Enough with the Indians and arrows.
- Thread starter logical
- Start date
It is a metaphor (technically an analogy). However, people seem to miss the fact that it's a figure of speech and not a literal comparison. Pretty soon you'll get some yahoo's arguing about whether Balabuska would have made the best arrows in the world, had he taken up archery as a kid... in other words, completely missing the point.
I for one, think the saying is pretty tired as well.
Last edited:
Middle 80s....Kirk Stevens ( who was #4 in the WPBSA rankings )
played Billy Johnson snooker on a 5x10 in Knoxville (or Chattanooga)
Billy was using his pool cue.
Kirk was using his snooker cue.
Kirk came out a few thousand ahead.
Billy said to Kirk "We can play more if we switch cues."
Kirk declined.
Great players playing great players...it's the arrow AND the Indian.
played Billy Johnson snooker on a 5x10 in Knoxville (or Chattanooga)
Billy was using his pool cue.
Kirk was using his snooker cue.
Kirk came out a few thousand ahead.
Billy said to Kirk "We can play more if we switch cues."
Kirk declined.
Great players playing great players...it's the arrow AND the Indian.
Bottom line. The best "indian" will beat the best "arrow" everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. I'll take Earl with a house cue against an APA 5 with any cue in the world
Yes and didn't Efren win his first tourney in US with $10 cue which I believe is cheaper than most house cues :thumbup:
I guess I'm in the minority as I haven't touch a house cue nearly over a decade now.
Yes I have played well with a house cue. Not just any house cue. Usually have to go through several until you find the right one. Nothing wrong with a good house cue. Think some cues are made to play and hit like a good house cue. Can't go wrong with a solid piece of wood.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Earl himself tells me that you have to understand the cue you playing with..because each cue play differently. To test the cue, you need to set up a familiar shot...and when you find the cue with the reaction you want and expect..than that's your cue.
Earl tells me he always test his cue and tip, he said...the right cue for you is one that does what you expect it to do.
I've changed all kinds of tips for Earl to try and at the end of the day...he still think Elk Master plays the best because...it does some of the thing that other especially layered tips wouldn't do for him.
If cue doesn't matter...everyone would be playing with a house cue and would care what kind of tip is on it. I've haven't seen anyone playing with a house cue in a tournament for ages now.
Does the cue you play with matter? Yes...hence everyone has a difference cue and preference for their tips.
Is a better cue going to help your game (doesn't have to be more expensive)? Yes.
Will a cue allow you to make a certain type of shot more consistently? Yes.
Will I take Earl playing with a house cue against Eferen? Heck No...he'll probably break his stick after the first game.
My point, the cue you play with matter and can make a difference in winning or losing.
Find yourself a good cue and stick with it until you find a better one. (If you been playing with the same cue for 30 years..no point looking because you're married to it. lol)
I've tournament tested most of my cues and play with a different cue each week in my local tournament at Steinway. My holy grail of cues (2 of them to date) give me a much higher percentage of wining these tournaments than any other that I've tried.
I would guess this to be true for other that have multiple cues....some will have their primary player depending on the type of game. I have a cue specifically for playing straight pool and I have another for playing 9 balls.
Best of luck in finding your holy grail of cue(s).
Earl tells me he always test his cue and tip, he said...the right cue for you is one that does what you expect it to do.
I've changed all kinds of tips for Earl to try and at the end of the day...he still think Elk Master plays the best because...it does some of the thing that other especially layered tips wouldn't do for him.
If cue doesn't matter...everyone would be playing with a house cue and would care what kind of tip is on it. I've haven't seen anyone playing with a house cue in a tournament for ages now.
Does the cue you play with matter? Yes...hence everyone has a difference cue and preference for their tips.
Is a better cue going to help your game (doesn't have to be more expensive)? Yes.
Will a cue allow you to make a certain type of shot more consistently? Yes.
Will I take Earl playing with a house cue against Eferen? Heck No...he'll probably break his stick after the first game.
My point, the cue you play with matter and can make a difference in winning or losing.
Find yourself a good cue and stick with it until you find a better one. (If you been playing with the same cue for 30 years..no point looking because you're married to it. lol)
I've tournament tested most of my cues and play with a different cue each week in my local tournament at Steinway. My holy grail of cues (2 of them to date) give me a much higher percentage of wining these tournaments than any other that I've tried.
I would guess this to be true for other that have multiple cues....some will have their primary player depending on the type of game. I have a cue specifically for playing straight pool and I have another for playing 9 balls.
Best of luck in finding your holy grail of cue(s).
And there lies the problem... better equipped. We know an F14 fighter jet is better than a Lear Jet, but pool cues, who the hell knows... they are all just too similar.
They are pretty much made from the same woods, the same stuff, etc, and everyone uses a different cue, and world champions have used cues from Cueteck to Richard Black.
The big difference lies in the weight and shaft diameter and the tip you have on it. I once offered someone to take their best cue and play it against on of my inexpensive cues, and I'd bet my cue can make every shot their cue can make....
