Custom made "Ultimate" Multispliced Oak cue !!

[CueAntW147]

Don't understand what this means in relation to this thread, can you clarify?

I thought that seems like he's had a bad experience with the seller of these cues in the past, as i take it the **** isn't the word nice.....

[JasonOwen]

Don't understand what this means in relation to this thread, can you clarify?

Its commonly thought that this guy 'may' be buying old hand spliced cues with no makers name, rebadging them and selling them as rare original cues.
'Could' possibly be linked to tomulus on ebay. Could be wrong there though.
So much better he peddles Oak as the new Ash and leaves the poor newby cue collectors alone.

[perpetualboredom]

Its commonly thought that this guy 'may' be buying old hand spliced cues with no makers name, rebadging them and selling them as rare original cues.
'Could' possibly be linked to tomulus on ebay. Could be wrong there though.
So much better he peddles Oak as the new Ash and leaves the poor newby cue collectors alone.

Couldn't have put it better... If only there were a website that would show collectors exactly what a 'replica' badge looks like against an original, guess we'll have to wait for that tho.

To be honest I have no idea what these oak cues are like, so yes my opinion is not worth much there, but if for instance, a seller had a particularly bad reputation for ripping people off.. (lets say from 3-4 independent sources) selling cues as genuine old cues, which were actually faked/replicas then would I recommend people buy from them? No.

[potter]

Lot of questions posted lately potter ! - are you going to answer them ?

What do you think?


Hi Trevor, I'm very surprised you felt the need to make comments on my thread, after all I'm only trying to sell a couple of cues, and didn't expect this type of gastapo questioning. Anyway, I feel obliged to answer your questions, now that you've asked them.

1) "why is 25 year old oak better than new oak?"

For the same reason that older ash, is better than new ash. Put simply, it plays and feels more solid and gives a better response, when striking the cue ball.

2) When you say, "never seem to find"...I'm assuming you're speaking for yourself and not ALL cue makers yes?

I'm not speaking for any cue makers at all. I'm adressing the players that maybe interested in buying a really good cue from me. I thought that would have been obvious.

3) ANY cue only has the screw power the person behind it is able to generate doesn't it?

No, that statement is far from true. The cue is a tool that is able to generate "X" amount of controllable side and screw power, due to the design, measurements and materials used. When the cue is set up correctly, the player finds it easier to do both.

4) I'm not so sure that older cues had a finish which was all that durable, or in any way superior to modern cues, and besides, ALL cues will achieve a better feel and finish to them over time with good care.

Well I am sure. Players nowadays don't have time to mess with linseed oil, or any other cue shaft applications, or wait for the perfect glossy shaft to develope over a number of years. They want it all and straight away, and with this cue they have it.

5) "How can you be sure that John Parris, or any other maker is unable to find such old timber? Also, (and maybe an interesting point) there are good reasons for using newer timber, and not using older timber.

If you feel you have to comment on this thread, at least read the description more carefully. I have no idea how John Parris sources his timber, and quite frankly have no interest in the subject either way.

6) "Again, this is purely speculation, nothing more". There is plenty of great ash out there, it just has to be found and selected.

The speculation as you put it, is that there is great ash out there to find. There isn't any great ash out there, and anyone who thinks there is, in my opinion is simply dillusional. There hasn't been any great ash available for at least the last 15 years, going back to the early 90's.

7) "Does that mean that they have no idea of what good tapers are for ash or maple also?. If not, why would they be unable to transfer their knowledge to another timber, even though it has slightly different properties?

Knowledge of tapering ash and maple cues, will be useless when working with oak.

8) As with other joints, it only needs to do the job effectively, nothing more. Various joints are used by various makers and ALL of the well made and well fitted ones work perfectly well. There is NO ADVANTAGE of one joint type over another....fact.

That statement couldn't be any further from the truth. Not all joints are the same, and the joints of 99% of the 3/4 cues that I've seen on the market today, are just tat.

Trevor I'm not going to endulge you any further in this thread, if you want any more education, then as they say, you will have to buy the book.

Please start your own thread, if you feel the need to comment further about cues or there construction, and I'm sure, I will be more than happy to leave a comment.





Potter

[potter]

Hi.. it is 'ultimate' cue, potter stated that ''This cue is soon to be badged "Ultimate Cue" number "21",

Hi 888, these cues are not made by John Parris, and are not John Parris Ultimate cues!

So that there is no further "confusion" for you or anyone else, I won't be badging them "Ultimate", and will only be supplying them with either the company nameplate, or without a badge fitted.





Potter

[poolqjunkie]

What do you think?


Hi Trevor, I'm very surprised you felt the need to make comments on my thread, after all I'm only trying to sell a couple of cues, and didn't expect this type of gastapo questioning. Anyway, I feel obliged to answer your questions, now that you've asked them.

