John Parris Cues

[Semih_Sayginer]

i believe its the impression he is trying to create.

that may or may not be the case. that said i still dont get the impression from the site that everyone actually *does*

[mattyuk]

bribery? lol.

[archalf1471]

Out of curiosity i visited pariscues.com and found this "helpful guide" in choosing the right cue for you! what a lot of tosh!

How to choose the specification for your custom made cue for your built and comfort of playing:

What a player should achieve: In order to choose the right cue, the built and comfort of play the player takes is very important. These factors together combined with the right specifications will deliver the maximum power of the cue for every shot.

Holding the cue: Remember, when your holding the cue, you must hold the cue at the end of the butt. Most people don't realise that holding the cue at below the cue butt or anywhere less than that provides an incorrect hold to the cue, which could result in shots that don't provide the right power.

Stances: There are 2 types of stances:

the square stance and
the boxing stance ( ANYONE FOR A FIGHT????)
The stance you choose when playing also plays a role in the types of selections you make for your cue.

1. Length of the cue: The length of the cue should be level to the shoulder of the player. For example: If the player is in boxing stance and he is 5 ft 7 ins, the length of the cue should be 55 inches in length in order to hold the cue to the end of the butt. If the player is in square stance, the length of the cue should be 54 inches in length since the square stance makes the frame of the body a little bit shorter.

5 ft 8 in to 5 ft 9in - 57 inches
5 ft 9 in to 5 ft 10 in - 58 inches
5 ft 10 in to 5 ft 11 in - 58.5 inches
2. Diameter of the tip: The average is 9.5 cm It all depends on the player as what kind of shot he likes to play. For make a good potting - the tip size should be 9.7 - 9.8 cm the disadvantage is very difficult to apply the side. For making a good side to the cue ball, 9.0 cm is good, the disadvantage is not easy to make a good potting since the shaft is a bit narrower. So 9.5 cm is good for both shot.

3. Diameter of the butt: the average is 29.5 cm

5 ft 6 in to 5 ft 7 in - 29 cm
5 ft 8 in to 5 ft 9 in - 29.5 cm
5ft 9 in to 5 ft 11 in - 30 cm

[ADR147]

my cue would be about 62" on that basis!

[hegeland]

2. Diameter of the tip: The average is 9.5 cm It all depends on the player as what kind of shot he likes to play. For make a good potting - the tip size should be 9.7 - 9.8 cm the disadvantage is very difficult to apply the side. For making a good side to the cue ball, 9.0 cm is good, the disadvantage is not easy to make a good potting since the shaft is a bit narrower. So 9.5 cm is good for both shot.

3. Diameter of the butt: the average is 29.5 cm

5 ft 6 in to 5 ft 7 in - 29 cm
5 ft 8 in to 5 ft 9 in - 29.5 cm
5ft 9 in to 5 ft 11 in - 30 cm

That's one heck of a cue!

[keith auld]

Andrew - you can slag John off as much as you like - I spoke to him the other day - he said he won't rise to this sort of abuse, his comment to me was ' they don't understand !' - who you consider to be the world's best cuemaker (or otherwise) is your, a laymans, opinion - there are a number of cuemakers, including myself who you know nothing about and about whom, without seeing what they produce, you cannot comment on. I accept that this is an open forum and, as a result, the beauty of it is that it is probably more democratic than anything else in our lives, so as a result I would like to urge reasoned debate and subsequent critiscm; when you achieve what John has achieved in snooker, I will take more notice of your comments - when you personally are able to make cues to the standard that John does (or has made by his employees for him - see Mike Wooldriges site - ' me and the crew'), then I'll take more notice of your comments. I know that this will probably mean that you'll find reason to dislike me, and perhaps slag me off in the future; I have no interest in belittleing you, I don't even know you, and vice versa, and I'm sure that on principle you'd never have one of my cues, but at least be fair, you might not like John, but for crying on loud give credit where it's due

[ADR147]

what are you talking about? i have never slagged off john, or anyone else come to that except the acuerate! i actually like the guy and i am the first to say how huge his contribution is.

also i would hardly describe myself as a layman.

