If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
do not know much about Hamilton & Tucker except they catered to high end customers.
The John Bennett "improvements" could be from just be nets and runs, to new rails and maybe slate supports.
Difficult to say but the exposed pocket plates often indicates an older table (latest circa1900/10s)
but Hamilton was not a very old company.
Nice looking table though
Can not wait for 100-uper to pop on with great info
Looks like a George Wright around 1900 time frame ,very weird as only this afternoon I saw one in someones house that had been totally reconditioned by Cheshire Billiards ,had gone up there to take some stuff uo ,its a massive house and he was having some work done in the second living room ,I said I would put a full size table in there ,he then led me to another room and there was the table .His looked like it had had totally new cushions on as they were mint ,but with the same top plate pockets .The cloth even looked perfect as I don't believe he plays .Very solid table by the looks of it .
Your table was made by Orme & Sons in the early 1890s, or possibly slightly earlier, into the 1880s. This is a picture of the same model which had their plate attached, but was manufactured at a later date (early 1900s), which accounts for the slight differences to the moulding. Definitely the same model though.
Your table was made by Orme & Sons in the early 1890s, or possibly slightly earlier, into the 1880s. This is a picture of the same model which had their plate attached, but was manufactured at a later date (early 1900s), which accounts for the slight differences to the moulding. Definitely the same model though.
Is that you on the wall in the background sticking two fingers up 100-uper ? Lolz, only joking, I know you're a proper gent!
Here is another table I have had the pleasure of playing on, again all info appreciated https://ibb.co/Tmny3Sw
sorry can't get the pic to upload , the link is the best I can do
I couldn't tell you Phillip, I know nothing about it. They tried to sand the cushions back ,which was a mistake for me as they lost all their history if that makes any sense.
It looks similar to the Burroughs and Watts Jacobean table in our club, same struts across the bottom of the legs except that on ours they are not carved. Maybe a higher priced model ?
Speak up, you've got to speak up against the madness, you've got speak your mind if you dare
but don't try to get yourself elected, for if you do you'll have to cut your hair
It looks similar to the Burroughs and Watts Jacobean table in our club, same struts across the bottom of the legs except that on ours they are not carved. Maybe a higher priced model ?
it is close isn't it and it was the first I went to, but too much is different, the legs, ok different carvings were often options, the foot is very different, and the leg-tops different, again options could be the answer
the side boards are also different design.
So I was not happy to say that model
could very well be a B&W, model not sure
hope our resident historians can pin-point the model
look forward to further info
other makers did also add stretchers, Ashcroft, Edwards, etc.
the closest I see to the leg is a Bentley Refectory which has many similar features but the refectory is a modern dinner, but so close
It's got 2 inch slate on it , it's a great table to play on , tough but fair, I would call it. Only table I had seen that has that little carved bowl for the chalk( I'm guessing), I have seen one other B&W table with one since I have been looking around for a match for this one, maybe they are more common than I know.
can you show the cups under the rails, how many of them are there and is there a ebony or ivory spot on the rails to indicate the placement of the cups?
or I did see that the rails may have been changed as an alteration?
cheers
Comment