Who are/were the master cuemakers?
AquaticRsh
Who do you consider the real master cuemakers of the past and who today please
put them in two different groups..
F.L.
AquaticRsh
Master Cuemakers of past
George Balabushka
Gus Szamboti
Harvey Martin
Herman Rambow
Burton Spain
Palmer
Frank Paradise
Master Cuemakers of today years
Frank Coster(should he be in the above list?)
Craig Peterson(should he be in the above list as well?)
South West
Paul Mottey
Pete Tascarella
Ginacue(maybe he should be in the above list?)
Tad
Joel Hercek
Barry Szamboti
I really don't know what list Ginacue, Craig Peterson, and Frank Coster should
be on the first or second list let me know your opinions about this. Also let
me know if you think I left out anyone.
F.L.
TheRacker
are quite knowledgeable that will probably respond. Having qualified my
remarks with that, from what I've read I think George Balabushka was considered
a very capable cue maker, of course that little blurb in "The Color of Money"
certainly added to his name recognition. As for today's craftsmen I'd guess
perhaps Jerry Pechauer should be on your list. Good luck in your quest for
knowledge.
MWilleyJr
Jim White
Jim
"AquaticRsh" <aquat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210193833...@mb-cv.aol.com...
AquaticRsh
First I want cuemakers on the second list that are a good sound investment
Second A great reputation
Third Excellent playability
So I could go on and on with lists of guys that are around today.. I'd most
likey end up with half of the Blue Book. I'm really looking for like 10 guys
from the last 20 or 25 years for second list. In the same league as South
West.. .... maybe i forgot to add Joss West on there as well.
F.L.
Jimbo Ct
Schick
Bender
Josswest
Black
Scruggs
Wayne
Tad
Samsara
Jim <---All alive all making cues
PS
George and Gus <---Not alive not making cues, best investments
WilleeCue
"masters" made cues that would fail to qualify them for admission to the
American Cuemakers Association and certainly would be judged as substandard
compared to the common production cues of today. That is unless you are talking
only about the value as a collectors item as being the key factor in determining
"master" cuemakers from common cuemakers.
Would you please offer what defining factors you consider to separate the
"master" cuemaker form the common cuemaker.
Is a "master" someone that knows a large amount about all the aspects of
cuemaking or just the knowledge to make the cue that makes you think he is a
"master" cuemaker? Is it judged by every cue he makes or just a few outstanding
examples of his work?
Would hand cut inlays be considered a "masters" skill or could he use CNC
machines?
Would the "master" be required to actually make the cue or could he employ other
to do it for him?
Since I have not had the chance to examine or watch the way each cuemaker makes
his cues nor have I actually played with cues from every cuemaker, nor have I
privilege to what each cue craftsman actually knows or does not know, I would be
forced to make my choices based on hearsay, popular opinion, price, resale
value, what my friends think, and pure guesswork as to who is a "master"
cuemaker and who is not. So I guess that limits my list of "master" cuemakers to
.......
Any and all cuemakers that have mastered the skills required to make a pool cue
that I would like to own.
This includes just about every member of the ACA, almost any cuemaker that is
listed in the Blue Book of Pool Cues, and a few cuemakers that I have not yet
heard about.
My list would not include those people who know everything about cuemaking but
do not really make any pool cues.
William Lee < .... just a cuemaker.
"TheRacker" <ther...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210194605...@mb-mc.aol.com...
WilleeCue
I think a better question would be ....
What atributes or skills seperate a "master" cuemaker from a common cuemaker?
William Lee
"AquaticRsh" <aquat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210185908...@mb-cv.aol.com...
MWilleyJr
WilleeCue
Just when I was settling down a bit too.
William Lee
"Jim White" <poola...@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:WiwJ9.1250$eQ3.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
WilleeCue
I should not be on the list at all.
William Lee
"MWilleyJr" <mwil...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210210317...@mb-ci.aol.com...
AquaticRsh
people now. There are tons of lil cuemakers out there who i feel might make a
great playing lil cue but in 20 40 years you'd be lucky to get what you paid or
much more. As for all your Alphabet organizations they mean as much to be as
the alphabets that run boxing. I'll just have to stick by my list i guess..
There is no doubt that the guys of the past are Balabushka, Burton Spain,
Herman Rambow, Harvey Martin, Gus Szamboit, Palmer, and Frank Paradise and even
some of the Brunswick cues.
For the newer generation i'll say Ginacue, Tad, Paul Mottey, South West, Bill
Schick, Pete Tascarella, Barry Szamboti, Craig Peterson(might go in the above
list) Frank Coster. Maybe Joel Hercek (since he only makes Full splice cues i
dunno) possibly Wayne Gunn. And thats about it.
I mean if i ask for the modern great actors in film i'd get the De Niro's ,
Pacino's , Brando's , Dean, Clift ... and i want the same with cuemakers.. Not
the Ben Afflecks, Matt Damons, Heath Ledgers, and Leonardo Dicaprio's of
acting if you can see what i mean.
F.L.
WilleeCue
skill evaluation.
Example: Southwest .... Brunswick.
You are not talking about a single cuemaker here as a person but refering to the
cue as a valueable product of a company.
I think you need ot re-think your question as to what you really are looking
for.
If cue value is all you are after then look in the blue book of pool cues.
You will need no futher help to pick them out.
However if you are really looking for who has greater skill as a cuemaker then
the cuemakers themselves are the best people to ask that question. Who else
would know better as to what it takes to quantify a "master" cuemaker.
You can watch the movies and judge for yourself who you think the best actor is
but how would you play with all the cues to judge who the best cuemakers are?
See the difference?
William Lee
"AquaticRsh" <aquat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210220453...@mb-cv.aol.com...
AquaticRsh
for Southwest I'm generally referring to Jerry Franklin and his era. when I
refer to Brunswick I'm basically talking titlist full splice cues. I was
basically looking the for "modern day legends" of cuemaking. I mean name your
top ten cuemakers alive today as I'm curious. Then name your top ten ever..
fl
Jim White
Jim
"WilleeCue" <wil...@stx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:%GyJ9.162743$8D.43...@twister.austin.rr.com...
WilleeCue
You got to admit .... exploring why a cuemaker is considered a "master" would
make a good thread.
OK ....
Let me take a stab at who comes to mind as an extraordinary craftsman and master
cuemaker, but you must realize this is a very uneducated and biased opinion..
Listed in order of what I would most like to own someday if money was not an
issue.
Ernie Gutierrez - Ginacue
Barry Szamboti - Szamboti Cues
Pete Tascarella - Tascarella Cues
David Doucette - Samsara Cues
Jim Stadum - Samsara Cues
Richard Black - Richard Balck Cues
Joe Gold - Cognoscenti Cues
Paul Mottey - Mottey Custom Cues
"AquaticRsh" <aquat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210225204...@mb-cv.aol.com...
Bell Robert
Rich Shewmaker
--
"AquaticRsh" <aquat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210193833...@mb-cv.aol.com...
Just a little note to put names with the mastery...
Under masters of the past, there was not a person named Palmer. Palmer cues
were made by Eugene Balner.
In the present list,
Ginacue = Ernie Gutierrez
Southwest=Laurie Franklin et.al.
Tad=Tad Kohara
By the way, I personally would definitely want Tim Scruggs on my list. Maybe
Richard Black, too.
