Technological advances in cues
- Thread starter luke
- Start date
Advancements in glue (epoxy) and coring are two that directly relate to better playing cues.
the Goof Ball
Goof Ball Committee
Probably the most significant is the graphite cue sticks they have now. I wrote a post about them on my website, you can read it here. I personally don't think that any technology has really taken the cue stick "world" by storm. You could say that they now have the cue sticks with lasers built in to the cue but they are more of a novelty than any legitimate cue.
Cheaper more accurate production methods. I hate to say it, but to make an accurate cue, the old school way is HARD. To me, that makes the work of guys like Edwin Reyes RIP, Al Bautista, Bebot Bautista, etc soooooo much more amazing than they appear.
CNC, advanced filtering, etc should just make it easier. Now, I don't make cues, so please don't flame me. I think modern cuemakers are putting this ease back into the product, better quality, shorter lead times, and more complex designs.
CNC, advanced filtering, etc should just make it easier. Now, I don't make cues, so please don't flame me. I think modern cuemakers are putting this ease back into the product, better quality, shorter lead times, and more complex designs.
Not much
there have been more improvements in cosmetics than anything else in the past 20 years. There is only so much a cue maker can do to make a cue bring the best out in any person, period. Great play is a people thing not a cue thing. There are plenty of Efrens and Earls out there that will never pick up a cue because they found Facebook first.:frown:
We had layered tips back in 85, I still like non-layered tips, its hard to find a good one, its hit or miss but when you get one there is nothing better. As far as manufactured shafts vs. solid wood shafts that varies from player to player(who thinks whats best). There has been a improvement on how good mass production cues play and you can get a lot more cue for your dollar now than 20 years ago(The low end). Because of technological advances making quality cues is faster and cheaper.
On the high end there has been very little improvement in how good any man or machine can make a cue play-its up to who is using the cue. Aint no cue made by a machine gonna turn Joe Blow in to Johnny Archer-not now, not in 50 years from now. You cant make a great player with a cue. Great players, play great with anything(within reason)
there have been more improvements in cosmetics than anything else in the past 20 years. There is only so much a cue maker can do to make a cue bring the best out in any person, period. Great play is a people thing not a cue thing. There are plenty of Efrens and Earls out there that will never pick up a cue because they found Facebook first.:frown:
We had layered tips back in 85, I still like non-layered tips, its hard to find a good one, its hit or miss but when you get one there is nothing better. As far as manufactured shafts vs. solid wood shafts that varies from player to player(who thinks whats best). There has been a improvement on how good mass production cues play and you can get a lot more cue for your dollar now than 20 years ago(The low end). Because of technological advances making quality cues is faster and cheaper.
On the high end there has been very little improvement in how good any man or machine can make a cue play-its up to who is using the cue. Aint no cue made by a machine gonna turn Joe Blow in to Johnny Archer-not now, not in 50 years from now. You cant make a great player with a cue. Great players, play great with anything(within reason)
Last edited:
NK, why would you get flamed for that. Dedicated cue building equipment in itself has led to advanced cue building and design. Good thoughts from a non cue builder.
Tommy is spot on with the epoxy. Think about what George, Gus and others had back in the day. I would say the average repair person and builder have at least 12 different glues and epoxys on hand. Each has its job.
And as Eric mentioned. Cosmetics. UV resistant epoxy designed for finishes. Automotive and CA glue for finishes. Water based poly acrylic
that was available back then but much better quality today.
Tommy is spot on with the epoxy. Think about what George, Gus and others had back in the day. I would say the average repair person and builder have at least 12 different glues and epoxys on hand. Each has its job.
And as Eric mentioned. Cosmetics. UV resistant epoxy designed for finishes. Automotive and CA glue for finishes. Water based poly acrylic
that was available back then but much better quality today.
Last edited:
When I look at golf equipment and see how technology has helped players do things they could not have done with less advanced equipment it makes you wonder. Would the pool players of yesteryear be at a disadvantage with their old cues if playing a modern day player? How many top pros are using Balabushka's these days? I know sponsorship has a lot to do with it, but new tech advances should make things better.
Lance Link
Banned
Interesting question, Luke,
I think the players of yesteryear would give today's pro players some serious competition. Look at vintage films of what Mosconi, Greenleaf, etc. were able to do with thier cues back then. For them, there was no 314 or OB1 or anything else like that. Only Balabushkas, Szambotis and Brunswicks
...Remember, a lot of those guys were consistently posting high numbers in Straight Pool, and quite a few were runnin' 150 and out on a regular basis. I can't imagine that a high-performance shaft (or any other innovation) would make thier game go 'through the roof'.
Even if you could convince any of them to play a game with an LD shaft, more than likely you'd get it back with the comment, "I'll keep my own shaft, thanks."
