Who's the greatest cueist ever?
QMagic150
pocket billiards: Willie Mosconi
billiards: Raymond Cuelemans and Willie Hope
Snooker: Steve Davis
Mr. Smith
GGHoliday
Dear ?@bigpond.com,
I can't fault you for your opinion, or your unfamiliarity with real billiards -
and by that I mean on tables without a bunch of balls or holes in the corners,
like pool, snooker, etc..
I think it's a misnomer, and consider these games to be in a different
category.
By the way, the Dutchman with all those championship titles in billiards is
called Raymond Ceulemans. He is good, alright, but Blohmdahl from Sweden is an
even greater talent, and will overtake Ceulemans in the record books of
championships won.
And then there was the golden era of American carom play, with Hoppe, Cochran,
etc.. Unfortunately, that's long ago, and carom billiards is only played by a
few enthusiasts nowadays. One of the remaining living legends, Jay Bozeman, of
Vallejo, Ca., unfotunately died not long ago as well. He was 91, and gave
Hoppe many tough matches in their days.
The classic carom disciplines of straight, balkline, 1-cushion, and 3-cushion
have fallen out of popularity in the U.S., I suspect because of the lack of
instant gratification. Anything that takes such a long time of practice and
devotion without much measurable success just doesn't attract the young people
in this culture any more.
I know that all disciplines require skill at their highest level, and I don't
want to belittle pool or snooker. But I see players "moving on" to billiards
from pool, but I don't see the reverse. That may tell you something about the
different depth of these games.
A.W.
Ron Hudson
On 25 Jun 1998 19:11:54 GMT, ggho...@aol.com (GGHoliday) wrote:
><snip>
>One of the remaining living legends, Jay Bozeman, of
>Vallejo, Ca., unfotunately died not long ago as well.
Wouldn't that have pretty much disqualified him from being a "living legend"?
The Baron
Yes Walter was the best. f you have aver seen any of the limited footage of
him playing he has such cue ball control the likes of which i have never
seen. No one else even comes close and i don't think many people will
believe us without seeing him play for themselves. I wish the ABC would
replay the documentry about him or offer is for sale its unbelievable. If
you have any more information about him please post it i am very
interested.
.
On 29 August 1998 there is a dinner being held in Melbourne Australia to
celebrate the centenary of the birth of a man that I believe to be the
greatest to ever pick up a cue. His name was Walter Lindrum. The dinner is a
black tie affair which will be attended by former Prime Ministers and
British Lords
I doubt that any Americans have ever heard the name and I suspect that many
English enthusiasts, having heard of the venerable Walter Lindrum are unsure
of his record.
I appreciate that there are many different cue sports and that it is simply
not possible to compare players who never met head to head and didn't even
play the same game, but I would be interested to hear the various cases for
your "best of the best".
American players whose records I am reasonably familiar with include Ives,
Mosconi, Hoppe, Mizerak and others. Who was the best of these? Are there
videotpaes of them available?
What about Raymond Keulmans the Belgian genius. I have seen tapes of him
playing three cushion carom and he has to be considered as he has dominated
his branch of cue sports for so long.
What about the giants of the Snooker world:
Joe Davis, Ray Reardon, Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry.
I have attended three World Snooker Championships at Sheffield (Full Monty
Country) in the U.K. and Hendry is the best I have ever seen playing
Snooker, though many folk I know rate Joe Davis as the best.
Having seen and read about all of these guys I believe Lindrum's claim to be
the strongest, but what say you?
Walter Lindrum played English Billiards and dabbled a little (very little)at
Snooker and pool games. A few of his highlights included:
* They had to change the rules of the game to limit his scoring.
* He still holds all the major records in his sport from the 1930's. Is
there another sport anywhere where the world record stands from the 1930's?
.
* He holds the record for scoring the fastest 100 break (fifty scoring
shots) in less than 30 seconds; close cannons.
