AzBilliards.com
Page 51 of 118 « First 41495051 525361101 Last »

AzBilliards.com (https://forums.azbilliards.com/index.php)
-   Main Forum (https://forums.azbilliards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Pool ball collecting. (https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=421609)

K2Kraze 01-19-2018 10:00 AM

That’s a great question, poppa -

I think a “Masterpiece” lineage or possibly a “Vintage” line of balls brought to us from Saluc/Aramith would be a fantastic idea - and if I were in charge of new products and production, would certainly pitch the idea.

I’ll see what I can find out [emoji6]

~ K


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

K2Kraze 01-19-2018 10:07 AM

ipoppa33 brought up an idea we’ve mentioned in the thread a few times about resurrecting and bringing new life to past ball designs that are considered exemplary if not spectacular - whether in a box or on the table.

So - for this posting, #752 in the thread, I’d like to see what members think are some of their favorite, iconic designs of the past that IF could be produced to modern standards, would like to see made available to us...

Maybe a TOP 5 or TOP 10 list.

~ K.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

franko 01-19-2018 10:36 AM

Hyatt
 
I think it was Hyatt that made the White ball with the jagged lines, I would love to see a reproduction of those .

Rubik's Cube 01-19-2018 11:04 AM

Good afternoon, everyone. :)

I'd dearly love to own a pristine set of Romanique Is (and IIs for that matter) but hand on heart, gentlemen, it would be important to me that they were originals and not reproductions. I'd prefer to see the manufacturers innovate new classics rather than replicate older designs. Just my personal tuppence worth, or course. :)

Franko: There is a new version of the zigzags, sir! K2Kraze offered up some beautiful photographs on post 711.

Best wishes,
RC.

K2Kraze 01-19-2018 11:39 AM

Pool ball collecting.
 
Dear Rubik’s - with your steadfast and unwavering stranglehold on sticking to the originals isn’t lost with me, sir, for the glorious designs of the past transport us not only to that era of games and technologies but also to that period of the folks that played in the cuesports.

A grand time to be playing the Grand Games.

The dizzying effects of the Hyatt zig zags that were then most likely looked upon as a gimmick ball and prompted players to offer up suggestions of “distracting” and “difficult to shoot” are seen as veritable treasures from the day by collectors around the globe. They were sold in low numbers and very few survived. Imagine the challenges of manufacturing that ball alone 75 years ago.

I think the same could be said about any “fancy” design like the Romaniques that relied upon insetting the numerals and rings versus printing them on the surface - they left those silly ideas to the amateur ball makers. Pushing the limits of manufacturing capabilities have been around since man starting “building things” and we see this today with such things like Duramith 4 from Aramith and Cyclop offerings.

The question I offered up is more along the lines of dreamy designs and those coveted patterns that most of us will never see or have the chance to play on the table - and IF they could be manufactured today, which would be the TOP 5 or 10 that would be on someone’s LOVE TO HAVE list.

Funny isn’t it - how the ONLY balls we can purchase are those that are offered - and made by a man with an idea. Perhaps a team of people - but nevertheless we can’t buy what we dream. Only what’s “out there”. Which is why we see new offerings from the likes of VIGMA and Aramith and Cyclop - with their most recent offering of a zig zag ball. Sure - you don’t like the colors. Or that person doesn’t like the translucent this or the finish like that. But don’t you think they (buyers and critics alike) said the exact same thing when every Hyatt ball was introduced outside of a plain-Jane?

Roman numerals? Really?!! It makes me think and translate to real numbers!

Hexagon rings? What’s wrong with a good ole circle anyway?!

My musings anyway ~




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rubik's Cube 01-19-2018 11:58 AM

Admirable sentiments, Mr K. :)

Furniture aficionados often enthuse about the patina of an aged mahogany, the warm glow of a beautiful rosewood, etc. I derive similar pleasures in the deep lustre of a Raschig bumblebee or how the colours of Hyatt Romaniques and Aramith Pokers mellow gracefully with age. :)

franko 01-19-2018 08:18 PM

Did
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rubik's Cube (Post 6067660)
Good afternoon, everyone. :)

I'd dearly love to own a pristine set of Romanique Is (and IIs for that matter) but hand on heart, gentlemen, it would be important to me that they were originals and not reproductions. I'd prefer to see the manufacturers innovate new classics rather than replicate older designs. Just my personal tuppence worth, or course. :)

Franko: There is a new version of the zigzags, sir! K2Kraze offered up some beautiful photographs on post 711.

