| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Modern Billiards - A Complete Text-Book of the Game, Containing Plain and Practical Instructions How to Play and Acquire Skill at This Scientific Amusement
Author: Garno, Benjamin
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Modern Billiards - A Complete Text-Book of the Game, Containing Plain and Practical Instructions How to Play and Acquire Skill at This Scientific Amusement" ***
Internet Archive (https://archive.org)
Images of the original pages are available through
Internet Archive. See
https://archive.org/details/modernbilliardsc01garn
Transcriber’s note:
Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
Text enclosed by equal signs is in bold face (=bold=).
MODERN BILLIARDS.
A Complete Text-Book of the Game,
Containing
Plain and Practical Instructions How to Play and Acquire Skill at This
Scientific Amusement.
Fully Illustrated
_With Plates and Engravings, showing two hundred and fifty Strokes, and
the best methods of executing them, as practised by the leading players
of the day._
New Edition—New Context—New and Complete Records of All Important Match
and Tournament Games, Amateur and Professional, from the Earliest to the
Present Time.
The Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co.,
New York: 31–33 West Thirty-second Street.
Chicago: 263–265 Wabash Av.
Cincinnati: 130–132 E. Sixth St.
St. Louis: 106 S. Fourth St.
Philadelphia: 1002 Arch St.
Boston: 86 Washington St.
San Francisco: 20th and Harrison
Toronto, Ont.: 68 King St., W.
Montreal, Que.: 67 Adelaide St., W.
Paris, Fr.: No. 19 Rue de la Pepiniere
City Of Mexico: Puente del Alvarado
Copyright by
The Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co.
1908.
Trow Directory
Printing and Bookbinding Company
New York
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTORY
HISTORICAL
THE BILLIARD-ROOM
PART I
PART II
CONDUCTING TOURNAMENTS
BILLIARD RECORD
REGULAR THREE-BALL CAROMS
CHAMPIONS GAME
BALKLINE GAME
CUSHION CAROMS
THREE-CUSHION CAROMS
FIFTEEN-BALL POOL
RULES GOVERNING PROFESSIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS
INDEX
INTRODUCTORY.
Apart from its inviting to moderate and wholesome exercise, billiards,
as popularly played, is pre-eminently a mental pastime. Nearly all its
exponents of approved skill, whatever were the drawbacks of their youth,
are intellectually quick and bright. This is due in some measure to the
ready mathematical requirements of the play as a routine, but in a much
greater degree to its taxing the eye, stimulating the fancy, and
disciplining the mind by imposing watchfulness, invention, and analysis.
Slowness is costly, and hence, as an early habit, an eager alertness of
vision, alacrity of step, and promptitude of decision.
Regarding billiards as a spectacle, its physical requisites to
perfection are keen sight, level head and steady hand; but they are by
no means essential to enjoyment of it as a leisure-hour diversion _en
amateur_. In this sense, its charm lies altogether in participation,
which is all the more agreeable and healthful because never needing to
be exhausting.
Caroming methods are still changing. Execution is again growing less
fantastic and more practical. Systemization is becoming more and more
dominant. In consequence, certain gathering shots, depicting instructive
possibilities rather than downright needs, and diagrammed as still
proper to teach when the earlier edition of this book was issued, have
no place in the present volume.
Play has been made harder in theory, but easier in fact. Lowering the
cushion first and the table next has facilitated most strokes, and
particularly those dependent upon elevating the cue. Our fathers knew
_piqué_, but seldom _massé_. Drawing a ball without hopping it has been
made surer. Cloths were once so much heavier in nap that ironing new
ones again and again, until the iron burned them out, was the method
here, as it is in certain other countries yet. Although longer than the
present ones by several inches, yet still choice cues of old rarely went
beyond eighteen ounces. For special needs there are cues now whose butts
alone are heavier than an old-fashioned cue in its entirety. The lighter
ashen sticks of the past were meant for a greater variety of shots than
the experts’ carom game of to-day has use for. Styles of play as a
matter of contest are also different. If the present generation know
better how to count, their elders knew better when not to try and count.
There has been progress in more directions than one. A light-weight cue
never before handled by its wielder played the last 1900 points of a
memorable contest. Our “Record” has no other one-night match so
impressive for headwork, handicraft, and hazard. In the same year, and
in the same State, a mile in harness was trotted in 2:19¾, but under
wholly different conditions from those which to-day govern track,
equipment, transportation, and individual effort. As in the popular eye
some Cresceus or Lou Dillon now completely obscures the bob-tailed,
homely little bay mare at Kalamazoo, so the billiard giants of these
times are apt to overlook that the credit they receive for a marvelous
progress as counters may not be exclusively their own. Some share in it
is possibly due to improvements that first-class mechanicians have made
in billiard implements. Rubber vulcanized in layers of different
densities in the one strip have made cushion-angles trustier, cloths are
of closer shear and more uniformly spread, choice cue-leathers are
choicer, cues have grown magical in their mere heft of hilt, and
vanished is the muslin under-cloth that helped the balls to dig their
graves deep into the one of green. Rarely seen, if ever now, is the
serrated cushion, with a face like a saw whose dulled teeth are set
inches apart, and not often is there complaint that the speed of the bed
is greater than that of the return from the cushion, or else not quite
so great.
HISTORICAL.
Billiards was practically without beginning. As with untold other
excellences, so with that. Until merit is established, curiosity as to
origin rarely begins. When merit is acknowledged, it is too late to
trace origin.
“Let us to billiards, Charmion,” is one of Shakespeare’s many
anachronisms. As introduced into “Antony and Cleopatra,” its
significance is simply that the amusement was growing in favor at the
English court in the time of Elizabeth, Shakespeare, and Mary, Queen of
Scots, the last of whom had brought her table over with her from France.
The diligent student may read that Socrates played billiards, that
Anacharsis saw it played during his travels in Greece, that St.
Augustine saw a billiard-table in journeying to or in Africa, and that
Cathire More, an Irish king of the second century A.D., bequeathed to
his nephew “fifty billiard-balls of brass, with the pools and cues of
the same material.” But the student must not go so far back as the
originals in his search, lest he discover that all are translators’
errors. St. Augustine’s vision has proved to be nothing else.
Billiards is also of quasi-historical record as having been invented by
Henri de Vigne, a Frenchman, for the amusement of Louis XI. As runs a
story more explicit, though probably no trustier, De Vigne was only a
carpenter, or cabinet-maker, who, at the order of Louis, fashioned “a
billiard-table with a bed of stone, covered with cloth, and having a
hole in the centre, into which the balls were driven.”
A more plausible recital is that the game was introduced to both France
and England centuries before, when the Knights-Templars returned from
their first or second crusade in the Holy Land. But why not have been
introduced into Spain and Italy at the same period? Rome should have
been a likely spot for this game of the monasteries of the East to
reach, and yet Rome’s ample archives seem to have shed no light upon it,
although we find the “Lives of the Roman Pontiffs” mentioning one Pope
who was fond of billiards, it being the Italian game of a century or so
ago. Any game of Eastern origin should have reached Spain, through the
Moors, centuries before France or England got it via Palestine.
History is no happier in taking liberties with our own country by
variously assigning the honor of introducing billiards here to the
Spaniards in Florida under De Soto, to the English Cavaliers in
Virginia, to the Huguenots settling in South Carolina in 1690, and to
the primitive Hollanders of Manhattan Island. But why not to the earlier
Spaniards in Florida under Ponce de Leon, to the English Cavaliers who
settled one-half of the province of New Jersey, and to the Huguenots who
founded New Rochelle, N. Y., at the same time that kindred refugees
found lodgment in South Carolina? Other nationalities have both played
the game and kept rooms in once pre-eminently cosmopolitan Holland, but
the Dutch themselves have never-been a billiard-playing people; and the
official proceedings before the schouts, scheppens and burgomasters of
New Amsterdam may safely be challenged to show any allusion whatever to
billiards.
Remote literature, whether official or otherwise, is lacking in evidence
of the game anywhere in America until introduced into New York City by
English officers in garrison in the eighteenth century. On the contrary,
there is proof that, even as late as 1808/9, the only billiards on
Manhattan Island was the English winning-and-losing game on six-pocket
tables, presumptively from England. One was a 7 × 14 with eight legs,
and having cushions stuffed with hair.
It is probably not worth disputing that, howsoever christened at first,
billiards was originally an outdoor game, and that, lifted three or four
feet from the ground, it was eventually taken indoors when it rained.
Remotely, it may have been marbles or the immemorially ancient goff (now
golf), or goff may have been remotely billiards or any one of half a
dozen other outdoor jollities. Suffice that billiards to-day bears no
more resemblance to what was so called a century and a half ago, before
France introduced first the third ball and in 1792 the fourth, than
bagatelle bears to shuffleboard or pingpong.
Obscure as that of the game itself is the origin of the “twist” and the
“draw,” the two most important strokes in modern billiards. England
claims them both for John Carr, the “Bath Marker,” on the ground that,
at some time prior to 1823, he was the first to chalk a cue, which is
not a fact; and France claims them for one Capt. Mingaud, an alleged
professional billiardist, who, while imprisoned for a political offence
in 1823, invented the cue-leather. As the writer recalls this Mingaudism
in its entirety, as published in a book issued in Paris about 1868 and
reprinted in the _Billiard Cue_ here, it was manifestly pure romance.
France may never have had a professional so named, but France did have a
Capt. Roget de Lisle, who, imprisoned for a political offence about the
beginning of the last century, invented the deathless “Marseillaise.”
Moreover, it was about 1868 that the writer, on the authority of Prof.
Wm. Lake, who was a professional billiard-player here before and after
1823, published that Camille Avout, a shoemaker, was the pioneer in
turning out cue-leathers in New York City prior to 1823, in which year a
few were imported from France.
Further to complicate matters, Carr is called the “father of the
side-stroke” by the renowned Pierce Egan, a contemporary of Carr, in his
“Annals of Sporting,” a London periodical; while later English billiard
writers recount that Roomkeeper Bartley, Carr’s employer, was the
inventor of the side-stroke and the draw, that in due course he showed
them to his marker, and that Carr merely profited by vending, as the
magical cause of both, some powdered chalk in pillboxes at
two-and-sixpence a box, Italian, French and Spanish players being his
easy customers.
No matter when or in what shape billiards had its beginning, it has been
a favorite recreation of the good and the great for ages, and never more
noticeably so than in the present one. Philosophers seek it, divines
commend it, and physicians prescribe it.
Whatever its old form, its new is essentially American. Other lands have
gradually yielded to the force of American ideas. Public matches were a
dozen years old in this country before there was one in any other, and
the American billiard tournament, never seen in England until 1874/5,
and not in France until 1879, is now the accepted mode in both.
Balklining, another American idea, was unknown to the professionals and
amateurs of France until 1880. It is now their standard caroming
restriction, while for seven or eight years past the English have been
urging a line around the table as a hindrance to the “nursery cannons”
that are the most recent powerful development in their national game.
Cushion-caroms were first publicly exhibited in this country in 1867,
but never in France until 1881. Three-cushion caroms, of which the Paris
professionals have made a specialty during the past dozen years,
constitute another game of American development, dating from 1878 in a
non-public way among professionals, and going many years further back
among our non-professionals.
Until the way was shown by Andrew Buist, an American, caroms were barely
an incidental feature of the English game. Attention was called anew to
them by the separate visits the Dions made to London more than twenty
years ago. Even the prolific spot-ball play, which has likewise been
surprisingly progressive, owes at least a little to this side of the
Atlantic, for in advance of Buist another American—Linley Higham, the
“Albany Pony”—settled in England. Spot-balling, at which he was mighty
for that era on an American 6 × 12 table, called then for but four
different strokes in England. Now it engages more than twice as many.
Modifications have likewise affected the representative players of
France and America. For fifteen years after they first came together,
the French were weak as compound cushioners, but strong as ball-to-ball
drivers. It was the other way with the Americans, who had been brought
up on 6 × 12 and 5½ × 11 pocket tables, while the French professors had
been accustoming themselves to what was nearly a 4½ × 9 carom, whereon
other cushioning than a single one, in which they were strong and the
Americans weak, was an infrequent necessity. Now that the two
nationalities are using the one table, there is little to choose between
them in respect of cushioning and ball-to-balling. If proof were needed,
there is the international championship match of January 29, 1904, with
its score of 500 to 496, which is both trusty history and the latest up
to date.
THE BILLIARD-ROOM.
An apartment to accommodate one table should be of the dimensions
following, graduated by the size of the table, and affording space for
the free exercise of the cue. Where two or more tables are placed, five
feet will be sufficient to allow between them.
For table 6 x 12, room should be 16 × 22.
For table 5½ × 11, room should be 15½ × 21.
For table 5 × 10, room should be 15 × 20.
For table 4½ × 9, room should be 14½ × 18½.
For table 4 × 8, room should be 14 × 17½.
For table 3½ × 7, room should be 12 × 15.
Architects, in their plans for modern mansions, should make suitable
provision for this amusement, without which no gentleman’s establishment
(more especially if a country one) can now be considered perfect. Even
if the builder of a house has no taste for the game himself, he should
look beforehand, and consider that such an accommodation might form an
important item in the price which a succeeding tenant would be willing
to pay for it. The light, if possible, should come from above, through
ample skylights, so as to bring the table within a general focus, and
thus prevent any shadow being thrown from the balls or cushions. The
gas-light should be raised about three feet two inches from the bed of
the table and supplied with horizontal burners, as by such an
arrangement no shadow is cast from the pipe. The distance of the light
from the floor should be about 6 feet 1 inch. For a 5 × 10 table the
cross-arms of the pendant should measure from light to light 28 inches,
and the long arms 56 inches. For a 4½ × 9 table, cross-arms 25 inches,
and long arms 50 inches. For a 4 × 8 table, cross-arms 22 inches, and
long arms 44 inches. For a 5½ × 11 table, cross-arms 31 inches, and long
arms 62 inches. A useful shade has been devised which throws a soft,
even light on the table, and keeps the glare from the player’s eyes. The
floor, if carpeted at all, should be covered with some thick, soft
material.
BILLIARD APPLIANCES—THEIR CHOICE AND CARE.
HOW TO SELECT A TABLE.
Never attempt it. Rather consult with and rely upon reputable
manufacturers.
SIZE, SHAPE, AND STYLE.
In this country there are the standard size, which is 5 × 10 feet, and
the popular size, which is 4½ × 9. Experts use the former, and the
latter is preferred in many public rooms and clubs, as well as in most
private houses, in the last of which the 4 × 8 also often finds a place.
Tables are of various styles and shapes, but mostly now without pockets,
and with the broad rails at sides and ends beveled, ogee, or square.
Those designed for ball-pool have six pockets usually, but sometimes
only four. In addition there is the combination billiard-table, meant
for both caroms and ball-pool at will.
Beds are of slate, and their tendency is toward greater thickness than
was required up to a few years ago. This adds to the general stability
of the table. Even for the 6 × 12, slabs now are often in three pieces,
instead of four, thus insuring a smoother playing surface. Heavier slabs
should have six legs instead of four, whether the table is 5 × 10 or
larger. Many 4½ × 9’s have six.
Apart from its cloth and cushions, a table requires no special care
beyond treating it similarly to any other piece of furniture, by keeping
its framework clean and occasionally applying polish, which can be had
of almost any furniture-dealer. When not in use, the table should be
well covered up.
THE CLOTH.
There are various kinds and several grades. Buying the best will save
money.
Almost invariably, it is the indifferent player or worse who, in or out
of public rooms, finds most fault with cushions, balls, cues, leathers,
or chalk. The experienced one has learned that usually, when all is not
well with him at billiards, the fault is with himself or in his stroke.
A less skillful performer will blame the balls when a sagging floor has
thrown the table out of level, the table when a ball needs either truing
or a holiday, the chalk or the leather when he is wildly throwing his
whole body at the ball, and the cushion when diminished speed is really
due to the influence of a protracted spell of damp weather upon cloth or
ivory. One is sure to absorb moisture, and the other may.
As soon as play is over, and especially in damp weather, the cloth
should first be hair-brushed and then whisk-broomed, both processes
being with the nap. This, on all tables properly set up, runs in the one
direction, although what in America and elsewhere are called “head” and
“foot” become “bottom” and “top” in England, an inversion whose effect
is to make the grain run the same way in both, the English starting from
the bottom. Whether table be pocket or carom, the dust is to be swept
out through the two corners farthest from the “string-line,” or “balk,”
as it is termed in Canada, India, England and Australia.
Beating with the hair-brush is not advisable. Cloth should not be so
long neglected as to need it. The brush spreads in the pounding, and its
action is as much against the nap as with it.
THE CUES.
As to both their selection and their care, players should trust to the
roomkeeper and his staff. An owner of a private table ought to see that,
after play, they are not only kept away from a heater, but are also
stood exactly upright in their rack, to prevent warping or crooking.
Under-leathers sometimes need sandpapering to overcome expansion.
Neglected, they will wear away the nap of the cloth in low-ball
“draw-shots,” if not make it picturesque with L-shaped rents, although
the usual start of these rents is that the cloth has been minutely
punctured either by a hammered cue-ball (massé) or by one made acrobatic
by an unskillful, thoughtless stroke as it leaves either the cue or the
cushion. For slightly roughening the surface of the upper leather,
solidifying it, smoothing its edges, and generally “rounding it off” as
a finishing touch, a fine rasp is of service; but it should not be used
without that instruction which any competent roomkeeper will be glad to
give.
It is a habit with a few to chalk both their bridge-hand and the upper
half of their cues in muggy weather, thereby befouling their own cloth
and that of the table. A wet rag, followed by a dry one, will remove the
stickiness.
Cues are made as light as 12 ounces, but those most in demand are from
17 to 22.
Ball-pool, in calling for a somewhat different stroke from that of
ordinary caroms, needs a little longer cue.
CUE-LEATHERS.
Self-adhesives, with directions accompanying every box, have made the
act of leathering an easy art; but selection is still a science, and
here again, until experience has taught the amateur not so much,
perhaps, what he needs as what he ought to expect to get, manufacturer
or roomkeeper will be the safer guide.
The same counsel will apply to
CHALK.
Most on the market is good. Much is often unspeakably bad. All should be
dry, and as free from grease as from grit. It now comes in various
shapes—octagon, cylindrical and square. As the colored is labor-saving,
few roomkeepers have use for the white. Just as few took to the colored
when first brought to notice, nearly forty years ago, although it was
made green in order not to show itself upon the cloth.
THE CUSHIONS.
Elasticity, accuracy and durability are their requisites. By elasticity
is not meant excessive speed, for a cushion can be made so fast as
utterly to baffle the good player without ultimately aiding the bad one
who craves it. All other things equal, that cushion is best which is
neither radical nor unexpected in its angles, and is least susceptible
to ordinary atmospheric changes.
Until their covering begins to wear out in spots, cushions need no other
attention than to be lightly brushed when the bed-cloth is cleansed, and
every few weeks to have their bolts tightened by the merest turn or
fraction. Should the bolts be overlooked too long, the cushion itself,
by emitting a jingling sound, will give notice that a shrinkage in wood
or metal calls for carpenter’s bit-and-brace.
The height of the top of the modern cushion-rail from the floor, if
level, may be roundly expressed as thirty-four inches, and that of the
cushion’s knife-like edge from the bed is one and seven-sixteenths
inches. This is for the regulation American and French ball, which, at
one-quarter of an inch above its centre, comes into contact with the
cushion’s edge. Struck with force, a much larger ball would jump over
the cushion, while a much smaller, jamming itself between table’s bed
and cushion’s edge, would jump inwardly.
Cushions must be tuned to balls. Unless the former have a given height
and pitch, there cannot be accurate reflection, and there may be
inaccurate stroke. Height has already been discussed. Pitch is the
inward slant of the cushion’s top surface as a guide to the cue in
certain situations.
THE MAGIC BALLS.
With balkline the vogue, as much depends upon balls, cloth and cushions
as upon the player himself.
Balls should be of well-seasoned ivory, and the only available guarantee
as to that is the ability of manufacturers to carry a heavy stock.
There are players who talk of perfect balls, but a well-turned ball is
the limit, and neither its truing-up nor its recoloring should ever be
intrusted to other than an artisan of conceded skill and experience.
Earth has never known an absolutely round sphere or a perfectly smooth
plane. Under the glare of a chemical light, lens and screen will show
hills and valleys in both.
Requiring much patience and much ivory, matching balls is an art in
itself. The lower end of a tusk is too small for carom balls, and the
upper and larger too hollow. Perhaps six balls, on an average, can be
shaped out of the central section. The ball toward the smaller end is
closer-grained than any of its companions, all of which, while of the
one size, may differ in other respects from one another. Possibly out of
twenty tusks not fifty balls will be found approximately equal, in sets
of three, with respect to weight and centralized gravity. As sets, they
may all differ from one another, notwithstanding that any one set is fit
for ordinary use; and for an important match the whole twenty tusks are
liable not to turn out three balls alike in size, weight and central
gravity.
The best and dearest ivory is the rarest—the worst, of course, is
cheapest. Some tusks, as they grow, acquire more moisture than others.
The dentine in the millions of little cells is greater in one tusk than
in another. When it comes to billiard-balls, what the animal fed upon up
to from ten to twenty years of age, and also where it fed, are no
inconsiderable factors, could we find them out. Some tusks partly season
by sun-drying as they grow, their owners having to trot long distances
for water. Other elephants rear themselves where water is abundant, but
sunshine scarce. There would also seem to be more durability in the
detached tusk than in balls made from it. The writer has a match-set he
knows to be at least twenty-three years old, that have never been
returned, and that have not had their cardboard box opened in nearly
twenty years. What will happen to them if put on table? Within four
hundred feet of where they rest, the set used in the Phelan-Seereiter
match fell to pieces, in 1867, as soon as played with. As souvenirs they
had lain idle eight years. In Paris, some years later, professors
engaged in a series of games with a set from a tusk (that of a mammoth)
presumably thousands of years old. Until told the players had no idea
but that those balls were from a modern elephant, born and despoiled
within their own lifetime.
In view of all this, is it any wonder either that manufacturers decline
to guarantee ivory or that man to-day knows no more about it and its
care than was known two hundred years ago?
Heat is a greater foe to balls than cold. The latter is not an abstract,
positive quality or condition, being merely the absence of heat. Could
excessive warmth be guarded against as to billiard-balls, there would be
little reason to dread the chilly draught. At the outset, balls need to
be much larger in hot climates than in cold. We in America murmur, and
yet billiards, both social and spectacular, is played in countries where
heat and moisture will change every new set from sphere to spheroid
within a month.
Balls usually do their prettiest freaks across the grain, but sometimes
do them with the grain. Those that swell under the influence of moisture
will occasionally, if allowed to remain idle for months, resume their
proper form automatically; but in a large majority of cases truing-up is
the only cure. Balls that crack will be helped to heal, like human lips
that chap, by touching them somewhat sparingly with tallow. Neither
rubbing balls with oil nor storing them in sawdust saturated with it is
recommended. There are countries having peculiarly evaporative traits in
which oil has been proved a blessing, but in this climate tallow for
cracks and sawdust without oil are about the limit of cure and
prevention.
Balls should never be placed on or near a heater. Modern artificial
warmth is ivory’s direst enemy. Roomkeepers meet with fewer mishaps as
to balls when their places are heated by stoves. Those fresh from play,
especially in hot rooms, should not be placed on metal or stone, nor
even on wood near door or window. Metal and stone are no colder than the
room itself, although feeling colder to the touch; but they have a
wonderful capacity for stealing heat from other things and giving it
away in space, to suck in more. Nor should balls be put at once into an
iron safe. Their play has been work, and there can be no work without
generating inside heat. The old way was to put them up on a shelf in the
open room. The box might have a lid, but there would be holes in it the
year round. The fire would go out slowly and early, and zero might come
after midnight, but the balls would be there at 8 A.M. sharp. Nails in
the floor worried the old-timers, with their self-ventilating balls,
more than heat or cold.
It was their fashion, too, never to put new balls in play at once. No
matter how well-seasoned ivory is in point of age, it is practically
nowhere riper than in its greenest part. Consequently a ball pared in
spots in returning is virtually a new ball throughout in proffering the
atmosphere new access to its interior. Were new balls put upon the table
every day for two or three weeks, after the chill is off the room, and
merely toyed with, without ever being struck with anything like force,
they would probably give better and longer service.
A private table should have two sets of balls, and public rooms not
fewer than three sets to every two carom tables.
As soon as play is done, the balls should be wiped off with a moist
cloth, and then dried and polished with one of wool or chamois, so fine
as not to scratch.
Composition balls have advantages besides their cheapness, but the
demand for them continues to be almost confined in this country to
ball-pool. The prejudice against them for caroms is still, as it was
thirty-six years ago, that they are not ivory. The interval has greatly
improved them, however, and this year’s promise of “absolute perfection”
may at least result in coming closer to it than ever before.
The match-standard American carom-ball, always of ivory, is of 2⅜
diameter, with the red no larger than the whites. Standard ones for
ordinary use are, when new, either 2⅜ full or 2–7/16 scant.
PART I.
MANUAL.
In billiards first impressions form no inconsiderable bearing upon the
future practice, and success depends, to a considerable extent, whether
these impressions be good or bad, true or false. Too often one
endeavoring to learn without the aid of an instructor falls into error
through a misunderstanding of the first principles, or a disregard for
them, in efforts to accomplish the desired ends, by means which at the
moment appear the readiest, but are liable, in the majority of cases, to
be at variance, and opposed to the laws governing the principle.
Repetitions of this fault create a habit, and the player, finding his
game does not show the satisfactory improvement he has reason to expect,
seeks a remedy in an instructor who, seeing the false ideas governing
his pupil’s movements, is forced to rid him of all that he has acquired,
and recommence upon an entirely new basis. All know the difficulty of
changing at once the ideas which have been long entertained, even though
one is satisfied of their falsity; and to avoid this it is better, when
possible, to start in a proper manner, secure a competent teacher, and
accustom one’s self to the proper mode of play in the beginning. A
teacher, to be valuable, should be able not only to show how the stroke
is to be made, but to make it and tell why the effect is produced and
how, to give the reasons for the different motions, and, in fact, to
understand the philosophy as well as the practice of the game.
There have been published some fifty or more volumes upon the game of
billiards, in English, French, and German, and despite this number the
remark has often been made that one cannot learn to execute well from a
book. This, to a great extent, has been the fault of the authors, who
have been obscure in their meanings, have not shown the _simple_ reasons
why each particular description of stroke is made, and have indulged too
much in perplexing fractions and algebraic problems, or else they have
reached the opposite extreme, and give no particulars other than how to
strike the ball, and what the result will be after it is so struck. It
has been the desire and effort of the writer to make the following
directions and diagrams so plain and comprehensible that any one, by the
exercise of ordinary care, can learn to play billiards _well_, by
following them, and the finished player may be able to learn something
further by a study of these pages. But, in order that this end may be
attained, the player is urged to follow the teachings _implicitly_, and
where his own views may be in conflict with those herein expressed, he
should discard them and conform strictly with those found hereafter.
Every diagram and example in this volume has been carefully tested, and
if the stroke is made as required, the result is _inevitably_ as set
forth; should it fail, the player will discover some divergence on his
part from the instruction.
ATTITUDE.
The acquisition of a good attitude is a point of the first importance to
the student of billiards, and yet, from its purely physical nature, is a
subject which almost defies the control of any written rules. There are
peculiarities of height and figure which render the rules that would be
excellent in one case totally inapplicable in the other; thus it is
impossible to define by inches the distance at which a player should
stand from the table, when about to strike; for not only will the
different statures of men cause a difference of position—but, even with
the same player, different positions of the ball will call for
corresponding changes of attitude.
Under these circumstances, the best that can be done is to give a
general direction, which each student must apply for himself to his own
particular case. Let him stand with his left foot slightly advanced, his
left arm extended and resting on the table to form a bridge, and his
body, not facing the table squarely, but forming an acute angle with the
side at which he stands; let him relax all the muscles of his limbs into
their usual and most natural posture—for rigidity of body is at all
times awkward and ungraceful, and seriously interferes with play. The
striking motion should be confined to the wrist and arm, and chiefly to
the lower division of it; athletes in billiards, or those persons who
throw their bodies forward after the cue, would do well to renounce the
“game,” for that quality totally unfits them for the delicacy of touch
and firmness of body, eye, and purpose, which are the grand essentials
of success. The body should remain immovable as a rock, while the right
arm swings to and fro at a sufficient distance to avoid contact with the
side, when advancing. All spasmodic motion and muscular contortions
should be avoided; mere bodily strength in the player will not give
strength to his stroke; the quantity of motion imparted to the ball will
correspond precisely with the weight of the cue multiplied by the
velocity with which it is advancing at the instant of contact; and
therefore the only force required from the player, even for the
strongest stroke, is force enough to cause his cue to move forward at a
rate of speed which, multiplied by its gravity, will give the required
result. As said, this motion should emanate especially from the wrist
and forearm. It is impossible to describe exactly what should be
conveyed; but if the readers, when striking, will imagine that they are
throwing a lasso, and give the same quick, steady force of wrist to the
cue that is required in flinging the coil, they will understand exactly
what is required.
It is owing to the knowledge of this secret, that men, physically weak,
are frequently more than a match in billiard-strength for players who
have the proportions of Hercules, and the “dead pull” of Samson when he
brought down the pillars of the temple on the heads of the assembled
heathen.
As for the attitude in which a lady should stand while playing
billiards, no instruction is needed; perfect ease is perfect grace, and
perfect ease of position is the grand DESIDERATUM for the
billiard-player. As the ladies are always graceful, they will naturally
observe that ease of attitude which it is only necessary to enforce upon
the ruder and more awkward sex.
The male novice should avoid all stiffness and parade—all affected
dignity. Let the dress and attitude be such as to afford the body a
perfect mastery of its own movements. A practised eye can discriminate
at the first glance, on entering a billiard-room, which is the really
skillful player, and which the pretentious bungler, by merely noting the
contrast which the good player’s easy grace presents to the rigid
formalism of the other. Paganini, in his younger days, when he taught
the violin, used to give his pupils six months time in which to practise
how to hold the instrument and bow. When they understood that
thoroughly, he could teach them, he said, the remainder of the art in a
few weeks.
Now, without requiring so long an apprenticeship—without, in fact,
requiring any at all—if the student will only allow himself to stand in
his natural position, the first essential feature of the game will have
been accomplished.
The left foot should be pushed slightly forward, pointing straight
ahead, while the right is withdrawn, and turned outward, at whatever
angle is habitual and most convenient to the player. The body should be
fairly balanced, for, without this equilibrium, we can neither have
grace nor ease. The left arm, when necessary, should be advanced and
rested on the table—the left hand being extended, as in the cut, to form
a “bridge.” (See page 36.)
SELECTION OF A CUE.
Select a cue in harmony with the physical powers, and become accustomed
so much as possible to play with cues of similar weight. From fifteen to
nineteen ounces are fair weights, according to the balls now used in
play. A cue, if too heavy, will paralyze the nerves of the arm and
render them unable to estimate correctly the amount of force employed;
if too light, on the other hand, it will call for an amount of force so
great as to be incompatible with a steady and deliberate aim. Without
some sensation communicated to the hand through the cue, when it
contacts with the ball, it would be impossible for experts to accomplish
the great runs so often made.
The heavier the cue the less is the influence of the stroke on the ball
felt, and it is carried beyond or falls short of the point desired. The
delicate touch for nursing should be as apparent as the stronger stroke.
Finally, let the cue be straight, for any crookedness in this instrument
distracts the eye, and may seriously interfere with the manual
correctness.
CUE-LEATHERS.
The leather is an important feature of the cue—in fact, an all-important
one to any player who deals much in the strokes which are technically
described as “forcing,” “twisting,” and “following.” With an inferior
leather, his play will be paralyzed by miscues. In selecting the
cue-leather, choose such as possess the finest fibre, and are at the
same time solid, pliable, and elastic; and see to it that they have a
good, solid under-leather, as that will save the point of the cue from
breaking away, and will last longer than a thin one. Before being fitted
on to the cue, they should be thoroughly well beaten out on a lapstone,
so as to prevent them from spreading in the course of play; but that
side of them which is next the cue should be roughened with a file or
sandpaper, as also the cue itself, in order that the adhesive wax may be
able to take good hold. The leather should be rounded, not flat, yet
each must decide for himself the exact degree of convexity which will
best suit his play. When the point of the leather becomes glazed from
excessive play, a little sandpaper should be used to roughen it, so that
the chalk may stick.
HOW TO HOLD THE CUE.
The cue should be held lightly in the hand, and when the tip rests
one-eighth of an inch from the ball the cue-hand will be found beneath
but a trifle forward of the elbow. This assures near a horizontal
stroke, whereas if the cue be held at the extreme end of the butt, a
curved motion up and down is given it in making the stroke. The cue is
to be held by the three fingers and thumb, bent about it for support.
When the stroke is given, and the cue carried forward, the hand closes
naturally and without effort on the part of the player, then as the cue
is drawn back the hand opens and is found again as described. The hand
is not closed upon the cue until the instant the ball is struck, when it
is done instinctively; the strength of this grasp being governed by the
quickness of the movement. The speed of the cue, rather than the weight
of the body or the greatness of muscle, gives force to the ball. At the
instant of aim being perfected the stroke should be made, and he who has
the faculty of quickest perception and calculation will become the
finest player.
AIM AND DELIVERY.
To determine the line of aim let the bridge hand be raised or lowered as
may be made necessary for the delivery of the cue, care being taken to
elevate the butt as little as possible, thus permitting the cue to rest
nearly horizontal. In changing the height of the bridge hand do not
allow the end of the thumb to rise or fall, separated from the
forefinger, against which it should rest gently, but secure the proper
height by raising or lowering the palm of the hand from the table,
permitting the weight to come upon the heel of the hand and the ends of
the fingers.
In preparing for the stroke many things must be considered; the strength
to be employed, the chances for a “kiss,” the weight of the ball and
cue, the probable position for the succeeding carom, and the more
important matter of all, the exact spot upon the cue-ball to be hit with
the cue-point.
First, resolve upon the direction of aim, then the point on the cue-ball
for receiving the cue; let the eye rise to the spot of contact on the
object-ball, and instantly upon being satisfied the calculations are
correct make the stroke. At the moment the cue strikes the cue-ball the
eye should shift to the object-ball, as with the marksman who regards
the target rather than his rifle, in shooting. In moving the cue
backward and forward to secure aim, let its point each time come within
one-eighth of an inch of the ball, being careful, of course, not to make
a foul. Some players do not permit the cue to approach nearer the ball
than an inch, and at that distance a stroke false to the calculation is
most certain to result. The beginner should not be discouraged by the
result of a stroke which he may have reasoned to himself was perfect.
Whatever the intentions may have been before making it, the course of
the ball will show beyond doubt the stroke that was _actually_ made, and
the player will then understand, if that course be different than he
anticipated, that the point of contact upon the cue-ball was not such as
he intended; he must remember, in fact, that the laws of motion are
unalterable, while human vision is easily deceived.
THE CUE-BALL.
The centre of the cue-ball being considered the point from which all
calculations are made, the following words are used in the directions
for making shots to express a stroke at fractional distances from this
centre.
The centre, as presented to player in a horizontal stroke:
_Above_ means above centre.
_Below_ means below centre.
_Right_ means right of centre.
_Left_ means left of centre.
_Massé Stroke._
The centre, as the player looks down upon the ball:
_Aft_ means off the perpendicular centre, directly away from the
object-ball looking from _above_, in direction of the line of aim.
_Forward_ means forward of centre toward object-ball.
_Right_ means right of centre from line of aim.
[Illustration: Diagram illustrating a stroke of the cue which imparts
the four primary motions to the ball.]
_Left_ means left of centre from line of aim.
_The cue-ball_ is that with which the play is made.
_The object-ball_ is the first ball struck by the cue-ball.
_The carom-ball_ is the second ball struck by the cue-ball, completing
the carom.
It is first necessary to master the centre-stroke, which is accomplished
by delivering the cue at the point _g_, the line _g_, _e_, _a_, being
the centre diameter of the ball.
The centre stroke imparts to the ball a _natural_ impelling force where
the strength of stroke is not in excess of “ordinary” (see Plate I).
This stroke should always be used unless the player has a _reason_ for a
different delivery. Any divergence from the centre produces an effect on
the ball in excess of the natural, and when applied in the smallest
degree the result should be fully understood.
A centre stroke, with exceeding strength, produces an effect herein
explained:
A centre stroke, slow or medium, will cause the cue-ball to rotate the
instant of delivery, but in excess of medium the ball will slide a
distance over the cloth before rotating, that distance being governed by
the strength of stroke, and when thus sliding should contact be had with
an object ball, at the slightest variation from its centre, right or
left, the cue-ball will perform a right angle to either side, and the
object-ball, taking up the impelling force, continues the direct right
line of the cue-ball.
_The Follow-Stroke._
By viewing the diagram in such way as will bring the explanation under
letter A into a proper reading position, the follow shot is seen. For
this stroke the cue is delivered ½ above centre, imparting two forces to
the ball: impelling it forward in direction of arrow a and rotating in
direction of arrow b, the entire force of the blow converging to centre
of motion _e_. With this stroke the cue-ball, after striking the
object-ball _full_, follows _directly_ in its path. At the instant of
impact with an object-ball, the cue-ball will, if struck with great
strength, apparently stand still through the resistance of opposite
forces caused by contact, but the rotating power overcoming the
repelling tendency of the concussion, carries it forward on its original
path.
It will be noticed the line _k_ through the cue meets the spot _h_ on
the ball which is the point of aim, and this should be the case in every
description of stroke. Only a part of the surface of the leather
impinges upon the ball in this stroke, and the quantity of surface is
governed by the strength used, for the stronger the blow the greater the
indentation of the ball in the leather. The effect of delivering the
cue-ball on the object-ball right or left of full will become apparent
to the student early in his practice.
The cue may be delivered still farther above the centre—a ⅝ delivery,
which imparts excessive rotation, and which is as far above as the
leather will hold on the ball surface. The “follow” can also be executed
with the cue delivered as far as one-fourth below centre, but the latter
delivery should be with a “slow” strength of stroke, that the ball may
rotate naturally; if it be _full_ upon the object-ball and with strength
exceeding “medium,” the cue-ball will stop, or will perform a right
angle if played a fraction off the centre, as shown in Plate IV., Balls
1 and 6.
_The Draw-Stroke._
Turn the diagram so the letter B may come beneath it and the draw-shot
is illustrated.
The delivery as shown is one-half below centre, with the central line
_k_ through cue meeting the point of contact, _h_, on ball, and
imparting to it three distinct forces, that of impulsion, rotation, and
retrograde, the latter causing the cue-ball to rotate in direction of
the arrow _b_; the strength of this force is such as to counteract the
natural tendency of the impulsion, prevent the forward rotation, and
cause the ball thereby to slide over the cloth without the rolling
motion. This stroke holds the ball (thus preventing for the instant its
natural rotation) in a position corresponding with the line _e_ to _i_,
the moment the impelling force is communicated to the object-ball, which
is at the instant of contact, the retrograde power acts with all its
_remaining_ strength, and it returns in the direction of the player. The
distance between the balls must regulate the strength of the stroke, but
greater distance between cue- and object-ball requires greater force,
that the cue-ball may retain its retrograde tendency which prevents its
being displaced by friction in sliding over the cloth, which inertia in
the cue-ball acts in the direction of dotted line _i_ to _j_. A delivery
½ below, with the object-ball the length of the table away, will act as
a “slowed” ball only. The quick, sudden delivery movement of the cue
made with the aid of the wrist is what imparts the retrograde or “draw”
tendency to the ball; there should be no spasmodic motion, but a free
and horizontal blow direct at the calculated spot on the surface of the
cue-ball, permitting the cue to pass naturally beyond where the cue-ball
has rested, as the grip of the hand upon the cue will stop the latter
when the limit of its swing is reached, except where cue- and
object-balls are near together; in the latter case, that a foul may be
avoided, a “twist” or “English” is imparted to the cue-ball, which
carries the cue naturally off the side of the cue-ball.
Do not withdraw the cue; it is an awkward habit many persons have
acquired. The limit of the swing of the cue is governed by the strength
of the stroke. Full instructions in regard to the cue and its delivery
have already been given.
_The “English” or “Twist”-Stroke._
Bringing C beneath the diagram, we have the “English” stroke, with the
cue delivered at ½ right of centre, which imparts to the cue-ball a
perpendicular axis. A variation to the slightest degree in twist makes a
difference in the direction of the cue-ball, which can only be
appreciated by those who have studied it carefully.
A player, when instructed to deliver a ⅛ cue-ball, for instance, will
disregard the direction and deliver a ¼ or even a ½ ball, apparently
unconscious or careless of the value of the change. When it is
understood that a cue-ball may be made to carom upon a ball placed
_anywhere_ upon the bed of the table by the application of the proper
degree of twist, then the player will recognize the necessity or
advisability of so fixing the various degrees in his mind as to have
them always ready for use. A twist secures, of course, a _false_ angle,
and is used generally when the natural angle will not accomplish the
result desired, and again, often is employed to control the object-ball.
The velocity of the cue-ball in the twist-stroke is governed by the
divergence from the centre at which delivery of cue is made. There is a
method in employing twist which is effective, that of combining it with
the division of the object- and cue-balls, giving an exact line of aim
to be had in no other way. When the twist is applied to that side of the
cue-ball coming in contact with the object-ball, the aim will be more
positive, as the cue covers the exact line of aim through the two balls.
The effect of the twist may be marked by placing the cue-ball upon its
spot, and playing the cue-ball, hit in its centre, at the left side
cushion, at an angle of 45°. The ball in its rebound taking a natural
angle, traverses a line corresponding to its original line of departure
from the cue. Impart right-hand English and the angle grows obtuse;
increase the twist and the angle widens accordingly, and it grows until
the extreme angle is reached through application of excessive twist.
Players frequently are at a loss to know upon which side to apply twist
to accomplish certain desired results, and but few give sufficient
thought to the matter to understand the theory of the “English.” A
cue-ball struck upon its right side and contacting with the left cushion
at an angle of 45°, the cue-ball touching cushion at point _l_ on ball
(see p. 44), will describe an obtuse or wide angle, which is nearer
parallel to the cushion than the natural angle, for the reason that the
circular spinning motion, imparted by the cue to the ball, is moving on
that side of the ball contacting with cushion in an opposite direction
to the impelling force (as shown in arrows _b_ and _l_); hence, when it
contacts with the cushion, it spins against it in a direction which acts
as a blow from the ball on the cushion, and this carries it farther
forward. When the reverse or left English is imparted the revolution of
the ball is exactly opposite to that already shown, and its tendency is
to leave the cushion toward an acute angle, the direction of the spin on
the side contacting being that in which the ball is moving; so, when it
meets the cushion, in place of gliding along it strikes it in such a
manner as to receive a check to further onward progress and describes a
line inclined toward a right angle from the point of contact.
When delivered directly upon a cushion the cue-ball should be struck
upon that side toward which it is expected to roll. In compound angles
the twist is so consumed after leaving the second cushion that the
response from a third cushion approximates a natural angle. Many players
are deluded with the idea that it is necessary to turn, jerk, or twist
the arm when making an “English” stroke, and some suppose the ball
should be rubbed by the cue in delivery; in reality no such thing is
required. After the aim is secured, and the point for striking is
determined upon, let the player make the stroke naturally and easily,
and leave everything else to take care of itself. After the blow has
been given, no amount of intelligence and no wonderful contortions can
alter its effects. In all deliveries imparting twist up to and including
“ordinary” strength of stroke, the wrist only is to be used. Every blow
delivered with the cue converges to the centre of motion at _e_ in the
cue-ball (as shown in arrow _c_, _c_,), and every grain of weight in the
ball is imparted through the cue to the hand; therefore with the expert
the weight and density of the ball is calculated to a nicety at each
delivery, whether it be at centre or at ⅝ right or left, else all
strengths could not be so cleverly estimated in gathering and holding
the balls for a long run.
_The Massé._
Bringing the letter D beneath the illustration the massé stroke is
shown.
This is the most difficult of all strokes to describe and instruct with
the pen. The cue is delivered in the diagram at the ½ ball surface-point
_h_; the cue is held slanting at an angle of 78¾ degrees, shown by
dotted line _d_. The butt of the cue is held as near the eye as is
possible, not interfering with the sight, that the eye may run down the
cue covering the spot on the ball to be hit; the cue is held between the
thumb and three fingers, the thumb being on that side toward the face,
and when the point of the cue rests on the ball the thumb of this
cue-hand should be about three inches above the horizontal line of the
elbow of that arm; this will show the spot on the cue-ball which is to
be struck. Permit the cue to play freely and without diverging from a
straight line in its movement up and down, to and from the ball, until
the aim is secured.
[Illustration]
The bridge is formed by resting the ends of the fingers of the
bridge-hand on the table with a slight pressure, the back of the hand
being turned outward nearly parallel with the side of the body, with the
fingers slightly spread to resist vibration from the play of the cue,
with the thumb separated from the hand, with its end resting about an
inch and a half from the forefinger. The spot upon the ball for delivery
of the cue must be found by looking between the thumb and forefinger,
immediately over the outer edge of the cue-tip. Practise this position
as instructed, and when it is acquired more than half the difficulties
of the stroke will be overcome. It is this correct attitude that goes
far toward insuring a proper delivery of the cue-tip on the cue-ball.
For deliveries in excess of “medium” the cue may be held at the butt,
the same as heretofore instructed for the regular massé, with the
exception that the left forearm must rest upon the hip, the forefinger
hooked about the cue a foot more or less from the tip. In this way
unlimited strength may be used. In the close massé the weight of the
cue, guided by the wrist only, is sufficient to accomplish the stroke.
The forearm is used in addition to the wrist when the balls lie farther
apart, judgment, of course, being exercised in imparting the force in
accordance with the distance between cue- and object-ball. When the
delivery is perfect, the bite or grasp of the cue-tip on the ball will
be felt in the hand by the player through a sensitive, keen vibration of
the cue. The retrograde movement imparted to the cue-ball is that
denoted by arrow _b_, and the slant given the cue, indicated by dotted
line _d_, imparts the impelling force and the ball moves in accordance
with the calculation. The cue-ball slides upon the cloth at point _a_,
the same as explained in the draw-stroke.
[Illustration: TAKING AIM.—THE ORDINARY MASSÉ.]
_Slowed Ball._
Slowing the cue-ball and speeding the object-ball is one of the most
important strokes in the game. If the cue-ball be delivered at the pivot
centre of the object-ball, the points of impact will be at the greatest
diameter of both balls and the exact centres of each ball will meet, and
the cue-ball, if hit ¼ below, will stop instantly and rest. If the
cue-ball be delivered a hair’s-breadth from the centre of the
object-ball, the former will describe a perfect right angle from the
object-ball, as illustrated in Plate IV., balls 1 and 6. The fractional
divergences from centre in delivery of cue on cue-ball gives that ball a
separate and distinct action.
_Elevation of the Cue._
[Illustration: Diagram giving the degrees of elevation at which the cue
should be held.]
The angle line 10° represents the position of cue in making the
“draw-jump” shot, the stroke “very hard” ⅝ below centre.
The angle 22½° is for the “jump stroke,” struck ¼ above the centre.
67½° is the “half-massé,” ½ aft the perpendicular or top centre, as
hereafter explained under “Massés.”
78¾° is the full massé, the cue-ball being struck ½ aft the
perpendicular centre, i.e., looking down from a line above the ball at
90°, at the top centre of the ball, which latter centre is directly over
the centre of motion, and the centre of gravity as well.
The common angle—45°—is denoted by a heavy line whereby the player may
better gauge the other lines.
_The “Jump”: its Causes and Preventions._
A ball is made to “jump” by being struck hard ¼ above its centre with
the cue held at an elevation of 22½°. The stroke of the cue at this
elevation is resisted by the bed of the table, and the ball rebounds,
leaves the table and flies through the air, the distance being regulated
by the strength of stroke, which is usually “hard.” When the cue-ball
reaches the object-ball or cushion, its centre is above that of the
object-ball or the top surface of the cushion, causing the ball to ride
over whatever it may contact with. If the force used is great the
object-ball will also be made to “jump,” often causing both balls to
fall to the floor. When a ball lies close under the cushion it makes
necessary an elevation of the cue to about the angle for a “jump;” when
this occurs the player must be very careful in making the stroke, and
must sacrifice a certain quantity of strength in order to secure the
carom, for should considerable force be used the ball will leave the bed
of the table. When the ball lies in the open table and it is desirable
to use more than “ordinary” strength, it is always better to deliver the
cue ½ below centre, so as to do away with any possibility of a “jump.”
The motion of the ball in being struck below centre is denoted by the
arrow _b_, the bed of the table being _j_, and when contacting with the
cushion at _a_ the ball is rolling upward, and the cushion acting
against it holds it down to the table.
In delivering cue on ball, it is always necessary to observe the exact
fractional divergence from centre, as the slightest change may make the
stroke a miss. For the fractional parts of balls, the reader is referred
to the next succeeding pages.
_Object-Ball._
In the object-ball all distance is measured from its central width
(indicated in cut by dotted line _a_) to its outer edge surface, and the
fractional strokes are calculated from this centre point, each
divergence denoting the body resistance received by the cue-ball from
the object-ball; thus with 8/8 as a _full_ ball, ⅞ signifies ⅛ to left
or right of centre as may be instructed.
The position which the object-ball may assume after being struck is
unimportant, _so far as that particular stroke is concerned_; but in the
management of the balls and the ability to leave them in a position
favorable to the next play—or unfavorable to his opponent, if the player
thinks it impossible to count himself—lies the strength and science of
the game.
_General Division of the Object-Balls._
The spots on the horizontal line through the centre diameter of the
ball, are the different fractional parts at which the cue-ball may be
delivered, to effect certain results. The spots are made by exact
measurement, and extend from the pivot A toward either side surface. The
centre A indicates a “dead full” delivery. The spots right and left of
this centre show the points of impact for the cue-ball, as may be
directed.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
_Division of the Cue and Object Balls._
The division of the cue and object balls are important elements in the
game of billiards for the player to understand and master. Both should
be divided at the instant of aim, and the line of aim should be through
the points on the two balls at which they will come in contact. If a
delivery on the object-ball of a ½ ball right be required, then the left
half of the cue-ball will impinge upon the right half of the
object-ball; consequently aim should be taken from and to these parts.
It is impossible to deliver a _full_ cue-ball on a ½ or other fractional
part of an object-ball; for when a full cue-ball delivery is made upon a
full object-ball, the centres of both balls meet.
The dotted lines show the course the object-ball takes after being
struck by the cue-ball. These directions may be considered in effecting
either a carom, or in pocketing the ball in the pool games.
The line from _a_ upon the cue-ball to _a_ upon the object-ball
indicates the direction taken by the former when delivered full upon the
latter.
The corresponding letters upon the two balls denote the points of
contact. Thus, the letter _b_ on the cue-ball shows the point of
fractional division of a ¾ ball, and _b_ upon the object-ball indicates
exactly where such a delivery will bring the cue-ball into contact with
it; the other fractions are at _c_, _d_, _e_, and _f_.
The dotted lines _beyond_ the object-ball are the paths over which it
will travel after being struck by the cue-ball at the fractional
deliveries indicated.
These balls can, of course, be still further divided into other
fractions.
_Fractional Divisions of the Cue-Ball._
[Illustration]
When the reader finds, in the explanation of the following diagrams,
directions to strike the cue-ball at a stated distance above or below
the centre, a reference to this plate will show the exact point
indicated by the fractions.
The letters _b_, _c_, _d_, _e_, denote points at which the ball may be
struck, giving to it four distinct movements, impulsion, rotation,
English or twist, and draw or recoil.
DIAGRAM OF STROKES.
PLATE I.
EXPLANATION OF STRENGTH OF STROKE.
Stroke 1.—A one-cushion stroke, denominated SLOW.
Stroke 2.—A two-cushion stroke, denominated MEDIUM.
Stroke 3.—A three-cushion stroke, denominated ORDINARY.
Stroke 4.—A four-cushion stroke, denominated HARD.
Stroke 5.—A five-cushion stroke, denominated VERY HARD.
The fractional parts of the table are indicated by the figures ¼, ½ or
¾, and when employed are to be understood as directing that such force
shall be imparted to the cue-ball as to carry it the distance denoted,
either in excess or below the space traversed by the ball when struck
with either of the five degrees of strength; thus ½ in excess of slow
instructs the player to use such force as shall return the ball one-half
the length of the table after contacting with the cushion.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE II.
CAROMS ILLUSTRATED.
_Illustrating different lineal directions of the cue-ball, with strength
of stroke, “Ordinary” to “Hard” (see Plate I. for strength of stroke)._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ above, object-ball ¾ right; strength,
“ordinary” to “hard.” The cue-ball, partaking of the
“follow” quality, and having its direction changed by
contact with the object-ball, rebounds slightly with the
concussion, and in its efforts to regain its natural
course—that of the “follow”—describes a convex curve, and
effects carom in corner.
_Diagram 2._—Illustrating the concave curve. Cue-ball ½ below, object
ball ¾ right; strength of stroke, “ordinary” to “hard.” The
retrograde tendency given the cue-ball by the “draw” overcomes the
impelling power after its contact with the object-ball, and causes
it to make the curve shown.
_Diagram 3._—Straight line carom. Cue-ball centre, object-ball ¾
right; strength of stroke, “ordinary.” The cue-ball being struck
in the centre has neither rotary motion forward nor back, but
slides over the bed of the table a certain distance, when the
natural condition of a moving sphere overcomes the propelling
power, and it takes a rolling movement. Plate IV. fully explains
this centre delivery.
PLATE III.
PLAIN CAROMS WITH DIFFERENT DEGREES OF STRENGTH.
_Illustrating the control of cue-ball by application of different
forces, and being struck ¼ below at each stroke, the object-ball ⅞
right._
_To carom on ball 1._—Strength of stroke, MEDIUM.
_To carom on ball 2._—Strength of stroke, ORDINARY.
_To carom on ball 3._—Strength of stroke, HARD.
_To carom on ball 4._—Strength of stroke, VERY HARD.
Constant practice is necessary to properly gauge the strength required.
The force of the delivery controls the several caroms. Familiarize the
eye with the angle of departure from the object to the carom-ball,
noting the width of space between them. When like positions are brought
about in the progress of a game, the player will recognize the
similarity to those shown here, and will understand how to play.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE IV.
DIAGRAM OF CAROMS SHOWING PLAYER’S CONTROL OF CUE-BALL.
This plate shows a most useful series of diagrams for general
instruction in striking the cue-ball. It is made to carom upon each of
the ten numbered balls, playing full each time upon the object-ball a,
simply by changing the position of the cue at, below, and above the
centre of the cue-ball.
_To carom on ball 1._—Cue-ball ¼ below, object-ball ⅞ left; strength
of stroke, “medium.” This gives the _slow_ movement to the
cue-ball and _speed_ to the object-ball, and is used in the game
to drive the object-ball for a gathering stroke.
_To carom on ball 2._—Cue-ball “centre,” object-ball ⅞ left; strength
of stroke “medium.” The stroke can also be played with any
strength desired.
_To carom on ball 3._—Cue-ball ½ above, object-ball ⅞ left; strength
of stroke, “medium.”
_To carom on ball 4._-Cue-ball ½ above, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“medium.”
_To carom on ball 5._—Cue-ball centre, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“medium.”
_To carom on ball 6._—Cue-ball ¼ below, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“medium.” By playing the cue-ball ¼ below, and _full_ on the
object-ball, the cue-ball _stops_ and _rests_ at the point where
it comes in contact with the object-ball.
_To carom on ball 7._—Cue-ball ½ below, object-ball ¾ right; stroke,
“medium.”
_To carom on ball 8._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“medium.”
_To carom on ball 9._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke,
“medium.”
_To carom on ball 10._—Cue-ball ½ below, object-ball ¾ left; stroke,
“medium.” The dotted lines 1 and 4 show course of object-ball from
a ¾ delivery, and lines 2 and 3 the course from a ⅞ delivery, and
show also how the object-ball may be thrown in position, as
explained hereafter in Part II.