* He regularly occupied the table for hours on end without missing (and
he played fast)
* Opponents would regularly not get a shot in a match up to 1000 points
(around 400 shots)
* His world record break (4137) entailed nearly 2000 consecutive strokes
without missing. In the post WW2 era I think there has not been a single
break over 1000 (say 400 shots) in a world championship.
* Playing partners attest that in social matches he played for more than
12 hours without a miss or a break. I wonder when he went to the toilet?
Bear in mind we are talking English Billiard tables here: 12ft x 6ft with
pocket openings at three and a half inches and cloth with a heavy nap on it.
Not your compact American tables with pockets in which you can park a
pickup.
Walter's father Fred was the Australian champion for many years around the
end of the last century and trained the boy from birth. From the age of six
he practiced 14 hours a day, every day, interrupted only by a limited
schooling. Although born a right hander his father forced him to play left
handed so they could stand face to face at the table for instruction. The
result was that he was truly ambidextrous.
For the first couple of years Fred would only let Walter have one ball, the
cue ball, to hit. What a happy day it must have been when Fred finally gave
him something to aim at!. But imagine how well he knew the angles by then.
Fred basically kept him locked up for twenty five years, just playing within
the family. His older brother was the Australian champion during most of
this period, but Walter was not allowed to seriously challenge him because
it would have ruined his older brother's career as a professional.
The world had a glimpse of Walter's genius when the recent world champion,
H.W. Stephenson came out to Australia for a billiards tour. He was ambushed
by a 24 year old Walter, losing 6540 to Walter's 16000.
Walter's competitive career was brief, playing his first world championship
in his thirties and bursting onto the UK scene as a virtual unknown. Within
two years, having of course been unbeaten and winning by unheard of margins,
the authorities revised the rules to attempt to limit his scoring and
reintroduce some interest into a game which had effectively been "solved".
It didn't work, he kept scoring prolifically and effectively ruined the
sport, taking all the competitive interest out of it. Paradoxically, the
greatest ever killed the very sport he was born for. Walter retired to
Australia in disgust and refused to travel again for competition. At one
time there was talk that he should play Willie Hoppe in an agreed "neutral
format" game, but neither player was happy with the arrangement so it never
came to pass. So we must guess.
My guess is Walter Lindrum by a mile, but what say you.
How good was your man. Tell me about him.
Patrick Johnson
. wrote: <lots of interesting stuff about Walter Lindrum>
Are we to understand that you're Australian, then? You seem to know a lot about
Lindrum... and you tell it well.
I don't know who the "greatest cueist" may be (Lindrum sounds plausible to me),
but your post was certainly interesting and entertaining. Hope we hear from you
again.
Pat Johnson
Peter Tankard
Thank you for the correction regarding Raymond Ceulemans. He deserves better
than to have his name and nationality badly described.
Apologies for my computer prowess, too much time playing billiards I guess.
Seems I can't get this dang machine to print my name. Anyway I'm Peter
tankard and yes I am an Australian, but I hope I don't bring a biased view
towards my countryman. I truly believe he was the best, but of course there
are mnay branches of the cue sports about which I am unfamiliar.
I'm certain that GG Holiday is right about the modern branches, which
revolve primarily around the potting of balls, requiring less overall table
skill than the carom, balkline and cushion billiards versions.
I met Stephen Hendry in England and was amazed to learn that he practiced
only a few hours a day most days, more coming into major tournaments.
When Walter travelled to England by boat in the 1930's it was said that he
became quite anxious just being away from a billiard table. He would get his
set of balls out and poke them around for hours on the bunk, just to keep
his touch.
In many ways I guess he was a little bit one-dimensional and it was said
that he could not hold down a personal or business relationship throughout
his life because he only could think of billiards.
For those who have the time or interest I commend the excellent biography by
Andrew Ricketts "Walter Lindrum - Billiards Phenomenon". published 1982 by
Brian Clouston p.o. box 391 Manuka ACT Australia. He tells the story of a
flawless genius with a flawed life.