They might consider a MagicRack or a Sardo rack a 'gimmick'...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WR_llVOJFaE
It's not the arrow, it's the indian.
I'm sure the Indian has the most to do with the outcome but I don't think it would be fun for say Rod Laver to play Roger Federer with a wood racquet, or Jack Nicklaus to try and outhit Tiger with a persimmon driver. Would Mosconi and Lassiter hold up against SVB using the old favorite cues including break cues?
thats not a fair comparison, here is why:
Federer with a wood racket would be a joke. Because the advances in tennis equipment have had a huge impact on the sport. In pool there hasnt been any real advances so putting a modern cue in a past champions hands wont make a difference.
Consider firearms 90%+ of the ammo shot at local gun ranges and used for hunting was designed around 90-100 years ago 30-06, 375 H&H, 38 Special, 9mm etc. There are new calibers that will carry the bullet down range a little farther and faster perhaps 10% the 338 Lapua or 408 Chey-Tac are 2 examples but for the cost of ammo and the guns the difference is negligent. Back when the guns 90% of police depts carry-TV wasnt invented, hell they didnt have plastic when the 30-06 was invented, I think they had bak-lite. Some things in life change quickly-electronics is very fast changing, firearms are very slow to change. These 2 things being at the extreme ends of things in the world.
So if you think of it like that, meaning electronics on the fast end and guns on the slow end-Cues fall closer to guns than electronics. and Tennis equipment is closer to electronics. And some things dont change-girls LOL
Last edited:
where there has been the biggest change in pool equipment is the balls, what we use now compaired to 50 years ago is huge.
I have some chalk thats 100 years old and you cant tell it from a new piece except by looking at the label. I have used it for a few hours a couple times and it works great. But because its collectable I didnt use it up, but I did verify for myself there has been n o changes to speak of with chalk. Some brands are better than others but it's all very similar.
Tables have changed a little but not much, pockets are smaller nowdays.
Cloth has been manufactured by Simonis for 100's of years, there are different types of cloth that effect how good you can play, the real slow fuzzy felt looking cloth is much harder to play on than fast Simonis, in 87 when Simonis showed up in California we had 4 3/4" to 5" pockets and everyone started running more packages in 9 ball. It got to the point that if someone missed he would concede the game if the balls were laying easy. so in response to this pockets have tightened up now you see 4" pockets. The reason is because its much easier to move the CB on Simonis cloth so to make the game harder the pockets had to be tightened up. There are many differnt kinds of cloth for differnt games, directional, rubber backed, worsted wool, etc. Some cloth types will determine which cues work the best. But for American pool i'll explaine below.
This brings us to cues, when the cloth was slow and the pockets were big cues were on average 20oz, 21oz. Now days 18oz, 17oz is the average weight. You dont need a heavy cue to muscle the rock around the box, Thats the single biggest change in cues is the average weight. With faster cloth you can let the cue do the work more often and you dont need 21oz to make that happen. I have played long enough and good enough to know this for a fact. Ask the old guys they will back me up.
I have some chalk thats 100 years old and you cant tell it from a new piece except by looking at the label. I have used it for a few hours a couple times and it works great. But because its collectable I didnt use it up, but I did verify for myself there has been n o changes to speak of with chalk. Some brands are better than others but it's all very similar.
Tables have changed a little but not much, pockets are smaller nowdays.
Cloth has been manufactured by Simonis for 100's of years, there are different types of cloth that effect how good you can play, the real slow fuzzy felt looking cloth is much harder to play on than fast Simonis, in 87 when Simonis showed up in California we had 4 3/4" to 5" pockets and everyone started running more packages in 9 ball. It got to the point that if someone missed he would concede the game if the balls were laying easy. so in response to this pockets have tightened up now you see 4" pockets. The reason is because its much easier to move the CB on Simonis cloth so to make the game harder the pockets had to be tightened up. There are many differnt kinds of cloth for differnt games, directional, rubber backed, worsted wool, etc. Some cloth types will determine which cues work the best. But for American pool i'll explaine below.
This brings us to cues, when the cloth was slow and the pockets were big cues were on average 20oz, 21oz. Now days 18oz, 17oz is the average weight. You dont need a heavy cue to muscle the rock around the box, Thats the single biggest change in cues is the average weight. With faster cloth you can let the cue do the work more often and you dont need 21oz to make that happen. I have played long enough and good enough to know this for a fact. Ask the old guys they will back me up.
Last edited:
Interesting points Fatboy! Since you mention tables. Do you think Mosconi could run 526 on a 9' Diamond with tight pockets using his old cue? Perhaps the overall difference in tech advances regarding pool is small, but it must equate to something. I'm just trying to get a handle on what can be quantified and demonstrated to be true and accurate.
