of those regular cues that jumps
really well. Should it be banned as well because my opponent chooses to
shoot with a Meucci?
>
> JMO,
> dwhite
>
And mine,
John
Patrick Johnson
JAM:
> What is the purpose of banning jump cues if one is still allowed to jump balls?
> That is what is baffling (IMO).
You're allowed to break hard, but you can't use a compressed air cue
ball cannon to do it. Why not?
(Baffling...)
Pat Johnson
Chicago
John Barton
"Tjander Nathoeni" <t.nat...@its.tudelft.nl> wrote in message
news:40221A5...@its.tudelft.nl...
That's correct. In Snooker however, there is no requirement to hit a rail
after contact and a foul does not result in ball-in-hand anywhere on the
table. You still see plenty of incredible kick shots when jump cues are in
play . I would say that after jump cues have been in use for a decade the
level of safety play will be so good that you will see players doing more
kick shots. Jump cues FORCE a better game.
John
JAM
piece of equipment that does NO harm to any other piece of equipment and gives
If the jump cue "does NO harm to any other piece of equipment" and "gives no
unfair advantage," it begs the question: WHY then, pray tell, did the USPPA
ban jump cues?
JAM (Hoping it's not political)
Mike Page
jama...@aol.comnojunk (JAM) wrote:
[...]
> I am puzzled by the USPPA ban. Why are they prohibiting jump cues, but
> allowing one to jump with their break and/or shooting cue?
>
> Do the jump cue cause damage to the equipment? It's baffling that they are
> going to allow one to jump balls, but not use a jump cue. This is what is
> confusing (IMO) about the ban.
>
> If pool were to return to the two-shot/push-out way of life, KM wouldn't mind
> it a bit, but if a tournament is going to allow one to jump balls, why can't
> a
> player use an instrument, i.e., a jump cue, that is designed to do such?
>
> What is the purpose of banning jump cues if one is still allowed to jump
> balls?
> That is what is baffling (IMO).
>
> JAM
I don't know the answer to the first question (why ban jump cues?). I
think the game is fine with jump cues, and it is fine without them also.
But I think I know the answer to the second question. It is really
really important to have rules that avoid questioning a player's intent.
To jump a corner of a ball with a full cue often requires just being
slightly jacked up and shooting hard. There's no bright line in
deciding what's a jump shot and what isn't. A rule banning full-cue
jump shots would be very difficult to enforce.
John Barton
Once again things like the leather tip come to mind. I am sure that at one
time this was considered by some to the nefarious end of billiards.
Of course any tournament can do as it pleases and so can I. If I had the
cash I would do quite a bit to disrupt other people's lives who annoy me. I
am THAT petulant. I would try to disrupt their business as they are doing
to all those who make a living from jump cues.
The MLB certainly does have the right to ban any bat they chose. The BCA
and the VNEA have both specified what a jump cue should be and all the jump
cue manufacturers have complied. I am all for banning equipment that does
harm and gives unfair advantages. Because it is impractical to continue
building bigger baseball parks to accomodate bats that allow a hitter to get
an extra 500 feet it is logical that the bat specifications must be defined.
The old jump rods were made so that literally anyone with half a stroke
could pound on the ball and make it jump. The balls were getting damaged,
the cloth was getting damaged and the lack of control of the cueball had
nothing to do with pool. This is why the specs were defined by
organizations that are bigger and have been around longer than the USPPA.
In my opinion, it is impertinent for the USPPA to go against the rest of the
country and the world on this issue. But, as you said, it's their thing.
You may feel that the game is better without jump cues which is fine. I
don't care whether there are jump cues or not. I will play either way. The
thing is that the USPPA is not banning jump shots, just jump cues. So who
is going to police this? Who is going to determine what is a jump cue and
what isn't. I can play pool with my jump.break cue and it certainly jumps
balls better than about 95% of so-called regular cues out there. Would you
agree with a rule that stated that everyone MUST play with a 19.5 Valley
house cue so that any chance of an advantage due to cue construction is
eliminated? Mike Webb took his time to develop what he considers a better
break shaft. How would you feel if such break shafts a'la Webb/Sledgehammer
were deemed illegal? Wouldn't you feel a twinge of regret for the money you
spent and perhaps a little sympathy for Mike Gulyassy and Mike Webb's
investments?
Not personal. Practical.
John
"Steve." <rsb-asp...@s-c-ellis.com> wrote in message
news:54be6c92.04020...@posting.google.com...
John Barton
instrument would be mechanically operated. In the case of a jump cue it it
simply an instrument that must be used in the same manner as a pool cue.
The player is responsible for stroke speed, spin and accuracy of hit not the
device.
John
"Patrick Johnson" <patrick.jo...@THIScomcast.net> wrote in message
news:1024kte...@news.supernews.com...
John Barton
> great job. bravo.
>
> Lou Figueroa
> forced to buy a jump cue
> purely out of self defense
I hear this a lot and I wonder why you think this. You buy a jump cue to
give yourself more options and to give your opponent more to think about
when playing safe. So a jump cue purchase is done for offensive reasons and
not defensive reasons.
John
John Barton
?????
John
"JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20040205093616...@mb-m07.aol.com...
john mcchesney
Let me remind you of a time a few scant years ago when the jump rods were
present in tournament play ( less than 40" in length and tips of about
20-25mm ).
We outlawed them on the McDermott Tour ( but gave the rod-cuemakers 1 full
year to comply so as to allow them to sell the inventory and make the new
size, etc. ) When we announced the ban on the rods via press releases, trade
show circulars and a re-write of that section of the rules, we ( and the ACA
& BCA ) announced the newly developed jump cue dimension specifications that
would be allowed in future tournament play as follows:
( and also be advised that the Texas Express membership of 50,000+ players,
BCA of 50+ players and the influence of the ACA certainly outweighed the
current ban being imposed by such a minority as a single tournament in
Reno ) ( makes one wonder if some of the players have put the pressure on
the promoter/Reno because the either don't have a legit jump cue or simply
can not or have not learned to use one ?? )
Per Texas Express general Rules ( www.texasexpress.com ) as follows:
"The cues may not be less than 40" in overall length and the shaft size must
not be exceed 16 mm at the tip. The tip must be leather or any product
deemed suitable for play by the tournament director. There is no minimum or
maximum weight for the cue; no maximum length; and no exclusion of material
for the ferrule, shaft, or butt of the cue. Any material deemed unsuitable
for play that may cause damage to the equipment may be excluded from play by
the tournament director."
Obviously, the ACA and BCA rules on the equipment are written slightly
different, but carry the same or similar message.
The reason for the change from the rods to the aforementioned 40" cues was
and is to attempt to put in place a set of standards and guidelines that
would assist in the possible prevention of table damage, i.e., torn cloth,
etc.
Those rod-cuemakers at the time agreed and thus the 40" jump cue was born,
i.e., frog, bungee and a host of others ...
Our ( Texas Express ) position on this is as follows: The Reno people who
have banned the jump cues certainly have that right. However, what were
their motives ? I doubt seriously that is was to prevent equipment damage ..
but it is likely that it is due to someone assuming ( through some
pressure ) that those who have mastered the use of the jump cues have some
sort of "advantage" over those who do not use them. THEY DO
This is no different than the long putters used on the golf tour ...
The jump cue is a legitimate part of the game .. has a 10+ year history in
tournament play .. lends to increased excitment .. is another hand-eye
regimen that has to be mastered in order to be applicable .. and many, many
players have and use them and many, many cuemakers build and sell them ..
SO, LET THEM BE USED !!! They have passed the test of time, don't hurt
tables or cloth, have created excitment, created needed sales and business
in the industry and in some cases ... have closed or made closer the skill
gap between the top players and those with less skill(s).
John McChesney
CEO
Texas Express
"Mike Page" <mike...@ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote in message
news:mike.page-BE21B...@news.supernews.com...
Nat
who annoy me. I
> am THAT petulant. I would try to disrupt their business as they are doing
> to all those who make a living from jump cues.
THAT sounds just a tad mean-spirited.
