Jwchandler
Registered
Check the photos of this highly customized Rambow that just went up on EBAY! It's a beauty. http://m.ebay.com/itm/Herman-Rambow-LEVEL-5-MONSTER-/131643318616?nav=SEARCH
Looks like it was a neat cue at one time, its unfortunate it has the owners name on it. The seller said it has a few imperfections, to me it looks like that cue is going to require a lot of costly restoration, its in rough condition.
Having the owners name is a desirable attribute with Rambow cues, and increases the rarity of the item as roughly 10% were actually signed. It also makes it easier to authenticate the cue. The cue is in great shape considering it's from the 50's at the earliest. I think whoever wins this auction would be crazy for refinishing the cue, or restoring it in any way... Rambow should be the last person to have altered the cue in any way, and he died in 1967. This is a historical artifact, and from the looks of it, maybe the most ornate Rambow ever produced. I would leave it untouched personally. Anyone else agree or disagree?
Please post the butt diameter.
Btw that's a very fluffy description. A little liberal with the presumptions.
Frequently it was Charles Kimmel.
Well first let's talk truth about bias vs facts.
The ebay description is biased. Which is to be expected to a certain extent from someone trying to sell something. But, not to the point of stretching the truth.
Is it your cue?
Friend of your's cue who asked you to plug it in the main forum ?
This cue is my cue, and it is a very rare piece of history as you well know. Every pool enthusiast deserves to see it. Even non-buyers. I researched Rambows for almost a full year, and the only photos of similar cues I ever saw were in private e-mails. It's a shame that one can search the World Wide Web and only see 15-20 cue's fabricated by the "grandfather." Almost all of those available for viewing were up for sale, and common examples. So I agree... Let's talk truth about bias verse facts. Is it a fact that you have information that refutes any claim or claims that I have made in the listing? If so, I will gladly make a donation to the billiard museum to hear it. The butt diameter is 1.25." The only misrepresentation in the listing is that the wood is actually Ebony and not Brazilian Rosewood. That would make it even more rare sir. I have multiple citations for the published information in the listing. I ask again... Which material was presumptuous exactly?
This cue is my cue, and it is a very rare piece of history. Every pool enthusiast deserves to see it. Even non-buyers. I researched it for almost a full year, and the only photos of similar cues I ever saw were in private e-mails. So I agree... Let's talk truth about bias verse facts. The fact is you want the cue, and you don't want competition, and with me sir your money would be no good. The butt diameter is 1.25." The only misrepresentation in the listing is that the wood is actually Ebony and not Brazilian Rosewood. That would make it even more rare sir. I have multiple citations for the published information in the listing. I ask again... Which material was presumptuous exactly?
Joseph, don't play head games with me and we'll get along just fine.
You know exactly what you did when you posted this thread.
You know exactly what you said in the listing that is "presumptuous" and what isn't.
Lets just leave it at that.