What current Cuebuilders Cues will be

Bill Shick, Paul Motey, Tad Kohara, Erine Martinez, Judd Fuller, Phillippi, Joel Hercek, Gina Cue just to name a few there are more! Start collecting New Cues. Put your name on the waiting lists Southwest Andy Gilbert
 
Dennis Searing, Bill Schick, Joel Hercek, Pete Tascarella, John Showman, Gina, Tad, B. Szamboti, and Ron Haley.
 
Last edited:
unlike yesteryear, knowledge of building nice hitting cues is known acroos the board and shared by many. so there will be no "szam/bushka". so i think the collectables will trend more towards design and craft,,,,,but computers and machinery has leveled the playing field there as well. the collectable might come from the innovators or the extreme designers.

gina,,,because ernie is who he is, and there's no one close.

tad,,,integrity and uniqueness. no one tries to copy him. also his output is VERY low.

everyone else is far behind, computers/machinery have made them all alike, or they end up copying gutierrez or szamboti-style anyway. then there's a group of players who are similiar in a broad sense with very ornate designs,,,, but imo, no one has risen above to the level of tad/gina/szam/bush. SW has too many cues out there.

there are a few who are flat out strong craftsmen like prewitt, haley, mottey, schick but they're a full level below tad and gina. prewitt/haley aren't good "designers", mottey follows szam-style, schick does gina + engraving. they all have their niche.

whoever has the best machinery wins.
 
Last edited:
bruin70 said:
unlike yesteryear, knowledge of building nice hitting cues is known acroos the board and shared by many. so there will be no "szam/bushka". so i think the collectables will trend more towards design and craft,,,,,but computers and machinery has leveled the playing field there as well. the collectable might come from the innovators or the extreme designers.

gina,,,because ernie is who he is, and there's no one close.

tad,,,integrity and uniqueness. no one tries to copy him. also his output is VERY low.

everyone else is far behind, computers/machinery have made them all alike, or they end up copying gutierrez or szamboti-style anyway. then there's a group of players who are similiar in a broad sense with very ornate designs,,,, but imo, no one has risen above to the level of tad/gina/szam/bush. SW has too many cues out there.

there are a few who are flat out strong craftsmen like prewitt, haley, mottey, schick but they're a full level below tad and gina. prewitt/haley aren't good "designers", mottey follows szam-style, schick does gina + engraving. they all have their niche.

whoever has the best machinery wins.
Click to expand...


Wow! Very surprising. I will vote for Joel. He is the only cue maker to make a blank the way he does. You don't think his work and ability are at the very least equal or better than the names you have listed? IMO-In execution and design he is far superior to these. I know hit is subjective but IMO his also play the best.:)
 
Last edited:
what about ronnie from cue perfect? never hit his stuff but the ivory work is amazing.

any one familiar with this builder?






....................................
 
bigdaddygerald said:
what about ronnie from cue perfect? never hit his stuff but the ivory work is amazing.

any one familiar with this builder?






....................................
Click to expand...


i shoot with a queperfect cue. love it, if you want ivory you'll have a hard time getting it now though. he's in the PI and customs is rough. point work is good fit is great in my opinion.
 
vinniebabarooch said:
Wow! Very surprising. I will vote for Joel. He is the only cue maker to make a blank the way he does. You don't think his work and ability are at the very least equal or better than the names you have listed? IMO-In execution and design he is far superior to these. I know hit is subjective but IMO his also play the best.:)
Click to expand...

i very much like joel's stuff, but the question was who will be the next szam/bala. i tried to keep the club exclusive, because all of a sudden every cuemaker's name is being thrown out there. the longer the list, the more you have to add.

oh,,,i forgot kershenbrock.
 
bruin70 said:
i very much like joel's stuff, but the question was who will be the next szam/bala. i tried to keep the club exclusive, because all of a sudden every cuemaker's name is being thrown out there. the longer the list, the more you have to add.

oh,,,i forgot kershenbrock.
Click to expand...

In terms of collectible, or playability, or both? I agree with a lot of the makers listed above, Tascarella in particular. Jerry Franklin made Kersenbrock Southwest and made them famous. David did design work for Jerry for a few years and actually started building the cue that became Southwest. The few Kersenbrocks I've hit were very stiff.
 
My vote is for Samsara.. these cues have original design, incredible craftsmanship, limited numbers being produced, and are just amazing to play with. The pics of mine don't do justice, they are beautiful works of art.
 
Pushout said:
In terms of collectible, or playability, or both? I agree with a lot of the makers listed above, Tascarella in particular. Jerry Franklin made Kersenbrock Southwest and made them famous. David did design work for Jerry for a few years and actually started building the cue that became Southwest. The few Kersenbrocks I've hit were very stiff.
Click to expand...

This question is close....but perhaps should read: 'in terms of playability or perceived aesthetic collectability?'

Here's the thing....the greats...Balabushka, G Szamboti, among a very few others...first made a great playing cue. The pretty stuff came later...but the playability of the cues always came first. It just doesn't matter how many inlays, or how much ivory, if it plays like a dog, it's just a pretty dog, with no tricks. It's like the adage amongst bikers....'chrome won't get you home'.

Yes...there will always be those few truly 'showcase' pieces that will command very high dollars to acquire.....but as cues get fancier and fancier, there are only so many who will be able to claim 'showcase' status.

I have very, very recently acquired, what is easily, to me, simply THE best playing cue I have ever owned in my life...truly a 'holy grail' cue. It is also, the simplest, plainest cue I have owned, (but very well executed w/really nice wood).....to me, much more highly desired than something really pretty I can look at.

Just food for thought.

Lisa
 
bruin70 said:
unlike yesteryear, knowledge of building nice hitting cues is known acroos the board and shared by many. so there will be no "szam/bushka". so i think the collectables will trend more towards design and craft,,,,,but computers and machinery has leveled the playing field there as well. the collectable might come from the innovators or the extreme designers.

gina,,,because ernie is who he is, and there's no one close.

tad,,,integrity and uniqueness. no one tries to copy him. also his output is VERY low.

everyone else is far behind, computers/machinery have made them all alike, or they end up copying gutierrez or szamboti-style anyway. then there's a group of players who are similiar in a broad sense with very ornate designs,,,, but imo, no one has risen above to the level of tad/gina/szam/bush. SW has too many cues out there.

there are a few who are flat out strong craftsmen like prewitt, haley, mottey, schick but they're a full level below tad and gina. prewitt/haley aren't good "designers", mottey follows szam-style, schick does gina + engraving. they all have their niche.

whoever has the best machinery wins.
Click to expand...


I would disagree on Ron Haley being a poor designer. I've loved just about every cue of his that I've seen. He has also broken his own ground with his paper veneers and spent the time to come up with his own very attractive double stich silver ring work. What's not to like?
 
ridewiththewind said:
This question is close....but perhaps should read: 'in terms of playability or perceived aesthetic collectability?'

Here's the thing....the greats...Balabushka, G Szamboti, among a very few others...first made a great playing cue. The pretty stuff came later...but the playability of the cues always came first. It just doesn't matter how many inlays, or how much ivory, if it plays like a dog, it's just a pretty dog, with no tricks. It's like the adage amongst bikers....'chrome won't get you home'.

Yes...there will always be those few truly 'showcase' pieces that will command very high dollars to acquire.....but as cues get fancier and fancier, there are only so many who will be able to claim 'showcase' status.

I have very, very recently acquired, what is easily, to me, simply THE best playing cue I have ever owned in my life...truly a 'holy grail' cue. It is also, the simplest, plainest cue I have owned, (but very well executed w/really nice wood).....to me, much more highly desired than something really pretty I can look at.

Just food for thought.

Lisa
Click to expand...

szams and balas are part of cue history, the beginning part.....and that's their intrinsic value. szams set a standard of design by which cuemakers STILL follow.

as it should be. only the cream should rise to the top.

playability, as you know, is subjective. your hitting cue may only have value to you but no one else. aesthetic beauty has broader acceptance and is quantifiable in the eyes of a collector. antiques are collected for history and beauty but not necessarilly functionality. stickley chairs are some of the most uncomfortable i've ever sat in. no one's going to pay top dollar for a great hitting gina 4 point, but they will pay $12,000 for a fancy one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top