Nat
JAM
(through some pressure ) that those who have mastered the use of the jump cues
have some sort of 'advantage' over those who do not use them ...."
Somebody told me that the East Coast could never beat the West Coast. So the
East Coast changed the rules of two-shot/push-out so they could win, and 9-ball
evolved into a game of luck thereafter.
Sounds like the West Coast now can't beat the East Coast with the jump cues,
and so they are going change the rules to "can only jump without a jump cue."
A real puzzler.
JAM
John Barton
and put AT&T and other telecom companies out of business as well.
Dreamin'
John
"Nat" <nat...@REMOVETHIScenturytel.net> wrote in message
news:QeSdneGPtL7...@centurytel.net...
ratchet
20-30 %) and can get over the ball about 50-60 % now but I am improving , Just
before I quit the game in 94 people were jumping with just shafts in my area ,
Now when I started playing again in 03 everyone is getting jump sticks to be in
the *in crowd* even if they dont know how to use one !! But they are learning
unfortunately it is at our local shooting establishments expense ie: Table
Felts,
they are getting tore up by people who have no idea how to play the game itself
I have a Lucasi Jumper and I love it !!! So what, if people can jump let them
jump
it does add a whole new dimension to the game for people like me , Let the BIG
BOYS learn some better defenses against the jump !!! I hate to hear the purists
whine about it , if thats what they want the pure game then why don't we just
all go back to the beginnings of pool and play just that game !!I don't think so
!!
>> Ratchet <<
Rob
Isn't this the equivalent of the PGA saying, "We welcome your playing
in our tournaments; however, players may only use drivers to hit each
shot"?
Rob
Patrick Johnson
>>You're allowed to break hard, but you can't use a compressed air cue
>>ball cannon to do it. Why not?
John:
> Because such a device would conceivably damage the equipment.
One obvious reason to consider banning new equipment is whether or not
it changes some previously highly skilled aspect of the game into
something that almost anybody can do. Even saying it requires new kinds
of skills doesn't answer the original concern that it diminishes or
eliminates some others that already existed.
The issue, unfortunately, can't be dismissed with simpler questions like
"will it cause damage?", "is it a mechanical device" or "is the result
legal?". Some judgment is required, and reasonable people will differ.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Patrick Johnson
> ... LET THEM BE USED !!! They have passed the test of time, don't hurt
> tables or cloth, have created excitment, created needed sales and business
> in the industry and in some cases ... have closed or made closer the skill
> gap between the top players and those with less skill(s).
You included that last part (about closing the skill gap) as if it's
another reason to allow jump cues, but it's actually the main objection
people have to them.
With today's technology devices could probably be invented that would
make playing professional caliber pool easy for neophytes -- but that's
not what we want for the game, is it? So the question can and SHOULD be
asked: does this "new" device go too far in that direction?
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Martin
unappealling to me. They have provided suppliers with an opportunity
to make and sell something that is at marginally useful at
best(anybody see one of those newfangled rubber shock absorbers at the
end of a cue yet?). I own a very nice jump cue but haven't had it out
of the case for over a year. I prefer to kick or masse most of the
time. Infrequently, I have jumped or attempted to jump with my
playing cue. Admittedly I could become more skillful with the jump
cue but I don't feel compelled to do so at this point.
In the USPPA tournaments I play in, I do see some higher rated players
(120+) use a jump cue on occasion. It seems to me, however,that the
jump cue and jump shafts are relied upon with greater frequency by
lower rated players, especialy those below 70 speed. I can live
happily and play whether jump cues are banned or not.
Martin
"John Barton" <inst...@instroke.com> wrote in message news:<2f2dnaXJhaj...@centurytel.net>...
Mike Page
jazz...@lycos.com (Martin) wrote:
> IMO, jump cues add a "gimmick" element to the game that is very
> unappealling to me. They have provided suppliers with an opportunity
> to make and sell something that is at marginally useful at
> best(anybody see one of those newfangled rubber shock absorbers at the
> end of a cue yet?). I own a very nice jump cue but haven't had it out
> of the case for over a year. I prefer to kick or masse most of the
> time. Infrequently, I have jumped or attempted to jump with my
> playing cue. Admittedly I could become more skillful with the jump
> cue but I don't feel compelled to do so at this point.
>
> In the USPPA tournaments I play in, I do see some higher rated players
> (120+) use a jump cue on occasion. It seems to me, however,that the
> jump cue and jump shafts are relied upon with greater frequency by
> lower rated players, especialy those below 70 speed. [...]
You have to be careful making this comparison. It may be true that
weaker players are jump-happy, but it's also true that weaker players
hook themselves much more frequently.
Pat Hall
Mike Page wrote:
>>In the USPPA tournaments I play in, I do see some higher rated players
>>(120+) use a jump cue on occasion. It seems to me, however,that the
>>jump cue and jump shafts are relied upon with greater frequency by
>>lower rated players, especialy those below 70 speed. [...]
>
>
> You have to be careful making this comparison. It may be true that
> weaker players are jump-happy, but it's also true that weaker players
> hook themselves much more frequently.
Thats for sure. One of the best "jumpers" I know is not a very good
player. Hooks himself all the time. Alot of us will play safe against
him by avoiding a jump situation. He's a lot better at jump shots than
he is at long green stroke shots.
PatH
John Barton
think they do. On the contrary, they will hinder anyone who tries to use
them as some sort of "magic wand" and neglects the other skills needed to
play good pool.
John
"Patrick Johnson" <patrick.jo...@THIScomcast.net> wrote in message
news:1024uku...@news.supernews.com...
John Barton
"Martin" <jazz...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:2edb2095.04020...@posting.google.com...
> IMO, jump cues add a "gimmick" element to the game that is very
> unappealling to me. They have provided suppliers with an opportunity
> to make and sell something that is at marginally useful at
> best
Fong Pong Chao won $50,000 using a Bunjee Jumper in the last game of the
Challenge of Champions. Allen Hopkins, the commentator, rightfully pointed
out that Bustamante could have played a different safety that would have
eliminated the jump shot and practically assured him of victory. Thorsten
Hohman played a push shot to a jump shot in the finals of the World
Championships and then made the shot when it was handed back to him. I
can't begin to enumerate the amount of testimonials I have received over the
last four years about players who have used the jump cue to help them win
matches and tournaments.
I keep comparing the modern jump cue to the leather tip. When was the last
time you saw a legal device that would add a whole plethora of new shots to
the game? No one would argue that the leather tip changed billiards
dramatically and I am not suggesting that jump cues affect such a change.
Jump cues do allow for just about every shot to be made with the addition of
the jump which changes the game. I think it changes it for the better as
the ability to apply spin through the use of a chalked surface did.
Have you ever tried to play pool with a mace? Do you think you would enjoy
it as much?
John
John Barton
"Patrick Johnson" <patrick.jo...@THIScomcast.net> wrote in message
As I mentioned earlier I have a Tim Scruggs cue with which I can jump almost
as well as with the Bunjee Jumper. If I were to attempt most jump shots
with my Layani you would conclude that I needed to learn to jump correctly.
If I were to shoot the same shots with my Scruggs you would conclude that I
am a fairly acomplished jumper. This is a major difference in two cues of
which neither were specifically engineered for driving the cueball into the
bed of the table. Both cues have distinctive hits and "I" play just as well
with either cue.
I conlcude from the above paragraph that full cue jumping skill is a mixture
of ability and equipment wherein the player must form a working knowledge of
what he/she can do with the cue they are using. When a cue that is
specifically engineered for the task is introduced thaen the difference
becomes one of almost pure ability since the cue characteristic variable
becomes a constant. In other words, this cue works for jumping now see what
you can do with it.
Logic dictates that a player be allowed to USE any type of device to
manipulate the balls which does no harm to the equipment, is not distracting
to other players and confers no mechanical advantage over the opponent.
What works and what doesn't will always become readily apparent.
John
Dan White
news:Xns9486D1E66420du...@140.99.99.130...