I don't recall ever missing a shot because of my cue...but lets talk about jumping up. check. rushing the shot. check. not focusing 100%. check. taking to long. check. mechanics falling apart. check. not getting in the right alignment. check. plain old fashion choking. check.
Bottom line. The best "indian" will beat the best "arrow" everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. I'll take Earl with a house cue against an APA 5 with any cue in the world
Last edited:
I've never used that expression, but I think you may be going a little overboard suggesting steroetyping or....maybe worse. no one means any harm by the expression, and the way it is termed does not imply any cultural stigma, so it should not be taken that way. It is a symbolic comparison, not a cultural slur, so there is no reason you should turn it into something it isn't.
To say it's the pitcher, not the ball would be no different than this. The Indian and arrow idea is not a duragatory term, and you are misinterpreting how the English lanquage works to suggest such. I don't say any of that to be mean or difficult, but to say that implying that people are wrong in using this term is incorrect.
And there lies the problem... better equipped. We know an F14 fighter jet is better than a Lear Jet, but pool cues, who the hell knows... they are all just too similar.
They are pretty much made from the same woods, the same stuff, etc, and everyone uses a different cue, and world champions have used cues from Cueteck to Richard Black.
The big difference lies in the weight and shaft diameter and the tip you have on it. I once offered someone to take their best cue and play it against on of my inexpensive cues, and I'd bet my cue can make every shot their cue can make....
I don't recall ever missing a shot because of my cue...but lets talk about jumping up. check. rushing the shot. check. not focusing 100%. check. taking to long. check. mechanics falling apart. check. not getting in the right alignment. check. plain old fashion choking. check.
Bottom line. The best "indian" will beat the best "arrow" everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. I'll take Earl with a house cue against an APA 5 with any cue in the world
Ask Earl if he thinks equipment is important, and makes a real difference.
Do you think Efren selected that cue based on cost? Obviously he liked that particular cue. Also, back in the 80's I'd say the dollar exchanged pretty favorably with Filipino currency. So it sounds good to say $10 cue, but maybe your $10 american dollars was able to buy a decent custom in the Philippines.
Haven't you ever had the feeling of "wow, this cue feels great...it's really working for me"? My guess is that Efren has had that feeling to a vastly deeper level than any of us. Why do you think he changes cues? Why even own his own cue? At some point you gotta get real. No offense intended to you...I'm speaking generally to posters here.
KMRUNOUT
Do you know that to be true? One of the first times I saw him play in the early 80's he had a Ginacue. In fact all the Philipianos seemed to have nice cues. Parica also played with a Ginacue.
I am sure he didn't play with a high end cue when he was growing up in the Philippines and maybe that is where the story originally came from. I never saw him with a junk cue but who knows. He did play with an Elk Master tip that was kind of puzzling though.
Last edited:
Actually, that would be *fundamentally* different. Assuming you are talking about major league, and probably most college and high school baseball, the ball is *standardized*. It conforms to very clear specifications. The idea is that any two baseballs in a major league game are going to be damn near identical. This is not at all the situation when comparing cues and their respective setups (taper, tip, a pile of other variables). Now you might contend that there are specs for a cue (length, weight, etc.) But the point is that the goal of baseball is that all baseballs are identical, whereas the specs for a pool cue only *intend* to present limits on the vast variety of cues that conform to these specs.
I do, however, agree that the arrow-indian statement has nothing to do with stereotyping or racism or anything like that.
KMRUNOUT
I have a cue made by the same cue maker that made Efren's.
It's a plain-jane....but it's a good cue.
You really need to read the whole thread. Stereotyping is not necessarily racist or offensive....but it is almost always inaccurate. I had no idea so many people would be so distracted by one word and miss the entire point of how stale it has become.
And the thread wasn't about whether cues are more or less important than skill, but that hasn't stopped 50% of the responses from debating it.
http://www.nycgrind.com/the-latest/...-at-the-12th-us-open-one-pocket-championship/
I think there is some truth to it. This was when some unknown named Caesar Morales first appeared in US and won Houston Open. It makes sense that he would use cheap $10 cue when he first showed up
It's an American idiomatic expression, more specifically, a proverb. If you love language, you love idioms.
Look deeper... There's a lot of flavor and American history behind those words.
How's this for a cliché: "If you're bored then you're boring."
http://www.nycgrind.com/the-latest/...-at-the-12th-us-open-one-pocket-championship/
I think there is some truth to it. This was when some unknown named Caesar Morales first appeared in US and won Houston Open. It makes sense that he would use cheap $10 cue when he first showed up
That has become somewhat of an an urban legend. I was there and played in the Reds Tournament. The fake name was for the calcutta, he stayed out of sight and they bought him for $100.00. Most of players knew him he had been around playing for a while. The cheap cue thing makes for a better story. Around the same time or close to it he was running around with Mike Lebron and he had a Ginacue he was playing with.