Custom is custom and a very good player friend told me his Custom Cue is worth 1.5-2.0 BALL ADVANTAGE in any game of One Pocket.
Custom Cue Mythology
- Thread starter Grilled Cheese
- Start date
He should advertise that. There are pros out there that would pay big money for that cue to gain a 2.0 ball advantage in one pocket. They'll be able to take down Efren at the DCC.
:embarrassed2:
ya know, he's right.
Same thing with cars - both a Bugatti and a SmartCar are made from the same basic materials - various types of metals, woods, carbon fibers, aluminum, plastics, glass, rubber, etc.
So I just can't imagine why someone would want a finely-tuned exotic sports car when they can buy a much less expensive Kia or Suzuki.
Why buy that BMW or Benz when a Ford Taurus was made from the same materials??
After all, they'll both get you to your destination........
-von
Same thing with cars - both a Bugatti and a SmartCar are made from the same basic materials - various types of metals, woods, carbon fibers, aluminum, plastics, glass, rubber, etc.
So I just can't imagine why someone would want a finely-tuned exotic sports car when they can buy a much less expensive Kia or Suzuki.
Why buy that BMW or Benz when a Ford Taurus was made from the same materials??
After all, they'll both get you to your destination........
-von
I'm going to have to side with the OP on this one and suggest that you change your highlighted line from "Played like" to "felt like" because that's all there is to it. Your Scruggs, SouthWest, Joss etc... etc... don't PLAY or make balls better than a 50 dollar bar cue. Now, those cues will FEEL a helluva lot better and have higher quality wood and most likely better balance, but the cue doesn't make the balls, that is all up to you. Hey, I'm not jabbing you, man. I have a James White, Tim Scruggs, 2 Paul Mottey's and a Thomas Wayne so I'm just as guilty as the next person as far as buying high end cues goes. But, I'm well aware that those cues don't make me play better. I went a number of years where I was in my "Earl Strickland" mode and I shot with a plain white Cuetec like he used to shoot with back in the day. I won a lot of tournaments playing with that cue. I still have that cue and use it every once in a while. My main player is the Jim White though. I just like the way it feels. Plus, it was custom made for me by Jim and he made it 59 inches so it fits me better, I'm tall.
MULLY
Yeah, but cars are something that people choose by ego rather than usefulness. You were being sarcastic about both cars getting you from A to B but in all reality that is exactly true and there are plenty of people out there that think like that. My mom is one of them. She is financially well enough that she could afford to buy a nice new car, instead she goes for used cars with low mileage that don't cost a whole lot. Her reasoning, exactly what you said, "I only need to go from here to there so why should I waste money on an expensive car?"
Same with watches. A 20 dollar Timex tells the same time as my 2,000 dollar Breitling. But it surely doesn't look as good.:thumbup:
MULLY
I think your wrong on this because most pro players I have seen use custom cues, some may use aftermarket shafts though. I have played good pool with both production and custom cues, the only thing I did not like as far as hit was most shafts from production cues were light or just did not feel right for me.
I also think that materials used such as handle wood along with other stuff affect hit and balance is also an issue. Most people prefer a certain hit and for some a production cue can replicate this but what about the cues with ivory joints, G10 pins and ivory ferrules?
Good points, Von! Ya know, whether it is simple blind faith or the fact that I sincerely believe that Dennis Searing can make a cue that will give the best Schon ever made the 4 out, I just shoot better with a custom cue.
Since hit is subjective, I think that there must be reasons that learned pool players will stay on a ten year waiting list for a South West, or pay over a grand for a plain jane Harris based on its playability, when they could have bought the Player's version for $99.
I guess my beliefs are simple, but I do believe that a Cadillac is a better car than a Yugo, even though they basically have the same function, getting you from point A to point B. Like you said, they are both made of metal, rubber, plastic, etc., so they should be the same. Drive them both on a thousand mile trip and tell me the Yugo's the best driving car on any level other than gas mileage.