> "Dan White" <dwh...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> > I think you could argue legitimately against jump cues on philosophical
> > reasons. Pool is a "two dimensional" game (ok, ok, you get my point
don't
> > be too technical) in that it is really meant to be played on the surface
of
> > the table. I think of it a little like standard chess vs that gimmicky
3-D
> > chess where you have 3 chess boards suspended one above the other, and
you
> > can move your pieces from one board to another, adding a 3-D element to
a
> > traditionally 2-D game.
> >
>
> ROUTINELY leave the bed of the table. You just don't really notice it most
of
> the time.
Well it isn't really a theory. Of course the ball leaves the table a little
during a break shot or in some other extreme circumstances. This is why I
said "don't be too technical."
You know what I'm saying.
>
> Pool is fairly BORING, like bowling or baseball.... I say anything that
> livens it up a bit has to be good for the sport.
So how about using aluminum bats in baseball, or putting a slot machine on
the side of the pool table so if you pocket a ball in a particular pocket,
the bells and light will go off and you win $100? These things would liven
up things, too, but they also cheapen it.
dwhite
Priveye
> > Pool is fairly BORING, like bowling or baseball.... I say anything that
> > livens it up a bit has to be good for the sport.
If pool is so boring then why do you play it. Maybe you need
something that provides more excitement? I can tell you that I've
been playing, on and off, since I was 12 and I can play/practice alone
for hours. I can play straight pool for hours on end and never get bored.
Roscoe
"Crisis occurs when women and cattle get excited"...James Thurber
Mike Page
"John Barton" <inst...@instroke.com> wrote:
[...]
> Logic dictates that a player be allowed to USE any type of device to
> manipulate the balls which does no harm to the equipment, is not distracting
> to other players and confers no mechanical advantage over the opponent. [...]
John John John ---
Logic dictates this?
Dan White
news:mike.page-BE21B...@news.supernews.com...
> But I think I know the answer to the second question. It is really
> really important to have rules that avoid questioning a player's intent.
> To jump a corner of a ball with a full cue often requires just being
> slightly jacked up and shooting hard. There's no bright line in
> deciding what's a jump shot and what isn't. A rule banning full-cue
> jump shots would be very difficult to enforce.
But this could be enforced with a ref's decision. You would call the ref or
TD over if you were concerned about a double or simultaneous hit, so why not
call him over to see if the shot can be done without a jump? The TD could
require the shot to be made with masse swerve instead of a jump, and it
probably wouldn't be that hard to tell if it is necessary.
I'm not really a jump Nazi, I just think it is lame to be switching cues out
for jumps.
Que sera sera.
dwhite
Frank Glenn
inst...@instroke.com says...
:|:It is. But then again if a had a couple hundered billion I would try
:|:and put AT&T and other telecom companies out of business as well.
:|:
Not me, but pool would be on TV, you can put that in the bank.
Frank
John Barton
Think about it Mike. If whatever you want to use to manipulate the cueball
does no harm to the ball, the slate or anything else and leaves nothing
behind to hinder play then who cares whether it's used or not. You and I
play about even, I think. If I offered to play you using a plastic water
bottle instead of a cue then you would probably jump at this. With a normal
empty water bottle I have next to zero chance of playing good pool or
beating you. So I would probably abandon the water bottle in favor of a
cue. You would be foolish not to let me use the water bottle as much as I
liked to.
But, if I had a full water bottle and I arranged it so that the cueball was
perpetually wet and the cloth was wet then your play would be affected and
this is where you would naturally want to disallow the water bottle under
those conditions.
Why should you care WHAT a player uses as long as fulfills the criteria I
have outlined? Why should anyone, league or TD care? Logically?
John
John Barton
"Dan White" <dwh...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:4022bbb8$0$8362$61fe...@news.rcn.com...
Or for break shots, or switching tips for more spin, or using x-brand chalk
or buying x-brand cue...........
We should all play with tournament supplied house cues that are made to be
exactly the same so that all equipment advantage is eliminated. No jump
cues, no jump shots, no ball in hand, call everything including safeties.
All players must wear the same league supplied uniform.
Where does it end? Innovation does not need to end, it just needs
direction. Censorship though is almost always evil in my opinion. Banning
jump cues is the same as burning books.
John
Patrick Johnson
> Logic dictates that a player be allowed to USE any type of device to
> manipulate the balls which does no harm to the equipment, is not distracting
> to other players and confers no mechanical advantage over the opponent.
This logic would suggest that you could use my "break cannon" if it
wouldn't damage the equipment and was available to everybody. Maybe
even a putter.
You get my point. Surely there are some possible technological advances
that we don't want in the game. I'm not saying the jump cue is one of
them, but the criteria for deciding aren't as simple as you say they
should be.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
JoeyA
low squirt cues too. I hate it when my opponent has such a distinct
equipment advantage over me. JoeyA
"John Barton" <inst...@instroke.com> wrote in message
news:3rKdnQMPm65...@centurytel.net...
ratchet
John Barton wrote:
> Why should anyone, league or TD care? Logically?
>
> John
hear here !!
Ratchet --The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few !!
ratchet
JoeyA wrote:
> If they are going to ban jump cues, I think they should burn and ban those
> low squirt cues too. I hate it when my opponent has such a distinct
> equipment advantage over me.
> JoeyA
I think they ought to ban chalk too , It stains my ferrules ..
and different size cue balls .. One size fits all
and different size tables too ..Too confusing
and everyone has to be the same size too
tall people (like me) have advantages that
short people do not ,tho they have their own too,
and only right eye dominants play right eye dominants
and vice-versa,
and one felt too , none of that real fast stuff either,
so slow people can play too,
and only the same tip and taper too,
then we need only 2 pool halls ,
one smoking, one not,
then of course I could be wrong !!
>>> Ratchet <<< why cant we all just get along ?? hehehe
Frank Glenn
says...
:|:hear here !!
:|:
Ya know, 4 years from now we will still be posting this, and few
readers will understand why. ROTFLMAO!
ratchet
LOL !!!
>> Ratchet<< aka Tom Seifert
Watchez
makes the Sledgehammer, Mike Gulyassy, is the person that made the custom
cue I play with. When Mike came thru St Louis & I placed my order for my
playing cue...he had a few of the Sledgehammers with him and it didn't take
him long to sell out. I told him many people have tried to teach me to jump
without success. With his cue, I was jumping in 5 minutes and continued for
about an hour until my arm got tired. If Keith likes his Sledgehammer so
well, he ought to get in touch with Mike about a custom cue. Mike was
taught about cue making partly by Bill Schick. I told Mike I wanted a cue
that hit like a Southwest but didn't want to wait 3 years or pay the steep
price. Four months later I got my cue for about 1/4 the price of a
Southwest. http://www.babysproshop.com/index.html for those who want a
Sledgehammer to compete. Hey Mike, can I get an extra shaft for my cue for
this shameless endorsement? Mike, come back to St. Louis.......Bird has
something he wants to show you.
Jump cues should be legal & I don't think equal the playing field. The top
players can still jump more accurate, with more control of the cue ball,
etc. than the weaker players. It would be like having a tournament where
you can't draw your ball. Sure there are some weak players that can draw
their ball nicely but I am sure that players like Keith, Larry Nevel, Jon
Kucaro, other pros. etc. still have more skill at any pool aspect than a
weaker player.
BTW, they have the Missouri state 9 ball championship this weekend and they
have a stupid rule involving jumping for this tournament. If you use a jump
cue during an inning, you have to finish the inning using the same cue.
What do people think about that?
"JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20040205082941...@mb-m07.aol.com...
> Steve Ellis posts: "I think the game of pool ('real' or otherwise) is
better
> without jump cues."
>
> I remember when the guy who made the Sledgehammer pulled KM aside at the
Open
> and handed him this break/jump cue stick and said, "Come on over to this
table
> and try it, Keith."
>
> Now, previous to this life-defining moment for KM, he would grimace and
growl
> every time an opponent would reach into their case and pull out this magic
wand
> and ruin his safeties.