Am I allowed to ask you questions regarding the product that you are advertising?

1) "why is 25 year old oak better than new oak?"

For the same reason that older ash, is better than new ash. Put simply, it plays and feels more solid and gives a better response, when striking the cue ball.

Why do they play better and give better response?


6) "Again, this is purely speculation, nothing more". There is plenty of great ash out there, it just has to be found and selected.

The speculation as you put it, is that there is great ash out there to find. There isn't any great ash out there, and anyone who thinks there is, in my opinion is simply dillusional. There hasn't been any great ash available for at least the last 15 years, going back to the early 90's.

I am curious if you have any proof to support this claim?

What you said about your taper really puzzles me.
You said a lot of people have had difficulities finding the perfect taper for oak shafts.
You said after many research you have found the best taper, which is a straight conical taper for your oak shaft.
Why do you choose a very stiff conical taper for such a stiff piece of wood?
Wouldn't that make the cue too stiff?
If a straight conical taper was really the perfect taper, why do you think no one was able to "discover" it before--isn't a straight conical taper easy to make and duplicate than a taper with curvature?





Potter

Thank you.

[JasonOwen]

Ash shafted cue - £450
Hand spliced cue with no badge off ebay - £35
Replica badge - £30
Fake Lindrum Non Pareil - £220
Fake Joe Davis - £200
Saying that Trevor white knows nothing about timber, tapers or joints - PRICELESS

[ADR147]

lol - very good - this thread has become comical.

[888]

Hi 888, these cues are not made by John Parris, and are not John Parris Ultimate cues!

So that there is no further "confusion" for you or anyone else, I won't be badging them "Ultimate", and will only be supplying them with either the company nameplate, or without a badge fitted.





Potter

So sorry for my mistakes pls forgive me, anyway your cue are really nice and u stated your comments old ash better than new ash, old oak better than new oak, back to 90s, almost ppl at my country here also agrees good luck in your sales, nice cue there

[888]

yap, read the post properly its not a parris ultimate it a new brand made by the original poster called the specialist cue company going to be badged as a ultimate cue. as far as i know parris as never used oak to make his shafts.

Correct me if i'm wrong, jp used to make oak, anyway my first batch more than 20 years old jpu without code the oaks really looks like potter cue in 2nd pic with single snake wood green venners, before i buying this cue from that seller, i email to john, he said that my first batch jpu is made by him, that is oak timber, sorry another question, the earliest old hunt & o'byrne black plate what timbers they using? is that oak too?

[ste bed]

potter why is old ash better than new ash ? was old ash not new ash once too. was it being grown by magic wizards in the 90s. it might be harder to find it now than in the 90s because demand as probably gone up but i cant see why the quality would change as long as your selecting the right stuff.

[jrc750]

5) "How can you be sure that John Parris, or any other maker is unable to find such old timber? Also, (and maybe an interesting point) there are good reasons for using newer timber, and not using older timber.

If you feel you have to comment on this thread, at least read the description more carefully. I have no idea how John Parris sources his timber, and quite frankly have no interest in the subject either way.

Potter

You said in your first post "Although he doesn't have access to this 25+ year old mature Oak timber, if he did, this type of package from John Parris, I'm sure would exceed £700+."
So was that just sales talk

[trevs1]

Potter.....

Interesting replies to some of my questions, which are shown in bold below. My response to some of your replies is in Italics and underlined. As I said, I think the cue generally looks quite nice, and the snakewood is excellent. I don't really have any axe to grind with you selling this or any other cue, but wanted to ask some questions about your posts, which do kind of relate to cue makers and their ability and knowledge of what they do.


Hi Trevor, I'm very surprised you felt the need to make comments on my thread, after all I'm only trying to sell a couple of cues, and didn't expect this type of gastapo questioning. Anyway, I feel obliged to answer your questions, now that you've asked them.

I am asking purely because I see someone selling a cue, (or cues) making pretty bold statements about 'their' product, whilst also making all sorts of assumptions about the knowledge or working practises of other people who make cues professionally, of which, I am one. If it was factually accurate, and did nothing to potentially mislead the reading public into choosing one product over another, then there's nothing to ask. I have no problem with ANYONE selling cues. I was just curious about these points.

1) "why is 25 year old oak better than new oak?"

For the same reason that older ash, is better than new ash. Put simply, it plays and feels more solid and gives a better response, when striking the cue ball.

Older timber DOES become softer with age, not harder, that's a fact. (though oak will still be very hard and stiff) Older ash (or maple) is no better than new ash either and that is also a fact.

Out of interesat, here's another fact......"the slightly softer, lighter weight pieces of timber are more responsive when playing shots below centre white (screw power), although there are trade-offs in other aspects of how the cue plays, so too soft is not a good choice.

2) When you say, "never seem to find"...I'm assuming you're speaking for yourself and not ALL cue makers yes?

