It looks like they are in an Aramith box. Since the retail price is $190 or so, I'd guess a reasonable used price is about half of that. That's not a lot to worry about. How's the seller's feedback?
EXACTLY what i was thinking. To each-his-own i guess but these are UGLY big-time.It would take a set of balls to counterfeit something that ugly.
Jason
They are reminiscent of a style from the early 1900s where the pattern on the surface looked like confetti. They look like they could be useful to someone who likes to pick out a spot on the ball to hit -- just the opposite of snooker balls.EXACTLY what i was thinking. To each-his-own i guess but these are UGLY big-time.
It looks like the pattern would be fairly hard to duplicate. That with the limited market would discourage counterfeiters when more popular sets are easier to fake.It would take a set of balls to counterfeit something that ugly.
Jason
I imagine that is just from the cue ball. You can change that out separately if the object balls aren't too small from wear.Granted it isn't my first choice in design but for the moment it will do. I'm playing with some old cheap balls right now and they are leaving burn marks in my new top of the line felt. I cant have that.
The fancier design has their new surface technology which presumably gives a harder, smoother surface. I have a set and they don't seem to need cleaning as often but I haven't done any careful testing.For the most part yes I can say that it is from the cue ball. As far as the others being too small I cant say. I've been thinking about getting this set from pooldawgs https://www.pooldawg.com/product/super-aramith-pro-cup-value-pack-pool-and-billiard-balls-set . What is the difference between that set and this one https://www.pooldawg.com/product/aramith-tournament-pro-cup-tv-set ? Other than the obvious extras you get.
The fancier design has their new surface technology which presumably gives a harder, smoother surface.
I assume your talking about the tv set?