I guess even in a world of cars where every one was a Yugo, I'd still want the best Yugo!
Steve
Attachments
Just last night i was think that it's been boring here lately and this thread popped up.
Here is my take on it. Play with what you want and can afford.
I've seen this in golf. A guy pulls out a brand new state of the art driver that costs $500 and hits it 200 yards and the next guy pulls out a no name driver that costs $50 and whacks it 250 yards. Like it has been said before a good player will play good with a decent house cue and a guy with a $2000 custom can't run 5 balls,seen it a 100 times.
On a personal note i have recently had the chance to hit some balls with a nice Schon and a Paul Mottey. Both nice cues and great to look at and played very well. But i thought that my humble Lucasi felt just as good.
Of course i must admit i am not that fussy. I once took a house cue and ran 101 balls with it.It was straight with a good tip and it got the job done.
On the rare occasion that i see someone with a high end cue i always ask if i can look at it and most of the time they will let me hit a few balls and i always give them a compliment on how nice it is and I'm not just patronizing because all custom cues feel great to me but not good enough for me to drop a couple grand on. But that's just me.
One last thing. If i had money to burn , yes i would drop some big bucks on a custom or two just because i could.
Here is my take on it. Play with what you want and can afford.
I've seen this in golf. A guy pulls out a brand new state of the art driver that costs $500 and hits it 200 yards and the next guy pulls out a no name driver that costs $50 and whacks it 250 yards. Like it has been said before a good player will play good with a decent house cue and a guy with a $2000 custom can't run 5 balls,seen it a 100 times.
On a personal note i have recently had the chance to hit some balls with a nice Schon and a Paul Mottey. Both nice cues and great to look at and played very well. But i thought that my humble Lucasi felt just as good.
Of course i must admit i am not that fussy. I once took a house cue and ran 101 balls with it.It was straight with a good tip and it got the job done.
On the rare occasion that i see someone with a high end cue i always ask if i can look at it and most of the time they will let me hit a few balls and i always give them a compliment on how nice it is and I'm not just patronizing because all custom cues feel great to me but not good enough for me to drop a couple grand on. But that's just me.
One last thing. If i had money to burn , yes i would drop some big bucks on a custom or two just because i could.
Last edited:
1. Why would I play for 100K with a cue I never played with? 2. In the post I mentioned commonly available cues other than "junk". However, given the choice of a Scruggs or a Schon (for instance) I think my odds would be as good with a Schon. (or Falcon, or Preditor, etc.) I have a case full of Scruggs that I can base that on. What I'd most likely do is hit with both and choose the one that felt best. I've used $35.00 pawn shop cues that played great.
barryc
I agree
Chris,
I agree with you although I have never seen a factory that was not worried about profit so your whole post is purely something to talk about in theory. There could be a factory turning out cues with tolerances to match any custom cue builder. The minor catch is that to break even on a cue it would cost more than a new car if any market at all could be found for these cues. The cues would be built in laboratory conditions and it would take a year or longer to build a cue after a human being selected the woods. Although in theory you could have more machines do the testing and inspection that would double or triple the price of the cue that already cost far more than most custom cues. In reality you would use human inspectors all along the line so what you have is the ultimate toy shop for a custom cue builder.
Machines can be more consistent than a human however machines don't normally check during or after each step and make any corrections necessary. Machines don't know when tooling is getting worn or dull. Machines can't accept or reject wood or other components either except by comparatively crude methods. Ultimately the custom shop is the cheapest and most efficient way to build a top quality cue because of the inherent flexibility of a human work flow and inflexibility of machine work flows.
Many things that are possible are far from practical. A production line fitting to custom builder tolerances is one of these things. When you have humans hand fitting everything behind the machines you only have a larger version of my NC machine roughing in things before I final fit them by hand. The best and most efficient operations use machines for what they are best suited for and humans for what they are best suited for.