Best wishes,
RC.

Thank you I found them on E Bay.

ipoppa33 01-19-2018 08:42 PM

If I had my choice I would like a 10 ball set like the Raschig 9 ball set!!! Give me that I would be happy! It shouldn't be that hard to make cool.

Rubik's Cube 01-20-2018 08:22 AM

What a beautiful set that would be, sir! A plain black and blue stripe for the 10 ball, perhaps?

Rubik's Cube 01-20-2018 03:05 PM

A quick question on those extraordinary Romanique 1s if I may, K2K?

What are their respective weights, sir? Have they stayed reasonably matched throughout the set? It is interesting to me how some early balls (particularly those including formaldehyde in their compound) although varying slightly over the decades remain extremely consistent dependant on colour.

If one took three sets from the 1970s, for example, whereas the weights of each ball might not now be as consistent as at the time of manufacture, all the blue deuces from each box will be a gram lighter; the three 9s all weighing 165g etc.

Just an observation for the chemists. :)

K2Kraze 01-20-2018 08:34 PM

Hello Rubik’s!

I will be more than happy to share the individual ball weights of the Romanique I’s upon my return to the Vault of Balls in two days time, sir, otherwise I’d have to recall the numbers from a foggy memory brought on by the sheer disbelief I actually had them in my hands [emoji51] I do vaguely recall the numbers were impressive. Enough so that I had to verify the scale calibration.

I think I’ll toss in numbers for the Romanique II’s while I’m at the test bench on Tuesday [emoji51]

Perhaps toss in a pic or two?

~ K.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

branpureza 01-22-2018 04:34 PM

.................. :)

K2Kraze 01-23-2018 07:07 AM

Pool ball collecting.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rubik's Cube (Post 6068573)
A quick question on those extraordinary Romanique 1s if I may, K2K?

What are their respective weights, sir? Have they stayed reasonably matched throughout the set? It is interesting to me how some early balls (particularly those including formaldehyde in their compound) although varying slightly over the decades remain extremely consistent dependant on colour.

If one took three sets from the 1970s, for example, whereas the weights of each ball might not now be as consistent as at the time of manufacture, all the blue deuces from each box will be a gram lighter; the three 9s all weighing 165g etc.

Just an observation for the chemists. :)



As promised, RC...

Romanique I individual ball weights in grams of course:

*all averages are excluding the cue ball weights

Cue ball 164.4
I 161.2
II 162.0
III 161.9
IV 159.9
V 162.2
VI 162.4
VII 162.4
VIII 162.4
IX 162.4
X 163.3
XI 165.6
XII 163.8
XIII 163.9
XIV 161.5
XV 162.3

Giving us:

Range: 5.7g
Average/mean: 162.5g
Median: 162.4g
Mean absolute deviation of .9g

The Romanique II numbers by comparison:

Range: 3.7g
Average/mean: 161.9g
Median: 162.3
Mean absolute deviation of .9g

Now for the interesting...

The incredible Raschig 9 Ball set I have:

Range: 1.1g
Average/mean: 164.6g
Median: 164.7g
Mean absolute deviation of .2g

Compared to Aramith’s finest new TOURNAMENT set:

Range: 1.6g
Average/mean: 168.5g
Median: 168.4g
Mean absolute deviation of .3g

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...3ff19a55f6.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...ab68559534.jpg

And for fun...since Fats like to watch over what I’m up to:

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...96136b31aa.jpg

What do you think ole chap?

[emoji41]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rubik's Cube 01-24-2018 03:31 PM

Good evening, K2K. :)

Thank you for taking the time and trouble to post up those individual weights, sir, very interesting and much appreciated. I would wager a pound to a penny if we were ever fortunate enough to find another example of Romanique 1s (highly unlikely) that XI outlier at 165 grams would also weigh something similar in the second set.

Romanique 1, Romanique 2 and Raschig Turniersatz, eh? I strongly suspect you are the only collector in the world to own those three particular sets, Mr K. :)

Best wishes,
RC.

GoPlayPool 01-24-2018 03:48 PM

Regarding pool balls
 
I noticed this thread...
I have some sets of balls for sale, but first I need to get pricing.
Any help is appreciated.
Too many pictures, so I put all of them on the "link" below for everyone to see.

http://assets.goplaypool.com/poolballs.html

Again, any help or interest is appreciated.

You can email me at: ramin@goplaypool.com
I am not sure if I get notifications on here or not.

Thanks


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:12 AM.
Page 51 of 118 « First 41495051 525361101 Last »

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.