One advance I see is that when I started playing in NJ in the early 60's the only cues that were available were Palmer and Paradise cues. Way too much money for a young kid or the average player. Now you can get a decent Chinese made cue for a $100 or less, That would be about $15 or so in that time period.Well with in reach of most pool players back then.
he could have ran those balls out with any decent cue made then or today.
No I don't believe mosconi could have ran 526 on todays tables b/c he ran it on an 8ft with buckets for pockets.
Playability of cues has not really changed.........they were made just as good back then.
the biggest differnence your going to see in the old cues is that their glues have somewhat broken down after 60 years...........but back then I dam guarantee you that all those cues from gus, george, herman, martin all played lights out, and most of them still do.
Just like all the LD and spliced shaft mumbo jumbo that everyone thinks is cutting edge tech and maybe a decade or so old........BS its old as sam hill.\
Things like glue get better.....but as far as construction techniques? Nope most were perfected very long ago. They were making intricately designed and spliced cues over 150 years ago, and spliced shafts are old as hell too.
Don't know why but everyone thinks just because we have computers and stuff now that everyone back in the real gap was retarted and incapable of producing something perfect without CNC or some new epoxy or what ever.
-Grey Ghost-
Fatboy:
Not to be contrary but in some respects you are wrong. Let me state up front I am a competative target shooter. I shoot center fire and rimfire rifle and pistol. I am very good with a pistol and fair with a rifle.
Having said that I will admit that center fire rifles have not changed much in 50 years. But ammunition and optics sure have. You used 30-06 as an example. It is an inherently accurate round. Ackley did some work and made it a little better. But it stands up well even today, BUT. It can't even begin to compare to some of Palissento's work. The 6mm PPC will run rings around the 06. There is no comparison. Bullet design has taken leaps forward in the last 20 years. I have some 80 grain 22 bullets that shot out of my 223 bolt gun will hang with any 30 caliber gun at 600 yards. Scope systems with integral atmosperic computers can give 1 round hits at a mile. These are just a few examples.
Rimfire it is even more pronounced. I shoot ISU (Olympic) 50 meter indoor 3 position. I have a 30 year old Anshutz 1413 rifle. It is a good shooter but it can't even come close to a tuned Feinwerbau 2602. Back then walnut stocks and few adjustments. Today aluminum and composite stocks with 6 adjustments in the cheek piece alone. Ammunition has undergone 2 coplete generations in the last 30 years. The stuff we are getting now is unreal in accuracy and consistancy. I could go on and on.
I know I lost many of you a long time ago and I appologize. Fatboy I do agree 100% with your observations on pool equipment. Hell I just bought a 20.5 oz customized Pechaur to deal with those fuzzy clothed Valleys. I normally shoot at 18.2 to 18.5. Need the extra heft to deal with the slow cloth.
And Fatboy I apologize if I came on a little hard. I am not in any way dissing you. Just hopefully informing. If I am out of line I am sorry.
Mark Shuman
Not to be contrary but in some respects you are wrong. Let me state up front I am a competative target shooter. I shoot center fire and rimfire rifle and pistol. I am very good with a pistol and fair with a rifle.
Having said that I will admit that center fire rifles have not changed much in 50 years. But ammunition and optics sure have. You used 30-06 as an example. It is an inherently accurate round. Ackley did some work and made it a little better. But it stands up well even today, BUT. It can't even begin to compare to some of Palissento's work. The 6mm PPC will run rings around the 06. There is no comparison. Bullet design has taken leaps forward in the last 20 years. I have some 80 grain 22 bullets that shot out of my 223 bolt gun will hang with any 30 caliber gun at 600 yards. Scope systems with integral atmosperic computers can give 1 round hits at a mile. These are just a few examples.
Rimfire it is even more pronounced. I shoot ISU (Olympic) 50 meter indoor 3 position. I have a 30 year old Anshutz 1413 rifle. It is a good shooter but it can't even come close to a tuned Feinwerbau 2602. Back then walnut stocks and few adjustments. Today aluminum and composite stocks with 6 adjustments in the cheek piece alone. Ammunition has undergone 2 coplete generations in the last 30 years. The stuff we are getting now is unreal in accuracy and consistancy. I could go on and on.
I know I lost many of you a long time ago and I appologize. Fatboy I do agree 100% with your observations on pool equipment. Hell I just bought a 20.5 oz customized Pechaur to deal with those fuzzy clothed Valleys. I normally shoot at 18.2 to 18.5. Need the extra heft to deal with the slow cloth.
And Fatboy I apologize if I came on a little hard. I am not in any way dissing you. Just hopefully informing. If I am out of line I am sorry.
Mark Shuman