JP Unique cue

[jrc750]

What, you mean the JPU, Powerglide Purist and Phoenix sitting right here. OH YES I DO!

Actually i got slightly confused there, i thought you meant one of these weird "not quite a full shaft" one piece cues versus a true one piece cue.
So apologies from me to you

[jrc750]

Yep, Thai lead hammers. People like em though, ya club clubbers.

I imagine Uncle John's 3/4 joint isn't exactly featherweight either !

[EZ_4_U_OK]

I imagine Uncle John's 3/4 joint isn't exactly featherweight either !

Ah yes, good old John everyones favorite uncle ...yes guilty as charged, in fact one of the worst offenders !

Although he battled me at the time, I think only MW took heed and has actually strived to make improvements over the years with his new lighter joints. Well done that man !

Btw, if you're tuning in Mike, please give a warning next time before doing a semi naked ice bucket challenge

EZ

[Master Blaster]

I imagine Uncle John's 3/4 joint isn't exactly featherweight either !

As said before, I think his 3/4 jointed cues to be some of the worst jointed cues out there for the reason you point out. The best joints are Aurora's/MW's hidden joints with wood to wood contact and the one sided plastic and bakelite joints we have seen (just one ring of plastic/bakelite) between the two sections of wood. These joints maintain as much feel as possible but they ain't as good as a 1-piece. Brass joints are a killer and they certainly do not belong on a JPU. Dreadful brass hammers. Only Ronnie could make a JPU hammer sing, unreal.

[Master Blaster]

* I know JP is very proud of his lathe and in-house joints but they're no better to me than a joint on a £30 JJ Chinese cue. Sorry John!

[billabong]

* I know JP is very proud of his lathe and in-house joints but they're no better to me than a joint on a £30 JJ Chinese cue. Sorry John!

And there's Jamie Jones just after beating Selby, playing with a 3/4 split cue. . .

I wonder how he copes with the reduced "feel" he could have with a one piece. . . .


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Ramon]

And there's Jamie Jones just after beating Selby, playing with a 3/4 split cue. . .

I wonder how he copes with the reduced "feel" he could have with a one piece. . . .


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He does'nt !! he just plays the game !!
I know a guy. He placed his order for a JP ultimate!!
JP told him in a fair way that it's gonna take sum time (about 24 months). so, what he did was, just buy a second hand GBL on Ebay. so he can play snooker until his JPU gonna be ready!!! He paid for that GBL cue about 120 mark!!
realy nice cue and he played very well with it!!
After 2 years (do'nt know exactly how long waiting time was), JP sent him a mail and told him the cue is ready!!
When he got the cue I saw it!! That JPU was made to perfection!!
I mean, everything was perfect!! craftsmnshap/playability//response of the cue!! was just a great cue!!
and you know what??? He sold that jpu after 3 weeks.
last time when I saw him, I asked him, why did you sold it ? was a great cue!!
He said, yes it was!! but I'm used to my GBL and he does'nt play as my gbl cue!! so, I'm gonna stick with this one!!
the problem was , he had played with that GBL for almost 2 years and got used to it !! JPU did'nt suit his game !!
I think the most important thing is the specification of the cue!!
If you buy a cue, the spcs has to be the right one u need and u play with !!
After that, the question is whether the cue suits ur game or not!!
No matter what you gonna play with,,, if you can'nt play the game, you just can'nt get on with it. It's as simple as that.
your arm is the one who does the work, not the cue.
There are also other group of people such as (collectors).
I can imagine that for such people is important where the cue is made of and how the cue looks like and that kind of things!!
even for a cmn players .. if you have a cue that suits ur game and looks good as well , that would be a bouns !! why not !!

[piper74]

He does'nt !! he just plays the game !!
I know a guy. He placed his order for a JP ultimate!!
JP told him in a fair way that it's gonna take sum time (about 24 months). so, what he did was, just buy a second hand GBL on Ebay. so he can play snooker until his JPU gonna be ready!!! He paid for that GBL cue about 120 mark!!
realy nice cue and he played very well with it!!
After 2 years (do'nt know exactly how long waiting time was), JP sent him a mail and told him the cue is ready!!
When he got the cue I saw it!! That JPU was made to perfection!!
I mean, everything was perfect!! craftsmnshap/playability//response of the cue!! was just a great cue!!
and you know what??? He sold that jpu after 3 weeks.
last time when I saw him, I asked him, why did you sold it ? was a great cue!!
He said, yes it was!! but I'm used to my GBL and he does'nt play as my gbl cue!! so, I'm gonna stick with this one!!
the problem was , he had played with that GBL for almost 2 years and got used to it !! JPU did'nt suit his game !!
I think the most important thing is the specification of the cue!!
If you buy a cue, the spcs has to be the right one u need and u play with !!
After that, the question is whether the cue suits ur game or not!!
No matter what you gonna play with,,, if you can'nt play the game, you just can'nt get on with it. It's as simple as that.
your arm is the one who does the work, not the cue.
There are also other group of people such as (collectors).
I can imagine that for such people is important where the cue is made of and how the cue looks like and that kind of things!!
even for a cmn players .. if you have a cue that suits ur game and looks good as well , that would be a bouns !! why not !!