For those with any interest in sport it is a lesson in sacrifice.
Bob Jewett
. (@bigpond.com) wrote:
...
: I doubt that any Americans have ever heard the name and I suspect that many
: English enthusiasts, having heard of the venerable Walter Lindrum are unsure
: of his record.
Well, some Americans have read the next to last chapter in Robert
Byrne's "Advanced Technique" book, which is a review of Ricketts'
biography. From that review:
[...] One drill he had to practice for hours at a time was shooting
the cueball from a distance of about two feet into a ball frozen on
the rail, making the cueball rebound softly to its starting point.
Lindrum seems to have a much better claim to greatest cueist than any
current player I can think of with the possible exception of Blomdahl,
who seems to be encountering increasingly difficult competition in 3-C.
: * He regularly occupied the table for hours on end without missing (and
: he played fast)
I think Tom Reece may have edged him out on the endurance part.
: Walter's competitive career was brief, playing his first world championship
: in his thirties and bursting onto the UK scene as a virtual unknown. Within
: two years, having of course been unbeaten and winning by unheard of margins,
: the authorities revised the rules to attempt to limit his scoring and
: reintroduce some interest into a game which had effectively been "solved".
He clearly lacked the celebrated "lemonading" technique.
It would have been interesting to see how he would have done at snooker,
which was just starting when he put his cue down.
The biography is not listed in the usual places. Is the "Walter
Lindrum Publishing Syndicate" at P.O. Box 158, Nunawading, Victoria,
3131 Australia, still offering it?
Bob Jewett
Smorgass Bored
Obviously,you've all led a very sheltered life.
The very greatest of all time is Pablo Picasso and shame on all of you
for not remembering him.....Picasso is the most famous of all and the
only one that comes to mind when...........
WHAT ? Cueist? I thought you said Cubist.
nevermind,
Doug W.
~>*)))>< Big fish eat Little fish ><(((*<~
Texas Express
isn't it Earl?
That's what he always says
--
John McChesney
Texas Express
j...@texasexpress.com
http://www.texasexpress.com
http:/national9balltour.com
Smorgass Bored wrote in message
<18140-35...@newsd-151.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
Peter Tankard
Thank you Bob for that further insight. You are the second person to mention
BlomDahl, he must be truly great.
You are right about Reece and his endurance, however it is worth noting that
his break, from memory 499,150 was performed over several weeks without
spectators.
The break was anchor cannons as I recall and while there is certainly a lot
of skill in wedging the balls into the pocket opening, it is fairly
elementary to score from them once they are so jammed. I guess that's why
the shot was banned.
The shot was originally designed i think by Ives, the American who used it
to great effect against John Roberts, the senior British player of his day.
While Lindrum is certainly remembered for his close cannon work, especially
his "nurseries", where the balls are nursed along the rail, he was first and
foremost an allround player. I think it was this aspect of his game which so
devastated the opposition. While he could score heavily from the cannons, if
ever he lost a position he was able to score elsewhere and then regain the
close cannon position.
How good would he have been at Snooker? No-one knows
I have already mentioned how Joe Davis said that he could best Walter at
Snooker and he could, but on the occassion of Walter's death Davis
reconsidered and was perhaps more reflective. He was reported in the
Sporting Globe as saying:
"Walter Lindrum was the greatest billiard player there has ever been or is
likely to be. And if he had taken to Snooker he would have been the greatest
snooker player the world ever knew."
Joe himself is of course considered by most to occupy that title so I guess
there can be no higher praise, but this is all speculation.
Some critics have questioned Walter's cue action which was designed for the
free flowing Billiards game rather than the regimented and mechanical
Snooker action. However it is worth remembering that Walter had many breaks
in excess of 135 at a time when no-one had scored a max. and at a game he
regarded as just a filler between Billiards tournaments.