Hu
Chris,
I agree with you although I have never seen a factory that was not worried about profit so your whole post is purely something to talk about in theory. There could be a factory turning out cues with tolerances to match any custom cue builder. The minor catch is that to break even on a cue it would cost more than a new car if any market at all could be found for these cues. The cues would be built in laboratory conditions and it would take a year or longer to build a cue after a human being selected the woods. Although in theory you could have more machines do the testing and inspection that would double or triple the price of the cue that already cost far more than most custom cues. In reality you would use human inspectors all along the line so what you have is the ultimate toy shop for a custom cue builder.
Machines can be more consistent than a human however machines don't normally check during or after each step and make any corrections necessary. Machines don't know when tooling is getting worn or dull. Machines can't accept or reject wood or other components either except by comparatively crude methods. Ultimately the custom shop is the cheapest and most efficient way to build a top quality cue because of the inherent flexibility of a human work flow and inflexibility of machine work flows.
Many things that are possible are far from practical. A production line fitting to custom builder tolerances is one of these things. When you have humans hand fitting everything behind the machines you only have a larger version of my NC machine roughing in things before I final fit them by hand. The best and most efficient operations use machines for what they are best suited for and humans for what they are best suited for.
Hu
quality assurance
If you go back and read every one of my posts you will find out that I have been talking about quality control the entire time. "Defective" is subjective. Had somebody not cut into these cues would the factory have considered them defective? They passed quality control and were sent to market. I suspect that while many more weren't that far out of center many more were too. Do you think that either one of the shafts in the images I posted a link to played consistently regardless of which way the shaft happened to be oriented when you picked up the cue?
A factory can't hold the tolerances that a custom cue builder can without having to sell the cue for far more money than most custom makers charge. As I have said in my earlier posts, that is simply the limitations of a production line. I have done production, semi-custom, and full custom work. I do know the practical limitations of each and practically speaking I can't fit production parts to nearly the tolerances I can hand fit them.
The best production cue is the lowly house cue. This is because it has a near minimum of components and large contact areas in the splice that makes perfect fitting less critical. If it has good shaft wood, proper balance, and the tip and ferrule replaced by someone that knows their business it will usually play with anything. Add ring work, a joint, on and on, then everything you add increases the issues with a production cue. Of course the human element comes in when selecting the quality house cue. If you order a dozen or two from the factory you may not get one with a good shaft or you might get a handful, the same consistency issue as with other factory cues.
Hu
If you go back and read every one of my posts you will find out that I have been talking about quality control the entire time. "Defective" is subjective. Had somebody not cut into these cues would the factory have considered them defective? They passed quality control and were sent to market. I suspect that while many more weren't that far out of center many more were too. Do you think that either one of the shafts in the images I posted a link to played consistently regardless of which way the shaft happened to be oriented when you picked up the cue?
A factory can't hold the tolerances that a custom cue builder can without having to sell the cue for far more money than most custom makers charge. As I have said in my earlier posts, that is simply the limitations of a production line. I have done production, semi-custom, and full custom work. I do know the practical limitations of each and practically speaking I can't fit production parts to nearly the tolerances I can hand fit them.
The best production cue is the lowly house cue. This is because it has a near minimum of components and large contact areas in the splice that makes perfect fitting less critical. If it has good shaft wood, proper balance, and the tip and ferrule replaced by someone that knows their business it will usually play with anything. Add ring work, a joint, on and on, then everything you add increases the issues with a production cue. Of course the human element comes in when selecting the quality house cue. If you order a dozen or two from the factory you may not get one with a good shaft or you might get a handful, the same consistency issue as with other factory cues.
Hu
Last edited:
And, not to single anyone out, but I think this post helped bolo's point by accident:
You purchased 8-10 custom cues, that sounds like a collector to me. Hell, collector is the wrong word, maybe 'addict'How fast do you go through them? If you're all about the playability, why didn't you find one that played perfect and stick with it for 20 years? Did the first 7 customs not hit balls good enough, or fall apart, so you just had to go buy that 8th?! Surely it can't help your consistency to keep switching every few years.
