Anyone knows this guy? How does he stack up with the best American old-timers?
Raymond Ceulemanns
- Thread starter crosseyedjoe
- Start date
Ceulemans has far surpassed Hoppe's averages at 3-cushion. I'm not sure about his averages at the other (so-called small) carom games, but he was a champion at them as well. He has a total of about 130 National, European and World titles. He won his latest World 3-Cushion Championship in 2001 -- 38 years after winning the first one, and he averaged 1.688, very near to his highest-ever average in the WC. He has a high run in competition of 28, while I think 17 was the high run in the US in the era of ivory balls.crosseyedjoe said:
Which brings up a large issue. The equipment is a lot different now. Shots are possible (and even fairly easy) now that were unplayable 60 years ago. Is Hoppe's 1.33 best grand average better than Ceulemans's 1.990? Today we see some tournaments with averages for the entire field of 1.7! Ceulemans is credited with a large part of that improvement in the sport, as he was the leader during much of the development.
For more on Ceulemans's record, see
http://www.raymondceulemans.com/ResultatenEN.html
Wow. That's sort of like asking how Steve Davis would stack up against some of the old-time snooker players. He's so good, he made our Hall of Fame!crosseyedjoe said:
Are there more than two players that can be truly spoken about in the same breath as Ceulemans?
Fred
When all the Hall of Famers got together in Orlando in Dec of 2005, I was sad that Mr. C didn't come. I have a Hall of Fame ball that needs his John Hancock.
IMO, anyone who doesn't know this man's contribution to 3C would do themselves a favor by reading up on his career.
IMO, anyone who doesn't know this man's contribution to 3C would do themselves a favor by reading up on his career.
He is in the top five cue sport players of all time.
One of the things that has always impressed me is that Cuelemans was able to raise his average with the increased competition. Part of this is certainly attributable to the newer, faster, better conditons.... but it's also much due to his skill, persistence and genius with the cue. Truly and incredibly player, and one who really defined 3C for decades.
Bob Jewett said:
Back in the early 90's, the pool room I managed sponsored Willie Mosconi to come in for an exhibition.
He arrived the day before the exhibition and Willie, the room owner and myself were about to leave and go eat dinner.
Just on a whim, I asked Willie who he thought was the best player in the world.
His response was, "You mean besides me?", with a big smile on his face.
He then said, " The best player in the world doesn't even play pocket billiards. His name is Raymond Ceulemans and he plays three cushion billiards."
I'd have to say that's a pretty good endorsement.
I saw him play a couple of years later and it turned me into a believer, big time.
I'm not sure but I think he won the world championships 19 times or more.
He arrived the day before the exhibition and Willie, the room owner and myself were about to leave and go eat dinner.
Just on a whim, I asked Willie who he thought was the best player in the world.
His response was, "You mean besides me?", with a big smile on his face.
He then said, " The best player in the world doesn't even play pocket billiards. His name is Raymond Ceulemans and he plays three cushion billiards."
I'd have to say that's a pretty good endorsement.
I saw him play a couple of years later and it turned me into a believer, big time.
I'm not sure but I think he won the world championships 19 times or more.
Last edited:
Bob Jewett said:
Bob, didn't Hoppe run 25 in an exhibition? I know that's not considered competition, but it may indicate what Hoppe could do if he played with the aggressive style of today's players.
I think a major reason why today's averages are so much higher is that defensive play has been pretty much eliminated, and I think Ceulemans was the first to do so and succeed. His skills and knowledge, along with more accurate equipment, showed the 3C world that the better strategy is to make as many points as you can and not worry about what the other guy might do if you miss. The Hoppe/Cochran/Schaefer style of play was to worry, and that held down their averages.
However, not knowing much about the earlier era, it's very possible that I'm wrong, and that Ceulemans, Blomdahl, et al are just way way better than Hoppe/Cochran/Schaefer. But I'd like to think that's not the case.
That is a good point. I read the rules and it was a foul in a major US 3 cushion tournament in Vegas to play an intentional safety. Hoppe played during the safety play era and he was playing on slower cloth. We will never know who was the best.Rich93 said:
cueman said:
I think during the Hoppe era you could shoot intentional safeties, but not two innings in a row. But I wasn't thinking of intentional safeties so much as I was of compromising your own position play to leave your opponent with a hard shot if you missed.
An example of such Hoppe thinking: "If I shoot at the red with moderate speed and "die on his cueball" I'll have great position if I make it. But if I miss I'll leave my opponent with an easy shot. If I shoot at the red with greater speed, my position won't be as good if I make it, but I'll leave him with a hard shot if I miss. So I'll shoot with greater speed."
Ceulemans-Blomdahl thinking: "I'll shoot with moderate speed for the best position and I won't miss."
During the age of Ceulemans the game changed to de-emphasize defensive thinking. Because of more consistent equipment and his great skill, offense became a better strategy for him, and Blomdahl et al followed his style and improved upon it.
I'm not sure of this, but it just doesn't seem right that Hoppe era averages are so much lower than today's unless the strategy of play has changed. Today's pool players may or may not be better than Greenleaf, Mosconi and Crane - it's debateable, not a sure thing. But in 3C there can be little debate that the game is being played today at a much higher level, and better equipment just doesn't seem a sufficient explanation for the difference.
Are there no old-time lifelong billiard players out there who can speak with authority on this?
There are a few Ceulemans videos on YouTube. I picked this one out because it shows Ceulemans running 100 points in straight rail billiards. He is known for his mastery of 3 cushions, but he also excels in the smaller billiard games, like straight rail and balkline. Blomdahl, on the other hand, has never bothered with these smaller games.
Straight rail died out because it became too easy, and this video shows you why. It looks like he could keep on doing this forever. Talk about a delicate touch.
Is that the late Sang Lee moderating this exhibition? Sure looks like him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_o2CptaJIU
Straight rail died out because it became too easy, and this video shows you why. It looks like he could keep on doing this forever. Talk about a delicate touch.
Is that the late Sang Lee moderating this exhibition? Sure looks like him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_o2CptaJIU
Bob Jewett said:
The fact that Ceulemans has been at (near now, at 143 years old?) the top of the heap in the different eras shows hi greatness, IMO. Not to mention his palmares...
PoolBum said:
All time most solid stance of any cue holder, in any game!
crosseyedjoe said:
He may be the best ever, including Hoppe, Cochran et al. Too bad, Harold Worst died so young. I would have loved to see these two go at it.
Rich93 said:
The part that amazed me were the masses. I can't imagine being able to control a masse shot where the CB only moves 2 inches total. That's "touch" in a nutshell, I think.
-Andrew
