Question about an ordinary-looking Rauenzahn cue

DangleShot

New member
Hello!

Over 25 years ago I worked in a restaurant and one of the patrons left a cue case in the bar. It sat in their lost-and-found for several years and nobody claimed it. When the bar was changing hands, the bartender was getting rid of everything, knew I played pool, and gave me the pool stick that had been left behind.

At the time, even though I was pretty good at the game, I hated two-piece cues, anything other than a one-piece always felt like two mismatched unlinked pieces of wood, the taper too narrow and the vibration and solidity compromised at the joint. Granted, I never really held an expensive cue more than two seconds. So I took a look at the cue for a few minutes, didn't recognize any distinguishing brand names or trademarks. I could tell it wasn't a department store cue but it wasn't very ornate or much unlike some of the two-piece cues I saw other novices using. It had a good tip on it and there's no warp to it. I tried it a few shots, hastily dismissed it because I was used to heavy, 21 oz maple one-piece Dufferin cues.

After years of playing on my basement table which required shorter cues to navigate between the walls, and never one to play tournaments or in the messy bar scene, the proprietor of one of the bowling centers I bowl at is a good player and a few years ago he challenged me to a game, and I was using the house cue, which was better than average as far as bar cues go, and was playing pretty well, so he asked me, do you have your own stick? To which I said, no, which blew his mind. Then I remembered the stick the old bartender gave me 20 years before. I said, "well, I have one, but I never use it."

I started playing pool with him at some of the neighborhood pool halls, and in my experience, house cues were getting scarcer and in worse condition over the years. So one day I brought what I thought was the pretty underwhelming pool stick to play, and my buddy saw the butt-end of the cue, saw the -R- on it and said, "What are you talking about, this is not a crappy stick, this is a Rauenzahn!" I had never heard of Jerry or that brand, I had only heard of Meucci and Mali and Cuetec and McDermott...so I was like, "Is that good?" and he was like, "Oh, shit yeah! Only like the 2nd best cuemaker ever!" I said, "Do you want it?", and he was like, "No, you use it, you'll be even better than you are."

I'm used to it now, and I shoot fine with it. So it got me to researching about the maker and his works, and amazingly, in this information age, very little seems to be available about him. I've been reading posts on this forum and have created a patchwork of a background about him and his craftsmanship. But one thing seems funny about all this - every single cue I see that Rauenzahn has made has custom ornate inlays and multi-bordered arrows on the butt end, whereas my cue does not have any of those, it is a solid greenish-gray translucently stained veneer and a linen wrap. Which is why I thought it was commercially-made and cheap.

The cue is at least 30 years old and I am reasonably sure it's not a knock-off or imitation. I saw posts on here about conversion cues, maybe somehow this cue got work done by him and Jerry was ok with putting his name on it? I thought I remember seeing an article a couple years back about Rauenzahn expanding or licensing his name for commercially-made cues for a short while, being dissatisfied with the partnership, and aborting it..? Has anyone out there ever seen a Rauenzahn stick without arrows or inlays?

I am somewhat indifferent about the cue, whether it has value or not is really not that important. I doubt the stick is worth all that much, but if anyone could lend me some insight about it, I'd appreciate it.

Thank you for reading this far.
Bill
Buffalo, NY
 

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Out of curiosity, I went and weighed the stick on a two good kitchen scales and it is a hair over 20oz. It's heavier than I thought it was. I have no idea what weight is right for my game. As you can tell from my comments, I'm a recreational player and never got lessons or any feedback from someone qualified to make an assessment. I don't play in tournaments or leagues. I enjoy the game more for what I call the 'Rain Man' aspect of it, the physical geometry of it, the nostalgia and nuances, the sounds the table makes and the pocket angles... Most people play pool for competition, to get out, have a few beers, get social, be the best they can be, win. I do none of those things. :) I almost always enjoy playing by myself more than against someone else. And as you can tell, I enjoy talking about billiards about as much as playing. Thanks.

Bill
I like a 20 myself.
 

boogieman

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
Good looking cue. I definitely get the "rain man" aspect of it. If you're a reader, the pleasure of small motions might be a good book in your downtime.
 

Black-Balled

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
That is the 2nd ugliest stick I have ever seen, I say you that.

I gotta see if I can find the pick of #1, an also green merry widow I had.
I couldn't find the pic, but it was green (ironwood?) impregnated wood with jet black ebony handle and elephant all over it.

