people asking what my personal cue is? here it is!

[buddha162]

some people form oppions on what they hear around the billiard room ,and most of it is third hand info!!!

Unfortunately, this isn't the case here. I've hit with 4 Blacks and three of them hit "clunky" and dead; the 4th one hit mediocre at best. Obviously hit is subjective but several players who've tried the cues found the same thing.

richard is the most acclaimed cue maker in the industry!awards and museum shows the art of cue . the smithsonian . ect...

His acclaim is undeniable, but that has nothing to do with how his cues play.

-Roger

 

[committeemember]

Unfortunately, this isn't the case here. I've hit with 4 Blacks and three of them hit "clunky" and dead; the 4th one hit mediocre at best. Obviously hit is subjective but several players who've tried the cues found the same thing.



His acclaim is undeniable, but that has nothing to do with how his cues play.

-Roger

hey someone gets it!!!!!!!!

 

[cornerstone]

play

I think what you are calling clunky and dead ,most people would consider a SOLID hit ,and that is what most experienced players want. If you want a cue that is soft and alive with alot of deflection then you of course would not like richards cues! but in my experience the playability of his cues have been consistantly solid with with a great ballance . now for the record. the cues i am talking about are cues untouched ( no shaft replacement, and richards orig tips, and weight not changed) all of wich can change the playibility of a cue! anybodys cue!!!! a good cue maker takes pride in his plability and for somone to come in and change shafts tips ect is like taking a picasso and adding paint!!!!

 

[td873]

His acclaim is undeniable, but that has nothing to do with how his cues play

It appears that when you say "his acclaim has nothing to do with how his cues play" you are making a broad generalization based on a few occurrences (or perhaps you are just trying to cause a stir). Just like any manufacturer, there may have been product over the years that that was not his best work. But these anomalies don't seem to be what you are addressing. Instead, you are making blanket statements that his cues don't play well.

In response:
Based on the facts as I see them, his acclaim is a reflection of how his cues play.
1) He has been making cues for 31 years (give or take). If his cues were NOT playable, he wouldn't have made it past year 1, much less year 31.
2) His reputation MUST have been spread by word of mouth for MANY years before his advertising kicked in. We all know that in the real world (and the pool world for that matter), word of advertising can make or break you. [Again, this is clear evidence that there are many people who believe his cues play great.]
3) His cues sell worldwide, indicating that it is not a subjective test regarding playability - apparently there is a common standard for playability across all games in the world. However, this is NOT the standard you measure by.
4) His cues have sold for all those years - and NOT just collector's cues, we're talking thousands of playing cues for players.
5) His cues maintain their value clearly indicating that there is a market for them. A market indicates that people are interested in buying them. This indicates that all those people must know something about their playability - otherwise, there would be no secondary market for 'non-collector' cues.
6) His cues appreciate in value - clearly indicating the demand is greater than the supply. Again this indicates the existence of a MARKET for his cues. People paying ABOVE retail for a cue indicates that his cues play well AND look good.

As I see it, his acclaim is justified in the eyes of the public, the eyes of the players, and the eyes of the collector. Clearly, his acclaim is not justified in your eyes -> but you at least have to respect someone who has made it their life's work to further the great game of billiards. If you don't like the hit, say you don't, but don't try to disparage one of the longstanding icons of cue building.

In sum, I must disagree with your analysis since you have made a generalized statement about an entire MARKET of the cue world based on a select few occurrences. You are entitled to your opinion, just like some players are entitled to believe that Meuccis have the best hit...

-td

 

[pharaoh68]

I think what you are calling clunky and dead ,most people would consider a SOLID hit ,and that is what most experienced players want...

Ok. I refrained the first time because I respect everyone's opinions as they are just that, opinions. Not fact. Here is my opinion and, I have to tell you, it comes from both experience and from other people's opinions. Richard Black is an excellent cue artist but a terrible cue maker. A cue artist makes a beautiful, unsurpassed design. A cue artist has his cues on display at a museum in Texas or wherever they're showing Blacks cues right now. A cuemaker makes a cue that plays like nothing else. A cuemaker knows what the player is looking for and constructs a cue that feels good, plays good, etc. In reference to the "clunky and dead" comment, both of those terms imply the exact opposite of solid. Clunky and dead hitting cues hit like hollow reeds. Solid hitting cues hit effortlessly and move a cue ball with ease. Paul Mottey, Jim White, Gus Szamboti, Bill Schick all make a solid hitting cue. Richard Black makes a pretty cue. This is first hand experience and, while I may not have been in the game as long as others on this forum, I know when a cue does not hit well. I've played with numerous cues from numerous makers, from Franklin to Mottey, Drexler to Scruggs, Szamboti to Bushka, and based on all that I've hit with, Richard Black is my least favorite. And I know many experienced players (open level players) who would readily agree.
Again, just an opinion.

 

[pharaoh68]

... His reputation MUST have been spread by word of mouth for MANY years before his advertising kicked in. We all know that in the real world (and the pool world for that matter), word of advertising can make or break you. [Again, this is clear evidence that there are many people who believe his cues play great.]

... His cues maintain their value clearly indicating that there is a market for them. A market indicates that people are interested in buying them. This indicates that all those people must know something about their playability - otherwise, there would be no secondary market for 'non-collector' cues.

...If you don't like the hit, say you don't, but don't try to disparage one of the longstanding icons of cue building.

In response to the fact that his reputation must have been spread by word of mouth, I will simply say that word of mouth can also speak negative volumes about aperson and that is the case here. Richard does not have a reputation for making a great playing cue in my neck of the woods.

As far as maintaining their value, we could revert back to RObert Weir custom cues. These cues maintain their value and there is a market for them as collectibles today when, according to most who are knowledgable on the subject, he never made a single one, rather had them made by an oversees production company and simplay stamped his own name and logo on them. This is indiciative that market value does not indicate quality or collectability.

Finally, in response to the "if you don't like the hit, say you don't" comment; well, I don't like the hit. Plain and simple. Again, just my opinion.

 

[buddha162]

As I see it, his acclaim is justified in the eyes of the public, the eyes of the players, and the eyes of the collector. Clearly, his acclaim is not justified in your eyes -> but you at least have to respect someone who has made it their life's work to further the great game of billiards. If you don't like the hit, say you don't, but don't try to disparage one of the longstanding icons of cue building.

Ok I'll make this as short as I can.

Richard Black enjoys an esteemed reputation as a premier cuemaker. I've heard of Black's name before I developed any significant interest in custom cues, and my opinion of his work prior to hitting with 4 of his cues was definitely positive, in accord with his great acclaim. Other acclaimed cuemakers such as Scruggs, SW, Mottey fit the same bill.

When I got around to hitting with my first Timmy Scruggs, I said to myself "of course, that makes sense." Same for the Mottey and SW. When I finally had the chance to knock a few balls around with a Black cue, I thought "wtf?"
and after the 4th clunky-ass, dead-weight Black I hit with I thought "wtf?!??!?!?!"

Again, and obviously, hit is subjective, but I do not know one player in my area, not ONE, who thinks Richard Black makes a good playing cue. Many have owned them in the past, and either sold them promptly or are hanging on to them for their resale value.

And furthermore, his point/veneer work and inlays are simply atrocious, on the cues that I've seen. I wouldn't even say he's a good cue artist, based on the shoddy pieces he allows to leave the shop.

In sum, I have no idea how he earned his reputation as a great cuemaker. I can think of a couple of reasons, one of which is that he started when there is very little competition (seniority is a large part of legitimacy), and the other is that he reached out to the general (clueless) public in promoting his cues, a more successful marketing strategy than most cuemakers were able to employ.

His innovative designs are definitely commendable, I'll give him that.

Roger

 

[cornerstone]

black is still great!and always was

as a reasponse to youve hit with gus szamboti - mottey - schick ect and you thought that black was inferior , well as a statment i own all of wich youve mention (now) ,and i choose to use a black!! for playibilty!! bar non ,also if you read last months artical on cue collecting you will also notice reading about the 3 extremely large collectors 2 of wich play exclusivy with black!! i think that should tell you somthing ! also I know of others that play with richads cues and have over 100,00 invested in a collection. iguess we are all able to have a oppinon

 

[Purdman]

Purdman Here

As a cue nut who has hit with some of the nicest cues ever made, Richard Black makes one nice hitting cue. I played with one last Saturday and again today. I put him right up there with the top 10 cuemakers who ever lived. JMHO
Purdman

 

[monski]

You don't find many RB's in the secondary market. If ever there is one, its still priced close to acquisition cost.

Re players: I am also of the opinion that many or most players who do not collect cues will probably not stay with a Richard Black or a high end custom for a long time not because the cue hits poorly but but because he has no use for an expensive cue - specially if it retails for more than $1500. The value of the cue will just go down due to wear and tear. Hence, just sell and make some money out of it. They will probably make up some reason why the cue is being sold (the "HIT" of the cue is usually used). More so for professionals. They are Professionals because they play for a living. A cue endorsement is one side of the equation. If they are paid to play with a cue, they will.

They can sell the cue after their endorsement. They offer it to a person who's into collecting or to one who plays as a hobby and can afford to buy. Then its off to the next endorsement. Some players get a free custom to try and work out a deal later. They use the cue for a while. After the deal is done, they sell the cue. I've bought cues from players and well... that's how it has gone for me. Well... that's life...

 

[cornerstone]

As a cue nut who has hit with some of the nicest cues ever made, Richard Black makes one nice hitting cue. I played with one last Saturday and again today. I put him right up there with the top 10 cuemakers who ever lived. JMHO
Purdman

youve posted some elobrate cues of a friend of yours what does he play with?

 

[pharaoh68]

as a reasponse to youve hit with gus szamboti - mottey - schick ect and you thought that black was inferior , well as a statment i own all of wich youve mention (now) ,and i choose to use a black!! for playibilty!! bar non ,also if you read last months artical on cue collecting you will also notice reading about the 3 extremely large collectors 2 of wich play exclusivy with black!! i think that should tell you somthing ! also I know of others that play with richads cues and have over 100,00 invested in a collection. iguess we are all able to have a oppinon

The article to which you referred featured well known "collectors", not players.
Also, if you choose to hit with Black, great! I am glad that he is a match for you, and others too. More power to all of you. I am simply giving my opinion and the opinion of dozens that I know, and it is that Richard Black is NOT the choice for playability. In my opinion, Paul Mottey is the best cue I have ever owned. No question.

 

[pharaoh68]

...also if you read last months artical on cue collecting you will also notice reading about the 3 extremely large collectors 2 of wich play exclusivy with black!! i think that should tell you somthing!...

Of the three collectors in the article, one is quoted as having "several Richard Blacks that he will never part with" but that his favorite playing cues are a PFD and a Samsara. He also sites that his newest favorite playing cue is a Jerry McWorter. While he says that he has several Richard Blacks that he will never get rid of, he doesn't call them his favorite playing cues. He also notes that in the later years, his collection has focused on 9 cuemakers. Black is not on that list.

Cue collector #2 plays with a Josswest. The fact that he owns cues by Richard Black is not indiciative of playability rather collectability.

Cue collector #3 plays with a Richard Black. His favorite cue is a Richard Black. His most expensive cue is a Richard Black. HOWEVER, this does not speak volumes about Richard Black because, if read closely, one can see that this collector has been friends with Richard Black since 1975 when he would exchange labor servies for cues by Richard. He has had 30 years to fall in love with the play of the first custom cue he has ever played with.

I still favor my first custom maker. I think he is one of the best in the business. Would the rest of the world agree? I'd bet not.

Again fellas, we need to remember. I am not saying Richard Black is a terrible cuemaker. I am merely saying that I don't like the way his cues play. If it works for you, great! Thats all that matters. If you played with a $50,000 Szamboti and your opponent shot w/ a broom handle but ran 10 straight racks on you, it doesn't mean what he played with was better. Clearly, its a matter of taste. Mine is not yours and vice versa. BUt that doesn't make one of us more right than another. Does it?

 

[Hit Man]

Richard Black

I had a guy that beat me with a broom handle once. I hit him back with my Scruggs, and he said "Man, that thing is solid!"

 

[jhendri2]

Not sure why some people feel the need to slam Richard Black. He made a cue for me while I was deployed and I love the way it hits. The ivory joint/ferrule combo make for a great hit and great playability. I have cues from other makers but the Black is my favorite.

FWIW,

Jim

 

[Purdman]

youve posted some elobrate cues of a friend of yours what does he play with?

He can play with anything he wants to. Usually a Richard Black. He sold his Black Boar for $16,000.
Purdman

 

[thepavlos]

I really don't believe that such broad generalizations are necessary. Hit of a cue is subjective. I once bought a steel-jointed cue from a cuemaker who is considered one of the top 5 cuemakers today. I didn't like the way it hit so I sold it to someone who did. I ordered another one from him and changed the joint to a piloted ivory and I liked that cue much more. No need to deride his work, just needed to find what works for me. BTW I bought my friends Black sneaky pete that has a piloted ivory joint and ivory ferrules, and I think that cue plays just as good as some of my favorite cues. Its the only Black I've hit with so I can't compare to anything else. Keep in mind its just my opinion.
Paul

 

[monski]

I really don't believe that such broad generalizations are necessary. Hit of a cue is subjective. I once bought a steel-jointed cue from a cuemaker who is considered one of the top 5 cuemakers today. I didn't like the way it hit so I sold it to someone who did. I ordered another one from him and changed the joint to a piloted ivory and I liked that cue much more. No need to deride his work, just needed to find what works for me. BTW I bought my friends Black sneaky pete that has a piloted ivory joint and ivory ferrules, and I think that cue plays just as good as some of my favorite cues. Its the only Black I've hit with so I can't compare to anything else. Keep in mind its just my opinion.
Paul

---------------

Nice point. I think we also need to be aware of our own personal biases. Sometimes because of these things, our mind can play tricks on us. One bias I had before was: a $50 cue can play as well as a $2000 cue. This may be true but once I got into finding out what cuemakers put into the cue, I discovered a differnt level of appreciation for both quality production and custom cues. Presently I have some nice production and customs.

Now, I also have this bias: A cue that's too pretty and intricate cannot possibly play well. Weight and balance will definitely be screwed. If its being displayed in a museum, it should stay there.

So its possible that if I get my hands on really high end cues like the ones Don has played with recently, this thing in my mind will bother me and cause me to miss shots and dislike the hit or whatever.

Right now, I'm just trying to be aware of it. I got over my first bias, maybe I'll get over this one...

 

[Rackin_Zack]

if that is your personal playing cue why do you have it priced and listed as new on you web site?

and if his cues are so great how come you will not take new unchalked blacks in on trade?

Great site! You have some really incredible cues. I really like the 8-point Hercek and Tascarella as well as the lizard wrapped Bender, the B. Szamboti and the James White!

*trying to find a towel big enough to clean up all the drool*

 

[Purdman]

16k? not even close

Please enlighten me if I am wrong. When we were talking, he had about $150,000 worth of cues sitting on my table. I saw and played with the BB in question about 4 years ago. At the time he had 4 or 5 of them. I may be mistaken about the $16,000. I am sure it was somewhere in the $12,000 to $16,000 range. So if you know, spit it up buddy!!! I would love to know.
Purdman