JohnnyOzone said:

Watching Mizerak play 9 ball is like watching Michael Jordan play baseball.

Click to expand...

When Miz was young he was a lot like Yapp. While not really robotic once on the ball he was very precision. Sigel also. They played much like today's players as far as execution. You don't win 4 US opens in a row unless you posses something extra. In that match with CJ it was in the 90s. He was not the player he was in the 70s.
His weight was probably a factor.

We had dinner once in Texas during one of the Reds tournaments. He ordered the meatloaf. It came and was a whole small meatloaf enough to feed 2 or 3 people. He ate the whole thing along with all the side dishes, Washing it down with multiple glasses of diet soda.
It was scary to watch.

middleofnowhere said:

Billy Stroud showed me how he would finish the rounded point with a razor knife to create a sharp point. Pretty easy actually. Then put in the inlayed point. You could not tell when it was done that it was not a splice unless you look closely.

The way to tell is at the pointed end in the point. On a splice each venner is a little different as it comes to a point due to the taper.
On an inlayed point they are unchanged.and the same.
As the cue is tapered the spliced point gets shorter. Inlayed points stay the same length as the cue is tapered. That is why they line up so perfectly, they are inlays. Spliced points if done correctly will line up perfectly as well.

I once refinished a Joss East cue and found the tips of the points were painted or inked on to make them come out even. The outside venner was black so this was almost undetectable.

On inlays in Ebony black tinted epoxy can be used to give the appearance of a more perfect fit. Tricks can be used.
I was at the BCA show once and picked up a Richard Black cue and took out my magnifer. He grabbed the cue from my hand and said "A cue must be examined at arms length with the naked eye".
He was probably right. A cue can look perfect from a small distance. Few cues could probably stand up to being examined with a loupe.

Click to expand...

The Richard Black story is funny. I'm guessing he knows exactly where all of the non perfect areas (I hesitate to call them flaws) are on the cues he builds but most normal people will probably never notice. Its the same with the racecar chassis' I build, I know every area that I don't consider "perfect" but the owners never or rarely notice, sometimes even when I point something out.

Bob Jewett said:

How do you deal with those perimeter lights, like the Predator ones?

Click to expand...

I have never played where perimeter lighting was used yet. Its also not my only method for aiming. I use ghost ball, contact point, fractional, and CTE, doesn't everyone use multiple aiming "systems"? On super thin hits how would you even use contact point or fractional, to me that would be essentially ghost ball because you are trying to put the cue ball at a point to barely touch the OB. Its really hard to even see the contact point in a case like this. straight shots or close to straight I use contact point, its very easy to see the contact point and the pocket at the same time. I would guess I use all of the aiming systems at the same time unconsciously, one system backs the other one up. I like CTE because for me it gets feet and body in the right in the right place, it forces me to always move forward into a shot, never slide sideways into a shot.

Go, Ira!

(Thanks, Ira...and Andy, and Charlie and Kenny and the other quiet folks making it happen in Bergen)

bbb said:

… if you use fractional aiming
You could just aim directly at a spot on the object ball
And not have to try to aim somewhere else to make a certain spot on the cue ball hit a certain spot on the object ball
Just saying…..

Click to expand...

Except fractional aiming (like all systems) only gets you close - you have to estimate the actual aim line from there. Very rarely does fractional aiming put you directly on the correct aim line with no adjustment.

pj
chgo

Billy Stroud showed me how he would finish the rounded point with a razor knife to create a sharp point. Pretty easy actually. Then put in the inlayed point. You could not tell when it was done that it was not a splice unless you look closely.

The way to tell is at the pointed end in the point. On a splice each venner is a little different as it comes to a point due to the taper.
On an inlayed point they are unchanged.and the same.
As the cue is tapered the spliced point gets shorter. Inlayed points stay the same length as the cue is tapered. That is why they line up so perfectly, they are inlays. Spliced points if done correctly will line up perfectly as well.

I once refinished a Joss East cue and found the tips of the points were painted or inked on to make them come out even. The outside venner was black so this was almost undetectable.

On inlays in Ebony black tinted epoxy can be used to give the appearance of a more perfect fit. Tricks can be used.
I was at the BCA show once and picked up a Richard Black cue and took out my magnifer. He grabbed the cue from my hand and said "A cue must be examined at arms length with the naked eye".
He was probably right. A cue can look perfect from a small distance. Few cues could probably stand up to being examined with a loupe.

skor said:

Anything to make the game easier….. oh man

Click to expand...

The way I'm playing lately 2 balls on the table is a lot...is a high run for me.

If you do it enough, you'll find perfection.

Rtoron,

This cue previously belonged to me. I came to own it through a trade deal with another collector, and it was NOT cheap. It was marketed to me as an F24 prototype. The collector I dealt with sells a lot of very expensive cues and has a good reputation so I have no reason to believe otherwise. I had a very nice transaction with him.

This F-24 has a non-standard joint material (these were released in steel, but the joint is an bone-esque material). The inlays are gorgeous. They are not ivory. The leather wrap is very nice, and the cue plays great.

It has no logo on the cue anywhere. You don't see many F-24s for sale (the pic you posted above is one I owned a decade or more ago). I ended up trading this cue, with a collection of cues, to our mutual friend you are dealing with, for something extremely special. I still have a bit of trader's remorse because every cue in this package was really nice.

This cue was made in the canadian plant. I'm sure there were not many of the F-24 manufacturered and every "good" FALCON appears to be in Europe. These have a lot of work in them. They were the "high end" model of that initial catalog. The FALCON sold cues cut and pasted above above are in no way what this cue is. As many would say, it's worth what someone would pay. Well, I paid (in trade) several thousand dollars, plus. It was worth that to me. I think it's an exceptional cue, and something special for your collection.

mikemosconi said:

They sell in the $250 tp $400 range or so if in very good condition - sometimes you may get more for an exception.

Click to expand...

I believe this cue is a Falcon 24 from 1991. Their high end model that retailed for $1900. Here is old price sheet.

jimmyg said:

View attachment 899749​

Click to expand...

God gave me two for a reason...

jimmyg said:

View attachment 899748​

Click to expand...

She pegged that one....