I couldn't make a ball with that damn cue:shrug:
 

DangleShot

New member
Then you definitely need to play players that know what they are doing or take lessons in order to understand the equipment and the game more. I've never know anything that benefited from knowing less about it or being worse at it LOL

Without lessons or at least some advice or guidance from better players you are just guessing as to what you are doing is correct. Almost all the players I see struggle with playing have started with poor mechanics and lack of knowledge and just went on with banging away at the game on their own, things that could be fixed with 10 minutes talking to someone that can teach a bit.

I'm actually going to be in NY on business, but I looked up where Buffalo was from where I will be and it's 5.5 hours LOL, stupid large states. In MA nothing is too far from anything else.
I appreciate your insight. Over the years as I've played tournament players or league players, they all point out flaws in my stance, grip, and stroke. I've always known my game is self-taught and not orthodox. I'm better than most recreational players but definitely no better than a bottom third when it comes to tournament players. I don't delude myself. Nor do I really strive to get better. I've always tried to keep things at an arm's length, always reluctant to take hard core lessons, play in tournaments, and put myself under so much pressure and take it so seriously that it's not fun anymore or that I lose that romance with the game. I'm the same way with bowling and golf. I understand my view of billiards staying the king at the kid's table instead of being the court jester in the dining room is not a popular one. I'm 50 now and people still tell me, "with a little more work you could be REALLY good." The time for me to really work on my game was when I was a carefree restaurant worker in my 20s. I watched my buddy take an all-day lesson with Earl Strickland, and gleaned a little off that. When people take the time to teach me something, I listen and genuinely try what they say. Many times I incorporate it into my game. I know a lot about caroms and throw and skids on banks and spin on the cue ball and speed control and my positional play is very good. I screw up because a flaw in my stroke makes me miss. I'm better now, but I was always undisciplined to try a hero shot I know I can make in the pool hall by myself at 2am just to show off or get a rise out of everyone and pretty much commit suicide in a more serious game rather than play defense. It was more fun to fail badly in a miracle than to try to snooker someone and make the percentage play. For those who take the game seriously, I am a farce and an enigma. It's mostly the reason why I stay away from the serious players and scene. The tournament players are the warriors and masters of the game and I respect them. I don't throw shade on them. It's just not my thing and I can't really make it my thing. They're battle-tested and have spent 30 years deadening their nerves. I've spent 30 years getting all warm and fuzzy sitting in a dead quiet pool room listing to Brunswick Centennials wop-wop-wop-clank as they funnel down those awesome Crown II Table gully pockets and content as I was able to make non-stop harmonious music while never hitting the ball hard or running around the table. *sigh*. :)
 

boogieman

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
I appreciate your insight. Over the years as I've played tournament players or league players, they all point out flaws in my stance, grip, and stroke. I've always known my game is self-taught and not orthodox.
Here's the thing, I'm kind of in the same boat, and now that I have back issues it's worse at times. I'm 40 now and know enough to be dangerous, I can usually finish in 1-3 place in maybe a 20 man local tournament. My thoughts are, who cares what your stroke looks like? I mean, yes, if you want to be a world beater, high fargo rate, big money player, tournament winner, then fundamentals are absolutely necessary. I try to work hard on my fundamentals, especially if I'm in a rut or missing stuff I shouldn't miss. I've personally found that I play best when I'm feeling the shot, even if my stance is slightly askew or such. I can stroke pure and get in the zone but not necessarily start out in a perfect fundamental stance. Sometimes I just can't due to my back, it's either stand slightly goofy, or not play. I choose to play, even if I'm not in perfect textbook fundamental stance.

People will say this is mental, but if I'm having problems, I'll switch from my 19oz McDermott to a random 18, a 20, a 21, different hardness tip, different chalk, etc for a few games. Sometimes this just adds enough randomness to reset whatever I'm doing wrong. It makes me focus on using the new tool effectively when I get lazy with the old tool which has become too much of an extension of myself to pay attention to, so I get the random bar cue thing. It could very well be mental, but it acts as a good mental reset switch for me to get back into stroke. It works, so I don't care if it's in my head or not. The randomness makes my body pay attention and evidently tickles the part of my brain that needs a tickle.

I'm not saying to not work on fundamentals and learn all you can. Books are great because you filter them, use what you want, and leave the rest on the page for the time being. You personally obviously learn and incorporate things into your game or you wouldn't know things like throw, caroms etc. I think the key is to find a good instructor that isn't trying to mold you in their textbook image. A good one knows body types are different and we have different goals and incorporates that into the structure of the lesson. Look at this clip where they are trying to figure out how Bustamante shoots how he does. He aims with the tip on the table, goofy as hell looking, but he hits the ball pure. I'm not saying I'm on his level, but this is how I play, though I don't sit my tip on the table, I can if I'm messing around. Makes for good "drunk player" acting at the local bar and really gets in people's heads. I understand the "feel" he plays by. He sees the cue ball as a ball to spin around at his will and doesn't treat it like a 2D object where you get perfect tip placement before shooting. Anyone who says your stroke must be perfectly level on all shots is suspect in my book. There are situations when you have to get a bit "goofy" and treat the ball like what it is, a ball.


I think anyone serious about the game would benefit from a good instructor but I also understand wanting the game to be your own. I play video games and I never look up tutorials or charts with what items do what, how powerful they are, ways to min-max your character etc. To me, that takes the fun out of it and ruins the sense of discovery. I used to look up everything, spending hours studying the most minute way to essentially break the game. I figured out this made me pretty much hate playing video games because there was no sense of discovery, no sense of wonder, and it was my fault as I'd spoiled the game for myself, turning it into charts and numbers rather than an organic playthrough.

I've only had one instructor in my life and it was Gene on here with his perfect aim system. Gene is a dude who knows how to teach, he won't try to mold you into something you're not. He might tweak a few things and show you a better way to stand etc, but he's not going to crack your knuckles with the ruler if you don't. If you have problems with thin cuts one one side more so than the other, he can probably set you right with a skype lesson. I really love what he teaches and how he does it because you can add it into your already programmed "billiards computer" and it jives with what you already know without trying to wipe you back to a blank slate.

Anyway, sorry for the book, but it really rang home with me. Keep having fun and don't forget the chalk! :)
 

DangleShot

New member
Here's the thing, I'm kind of in the same boat, and now that I have back issues it's worse at times. I'm 40 now and know enough to be dangerous, I can usually finish in 1-3 place in maybe a 20 man local tournament. My thoughts are, who cares what your stroke looks like? I mean, yes, if you want to be a world beater, high fargo rate, big money player, tournament winner, then fundamentals are absolutely necessary. I try to work hard on my fundamentals, especially if I'm in a rut or missing stuff I shouldn't miss. I've personally found that I play best when I'm feeling the shot, even if my stance is slightly askew or such. I can stroke pure and get in the zone but not necessarily start out in a perfect fundamental stance. Sometimes I just can't due to my back, it's either stand slightly goofy, or not play. I choose to play, even if I'm not in perfect textbook fundamental stance.

People will say this is mental, but if I'm having problems, I'll switch from my 19oz McDermott to a random 18, a 20, a 21, different hardness tip, different chalk, etc for a few games. Sometimes this just adds enough randomness to reset whatever I'm doing wrong. It makes me focus on using the new tool effectively when I get lazy with the old tool which has become too much of an extension of myself to pay attention to, so I get the random bar cue thing. It could very well be mental, but it acts as a good mental reset switch for me to get back into stroke. It works, so I don't care if it's in my head or not. The randomness makes my body pay attention and evidently tickles the part of my brain that needs a tickle.

I'm not saying to not work on fundamentals and learn all you can. Books are great because you filter them, use what you want, and leave the rest on the page for the time being. You personally obviously learn and incorporate things into your game or you wouldn't know things like throw, caroms etc. I think the key is to find a good instructor that isn't trying to mold you in their textbook image. A good one knows body types are different and we have different goals and incorporates that into the structure of the lesson. Look at this clip where they are trying to figure out how Bustamante shoots how he does. He aims with the tip on the table, goofy as hell looking, but he hits the ball pure. I'm not saying I'm on his level, but this is how I play, though I don't sit my tip on the table, I can if I'm messing around. Makes for good "drunk player" acting at the local bar and really gets in people's heads. I understand the "feel" he plays by. He sees the cue ball as a ball to spin around at his will and doesn't treat it like a 2D object where you get perfect tip placement before shooting. Anyone who says your stroke must be perfectly level on all shots is suspect in my book. There are situations when you have to get a bit "goofy" and treat the ball like what it is, a ball.


I think anyone serious about the game would benefit from a good instructor but I also understand wanting the game to be your own. I play video games and I never look up tutorials or charts with what items do what, how powerful they are, ways to min-max your character etc. To me, that takes the fun out of it and ruins the sense of discovery. I used to look up everything, spending hours studying the most minute way to essentially break the game. I figured out this made me pretty much hate playing video games because there was no sense of discovery, no sense of wonder, and it was my fault as I'd spoiled the game for myself, turning it into charts and numbers rather than an organic playthrough.