The player should thoroughly understand what motion each stroke imparts
to the cue-ball, and what positive direction the latter gives to the
object-balls.
In all draw-shots allowance should be made for the curve of the cue-ball
when it leaves the object-ball, and direction thereafter should be
calculated with the curve considered, its extent being governed by the
strength and proximity to the centre of the object-ball—nearer the
centre the less marked is the divergence from a straight line.
[Illustration]
PLATE V.
_Illustrating the various angles resulting from the application of
different degrees of strength when played at the same point on the
cushion._
Having explained the methods of the direct caroms, the cushion play is
illustrated:
To perform the angle _a_ to _b_ strike the centre of the cue-ball, the
line of aim being at the point _a_. The natural angle from the cushion
through a medium stroke is that of line from _a_ to _b_, _b_, bearing in
mind that with the medium strength the angle of reflection is always
equal to the angle of incidence—that is to say, the line of angle from
_a_ to _b_ is the exact counterpart of the original direction of the
cue-ball to point _a_.
An “ordinary” stroke will effect angle from _a_ to _c_, and the “hard”
stroke will produce the angle _a_ to _d_.
As the strength of stroke is increased the ball necessarily imbeds
itself more firmly in the cushion, and the sudden rebound, together with
the resistance from the rubber through indentation, throws it off with
greater velocity and produces a more acute angle.
PLATE VI.
DIVISION OF ANGLES.
_Diagram 1._—The angle from _c_, _a_, to ball 2 represents the angles
of incidence and reflection, and it is drawn mentally before
considering the ball 1. If a ball is banked from _c_ at the centre
diamond at _b_ on the end cushion, it will take its angle of
reflection directly on ball 2. Therefore, with ball 1 placed as
per diagram, with its edge surface at the line running from _c_ to
_a_, and the centre stroke on cue-ball on ½ right of ball 1, with
strength of stroke “slow,” the cue-ball will follow same angle
found in the bank and will carom on ball 2.
Regarding diagrams 2, 3, 4, and 5, follow the same directions as in
diagram 1, excepting, of course, in the necessary change of impingement,
owing to the difference in position toward the diamond sight _b_,
increasing the strength of stroke to cover the lines of the diagram.
Play to be made from ball 3 to 4, 5 to 6, etc., etc.
[Illustration]
PLATE VII.
PHILOSOPHY OF THE ENGLISH OR TWIST STROKE.
When “English” or “twist” is applied to the cue-ball in its course, it
is forced from a straight line and diverges to an extent that it will
pass around a ball placed in a direct line before it. The line of aim in
the diagram is a ½ ball right on the object-ball, cue-ball ⅝ left and ⅝
below; stroke, “medium.” This stroke is the application of the extreme
English and extreme draw, and is of such force as permits the combined
motions—impelling, rotating, retrograde, and diagonal—applied to the
cue-ball to act upon it. The distance from the starting-point of the
greatest point of divergence of a cue-ball is, of course, governed by
the strength of stroke applied.
The point _e_ is the natural destination of the cue-ball struck at
centre, upon ½ object-ball, and the difference in space between points
_e_ and _f_ may be made by striking the ball, as shown in the diagram,
for the reason that the cue-ball, diverging as it does from a straight
line, takes from the point _e_ a new direction, effecting a ½ stroke
upon the object-ball and rolling, as we have said, to point _f_.
The dotted line _d_ shows the direction in which the ball is forced by
being struck on the side, but the ball rotating in the opposite
direction to that which it is impelled, in consequence of the twist and
draw imparted, aided by the resistance through friction of the nap of
the cloth, serves to bring it back to the original point of aim, as
shown by the curved loop-line, _b_, which denotes twist.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE VIII.
ILLUSTRATING CUSHION TWISTS.
This diagram illustrates the three principal strokes of the cue-ball on
the cushion, showing the effect of twist after contact of ball with the
cushion:
If the cue-ball be struck in the centre from point shown in the diagram,
upon the cushion at _a_, its natural course will be the line from _a_ to
_b_—stroke, “medium.” If ⅝ right and ⅝ below at _a_, it will take the
extreme angle indicated by the line _a_ to _d_—stroke, “medium.” If ⅝
left and ⅝ below at _a_, stroke, “ordinary,” it will effect the angle
from _a_ to _c_.
[Illustration]
PLATE IX.
CUSHION CAROMS BY CENTRE STROKE, ENGLISH OR TWIST, FROM ONE POSITION.
This plate gives simple examples of the cushion angles shown in previous
diagrams.
_To carom on balls 7 or 8._—Cue-ball centre, object-ball ¼ right;
stroke, “medium.” This is the natural or reflected angle.
_To carom on balls 2 or 4._—Cue-ball ½ right, ⅛ above, object-ball ¼
right; stroke, “medium.”
_To carom on balls 3 or 5._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ⅛ above, object-ball ¼
right; stroke, “medium.”
_To carom on balls 6 or 9._—Cue-ball ⅝ _left_—a reverse
English—object-ball ¼ right; stroke, “medium.”
PLATE X.
COMPOUND ANGLES.
_Illustrating the manner of effecting a 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 cushion carom._
Ball _a_, _a_ is introduced as an imaginary one from which the player
may make the mental calculation of the angles necessary to secure the
carom, as shown before in Plate VII.
After finding the angles place the ball 1 as in diagram, strike cue-ball
(2) ½ right, ¼ below, object-ball ½ right; stroke, “ordinary.” Cue-ball
cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, and _e_, caroming on ball 3.
Should a ball be located at either of the points indicated as those
where the cue-ball contacts with the cushion, of course a carom would be
effected there as well.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XI.
THE CUSHION KISS.
_Illustrating the four kiss strokes possible by making stroke on
different points of the cue-ball and the object-ball ⅞ right._
_To kiss to cushion at c._—Where a ball may rest: cue-ball ½ above,
object-ball ⅞ right; stroke, “ordinary.” The cue-ball will
describe the curve line from ball 1 to _c_. Should player desire
to reach any point between _c_ and _e_ the ball 1 should be hit
from ⅞ to ¾ right. Judgment must be exercised as to the precise
fractional part and also the strength of stroke.
_To kiss to b._—Cue-ball ⅛ below centre, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“ordinary.”
_To kiss to d_, the natural angle of reflection, cue-ball ½ below,
object-ball ⅞ right; stroke, “ordinary.”
_To a_, the acute angle, cue-ball ⅝ below, object-ball ⅞ right;
stroke, “hard.” The “draw” imparted to the cue-ball, together with
the kiss and the extreme velocity obtained from the cushion
resulting from the hard stroke, tends to rebound the cue-ball in a
direct line across the table.
PLATE XII.
PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATION OF THE MASSÉ STROKE.
_Illustrating the most difficult stroke that may be made without the
personal aid of a teacher._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ aft of perpendicular centre, the line of aim
being direct at ball 1, the elevation of cue being at an angle of
78¾°; stroke, “medium.” This is a simple initial massé, the
cue-ball resting at _b_. It must be practised constantly to secure
proper hold on the cue-ball. The backward whirl given it by the
stroke acts instantly upon its contact with the object-ball,
because the impelling force is taken from the cue-ball and
imparted to the object-ball. Strength of stroke must be slight,
the weight of cue is almost sufficient. The fingers of the
bridge-hand, in the instance shown, must rest on the rail, with
the palm turned toward the cue-ball diagonally.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball, ⅝ aft of perpendicular centre, ¼ forward toward
the object-ball; stroke, ½ less than “slow;” the line of aim,
along dotted line _a_, from edge of cue-ball just off edge of ball
1. The weight of cue, through the gentle motion of the wrist, is
sufficient to effect the stroke.
_Diagram 3._—The balls here are at a distance from each other.
Cue-ball ⅝ left, ¼ forward perpendicular centre; object-ball,
“fine;” stroke; “slow;” line of aim on dotted line _a_.
_Diagram 4._—The distance here is further increased. Cue-ball, ⅝
right, ¼ forward perpendicular centre; stroke, “medium;” the line
of aim along dotted line _a_, from edge to edge, on account of
greater strength.
_Diagram 5._—Cue-ball ½ left, ¼ forward perpendicular centre; stroke,
“medium;” line of aim along line _a_; object-ball, “fine,” taking
direction of line _b_, and cue-ball cushions at point _c_,
effecting carom on ball 2.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PART II.
PLATE XIII.
THE TABLE LAID OUT FOR THE SEVERAL GAMES.
The letters A, B, C, D, and E, on the diagram opposite, show the
position of the _spots_ on the billiard-table. In placing them a line is
drawn down the centre of the bed, from and to the middle nails or sights
in the head and lower cushions; another line is then drawn from the
centre sights in the _side_ cushions, across the table, and where the
lines intersect the spots are placed.
The spot at A, being next the head of the table, is, in the American or
four-ball game, the light red spot, and an imaginary line (G) across the
table at this point is the _string_; the spot at B is the dark red spot;
that at D is the white ball spot. The spot at C is the English spot,
which is twelve and a half inches from the _end_ or lower cushion, and
is used in playing the English game, but in this country it is generally
put about nine inches from the lower cushion.
The spot at D is used in two-ball pool, also, and is placed about five
inches from the lower cushion.
E shows the pin-pool spots, that in the centre being numbered five; each
of the others should be placed three inches from it, in position shown,
and measuring from the centre of each spot.
F shows the position of the balls in playing fifteen-ball pool. The
balls are placed in a triangular frame so as to insure exactness—the
base of the triangle being parallel with the end or lower cushion of the
table. The highest number, fifteen, should be placed on the deep red
spot at B.
Figures 1 and 2 show the positions of the semicircles or playing points
for the English and three-ball games.
In playing the English game, the semicircle is drawn from the white ball
spot with a radius of ten and one-half to eleven and one-half inches. In
England the spot is placed two feet four and one-half inches from the
cushion on the English 6 × 12 table.
The semicircle for the three-ball game is drawn with a radius of six
inches on the American table.
In playing the three-ball game, the spot A is occupied by the white
ball, and the spot B by the red. The semicircle 1 is drawn six inches
from A, and from within this limit the cue-ball must be delivered in
opening the game.
PLATE XIV.
THE OPENING STROKE.
The object of a good player is to keep the balls before him in such
manner that every stroke when completed shall leave another to follow.
DIRECTIONS.—The cue-ball is placed about three inches from either side
of the white spotted ball. In this diagram the left side is
employed. When the stroke is _perfectly_ made the course of the
balls and position left, will approximate the dotted lines, and at
the spots _g_, _h_, and _d_. With the ordinary player, perhaps,
the success of the carom will alone be sufficient, regardless of
which side the carom-ball is struck by the cue-ball. In this
diagram at the finish of the stroke the object-balls are in front
of the cue-ball for the succeeding stroke, whereas the result
generally produced from this opening carom is to place the
cue-ball _between_ the others. When one perfects himself at the
opening stroke, which can only be done with practice, the
direction of the cue and object balls will be easily mastered. The
strength of stroke must also be carefully considered and studied.
Cue-ball ¼ above, ⅛ right, object-ball ⅝ left; stroke, ½ in excess of
“medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting carom at point
_c_, about ½ or ¾ on the carom-ball from direction of point _b_.
The cue-ball after carom takes the direction of _c_, _d_, and
rests at or near _d_; the carom-ball travels to _h_, there
resting, and object-ball cushions at _e_, _f_, stopping finally at
_g_.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XV.
SIMPLE CAROMS.
_Illustrating the natural line of departure of the cue-ball from the
object-ball to the carom-ball with different degrees of strength._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball centre, object-ball ½ right; stroke, “medium.”
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball centre, object-ball ½ right; stroke, “medium.”
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball centre, object-ball ¾ right; stroke, “ordinary.”
Caroming on ball 2.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball centre, object-ball ¾ right; stroke, “hard.”
Caroming on ball 3.
Particular attention must be given to the different degrees of strength
of stroke.
It is necessary to learn these caroms thoroughly, as upon the principles
involved in them depend, to a great extent, all the strokes likely to
occur in a game of billiards.
[Illustration]
PLATE XVI.
DRAW AND FOLLOW STROKES.
_Illustrating the results attained by striking cue-ball above or below
its centre._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ below, object-ball 15/16 left; stroke,
“medium,” effecting carom on ball 2. Ball 1 will return to corner,
gathering with ball 2. A wrist stroke. An easy, direct draw.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke, “medium,”
caroming on ball 2, gathering ball 1 in corner with ball 2. An
easy quarter-spread draw.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, object-ball 15/16 left; stroke,
“ordinary,” effecting carom on ball 2. Long draw stroke, somewhat
difficult.
_Diagram 4._—Cue-ball ¼ above, ⅛ left, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“medium.” Ball 1 returns from end cushion, and gathers with ball
2. Follow gathering stroke.
_Diagram 5._—Cue-ball ½ above, ⅛ left, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“ordinary,” effecting carom on ball 2, ball 1 gathering with ball
2 in corner. A follow stroke, driving ball around the table.
PLATE XVII.
GATHERING STROKES FROM PLAIN CAROMS.
_Illustrating the first step in gathering balls for a succeeding
stroke._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ above, ¼ left, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke, ¼
less than “slow,” effecting carom on ball 2 at point _a_. This
stroke is played as a half follow, in order to gain the position,
although the carom can be easily effected by playing on ball 1, ¼
right, but this would spread them beyond position for the
succeeding stroke. The course and final resting-place of the
different object-balls are indicated in all the diagrams by the
dotted lines and spots, the heavy lines showing the course of the
cue-ball.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ above, ⅛ left, object-ball 15/16 right;
stroke, “medium,” caroming on ball 2. A follow stroke. To insure
the cue-ball being held on its proper course, it is struck by the
cue just enough left of the centre to prevent the opposite twist
taking effect through carelessness; for if the cue-ball be struck
_at all_ to the right of centre, it will not follow the line laid
out for it. Forearm and wrist motion only required in this stroke.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ½ below, _exact_, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke,
“slow.” Spread draw for position. Note in this diagram the curved
line of the cue-ball as it leaves the object-ball, and allow for
this curve in calculation.
NOTE.—That the balls may be placed _exact_ upon the table according
to the diagrams, the author suggests that the student follow the
plan here given: First refer to the diagram desired for practice. If
it be the one herewith (No. XVII.), in order to place ball 2 of
diagram 1, draw the direct right lines _a_, _b_ from the centre of
ball 2 to the nearest cushion surface at _c_, _d_, or from the
points _c_, _d_ to centre of ball 2. On the point where the lines
_a_, _b_ intersect, place ball 2. In this manner the student may
place any ball _exact_ in position that may be found in either of
the plates in this work. To calculate correctly the spot for the
placing of a ball, note carefully the distance from the _nearest_
diamond sights, at either _nearest_ cushion, to the point where each
line joins the cushion surface, which will be immediately opposite
the exact centre of the ball which is to be placed.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XVIII.
EAST COMPOUND ANGLES.
_Illustrating the angular gathering stroke—Effecting carom from the
various positions of object-balls 1, 2, 3, and 4, on ball 5, and
gathering all in corner near carom-ball._
_From ball 1._—Cue-ball ¼ above, 1/16 left, object-ball ⅝ left;
stroke, “ordinary.” The course of the cue-ball is marked by the
heavy line, that of the object-ball by the dotted line.
_From ball 2._—Cue-ball ¼ above, ⅛ left, object-ball ½ left; stroke,
“ordinary.”
_From ball 3._—Cue-ball ¼ above, ¼ left, object-ball ⅜ left; stroke,
“ordinary.”
_From ball 4._—Cue-ball ¼ above, ½ left, object-ball ¼ left; stroke, ½
greater than “medium.”
The natural line of departure from the object-ball, if the cue-ball be
struck centre at a ⅝ ball as stated, would be on the first cushion, to
the right of the heavy line indicated, or at spot _c_; this, of course,
would govern the point of contact with the second cushion, and result in
missing the carom. The use of the twist, however, gives it the direction
calculated more or less acute than natural.
The twist given the cue-ball is imparted, to some extent, to the
object-ball in impact, causing it to take the proper angles to gather as
desired. By some writers and theorists this statement is disputed, but
repeated experiments have shown it to be a fact beyond question.
The caroms illustrated could be effected by striking the cue-ball
centre, and contacting the object-ball nearer full; but in order to
bring this object-ball into position for next stroke, the twist is
applied, and the natural angle is sacrificed for a _false_ one, in order
to control the object-ball.
PLATE XIX.
PLAIN AND ONE-CUSHION STROKES.
_Further illustrating the cushion carom and twist stroke, gathering the
balls in a corner._
_Diagram 1._—Play on ball 1, cushion at _a_, carom on ball 2. Cue-ball
⅝ right, ¼ above, object-ball ½ right; stroke, ½ in excess of
“medium.” Object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_, gathering at _d_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ½ below, object-ball ¼ right; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _h_, effecting carom
on ball 3. Object-ball cushions at _e_, _f_, gathering at _g_.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ¼ above, ¼ right, object-ball ⅜ left; stroke,
“medium.” A direct carom, gathering all the balls in the corner.
[Illustration]
PLATE XX.
TWO-CUSHION ROUND-THE-TABLE STROKE.
In effecting this carom and gathering the balls, cue-ball ¼ left, ¼
above, object-ball ½ left; stroke, “ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions
at _a_, _b_, effecting a carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at
_c_, _d_, _e_, resting at _f_, near ball 2.
There are many strokes resembling this one, where the balls are in a
somewhat similar position, and where the same cushions are used, from
either side the table. The cue-ball may be in a more direct line in its
bearing to the object-ball, or it may lie more away to the left. If the
former is the case less twist is required, not exceeding ⅛; but if the
latter, then it is increased, so as to perform the angle required.
In this stroke the value of thoroughly understanding the different
shades of “twist” is appreciated, and if comprehended fully there will
be no difficulty in executing these strokes from a mere glance at the
position of the balls.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XXI.
VARIOUS CAROMS FROM ONE POSITION.
_Illustrating one and two cushion caroms, effected with the cue-ball in
one position, by delivering the cue at different parts of the cue-ball._
_To carom on ball 2._—Cue-ball ¼ left, ⅛ above, object-ball ½ right;
stroke, “medium.”
_To carom on ball 3._—Cue-ball ½ left, ⅛ above, object-ball ½ right;
stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.”
_To carom on ball 4._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅛ above, object-ball ½ right;
stroke, “ordinary;” effecting carom by reverse “English,” the
cue-ball taking but one cushion and straight line back to ball 4.
_To carom on ball 5._—Cue-ball ¼ right, ⅛ above, object-ball ½ right;
stroke, “medium.”
_To carom on ball 6._—Cue-ball ½ right, ⅛ above, object-ball ⅝ right;
stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.”
_To carom on ball 7._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ⅛ above, object-ball ½ right;
stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.”
_To carom on ball 8._—Cue-ball ½ right, ½ below, object-ball ⅝ right;
stroke, “ordinary.”
_To carom on ball 9._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ½ below, object-ball ⅝ right;
stroke, “ordinary.”
PLATE XXII.
THE FOLLOW CUSHION—“ENGLISH” OR “TWIST.”
_Illustrating caroms that are accomplished through the application of
excessive “English” and “follow” stroke; the execution being effective,
and from comparative safe position._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ¼ above, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“medium,” caroming on ball 2. The object-ball passes behind ball
2, taking the direction of dotted line _b_ to _c_. The cue-ball
accomplishes the angle from _a_ to ball 2, through the excessive
twist applied. The natural angle for the cue-ball, after meeting
cushion at _a_, is in the direction of _d_, which it would take
were the twist not imparted.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ½ above, object-ball 15/16 left;
stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_,
effecting a carom on ball 2. The object-ball takes direction of
arrow. The player is cautioned to take the cushion at or below
_a_, otherwise the carom will not be effected.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XXIII.
CAROM BY CUSHION “ENGLISH” OR “TWIST.”
_Illustrating one-cushion caroms with the application of strong and
excessive twist to the cue-ball._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ right, ¼ below, object-ball ½ left; stroke,
“slow.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, twist carrying it to ball 2. The
object-ball taking direction of dotted line resting at spot _b_.
The natural angle from ball 1 to _a_ is represented by dotted line
_a_ to _c_, but the ½ “English” imparted to cue-ball accomplishes
the angle to ball 2 in excess of the natural.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ½ below, object-ball ¼ right, stroke,
“medium,” effecting carom on ball 2. The object-ball follows _d_,
_e_, at which latter it stops. The dotted line _a_ to _b_ is the
natural angle, and the line to _c_ is the real excessive angle
produced by ⅝ twist given cue-ball.
PLATE XXIV.
CAROMS BY ONE-CUSHION ENGLISH.
_Illustrating the natural and false angle carom._
Cue-ball ⅝ left, ¼ below, object-ball ¼ right; stroke “medium.” The
object-ball traverses _c_ to _e_, where it rests. The cue-ball,
twist excessive, cushions at _a_ and thence along _b_ to ball 2,
where it effects carom. The natural angle is _a_ to _d_.
The stroke is very effective and gathers the balls well.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XXV.
ONE-CUSHION REVERSE ENGLISH.
Cue-ball ⅛ above, ½ right, object-ball ½ left; stroke, ½ in excess of
“medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, and by reverse twist effects
carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_, resting near or
at _d_.
This stroke is a very effective one and may be played from various
positions. It requires much attention to master it, and the value of the
twist and strength must be familiar to the player. The skill is in the
judgment displayed in estimating quantity of twist necessary to effect
carom, as the cue-ball _can_ be made to come away from the cushion at
_a_ on an acute angle nearly parallel with the side cushion.
PLATE XXVI.
SERIAL ONE-CUSHION STROKES.
_Illustrating serial one-cushion caroms, with the application of either
“twists.”_
_To carom on ball 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅝ below, object-ball ⅝ left;
stroke, “ordinary.” Object-ball cushions at _e_, _f_, _g_, resting
at _h_. Cue-ball cushions at _a_, caroms on ball 1.
_To carom on ball 2._—Cue-ball ½ left, ½ below, object-ball ½ left;
stroke, “ordinary.”
_To carom on ball 3._—Cue-ball ½ left, ½ below, object-ball ¼ left;
stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.”
_To carom on ball 4._—Cue-ball ⅛ left, ⅛ above, object-ball ¼ left;
stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.”
_To carom on ball 5._—Cue-ball ¼ right, object-ball ¼ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.”
_To carom on ball 6._—Cue-ball ½ right, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.”
_To carom on ball 7._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ⅝ below, object-ball ⅛ left;
stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.”
_To carom on ball 8._—Cue-ball ½ right, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.”
_To carom on ball 9._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ¼ above, object-ball “full;”
stroke, “ordinary.”
The practice of these single-cushion carom strokes is of vast
importance, as the positions constantly present themselves during play.
When the pupil becomes familiar with the “breaks,” the carom is of easy
accomplishment.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XXVII.
SERIAL ONE-CUSHION STROKES.
_Illustrating how a carom may be effected from various more or less
difficult positions._
_From ball 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, object-ball ½ left; stroke, ½ in
excess of “medium.”
_From ball 2._—Cue-ball ½ right, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke, “medium.”
_From ball 3._—Cue ball ¼ right, object-ball ⅛ right; stroke,
“medium.”
_From ball 4._—Cue-ball ½ left, ¼ above, object-ball ½ left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _c_, _f_, _d_, _e_ effecting
carom on ball 5. The object-ball 4 doubles the length of the
table, resting at _h_. Ball 5 is placed the width of a ball from
either cushion. Ball 4 is placed in this diagram just off the
cushion that the pupil may avoid a kiss on account of it touching
the cushion. The carom may be made with ball 4 touching the
cushion.
PLATE XXVIII.
SLOWING CUE-BALL, DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.
_Illustrating a very important stroke for position play._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ right, ⅛ above, object-ball full centre;
stroke, “ordinary.” Object-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, resting
at _d_. Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effecting carom on ball 2. The
delivery ⅛ above gives a slow-follow motive power to cue-ball,
while the ½ English, delivered on right of cue-ball, causes the
latter to perform the obtuse angle from the cushion at _a_ to the
carom-ball. The object-ball is placed in line, so that it will
clear the carom-ball and perform the angles shown by dotted lines.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅛ right, object-ball ⅛ right; stroke, ½ in
excess of “medium,” effecting carom on ball 2. Cue-ball cushions
at _a_, _b_, _c_. Object-ball takes direction of the arrow _e_,
the carom-ball being hit near full, takes direction of the arrow
_d_.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XXIX.
SLOWING CUE-BALL, DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.
_Illustrating another fundamental stroke, that of doubling the
object-ball with a “slowed” cue-ball._
_Diagram 1._—To double the object-ball twice across the table by
playing as full upon it as is possible. Cue-ball ⅜ below, ½ right,
object-ball 15/16 left, effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball
cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, and joins ball 2 in corner.
Cue-ball is slowed so it barely effects carom. Stroke, “very
hard.”
_Diagram 2._—Gathering stroke, to double object-ball and effect carom.
Cue-ball ¼ below, 1/16 left, object-ball 15/16 right; stroke,
“ordinary.” Object-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, gathering at _c_.
The cue-ball travels very slowly to the carom-ball, speed merely
sufficient to effect carom.
These strokes appear in all parts of the table, and the player should
search for those he has practised, selecting always that which will give
the best result in position. He who displays the best judgment in thus
calculating will make the most successful player.
PLATE XXX.
SLOWING CUE-BALL DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.
_Illustrating a stroke that is of difficult accomplishment but very
effective._
Cue-ball ¼ below, object-ball 15/16 left; stroke, “hard.” Object-ball
cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, and rests beyond _d_. The
object-ball is struck nearly “dead” full to cross the table, as
the lines indicate; the cue-ball is “slowed” through the ¼ below
delivery, effecting carom on ball 2. This stroke requires much
practice, as the compound doubling of the cue-ball is of difficult
execution when combined with the “slowed” cue-ball.
Care should be used in the placing of the cue-ball for the execution of
the stroke.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XXXI.
COMPOUND ANGLES.
_A series of caroms with the object and cue-ball in same position,
illustrating the player’s control over the cue-ball._
_To carom on ball 1._—Cue-ball ¼ above, ¼ right, object-ball ⅝ left;
stroke, “medium.” The cue-ball is struck ¼ above, in order to keep
it from describing too great a curved line that it would do if hit
½ above, which latter delivery requires greater precision. If hit
below ¼ above, the ball will come away more toward the open table.
The cue-ball is also hit ¼ right, that it may be kept away from
the cushion in its course toward the carom-ball; if struck on left
side it would take cushion upon nearly every occasion. Put the
twist on the side opposite the direction the cue-ball will take
when it lies at this angle.
_To carom on ball 2._—Cue-ball ¼ below, ½ right, object-ball ⅛ left;
stroke, “ordinary.”
_To carom on ball 3._—Cue-ball ¼ below, ½ left, object-ball 1/16
right; stroke, “ordinary.”
_To carom on ball 4._—Cue-ball ¼ right, ½ below, object-ball ¼ right;
stroke, “ordinary.”
_To carom on ball 5._—Cue-ball ½ below, ½ left, object-ball ½ left;
stroke, “ordinary.”
_To carom on ball 6._—Cue-ball ¼ above, ¼ left, object-ball ⅝ right;
stroke, “medium.”
_To carom on ball 7._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, object-ball ¾ right; stroke,
“ordinary.”
_Again on ball 3._—Cue-ball ½ left, object-ball ¾ left, stroke,
“hard.”
PLATE XXXII.
COMPOUND ANGLES.
In the stroke illustrated, a ⅝ full delivery of the cue-ball on
object-ball 1 is absolutely necessary, with the cue-ball struck
_exactly_ ⅝ left centre.
Cue-ball ⅝ left, object-ball ⅝ left; stroke, “ordinary.”
If the cue is delivered below the centre of the cue-ball, with the
object-ball 1 touching the cushion, the cue-ball will rebound at an
acute angle that generally fails to effect the carom. The objective
point is the cushion at _b_, which insures the stroke, and if the angle
be always calculated from a point on the second cushion with the
cue-ball so delivered as to reach that spot, the remainder of the stroke
is assured and will take care of itself. That is to say, draw the angle
required from the object-ball to the first cushion, then from that point
to the second cushion.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XXXIII.
COMPOUND ANGLES.
_Illustrating a peculiar two-cushion stroke with the application of
twist and draw._
Cue-ball ¼ left, ⅝ below, object-ball ½ right; stroke, “medium.”
The purpose in striking cue-ball ⅝ below is to reach cushion at _a_ by
making no more than ½ on object-ball, driving it to _c_. The ¼ left is
given the cue-ball that it may perform the angle _a_ to _b_, which
accomplishes the carom. Greater twist would perform a more obtuse angle
to side cushion, striking at _e_.
PLATE XXXIV.
COMPOUND ANGLES.
_Illustrating a difficult two-cushion carom with application of extreme
draw and twist._
Cue-ball ½ below, ⅝ right, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke, “ordinary.”
The twist is the principal force exerted in this stroke, though aided by
the very full play upon the object-ball. A full ball on the object-ball
is required for two reasons, to throw it into position at _g_, and also
to reach the point _a_ with cue-ball, without the excessive draw being
applied, the twist performing the larger portion of the work.
The cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting carom on ball 2, the latter
resting at or near h. Object-ball cushions at _c_, _d_, _e_, _f_,
resting at _g_.
The wrist and forearm are required for this stroke.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XXXV.
SLOWED AND TWISTED CUE-BALLS.
_Illustrating compound angles of cue and object balls._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball centre, object-ball 15/16 left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball, being slowed, effects carom on ball 2; the
object-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, resting at _e_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke, ½ in excess
of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting carom on
ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, resting at _d_.
[Illustration]
PLATE XXXVI.
THE “TWICE-AROUND-THE-TABLE” STROKE.
_Illustrating a fine cushion stroke with the balls in a straight line,
resulting in the so-called “twice-around-the-table” carom._
This stroke is played on account of the balls occupying a position
directly before each other, insuring a “kiss” should the “follow” be
attempted.
Cue-ball ⅛ below, ½ left, object-ball 1/16 right; stroke, “hard.” The
⅛ below prevents cue-ball jumping at instant of delivery. Cue-ball
cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, _e_, effecting carom on ball 2.
Object-ball crosses the table twice, cushions at _f_, _a_, resting
at _g_.
Bear in mind the twist on the cue-ball aids the player in imparting
force after contact with the first cushion; so whilst _great speed_ of
cue-hand is necessary, it need not be conveyed by excess of muscle or
violent action of the body. The object-ball must be struck very fine,
about 1/16, so the resistance may be slight and not interfere with the
free run of the cue-ball.
[Illustration]
PLATE XXXVII.
FURTHER ILLUSTRATION OF THE “TWICE-AROUND” STROKE.
Balls in a line, that if a “follow” stroke were played a “kiss” between
object and carom ball would result; therefore the play as directed:
Cue-ball ⅝ right, ⅛ below, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke, “hard.”
Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, _e_, effecting carom on
ball 2. Object-ball doubles the table, resting at _g_.
The object-ball must be struck but ⅛ in order to carry the cue-ball to
cushion at _a_ and to give proper direction to the former ball.
The quick movement of the cue insures speed to the cue-ball.
In order to reach the point _a_ with the cue-ball, which also gives
direction to ball 1, it is absolutely necessary to strike very fine on
the latter.
PLATE XXXVIII.
_Illustrating two extreme strokes, draw and twist._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ½ below, object-ball, “very fine,” 1/32
left; stroke, ½ in excess of “medium”. Cue-ball cushions sharp at
_a_, _b_, effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball moving slowly,
having been cut _exceedingly_ fine, up table to _c_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅝ below, object-ball 1/16 right; stroke,
“ordinary.” The point of aim on object-ball, 1/16 right, is to
prevent cue-ball striking cushion after leaving object-ball.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XXXIX.
“KISS” AND THREE-CUSHION CAROM.
_Illustrating a simple “kiss” and a carom through angles difficult to
accomplish._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ above, ¼ right, object-ball 15/16 left;
stroke, “slow.” The balls here are in a direct line. After
delivery object-ball “kisses” carom-ball, throwing it to point
_a_, where the cue-ball has been carried by ¼ right, and carom is
effected.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ¼ below, object-ball, “fine cut,” 1/16
right. Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, and receiving the
excessive twist describes angles shown, effecting carom on ball 2.
Object-ball rolls up table to _d_.
The carom is difficult; the cue-ball requires excessive English; ball 1
must be cut exceedingly fine.
PLATE XL.
SLOWED CUE-BALL.
_Illustrating a driving stroke with the cue-ball “slowed.”_
Cue-ball ⅛ below, object-ball 31/32 left; stroke, “ordinary.” Cue-ball
effects carom and rolls to _f_, carom ball rests at _e_, and
object-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, stopping at _d_. The ⅛
below delivery “slows” the cue-ball, imparting strength merely
sufficient to drive carom-ball to _e_ for position.
This is one of the most important strokes known in the game, and should
be mastered perfectly by the pupil.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XLI.
SLOWED CUE-BALL.
_Illustrating similar caroms from different positions._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅛ below, object-ball 15/16 left; stroke, ½ in
excess of “medium.” Cue-ball caroms _slowly_ on ball 2.
Object-ball cushions at _a_, resting at _c_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ¼ below, object-ball 15/16 left; stroke, ½ in
excess of “medium.” Cue-ball caroms slowly on ball 2. Object-ball
cushions at _b_, resting at _c_.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ⅜ below, object-ball 15/16 left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball caroms by slowed ball. Object-ball cushions
at _d_, _e_, _f_, _h_, resting at _g_.
PLATE XLII.
ACUTE DRAW STROKES.
_Illustrating quartering “draw” strokes for position, driving
object-ball around table._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ¼ right, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball caroms on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at
_a_, _b_, _c_, and rests in corner near ball 2. Allowance must be
made for curve of the cue-ball when it leaves the object-ball, and
it must be considered in calculating the imaginary line of
progress over the cloth of the cue-ball.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ¼ left, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball describes acute curve on leaving object-ball,
and caroms on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_,
gathering in corner near ball 2. Draw for the carom-ball as though
there was no cushion near by, for it is better to learn to do
entirely without this cushion assistance.
[Illustration]
PLATE XLIII.
EFFECTIVE ONE-CUSHION “DRAWS.”
_In illustration of very important one-cushion draw and twist strokes,
for position, also massé by playing well on outside of object for direct
draw._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅛ below, ⅛ right, object-ball ½ right; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.”
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ¼ below, ¼ right, object-ball ⅝ right; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.”
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ½ below, ½ right, object-ball ⅝ right; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.”
_Diagram 4._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ⅝ right, object-ball ¾ right; stroke, ¾
in excess of “medium.”
Cue-ball cushions in each instance at points _a_. Object-ball in diagram
1 cushions at _b_, _f_, in diagram 2 at _c_, _f_, in diagram 3 at _d_,
_g_, in diagram 4 at _e_, _h_, all stopping at _i_, and cue-ball effects
carom on ball 2.
_Diagram 5._—A massé. Cue-ball ½ left, ½ _aft_, perpendicular;
object-ball ¾ right; stroke, “medium.” The cue-ball curves,
letting ball 1 through for position, and caroms on ball 2. This is
a direct curve massé, the cue-ball in centre of other balls, the
three being in a line about one inch from rail. Spot on cue-ball
indicates where it is to be struck by cue, looking down upon it.
The line of aim is the dotted line from _a_ to _b_.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XLIV.
DRAW WITH REVERSE AND NATURAL ENGLISH.
_Illustrating the cushion-draw with “English” or “twist,” driving
object-ball. Peculiar strokes, one of which requires considerable
practice, the reverse._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ½ right, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke, ½
greater than “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effecting carom
on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, _d_, _e_, _f_, resting at
_g_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅝ below, object-ball 15/16 right;
stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, through
the strong draw delivery of the cue and having also the excessive
reverse twist in it, performs the obtuse angle from a to
carom-ball. Object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_, resting at _d_, the
balls here gathering. The delivery of the cue on the cue-ball ⅝
below and left is one that requires much practice to perfect.
PLATE XLV.
DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.
_In illustration of important principles for position play, where other
easier methods present themselves for effecting caroms._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ left, ⅛ below, taking cushion first at _a_,
then the object-ball, ¾ right, considered from point _a_ on
cushion; stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions again
at _b_, effecting carom on ball 2 which rolls to _d_. Object-ball
crosses table, cushions at _e_, stopping at _c_. This stroke is
played with the forearm and wrist.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ½ left, object-ball ¾ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effecting carom
on ball 2 which stops at _c_. Object-ball cushions at _b_, _e_,
and rests at _d_. The quick wrist movement only is employed in
this stroke.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XLVI.
SERIAL CAROMS, ALSO TWIST AND “KISS” CUSHION FOLLOW.
_Illustration of a series of caroms effected with cue and object-ball
in one given position, also a peculiar “kiss” carom with balls in
a line._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ¼ above, object-ball 15/16 right;
driving it to cushion at _a_, _b_, a little beyond which it
contacts with carom-ball forcing it to point _d_, where the
cue-ball meets it and effects carom. Stroke, ½ in excess of
“slow.” Cue-ball cushions at _c_ with an excessive spinning twist.
_Diagram 2._—_To carom on balls 1 and 2_: cue-ball ⅜ right, ⅛ below,
object-ball ½ left; stroke, ½ of “slow.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_,
effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_,
resting at _d_.
_To carom on ball 3._—Cue-ball ½ right, ⅛ below, object ball ½ left;
stroke, ½ less than “slow.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, and
object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_, stopping at _d_.
_To carom on ball 4._—Cue-ball ¼ left, ¼ below, object-ball ½ left;
stroke, ½ in excess of “ordinary.”
_To carom on ball 5._—Cue-ball ½ left, ¼ below, object-ball ½ left;
stroke, “slow.”
_To carom on ball 6._—Cue-ball ½ below, ½ left, object-ball ½ left;
stroke, “ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _e_, _b_, _g_.
_Again on ball 6._—Cue-ball ¼ above, ⅛ right, object-ball ¼ right;
stroke, “ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _e_, effecting carom by
one cushion on ball 6.
PLATE XLVII.
THREE-CUSHION AND CUSHION “KISS” STROKE.
_Illustrating a three-cushion driving stroke, together with a long
“kiss” carom, both effectively gathering the balls._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅛ below, ⅝ left, object-ball ¾ right; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_,
effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _d_, _e_,
resting finally at _f_, near ball 2. This is a stroke that occurs
often in the course of a game, the position being changed to the
other side of the table, possibly. Most players are content with
making the carom simply, and, with that only in view, merely “_cut
fine_” the object-ball, whilst, if they would play full upon it
with twist the stroke would be as surely effected, and a fine
set-up is left. The secret of the stroke is to throw the
object-ball at the point _d_ on _side cushion_ at corner, or as
near that as possible; excessive twist being given the cue-ball,
the carom is assured.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅛ above, ⅛ left, object-ball ½ left; stroke,
“medium.” Cue-ball “kisses” directly on carom-ball, and
object-ball, springing from the cushion, rolls to _a_.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE XLVIII.
KISS CAROMS.
_Illustrating peculiar “kiss” caroms with balls comparatively safe._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, object-ball full centre; stroke,
“slow.” The excessive twist upon cue-ball causes the latter to
curve to the left whilst hitting the object-ball at the line of a
full ball. The twist of the cue-ball gives a slight _opposite_
twist to the object-ball, which in its turn communicates the
motion in a less degree to the carom-ball, causing the latter to
deflect from its natural course on leaving the cushion at _a_,
meeting cue-ball at _b_, the object-ball being carried to one side
by the excessive twist of cue-ball and the “kiss” from carom-ball.
A carom may be effected on left of balls by changing the twist
force to left side of cue-ball.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ below, ⅝ right, object-ball ⅝ right; stroke,
“medium.” The carom can be made on either side of the balls by
changing slightly the direction.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ¼ above, object-ball 31/32 left; stroke, ½ in
excess of “slow.” Object-ball strikes the carom-ball a hair off
its centre, taking direction _a_; the cue-ball follows, effecting
carom.
_Diagram 4._—Cue-ball ½ above, object-ball 31/32 right; stroke ½ in
excess of “slow.” Carom by double kiss at _a_.
[Illustration]
PLATE XLIX.
PECULIAR DRIVING STROKES.
_Illustrating difficult methods in effecting caroms, resulting in
position, from doubling object-ball._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ above, ¼ left, object-ball 15/16 right;
stroke, “ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _g_, _d_, _e_, effecting
carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, resting at
_f_. This is a follow-cushion stroke, the cue-ball hugging
cushion.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ½ above, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball describes curved line, effecting carom on
ball 2. Object-ball doubles the table, cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_,
resting at _d_.
Point the cue and object balls to cover the angles of dotted lines.
Deliver a quick wrist stroke, using care against foul.
PLATE L.
KISS CAROMS.
_Illustrating kiss caroms where there is an easy angle of division, and
another of a “kiss” to cushion, with reverse English, effecting neat
carom._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball centre, object-ball ½ left; stroke, “ordinary.”
Cue-ball kisses direct onto ball 2.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ below, ⅝ left, object-ball ¾ right; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball takes cushion at _a_, and thence
to _b_, where carom-ball meets it, having been forced directly
down the cushion by kiss from object-ball. The balls are in such
position here that a fine stroke is impossible, and where a massé
is exceedingly difficult.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LI.
“KISS” AND “HUG” CUSHION STROKES.
_In illustration of several neat caroms through the “kiss” and follow
“hug” cushion strokes, from comparatively safe positions._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ¼ above, object-ball full; stroke,
“slow.” Carom-ball, kissed by object-ball, cushions at _b_,
returns to _a_, where cue-ball meets it and effects carom.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ above, ½ left, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions _c_, _d_, _e_, effecting carom on
ball 2. Object-ball doubles table, takes cushion at _a_, resting
at _b_. This is termed a “following cushion hug stroke.”
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅛ above, object-ball 15/16 right;
stroke, ½ in excess of “slow.” The cue-ball taking a curved line
on object-ball, forcing it out from the cushion that it may strike
the carom-ball on right of centre, thus making room for cue-ball,
the object-ball going to right. Carom-ball cushions at _b_,
meeting cue-ball on rebound at _a_, where carom is effected.
_Diagram 4._—Cue-ball ½ above, ¼ right, object-ball ⅛ left. Kissing
carom-ball to cushion at _b_, the cue-ball following and meeting
carom-ball at _a_, where carom is effected.
_Diagram 5._—Cue-ball ¼ above object-ball 31/32 left; stroke, ½ in
excess of “medium.” Object-ball kisses carom-ball to cushion at
_a_, upon its rebound it meets cue-ball at _b_.
[Illustration]
PLATE LII.
KISS AND MASSÉ CAROMS.
_Illustrating some very difficult “kiss” caroms, with balls in
comparative safe position._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ _right_, ½ below, object-ball ¾ left; stroke,
½ in excess of “ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, and _c_,
effecting a carom on ball 2. Object-ball is kissed out, resting at
_d_. The object-ball, in this stroke, is touching the cushion; the
cue-ball is about ¼-ball below, a right line from the former. The
carom is effected by a “kiss” from object-ball to opposite cushion
at _a_, _b_, and, with an excessive twist, the cue-ball performs
angles shown.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅛ above, object-ball 31/32 right;
stroke, “medium.” Cue-ball curves, forcing object-ball from the
cushion, permitting the ball to pass through and meet carom-ball
at a after the latter has rebounded from cushion at _b_.
_Diagram 3._—Massé. Cue-ball struck at spot ⅝ left, ½ forward.
Carom-ball is kissed by object-ball into corner at _b_, where
cue-ball meets it. Strength, “slow.”
_Diagram 4._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅝ above, object-ball “full”; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball meets carom-ball at _a_ through
kiss.
PLATE LIII.
DOUBLING CUE AND OBJECT BALLS.
_Illustrating compound angles for gathering the balls well._
Cue-ball ¼ below, ⅛ left, object-ball ⅝ left; stroke, ½ in excess of
“ordinary.” Cue-ball doubles the width of the table, cushions at
_a_, _b_, effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_,
_d_, _e_, resting at _f_.
If the cue-ball is struck _above_ centre it will describe a curved line
from _a_ to _b_, thereby missing the carom, by taking the end cushion
and passing ball 2. The accuracy of this stroke is in delivering the cue
below the centre of the ball which causes the cue-ball to take a direct
line from each cushion.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LIV.
QUARTER AND DIRECT DRAWS.
_Illustrating very important methods for gathering of balls; also a very
neat follow “kiss.”_
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ below, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke, ½ in excess
of “medium.” Cue-ball effects carom on ball 2. Object-ball
cushions at _a_, _b_, resting at _c_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke, ½ in excess
of “medium.” Cue-ball effects carom on ball 2. Object-ball
cushions at _d_, _b_, resting at _c_.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, object-ball 15/16 left; stroke, ½ in
excess of “medium.” Cue-ball effects carom on ball 2. Object-ball
cushions at _e_, _f_, and rests at _c_.
The above are all wrist-strokes, and should be played with a careful
delivery.
_Diagram 4._—Cue-ball ½ above, object-ball 31/32 left, the latter
striking carom-ball 31/32 right; stroke, ½ in excess of “slow.”
The object-ball kisses off carom-ball, taking direction of dotted line,
resting at or near _a_; the cue-ball effects the carom. Here the
carom-ball lies in corner touching two cushions. The three balls are in
a direct line.
PLATE LV.
“FINE-CUT” AND HUG-CUSHION STROKES.
_Illustrating difficult caroms from difficult positions, hugging the
cushions by cutting ball fine._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ¼ left, ¼ above, object-ball ¼ left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _d_, _a_, _b_, _c_, effecting
carom on ball 2. Object-ball takes direction of dotted line.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ¼ above, ⅛ right, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _d_, _a_, =b=, _c_, or possibly
the player may not be able to hug the cushion beyond one or two of
points indicated by the letters. Object-ball takes direction of
dotted lines. The angles in this diagram are more obtuse than
those in Diagram 1, and the object-ball lies away from the
end-cushion.
[Illustration]
PLATE LVI.
A DIFFICULT GATHERING STROKE.
_In illustration of a very effective two-cushion across-table stroke,
leaving good position._
Cue-ball ⅜ below, ¼ left, object-ball ½ left; stroke, “ordinary.”
Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting carom on ball 2.
Object-ball cushions at _e_, _c_, resting at _d_.
A carom may also be effected from object-ball 1 by direct kiss to ball
2. In this stroke: cue-ball ½ left, ⅛ above, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke,
½ in excess of “medium.”
[Illustration]
PLATE LVII.
EFFECTIVE ONE AND TWO CUSHION STROKES.
_Illustrating excellent position play, and gathering balls by peculiar
method._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ left, ½ below, object-ball ½ left; stroke,
“medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting carom on ball
2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, crosses table, and rests at _e_.
The carom-ball rests at _d_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ below, ⅝ left, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effecting carom
on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _b_, resting at _c_.
This stroke is very effective in gathering the balls, and may be readily
played, with care. Similar strokes are played with the first object-ball
lying well out toward the centre of the table, with the cue-ball
occupying a similar position in its bearings toward the object-ball. The
cue-ball leaves the cushion at _a_ sharp and in direct line to the
carom-ball.
[Illustration]
PLATE LVIII.
ACUTE DRAWS ALONG CUSHION.
_In illustration of very effective gathering strokes, drawing with twist
along a cushion._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ¼ right, object-ball 31/32 right;
stroke, ¼ in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_,
effecting carom on ball 2, the latter resting at _f_; cue-ball
rests at _e_. Object-ball cushions at _f_, _b_, _c_, resting at
_d_. The secret in this stroke is in getting off the object-ball
sharp and clear to cushion at _a_. The cue-ball should travel
slowly to carom-ball from being struck so nearly full on
object-ball.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ below, ¼ right, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke, ¼
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions slowly at _a_, effecting
carom on ball 2, which rests at _f_, and the cue-ball at _g_.
Object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_, _d_, resting at _e_.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LIX.
“KISS” CAROM, ALSO ONE AND THREE CUSHION DRAWS.
_Illustrating excellent strokes for position play, through the kiss and
acute draw._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ below, ⅝ left, object-ball ½ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_,
effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _d_, _e_,
resting at _f_.
_Diagram 2._—_A kiss carom._—Cue-ball ⅛ above, object-ball 31/32
right; stroke, ¼ less than “slow.” Carom-ball cushions at _b_,
where it meets cue-ball, and carom is effected.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ¼ below, ⅛ left, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at a, effecting carom on ball 2,
which rests at _b_. Object-ball cushions at _d_, _e_, _f_, _g_,
stopping at _c_.
PLATE LX.
BANK STROKES.
_In illustration of “bank” or cushion first effecting caroms which
neatly gather the balls._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ¼ right, ½ below, object-ball ½ right,
calculated from point _a_; stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.”
Cue-ball cushions at _a_, taking object-ball ½ full, effecting
carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_, resting at _d_.
This is a bank stroke, cue-ball played on cushion first before
striking any ball. Object-ball is at such a location in corner
that the stroke shown is the only practicable one.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ½ below, object-ball ½ left, calculated
from point _a_; stroke, ¼ in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions
at _a_, strikes object-ball ½ full, cushions again at _b_, and
effects carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, resting at
_d_.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LXI.
“BANK” WITH “TWIST,” CUSHION-“MASSÉ” AND “DRAW”-CUSHION STROKES.
_Illustrating caroms from difficult “breaks,” which produce excellent
positions._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ¼ above, cushion first at _a_;
object-ball ⅞ left from _a_. Cue-ball cushions again at _b_,
effecting carom on ball 2; stroke, “medium.” This stroke combines
a very heavy twist with follow tendency, and, in order that the
two forces may be effective, the object-ball must be struck
exactly ⅞ left, as calculated from point _a_.
_Diagram 2._—A massé. Cue-ball ½ left of perpendicular centre, ⅛
forward in direction of object-ball, object-ball 1/16 right. Line
of sight being along dotted line _b_ to _a_. Cue-ball cushions at
_a_, effecting carom on ball 2 by a _treble_ curved line.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ½ right, object-ball full; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effecting carom on ball 2.
Object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_, _d_, resting at _e_.
PLATE LXII.
INTRICATE CAROM.
_Illustrating a stroke which appears at first sight to be a “bank,” but,
from position of balls, a cushion hit before a ball will fail to effect
carom._
Cue-ball ⅝ right, ⅝ below, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke, “medium.” As
the object-ball lies from the cushion—a space ⅛ of a ball, less
than the width of a 2⅜ ball—it is impossible for the cue-ball to
pass behind it, as it would have to do in order to contact with
the cushion _first_; as it is, the contact with cushion and
object-ball is at the same instant. The cue-ball really takes two
cushions, but it is so instantaneous as to be imperceptible.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LXIII.
ACUTE AND “SPREAD”-DRAW.
_Illustrating effective gathering strokes from a “wide spread” and
direct draw._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke, ½ in excess
of “medium.” Cue-ball effects carom on ball 2. Object-ball
cushions at _a_, _b_, resting at _c_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, object-ball 31/32 right; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball, by an acute draw, effects carom on ball 2.
Object-ball cushions at _d_, _g_, _e_, resting at _f_.
Positions similar to Diagram 1 frequently occur during play,
consequently the pupil should know the gathering angle to cushions _a_,
_b_, for any object-ball which may rest at any part of the table within
space between the spot at _h_ and side cushion at ball 1; the cue-ball
at all times played from behind the object-ball as shown.
PLATE LXIIIA.
SLOW “FOLLOW” CUSHION “TWIST” AND DRAW TWIST.
_Illustrating the “slowed follow,” while “driving” the object-ball
around table; also an acute draw two-cushion stroke._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ⅝ right, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke, ¾
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting
carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, _d_, _e_, resting at
_f_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ left, ⅛ above, object-ball “full;” stroke, ½
in excess of “ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effects carom
on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, resting at
_e_.
The cue-ball performs a slow twisting “follow,” the object-ball running
with speed. The “slowed” follow ball is executed through the delivery ⅛
above, which imparts _slight_ rotating power in the ball.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LXIV.
A FOLLOW WITH EXCESSIVE ENGLISH.
_Illustrating a one-cushion “follow twist,” doubling the object-ball._
Cue-ball ⅝ left, ¼ above, object-ball “full centre;” stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, with excessive ⅝ twist,
effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_,
resting at _d_.
The player may find trouble in striking the object-ball dead full, where
he delivers the cue ⅝ left. A little practice will overcome all
difficulty.
[Illustration]
PLATE LXV.
EFFECTIVE GATHERING STROKES.
_Illustrating caroms accomplished with excessive “draw, reverse, twists,
and cushion,” driving the object-ball to position._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅝ below, object-ball full; stroke, ½ in
excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _c_ through draw and
twist delivery, effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at
_a_, _b_, finally resting at _c_. An effective gathering stroke.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ below, ½ left, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effects carom on ball 2 and
rolls to _i_. Object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_, _d_, _f_, resting
at _g_. Carom-ball cushions at _e_, crosses table, and stops at
_h_.
The space between balls 1 and 2 is nearly the distance which separates
the diamond sights.
PLATE LXVI.
“BANK”-STROKE CAROMS.
_Illustrating two methods of effecting the same carom, like principles
governing both strokes._
_First._—Cue-ball ¼ below, ½ left; cushions at _a_, _d_, strikes
object-ball at _f_, ½ right, calculating from point _d_; cue-ball
then cushions again at _g_, _h_, _i_, effecting carom on ball 2.
Object-ball takes direction of arrow. Stroke, “hard.”
_Second._—Cue-ball ¼ below, ½ left; cushions at _b_, _c_, hits
object-ball at _e_, ½ left, sighting from cushion at _c_; cushions
then at _j_, effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball is driven
around table, cushions at _n_, _o_, _p_, resting at _l_. Stroke,
“hard.”
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LXVII.
FOUR-CUSHION AND “BANK”-STROKE CAROMS.
_Illustrating caroms which gather the balls from difficult positions._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ¼ below, ¼ right, object-ball ¼ right, sighting
from cushion at _a_. Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting
carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, _d_, resting at _e_.
Stroke, “ordinary.” The object-ball (1) lies near and cushions so
that cue-ball has not room to go around table and gather balls
after carom, therefore the bank stroke is employed.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ right, ⅛ below, object-ball ¼ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Object-ball is width of a ball from the
cushion. Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, effecting carom
on ball 2.
Object-ball cushions at _e_, _f_, resting at _g_. Ball 1 _must_ be so
placed that the cushion at _a_ can be reached by cue-ball.
PLATE LXVIII.
REVERSE ENGLISH.
_Illustrating application of reverse twist when the object-ball lies in
difficult position for gathering._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ⅛ above, object-ball ½ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effecting carom
on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _b_, _c_, resting at _d_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅛ below, object-ball ½ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting
carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, _d_, _e_, resting at
_f_.
Caroms could be effected by cutting object-ball fine on right, but
gathering position for next stroke would then be sacrificed.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LXIX.
“KISS” AND “FINE” CUSHION CAROMS.
_Illustrating caroms from comparatively safe positions._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ¼ below, object-ball ⅛ right; stroke, ½
in excess of “slow.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting
carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, resting at or near
_d_.
_To carom on ball 3._—Cue ball ¼ right, ¼ below, object-ball ⅛
right; stroke, “medium.”
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ½ below, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball kisses from object-ball, takes
cushion at a, then, by ⅝ twist, runs to ball 2, effecting carom.
The object-ball lies in corner touching both cushions. When the
point _a_ is reached the stroke is assured, if the ⅝ “twist” has
been applied to cue-ball.
_To carom on ball 3._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ½ below, object-ball
“full”; stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _b_.
Similar in principle to preceding stroke.
PLATE LXX.
A “FINE-CUT” BALL AND EFFECTIVE ONE-CUSHION GATHERING STROKES.
_Illustrating a seeming impossible “fine-cut” stroke, effecting carom at
extreme points, with application of either “twist”; also excellent
one-cushion position strokes._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ below, ¼ left, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effecting carom
on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, resting at _e_.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ below, ½ left, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _b_, effecting carom
on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _d_, resting at _f_.
_Diagram 3._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ⅝ right, object-ball _extremely_ fine,
1/32 left; stroke, “hard.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, describes a
curve, and effects carom on ball 2 in corner. The strong right
twist given cue-ball counteracts opposite twist given by contact
with cushion, whilst the draw or retrograde force imparts a
tendency to return in direction from the impelling force, this
producing the curved line of progress.
