Hmm, funny that a ban on jump cues would illicit such responses.
1. John, you're not exactly an objective observer in this, so your OPINION doesn't carry a whole lot of weight, regardless of how long or erudite your stated opinion is.
His opinion carrys as much weight as anyone elses. He simply answered each bullet as needed in his words. Does your opinion count for more?
2. Jump cues change the game, plain and simple. This is one of the few things I agree with Earl Strickland on. Do I have one? Hell yes. I'm not going to punish myself in tournaments where they're allowed (this is also one area I congratulate Earl for sticking to his moral guns - I couldn't do it). Why should I put in all the work to learn to jump with a full cue when I can use a gimmick stick to cut the learning time down to 10 minutes? That's literally how long it took for me to learn to jump over a full ball from 4 inches away with a jump cue.
Name ONE sport that the game isnt changing and evolving from time/equipment? As has been stated, tips/chaulk/rails/cloth have already changed the way the game is played. You have a jump cue, so you have supported the game. Has it changed your way of playing?
3. Less skill (that's right, I said it) is required to jump out of a safe position than to kick. That doesn't mean I think that NO skill is involved, simply less. Much less. Nobody in their right mind thinks it's easier to kick than to jump, otherwise nobody would use a jump cue at all. People are constantly looking for shortcuts not to learn the difficult aspects of the game, and one of the quickest shortcuts to make the game easier is the jump cue.
People that master the jump shots, took time to master it. I would assume that the same people can kick balls as well, only do to their efforts to learn it. One thing about skill, it has already been mentioned, but ALOT of people sell out when using their jump cues. These same sellouts would probably happen if kicking at them. Goes back to the principle of playing a decent safe.
4. Professional contests are meant to be a measure of skill. The most skillful player should win. Why should equipment meant to reduce the amount of skill needed be allowed? Can it successfully be argued that jump cues WERE NOT invented to reduce the skill needed to get out of safe positions? I don't think so.
So lets take away all the new equipment, including the cues that they use and toss bar 'sticks' into their hands then. Every sport equipment is changing, and pool is no different. I would argue that jump cues were invented to increase the jump percentages. People have jumped balls forever, and if you wanted to argue about it, I would say that having a jump cue will do less damage to the cloth than the same players using a playing cue to jump.
5. Jump cues DO cause damage to the cloth. If somebody thinks they can jump, they're gonna do it. That may cause a ding or a mark in the cloth. How's this different from the marks left by breaking? Breaking generally only leaves marks along the headstring. Jumping can cause damage all over the playing surface. How's this different from jumping with a regular cue? Most people, if faced with a difficult jump, won't even try jumping with their regular cue, hence the table is protected. With a jump cue, that same shot might be tried 90% of the time.
Marks happen all over the table. The marks from jump shots are random. If you can jump with a playing cue, you will have the same marks. Taking away the jump cue will not eliminate marks on the table. Marks happen for many different reasons. The type of CB will make marks, break shots make marks, power draw shots make marks, and yes even some of the kick shots will make marks.
6. The biggest problem with jump cues isn't the damage to the equipment, it's the changing of the game. When the Sardo first came out, lots of people heralded it as the greatest thing since leather tips. Now, since pros have learned how to manipulate the break to make balls and run out consistently, the Sardo is dumped on like Mel Gibson at a Jewish temple. First, the US Open moves the 9 to the spot. Then, breaking rules are changed to require 2 balls to pass the side pocket. What next, are we going to place speed limits on the break? If equipment has to cause the game to be changed, then the equipment shouldn't be used, which is exactly why the Sardo has fallen out of favor and more and more tournaments are banning it (see WPBA and WPA World Championships). The same thinking is beginning to be applied to jump cues (finally!) and I'm definitely in favor of that.
Since so many are manipulating the break to pocket balls, I am guessing that their are many pros/players that cant make balls that are suddenly a pro because of the Sardo? Seems that the same players that found the spot to hit the rack with the sardo are doing the same thing with manual racks. Maybe its because they practice?
-djb
They R called jump cues 