I've only had one instructor in my life and it was Gene on here with his perfect aim system. Gene is a dude who knows how to teach, he won't try to mold you into something you're not. He might tweak a few things and show you a better way to stand etc, but he's not going to crack your knuckles with the ruler if you don't. If you have problems with thin cuts one one side more so than the other, he can probably set you right with a skype lesson. I really love what he teaches and how he does it because you can add it into your already programmed "billiards computer" and it jives with what you already know without trying to wipe you back to a blank slate.

Anyway, sorry for the book, but it really rang home with me. Keep having fun and don't forget the chalk! :)
Thanks for the reply. I know my long and rambling messages on the internet will make me an anachronism to some people, and some will think I've gone down the rabbit hole and others will be refreshed that they get something other than dismissive, turn-and-burn torpedoes. I know there's merit to being succinct and simple...but that's not me unless it's for comedic effect. ;-)

I understand what you mean. Some of the people who give lessons in bowling and golf try to get you into textbook perfect balance, timing, etc. and try and get as much from someone's limited strength as possible, while other teachers work with your flaws and try and make your bad habits repeatable or canceling each other out. Not sure if there's a correlation of those two styles to their success rates, each iteration is different I guess. I've had both kinds and drawn aptitude from both. Many times when I take a lesson and change something, I can't go back to my old way even if I wanted to, and that can be maddening and rewarding. I practice a lot but in binges.

My stroke has evolved greatly over the past five years. I used to stand fairly upright, play very quickly, have a long bridge, and stroke thru the cue ball at all kinds of oblique angles, accounting for some on-the-fly mathematically-calculated squirt and swerve and throw on every shot. I played against Adam Wheeler in college, he mesmerized me, and I kinda emulated his game because mine was a little like his, he gave me some good pointers. I would make some amazingly difficult shots but also miss a fair share of easy ones. Now I get a lot lower, take a couple extra seconds, and keep the cue more 'on plane' with a short bridge and compact stroke. Now I don't miss easy shots very often but when I have to dial up some massive throw to make a ball it's not as easy to summon. Sometimes it makes me cringe that I opt for a good defensive safety than try that sexy thrillseeker.

And like you said, sometimes when you're a little less confident or struggling with your stroke, either get super simple or try that one exasperating piece of advice someone has been telling you to do forever. Like a pitcher who can't get a simple fastball over the plate, try a wicked slider or curveball that's not necessarily your forte and if you throw that well, it can calm you down and you'll get your mojo back.

And I know you might've meant it as a euphemism, but I never forget the chalk. I'm covered in it after playing. I used to stain my tube socks blue playing pool in my parents' basement in my stocking feet. :)

Thanks for the pleasant conversation...
Bill
 
Last edited:

DangleShot

New member
That is the 2nd ugliest stick I have ever seen, I say you that.

I gotta see if I can find the pick of #1, an also green merry widow I had.
You can understand why I thought it wasn't much better than a department store cue, right? I had seen the ESPN-visible brand-name $200-$400 glossy rockets (1996 prices) at the pool hall and my cue didn't look like those. :) Then when I found out recently it was made by Jerry, and when I researched him he had all these elaborate hand-crafted inlaid intricate designs, and mine wasn't like that, I thought..."what the..." :)

Bill
 

DangleShot

New member
Good looking cue. I definitely get the "rain man" aspect of it. If you're a reader, the pleasure of small motions might be a good book in your downtime.
I might just do that. I'm not an avid reader per se, but after reading some of the mixed reviews on here, I kinda like esoteric fluff. ;-) If that wasn't evident already :)

Bill
 

boogieman

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
You can understand why I thought it wasn't much better than a department store cue, right? I had seen the ESPN-visible brand-name $200-$400 glossy rockets (1996 prices) at the pool hall and my cue didn't look like those. :) Then when I found out recently it was made by Jerry, and when I researched him he had all these elaborate hand-crafted inlaid intricate designs, and mine wasn't like that, I thought..."what the..." :)

Bill
If you're like me, that simple design is nicer than something super intricate. I can't explain it, but a butt made from a single piece of wood with nice stain and grain, or something without all the inlay "jewelry" on it just speaks to me. Beauty through simplicity just shouts good craftsmanship to me.

I might just do that. I'm not an avid reader per se, but after reading some of the mixed reviews on here, I kinda like esoteric fluff. ;-) If that wasn't evident already :)

Bill
If you like some esoteric stuff check out this thread, there's a ton to get the ol' noodle engaged: https://forums.azbilliards.com/threads/developing-expertise-in-pool.496802/ I bet you'll enjoy it.
 
Top