Sydney Lee the long time "Pot Black" tournament referee whose own career
spanned both the golden age of Billiards and the modern Snooker game was
even more decisive. He said that there was simply no doubt in his mind that
" had Walter taken to Snooker he would have been the greatest Snooker player
of any age."
We will never know. That's a great thing I think, because then hackers like
me can postulate what might have been.
I would love to know more about Blomdahl and his record if anyone has any
further info. Are there tapes available?
Bob Jewett
Peter Tankard (PeterT...@bigpond.com) wrote:
...
: I would love to know more about Blomdahl and his record if anyone has
: any further info. Are there tapes available?
The best source of tapes is Accu-stats (http://www.accu-stats.com/,
VHS) and a good tape to get would be SL96-09 which is a three-cushion
match between Ceulemans and Blomdahl. Ceulemans averaged 2.214, which
is a very strong average at 3-C, but he lost 31-60 as Blomdahl needed
only 15 innings to score 60 points. This is still the record for that
length of match. Blomdahl had a run of 14; Ceulemans 9. Robert Byrne
and Mike Shamos provide the commentary on the shots.
Accu-stats also has two tapes of "best shots" from all their 3-C tapes
which allows you to see many of the best players in the world make some
very remarkable shots.
Bob Jewett
Brent Ellingson
: "Walter Lindrum was the greatest billiard player there has ever been or is
: likely to be. And if he had taken to Snooker he would have been the greatest
: snooker player the world ever knew."
: Joe himself is of course considered by most to occupy that title so I guess
: there can be no higher praise, but this is all speculation.
Joe himself is of course considered the greatest Snooker
player of HIS TIME, but I'm afraid that the majority
of aficionados of the game would finger Stephen Hendry
as the best ever. No one would question the result of
Hendry at his peak vs. Davis (Joe or Steve or Fred) at
his.
B
Bob Jewett
: Joe [Davis] is of course considered the greatest Snooker
: player of HIS TIME, but I'm afraid that the majority
: of aficionados of the game would finger Stephen Hendry
: as the best ever. No one would question the result of
: Hendry at his peak vs. Davis (Joe or Steve or Fred) at his.
Another factor is whether the player changed the game. I gather
that Joe Davis was responsible for much of the early development
of snooker. Has Hendry contributed to the game or does he just
play it very well?
Bob Jewett
tva...@my-dejanews.com
I'm not quite sure I agree with your criteria, Bob. As any sports game
matures and stabilizes, I think that "tradition" tends to make it harder and
harder for anyone to significantly impact its form. Who's to say that
Hendry, if portalled back to Davis's time, wouldn't have had an equal impact
on Snooker's development.
Another thing that happens as a sport develops is that there tends to be an
evening out of the talent pool. In other words, the difference in skill
between the best and worst professionals tends to become smaller and smaller,
thus making true excellence harder to recognize, since it must be
distinguished by a finer and finer precision.
This sort of debate over who's the greatest "of all time" comes up frequently
in baseball circles. The renown baseball statistician and analyst Bill James
has tried to come up with an objective criteria for measuring performance
across ages, but even he admits that this is a shaky proposition at best.
There is no closed, immutable environment upon which to establish a framework.
As far as greatest cueist, all I know for sure is that I'm certainly not in
the running <grin>.
--
- Toby Vaughn
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Brent Ellingson
: : Joe [Davis] is of course considered the greatest Snooker
: : player of HIS TIME, but I'm afraid that the majority
: : of aficionados of the game would finger Stephen Hendry
: : as the best ever. No one would question the result of
: : Hendry at his peak vs. Davis (Joe or Steve or Fred) at his.
: Another factor is whether the player changed the game. I gather
: that Joe Davis was responsible for much of the early development
: of snooker. Has Hendry contributed to the game or does he just
: play it very well?
: Bob Jewett
No question -- he just played it very well. But you'll find
that as *anything* evolves, the changes that are considered
the most important and the most dramatic *invariably* happen
early on. The rest is refinement and adjustment.
B
--