>
> Keith placed a couple of balls close to the side pocket and then took aim
on
> the cue-ball. He made it first try, and immediately grinned from ear to
ear
> and said, "I've got to get me one of these." Then, like a kid, KM
contined to
> jump and jump and jump like he had just discovered a new toy. He didn't
want
> to leave the tournament room, even though they were breaking down the
tables,
> because he was enjoying this Sledgehammer and the fact that he could jump
the
> ball so easily.
>
> Most of the anti-jump cue rhetoric I hear comes from older pool players
who
> enjoyed the two-shot/push-out rules and being able to make a spot shot and
> getting perfect leave. Because KM grew up in this era, he was not very
> receptive to the advent of the jump cue.
>
> Having said that, every time somebody leaves KM a safety which provides a
> jumping opportunity, he now runs to his case and grabs his Sledgehammer
and,
> still grinning from ear to ear every time he uses it, he successfully
pockets
> the ball, I'd say, about 80 percent of the time. He loves his jump cue.
>
> I am puzzled by the USPPA ban. Why are they prohibiting jump cues, but
> allowing one to jump with their break and/or shooting cue?
>
> Do the jump cue cause damage to the equipment? It's baffling that they
are
> going to allow one to jump balls, but not use a jump cue. This is what is
> confusing (IMO) about the ban.
>
> If pool were to return to the two-shot/push-out way of life, KM wouldn't
mind
> it a bit, but if a tournament is going to allow one to jump balls, why
can't a
> player use an instrument, i.e., a jump cue, that is designed to do such?
>
> What is the purpose of banning jump cues if one is still allowed to jump
balls?
> That is what is baffling (IMO).
>
> JAM
John Barton
"Patrick Johnson" <patrick.jo...@THIScomcast.net> wrote in message
"If" your break cannon fits the criteria then why not let it be used?
Although I suspect that it would confer a mechanical advantage over the
opponent and perhaps damage the balls.
John
John Barton
"Watchez" <wat...@usmo.com> wrote in message
news:s%AUb.15666$uM2....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
If you use a jump
> cue during an inning, you have to finish the inning using the same cue.
> What do people think about that?
I think it's a DUMBASS rule and I would win the tournament because I can
play with my jump cue :-))
John
Tony DeAngelo
Patrick Johnson wrote:
> The issue, unfortunately, can't be dismissed with simpler questions like
> "will it cause damage?", "is it a mechanical device" or "is the result
> legal?". Some judgment is required, and reasonable people will differ.
>
> Pat Johnson
> Chicago
>
I can certainly see both sides of the argument. It amazes me how many
people can't.
lfigueroa
a gunfight.
Look, if from a million miles away, I create a safety like this, I should
get rewarded for a great shot.
http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/9egg/
START(
%A[8B6%B[2]5%Cs6\1%Dt0C1%E[0B3%Ft0\6%Gs8C4%HD1G3%ID1V1%JB9B8
%Kt1\1%LB7C1%MB8\4%NB9\1%OC3B6%PD3Y6
)END
My opponent, sans jump cue, would have to send the cue ball almost 18' for a
legal hit, going at least one rail, or execute a masse, and has almost no
chance to make the ball, and a high probability of selling out. Nowadays,
any snot nosed kid that's been playing a couple of years and just shelled
out less than a $100, pulls out his jump cue and is not only a lock to make
a legal hit, but actually a fair to middling favorite to make the ball and
get out. You certainly cannot deny all the folks who have posted here at
one time or another, words to the effect, "Gee, I bought a jump cue and five
minutes later I was clearing balls from six inches away."
They've has bought their way out of the trap.
If it's going to be that easy for my opponent, I need to make it just as
easy on myself.
Lou Figueroa
"John Barton" <inst...@instroke.com> wrote in message
news:2f2dnaXJhaj...@centurytel.net...
>
> "lfigueroa" <lfig...@att.net> wrote in message
> news:jhsUb.57949$6O4.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > great job. bravo.
> >
> > Lou Figueroa
> > forced to buy a jump cue
> > purely out of self defense
>
> I hear this a lot and I wonder why you think this. You buy a jump cue to
> give yourself more options and to give your opponent more to think about
> when playing safe. So a jump cue purchase is done for offensive reasons
and
> not defensive reasons.
>
> John
>
>
> >
> > "John Barton" <inst...@instroke.com> wrote in message
> > > > "JAM" <jama...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
bp
>
>JAM (Two-shot/push-out on the come?)
That would be "on the come back"
It'll never sell for TV, matter of fact TV is the reason we play one
foul now.
Tony DeAngelo
John Barton wrote:
> "Watchez" <wat...@usmo.com> wrote in message
> news:s%AUb.15666$uM2....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> If you use a jump
>
>>cue during an inning, you have to finish the inning using the same cue.
>>What do people think about that?
>
>
> I think it's a DUMBASS rule and I would win the tournament because I can
> play with my jump cue :-))
You wouldn't win the tournement if Jimbo was in it :-))
Seriously John, I'm not necessarily in favor of banning jump cues, but
how can you not see the other side of the coin? Can't you appreciate
the posts that express the other view? Why must an opposing opinion
always be "stupid" or without any merit whatsoever? I'm not saying that
you should agree, or that it's an argument that can be "won" or
"proved" at all, just that clearly a lot of people don't see the need
for a dedicated jump cue, and believe that it changes the game in a way
that for them is detrimental to their enjoyment. Can't you see that?
What of the guy who compared the jump cue to the aluminum bat? Why not
introduce the aluminum bat to MLB? If everyone can use them, then
nobody has an advantage, right? It adds excitement, and hey, it's good
for the environment! Come to it, why not just allow shaft jumping?
What's wrong with that? Again, I'm not saying jump cues should be
banned, and I fully understand and appreciate your arguments for
them-especially since you've made money on their sale (that would
certainly sway my opinion).I just think you should try sometime to see
things from someone else's point of view.
john mcchesney
Texas Express Rules )in order to be able to speed up the state championship
tournament which would have been impossible using 2 foul ... in Moyer's Pool
Room with only 8 tables at the time ( simply way too many players for the
amount of time to complete ).
Texas Express co-founder, Robin Adair actually coined the name and wrote the
rules on the wall with a amjic marker .. as follows: Texas Express .. any
foul is ball in hand and the only push out is after the break.
Much later .. the pros ( then the M.P.B.A. ) ( Men's Professional Billiards
Association ) voted to adopt the rules and the only player who voted against
going to the 1 foul rules was Allen Hopkins .. and they voted for them
obviously to speed up the game for TV .. among the reasons ( and buy the way
.. Robin Adair was member number 1 and he also is the very first McDermott
dealer ).
John McChesney
CEO
Texas Express
www.texasexpress.com
"bp" <6b...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:c206205t2vd5apdou...@4ax.com...
Patrick Johnson
> "If" your break cannon fits the criteria then why not let it be used?
Why not allow players to take their shoes off, stand on the table and
use putters? That would meet all your criteria, wouldn't it? But would
it be pool? The game has a "personality" that attracts me. Change it
too much and I'm not interested any more.
As you know, I have nothing against jump cues -- I bought one from you
the last time I saw you. But the question of whether jump cues change
the game too much is a legitimate one that can't be dismissed just
because they don't damage anything and don't give anybody an unfair
advantage. There's more to it than that.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Ron Shepard
"Dan White" <dwh...@erols.com> wrote:
> So how about using aluminum bats in baseball,
From what I read a few months ago, aluminum bats do not increase
home runs, but they do increase batting averages. The reason is
that the "sweet spot" for a hollow aluminum bat is bigger than a
solid wood bat, but the energy transfer is a little less efficient.
Although MLB does not allow aluminum bats, college baseball and
softball do, and there is sufficient evidence from there what the
effect would be in MLB.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
Ron Shepard
bp <6b...@comcast.net> wrote:
> That would be "on the come back"
> It'll never sell for TV, matter of fact TV is the reason we play one
> foul now.
The current rules (ignoring the jump cue issue for the moment)
result in a player using a much larger range of shots than the old
push-out rules. With the old rules, you never saw anyone playing
multi-cushion kick shots, the odds are better if they just push out
and take their chances with the option.