I think a lot of people buy customs because they like to shop around for, pick out, customize and buy things. No shame in that, just be honest about it.
If I collected I'd still have them all. Roughly, four to five years each, some more, some less. I've sold one to try another because I've never had the money to have more than one at a time except once. I sold one Southwest to make a mortgage payment, not because I wanted to. How many do I have now? One, the Dishaw, since 1995 or so. And if you think I go through them fast, I know people, some on this forum, who change cues almost weekly or at least monthly. I had the Dishaw for sale at one time on Ebay and Jimbo bid on it not knowing it was mine and didn't make the reserve. When it didn't sell I decided to hang onto it. I've had standing offers to buy it from several different people in the SE and points north. There was a guy at the Raisin Cain tournament who drools every time he sees it and has been after me to sell it to him for years. That won't happen with a production cue. I buy them because I like the way they feel to me. I still buy different ones because there is something I like about them. Production cues don't feel the same, not to me. I really should have stayed the hell out of this but I haven't been well lately.
It's the term we used years ago and I don't feel like changing the way I carry on a conversation. I know you've got some nice cues. I think in some ways they do make you play better to some extent, but I'm too damn tired to get into it now. As I said in my above post I've had the Dishaw since around 1995 and of all the cues I've owned it's the only one I still have. I'd sell it if I had to but I wouldn't like it. Some I've sold to move up, some I sold as a mistake, {if I told you what I sold my first Southwest to buy, you give me the NY raspberry.} some got sold because we needed the money more that I needed that particular cue. I've hit one ball with a cue and knew it was right for me or not. And I don't care if no one believes it. And, I could tell the difference in a steel joint and wood to wood.
Have a good night/day/whatever it is over there:grin: I gotta go to bed!!
If you believe that then will you back your player against my player in this simple test?
I will provide your player with a pool cue bought off the rack in a major retailer's store.
My player will play with his normal cue.
Your player can have one day to get used to the new cue but he cannot change one thing on it.
The two players will race to 100 TAR style for $10,000 per man.
Would you be willing to bet on your player being able to perform as well with the cue I provide? The provision would be that both cues be constructed with similar woods and with similar parts.
The argument is preposterous that all cues perform the same. I will let others explain why.
Are all guitars qualitatively the same?
Actually there is. But it varies from cue to cue and you have to have a higher level of play to discern the differences as well as have experience with many brands of cues.
There is a definite scientific basis why one cue would "perform" better than another one. It's called the coefficient of restitution and you can read more about it here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_restitution
Not true. Some custom cue makers do in fact use unique or special technology that they feel improves playability. Mike Lambros, an engineer, certainly feels that his UltraJoint improves playability. Theirry Layani believes the same thing about his conical joint. Bill Stroud has experimented with all sorts of things such as piezoelectric cloth embedded in the cue. Joe Gold pioneered the use of G-10 glass epoxy pins among other things. The Radial Pin is a piece of technology that was invented to improve the surface contact between the wood and the pin. You can look back through the patents over the last hundred years and find many patents related to improving the "playability" of cues.
Production cue makers can and so source wood from the same suppliers and can afford to by more of it.
As I said above it varies from cue to cue. I agree with the premise that a custom cue is not automatically better than any particular custom cue, within certain parameters and standards in construction.
This is true BUT origin and brand exist as indicators for a consumer to start with.
Well certainly HIT is subjective. Conversely, hand your $10 flea market special to SVB and put him in the box against Johnny Archer and see how he does.
In Germany they say "a new broom always sweeps better". But this is not the placebo effect because you can't put everyone in the same box. Many people on here report that they don't in fact play better with their new cue. People talk all the time about "learning" a new cue, getting used to a new cue, the difficulty of going from a flexible shaft to stiff one, etc....
