Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

john parris or mike wooldridge

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally Posted by marriott View Post
    John Parris or Mike Wooldridge cue?

    If you're a decent, century-break player it's a John Parris cue. An Ultimate if you can afford it.

    Otherwise it's a Mike Wooldridge in this scenario, as because your ability dictates that you can't knock centuries in with either cue, excuses like 'over-priced' 'same quality elsewhere' starts creeping in.

    If you're a decent, century breaker who wins tournaments and plays off 0 handicap down the local snooker centre, then your level of performance has the capability of being very high. A Parris cue is guaranteed to be of very high quality due to the structure John has developed over the past 25 years, and such a decent player will notice high level of performances on a consistent, sustained period with his Parris cue due to this.

    A lesser player won't notice the importance I'm afraid. Just my opinion. To quote Ronnie O'Sullivan from a recent twitter post in reply to a fan's exhaustive question about cue problems- "Don't f*ck about with sh*te. Get a decent cue mate. Get on to John Parris."
    I have a feeling this post will prove controversial. Not to add more flames to the fire, but imho TW's are up there with the very best cues John Parris ( and others ) have to offer. Have heard many good things about MW cues too, so idk.

    In the end it's all down to personal choice and budget. Good luck.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally Posted by Inoffthered View Post
      I have a feeling this post will prove controversial. Not to add more flames to the fire, but imho TW's are up there with the very best cues John Parris ( and others ) have to offer. Have heard many good things about MW cues too, so idk.

      In the end it's all down to personal choice and budget. Good luck.
      Just my opinion, importantly. I don't doubt that Trevor White, Mike Wooldridge etc make good cues - it appears blatantly obvious they do. What I would say is, imho and experience, a Parris cue tends to glue together high levels of performance month to month due to the tremendously high level of craftmanship which has been the result of hard labour spanning a quarter of a century. Which is why decent century break players will notice its importance in their game.

      I guess what I'm tired of is 40-50 break players saying they "couldn't get on with a Parris cue" - what they need is coaching not a Parris cue!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally Posted by marriott View Post
        Just my opinion, importantly. I don't doubt that Trevor White, Mike Wooldridge etc make good cues - it appears blatantly obvious they do. What I would say is, imho and experience, a Parris cue tends to glue together high levels of performance month to month due to the tremendously high level of craftmanship which has been the result of hard labour spanning a quarter of a century. Which is why decent century break players will notice its importance in their game.

        I guess what I'm tired of is 40-50 break players saying they "couldn't get on with a Parris cue" - what they need is coaching not a Parris cue!
        A couple of points - both Mike and Trevor also have many many years of experience in making cues.

        And your point about not getting along with cues kind of undermines any credibility you were trying for with your argument as no matter how high the quality of manufacture or woods selected to make a cue, many more players will not get along with any one cue than will as there are so many variables with cues that come down to personal preference, hence why Ronnie, John, Stephen etc. all have extremely high quality cues but none would get along with any of the other's cues. That has nothing to do with the cues or who the manufacturer is and everything to do with their own personal preferences when it comes to selecting a cue.

        Comment


        • #19
          Can anyone explains the structural parameters that distinguish the difference in cue design between MW, TW and JP, what is it in terms of, is it tapering? joint weight? or what?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally Posted by marriott View Post
            John Parris or Mike Wooldridge cue?

            If you're a decent, century-break player it's a John Parris cue. An Ultimate if you can afford it.

            Otherwise it's a Mike Wooldridge in this scenario, as because your ability dictates that you can't knock centuries in with either cue, excuses like 'over-priced' 'same quality elsewhere' starts creeping in.

            If you're a decent, century breaker who wins tournaments and plays off 0 handicap down the local snooker centre, then your level of performance has the capability of being very high. A Parris cue is guaranteed to be of very high quality due to the structure John has developed over the past 25 years, and such a decent player will notice high level of performances on a consistent, sustained period with his Parris cue due to this.

            A lesser player won't notice the importance I'm afraid. Just my opinion. To quote Ronnie O'Sullivan from a recent twitter post in reply to a fan's exhaustive question about cue problems- "Don't f*ck about with sh*te. Get a decent cue mate. Get on to John Parris."
            What a load of Tosh .

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally Posted by hotpot View Post
              What a load of Tosh .
              +1. Exactly!

              That above is quite possibly the biggest load of bulls**t I've read in a while.

              I've made centuries, and didn't need a parris cue. The cue I have I would put against ANY cue JP can care to build or supply, and would be bet it it more than measures up in just about every aspect you care to test!

              I know one local player that had a JP ultimate made as an exact copy of his cue (length, weight, butt/tip diameter, balance etc) in case anything happened to his cue, but he couldn't get on with it at all and sold it shortly after receiving it. Does this mean it was a bad cue? No, of course not, but it wasn't "right" for the player.
              And before you start saying the player must be useless, he is quite possibly one of the best players I have seen when he sets his mind to it. uncounted centuries, including at least 15 147's, so I think he would know what he is doing with a cue!
              There is VERY little/no difference in the quality supplied by the top cuemakers such as JP, MW, TW, Robert Osborne, Robin Cook etc. (plus others not mentioned) I am pretty certain all of these would agree they all make exceptional cues, but obviously have to consider themselves the best as they need business. If I say to you "we're all brilliant cue makers, but between you and me I think .... is the best of us" and we are the same price, who do you get your cue from??
              If you want to play the pink, but you're hampered by the red, you could always try to play the brown!

              Comment

              Working...
              X