--Rich
Crsfmr
Gunn
Jensen (since mid-60's)
Joss West
Black Boar
Bludworth
Bert schrager (belongs in old masters??)
jcg
worth.
[Top 10 Cuemakers]
Alive Today
Updated Dec 05, 2002
1. Paul Mottey
2. Barry Szamboti
3. Dennis Searing
4. SouthWest
5. Bill Stroud
6. Joel Hercek
7. Ernie Gutierrez
8. James White
9. Tad Kohara
10. Pete Tascarella
If I were making the list there would be a few in the top spots with about
25 or 30 tied for the next position.
jcg
"Crsfmr" <crs...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021211012245...@mb-fg.aol.com...
Q-Ball
>
> Most famous cuemakers best investments best reputations.
Aren't those characteristics rather combined? Could you make a
'good investment' in a cue with a bad reputation? Sounds like
it would not be so collectable.
While 'playability' would also be somewhat related to
reputation, I could see where it might be secondary to design
and rarity as to 'collectability'.
Being the frugal sort, I would prolly put function over form,
playability over monetary appreciation potential. And I would
want a stick I could enjoy playing with and not always being
paranoid it would get nicked or scratched. The mental cost of
living that way would devalue 'museum' art sticks in my world.
It takes some of the fun out of just enjoying life when you have
to focus so much on 'stuff'.
For those who prefer form over function, perhaps a better
investment would be implants for your woman :)
RIPP
> Here's what i had so far,
>
> Master Cuemakers of past
>
> George Balabushka
> Gus Szamboti
> Harvey Martin
> Herman Rambow
> Burton Spain
> Palmer
> Frank Paradise
>
> Master Cuemakers of today years
>
> Frank Coster(should he be in the above list?)
> Craig Peterson(should he be in the above list as well?)
> South West
> Paul Mottey
> Pete Tascarella
> Ginacue(maybe he should be in the above list?)
> Tad
> Joel Hercek
> Barry Szamboti
In my opinion there is no way you can leave Tim Scruggs off this
list of cuemakers of today.His cues are second to none.They hold their
value exceptionally well.On top of that they play better than any
other cue I`ve ever played with.I recently sold a 4 pointer with no
veneers for over $900 that was bought in 1993 from Tim for $665.
A couple of other notables that are absent from your list would be
Bill Schick,Joey Gold and Bob Runde among others.
George Comerford
Providence,RI
Fred Agnir
> Why start a long running thread based on a popularity contest?.
>
> I think a better question would be ....
> What atributes or skills seperate a "master" cuemaker from a common cuemaker?
>
Was there something on the list that indicated that it was a
popularity contest? I thought the list was a pretty good shot at what
most people would consider a "master cuemaker" list. We've done
popularity contests before. If the two lists are compared, they end up
looking different.
Fred
Fred Agnir
> There is no doubt that the guys of the past are Balabushka, Burton Spain,
> Herman Rambow, Harvey Martin, Gus Szamboit, Palmer, and Frank Paradise and even
> some of the Brunswick cues.
>
> For the newer generation i'll say Ginacue, Tad,
My personal opinion is that these two aren't part of the newer
generation. They just happen to be alive and still making cues. I'd
say they're part of the transition period between old school ('Boti,
Bushka) to new school (Mottey, TWC). I'd add Stroud and Schick to the
transition period.
Fred
WilleeCue
I doubt if you get an answer.
Everyone will tell you who they think is one but cant explain what makes him a
"master".
I would think that only other cue craftsmen could bestow that title on a
cuemaker.
Who else would know better what it takes to master the craft.
William Lee
"charlie edwards" <charlese...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:31a882d7.0212...@posting.google.com...
> aquat...@aol.com (AquaticRsh) wrote in message
news:<20021210185908...@mb-cv.aol.com>...
> > Please let me know your opinions as i'm doing some research.
> >
> > Who do you consider the real master cuemakers of the past and who today
please
> > put them in two different groups..
> >
> > F.L.
>
>
>
> Give your definition of Master Cuemaker.
redfish
Hi
I've been watching this thread and have been wondering about Rocky
Tillis. He seems worth some mention.
Ed
Lance Ogasawara
this thread. I would consider him one of the greatest cuemakers ever,
alive or dead. Its too bad they didn't use a southwest in The Color of
Money. Then maybe David would get the recognition he is due.
On the plus side, I was happy to see Craig Petersen listed. IMO, he
is definitely one of the all time great master cuemakers. I always
thought his work was outstanding and then I had a chance to visit his
shop shortly before his death. I couldn't believe how little equipment
he had. How he could make the cues he did with the equipment he had is
mind boggling to me.
Lance
WilleeCue
It aint what you got itis how you use it!
William Lee
"Lance Ogasawara" <la...@ihlbr2.lucent.com> wrote in message
news:at8i82$4...@netnews.proxy.lucent.com...
Cory
> For the newer generation i'll say Ginacue, Tad, Paul Mottey, South West, Bill
> Schick, Pete Tascarella, Barry Szamboti, Craig Peterson(might go in the above
> list) Frank Coster. Maybe Joel Hercek (since he only makes Full splice cues i
> dunno) possibly Wayne Gunn. And thats about it.
Kersenbock and Stroud come to mind as much more DeNiro than DiCaprio.
Bender and Black as well. And Scruggs maybe to though their not my
favorite.
Cory
AquaticRsh
F.L.
ted harris
--
Ted Harris
http://www.tedharris.com
(remove "NOJUNK" from email address listed to reply)
"AquaticRsh" <aquat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210201424...@mb-cv.aol.com...
ted harris
"Only" makes full spliced cues?!!! Are you kidding?
--
Ted Harris
http://www.tedharris.com
(remove "NOJUNK" from email address listed to reply)
"AquaticRsh" <aquat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210220453...@mb-cv.aol.com...
Vlad
> First [snip] good sound investment
I have never made money in pool cues. The buyers of cues are not
marks who will unreservedly pay more than a cue is "worth". Look at
ebay, rarely do collectable cues go for what their purported worth is.
Yes the Ginas, Boti's etc. go for a lot, but not what their owners
have in them. IMO cue dealing/sales is a lousy investment. I collect
cues because of their beauty and billiard/pool history, and not for
the investment. Sure I can delude myself that its an investment, but
it really is not. The only way to make money on cues is to get in so
good (cheap) on a cue and then sell it, and that is just as rare as
the cue is :o)
> Second A great reputation
I buy cues from people I like and respect. If I don't like or respect
the cue maker, their cue will not end up in my collection. Some of my
fondest moments are when I visit with the cue maker and discuss cues,
or play and hear their stories.
> Third Excellent playability
The playdora's box. This is a very personal opinion and choice. I am
and have allways been partial to ss jointed, brass piloted shaft cues,
yet currently I play with a laminated core butt with thin
ivory/phenolic joint and radial pin. The first time one of my buddies
hit with it, he offered me his Gina or his Mottey for it in trade,
because he liked it and the way it played. I did not trade because at
this point in my life I like this cue and the way it plays. I believe
I play a ball better with this cue and hence I keep hitting with it.
(I run 100 ball cut drills during practice and have my current high
score with this cue.)
I enjoy custom cues because of their beauty and purpose (the worse day
of pool is still better than the best day at work :o). A fancy cue is
a pleasure to hold and view and makes playing enjoyable for me. I
have simple cues that are used in unknown or smoke filled environments
that have personality (history and stories behind them) that are just
as pleasurable and enjoyable to play with. But do not loose focus
that cues are only part of this wonderful gift that we can have in
magically moving a 2.25 inch white object around a green sea in ways
that can make us happy and smile deep down. We can reach out for and
ocassionally obtain perfection in this game.