_To carom on ball 3._—Cue-ball ¼ left, ⅛ below, object-ball 1/16
left; stroke, “ordinary.”
_To carom on ball 4._—Cue-ball ½ left, ⅛ below, object-ball ¼
left; stroke, “ordinary.”
[Illustration]
PLATE LXXI.
REVERSE ENGLISH CAROMS.
_In illustration of caroms through the application of the “reverse
twist,” performing curious angles thereby and gathering the balls._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ⅝ right, object-ball ⅛ right; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball cushions at _b_, from which it performs
curved line in effecting carom on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at
_c_, _d_, _a_, resting at _e_. The carom-ball crosses table,
cushions at _g_, resting at _f_. An acute wrist delivery is
necessary in order to impart extreme “draw-and-twist” to the
cue-ball.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ left, ⅛ above, object-ball ¾ left; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball takes cushion at _a_, _b_, effecting carom by
reverse twist, on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _c_, _d_,
resting at _e_.
This stroke is played to gather the object-ball at ball 2. If the
cue-ball is played around the table, imparting opposite twist, taking
cushions _a_, _b_, _d_, the object-ball will be “lost.”
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LXXII.
ONE-CUSHION AND KISS STROKES.
_Illustrating a carom by “kiss” gathering the balls, also carom from
same position from one cushion._
Cue-ball ⅝ below, ½ left, object-ball ⅛ left; stroke, ½ in excess of
“medium.” Cue-ball “kisses” directly to ball 2. Object-ball is
struck ⅛ left, driving it to cushion _a_, _b_, resting at _c_.
Carom-ball takes direction _d_, after carom has been effected. The
object-ball must be hit with exactness to get it away from the
cushion to the points _a_, _b_, _c_.
Again, cue-ball ¼ left, ¼ above, object-ball ½ left; stroke, ½ in
excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _e_, effecting, carom on
ball 2. Object-ball takes direction approximating dotted line.
[Illustration]
PLATE LXXIII.
CLOSE DRAW.
_Illustrating a fair stroke where the balls are near a “freeze,”
effecting a “draw” and “English,” the cue-ball performing a concave
curve on its course to cushion._
Cue-ball ⅝ below, ⅝ right, object-ball ¾ left; stroke, “hard.”
Cue-ball describes curve, cushions at _a_, _b_, _c_, effecting
carom on ball 2, which rests at _h_, with cue-ball at _i_.
Object-ball doubles the width of table, cushions at _d_, _e_, _f_,
resting at _g_.
The carom could be made with a massé, but position would be sacrificed.
The close draw is played in order to gather the balls.
The stroke is an acute wrist and arm delivery, and should be given with
confidence.
PLATE LXXIV.
TWIST AND DRAW STROKES.
_Illustrating excessive twist and draw when the cue-balls rest on the
cushion._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ⅝ below, ⅝ right, object-ball 15/16 left;
stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.” Object-ball cushions at _a_,
returning to _b_. Cue-ball, by excessive draw and twist, caroms on
ball 2.
The object in imparting excessive twist to cue-ball is to avoid cushion
in recoil. The object-ball is struck _slightly_ to the left, and the
twist overcoming the outward tendency this would naturally give to the
cue-ball, brings it back to a straight line.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ⅝ right, ⅛ above, object-ball ½ left; stroke,
“medium.” Object-ball cushions at _c_, resting at _d_. Cue-ball
cushions at _e_, effects carom on ball 2.
In practising this stroke, the object-ball must be set about the
distance of ½ ball from the cushion.
If the ball be so set that it be hit too full it will throw the cue-ball
toward the corner at _a_; again, if it be struck too fine the cue-ball
will be thrown to the left of ball 2.
[Illustration]
PLATE LXXV.
THE KISS AND TWIST STROKE.
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ above, ¼ left, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball by kiss effects carom on ball 2.
To reach the carom-ball in this stroke it is absolutely necessary
that the object-ball be struck ⅞ right, more or less will bring
the cue-ball short of or beyond the corner at ball 2.
_Diagram 2._—Cue-ball ½ below, ⅝ left, object-ball ⅞ right; stroke,
“ordinary.” Cue-ball by kiss cushions at _a_, _b_, effecting carom
on ball 2.
This latter diagram shows a comparatively difficult position from which
to effect a carom. The excessive twist completes the stroke. The proper
direction of aim must be first determined—in this diagram it is to point
_a_ on end cushion. The player is asked to observe the angle of cue from
the cue-ball to the cushion.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
PLATE LXXVI.
CLOSE DRAW AND FOLLOW MASSÉ.
_Illustrating two of the most difficult of these two strokes—draw and
massé._
_Diagram 1._—Cue-ball ½ below, ⅝ right, object-ball ⅞ left; stroke, ½
in excess of “medium.” Cue-ball cushions at _a_, effecting carom
on ball 2. Object-ball cushions at _b_, resting at _c_.
This stroke is one-half draw with excessive twist, the latter actually
effecting the carom.
_Diagram 2._—Massé follow.—Cue-ball ½ forward, ½ left, object-ball
15/16 right; stroke, ½ in excess of “medium.” Elevation of cue
78¾°.
Cue-ball describes curve, and effects carom on ball 2. As the balls lie
in this diagram an ordinary plain massé is impossible, as the player
will not be able to reach the cue-ball from either side the table,
therefore the follow massé is resorted to. Through force of the massé,
the cue-ball curves out as shown, but returns to proper line, governed
by the excessive twist and massé.
CONDUCTING TOURNAMENTS.
FINDING THE NUMBER OF GAMES.—The first thing to know is the number of
games imposed by differing numbers of entries. There are several ways of
working this out. The quickest and simplest is a mental one. If the
number of entries is even, say 10, multiply the second highest term (9)
by one-half the highest—9 × 5 = 45. If odd, as 7, multiply that figure
by one-half the next highest—7 × 3 = 21 games. But, if a pencil is
handy, a quick enough way is to multiply the highest term, whether odd
or even, by the next highest, and then divide the product by 2, which
will show 253 games if there are 23 entries—23 × 22 506, halved. These
are regular games. No amount of figuring can forecast ties.
TIE GAMES.—When competition is for a championship, any tie for it must
be played off. Ties for other prizes may or may not be, as circumstances
dictate.
TIE GAMES SEPARATE.—Save when they involve a championship, tie games are
no part of the tournament proper, which ordinarily ends when all the
contestants have either played or forfeited an equal number of games.
Yet, while tie games for else than the championship will not serve to
determine other than special wagers, they are, nevertheless, records in
themselves, although without being a part of the tournament.
FORFEITURES.—In a tournament, every game begins with the first one, in
the sense of binding every player who has not previously been declared
out. It has always been an unwritten law of billiards that a withdrawer,
instead of canceling his games already played, forfeits those he has yet
to play. The former procedure penalizes the faultless for another’s
fault. It is also open to the objection that, in order to deprive one
winner of his record for high average or high run, the loser of the game
in which either was made may be induced to withdraw. Injustice is
possible even without collusion. Within two years, cancellation has
deprived one continuing player of his highest average, and another of
the highest average of all.
For amateur tournaments, a few Western roomkeepers have a rule of their
own, which cancels if the withdrawer has not played more than half his
games, and forfeits if he has.
GUARDING AGAINST FORFEITURE OR OTHER FAILURE.—Until a scheduled game is
started, the players of the next one in order should be on hand.
THE SANCTITY OF SCHEDULE.—A schedule once made out by due authority
should be adhered to, instead of being changed to suit some individual
caprice.
OPENING GAME.—Never let it be between the supposed best two players. For
some special reason, one such may be utilized, but not two without
inviting the almost certain penalty of a loss of public interest as the
games draw near their close.
RUSH THE LOSERS.—As far as practicable, play losers first in preference
to winners. If they are good losers, they will not object. In no other
way can the anti-climax be prevented of having one or more games to play
after the main prize has been won, or of requiring the leader to play
when there is nothing for him to win.
HANDICAPPING.—This, so often necessary, calls for a nice knowledge of
the contestants. Fixed rules are impossible. That one man has a chance
to sit long and think while the other plays, and perhaps not always
plays with as much ability as effect, makes billiards pre-eminently the
temperamental game. There must, therefore, be much guessing in the name
of handicapping. Not a few conductors of tournaments shirk their office
by happily inveigling their players into handicapping themselves.
One thing is to be cautioned against. As a rule, if the light-weighted,
with their imposts, about fairly balance the middleweights, they are apt
to prove too heavy for the heavyweights. To illustrate, A can give B 30
in 100, B give C 30, C give D 20, and D give E 20. A in practice can
possibly give C the 60 required by theory, but he can little better give
D 80 than he can, as theory requires, give E 100 in 100! Again, if there
are many entries, those with a light impost possess a decided advantage
in having so much more to learn than the others. The oftener they play,
the relatively better.
If A can give B 12 in 100, B give C 15, and C give D 23, then A should
give C 25 and D 44, and B give D 35. It is all merely a question of
multiplication, division, addition and subtraction, without being simple
enough to look easy in print.
The process multiplies together the odds A gives B and B gives C, as
12 × 15 = 180, which is to be divided by the number of points (100)
constituting game. The quotient, which is nearer 2 points than 1, is to
be reckoned as 2, and deducted from the 15 B gives C, leaving 13, which,
added to the 12 given B by A, makes 25 to be given by A to C. By a
similar process—multiplying together the 15 given by B to C and the 23
given by C to D (15 × 23 = 345), dividing by 100 and subtracting the 3
from the 38 (15 added to 23)—35 are what B should give D. What A is to
give D is ascertained by multiplying together the 15 (less 2) and the 23
(13 × 23 = 389), which, divided by 100, shows that 4 are to be deducted
from the added 13 and 23, leaving 32, which, added to the 12 A gives B,
makes 44 to be given by A to D.
SCORING TOURNAMENTS.—Owing to a faulty system of keeping track of games
played, not a few conductors of tournaments are temporarily at a loss to
determine with whom some contestants have yet to play. This formulary
covers everything:
───────────────┬────────┬────────┬────────┬────────
│ JONES. │ SMITH. │ BROWN. │ GRAY.
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
│ │ 205 │ 250 │
Jones, 250 │ D. │6–25/30 │11–19/21│
│ │ 42 │ 38 │
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
│ 220 │ │ 220 │
Smith, 220 │7–10/30 │ D. │9–13/23 │
│ 37 │ │ 41 │
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
│ 175 │ 170 │ │ 190
Brown, 190 │8–15/20 │ 7–9/23 │ D. │ 5–5/37
│ 29 │ 31 │ │ 41
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
│ │ │ 170 │
Gray, 180 │ │ │4–22/37 │ D.
│ │ │ 23 │
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
Games Won │ I │ II │ I │
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
Games Lost │ X │ │ XX │ X
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
Total Points │ │ │ │
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
Total Innings │ │ │ │
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
General Average│ │ │ │
───────────────┼────────┼────────┼────────┼────────
│ │ │ │
───────────────┴────────┴────────┴────────┴────────
AVERAGE OF TOURNAMENT,——
Figures next to names stand for handicap, if any.
Figures standing alone in squares are for total first, average next,
and highest run last.
Winning and losing averages are both given, and in common fractions,
with the double purpose of showing which player led (in case of
later dispute), and of facilitating the making-up of general and
tournament averages when play is done.
When a game is over, add an I to Games Won and an X to Games Lost.
When tournament is finished add up totals, as well as innings (last
figures of those in middle line of squares), and compute single,
general and tournament averages decimally.
To find out who has yet to play, look for blank spaces exclusive of
those running obliquely and marked D. (for Jones of horizontal
column doubling with Jones of vertical). In the table are four
blanks, meaning two games to play—Gray with Jones and Smith.
To find out how many games have been played, add I’s and X’s
together, and divide by 2.
When I’s and X’s differ in their totals, there has been an error in
tallying games either won or lost.
SCORING FOR THE PRESS.—Care should be taken to begin with the score of
him who plays first. His winning then will mean that the innings were
unequal, while putting the winner’s score second will indicate equal
innings. Disregard of this rule, prevalent of late years, forces whoever
would verify the average to count up the innings in each score.
HOW TO FIGURE AVERAGES.
DECIMALS ARE BEST.—Divide total points by total innings. Thus, 300
points in 28 innings show 1020/28 in crude fractions, 10 and 5/7ths in
the lowest evenly reduced ones, and 10.71 (71/100ths) decimally. The
first system seldom gives an accurate idea at sight. In the second, the
fractions cannot always be reduced evenly, as above. Ordinarily, the
third is closest, briefest and clearest.
AVOID A JUMBLE.—Some computers mix themselves and others up by using all
three methods. Others, as a convenience, express the single average as
1020/28, and the general average not as 8170/175, to be consistent, but
as 8.97. This is akin to the barbarism of speaking in two languages at
once. There are others who, simply because it is so divisible, convert
the 8170/175 into 834/35, so that anybody seeking to prove the average
by finding the points and innings will have rare figuring as a
preliminary.
DECIMALIZING.—This is simply adding a cipher to the right-hand end of
every remainder after the dividend has no unused figure left. Adding a
cipher to the 20 in 1020/28 yields 7 and 4 over when divided by 28, and
now adding a cipher to the 4 will result altogether in 10.71, with 12
over.
Pay no attention to this remainder unless, if a general average, 10.71
seems to be a tie with some other general average. Such a tie will
rarely happen. Should it, add a cipher to the 12, and dividing the 120
by 28 will result in 10.714 (1000ths now, instead of 100ths), with 8
over. If there is still a tie, proceed as before, first making 80 of the
8.
GIVE AND TAKE.—Had the 10.71’s remainder been 14 or more, instead of 12,
which is less than one-half the innings, the average would change to
10.72. The arbitrary rule is to ignore the final remainder when it is
less than half the innings, but enlarge it and give it to the player
when it is half or more.
RECONVERSION.—If for any reason it be necessary to find the number of
innings, add ciphers (two will usually be enough in billiards) to the
points, and divide by the decimalized average. Thus 1071)30000(28
innings, with 12 over. To find the points on which a general average is
based, innings (50) and average (16) being known, multiply the one by
the other—16 × 50 = 800.
GENERAL AVERAGE.—A match of continuous points has but one average,
whether it be played in one session or half a dozen; but it is different
both in a tournament and in a match of several separate games, a
majority to win.
In computing the general average, avoid the easy error of adding all a
player’s game-averages together, and dividing the product by the number
of games. There is only one condition in which this will show the true
average, and that is when all the games have innings separately equal in
number, howsoever much the points themselves may vary.
Illustration of false and true:
Inn. Points. Game Average.
15 600 40
30 600 20
30 600 20
7 600 85.71
—— ———— ——————
82 82)2400(29.29 4)165.71(41.43
The average found by dividing by the number of games is grossly
extravagant.
LOSING AVERAGES.—Properly, the loser’s average can never be higher than
the winner’s. To concede that it can is to premiumize its maker’s
inefficiency. Setting out to win the opening shot, he had failed, which
is the only way, with fewer points, to make the seemingly higher
average. It is equally unfair, in a continuous game of several sessions,
to concede an average for a fraction of the game. By getting far behind,
one player is without limit on any night, while the other is stopped
every night by reaching the number of points assigned to every leader.
Except as personal compliments, losing averages are valueless. Their
apparent makers do not wholly make them. Much depends upon the other
man. The loser reaches a high figure largely because, having aimed to
cover a given number of points, he failed to do so. It has often
happened that a player with 50 to go has needed as many innings to make
them as he had taken to make his other 250. As a rule, losers “let down”
near the finish more than winners, and hence their average is dependent
less upon themselves than upon those who close the game.
BILLIARD RECORD:
A COMPENDIUM OF THE MORE IMPORTANT PUBLIC CONTESTS, MATCH AND
TOURNAMENT, AT BOTH CAROMS AND POOL.
COMPILED FROM THE MOST AUTHENTIC SOURCES BY THE
BRUNSWICK-BALKE-COLLENDER CO.
FOUR-BALL GAME
[Up to 1863, all play not otherwise described was at unrestricted
caroms, with 2⅜ balls, on a 6 × 12 ft. six-pocket table; from 1863
to 1869, on a 6 × 12 four-pocket, with the various restrictions
mentioned; from 1869 to 1873, chiefly on a 5½ × 11 four-pocket,
under a new system of counting; and from 1873 to 1876, almost
altogether on a 5 × 10 carom table.]
ABBREVIATIONS.—P., 2000—12.20—129; S., 1904—157, indicates winner’s
total, average, and best run, always in that order, together with
loser’s total and high run, without his average, which has never
been a record; W., games won in tournament; R., highest run; Av.,
best winning average; G. A., general (or grand) average; p. b.,
push-shot barred; c. b., crotching barred (carom table); j. b., jaw
barred (pocket table).
1854.
=First Contest in a Public Hall.= May 13th, Malcolm Hall, Syracuse, N.
Y.—Caroms with unrestricted hazards (pocketings), stake unknown. Joseph
N. White, 500; Geo. Smith, 484.
This was not technically a public contest, admission having been by
invitation only. Mixed caroms and hazards were last played
professionally on a six-pocket table by two lads in a hotel
billiard-room on Third Avenue, N. Y. City, in 1865, for a stake of $50 a
side. The winner is living, but has long been out of billiards. Maurice
Daly, then sixteen, was loser.
1858.
=First Match with an “Average” without Guessing.= N. Y. City, April
24th, $250 a side.—Totals, winning average and best runs: John
Seereiter, 1000—6.94—53; Bernard Crystal, 830—68. This was a
billiard-room or private match, and it is given here only because it was
the first in which score was kept in figures from beginning to end.
1859.
=First Technically Public Contest.= Fireman’s Hall, Detroit, Mich.,
April 10th.—$250 a side. Dudley Kavanagh, New York, 1000—8.47—177;
Michael Foley, Detroit, 989—87. This match was the first to which an
admission fee was charged.
* * * * *
=Michael Phelan= (New York) =vs. John Seereiter= (Detroit). Same hall,
April 11th, $5,000 a side, on table taken from Seereiter’s room (used
night before by K. and F.), but having a new cloth. P., 2000—12.20—129;
S., 1904—157.
Admission was five dollars, but this charge was rather to keep the wrong
persons out than to profit from letting the right ones in. Phelan was
out-nursed, but he outbetted the Detroiters, and both outgeneraled and
generally outbetted their representative.
1860.
=First Professional Tournament.= Phelan & Collender’s Union Square
Billiard Rooms (upper floor), N. Y. City, October 26–31st.—Invitation or
private tournament on a 6 × 12 carom table for two souvenir cues, one
given by Claudius Berger, of France. In the table below, a “Lost” column
is specially inserted because of a shortage of games, that between Lynch
and Geary (the latter substituting for Christian Bird, of Philadelphia)
being neither played nor forfeited. All games were 500 up but the final
and deciding one (Kavanagh, 1000—29.41—144; Tieman, 746—156).
W. L. R. Av. G. Av.
Dudley Kavanagh, N. Y. 4 0 144 29.41 20.49
Philip Tieman, Cincinnati 3 1 185 21.74 18.41
James Lynch, N. Y. 1 2 162 18.52 18.37
Joseph N. White, N. Y. 1 3 94 12.20 10.55
Michael Geary, Chicago 0 3 65 9.04
1861.
=First Public Match Between Western Players.= Wood’s Theatre,
Cincinnati, November 21st.—Philip Tieman vs. John Deery, both of
Cincinnati; $500 a side. T., 1000—12.25—106; D., 683—54.
1862.
=First Public Home-and-home Match.= Cleveland, O., March 6th.—First of
two games, each $500 a side. Dudley Kavanagh, N. Y., 1500—13.39—118;
Michael Foley, then of Cleveland, 1065—102. Return: Irving Hall, N. Y.
City, April 3d, F., 1500—9.43—99; K., 1466—108.
* * * * *
=Push and Massé Barred.= Half-way game, Kremlin Hall, Buffalo, N. Y.,
November 6th.—Also for $500 a side, but barring both push-shot and
massé. K., 1500—10—86; F., 1296—90.
This was the first public match from which the push-shot was excluded.
No other has ever barred the massé.
* * * * *
=M. Foley vs. Deery.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, April 4th.—$250 a side.
F., 1000—11.24—66; D., 502—45. Same night, a private match was begun for
same amount, but in 100–point games, Deery winning the odd (11 to 10).
The two matches lasted from 8 p.m. to 8 a.m.
* * * * *
=Wm. Goldthwait vs. Deery.= Alston Hall, Boston, June 25th.—$250 a side.
G., 1500—9.87—99; D., 1270—79.
* * * * *
=First Barring of Crotch in Public.= Tucker’s Academy, San Francisco,
August 2d.—Championship of California and $100, carom table, c.
b.—_i.e._, crotching limited to three successive shots within an
imaginary line. Daniel Lynch, 1000—971—104; Joseph W. Little, 852—run
not known.
1863.
=Kavanagh vs. Goldthwait.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, April 23d.—$500 a
side. K., 1500—14.42—125; G., 1282—130.
* * * * *
=First Public Tournament, First Formal Professional Championship
Anywhere, and First Four-pocket Table.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, June
1–9th.—First prize, emblematic cue and a $750 Phelan & Collender
billiard-table; second, $250. Instead of the usual 6 × 12 six-pocket, a
6 × 12 four-pocket was used for first time in public. The highest run
was made by “jawing,” also for first time in public. Tieing in both high
run and high winning average, done by Kavanagh and Tieman, has yet to be
paralleled in a public tournament. Average of this one (seven games
apiece), 12.19. Points and money stake in all succeeding matches, 1500
and $500 a side.
W. R. Av. G. A.
D. Kavanagh, N. Y. 6 203 33.33 15.18
Louis Fox, Rochester 5 141 23.81 14.45
John Deery, N. Y. 4 313 16.13 11.41
Phil. Tieman, Cincinnati 3 203 33.33 14.48
John Seereiter, Detroit 3 114 13.16 10.22
M. Foley, Detroit 3 102 16.67 12.48
Wm. Goldthwait, N. Y. 3 185 17.24 11.46
Victor Estephe, Philadelphia 1 86 8.31 9.19
KAVANAGH VS. SEEREITER. First match, same hall, October 15th—K.,
1500—16.85—151; S., 715—57.
KAVANAGH VS. TIEMAN. Same hall, April 7, 1864.—K., 1500—12.29—152; T.,
1265—93.
KAVANAGH VS. GOLDTHWAIT. Hippotheatron, N. Y. City, June 9, 1864.—K.,
1500—17.44—154; G., 1425—117.
KAVANAGH VS. TIEMAN. Same hall, September 15, 1864.—K., 1500—14.56—147;
T., 927—139.
KAVANAGH VS. GOLDTHWAIT. Academy of Music, N. Y. City, January 20,
1865.—K., 1500—15.63—158; G., 1406—113.
KAVANAGH VS. FOX. May 16, 1865.—K., ill, forfeited.
FOX VS. DEERY. Washington Hall, Rochester, N. Y., September 7, 1865.—D.,
1500—16.67–166; F., 1465—276.
DEERY VS. PIERRE CARME. January 7, 1866.—C. paid forfeit.
DEERY VS. JOHN MCDEVITT. Cooper Institute, N. Y. City, March 13,
1866.—D., 1500—10.79—119; McD., 1145—95.
DEERY VS. JOSEPH DION, of Montreal. Same hall, May 23, 1866.—Dion,
1500—10.42—92; Deery, 1366—144.
DION VS. McDEVITT. Mechanics’ Hall, Montreal, October 5, 1866.—D.,
1500—25.86—258; McD., 1276—308.
DION VS. McDEVITT. Same hall, June 10, 1867.—D., 1500—19.73—616; McD.,
816—220. Run of 616 was the first case of “jawing” in a match contest
for any championship. It led at once to the abolition of “jawing” in
this series.
DION VS. EDMUND H. NELMS, Philadelphia. Same hall, September 15, 1867,
“jawing” then and thenceforth barred. N. paid forfeit.
DION VS. McDEVITT. Same hall, December 11, 1867.—McD., 1500—13.16—181;
D., 1488—291.
McDEVITT (residence changed from New York to Chicago) vs. MELVIN FOSTER,
N. Y. Library Hall, Chicago, April 8, 1868.—McD., 1268—21.49—293; F.,
1262—263. In fifty-ninth inning, F. protested against a decision.
Confusion followed, and the referee adjudged McD. winner while it was
still his turn to play. Declining to submit to arbitration, McDevitt
guaranteed the stakeholder against a possible suit-at-law, and was paid
the stakes.
McDEVITT VS. J. DION. Same hall, September 16, 1868.—McD.,
1500—166.67—1458; D., 407—261.
McDEVITT VS. GOLDTHWAIT. Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, December 22,
1868.—Fourteenth contest and seventeenth and last match. McD.,
1500—25—238; G., 1483—226.
On Christmas Day, 1868, there being no challenge pending, McDevitt
resigned the cue to its donors, Phelan & Collender, as a step toward a
new championship, push barred. The old style of game came thus to an
end.
* * * * *
=Best Record Average on a Six-pocket Table.= Union Hall, Indianapolis,
December 17, 1863.—$250 a side. McDevitt, 1500—17.24—148; Frank Parker,
661—68.
Excepting one at the three-ball game, this was the last public contest
at caroms on a six-pocket table.
1864.
=First Public Contest Prohibiting Both Pushing and Jawing.= Irving Hall,
N. Y. City, April 8th.—Informal match in aid of Workingwomen’s
Protective Union, 6 × 12 four-pocket. Michael Phelan, 1000—8.40—56;
Dudley Kavanagh, 965—40.
* * * * *
=First State Championship Tournament—An Unbeaten Amateur.= Allyn Hall,
Hartford, beginning August 16th.—Tournament for championship of
Connecticut. Games, 300 points up, save in the final one, which, between
Gershom B. Hubbell, of Hartford, and Geo. B. Hunt, of Bridgeport, was
500 points. The winner-in-chief was beaten by none but another
amateur—Lieut. J. B. Burbank, then stationed at New London Harbor, and
now a field-officer in the Fifth U. S. Artillery. Messrs. Burbank, Hunt
and Hewins tied for second and third prizes, purses of $50 and $25,
which the first two resigned to the professional, who is still such in
Hartford. First prize, the champion cue, to which, when the champion’s
term was up, was added the billiard-table. Average of tournament (five
games apiece, 6 × 12 four-pocket), 5.90. The matches following the
tournament were all played in Allyn Hall.
W. R. Av. G. A.
G. B. Hubbell 4 53 7.32 6.36
J. B. Burbank 3 50 6.98 6.34
M. H. Hewins 3 48 7.50 5.91
G. B. Hunt 3 46 7.14 6.05
W. C. Porter 1 55 6. 5.11
H. S. Keating 1 44 5.76 4.55
HUBBELL VS. MICHAEL WOLLAHAN. November 15th.—First match. H.,
1000—6.62—78; W., 921—47.
HUBBELL VS. HUNT. February 21, 1865. Hubbell, 1000—7.58—70; Hunt,
649—57.
HUBBELL VS. RALPH BENJAMIN. August 16, 1865.—H., 1000—6.13—58; B.,
956—33.
HUBBELL VS. BENJAMIN. March 27, 1866.—Fourth and last match. Hubbell,
who then acquired the emblem on time-limit, ran 154 to Benjamin’s 42,
averaged 10.87, and won by nearly 400 in 1000.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Pennsylvania.=—October 4–10, 1864, Sansom Street
Hall, Philadelphia.—500 points on a 6 × 12 carom, p. and c. barred.
Prizes, champion cue for first; silver plate, worth $100, for second.
Nelms beaten by Estephe and Montgomery only. Average of tournament
(seven games apiece), 8.23. Money stake in matches, $100.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Estephe 7 121 13.51 11.29
Nelms 5 108 13.12 9.55
Bird 4 64 11.60 8.94
Montgomery 4 74 9.26 7.64
Ryall 3 54 9.80 7.98
Plunkett 2 92 9.60 7.96
Palmer 2 57 10.20 7.70
Hewes 1 49 7.22[1] 5.83
Footnote 1:
Losing average.
ESTEPHE VS. RYALL. First match, same hall, December 13th.—E.,
1200—10.63—60; R., 966—76.
ESTEPHE VS. MONTGOMERY. Same hall, February 20, 1865.—E., 1200—16—109;
M., 525—44.
ESTEPHE VS. NELMS. Third and last match, Academy of Music, Philadelphia,
April 13, 1865.—E., 1200—15.38—78; N., 1161—155.
* * * * *
=First Annual Championship of Upper Canada.= November 21–26, 1864, Music
Hall, Toronto.—Games, 500 points, 6 × 12 four-pocket. Wm. Jakes beaten
by none but Samuel May, who won play-off with D. Miller. Two prizes for
place, and one for high run. Tournament unique in the approximate
uniformity of its high runs and averages at the style of game. Its own
average (six games apiece) was 5.99.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Jakes 5 60 8.20 7.56
May 4 64 7.58 6.01
Miller 4 48 7.81 6.70
Cronn 3 40 7.25 5.42
Brown 3 49 8.62 6.32
Cheseborough 2 40 5.62 5.43
Phillips 0 43 4.90
1865.
=First Public Contest on a 5½ × 11 Table (Four-pocket).= Grover’s
Theatre, Washington, D. C., January 23d.—$250 a side. Melvin Foster,
1500—19.23—170; John Deery, 1445—205. Return game, Irving Hall, N. Y.
City, February 11th.—F., 1500—16.13—137; D., 1124—122.
* * * * *
=Thomas Foley vs. Chas. A. Frink.= Metropolitan Hall, Chicago, January
29, $250 a side, 6 × 12 four-pocket. Foley, 1000; Frink, 872. Same terms
and hall, February 11th.—Foley, 1000—14.71—93; Frink, 537—47.
* * * * *
=Amateurs’ Sixteen-hour Contest for $2,000.= “Arena,” 185 Sixth Avenue,
N. Y. City, February 20–21st—Admission by invitation. Wm. N. Wickes gave
Wm. McKeever odds of “double discount,” best in 37 100–point games
“around the table”—i.e., mixed caroms and pocketings, latter limited to
three consecutive times from the one spot (6 × 12 four-pocket). Games
won: W., 20; McK., 14; W.’s extra one due to a dispute as to which had
won the 13th. Total points: W., 4981; McK., 2129. Winner’s general
average, 14.43. No intermission. Referee throughout, Peter D. Braisted,
Jr., color-sergeant Seventh Regiment.
* * * * *
=Mace, Bridge and Jaw Barred.= Music Hall, Milwaukee, Wis., March
11th.—$250 a side, 6 × 12 four-pocket, John W. Coon giving S. A. Tustin
odds of 200. C., 1000—14.08—112; T., 864—106.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Massachusetts.=—Bumstead Hall, Boston, March
13–18th.—Games, 300 points. Contestants all Boston professionals but Lee
W. Langdon, amateur, of Florence, Mass. Four prizes, all for place, went
to the first four as tabled. They also made the best four winning
averages, but in this order—W., 17.65; D., 12.50; T., 12; L., 7.89.
Average of tournament (seven games apiece), 6.72. Ensuing matches were
all played in Bumstead Hall.
W. R. G. A.
W. A. Tobin 7 127 11.17
R. E. Wilmarth 6 111 8.18
Ed. Daniels 4 68 7.90
L. W. Langdon 4 45 6.84
L. S. Brooks 2 108 5.53
F. E. Smith 2 53 5.62
F. A. Harding 2 47 4.88
John Peck 1 64 5.68
TOBIN VS. WILMARTH. First match, June 21st.—W., 1500—11.36—110; T.,
1439—134.
WILMARTH VS. DANIELS. October 18th.—D., 1500—9.74—80; W., 1020—58.
DANIELS VS. LANGDON. February 21, 1866.—D., 1500—8.61—129; L., 1252—50.
DANIELS VS. WILMARTH. June 21, 1866.—D., 1500—11.64—151; W., 911—115.
DANIELS VS. TOBIN. October 17, 1866.—T., 1500–10.14; D., 1292.
TOBIN VS. JOHN H. FLACK. June 28, 1867.—T., 1500—9.15—122; F., 1470—119.
TOBIN VS. DANIELS. October 31, 1867.—D., 1500—28.30—255; T., 628—101.
Series ended with seventh match. After that run of 255 and that average
of 28.30 on a 6 × 12 four-pocket, no one challenged the title of the
restored champion; and for that reason, also, there was no new
championship until, in 1869, there was a remodeled game.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Ohio.= Mozart Hall, Cincinnati, May 22–30, 1865.
Games, 300 points. Two prizes, gold-mounted cue and silver goblet. Tiers
for latter tied again, and presented it to Tony Honing, who had marked
the games. The winning averages of the five leaders, in this order,
were: 10.71, 12.50, 8.67, 15.79, and 8.57; but actually fourth and fifth
were Broga’s 10 and Turners 9.68. Average of tournament (seven games
apiece), 7.25. All matches were for $250 a side.
W. R. G. A.
H. Choate 5 111 7.78
F. Ackerman 4 76 8.60
W. Rivers 4 76 7.30
G. Griffey 4 92 7.43
J. Frawley 4 50 7.13
J. Broga 3 99 7.04
B. Beatty 2 62 5.74
S. Turner 2 77 5.93
CHOATE VS. FRAWLEY. Same hall, September 28.—F., 1000—9.01—90; C.,
874—74.
FRAWLEY VS. CHAS. DAVIS. Academy of Music, Cleveland, January 24, 1866.
F., 1000—11.36—291; Davis, 998–135.
FRAWLEY VS. CHOATE. May 31st.—C. forfeited.
FRAWLEY VS. ACKERMAN. Brainard’s Hall, Cleveland, September 25,
1867.—Fourth and last match, j. b. and game arbitrarily lengthened. F.,
1500—16.32—410; A., 1239—110.
* * * * *
=McDevitt vs. Goldthwait.= Mozart Hall, Cincinnati, May 31, 1865.—$1,000
a side.—McD., 1500—22.73—267; G., 10.86—16.71—96.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Illinois.= Smith & Nixon’s Hall, Chicago, June
14—21st.—First prize, gold-mounted cue; second, silver tea-service.
Lowell Mason, ill, withdrew without playing; Charles A. Frink, taking
his place, withdrew after playing and losing a game; and a Chicago
amateur, billed as “Davis,” filled out the Mason-Frink gap. Those who
reached double figures in their best winning averages were: F., 13.64;
R., 11.54; and Le B. and “Davis,” 10.34 each. The one victory credited
to M. W. Donahue was a forfeit from Chas. Masters. Average of
tournament, 6.55. Seven 300–point games apiece.
W. R. G. A.
T. Foley 7 101 8.57
J. Ferguson 6 50 6.98
A. Le Brun 5 76 7.35
H. Rhines 3 85 6.62
Cy. Coan 3 42 6.23
“Davis” 2 76 5.84
C. Masters 1 55 5.66
M. Donahue 1 51 4.90
Money-stake in all matches, $250 a side.
FOLEY VS. RHINES. Bryan Hall, Chicago, October 12th.—F., 1500—12.50—84;
R., 1061—47.
FOLEY VS. LE BRUN. Latter declared forfeit.
FOLEY VS. JOSEPH VERMEULEN. Chicago, June 27, 1866.—F., 1500—15.46—178;
V., 1002—126.
FOLEY VS. RHINES. Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, October 15, 1866.—Fourth
and last match of series. F., 1500—12.10—159; R., 1225—157.
Challenges ceasing, emblem eventually became the unbeaten Foley’s own.
* * * * *
=First Championship of All Canada.= Mechanics’ Hall, Montreal, July
12–19, 1865.—Tournament for gold-mounted cue for first, and a $75 silver
cup for second. Five 500–point games apiece. Average of tournament,
7.07.
W. R. G. A.
C. Dion 5 138 12.33
W. Jakes 4 70 7.32
S. May 3 130 8.37
A. Guillett 2 62 6.51
J. Rooney 1 44 5.15
H. McVittie 0 70 4.90
The only high winning averages passing 8.47 (Jakes’s) were Dion’s 20 and
May’s 12.50. This championship was simply nominal, as Joseph Dion was
clearly the Canadian premier, with his brother Cyrille easily second. It
was never played for again.
* * * * *
=Jos. Dion vs. Melvin Foster.= Mechanics’ Hall, Montreal, July
19th.—$1,000 a side in gold (U. S. currency still at heavy discount) D.,
1500—21.74—151; F., 1108—147.
* * * * *
=Champion of Canada vs. Champion of Massachusetts.= Mechanics’ Hall,
Montreal, July 20th.—First contest of a home-and-home match, $500 in
gold each game. C. Dion, 1500—12.71—109; Robt. E. Wilmarth, 1375—90. In
return game, set for Bumstead Hall, Boston, October 19, W. forfeited.
* * * * *
=Championship of Maine.= First tournament, Meonian Hall, Augusta,
September 4–9th. Games, 300 points. R. T. Williams, E. Godfrey, and C.
E. Smith were the prize-winners.
* * * * *
=Championship of Upper Canada.= Second annual tournament, Dallas Block,
Toronto. Games, 300 points, p. b. Messrs. May, Miller and Brown tied,
and the play-off gave Brown the championship and May the second prize.
Their best winning average and their general average in the regular
games were: Brown, 7.14 and 5.94; May, 9.38 and 6.92; Miller, 6.82 and
5.65. May won prize for high run, 79. The other contestants were Messrs.
Cheseborough and Phillips, the latter winning no game, and the former
beating only Phillips.
* * * * *
=Thomas Foley vs. John W. Coon.= Bryan Hall, Chicago, September 28.—$500
a side, Foley giving odds of 400. F., 1500—12.50—91; C., 1463—151.
* * * * *
=C. Dion vs. Ed. Daniels.=—Bumstead Hall, Boston, October 19.—$250 a
side. Dion, 1500—16.30—157; Daniels, 728—59.
* * * * *
=Dudley Kavanagh vs. Pierre Carme.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, November
4.—Second game of match of three, every one for $1,000 a side, half
forfeit. (See Three-ball Caroms, October 5, 1865, for first.) Push-shot
barred, 5½ × 11 four-pocket table, 2–5/16 balls. K., 1500—25—132; C.,
1339—178. Third game, pushing and jawing allowed on 6 × 12 four-pocket,
set for December 4th, was forfeited by Carme.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Maryland.= Baltimore, December 11–13th. 6 × 12
carom, c. b. Five players. Winner, Glessner, whose best average was
about 8. No matches.
=First Championship of Virginia.= Norfolk, December 19–23d. Six
participants. W. Baldwin, beaten by S. D. Brough only, was winner, his
40 being the highest run of all, and his 4.61 the best general average.
W. BALDWIN VS. EDWARD BRYAN. Norfolk, Va., May 10, 1866.—Only match.
Bryan, 800—9.52—46; Baldwin, 429—49. By agreement, a 5½ × 11 four-pocket
instead of a 6 × 12, as in tournament.
1866.
=Pennsylvania Restores Push-Shot.= Concert Hall, Philadelphia, January
31 to February 4, 1866.—Second championship of State, 6 × 12 carom, c.
b., push allowed. Contestants: E. J. Plunkett, R. T. Ryall, Jas. Palmer,
J. B. Bruce, and H. W. Hewes. All games 500 up but deciding one, which,
between Ryall and Plunkett, was 1000 up; and in that the winner,
Plunkett, ran 251, highest of tournament. Ryall, in playing Hewes, had
made the next highest, 172. Palmer won third prize.
PLUNKETT VS. RYALL. Same hall, March 29th.—First match. R.,
1500—18.07—123; P., 629—50.
RYALL VS. ESTEPHE. Same hall, May 14th.—R., 1500—17.44—160; E., 1349—75.
RYALL VS. PLUNKETT. Same hall, June 29th.—P., 1500—18.52—115; R.,
823—117.
PLUNKETT VS. ESTEPHE. Sansom Street Hall, Philadelphia, August 28th.—P.,
1500—30—223; E., 1360—282.
With this match the series was discontinued. Restoring the push had
caused a division of sentiment.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Georgia.= Atlanta, February 12–21st.—300 points,
eight contestants. A. W. Crawford beat all; John P. Chapman, second
prize, $50 and gold watch; John Lloyd, third, $25 and a set of jewelry.
Their best runs and averages were: Crawford, 54 and 13.64; Chapman, 68
and 14.29; Lloyd, 96 and 12.50.
* * * * *
=Memphis, Tenn., Tournament.= February 14–24th.—500 points, six players.
Melvin Foster, N. Y., won first ($500) after a tie with F. A. Myers, of
Memphis ($300), while Wm. Brown was third ($200). The best winning
average and highest run, Foster’s 50 and 282, resulted from his “jawing”
the balls against Harry Choate.
* * * * *
=First Public Contest in United States Between Foreign Players.= Cooper
Institute, N. Y. City, May 24th.—Purse game for a testimonial benefit,
2–5/16 balls on a 5½ × 11 carom, p. b. J. Dion, of Montreal,
750—39.47—297 (by crotching); P. Carme, from France, 491—105.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Indiana.= Hamilton Hall, Fort Wayne, June 6–11th.
Games, 300 up. Morris beat McCarthy, but lost in playing off. Best four
winning averages: Morris, 12; McCarthy, 10.34; Capron, 9.33. Average of
tournament, 6.19. All players tied but one, the only case of the kind
among so many as seven at the four-ball game. No matches, McCarthy
passing unchallenged. Six games apiece, tournament averaging 6.19. This
was the first case of a championship tie.
W. R. G. A.
Tim McCarthy 5 73 8.19
Geo. Morris 5 67 6.84
J. O’Connell 3 43 5.28
Louis Capron 2 65 6.
W. T. McFarland 2 65 5.70
A. McCracken 2 154 6.35
C. Anderson 2 40 5.50
* * * * *
=Goldthwait vs. Deery.= Cooper Institute, N. Y. City, June 15.—$500 a
side. G., 1500—15.79—218; Deery, 1245—202.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Missouri.= Verandah Hall, St. Louis, June
14–20th.—Six 300–point games apiece. Winner beaten by Terrell only, and
beat Pearce in play-off. Best three winning averages—H., 60; B., 13.64;
Wade, 8.57. Average of tournament, 6.87.
W. R. G. A.
A. H. Harrison 5 127 10.09
P. J. Pearce 5 58 6.86
H. Wade 4 83 6.12
Wm. Terrell 4 43 6.57
John Bluim 2 88 8.80
M. M. Miller 1 71 5.65
H. Wider 0 70 5.17
HARRISON VS. PEARCE. Same hall, October 4th.—Only match. P.,
1500—10.71—136; H., 1462—98.
* * * * *
=T. Foley vs. Jos. Vermeulen.= Chicago, June 27th.—First of two games,
each $250 a side. F., 1500—15.47—178; V., 1002—126. Academy of Music,
Chicago, July 26th, return game, p. b. F., 1000—7.63—52; V., 898—63.
* * * * *
=Third Annual Championship of Upper Canada.= Rossin House, Toronto, p.
b. D. C. Cheseborough beat Samuel May by 300 to 202, and J. Manard by
300 to 183. No others.
* * * * *
=Championship of the Champions.= Hippotheatron, N. Y. City, beginning
September 15th. Tournament of State and provincial champions—Canada,
Pennsylvania, Indiana, Massachusetts, Illinois, Connecticut, Missouri,
and Ohio. First prize, gold-mounted cue. Plunkett beat McCarthy in
playing off for second and third—a billiard-table and an emblematic
silver service. Frawley’s 141 won gold watch and chain for highest run,
Foley being near with 134. Average of tournament (seven games apiece),
9.83. It would have been higher, did not the subjoined table show 27
games instead of 28. The missing one was between Harrison and Frawley,
and was annulled next morning (the only such instance on record as to a
public tournament) by a vote of 7 to 1 of the eight contestants.
W. L. R. Av. G. A.
C. Dion 6 1 127 25. 12.
E. J. Plunkett 5 2 117 16.13 11.09
T. McCarthy 5 2 99 14.29 10.03
E. Daniels 3 4 80 15.15 9.37
T. Foley 3 4 134 16.67 10.
G. B. Hubbell 3 4 98 9.80 8.51
A. H. Harrison 1 5 132 11.11 9.79
J. Frawley 1 5 141 8.20 8.31
* * * * *
=Goldthwait vs. Daniels.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, October 26th.—$250 a
side, winner conceding 500 points. G., 1500—20—218; D., 1499—195.
No match of so close a finish had ever before been played, the nearest
approach having been the Frawley-Davis contest of 1000 to 998.
* * * * *
=McDevitt vs. Goldthwait.= October 30 in Bumstead Hall, Boston, and
November 30 in Irving Hall, N. Y. City.—Home-and-home match for $500 a
side each game. Goldthwait lost in his own city by 926 to 1500, and won
in McDevitt’s by 1500 to 1137. McDevitt surpassed match record for a
6 × 12 four-pocket (his own 308) by running 409 in Boston.
1867.
=Third Championship of Pennsylvania.= Philadelphia, February
14–22d.—6 × 12 carom, c. b., push retained. All games 500 points but the
last, in which, 1000 up, Nelms vs. Estephe, the highest run and best
winning average (38.46) were made. Other players with winning averages
above 15: Estephe, 33.33; Jas. Palmer, 17.86; Wm. Rockhill, 16.73;
Ryall, 16.13. Nelms-Estephe game was played in National Hall. Average of
tournament, 10.63. Seven games apiece.
W. R. G. A.
Nelms 7 470 19.32
Estephe 6 148 20.60
Ryall 5 120 12.34
Rockhill 4 96 9.52
Palmer 3 98 10.15
Hewes 2 71 9.13
Bruce 1 80 6.27
Hoyt 0 66 6.02
NELMS VS. RYALL. National Hall, Philadelphia, May 27.—Only match. N.,
1500—33.33—543; R., 1140—277.
* * * * *
=Second Championship of Illinois.= Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, June
17–26th.—500 points, j. b. Prizes: Gold-mounted cue for first (won by
Vermeulen in playing-off with Rhines), gold watch for second and
amethyst ring for third. Best four winning averages were the four
leaders’: R., 20.83; V., 14.29; Honohan, 12.20; Davis, 13.16. Average of
tournament, 8.93. Seven games apiece.
W. R. G. A.
Vermeulen 6 196 10.59
Rhines 6 278 13.08
Davis 5 139 10.24
Honohan 4 92 9.64
Le Brun 4 85 8.48
Furlong 2 92 7.19
Forhan 1 42 5.63
Cusick 0 63 5.16
All matches were in Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, and the money-stake,
except in last, was $200 a side.
VERMEULEN VS. RHINES. September 9.—R., 1500—18.29—300; V., 1162—236.
RHINES VS. HONOHAN. December 4th.—R., 1500—14.66—162; H., 1275—211.
RHINES VS. VERMEULEN. March 4, 1868.—V., 1500—13.65—201; R., 1415—161.
VERMEULEN VS. HONOHAN. May 25, 1868.—V., 1500—12.61—187; H., 1376—75.
VERMEULEN VS. RHINES. September 2, 1868.—R., 1500—11.16—211; V.,
1377—128.
RHINES VS. VERMEULEN. December 21, 1868.—V., 1500—10.42; R., 1472.
VERMEULEN VS. HONOHAN. March 25, 1869.—J. and p. b., and points reduced.
V., 1200—13.33—111; H., 910—68.
VERMEULEN VS. FRANK PARKER. July 5, 1869.—Another change, counting three
for every carom instead of in twos or threes. P., 1200—19.67—117; V.,
523—57.
PARKER VS. SNYDER. November 20, 1869.—P., 1200—15.38—129; S., 827—63.
PARKER VS. SNYDER. March 23, 1870.—Tenth and last match, stake increased
to $250 a side. P., 1200—16.90—105; S., 978—93.
* * * * *
=Championship of Pacific Coast.= Platt’s Hall, San Francisco, August 17,
1867.—$500 a side, 5½ × 11 carom, c. b. Albert W. Jamison, 1500—50—212;
Edward Morris, 740—236.
* * * * *
=First J. M. Brunswick & Co.’s Table in Tournament.= Cincinnati, O.,
October, 21–31st.—5½ × 11 four-pocket, play unrestricted. All games 300
points but that determining tie between Foster and Coon, which was 1000.
Davis won third prize. The first was the table on which games were
played. Average of tournament, nine games apiece, 12.93.
W. R. Av. G. A.
M. Foster 8 194 100. 25.37
J. W. Coon 8 162 37.50 16.25
C. Davis 7 124 23.08 14.
P. Snyder 4 288 50. 13.29
J. Vermeulen 4 98 23.08 11.61
F. Ackerman 4 141 27.27 13.47
H. Choate 4 81 11.11 9.
F. Parker 4 138 42.86 14.05
W. C. Rivers 2 116 15.79 11.11
F. E. Smith 0 76 7.31
One-half of the contestants became champions, State, national, or both;
but the best mere billiard-player of the ten (Foster) never could attain
to that eminence.
* * * * *
=C. Dion vs. Daniels.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, Mass., December 18th.—$250
a side, p. and j. barred, 6 × 12. Dion, 1000—11.71—101; Daniels, 770—94.
* * * * *
=Fourth Annual Championship of Upper Canada.= Toronto, December.—500 up,
p. b., but jawing allowed. Wm. Jakes, with G. A. of 8.43, won all his
games; Samuel May, G. A. 7.42, won all but one; Turner, G. A. 6.33, was
third; Egener, G. A. 4.67, fourth; and Davis, G. A. 3.27, fifth and
last. Average of tournament, 5.94.
1868.
=McDevitt vs. Goldthwait.= Cooper Institute, N. Y. City, January 8.—$250
a side, no restrictions. McD., 1500—166.67—1483; G., 113—48. The 1483
were made nominally in the “jaw,” but in effect it was a carom-table
“crotch.”
* * * * *
=Championship of Nevada.= Opera House, Virginia City, January 20th.—$250
a side in gold, unrestricted; 5½ × 11 carom. W. Wright, 1500—71.43—768;
Valentine J. Orndorff, 279—59. The 768 were crotched.
* * * * *
=Hewins vs. L. W. Simonds.= Music Hall, New Haven, Conn., March
4th.—$500 a side, j. b. on 5½ × 11, the Danbury expert giving the
Hartfordite 500. H., 1500—8.13 (1000)—64; S., 1015—68.
* * * * *
=Carme vs. Vermeulen.= Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, July 22d.—$250 a
side, 5½ × 11 carom, c. and p. barred, and V. receiving 500. C.,
1500—34.88—382; V., 1135 (with odds)—73.
* * * * *
=Third Championship of Ohio.= Mozart Hall, Cincinnati, October
21–26th.—5½ × 11 four-pocket, c. and p. b., 300–point games. Fred.
Ackerman won play-off and second prize, $150, and Tony Honing third,
$100. Harry Choate, winning all his games, received first
prize—gold-mounted cue and $100. Ackerman’s 33.33 was best average, his
14.88 the best general average, and Asa Brainard’s 143 the best run. The
other six were Samuel Turner, J. W. Cronn, J. Quill, Joseph Casper, Jos.
Cherry, and J. Grunkemeyer. Average of tournament, 10.37.
CHOATE VS. ACKERMAN. City Hall, Springfield, O., January 12, 1869.—First
match. A., 1000—20.41—99; C., 563—65.
ACKERMAN VS. HONING. Mozart Hall, Cincinnati, September 11, 1869.—Second
and last match. A., 1000—16.67—130; H., 894—187.
* * * * *
=First Match in America Between French Experts.= In November, A. P.
Rudolphe and Pierre Carme were matched to play two games in Chicago,
four-ball, p. and c. barred, and three-ball, each for $1,000 a side.
Carme was adjudged to have forfeited in both. Soon afterward, they
played two similar games, Rudolphe winning both, without equaling the
record in either.
* * * * *
=T. Foley vs. Frawley.= Garrett’s Hall, Cleveland, December 2,
1868.—First of three games, every one for $500 a side, 5½ × 11, j. b.
and push allowed in first, but both barred in second. Foley,
1500—16.30—120; Frawley, 975—189.
Second game, Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, December 30th.—Foley,
1000—10.63—78; Frawley, 645—81.
Third game, three-ball caroms, Frawley forfeited; and a new match, same
as game of December 2, but for $1,000 a side, was played in same hall as
second, February 24, 1869. Foley, 1500—22.39—248; Frawley, 1202—188.
1869.
[In this and all later years until close of the four-ball series,
table was a 5½ × 11 four-pocket, when not differently indicated, the
game p. and j. b., and the count in ones (for misses), threes and
sixes.]
=Frawley vs. Rhines.= Garrett’s Hall, Cleveland, January 22d.—$250 a
side. F., 1000—14.02—153; R., 1496—298.
* * * * *
=J. Dion vs. Foster.= Mechanics’ Hall, Montreal, January 28th.—First of
home-and-home-and-odd (see Three-ball Caroms, 1869), $1,000 a side every
game. D., 1200—36.36—208; F., 1116—355.
=First Chalking of Lines.= On every corner cushion rail, about eight
inches apart, the terminals of an imaginary line were drawn. This line
had no reference to jawing or crotching, already barred by the articles
of agreement, and yet its purpose was to prevent what, without
describing it, a Montreal paper had spoken of as “Dion’s patent shot.”
No one could be found who knew its nature. Suspecting it to be a
“kiss-back” from one ball dead against the end-rail, one of the staff of
the “N. Y. Times” suggested the line, and the referee, Gershom B.
Hubbell, marked it with the concurrence of the players.
=First Public Game Played Under Protest.= Dion could not have fully
understood the purpose of the line. Because of it, he played the latter
half of the game under protest, Michael Phelan to decide. As he won, the
protest was needless. Had he lost, it would have been useless. There has
been only one other case of playing on after protesting, instead of
having the point decided then and there; and in that other case the
protester won because of a wrong decision due to delay, and that, if
given on the spot, would not have been wrong, singular to say.
=Dion vs. Foster.= Mechanics’ Hall, Montreal, April 6th.—Third and last
match of series, same terms as one above. D., 1200—28.57—124; F.,
1118—102.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Wisconsin.= Opera House Hall, Fond du Lac,
February 9–12th. Counting in twos, threes, and fives. Adam Kleser, then
of Milwaukee, first; L. Olcott second; Harris Liverman, third. The
others were S. A. Tustin, W. W. Seavor, and C. Bly. Stake in matches,
$200.
KLESER VS. SEAVOR. Madison, Wis., May 19th. Counting now in threes and
sixes. K., 1200—9.92—102; S., 728—48.
KLESER VS. LIVERMAN. Music Hall, Milwaukee, December 6, 1870. L.,
1200—av., 11.54; K., 776.
LIVERMAN VS. KLESER. Eau Claire, June 29, 1871. L., 1200—av., 15; K.,
1164.
* * * * *
=First Formal Amateur Championship.= That of Long Island, at Assembly
Rooms, Brooklyn, April 19–28th. Games, 300 points, old counting,
unrestricted. Contestants, Messrs. Dodge, Rogers, Wharton (prize-winners
in that order), Hardy, Karff, Sproul, and Vanderwerker.
* * * * *
=Second or Diamond Cue Championship of America.= Irving Hall, N. Y.
City, April 26 to May 10, 1869. This was a tournament of innovations. It
was the first with an entrance-fee from contestants. Instead of in twos,
threes, and fives, caroms were counted in threes and sixes. Instead of
two short games per session, there was one long one (1200 points). For
the first time in national championship contests, a 5½ × 11
(four-pocket) table was used, and the push-shot prohibited. Foster alone
beat the winner-in-chief. Average of tournament, six games apiece,
17.35.
W. R. Av. G. A.
John Deery, $1,000 5 358 24. 18.66
A. P. Rudolphe, $625 4 170 25. 18.48
Melvin Foster, $475 4 189 23.53 18.41
Peter Snyder, $275 4 207 25. 18.29
Henry Rhines, $125 2 171 16. 16.52
W. Goldthwait 1 129 21.53 16.76
Ed. Daniels 1 219 25. 14.57
The closeness of the single and general averages is still without
parallel in a tournament of leading experts. Playing off, Rudolphe beat
both Foster and Snyder, and Foster, in defeating Snyder by 1200 to 872,
ran 492 and averaged 38.67—records in themselves without being records
of the tournament. Could Foster’s extra two games have been added to his
tournament six, he would have credited himself with the tournament’s
best run, its best single average, and its best general average (20.13).
