Help Identify This Cue!

Benelli said:
It's a Black, WTF are you on about
Click to expand...
I understand it means a lot to you, but too many things wrong. Black didn't treat the insides of the buttplate that way. Black would never have shaft collar rings that uneven. Black's points came together closer at the wrap. Just too many things.
 
WildWing said:
I understand it means a lot to you, but too many things wrong. Black didn't treat the insides of the buttplate that way. Black would never have shaft collar rings that uneven. Black's points came together closer at the wrap. Just too many things.
Click to expand...
You realize we're talking about some of the very first cues he made before he fully fleshed out what we know as his style.

You can't compare this to anything made after 78/79. How many RB cues from 74-77 have you owned or handled.

And I get pretty sick of people throwing out the emotionaly invested card as some sort of explanation of how their janky unsupported logic is infinitely superior.

My cue is identical to the other 75 cue except for the different wood choices in the forearm and sleeve. You never really addressed that at all unless your saying that cue is fake.
 
Benelli said:
You realize we're talking about some of the very first cues he made before he fully fleshed out what we know as his style.

You can't compare this to anything made after 78/79. How many RB cues from 74-77 have you owned or handled.

And I get pretty sick of people throwing out the emotionaly invested card as some sort of explanation of how their janky unsupported logic is infinitely superior.

My cue is identical to the other 75 cue except for the different wood choices in the forearm and sleeve. You never really addressed that at all unless your saying that cue is fake.
Click to expand...
I never said it's a fake anything. It's a very common design. I think about every cuemaker has made a similar box style buttsleeve like this. It just doesn't look like Richard's work. But, enjoy it, whatever it is. Any pictures of the ferrules, or the bumper? Those are very important.
 
Last edited:
WildWing said:
I never said it's a fake anything. It's a very common design. I think about every cuemaker has made a similar box style buttsleeve like this. It just doesn't look like Richard's work. But, enjoy it, whatever it is. Any pictures of the ferrules, or the bumper? Those are very important.
Click to expand...
My cue does not have a bumper and from the photos of Nineballs neither did his but he would need to independently confirm that.

The ferrule on my shaft is ivory here is a photo of it.

1000005618.jpg
 
Benelli said:
You realize we're talking about some of the very first cues he made before he fully fleshed out what we know as his style.

You can't compare this to anything made after 78/79. How many RB cues from 74-77 have you owned or handled.

And I get pretty sick of people throwing out the emotionaly invested card as some sort of explanation of how their janky unsupported logic is infinitely superior.

My cue is identical to the other 75 cue except for the different wood choices in the forearm and sleeve. You never really addressed that at all unless your saying that cue is fake.
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree with you, I think you right after looking at a second time.
 
Last edited:
UPDATE:

I took the cue to Scott Gilmore for a full refinish and restoration. This morning Richard was in the shop and Scott had him go hands on with the cue and this is what we learned.

1. Richard made the cue.
2. Was made in 75/76
3. Forearm is Gus Szamboti

Case Closed.
 
Benelli said:
UPDATE:

I took the cue to Scott Gilmore for a full refinish and restoration. This morning Richard was in the shop and Scott had him go hands on with the cue and this is what we learned.

1. Richard made the cue.
2. Was made in 75/76
3. Forearm is Gus Szamboti

Case Closed.
Click to expand...
Spectacular!

I am not doubting at all. Did you get it in writing? It would be a good idea to have a signed COA.

I'm very happy this got nailed down. It's also a cautionary tale about what we think we definitely know.

The early work of makers can be very different and difficult to nail down. Once they are gone the chances of a definitive ID diminish.
 
Chopdoc said:
Spectacular!

I am not doubting at all. Did you get it in writing? It would be a good idea to have a signed COA.

I'm very happy this got nailed down. It's also a cautionary tale about what we think we definitely know.

The early work of makers can be very different and difficult to nail down. Once they are gone the chances of a definitive ID diminish.
Click to expand...
I can get the butt engraved with RB's logo which I don't want to do. But my plan is to get a video with Richard holding and talking about the cue when I see him in November.

He does not make COA's anymore.
 
Benelli said:
I can get the butt engraved with RB's logo which I don't want to do. But my plan is to get a video with Richard holding and talking about the cue when I see him in November.

He does not make COA's anymore.
Click to expand...
The video is a great idea. Yeah, I wouldn't get it engraved either. Maybe see if he'll autograph a picture of him holding the cue?

In any case, it's really spectacular.
 
99% chance its one of his early cues. looks like his work and style back then. other than around texas there were very few of his cues out.

and his early cues were not expensive.
 
Benelli said:
UPDATE:

I took the cue to Scott Gilmore for a full refinish and restoration. This morning Richard was in the shop and Scott had him go hands on with the cue and this is what we learned.

1. Richard made the cue.
2. Was made in 75/76
3. Forearm is Gus Szamboti

Case Closed.
Click to expand...
What a great find!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top