nick serdula said:
nick, let me stick my nose in this....i don't play great, but in my less-than-humble opinion, i can explain exactly what i think it takes to make a great hitting cue, and furthermore i can spec out a cue for a cuemaker i don't know and be pretty damn certain he will make sweet hitting cue if he follows my specs to the letter. it takes knowledge not playing ability.
your criteria might be objective to you just as certain things i perceive through my objective eyes as well simply because we both have VERY SPECIFIC requirements. however against the backdrop of everyone else's idea of what is good, we are using subjective criteria because we choose a different set of standards.
and what do you say of players who evolve through different types of cues? are they evolving for the better, or are they merely going through a phase? if they a going through different phases, then are all they cues they chose to play with great?????? one day i see grady matthews playing with a billiard tapered cue, the next year i see him playing with a standard pro taper. i've seen robles go from ss jointed to meucci through predator. and the same can be said with a myriad other players of high caliber. were all the cues they played with great?? i've toyed with a cuetec,,,i think it blows chunks. am i wrong because earl and allison endorse it? i think not.
i think most people are NOT cue conscious, and that includes the players. in fact, quite honestly, i think many pool players are the least cognizant of their equipment than maybe any sport performers i can think of.
if you feel you have a high level of understanding about cues, does this mean you can pick the right cue for others? you know this is not so and therefore your criteria is as subjective as any other.
Last edited:
