PSA: A point with a Re-Cut inside is not 2 points

How I look at "points" is, not meaning to sway anyone in either direction, determined by the separated tips that travel around the circumference of the cue. Any embellishment "within" those points are a part of the original. Thats not to say the inside points are not "true" points, they are, just that I don't consider them in the count.... But that's me...:embarrassed2

And YES recuts are more work than veneers.... Unless you do veneers like Dennis ;)

As for the pic Eric posted I would count all of the tips around the circumference of the cue that are separated and call the cue an umpteen pointer :smile:

Skins--------- wants that Sugartree! Phenomenal!
 
There are veneers and there are Searing veneers.
I think Searing's V veneers require more work than recuts.
 
JoeyInCali said:
There are veneers and there are Searing veneers.

I think Searing's V veneers require more work than recuts.
Click to expand...


I think they're more appropriately called PITA-TM-Recut Veneers.

PITA-TM : Pain In The A$$ - To Make
 
prewarhero said:
in other words you are using a point shaped inlay. An inlay is not a point. A point is not a term used just to describe a shape it is also used to mean a prong. An inlay is not a prong and not a point. I know, you are going to say it is not an lnlay. I argue it is, but in any event, it is still not a point. What ever someone wants to do inside the point, have at it, it is still all within 1 point.
Click to expand...

We are not talking flat bottom inlays being added. We are about talking v-groove points. What ever location on the cue you cut another point into counts as a point.

Have you ever gotten a present for your birthday and opened it only to find another box inside a box? Then open that one and find a smaller box and so on for several boxes? Well if you have I am sure you thought there was more than one box, even though all the smaller boxes were inside the larger box.
 
cueman said:
We are not talking flat bottom inlays being added. We are about talking v-groove points. What ever location on the cue you cut another point into counts as a point.

Have you ever gotten a present for your birthday and opened it only to find another box inside a box? Then open that one and find a smaller box and so on for several boxes? Well if you have I am sure you thought there was more than one box, even though all the smaller boxes were inside the larger box.
Click to expand...

With respect Chris, technically v-groove points are still inlays... Flat bottom is just a static depth and v-groove is a tapered depth... Flat bottom points are still points too... Don't discriminate... That goes to person who's post you responded too as well..LOL :smile:..
 
Last edited:
skins said:
With respect Chris, technically v-groove points are still inlays... Flat bottom is just a static depth and v-groove is a tapered depth... Flat bottom points are still points too... Don't discriminate... That goes to person who's post you responded too as well..LOL :smile:..
Click to expand...

I agree, points done on a 'short' splice are ONLY inlays....compared to a full splice which is a true splicing of two different pieces that interlock and mate on multiple planes. A 'short' splice is only cutting a groove into a piece of wood and inlaying a piece that was cut to fit, just like an 'inlay.' When I glue them up, I inlay the point stock into the V groove. A recut on a point is the same as veneers on a point, otherwise every cue that has 4 veneer 4 pointer should be considered a 20 pointer as there are points within points. A cue should be described as:
A four point cue with 4 veneers on each point, Or as a four point cue with 4 recuts in each point.
To me, the first and original V grooves cut into the forearm or butt sleeve are the only ones that should be called points, the rest (either veneers or recuts) just accentuate that point.
A recut IMO, is simply another way to make a veneer look-a-like without any glue lines. Not saying extra work is not involved, as it can be, but the amount of work doesn't dictate what it should be called. I do dare to say that no one should ever consider a 'short splice' forearm to be anything but a forearm with long inlays, as they are inlaid to a pocket that was cut into the forearm, no different then any other inlays on a cue.
JMO,
Dave
 
Last edited:
qbilder said:
To drive my point(s) home, here's a couple pics of a recut pointed forearm. Classify it according to the OP's definition of recuts, and then honestly explain how veneers are harder or require more work. How many points does this forearm have? And then how many recuts?
Click to expand...
Holy shit, this is a one of the most beautiful forearms I've ever seen.
BTW, I cannot count so much, sorry :(
 
JoshStodola said:
I tend to agree but I am awfully ignorant. The way I understand it,
veneers are just thin sheets glued to the point wood. Only one
"point" is actually cut. I wish I had a slight clue as to how recut
points were constructed. Definitely seems like more work on the
surface. If you have some free time can you share some of your
knowledge as to how recuts are constructed, for the dummies
like me? :embarrassed2:
Click to expand...
I'm not a cuemaker, so excuse me for interruption, but look at the picture I've posted here: http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4820464&postcount=19
This is a 6 pointer fullsplice with 3 recuts. Every recut is cut after another one is glued together. So, according to qbuilder, this is a 18 pointer (36 if you count reverse points, too). I insist this is much more work here as with veneers.
 
Recuts

Here is my explanation on the # of points. I make a 4-point front (all v-points here). Then machine 4 more shorter points between the ist set of 4 (rotated 45 digs.). No one would say this is not an 8-point front. Right!! Now take those 4 short points and rotate them 45 deg. until they are centered over the 4 long points. Is this not still an 8 pointer or does the oreintation of the short points over the long points negate the value of the short points.
I think not. This recut is still 8 points.
MIke L.
 
I hate to say it

JoeyInCali said:
There are veneers and there are Searing veneers.
I think Searing's V veneers require more work than recuts.
Click to expand...

But you are wrong. And overlapping veneers would be way less work than recuts.
Nick :)
 
Last edited:
Well, regardless of the outcome I'm happy I stumbled upon this thread so at least there's some substance behind the 24 pt cues I've seen, where I could 6.

With the work involved, real truth in advertising - to **ME**, would be stating you just made a 6pt cue with 3 recuts. I'll never view any such cue as anything other than a 6pt cue, but knowing that 3 more points were cut within the larger/1st/original point, and knowing how much work was involved, would absolutely go a long way to explaining why it was more expensive.

Anyway, happy to be educated. But I personally hate seeing 18+ point cues... I'll even go so far as to now say it's technically accurate, but to me it's still not right.
 
Dave38 said:
A recut IMO, is simply another way to make a veneer look-a-like without any glue lines.
Click to expand...

While a 4 point with 4 recuts will look similar to 4 point/4 veneer cue, that's not the purpose of recuts. As I show with my pics, some designs are impossible to do with veneers and can only be achieved with recuts. Even the very simple ebony/tulip cue I posted a pic of cannot be attained with veneers. While recuts can be used to create the designs typically reserved for veneers, veneers cannot be used in lieu of recuts.

The only way this discussion can even take place is by comparing the most basic recut designs that in effect could have been executed also with veneer. Go beyond the complexity of a simple outline and no longer does this conversation even make sense or have any basis. Again, the 96 splice forearm I showed with braided points is a bit extreme, but certainly makes the point that recuts and veneers are nothing comparable. Only by cutting 96 individual points could that forearm be made. It is unfathomable & utterly impossible to achieve that design with veneers & no recuts. Veneers are limited to being outlines, and beyond a simple outline, the two are incomparable.
 
buzzmc said:
real truth in advertising - to **ME**, would be stating you just made a 6pt cue with 3 recuts.
Click to expand...

100% spot on. Where recuts are used to serve a similar purpose as veneer, I completely agree. But again, it's only semantics.
 
qbilder said:
While a 4 point with 4 recuts will look similar to 4 point/4 veneer cue, that's not the purpose of recuts. As I show with my pics, some designs are impossible to do with veneers and can only be achieved with recuts. Even the very simple ebony/tulip cue I posted a pic of cannot be attained with veneers. While recuts can be used to create the designs typically reserved for veneers, veneers cannot be used in lieu of recuts.
Click to expand...

I'll state my view a slightly different way then to make the same point.

Maybe the definition of a point should be clear... And certainly pre-recut the definition of a point wasn't even a question.

Now it is a question, it's a valid question, especially considering the work involved, but I think the folks that are doing recuts would serve everyone better if they advertised that's what was happening.

A point is a peak. And on a 6 pt cue with 100 recuts, there's still only 6 peaks.

Again, this is me, and that's how I view it. But I would, especially now after reading this thread, know there's significantly more work involved in cues with recuts and therefore understand why the price was higher.
 
mljl said:
Here is my explanation on the # of points. I make a 4-point front (all v-points here). Then machine 4 more shorter points between the ist set of 4 (rotated 45 digs.). No one would say this is not an 8-point front. Right!! Now take those 4 short points and rotate them 45 deg. until they are centered over the 4 long points. Is this not still an 8 pointer or does the oreintation of the short points over the long points negate the value of the short points.
I think not. This recut is still 8 points.
MIke L.
Click to expand...

Well said!
 
=buzzmc;4821917]
A point is a peak. And on a 6 pt cue with 100 recuts, there's still only 6 peaks.
Click to expand...
No, there would still be a hundred peaks. Think of it like a mountain range leading up to the highest peak, but with you being a long ways away you can see many smaller peaks in front of the highest peak. Yet they are all peaks. All individual mountains.

As a compromise we could say there are 6 outer points and 100 inner points.
 
Last edited:
buzzmc said:
Now it is a question, it's a valid question, especially considering the work involved, but I think the folks that are doing recuts would serve everyone better if they advertised that's what was happening.
Click to expand...


This is where semantics come in to play. An 8-pointer with a set of recuts is just that, which also makes it a 16-pointer. Either classification would be correct, IMO, and is really up to each individual to label as they see fit. Nobody is wrong. Everybody has obvious evidence to support their perception. Nobody will quit calling a cue a 16-pointer when you see only 8 points, but now you will understand why they label it that way & won't be so confused. You may not agree with their label, but you understand what they are saying. It would be nice if we had some standard jargon, but we don't. Same thing with a forearm, which is also a "front" or a "prong". We got some illogical terminology. It's confusing and even sometimes seemingly misleading, but threads like this go a ways in helping folks understand. Clear as mud :grin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top