There is no doubt that some people are constantly trying to buy a better game. But this does not apply to everyone and certainly doesn't apply to those who are good enough to simply be in tune with how their cue performs and how they prefer it to be.
You are mixing things here. This last paragraph is the true sentiment you wish to convey but you have use some unreasonable logic to get there.
There are definite and measurable performance differences in cues. While any given cue may not elevate a person's game much it is certainly true that some cues can handicap a person's game. This is easily proven and has been discussed many times here.
In any sport some people fall prey to the idea that equipment will "make" them better. This is a lot different than the idea that one should use the best equipment that one can. Notice I didn't say the highest priced or most prestigious.
Take two players and both play with house cues. One may only be concerned that the cue is straight with no clue about the ferrule and the tip. So he picks a straight cue that is very butt heavy with a soft plastic ferrule and a crappy tip.
The other player takes a little more time and using his experience picks out a straight cue with nice medium hard tip and a very good ferrule that is forward balanced.
Both players being relatively equal in skill the one with the "better" cue will simply miss less, make more and win the majority of the games because he doesn't have to fight the cue.
Note: I have only read the first post and will read more of the thread when I have the time but I'd like to react to the OP.
I frankly believe that there is.
I suggest you do a research on Anthony Scianella of Black Boar cues, how he assembles his cues and why he does what he does.
OR read some lines of Burton Spain and/or Joel Hercek about the difficulties (and the advantages) of assembling a full-splice cue. What you say denies 100% that there is any difference (and hence pros and cons) in between a 3-piece (butt sleeve - handle - forearm), A-joint cue (Predator, Schön, Mezz, etcetc) and a Hercek cue. I am yet to play with a Hercek but if it is going to play like a Predator butt feels I am going to trash it I promise.
Yes, none of the things I see on the pictures below show "any kind of unique or special technology in construction/design".
I frankly believe that if all wood played the same in their own species then selecting them would not make any sense. If you notice Balabushka used straight grain maple, probably the most boring looking wood on the entire planet and still, he wanted his blank-makers to use wood that lack figures as much as possible - and G.B. had playability and endurance on his mind when saying this and definitely not aesthetics. Therefore: selecting woods is a very important and basic step of cuemaking.
You are correct if you do not consider the miserably short lifetime of the second series Predator shafts... I have seen some of Gus's shafts and they were honestly in every possible way DIMENSIONS ahead of where the majority of today's production makers' quality is. One more aspect where selecting woods is vital.
This is true. Yet, the origin should provide you some sort of a safe feeling that you know pretty much what you are going to get for your 500 or 5000 bucks.
I have always said this and it's true here I think as well, pool - beyond a given level - is a mental game, whether you can get the best from yourself or not... A consistent cue will feel the same when you play crap or when you cannot miss. This is not the point. The point is that when you are doing good you know the cue in your hands is an aid, more of a tool because you feel assured it is going to perform the same one minute or 4 hours later. This helps maintain your good form - well, it helps me at least.
I completely agree with you on this.
However if I could afford it I would be collecting cues and not because I was expecting from every new cue to play better. It's just that when you actually put a Gus shaft next to a production shaft you can actually see the difference - what's more I still remember, I still see with my mind's eye what I saw in person at Fatboy's place when I had the honour of visiting him. I saw a few shafts and cues there that make production stuff look even more miserable than it sometimes is all alone by itself.
I do NOT MEAN that I wouldn't play with a Mezz because it's a piece of crap - actually I will get one of those soon I like them so much.
What I do mean is that we should not pull the custom cues generally down to the level of production cues. You simply cannot compare a player's black boar to a player's schön as much as you cannot compare a Schick to a limited predator.
I frankly believe that there is.
I suggest you do a research on Anthony Scianella of Black Boar cues, how he assembles his cues and why he does what he does.