Efren Reyes is often credited with introducing accurate kick shots
into 9-ball. Efren not only can pocket balls accurately with kick
shots, but he can also return safeties by hitting the right side of
the object ball with the right speed. With the old two-shot
push-out rules, Efren would never get a chance to use that skill and
knowledge to his advantage. It was the rule changes in 9-ball
(ball-in-hand and the 3-foul rules) in the mid 80's that allowed
that kind of skill and knowledge to be used to his advantage.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
Ron Shepard
"john mcchesney" <johnmc...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Texas Express co-founder, Robin Adair actually coined the name and wrote the
> rules on the wall with a amjic marker .. as follows: Texas Express .. any
> foul is ball in hand and the only push out is after the break.
John, when was this rule first used?
$.02 -Ron Shepard
john mcchesney
The year of the original tournament in which the rules were put in play was
1979.
I grew up playing 2 foul ( aging myself .. just turned 56 last month and
Robin Adair is 53 and Randy Goettlicher is ... whew .. 61 ( the 3 muskateers
of T.E. ) ) .. and remember when .. I witnessed the greatest display of
jumping from one of the world's best players .. hell, he would roll out and
purposely "stick" himself behind a ball .. the other player would smile and
say .. go ahead .. shoot .. and the player would fire the ball skyward using
his regular playing cue .. stab the ball in the hole .. draw it back for
shape and run out !!!!! Earl the Pearl .. !!!
You are absolutely right .. players have ( had ) to learn the diamonds ..
multi-rail kicks .. and generally have to attempt much more difficult outs
when confronted with no place to hide ( safely ). It took some time before
the T.E. Rules were accepted all over .. many tournaments and the players
spread the word and 2 foul was shelved.
Even I realize that the luck factor is way too high in tournament play
utilizing the current rules ..
when a player can lock you up and you have no chance at a good hit .. you
just feel cheated ..
but, without changing the game altogether, i.e., call shot ... and/or push
out anytime, etc.
?!%$#@!?* It will likely remain the game of choice for tournament play as
it has the elements of excitment, run outs, jumps, hammer breaks .. and the
speed of completion to get a final of 13-11 over in a couple of hours or
less. I .. personally like BCA 8 ball .. it demands consistent thinking,
shotmaking and shape .. and is as difficult or more difficult to play very
well as any cue sports regimen .. it ... and of course the old man's game
.. one-hole ... IMHO
"Ron Shepard" <ron-s...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ron-shepard-B6A4...@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
Dan White
>If I offered to play you using a plastic water
> bottle instead of a cue then you would probably jump at this.
OK, but never take a proposition bet from a guy named Hamster Malone with
his dog.
dwhite
Dan White
OK well then using your line of thought, what if I had an electronic hat
that worked with the cue to tell me the exact contact point on the object
ball, and the resulting path of the cue ball? Would stuff like this be good
for the game?
When you talk about censorship, why should my rock hard jump cue be banned
just because it might chip the cue ball? They should replace cue balls
after every game anyway so its not my problem. If the other guy misses
because of a chip in the cue ball then he better get that jump cue, too, and
even out the odds.
Like you said, where do you stop?
dwhite
Tom Bellhouse
"Patrick Johnson" <patrick...@comcast.net>
wrote in message
news:10265c3...@news.supernews.com...
> John Barton wrote:
> > "If" your break cannon fits the criteria then
why not let it be used?
>
> Why not allow players to take their shoes off,
stand on the table and
> use putters? That would meet all your criteria,
wouldn't it? But would
> it be pool? The game has a "personality" that
attracts me. Change it
> too much and I'm not interested any more.
>
Pat, I grew up in an era when most of the good
players DID take their shoes off and climb up on
the table. Didn't hurt the game a bit, although
the effect on the tables might have been negative.
Only saw a putter used in a proposition once,
though.
Tom
Patrick Johnson
> ... I grew up in an era when most of the good
> players DID take their shoes off and climb up on
> the table.
I used to travel to Honolulu a lot and spent some time at Hawaiian
Brian's pool hall there. The players were shorter on average than
mainlanders, and I saw more than one of them climb up on the table and
sit cross-legged in the middle to reach a shot.
They also had a custom of helping each other with banks and kicks -- a
player who wasn't shooting would hold his stick out from the rail to
mark the location in space of the "mirror image" of the target for the
shooter.
All very communal, but disconcerting to a visiting haoli.
Pat Johnson
Chicago
john mcchesney
the history
of the super players from the islands .. i.e., Evan Kakugawa, Rodney Morris,
AKU and many others ...
I knew Brian from his trips to the mainland to beat most of the players in
the U.S. ..
Brian suffers from extreme Arthritis .. and has a tough time playing.
and ... ran a few events over on Maui @ Maui Cue and met some super people
..
The first visit I was ref. to as "JOJ" ( just off the jet) and a haoli (
pronounced How-lee ) ..
but after numerous trips was accepted and travelled to some of the most
gorgeous places on earth escorted by long time residents .. thanks to Mike
Ogasawara and Neil Watanabe who are residents of Kahalui, Maui.
I saw teenage kids that played super speed .. and they all gamble high ..
They all love the super spped cloth .. Maui Cue had the fastest Granito ..
and you merely bump the ball to get 3 or more rails !!
John
"Patrick Johnson" <patrick.jo...@THIScomcast.net> wrote in message
news:102779m...@news.supernews.com...
JoeyA
One CRITICAL reason for allowing jump cues is the television audience.
Pool when it is played well, looks somewhat boring to most of the television
audience.
The jump shot is probably the most exciting shot in all of pool to novices
and non-pool freaks. I believe that the jump shot adds more excitement to
the game on television. Even amongst serious pool freaks, I hear them
remark, come take a look at this tape. Watch this jump shot! We need the
television audience to become interested in pool. The jump shot can help
the television audience with their need for excitement.
Personally, I don't care for the jump shot but I use it whenever I can. I
just don't like the little dots that it plants on the table. Allowing jump
shots with your 'UN-BROKEN DOWN" regular playing cue just isn't that much
fun. Your regular playing cue can cause FAR more damage to a table than a
traditional jump cue. In fact, I would believe that it won't be long before
we see on television someone who attempts a simple jump shot and they rip
the cloth because of the power that is needed to jump with a playing cue.
That will get a lot of mileage for the bloopers re-runs.
JoeyA
"Tony DeAngelo" <aj...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:402308...@adelphia.net...
John Barton
How can I when the point of view is not presented? Watchez asked about the
rule in his tournament - he didn't give any reason why the rule was put in
place. No one from the USPPA has chimed in to say why they banned jump
cues. Like I said earlier, I would still play pool either way. I don't
give a flying flip about how people "feel" about jump cues. They are a tool
and that's all.
I can certainly see the other side and I dismiss their arguments. When it
comes down to it, the decision to ban jump cues is almost always emotional
rather than practical. Only John McChesney has given a practical reason for
banning equipment as well as a reasonable path for the implementation of
that ban.
John
John Barton
> > "If" your break cannon fits the criteria then why not let it be used?
>
> Why not allow players to take their shoes off, stand on the table and
> use putters? That would meet all your criteria, wouldn't it? But would
> it be pool? The game has a "personality" that attracts me. Change it
> too much and I'm not interested any more.
And wouldn't that distract the players? Again that's part of my criteria.
>
> As you know, I have nothing against jump cues -- I bought one from you
> the last time I saw you. But the question of whether jump cues change
> the game too much is a legitimate one that can't be dismissed just
> because they don't damage anything and don't give anybody an unfair
> advantage. There's more to it than that.
This is a discussion Pat, nothing personal. So far all of your examples
have not fit in to my criteria and should be regulated accordingly.
John
>
> Pat Johnson
> Chicago
>
John Barton
Would such a hat confer an unfair advantage? Would it be distracting?
>
> When you talk about censorship, why should my rock hard jump cue be banned
> just because it might chip the cue ball? They should replace cue balls
> after every game anyway so its not my problem. If the other guy misses
> because of a chip in the cue ball then he better get that jump cue, too,
and
> even out the odds.
