Why do you choose ash over maple?

[Asi]

שלום Noel,

Being a 'character...is it a good thing or a bad thing? has 2 meanings in Hebrew

[noel]

שלום Noel,

Being a 'character...is it a good thing or a bad thing? has 2 meanings in Hebrew

... being called "a character" means someone is unusual, or noteworthy... neutral rather than "good" or "bad". Though, some may disagree that in the way it's said, the tonal inflection, and facial or other gestures could impart a judgemental slant.



=o)

Noel

[JamesFoster]

So what maple cues are available out there up to £150? Does anyone know?

[eaoin11]

I was looking for a decent off the shelf maple cue for around £100-£150. I didn't see anything from Peradon, Mastercue etc. It disappoints me that maple snooker cues are hard to find. Any recommendations?

I've been in touch with Stu Green at Green Baize limited, he has some mastercues and GBL champions in maple in your price range, though mostly 1pce I think. If you go to try some out let me know what you think

[Krypton]

Maple has no character

über-lol

noel's has, and so has mine (wooldridge)

personnally, i don't like ash thst much. depends a lot on the finish for me though. it's either perfect (ask trevor) and on an anyway beautiful cue... or I can't get rid of the feeling playing with a roof lath (ask a certsin john p).

but then, for the looks - I'd prefer maple, always. no splices, plain black ebony and light (or golden aged) maple.

It's personal though, anyone his own taste.

[arumpoey]

ash is better

trust me, i've been using both types for several years. ash generates more cue power and spins on the white. don't ask me for reasons, coz i don't know. this opinion is just from my own expericence, that's all.

[Krypton]

trust me, i've been using both types for several years. ash generates more cue power and spins on the white. don't ask me for reasons, coz i don't know. this opinion is just from my own expericence, that's all.

and as I said before: your opinion is based on your cues, cues that you've played with, and therefor wrong. or right for you. call it, what ever you like.

cue power, and spin on shots, come from good technique, not from a certain kind of wood. Ever seen the new-style 'house rack cues', the cheap 'fibre glass over maple thing'? now i guess Jimmy will have more cue power with one of these than you with your ash.

I don't want to blame anyone or so, but it's just simply not true that maple and ash play that differently (they just look differently), quality wise. in a sense of A) is better than B). Or M) aple is better than A) sh.

I count all arguments like 'I like to look at it (ash or maple)', 'I like my arrows (ash)', 'I like the little bit of exclusiveness as not everybody's got one (me about my maple)' valid. Arguments about playability, stability, stiffness and so on, i count 'rubbish'.

Ask Mike (his homepage, very helpful). Ask Stephen Hendry and his 'lifeless, powerless, wobbly piece of maple fire wood... ..Wuahaha, can't stop laughing about such a pointless view. This man's got World Champs with it. And not one only


hehe

[arumpoey]

ask Mr.O'sullivan, Mr.Davis, or Mr.Parotte what they prefer, and i'm sure they'll tell you exactly what i've told. trust me.

[Krypton]

What a rubbish

LOL

I'll trust you. Blame Hendry. Blame Mike and all the cuemakers. Blame mates I got who like the looks of my cue. Blame Maple trees for growing. And of course burn my cue.

Ash MUST play better then. Dumb me. How could I play maple. THAT's the reason not scoring a century with every visit.

How could I - start playing snooker without asking YOU before.


Then, to all the other guys: Go for whatever you like, what looks good in your eyes. But be aware of maple, it plays a little worse than ash. So if you prefer looks over pots, go for it

[arumpoey]

LOL

opion is not rubbish. maple betters ash? maybe. ash betters maple? maybe. are they the same? maybe. all i'm saying is from my OWN experience m8. i do love the feel of maple on my bridge tho, they are as smooth as silk.

peace.

by the way, i never blame anyone

[thai_son22]

your opinion implies ash is better than maple. this isnt necessarily true.

you talk a load of rubbish. end of

[Krypton]

I made my points before and will stick to them, even if you don't agree, because I first of all trust myself (and then the maker of my cue who got it all together on his homepage, and all the players and forumers of the same opinion).



My points were:

- chose a bad piece of wood and you can make a lifeless, wobbly and unconsistantly playing cue both out of ash and maple,
and
you can (or no, gifted cuemaking artists can) make wonderfully performing cues out of both.

- chose ash or maple by the touch/feeling of the wood on the shaft you prefer, and by the different look.

- who ever pretends that cues play differently:
Yes they do. So do all cues. And it's irrelevant what type of wood they're made of. In the full range out of wobbly soft cues that play like a string/rope up to rock hard cues that play like a skiing stick with tip on, you can find both extremes and anything in between MADE OF BOTH TYPES OF WOOD.
So:
If you got an ash cue that hits more solid than a maple cue you also got, than this is because THAT SPECIFIC ash cue plays more solid than THAT SPECIFIC maple cue. It could always be the other way round and does not mean anything in general.


Then, you came up with this:

ash generates more cue power and spins on the white.

And that's the only thing I'm saying "BOLLOCKS!" to. Cue power is a matter of skill an technique and comes from cue action, technique, touch and feeling... call it what ever you like. A player's attribute, not a wood's attribute. Saying that cue power comes from a type of wood alone is an "advanced rubbish speaker's output" as such and should go down in the book of "collected non-sense 2009". Now that was harsh, and I excuse for it right here

But then, the most important thing anyway is the fact that you LIKE your cue the way it is, because that makes a difference in how you perform with it. And if that liking/feeling with one's own cue is founded in tip selection, lovely splices (that won't affect playing physically neither), looks of the cue, maybe knowledge of who created it, who got the same, who doesn't, age of the cue... add what ever you like, that's what makes you fall in love with your cue, or not. Even if it's founded on rumours about maple/ash playing siginificantly differently.

[Shanghai Matt]

an argument about whats best, ash or maple, is a pretty pointless one really isnt it....

take into account that an ash or maple cue can both be stiff/whippy/heavy/light/have different balance points etc. etc. etc. then add to that the fact that Player A will have different preferences to Player B in all of those areas.

so basically this agument seems to be really just about how each of you has or hasnt gotten on with the specific cues that you've used.

back to the origional topic: i tend to prefer ash cues as in general i think they look nicer, and I'm shallow .

[Krypton]

good keen post

[arumpoey]

Krpton maybe right, but i once heard John Parotte said ash is better then maple. moreover, mr.Davis who sat right beside him in the discussion hadn't said anything and seemed to agree.

well, at least i'm one of those who completely agrees with John. i've tried so many good maple cues and many ash cues, almost always ash cues came on top. i hit them with the same skill and techniques, trust me scientificaly, it is possible should one type of wood able to generate more cue power and spins than another type, just like golf clubs, tennis rackets, etc.

i'm not saying that i'm the smartest guy or my opinion is the only correct one. all i'm trying to do is sharing my experience with all of you. wise man listens to opinions, trust me