OR read some lines of Burton Spain and/or Joel Hercek about the difficulties (and the advantages) of assembling a full-splice cue. What you say denies 100% that there is any difference (and hence pros and cons) in between a 3-piece (butt sleeve - handle - forearm), A-joint cue (Predator, Schön, Mezz, etcetc) and a Hercek cue. I am yet to play with a Hercek but if it is going to play like a Predator butt feels I am going to trash it I promise.
Yes, none of the things I see on the pictures below show "any kind of unique or special technology in construction/design".
I frankly believe that if all wood played the same in their own species then selecting them would not make any sense. If you notice Balabushka used straight grain maple, probably the most boring looking wood on the entire planet and still, he wanted his blank-makers to use wood that lack figures as much as possible - and G.B. had playability and endurance on his mind when saying this and definitely not aesthetics. Therefore: selecting woods is a very important and basic step of cuemaking.
You are correct if you do not consider the miserably short lifetime of the second series Predator shafts... I have seen some of Gus's shafts and they were honestly in every possible way DIMENSIONS ahead of where the majority of today's production makers' quality is. One more aspect where selecting woods is vital.
This is true. Yet, the origin should provide you some sort of a safe feeling that you know pretty much what you are going to get for your 500 or 5000 bucks.
I have always said this and it's true here I think as well, pool - beyond a given level - is a mental game, whether you can get the best from yourself or not... A consistent cue will feel the same when you play crap or when you cannot miss. This is not the point. The point is that when you are doing good you know the cue in your hands is an aid, more of a tool because you feel assured it is going to perform the same one minute or 4 hours later. This helps maintain your good form - well, it helps me at least.
I completely agree with you on this.
However if I could afford it I would be collecting cues and not because I was expecting from every new cue to play better. It's just that when you actually put a Gus shaft next to a production shaft you can actually see the difference - what's more I still remember, I still see with my mind's eye what I saw in person at Fatboy's place when I had the honour of visiting him. I saw a few shafts and cues there that make production stuff look even more miserable than it sometimes is all alone by itself.
I do NOT MEAN that I wouldn't play with a Mezz because it's a piece of crap - actually I will get one of those soon I like them so much.
What I do mean is that we should not pull the custom cues generally down to the level of production cues. You simply cannot compare a player's black boar to a player's schön as much as you cannot compare a Schick to a limited predator.
I think players want really expensive cues so that they can justify purchasing a really expensive fancy JB Case.
I've hit with only about ten custom and production cues each. Both categories had an equal amount of winners, so-so's, and duds in terms of what I like in a cue's hit. It's too small of a sample size to represent the entire cue market, but that isn't my point. The difference for me was that a sub-$100 production cue being a dud is easily shrugged off, whereas a dud $4,000 custom cue from one of the elites is unforgivable.
These days I play with an old production cue that hits as good as any cue I've tried (might be tied with the best custom I've tried, but it's probably a bit better than that custom). It's not loaded with inlays or anything else that will land it on Cuezilla or send a cue nut running for his scientific measuring devices. It is however, a nice looking plain jane that feels completely natural to me. I also like that the price I paid was very reasonable. When my game is where I'd like it to be and all of my higher-priority financial needs are satisfied, I might pick up something like a custom four-pointer from one of the great makers if I like the hit as much as I do my current cue. If that four-pointer turns out to be another old production cue, that's fine too. Right now, it isn't a priority or even a minor itch.
These days I play with an old production cue that hits as good as any cue I've tried (might be tied with the best custom I've tried, but it's probably a bit better than that custom). It's not loaded with inlays or anything else that will land it on Cuezilla or send a cue nut running for his scientific measuring devices. It is however, a nice looking plain jane that feels completely natural to me. I also like that the price I paid was very reasonable. When my game is where I'd like it to be and all of my higher-priority financial needs are satisfied, I might pick up something like a custom four-pointer from one of the great makers if I like the hit as much as I do my current cue. If that four-pointer turns out to be another old production cue, that's fine too. Right now, it isn't a priority or even a minor itch.
Last edited: