Who were the best Cue Makers of their time?

B

brunswick1901

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
I'm changing my GOAT question because I should have asked about cue makers who were the best of their era.

I am also interested in an individual not a company and I'll start with what Craig Peterson said about Balabushka. Craig said the first time he saw a Balabushka, without touching it, he knew right away that it was different. Then when he ran his hand over the joint and the wrap he said to himself, "I'm going to have to make a better cue". I do not think anyone would disagree that George Balabushka was the best cue maker of his era.

Before Gus Szamboti placed his business card ad in the Billiard news he spent a long time working with a top player making changes to his cue until the player said the cue was perfect. Gus was the best cue maker of his era.

Gus said it was painful to keep re-doing the cue until the player was satisfied. Gus didn't say who the player was but Gus mentioned a player few times during other conversations, I cannot tell you the name because it may not be correct.

In the 1970s David Kersenbrock (certainly the mad scientist of cue makers) and Jerry Franklin worked together to use a table saw, your read that correctly, they used a table saw, to turn shafts and standardize shaft tapers for performance. Another breakthrough in cue making Southwest one of the best of their era.

I would like to heard about other great cue makers and their stories.
 
Last edited:
This is a tough one and you will get many answers. He is certainly not the greatest like any other cue makers that are declared such a title.

I would say there is none.
 
I wonder if man is still taking orders. I would like that basic model 1 ginacue. That is what I think of when I think of his cues.
 
My choice is Ginacue by Ernie Gutierrez because when he started making cues in the 1963 he changed the way cues were made.

Today, 61 years later, with his latest crosscut maple cue Ernie continues to change the industry.
 
Last edited:
Got news for you……there is no greatest….no one cue maker has distinguished their skills as being far superior
to their peers. There are great cue makers but no one is the greatest. Individual designs of cues have different
appeal and since there isn’t any standard for comparison purposes, it a matter of individual taste. The only fair test
is to have a Cue Off”…every cue maker that wants to be considered for the title of the greatest has to make 7 cues.

The designs will be specified and every cue maker has to make the same design for all 7 cues. There would be a due
date for completion. Additionally, the cue maker can make up to 3 additional cues comprising a total of 10 pool cues.

The 3 cues will not have any specific design pattern to emulate. One of the cues must be a 4 point design; one cue
must be a 6 point design; the last cue must include a 360 design. Th cue makers can be as artistic or precise as they
choose. The last 3 cues are the opportunity for the greatest cue maker of all time (GOAT) entrants to be creative.

Now I am not saying this is the best way of determining the greatest cue maker but it is a fair and most importantly, an objective way of assigning that title. The problem is you’d have to be alive to be able to make the cues to submit.

As you can see, it’s a fool’s errand and so unless there is specific criteria to measure, compare and contrast the cue
maker candidates, it is just one’s opinion. And if nothing else since 2008, opinions will always vary and often conflict.

Everyone has a favorite something……food, candy, ice cream, musician……the same even applies to cue makers.
 
Bavafongoul said:
Got news for you……there is no greatest….no one cue maker has distinguished their skills as being far superior
to their peers. There are great cue makers but no one is the greatest. Individual designs of cues have different
appeal and since there isn’t any standard for comparison purposes, it a matter of individual taste. The only fair test
is to have a Cue Off”…every cue maker that wants to be considered for the title of the greatest has to make 7 cues.

The designs will be specified and every cue maker has to make the same design for all 7 cues. There would be a due
date for completion. Additionally, the cue maker can make up to 3 additional cues comprising a total of 10 pool cues.

The 3 cues will not have any specific design pattern to emulate. One of the cues must be a 4 point design; one cue
must be a 6 point design; the last cue must include a 360 design. Th cue makers can be as artistic or precise as they
choose. The last 3 cues are the opportunity for the greatest cue maker of all time (GOAT) entrants to be creative.

Now I am not saying this is the best way of determining the greatest cue maker but it is a fair and most importantly, an objective way of assigning that title. The problem is you’d have to be alive to be able to make the cues to submit.

As you can see, it’s a fool’s errand and so unless there is specific criteria to measure, compare and contrast the cue
maker candidates, it is just one’s opinion. And if nothing else since 2008, opinions will always vary and often conflict.

Everyone has a favorite something……food, candy, ice cream, musician……the same even applies to cue makers.
Click to expand...
If we are going to base it on achievements, Ernie wins it by a country mile imo.
Millions of dollars in custom cue sales.
Tad might be the closest to him.
 
It’s all preference. There’s so many I haven’t tried. People will probably say Ginacue, Balabushka, Szamboti, Searing, Scruggs, etc. My favorite cue I’ve hit with was a Prewitt or Scruggs. Depends on if you value playability or design.
 
Last edited:
Ģüśţāṿ said:
Probably cuetec or meucci, they both have A LOT of wins 😉
Click to expand...
You mean the same meucci that was putting out such garbage in the late 80s early 90s that the pool halls had to send 3/4 of every shipment back because they were warped, had inlays half falling out, had glue marks all over them. Were unsellable.

You mean the same meucci thats product was so bad for a few years when you would click on them on web sites like ozone billiards you would get a message saying due to their poor quality they are no longer selling meucci try these instead 😂

noooooo. You got to do better then that
 
Last edited:
To each his own. Many cuemakers have distinguished themselves from the pack simply by word of mouth. No large marketing machine behind them.
I've talked to several cuemakers in my lifetime and each is a character in his or her own right.
2 of the aforementioned actually blew my gray matter when they said wood resonates and pairing of woods in the construction of a cue makes all the difference in playability vs eye candy. You can drop 10k on a custom that might play like crap but would you ever admit it, or for that matter, even play it??
Today many makers use tech to their advantage resulting in the market being flooded by mass produced, very playable axes. Y'all know to whom I refer.
Imo, those cuemakers that KNEW wood and all of its properties were and are the best in the bizz.
The pairing discussions I've had in the past led me to this conclusion. You can't make a top of the line cue if the base materials are crap. Strawberries and pigs.
That being said, are today's cuemakers able to make a cue that plays as well as one containing old growth maple, and/or other woods or materials not available to them today, for whatever reason??
I'd like to have a serious discussion w a maker about this very subject.
If any read this, I'm all ears fellas.
Here we are now. Educate us.
 
Mensabum said:
To each his own. Many cuemakers have distinguished themselves from the pack simply by word of mouth. No large marketing machine behind them.
I've talked to several cuemakers in my lifetime and each is a character in his or her own right.
2 of the aforementioned actually blew my gray matter when they said wood resonates and pairing of woods in the construction of a cue makes all the difference in playability vs eye candy. You can drop 10k on a custom that might play like crap but would you ever admit it, or for that matter, even play it??
Today many makers use tech to their advantage resulting in the market being flooded by mass produced, very playable axes. Y'all know to whom I refer.
Imo, those cuemakers that KNEW wood and all of its properties were and are the best in the bizz.
The pairing discussions I've had in the past led me to this conclusion. You can't make a top of the line cue if the base materials are crap. Strawberries and pigs.
That being said, are today's cuemakers able to make a cue that plays as well as one containing old growth maple, and/or other woods or materials not available to them today, for whatever reason??
I'd like to have a serious discussion w a maker about this very subject.
If any read this, I'm all ears fellas.
Here we are now. Educate us.
Click to expand...
Consider asking your question in the
”Ask The Cuemaker “ forum
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top