MBL
Registered
Alright, I've been reading quite a few posts from old threads etc. about cue preferences and values. This may be my ignorance, but I'm getting the idea that cue values are somewhat like the values of guitars. There is a collector value, and there is a functional value. A combination of the two seems to drive the prices.
Now the reason I ask is that back in the early 90's, I can recall Helmstetters being a nice cue that was highly regarded. Those same cues on the secondary market seem to not be so valuable. But if they shot nice, and you could play a good game with them, why are they not considered nice pieces anymore? Are the new cues really so much better?
I realize the cues to which I am referring were made in Japan, and this most certainly drives the collector value down. But the functionality may be the same as some other pieces that are considered "nice" cues.
On the other hand, I remember shooting some of the best games I ever had with a nice straight house cue. I do recall that I shot better with cues of lighter weights...18oz or so.
Thoughts?
Tim
MBL
Now the reason I ask is that back in the early 90's, I can recall Helmstetters being a nice cue that was highly regarded. Those same cues on the secondary market seem to not be so valuable. But if they shot nice, and you could play a good game with them, why are they not considered nice pieces anymore? Are the new cues really so much better?
I realize the cues to which I am referring were made in Japan, and this most certainly drives the collector value down. But the functionality may be the same as some other pieces that are considered "nice" cues.
On the other hand, I remember shooting some of the best games I ever had with a nice straight house cue. I do recall that I shot better with cues of lighter weights...18oz or so.
Thoughts?
Tim
MBL