All matches were for the Diamond Cue and a money-stake of $500 a side.
DEERY VS. FOSTER. Hippotheatron, N. Y. City, September 14, 1869. D.,
1500—20—174; Foster, 1229—154.
DEERY VS. C. DION. Mechanics’ Pavilion, San Francisco, January 8, 1870.
Deery, 1500—15.31—177; Dion, 1489—156.
DEERY VS. RUDOLPHE. Same hall, March 5, 1870. R., 1500—18.52—279; Deery,
1327—235.
RUDOLPHE VS. C. DION. Hippotheatron, N. Y. City, May 31st. R.,
1500—27.27—153; D., 1485—177. Instead of one referee and two umpires,
this contest had three joint referees, and an erroneous decision as to
count, thoughtlessly given by one without consulting another, the third
being absent temporarily, gave Rudolphe the match, $1,000 in stakes, and
about $1,750 in clear door-money, the largest ever realized from one
night’s play.
RUDOLPHE VS. J. DION. Apollo Hall, N. Y. City, October 7, 1870. R.,
1500—28.30—192; D., 1192—180.
RUDOLPHE VS. PARKER. Kremlin Hall, Buffalo, N. Y., January, 11, 1871.
P., 1500—18.29—144; R., 1235—162.
PARKER VS. C. DION. Crosby’s Opera House, Chicago, April 26, 1871. D.,
1500—19.48—183; P., 1164—168.
C. DION VS. DANIELS. Latter declared forfeit.
C. DION VS. FOSTER. Hippotheatron, N. Y. City, June 19, 1871. D.,
1500—24.59—186; F., 616—96.
C. DION VS. DEERY. Irving Hall, N. Y. City, November 29, 1872. Dion,
1500—16.67—321; Deery, 1201—81.
C. DION VS. DALY. Irving Hall, N. Y. City, January 2, 1873. Daly missed
victory through his failure to see, until too late for rectification
under the rules, that 15 points of his had not been marked up. When the
score-strings showed 1490 for Daly and 1486 for Dion, the contest was
annulled by an agreement to begin again, in Tammany Hall, January 9th.
Dion then, 1500—25.42—156; Daly, 1147—159.
C. DION VS. DALY. Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, May 16, 1873. Daly,
1500—26.79—195; Dion, 1261—147.
DALY VS. GARNIER. Same hall, October 2, 1873. G., 1500—31.25—171; D.,
1224—249.
October 6, Garnier resigned Diamond Cue to its surviving donor, H. W.
Collender, instead of to C. Dion, who on September 30 had challenged
winner of then pending Daly-Garnier match. Dion thereupon again became
champion.
C. DION VS. RUDOLPHE. Same hall, April 7, 1876. Fourteenth match and
thirteenth and last completed contest. Dion, 1500—40.54—228; Rudolphe,
392—108.
Time-limit, two years and a half, made the emblem Dion’s. Daly holds it
as a souvenir of his having held it as champion.
* * * * *
=Second Championship of Massachusetts.= Olympic Theatre, Boston, May
10–18, 1869.—500–point games. R. E. Wilmarth, champion cue and $250; A.
B. Williams, second (billiard-table); John H. Flack, third (gold watch
and chain). Other contestants were W. A. Tobin, John F. Murphy, L. S.
Brooks, Samuel Colby, and R. Davis. Stake in matches, $200.
WILMARTH VS. BROOKS. Bumstead Hall, Boston, December 10th. W.,
1200—10—87; B., 955—99.
WILMARTH VS. MURPHY. Same hall, January 24, 1870. W., 1200—16.67—93; M.,
846—69.
WILMARTH VS. B. FRANK DENNISON. Same hall, March 31, 1870. D.,
1200—16—208; W., 787—60.
DENNISON VS. TOBIN. Opera House, Springfield, Mass., June 30, 1870. D.,
1200—13.33—132; T., 1014—105.
* * * * *
=Chicago’s First Amateur Championship.= T. Foley’s Room, June 7–26,
1869.—500–point games. Clem Ellison won second in play-off, and fourth
went to Humphreys. Average of tournament, nine games apiece, 8.02. G. A.
of five leaders were: S., 12.06; E., 9.59; W., 9.34; H., 9.66; John W.
Blaisdell, the actor, 8.26.
W. R. Av.
Spear 9 87 10.23
Ellison 7 108 13.89
Watkins 7 85 12.82
Humphreys 6 111 11.11
Blaisdell 5 87 11.36
Kinzie 5 72 10.09
Stevens 3 63 7.41
O’Brien 2 51 7.14
Wilson 1 66 7.35
Pickley 0 51
* * * * *
=Second Championship of Maine.= Portland, August 2–7th. 500 points,
5½ × 11 four-pocket, unrestricted, and counted in old way. Henry F.
Shiel, unbeaten, won champion cue and $200; C. E. Smith, of Augusta,
billiard-table; and Smith, of Portland, gold watch. Others, J. M. Bonney
and George Swazey.
SHIEL VS. T. HERBERT WHITE. Portland, August 7, 1871. Former won by 1000
to 867.
SHIEL VS. C. E. SMITH. Lancaster Hall, Portland, June 28, 1871. Shiel,
1200—17.91—150; Smith, 818—115.
* * * * *
=Average of 1000.= Breed’s Hall, Norwich, Conn., August 4th.—First of
home-and-home, each for $200 a side, $50 forfeit, Melvin Foster to
discount Geo. T. Stone on 5½ × 11 carom, c. and p. both allowed, and
counting in the old way. Foster “crotched” out his whole 1000 in his
first inning. Stone, who made but 19, forfeited in return one, set for
Aborn Hall, New London, August 11th.
=Third Championship of Ohio.= Mozart Hall, Cincinnati, November 29th to
December 1st.—500–point games, 5½ × 11 carom. Williamson won play-off.
Average of tournament, three games apiece, 11.77. Match stake, $100 a
side, in games of 1000 points.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Williamson 2 108 13.51 12.02
Grunkemeyer 2 63 13.89 11.44
Casper 1 81 18.52 13.29
Cherry 1 57 13.51 10.47
Champions by turn were Williamson, Casper, Choate, Honing, and Choate
again. Honing made the best run of the match series, 192 against Choate,
May 17, 1871, in Cincinnati, and Choate the best winning average, 32.26
against Honing, same date.
* * * * *
=Choate vs. Jacob Garratt.= Respectively as champions of Ohio and
Indiana, they played a match of $200 a side in Indianapolis July 3, 1871
(C., 1200—22.22—126; G., 989—78); and in Hopkins’s Hall, Cincinnati,
July 18th following, they contended for the joint championship of the
two States, regardless of disability by reason of non-residence (G.,
1200—21.05—123; C., 1162—105). Both games, counted in threes, were on a
5 × 10, probably with push, but minus crotch; and on August 2, 1871, at
the Opera House, Springfield, O., Choate’s home, they played a purse
game on a 5½ × 11 carom, c. and p. barred (C., 1200—7.69—187; G.,
1170—141).
* * * * *
=Parker vs. Snyder.= December 4, 1869, Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago,
$250 a side. P., 1200—15.58—207; S., 1088—84.
* * * * *
=Second Championship of Indiana.= If there was a tournament, record of
it is altogether lacking. December 4, 1869, in Indianapolis, Alex.
McCracken, then champion, contended with John W. Gregg for the
championship and $200 on 5½ × 11 carom. G., 1200—19.05—126; McC.,
1111—126.
GARRATT VS. McCRACKEN. Record is lacking as to how Gregg relinquished
and Garratt acquired the championship. Washington Hall, Indianapolis,
April 4, 1870, Champion Jacob Garratt, 1200—22.22—93; McC., 1129—144.
GARRATT VS. GREGG. Same hall, January 9, 1871.—Garratt, 1200—15—90;
Gregg, 976—63.
GARRATT VS. CHOATE. For joint championship of Indiana and Ohio, July 18,
1871, see year 1869 under “Third Championship of Ohio.”
GARRATT VS. PARKER A. BYERS. Indianapolis, October 26, 1871.—For Indiana
championship. G., 1200—24—105; B., 1187—135.
Byers was afterward proclaimed champion, and for some time Indiana had
rival Billiard Associations and two championships.
GARST VS. GARRATT. Indianapolis, September 15, 1872.—New Billiard
Association, with Peter Garst as standard-bearer. Table, 5½ × 11 carom.
Garst won by 1500 to 1252.
BYERS VS. GARRATT. Lafayette, home of Byers, May 22, 1873.—$100 a side,
5 × 10 carom, “under the rules of the Indiana Billiard Association.” G.,
1500—41.67—114; B., 1194—120.
This closed the often puzzling four-ball record of professionals in
Indiana.
* * * * *
=First Case of Two Styles of Game in One Night.= Bumstead Hall, Boston,
December 13, 1869.—First of two games, each $100 a side (see Three-ball
Caroms, December 13, 1869, for second), 5½ × 11 carom, c. and p. b.
Melvin Foster, 750—44.12—426; E. Daniels, 645—147.
1870.
=Deery vs. C. Dion.= Platt’s Hall, San Francisco, February 3d.—$1,000 a
side. Deery, 1500—18.42—231; Dion, 1044—120.
* * * * *
=Parker vs. Adam Kleser.= Music Hall, Milwaukee, February 9th.—$100 a
side. P., 1200—42.86—277; K., 321—run, 42.
(See “Best Record Performances.”)
* * * * *
=Rudolphe vs. Deery.= Mercantile Library Hall, San Francisco, March
17th.—$1,500 a side. R., 1500—32.61—312; D., 970—174.
This contest was unique in having three judges in addition to a referee.
* * * * *
=Parker vs. Coon.= Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, April 11th.—$250 a
side. P., 1500—19.48—189; C., 1205—133.
* * * * *
=Second Championship of Maine.= First match was in Congress Hall,
Portland, May 13th.—$100 a side, on a 5½ × 11 four-pocket, surely
counting in threes, and supposedly j. and p. b. Champion, Henry Shiel,
1200—12.37—78; C. E. Smith, 1152—90.
* * * * *
=Second Amateur Championship of Long Island.= Assembly Rooms, Brooklyn,
May 23d to June 2d.—Five games apiece. Rogers, won 5; Kirkby, 4; Craft
and Upham, each 2; Roberts and Campbell, each 1. Of the matches, Kirkby
beat Rogers, December 16, 1870, by 500 to 393; Earle, January 11, 1871,
by 500 to 338; Aaron Vandewerker, January 26, 1871, by 500 to 375 (table
changed from 5½ × 11 four-pocket to a carom of same size); and
Vandewerker again, May 22, 1871, by 500 to 296. On October 17, 1871, it
was Rogers, 500—20—99; Kirkby, 307—63, and on January 17, 1872, it was
Rogers, 500—17.86—99; Rapelye, 375—108. Rogers’s 20 was high average,
and the best carom-table run, next to the 108 and the two 99’s, was
Kirkby’s 87 against Vandewerker.
* * * * *
=Experts’ Game, Also Known as “Red, White and Blue.”= Hippotheatron, N.
Y. City, June 1st.—500 points, $250 purse. J. Dion, 300—5.36—25; M.
Foster, 260—28.
This was the first game designed to suppress nursing. Instead of two
reds, one red and a blue were used with two whites. The game had special
rules, but its chief feature consisted in prohibiting the striker from
playing on the nearer ball first when both were within a certain
distance of each other. While 500 points had not been found too long in
practising for the match, they proved too many in public competition,
and when 100 points had been scored it was decided to shorten the game
by two-fifths.
* * * * *
=Rudolphe vs. C. Dion.= Hippotheatron, N. Y. City, June 17, 1870.—$500 a
side. D., 1500—27.27—193; R., 1090—246.
* * * * *
=New Championship of California.= Platt’s Hall, San Francisco, June
18th.—Match for silver cue and $400, 5½ × 11 carom, c. and p. b., and
counted in threes. Joseph W. Little, averaging 16, won by 1200 to John
F. B. McCleery’s 669. Congress Hall, same city, November 18th: McCleery,
1200—19.67—93; L., 836—93. See 1872 for another new series.
* * * * *
=G. F. Slosson’s First Public Match.= Opera House, Springfield, Mass.,
October 13th.—B. Frank Dennison giving odds of 300 in points and $200 to
$100 in money. D., 1000—76.92—355; S., 684—138. This was counted in the
old way, and was probably on a 5 × 10 carom-table.
* * * * *
=C. Dion vs. Dennison.= M. H. Hewins’s Room, Hartford, Conn., November
3d.—Purse game, carom-table, c. and p. b., counting in threes, and Dion
giving odds of 250. Dion, 1000—52.63—171; Dennison, 577 (with odds)—57.
A similar contest, $200 a side, was begun at once, odds now being 250.
Dion, 1000—125—330; Dennison, 478 (with odds)—run not known.
* * * * *
=J. Dion vs. Deery.= San Francisco, November 26th.—$1,000 a side. Dion,
1500—22.38—315; Deery, 896—115.
* * * * *
=C. Dion vs. Rudolphe.= Academy of Music, N. Y. City, December
28th.—$1,000 a side, Rudolphe giving odds of 5 per cent. D., 2000—20 (in
1900)—141; R., 989—315.
1871.
=First Public Handicap Tournament.= Allyn Hall, Hartford, February 23d
to March 1st.—Five games apiece, Clark E. Wilson winning 4, and prize
cue and $250. Melvin Foster, M. H. Hewins and Geo. T. Stone 3 apiece, B.
F. Dennison 2, and Wm. Bowen 0. In playing off the ties, Hewins beat
Stone and won third ($50), and Foster beat both. In round numbers, the
general averages were: F., 18; S., 13; W., 12; Dennison, 11; Hewins, 10.
Bowen forfeited two games.
* * * * *
=First Known Use of 5 × 10 in Four-ball Game.= Academy of Music,
Lafayette, Ind., March 2d.—$400. Parker A. Byers, 1200—24—96; Wm. F.
Kenny, 817—108. The 5 × 10 is to be suspected of having been utilized in
this way once or twice before, but this is the first sure case.
* * * * *
=Slosson and Daly’s First Tournament.= Rochester, N. Y., March 28th to
April 1st.—1000–point games, counted in threes, p. and c. barred, but on
a 5½ × 11 carom. Daly won play-off, and Slosson the $25 extra for
highest run. Six games apiece.
W. R. Av.
G. F. Slosson, $200 6 342 52.63
M. Daly, $70 4 240 71.43
Eugene Kimball, $30 4 186 37.04
Wm. Jakes 3 207 26.32
Jeff. Ferguson 2 234 41.67
Frank Fitch 1 240
Frank Twitchell 1 28.57
* * * * *
=Rudolphe vs. J. Dion.= Platt’s Hall, San Francisco, April 1st.—Second
of three games, every one for $1,000 a side. R., 1500—20.27—228; D.,
1288—207. For third, see Three-ball Caroms. The first, English
winning-and-losing, caroms and pocketings, with 2⅛ balls on an English
6 × 12 six-pocket table, was played in same hall, March 15th. Dion,
1000—4.24—29; R., 956—40.
* * * * *
=Plunkett vs. Nelms.= Assembly Buildings, Philadelphia, May 23d.—$250 a
side, counted in the old way on a 5½ × 11 carom. P., 1500—28.85—132; N.,
1183—138.
* * * * *
=Championship of Canada.= Also on 5½ × 11 carom, Montreal, July
18–27th.—Frank Dion first (gold-mounted cue and $100), John Hickey
second ($60), and Thos. Russell third ($40). Jas. G. Bennett, Alphonse
Derome, Chas. Egener, Thos. Knox, and Jas. Phelan were the others. Match
record is incomplete. January 19, 1872: J. G. Bennett, 1500—18.07—75; A.
Derome, 1259—105; and March 20, 1872, Wm. Jakes defeated Bennett by 1500
to 1183. Each match was for $100 a side, and both were played in
Montreal.
* * * * *
=G. F. Slosson vs. Eugene Carter.= Toledo, O., July 26th.—$500 a side.
S., 1500—av. about 27; C., 1032.
* * * * *
=A Wrong Decision Makes a Second Game.= Apollo Hall, Newark, N. J.,
August 14th.—C. A. Frink vs. Ebenezer Francis, $250 a side, carom table.
As Francis made apparently the winning shot, spectators closed in,
causing his cue to touch a ball. Frink claimed foul, the referee so
ruled, and Frink, with a run of 82, changed score to 1500 to 1497 in his
favor, with an average of 28.25. Francis protested against payment of
stakes, and another game was played in same hall August 21st. Francis,
1500—24.19—154; Frink, 1378—141.
* * * * *
=Maurice Daly’s First Public Match.= Athenæum, Brooklyn, September
15th.—$50 a side, usual way of going, but on a carom table (5½ × 11).
D., 1500—93.75—357; A. W. Jamison, 414—105.
* * * * *
=Garnier vs. Daly.= Metropolitan Hall, Chicago, October 2d.—First of
home-and-home, $1,000 each game, usual terms. G., 1500—26.79—201; D.,
1365—159.
Return, Irving Hall, N. Y. City, October 27th.—D., 1500—25—327; G.,
1230—132.
This tie was virtually disposed of in Titusville, Pa., December 6th.
First of two games (see Three-ball Caroms for second), severally for
$250 and $200 a side. D., 1500—34.69—291; G. scored 698.
* * * * *
=Byron Gillett vs. G. F. Slosson.= Stancliff Hall, November 1st.—$250 a
side, carom table G., 1500—50—267; S., 1263—240.
1872.
=Amateur Championship of Long Island.= Assembly Rooms, Brooklyn, March
11–12th.—Carom table of usual size, cue to become personal property of
tournament winner. Two games each.
W. R. Av. G. A.
S. Rapelye 2 64 16.31 14.08
F. Rogers 1 99 17.24 15.08
A. Vanderwerker 0 9.10
* * * * *
=Championship of Pacific Coast.= Platt’s Hall, San Francisco, March
21st.—Silver cue and $200 a side, 5 × 10 carom. J. F. B. McCleery,
1500—28.85—207; W. W. Wright, 900—117. Same hall, May 7th, A. Kraker,
1500—38.46—147; McC., 754—150. Same hall, October 25th, Kraker,
1500—83.33—348; McC., 930—234.
* * * * *
=Championship of Massachusetts.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, December
9–12th.—Entrance fee $50, 600–point games, carom table, 5 × 10. First
prize, cue and $300; second, billiard-table; third, $150. Nothing to
indicate general averages or disposition of ties. Five games apiece.
W. R. Av.
Ed. Kendall 4 219 66.67
John Peck 3 213 35.29
R. E. Wilmarth 3 201 40.
B. F. Dennison 3 276 46.15
C. E. Wilson 2 195 42.86
T. R. Bullock 0 123
KENDALL VS. JOHN HICKEY. Same hall, February 11, 1873, stake $100 a side
and championship. K., 1500—31.58—186; H., 1225—168.
KENDALL VS. WILSON. Same hall, March 11, 1873. W., 1500—33.44—273, K.,
1410—150.
WILSON VS. DENNISON. Same hall, April 2, 1873. D., 1500—46.88—330; W.,
741—159.
DENNISON VS. BULLOCK. Same hall, April 28, 1873. D., 1500—40.54—120; B.,
784—207.
DENNISON VS. KENDALL. Same hall, October 24, 1873. K., 1500—52.41—273;
D., 1485—285.
1873.
[This year and thenceforward, except when otherwise stated, 5 × 10
carom, c. and p. barred, counting in threes.]
=Dennison vs. J. G. Bennett.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, April 14th.—$200 a
side. D., 1500—83.33—300; B., 579—240.
* * * * *
=Slosson vs. John Bessunger.= Kingsbury Hall, Chicago, September
9th.—$250 a side. S., 2000—142.86—534; B., 216—run, 108. On the prior
April 19th they had played a similar match in Chicago. S.,
2000—44.44—279; B., 1969—213.
* * * * *
=Dennison vs. Goldthwait.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, September 18th.—$100 a
side. D., 1500—65.22—417; G., 819—216.
1874.
=Louisiana Double Championship.= Crescent Hall, New Orleans, April
6–30th.—Tournament at both four-ball and three-ball games. (For second,
see Three-ball Caroms.) First prize, championship locket and $100;
second, $50. Six games apiece. Average of tournament, about 13¼.
Individual G. A.: H., 14.40; H. M., 20.61; C., 10.11; J. M., 14.31; J.
F. M., 15.25; A., 10.31; Q., 10.65.
W. R. Av.
Albert Hoa 5 77 21.36
H. Miller 4 92 30.
A. Coste 3 91 14.29
J. Miller 3 86 10.71
J. F. Maggioli 3 93 23.08
L. Abrams 2 96 21.43
Chas. Quaid 1 128 18.75
HOA VS. H. MILLER. Same hall, June 1st.—Match, stake $50. M.,
500—20.83—155; H., 180—36.
H. MILLER VS. MAGGIOLI. Varieties Theatre, New Orleans, March 4, 1876.
Miller, 500—33.33—91; Maggioli, 360—77.
1876.
=Slosson vs. Sexton.= Foley’s Room, Chicago, September 17th.—Purse game,
5½ × 11 four-pocket table, counting in the old way. Slosson,
2000—33.33—356; Sexton, 1730—257. [The night before they had played the
three-ball game on the same table. Slosson, 600—8.22—137; Sexton’s
total, 278.]
Those games were not matches, and are not records. Not being matches,
they furnished no line at all as to Old Billiards vs. New. This is the
final four-ball chronicle as to professed experts of standing. The
revival of contests on pocketless tables, tested as early as 1860, and
abandoned outside of Philadelphia as too repressive of “safety,” or
generalship, had brought the game into disesteem for spectacular uses.
So small a table as a 5 × 10 for that way of going was almost a
burlesque of competitive billiards in the hands even of approximate
masters; and yet it remained for four-ball caroms to be played, although
by an inferior class of experts in the remoter West, on a 4½ × 9 carom!
BEST RECORD PERFORMANCES AT FOUR-BALL CAROMS
IN MATCHES FOR A GENERAL CHAMPIONSHIP.
BEST AVERAGES ON 6 × 12 FOUR-POCKET TABLE.
166.67 in 1500, jawing barred, pushing allowed—J. McDevitt, 1868
(see series under 1863).
25.86 in 1500, push and jaw allowed—J. Dion, 1866 (see series under
1863).
BEST RUNS ON 6 × 12 FOUR-POCKET TABLE.
1458, jaw barred, push allowed—J. McDevitt, 1868.
616, due to jawing—J. Dion, 1867. (See series under 1863 for both.)
BEST AVERAGES ON 5½ × 11 FOUR-POCKET TABLE.
40.54 in 1500, push and jaw barred—C. Dion, 1876.
31.25 in 1500, push and jaw barred—A. Garnier, 1873. (See series
under 1869 for both.)
RUNS ON 5½ × 11 FOUR-POCKET TABLE.
321 by C. Dion, 1872; 279 by A. P. Rudolphe, 1870; and 249 by
Maurice Daly, 1873—all push and jaw barred. (See series under 1869.)
PUBLIC CONTESTS NOT FOR GENERAL CHAMPIONSHIP.
BEST AVERAGES ON 6 × 12 SIX-POCKET TABLE.
12.20 in 2000—Michael Phelan, 1859.
17.24 in 1500—John McDevitt, 1863.
10.00 in 1500, push and massé barred—Dudley Kavanagh, 1862.
BEST RUNS ON 6 × 12 SIX-POCKET TABLE.
177 by Dudley Kavanagh, 157 by John Seereiter, and 129 by Michael
Phelan, all in 1859.
90, push and massé barred—Michael Foley, 1862.
BEST AVERAGES ON 6 × 12 FOUR-POCKET TABLE.
8.40 in 1000, push and jaw barred—Michael Phelan, 1864.
166.67 (by jawing and pushing)—John McDevitt, 1868.
BEST RUNS ON 6 × 12 FOUR-POCKET.
56, push and jaw barred—Michael Phelan, 1864.
1483, by jawing and pushing—John McDevitt, 1868.
BEST AVERAGES ON A 5½ × 11 FOUR-POCKET.
42.86 in 1200, push and jaw barred—Frank Parker, 1870.
BEST RUNS ON A 5½ × 11 FOUR-POCKET.
492, push and jaw barred—Melvin Foster, 1869.
327, push and jaw barred—Maurice Daly, 1871.
315, push and jaw barred—J. Dion and A. P. Rudolphe, 1870.
BEST AVERAGES ON A CAROM TABLE.
15.38 in 1200, push and crotch barred, size 6 × 12—Victor Estephe,
1865.
25.00 in 1500, push barred, crotching allowed, but none done, size
5½ × 11, 2–5/16 balls—Dudley Kavanagh, 1865.
39.47 in 750, push barred, but average due to crotching, 5½ × 11,
2–5/16 balls—J. Dion, 1866.
33.33 in 1500, crotch barred, push allowed, 6 × 12—E. H. Nelms,
1867.
1000 in 1000, push and crotch allowed, 5½ × 11—Melvin Foster, 1869.
32.26 in 1000, push allowed, crotch barred, 5½ × 11 table, $500 a
side—W. W. Wright, Virginia City, N. T., December 11, 1868. Loser,
C. A. W. Jamison, who was given odds of discount, averaged 51.23 in
his total of 1537.
93.75 in 1500, 5½ × 11, crotch barred—M. Daly, 1871.
BEST RUNS ON CAROM TABLE
543, crotching barred, push allowed, 6 × 12—E. H. Nelms, 1867.
297, by crotching on a 5½ × 11—J. Dion, 1866.
1000 (whole game), by pushing and crotching, 5½ × 11—Melvin Foster,
1869.
BEST AVERAGE IN TOURNAMENT.
100 in 300, 5½ × 11 four-pocket, no restrictions—M. Foster, 1867.
NOTE.—No account has been taken here of either tournament games or
matches on any table smaller than a 5½ × 11, which was the
first-class professionals’ limit.
REGULAR THREE-BALL CAROMS.
[Unless otherwise stated, all play was with 2⅜ balls, and, with but
few exceptions, on a Phelan & Collender, a Collender or a
Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. 5 × 10 carom table, crotching not
barred until 1870.]
ABBREVIATIONS.—This succession—Player, 250—10.—54; Player,
212—69—stands for winner’s total, average, and high run, and loser’s
total and high run.
1862.
=First Public Match.= Louis Fox, of Rochester vs. John Deery, of N. Y.
City, $250 a side, 250 points up, 6 × 12 four-pocket table, was the
first match made at this game with any idea of playing it in public. It
was set for Buffalo, N. Y., but the Deery side forfeited on November
7th.
1864.
=First Technically Public Contest.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, afternoon
of April 8th.—$250 a side, 6 × 12 four-pocket table, in aid of the
Workingwomen’s Protective Union. Peter D. Braisted, Jr., 100; Wm. H.
Freeman, 79. Players were not of the first class, and hence runs and
averages were not tallied for publication.
There had, of course, been many earlier match-contests, both amateur and
professional; but those and scores of others before them were of the
nature of billiard-room contests, with the exception that Michael Phelan
and Ralph Benjamin’s in Philadelphia, in 1857, was a formal match,
although not public, each principal being limited to a certain number of
friends as spectators.
1865.
=First Formal Public Contest.= Gallaher’s Hall, N. Y. City, October
5th.—First of the three-game match (see, Four-ball for others), $1,000 a
side, 5½ × 11 carom, 2–5/16 balls. Pierre Carme, from France: Total,
250—winning average, 2.48—high run, 19; Dudley Kavanagh, 224—15.
[Note.—This is the order of all matches, the loser’s average being
omitted as not a technical record.]
The table was a compromise in height between the French and the
American.
1868.
=First Match on a 5 × 10 Carom.= For this reason, a billiard-room match
merits mention. This size is not known to have been used again in any
expert match in this country until 1870.
Peter D. Braisted’s Room, N. Y. City, January 21st.—$50 a side Wm. N.
Wickes, amateur, 150—2.86—15; Braisted, 47—5.
* * * * *
=Melvin Foster vs. John Deery.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, September
30th.—$250 a side, 5½ × 11 carom. Foster, 300—2.80—40; D., 184—24.
* * * * *
=Foster vs. Joseph Dion.= Academy of Music, N. Y. City, December
28th.—Second game of match of three (see Four-ball for others), $1,000 a
side, 5½ × 11 carom. F., 300—1.73—21; D., 296—11. Catching the draughts
and blasts from the untenanted stage, the balls were ice, the cues
icicles, and the players paralytics in sheer numbness.
1869.
=Foster vs. Benjamin.= Braisted’s Room, N. Y. City, January 6th.—F.
giving 150 in 300 and laying $100 to $80, 5½ × 11 carom. F.,
300—1.94—16; B., 131 (without odds)—14.
Not a record except as a match in which, for many successive innings,
both men played alternately for “safety” without leaving their seats.
Foster, who began it, had to quit, as he was behind, and the misses, if
continued, would have put his opponent out. This contest suggested the
rule of 1879, illegalizing more than two consecutive misses.
* * * * *
=Foster vs. Deery.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, April 23d.—$250 a side,
5½ × 11 four-pocket. F., 300—2.80—18; D., 183—14.
* * * * *
=McDevitt vs. C. Dion.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, May 10, $500, 5¼ × 11
four-pocket. D., 300—2.03—19; MCD., 299—29.
* * * * *
=Ralph Benjamin vs. M. H. Hewins.= Town Hall, Meriden, Conn., November
23d.—$100 a side, 5½ × 11 four-pocket. B., 150; H., 132. On the same
terms, Hewins had won in Meriden, Conn., August 21st, by 150 to 130, and
Benjamin had won return game in Portchester, N. Y., October 22d, by
protesting against referee’s decision as to a shot claimed as foul
(actual score, 150 to 149 in favor of Hewins). Best runs in the three
games: B., 7, 8, and 11; H., 7, 10, 8. Winning averages, barring
protested game, 1.50 each.
1870.
=Geo. T. Stone vs. Hewins.= Music Hall, New Haven, Conn., January
4th.—$300 a side, Stone giving odds of 60, probably a 5½ × 11 carom. S.,
300—1.63—11; H., 267—11.
* * * * *
=First Public Match Contest at the West.= Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago,
January 19th.—$200 a side, 5½ × 11 carom, Frank Parker defeating Henry
Rhines by 300 to 260. There had been an announced three-ball match at
the West a year or so before, but it was really an exhibition.
* * * * *
=Carme vs. Henry Miller.= National Theatre, New Orleans, March
24–25th.—Two games, each $250 a side, Carme giving odds of 150. First
game: M., 500—3.98 (in 350)—56; C., 374—29. Second game: C.,
500—6.49—85; M., 388—31. Table was surely no larger than 5 × 10.
* * * * *
=J. W. Coon vs. Frank Parker.= Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, April
25th.—$250 a side, 5½ × 11 carom. C., 500—2.90—24; P., 499—17.
* * * * *
=First Three-ball State Championship.= Assembly Rooms, Philadelphia,
April 25–30th.—First tournament for championship of Pennsylvania,
5½ × 11 carom. E. J. Plunkett, 6—0; E. H. Nelms, 5—1; Wm. Rockhill, 4—2;
James Palmer, 3—3; Robt. Hunter, 2—4; McAlier, 1—5; Doyle, 0—6.
Prizes—1st., cue and billiard-table; 2d, $150; third, $70.
=Plunkett vs. Nelms.=—Same hall, January 18, 1872.—First match for
champion cue. N., 200—av., 2—run, 22; P., 168—18.
* * * * *
=Michael Honohan vs. Abraham Bassford.= Crosby’s Music Hall,
Chicago.—$100 a side, 5 × 10 carom. H., 300—2.63—17; B., 191—17.
* * * * *
=First Known Case of Crotching Barred.= Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago,
October 19th.—$250 a side, 5½ × 11 carom, c. b. Frank Parker and Henry
Rhines, 400—3.07 and 2.54—19 and 17; Peter Snyder and John W. Coon,
264—2.26 and 1.51—13 and 12.
As far back as 1860–1, a run of 40 had been crotched (or jawed, in
fact), in a non-public match at the three-ball game; and that crotching
was not specifically barred before 1870 was because, until small tables
came into vogue, it was theoretically twice as hard to get the crotch at
three-ball caroms as at four-ball, and practically much harder.
1871.
[In this and all later years, table a 5 × 10 carom, with crotch
barred, unless mentioned differently.]
=First Match on a 5 × 10 Between First-Class Players.= Platt’s Hall, San
Francisco, January 12th.—$500 a side. J. Dion, 500—3.60—46; Deery,
474—37.
January 26th, same hall and stake, Dion giving odds of 100. Deery,
600—3.73 (in 500)—57; Dion, 479—42.
February 9th, same place and stake, Dion now giving 50. Deery, 600—5.98
(in 550)—83; Dion, 491—25.
These were the first public three-ball contests at odds between
first-class players, and the odds was always marked up at the start of
the game, instead of, as usual now, one man’s going to 500 against the
other’s 600. Practically, or temperamentally, there is often a
difference between ways that theoretically seem the same.
* * * * *
=Rudolphe vs. Garnier.= Apollo Hall, N. Y. City, January 21st.—$500 a
side, 5½ × 11 carom, crotch not barred, but no crotching, Garnier
receiving odds of 15 per cent. Rudolphe, 600—5.46—72; G., 510—28.
* * * * *
=C. Dion vs. Daniels.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, January 24th.—$250 a side,
5½ × 11 carom, no bar. Dion won by 300 to 131, with 38 against 12 for
best run.
* * * * *
=First Professional Tournament at Three-ball Game, and Also First
Championship of the Northwest.= Chicago, February 2–28th.—Games 300
points, balls 2–5/16. Playing off, Foley beat Pearce, and Coon both
Pearce and Foley. Six games apiece.
W. R. Av.
H. Rhines 5 34 4.84
J. W. Coon 4 36 4.41
T. Foley 4 32 4.55
P. J. Pearce 4 23 3.
J. Vermeulen 3 30 3.75
A. Le Brun 1 18 2.88
H. Liverman 0 29
The 2–5/16 ball had not been used in tournament before, and has been
availed of in but one since. It makes “position draws” harder, and
failures easier by an eighth of an inch. Yet it made less difference
then than it would make now. There was but one match.
RHINES VS. COON.—Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, May 27th.—$250 a side,
same balls. R., 400—4.82—54; C., 295—18.
* * * * *
=Coon vs. Garnier.= Same hall as above, March 8th.—$200, 5½ × 11 carom.
C., 600 (odds of 100)—4.76 in 500—58; G., 522—35.
* * * * *
=Coon vs. Parker.= Same hall and table, March 11th.—$500. C.,
400—3.48—22; P., 320—29.
* * * * *
=Parker vs. Rhines.= Same hall and table, March 22d.—$500. P.,
400—2.44—26; R., 369—29.
* * * * *
=C. Dion vs. Deery.= Platt’s Hall, San Francisco, April 7th.—$500 a
side. Dion, 500—6.41—58; Deery, 476—73.
* * * * *
=J. Dion vs. Rudolphe.= Congress Hall, San Francisco, April 17th.—Third
and last of three games (see Four-ball Game for both that style and
English billiards for $1,000 apiece). D., 500—4.72—(run not recorded);
R., 472—69.
* * * * *
=Daly vs. Rhines.= Brooklyn Hall, Brooklyn, N. Y., November 6th.—$500 a
side. Daly, 500—4.27—44; R., 397—58.
* * * * *
=First Triple-figure Runs.= National Theatre, New Orleans, November
20th, 22d, 25th.—Separate games, $500 apiece, crotch probably not
barred. Joseph Dion won by 500 to 479, 365, and 268, including odds of
150 received invariably by Henry Miller. Winner’s averages: 4.95, 6.85,
and 8.94. Best runs per game: D., 48, 105, 107; M., 29, 23, 11. [In this
city, January 16, 1872, C. Dion ran 109, mainly in the crotch of a
5 × 10; but as a billiard-room match it was not a record.]
* * * * *
=First Double-figure Average.= Corinthian Hall, Titusville, Pa.,
December 7th.—$250 a side. Garnier, 500—10.42—80; Daly, 233—27.
1872.
=Garnier and Rhines vs. Deery and Parker.= Orpheus Hall, Chicago, May
25th.—$250 a side. G. and R., 336 and 164 (500)—7 and 3.49—82 and 27; D.
and P., 181 and 191 (372)—3.85 and 4.07—32 and 46.
* * * * *
=Parker vs. Rhines.= Orpheus Hall, Chicago, July 1st.—$500 a side,
5 × 10 carom. P., 500—4.94—44; R., 359—27.
* * * * *
=Daly vs. Deery.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, September 3d and 13th.—Match
of 500 and 600 points, each for $1,000 a side, c. b. Resulted from match
for $250 a side, played July 25th in the private room at Chris.
O’Connor’s, Daly then winning by 500 to 455, averaging 4, and running 56
against 31. September 3d: Daly, 500—6.94—59; Deery, 292—41. September
13th: Daly, 600—6.25—54; Deery, 406—63.
1873.
=Francois Ubassy vs. Henry Miller and John Bessunger.= In Harmony Hall,
New Orleans, and in Nixon’s Amphitheatre and the Globe Theatre, Chicago,
Ubassy gave odds varying from “discount” to 200 in 600 and 300 in 800,
in April, May, and June. The half dozen contests were of importance
chiefly by reason of Ubassy’s runs and averages. The highest of the
former were 117 and 116; of the latter, 15.79 in 300 in New Orleans and
17.78 in 800 in Chicago.
* * * * *
=Amateur Championship of Louisiana.= New Orleans, May 12th to
28th.—Tournament of 200–point games on a 4½ × 9 carom table. This series
was so called not so much because quite all the contestants were clearly
non-professionals as for the reason that any professional championship
at that precise time would have fallen to either Henry Miller or his
brother John, then first and second best players in the State. All
matches of the new series were 300 up, on a 4½ × 9 table, for a stake of
$100 a side, and played in New Orleans. Record of tournament, four games
apiece:
W. R. Av.
F. Maggioli 4 22 4.17
L. Abrams 3 43 5.88
A. Coste 2 34 4.57[2]
J. Cochran 1 20 2.78
C. Blanchard 0 38
Footnote 2:
A losing average.
From June 10th of this year until July 14, 1874, there were a dozen or
two matches, Maggioli, Abrams and Choate taking turns as champions.
Ultimately, the emblem became Maggioli’s permanently. The highest run of
the series was 60, and the highest average 12, both by Maggioli.
* * * * *
=First Championship of the World.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, June
23–30th.—First first-class professional tournament anywhere at
three-ball caroms. Games, five apiece, 300 points. This tournament made
the 5 × 10 carom table, bar crotch (4½ in. in all directions from the
cushion-junction), the standard. Garnier and C. Dion first and second
after playing off.
W. H. R. Av. G. A.
Garnier 4 113 12. 9.32
C. Dion 4 77 10.75 7.57
Daly 4 62 9.68 7.01
Ubassy 2 98 17.65 8.53
J. Dion 1 64 10. 5.60
Deery 0 79 6.08
Average of tournament, 7.89.
All matches were for the Challenge Cup and $1,000 a side, and all but
the last were played in Tammany Hall, N. Y. City.
GARNIER VS. C. DION. December 2d.—G., 600—10—68; D., 480—61.
GARNIER VS. UBASSY. January 30, 1874.—G., 600—8.70—108; U., 460—50.
GARNIER VS. DALY. April 3, 1874.—G., 600—12.77—75; D., 380—62.
GARNIER VS. RUDOLPHE. December 10, 1874.—R., 600—14.63—161; G., 387—101.
RUDOLPHE VS. MAURICE VIGNAUX. February 22, 1875.—V., 600—10.17—60; R.,
556—58.
VIGNAUX VS. SEXTON. Grand Hotel, Paris, France, March 3, 1876.—V.,
600—19.35; S., 459—run, 129.
* * * * *
=Jacob Schaefer’s Public Debut.= Washington Hall, Indianapolis, July
25th.—Purse game. Schaefer, 300—4.84—38; Parker A. Byers, 183—20. He had
also pursed two weeks before, Jacob Garratt beating him by 1000 to 932;
but it was at the four-ball game, and in Garratt’s Indianapolis
billiard-room.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Pacific Coast.= Mercantile Library Hall, San
Francisco, August 25–30, 1873.—Tournament for championship, a silver cup
and $650. Games, 200 points, six apiece. Mott won play-off.
W. R. Av.
J. McCleery 6 31 3.39
Tony Kraker 5 30 4.65
J.H Mott, Jr. 3 32 3.92
Wm. Terrell 3 18 2.79
W. W. Wright 2 32 2.73[3]
J. W. Little 1 26 2.90
L. W. Perkins 1 23 2.53[3]
Footnote 3:
Losing averages.
=Slosson and Schaefer’s First Meeting.= October 5, 1873, Indianapolis,
$100 a side, was the first meeting between a pair that have met oftener
in public than any other two. Slosson, 500—5.32—35; Schaefer, 321—45.
* * * * *
=Slosson vs. Daly.= Kingsbury Hall, Chicago, November 8th.—$500 a side,
Daly giving odds of 100. S., 600—5.68 (in 500); D., 593—44.
* * * * *
=Chicago’s First First-Class Tournament.= Kingsbury Hall, November
10–21st.—Aggregate, $3,100 in cash prizes, seven 400–point games apiece.
Garnier and Daly won in playing off. Average of tournament, 6.46.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Garnier 6 82 17.35 9.88
Ubassy 6 69 12.90 7.98
C. Dion 5 86 8.52 6.56
Daly 4 153 12.12 7.44
J. Dion 4 124 7.18[4] 5.60
Slosson 2 68 9.09 6.53
Bessunger 1 71 7.28[4] 5.66
Snyder 0 48 3.72
Footnote 4:
The 7.18 and 7.28 were not winning averages.
In tabulating this tournament originally, the mistake was made of
including the tie or extra games. Omitting them makes a slight
difference in the general averages of Garnier, Ubassy and Daly, but none
at all in J. Dion’s.
* * * * *
=First Three-ball Championship of Massachusetts.= Boston, closing
December 5, 1873. Three prizes for place, and one for high run. Five
games apiece.
W. R. Av. G. A.
J. Hickey 4 34 6.67 3.74
F. Dennison 3 45 3.08 2.80
C. E. Wilson 3 51 4. 2.76
J. Peck 2 22 2.06[5] 2.27
Lon Morris 2 37 3.77 2.80
D. T. Pulsifer 1 24 2.60 2.30
Footnote 5:
The 2.06 was a losing average.
Match-stake was $200, but there was only one contest—Bumstead Hall,
Boston, January 7, 1874. Hickey, 400—3.40—22; Dennison, 323—26. On March
3 following, when there was no challenge outstanding, H. resigned emblem
to Massachusetts Billiard Congress.
* * * * *
=Tournament at Two Different Games.= (See Four-ball Game, 1874, for
one.) New Orleans, April 6–30th.—200 points up, for three prizes. Called
an amateur tournament. Hoa won play-off.
W. R. Av. G. A.
H. Miller 5 58 9.52 5.37
A. Hoa 4 48 5.55 3.93
J. Miller 4 29 3.88 3.20
F. Maggioli 3 47 4.08 3.34
A. Coste 3 33 4. 3.03
L. Abrams 1 27 4.65 3.60
C. Quaid 1 32 3.98[6] 2.68
Footnote 6:
Quaid’s 3.98 was a losing average—beaten by one point.
MILLER VS. HOA. New Orleans, July 1st.—M., 300—3.33—20; H., 285—29. In
this match, as in the other, the stake was the championship and $25 a
side.
MILLER VS. MAGGIOLI. Same city, September 1st.—Maggioli, 300—3.85—33;
Miller, 277—21.
1874.
=First Game of Multiple Nights in America.= Fall River, Mass., January
19–27th.—Wm. Briggs vs. Jerry Sullivan, for championship of Fall River
and a silver cup, played in nightly blocks. Nothing reported but totals
and best runs. B., 1500—26; S., 1449—19.
Multiple nights’ play, since carried to an extreme in England,
originated in France in 1867.
* * * * *
=First First-Class Tournament in Boston.= Bumstead Hall, March
9–13th.—There was a prize for every player, and there was also poor
playing for every prize, Garnier’s 78, 7.84 and 5.90 being best run,
winning average and general average. This was the order of the
prize-winners: Garnier, C. Dion, J. Dion, Ubassy, and Daly.
* * * * *
=Daly vs. C. Dion.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, March 3d.—$1,000 a side.
Daly, 600—8.95—212; Dion, 547—81. Daly here beat the record run, which
was his own 153.
* * * * *
=C. Dion vs. Daly.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, May 15th.—$2,000. Dion,
600—8.22—83; Daly, 578—94.
* * * * *
=Ubassy vs. Garnier.= Same hall, May 24th.—Purse game. U., 600—8.33—68;
G., 446—61.
* * * * *
=Wm. M. Dodds vs. E. H. Nelms.= Assembly Buildings, Philadelphia, May
27th.—$250 a side, probably a 5½ × 11. D., 400—3.25—27; N., 334—28.
Same hall, same terms, June 30th.—N., 400—3.20—48; D., 391—31.
* * * * *
=Rudolphe vs. C. Dion.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, September 18th.—$500 a
side. R., 600—12—79; D., 338—55.
This led to a $200 “freeze-out,” $50 a game, played September 21–22 in
Tim Flynn’s room, and lasting from 8.45 P.M. until 9.30 A.M. Games (100
up) and total points: R., 13—1349; D., 9—1266.
* * * * *
=Rudolphe vs. Wm. Cook, Champion of England.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City,
October 9th.—$1,000 a side, with 2–1/16 balls on an English six-pocket
table, 6 × 12 inside measurement. R., 400—1.96—26; C., 274—16.
* * * * *
=Amateur Championship of Long Island.= Assembly Rooms, Brooklyn, N. Y.,
beginning October 26th.—Tournament for gold-mounted cue and $50 for
first, and $75 apportioned as other prizes. Games, 200 points, with
eleven entries. Samuel F. Knight and Joseph Pihet tied. After Knight had
won the play-off, the loser protested on the ground that Knight, the
year before, had received pay for marking in a professional tournament,
and the cue and the $50 were awarded to Pihet. Later, there were half a
dozen or more matches for the emblem, with varying results.
=First Three-ball Championship of America.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City,
November 4–13th.—Special prizes were a gold watch from Capt. Fred Grote
for best run, a watch from Peter Totans for best general average, and an
emblematic gold medal from Matthew Delancy. There were also a number of
special playing-rules, no one of which outlasted the championship
itself. Among them was one to bar crotching by requiring a 5½-in.
oblique line on the bed of the table. This had been suggested for
another end in the Dion-Foster match in Montreal in 1869 (see “First
Protest” under Four-ball Game). Accomplishing nothing except actually to
increase the crotching area by an inch, this, too, was speedily
abandoned, an imaginary line (on the principle of the spot-radius in the
three-ball game and the “string” in the four-ball) having been
sufficient ever since 1862.
The tournament itself was an emphatic success, but the strange rules
confused the public and irritated the players; and for the first time in
a professional tournament a game was not completed, and for the first
time, also, a referee was impelled, in self-respect, to vacate his
office in rebuke of a player who refused to defer to the official
ruling. It is necessary to mention the unfinished game (Garnier ahead of
Ubassy by 274 to 246) for the reason that, as his general average
indicates in the table below, Garnier has a total of but 2238, whereas,
beaten only by Vignaux (11) and Daly (125), he should have 2264. The
average of the tournament, eight games apiece, was 8.93.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Vignaux ($1,351) 7 159 16.66 10.53
Garnier ($928.58) 6 93 18.75 11.36
Daly ($928.58) 6 108 21.43 9.73
J. Dion ($585.72) 5 150 25. 11.
Rudolphe ($440.48) 4 97 15.79 9.35
Ubassy ($127.62) 3 104 12. 7.912
Slosson ($127.62) 3 88 11.11 7.910
C. Dion 2 79 14.29 8.43
Daniels 0 45 5.13
All matches for $500 a side, and in Tammany Hall.
VIGNAUX VS. J. DION. December 30, 1874.—V., 600—12.50—192; D., 538—64.
VIGNAUX VS. RUDOLPHE. February 23, 1875.—V., 600—15.38—69; R., 326—41.
VIGNAUX VS. C. DION. March 25, 1875.—V., 600—12—80; Dion, 543—119.
April 26, 1875, his backers having failed to cover challenger’s final
money on time, Vignaux forfeited emblem and $250 to Garnier. Money was
returned, but emblem was retained until, on June 12th, Garnier resigned
it to Daly, who had challenged May 26th.
DALY VS. C. DION. November 23, 1875.—Dion, 600—12.50—52; Daly, 557—104.
Challenged by Garnier November 30th, Dion resigned the emblem December
14th.
GARNIER VS. J. DION. November 16, 1876.—D., 600—8.22—180; G., 495—77.
J. DION VS. SEXTON. May 31, 1877.—S., 600—12.23—247; D., 442—84. This
was the first match-run to beat Daly’s 212 of 1874. Sexton seemed
hopelessly behind when he made it.
SEXTON VS. C. DION. November 13, 1877.—S., 600—11.32—97; D., 428—105.
SEXTON VS. SLOSSON. June 27, 1878.—Sexton, 600—28.57—158; S., 338—100.
SEXTON VS. SLOSSON. December 27, 1878.—Tenth match and ninth and final
contest. Sexton, 600—20.69—158; Slosson, 468—140.
* * * * *
=Vignaux vs. C. Dion.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, December 8, 1874.—$500
a side. V., 800—11.94—100; D., 772—127.
* * * * *
=Ubassy vs. C. Dion.= Chris. O’Connor’s private room, N. Y. City,
December 15–16th.—$500 a side, played in two nights. U., 1000—8.16—137;
D., 930—91.
This was the first contest of more than one night between leading
experts in America.
1875.
=Championship of Ohio.= Cleveland, O., closing January 25th.—Tournament
for championship of Ohio and $1000 in money. Eugene Carter first, T. J.
Gallagher second, and Anthony Honing, John Bluim, John A. Thatcher,
Harry Choate, Joseph Casper, W. A. Burchard, Martin Mullen and H.
Coleman following. Stake in match series was $200 a side, and table a
5 × 10. Carter beat Gallagher by 400 to 346, March 25th, and Honing by
400 to 353, both in White’s Hall, Toledo. In the Globe Theatre,
Cleveland, October 17, 1876, occurred the fastest game of the series,
which was for $250 a side. Gallagher, 400—17.39—76; Carter, 221—31.
* * * * *
=Four-handed Public Game.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, February 17th.—In
aid of the Homoœpathic Hospital Fund. J. and C. Dion, 500—15.15—36 and
56; Daly and Garnier, 354—28 and 34.
=First Avowedly Professional Use of 4½ × 9 Table.= (It had already been
used in declaratively amateur games in New Orleans.) Championship of
Indiana, Indianapolis, February 23 to March 1, 1875.—Eight contestants.
Henry Bussey was undefeated, while Parker A. Byers, failing to beat
Bussey only, made best run, winning average, and general average, viz.,
67—14.29—6.66.
But one match-contest is chronicled, and in that, played in Turners’
Hall, Indianapolis, June 24th, Byers beat Jacob Garratt who had been
third in tournament. B., 400—10.26—63; G., 201—38.
* * * * *
=First Undeniably Professional Match on 4½ × 9.= Washington Hall,
Indianapolis, March 9th.—$200 a side. Lewis Shaw, 400—13.79—51; Wm.
Burleigh, 188—25.
* * * * *
=Slosson vs. Rhines.= Warerooms of J. M. Brunswick & Balke Co., Chicago,
March 24th.—Rhines receiving odds of 100. S., 600—5.13—45; R., 579—41.
* * * * *
=Brooklyn’s Only Professional Carom Tournament.= Assembly (Billiard)
Rooms, April 1–15th.—300–point games, for $600 (Garnier), $400
(Vignaux), $250 (J. Dion), $150 (Ubassy), and $100 (C. Dion). Neither
runs nor averages were striking. Games won and lost: G., 5—1; V., 4—2;
J. D., U., and C. D., 3—3; Daly, 2—4; Rudolphe, 1—5. J. Dion and Ubassy
won in playing off triple tie.
* * * * *
=Wm. Sexton’s First Public Three-ball Match.= Bleecker Hall, Albany, N.
Y., April 5th.—$100 a side, c. b. S., 500 to 462; winning average, 4.32.
* * * * *
=Championship of Northwestern and Southwestern States.= Warerooms of J.
M. Brunswick & Balke Co., Chicago, April 12–24th.—200–point games.
Prizes show outcomes of play-offs, every one of the twelve but Miller,
Maggioli and Honing having tied. Average of tournament, 5.36. General
averages of Gallagher and Burleigh parallel Ubassy and Slosson’s in 1874
for closeness.
W. R. Av. G. A.
H. Miller ($500) 9 50 6.90 5.20
W. Burleigh ($400) 8 117 11.04[7] 6.961
H. Rhines ($300) 8 100 11.11 5.25
Lannie McAfee ($250) 7 76 10.53 6.98
E. Carter ($175) 7 84 22.22 7.22
T. J. Gallagher ($125) 7 94 11.11 6.962
L. Shaw 6 86 10.53 5.62
F. Parker 6 94 8.18 5.57
F. Maggioli 4 83 9.09 4.53
A. Honing 2 44 8. 4.96
H. Liverman 1 34 6.06 3.78
A. Hoa 1 34 5.94 3.45
Footnote 7:
Hoa’s 5.94 was a loser, and so were Burleigh’s 11.04 and Parker’s
8.18.
MILLER VS. RHINES. Academy of Music, New Orleans, July 8th.—First match
for championship and $500. M., 500—5.49—32; R., 304—60.
MILLER VS. MAGGIOLI. Same hall, September 9th.—Maggioli, 500—5.68—73;
Miller, 354—36.
MAGGIOLI VS. BURLEIGH. Oddfellows’ Hall, New Orleans, December 9th.—B.,
500—9.43—69; M., 365—33.
BURLEIGH VS. SHAW. Chicago, February 19, 1876. S., 500—8.62—67; B.,
485—87.
As a changeful championship, this has always stood unmatched. No one man
won two successive contests.
* * * * *
=Garnier vs. Vignaux.= Tammany Hall, April 28, 1875.—$500 a side, c. b.
G., 600—13.04—90; V., 258—33.
* * * * *
=Garratt vs. Choate.= Academy of Music, Cincinnati, July 29th.—$250 a
side, c. b. G., 400—6.90—75; C., 304—27.
* * * * *
=Anthony Kraker vs. Deery.= Palace Amphitheatre, San Francisco, August
14th.—$1.000, c. b. K., 600—5.77—38; D., 598—48.
* * * * *
=“The Garnier Tournament.”= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, November
15–22d.—For a purse of $3,000, presented by the late George L. Lorillard
through Albert Garnier; 300–point games. Ties for third, fourth, and
fifth prizes were not played off, the aggregate $1,000 being divided
equally. The tournament stands alone not only because its winner’s
general average is surpassed by those of four out of his six
competitors, but also because his best single average is lower than that
of any other player who won one or more games. Average of tournament
(six games apiece), 9.81.
W. R. Av. G. A.
J. Dion ($1,500) 5 122 14.29 9.43
C. Dion ($1,000) 5 89 30. 10.78
A. Garnier ($333) 3 119 30. 11.13
G. F. Slosson ($333) 3 104 16.67 8.60
Wm. Sexton ($333) 3 136 15. 10.96
M. Daly 2 124 23.08 12.32
A. P. Rudolphe 0 67 6.75
=Schaefer vs. A. Kraker.= About this year, Schaefer played and won a
$500 match in Virginia City, N. T. (we think, having no record but
memory), averaging 12 or 12.50 in 500 or 600, which was high for that
region, high for himself, and high for his surroundings, unsecreted
pistols stimulating him to unusual efforts.
1876.
=Shaw vs. Carter.= Adelphi Theatre, Toledo, January 7th.—$500, 4½ × 9,
c. b. S., 500—15.13—108; C., 311—89.