Just my .02 worth and other ramblings... Vlad
AquaticRsh
cuemakers?
dalecue
Tad and Gina<ernie> both built cues for quite some time
before Gus did
Dale<-- who*s anal retentive gene is working overtime>
Fred Agnir wrote in message
<5447edcf.02121...@posting.google.com>...
dalecue
cuemaker????
(it*s rhetorical Williee>
Dale
Fred Agnir wrote in message
<5447edcf.02121...@posting.google.com>...
WilleeCue
Cuemakers like yourself are really the only people here that have the experience
and knowledge to determine the skills that a "master cuemaker" would possess.
Kinda like when the actors themselves acknowledge other actors that are doing
exceptional work.
I think anything else is just a popularity contest based on hearsay and monetary
value. wouldn't you value the recognition a bit more if it came from your peers?
Perhaps you consider yourself as a cuemaker that has mastered his craft ...
perhaps you do not. I have used the title "master cuemaker" in the past but I
was only doing so in jest or to provoke those that were needling me about making
cues. I do not in any way consider myself as someone that has mastered the
craft of cuemaking. I can only call myself a cuemaker by virtue of the fact I
have actually made some pool cues. You on the other hand have been making pool
cues long enough to have acquired the skills and knowledge that would qualify
you as a master cuemaker. Without watching what you do for a while, seeing what
mistakes you make, what techniques you use, and how you overcome problems, how
would anyone really be able to judge?
As to rhetoric I can only say that it is the fuel that keeps this group turning
and burning.
Without rhetorical questions and discussions it would be a very boring place
indeed.
William Lee
"dalecue" <pdg...@nospam.worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:2fYJ9.49294$vM1.3...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Fred Agnir
> old school new school
>
> Tad and Gina<ernie> both built cues for quite some time
> before Gus did
>
> Dale<-- who*s anal retentive gene is working overtime>
>
>
Maybe your anal retentiveness could have figured out that *time* isn't
what old school and new school is about.
Fred
Fred Agnir
> who here is qualified to determine the skill set of a master
> cuemaker????
>
> (it*s rhetorical Williee>
Someone was asking opinions. So, in that respect, we all are qualified
to opine about who and what constitutes "master" anything. By that
reasoning, anyone is qualified to retort with their own opinion.
And maybe you'd have to be quite anal to not consider certain
craftsmen within the realm of "master" regardless of who is qualified
to draw the line. If that's the case, then don't bother putting down
an opinion.
Fred
Brian
time. The cue has remained solid, straight, and still playable after 20 or
so years. So by my standard, there are only a handful of cuemakes I would
call 'masters'. However, there are many cuemakers that on their way to that
level.
BrianB
"AquaticRsh" <aquat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021210185908...@mb-cv.aol.com...
AquaticRsh
Am I wrong about Joel Hercek I thought all his cues were made with a FULL
SPLICE I know he does what he calls a "Double splice" with the ebony and
cocobola cues. So I wasn't kidding.. Did i get that wrong.
F.L.
WilleeCue
Old school and new school is closely tied in with time.
It takes time to gain experience and learn new things.
Isn't that the big point you made to me about cuemaking a while back.
William Lee
"Fred Agnir" <oha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5447edcf.02121...@posting.google.com...
WilleeCue
news:Sd3K9.54303$r4.39...@news1.west.cox.net...
> I would classify a 'master' cuemaker as one who's work has stood the test of
> time. The cue has remained solid, straight, and still playable after 20 or
> so years.
Brian, do all the cues made by this master cuemaker need to stay straight or is
he downgraded if a few of his shafts warp after 20 years of use?
Do you know ANY cuemakers that garentee their shafts against warping for 5
years?
How about one year?
>So by my standard, there are only a handful of cuemakes I would
> call 'masters'. However, there are many cuemakers that on their way to that
> level.
I can understand that if you need to wait 20 years to judge their cues.
William Lee
Brian
if the cuemaker really knows what they are doing, and understands how wood
ages and changes, then they should have a pretty good percentage. Of all the
cues I've played with in the last 10-15 years, I have only found 4 that I
would put my stamp on as being made by a Master CueMaker, 1st being the cue
that I play with everyday now, its a Joss made in 1970 (Bill Stroud). 2nd,
would be a Gus Szamboti cue that Terry Osborne plays with. 3rd is a Paul
Huebler that was custom made for Jim Matney. And 4th is a Jerry Franklin
Southwest. Of what I know about these 4 cuemakers, they took their time in
perfecting their workmanship. they studied how to join the various woods
together. I would also say, that if it wasn't for these guys, some of the
cue makes today would be clueless. I should also note, guys like Thomas
Wayne helped change how cues are built by inventing equipment, techniques
and even new materials. Now days, someone goes out and buys a fancy lathe
and some other tools and expects to be call a master. There's alot more to
being a master than just making a piece of wood look pretty for the present
moment.
"WilleeCue" <wil...@stx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:GI5K9.180407$8D.47...@twister.austin.rr.com...
ted harris
that making a full spliced cue such as the one's Joel Hercek makes are maybe
not qualification for him to be a master cuemaker. IMHO, the full spliced
cues he makes are much more labor intensive than half splice cues. However,
I am not an expert on this typoe of design, as I am just learning about it
now.
"AquaticRsh" <aquat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021212124718...@mb-df.aol.com...
ted harris
how to get it back in Outlook Express?
>Do you know ANY cuemakers that garentee their shafts against warping for 5
>years? How about one year?
I do.
--
Ted Harris
http://www.tedharris.com
(remove "NOJUNK" from email address listed to reply)
"Brian" <be...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Sd3K9.54303$r4.39...@news1.west.cox.net...
AquaticRsh
he should definately qualify since he is like the only cuemaker to make all his
cues FULL SPLICES and he learned from Burton Spain who I consider one of the
Masters of Cuemaking. He more than qualifies in my book. In Fact I have just
one more year before I get my cue from him and I simply can't wait.
F.L.
WilleeCue
offering that kind of garentee.
I am willing to bet it is very seldom you ever need to replace a shaft, but to
stand behind your work like that says a lot about you and your attitude toward
your craftsmanship.
William Lee < .... hoisting a beer to Ted.
"ted harris" <poolcue...@tedharris.com> wrote in message
news:uC4K9.9887$K5.409@fe01...
WilleeCue
good cues it is hard to sort and categorize them.
The technology is available to anyone that has the desire to apply it.
However, if you are going to list Jerry Franklin as a master cuemaker (agreed)
you need to consider his partner David Kersenbrock as well as together they
developed what is known as the South West Cue.
My only question is whether a master cuemaker should know and be able to make
more than one style of cue or is the mastery of only his style enough to qualify
that title?
William Lee
"Brian" <be...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Sy4K9.54900$r4.39...@news1.west.cox.net...
Mark0
master the fit, finish and playability factors much sooner than 20 years.
Though he's too modest to say so himself, I certainly consider Dan Trogdon
to be a master cue maker.
Mark0 <-- shill
"Brian" <be...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Sd3K9.54303$r4.39...@news1.west.cox.net...
Mark0
HTH
MArk0
"ted harris" <poolcue...@tedharris.com> wrote in message
news:uC4K9.9887$K5.409@fe01...