If it chips the cueball then it should not be allowed. If one piece of
equipment damages another then it should be modified or banned.
>
> Like you said, where do you stop?
At censorship born of ignorance. I want to see the major leaugues and
tournaments get together and agree on a standardized set of rules and
equipment specs that will be governed by reps from each of them. This way
manufacturers and players can stop jumping through hoops created by
conflicting rules and equipment specs.
John
Mike Page
"John Barton" <inst...@instroke.com> wrote:
how about placing measuring devices on the rails?
Mike Page
"John Barton" <inst...@instroke.com> wrote:
[...]
I want to see the major leaugues and
> tournaments get together and agree on a standardized set of rules and
> equipment specs that will be governed by reps from each of them. This way
> manufacturers and players can stop jumping through hoops created by
> conflicting rules and equipment specs.
>
That's fair and reasonable.
Tony DeAngelo
John Barton wrote:
I don't
> give a flying flip about how people "feel" about jump cues.
Nor, apparantly what they believe (or "feel" if you prefer) about
anything else at all. Pat Johnson has been summing up my thoughts on
the subject exactly and you completely dismiss him. It's as if yours is
the only worthwhile point of view and everyone else is plain wrong.
Everything is black and white with you and you are always 100% correct
and every person who disagrees is always 100% wrong. Strangely, you
usually have a monetary stake in the argument. When I read these posts,
you have much less credibility with me than someone who actually tries
to see the other side of the coin. I'm sure you couldn't care less, but
FYI if you are arguing you do better if you listen and consider what the
other guy says before you immediately dismiss his points out of hand.
Tony DeAngelo
John Barton wrote:
> This is a discussion Pat, nothing personal. So far all of your examples
> have not fit in to my criteria and should be regulated accordingly.
>
> John
>
>
>>Pat Johnson
>>Chicago
>>
>
>
>
See, this is what I'm talking about. You define an argument so you are
always right. To use your language I don't give a flying flip if a jump
cue doesn't hurt the cloth (and I dont give a flying flip how long it
takes the Samsonite gorilla to tear apart my cue case). My thoughts on
jump cues have nothing whatever to do with the cloth being hurt (and my
purchase decisions on luggage do not include what happens to said
luggage when I throw it into a gorilla's cage).
The aluminum bat analogy is 100% correct. Kids grow up with them, they
use them all through college, but they cannot use them in MLB. Why not?
Hint: it has less to do with damage and unfair advantages and more to do
with tradition and what fans want to see in baseball. You might totally
disagree (especially if you founded Easton) and I can see that point of
view. I'm not pleading my case here. I'm just pleading for you to admit
to the possibility that yours isn't the only valid point of view. I
know it's all for naught, and I'll stop now.
ratchet
John Barton wrote:
I want to see the major leaugues andtournaments get together and agree on a
standardized set of rules and equipment specs that will be governed by reps from
each of them. This way manufacturers and players can stop jumping through hoops
created by conflicting rules and equipment specs.
>
> John
hehehe you said " Jumping " thru hoops LOL
Ratchet --- suppose thats the next progression in the *trick* shot shows ????
John Barton
What makes you think I don't consider what the other guy has to say? When
Pat makes a point I either make a counterpoint or acknowledge his superior
logic and concede the point. Why must you argue about how I debate things?
What does it matter whether I have a monetary stake or not? Either my
points are valid or they are not. I am not in love with jump cues, I do not
get that warm feeling inside when I use them, maybe my opponent does but
probably not.
So far I have outlined a couple basic things that I think ought to be the
case. So far no one has seriously challenged the criteria that I have
defined (and these are not my ideas by the way) for use of "anything" to
manipulate the cueball. Why do we not use "break-cannons"? It's not
because people have not thought of things like that, it's because they are
impractical for actually playing the game. In other words Tony to summarize
once more, let people use any device they want as long as it does not harm
the equipment, give an unfair advantage, distract the opponent or hinder
play. Yes, I defined these things and by doing so I invite people to tell
me why this won't work.
I don't need to say "I see your point, but". My rebuttal is enough. I have
often conceded points in this forum and will continue to do so when my
points are not strong enough to hold up.
Either you are debating from an emotional standpoint or a logical one.
Emotion is nostalgia for the grand ole' game of Pool, no jumpers, no videos,
no stroke trainers just Pool, mister. Logic is we live in a changing world
where smart people are always looking for some way to improve things and
that creativity must be allowed and the results thereof evaluated and
regulated as appropriate.
Like I said, I don't care how people "feel" about jump cues. I don't sell
them to players by getting them emotionally revved up about them. I show a
tool that can be used effectively with practice and caution against the
"magic wand" mentality. I have proven on dozens of occassions that the jump
cue does not harm the cloth and that the tip does not even touch the cloth.
I bet you are not in the least bit concerned about hearing what does
actually leave the little burn marks on the cloth? Ask me and I'll tell you.
But again, if jump cues were proven to "harm" the cloth then that obviously
falls under the rubrik of damaging the equipment and must be regulated.
Tony, you are not going to change me. Nothing I ever said to you has
changed one thing about you as far as I can tell. Just debate the points
without the emotion would be my advice. Thank you for trying.
John
JAM
advice."
I second that emotion -- I mean motion.
JAM
Patrick Johnson
>> Just debate the points without the emotion
JAM:
> I second that
Of course, she means "I second that, Monkeyjumper."
(Oh, the irony...)
Pat Johnson <-- Monkeycritic
Chicago
JAM
JAM: "I second that."
Monkey Doctor: "Of course, she means 'I second that, Monkeyjumper.'"
Patrick Johnson, nope, I didn't. It takes a lot for a poster to meet the
Monkey Tribe accreditations here at RSB Land. You know that.
JAM
John Barton
>
>
> John Barton wrote:
>
> > This is a discussion Pat, nothing personal. So far all of your examples
> > have not fit in to my criteria and should be regulated accordingly.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >>Pat Johnson
> >>Chicago
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> See, this is what I'm talking about. You define an argument so you are
> always right. To use your language I don't give a flying flip if a jump
> cue doesn't hurt the cloth (and I dont give a flying flip how long it
> takes the Samsonite gorilla to tear apart my cue case). My thoughts on
> jump cues have nothing whatever to do with the cloth being hurt (and my
> purchase decisions on luggage do not include what happens to said
> luggage when I throw it into a gorilla's cage).
Tony, you didn't use my words correctly. To use my words it would go like
this; I don't give a flying flip how you feel about jump cues, what I care
about is whether they harm the cloth, they distract the other players,
confer an unfair advantage or otherwise disrupt play. Do they do any of
these things? No, then let the players use the damn things.
>
> The aluminum bat analogy is 100% correct. Kids grow up with them, they
> use them all through college, but they cannot use them in MLB. Why not?
> Hint: it has less to do with damage and unfair advantages and more to do
> with tradition and what fans want to see in baseball. You might totally
> disagree (especially if you founded Easton) and I can see that point of
> view. I'm not pleading my case here. I'm just pleading for you to admit
> to the possibility that yours isn't the only valid point of view. I
> know it's all for naught, and I'll stop now.
>
I don't know anything about Baseball and I could care less. I do know from
all the hype about it that fans want to see home runs and I believe that if
the fans were really asked then aluminum bats would be okay with them.
Obviously Major League Baseball is out of touch with what the rest of the
world does if aluminum bats are still being produced and used by the rest of
the world outside MLB. I guess then that I fall on the side of the aluminum
bat proponents. I don't have to understand the nostaglic side of things.
Neither baseball nor pool can claim that they do not use or have not
benefited from innovation in the last century. Knowing what you know now
you would get very little enjoyment if you tried to play pool with the
equipment from 1900.
Why would I need to admit that another point of view is valid until
convinced of it? What is the purpose of debate and discussion if not to
come to some sort of agreement on which points are valid and which are not.
Obviously on most issues there will be chicken and egg points that could go
either way but from a logical standpoint some things ARE just black and
white.
Do we ban jump cues? Let's see, do they harm the equipment? No. Do they
distract the opponent? Generally no, but sometimes. Do they give an unfair
advantage? Not really but it is perceived so. Do they hinder play?