* * * * *
=Rudolphe vs. Daniels.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, January 20th.—$500,
5 × 10, R. giving odds of 150. R., 600—13.04—68; D., 426—44. This match
came of a billiard-room encounter between the pair in N. Y. City,
Daniels receiving odds then, also, and losing.
* * * * *
=Sexton vs. Slosson.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, January 27th.—$1,000.
Sexton, 600—15.38—73; Slosson, 482—110. It was this match, with its high
winning average, that determined the choice of Sexton over Slosson to go
to Paris as challenger of Vignaux to the last game for the first world’s
championship, which see under 1873.
* * * * *
=Schaefer’s First Public Match in the East.= Ford’s Opera-house,
Washington, D. C., April 26th.—Announced as for $2,500 a side. Lewis
Shaw, 600—10.72—69; Jacob Schaefer, 547—76. It was because of Shaw’s
victory that he, instead of Schaefer, was admitted to the Centennial
Tournament of May following.
* * * * *
=Centennial Tournament.= Horticultural Hall, Philadelphia, May
15–27th.—300–point games. This tournament took its rise in a purse of
$1,000 proffered by Frank Queen, editor of the New York Clipper, to
whichever billiard manufacturer should add most. H. W. Collender added
$4,000. J. Dion, Daly, and Rudolphe played off their ties in Irving
Hall, this city, June 5, 6, 7, with the results shown here in
apportioning the prizes. Nine games apiece. Average of tournament,
10.07.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Wm. Sexton ($2,000) 8 287[8] 60.[8] 14.73[8]
A. Garnier ($1,200) 7 176 37.50 13.78
G. F. Slosson ($800) 6 103 21.43 13.48
J. Dion ($600) 5 106 50. 14.26
M. Daly ($400) 5 153 23.08 13.04
A. P. Rudolphe 5 175 23.08 12.66
J. Bessunger 4 91 12.50 7.83
C. Dion 3 86 15.79 8.72
L. Shaw 1 62 6.98 7.26
M. Foster 1 79 6.38 7.29
Footnote 8:
Beating record—Daly’s 212, Garnier and C. Dion’s 30 and Daly’s 12.32.
The runs of 251 and 287 by Sexton were the first public exhibitions of
straightforward railing (term shortened to “straight rail”). Before
that, players hugged the rail, or cushion, by close nursing, not going
far forward, and especially aiming to keep near a corner.
* * * * *
=First of Long Games in Tournaments.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, June
8–16th.—$1,500 in prize-money, 600–point games, one a night, instead of
two short ones. In playing off ties, Rudolphe averaged 25 and ran 127
against Sexton, while Slosson against Garnier ran 311, thus beating
record, which was Sexton’s 287. Average of tournament was the high one
of 15.88. Garnier’s 17.84 eclipsed the general-average record, which was
Sexton’s 14.73.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Rudolphe 2 102 21.43 16.71
Sexton 2 125 20. 14.56
Garnier 1 121 22.22 17.84
Slosson 1 152 20.81[9] 14.66
Footnote 9:
Either losing average or error.
* * * * *
=Daly vs. C. Dion.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, June 12–15th.—Five nights
for $200 a side, c. b. Dion, 2000—12.99—121; Daly, 1141—128.
* * * * *
=The Only First-class Tournament in California.= Platt’s Hall, San
Francisco, July 31st to August 4th.—600–point games for announced $3,000
in prize-money. Average of tournament, 17.44. Ties not played off.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Garnier 2 139 21.43 15.47
Sexton 2 120 19.35 16.16
Slosson 2 230 20. 18.80
Daly 0 184 14.29
Slosson’s general average of 18.80 surpasses Garnier’s New York record
of 17.84. The two tournaments themselves were record-beaters for
coincidences. They were the first with long games at three-ball caroms,
600 points in each, and neither came anywhere near paying expenses. The
single averages of the winners-in-chief in the two cities were precisely
the same (21.43) in exactly the same number of games. Finally, the
player who had made the highest single average in New York made the
highest in San Francisco also.
* * * * *
=Daly vs. Slosson.= August 12, same hall and c. b. game as
foregoing.—$500 a side. D., 600—13.95—153; S., 364—47.
* * * * *
=Louisiana Championship.= No record of tournament, if there was one. A
change seemingly made to 5 × 10 table.
New Orleans, June 6th, first match, stake $50 a side. Louis Abrams,
already champion, 300 to Chas. Quaid’s 143, winner’s average and best
run being 8.33 and 50.
August 4th, Abrams, 300—5.88—55; John Miller’s total, 249.
October 4th, Henry Miller, 300—6—63; Abrams, 244—23.
December 4th, Maggioli, 300—10.71—58; H. Miller, 253—61.
This was the sixth match, and seems to have been the last.
* * * * *
=Schaefer’s First Tournament.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, November
20–28th.—Four money-prizes, aggregating $1,500, 300–point games on the
usual 5 × 10, but with 2–5/16 balls. Slosson having gone South, but one
tie game was played, and that, increased to 600 points, was won by J.
Dion, who also received the special prize (a billiard-table) for best
general average. Six games apiece, averaging 9.30, a drop due less to
lesser runs on balls together than to missing on smaller balls far
apart.
W. R. Av. G. A.
J. Dion 4 195 17.65 10.94
Rudolphe 4 134 21.43 10.04
Slosson 4 122 16.70[10] 9.73
Garnier 3 181 16.67 8.71
Daly 2 123 11.54 9.34
C. Dion 2 136 13.67[10] 8.79
Schaefer 2 155 12.50 7.60
Footnote 10:
Losing averages.
* * * * *
=First Public Handicap Tourney at Game.= Begun in Academy of Music,
Cleveland, O., December 27th.—A Honing (275), $250; T. J. Gallagher
(350), $200; J. Randolph Heiser (275), $150; Eugene Carter (300), $100.
J. A. Thatcher (275) was the other competitor.
1877.
=Sexton vs. Slosson.= Globe Theatre, New Orleans, January 5th, 6th,
7th.—5 × 10, c. b., $200 a side. Sexton, 1800—24.32—417; Slosson,
976—172. Winner’s run and average surpassed previous records.
* * * * *
=Schaefer’s Second Tournament.= Mechanics’ Hall, Utica, N. Y., beginning
March 20th.—300–point games, c. b. John Bessunger, $400, in addition to
a gold-mounted cue for best general average; T. J. Gallagher (beaten by
Bessunger in play-off), $250; Wm. Burleigh, $150; Jacob Schaefer, $125;
and Eugene Carter (beat Chas. Knight in play-off), $75.
1878.
=Four First-place Ties Out of Seven Players.= Championship of Chicago,
January 7th to February 4th.—300–point games. Henry Rhines ($150), Frank
Parker ($100), Albert Hoa ($50), and M. Honahan ($25) had to play off,
result being as given above. Peter Snyder, Ben Saylor, and Chas. P.
Miller were the remaining contestants.
RHINES VS. PARKER. Same city, April 11th.—Championship and $200. Parker,
500—4.95—65; R., 449—36.
* * * * *
=First First-class Tourney in New Orleans.= January 10–19th, c. b., for
$1,000 in prizes. Ties resulted in the precedence here given. Sexton
topped Slosson’s San Francisco general average.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Sexton 4 297 30. 22.37
Slosson 2 173 23.08 16.80
Rudolphe 2 134 24. 15.07
M. Daly 1 136 20. 15.07
C. Dion 1 145 19.35 13.91
Average of tournament, 17.25.
* * * * *
=Sexton vs. C. Dion.= St. Charles Theatre, New Orleans, February
5th.—$2,000 a side, c. b., Sexton giving odds of 200. S.,
1000—27.78—228; Dion, 765 (with odds)—94.
* * * * *
=Indiana Championship.= Washington Hall, March 18–23d.—Probably a 4½ × 9
table, c. b. P. A. Byers, gold badge and a Brunswick-Balke
billiard-table; J. Randolph Heiser, $100; Henry Bussey, $60; and Jacob
Garratt, $40. The best run (116) was made by Bussey, and the best single
average (30) by Heiser. The other competitors were Geo. Morris, J. R.
Seaman, A. Hawkins, and C. E. Carney.
Challenged by Bussey and receiving forfeit on May 23d, Byers resigned
the championship emblem to the State Association.
* * * * *
=St. Louis Handicap.= Chas. E. Mussey’s Room, March 21–28th.—600 points
up, c. b., for money-prizes aggregating $400. G. F. Slosson, C. Dion and
J. Schaefer were at “scratch,” T. J. Gallagher received 10 per cent.,
and Wayman C. McCreery 20 per cent. Schaefer beat Dion, Slosson beat
Schaefer, McCreery beat Slosson, and Gallagher beat McCreery. In beating
Dion in the play-off, Schaefer ran 429, eclipsing Sexton’s match-run of
417. (This led to the match next below.) Average of tournament proper,
14.79 (four games apiece).
W. R. Av. G. A.
Schaefer ($200) 3 327 66.67 27.97
C. Dion ($125) 3 194 13.04 12.27
Slosson ($75) 2 288 37.50 14.25
Gallagher 1 182 19.35 12.73
McCreery 1 88 17.78 12.38
* * * * *
=Schaefer Forfeits to Sexton.= Match of three games, 1000 points each in
New York, Chicago and St. Louis, for $2,000 a side, highest aggregate
score to decide. Schaefer side incurred forfeit through failure to make
the final deposit, July 3d.
* * * * *
=First 1000 Points in a Night.= Three-ball. Turner’s Hall, Chicago,
November 20th.—$500 a side. Slosson, 1000—25.64—293; Schaefer, 739—217.
1879.
=Second Championship of the World.= Cooper Institute, N. Y. City,
January 23d to February 10th.—Tournament for the J. M. Brunswick & Balke
Co.’s emblem and $2,100 in cash, 600–point games. Slosson had the
highest run by 19 per cent., and the best general average by 25 per
cent.; but it was against him that Daly made the best run of his life,
and his defeat of Slosson placed the latter in a position from which he
could extricate himself only by vanquishing Schaefer twice. Instead,
Schaefer beat him at once (600 to 571 in seven innings), after it had
seemed almost certain that Slosson would win in five or six innings, and
by about 600 to 200. There was only one play-off, Sexton beating Daly.
The seven games apiece averaged 16.10, which, while lower than the
figures of earlier tournaments, was yet higher than the general averages
of all the contestants in this one but Slosson, Schaefer, and Daly. Only
half the single averages in the appended table, viz., those of Schaefer,
Daly, Gallagher, and Rudolphe, are winning ones. This proved to be the
last tournament at the regular three-ball game to command the presence
of first-class experts in America.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Schaefer ($1,000) 7 376 85.71 28.19
Slosson ($600) 5 464 81.57 37.60
Sexton ($300) 4 214 45. 14.86
Daly ($200) 4 370 30. 18.76
Garnier 3 220 36.75 14.67
Gallagher 3 187 20. 13.89
Rudolphe 1 159 15. 10.52
Heiser 1 158 12.26 8.44
There was but one match for this championship, together with a
money-stake of $1,000 a side. It occurred in McCormack’s Hall, Chicago,
May 15th. Schaefer, 1000—333.33—690; Slosson, 44—21.
* * * * *
=Last First-class Professional Tournament.= It was also the first
tournament in France. Cercle Internationale, Paris, May 5–10th.—Games
600 up, on a J. M. Brunswick & Balke Co.’s 5 × 10 carom, for a
championship emblem and other prizes. Triple tie not played off.
──────────┬───────┬───────┬───────┬───────╥───────
│ V. │ P. │ D. │ G. ║ Gen.
│ │ │ │ ║average
──────────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────╫───────
│ │ 600 │ 600 │ 600 ║
M. Vignaux│ │ 23.08 │ 46.15 │ 25 ║ 24.05
│ │ 183 │ 308 │ 184 ║
──────────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────╫───────
│ 308 │ │ 600 │ 288 ║
L. Piot │ │ │ 18.18 │ ║ 13.90
│ 60 │ │ 93 │ 62 ║
──────────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────╫───────
│ 270 │ 555 │ │ 600 ║
M. Daly │ │ │ │ 27.27 ║ 19.78
│ 73 │ 182 │ │ 155 ║
──────────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────╫───────
│ 413 │ 600 │ 392 │ ║
A. Garnier│ │ 22.22 │ │ ║ 22.46
│ 115 │ 184 │ 71 │ ║
──────────┴───────┴───────┴───────┴───────╨───────
* * * * *
=Last First-class Professional Match in America.= Madison Square Garden,
N. Y. City, October 23–25th.—1000 points nightly, $2,000 a side.
Schaefer, 3000—41.62—427; Slosson, 2604—365.
1880.
=Last First-class Match Anywhere.= Salle Cremorne, Paris, April
10–14th.—$500 a side. Vignaux, 4000—80—1531; Slosson, 3118—1103.
* * * * *
=Championship of Pennsylvania.= Philadelphia, beginning December
4th.—Games, 300 up. Ed. McLaughlin, E. H. Nelms, V. Estephe and Wm. M.
Dodds prize-winners.
* * * * *
=B.-B.-C. Co.’s First Tournament on Pacific Coast.= San Francisco, Cal.,
about 1880–81.—To write from memory, it was won by W. J. Lowry, one of
whose strongest competitors was an Eastern amateur, who was persuaded
into participating while on a visit to that city.
* * * * *
=Spotting at Fifty.= C. E. Mussey’s Room, St. Louis, March 20–27th, five
days’ play, Wayman C. McCreery giving the odds, for $100 a side, of
spotting at 50 to W. H. Catton’s 60. McC., 3000; C., 2771.
This method of repressing straight-rail nursing had been tested in a
six-handed handicap tournament at Mussey’s in the prior February, the
winner being Louis Reed, who spotted at 50, Catton (35) taking second
prize, and Leon Magnus (50) the third.
1883.
=St. Louis Handicap.= Mussey’s, February 3d to March 10th.—Seven
entries, of whom Gallagher (650) and Catton (500) tied on 5—1 each,
without playing off. Highest run and best winning average were
Gallagher’s 332 and 46.44.
* * * * *
=Championship of Pacific Coast and $500.= Mechanics’ Pavilion, San
Francisco, September 25–30th.—Ben Saylor, 2500—10.91—191; J. F. B.
McCreery, 1783—112.
* * * * *
=Ed. McLaughlin vs. Randolph Heiser.= Assembly Buildings, Philadelphia,
December 12th.—First of match of three games (see Balkline and
Champion’s Game for the others) for $250 a side each. McL.,
1000—71.43—805 (finish); H., 134—run, 119.
1884.
=Maggioli vs. Edward Dawson.= Theatre, Mobile, Ala., July 8th.—$500 a
side, 4½ × 9. M., 1000—13.51—170; D., 789—148.
* * * * *
=Maggioli vs. Harry Cole.= Casino Hall, San Antonio, Tex., October
24–26th.—$500 a side, 4½ × 9. M., 3000—71.43—833; C., 2383—854. They
played in Galveston on January 4th, 1885, and Cole won the $500 by 1000
to 254, averaging 66.67, and running 507.
* * * * *
=First of 1500 Points a Night.= Central Music Hall, Chicago, December
19–20th.—$1,000 a side. W. H. Catton, 3000—31.58—933; Edward McLaughlin,
2307—942. These are the largest runs in this country in a stake game on
a 5 × 10 table.
1885.
=Ben Saylor vs. Lon Morris.= San Francisco, April 22d.—$125 a side,
Morris discounting. S., 1000—27.77—101; Morris had 470 left—best runs,
554 and 289.
* * * * *
=Eugene Carter vs. Harvey McKenna.= Frasheim Hall, Cleveland, O., May
12–13th.—$1,000 a side, 5 × 10. C., 3000—26.79—289; McK., 2288—417.
* * * * *
=Championship of Dakota and $200.= Mitchell, December 27th. L. E. Stern
defeated Max Shauer.
1886.
=W. D. Emery vs. Lansing W. Perkins.= Hershey’s Music Hall, Chicago,
February 18th.—$500 a side. E., 800—7.16—87; P., 775—75.
* * * * *
=Amateur Handicap Annuals.= Maurice Daly’s Assembly Rooms, Brooklyn, N.
Y., March 20th.—Commencement of annual tournaments for jeweled prizes.
Eight contestants. Orville Oddie, Jr., won the one-carat diamond stud,
having incidentally made highest run (75) and single winning average
(12). In tournament of November 8th to 24th, he was awarded another
diamond stud, winning 6—1, and again making highest run (130) and single
average (18.18).
1887.
=Amateur Match for $3,000.= N. Y. Racquet Club, April 15–20th.—300
points a night. Dr. G. L. Knapp, 1500—4.15—76; Alexander Morten,
1383—52.
* * * * *
=500 or No Count.= Grand Rapids, Mich., May 21st.—Game of 1000 points,
$50 a side. McKenna, 1000; Wm. Burleigh, 143. Numerically, this is the
largest odds ever known to have been given to one of Burleigh’s speed.
* * * * *
=First Amateur Championship of America.= May 23–28th.—N.Y. Racquet Club
tournament for a silver tankard valued at $500. Five games apiece, 300
points up. Messrs. Soulé and Flannagan represented Philadelphia.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Orville Oddie, Jr. 5 183 15.79 11.03
Alex. Morten 4 58 6.25 4.59
Dr. H. D. Jennings 3 98 5.66 4.26
J. E. Soulé 3 57 6.38 4.43
C. T. Jones 1 58 5.08 3.78
L. A. Flannagan 0 39 ————
One general average having been withheld, it is not possible to figure
out the average of tournament.
* * * * *
=McKenna vs. Fred Eames.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, December 20–21st.—Game
for a purse, McKenna to make 5000 before Eames could score 500
altogether on either night. McK., 5000—416.67—2572 and 2121; E., 45—18.
1888.
=Second Amateur Championship of America.= N. Y. Racquet Club, May
14–19th.—First competition for the Townsend Cup, valued at $1,000, and
to be won, consecutively or otherwise, in three annual tournaments.
Three games apiece, 300 points. Average of tournament, 4.90.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Orville Oddie, Jr. 3 109 8.33 7.69
C. Bainbridge 2 82 5.45 4.70
H. D. Jennings 1 81 3.47 4.67
Alex. Morten 0 47 3.32
1889.
=Brooklyn, N. Y., Amateur Annual.= Daly’s Assembly Rooms, February
4–14th.—Handicap tournament for diamonds, 5 × 10. Arthur R. Townsend
(scratch, 375), winning 3—1, won first prize and also made highest
single average (15), highest general average (7.40), and highest run
(116). Townsend was tied by Wm. Barnard (375), but defeated him, in
playing off for first and second, by 375 to 185.
* * * * *
=Third Tourney for Amateur Championship of America.= Second and last for
Townsend Cup. N. Y. Racquet Club, May 13–18th. Average of tournament
(four games apiece), 6.01.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Orville Oddie, Jr. 4 195 17.32 8.56
A. R. Townsend 3 138 11.11 7.57
R. J. Maginniss 2 94 11.53 5.68
H. D. Jennings 1 101 11.53 5.31
Andrew Miller 0 42 4.07
May 12, 1900, a third annual competition having been found
impracticable, the club committee awarded the Townsend Cup to Oddie.
* * * * *
=Joseph Capron vs. John Donahue.= Montreal, Can., September 18th.—$250 a
side. Capron won by 500 to about 340, but loser made best run (66).
* * * * *
=Schaefer vs. McKenna.= November.—Match for $2,500 a side, even up.
Death of Schaefer’s wife caused his side to pay $500 for postponement to
January, and death of McKenna meanwhile ended match.
1890.
=Brooklyn, N. Y., Annual Amateur Handicap.= Daly’s Assembly Rooms, March
10–22d.—Average of tournament (five games apiece), 5.10.
W. R. Av. G. A.
A. R. Townsend (500) 4 257 17.24 9.83
Dr. H. D. Jennings (300) 3 91 8.57 4.73
Frank A. Keeney (300) 3 135 5.77 5.49
Herbert S. Haskell (500) 2 171 9.43 6.65
Wm. H. Barnard (350) 1 56 3.50 3.
George Moulton (275) 1 39 3.44 2.90
* * * * *
=J. Schaefer vs. J. F. B. McCleery.= San Francisco, May 29th, 30th,
31st.—$200 a side, 3000 points, Schaefer giving odds of discount,
4½ × 9, c. b. S., 3000 (winning score)—average, 751 in actual score
(3004)—run, 3000; McC., 15—run, 13.
* * * * *
=F. C. Ives vs. McCleery.= Same city, same table, a day or two later,
Ives conceding 1000 for a stake of $250 a side. Ives, 3000—176.46—982;
McC., 1748—717.
Nothing could more fitly close the chronicle of regular three-ball
caroms than those McCleery matches. For other than amateurs or rising
professionals, the game had lacked approval ever since the spring of
1879. Several of the contests after that were designed chiefly to
surpass the “run” and “average” records of one or two professionals
earlier in the wonder-working field; and so lamentably did the
unrestricted game decline that first-class players, avoiding one another
to the neglect of championships, welcomed matches with fourth or
fifth-rate ones on 4½ × 9 tables.
* * * * *
=Kerkau vs. McLaughlin.= Daly’s Room, N. Y. City, purse games. August
16–21st.—McLaughlin, 6000—run, 1290; K., 4749, total. Sept.
6–11th.—Kerkau, 6000—run, 1355; McL., 4520—run, 1349. Averages in both
were light for the high runs.
1905.
=J. Ferd. Poggenburg vs. Wm. H. Duhy.= Rooms of the Cherokee Club, N. Y.
City, February 26th.—Contest for the Victor Dowling Championship Cup at
“straight-rail,” 4½ × 9 table. P., 150—9.44—run not stated; D., 146—run,
60 (highest of game). At the Lexington Avenue Opera House, N. Y. City,
April 30th, for same emblem: Ed. McLaughlin, 300—21.43—158; Wm. Duhy,
153—50. Table, 4½ × 9.
BEST PERFORMANCES,
OMITTING TABLES LARGER OR SMALLER THAN THE STANDARD 5 × 10 FOR THIS
GAME, AS OFFICIALLY DECREED IN 1873.
AVERAGES IN CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.
333.33 in 1000—J. Schaefer, 1879.
28.57 in 600—Wm. Sexton, 1878.
RUNS IN CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.
690 in 1000—J. Schaefer, 1879.
247 in 600—Wm. Sexton, 1877.
AVERAGES IN CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
85.71 in 600 points—J. Schaefer, 1879.
25.00 in 300—J. Dion, 1874 (championship of America).
37.60 (gen. av. in 3947 points)—G. F. Slosson, 1879.
RUNS IN CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
464 in 600—G. F. Slosson, 1879.
159 in 300—M. Vignaux, 1874 (championship of America).
AVERAGES IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.
416.67 in 5000—H. McKenna, 1887 (nominally a match, but actually a
purse game. Schaefer averaged 751 in 1890, running 3000, but the
table was a 4½ × 9).
80.00 in 4000—M. Vignaux, Paris, 1880.
48.39 in 3000—W. H. Catton, 1884.
24.32 in 1800—W. Sexton, 1877.
71.57 in 1000—Ed. McLaughlin, 1883.
RUNS IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.
1355 in 6000—H. Kerkau, purse game, 1887.
2572 in 5000—H. McKenna, 1887 (see paragraph above).
1531 in 4000—M. Vignaux, Paris, 1880.
942 in 3000—Ed. McLaughlin, 1884.
417 in 1800—Wm. Sexton, 1877.
805 in 1000—Ed. McLaughlin, 1883.
212 in 600—M. Daly, 1874.
AVERAGES IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
66.67 in 600—J. Schaefer, 1878.
60.00 in 300—Wm. Sexton, 1876.
RUNS IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
287 in 300—Wm. Sexton, 1876.
327 in 600—J. Schaefer, 1878. (S. ran 429 in tie-game, but it was
outside of tournament.)
CHAMPIONS GAME.
All play was on a 5 × 10 carom, with 2⅜ balls, and also with a
14 × 28–in. line, except in last two public matches.
ABBREVIATIONS.—Player, 600—18.75—165; Player, 585—151—signifies
winner’s total, average, and high run, followed by loser’s total and
high run.
1879.
=First Tournament at Restricted Three-ball Caroms.= In the Champion’s
Game, as originally played in public on the dates given below, an
oblique line was drawn near every corner. Its purpose was to make it
harder to swing the balls (“turn the corner”) in the progressive nursing
process known as “straight rail.” On the short rail, this line ended 14
inches from the nearest corner, and on the long rail 28 inches. Within
any one of the four balks so formed, only two successive shots could be
wholly made; but, for it to count, the second shot had to send at least
one ball out.
Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, November 11–24th.—Challenge emblem and $2,000.
Games 300 points, except in playing off ties. Sexton by 500 to 478, and
Daly by 500 to 496, were winners of ties. Average of tournament (seven
games apiece), 10.58.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Sexton ($1,000) 6 112 27.27 13.77
Slosson ($500) 6 107 25.00 14.02
Schaefer ($250) 5 122 23.08 13.65
Daly ($150) 3 123 18.75 11.36
Garnier ($100) 3 147 16.67 10.19
Carter 2 103 11.11 9.54
Rudolphe 1 81 15.79 8.70
Heiser 0 113 7.31
Money-stake in championship matches, $500 a side. All were played in
Tammany Hall. After his second victory over Schaefer, Slosson was never
again challenged.
SEXTON VS. SCHAEFER. January 10, 1880. Schaefer, 600—18.75—165; Sexton,
585—151.
SCHAEFER VS. SEXTON. April 22, 1880. Schaefer, 600—14.63—141; Sexton,
523—75.
SCHAEFER VS. SLOSSON. June 19, 1880. Slosson, 600—30—236; Schaefer,
470—114.
SLOSSON VS. SCHAEFER. October 4, 1880. Slosson, 600—33.33—138; Schaefer,
438—312.
1880.
=Carter vs. Gallagher.= Union Square Rooms, N. Y. City, March 22d.—$500
a side. C., 600—10.17—140; G., 423—54.
* * * * *
=Heiser vs. Carter.= Same hall, March 26th.—$500 a side. H.,
600—10.53—93; C., 566—149.
* * * * *
=Vignaux vs. Slosson.= Grand Hotel, Paris, December 20–24th.—$1,000 a
side. V., 3000—29.70—214; S., 2961—273.
1881.
=Schaefer vs. Slosson.= Academy of Music, N. Y. City, April
11–15th.—$2,000. Schaefer, 4000—32.52—342; Slosson, 2780—252.
1882.
=Longest Run Abroad.= Grand Hotel, Paris, January 30th to February
3d.—$1,000 a side. Slosson, 3000—37.97—398; Vignaux, 2553—394.
As the first victory of an American abroad in a public match, this was
commemorated by a dinner to Slosson at Delmonico’s, N. Y. City, on
February 23d, by a professional testimonial to him afterwards at the
Columbian Room, not then his, and later by a purse of $700, contributed
in part by Charles A. Dana, Frank Queen, and other journalistic patrons
of billiards. [The winner maintains that this game was played on 18 × 38
lines.—ED.]
* * * * *
=New Orleans Tournament.= Millers Room, March 27th to April 13th.—Games
started at 400, but found too long, and reduced to 300 after first
night. Maggioli, 5—0; Abrams and Coste, each 3—2, Coste winning
play-off; Oberlander and Zaehringer, each 2—3, former winning play-off;
and Bartley, 0—5.
1884.
=Longest Run in America.= Madison Square Hall, N. Y. City, February
14th.—$250 a side, last game of match (see Three-ball Caroms and
Balkline for others). Edward McLaughlin, 600—15.79—206; J. R. Heiser,
552—351.
* * * * *
=Handicap Tournament of Chicago Amateurs.= Collender Billiard Hall,
beginning March 17th.—Messrs. Ed. Rein, Sawyer and Davis played
Champion’s Game against Frank Rice and four others. Rein won 6—1, and
Rice and Davis 5—2 each, Rice also winning play-off. Sawyer won fourth
prize.
* * * * *
=Line Increased from 14 × 28 to 18 × 38.= Central Music Hall, Chicago,
May 31st.—Second game of match of two (see Balkline Game for the other),
$500 a side each. Slosson, 800—28.54—236; Schaefer, 657—98. The 18 × 38
line was then first played in public in America, but had been practiced
in 1882–83, and on January 20, 1883, Slosson challenged Schaefer to play
it for $500 a side.
1885.
=Line Increased from 18 × 38 to 20 × 40.= Same hall and stake as
foregoing about Feb. 2, Chicago. Schaefer, 800—16.67—78; Slosson,
589—97.
Making runs of 100 unlikely or impossible in public defeated the purpose
of the game, which was to restrict nursing without prohibiting it, and
at this stage this line system was abandoned.
BEST PERFORMANCES IN PUBLIC MATCHES.
AVERAGES AT 14 × 28.
33.33 in 600 (championship)—G. F. Slosson, 1880.
37.97 in 3000, Paris, France—G. F. Slosson, 1882.
32.52 in 4000—J. Schaefer, 1881.
RUNS AT 14 × 28.
312 (championship)—J. Schaefer, 1880.
351 (best in America)—J. R. Heiser, 1884.
398 (best anywhere)—G. F. Slosson, Paris, France, 1882.
AVERAGES AT 18 × 38.
28.54 in 800—G. F. Slosson, 1884.
RUN AT 18 × 38.
236—G. F. Slosson, 1884.
AVERAGE AT 20 × 40.
16.67—J. Schaefer, 1885.
RUN AT 20 × 40.
97—G. F. Slosson, 1885.
BALKLINE GAME.
All play, unless otherwise stated, was with 2⅜ balls on a 5 × 10
carom table, and until 1885 on an 8–inch line.
Abbreviations.—Such figures as 600—50.—375 stand in that order for
total, average, and high run, the loser’s average being omitted as
not a record. Those of 8:2, 14:2, 18:1, and 18:2 signify eight,
fourteen, or eighteen-inch line with either one or two shots or
plays in balk, regardless of count.
1883.
=First Public Contests.= What is known simply as “Balkline” took its
name originally from the table’s having a continuous line running around
it six inches from the cushion. This form, with three shots in balk, was
practiced by Rudolphe and the Dions in 1875, pronounced too difficult,
and never played in public. The intersecting short lines near every
corner were added early in 1883, and the main line was then put eight
inches from the cushion; and in this form, with its eight balks and the
two shots or one valid count therein, as described for the Champion’s
Game, the “Balkline” was first played publicly for the world’s
championship in Central Music Hall, Chicago, March 26th to April 6th. Of
the seven contestants, Alonzo Morris and Thomas Wallace were graduated
from a preliminary tournament held at the J. M. Brunswick & Balke Co.’s
warerooms, that city, March 6–13th. In addition to the challenge emblem,
there were money-prizes aggregating $3,000, and the tournament was akin
to a marvel in embodying so many as seven players without a single tie.
Average of the twenty-one games, 12.86. J. Dion’s 17.71 and Sexton’s
16.58 were their best averages—not winning ones. During Sexton’s run of
170 the first glimpses in public were seen of what, in 1890, was dubbed
“The Anchor.” It had been played in private at the regular three-ball
game, but lacked favoring opportunities at the Champion’s Game, while at
Balkline it was impossible until the eight short lines were added near
the corners.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Schaefer ($1,000) 6 220 40.00 23.23
Vignaux ($800) 5 246 31.58 22.07
Daly ($500) 4 90 17.14 13.50
Sexton ($300) 3 170 16.58 10.88
Morris ($200) 2 101 15. 10.84
J. Dion 1 101 15.71 10.36
Wallace 0 134 7.79
Matches were to have been 800 points for $500 a side, but none was ever
made, and in due time the emblem became Schaefer’s to keep. This was the
second case of first-class championship tournament without ever a match.
Nor was there a balkline championship match until Slosson and Schaefer’s
in 1890, which was the first case of first-class carom championship,
either national or universal, without a tournament.
* * * * *
=Vignaux vs. Schaefer.= At close of foregoing tournament these experts
played two games in public. The one in Hartford, Conn., was at cushion
caroms, and Schaefer won it. The other, played at Academy of Music, N.
Y. City, June 12th, was in all respects on balkline championship terms,
except that, as there was no challenge, therefore there could not be a
championship match. V., 800 (total)—22.22 (winning average)—106 (highest
run); S., 644 (total)—90 (highest run).
* * * * *
=First Balkline Match Abroad.= Grand Café, Brussels, Belgium, November
21–25th.—$500 a side, 4½ × 9 table. Garnier, 3000; Daly, 2839. Averages
and runs not cabled.
Second game, Lyons, France, December 10–14th.—Same size of table.
Garnier, 3000—27.23—238; Daly, 2970—309.
* * * * *
=Vignaux vs. Schaefer.= Grand Hotel, Paris, November 26–30th.—$1,000 a
side. V., 3000—28.85—165; S., 2859—164.
Same place and terms, January 14–18, 1884. V., 3000—44.75—329; S.,
2869—201.
* * * * *
=Vignaux vs. Rudolphe.= Paris, December 10–14th.—Same terms as last two
games above. V., 3000; R., 1415. Runs and averages not cabled.
1884.
=Vignaux vs. Schaefer.= See 1883, November 26–30th.
* * * * *
=Championship of Connecticut and Western Massachusetts.= M. H. Hewins’s
Room, Hartford (except last game, which was played in Allyn Hall),
January 29th to February 15th.—Tournament at “Space Game,” a combination
of Balkline and the oblique line of the Champion’s Game. L. A. Guillet,
5—0; Hewins, 4—1; H. Behrens, J. A. Hendrick and C. T. Shean, 2—3
apiece; and J. Pletcher, 0—5. Play-off gave Behrens third money, and
Shean fourth. A gold watch was championship emblem.
Three matches followed, all played in Springfield, Mass., the home of
Guillet, who defeated Hewins by 500 to 286, received forfeit from
Behrens, and finally, December 30, 1885, defeated Behrens by 500 to 366.
Except as here set forth, the “Space Game” has never been played in
public.
* * * * *
=McLaughlin vs. Heiser.= Assembly Buildings, Phila., Jan. 17, second of
three different styles of game, $250 a side apiece. McL., 600—10—64; H.,
470—43. (See Regular Three-ball and Champion’s Game for the two other
contests.)
* * * * *
=Maggioli vs. John T. Moulds.= New Orleans, February 28–29th, March
1st.—Former gave odds of 25 per cent., for $500 a side, and won by 1200
to 1153. Nothing of moment in runs or averages.
* * * * *
=Schaefer vs. Slosson.= Central Music Hall, Chicago, May 12th.—$500 a
side. Schaefer, 800—38.10—211; Slosson, 384—200. First game of a match
at two different styles (see Champion’s Game, 1884, for the other).
Later there were a few 8:2 matches between lesser experts; but this was
the last, of either match or tournament, between first-class ones.
1885.
=First Handicap Tournament.= Starting early this year, there were many
handicap tournaments during that and the next half dozen or more; but in
only a half dozen of such tournaments was aught accomplished worth
recording. The one in Platt’s Hall, San Francisco, January 4–6th, this
year, is cited first among the exceptional six because of its having
been the first at the game, the first tournamental playing of it on a
4½ × 9 table, and the only instance of a player’s single averages being
the same as his general average.
Entrance fee, $250, with $250 added by the B. B. C. Co. Three games.
Hand. Run. Av. G. A.
Lon Morris ($750) 500 97 18.52 18.52
J. F. B. McCleery ($250). 300 77 7.89 9.11
Ben Saylor 350 87 10.03
Morris’s averaging 18.52 against both opponents necessarily made his
general average 18.52 also.
* * * * *
=Line Increased from 8:2 to 12.2.= Central Music Hall, Chicago, January
26th.—$500 a side. Schaefer, 800—14.55—109; Slosson, 719—98.
* * * * *
=Increased to 14:2.= Philadelphia roomkeepers’ championship handicap
tournament, begun March 2d. Ed McLaughlin, Wm. Rockhill, and Pincus Levy
won, 6—1 apiece, and Rockhill won emblem and $100 in playing off, Levy
taking second prize ($75), and McLaughlin third ($50).
There were about a dozen match-contests for the trophy. Winning it from
Rockhill on May 28th, at odds of 300 to 200, McLaughlin would have made
it his own had not James Palmer, on May 25, 1886, defeated him by 175 to
254 in a possible 300. Ed. Burris beat Palmer on September 23, 1886, and
others later at intervals, among them McLaughlin twice (handicap 225 to
300), and finally became owner of the emblem by defeating Pincus Levy,
June 2, 1887, by 200 to 126 in a possible 150. What is worth recording
here is not in the play itself, but in the logic of the situation. That
it was a handicap championship necessarily made McLaughlin the champion
all along as the giver of the longest odds.
In December, 1890, at the Continental Hotel, the Philadelphia
roomkeepers engaged in another 14:2 handicap (John Cline, Ed. Burris and
Ed. McLaughlin first, second, and third on imposts of 225, 300, and 400
points), but avoided the championship contradiction.
* * * * *
=First Public Match at 14:2.= Central Music Hall, Chicago, March
25th.—$250 a side. Capt. A. C. Anson, 500—5.43—39; Frank Parker, 364—22.
* * * * *
=Catton vs. Gallagher.= Mercantile Library Hall, St. Louis, $500 a side,
8:2. C., 800—10.67—74; G., 687—78.
* * * * *
=First Strictly Public Tournament at 14:2.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City,
April 20–29th.—$2,250 added by the B. B. C. Co. to entrance fees of $250
apiece and to net door-money equally divided among the five. The
approximate average of tournament, which instituted no championship, was
11.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Slosson ($1,464.78) 4 148 22.73 18.18
Schaefer ($1,064.78) 3 97 18.52 15.08
Sexton ($864.78) 2 53 10. 7.97
Daly ($714.78) 1 51 8.95 7.99
J. Dion ($464.78) 0 52 7.24
* * * * *
=A 14:2 Tournament of Four Rounds.= VIGNAUX, SCHAEFER AND
SLOSSON.—Central Music Hall, Chicago, twelve nights between November
16th and December 26th, both inclusive, for $2,950, given by Chicago
roomkeepers, and $1,000 by the B. B. C. Co., with the net receipts
added. No championship was involved. Independent games of 600 points,
every player playing every other twice, constituted the first two
rounds, or tournament proper, and 800–point games, every man playing
every other twice, constituted the remaining rounds, which were to
determine the triple tie of November 16–21st, duplicated December
21–23d.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Slosson 2 89 19.36 18.85
Vignaux 2 195 75. 25.64
Schaefer 2 152 23.08 19.47
After this tie, the three proposed to divide all, and did divide all but
the $1,000 of the B. B. C. Co., which required them to play to a finish.
The next round was also a tie, but in the final one Schaefer beat both,
and Vignaux beat Slosson. Nothing of moment signalized the six extra
games, save that Schaefer lengthened his high run to 187, that Slosson
reached 159, and that Vignaux fell from a winning average of 75 to
22.22, and then to 13.11.
1886.
[All play now 14:2 on a 5 × 10, unless otherwise stated.]
=Schaefer vs. Vignaux.= Cosmopolitan Hall, N. Y. City, January
26–30th.—$2,500 a side. S., 3000—20.97—180; V., 2838—143.
Same hall, March 9–13th.—$1,000 a side. S., 3000—25.86—230; V.,
1855—149.
* * * * *
=Gallagher vs. Carter.= B. B. C. Co.’s Warerooms, Chicago, March
9th.—$250 a side. G., 500—9.61—41; C., 381—37.
* * * * *
=McLaughlin vs. Heiser.= Cosmopolitan Hall, N. Y. City, March 8th.—$500
a side, home-and-home. McL., 500—7.35—51; H., 435—65. Return game,
Assembly Buildings, Philadelphia, March 19th. H., 500—9.61—55; McL.,
429—48.
* * * * *
=Purse Game at 10.2.= Allyn Hall, Hartford, Conn., December 20th.
Sexton, 500—9.61—69; McKenna, 369—52.
An unexampled feature of the year was that three winners out of
four—Gallagher, Heiser, and Sexton—did 500 points in 52 innings (or
9.61) in matches.
1887.
=Twelve Players Tied Out of Thirteen.= St. Louis, January 3d to February
17th.—Handicap for six prizes (aggregating $725) and a challenge medal.
Wayman C. McCreery did the handicapping, E. Carter and T. J. Gallagher
being high at 300 each. There were two ties of four each, and two of two
each, W. H. Catton, sixth from both top and bottom with his 6—6, being
the only one who escaped. Among amateurs, Chicago has since surpassed
this in the striking particular that all five contestants tied alike,
every one winning and losing two games of a tournament held in the late
Henry Rhines’s room.
In playing off for from first to fourth in St. Louis, Frank Day and John
Thatcher tied again for first and second, and Gallagher and Maggioli for
third and fourth. Thatcher beat Day, and Maggioli lost to Gallagher.
Carter, who, with 5—7, was among the other tieing four, made the highest
single average (18.75) by 50 per cent., and was the only one who ran
triple figures (101), Maggioli coming next with 78, Gallagher with 69,
and Catton with 68. The regular games numbered 78.
* * * * *
=McLaughlin vs. Heiser.= Natatorium Hall, Philadelphia, February
24–26th.—$250 a side. McL., 1500—5.60—46; H., 1064—45.
Daly’s Assembly Rooms, Brooklyn, March 15–17th.—Return game, $250 a
side. H., 1500—7.81—55; McL., 1258—60.
* * * * *
=Schaefer vs. Slosson.= Central Music Hall, Chicago, April 12th.—$500 a
side. Schaefer, 800—17.78—126; Slosson, 639—135.
1888.
=Connecticut Championship at 8:2 on a 4½ × 9.= M. H. Hewins’ Rooms,
Hartford, January 17th to February 6th.—Tournament of 250–point games.
Fred Hawks, 5—0, first prize; J. A. Hendrick, 4—1, second prize, and
also prize for high run (36); W. G. White, 2—3, third prize, having
beaten R. W. Kellogg in play-off.
Same room, game, and table, April 9th.—Match for championship. Hawks,
300—4.55—27; John H. Kingsbury, 217—7.
The championship emblem was a billiard-table, to be defended fifteen
months.
* * * * *
=First 14:2 Tournament in France.= Played on a B. B. C. Co.’s 5 × 10
table at Vignaux’s Academy, Paris, March 19–28th.—Contestants at various
handicaps, Messrs. Vignaux (3—1), Piot, Fournil, and Leuiller (2—2
apiece), and Gay (1—3).
* * * * *
=Slosson Defeats Schaefer.= St. Paul, Minn., October —, 14:2, purse
game, $250, given by the B. B. C. Co. No data as to totals, runs or
averages.
* * * * *
=First Championship of Shortstops.= Madison Street Theatre, Chicago,
November 26th to December 8th.—200–point games. Carter, who won 7—0 in
games and $254.80 in money, made highest run, single average and general
average (87—13.33—9.33). Catton and Gallagher tied for second and third,
and divided $302.80, and Maggioli and John T. Moulds, tieing for fourth,
divided $64.60. The other contestants were Frank C. Ives (2—5), Wm. F.
Hatley (2—5), and Henry Rhines (1—6). In December, 1889, Ives challenged
Carter, who, intending to go to Paris, declined to defend the emblem.
There was never a match-contest for the emblem, Ives holding it the
required time without challenge. After Carter’s return from Europe,
there was a second tournament for the shortstop championship (see 1891).
1889.
=New England Championship at 10.2 on 4½ × 9.= J. J. Murphy’s Hub Palace,
Boston, ending December 18th.—Eight in. Fred Eames first, Moses Yatter
second, Chas. F. Campbell third. (See February 16–26, 1891, for their
being 1—2—3 also for another 10.2 championship.)
1890.
=Maggioli vs. Hatley.= Madison Street Theatre, Chicago, January
23d.—Match for $250 a side and the championship of Western players below
first grade. M., 500—9.26—71; H., 327—28.
* * * * *
=Old Line Against New.= Chickering Hall, N. Y. City, February 20th to
March 1st.—First appearance of Ives and Catton in the East. To six
entrances of $250 apiece, the B. B. C. Co. added $2,500. Games 500 up,
Slosson and Schaefer playing 14:2 against the 8:2 of the others, three
of whom divided third, fourth, and fifth prizes.
As professionals of mark have never publicly repeated this experiment of
line against line, averaging this tournament in its entirety would be
worthless for comparison. Average of the four 8:2 players, 13.17; of the
two 14:2, 17.63.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Slosson ($1,600) 5 136 26.32 17.36
Schaefer ($1,200) 4 168 26.32 17.93
Daly ($400) 2 118 20.83 13.52
Catton ($400) 2 95 15.13 11.31
Ives ($400) 2 105 25. 17.80
Heiser 0 141 10.90
Going to Chicago, the same players contended in Central Music Hall,
April 5–12th for a like amount of money, but handicapped in points, all
at 14:2. In place of $400 thrice, now read Slosson, $800; Catton, $400.
Average of tournament, 12.48.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Schaefer (500) 5 200 38.46 25.00
Ives (275) 4 97 25.00 13.12
Slosson (500) 3 178 25. 20.18
Catton (250) 2 74 9.26 8.33
Heiser (250) 1 52 6.25 5.67
Daly (300) 0 62 6.96
* * * * *
=Maggioli vs. Ives.= Madison Street Theatre, Chicago, April 16th.—$250 a
side. M., 500—15.15—121; I., 440—73.
* * * * *
=First World’s Championship at 14:2.= Instituted without the formality
of a tournament in a match-contest at Chickering Hall, N. Y. City,
December 1st.—Stake, $500 a side in money and a silver Challenge Cup
presented by the B. B. C. Co. Schaefer, 800—19.51—128; Slosson, 609—60.
SCHAEFER VS. CARTER. Second match, same terms, Central Music Hall,
Chicago, May 6, 1891.—S., 800—21.05—104; C., 481—111.
SCHAEFER VS. SLOSSON. Third match, Lenox Lyceum, N. Y. City, January 22,
1892.—Schaefer, 800—23.53—155; Slosson, 592—119.
SCHAEFER BEATEN BY IVES. Fourth match, Central Music Hall, Chicago,
March 19, 1892.—I., 800—16.33—95; S., 499—45.
IVES VS. SLOSSON. Fifth match and last contest, same place as above, May
21, 1892.—I., 800—26.67—124; S., 488—120.
=First Reversion of an Emblem to Donors.= For their failure to play the
sixth match in Paris, where it was made in 1892 by Ives and Schaefer,
the official stakeholders declared match off, Challenge Cup reverting to
donors under the rules.
1891.
=Second New England Championship at 10.2.= J. J. Murphy’s Hub Palace,
Boston, Feb. 16–26, tournament for challenge emblem valued at $100 and
$320 in money, 250 points on 4½ × 9. Eames, Yatter, and Campbell were
again 1—2—3, but this time against T. R. Bullock (fourth money) and Wm.
Gilman. Eames lost not a game and made best single average, run, and
general average—10.87—55—7.58.
* * * * *
=Second Shortstop Championship.= B. B. C. Co.’s Warerooms, Chicago,
February 10–27th.—Games, 400 points. Average of tournament, 9.86.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Carter 7 116 30.77 15.55
Ives 6 116 44.44 19.38
Catton 4 83 21.05 10.55
McLaughlin 3 109 14.29 9.34
Maggioli 3 76 9.09 8.18
Hatley 3 60 12.12 9.30
Jos. Capron 2 54 10.33 7.26
L. Shaw 0 54 6.15
Either Capron’s is a losing average or the figures are an error for
13.33, a winning one.
CARTER VS. IVES. Central Music Mall, Chicago, April 29th.—Only match
contest. I., 500—9.43—70; C., 478—72.
* * * * *
=Again 10.2 on a 4½ × 9.= Union Hall, Providence, R. I., March
10–14th.—C. F. Campbell, 2—1; Eames, 2—1; Bullock, 1—2; and Moses
Yatter, 1—2. Campbell won in play-off. Eames made best single average
and run—9.68 and 66.
* * * * *
=First Balkline Amateur Tournament in the East.= Daly’s Assembly Rooms,
Brooklyn, March 9–20th.—8:2 on 4½ × 9, handicap. Won by Samuel Ehrlich
(165). Best averages, single and general (6.43 and 5.70), by Wm.
Barnard, who carried the top weight (225), and best run (76) by Dr. H.
D. Jennings, who was next in weight (200).
Eastern amateurs last played 8:2 in formal contest on February 2 and
March 4, 1893, in Brooklyn, Frank A. Keeney scoring 300 to Dr. Jennings
189 first, and 300 to his 212 next.
* * * * *
=Championship of Pennsylvania.= Pittsburg, March 16–21st.—Challenge
emblem and money-prizes aggregating $800. Average of tournament, 4.22.
W. R. Av. G. A.
McLaughlin 5 64 9.09 6.23
Dodds 4 31 4.84 4.25
Burris 3 45 6.84 4.95
Boschert 2 25 5.17 3.83
Walker 1 29 4.23 3.94
J. Cline 0 31 3.71
Stake in matches, $300. Challenged by Dodds, McLaughlin won in
Philadelphia, May 4th, by 400 to 181.
* * * * *
=Twelve and a Half Line on 4½ × 9.= B’nai B’rith Hall, San Francisco,
April 23d.—J. F. B. McCleery and B. Saylor began a tournament at 12½.2
for championship of the Pacific Coast. Result of first game is all that
ever reached the Atlantic. S., 400—12.12—73; McC., 221—41. W. A. Spinks
was the other entry.
* * * * *
=Slosson vs. Schaefer.= N. Y. City, October 26th.—$500 a side. Slosson,
800—22.22—173; Schaefer, 392—48.
* * * * *
=Ives vs. Carter.= Milwaukee, Wis., October 28th.—Consideration not
known. As it was played out of the bailiwick of both, it was probably a
purse game. I., 600—30—133; C., 183 (total).
1892.
[See 1890 for championship matches in this year, together with
explanation of later inaction.]
* * * * *
=Vignaux vs. Schaefer.= Paris, France, December 21–22d.—$500 a side. V.,
1200; S., 982. Runs and averages not cabled.
1893.
=First Known 14:2 Tournament of Amateurs.= G. F. Slosson’s Room, N. Y.
City, 1893. Byron Stark first, Dr. A. B. Miller second, and Dr. A. L.
Ranney third.
But at Daly’s, Brooklyn, December 23, 1886, two amateurs had played a
match at 12.2. Orville Oddie, Jr., who won, gave odds of 100. Winner,
400—4.40—18; loser, 338—21.
* * * * *
=Sutton’s Caromic Beginnings in Public.= Toronto, Can., championship of
Canada and $500. George Sutton, 500; Joseph W. Capron, 459. (January
27th, $500, the former ball-pool player beat Capron at regular
three-ball game by 700 to 266.)
Galt, Ont., March 28th.—Championship and same stake. C., 500; S., 306.
Galt, Ont., April 20th.—Championship and same stake. S., 500; C., 408.
In January, 1894, S. forfeited championship to C.
Half in Toronto and half in Galt, March 29–30, 1894.—Fourth time for
championship and $500. C., 1000; S., 830.
April, 1894, Montreal, C. played M. Thomas for championship and $500.
C., 500; T., 415.
December, 1894, Montreal, C. again encountered Sutton, but now in a
tournament in which he had to play off with Spark B. Watson to get first
prize, Sutton being third, Thomas fourth, and W. Jakes fifth.
* * * * *
=Championship of Canada at 14:2.= See Sutton, above.
* * * * *
=Capron vs. Ed. M. Helm.= Chicago, July 7, 1893.—$200. C., 400; H., 246.
* * * * *
=Schaefer vs. Ives.= Chicago, November 21–25, 1893.—$2,000 a side.
Schaefer, 4000—27.21—343; I., 3955—456. When last night’s play began,
winner had 1305 to go to Ives’s 800. Run of 456 chiefly by anchor, due
to the Ives-Roberts London match in prior spring.
* * * * *
=Second Tournament of Doubled Games.= Madison Square Garden Concert
Hall, N. Y. City, December 11–16th.—$600 entrance fee apiece, winner to
take 50 per cent. of it and of the net receipts, second and third taking
30 and 20. Schaefer first—average, 100—run, 566 (against Ives in final
game); Ives, second, 50—141; Slosson, third, 41.67—164. Schaefer’s 566
was nearly all anchor across short line ending at left-lower cushion.
Going to Chicago, the three played January 8–13, 1894, in Central Music
Hall, ending in a tie (not played off) between Schaefer and Ives, who
had anchored up to 487 and equaled the Schaefer average in New York.
Slosson won no game. After the others had each beaten him once, anchor
was barred, and neither first nor second class players have ever revived
it, eyes like Ives’s and Schaefer’s being scarce.
Next to Cincinnati, February 1–3d, and there, playing but once around
for $1,500, Ives was first—general average, 28.60—run, 163; Schaefer,
second—general average, 21.52—run, 74; and Slosson third—general
average, 17.36—run, 97.
Next to Boston, February 8–10th.—Same terms as in Cincinnati, and this
ended tour. Slosson first—general average, 23.50—run, 163; Schaefer
second—general average, 16—run, 271; Ives third—general average, 19—run,
146.
1894.
=Philadelphia Three-handed Handicap.= March 19–24th.—Purse of $300 added
to entrance fees, Burris and Dodds, second and third, playing 300 to the
400 of McLaughlin, first.
* * * * *
=Boston Match at 4½ × 9 10.2.= April 11–13th.—Eames, 1200; Geo. R.
Carter, 883.
* * * * *
=Sexton vs. Heiser.= N. Y. City, August 13–18th.—Opening of Maurice
Daly’s Annex. Purse game. S., 1500; H., 1152.
* * * * *
=Ives vs. Schaefer.= Home-and-home match, November 12–17th in New York,
and in December 3–8th in Chicago.—$2,500 a side each game. First: I.,
3600—48.62—331; S., 3074—244. Second: I., 3600—41.38—359; S., 2831—217.
This was the last stake-match at 14:2 between stars of the first
magnitude.
* * * * *
=Gallagher vs. Fournil.= Daly’s, N. Y. City, beginning December
17th.—Purse game. Edouard Fournil, of Paris, France, gave odds of 50 per
cent. and won by 3000 to 1421, actual score, the best run being the
winner’s 176. A little later, Gallagher won with odds of 1800; G.,
3000—14.65; F., 2289—27.91.
1895.
=Sutton’s First in Carom Tournament.= Recital Hall, Chicago, January
18–27th.—Shortstops at 14:2, anchor barred, $1,000 in prizes. Order here
is games won and lost, best average, general average, and high run:
Gallagher, 5 to 0—28.58—19.80—104; Hatley, 3 to 2—12.15—11.—93;
Maggioli, 3 to 2—14.29—10.54—91; McLaughlin, 2 to 3—21.—13.50—114;
Sutton, 1 to 4—13.80—9.75—80; Capron, 1 to 4—13.—8.40—54. Hatley and
Maggioli divided second and third. Sutton beat McLaughlin only.
* * * * *
=Amateur Championship of Illinois at 14:2.= B. B. C. Co.’s Warerooms,
Chicago, Ill., February, 300 points. With the exception of the
winner-in-chief’s, which we have corrected, the averages—some winning
and others losing—are only roundly expressed, as they appeared
originally in a Chicago daily newspaper in 1895.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Ellison 7 74 10. 7.81
Rice 6 59 9. 5.80
Kellogg 4 34 6.50 4.75
Nolan 3 39 5. 3.60
Goodwin 3 46 6. 4.
Adams 3 36 6.50 4.40
Rein 1 23 4. 3.20
Brown 0 44 4. 3.
The emblem ultimately became the property of Clem E. Ellison. There was
but one match-contest for it, and in that, against Mr. Milburn at the
rooms of the Chicago A. C., E. won on an average of 6.
* * * * *
=W. A. Spinks vs. George Carter at 14:2.= Boston, October 13–14th.—$100,
4½ × 9. S., 900; C., 477.
* * * * *
=Roomkeepers’ 14:2 Tournament.= Philadelphia, ending October 26th.—Order
of finish: Burris, H. Cline, McCabe, J. Cline, and Rhoads.
1896.
=Shortstops in Chicago.= Recital Hall, Jan. 18–27; game, 400 points,
14:2; prizes, $1,000.