Ray C
> Here's what i had so far,
>
> Master Cuemakers of past
>
> George Balabushka
> Gus Szamboti
> Harvey Martin
> Herman Rambow
> Burton Spain
> Palmer
> Frank Paradise
>
> Master Cuemakers of today years
>
> Frank Coster(should he be in the above list?)
> Craig Peterson(should he be in the above list as well?)
> South West
> Paul Mottey
> Pete Tascarella
> Ginacue(maybe he should be in the above list?)
> Tad
> Joel Hercek
> Barry Szamboti
>
>
> I really don't know what list Ginacue, Craig Peterson, and Frank Coster should
> be on the first or second list let me know your opinions about this. Also let
> me know if you think I left out anyone.
>
> F.L.
What about Abe Rich or Wayne Holmes 2nd and 3rd generation cue makers,
definitely masters in their on right?
Brian
that I have seen up close made by David was being used by young Ronnie Allen
in the bay area, and that was almost 15 years ago. He's the one that turned
me onto the Southwests back then. As far as your question about knowing how
to make different styles, I think it more complex than that. A good cue
maker will know when to use different joints to accomplish different feels,
along with the different materials. I'm not only speaking about the joint at
the shaft. But knowing how to put the forearm together with the handle, and
how to eliminate every possible air pocket. Techniques of pressing the
veneers. There are so many attributes that make up what a master is, it
would be nearly impossible to list everything. I also feel that a master
cuemaker will age his own shaft wood, how many of the cuemakers today even
attempt this, most of them go down to the local hardwood supply, pick up
some maple rough stock, and turn it down to create a shaft. Or the order
shaft blanks from someone else. Not the getting them from another cuemaker
is always bad, but how do you control your own quality if your depending on
someone. Something else, years ago, wood was dried out naturally, cuemakers
would hang the rough sawn blanks, turning them every so often. Now days,
cuemakes can't wait that length of time, they can't keep the overhead. And I
can't agree with anyone who thinks kiln dried wood is as good as naturally
dried.
LEON3MN
>
>Agreed, David has also passed on many of his talent to others. The only cue
>that I have seen up close made by David was being used by young Ronnie Allen
>in the bay area, and that was almost 15 years ago. He's the one that turned
>me onto the Southwests back then
Brian, I bought two cues from Ronnie; one was an old Kersenbrock and the other
was a very pretty Southwest with striking green veneers. The Kersenbrock I
subsequently sold to Tony Chohan, and the Southwest is now in the collection of
Kenny Koo (not the Kenny who posts here).
Leon
ted harris
and a lathe that is about a thousand years old. I used to live near his
shop, and long before I got into pool in a serious manner, I would go to his
shop and hang out with him. I guess that is where I got my interest stems
from. He makes a 6 point cue with veneers for about $200- even today. His
sneaky pete's are a great deal at like $140- or so. He is the best
woodturner/chisel using/cuemaker that ever lived! I still go to see him and
go to lunch with him every time I go to Miami. If you see him, thell him
Ted Harris says hello...with my luck he probably won't even know who I am.
"Ray C" <rcat...@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9e79d69e.0212...@posting.google.com...
Rich Shewmaker
--
"Brian" <be...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Sy4K9.54900$r4.39...@news1.west.cox.net...
> I wouldn't say that 100% of the shaft would have to stay straight, but,
the
> if the cuemaker really knows what they are doing, and understands how wood
> ages and changes, then they should have a pretty good percentage. Of all
the
> cues I've played with in the last 10-15 years, I have only found 4 that I
> would put my stamp on as being made by a Master CueMaker, 1st being the
cue
> that I play with everyday now, its a Joss made in 1970 (Bill Stroud). 2nd,
> would be a Gus Szamboti cue that Terry Osborne plays with. 3rd is a Paul
> Huebler that was custom made for Jim Matney. And 4th is a Jerry Franklin
> Southwest. Of what I know about these 4 cuemakers, they took their time in
> perfecting their workmanship. they studied how to join the various woods
> together. I would also say, that if it wasn't for these guys, some of the
> cue makes today would be clueless. I should also note, guys like Thomas
> Wayne helped change how cues are built by inventing equipment, techniques
> and even new materials. Now days, someone goes out and buys a fancy lathe
> and some other tools and expects to be call a master. There's alot more to
> being a master than just making a piece of wood look pretty for the
present
> moment.
At the risk of offending some who have paid $5,000+ for a cue, I propose
that the products of some of the present cuemakers are much better that any
of the cues made by Balabushka, Balner, Gus Szamboti, or Herman Rambow.
Those gentlemen certainly deserved their reputations in their day, and one
cannot deny that they earned their places in the Hall of Fame. But they made
those reputations in a day when they had little competition--If you wanted a
high-end custom cue, you bought it from one of these guys, or not at all.
Now, there are more than 500 craftsmen making quality cues, and probably a
hundred of them or more have the experience and knowledge of woods,
adhesives, and techniques to make better cues than those old masters ever
dreamed of. I'm not saying that that $15,000 Bushka is not worth its
price...just that its value is in its collectability, not in any superior
quality as a pool-playing instrument. A Mottey, a Scruggs, a Capone, or a
Buss will be at least equal, and probably superior to that Bushka in quality
of construction, materials, playability, and durability, and at far less
cost. Will they appreciate in "value" like the Bushka? Probably not, because
in twenty or thirty years there will be a hundred or more "old masters, "
not five or six, and tens of thousands of great cues, not a few hundred,
competing for the collector's dollar. So I won't get rich collecting cues by
our living masters. But I'll continue to buy them because they are
beautiful, it feels good to play with them, and I enjoy owning them.
---Rich
albert
who was the 1st gen and 2nd gen to Wayne holmes ?
Dav1936531
><ARmcnesM7_E...@ilhawaii.net>
>
><snip>
>Now, there are more than 500 craftsmen making quality cues, and probably a
hundred of them or more have the experience and knowledge of woods, adhesives,
and techniques to make better cues than those old masters ever dreamed
>---Rich
The technical advancement of adhesives alone makes for a far superior cue than
was made in "the good ol' days".
Dave
lfigueroa
he been up to lately?
Lou Figueroa
"LEON3MN" <leo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021212234619...@mb-mc.aol.com...
Fred Agnir
> Fred, you seem to fall back on that "its not about" thing a lot don't you?
> Old school and new school is closely tied in with time.
> It takes time to gain experience and learn new things.
> Isn't that the big point you made to me about cuemaking a while back.
>
In other words, you don't understand the terms "old school" and "new
school" either. No surprises, as usual.
Fred
Fred Agnir
> However, if you are going to list Jerry Franklin as a master cuemaker (agreed)
> you need to consider his partner David Kersenbrock as well as together they
> developed what is known as the South West Cue.
Not to take anything away from Kersh, but Laurie says that there were
several changes to the South West Cue after David left.
Fred
WilleeCue
Dieckman.
Now there is an interesting thought to explore, Brian.
You think that natural drying has advantages over klin drying shaft wood.
I have never given that much thought as I am one of those cuemakers depending on
others for shaft wood and it seems all of that is klin dried. What qualitys of
the wood do you think natural drying improves?
William Lee
"Brian" <be...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Y7dK9.60171$r4.43...@news1.west.cox.net...