I think anybody who plays cue sports somewhat seriously will know that it is the player and not the cue that is the main contributing factor for their game.

It's just that cue lovers will tend to find out more about cues in general and scrutinise their own cues.

Any excessive scrutiny is (in my opinion) is detrimental to the progress of improving in the game.

[Ramon]

I think anybody who plays cue sports somewhat seriously will know that it is the player and not the cue that is the main contributing factor for their game.

It's just that cue lovers will tend to find out more about cues in general and scrutinise their own cues.

Any excessive scrutiny is (in my opinion) is detrimental to the progress of improving in the game.

anybody who smokes knows that he may gonna die of it and is not healthy either ,, But , there are many people who still smoke !!
knowing something is one thing , act like that and doing it ,, is another thing !!
But I'm agree with u that cue lovers Or collectrs Or whatever you call it , re more intrested where the cue comes from and that kind of things !!
I would lie if I say I'm not one of them !! For me , playblty of the cue is the main factor !! But still , I love to see sum Nice and good looking cues !! ( not as fanatical as collectors ) But , it's a intresting topic !!
Anyway ,, players have a diff kind of tast about this !! Every one should do what ever he wants with his money !!
Btw,, good post !!

[billabong]

He does'nt !! he just plays the game !!

My point exactly. :snooker:

[Master Blaster]

The same people who say cues don't matter are always talking about and buying new cues!

:biggrin-new::biggrin-new::biggrin-new::biggrin-new::biggrin-new:

[ADW147CUEMAN]

anybody who smokes knows that he may gonna die of it and is not healthy either ,, But , there are many people who still smoke !!
knowing something is one thing , act like that and doing it ,, is another thing !!
But I'm agree with u that cue lovers Or collectrs Or whatever you call it , re more intrested where the cue comes from and that kind of things !!
I would lie if I say I'm not one of them !! For me , playblty of the cue is the main factor !! But still , I love to see sum Nice and good looking cues !! ( not as fanatical as collectors ) But , it's a intresting topic !!
Anyway ,, players have a diff kind of tast about this !! Every one should do what ever he wants with his money !!
Btw,, good post !!

NICE TO READ PROPER GENUINE MEANINGFUL COMMON SENSE REPLIES THAT ARNT SLATING SOMEONE FOR DOING AND SHARING THERE EXPERIENCES , YOU SPEAK ALOT OF SENSE RAMON :snooker:

[trevs1]

I've said this many times and I can tell the difference between all my cues blindfolded. I could tell certain cues I've sold if I came across em twenty years later. Folk like Trevs1 have said this is nonsense! That's ok, maybe those with agricultural hands can simply buy a Thai lump hammer from the skool wood jointing class and the rest of us can source fine cues. If you can't tell the difference, then just cancel that TW, TP, MW, Parris, CJ order, any old Thai cue will do for you by Trevs own admission on feel, the rest is wasted expenditure! The difference between a rush kiln (that's most cues these days even most bespoke cues) and an air angle is like the difference between maple and ash, HUGE!

Haha! Every time a JP thread crops up it always takes on a more beastly, argumentative character. Nothing turns the pages like JP. Hats off to you bear, you're the man!

You are either totally missing the point of what I wrote (which I don't think you are), or, you are consciously misrepresenting what I write to provoke a response...sad.

What I wrote is here, posted again, so you and everyone else can read it and take it in and compare to what you write above.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd wager that a whole host of players, from rank novice's to top level professionals wouldn't have a clue if a weight fitted to a cue butt was part bonded in with bloody marmalade.

There is so much assumption made as to what people can "definitely" feel that it's laughable.

The variation in performance of different cues is so enormous, that it's just not realistic for anyone to claim they can
attribute those variations to construction "methods" or "materials" alone. Anyone making such claims is not really worth taking too seriously at all. Whether cues are made from ash, maple, jointed, one piece, air dried timber, kiln dried timber or whatever, they can be poor, average or simply outstanding.

It's just not that a precise a science, and, if ANYONE tells you differently, you need to be highly sceptical.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I'll explain it, just in case you are "actually" missing the gist......

The first line about how a weight is fitted is just an example of how "methods" of a cue's construction is not something that can be determined by using the cue alone.