W. R. Av. G. A.
T. J. Gallagher 5 104 28.57 19.80
J. F. Maggioli 3 91 14.29 10.60
Ed. McLaughlin 2 114 21.05 13.53
W. F. Hatley 3 93 12.50 11.
Geo. Sutton 1 86 13.79 9.75
Jos. Capron 1 54 13. 8.51
=Intercity and Interclub Amateur Tournament.= The first was held at
Maurice Daly’s Assembly Rooms, Brooklyn, in 1895, and the second, held
at his rooms in this city, January 13–27, 1896, is given a place here
because of its having embraced nearly all of those who have since been
busiest _en amateur_ in and around Manhattan.
W. R. Av. G. A.
A. R. Townsend(325) 4 57 8.80 5.87
J. Byron Stark (270) 9 53 10.38 5.56
Ed. W. Gardner(250) 6 34 5.70 4.34
F. A. Keeney(240) 6 39 5.72 4.68
Dr. A. B. Miller(240) 4 44 6.13 4.32
Dr. A. L. Ranney(240) 1 42 4.25 3.59
F. Poggenburg(210) 6 36 5.13 4.
There were three other competitors—Messrs. Wm. Barnard, Dr. H. D.
Jennings, and Fred Oakes. The game was 14:2.
* * * * *
=First Tournament at 18:2.= Madison Square Garden Concert Hall, March
31st to April 5th, under the auspices of Ives and Daly. Two shots in
balk and five in anchor-box, instead of ten, as had latterly been the
practice at 14:2. Games, 600 points, all three contestants playing twice
around. Schaefer and Ives 3—1 each, but never played off; Albert
Garnier, 0—4. Best winning averages, general averages, and high runs:
I., 50—36.48—200; S., 30—24.11—176; Garnier, ...—9.99—36.
Repairing to Chicago, they next played the
=First Tournament at 18:1.=
Central Music Hall, May 18–23d.—Only one shot either in anchor or in
balk. Playing twice around, Schaefer and Ives 500 to Garnier’s 300, G.
first, I. second. Best single, best general, and highest run: G.,
12—9.60—53; I., 19.58 (losing)—16.58—103; S., 17.56 (losing)—12.70—111.
In Boston their tour ended. See Cushion Caroms.
* * * * *
=Temporary Revival of 14:2 by Stars.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, April
18th.—Four-handed. Daly and Schaefer, averaging 23.81, defeated Garnier
and Ives by 500 to 347.
1897.
=All Tie in Pittsburg, Pa., Tournament of Shortstops.= Davis’s Room,
February 27th to March 6th.—14:2 without anchor, $1,000 in 40, 30, 20,
and 10 per cent. divisions, 400–point games. Average of tournament,
approximately 12.70. In play-off, Sutton beat both, and Spinks, running
187 and averaging 40, put third prize upon Gallagher.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Sutton 3 88 22.22 12.
Spinks 3 138 36.36 11.90
Gallagher 3 100 27. 17.16
McLaughlin 2 78 15.39 11.78
Maggioli 2 99 13.33 10.14
Catton 2 97 22.22 13.41
* * * * *
=Same Players, Plus John Matthews, in Chicago.= Under the auspices of
and at Clarence E. Green’s Imperial Room, April 6th.—Same game and the
like prize-money. In playing off, Catton won by 600 to 478, but Spinks
topped the shortstop record with a run of 197. Maggioli’s 28 is either a
losing average or an error. Average of tournament, 14.65.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Spinks 5 167 18.18 15.50
Catton 5 158 23.50 16.75
Sutton 4 169 30.77 21.10
McLaughlin 3 99 17.39 13.33
Gallagher 2 95 21. 15.50
Maggioli 1 107 28. 13.
Matthews 1 118 15. 9.80
* * * * *
=Hugo Kerkau’s American Debut.= Daly’s Room, N. Y. City, July
5–10th.—Purse game, 300 points of 14:2 nightly. K., 1800; Morningstar,
1523.
Same place and terms, July 19–24th.—McLaughlin, 1800; K., 1702.
* * * * *
=First World’s Championship at 18:1.= Madison Square Garden Concert
Hall, N. Y. City, November 20th–December 4th.—Emblem and $1,200 in cash,
both presented by the B. B. C. Co., added to $500 in entrance fees and
to the net receipts. Average of tournament, four 500–point games apiece,
8.89.
W. R. Av. G. A.
G. F. Slosson ($1466.50) 4 97 12.20 9.39
J. Schaefer ($879.90) 3 85 15.45 9.25
F. C. Ives ($586.60) 2 140 31.25 14.95
M. Daly 1 73 8.20 7.18
Geo. Sutton 0 53 6.09
SCHAEFER DEFEATS SLOSSON. Same hall, February 5, 1898.—First match for
championship and $500 a side. Schaefer, 600—7.46—76; Slosson, 596—34.
IVES DEFEATS SCHAEFER. Central Music Hall, Chicago, April 4,
1898.—Second and last match. I., 600—15—91; S., 426—90.
As there was no challenge outstanding, and as Ives declined the emblem
without waiting to qualify as champion, it reverted, under the rules, to
its donors, and there was no 18:1 championship again until December,
1901.
1898.
=Schaefer vs. Slosson.= Opera-house, Hartford, Conn., February
16th.—18:1 purse game. Schaefer, 400—7.84—39; Slosson, 317—59.
* * * * *
=First Handicap at 18:1.= Central Music Hall, Chicago, January
17–22d.—Ives and Schaefer playing 400 to the 260 of Sutton, Catton, and
Spinks. Schaefer’s defeat of Ives by 22, coupled with his own defeat at
the hands of Spinks by 262, caused a tie between the “scratchmen,” who
divided first and second moneys, as Spinks and Catton did the fourth
prize. The B. B. C. Co. had added $1,750 to the entrance fees. Average
of tournament, 14.57.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Schaefer ($787.50) 3 138 40. 18.85
Ives ($787.50) 3 136 28.71 24.28
Sutton ($450) 2 73 17.65 13.85
Catton ($112.50) 1 56 9.38 6.75
Spinks ($112.50) 1 48 10.82 8.23
* * * * *
=Roomkeepers’ New Handicap Championship.= Philadelphia, April 4th.—Match
won by Edward Burris (225—5.—28) from Sol Allinger, who played for 175.
* * * * *
=Knickerbocker A. C. Championship.= N. Y. City, April.—14:2. Making best
single and general, 9.67 and 7.50, Byron Stark won, Dr. A. B. Miller,
Dr. L. L. Mial and F. Poggenburg finishing as named.
* * * * *
=Amateur Athletic Union Handicap.= Knickerbocker A. C., N. Y. City,
May.—14:2. Order at close: Mial (250), Stark (300), Miller (250), J. A.
Hendrick (270), Clement Bainbridge (260), and L. A. Servatius (250).
Best single, general, and run: 9.09—6.37—64, by Stark.
* * * * *
=Amateur 14:2 Handicap.= Ives’s Room, N. Y. City, November 2–9th.—Won by
Florian Tobias (215) from Messrs. Stark, Mial, and Poggenburg (all three
at 300), Wm. Gershel (240), and Wm. Arnold, Dr. W. G. Douglas, and L. A.
Servatius (all at 200). Arnold was second, and Stark third.
* * * * *
=A. A. U.’s First Class B Tournament.= Knickerbocker A. C., beginning
December 5th.—300–point games, 14:2. All the singles except Stark’s and
possibly Miller’s are either losing averages or slightly inaccurate in
their fractions.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Stark 6 47 10.34 7.74
Taylor 4 71 7.56 5.42
Smith 4 64 6.97 5.50
Poggenburg 3 48 7.60 5.42
Miller 2 33 5. 4.13
G. E. Hevner 1 29 5.79 4.67
J. A. Hendrick 1 32 4.63 3.92
Al Taylor, of Chicago, won play-off from J. De Mun Smith, of St. Louis.
Approximate average of tournament, 5.25. Figures are not at hand to test
whether or not the general averages of Taylor and Poggenburg were
exactly alike. If they were, it was the first known case (see
Metropolitan Championship, 1900, and “Another Tie in General Averages,”
1903).
1899.
=A. A. U.’s First Class A Tournament.= Knickerbocker Club, N. Y. City,
February 13–18th.—Doubled 400–point games of 14:2, anchor barred, for an
unchallengeable championship trophy presented by the B. B. C. Co. Martin
Mullen, of Cleveland, lost none but opening game, and that to Wayman C.
McCreery, of St. Louis, who won no other. Wilson P. Foss, of Haverstraw,
N. Y., second.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Mullen 3 73 10.26 8.30
Foss 2 133 12.25 8.27
McCreery 1 139 13.33 9.16
Average of tournament, 8.56.
* * * * *
=Liederkranz Amateur Trophy.= Liederkranz Society’s Room, N. Y. City,
May.—300 points of 14:2 nightly, best in five, J. F. Poggenburg,
averaging 12 in one session, won three, and J. Byron Stark two.
* * * * *
=Straight Rail vs. 8:2 Balkline Revived.= Amateur handicap, Foley’s
Room, Chicago, March.—Al Taylor and Griffith played the line for 250
against the unlimited three-ball game of Gray (250), Cochrane, Harris,
and the younger Foley (all at 180), McKay and Atwater (both 140), Rawson
(130), and Wilder (120). Taylor, winning by 9—0, had highest general
average (5.86), second-best run (74), and second-best single average
(7.81), the highest run and single by a “railer” being the 126 and 13.85
of Foley, who got second place on 7—2. Atwater (6—3) third, and the
veteran McKay (5—4) fourth.
* * * * *
=Schaefer vs. Slosson at 18:1.= Lenox Lyceum, N. Y. City, May
13th.—First of match of two games, each for $500 a side (see Cushion
Caroms, May 22, for second). Schaefer, 600—13.64—139; Slosson, 418—62.
* * * * *
=First Tournament National Association Amateur Billiard Players.= These
were two sets of handicap 14:2 games, both one as to the main prize (the
Daly-Slosson Cup), but independent as to the two sets of other prizes.
Poggenburg won at G. F. Slosson’s Room, beginning November 13th, and
Keeney at Maurice Daly’s, ending December 15th. The records of the two
tournaments are given side by side.
W. R. Av. G. A.
─────────────────────────────────────────────────
Poggenburg, 300 5 2 70 40 9.68 5.66 7.21 5.20
Stark, 300 3 3 77 63 10.34 10.79 7.77 6.78
Keeney, 280 3 5 72 44 9.03 6.83 6.15 6.10
Townsend, 280 2 3 61 48 8. 7.37 5.70 5.29
Muldaur, 220 2 2 36 31 5.64 4.78 4.52 3.73
Arnold, 220 0 0 23 19 3.09 3.17
Approximate average of whole play at Slosson’s, 5.75; at Daly’s, 4.32;
of both combined, 5.30.
Play-off for the Daly-Slosson Cup, December 19–20th: P., 600—6.82—44;
K., 439—33.
* * * * *
=A. A. U.’s Second Class B Tournament.= Knickerbocker A. C., N. Y. City,
December—300 points, 14:2. This and all later ones given under authority
of the A. A. U. were not strictly invitation tournaments, the box-office
being open to the public. A. G. Cutler’s run of 74 does not properly
belong to this series of games, having been accomplished by reason of
his preliminarily playing in more games than some others. Threshie,
Smith and Kellogg’s singles are winning ones.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Threshie 5 74 10.34 7.65
Smith 4 72 11.11 6.19
Kellogg 3 49 7.50 5.58
Hendrick 2 52 6.81 4.98
Cutler 1 74 6.31 5.42
Hevner 0 36 3.67
Tournament’s approximate average, 5.55.
* * * * *
=Chicago Amateur Handicap.= Foley’s Room, December.—14:2. Harris (145),
9—0; Al Taylor (300), 7—2; Levine (145), 6—3; and Lang, Atwater, and the
younger Foley (severally 200, 135, and 170), all 5—4. Best single and
general averages and highest runs were 7.14—6.20—66 by Taylor, and
6.10—4.—56 by Nolan (250), who won but two games.
1900.
=A. A. U.’s Second Class A Tournament.= Knickerbocker A. C., February
5–16th.—400–point games, 14:2, anchor barred, for championship Silver
Cup given by the B. B. C. Co., to become the property of anyone winning
it thrice.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Foss 5 115 14.29 10.64
McCreery 4 68 14.81 9.59
Smith 3 54 8.51 7.50
Threshie 2 79 12.90 7.99
Mial 1 80 7.41 6.32
Conklin 0 44 5.68
Average of tournament, 7.95.
* * * * *
=Metropolitan Amateur Championship of 14:2.= First tournament held by
Hanover Club, and second participated in by the N. A. A. B. P.,
Brooklyn, N. Y., March 12–17th. Average of tournament, 6.57.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Poggenburg 3 49 8.33 7.20
Keeney 2 45 8.57 6.58
Townsend 1 33 5.77 5.52
Stark 0 64 6.58
The remarkable features were presented of three players, Stark, Keeney,
and Poggenburg, having the same total innings (125), of Stark and Keeney
with 821 points each, and of their also tieing on general average for
the first time known to us in a demonstrated way.
* * * * *
=Roomkeepers’ Championship of Philadelphia.= This time without a
handicap, it began May 3d in a tournament at 14:2. Merrick Levy won it,
but had to average 4.88 against John Cline to do so. John Thornton was
second.
* * * * *
=A. G. Cutler vs. Chas. Threshie.= Hub Billiard Palace, Boston, May 9th,
10th, 11th.—Match at 14:2. C., 1000—6.17—48; T., 998—51. The pair had
the rating then of amateurs.
* * * * *
=Cook County Amateur Championship.= What with tournament bouts and
challenge matches as a sequel, W. P. Mussey’s memorable Chicago 14:2
series lasted this year from February 26th to August 15th. That four out
of the nine in the tournament met on even terms tended largely to
overcome the logical objection to handicapping as a championship factor.
The table below exhibits a winning average of 9.68 for one “scratch,” as
well as a general average of 7.10. The challenge matches were always
interesting, and often impressive, as when, with a run of 76 and an
average of 10.34, Conklin took the emblem from Kellogg. McGinniss, like
Kellogg, Brown, and Dr. Parker, lost half his tournament games; but he
made amends by winning his whole six matches, thus acquiring ownership
of the “Mussey Medal,” in the final match for which, August 15th, he
averaged 7.50 against Adams.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Harley Parker, 225 4 52 6.82 3.86
R. J. McGinniss, 300 4 52 9.68 7.10
C. F. Conklin, 300 7 47 7.68 6.
A. J. Brown, 225 4 41 5.11 3.80
W. W. Kellogg, 300 4 44 6.38 5.54
J. D. Adams, 225 7 44 5.92 4.31
T. J. Nolan, 250 2 35 4.90 4.15
B. S. Bingham, 200 3 36 5.74 3.69
C. S. Schmitt, 300 1 51 5.88 4.80
In beating Conklin by 225 to 232 on the tie, Adams averaged 5.77, and
Kellogg reached 5.88 in depriving Adams of the championship in the very
first match. Expressed in a round way, the average of the tournament was
4.80.
* * * * *
=Doubled Tournament Games at Daly’s.= N. Y. City, October
15–20th.—Handicap at 14:2. Gallagher (400), 4—0; Morningstar (250), 3—1;
Howison (200), 3—1. Highest runs, winning averages and general averages:
M., 73—9.62—7.78; H., 39—10—6.07; G., 84—general, 12.55. Playing off
tie, Howison won by 2 points on an average of 8.78.
* * * * *
=Clubmen Made Desperate by Ties.= October.—The 14:2 tournament of the
Olympic Club, San Francisco, ended in a first-place tie of four out of
seven—Dr. O. B. Burns, F. L. Taylor, J. J. Roggan, and W. Franklin. The
first three tied again, shutting out Franklin; and after tieing again
and again, they played once three-handed, which summarily cut the
Gordian knot thus—Taylor, Burns, and Roggan. In the tournament proper,
Burns had made high average (5.77), and Franklin the high run (42).
* * * * *
=Revival of 8:2 in New Orleans.= Capt. John Miller’s Room, October 22d
to November 16th.—Louis Abrams and George H. Miller, the two
“scratchmen,” were first and second among six. Best runs and averages:
Abrams’s 8.33 and 46, and Miller’s 7.14 and 57.
Following week, same game, match for $50, best in three nights. Abrams
made the more points, but Miller won the three nights, averaging 5.88 as
his best, and running 48 to Abrams’s 29 for high.
* * * * *
=Knickerbocker A. C.’s Championship of 14:2.= N. Y. City, beginning
December 26th and recordable chiefly because of the winner’s having the
unexampled privilege of “keeping warm” in the depth of winter by playing
all his games one after another without interregnum, which necessarily
had to deprive the remaining games of interest. Contestants: Chas. S.
Norris, J. A. Hendrick, Dr. A. B. Miller, Dr. L. L. Mial, and Albro
Akin. Best general average, 5.77 by the winner-in-chief, Norris.
1901.
=Championship of the N. A. A. B. P.= First tournament, under the
patronage of the Hanover Club, Brooklyn, N. Y., for the Brooklyn Eagle’s
Gold Cup, but the third annual one of the Association, Brooklyn, N. Y.,
January 14–26th. Arthur R. Townsend won play-off. Average of tournament,
5.96. Three tied on high run, and the other three were not far from
virtually tieing on general average. Such closeness, practicable for any
grade of performers at any form of cushion caroms, is phenomenal at 14:2
balkline for players of the speed of these.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Townsend 4 69 8.11 6.26
Keeney 4 46 7.32 6.04
E. W. Gardner 3 52 8.33 6.80
Stark 3 50 7.89 5.83
Poggenburg 1 50 9.68 5.85
F. C. Gardner 0 50 4.71
* * * * *
=A. A. U.’s Third Annual Class A Championship Tournament.= Knickerbocker
Club, N. Y. City, February 5–15th.—At 14:2. Average of tournament, four
400–point games apiece, 6.39.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Conklin 4 52 8.70 7.55
Threshie 3 47 7.41 7.37
Hendrick 1 40 5.33 5.03
Mial 1 63 6.56 6.39
McKee 1 60 7.30 5.85
In the play-off, Mial made the best run and single average (89 and
8.16), both in defeating McKee.
As winner-in-chief, Conklin on February 16th played Foss, holder of the
A. A. U.’s championship. F., 400—10.87—69; C., 262—43.
* * * * *
=Morningstar vs. Howison.= Maurice Daly’s Room, N. Y. City, beginning
February 18th.—Six nights’ purse game at 14:2, even up. M.,
1800—8.78—92; H., 1761—76.
* * * * *
=Progressive Billiards.= City Athletic Club, Toronto, Can., February
23d.—Game so called, ten members on each side, using five tables with
four players apiece. Messrs. White and McDonald made highest and lowest
individual scores—177 and 37.
* * * * *
=Three-handed Doubled Games.= Daly’s, N. Y. City, March 18–23d.—Handicap
purse tournament at 14:2. Morningstar (300)—1122—23.08—183; Gallagher
(400)—1158—19.05—75; McLaughlin (400)—1414—20.—92. G. A.—M., 14.20;
McL., 13.09; G., 12.12.
* * * * *
=Competition by Telegraph.= March 26th.—14:2, St. Louis and Cleveland,
Wayman C. McCreery playing in John Lacari’s room and Martin Mullen in
Ed. M. Helm’s. Runs, etc., wired to and fro. Averages not announced.
Totals and highest runs: M., 500—80; McC., 471—53. McCreery, who
suggested this experimental contest, proposed to spot at every inning.
As the St. Louisan later wrote _The Weekly Billiardist_: “Mullen thought
that too easy, and amended by commencing in the ordinary way, viz.,
playing on the far ball, then playing with still ball for five innings,
then respotting,” and so on.
* * * * *
=“The Mussey Handicap.”= Mussey’s Room, Chicago, ending May 7th.—Amateur
14:2 tournament for gold watch and chain. Messrs. Adams, Kurtz,
Gerhardt, and Miehle, severally in at 240, 200, 215, and 200, were
trailers in that order. The other five, with their handicaps, best
single averages and highest runs, were Ed. Rein (230)—6.76—52; Dr.
Harley Parker (230)—5.90—65; W. W. Kellogg (275)—8.60—45; C. F. Conklin
(300)—8.57—49; and H. A. Coleman, of Milwaukee (300)—6.25—36. The two
postmen, Conklin and Coleman, won 5—3 each, while Rein and Parker, third
heaviest weight-carriers, but first and second winners, won 7 to 1 and 6
to 2.
* * * * *
=Morningstar vs. Jose Ortiz, of Spain.= Daly’s Room, N. Y. City, May,
five nights’ purse game of 14:2. M., 1500—10.49—83; O., 1032—68.
* * * * *
=C. F. Conklin’s Lofty Average.= A. M. Clarke’s 14:2 handicap, Chicago,
closing May 29th.—Leaders were Conklin (250 and unbeaten), 15.60—run,
67; Brown (175), 5.67—33; Morin (175), 6.50—38. The latter two tied in
games with 5 up and 2 down, and Brown won play-off by 18.
* * * * *
=John Miller’s Plexus, or Bunch of Ties.= New Orleans, 14:2 handicap,
ending October 2d.—Of seven entries, Abrams (160), G. H. Miller (160),
and Zaehringer (140), tied in high run (31), as also did Van Gelder and
Peterson (120 each) on 21, while there were two ties for first prize,
Abrams winning play-off, and three for fourth.
* * * * *
=Gallagher vs. Ortiz.= Daly’s, N. Y.; October 7–11th.—14:2 purse game.
G., 1500—11.54—82; O., 913 (with 250 odds)—58.
* * * * *
=Daly Handicap at 18:2.= N. Y. City, October 21–26th, and Willie Hoppe’s
first in tournament, which was for purse. Handicap, best winning and
general averages, and highest run, individually: Hoppe (200),
10.—8.81—54; Morningstar (300), 12.—12.75—59; McLaughlin (300),
15.79—13.79—89; Gallagher (300), 11.11—9.50—75; Ortiz (225), 5.22 (gen.
av.)—49. Hoppe and Ortiz reversed in games, 4—0 to 0—4, and the other
three, tieing at 2—1, tied again, and then divided.
* * * * *
=Chicago Handicap at 14:2.= Foley’s Room, October 18 to December
9th.—Amateur contestants—Harris and Kent, 200; Cochrane and Sorenson,
175; Miller, 160; Dethke, 145; Ballard, 135; Gunther and Shute, 130.
Outcome—Harris, Ballard, Sorenson and Cochrane. High runs, with averages
of both kinds: 49—5.26—4.00, by Harris. Miller’s 44 was second in runs.
* * * * *
=Second World’s Championship at 18:1.= Madison Square Garden Concert
Hall, N. Y. City, December 2–10th.—Tournament for jeweled badge and
$2,000 in cash added by the B. B. C. Co. to $1,500 in entrance fees and
net receipts. This was the public début of Leon Barutel, Orlando
Morningstar, and Leonard Howison in first-class company. Tournament’s
average, five 400–point games apiece, 6.61.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Schaefer 5 68 12.50 7.78
Slosson 3 45 10.26 7.58
Barutel 3 42 8.70 6.19
Sutton 2 64 13.79 9.26
Morningstar 1 62 9.52 5.21
Howison 1 35 5.32 4.84
Instead of any contest, there were three challenges for this emblem.
Sutton, who challenged twice, claimed it the latter time, and it was
awarded to him on October 30, 1903, in default of Schaefer’s covering
forfeit. (See March 4, 1904, and January and March, 1906).
* * * * *
=Championship of the Northwest at 14:2.= Played for on a 4½ × 9 table in
Duluth, Fargo, Minneapolis, and St. Paul, November. Emblematic cup
presented by B. B. C. Co.
W. R. Av. G. A.
W. F. Hatley 5 85 14.40 10.33
G. E. Spears 4 86 15. 8.33
C. Peterson 2 60 7.90 6.12
Chas. Clow 1 33 5.80 4.67
* * * * *
=Schaefer vs. Barutel at 18:2.= Frank A. Keeney’s Knickerbocker Academy,
Brooklyn, N. Y., December 19–21st, three nights’ purse game. S.,
1800—16.90—85; B., 946—58.
1902.
=Last Class B. Tournament of A. A. U.= Knickerbocker Club, N. Y. City,
winter of 1901–2.—Game, 14:2. Instead of by games, this tournament was
to be decided by best general averages in case of tie for first place.
A. G. Cutler, W. W. Kellogg, and J. A. Hendrick tied, and Cutler was
winner on average. Other contestants were Frank Billiter, of
Minneapolis, C. S. Schmitt, of Chicago, and W. A. Paige, of Boston, all
new to this series of games.
* * * * *
=Second Tournament for “Brooklyn Eagle” Gold Cup.= Brooklyn, N. Y.,
January 13–18th, under patronage of Hanover Club and under auspices of
the N. A. A. B. P. Four games apiece, 300 points, 14:2. Average of
tournament, 5.32. Uniformity of runs and general averages is remarkable
for players of their speed.
W. R. Av. G. A.
E. W. Gardner 4 52 6.12 5.48
Townsend 2 39 6.25 5.20
Stark 2 37 8.82 5.15
Poggenburg 1 40 6.52 5.88
F. Gardner 1 38 5.26 5.13
* * * * *
=Championship of France at 18:2.= Grand Hotel, Paris, February,
500–point games.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Cure 2 156 17.86 16.65
Fournil 2 131 31.25 27.73
Vignaux 2 175 50. 20.46
Gibelin 0 70 13.33
Average of tournament, 18.22. The three ties were determined in the same
hall in March, and placed Cure first, Fournil second, and Vignaux third.
* * * * *
=Third and Last Annual for the A. A. U. Championship.= Knickerbocker
Club, N. Y. City, February.—Average of tournament, six games apiece,
5.75.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Chas. Norris 5 62 8.89 6.55
W. H. Sigourney 5 64 7.02 5.50
L. L. Mial 4 90 9.09 7.28
C. F. Conklin 3 45 8.51 6.03
Chas. Threshie 2 52 9.55 5.78
J. A. Hendrick 1 34 7.84 4.60
Dr. A. B. Miller 1 42 4.88 4.71
Chas. S. Schmitt played in the opening game, was beaten by Sigourney
(400 to 251, average 8.70), and then withdrew, Sigourney losing the
credit both of his victory and of his highest average, instead of
Schmitt’s forfeiting his other games. (See “Revival of Cushion Caroms,”
1903.)
Mial alone beat Sigourney, and Sigourney was the only one who beat
Norris (55 in 400). In playing off, Norris won by 25.
February 19, as chief winner, Norris played Wilson P. Foss, who was 100
when Norris was 71, 153 when he was 211, 237 when he was 307, and winner
when he was 464. F., 500—6.85—52; N., 464—70. The B. B. C. Co.’s
Challenge Cup then became the property of Foss, he having won it in
tournament in 1900, defended it in 1901 match with Conklin, and now in
match against another Chicagoan.
* * * * *
=Adorjan vs. Morningstar.= Daly’s, N. Y. City, May 26–30th.—300 a night,
18:2. A., 1500—17.08—105; M., 929—80.
On the final night, the winner made double figures in ten innings out of
his twelve—something whose like probably cannot be matched at any style
of game, whether free three-ball or full four-ball. These were
successive in the last eight—27, 17, 21, 35, 23, 76, 46, 26.
* * * * *
=Championship of St. Paul and Minneapolis.= Doubled 300–point games of
14:2, 4½ × 9, closing May 28th.
W. R. Av. G. A.
C. Ferris 3 77 10.34 9.15
J. W. Carney 2 87 10.34 8.20
G. E. Spears 1 55 [11] 8.44
Footnote 11:
The one winning average by Spears is lacking.
* * * * *
=Championship of Minnesota at 14:2.= Opened at Ryan Hotel, St. Paul,
June 16th.—300 points, 4½ × 9.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Ferris 3 77 12.50 9.28
Carney 1 65 10.71 7.94
C. Clow 1 35 6.96 7.90
Spears 1 61 11.11 9.35
* * * * *
=New England Championship at 18:2.= Boston, Mass., March 25–27th.—Match
announced as above (although no tournament had been held), Maxime
Thomas, then of Worcester, Mass., vs. A. G. Cutler, Boston. C.,
1000—av., 11.90; T., 862. Chief runs not high.
* * * * *
=Julius Adorjan, of Hungary, vs. McLaughlin.= Daly’s Room, N. Y. City,
May 12–16th.—300 points at 18:2. A., 1500—18.29—118; McL., 1294—120.
Average of the whole play, 17.15 in 2794 points.
* * * * *
=Pittsburg, Penn., Handicap at 14:2.= Great Northern Billiard Parlors,
ending May 15th.—Won by James English, who was “scratch” with Messrs.
Marshall (second prize), Phillippi and Roberts. The two last mentioned
tied with Beymer for third, without playing off. English made the best
single average (4), as well as the best run (33), which, however, was
equaled by one other. Messrs. Powers, Jack and Billings were the
remaining contestants.
* * * * *
=Chicago 14:2 Handicap.= Foley’s, May 12th to July 12th.—Miller (150)
first with 7 up and 2 down, and Rein, Kent, Brown, and Hale,
respectively at 250, 210, 210, and 140, were tied with 6—3 for from
second to fifth. Rein was highest in averages and run, 7.58—5.33—45, and
Kent next with 5.53—4.34—41.
* * * * *
=Amateur Class B Championship of Pacific.= Waldorf Café, San Francisco,
July 12th to August 12th.—Games, 150 up, 14:2. Won by J. J. Roggan, who
had beaten Frank Pecchart, the favorite, by 1 point in tournament
proper, and beat him by 44 in playing off. With no higher run than 16 in
the game by which he won third prize, Frank Whitney made best average,
5.17. Pecchart’s 36 was best run of all. The other players were Dr. O.
B. Burns, Henry White, Frank Dubois, and Dr. W. E. Davis.
* * * * *
=Championship of the Northwest.= St. Louis Hotel, Minn., October
1st.—Wm. F. Hatley vs. G. E. Spears, 14:2 on 4½ × 9. H., 300—13.04—44;
S., 165—31.
* * * * *
=Waldorf Café Handicap at 14:2.= San Francisco, November.—Class B
amateur tournament. Dr. O. B. Burns won his whole six games, while H. A.
Wright, the one “scratchman,” carrying a weight of from 16.67 to 36.67
per cent. more than his opponents, failed twice in his six trials, and
tied with Messrs. Coffin and Carcass for second, third, and fourth
prizes. The other contestants were Messrs. Howe, De Sola, and H. W.
White. Wright made highest single and general averages and best run,
10.34—5.67—58.
1903.
=Fast Play by Chicago Amateurs.= December 29, 1902, to March 18th.—Thos.
Foley’s annual winter handicap. Six ran past 40.
W. R. Av.
Conklin, 300 6 58 7.30
Rein, 250 10 74 12.50
Harris, 215 4 44 7.17
Brown, 215 4 46 7.97
Lang, 215 2 24 3.47
Kent, 215 6 50 6.94
Cochrane, 190 4 32 4.22
Miller, 165 4 56 4.23
Adair, 150 3 23 4.29
Ballard, 150 6 20 3.75
Hale, 150 6 37 4.84
* * * * *
=G. E. Spears vs. Wm. Ryle.= Kansas City, January 12–14th, Minneapolis,
January 19–21st.—At 14:2. S., 3000—7.—75; R., 2447—45. April, 1904: S.,
1800—73; R., 1493.
* * * * *
=Third Tournament for “Brooklyn Eagle” Gold Cup.= Brooklyn, N. Y.,
February 2–13th.—Under patronage of Hanover Club, 300 points nightly,
14:2. Game that directly caused a tie: W. P. Foss, 300—10.—67; E. W.
Gardner, 280—31. Play-off, February 14th—F., 300—15.—73; G., 149—38. Tie
of four not played off. Average of tournament, 7.87.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Foss 5 82 18.75 12.13
Gardner 5 58 12. 8.72
Conklin 3 59 10.34 6.80
Poggenburg 2 71 9.38 7.51
Stark 2 47 7.69 6.77
Townsend 2 59 8.57 7.41
Mial 2 79 8.11 7.31
Gardner lost only to Foss, and Foss to none but Conklin, who then made
his best average.
Of the three—Townsend, Gardner, and Foss—having an equal lien upon this
championship, the last declined to compete in the tournament of 1904,
which see.
* * * * *
=Townsend vs. Conklin.= Knickerbocker Academy, Brooklyn, N. Y., February
16–19th.—14:2 for a jewel trophy offered by Frank A. Keeney. T.,
1000—7.11; C., 918. Neither surpassed his high run in tourney that led
to the match.
* * * * *
=First World’s Championship of 18:2.= Grand Hotel, Paris, France,
February 15–20th.—Tournament for emblem and $1,000 in cash, both given
by the B. B. C. Co., and added to entrance fees and net receipts.
Average of tournament, 17.47. Games, 500 points up.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Cure 2 113 20.83 19.76
Sutton 2 200 31.25 20.81
Vignaux 2 136 23.81 22.29
Slosson 0 71 8.49
Weeks before play began, the four entered into a parole agreement to
play off ties, as well as to divide the net receipts equally. Months
before that, the first three had signed a document requiring all ties to
be determined by the general averages, and specifying as prizes only the
emblem, the given money, and the entrance fees. At the conclusion of the
final game (Vignaux vs. Cure), it was announced that ties would be
played off in the same hall, beginning February 25th. Vignaux declined
to play off, claiming to have won on general average, and carrying the
case into court. Litigation lasted nine months, the claimant being
awarded the championship in his first suit, but denied the equal share
in the receipts forming the basis of his second.
All matches are for the jeweled emblem and $500 a side, 500 points up.
The first was also the last of this series.
=Vignaux vs. Sutton.= Grand Hotel, Paris, January 29, 1904. V.,
500—19.23—148; S., 496—128.
* * * * *
=Another Tie in General Averages.= Yearly championship of the N. Y. A.
C. at 14:2, closing February 26th.—Dr. Walter G. Douglas had for years
been the club’s champion at both caroms and pool (beaten at the latter
this year), and the tournament of 1903 is given only because of the
rarity of an exact tie in general averages, which might not have
occurred, however, had not Percy Gardner forfeited to J. V. B. Rapp.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Douglas 3 32 4.80 4.41
Rapp 2 38 5.21 4.41
Kinsman 1 22 3.33 2.86
Gardner 0 15 2.42 1.94
=Philadelphia Amateur Championship at 14:2.= Hall of Philadelphia A. C.,
closing March 27th.—Won by T. Mortimer Rolls, Belmont Cricket Club, who
had also won in 1902, when this championship was instituted by the
Schuylkill Navy. R. won by 7—0, and in one game averaged 4.79. With 5—2,
J. E. Cape Morton (av., 4.38) and C. A. Shedaker tied for second and
third, Morton losing play-off by 250 to 162. Over 4,000 persons saw the
tourney in whole or part.
* * * * *
=Armless Sutton vs. Gallagher.= Given 300 in 1500 at Clarence Greens,
March 16–20th, and 600 in 3000 at Maurice Daly’s, March 23–27th, and
losing by 653 in N. Y. City, but by only 89 in Brooklyn, George H.
Sutton made first formal appearance in the East.
* * * * *
=Amateur Championship of Twin Cities=, Minneapolis and St. Paul. West
Hotel, March.—14:2 on 4½ × 9. Parker won by 6—0, with highest single
average, 5.72. Thayer was second. Huyck made highest run, 51.
* * * * *
=Amateur Championship of France and Belgium.= National Academy of
Amateurs (El Dorado), Paris, France, March and April, games 400 points,
18:2. Eight entries, MM. Rérolle, Rasquinet, R. Maure, Lejeune, Fouquet,
Naves, Nélys, and Comte de Drée. First and second winners were Rérolle
of Toulouse, and Rasquinet, then an army officer in Brussels. One scored
2800, not losing a game, and the other, beaten only by Rérolle (400 to
391), 2791. Against Rasquinet, opponents scored 2319; against Rérolle,
but 1485. The highest runs, allowing only one for each player per game,
were 109, 103, 87, 73, 73, 61, and 55 for Rérolle, and 91, 67, 63, 42,
41, 30, and 27 for Rasquinet. In single winning averages, Rasquinet
reached double figures but twice, viz., 10, and 10.50, while Rérolle
reached them in every game, viz., 11.70, 14.60, 14.80, 14.80, 15.30,
17.30, and 33.33 (Lejeune in this game scored but 64 altogether). The
general averages, as forwarded from Paris, were 17.40 and 10.10 for
Rérolle and Rasquinet; but their single averages, as forwarded, together
with their total points per game, show their general averages to have
been 15.91 and 9.83.
* * * * *
=Pittsburg, Penn., Handicap.= Great Northern Room, April and May.—At
4.2, and probably on a 4½ × 9. Bennie (185) tied Poland (170), 5—1 in
games each, for first prize ($100), and won play-off. Phillippi (185)
beat English (200) for third and fourth after tieing at 4—2. English,
who won the series in 1892, this year made best winning average (5.56),
first against Poland and next against Jack. Powers and Miller were the
other two players.
* * * * *
=Pacific Coast Class B Amateurs.= Jas. F. Morley’s Rooms, San Francisco,
June and July.—14:2 championship. Won by Frank Pecchart, Frank Coffin
second. The pair having tied, P. won play-off by 200 to 127, averaging
5.26.
* * * * *
=Chas. Ferris vs. Al Taylor.= West Hotel, Minneapolis, October.—Three
nights of 14:2 on a 4½ × 9, purse game. F., 1200—19.67—112; T.,
1008—105.
* * * * *
=High Amateur Averages.= Maurice Daly’s, N. Y. City, ending October
26th.—Ferdinand Poggenburg and Dr. L. L. Mial going 300 to Wm. Gershel’s
250, doubled games of 14:2.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Poggenburg 4 119 17.65 11.11
Gershel 2 33 8.93 5.97
Mial 0 51 7.86
* * * * *
=Championship of the Northwest.= Fargo, N. D., Duluth and Minneapolis,
Minn., ending November 13th.—For cash prizes and a challenge emblem
presented by the B. B. C. Co. Doubled games of 14:2, 300 points, on a
4½ × 9 table. Average of tournament, 10.03.
W. R. Av. G. A.
W. F. Hatley 6 88 21.43 13.81
F. Billiter 5 94 13.64 10.67
G. Spears 5 67 15. 9.89
C. Peterson 3 70 14.29 10.04
C. Ferris 1 91 17.65 9.06
* * * * *
=J. W. Carney vs. George Kenniston.= Hoffman Billiard Parlors, Los
Angeles, Cal., November 18–20th.—Purse game, 14:2. C., 1000—7.60—50; K.,
953—45.
* * * * *
=McLaughlin vs. Gillette.= Daly’s Room, N. Y. City, December 1–3d.—Purse
game, 18:2. McL., 1000—13.16—100; G., 485—38.
* * * * *
=Brooklyn Amateur Tournament at 14:2.= Keeney’s Knickerbocker Academy,
ending December 14th.—200–point games. Won by C. B. Barker, who made
high run and average—41 and 8.70. In playing off ties for second and
third prizes, C. E. White beat Dr. H. D. Jennings. Other contestants
were Frank Boyd and L. A. Servatius.
* * * * *
=Amateur Tournament at 14:2.= Metropolitan Academy, N. Y. City, games of
200 points, ending December 15th.—Won by L. A. Servatius in playing off
ties with Messrs. Bennett and Farley. Servatius averaged 4.65 in
defeating Farley. J. H. Millette made high run—39.
* * * * *
=Eames vs. Cutler.= Hub Billiard Parlors, Boston, November 3–5th.—400
points nightly, 18:2, $250 a side. E., 1200—15.19—124; C., 1021—84. The
remote cause of this contest was that Cutler, having withdrawn from the
amateur ranks, had the year before, in Boston, while Eames was in
Denver, Col., played and won from Thomas, formerly of Montreal, a
balkline match of multiple nights announced as for the championship of
New England.
1904
=First American Amateur Tournament at 18:2.= Daly’s, N.Y. City,
beginning January 4th. Handicap.
W. R. Av. G. A.
J. F. Poggenburg (300) 3 58 10. 8.41
Dr. L. L. Mial (300) 2 60 8.57 8.51
Wm. Gershel (250) 1 27 4.15 5.13
F. M. Canda (225) 0 26 3.71
* * * * *
=First Match for 18:2 Championship of the World.= See Vignaux vs.
Sutton, January 29, 1904, under February, 1903.
* * * * *
=Pittsburg, Pa., Handicap at 14:2.= Great Northern Billiard Hall,
January 11–26th.—4½ × 9 table. First to fourth, Messrs. Bennie, Jack,
Powers, and Brown. Bennie, the only “scratchman,” made highest run and
best average—36 and 6.90.
* * * * *
=Chicago Handicap at 14:2.= A. M. Clarke’s Room, ending January 28th.—J.
M. Miller (175), first in field of ten, winning every game. C. F.
Conklin (300), beaten only by Miller (175 to 213), made highest run
(112) and best average (12). John Daly, who also was at 300, won only a
game or two.
* * * * *
=Fourth Annual Gold Cup Championship.= Under patronage of the German
Liederkranz Society and the N. A. A. B. P. Held in the minor hall of the
German Liederkranz Society, N. Y. City, February 1–13th.—Game, 300
points, 14:2, Arthur Marcotte, of Quebec, representing Canada; C. F.
Conklin, Chicago; J. De Munn Smith, St. Louis; E. W. Gardner, New
Jersey; and Dr. L. L. Mial, Arthur Townsend, and J. Ferdinand
Poggenburg, N. Y. City. Prizes: First, the “Brooklyn Eagle” Gold Cup
(contingent upon three winnings, consecutive or non-consecutive) and a
royal Dresden vase (absolute); second, silver punchbowl and ladle;
third, marble statue of “Night”; fourth, a camera; for high run, an
ornate clock, with candelabra; for best single average, a cut-glass wine
set, with silver tray. Average of tournament, six games apiece, 6.66.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Poggenburg 5 73 13.64 8.56
Mial 5 73 10. 7.39
Gardner 4 64 9.68 6.75
Conklin 3 68 13.04 8.41
Townsend 2 60 9.09 5.98
Smith 1 50 6.82 5.62
Marcotte 1 35 3.90 4.67
Tie game, February 13th: Poggenburg, 300—9.68—41; Mial, 185—31. By
agreement, high run in this game also determined the tie as to high run
of tournament.
Four players now have equal claims upon the Gold Cup, viz., Messrs.
Townsend, Gardner, Foss, and Poggenburg, severally as winners of the
tournaments of 1901, 1902, 1903, and 1904.
* * * * *
=Championship of “The Young Masters.”= Salle Scribe, Grand Hotel, Paris,
France, beginning January 31st. Tournament at 18:2 (in reality, 45
centimetres, or 17¾ in.), 400–point games. There were ten in at the
outset, but Jose Ortiz, of Spain, and Mons. Payan, of France, appear not
to have played, while Juan Alvarez, of Spain, and Al Taylor and Joseph
Capron, of Chicago, seem to have withdrawn after playing two
unsuccessful games apiece. This table, forwarded from Paris, limits
itself to the four games played by every one of the five named therein
after the others had withdrawn.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Willie Hoppe 4 94 17.39 12.80
Manuel Sanchez 3 54 18.18 13.71
Robert Glorieux 2 100 11.76 10.86
Ora Morningstar 1 107 18.18 13.89
Mons. Ducasse 0 52 8.78
We make the average of the final four games apiece, or ten in all, to be
11.82.
As matter of exact record, Hoppe’s best winning average is 20, made in
defeating Taylor by 400 to 164; Morningstar’s 21.05, in defeating Capron
by 400 to 85; and Glorieux’s 12.90, in defeating Taylor by 400 to 310.
The general averages of those known here to have played six games apiece
are: Morningstar, 14.14; Hoppe, 13.66; and Sanchez, 12.36. Omission of
the first two games played by every one of those three affects the
single and general averages somewhat, but not the high runs at all, all
five of the tabulated contestants happening to have made their highest
in their latest four games.
* * * * *
=Boston Class A Amateur Tournament at 14:2.= “The Hub” Academy, closing
about February 26th.—Won by W. A. Paige, who defeated Charles Eaton in
final game by 300 to 260. Table probably 4½ × 9.
* * * * *
=Championship of the World at 18:1.= Paris, France, March 4th.—First
match contest for championship instituted in 1901 and $500 a side.
Maurice Vignaux, 500—12.82—89; Geo. Sutton (as champion), 387—79. (For
later matches, see Jan., March, and Oct., 1906.)
* * * * *
=Brooklyn Amateur Handicap at 14:2.= Keeney’s Knickerbocker Academy,
February and March.—H. Hoxie, H. White, and F. Lowenthal, tied, won
play-offs in that order March 7th, 8th, 9th.
* * * * *
=Fifth Avenue Hotel Amateur Handicap at 14:2.= N. Y. City, ending March
12th.—C. E. White (300), 5—0; E. O. Presby (250), second. In playing off
for third prize, Dr. W. G. Douglas (300) defeated L. A. Servatius (250)
and J. M. Millette (225). F. M. Canda (300), who beat Douglas only, made
highest run of tournament (46), and White the highest single (6.67) and
general average (5.51).
* * * * *
=Interclub Tournament at 14:2.= Arts Club, Philadelphia, February and
March.—Won by T. Mortimer Rolls, of Belmont Cricket Club, who made
highest runs and single averages (94 and 10.87, both against T. R.
Reaney, and 51 and 6.95, both against Dr. C. A. Borda). Other
competitors were Harrison Townsend, Julius J. Hovey, J. E. Cape Morton,
and Dr. Holden.
* * * * *
=Foley’s Chicago Amateur Handicap at 14:2.= Ended March 23d.—J. M.
Miller (155) first, Ed. C. Rein (250) second, and Messrs. Hale and
Cochrane (both 180) tied for third and fourth. Rein made highest run
(76) and best single average (11.36, against Hale, in final game).
* * * * *
=Amateur International Souvenir Match at 18:2.= Theatre of the
Automobile Club of France, Paris, March 29th, 30th, 31st, for an emblem
presented by the B. B. C. Co. Admission by invitation. Lucien Rérolle,
of Toulouse, 1200—12.24—129, 94, 71; W. P. Foss, of Haverstraw, N. Y.,
1153—74, 73, 63.
* * * * *
=Championship of Billiard Club at 14:2.= N. Y. City, ending March 29th
in tie among Dr. A. B. Miller, Florian Tobias, and Dr. W. G. Douglas. Of
the eight contestants, Wm. Gershel made the highest run (65), Douglas
the next highest (51), and Tobias the third highest (50). The highest
average (8.06) was made by both Douglas and Miller.
Miller, in winning both plays-off, ran 52 and averaged 11.36 against
Douglas, this final contest of theirs occurring April 18th. All games
were of 250 points. The 11.36 is Miller’s best performance in a set
competition to date.
* * * * *
=Championship of Minneapolis.= Hotel Vendome, March and April, game 14:2
on a 4½ × 9 table, with seven contestants.—Winner was Hogue, who lost no
game. Logan, who was second, was beaten only by Hogue, and made best
run, single average, and general average, viz., 43, 7.14, and 5.28.
* * * * *
=Interborough Amateur Tournament at 14:2.= Maurice Daly’s Room, N. Y.,
March 28th to April 14th, including ties. All games were 300 up. Average
of tournament, 5.50.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Dr. W. G. Douglas 3 43 6.26 5.60
F. M. Canda 3 42 7.14 6.68
A. Lewenberg 3 40 7.50 6.02
C. B. Barker 1 36 5.45 4.87
C. E. White 0 38 4.04
The playing-off resulted in another tie, Douglas being beaten by
Lewenberg, Canda by Douglas, and Lewenberg by Canda. In beating Canda
for the second time, Douglas averaged 9.68, thus surpassing his best
previous one—8.06 (vide “Championship of Billiard Club at 14:2,” above).
In the second play-off, Douglas beat both Lewenberg and Canda, and the
latter lost to Lewenberg.
* * * * *
=Mussey’s Handicap at 14:2.= Chicago, Ill., March and April, with C. F.
Conklin and R. J. Maginniss at “scratch” (300). Of the other eight, H.
A. Coleman represented Milwaukee, and C. S. Schmitt, once of Chicago,
had latterly moved from Boston, Mass., to Racine, Wis. Messrs. Reinman,
Huntley, Adams, Harley Parker, and George Kent were of the eight
representatives of Chicago. Maginniss, who made best run (89) and best
single average (13.64), was winner-in-chief, with Schmitt second.
Conklin, who made the best general average, was third, and Coleman and
Adams divided fourth and fifth prizes. Maginniss and Conklin played the
final game, April 29, the latter losing. Maginniss was beaten by Kent
only.
* * * * *
=French Amateur Championship of the World at 14:2.= Billiard Palace,
Boulevard des Capucines, Paris, March 7–21st, under the auspices of the
Federation des Sociétés Françaises d’Amateurs de Billard. Unlike that at
18:2, won by Rérolle a year before, this championship is typified in a
Challenge Cup, the gift of the B. B. C. Co. There were twenty-one
entries, but a weeding-out process left but six for the final rounds,
whose fifteen games resulted in these winnings:
Rérolle 5
Darantière 4
Blanc 3
De Drée 2
Maure 1
Cayla 0
Maure forfeited a half-finished game to De Drée. The best runs of the
whole tournament were 111 by Rérolle (in the last game of all, which was
with Darantière, second winner) and 108 by Maure. The third-best run
seems to have been Darantière’s 89. The best winning average was
Rérolle’s 20 against Blanc. As to general averages, there are no
complete figures at hand as to any one of the players; but Rérolle’s was
probably not far below 15. The games were 400 up. A special round of
250–point ones for a consolation prize terminated as follows: Nélys,
3—0; Castel, 2—1; Faroux, 1—2; Lamare, 0—3. In the deciding game of this
round, Nélys vs. Faroux, the former averaged 8.62, with 31 for high run
to 27 for the loser (Faroux).
* * * * *
=San Francisco Handicap at 14:2.= At J. F. Morley’s Room, May 2–19th.—H.
A. Wright, winner-in-chief, averaged 16.67 in one game and 14.85 in all
(1500 points), and ran 101, 95, 84, 76, and 67 for high in his five
games. Wilson H. Sigourney, beaten by Wright and Frank Dubois, had 18.75
for high average, 12.62 in 1426 points for general, and 111, 95, 83, 79,
and 79 for high runs per game. The two general averages are high for
amateurs in this country. Dubois, Frank Coffin, Dr. O. B. Burns, and J.
F. Morley played 150 to the 300 of Wright and Sigourney.
* * * * *
=Jacob Schaefer vs. Louis Cure.= Match at 18:2 for $2000 a side, 500
points nightly, Nouveau Cirque, Paris, France, June 6–11th.—S.,
3000—22.90—166; C., 2988—255.
* * * * *
=Al Taylor vs. John Matthews.= Chicago, September 14th.—Match at 18:2
for $50 a side. T., 400—11.11—61; M., 259—39.
* * * * *
=Ten Games Straight.= Summer handicap at 14:2, Foley’s Room, Chicago,
July 7th to October 3d.—Roney (115) won all his games. Myers (150,
scratch) tied Bevington (140) for second and third, and Bevington
forfeited. Eleven contestants.
* * * * *
=Amateur Handicap at 14:2.= Maurice Daly’s, New York City, October
3–10th.—Winners of the first eight games made an aggregate average of
8.25, which is high for the start of an amateur tournament having as
many as six competitors. After defeating J. Ferd. Poggenburg (scratch,
300) by 240 to 292, and Wm. Gershel by 240 to 188, averaging 8 in the
first game and 8.28 in the second, Albert Brock had to withdraw, and
those games and his unplayed three were canceled. This was Paul Van
Dieman’s first tournament, H. A. Coleman’s first in the East, and Albert
Lewenberg’s first tournamental victory at balkline.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Poggenburg, 300. 3 70 15.79 7.80
Lewenberg, 240. 4 44 8. 6.96
Coleman, 240. 2 36 6.32 5.07
Gershel, 240. 1 39 6.32 5.43
Brock, 240. 2 37 8.25 8.12[12]
Van Dieman. 0 32 4.38
Footnote 12:
Two games only.
* * * * *
=Boston Class B Amateur Championship at 14:2.= “Hub” Billiard Parlors,
October.—Amidon won all five of his games, and also made high winning
average (4.26) and second highest run (26). Smalley’s 39 was highest.
* * * * *
=Chas. Threshie vs. Wm. A. Paige.= Class A challenge match at 14:2,
Boston, Mass., about November 15th.—T., 400—11.11—48; P., 203—36.
* * * * *
=Championship of Northwest and Southwest at 18:2.= A tournament so
announced was held in St. Louis toward the close of November, and was
won by Al Taylor, of Chicago. The other contestants were Chas. Peterson,
Frank Maggioli, and Lewis Shaw. They played afternoon and night, 300
points up, and every game (600 points in all) had two sessions. Peterson
was second. It was professedly a challenge championship for shortstops,
but there has never been a match for it.
* * * * *
=Handicap 14:2 at Louis Bensinger’s, Chicago.= October 31st to December
8th.—Chas. F. Conklin (scratch, 300) won every game of his but the last,
which was with Ed. Rein (265), who finished second. Tieing Bliss for
third and fourth, A. J. Brown won play-off. Bliss had been the leader
until Conklin, making high average (14.29), defeated him by 300 to 46.
* * * * *
=Maurice Daly’s Class B 14:2 Tourney.= N. Y. City, December 5–14th.—Won
by Albert Lewenberg, with H. A. Coleman second and F. M. Canda third.
The chief winning averages were 9.26 by Lewenberg, 8.03 by J. B.
Whitehead, and 7.58 by Canda. This was the first tournament of Whitehead
and James Vantine, and Canda’s last up to the present time. A sixth
competitor was Louis A. Servatius.
* * * * *
=Championship of Illinois at 18:2.= Louis Bensinger’s Room, Chicago,
December 12–17th.—Three-handed tournament among Clem E. Ellison, John
Matthews, and George Wheeler. Ellison, the winner, made the best run
(124 in the first half of his game with Matthews), and the latter the
best full-game average (13.33) in his contest with Wheeler. They played
in double sessions of 300 points each, and in his first session with
Wheeler Matthews showed the remarkable speed of 33.33 per inning for the
300 points.
* * * * *
=Foley’s Chicago Handicap at 14:2.= October 17th to December
24th.—Ballard (175) lost only one game to the two each of Jenkins (140)
and Ed. Rein (scratch, 300). In the play-off for second prize, Jenkins
beat Rein. Of the other seven, J. M. Miller (200) failed to win a game.
Rein made the best run and average (84 and 9.38), Ballard the
second-best run (37), and De Witt Cochrane the second-best average
(8.70).
* * * * *
=Amateur Match, Ed. W. Gardner vs. Dr. L. L. Mial.= German Liederkranz
Society’s Rooms, December 29th.—Game 14:2. G., 300—14.29—137; M.,
100—46.
* * * * *
=Northwestern Amateur Championship.= West Hotel, Minneapolis, Minn.,
November and December, Messrs. Logan, Huyck, and Campbell tieing,
playing off, and winning the first three prizes in that order. Thayer
made the best run (50), and Thayer, Logan, and Fremont tied on the best
winning average (7.14). Liverman, Stephenson, and Risden were the other
competitors. The game was 14:2, 200 up, on a 4½ × 9 table.
1905.
=Maurice Daly’s Class B Amateur Championship.= Begun January 23d, N. Y.
City, and won by H. A. Coleman.—In playing off tie for second and third,
February 3d, Wm. Gershel averaged 11.11, defeating Albert Lewenberg by
300 to 119. Other contestants were Chas. E. White, Louis A. Servatius,
and James Vantine. Games were 14:2, 300 up.
* * * * *
=Fifth Annual Gold Cup Championship Tourney.= Held in Chicago January
30th to February 11th, under the auspices and at the clubhouse of the
Chicago Athletic Association. Known as the “Diamond Tournament.” Games,
300 points, 14:2. The day before play began, H. A. Wright, of San
Francisco, was summoned home, his father having been mortally stricken
by paralysis; after playing one game, defeating Edward Rein, of Chicago,
J. Ferdinand Poggenburg was called to New York by the death of his
mother; and Rein, having won from Ed. W. Gardner and lost to Chas. S.
