Nice try....
Why is Tascarella the Bushka expert?
- Thread starter hang-the-9
- Start date
Nice try....
I found the Frye thread, thanks for pointing it out. Nice old school cues.
All the best,
WW
Lol......:thumbup:
Jason! - Hoot!
GO TO YOUR ROOMS!
Yes sir, Tim. :sorry:
Cue history is fun, isn't it. Especially when you know some of it.
But, to keep it on topic, the thread is why Pete T. is the Bushka expert. I embodied it earlier, but I think it's because he took on the mantle, built cues closely in the style of George, continues to do so, and has received more examples of cues to validate than anyone else.
Note that I said closely in the style of George. Pete's cues fit a more modern profile, slightly longer standard, and just a bit slimmer, but still fairly large dimension by today's standard. There are other differences, and there are some other experts. Given history, I think he has spent more time in his career on the subject than others.
All the best,
H
Last edited:
To add to this, because Pete didn't start off with intentions of becoming a full-time cue maker, his first cues were made exactly to George's notes, dimensions, specs and even materials that came with the purchase. Those first cues weren't signed either by Tascarella, so the first handful are actually identical to a Balabushka.
So, when someone was showing off one of his early cues, but mistakenly calling it a Balabushka, Pete at that moment decided to make them look different to not get them confused as anything but his own work. He started off by just some material changes in color (which didn't stop them from being confused as Balabushka). He added the famous signature and of course his own half-spliced forearms, so though he still follows old school lineage, Tascarellas have stood on their own excellence from very early on.
Freddie <~~~ love this thread
Last edited:
I'm curious about the nature of these notes. Was he changing measurements throughout his career or from cue to cue? Were they highly detailed plans that were presented to customers?
A baker doesn't forget the recipe for the bread he makes day in, day out.
So would every cuemaker and cue enthusiast be.
I'm sure he changed something, but there are specific design construction details that are in those notes. I assume you know how a cue is built. I assume every cue builder has construction notes. If I built cues, I certainly would.
How very peculiar, this question is. We're talking about Balabushka.
Equally peculiar analogy.
They are his notes. Plain and simple. I'm sure as his craft developed (every cue was different after all), he took notes. I'm not sure why (I assume) you think this would be odd (since you're comparing to baking bread without a recipe).
As both an engineer and a lifelong cook, let me tell you there's no comparison. But I still have notes all over my recipes. When someone asks me, for example, about a past engineering project or even my Balabushka articles, I tell them I have to check my notes.
These Balabushka notes were absolutely private, not for the public, design notes just like every good designer (engineering, dress-making, and yes, culinary) would take down. And as meticulous as the man was reported to be, I would expect those notes to follow suit.
I have only Pete's description of the notes, but there's no question what they are. They're his notes. Just like Bell or Edison, or Da Vinci for that matter. We all understand the value of finding these greats' notes.
Again, I would expect every good cuemaker today to have notes.
Freddie <~~~ taking note
Last edited:
Thanks. I'm just wondering if he wasn't working on a catalog at some point, and if he ever touches on the subject of ebony Titlists and why he seems to have never used one.
I don't mean to derail, but of the few handful of Ebony titlist I have seen converted, they all have had the points pushed way up the forearm due to them being too skinny.
Does anyone have an example of a Ebony titlist, that has been converted, with low point, and a standard joint size?
If Bushkas played that well why would he change anything on them? Build the same cue and sign them, take pics, etc to identify.
If I bought Searings, Showmans, Southwests shop and notes, I wouldn't change a thing. Why change what is considered the best? Doesn't make sense.
Jason
If I bought Searings, Showmans, Southwests shop and notes, I wouldn't change a thing. Why change what is considered the best? Doesn't make sense.
Jason
Thanks for sharing....I am learning a ton from this thread.
Philly - did you have or do you have any Doc Frye cues?
Thanks
Ken
I do/did not. Guys back then in my poolroom were buying them. Probably bought after a big score. Very expensive at the time. About $125 with two shafts in 1968 dollars. I had a good old Hoppe in a hard leather snap top case that cost me $50 case and all. I have friend that has a Frye. The picture in the other thread with it sitting on a table with gold cloth. Goes by Gold Crown here. They are probably undervalued.
Nice info here, I did not expect the thread to hit this many pages without being about aiming or the APA LOL
That's what I've heard as well . I've also spoken to a few people who knew George and ordered cues from him (all three still have them) and it took over a year to get the cue. Which leads me to believe that the current estimate of total cues produced by him is outrageous. Let's do some quick math on it
1200 total cues spanning a 16 year career
His first few years by historical account (blue book) had a small (couple dozen) output so let's say 24 cues a year for first 3 years . That's 72 cues
1200-72 leaves 1,128 cues In 13 years
1,128/ 13 years= 86 cues per year
86/12 months a year = 7.16
7.16/ 4 weeks = 1.86 cues per week
that's working every single day of the year!!!
. Let's say old George took the weekends off like the rest of planet earth .....(and I'm sure also had a few sick and personal days and holidays which aren't going to be accounted for)
That leaves a generous 261 working days in the year
261X 12 = 3393 days
3393/ 1128 cues = 3.00days
THATS 1 CUE FINISHED EVERY 3 DAYS!!! FOR 13 YEARS....... AND THATS CONSERVATIVE !!! I DIDNT EVEN BREAK THAT DOWN INTO WORKING HOURS !!!!! THE NUMBER WOULD BE LAUGHABLE
There is NO WAY that man produced that many cues in his life having been so picky about his clients.
I wonder who's responsible for the gross inflation of those estimates
If he worked for 12 hrs a day for 5 days a week that's 2.5 days a week or 130 work days.
130 work days X 13 years =1690 work days
1690 work days / 1128 cues = 1.49 days
THAT MEANS EVERY CUE TOOK ONLY 1.5 DAYS TO MAKE FOR 13 STRAIGHT YEARS......CANT WAIT TO HEAR THE EXPLAINTIONS THAT JUSTIFY THIS. LMAO!!!!!!!!
Last edited:
Probably the dealers who knew they were selling fakes
Jason
Edit: I would probably work closer to 340/350 days per year
Last edited:
No not even close. If you break it down to working hours @ 12 hrs per day 5 days a week
It's 130 very hardworking generous work days. If 1200 cues is true. George had the Keebler elves working with him before they got into the cookie business
I believe he wanted them to have discernible differences so his and Georges cues could be told apart.
Regardless, the differences that would matter most would be the internal construction methods, not external, and I think Pete prabably didn't deviate far if at all from those. Thats one of the reasons his cues get all the praise for their playability.