[ADR147]

umm he says 8/10 players use his cues - its not true, at least not now. and he has photos with lots of players with him some of whom i know have never used one of his cues.

this is my only post - it says this on his site i am just quoting it its not true - in what way is that not fair comment?

[ADR147]

ok keith firstly i have never seen one of your cues so as yet i will not comment on them.

secondly this is from john's site.

"John's Cues set the standards that the rest of the industry tries to follow. His cue designs are regularly copied. You will also find descriptions of the way his cues are made creeping into the text of many other aspiring cue makers. They say that being copied is a form of flattery, although John sometime wishes others would be a bit more individual.

Most cue manufacturers tell you how good their cues are. We prove it by the large number of professionals that use Parris Cues and the amount of tournaments that are won using Parris Cues. Our customers include eight of the top ten and thirty six of the top fifty professionals. Anyone can say they are good we prove it. There is a difference. "

i have only 2 issues with this, both of which i will stand by.

number one,
i personally own cues in almost every design parris makes that are older than he is, there are only so many designs out there and its not realistic to claim you created them... his best selling cue will be the traditional which as the name hints is based on a burwat champion.

number 2,
8 out of the top 10 and 36 of the top 50 do not use his cues. and this is a very bold claim to make and a good advert if people believe it.

[keith auld]

Andrew - I go back to my original reply - that which John said to me - ' Keith, they don't understand ! ' , that was his qoute - take it as you wish! -
If you're not a layman - how would you describe yourself ? - are you a cuemaker? how many cues have you made ? how long have you been making cues for? - or are you an observer to the art rather than a creator? - I like Trevor's comment (to parphrase) about how people have no idea of the actual costs of the materials or the demands people put on cuemakers, always expecting the impossible for next to nothing.
As I said earlier, I don't know you, but somehow we seem to have got off on the wrong foot - as a fellow scot (by birth, if not by being raised - like most scots of the age my father emigrated after the war, but never stopped talking about how great the place was, my brother and myself used to think ' if it was that great why the f*** did you ever leave !), you'll appreciate that I'll say what I believe to be the case; in this regard you appear to be closer to every cuemaker other than John. You constantly espose the abilities of Trevor and Mike and hold them as the world's best cuemakers, in your opinion, all I ask is that you qualify what you say as ' in your opinion ' - it's just that this forum goes worldwide and there are a number of people all around the world who may be influenced by biased opinion, give John a break! - his pedigree goes beyond all others and to those people who have bought John Parris cues, all I can say is that the cues you own will always have a resale value whereas others (including myself ), will be long forgotten and only be remembered by the experts of the Antiques Roadshow

[S Davis Fan]

If you look at his Web Site you will notice that it is dated 1999, and as far as I can remember has remained the same as when it was created in 1999. I remember from the early 1990's that his ad in Pot black the text was pretty much the same as it is now. Maybe at that time that the pros that used his cues rang some truth. I think he cares more about making his cue than advertising. The Ad recently shown was the same as last time, and you can't blame John for that, that is just a stop gap for the BBC. But let me ask you this if John cared more about making statements for his Web site about who uses what ect. How come it still goes on about 2007 finalists. Surely the fact that Ronnie is the World champion and uses a Parris cue would be the ultimate sales pitch. But alas nothing on the Web site. I rest my case.

[Jlaix]

you appear to be closer to every cuemaker other than John. You constantly espose the abilities of Trevor and Mike and hold them as the world's best cuemakers,

he's got a point Andy.

[JP1]

If you look at his Web Site you will notice that it is dated 1999, and as far as I can remember has remained the same as when it was created in 1999. I remember from the early 1990's that his ad in Pot black the text was pretty much the same as it is now. Maybe at that time that the pros that used his cues rang some truth. I think he cares more about making his cue than advertising. The Ad recently shown was the same as last time, and you can't blame John for that, that is just a stop gap for the BBC. But let me ask you this if John cared more about making statements for his Web site about who uses what ect. How come it still goes on about 2007 finalists. Surely the fact that Ronnie is the World champion and uses a Parris cue would be the ultimate sales pitch. But alas nothing on the Web site. I rest my case.