Schmitt and Wilson H. Sigourney, was forced by illness to forfeit to
Chas. F. Conklin, Chas. S. Norris, Byron Stark, and Charles Threshie.
The C. A. A. threw out the games of Poggenburg and Rein, but the
subjoined table retains them, inclusive of the 51 to 1 score by Conklin
and Rein as a factor in their general averages, as well as Poggenburg’s
run of 79, which was actually the highest of the tournament, although
Conklin’s 78 was awarded the special prize in consequence of the
canceling of games.
W. H. R. Av. G. A.
Conklin 7 78 11.11 7.76
Sigourney 7 61 10.34 7.49
Gardner 5 76 11.11 8.17
Norris 5 66 8.82 6.28
Threshie 5 45 7.89 6.02
Schmitt 3 49 8.11 5.31
Stark 2 52 5.51
Rein 1 41 6.82 4.73
Poggenburg 1 79 6.97
Stark has no winning average because the two games credited to him were
won by forfeiture only, and Poggenburg lacks a general average because
of having played but one game.
Averaging 8.33, Norris won the play-off for fourth and fifth prizes by
300 to 256. The championship tie was won by 300 to 231, Conklin
averaging 6.52; and Conklin averaged 9.09 in winning from Gardner, by
300 to 263, the special prize for high single average.
* * * * *
=Mussey’s 14:2 Handicap, Chicago.= Held in February, and won by Dr.
Harley C. Parker, who was at “scratch” with C. F. Conklin, whom he
defeated by 300 to 228, losing to George Kent alone. Kent, Walker,
Edwards, and A. J. Brown tied for second, third, fourth, and fifth
prizes, and agreed to divide.
* * * * *
=A Shortstop Championship.= McLaughlin’s Room, N. Y. City, February 27th
to March 10th.—Tournament for the 14:2 shortstop championship of Greater
New York and vicinity. Frank Hoppe won his whole four games, Louis M.
Crane and Walter Aborn tied for second and third prizes (Crane won
play-off by 250 to 227), and Wm. Cox and Fred. Harer tied for last two
places, Cox winning by 250 to 160. Crane made highest run and best
single average, 45 and 6.94, and Hoppe the best general average, 4.85.
This was meant to be a challenge championship for an emblem given by the
Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., but there have been no matches.
* * * * *
=Philadelphia Clubmen’s 14:2 Handicap.= Tournament under auspices of the
Schuylkill Navy’s Athletic Club, February 20th to March 20th.—Every man
played in nine games. Dr. Uffenheimer, of the Pennsylvania University
Club, won his every game but one, and that the opening one, in which
Hovey defeated him by 20.
H. G. W. H. R. H. A. G. A.
T. Mortimer S. Rolls 325 6 47 9.56 5.51
J. E. Cope Morton 275 6 47 5.85 4.31
Dr. Wm. E. Uffenheimer 240 8 36 5.59 4.30
Julius J. Hovey 240 5 35 6.86 3.74
Dr. F. W. Holden 240 5 25 4.71 3.46
C. A. Borda 240 3 30 3.93 3.05
James S. Alcorn 225 6 53 5.62 3.08
Walter R. McShea 225 3 24 4.26 2.70
H. P. Moon 225 1 25 3.14 2.44
W. A. Hawley 225 2 27 3. 2.73
Alcorn, who made the highest run in the tourney proper, was defeated in
the play-offs by both Rolls and Morton. In defeating Alcorn, Morton
surpassed his tournamental average by making 5.98, and Rolls made 7.22,
surpassed only by his 9.56 in beating Moon by 325 to 82. Also defeating
Rolls in the play-off (275 to 292, with 5.73 for winning average),
Morton secured second prize.
* * * * *
=French Championship of the World at 14:2.= Classes A and B were both
determined in March. The Class B tourney, held first, was won by Roudil,
of Montpellier, who lost but one of his six games, and tied Nélys, of
Fontainebleau, as to highest run (51), but was second in winning average
(6.81) to Rose, of Paris (7.89), who lost four games. Roudil’s general
average was 4.79, which was second to Nélys’ 4.99. The winner of second
prize was Pleindoux, of Beziers, who won four games, and yet was the
only one of the seven whose general average (3.72) failed to pass 4.
Lucien Rérolle won Class A, although he lost one game to Letellier by
400 to 259, the winning average being 16.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Rérolle 3 118 20. 15.55
Darantière 2 47 14.29 10.78
Letellier 2 85 16. 9.58
De Drée 2 54 9.09 8.36
Artus 1 108 9.30 7.80
In the play-offs, Darantière scored 400 to 213 and averaged 14.29
against Letellier, and 400 to 218, with an average of 16.67, against De
Drée; and Letellier, in defeating De Drée, averaged 11.11, making the
ninth winning average above 10 in thirteen games. The play-off high runs
were: Darantière, 82; Letellier, 72; De Drée, 60.
The average of the tournament may be roundly expressed as 10.35,
exclusive of the three tie-games.
* * * * *
=Bensinger 14:2 Handicap, Chicago.= Ed. Rein won by defeating C. F.
Conklin in the final game, about March 15th, leaving Conklin tied for
minor prizes with Thos. J. Nolan and Dr. Harley Parker. Conklin and
Nolan defeated Parker in the play-offs.
* * * * *
=Amateur 14:2 Handicap in Brooklyn, N. Y.= Frank A. Keeney’s Room,
February, March, and April.—Won by J. M. Millette (225), who lost but
one game out of seven. Chas. E. White (scratch, 260) and Wm. A. Leonard
(200) tied on 5—2, and no one else did better than 3—4, which was the
tally of Louis A. Servatius (230), Frank A. Boyd (225), and John A.
Keane (220). The other two were Geo. C. Seeley (200) and Henry Hoxie
(190). The best winning averages were White’s 7.03 and Leonard’s 4.76,
the best general averages White’s 5.72 and Millette’s 3.89, and the best
runs Leonard’s 43 and Servatius and White’s 41 each.
* * * * *
=Jacob Schaefer vs. W. F. Hoppe.= Three nights of 18:2, John Miller’s
Room, New Orleans, April 18th, 19th, 20th.—S., 1500—16.85—117; H.,
1467—118.
* * * * *
=French “Championship of the World” at 18:2.= Paris held a tournament in
April and May.—The winner was Van Duppen, of Antwerp. Totals were made
public, but not averages and runs.
* * * * *
=Maurice Daly’s Class B.= N. Y. City, May 22–26th.—“Even up” at 14:2.
Neither having won a game, Wm. Gershel and Albert Lewenberg did not play
the scheduled sixth and last.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Mark Muldaur 3 41 7.14 6.05
H. A. Coleman 2 44 8.33 6.17
A. Lewenberg 0 26 5.03
Wm. Gershel 0 46 3.70
* * * * *
=Foley’s Summer Class B Handicap, 14:2.= Chicago, Ill., May 15th to
October 13th.—Twelve entries, J. M. Miller (scratch, 200) tieing Roney
(145) and C. L. Jackson (200) for first, second, and third. Harris (200)
made the highest run, 41, and Jackson, new to tournaments, the best
winning average, 6.90. Playing off the ties put Jackson, Miller, and
Roney from first to third.
* * * * *
=Summer 14:2 Tourney at Daly’s.= N. Y. City, June 12–21st.—Won by Eddie
Foy, beaten only by W. Wefers, who made the highest run (31), which was
duplicated by M. Conly, whose winning average (4.65) was second only to
R. Dittman’s 6.45, and whose general average, 3.42, was highest of all.
Games were 200 up, L. Wormser winning none, and S. B. De Young, Dittman,
and Wefers tied on 3—2 for second, third, and fourth prizes, play-offs
resulting as those players are named.
* * * * *
=Al Taylor’s Stunt at 18:2.= Wagered that he could not average 15 in six
sessions at Foley’s Room, Chicago, week ending June 24th, Taylor to
choose his opponent and selecting George Wheeler, he failed by 20 per
cent. T., 2500—12.14—104; W., 1683—74.
* * * * *
=Three-handed 18:2.= Louis Bensinger’s Room, Chicago, week ending
September 2d.—Games played in double sessions. Clem E. Ellison won,
defeating both George Wheeler and Frank Maggioli, who came out even.
Wheeler made highest run (120) and average (21.40), but it was against
Maggioli. Against the safer Ellison, who won by 600 to 523, he could not
reach 9.50. Maggioli lost to Ellison by 449 to 600.
* * * * *
=Amateur Championship at 14:2.= Challenge match, 4½ × 9 table, West
Hotel, Minneapolis, about September 7th.—Ed. Huyck (champion),
200—5.26—30; W. F. Thayer, 142—26.
* * * * *
=Maurice Daly’s Class A Handicap at 18:2.= N. Y. City, October 2–7th.—H.
A. Coleman (240) was first; J. Ferd. Poggenburg (300), second; Wm.
Gershel (240), third; and Dr. Walter G. Douglas (240), fourth.
Poggenburg, whom Coleman defeated by 240 to 232 in the opening game,
made the highest three runs of the tourney, 60, 73, and 54, and also the
highest average, 12, first against Douglas, and again in defeating
Gershel. Coleman’s 44 was the fourth highest run, and his 8.57 the
highest average next to Poggenburg’s 12. Gershel’s winning average was
5.33. The general averages were: Poggenburg, 8.95; Coleman, 6.05;
Gershel, 5.72; Douglas, 4.88.
* * * * *
=Class B 14:2 in San Francisco.= “The Savoy,” September and October.—Won
by George Kennedy. High average, 10, was made by Wm. Maguire. Within a
few days, these two played 1,000 up at Jas. F. Morley’s Rooms, Kennedy
winning by 31 and averaging 6.90.
* * * * *
=Handicap 14:2 in Portland, Ore.= J. G. Reddick’s Room, September and
October.—W. F. Lowry, A. Clark, W. R. Cody, and J. Mayer played 250 to
C. B. Hansen’s 160. When last heard from here, Lowry or Clark should
have been winner-in-chief.
* * * * *
=Début of Calvin Demarest in Tournament.= W. P. Mussey’s Room, Chicago,
October 2d to November 9th.—Handicap at 14:2, Demarest and C. F. Conklin
being the “scratchmen” at 300. Four of the competitors—Conklin, Collins,
Huntley, and A. J. Brown—were at the same time playing in the tournament
at Bensinger’s, recorded below. Walker was another competitor. Demarest
won Mussey’s, winning every game and making the highest run, single
average, and general average, viz., 79, 13.04, and 9.95.
* * * * *
=Handicap 14:2 at Bensinger’s, Chicago.= October 2d to December 13th.—C.
F. Conklin and Ed. Rein at “scratch” (300), and other contestants being
Messrs. Huntley, May, Barrett, Collins, Dr. Harley Parker, T. J. Nolan,
and A. J. Brown. Opening with Collins, Rein made his best average,
11.11; in early defeating May, Conklin ran 92, the best of the tourney;
and in the final game, in which he defeated Rein by 300 to 109, he made
the best average, 17.67. This tied Conklin, Parker, and Huntley (and the
play-off placed them in that succession), put Rein fourth, and tied
Brown and Nolan for fifth and sixth, and May and Barrett for eighth and
ninth.
* * * * *
=Final Contest for the Gold Cup.= By agreement of those chiefly
concerned, it was decided to end this series of annual amateur
competitions, begun in 1901, by holding a tournament of the Cup’s five
winners. Two, Arthur R. Townsend and Wilson P. Foss, did not play. This
proffered the other three an opportunity for two 300–point games apiece,
November 27th to December 2d, at the rooms of the German Liederkranz
Society, N. Y. City, and with these results:
G.W. T.P. H. R. H.W.A. G. A.
J. F. Poggenburg 4 1200 91 15. 12.
Ed. W. Gardner 1 903 59 8.82 7.99
Chas. F. Conklin 1 999 58 8.82 8.83
The Gold Cup thereupon became the personal property of Poggenburg, who
lost no game, while Gardner and Conklin lost one to each other.
* * * * *
=Phenomenally Close and Uniform Play.= Maurice Daly’s, N. Y. City,
December 11–22d.—Six games apiece, 300 up, 14:2.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Wm. Gershel 5 82 7.14 5.77
Van Vleck 4 46 6.67 4.99
Dr. W. G. Douglas 3 51 9.68 5.94
A. Lewenberg. 3 57 7.14 5.25
H. A. Coleman 2 52 5.66 5.35
Mark Muldaur 2 46 6.38 5.34
C. E. White 2 53 5.77 5.28
Every general average was in the 5 block but Van Vleck’s 4.99. Six of
the high winning averages were only 20 per cent. apart in their
extremes, 5.66 and 7.14. Gershel’s 82 apart, the extremes of the high
runs, too, were at only 20 per cent. variance. Nearly one-fifth of the
twenty-one games (ties were not played off) were won by fewer than 10
points, and about one-half by fewer than 30.
* * * * *
=Professional Tournaments at 18:2.= Beginning at Frank A. Keeney’s Room,
Brooklyn, December 11–16th, going thence to Maurice Daly’s, Manhattan,
January 1–6, 1906, and from there to Splaine & Cutler’s, Boston, January
15–20th, Thomas J. Gallagher, Edward McLaughlin, and Albert G. Cutler
took part in doubled games, or 400 points separately, twice around.
McLaughlin won in Brooklyn, and Cutler in Manhattan and Boston. The
striking features of the whole play were Cutler’s run of 193 and average
of 40 in Boston, where Charles F. Campbell was added; and it was in his
second game with Campbell that Cutler made both run and average.
1906.
=Foley’s 14:2 Handicap, Chicago.= Begun October 19th, and finished
January 5, 1906.—Jackson (200) and Van Haften (170) tied for first and
second, and Jenkins and Roney, 140 each, for third and fourth. Jackson
and Jenkins won. High run (33) was made by Cochrane (200), and he and
Jackson tied on high single average, which was 7.15. J. M. Miller,
another “scratchman,” lost his whole eight games.
* * * * *
=McLaughlin, Gallagher, and Cutler.= See “Professional Tournaments at
18:2,” last paragraph of 1905 but one.
* * * * *
=Crescent A. C. Championship, Brooklyn, N. Y.= Doubled games of 14:2.
The tourney narrowed down to Dr. H. D. Jennings vs. Geo. A. Fish. The
latter had won their first game, but on January 16th lost the second by
250 to 155. Next night they played off, and the Doctor, running 44 and
averaging 5.56, acquired the year’s championship by 250 to 151.
* * * * *
=Class C 14:2 at Daly’s.= N. Y. City, January 22–31st.—Conway won
without a losing, and Eddie Foy tied Wormser for second and third
prizes. Dittman’s 37 won the high prize, and that for high average,
5.58, was played off by him and Conway on February 6th, the latter
winning.
* * * * *
=Philadelphia Clubmen’s Handicap at 14:2.= Begun February 19th in the
hall of the Philadelphia Athletic Club, the “scratchmen” (300) being T.
Mortimer S. Rolls, of the Arts and the Belmont Cricket Club, and J. E.
Cope Morton, of the Germantown Cricket Club. Dr. Wm. E. Uffenheimer
(275) represented the University of Pennsylvania, and James S. Alcorn
(260) and Joseph Mayer (260) the Lawyers’ and the Mutual Club. The other
participants were J. Julius Hovey (260), and Charles A. Shedaker,
Charles Stiltz, and Warren A. Hawley, all three at 240. The Phila. A. C.
gave three prizes: hall clock for first, silver candelabra for second,
and a modern double reading lamp for third. Afternoon and night, about
5000 persons witnessed the games by invitation.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Rolls 8 46 8.57 5.65
Morton 7 43 6.12 4.85
Uffenheimer 3 41 5.73 4.37
Hovey 4 33 4.91 3.80
Mayer 4 40 5.65 3.89
Alcorn 4 32 4.41 3.65
Stiltz 3 29 4.71 3.31
Shedaker 2 32 4.36 2.97
Hawley 1 34 3.58 2.85
* * * * *
=Championship of the World at 18:1.= Grand Hotel, Paris, January 15th,
match for the championship and $500 a side between Maurice Vignaux, of
France (champion), and Wm. F. Hoppe, of America, challenger. H.,
500—20.83—93; V., 323—61. Winner’s run average is the highest to date
for any 18:1 championship match. (For other matches of the two 18:1
series see pp. 277–78, 285–86, 295 and 308.)
* * * * *
=Professional 18:2 in Four Cities.= Beginning on February 5th at “The
Casino,” Philadelphia, Harry Cline, Al Taylor, Ed. McLaughlin, T. J.
Gallagher, and Albert G. Cutler played a round a week in that city,
Trenton, N. J., Maurice Daly’s in Manhattan, and Frank A. Keeney’s in
Brooklyn, the chief prize being a loving cup presented by the
Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. Taken ill, McLaughlin had to withdraw in
Philadelphia. He played one game in Trenton, the second stand, but had
then to withdraw for good. This series of games involved no
championship. Cline won the cup, and also made the highest averages, as
a rule, but Gallagher made the highest run (138). The best average was
Cline’s 22.22, all games being 400 up. At Daly’s, Cline, Cutler, and
Gallagher tied, but did not play off. At Keeney’s, Gallagher and Cline
tied, and did play off, Cline winning.
* * * * *
=New National Amateur Championship at 14:2.= This, succeeding that of
the “Brooklyn Eagle” Gold Cup of 1901–5, was established by the
Chicago Athletic Association, the medium being a tournament held at
their gymnasium, Michigan Avenue, March 12th to 21st. Inclusive of an
ornate silver cup, serving the winner-in-chief as a perpetual memento
of the initial tourney, all the prizes but one were given by the C. A.
A., the exception being another silver cup, proffered by the
Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., symbolizing the American amateur
championship, and needing to be won by someone in two annual
tournaments to confer permanent possession. Games consisted of 300
points, and were fifteen in number, exclusive of the three ties, which
determined second, third, and fourth prizes in favor of Demarest,
Poggenburg, and Wright, the game between the latter two at the same
time deciding their tie for high-average prize in favor of Poggenburg.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Ed. W. Gardner 5 88 13.64 8.15
Calvin Demarest 3 83 14.29 12.07
J. F. Poggenburg 3 112 16.67 8.69
H. A. Wright 3 127 16.67 9.66
C. F. Conklin 1 90 7.14 7.43
Chas. S. Norris 0 51 6.37
That Conklin, who until then was titular champion, averaged higher as
loser than as winner was due to his winning but one game.
In his play-off with Wright, Demarest averaged 17.65.
Alike in direct execution and in generalship when preferable at times,
the playing was of a high order, as suggested by the average of the
fifteen regular games, which was 8.70; and there was scarcely a
particular in which the tournament was not a gratifying success.
* * * * *
=French Amateur Championship of the World at 14:2.= Paris, France,
February and March.—Class B:
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Labouret 5 68 6.97 4.89
Roudil 4 55 7.14 5.05
Duluard 3 43 7.14 5.17
De Vauce 2 35 6.12 4.44
Larcher 1 42 7.14 4.87
Deconde 0 31 2.98
In the preliminary, Labouret had 9.37 for high winning average and 6.87
for general, while Duluard had 6.97 and 6.25.
In Class A, the 133 and 100 were run in the opening game, wherein Sutra,
though twice running 100, lost by 400 to 397 to Rérolle, who averaged
16.67. On the other hand, when Rérolle made his best average, which was
against Hecking, his best run was only 72. The average of the tournament
was 10.60.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Rérolle 3 133 19.04 13.44
Sutra 2 100 13.33 11.62
Darantière 1 67 10.26 10.39
Hecking 0 53 7.22
* * * * *
=Championship of the World at 18:1.= Grand Central Palace, New York
City, March 27th.—Third match contest of the second series for the
world’s championship at 18:1 and $500 a side. Wm. F. Hoppe, champion,
500—10.64—56; Geo. F. Slosson, 391—61. In its financial aspect, the
attendance surpassed that of any other one-night billiard match ever
played.
Fourth match contest, Madison Square Garden Concert Hall, New York City,
October 17th: W. F. Hoppe (champion), 500—10.64—96; Jacob Schaefer,
472—42.
* * * * *
=Handicap 14:2 at Frank A. Keeney’s, Brooklyn.= Interrupted by illnesses
and also postponed nine days by a professional tournament, this lasted
from January 29th to March 16th, when there were ties yet to play. C. E.
White, scratchman at 275, of course made the highest average (6.40), but
near the finish lost three games straight to Keane, Smith, and Boyd.
Leaders in high runs were Leonard, White, Boyd, and Robinson, with 35,
33, 30, and 30. Servatius was another contestant.
* * * * *
=Championship of the World at 18:2, Second Series.= Maurice Vignaux’s
term as champion expiring in 1905, the jeweled emblem became his, and
the first series of games for the championship of 18:2 came to an end.
The second were instituted in Madison Square Garden Concert Hall, New
York City, by a tournament of 500–point games held April 9–21st, with a
tie-game between Sutton and Schaefer on the 23d. The prizes were a
silver cup (championship emblem), and $3000 in cash, both given by the
Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., the entrance fees of $250 apiece, and the
door receipts above expenses. This net amounted to $4200, which, added
to the $3000 purse and the aggregate entrance fees ($1750), made the
realization $8950 for the five most successful players. The tournament
was the costliest ever held, as well as the heaviest in receipts.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
George F. Slosson, New York ($3580) 5 153 33.33 18.47
George Sutton, from Paris ($2237.50) 4 234 100.00 24.14
Jacob Schaefer, Chicago ($1342.50) 4 171 31.25 22.94
Wm. F. Hoppe, New York ($1074) 3 177 27.78 20.44
Louis Cure, from Paris ($716) 2 100 20.83 15.14
Albert G. Cutler, Boston 2 146 17.24 14.46
Orlando E. Morningstar, New York 1 82 9.26 10.89
Average of tournament, 18.24.
The play-offs were won by Cure from Cutler, and Sutton from Schaefer.
Madison Square Garden Concert Hall, New York City, October 18th.—First
match ($500 a side): George Sutton (challenger), 500—31.25—202; George
F. Slosson (champion), 375—75.
Grand Central Palace, New York City, December 18th.—Second match ($500 a
side): George Sutton (champion), 500—107—26.32; Wm. F. Hoppe
(challenger), 258—78.
Continued under years 1906, 1907, 1908.
* * * * *
=Professional Tournament in Chicago.= Thomas Orchestra Hall, May
7–12th.—Games 18:2, 500 points up, for a purse of $2000 guaranteed by
the Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., and divided pro rata. Ties were not
played off.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Wm. F. Hoppe 4 307 62.50 27.78
Geo. Sutton 3 236 83.33 29.25
Jacob Schaefer 1 107 17.24 19.98
Louis Cure 1 126 23.81 18.69
Geo. F. Slosson 1 142 26.32 16.72
Average of tournament, 21.97. This is high, but it was by five chosen
players out of seven, which five had aggregately averaged 20.11 in the
championship tournament in New York City.
In Chicago, the aggregates of triple-figure runs were: Slosson’s, 260;
Schaefer’s, 393; Cure’s, 452; Hoppe’s, 537; Sutton’s, 1008. In New York:
Cure’s, 200; Hoppe’s, 427; Slosson’s, 478; Schaefer’s, 611; Sutton’s,
858.
* * * * *
=Class B 18:2 at Maurice Daly’s.= New York City, closing as follows on
May 23d:
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
M. Muldaur, 300 5 77 8.33 5.67
H. A. Coleman, 300 5 47 6.98 5.90
A. Brock, 300 4 53 8.82 5.85
A. Lewenberg, 300 3 88 6.00 5.54
Tomsone, 270 2 31 4.66 4.42
Wiener, 240 2 37 5.71 4.08
Strauss, 240 0 46 3.32
Muldaur won play-off for first prize.
* * * * *
=Calvin Demarest vs. A. J. Brown.= W. P. Mussey’s Room, Chicago, week
ending October 13th.—Undertaking to play 2000 points of 14:2 to Brown’s
1000, Demarest failed to reach 400 on any of the five nights, and scored
but 1550 in all. Brown on the final night made his 200 at a 9.52 gait.
* * * * *
=Minor Championship of America at 18:2.= Concert Hall of New York
Theatre, November 19th to December 1st.—Tournament for gold-lined silver
challenge emblem, presented by the Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., and
50, 25, 15, 5, and 5 per cent. of $950, of which $775 were subscribed by
that company ($500) and the following named roomkeepers: Timothy Flynn
and Maurice Daly ($100 each), Frank A. Keeney ($50), and Keyser &
Garraty ($25). In the tournament, Boston was represented by Albert G.
Cutler, Philadelphia by Henry P. Cline, Chicago by Al Taylor, St. Louis
by Charles Peterson, and New York City by T. J. Gallagher, Edward
McLaughlin, and Frank Hoppe. Games, 400 points.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Cutler 5 162 26.67 14.31
Cline 5 109 25.00 14.52
Gallagher 4 118 18.18 10.02
McLaughlin 3 80 12.90 9.15
Taylor 3 94 20.00 13.33
Peterson 1 56 14.29 9.26
Hoppe 0 37 6.02
Cutler was defeated by Gallagher only (400 to 200), and Cline by none
but Cutler (400 to 288). Their tie was played off at Maurice Daly’s Room
on December 3d, and Cutler won by 400 to 230, with 13.33 for average and
47 for high run, Cline’s being 44. The tie between Taylor and McLaughlin
was not decided. There was never a challenge for the emblem, which
became Cutler’s personal property on December 3, 1907, the championship
itself then expiring.
* * * * *
=Chicago 14:2 Handicap.= W. P. Mussey’s Room, November.—With 13.64 as
best average and 10.50 as general average, Calvin Demarest won his whole
seven games, and A. J. Brown, with five victories, won second prize.
* * * * *
=Amateur 18:2 Tournament.= Maurice Daly’s Room, New York City, December
10–15th.—Games, 250 points.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
C. A. Van Vleck 4 33 6.76 4.69
F. M. Canda 3 33 7.58 5.62
Wm. Gershel 1 48 5.43 5.11
W. H. Tomsone 1 53 6.10 4.55
Mark Muldaur 1 37 6.76 4.63
* * * * *
=Mixed Amateur and Professional Handicap.= L. Bensinger’s Room, Chicago,
December.—Defeating A. J. Brown by 230 to 58 on an average of 17.69 and
a high run of 85, C. F. Conklin closed his series without having lost a
game. George Wheeler, professional, was second, and Edward Rein,
amateur, with two games won and three lost, tied Frank Maggioli,
professional, for third and fourth prizes. The play was 18:2.
1907.
=Maxine Thomas’s Formal New York Debut.= Maurice Daly’s Room, December
31, 1906, and January 1–2, 1907. Style, 18:2. Averaging 16.46, and
having 102 for high run, T. J. Gallagher won by 1200 to 889.
* * * * *
=Calvin Demarest vs. Ora Morningstar.= W. P. Mussey’s Room, Chicago,
January 14th to 19th.—Exhibition six nights’ game at 18:2, Morningstar
to make 500 points nightly to Demarest’s 300, but failing on the whole
by 792. Demarest averaged 16.36 in his 1800, with 152 for high run to
Morningstar’s 143.
* * * * *
=World’s Championship and $500 a Side at 18:2.= (See p. 309 for earlier
contests of second series.) Orchestra Hall, Chicago, January 21st, third
match.—George Sutton (champion), 500—71—17.86; Orlando C. Morningstar
(challenger), 472—72.
Same hall, November 5th.—Fourth match. George Sutton (champion),
500—232—33.33; Jacob Schaefer (challenger), 241—93.
Lenox Lyceum, New York City, January 27, 1908.—Fifth match. George
Sutton (champion), 500—93—7.46; Orlando C. Morningstar (challenger),
309—26—4.68.
Madison Square Garden Concert Hall, New York City, March 27, 1908.—Sixth
match. George Sutton (champion), 272—83; Wm. F. Hoppe (challenger),
500—99—20.83. The week following, Hoppe returned the emblem to its
donors. There being no challenge pending, this closed the second 18:2
series.
* * * * *
=Interclub Handicap Championship.= Philadelphia, February, 1907.—Game
14:2. T. Mortimer S. Rolls (scratch, 300) was first, with 11.54 for best
winning average; J. E. C. Morton second, with 7.24; and Joseph Mayer
third, with 5.48. The other contestants were James S. Alcorn, J. Julius
Hovey, Dr. W. E. Uffenheimer, and Warren A. Hawley. High runs were
lighter than usual in this series, but the general play was better.
* * * * *
=18:2 vs. 14:2.= L. Bensinger’s Room, Chicago, six nights, closing
February 23d.—C. F. Conklin, 1800 at 14:2, with 11.76 for average;
George Wheeler, 1419 at 18:2.
* * * * *
=National Amateur Championship at 14:2.=—See year 1908.
* * * * *
=Minneapolis Amateur 14:2 Championship.= February.—Defeating J.
C. Fremont in the final game, Edward Huyck retained the
Brunswick-Balke-Collender medal. Dr. Parker tied Wilmot for second and
third prizes.
* * * * *
=World’s Championship at 18:1.= (Series continued from 1905–6.)—On
January 2, 1907, electing to go abroad, Wm. F. Hoppe forfeited the
championship and $250 to George Sutton, who was soon challenged by Jacob
Schaefer.
Orchestra Hall, Chicago, March 11th.—Contest for 18:1 championship and
regulation stake, $500 a side. George Sutton (champion), 448—51; Jacob
Schaefer, 500—100—13.88.
Same hall and terms, December 2d.—Jacob Schaefer (champion),
500—88—11.63; George Sutton (challenger), 486—37.
Horticultural Hall, Philadelphia, January 23, 1908.—Same terms as
before. Jacob Schaefer (champion), 500—59—7.69; Albert G. Cutler
(challenger), 476—56.
Orchestra Hall, Chicago, March 11th.—Same terms as before. Jacob
Schaefer (champion), 500—95—14.29; Wm. F. Hoppe (challenger), 423—59.
Owing to illness, Schaefer forfeited in May, 1908, to Sutton, who had
challenged in the prior February.
* * * * *
=French “Amateur Championnat du Monde.”= Third and last annual
tournament of the series, and held at the Billiard Palace, Paris,
closing March 15, 1907.—The victor was Lucien Rérolle, Darantière and
Francois tying for second and third prizes. Next to Rérolle’s 17.39, 20,
21.05, and 26.67, Darantière’s 16.67 was the highest winning average.
The only triple-figure runs were Darantière’s 130 and Rérolle’s 103. The
other contestants were Pasco, Blanc, and Mortier. The last withdrew
after losing his first two games, one to Rérolle, and the latter was the
only unbeaten player. This was Rérolle’s fourth successive annual
triumph, and brought this particular championship to a close, it having
been projected for 14:2. The first annual he won was projected for 18:2,
and its championship ended with the tournament that instituted it. The
other had to be won three times, we think.
* * * * *
=N. Y. A. C. Championship at 14:2.= May, and again won by Dr. Walter G.
Douglas, who in this tournament had but two competitors.
* * * * *
=Calvin Demarest vs. Clarence Jackson.= Exhibition at 14:2, October
1–4th, first and third nights at W. P. Mussey’s Room, and second and
fourth at Thomas Foley’s.—Demarest was to go to 1200 against Jackson’s
800, but failed by 42 points, although making five runs—127, 122, 77,
73, and 64—superior to his opponent’s best, which was 58. The winning
average, as near as can be ascertained in penalty of resuming play in an
irregular way on three of the four nights, was 9.88. In reason, it
should have been higher.
* * * * *
=C. F. Conklin vs. Clarence Jackson.= Chicago, week ending October 26th,
four nights of exhibition 14:2 alternately at Thomas Foley’s and A. M.
Clarke’s Room, Conklin playing 1200 to 1000, and winning by 23, with an
average approximately 10.50. High runs—Jackson, 80; Conklin, 79.
* * * * *
=Amateur Championship of Oregon.= Portland, Ore., October, last of the
three 14:2 contests for the gold medal.—W. C. Duniway, who had won the
other two, was also victor now, with an average of 5.13, although
MacBisaillon, his opponent on this occasion, made the highest run (41)
when he had but 50 to go to Duniway’s 9. The final score was 200 to 198.
* * * * *
=T. J. Gallagher vs. Ora Morningstar at 18:2.= Maurice Daly’s Room, New
York City, October 28th to November 2d, the latter to play 2500 to
1800.—Gallagher, 1800—150—16.09; Morningstar, 1467—79.
* * * * *
=Gallagher vs. Ed. McLaughlin.= Maurice Daly’s, New York City, November
4–9th, six nights of 18:2.—Gallagher, 1800—80—14.06; McLaughlin,
1571—105.
* * * * *
=“Imperial” Class B Tournament at 14:2.= L. A. Curtis’s Room, Boston,
closing November 6th.—Prior, who won his whole five games and made the
highest run (36), was winner of the gold watch. Parker, beaten only by
Prior, was second, besides being high in both averages, 4 for single and
3.42 for general.
* * * * *
=Trenton, N. J., Tournament.= Held in November, and tied for by three
whose playing off placed them in this order: Wm. Allen, of the Mercer
County Wheelmen, first prize; Whitehead, second; and Fischer, third.
* * * * *
=Foley’s Class A 14:2 Handicap.= Thomas Foley’s Room, Chicago, ending
week of December 11–16th.—Ten competitors, with Clarence Jackson as
scratchman (300). With 84 and 17.65 as the highest run and winning
average of the tournament, and with a general average of 10.96, Jackson
won every game but that with A. J. Brown, who tied W. K. Cochrane for
third and fourth, Percy Collins being second. Collins and Brown were at
260, and Cochrane at 200. Brown had second highest run, 56, and Collins
second highest winning average, 10.40.
* * * * *
=George F. Slosson vs. Albert G. Cutler.= Slosson’s Room, New York City,
December 9–21st, two exhibition games at 18:2.—Slosson won the first by
1800 to 1430, and the second by 1800 to 1518. Neither game went beyond
10 in winning average, and the highest runs were 77 by Cutler and 72 by
Slosson.
1908.
=World’s Championship at 18:1 and 18:2.= For contests in 1908, see pp.
312–13.
* * * * *
=Crescent A. C. Annual 14:2 Championship.= At Brooklyn, N. Y., ending
January 3d.—Tournament won by Dr. H. D. Jennings from E. A. Clough
(second prize) in final game, increased from 200 to 300 points.
Jennings, 300—41—5.77; Clough, 145—29. The highest average of the
tournament, 8.33, was by Jennings in defeating Banker by 200 to 49.
* * * * *
=Knickerbocker Annual 14:2 Handicap.= F. A. Keeney’s Room, Brooklyn,
tournament closing January 1st.—J. Ferdinand Poggenburg (400), Chas. E.
White (250), Frank Boyd (225), and Walter A. Leonard (220) tied for
first four places. Playing off the ties made the winning order White,
Leonard, Boyd, and Poggenburg. Naturally, the scratchman (Poggenburg)
made the highest run and average, which were 136 and 11.11 in his last
regular game, won from Boyd by 69. The second highest run was 69, made
by J. M. Millette (230) when averaging 5.90 in defeating Poggenburg by
111. The other contestants were Christian Scheidig (250), Dr. H. D.
Jennings (230), and John A. Keane (185).
* * * * *
=E. W. Gardner vs. Ferdinand Poggenburg.= Tim Flynn’s Room, New York
City, January 31st.—Match at 18:2 for one hundred cigars. Gardner,
400—89—11.76; Poggenburg, 345—60.
* * * * *
=T. J. Gallagher vs. Ora Morningstar.= February 3–7th, match of single
games of 400 points at 18:2 for a purse subscribed by patrons of Maurice
Daly’s Room.—Gallagher won the three middle games, and Morningstar the
two at the extremes. The highest run, 136, and the highest winning
average, 28.57, were made by Morningstar in the final game, which was of
no use to either. Gallagher’s best run and highest winning average were
85 and 26.67.
* * * * *
=California 18:2 Handicap.= W. H. Berry’s Room, Los Angeles, January
27th to February 1st.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
H. A. Wright (400) 1 111 14.81 15.17
George Kennedy (300) 3 57 11.54 9.48
Wm. Maguire (300) 1 65 11.11 9.82
Frank A. Du Bois (200) 1 52 9.09 5.80
Kennedy and Maguire rate as professionals. The one victory of Du Bois,
with its average of 9.09, was over Wright, all of whose games were so
near victories that his general average surpasses his highest winning
one.
* * * * *
=Championship of Wisconsin at 14:2.= Coleman & Perrigo’s Room,
Milwaukee, Wis., tournament ending February 25th in the sixth regular
game, which, between James Brown and Alexander Emslie, determined first
and second places, Brown winning by 300 to 147, and making at once the
highest run (36) and the highest average (7.32) of the tournament. With
Thomas Bigelow, winner of third prize. Brown and Emslie represented
Milwaukee, Charles H. Schweizer coming from La Crosse.
W. W. A. G. A.
Brown 3 7.32 6.00
Emslie 2 5.45 4.64
Bigelow 1 4.76 4.29
Schweizer 0 3.14
* * * * *
Roomkeepers’ 18:2 Championship of Wisconsin. Tournament closed April
22d, Milwaukee, with decisive game: H. A. Coleman, 300—47—6.98; John
Hahman, 221—32.
* * * * *
National Amateur Championship at 14:2. Instituted March 12 to 21, 1906
(see that year), this was continued in March, 1907, at the rooms of the
German Liederkranz Society, N. Y. City, with the results in the table
first appended, and concluded at the rooms of the Chicago, Ill.,
Athletic Association, March 14–23, 1908, as set forth in the second
table.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Calvin Demarest 5 115 27.27 14.85
C. F. Conklin 3 68 12.00 9.18
E. W. Gardner 3 101 10.71 9.32
J. Ferd. Poggenburg 2 101 21.43 11.55
Dr. L. L. Mial 2 94 14.29 9.51
T. M. S. Rolls 0 96 8.10
Conklin and Poggenburg defeated Gardner and Mial in the extra or
play-off games, Poggenburg running 115 and averaging 42.86. Neither the
average nor the run counts against the figures in the table.
Nevertheless, the 42.86 was the highest of record for a player of
Poggenburg’s class.
The regular games, 300 points up, were fifteen. In Chicago they numbered
the same, but were 400 points up.
Demarest’s victory in Chicago closed the series by making him owner of
the emblem, with 202 (in his tie game with H. A. Wright) and 57.14 (in
his regular-schedule game with E. W. Gardner) as the highest record run
and single average of his class at 14:2. The same is true of his general
average of 21.22, which, could his two tie games be computed with it,
would be transformed into 23.19.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Calvin Demarest[13] 4 170 57.14 21.22
H. A. Wright 4 133 30.08 16.14
C. F. Conklin 4 141 15.39 12.11
E. W. Gardner 2 75 13.80 11.01
J. F. Poggenburg 1 116 21.05 11.29
Clarence Jackson 0 56 10.85
Footnote 13:
Lost to Wright by 133 (average and high run 16.67 and 83 for winner,
and 11.13 and 66 for loser), which caused a tie among himself, Wright,
and Conklin.
* * * * *
=American Debut of Firmin Cassignol of France.=—March 2, Geo. F.
Slosson’s Rooms, N. Y. City, beginning a series of 18:2 exhibition games
with the proprietor.
* * * * *
=New French Championship at 18:2.= Tournament held in Paris, France,
April 3–10, 1908. The general average of Rérolle is closely approximate
only, all known on this side as to the final game, which was between him
and Robert Mortier, is Rérolle’s recollection that Mortier averaged 25,
and that he himself did not make half the game. Points were 400, and
balls presumably 61 millimeters. Games, 400 up.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Mortier 5 118 25.00 16.26
Rérolle 4 175 20.00 14.02
Blanc 3 98 22.22 11.79
Darantière 2 121 21.06 13.59
De Drée 1 79 7.55 7.94
Labouret 0 58 6.37
* * * * *
=International Tournament for Amateur World’s Championship at 18:2.=
Held in the large hall of the German Liederkranz Society, N. Y. City,
five competing and finishing in the order given in the subjoined
summary, viz., Lucien Rérolle, Toulouse, France; Calvin Demarest and
Chas. F. Conklin, Chicago, Ill.; and E. W. Gardner and J. Ferd.
Poggenburg, N. Y. City. Apart from the championship emblem, which, the
gift of the Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., and formally presented by the
National Association of Amateur Billiard Players, is subject to annual
competition until some one player shall have won it twice, the prizes
were at the choice of the players in the order of their standing as
winners of games, which were 400 points up, April 28 to May 7.
W. H. R. W. A. G. A.
Demarest 4 151 28.57 20.00
Rérolle 2 103 15.38 13.44
Conklin 2 59 13.79 9.93
Gardner 1 62 10.53 8.50
Poggenburg 1 55 11.76 9.47
In playing off the ties, the winners, Rérolle and Gardner, both
surpassed their prior best winning average by respectively making 16
flat and 10.81, Gardner also making his highest run of all (83, which is
a record for him), and Rérolle his second best (91). Demarest’s general
average is record high, but his single average of 28.57 and his run of
151 are second best.
Conditions of the tournament barred “anchor” and imposed balls of a
diameter of 61 millimeters, or 2⅜ in. plus. Games, 400 points.
BEST RECORD PERFORMANCES
ON DIFFERENT LINES, BUT ALWAYS ON A 5 × 10 TABLE.
AVERAGES IN CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.
26.67 in 800, 14:2—F. C. Ives, 1892.
15.00 in 600, 18:1—F. C. Ives, 1898.
33.33 in 500, 18:2—George Sutton, 1907.
20.83 in 500, 18:1—W. F. Hoppe, Paris, France, 1906.
RUNS IN CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.
155 in 800–point game, 14:2—J. Schaefer, 189.
91 in 600–point game, 18:1—F. C. Ives, 1898.
100 in 500–point game, 18:1—J. Schaefer, 1907.
232 in 500, 18:2—George Sutton, 1907.
AVERAGES IN CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
40 in 600, 8:2—J. Schaefer, 1883.
31.25 in 500, 18:1—F. C. Ives, 1897.
50 in 500, 18:2—M. Vignaux, Paris (championship of France), 1902.
100 in 500, 18:2—G. Sutton (championship of the world), 1906.
RUNS IN CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
246 in 600–point game, 8:2—M. Vignaux, 1883.
140 in 500–point game, 18:1—F. C. Ives, 1897.
175 in 600–point game, 18:2—M. Vignaux, Paris (championship of
France), 1902.
234 in 500–point game, 18:2—G. Sutton (championship of the world),
1906.
BEST GENERAL AVERAGES (CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS ONLY).
23.23, game 8:2, Chicago—J. Schaefer, winner, 1883.
9.39, game 18:1, N. Y. City—G. F. Slosson, winner, 1897.
14.95, game 18:1. N. Y. City—F. C. Ives, loser, 1897.
27.73, game 18:2, Paris, France—Edouard Fournil, tied with L. Cure
and M. Vignaux, and second in play-off, with Cure first
(championship of France), 1902.
22.29, game 18:2, Paris, France—M. Vignaux, tied with L. Cure and G.
Sutton (championship of world), 1903.
24.14, game 18:2, N. Y. City (championship of the world)—G. Sutton,
1906.
AVERAGES IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.
44.75 in 3000, 8:2—M. Vignaux, Paris, 1884.
38.10 in 800, 8:2—J. Schaefer, 1884.
14.55 in 800, 12:2—J. Schaefer, 1885.
25.86 in 3000, 14:2—J. Schaefer, 1886.
22.22 in 800, 14:2—G. F. Slosson, 1891.
27.41 in 4000, 14:2—J. Schaefer, 1893.
48.62 in 3600, 14:2—F. C. Ives, 1894.
18.29 in 1500, 18:2—J. Adorjan, 1902.
22.90 in 3000, 18:2—J. Schaefer, Paris, 1904.
RUNS IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.
329 in 3000–point game, 8:2—M. Vignaux, Paris, 1884.
211 in 800–point game, 8:2—J. Schaefer, 1884.
109 in 800–point game, 12:2—J. Schaefer, 1885.
230 in 3000–point game, 14:2—J. Schaefer, 1886.
173 in 800–point game, 14:2—G. F. Slosson, 1891.
456 (anchor) in 4000–point game, 14:2—F. C. Ives, 1893.
359 in 3600–point game, 14:2—F. C. Ives, 1894.
139 in 600–point game, 18:1—J. Schaefer, 1899.
255 in 3000–point game, 18:2—L. Cure, Paris, 1904.
AVERAGES IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
75 in 600, 14:2—M. Vignaux, 1885.
38.46 in 600, 14:2—J. Schaefer, 1890.
100 in 600, 14:2—J. Schaefer in New York and F. C. Ives in Chicago,
both due to anchor, 1893.
50 in 600, 18:2—F. C. Ives, 1896.
40 in 400, 18:1—J. Schaefer, 1898.
83.33 in 500—G. Sutton, Chicago, 1906.
RUNS IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
566 (anchor) in 600–point game, 14:2—J. Schaefer, 1893.
200 in 600–point game, 18:2—F. C. Ives, New York, 1896.
111 in 500–point game, 18:1—J. Schaefer, 1896.
138 in 400–point game, 18:1—J. Schaefer, 1898.
195 in 600–point game, 14:2—M. Vignaux, 1885.
307 in 500–point game, 18:2—W. F. Hoppe, Chicago, 1906.
CUSHION CAROMS.
[When not otherwise specified, all play was at ordinary C. C., with
three 2⅜ balls on 5 × 10 table, cushion being taken at some time
before hitting second object-ball.]
1867.
=First Public Exhibition.= Opening of Tobin & Bosworth’s Room, Boston,
October, 1867.—Played with four balls on a 5½ × 11 four-pocket table,
Joseph Dion, of Montreal, defeating John McDevitt, of N. Y. City.
1878.
=First Public Match Contest.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, February 21st.—$250
a side, Jacob Schaefer discounting John H. Flack. Schaefer’s actual
score at close, 300; average of all points he made, 2.50; best run, 35.
Flack’s total, 299; best run, 8. Time, 5h. 50m.
* * * * *
=First Tournament.= Begun in a St. Louis billiard room, March 14th.—The
games, as reported, were 400 points up, and the best averages of the
four prize-winners (Frank Day, S. G. Baldwin, Eugene Wolff, and Edward
Warner) 3.60, 2.98, 2.14, and 3.15, with 23, 18, 14, and 38 as their
high runs respectively. Figures sometimes need vouchers. It was not
until three years later that the finest professionals in the land were
able to equal some of the foregoing, and not until 1883 that such
professionals ventured upon longer games in tournament than 200 points,
and then on a 4½ × 9 table.
1881.
=The Sexton-Schaefer Matches.= All independent of one another. First:
Cooper Institute, N. Y. City, February 15th.—$500 a side, Schaefer,
400—3.92—26; Sexton, 396—21.
Tammany Hall, same city, $1,000 a side, February 26th.—Sexton,
400—3.33—27; Schaefer, 363—20.
Same hall, December 29th.—$2,500 a side. Sexton, 600—3.87—77; Schaefer,
576—23. That 77 is still record-high for a public match.
Academy of Music, same city and like stake, April 27, 1882.—Sexton,
600—4.05—32; Schaefer, 538—28. (Owing to the 77 run in the other, this
match drew by far the most money cushion-caroms have ever known.)
* * * * *
=First Tournament in the East.= Philadelphia Roomkeepers’ Championship,
played in various rooms, April 4–20, 1881.—Victor Estephe winning 6—0,
McLaughlin 5—1, Chris. Bird, Ed. Nelms, and Robt. Hunter 3—3, Pincus
Levy 1—5, and Jas. Palmer 0—6. All games 150 up.
In ensuing matches, same points, Estephe beat McLaughlin and Hunter, and
then McLaughlin won six straight—from Estephe, Bird, and Palmer once
apiece, and from Hunter thrice.
* * * * *
=Only Four-handed Game in Public.= Winter Circus, Paris, France, June
26, 1881.—4½ × 9 table, purse game. Vignaux and Garnier, 600—6.12—25 and
12 each for best run; Slosson and Lucien Piot, 577—22 and 14 for runs.
* * * * *
=Only World’s Championship.= Tammany Hall, November 14–19th and Cooper
Institute, November 21–26th, both N. Y. City.—For an emblem and $2,500
in prize money. Games, 200 points up, nine for every player. Slosson and
Lon Morris were first and second in playing off triple tie.
W. R. Av. G. A.
J. Dion, $1,000 7 45 4.26 3.40
Schaefer, $700 6 35 6.25 3.20
Slosson, $500 5 32 5.13 3.56
Morris, $300 5 37 4.35 3.
Wallace 5 26 3.45 2.98
Daly 4 44 3.85 3.04
Gallagher 4 29 3.72 2.91
Carter 4 27 4.44 2.85
Sexton 3 32 3.57 2.93
Heiser 2 18 3.68 2.49
There having been but one other first-class professional tournament, and
that on different terms, it would subserve no purpose to figure out the
exact average of the entire play. Approximately, 3.04.
There was never a match for this championship. Sexton challenged, and on
September 23d Dion resigned on the ground that the conditions announced
when he competed for the emblem had not been observed. Sexton held it
thenceforward without challenge.
1882.
=First Tournament “Down East.”= Boston, Mass., closing January 5th.—For
amateur championship. Prize-winners were Moses Yatter, E. H. Marshall,
G. A. Roberts, Thos. R. Tarrant, and Chas. F. Campbell. The last
subsequently acquired the emblematic silver cup and lost it to Marshall,
April 12th, by 250 to 241. Campbell and Yatter played for the State
championship on January 25, 1883, and out of that match (C.,
250—1.85—12; Y., 249—11) came the State championship of 1884.
* * * * *
=Piot vs. Schaefer.= Grand Café, Paris, February 10th.—$50 a side. P.,
200; S., 198.
* * * * *
=Eugene Kimball vs. Sexton.= Cooper Institute, N. Y. City, April
29th.—$500 a side. K. (with odds of 150), 500—3.37 in 350—26; S.,
403—42.
* * * * *
=Slosson vs. Sexton.= Assembly Buildings, Philadelphia, public contest
in aid of National Billiard Association. Slosson, 300; Sexton, 198.
* * * * *
=Daly vs. Kimball.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, June 1st.—$500 a side,
even up. D., 500—4.35—28; K., 347—30. [See Sexton vs. Daly below, and
also Carter vs. Gallagher under 1884, for 4.35 as a tie on high record
average thrice.]
* * * * *
=Sexton vs. Daly.= Independent matches, each for $500 a side and in
Tammany Hall, N. Y. City.—December 1, 1882: S., 500—3.57—27; D., 456—24.
January 6, 1883: D., 500—4.35—44; S. 467—30.
1883.
=Only Championship of America.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, May
14–25th.—$3,000 in money and an emblem presented by H. W. Collender; 500
points on 4½ × 9; shot to count whether cue-ball cushioned before
hitting second object-ball or after hitting both and before hitting
either again. This was a revival. It was little followed after 1883, and
was expunged from the rules in 1897.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Daly, $1,200 5 56 8.06 6.550
Wallace, $800 4 41 5.62 5.25
Schaefer, $500 4 49 10. 6.559
Vignaux, $300 3 43 7.94 6.09
J. Dion 3 47 6.17 5.21
Sexton 2 65 6.89 5.37
Carter 0 36 4.82
This tournament is exceptional among professional ones in that before
his one defeat (by Schaefer) Daly had won the championship, Wallace and
Vignaux won play-offs. In thus defeating Schaefer, Wallace ran 76 and
averaged 7.25. Sexton’s 6.89 is a losing average. The general averages
of Daly and Schaefer were a close call, of which the old form of
expression (6–248/451 and 6–238/426) gives scant idea. Average of
tournament, 5.66.
There was but one match. Sexton and Vignaux both challenged, Daly
resigned to Sexton as having priority, and Slosson challenged on
September 22d. Sexton thereupon named Chicago and unexpectedly a 5 × 10
table for the contest. This was the first time that a champion ever
chose a place not his own residence, and such a naming did not happen
again until April, 1902, when, Schaefer and Vignaux both being in Paris,
the former named N. Y. City, and in consequence there was no contest.
Slosson was not to be balked, and finally found himself up against a
faster Collender cushion than he had been given to practise with, which
will explain the drop in average.
SEXTON LOSES TO SLOSSON. Central Music Hall, Chicago, October
24th.—Championship and $500 a side. Slosson, 500—3.55—38; Sexton,
483—30.
Next day, Slosson resigned the emblem to its donor. Passing again to
Sexton without further competition, it eventually became his in
perpetuity.
* * * * *
=Johnson vs. Reeves for $1,000 a Side.= Madison Square Hall, N. Y. City,
November 9th.—4½ × 9 table. David Johnson, 250—2.14—13; John T. Reeves,
233—12. (See Bookmakers’ Tournaments.)
1884.
=Carter vs. Gallagher.= St. Louis, February 20th.—$500 a side. C.,
400—4.35—33; G., 327—31. [Carried a term higher, Carter’s average
becomes a shade better than the best prior match record, being 4.348 to
Daly’s 4.347.]
* * * * *
=Championship of Massachusetts.= W. P. Marshall’s Room, Boston,
tournament on 4½ × 9, ending March 1st.—Moses Yatter 8—1, E. H. Marshall
7—2, C. F. Campbell 6—3, and T. W. Allen 3—4, prize-winners. Allen made
the best run, 26, and Campbell the highest winning average, 3.33.
There were nine match-contests for the emblem, John Morse winning the
first three, Campbell the fourth and fifth, and Yatter the remaining
four.
* * * * *
=Championship of Ohio.= Mozart Hall, Cincinnati, April 21–26th.—4½ × 9
table. Seven contestants, these four being prize-winners: John A.
Thatcher, 6—0, $200 and medal; Tony Honing, 4—3, $125; Harry Bussey, 4—2
(beaten by Honing in play-off), $75; and West (beat W. De Long in
play-off), $50. Championship competition ended with tournament.
1885.
=Second Massachusetts Championship.= This was the pioneer prohibition
one, Yatter and Campbell being barred. Boston, January 12th to February
13th.—4½ × 9 table. Jas. O’Neil 9—0, Fred Eames 7—2, E. H. Marshall 6—3,
and Chas. Barnard 5—4, were prize-winners. Best average, 3.45, was by
Eames, whose 22 tied W. G. Gilman’s for high-run prize, won by G. in
playing off. Emblem was held successively by O’Neil (forfeited through
illness), Marshall, O’Neil again, and Eames finally.
* * * * *
=Sexton vs. Slosson.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, May 6th.—$2,550 ($1,500
staked on Slosson against $1,050 on Sexton). Sexton, 500—4.42—30;
Slosson, 486—35. (See 1866 and 1887 for this match average surpassed.)
1886.
=Bookmakers’ Handicaps.= The Reeves-Johnson match of 1883, which was a
heavily speculative event, led to a series of bookmakers’ tournaments in
this city, February 8–18, 1886; January 31st to February 14, 1887;
January 23–27, 1888; and January 14–22, 1889, the winners of which
severally were Chas. Davis, Joseph Cotton, Davis again, and David
Johnson. The last-named was at “scratch” in two out of four, and Davis
always at “scratch” except in the third, when Reeves, playing 170 to his
150, tied him, but was beaten in the play-off. All but the 1887
tournament were on a 4½ × 9.
* * * * *
=Only Real Sweepstakes Known to Billiards.= Two of the foregoing
bookmakers’ handicaps—those of 1888 and 1889, Davis winning one and
Cotton the other—were genuine sweepstakes. Entrance fees may combine to
form stakes, but not sweepstakes when portioned out.
* * * * *
=Slosson vs. Schaefer.= Masonic Hall, St. Louis, November 27,
1886.—First game of home-and-home match, each for $2,000 a side.
Slosson, 500—4.07—26; Schaefer, 469—26.
Return game, Central Music Hall, Chicago, December 17th.—Schaefer,
500—4.50—48; Slosson, 430—22.
1887.
=Slosson vs. Schaefer.= Central Music Hall, Chicago, April 4th.—First
game of match of two (see “Balkline,” 14:2, 1887, for the other), each
for $500 a side. Slosson, 500—4.81—25; Schaefer, 488—49. The average is
still match-high. Winner overcame the longest lead known to a public
match at this game. When Schaefer needed but 130 to go, Slosson was 120
behind.