WilleeCue
William Lee
"ted harris" <poolcue...@tedharris.com> wrote in message
news:BpeK9.10786$K5.10100@fe01...
WilleeCue
Thank you Dave and Rich for reinforcing the way I also felt about the technoligy
of cuemaking today.
William Lee
"Dav1936531" <dav19...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021213055244...@mb-mg.aol.com...
WilleeCue
well.
Personally ... I think Laurie Franklin deserves a big "Boy Howdy" for keeping
the company alive and healthy after the tragic and untimely death of Jerry
Franklin. That blow would have forced the closure or sale of most other
cuemaking outfits. Laurie rolled up her sleeves and went to work maintaining the
quality and craftsmanship that is still a recognizable and highly regarded
standard in the cuemaking industry. No small acomplishment indeed.
William Lee
"Fred Agnir" <oha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5447edcf.02121...@posting.google.com...
Rich Shewmaker
--
"WilleeCue" <wil...@stx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:JylK9.147815$Gc.48...@twister.austin.rr.com...
> I am sure there have been some changes to the cues since Jerry passed on
as
> well.
> Personally ... I think Laurie Franklin deserves a big "Boy Howdy" for
keeping
> the company alive and healthy after the tragic and untimely death of Jerry
> Franklin. That blow would have forced the closure or sale of most other
> cuemaking outfits. Laurie rolled up her sleeves and went to work
maintaining the
> quality and craftsmanship that is still a recognizable and highly regarded
> standard in the cuemaking industry. No small acomplishment indeed.
>
> William Lee
>
Laurie Franklin is difficult to classify in our gallery of "masters."
Certainly Kersenbrock and Jerry F. made some important innovations in cue
design that have made Southwest sticks some of the most admired and sought
after (and copied). If Laurie has continued that evolution, it is not
obvious. Laurie's mastery is in keeping the company alive after Jerry's
demise and preserving the quality and reputation of its product. But even
in Jerry's "era," Southwest made the same cue over and over. Some of their
cues have more and fancier inlays than others, but they are all made exactly
the same way. In a sense, they are high-end production cues. Compared to a
Richard Black "Athena," or one of Thomas Wayne's more fanciful pieces, a
Southwest lacks artistic creativity and value. On the other hand, if you buy
a Southwest, plain or fancy, you can depend on it playing beautifully and
feeling just like your other Southwest. Buy one of those art originals at
any price, and you are taking your chances on playability, but no
matter...it was for display and wasn't going to be your daily player,
anyway.
--Rich -->Would love to have a Southwest in his hand and R. Black's
"functional art," especially this one,
http://www.blackcues.com/cues/rhapsody.html, on the wall.
Brian
superior to those of 20 years ago, however, if the craftsman doesn't take
his time and perfect his technique, he'll still use either too much, or too
little. And either way causing air pockets and dead spots in the cue.
Uno
JoeyA
JoeyA
"WilleeCue" <wil...@stx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ZmlK9.147600$Gc.48...@twister.austin.rr.com...
Dan White
"Rich Shewmaker" <ri...@ilhawaii.net> wrote
> A Mottey, a Scruggs, a Capone, or a
> Buss will be at least equal, and probably superior to that Bushka in
quality
> of construction, materials, playability, and durability, and at far less
> cost.
No doubt much of what you say concerning production materials is true
concerning Bushka's, Szamboti's vs today's cues. However, my Bushka is as
tight and sound as the day it was made 38 years ago! Well, I take that back
a little. One of my shafts began to vibrate a year ago, so I had the ring
on the shaft reglued...The other shaft is fine and the rest of the cue,
including the linen wrap, is tight. I'm no expert, but I believe factors
such as wood selection and treatment are universal and not so dependent on
technology. I think the best makers of years ago probably understood this
better than most of those 500 cuemakers around today. Stradivarius seemed
to make pretty good fiddles without much technology!
regards,
dwhite
WilleeCue
growth, high ring count, hard maple.
Today's common maple has larger growth rings and that could make some
difference.
William Lee
"Dan White" <dwh...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:ate0gi$jfu$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Ray C
Actually Wayne Holmes is 2nd generation to Orie Holmes who was 1st
generation.
Abe Rich is the third master cue maker in his family, which has roots
to the craft of cue making leading back to the turn of the century. My
assumption was that ties from the turn of the century would represent
at least 3 generations.
BACECKENRODE
AquaticRsh
Joe Van
>The technical advancement of adhesives alone makes for a far superior cue
>than was made in "the good ol' days".
>Dave<<
Really?? Adhesives alone? Well then maybe you can explain to me why people
still
convert titlist house cues that have been glued together over 50-60 years ago.
If the glue was so bad wouldn't you see catastophic failures? I think the
arguement over better materials is horseshit when you consider the steel is
still the same, the wood is the same. (Although there was a better selection
back then, primarily because there weren't alot of hacks using the good stock
up.) How can todays adhesives be compared when the test of time surely cannot
apply to them, yet. BUT you have centuries old cues still together in
collections all over the world.
Joe
Joe Van
>At the risk of offending some who have paid $5,000+ for a cue, I propose
>that the products of some of the present cuemakers are much better that any
>of the cues made by Balabushka, Balner, Gus Szamboti, or Herman Rambow.
>Those gentlemen certainly deserved their reputations in their day, and one
>cannot deny that they earned their places in the Hall of Fame. But they made
>those reputations in a day when they had little competition--If you wanted a
>high-end custom cue, you bought it from one of these guys, or not at all.
>Now, there are more than 500 craftsmen making quality cues, and probably a
>hundred of them or more have the experience and knowledge of woods,
>adhesives, and techniques to make better cues than those old masters ever
>dreamed of.
This is a pretty fair statement. I would add that the other 500 craftman
wouldn't have
an industry if it wasn't for the above mentioned gentlemen. The above mentioned
also
didn't have the BlueBook or the Internet for advertisement. Ebay to sell the
stuff that
wasn't selling, or even for free advertisement. Or being able to come into a
group
like this and say "Hey I make cues, look at my website...".
Rich Shewmaker
--
"Joe Van" <class...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021215232749...@mb-fp.aol.com...
I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say. And I mean no disrespect for
the Hall-of-Fame guys.
Ferdinand Porsche was a Balabushka of sports cars--a real genius. One of the
earliest Porsche's would sell for really big bucks, now. But a
top-of-the-line "New Beetle" would cost you tens of thousands less, would
outperform the old classic in every category but gas mileage, and will go a
hundred thousand miles without major repairs.
Classic Porsche : New Beetle : : Balabushka cue : Paul Mottey cue
Put your money in whatever meets your needs. I would not criticize any of
the choices. Come to think of it, I'll have one of each, please (as soon as
I hit the lottery.)
;o) Rich
Will Carey
On 11 Dec 2002 03:04:53 GMT, aquat...@aol.com (AquaticRsh) wrote:
>Most famous cuemakers best investments best reputations. I'm talking like 10 15
>people now. There are tons of lil cuemakers out there who i feel might make a
>great playing lil cue but in 20 40 years you'd be lucky to get what you paid or
>much more. As for all your Alphabet organizations they mean as much to be as
>the alphabets that run boxing. I'll just have to stick by my list i guess..
>There is no doubt that the guys of the past are Balabushka, Burton Spain,
>Herman Rambow, Harvey Martin, Gus Szamboit, Palmer, and Frank Paradise and even
>some of the Brunswick cues.
