Forget about the world class players for a minute, and think about your own game. You probably don't make runs over 20, very few people do. If you produce the occasional 13 or 14, you are a very strong player indeed. Most of us in the 3-cushion community have to settle for fives and sixes, maybe the occasional nine. And that's okay: for all levels there are "corresponding" runs.
Not everybody makes high runs, proportional to their average. Some players are better at it than others, who have roughly the same playing strength. We all know this guy, who "sometimes can't miss". He has days when he looks like a 0.900, when in fact he's a 0.650. But don't forget, he plays many 0.500 matches as well, or he wouldn't be a 0.650!
Let's compare two types of players. I'll be exaggerating a little bit, to get the idea across. Our player A has score sheets that look like this: 0-1-0-0-0-8-0-0-1-0-0-0. Our player B has a different style: 2-0-0-1-0-2-3-0-1-0-1-0. Both have made 10 points in 12 innings, so we'll assume their playing strength is comparable. What's the difference?
If this is not an isolated example, but their regular way of scoring, it tells us something about their game. Player A needs to work on his problem-solving skills. It's too easy for opponents to make him miss. But then, when he has control of the balls, he's dangerous. It looks like he plays the makeable points intelligently. Player B is the opposite. He is hard to defend against, he'll keep scoring, whatever you leave for him. But then, he seems unable to really make the most of good opportunities. He plays the tough shots relatively better than the easy ones.
Which skill is the most enviable one, player A's or player B's? The answer totally depends on the playing strength. We should always keep in mind that the importance of defense is highest when the average is lowest. Why is that? If you have a 0.666 average (say 40 points in 60 innings), your opponent is the one putting most of your positions on the table. If you are a 1.500 (60 points in 40 innings), YOU are the one putting most of the positions on the table. Therefore, in the life of Regular Joe, the opponent is of crucial importance. The game revolves around starting positions. For the regular Cho, the game is all about runs.
This is the learning curve for every 3-cushion player. Don't focus on making every hellishly difficult shot, breaking every defense. That's not going to work anyway, and you'll invest a thousand dollars to make thirty cents. What DOES work, is learning how to turn your three's into fives, and your sixes into tens. In other words: spend time and energy on the correct way of playing the easy shots, and the semi-difficult ones.
The beauty of a 3-cushion run is that it no longer matters who is in the chair. You could be playing your auntie Jemima or the intimidating Dani Sánchez: as long as you keep scoring, it makes no difference. There's not a thing they can do. And remember: always try to end your run with a solid defensive shot. You run seven, he runs six? I bet he's the one feeling better about that exchange. You're better off if you run four, and make him miss.
Here are a few examples of matches that only live on in our memory because of the runs a player made.
- A run of seven is nothing special, in international 3-cushion. But five of them, in a single match? Zanetti - Caudron in the European Ch'ship of 2017, final score 40-14 in 11.
- Steven van Acker from Belgium will never forget this match: he beat Eddy Leppens 50-20 in 16 innings, and these were his four last trips to the table: 12-0-5-19.
- Quite a few players ran 10 or more, three times in a match. 10-10-10, by Burgman and Leppens. 11-11-11 by Sang Lee. 10-11-12 by Forthomme and Caudron. 10-10-14 by Sánchez and Zanetti. And how about this one: Anno de Kleine from the Netherlands made 50 in 9 against Jean van Erp, with an opening run of 12, a 16 in the middle, and another 12 to close out the match!
- Blomdahl beat Nguyen 40-5 in 8 in the LG+ Cup in 2017, finishing 7-9-18.
- Two-inning fireworks? Plenty of those. I'll only mention ones with a total over 30 points (and I'm sure I'll be forgetting several, my memory is not what it was). The great Murat Naci Coklu once had two 15's in one match. That was in 2015, of course. Dick Jaspers ran 22 and 10 in the same match (against Caudron), and he lost! The Dutchman also had a match where he ran 22 and 11, beating Efler in a world record four innings. Nelin ran 22 and 12, beating Philipoom 50-16 in 11 in 2000. Caudron made 21 and 14 when he beat Klompenhouwer in 2016, 50-12 in 12. Another one by Jaspers: he ran 17 and 18 when he beat Horn in 2003, 50-13 in 12. And finally, Jef Philipoom beat Bart Ceulemans in great style in 2013, that ended 50-15 in 10. Jef finished the match 17-1-18! The world and European champion of 1995 is a high run specialist, and it's all about position play. Also in that category: Turkey's Tayfun Tasdemir, who has ran several 30+ 's in practice matches.
- As long as I'm inventing new categories: how about that wonderful match between Jae Ho Cho and Semih Sayginer we saw recently? Cho runs 10 from the break, Sayginer answers with 19. Twenty-nine points between two players, in the same inning, that's not so bad. But then, in 2010 in the French League, Caudron ran 25 and out against Martin Spoormans. The seasoned referee / 3-cushion player / snooker player made 11 in the equalizing inning, for a total of 36 points without a miss.
Why do we keep saying it's a difficult game?