The second line is aimed at those who believe they can feel things about a cue that in reality they just cannot. These feelings are more in their head than they are in any actual real physical sense. There is no one alive who can tell from using a cue whether that cue is a one piece cue, a jointed cue, a maple cue, an ash cue, a rosewood butt cue, an ebony butt cue, a cue with a brass ferrule, a cue with a fibre ferrule and so on and so on. Anyone claiming to be able to "know for sure" by simply using a cue is either......

a) lying
b) suffering from mental illness.

The third line of the above relates exactly to the second line, and makes it clear that no notice should be taken of people who suggest they can tell exactly what a cue is, or how it was made, simply by using it. Suggestions by anyone that cues are only any good if a shaft runs to the bottom of the cue butt, truly is hilariously innaccurate. There are fabulous performing 3/4 jointed cues out there, and yes, some of them are even made by John Parris, with his clunky joints (as you put it) and his kiln dried clunk wood (again as you put it). Likewise, there are fantastic performing machine spliced cues out there, just as there will be hand spliced cues, whether they be ash, maple, with split shafts or full length shafts. By the very same token, cues of any description can be poor also. Anyone who knows anything about trying enough cues will know this anyway, but I am just SPELLING IT OUT, so as we are clear about my thoughts on it.

The last line about "not that precise a science" refers to the fact that cues, their method of manufacture and resulting performance is not always entirely predictable. Yes, there are things that can be done in the making of a cue which makes it either more or less likely to perform well, but these are NEVER a guaranteed template that produce totally predictable results every time. My point in this last line is that the folks reading this thread, or in fact any thread, where it gets stated that a cue is no good unless a cue is made in a specific way, need to be very sceptical of such claims.

There we go.... clear enough.

[Master Blaster]

You are either totally missing the point of what I wrote (which I don't think you are), or, you are consciously misrepresenting what I write to provoke a response...sad.

What I wrote is here, posted again, so you and everyone else can read it and take it in and compare to what you write above.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd wager that a whole host of players, from rank novice's to top level professionals wouldn't have a clue if a weight fitted to a cue butt was part bonded in with bloody marmalade.

There is so much assumption made as to what people can "definitely" feel that it's laughable.

The variation in performance of different cues is so enormous, that it's just not realistic for anyone to claim they can
attribute those variations to construction "methods" or "materials" alone. Anyone making such claims is not really worth taking too seriously at all. Whether cues are made from ash, maple, jointed, one piece, air dried timber, kiln dried timber or whatever, they can be poor, average or simply outstanding.

It's just not that a precise a science, and, if ANYONE tells you differently, you need to be highly sceptical.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I'll explain it, just in case you are "actually" missing the gist......

The first line about how a weight is fitted is just an example of how "methods" of a cue's construction is not something that can be determined by using the cue alone.

The second line is aimed at those who believe they can feel things about a cue that in reality they just cannot. These feelings are more in their head than they are in any actual real physical sense. There is no one alive who can tell from using a cue whether that cue is a one piece cue, a jointed cue, a maple cue, an ash cue, a rosewood butt cue, an ebony butt cue, a cue with a brass ferrule, a cue with a fibre ferrule and so on and so on. Anyone claiming to be able to "know for sure" by simply using a cue is either......

a) lying
b) suffering from mental illness.

The third line of the above relates exactly to the second line, and makes it clear that no notice should be taken of people who suggest they can tell exactly what a cue is, or how it was made, simply by using it. Suggestions by anyone that cues are only any good if a shaft runs to the bottom of the cue butt, truly is hilariously innaccurate. There are fabulous performing 3/4 jointed cues out there, and yes, some of them are even made by John Parris, with his clunky joints (as you put it) and his kiln dried clunk wood (again as you put it). Likewise, there are fantastic performing machine spliced cues out there, just as there will be hand spliced cues, whether they be ash, maple, with split shafts or full length shafts. By the very same token, cues of any description can be poor also. Anyone who knows anything about trying enough cues will know this anyway, but I am just SPELLING IT OUT, so as we are clear about my thoughts on it.

The last line about "not that precise a science" refers to the fact that cues, their method of manufacture and resulting performance is not always entirely predictable. Yes, there are things that can be done in the making of a cue which makes it either more or less likely to perform well, but these are NEVER a guaranteed template that produce totally predictable results every time. My point in this last line is that the folks reading this thread, or in fact any thread, where it gets stated that a cue is no good unless a cue is made in a specific way, need to be very sceptical of such claims.

There we go.... clear enough.

Yep, good of you to call folk liars, poke fun and make jokes about mental illness. Cues must be close to your heart; not people.

Congrats, classy.

[trevs1]

No, not liars, just deluded.