>
>For the newer generation i'll say Ginacue, Tad, Paul Mottey, South West, Bill
>Schick, Pete Tascarella, Barry Szamboti, Craig Peterson(might go in the above
>list) Frank Coster. Maybe Joel Hercek (since he only makes Full splice cues i
>dunno) possibly Wayne Gunn. And thats about it.
>I mean if i ask for the modern great actors in film i'd get the De Niro's ,
>Pacino's , Brando's , Dean, Clift ... and i want the same with cuemakers.. Not
>the Ben Afflecks, Matt Damons, Heath Ledgers, and Leonardo Dicaprio's of
>acting if you can see what i mean.
>
>F.L.
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
WilleeCue
For someone that is in the business of buying low and selling high that is a
puzzling position to take.
You seem to get your share of "free" advertising around here with every post you
make.
Has the competition become too great or your sales expectations fallen short?
William Lee < .... getting rich making pool cues.
"Joe Van" <class...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021215232749...@mb-fp.aol.com...
Joe Van
>Joe, you seem to have a problem with new cuemakers and modern materials.
Assuming you are talking about the other post, I don't know how you could say
that. Tell me please where the modern materials are better than the older
materials.
Again prove this to me and everyone here... the fact is you can't. Like I said
in the
other post you are referencing, its horseshit. The wood is the same, infact
maybe
the wood selection is probably worse. You keep saying the adhesives are better,
but
what proof do you have that this is the case? I can show you centuries old cues
that are as tight as the day they were built, so please show me where todays
glues are better? Wouldn't
it be fair to say that until the "new" glue lasts the same length of time, you
really can't make
this statement. Now if you said the new adhesives dry quicker, maybe this could
be a fact.
Or that the new glue has this or that that the other glues don't have, maybe
thats true.
But to claim they are superior for adhesion properties is severly misleading,
and without proof.
>For someone that is in the business of buying low and selling high that is a
puzzling position to take.<<
Not if you could read and understand what I wrote.
>You seem to get your share of "free" advertising around here with every post
>you make.<<
This is exactly the point I was making. The "masters" did not have this
available
to them. As do you. Did you ever think how you would share your new creations
if this wasn't available? Do you know how Gus built his reputation for the best
playing cue of his time? Its called word of mouth. Unlike in your
case where word of mouth is your own, Gus relied on his customers. To say
he had the luxury of less competition is also misleading because there weren't
the
number of players back then either that there are today.
>Has the competition become too great or your sales expectations fallen short?
Actually the market place is weak and we are not the only ones seeing this. Any
one with half a brain knows this. I advertise on my links page for the
competition and
they see the same things we see. We welcome the competition, but this has
nothing
to do with you, or my posts.
Patrick Johnson
> is severly misleading, and without proof.
We need proof that the adhesives industry has made significant
advancements in the past 50 years? Do you seriously think otherwise?
Who's misleading whom?
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Joe Van
>We need proof that the adhesives industry has made significant
>advancements in the past 50 years? Do you seriously think otherwise?
>Who's misleading whom?
>
>Pat Johnson
>Chicago
Sure "overall" adhesives have gotten better. But show me where they benefit
cues,
which is the basis of the arguement. In another 50 years when the "new"
adhesives
will have withstood the test of time, which I am sure they will, the "older"
adhesives will
probably still be together.
So again in the use of cues, its horse-hoky.
Donald Tees
wait 50 years as well, just to see if you get this message. After all,
the home computer and email have not been around for 50 years yet ...
until the 50 years pass, I think we'd better go back to cues carved with
a knife. After all, those CNC machines migh not really work, and the
cutting done with them may well be an illusion that will grow back in
over the next few months.
Donald
WilleeCue
is ridiculous.
Do you think that the composite materials that are in the new stealth fighter
planes are held together with hide glue?
Why not ... 40 years of durability is way past the life expectancy of any
aircraft.
Do you really think that there has never been a warped Balabushka or a failed
glue joint in a Paradise cue?
What ... they did not need cue repair 40 years ago?
You ever wonder why Brunswick and other cuemakers don't use the same adhesives
they used 40 years ago to make cues?
Ya think it is to make sure their cues will fall apart faster and need
replacement sooner?
No ... it benefits you to keep the myth alive that older is really better that
what is made today.
I make my pool cues with my own two hands, Joe, I am not just a buyer and seller
of objects.
My cues are made by me personally and not purchased or hired out to someone
else.
That is the big difference between a craftsman and a merchant.
I create what I sell and so far have sold just about everything I have made.
How long have your table cleaning products been around and what was wrong with
the stuff they used 30 years ago to clean tables?
Do we need to wait 30 years before we can decide if your table cleaner is
better?
William Lee
"Joe Van" <class...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021216103339...@mb-mq.aol.com...
> >WilleeCue" wil...@stx.rr.com writes:
>
> >Joe, you seem to have a problem with new cuemakers and modern materials.
>
> Assuming you are talking about the other post, I don't know how you could say
> that. Tell me please where the modern materials are better than the older
> materials.
> Again prove this to me and everyone here... the fact is you can't. Like I said
> in the
> other post you are referencing, its horseshit.
<snip>
Joe Van
>Joe, stop using that same tired old rhetoric of "passed the test of time"
>that is ridiculous.<<
As soon as you stop touting newer is better, for stupid reasons.
>Do you really think that there has never been a warped Balabushka or a failed
>glue joint in a Paradise cue?<<
If my Bushka warped because of the glue I would have a complaint. Not much
he could do about it now though. So what constitutes a failed glue joint to
you?
I have seen many older cues that need repair, just not normally because of
adhesive failure. If I pick up a Paradise and a ring is loose, how does one
know its
not from incorrect storage, or someone banged it on the table? Are you saying
now that all repairs on older cues are from bad glue?
>You ever wonder why Brunswick and other cuemakers don't use the same
>adhesives they used 40 years ago to make cues?<<
No I never wondered why. No need to. But probably because Brunswick don't make
cues anymore (out of their own factories) and how many cuemakers have 40 years
in the
field that can answer that? But I bet the switches in glues would be more
suited to lesser
drying or curing times, or maybe even better suited to glueing dissimilar
materials.
But thats not to say the old glue wasn't doing the job.
>No ... it benefits you to keep the myth alive that older is really better
>that what is made today.<<
Really? Maybe its you who needs to keep the myth alive by saying newer is
better just to sell your stuff. I am not saying older is better, but since you
have proved time and
time again you can't comprehend what I write, what I am saying newer is not
necessarily
better, or at least not for the reasons you are using.
>I make my pool cues with my own two hands, Joe, I am not just a buyer and
>seller of objects. My cues are made by me personally and not purchased or
hired out to someone else. That is the big difference between a craftsman and a
merchant.<<
This is also why I can say newer is not necessarily better because I sell both
and
do not have to knock one to sell the other. What I will knock however is the
crap
that is used to sell new stuff based on "superior" materials when its not the
case,
or at least the reasoning is a stretch.
Again I am still waiting for what makes your glue so superior, and what effects
it has
on the cue. A question that doesn't surprise me you can't answer.
Let me do it in a nutshell for you....
Willies glue - Holds cue together for at least 2 years Yes
Gus's glue - Held cue together for at least 30 years... Yes
Willies glue - dries quicker.. probably
Gus's glue maybe it takes a few hours or even 1-2 days or longer, loose
estimate.
