Referring To Eras Makes Complete Sense
I have a 1984 Schon ....now I know Runde made it because he was upset over having to make the cue twice and explained to me what he had to do the complete the first cue attempt....it was a custom design that he & I worked out at the Billiard show in Forth Worth, Texas. I don't think Evan Clarke was around in the inception years but be that as it may. Last year I bought a Schon LTD 1405 and boy is there a difference in the cue feel, hit and weight balance. I tried every which way to figure out why and every single person that's tried my two cues...and there's probably been more than 50 between my APA & BCA pool leagues and also my pool hall buddies.
Nary a one....not a single person picked the new Schon's overall feel & playability over the old Schon. Everyone...100% picked the old Schon to being "noticeably" better than the new Schon which many described as having a dead feel to it compared to the Schon Runde produced. Now someone said earlier that regardless of who made the cue, it's a beauty and someone got a great deal. Absolutely...hands down yes on that point.
And someone also pointed out the issue of cues made by era and the merit of even doing that. Well, cues deserve to be referred to by era becasue sometimes the cue maker alters or modifies their style. That's why there are three periods for referring to original Balabushka cues. Then there's Bill Stroud and period cues made from 1972 to 1980 during which time he used the logo J with sideways W. Cues from that period have a inherently higher price than the very same design cue made in a different period. The same is true for early Tim Scruggs cues and those that have the intertwined TS logo are worth more than the exact same design cue made with TS and the year.
There's reason for this.....it's simple...scarcity and the overall number of cues made during that time....how many hours that Bill Stroud or Tim Scruggs personally invested making the cue versus finishing it or supervising its manufacture. Mike Cocharn was a big help to Tim's cue business while he was still alive. Referring to cues by era or by period identifies the cue maker's benchmark and sometimes even hallmark workmanship which is reflected in the appearance and performance of the cues produced at that time. It can also differentiate manufacturing changes like when Stroud changed from 5/16-14 thread to a radial pin joint.
Nonetheless, I am convinced that while Bob Rundy was still actively involved in Schon, the cue made were superior to Schon cues made after he backed away from the business. I estimate that would mean cues made between 1981 and 1990. Bob retired from Schon in 1992 and his involvement was diminishing during the last year or so while he was still an owner. I haven't the foggiest idea when Evan Clarke cam eon the scene at Schon but I do know he's "extremely sensiitive" anytime Bob's name comes up in conection with Schon. In fact, he's just outright defensive and swears that he did all the work while Bob did very littleWell, how come
I still hear from other Schon cue owners that are able to compare a cue made by Bob Runde and a cue made by Evan Clarke that they're amazed that there could be a difference and not one ever told me they prefer the hit and feel of Evan's Schon.
Now before you jump into the foray, I've already allowed for factors such as ferrule composition differences, tip type, tip brand, overall tip condition, shaft diameter, shaft taper length. But since Scho shafts can be swirtched, I also sawapped shafts from my new Schon to my old Schon and vice versa...I mean I've looked at this way every way imaginable and I'm hear to tell you that if Bob Runde made the Schon, it just flat out feels better than one made by Evan Clarke.
Now does that diminish the Schon cue that someone buys in any way because wasn't made by Runde, absolutely not. Let's put it this way, it's more a question of desireablity rather than playability. If the buyer likes the Schon, that all that matters to the buyer. But if the buyer wanted a Schon that was made during Runde's time at Schon but actually winds up with a cue made after Runde departed, then the buyer is the still the only one who has a right to gripe.
I think we make too much out of when a cue was made, or who the cuemaker was. How about this....wouldn't it be great to be able to go into a room and pick the cue you wanted based upon its looks and feel and make the selection without ever knowing who made the cue. Every cue was labelled with a number that covered the cuemaker's logo so you never really knew the cuemaker's identity until after you selected the cue..I haven't quite figured out what to do about cue price or displaying it because then obviously someone would think a $2000 cue was going to be superior to a $700 cue.
But I hope you get my point....I'm betting that a lot of top name cuemakers wouldn't be picked and other newer name cuemakers would. We get wrapped up in the cuemaker's name which is fine if you're going to just put the cue in the closet and hope it increases in value. But if you're going to play with the cue as I do with mine, and I have a early 70's Joss West cue which I also treasure, how the cue plays is more important than whether Bill Stroud made it versus Dan Janes.
Anyway, hope I haven't put anyone to sleep with this posting but it covers a myriad of topics.