Not quite true, John Parris did add very recently on his web site that he has no affiliation with any other cue maker, and that he sources all materials personally;;
So he has responded to rumours that he imports part or all of his material or cue blanks from asia, he counteracted what he believed to be lies about him very quickly, adr147 is correct when he says that the web site contains blatant lies by claiming how many of the worlds top professionals actually use a Parris cue, it is fair comment to ask that if he corrects one perception he considers damaging to his reputation why not correct another? is it because this one is beneficial to him? Just a few comments on Keiths contributions, Stephen Lee may have more then one cue ?? and does it really matter what he plays with?? at the moment I am sure Steven wished he had a magic wand instead of a cue, does not seem to live up to his potential, let's hope it changes soon for him, why not make him a new cue altogether Keith, maybe that will do the trick? I dont understand the position Keith takes with John Parris, are you saying that Parris is beyond criticism?? that no one is allowed to make any adverse comments about his products?? and I dont understand your condescending tone with adr147, you dont need to be a cue maker of 50 years standing to know about cues, its like wine, age does not guarantee quality, if you bottle an awful wine it will still be an awful wine in 50 years time, the only difference will be it's 50 years older, I have seen a lot of Parris cues manufactured in the last 10 years, some very good, others average and others like the awful 50 year old wine, remember Keith, no one has forced you Parris or any other cue maker into that craft, it was your choice, and thank god we have an open market economy where competition determines the quality and value of goods traded, you may think that someone paying 700 pounds and more for a snooker cue is not entitled to make comment about the product he receives because the suggestion is that "" they dont understand "", that is just plain nonsense, and indicative of market manipulation, on that basis Rolls Royse would still be selling their clapped out old carriages which broke down more often then not today. You produce goods for re sale and you put yourself into the arena of public comment and review of those products, that is what a free market economy is all about.
John Parris has not invented or re invented the cue, he copies what cue makers before him did, the art of hand planing splices onto cue butts is claimed to have originated with Peradon and not John Parris, how did the greats of the past ever get by?? Joe Davis Walter Lindrum, Willie Smith, et al, they all used cues to play the game with.

If adr147 espouses the abilities of Trevor White and Mike Wooldridge over John Parris, maybe in his opinion their cues are just BETTER, thank god we live in a democracy where we can openly say what we like and what we dislike.

No one would mention John Parris, if John had not put himself into that position by claiming that he was THE worlds cue expert to whose standard the rest of the industry aspired to, it may just be Keith, that the rest of the industry has not just caught up with Parris but actually surpassed him?

Joe Average buys a Parris cue based on the perceptions created mainly by John Parris that his cues are the pinnacle in snooker cues, they try to impress their peers by saying look at me I am also playing a Parris cue I must also be important, if you read comments like " my Parris cue has lifted my game by 50%" or " it plays like a dream" and so forth, they are sad in a way, because somehow they hope that a certain cue will give them what nature and a lot of hard work have not managed to do, talent and skill, everyone with a modicum of intelligence realizes that if such a cue existed, a cue that plays like a dream or lifts your ability by 50% the WSA would have it banned immediately, just imagine Ali Carter using such a cue, with an extra 50% in ability the scores in the final would have been easily reversed.

Cirticism is a fact of life Keith, and as the saying goes if you cannot stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

[keith auld]

Plenty of food for thought here - and I accept all your points, - in an earlier post on this subject I said

'I accept that this is an open forum and, as a result, the beauty of it is that it is probably more democratic than anything else in our lives'

(ie our ability for free speech and our personal opinions) - I merely wanted to point out that Andrews opinion should be viewed as a 'personal' opinion and not one of given or stated fact otherwise it could be misconstrued as bias or worst of all, character assassination. John randomly visits the forum and it would be nice for all of us to have his input, but you can't blame the guy for deciding not to visit the forum anymore if he and his products are going to be continually slagged off. You might argue that he should come on line and answer his critics - but he considers he has nothing to gain by getting involved in a slanging match and as he said

' Keith,they don't understand'

. I'm sure Andrew will continue to sell John's cues on ebay and profit from them - thet's the irony of it all

[ADR147]

he's got a point Andy.

yes he has, only one but i will admit that! - because i do believe that to be the case, and i have seen a lot of cues over the years by a lot of different makers, interestingly i have never come accross one of keiths maybe because of geographical location.