So in this instance maybe your glue is better, but it has nothing to do with
any
reasoning on why new glue is superior to old glue, in the use of a pool cue.
WilleeCue
> Again I am still waiting for what makes your glue so superior, and what
effects
> it has on the cue. A question that doesn't surprise me you can't answer.
It is a stupid question to start with.
I dont make glue, I buy it from a company that makes it.
If the new glues are not better then why are cues made with them instead of the
older glues?
What effects ?? I can recomend a good cuemakers book to you.
> Willies glue - Holds cue together for at least 2 years Yes
Willee don't make glue.
He uses pre-made glue for bonding wood to make cues.
( I know ... the old masters used to grow the crops that fed the livestock they
slaughtered to make their own glue)
> Gus's glue - Held cue together for at least 30 years... Yes
Not all of them did.
Some had glue joint failure.
Ever hear of the word "Buzz" as it relates to a cue?
Why do you think the old masters used a "Buzz Ring" in their cues?
I will tell you why .... the glue was not strong enough to hold the end grain
surface joints and would fail causing a "Buzz".
Ever hear a Balabushka "Buzz"?
> Willies glue - dries quicker.. probably
Again, I dont make glue...
but a good guess, however... the glue I use for most joints takes 24 hours to
properly set and days to fully cure.
> Gus's glue maybe it takes a few hours or even 1-2 days or longer, loose
> estimate.
Again you demonstrate you dont know really what you are talking about.
Why do you want to argue about something you know so little about?
Did you just wake up this morning and think .... "Hey, the newer wood glue is
not as good as the old stuff".
> So in this instance maybe your glue is better, but it has nothing to do with
> any reasoning on why new glue is superior to old glue, in the use of a pool
cue.
Joe, stick with what you know or at least read a book on what you want to argue
about.
If I really gave a shit what you thought, I would go get the facts to disprove
what you say but as it is it just aint worth the effort.
If you ever start making cues call me and I will fill you in about what glues to
use where and why.
William Lee
Joe Van
>It is a stupid question to start with.
Only cause you don't know the answer, and can't possibly answer it.
Since that question was too hard, please explain to me why cuemakers
still cut titlist blanks into cues. You would think that the chance of 40-60
year old glue failing at the rate you suggest, would surely mean failure on
a cue of this nature.
>Not all of them did.
>Some had glue joint failure.
>Ever hear of the word "Buzz" as it relates to a cue?
>Why do you think the old masters used a "Buzz Ring" in their cues?
>I will tell you why .... the glue was not strong enough to hold the end grain
>surface joints and would fail causing a "Buzz".<<
Yes, genius but not all "Buzzing" is related to endgraining. But then again if
you could cut a decent splice you would know that. I think you need a little
more experience. Or maybe this is in that last 5% you talked about. So now
new glue is the cure all to endgraining and buzzing. Thats interesting, I am
sure the
guys who make that obviously unneccessary ring are going to thank you
for all your research. BTW I have heard new cues buzz also, is it the glue?
Buzzing is not inherent to old cues, like you would like everyone to think.
>If you ever start making cues call me and I will fill you in about what glues
>to use where and why.<<
Why would I do that when I can get the Hightower series and think I know 95%
of everything there is to know about building cues after I read and watch it.
>Did you just wake up this morning and think .... "Hey, the newer wood glue is
>not as good as the old stuff".<<
Just as likely as you woke up and said .. hey my cues ain't selling, lets knock
the older stuff....
Show me these better materials as I have asked for repeatedly. Better yet try
selling cues
on the merit of the cue and not some fabrication of my cue is better than a
Szamboti because
I have better glue.
Joe (--- again dissappointed.. real questions avoided, or ignored... just the
typical MO
WilleeCue
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Van" <class...@aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.billiard
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: Who are/were the master cuemakers?
> > "WilleeCue" wil...@stx.rr.com writes:
> >It is a stupid question to start with.
>
> Only cause you don't know the answer, and can't possibly answer it.
> Since that question was too hard, please explain to me why cuemakers
> still cut titlist blanks into cues.
Cause they want to?
Cause the cuemaker needed some practice and did not want to waste a good blank?
Cause people like you will pay big bucks for them to do it?
Cause the Titlest house cue is too hard to get into an Instroke case?
Cause someones buddy said it was better that way?
Cause they read Chris Hightower's book on cuemaking?
Cause it is something that is so good it is hard to get nowdays?
Take your pick.
>You would think that the chance of 40-60 year old glue failing at the rate you
suggest,
>would surely mean failure ona cue of this nature.
What rate was that, Joe?
Was that in this lifetime or the last ... it is so hard for me to remember
anymore.
I do not recall making any statements to that effect.
> >Not all of them did.
> >Some had glue joint failure.
> >Ever hear of the word "Buzz" as it relates to a cue?
> >Why do you think the old masters used a "Buzz Ring" in their cues?
> >I will tell you why .... the glue was not strong enough to hold the end grain
> >surface joints and would fail causing a "Buzz".<<
> Yes, genius but not all "Buzzing" is related to endgraining. But then again if
> you could cut a decent splice you would know that.
You mean one better than the one you can cut?
Oh ... I forgot ... you dont make cues do you.
BTW: Here is a freebie for you to impress all the buds down at the pool hall
with.
Full splice cues do not have endgrain glue joint problems.
>I think you need a little more experience.
Ya think, Joe?
Damm, I thought I was just about ready to apply for a "masters" certificate and
you go and say something like this.
I could have been a real contender and here you are busting my balls big time.
>Or maybe this is in that last 5% you talked about.
When did I talk about that?
Oh Yeah ... ages ago .... Well .... now it is more like 4%.
I have learned a lot in the last three or four months. <G>
>So now new glue is the cure all to endgraining and buzzing.
If you say so, Joe.
But I think you need some more experience in cuemaking before you say something
like that.
Can you back that up with hard proof or is that something you read in a book?
>Thats interesting, I am sure the guys who make that obviously
>unneccessary ring are going to thank you for all your research.
No thanks needed but cash donations are accepted.
FYI... buzz rings are "old school" ... But ... I bet you knew that, didn't you,
Joe?
>BTW I have heard new cues buzz also, is it the glue?
No .. that is a buzz.
It is the lack of glue or bond thereof that causes it.
You need to stop buying the off shore cheap-o cues and buy some American quality
stuff.
If you want a really solid cue you should order one from me.
Tell you what ... special deal just cause I like you so much .... $1600
But ... if it ever "buzzes" in your lifetime you get 50% of your money back.
And ... if my cue should ever warp in the next 40 years you get 25% of your
money back.
Do you offer a better guarantee than that on the cues you sell?
Ya want two of em'?
> Buzzing is not inherent to old cues, like you would like everyone to think.
Is that what I want everyone to think, Joe?
Speak up and show us who the real idiot is.
> >If you ever start making cues call me and I will fill you in about what glues
> >to use where and why.<<
>
> Why would I do that when I can get the Hightower series and think I know 95%
> of everything there is to know about building cues after I read and watch it.
Are you really that brain dead, Joe, or did you sniff some of that magic table
dust you sell.
BTW ... Did you ever answer my question ... is there really magic in that stuff
... or is the name intentionally misleading?
> Just as likely as you woke up and said .. hey my cues ain't selling, lets
knock
> the older stuff....
Yeah Right ... Knock older cues .... you should know all about that, right Joe?
Did you not start all this by knocking the newer glues and adhesives with your
"test of time" bullshit?