I'm not speaking for any cue makers at all. I'm adressing the players that maybe interested in buying a really good cue from me. I thought that would have been obvious.

Fair enough, but it could have been worded that way, and not imply that great ash is NOT available, which it clearly is.

3) ANY cue only has the screw power the person behind it is able to generate doesn't it?

No, that statement is far from true. The cue is a tool that is able to generate "X" amount of controllable side and screw power, due to the design, measurements and materials used. When the cue is set up correctly, the player finds it easier to do both.

No, that statement is VERY true. Yes, I will admit there can be, and are MASSIVE variations in one cue to another in terms of their ability to offer a player ease of moving the ball, whether that be striking high (topspin) or low (backspin) in the white. BUT, it is never going to be the case that someone who cannot generate that spin with ten different cues, is suddenly going to be able to generate that spin with this oak cue. So, comments like "UNLIMITED SCREW POWER" is simply misleading.

4) I'm not so sure that older cues had a finish which was all that durable, or in any way superior to modern cues, and besides, ALL cues will achieve a better feel and finish to them over time with good care.

Well I am sure. Players nowadays don't have time to mess with linseed oil, or any other cue shaft applications, or wait for the perfect glossy shaft to develope over a number of years. They want it all and straight away, and with this cue they have it.

It is a fair point that "some" people do want it all now, yes. Having said that, I think if they buy a new "quality" cue, they should be entitled to expect the finish to be of a good standard straight away, and should not have to apply oils or whatever to improve it. As I mentioned also, wood generally does get better and better to touch the more it is handled. I'm sure you've heard of the term 'Patina'

5) "How can you be sure that John Parris, or any other maker is unable to find such old timber? Also, (and maybe an interesting point) there are good reasons for using newer timber, and not using older timber.

If you feel you have to comment on this thread, at least read the description more carefully. I have no idea how John Parris sources his timber, and quite frankly have no interest in the subject either way.

If you read your own words again, which were...... "Although he doesn't have access to this 25+ year old mature Oak timber, if he did, this type of package from John Parris, I'm sure would exceed £700+". I'm sure my question is a valid one.
To me, it is an attempt to imply that you have something "special" which one of the best makers out there does not have, or cannot get. Again, as I said, there is no doubt very good reason why he does not use this timber, and I'll trust that most of those reading this DO have the intelligence to come to their own decisions on it.

6) "Again, this is purely speculation, nothing more". There is plenty of great ash out there, it just has to be found and selected.

The speculation as you put it, is that there is great ash out there to find. There isn't any great ash out there, and anyone who thinks there is, in my opinion is simply dillusional. There hasn't been any great ash available for at least the last 15 years, going back to the early 90's.

Quite frankly, unless you visit EVERY timber yard in the UK, and, see EVERY piece of ash coming out of North America, you are just not able to make statements as sweeping as the one above and be taken seriously. I KNOW for certain that there is ash available as good as it ever was, but it has to be selected, as it always has been.

7) "Does that mean that they have no idea of what good tapers are for ash or maple also?. If not, why would they be unable to transfer their knowledge to another timber, even though it has slightly different properties?

Knowledge of tapering ash and maple cues, will be useless when working with oak.

I think on this one we should again let those reading decide whether that's likely to be true or not.

8) As with other joints, it only needs to do the job effectively, nothing more. Various joints are used by various makers and ALL of the well made and well fitted ones work perfectly well. There is NO ADVANTAGE of one joint type over another....fact.

That statement couldn't be any further from the truth. Not all joints are the same, and the joints of 99% of the 3/4 cues that I've seen on the market today, are just tat.

Who sounds the most plausible here, somene who makes and sells cues stating that there are numerous makers joints which are very good, AND NOT JUST HIS OWN.(me) ..........Or........ the person trying to sell a few cues who states that virtually every other makers joints are "tat", to falsely elevate the quality of his own joint used for the cues he is actively trying to sell..(you) ???... Again, we should let those reading decide.

Trevor I'm not going to endulge you any further in this thread, if you want any more education, then as they say, you will have to buy the book.

Yes, I'll leave this thread too I think. Thanks ever so much for the education you have provided me with so far, it's been interesting.

Please start your own thread, if you feel the need to comment further about cues or there construction, and I'm sure, I will be more than happy to leave a comment.

No intention of starting my own thread, but just to point out one more thing, the word "there" that you have used above is NOT the same as the word "their"....look it up. Maybe also look up the word "they're" while you're at it.

Best of luck with the cues by the way.

[sbq79]

whoah. heavy read..

[potter]

Update.

I have received a part-exchange offer for the Oak multisplice, which I will accept this Saturday 2nd October, if there are no cash offers in the meantime.

The original Oak Prototype is still available, and I'm prepared to reduce the price further, for those that would still like to try my cues, without a company badge fitted to £300, plus £20 local courier delivery.





Potter