Slightly, if the player has to take undue time to put one together,
otherwise no. What is the consensus of the player base? Generally they are
for them with some voices of dissent. And so on.
Again, I don't care whether jump cues are allowed or not I just don't like
things being banned for purely emotional reasons. I don't like that some
organizations apparently like to use jump cues as a way to say "lookee here,
we're doing something." I am sorry if you feel that this is being one-sided.
I don't see it that way which I am sure is no surprise to you.
John
John
John Barton
John
"ratchet" <rat...@littlegreenapple.com> wrote in message
news:4023D7F9...@littlegreenapple.com...
Frank Glenn
patrick.jo...@THIScomcast.net says...
:|:Of course, she means "I second that, Monkeyjumper."
:|:
I know you believe what you think I said, but what you don't realize
is that what you heard was not what I meant. :)
Patrick Johnson
> .... It takes a lot for a poster to meet the
> Monkey Tribe accreditations
All that seems to be necessary is to say anything you dislike, which
appears to be pretty easy.
Pat Johnson <-- charter Monkey
Chicago
JAM
dislike, which appears to be pretty easy."
You know what the accreditations are, Patrick Johnson, to be eligible for
Monkey Tribal status: tag-teaming, sucker-punching, bashing, trolling,
sarcastic remarks, cantankerous personality, a stickler for word definitions,
and how about down right mean and nasty?!
JAM
frog
am pretty sporty w/ a jump shot. Its gimmicky, and in my opinion
circumvents the intent of the game. Earlier in the post someone
mentioned that in a certain tourny, if you brought out the jump rod
you must finish the inning w/ it. I like that approach, kind of like
golf rules, i.e. certain # of clubs, and balls etc.
John Barton
"frog" <fire...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:40c4d8a1.04020...@posting.google.com...
There is nothing wrong with this opinion. Snooker does pretty good without
the jump shot. I am of the opinion that nine ball should be totally
offensive using Grady's rules. If you don't make a ball then it's bal in
hand for your opponent. No push outs, no safeties just run out pool. Of
course it will probably drop the particiapation level quite a bit but hey,
the hardcore fans will appreciate it.
I would also go for call everything in nine-ball. Using a Post-It note
sized template the player must call not only the pocket but exactly where
the cueball is going to land. Let's eliminate luck altogether.
But, as long as the rules allow for the incoming player to be penalized for
unintentional safeties then the player should have the opportunity to hit
the objct ball by any legal means, including a jump shot performed with a
jump cue.
John
Patrick Johnson
> ... sucker-punching, bashing, trolling,
> sarcastic remarks, cantankerous personality, a stickler for word definitions,
> and how about down right mean and nasty?!
It's always about you, isn't it?
pj
chgo
Larry
Sounds like a basic survival listing for Usenet.
Dunno about the tag-teaming, though -- if a thread goes more than a
dozen or so posts, most teams bagin eating their own.
Hell, that's the fun of it.
-- Larry
JAM
eligible for Monkey Tribal status: tag-teaming, sucker-punching, bashing,
trolling, sarcastic remarks, cantankerous personality, a stickler for word
definitions,
Monkey Doctor responds, needlessly, to JAM: "All that seems to be necessary is
to say anything you dislike, which appears to be pretty easy."
Larry proclaims: "Sounds like a basic survival listing for Usenet. Dunno
about the tag-teaming, though -- if a thread goes more than a dozen or so
posts, most teams begin eating their own. Hell, that's the fun of it."
Monkeys do have fun tag-teaming, being mean and nasty, responding with flippant
remarks. It gives some crackpots of feeling of superiority when they are able
to accomplish this.
However, the difference between a crackpot and a monkey is intelligence. If
you're going to sucker-punch somebody, do it right or don't do it at all.
Monkeys usually don't find the need and recruit trolls to do their dirty work.
They are capable of tag-teaming and bashing all on their own, with very little
assistance.
NG Monkeys are a rare breed, indeed, very few of them around these days.
JAM
Dan White
> I want to see the major leaugues and
> tournaments get together and agree on a standardized set of rules and
> equipment specs that will be governed by reps from each of them. This way
> manufacturers and players can stop jumping through hoops created by
> conflicting rules and equipment specs.
>
That's fair enough, assuming the panel isn't stacked with people who stand
to gain from any new gimmick that comes along.
dwhite
Dan White
> am pretty sporty w/ a jump shot. Its gimmicky, and in my opinion
> circumvents the intent of the game.
Yes, this was my opinion as well. This is NOT an "emotional" position that
has not been thought through logically. It is based on a notion of what
skills the game is really intended to test. Launching the cue ball 1/2 way
across the table, IMO, is not a skill meant for the pool table...go play
darts or something instead.
Now, if the future success of pool depends so heavily on the jump shot, then
that is a different matter and should be considered. Apparently, this has
already happened, and the vote has gone to the jump shot.
Maybe my other post said it best. If you don't want to jump balls, don't
play 9 ball. Lump all the gimmicks together and leave them at the 9 ball
table.
dwhite
John Barton
I use the jump cue in one pocket, 14.1 and 8-ball. Most people applaud when
I shoot a jump shot, especially my teammates and road partners :-))
John
Watchez
I am not that accomplished with a jump cue so I liked the idea of a player
having to use it for the full inning. They have had this tournament for
years but the jump rule just came into effect I think 3 years ago. They
have other stupid rules, like if you win the tournament you can't come
back.....EVER. This was the effect of Louie winning the tournament 4 years
in a row, some 20 years ago.
John, have you ever used a jump cue in a one pocket game for the shot after
the break? I will give my friend Little Ricky with coming up with this
"move" because very few times have I seen it done. The other player lays
down a perfect break and you can see no way out of it. Bring out your jump
cue, and like golf if you can just block out the 100 yards of water you can
make a good shot, you jump right over the stack, stick the cue ball and bank
a ball back to your side. The first time I saw Ricky do this was when he
was playing Jack Cooney, and Cooney sat there shaking his head for literally
10 minutes.
"John Barton" <inst...@instroke.com> wrote in message
news:CNudnZLWWMh...@centurytel.net...
Dan White
> I use the jump cue in one pocket, 14.1 and 8-ball. Most people applaud
when
> I shoot a jump shot, especially my teammates and road partners :-))
>
You shoot jump shots in 14.1? Wow, pretty balsy. I assume you wait for
hangers and shots you know you can make, that or you play people who can't
run out?
interesting,
dwhite
pltrgyst
>Monkeys do have fun tag-teaming, being mean and nasty, responding with flippant
>remarks. It gives some crackpots of feeling of superiority when they are able
>to accomplish this.
>
>However, the difference between a crackpot and a monkey is intelligence. If
>you're going to sucker-punch somebody, do it right or don't do it at all.
>Monkeys usually don't find the need and recruit trolls to do their dirty work.
>They are capable of tag-teaming and bashing all on their own, with very little
>assistance.
>
>NG Monkeys are a rare breed, indeed, very few of them around these days.
Ummm, Jam, I think you've led a sheltered life. Lurk around
rec.motorcycles or rec.autos.sport.f1 for a few days and see what the
big bad Usenet world is like.
RSB is dainty by comparison.
-- Larry
Ron Shepard
Tony DeAngelo <aj...@adelphia.net> wrote:
[on aluminum bats in MLB...]
> Hint: it has less to do with damage and unfair advantages and more to do
> with tradition and what fans want to see in baseball.
I agree with this entirely, it is history and tradition. Major
Leabue baseball has records, year by year, that it compares for over
100 years. If they change equipment drastically, then those
comparisons would become meaningless. Even changing the number of
games per year is a big deal in MLB. Little league, high school,
college, and minor league baseball and softball don't have this
constraint, so they are more flexible with their equipment specs.
In this context, where does 9-ball fit in? I'd say that 100 year
history and tradition are relatively unimportant. 10 or 15 years
maybe (since the 3-foul and BIH rule change), but not 50 or 100
years.