Hey ... you are getting what you want .... attention.
You might even sell someone some pixie dust.
> Show me these better materials as I have asked for repeatedly.
If you were a nicer person Joe, I might be inclined to help you but your crappy
attitude has lead me to believe you are not worthy of my help. Go find them for
yourself or buy Chris Hightower's book on cuemaking
http://www.cuesmith.com/main/books_videos/index.php
Then you might sound like you know a little about what you are arguing about.
>Better yet try selling cues on the merit of the cue and not some fabrication of
my cue is better than a
> Szamboti because I have better glue.
LOL ... I think Barry Szamboti knows what kind of glue works best for his cues.
However, feel free to call him up and let him in on the big secret.
More of that pixie dust up your nose, Joe? <G>
You seem to be having so much fun here I gotta try some of that that stuff.
Want to trade some for a custom Willee Cue made with the latest magical, buzz be
gone, glue?
William Lee
Corpus Christi, Texas.
http://home.stx.rr.com/n5wrx
Making and repairing cues since the turn of the century.
ted harris
are chosen to bond dissimilair materials. Some are chosen for their
flexibility. Others are chosen for their ability to dry over long periods
of time(12-24 hours) to ensure proper penetration for bonding in high stress
areas. The only glue I use that dries fast is loctite 454 for tips. Speed
is not a consideration in any other chioce of glue used, and as such, 5
minute epoxy is used very little in my shop, and is used at no point in the
construction of my cues. Mostly, they are ALL chosen because they do not
dry as a result of the evaporation of water. They dry because of chemical
reactions, and as such add no moisture to the wood they are being applied
to. That is the one advantage over "older glues." Another is that many if
not all of these "new" glues are labratory tested for different strengths;
hardness, compression strength, tensile strength, and flexural strengths to
name a few. Yet another is selected for its ability to seal the cue before
the finish is applied. And another because it does not shrink around inlays
and such. Statistics are available today for the PSI required to cause
failure of the adhesives within these categories of strengths. Then you can
add things such as density fillers, and pigments for altering the colors of
the glue. Then we can get to the finish, which is only about a thousand
light years more advanced than finishes on "older" cues. Almost none of
these things were considerations on "older" cues. The old masters just
worked with what was available. Today, there is a much wider variety of
products offered, and I would say there is lots of factual scientific
evidence to support that claim.
However, it is not always the machine. It is oftentimes the man running it.
That statement holds a lot of validity within this industry. In any event,
I would say that adhesives play a major role in the advancement of quality
of pool cues. This is not to take away anything from the master's you defen
d. They were at the top of their class too...
"Joe Van" <class...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021216135445...@mb-mq.aol.com...
ted harris
> Since that question was too hard, please explain to me why cuemakers
> still cut titlist blanks into cues. You would think that the chance of
40-60
> year old glue failing at the rate you suggest, would surely mean failure
on
> a cue of this nature.
How many cuemakers would like to run a gun drill through them for coring
purposes? I can only think of two that have the nuts to try it.
Joe Van
>That is the one advantage over "older glues." Another is that many if
>not all of these "new" glues are labratory tested for different strengths;
>hardness, compression strength, tensile strength, and flexural strengths to
>name a few. Yet another is selected for its ability to seal the cue before
>the finish is applied. And another because it does not shrink around inlays
>and such. Statistics are available today for the PSI required to cause
>failure of the adhesives within these categories of strengths.
Ted, all this info on glue is fine. My question is if a cue is 40-60 years old,
and still solid how can anyone say its inferior? In theory all you listed are
fine, but in fact its just holding wood together. How many PSI do you think
a cue needs to withstand? Here is the stat I need to know... solid today, solid
tomorrow,
solid 50 years from now. This cannot be said about todays glue, but when I pick
up an older cue, I can prove it just by using it.
>Almost none of these things were considerations on "older" cues. The old
masters just
>worked with what was available.<<
Again true, and most of the cues are still solid as the day they were built.
Which
is the basis of the arguement. If your glue does its job, and the glue the
"masters"
used is STILL doing its job, show me the superiority or inferiority of the
glues.
This is a fact that cannot be showed in a lab test regarding tensile strength,
this
is what is seen everyday by people handling cues.
Joe
WilleeCue
cues made by the masters 40-60 years ago.
Perhaps 60 years form now some future generation of yours will be selling cues
made by me for their real time tested value.
Who knows .... it is still a silly thing to argue about and we won't be here to
see it.
William Lee
"Joe Van" <class...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021217062210...@mb-fe.aol.com...
Fred Agnir
> Are you really that brain dead, Joe, or did you sniff some of that magic table
> dust you sell.
> BTW ... Did you ever answer my question ... is there really magic in that stuff
> ... or is the name intentionally misleading?
Hahahahaha. This is too funny. I had to quote it so Joe could see it
instead of passing it over for the third for fourth time.
I answered you, but your advanced reading comprehension couldn't pick
it up.
Fred <~~~ knows something about adhesives
Donald Tees
>Again true, and most of the cues are still solid as the day they were built.
>Which
>is the basis of the arguement. If your glue does its job, and the glue the
>"masters"
>used is STILL doing its job, show me the superiority or inferiority of the
>glues.
>This is a fact that cannot be showed in a lab test regarding tensile strength,
>this
>is what is seen everyday by people handling cues.
>
>Joe
>
>
>
>
This is a bit like saying that a modern car cannot be any better than a
model T until after every model T stops running. The fact that an old
cue has not had glue failure says absolutely nothing about modern glues.
There are all sorts of construction methods used in modern cues that
were simply not available years ago. Those modern methods happen
because there are materials and tools that were not available then.
They get used because they are superior.
I'll bet a lot of those old woodworking shops never had electricity.
The mere fact that you can turn a lathe with a foot pedal, and that the
wood so turned does not go back to it's original states does not make it
a superior method. BTW, nobody said that the older cues were
"inferior". That is your own particular private twist.
Donald
Joe Van
>This is a bit like saying that a modern car cannot be any better than a
>model T until after every model T stops running.
What I am saying is no how close to this. We are talking a single component,
the difference in automotive technology between a Model T and a new car
is light years different
>The fact that an old cue has not had glue failure says absolutely nothing
about modern glues. <<
This is very true and I am not putting down modern glues. The fact is
old cues are still bonded by the glue that they were assembled with.
So saying a new cue is better because of materials, glue, and this is
_why_ you should buy them, is off the mark IMHO.
> There are all sorts of construction methods used in modern cues that
>were simply not available years ago. Those modern methods happen
>because there are materials and tools that were not available then.
> They get used because they are superior.<<
Really? You ever x-ray a cue? You know what, there maybe differences
in the way they are done, but the construction is close to the same. All cues
still have mainly the same components.So I must ask, please tell me these
methods that were not available that you mention. Could you not tap a piece
of wood back then? Is a Bushka held together at the forearm handle with
something other than a bolt or screw? Is that any different than whats done
today?
Maybe craftsman learned a particular way is better, but I am sure its something
that could be done off of any lathe or mill, new or old.
> BTW, nobody said that the older cues were "inferior". That is your own
particular private twist.<<
>The technical advancement of adhesives alone makes for a far superior cue than
was made in "the good ol' days"<<
Above is what was said in this thread, and its far from correct IMHO. Just for
the record
whats the opposite of superior? I thought so, so thats my twist huh? Good try.
Joe