$.02 -Ron Shepard
JAM
around rec.motorcycles or rec.autos.sport.f1 for a few days and see what the
big bad Usenet world is like. RSB is dainty by comparison."
Only in your NG world, Larry.
I've never hung out with the motorcycle and car guys on the Net, Larry, as I
don't have much in common with them, but the NG of court reporters is great,
grammatically correct and well-written posts, and the folks who post are
extremely nice.
It's also a GREAT reference source. If I don't know how to do something
software-wise, if I can't spell it, or if I'm not sure how to punctuate it,
these regulars are more than willing to share information.
JAM
Tony DeAngelo
MLB has changed a lot in the last 100 years (ever see those old mitts?),
but with each change they have to take stock. That's all I'm
saying...take stock.
Tony----> not anti-jumping.
Jack Stein
> If the jump cue "does NO harm to any other piece of equipment"
A tape measure does NO harm to any equipment, yet most rules prohibit
the use of measuring devices.... why would THAT be?
> and "gives no unfair advantage," it begs the question: WHY then, pray tell, did the USPPA
> ban jump cues?
If the jump cue gives no unfair advantage, then WHY, pray tell, use one?
I would hope they banned them for the same reason I dislike them, they
are boring and provide a purchased skill. KM, for example bought one,
and INSTANTLY could jump balls that he could not have jumped in the
past. That is a purchased skill, and is quite boring, and causes people
that realize it is simply a purchased piece of equipment that makes the
shot easy, to simply yawn.
As far as being POLITICAL, I guess you mean if people like John bribe
them enough with cash, they might allow the cues and even promote them
like the Sardo Rack? Well, who knows, money has a way of talking pretty
loud to the unprincipled.
--
Jack
http://jbstein.com
Jack Stein
> It's not my fight anymore. I won't pay a dime to any organization that
> completely discounts a legitmate part of the industry so the USPPA and the
> Reno tournaments will never get any of my business.
Nice to know common sense beat out out and out bribery for a change.
Don't worry, if they need the money, they will change their mind if you
offer them enough cash. Hell, send me some cash and I'll promote your
lame ass jump cues....
> It's funny how they will "allow" people to use them in action games (as if
> they could stop it) but not in the tournament. Stupid, stupid stupid.
How dumb are you?
> There is not ONE tournament director or league that has given even ONE good
> reason for not allowing jump cues. Not one. Oh, they THINK their reasons
> are good but every one I have ever heard is easily refuted. I can only
> imagine the reasoning here.
Funny, I think every pro jump cue argument has easily been refuted and
those for them generally only THINK their reasons are good, and are too
closed minded to see how easily their positions have been refuted.
> Screw them. There are lots of businesses that make all or part of their
> revenue from jump cues. Bunjee has put approxiamately $30,000 back into
> pool over the last four years. The USPPA is a small time operation with
> small minded people at the helm if they think that this decision is
> signifigant.
This has what to do with why I should be happy that Lou has now
purchased the ability to jump out of a good safety because he was forced
to BUY the ability in self-defense?
> This is my OPINION.
Your opinion doesn't mean much to the USPPA, perhaps you should try
offering cash to convince them your opinion is meaningful?
> I ain't concerned about getting customers. I don't sell
> jump cues for a living anymore. The PLAYERS will buy the jump cues because
> they know that today's jump cues are essential to a complete game.
Of course they will, even Lou bought one, out of self defense. Players,
when offered the vote, often vote no. There is plenty of disagreement,
so don't bother trying to lie about all players wanting them for the
sake of the game, that is a simple lie.
> They know that having a jump cue adds another range of shots to their arsenal.
Well duh!
> They know that small-minded TD's and league ops aren't part of real pool and
> real pool includes jump cues.
Real pool includes jump cues... yeah right, there is a convincing
argument. You would do better to offer your cash than make stupid,
stupid arguments.
> So USPPA, I hope that this post firmly entrenches you to the idea of banning
> jump cues permanently. It just shows that you are out of touch with real
> pool and real pool players and eventually that ignorance will unravel your
> league.
Offer them a few of your dimes (not sure why you would, since you make
nothing from jump cues any more) and perhaps they will make the ultimate
sacrifice so real pool and real pool players can play.
--
Jack
http://jbstein.com
Jack Stein
John Barton wrote:
> I don't take it personally Steve. Real pool is how the game has evolved.
> Once again things like the leather tip come to mind. I am sure that at one
> time this was considered by some to the nefarious end of billiards.
Or ceramic tips, or compressed air break cues, or, simple tape measures.
> Of course any tournament can do as it pleases and so can I. If I had the
> cash I would do quite a bit to disrupt other people's lives who annoy me. I
> am THAT petulant.
No shit, most people dislike being annoyed.
> I would try to disrupt their business as they are doing
> to all those who make a living from jump cues.
I see, so "real pool" is really all about supporting those that make
cash out the game, and not about the game... interesting, but not
surprising.
> The MLB certainly does have the right to ban any bat they chose. The BCA
> and the VNEA have both specified what a jump cue should be and all the jump
> cue manufacturers have complied.
Yeah, and no one can justify what some of the qualifications are. What,
for example is so special about a 40 inch length? Let me see, how long
is my shaft... oops, no shaft jumping, better go give some cash to Johns
ex company if I want to play "real pool"... get real John.
> I am all for banning equipment that does
> harm and gives unfair advantages.
All that is, except jump cues. Oh thats right, you made a living from
those, so that unfair advantage is OK... No, wait, there is no unfair
advantage, people buy them ONLY to get rid of some extra cash, I forgot...
> The balls were getting damaged,
> the cloth was getting damaged and the lack of control of the cueball had
> nothing to do with pool. This is why the specs were defined by
> organizations that are bigger and have been around longer than the USPPA.
I think it was too support the money grubbers rather than the "sport".
> In my opinion, it is impertinent for the USPPA to go against the rest of the
> country and the world on this issue. But, as you said, it's their thing.
Oh, not just all pool players support jump cues, but now the whole
country, and the whole WORLD love them... WOW, it sure is lonely being
against jump cues then the whole WORLD is in love with them... Still, if
you want ME to support them, considering your total lack of good
arguments for them, you will need to bribe me, so send some cash my way
if you want to say the whole WORLD sleeps with your jump cues.
> You may feel that the game is better without jump cues which is fine.
Unless he is part of your WORLD, cause your country, and in fact, world
is all for them.
> I don't care whether there are jump cues or not.
Me neither. I just argue like hell against them for no reason, just
like people buy them to get rid of extra cash, rather than for the
[unfair] advantage they provide.
> I will play either way.
Me too.
> The thing is that the USPPA is not banning jump shots, just jump cues. So who
> is going to police this?
Pretty simple actually. Anyone that is sighted could police this.
> Who is going to determine what is a jump cue and
> what isn't. I can play pool with my jump.break cue and it certainly jumps
> balls better than about 95% of so-called regular cues out there.
The easy way is to require shooting with the same cue used immediately
after the break. Not very difficult so if the USPPA has trouble, they
can make that a requirement, and allow only sighted people to watch for
violations.
> Would you agree with a rule that stated that everyone MUST play with a 19.5 Valley
> house cue so that any chance of an advantage due to cue construction is
> eliminated? Mike Webb took his time to develop what he considers a better
> break shaft. How would you feel if such break shafts a'la Webb/Sledgehammer
> were deemed illegal?
Well, if they had a compressed air piston to aid in breaking, I would
have no problem. Something in between would depend...
> Wouldn't you feel a twinge of regret for the money you
> spent and perhaps a little sympathy for Mike Gulyassy and Mike Webb's
> investments?
Nope, not a twinge, nor would I feel a twinge if he made millions
selling nice cues or even cue cases. I wouldn't even give a shit if he
made millions selling compressed air jump/break cues. I still would be
against compressed air jump cues however. Two different issues.
> Not personal. Practical.
Why would you be "twinging" over someone else making money or not, if it
wasn't personal? Do you have a financial investment in Webb's work?
--
Jack
http://jbstein.com
ratchet
Ratchet --- Couldn't resist the temptation :)