* * * * *
=First Contest of Multiple Nights.= Light Infantry Armory, Washington,
D. C., May 23–28th.—Game for a purse, 300 points nightly. Daly,
1800—4.66—38; Sexton, 1182—46. Multiplying nights at cushion caroms has
been given a trial but once since, and then by Slosson and Schaefer (see
1899).
* * * * *
=First Public Handicap.= Madison Street Theatre, Chicago, November
5–22d.—This was Frank C. Ives’s tournamental début.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Carter (170) 9 29 6.80 4.53
Schaefer (200) 8 54 10. 5.53
Moulds (110) 7 24 3.79 2.66
Ives (110) 6 16 2.70 2.36
Thatcher (110) 6 25 2.60 2.24
J. Matthews (110) 6 25 4.40 2.60
Gallagher (160) 5 30 3.90 3.30
Slosson (200) 3 40 5.89 4.
J. F. Donovan (110) 2 21 2.44 1.77
Hatley (115) 2 20 2.57 1.90
Catton (160) 1 18 4. 2.50
Average of tournament, 3.005. There has been no technically public
handicap at cushion caroms since.
* * * * *
=Donovan vs. Chas. Schaefer.= St. Louis, December 19th.—Match for $500 a
side. S., 200—1.98—13; D., 152—10.
1888.
=Championship of Pennsylvania.= Continental Hotel, Philadelphia, January
9–26th.—200–point games, eight contestants and seven prize-winners,
viz., McLaughlin, 7—0; Burris, 6—1; Bullock, 5—2; Pollard, 4—3; P. Levy,
3—4; J. Cline, 2—5; Palmer, 1—6. Eighth man was Edward Woods, 0—7.
Matches were not meant to follow. The championship emblem, won by
McLaughlin along with $210, was presented by H. J. Bergman.
* * * * *
=Saratoga, N. Y., Three-handed Tournament.= Town Hall, August
6–8th.—Slosson, $500; Daly, $350; Sexton, $150. Play was inconspicuous
in runs and averages.
1889.
=Five-handed Tournament in Boston.= John J. Murphy’s Hub Palace,
finishing January 4th.—4½ × 9 table. Eames, 4—0; Yatter, 3—1; and John
Dankleman; C. F. Campbell, and W. M. Gilman, 1—3 apiece, divided third
money.
On January 16th, for $150 a side, 4½ × 9, Eames defeated Yatter by 200
to 209, and in same room, March 7th, and at C. T. Shean’s Room,
Springfield, March 20th, he defeated L. A. Guillet in a home-and-home,
$100 a side.
1892.
=Garnier vs. Carter.= Paris, February 2d.—$500 a side. G., 300; C., 293.
February 26th: G., 300; C., 233.
* * * * *
=Carter vs. Vignaux.= Paris, February 10th.—$500 a side. C., 50; V., 49.
* * * * *
=Schaefer vs. Vignaux.= Paris, December 27th.—$500 a side. S., 400—3.96;
V., 345.
1894.
=Fournil vs. Gallagher.= Daly’s Room, N. Y. City, December 3–7th.—Formal
American début of Edouard Fournil, of Paris, France. Purse game, 200
points nightly. With 45 for high run against 37, F. won by 1,000 to 848.
1896.
=Last Professional Tournament.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, April
13–17th.—Under auspices of Daly and Ives, 300–point games.
W. R. Av. G. A.
Ives 3 85 5.88 5.29
Schaefer 2 39 5.36 4.91
Daly 1 29 4.62 4.35
Garnier 0 43 3.82
Approximate average of tournament, 4.67. Ives’s 85 was run against Daly.
While it is absolutely the highest in public, yet it cannot properly be
compared with Sexton’s 77 in virtually a $6,250 stake match (not
counting side bets) that he won from Schaefer by no more than 4 per
cent. in 600.
1899.
=Schaefer’s Highest Run of Record.= Lenox Lyceum, N. Y. City, May
22d.—Second game of match of two, each for $500 a side (see Balkline,
May 13, 1899, for first). Slosson, 500—4.60—34; Schaefer, 359—55.
* * * * *
=Second Match of Multiple Nights.= Madison Square Garden Concert Hall,
N. Y. City, October 30 to November 1st.—$500 a side. Slosson,
900—4.57—37; Schaefer, 757—41.
* * * * *
=McLaughlin vs. Gallagher.= Maurice Daly’s, N. Y. City, November
6–10.—Purse game, best in five. McLaughlin, who won the odd, also made
the more points—944 to 924.
1902–3.
=Amateur Revival Tournaments.= After having been out of fashion for
years, the game was revived in winter of 1902–3 at Maurice Daly’s, N. Y.
City, by Messrs. Mark Muldaur, Albert Brock, Wm. Gershel and F.
Poggenburg, who finished in that order without unusual play, and at
Foley’s, Chicago, August 31st to October 31st, C. F. Conklin (scratch at
125) winning by 7—1 in games, and making best run (21), and highest
winning average (2.75). S. W. Miller made 3.33 in the opening game, but
it was canceled with the game itself when Ballard, whom Miller had
beaten, withdrew from tournament. Miller, Beard and Hale tied, and
play-off gave Miller second prize, Beard third, and Hale fourth. Conklin
was beaten by none but Hale (100). Miller and Beard were at 70.
BEST RECORD PERFORMANCES
ON 5 × 10 AND 4½ × 9 TABLES, BOTH HAVING BEEN CHAMPIONSHIP STANDARDS
CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH AVERAGE.
3.55 in 500—G. F. Slosson, 1883.
CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH RUN.
38 in 500 (still his best record in match, with 40 his best in
tournament)—G. F. Slosson, 1883.
CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT AVERAGE.
6.25 in 200—J. Schaefer (with 3.56 by G. F. Slosson for high general
average, but the two were second and third winners only), 1881.
10.00 in 500–point game, 4½ × 9 table—J. Schaefer, with 6.559 for
best general average, that of winner-in-chief (M. Daly) being 6.550,
1883.
CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT RUN.
45 in 200–point game—J. Dion, winner, 1881.
65 in 500–point game, 4½ × 9 table—W. Sexton, 1883 (T. Wallace ran
76 in play-off for second prize, but championship tournament was
then over).
NON-CHAMPIONSHIP AVERAGES.
3.92 in 400—J. Schaefer, 1881.
4.81 in 500—G. F. Slosson, 1887.
4.05 in 600—W. Sexton, 1882 (see under 1881).
4.66 in 1800—M. Daly, 1887.
4.57 in 900—G. F. Slosson, 1902.
NON-CHAMPIONSHIP RUNS.
27 in 400—W. Sexton, 1881.
77 in 600—W. Sexton, 1881.
46 in 1800—W. Sexton, 1887.
55 in 500—J. Schaefer, 1899.
41 in 900—J. Schaefer, 1902.
NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
In Chicago, in 1887, Schaefer made his best average (10 in 200) on a
5 × 10 table, and Slosson his highest run of all (40); and in
Boston, in 1896, Ives ran 85 (highest of all runs) and made the best
general average on 5 × 10 table (5.29).
THREE-CUSHION CAROMS.
1878.
=First Tournament.= C. E. Mussey’s Room, St. Louis, January
14–31st.—50–point games. Leon Magnus, 4—1; Carter, Gallagher, and
Heiser, 3—2; W. C. McCreery, 2—3; Thomas Potts, 0—5. Carter won
play-off, with Gallagher second. The best run (6) and the best average
(.75, or ¾ of a point) were Gallagher’s.
1882.
=McCreery vs. Magnus.= St. Louis, February 2d.—$200 a side. McC.,
50—.94—runs not reported. Magnus scored 31. It is not known of this
unknown game that the winner’s average, nearly one point, has ever been
equaled in so long a match as 50 points. (See May 30–31, 1900.)
1886.
=First Tournament in the East.= Schaefer & Emerich’s Room, N. Y. City,
25–point games. Gus Newland, 7—2, won first prize, $75 and a gold medal,
and Al. Sauer, Herbert Haskell, W. Clark and C. Wilson tied at 6—3. The
other contestants, not all of whom finished, were Arthur R. Townsend,
Charles Heineman, Joseph Stiner, Ed. Williamson, and Mr. Pollock.
1898.
=Schaefer vs. Ives.= Auditorium Recital Hall, Chicago, April 4th.—$100 a
side. Schaefer, 120—average unreported—8; Ives, 106.
* * * * *
=Capt. A. C. Anson vs. L. Jevne.= Chicago, September.—Each game for $50
a side, Jevne giving odds of 10. First: A., 50; J., 38. Second: A., 50;
J., 39.
1899.
=Schaefer vs. Carter.= Chicago, Ill., February 4th.—$200 a side. S.,
100; C., 89.
* * * * *
=Frank C. Ives’s Last Match.= “Ives Room,” N. Y. City, May
24–25th.—Four-handed for announced $250 purse and $2,500 stake. First
game: Ives and W. H. Harrison, 60; Schaefer and J. A. Thatcher, 45.
Second game: S. and T., 65; I. and H., 55.
While rather an exhibition than a match, nevertheless these games are of
interest as the last formal ones in which Ives took part. All but
Schaefer were soon dead.
* * * * *
=First Tournament in N. Y. City.= “Ives Room,” ending July
29th.—Thatcher, 13—1, first; Maloney, 12—3, second; W. H. Myers, 10—5,
third.
* * * * *
=John Daly vs. Luis Vasquez.= Chicago, Ill., December 13th.—$50. D.,
50—av., .34; V., 39.
1900.
=Averaging in Short Games.= The Daly-Vasquez contest has been given a
place because it typifies generalship on the part of a winner lacking
his opponent’s executive ability, and the following are added as
representing free play or catch-as-catch-can billiards. Chicago, May
30th: Capron, 30—av., 1.25; Sutton, 17. May 31st: Carter, 30—av., .97;
Sutton, 15.
* * * * *
=Carter Loses Championship to Jevne.= Clarence E. Green’s Academy,
Chicago, June 15th (postponed from June 8th because of C.’s unfitness).
J., 100—.45—6; C., 66—5.
Winner was challenged by C., who had to declare forfeit by reason of
further unfitness. W. H. Catton challenged, but nothing came of it.
This championship was instituted through an emblem presented it by the
B. B. C. Co. for a tournament in Chicago. Catton won it and at once
resigned it. Clarence Green sought to revive the championship a few
months later, Carter won it in tournament, and no match but that he lost
for it has ever been played. Its time expired years ago.
* * * * *
=Championship of Louisiana.= John Miller’s Room, New Orleans, ending in
September. Seven entries. Wm. Zaehringer (5—1) made best run, 7; M.
Tarleton (4—2) ran 6, as also G. H. Miller, who, with 3—3, tied L.
Abrams for third and fourth.
* * * * *
=“Red, White, and Blue.”= Foley’s Room, Chicago, October and
November.—This was an experimental tournament to ascertain how one
cue-ball for both players would work. Instead of making a red of the
other white, it was colored blue. This handicap of amateurs ended in a
tie between Messrs. Anderson and Bunker, and on November 20 the former
won the play-off by 27 to 12.
1901.
=Amateur Championship of Pacific Coast.= “The Waldorf,” San Francisco,
October.—Probably 4½ × 9. J. C. Howard, unbeaten, Dr. W. F. Davis, W. I.
Barry, J. Berry, and J. J. Roggan (won no game) closed in that order.
General averages and best runs: Howard, .48—4; Barry, .42—6; Davis,
.38—4; Berry, .36—5.
1902.
=Fred Eames vs. Jevne.= Denver, Col., January 28th.—$500, former getting
odds of 10. E., 85; J., 61. Table possibly a 4½ × 9.
* * * * *
=St. Louis Tournament.= January.—Clarence Hutchings lost but one game,
and that to Wright after having already won the tournament. Wright tied
Clayton and Brock for third place, G. E. Hevner being second, and also
having the best general average (.44), besides standing off Hutchings,
Brock, and Wheeler on high run (5). Best single averages were
Hutchings’s .65 and Wright’s .63.
* * * * *
=Metropolitan Academy Tournament.= N. Y. City.—Ending April 4th in ties
between Wm. Gershel and “Williams” for first and second, and W. S.
Johnson and A. D. Ferguson for third and fourth. Gershel won by 4 in 35,
averaging .52 (averaged .55 against J. V. B. Rapp), and Ferguson by 35
to 25, averaging .40. “Williams” ran 5 in the play-off, but in the
tournament proper the highest was 4, by Gershel and others. In the
tourney of November, 1903, Ferguson was winner-in-chief, and Gershel
last.
1903.
=“Mussey Challenge Trophy.”= Closing March 20th at Mussey’s Room,
Chicago, “Harris” (scratch, 50) averaging .57, won final game from
“Wadsworth,” who took second prize, as well as that for high run (7) in
an amateur field of eight.
In April, May, and June, a larger and higher class, numbering eleven,
comprised a new tournament for the “Mussey Challenge Trophy.” “Harris”
made high run (12), but Avery won first prize, and “Harris,”
“Wadsworth,” Riley and Wheeler tied for next four places. In the first
challenge match that followed, June 19th, Avery was defeated by
“Wadsworth.” This challenge series is still (February, 1904) playing,
Morin, “Wadsworth,” and Riley having severally won the most matches. Had
Morin won the match he lost to Riley in January, 1904, the emblem would
have been his to keep.
* * * * *
=Gallagher vs. Luis Vasquez.= Daly’s, N. Y. City, May 27–29th.—Purse
game. V. made the highest run (11), but lost by 200 to about 170. This
was the Spaniard’s debut in the East.
* * * * *
=Jevne vs. Barutel.= Same room, August 3–5th.—Purse game, J., 150—.55—4;
Barutel, 147—4. This was Jevne’s first formal bow in the East, although
years before he had three-cushioned privately here with De Oro.
1904.
=San Francisco (Café Waldorf) Tournament.= December, 1903, to February,
1904. Won by Mitchell (George), with Pellage second, in a field of
eleven.
* * * * *
=Billiard Club Championship.= N. Y. City, tournament of eleven
contestants, ending April 19th.—Winner, F. R. White, who lost not a
game. E. O. Presby, second, was beaten by White only.
* * * * *
=An Amateur Average of 1.03 in 50 Points.= Tournament at W. P. Mussey’s
Room, Chicago, April and May.—Won by James Shea, who in one game scored
his 50 in 49 innings, although his best run was but 7. Tieing Riley for
second and third prizes, Henry W. Avery lost the play-off. Charles Morin
won fourth prize.
* * * * *
=Professional Tourney in Los Angeles, Cal.= Begun at W. H. Berry’s Room,
May 2d, contestants being Arthur Seymour, George Kenniston, Walter
Johnston, Robert Upton, and Joseph W. Carney, who finished in that
order. On the 13th, Seymour scored his 40 points in 40 innings, an
average of 1 flat. His general average we figure as .628, or not far
short of two-thirds of a point to an inning, and the average of the
whole tournament was almost half a point. As in Shea’s case, table was a
5 × 10.
* * * * *
=Other Notable Averages.= In an amateur handicap tournament at A. M.
Clarke’s Room, Chicago, Charles F. Conklin, defeating Kasey by 30 to 12
in the final regular game, September 2d, averaged 1.07. This made a tie
for first prize among himself and Hyatt (30 each), John Daly (scratch at
35), Scovil (25), and Kasey (20), the five having severally won seven
times and lost thrice; and Daly, in defeating Hyatt in the play-off, was
reported in Chicago newspapers as having run 17, 7 and 5, and averaged
1.25. The run especially needs verification.
In November, in a tournament at Hauser’s room, St. Louis, the press of
that city credited G. Gundaker with running two 6’s and two 4’s and
averaging 1.20 in defeating Coon by 30 to 13. There a 4½ × 9 table was
liable to have been used.
About the same time, it reached here through Duluth, Minn., papers that
Wm. F. Hatley, in playing an amateur in that city, averaged 1.03 in 150.
Here, too, a 4½ × 9 table was peculiarly liable. Moreover, the length of
the game suggests that it was an exhibition of two or more sessions.
Considering the number of points, the average is phenomenal. It is not
known to us that Hatley has ever claimed it.
In October, 1905, in Davenport, Iowa, Lloyd Jevne, in playing Louis
Magnus, was reported as having scored a game of 50 points in 41 innings,
which is an average of 1.22. There was no higher run than 7, which each
player made.
* * * * *
=Team Tournament.= W. P. Mussey’s, Chicago, November 28th to January 10,
1905, playing in pairs.—Messrs. Sayles and Jones, who had led almost
from the start, won by defeating Messrs. Wesseling and Short in the
final game by 50 to 39.
* * * * *
=Down-town Amateur Handicap.= Keyser & Garraty’s Room, N. Y. City,
beginning February 6th and ending March 31st in the success of W.
“Goodday” (20) after tieing T. French (40, scratch) and F. “Shawt” (34)
in a tally of 7—2. The highest run (6) was made by both “Shawt” and
Roux, and up to the last regular contest the best winning average (.67)
was by “Larry Dooley” (34). In his first and last games, however, French
averaged .63½ against Stone (30) and 1.03 against “Goodday,” who had won
his first seven games straight, lost his eighth to “Dooley,” and now
lost his ninth. The 1.03 is the best average to date in a tournament in
the East. The general averages of the three leaders were: French, .48;
“Shawt,” .42; “Goodday,” .25. In playing off the ties, April 4th, French
lost to “Goodday” by 7 and to “Shawt” by 1, and “Shawt” to “Goodday” by
8. Wallace (21) won fourth prize. The other contestants were Freeman
(32) and “Professor Turnero” (21).
* * * * *
=Team Tourney at Mussey’s, Chicago.= Ended week of June 3d, Shea and
Howe (45) tieing Morin and Burdick (50), and outscoring them in the
play-off by 45 to 44.
* * * * *
=Single-handed at Bensinger’s, Chicago.= Week ending June 3d, Lawrence
won by defeating Huey by 45 to 24. Ball won second prize, and Huey
third.
1906.
=Handicap Heat Tournament at G. F. Slosson’s.= N. Y. City, January
15–26th.—Eight were forced out by their one defeat in the first week,
and of the remaining eight the ones longest to last were Rinehart
(scratch, 40) and J. A. Pallasco (36). The latter averaged .38, and the
former scored 33, Pallasco thus winning first prize, a costly fur
overcoat.
* * * * *
=Bensinger’s Professional Handicap, Chicago.= January 15–20th.—Charles
Weston (50), third; George Wheeler (45), first; Clem E. Ellison (42),
fourth; Frank Maggioli (40), second.
1907.
=Amateur Handicap.= W. P. Mussey’s Room, Chicago, closing in April.—Ties
played off made Stanley first, Austin second, and Lord third. Stanley
and Lord, with Fuller, were scratchmen.
* * * * *
=James Ryan vs. Benjamin Laurie.= Imperial Billiard Room, Boston, nights
of April 1st, 3d, and 5th.—Ryan, 150; Laurie, 139. They played again May
21st, 22d, 24th, Ryan winning by 150 to 144.
* * * * *
=Amateurs in Los Angeles, Cal.= Jas. F. Morley’s Room, June.—Thirteen
entries, and 25–point games. J. B. Bayne promised most, but was
eventually overhauled by Clark, who beat him for first place. Milsap and
Lacey were next best. J. G. Kendrick won prize for high run, which was 9
in a game wherein Chapell beat him by 25 to 22.
* * * * *
=Championship of Los Angeles, Cal., Club.= July 17th to August
27th.—Nineteen entries, with handicaps from 25 to 12. Only one of the
three scratchmen, T. E. Gordon, finished among the first three. Dr. R.
B. Griffith (18) was first, Gordon second, and Carter (15) third.
* * * * *
=Championship of New England.= “The Hub,” Boston, November.—Won by
Albert G. Cutler, who “out-safetied” his strongest opponent, James Ryan.
* * * * *
=Lambert Three-Cushion Championship of America.= St. Louis, November and
December, tournament for the Lambert Emblem.—Contestants were Henry P.
Cline and John Daly, tied for first and second; John Horgan, third;
Lloyd Jevne, fourth; Alfredo De Oro, Thomas Hueston, and Frank P. Day,
tied for fifth, sixth, and seventh; and Horace B. Lean and Joseph Capron
eighth and last. Thus the two best known as caromers, Cline and Capron,
were first and last, for Cline defeated Daly by 50 to 41 in playing off.
Runs never reached double figures, but Day, in defeating De Oro with no
run above 5, was credited with the remarkable average of 1.32 for his 50
points.
St. Louis, February 6th, 7th, 8th.—First match, three nights, 50 points
per night. Henry P. Cline (champion), of Philadelphia, 133; John Daly
(challenger), 150. The winner averaged .66, and on neither side was
there a run above 6.
St. Louis, May 7th, 8th, 9th.—Second match, same terms. John Daly
(champion) vs. John Horgan (challenger). Daly, 150—8—.59; Horgan, 142—6.
The money-stake in this series is $250 a side.
* * * * *
=A Game of 568 Innings.= City of Mexico, November, six nights’ play, 50
points a night, continuous.—Luis Vasquez, 300—7—.51; S. Johnson, 282—5.
1908.
=Amateur Handicap at G. F. Slosson’s Room.= February
3–11th.—Contestants, Messrs. Gremmels (50), French, Blair, Strauss, and
Pallasco, the last four at 40. Won by French, who in his final game,
defeating Gremmels by 20, averaged .52. One higher average (.67) had
been made by Blair when he ran 6 and defeated Pallasco by 40 to 34.
* * * * *
=Three-Handed Professional Exhibition.= Maurice Daly’s Room, week ending
February 22d, 50–point games, playing twice around.—Won by Edward
McLaughlin, who lost only his second game with T. J. Gallagher.
Morningstar won only his first game with Gallagher. The latter made the
highest run and best winning average of the tournament, respectively 6
and .67. McLaughlin’s .55 was high general average, .65 being his best
winning one.
BEST PERFORMANCES.
There are few unquestionable records. Most of the professional
games, whether short or long, have of late years been played in
“academies” by “academy” employees. To admit one such to record, on
the plea that there was a public admission-fee, as well as more or
less of a staking, would be to admit all. Then, again, this is a
game that has never had a standard as to length. It is unlikely that
since 1878 there has been a better average for 50 points in a match
than Wayman C. McCreery’s .94; but there may have been before that
year, and without attracting any attention whatever. In a tournament
game of 50 points at Mussey’s, Chicago, Avery surpassed it by making
.98 during season of 1901–2. The best verified run is 14. Two
amateurs made it—Peterson in St. Louis, and Avery years afterward in
Chicago, both in Mussey’s rooms. Also in Mussey’s, in 1905, James
Shea, another amateur, reached 1.03 in a game of 50, while Charles
P. Day, in the St. Louis tournament of November and December, 1907,
attained to 1.32 in 50 points.
BEST PERFORMANCES BY AMATEURS
The New York Racquet Club was the first to institute a national
championship of amateurs (1887–88–89–90), which it did not attempt to
renew. There was no second essay until the Amateur Athletic Union
entered the field in 1898–99. Anything in the nature of amateur record,
therefore, may be said to begin in 1887 and end in 1890, to resume in
another direction in 1898 and continue until now.
AVERAGES AT REGULAR THREE-BALL GAME.
17.33 in 300 (championship)—Orville Oddie, Jr., 1889.
11.03 in 1500, gen. av. (championship), Orville Oddie, Jr., 1887.
RUNS AT REGULAR THREE-BALL GAME.
257 in 300 (non-championship), Arthur R. Townsend, 1890.
195 in 300 (championship)—Orville Oddie, Jr., 1889.
BEST RECORD AVERAGES AT 14:2 BALKLINE.
57.14 in 400 (championship)—C. Demarest, Chicago, 1908.
42.86 in 300 (tie game of championship tournament)—J. F. Poggenburg,
New York, 1907.
BEST RECORD RUN AT 14:2.
202 in 400 (championship)—C. Demarest, Chicago, 1908.
BEST RECORD RUNS AT 18:2.
175 in 400 (championship)—L. Rérolle, Paris, France, 1908.
151 in 400 (championship)—C. Demarest, N. Y. City, 1908.
BEST RECORD AVERAGES AT 18:2.
33.33 in 400 (championship)—Lucien Rérolle, Paris, France, 1903.
28.57 in 400 (championship)—C. Demarest, N. Y. City, 1908.
BEST GENERAL AVERAGES AT 18:2.
20 in four games (1600 points, championship)—C. Demarest, N. Y.
City, 1908.
16.26 in five games (2000 points, championship)—R. Mortier, Paris,
1908.
15.91 in seven games (2800 points, championship)—L. Rérolle, Paris,
1903.
BEST PUBLIC MATCH RECORDS.
109 run in 1200 (non-championship)—L. Rérolle, Paris, France, 1904.
12.24 average in 1200 (non-championship)—L. Rérolle, Paris, 1904.
IRREGULAR CONTESTS
=Ives vs. John Roberts.= Henley’s Circus, London, Eng., May 29th to June
2, 1893.—$5,000 a side, 1,000 points nightly. I., 6000—run, 2540; R.,
3821—run, 249. Roberts’s total has been variously given. The figures
here are from Major Broadfoot’s “Billiards.”
This was styled a “compromise match” at the English winning-and-losing
game on an English 6 × 12 six-pocket table.
CENTRAL MUSIC HALL. Chicago, September 18–23.—$5,000 a side. Ives, 6000;
Roberts, 5303.
LENOX LYCEUM. N. Y. City, October 2–7th.—$5,000 a side, R., 10,000; I.,
8738.
* * * * *
=De Oro vs. Roberts.= On October 16–21st following, at Madison Square
Garden, N. Y. City, these experts played alternately on an English and
an American ball-pool table for an announced stake of $1,000 a side and
the championship of the world, De Oro winning by 1000 balls to 927. No
two players can ever be justified in creating a championship.
* * * * *
=Hugo Kerkau vs. Johann Trebar.= In 1900 these experts, German and
Hungarian, engaged in more than one series of “straight rail” games in
the chief cities of their respective countries. The two were known to be
far apart in skill. In one series, Kerkau scored 40,000 to Trebar’s
4998, and made runs of 1656, 1743, 2194, and 3843. It invalidates these
runs as comparisons with the lesser deeds of earlier men that, although
scarcely through fault of Kerkau, they were not achieved under similar
conditions. Years before he ran his 3843, Kerkau ran 3092 against Woerz
in Berlin. This was under the old rule as to “frozen” balls, but it was
probably also on a 4½ × 9 or smaller table. The 3092 were made in
January, 1896. When, not far from that time, Kerkau was here, he showed
capacity for but about half that height on a 5 × 10.
FIFTEEN-BALL POOL.
A 5 × 10 table, unless otherwise stated. After the close of 1887,
the game is always “Continuous Pool.”
1878.
Record properly begins with the
=First National Championship Tournament.= Union Square Rooms, N. Y.
City, April 8–20th.—Best in 21 games of 61 up, for an emblematic gold
medal and $550 in four parts. Among the contestants were all the
recognized first-class American caromers of that period, with the
exception of Albert Garnier, Maurice Daly and Jacob Schaefer. In
addition were the pool-players Samuel F. Knight, Clarke E. Wilson,
George Frey, J. McWarble, and Gottlieb Wahlstrom, “The Swede” No. 1.
Winners in this order were C. Dion, Knight, Wahlstrom, and J. Dion.
McWarble and G. F. Slosson tied for fifth and sixth places, Wilson got
seventh, Wm. Sexton eighth, and A. P. Rudolphe tied with Frey for ninth.
* * * * *
Wahlstrom and Wilson had played a match (December 13, 1877, Terrace
Garden, N. Y. City, which “The Swede” won by 26 games to 13 out of 50)
announced as for the championship of America and $500 a side; but they
were not warranted in thus appropriating that title to the exclusion of
other experts. The medal of 1878 was held successively up to 1881 by C.
Dion, Knight, Alonzo Morris, Wahlstrom and Knight again.
1879.
=First Championship of Indiana.= Crescent Hall, Indianapolis, January
2–11th.—Won by D. Hough from Albert Hawkins, George Morris, and R. E.
Whitney (tied), C. Eden, Weller, Gould, and Mack. After losing his first
game to Eden, Mack forfeited his remaining six by withdrawing.
1881.
=Début of Albert Frey.= Union Square Rooms, N. Y. City, December 29,
1880, to January 5th.—Frey, Chas. Schaefer, Otis Field, and Joseph King
were graduated from a preliminary tournament of nine into the one next
following.
* * * * *
=Second National Championship Tournament.= Union Square Rooms, N. Y.
City, January 6th.—Under amended rules. Winners of the five prizes were
Wahlstrom, Frey, A. Morris, King, and Knight. Among the other four
participants was Jacob Schaefer, beaten by Wahlstrom, Frey, and Knight.
* * * * *
=Only Match for the New Emblem.= Tammany Hall, N. Y. City, June
2d.—Money-stake, $250 a side, best in 41 games. W., 21; Frey, 18.
* * * * *
=Frey vs. King.= Tammany Hall, September 29th.—$250 a side. F., 21; K.,
16.
1882.
=Frey vs. Knight.= Tammany Hall, March 8th.—$500 a side. F., 21; K., 18.
* * * * *
=First Tournament at Pyramid (Eight-ball).= Republican Hall, N. Y. City,
May 3–17th.—Best in 21. Frey beat John Dankleman in playing off for
first money and the pyramid championship emblem. George Sutton (début in
public) won third, and Jacob Schaefer (tied by Thomas Wallace) fourth.
The others were Eugene Carter, John Bessunger, Knight, C. Schaefer, and
Albert Lambert.
1883.
=First Amateur Challenge Championship.= C. E. Mussey’s Room, St. Louis,
October 15th to November 7th.—Matches were to be 150 balls up, for $25 a
side, none but St. Louis amateurs eligible. E. Thompson, tied with E.
Block for first prize, won play-off. There were eight other contestants.
In the match that followed, December 4th, Ed. Dale won championship by
150 to 98.
1884.
=Third National Championship.= Madison Square Hall, N. Y. City,
beginning January 10th.—Call ball, but not pocket. J. L. Malone won
emblem and first money, $250, Frey and King tied for second and third,
George Sutton took fourth, Lambert and Charles H. Manning tied for fifth
and sixth, and Knight, Dankleman, and J. S. Leonard were the trailers.
* * * * *
=First Call-ball-and-pocket Tournament.= Morrissy’s Room, Syracuse, N.
Y., January 28th to February 15th.—Eleven were in, the prize-winners
being Frey, Malone, Sutton, Leonard, and King.
During this year, as well as in 1883 and 1885, the leading players named
above, along with Knight and others, all supported by local talent,
figured in tournaments in various cities, all partaking of the nature of
exhibitions, but Frey almost invariably winning.
* * * * *
=Championship of Ohio.= Won by Gus Heman in tournament ending April 6th,
Cincinnati.
1885.
=Peter Rodgers Defeats Malone.= Bumstead Hall, Boston, Mass., December
11th.—$100 a side. R., 21; M., 11. This contest was regulation neither
in table, which was a 4½ × 9, nor in size of pocket-openings, which were
large.
1886.
=First Match of Multiple Nights.= Maurice Daly’s Assembly Rooms,
Brooklyn, March 15–19th.—80 to win in best 31 games nightly, $250 a
side. Frey, 80; Malone, 72.
* * * * *
=Frey vs. Malone.= Irving Hall, N. Y. City, May 11–15th.—Same terms as
above, except that stake was $500 a side. F., 80; M., 63.
* * * * *
=Henry Claess vs. C. Schaefer.= St. Louis, Mo., October 15th.—$50 a
side. C., 16; S., 14. Same city, January 29, 1887.—$500 a side. C., 21;
S., 10. January 29th, S. beat C., and in a later game C. beat S., each
for $50 a side.
1887.
=Fourth National Championship.= Fifth Avenue Music Hall, N. Y. City,
February 14–20th.—Tournament under amended rules again. Alfredo De Oro,
of Havana, Cuba, making his first public appearance, tied Frey and
Malone, but was third after play-off, Frey being first, with King,
Manning, and James Hamilton fourth, fifth, and last.
The first match for this championship, represented by the Grote
Challenge Emblem, was played at Daly’s Assembly Rooms, Brooklyn, March
28th to April 1st. Frey, 80; Malone, 40.
On May 15th, Frey forfeited to Malone by failing to cover his
challenger’s money within the time set by the rules, and on May 30th
Malone forfeited to De Oro, declining to play when challenged; but they
came together for the Grote Emblem on February 10th, 1888, at Slosson’s
Columbian Room, N. Y. City, in a single night’s contest, 125 balls up,
best in 31. De O., 16; M., 15.
* * * * *
=De Oro vs. Manning.= Turn Hall, Springfield, Mass., April
7th.—Pyramids, $300 a side. De O., 16; M., 12.
* * * * *
=De Oro vs. Claess.= Schaefer’s Room, St. Louis, May 21st.—$500 a side.
De O., 21; C., 9.
* * * * *
NOTE.—This year established 4½ in. at the points of the corner-pocket
jaws, and 4¾ in. for the side pockets, as the standard width in
conjunction with 2–5/16 balls.
* * * * *
=First Continuous Pool Tournament.= Daly’s, Brooklyn, January 30th to
February 9th.—$50 entrance, games, 150 balls. Frey and Malone tied for
first, and Malone lost play-off. Albert G. Powers was third, Daniel
Lawlor fourth, De Oro fifth, Manning sixth, and Knight seventh and last.
* * * * *
=Wm. Clearwater’s First Tournament.= Grand Billiard Hall, Syracuse, N.
Y., February 20th to March 3d, continuous pool. De Oro and Clearwater
tied for first and second, Malone and Powers for third and fourth,
Manning won fifth, Myron Eggleston, George Kuntzsch, Dankleman and
Wharton tied for sixth, and Louis Shaw was last. Clearwater defeated De
Oro, but Malone and Powers did not play off.
* * * * *
=Powers vs. De Oro.= Hub Billiard Palace, Boston, Mass., May 1–3d.—Best
in 101 games of pyramid on a 4½ × 9.—$300. P., 51; De Oro, 35.
1889.
=Fifth Championship Series.= Hardman Hall, N. Y. City, February 25th to
March 2d.—Continuous pool, 100 balls up, for the B. B. C. Co.’s
Challenge Emblem and money prizes. Frey, De Oro, and Malone tied as the
first three, Clearwater and Manning tied for fourth and fifth, and King
came next and last after forfeiting to Manning. The first three ties
were played off in Daly’s Assembly Rooms, Brooklyn, March 11–16th, 300
balls, 150 per night, and resulted in Frey first and De Oro second.
CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES FROM 1889 TO 1904. By rule, 200 balls nightly for
$150 a side and the emblem. Albert Frey having died suddenly of
pneumonia, the first match was between De Oro and Manning, and was
played at Daly’s, Brooklyn, June 20–22, 1889, De Oro winning by 600 to
564.
Same hall, April 10–12, 1890.—De Oro, 600; Manning, 565.
Hardman Hall, N. Y. City, May 8–10th.—Powers, 600; De Oro 569.
Daly’s Room, Brooklyn, June 19–21st.—Manning, 600; Powers, 489.
Same hall, July 31st to August 20th.—Champion Manning’s opponent was
Geo. Kuntzsch, who did not appear on third night, and Manning was
awarded match.
Same hall, October 29–31st.—Manning, 600; Powers, 526.
January 6, 1891.—Manning forfeited to Powers.
Recital Hall, Chicago, March 16–18th.—Powers, 600; P. H. Walsh, 392.
Same hall, May 13–15th.—De Oro, 600; Powers, 517.
The emblem became De Oro’s exclusively in May, 1892, and in Syracuse, N.
Y., in March, 1893, there was a tournament for another B. B. C. Co.’s
emblem, which, like the one of 1889–92, was meant to represent the
championship of America, but came to be accepted, in courtesy, as for
the championship of the world. De Oro, Sherman, and Stewart tied for
first, and won play-offs in that order, Clearwater being fourth.
* * * * *
=First Match.= N. Y. City, June 15–17th.—De Oro, 600; Walsh, 398.
In November, 1895, this emblem having run its time, the B. B. C. Co.
gave another. Clearwater won the tournament, with De Oro, Keogh, and
Walsh second to fourth.
* * * * *
=First Match.= Pittsburg, Pa., March 19–21, 1896.—Clearwater, 600;
Keogh, 535.
Pittsburg, April 22–25th.—Clearwater vs. De Oro, a draw, and played over
May 7–9th: De Oro, 600; Clearwater, 544.
Hardman Hall, N. Y. City, June 11–13th.—De Oro, 600; Eby, 404.
Illness forced De Oro to forfeit to Stewart.
N. Y. City, May 6–8, 1897.—Stewart lost to Grant Eby, his first
challenger: 583 to 600.
Palm Garden, N. Y. City, June 7–9th.—Keogh, 600; Eby, 505.
Academy of Music, Scranton, Pa., August.—Keogh, 600; Clearwater, 350.
Bumstead Hall, Boston, Mass., March 7–9, 1898.—Clearwater, 600; Keogh,
567.
Pittsburg, Pa., April 27–29th.—Keogh, 600; Clearwater, 447.
Chicago, Ill., April 11–13, 1899.—De Oro, 600; K., 515.
Daly’s Room, N. Y. City, November 30th to December 2d.—De Oro, 600; Fred
Payton, of Omaha, 479.
Same hall, April 19–21, 1900.—De Oro, 600; Keogh, 481. This was the
final contest of the series, the emblem becoming De Oro’s.
[For Boston tournament, won by Frank Sherman, see 1901.]
Sherman vs. De Oro. Odd Fellows’ Hall, Washington, D. C., April 16–18,
1901.—De O., 600; S., 498. This was the only match for the emblematic
medal, which became De Oro’s personal property in the following April.
[For Brooklyn tournament and the “Green Trophy,” won by Clearwater, see
1902.]
Green’s “Montauk,” Brooklyn, N. Y., May 8–10, 1902.—Clearwater, 488;
Eby, 600. First match for Green Trophy.
Pittsburg, Pa., December 4–6, 1902.—Second and last match for the Green
Trophy. Eby, 600; Walsh, 375.
This emblem became Eby’s by time-limit in May, 1903, and up to October,
1904 (see p. 340), no other championship has been instituted.
1890.
=Tournament for Kuntzsch Medal.= Geo. N. Kuntzsch’s Room, Syracuse, N.
Y., March 17th to April 8th.—Medal and $125, De Oro; $100, Powers; $75,
Clearwater; fourth, Manning; fifth and last, Joseph Dinning.
* * * * *
=First Handicap Tournament.= Lawrence’s Room, N. Y. City, ending April
26th.—Playing off for first prize, C. Erickson (95) defeated P. H. Walsh
(95). Powers (100) was third. Later came Edward Dougherty, Edward
Barton, James Luddington, Stewart, and Dinning.
* * * * *
=Binghamton, N. Y. Tournament.= Keogh first in field of seven.
1891.
=Clearwater vs. Kuntzsch.= Grand Central Rink, Pittsburg, Pa., January
29–31st.—$300 a side. C., 600; K., 428.
* * * * *
=Second Medal Tournament in Syracuse, N. Y.= Grand Billiard Hall, and
thence to Standard Theatre, February 23d to March 16th.—Powers first, De
Oro and Clearwater tied (De Oro lost play-off), Frank Sherman fourth,
Jerome R. Keogh, Wm. Wenrick, and Kuntzsch tied for fifth (divided), and
Chas. Strewe, Nathaniel Ward, and Luddington, together with Eulalio
Saborido, of Cuba, bringing up the rear.
* * * * *
=Binghamton, N. Y., Tournament.= March 23d to April 4th.—Clearwater, De
Oro, Sherman, and Eggleston tied for first, and Stewart and Powers for
fifth, Stewart winning play-off, and the quartet finishing finally as
named above. Keogh, Kuntzsch, and Wenrick were the others.
* * * * *
=De Oro vs. John Werner.= Recital Hall, Chicago, April 9–11th.—$500 a
side, Werner starting with 75 balls. De O., 600; W., 493.
* * * * *
=Chicago Tournament.= “White Elephant,” April 27th to May 2d.—$100
entrance, with $300 added by the B. B. C. Co., 125 balls up. Powers won
first, with Clearwater, De Oro, and Eggleston tied for second, and
finishing play-off as named. Werner was fifth.
1892.
=Powers vs. Clearwater.= Philadelphia, March 2–4th.—P., 600; C., 420.
* * * * *
=Syracuse, N. Y., Tournament.= March 7–18th.—$500 in prizes, games of
100 points. Winners—De Oro, Powers, Werner, and Clearwater.
1893.
=“White Elephant” Tournament.= N. Y. City, January 16th to February
1st.—Professional games for money prizes. Winners—P. H. Walsh, P.
Rodgers, H. E. Stewart and Wm. Wenrick.
* * * * *
=Championship of America.= Syracuse, N. Y., tournament ending March
24th. First, second, and third winners—De Oro, F. Sherman, and Stewart.
[For match, see under 1889.]
* * * * *
=De Oro vs. John Roberts, of London.= Madison Square Garden, N. Y., Oct.
16–21.—Match of 1000 balls for $2,000 on standard English and American
tables, playing every sixty balls by turns on the two tables. De O.,
1000; R., 924.
* * * * *
=Clearwater vs. De Oro.= Pittsburg, Pa., November 2–4th.—C., 600; De O.,
447.
* * * * *
=Binghamton, N. Y., Tournament.= Won by Keogh.
1894.
=Pennsylvania Championship.= Philadelphia, closing February
22d.—Winners—Keogh, Sherman, Dougherty, Wilson, and Tate.
* * * * *
=Clearwater vs. De Oro.= Cleveland, O., April.—As reported at the time,
there were two series, C. winning the first by 1000 to 863, and the
second by 1200 to 1188.
* * * * *
=T. E. White vs. H. King.= May 7–12.—Half in Philadelphia and half in
Washington, $1,000. W., 500; K., 372.
* * * * *
100 to 0. Pittsburg, Pa., May 17th.—Clearwater thus won a game with
Frank Munsey. Probably a 4½ × 9 table.
1895–96–97.
=Championship Tournament.= Syracuse, N. Y., November and December, 1895,
closing 14th.—Clearwater first, De Oro second, and Keogh third. For
matches, see under 1889.
1897.
=Seventy-five Balls Consecutively.= Dallas, Tex., January 9th.—The late
Samuel Barnes, giving his opponent odds of 60, holed 75 balls from the
start without a miss. Almost certainly on a 4½ × 9 table, and probably,
also, with pocket-openings above regulation size.
* * * * *
=Ninety-seven Balls in Succession.= Toledo, O., September 10th.—By
Clearwater. See remarks above. There is the further objection to going
outside of a frame to count pocketings as “runs” that the best players
are not usually their makers. Such “runs” tend rather to come to losers.
A player anxious to win cannot afford to run a risk that, sometimes
justifiable when far behind, is folly when commandingly ahead. Besides,
the rules themselves have been in conflict, one championship code
(expired) having required the winner of one frame to open the next,
while a later championship code (also expired) made it optional with
him. The Toledo game was probably a mere exhibition. Clearwater has
since holed 118 balls on a 4½ × 9.
1898.
=Roomkeepers’ Championship of Philadelphia.= November.—Horning and Levy,
5—1 each; J. Thornton, 4—2; Ed. Burris, 3—3; Sol Allinger and Rhoades,
2—4 each; McCabe, 0—6. Horning won play-off.
* * * * *
=Championship of America (Nominal).= Syracuse, N. Y., December
10–13th.—Tieing Eby and Horgan on 7—2, De Oro won play-off. Challenge
matches were not contemplated.
1899.
=Professional Tournaments.= N. Y. City, January 23–28th.—Won by Keogh.
That in Chicago, Ill., ended in favor of De Oro by his defeating John
Daly by 125 to 97.
* * * * *
=Special Championship of Philadelphia.= February 15–17th.—Match.
Dougherty, 600; Kelly, 504.
* * * * *
=Keogh vs. De Oro.= Daly’s Room, N. Y. City, 150 balls nightly, for a
purse. K., 900; De O., 813.
1901.
=Championship Tournament in Boston.= Hub Billiard Palace, February and
March.—Announced as for the championship of the world. Frank Sherman won
by 6—0, Stofft and De Oro 4—2 each, Eby 3—3, Clearwater 2—4, and Wm.
Stubbs and Irving Long 1—5 each. De Oro beat Stofft in play-off, and
then De Oro and Sherman entered into the only match ever played for the
emblem. See under 1889, “Championship Matches.”
* * * * *
=De Oro vs. Eby.= Boston, Mass., March.—$250 a side. De O., 600; E.,
463.
1902.
=World’s Championship, 1902–03.= Clarence E. Green’s “Montauk,”
Brooklyn, N. Y., March 10–25th.—Continuous pool, 125 balls, for
championship emblem and money prizes. Clearwater and Charles Weston tied
for first and second, and former won play-off by 20. Wenrick won 6,
Keogh 5, Walsh and Long 3 each, Eby and H. P. Stofft 2 each, and W.
McCune 1. (For the two matches that followed, see under 1889.)
* * * * *
=Championship of Louisiana.= Miller’s Room, New Orleans, May 26th to
June 20th.—Eugene Price and Emile Carreche tied on 5—1, and Carreche
lost play-off.
In first match, Carreche took emblem from Price, and Tarleton made it
his own by winning the next three from Carreche by 250 to 214 and to
160, and by 250 to 225 from Price in between.
1903.
=Professional Tournament for Money Prizes.= Clarence E. Green’s
“Montauk,” Brooklyn, ending February 6th.—Stofft and Weston, 8—1 each;
Kirkland, Sneden, and Rodgers, 5—4 apiece; Burns, 4—5; Smith, Ward, and
Wenrick, 3—6 apiece; Hamber, 1—8. Stofft beat Weston for first money,
Sneden defeated Kirkland and Rodgers for third, and Kirkland won fourth
from Rodgers.
* * * * *
=Buffalo, N. Y., Tournament.= Schwabl’s Room, March.—Byron Gillette
unbeaten in field of nine, and Charles Porter, beaten only by Gillette
(150 to 108), second.
* * * * *
=Championship of Louisiana.= Miller’s Room, New Orleans, April 17th to
May 12th.—New annual series. Mark Tarleton won 6—0, and E. Carreche and
James Vorhoff tied on 4—2 for the other prizes, Carreche winning the
play-off. Price was fifth only, Geo. Vorhoff being fourth. The others
were Harry Alana and David Moore, who tied on 5—1.
* * * * *
=Championship of N. Y. Athletic Club.= This annual series of tourneys
merits mention now because Dr. W. G. Douglas, who for several years had
been the club’s champion at both caroms and pool, this April lost the
pool tournament to S. W. Becker, who had long been of promise.
1904.
=World’s Championship Tournament.= St. Louis, Mo., October 12th to
November 2d.—For a trophy emblematic of the championship of the world,
and given by the Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., with money prizes in
addition. Contestants were Alfredo De Oro, Jerome Keogh, Wm. H.
Clearwater, Frank Sherman, Grant Eby (all ex-champions then), Thomas
Hueston, Charles Weston, and Benjamin H. Brumby, of Marietta, Ga. This
was Brumby’s first in tournament, and he withdrew after playing
four-sevenths of his games. On a game-tally of 5—2 (beaten 11 balls in
125 by Brumby, and 18 by Eby), De Oro tied Keogh and Hueston for the
first three prizes, and defeated both in playing off. The decisive game
was De Oro vs. Keogh, and the score 125 to 120. Having already defeated
Hueston, Keogh took second prize. Clearwater tied for fourth and fifth
on 4—3, Weston was sixth on 3—4, and Sherman won no game apart from
receiving forfeit from the Georgian. Hueston was the first challenger in
this series, wherein the stake must be at least $150 a side, though by
mutual agreement it may be more.
St. Louis, November 24–26th.—De Oro, 600; Hueston, 470. Eby challenged
next.
St. Louis, January 15, 16, 17, 1905.—De Oro, 600; Eby, 480. Keogh
challenged on January 20th.
Late in March, the official stakeholders, on appeal by Keogh, awarded
the championship and the full stake of $150 a side to the challenger
because of De Oro’s failure to comply with the rules as to place and
time of playing. De Oro was the next challenger, and each side wagered
$100 in addition to the usual $150.
Concert Hall, Buffalo, N. Y., May 18th, 19th, 20th.—De Oro, 600; K.,
563. W. H. Clearwater challenged.
St. Louis, October 19th, 20th, 21st.—De Oro, 600; Clearwater, 409.
Winner was challenged by Thomas Hueston.
De Oro declined to play, on the ground that he had already held the
emblem for the required one year, whereas he had forfeited it to and
reacquired it from Keogh no farther back than the prior spring. Hueston
demanded play or pay, and the official stakeholders on December 20,
1905, awarded the emblem to Hueston.
San Francisco, April 9–12th.—Hueston, 800; J. W. Carney, 512.
1906.
St. Louis, February 8–10th.—Hueston, 600; Chas. Weston, 589.
St. Louis, May 17–19th.—John Horgan, 600; Hueston, 542.
St. Louis, October 4–6th.—J. Horgan, 600; H. B. Lean, 454. Horgan
resigned emblem to Jerome Keogh.
Rochester, N. Y., November 21st, 22d, 23d.—Jerome Keogh (champion), 600;
Fred. Tallman (challenger), 346.
Buffalo, N. Y., December 27th, 28th, 29th.—Jerome Keogh, 507; Thos.
Hueston (challenger), 600.
New York City, February 7th, 8th, 9th, 1907.—T. Hueston, 600; Edward
Dawson (challenger), 368.
New York City, March 21st, 22d, 23d.—Thomas Hueston, 600; Jerome Keogh
(challenger), 497.
Keaggy’s Rink, Greensburg, Pa., April 23d, 24th, 25th.—Thomas Hueston,
600; Wm. H. Clearwater (challenger), 537.
St. Louis, January 27, 28, 29, 1908.—Thomas Hueston, 600; Jerome Keogh
(challenger), 584.
This, conferring upon Hueston permanent possession of the emblem,
brought this championship series to a close.
* * * * *
=Amateur Championship of “Greater New York.”= Tournament ended at
Clarence E. Green’s, Brooklyn, N. Y., Feb. 24th, 1905, when Albert F.
Young, Jr., won the final game, defeating Clinton Robinson by 100 balls
to 11. This defeat tied Robinson with Geo. Kowenhoven for second and
third. Messrs. Lewis, Fancher, Lake, and Alexander finished from fourth
to last in that order. Defeating Kowenhoven and Robinson in a challenge
match with each, Young soon made the emblem his own. Later, or ending
April 20th, he and Arthur Hyman were matched to play four nights—half at
Green’s and half at Samuel Gruhn’s Room, Manhattan—for a separate
championship emblem. Young won by 500 to 356.
* * * * *
=Championship of Cook County, Ill.= Thomas Foley’s Room, Chicago, March
29th to April 25th.—Eight contestants, of whom McNamarra and John Daly
forfeited five games each. George Banks and Martin Fey, each of whom had
won six times and lost once, played off, Banks winning by 100 to 88.
Tripp, tied with Pelletier for third and fourth, beat him by 100 to 89.
This was a challenge series, there were a dozen or more matches, and the
emblem changed hands several times, its winner oftenest and finally
(from Pelletier) being Fey in the winter of 1905–6.
* * * * *
=Strollers’ Club Handicap.= Begun May 31st, N. Y. City.—Played in heats
instead of rounds. There were 128 entries, but many of them forfeited
without ever hitting a ball. The one to last was W. S. Fraley, who
represented the Rochester, N. Y., Club. Next in endurance was Evan A.
Gamble, of the N. Y. A. C., whom Fraley defeated in the final game by
150 balls to 98. George C. Smith, of the Union League, Edward F. Gray,
of the Strollers, Dr. Walter G. Douglas, of the Billiard Club, and
Albert F. Young, Jr., of no club at all, also lasted until near the
finish. It was Gray who put out Smith by 10 balls, and Young who
finished Douglas by 125 to 97. Aside from the final game, 125 balls
constituted “scratch.”
* * * * *
=Championship of Illinois.= Tournament at A. M. Clarke’s Room, Chicago,
July 17th to September 2d.—George Banks won, with Dupree and Martin Fey
tied for second and third. Pelletier was fourth, and John Daly fifth.
1906.
=Fifth Avenue Hotel’s Second Annual.= New York City, February
15–16th.—Contestants, who played from “scratch” and in heats, one defeat
distancing, were Geo. A. Roff, Edward Rice, Joseph E. O’Donahue, Gillman
Collamore, S. J. Dewey, Franklin Bien, Jr., F. B. Colton, and Mr.
Schutt. The undistanced were Roff and Bien, and the winner of their
game, by 100 balls to 46, was Roff, who was awarded a sterling silver
cup. All the earlier games were 50 up.
1907.
=Third Fifth Avenue Hotel Annual.= New York City, February, 1907.—Eight
competitors, George A. Roff winning the silver loving cup by defeating
Franklin Bien, 100 to 95, in the final game.
* * * * *
=Crescent A. C. Championship Annual.= Brooklyn, N. Y., February.—Having
defeated leaders like J. M. Heatherton and Augustus S. Hart, lost to
nobody, and needing to play only H. M. Barrett, who had won but one game
out of six, E. H. Griffith was beaten by Barrett. This tied Griffith
with Hart, and their play-off increased to 200 balls, terminated in
favor of Hart by 77, the latter thus winning a championship that
Griffith had to wait for until December 26th. In the tournament of that
month he lost only to Williams (third to Kryne’s fourth), and twice
defeated J. M. Heatherton (second).
* * * * *
=Amateur Championship of Houston, Tex.= “The Brunswick,” ending February
22d.—Twelve were in, and Messrs. Thompson and Smith, each having lost
but once, played the final game, which Thompson won by 75 to 56. Lubbock
won third prize.
* * * * *
=N. Y. A. C. Championship Changes Hands.= Annual tournament closed April
16th in game doubled to 200 balls, E. A. Gamble deposing W. A. Tilt by
200 to 108. This tied Tilt with Dr. W. G. Douglas, and his skill as a
coin-tosser made Douglas winner of second prize. J. M. Heatherton was
among the contestants.
* * * * *
=Championship of Ohio.= So announced, as well as for $400 a side, in
September, when a four nights’ contest at E. A. Pearce’s Room, Columbus,
Ohio, between that player and McCoy, of Cincinnati, holder of the title,
ended in favor of the latter by 800 balls to 513.
* * * * *
=Championship of Louisville, Ky.= December, three nights and 600 balls
for a purse of $50 besides.—Emmett Doran, 600; Ed. F. Schu, 352.
1908.
=Final Match of Professional Championship Series.= For Hueston-Keogh
contest, see under 1907.
* * * * *
=Last Fifth Avenue Hotel Annual.= Held in closing week of
February.—Contestants, Geo. A. Roff, Franklin Bien, F. B. Colton,
Gillman Collamore, Putnam, and Andrews. The last and decisive game was
won by Roff from Bien, 100 to 99. The famous hotel is slated for other
uses. Roff has its loving cups for the last three years. This February’s
tournament was the fourth.
* * * * *
=N. Y. A. C. Championship for 1908.= Tournament held in February and
March. The chief winners were W. A. Tilt, J. M. Heatherton, and E. F.
Crowe, in the order here given. Heatherton and Crowe tied for second and
third, and the former won the play-off.
* * * * *
=New World’s Championship Series.= Tournament held in Recital Hall,
Chicago, April 6th to 17th, for a championship emblem given by the
Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., and money prizes. Won by Frank Sherman,
of Washington, D. C., whose tally of games won and lost was 6—1; Charles
Weston, 5—2; Alfredo De Oro, Thomas Hueston, and Edmund Pelletier tied
for third money on 4—3; Benj. Allen, 3—4; H. B. Lean, 2—5; and Martin
Fey, 0—7. De Oro, Allen, and Hueston promptly challenged, the first
being first to do so; and he and Sherman played the first match of the
new series in Allinger’s Academy, Philadelphia, May 18, 19, 20. Frank
Sherman, 597; Alfredo De Oro, 600.
The money-stake in this series is $250 a side.
RULES GOVERNING VARIOUS GAMES
These can be had, free of charge, on application to the
Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co.’s publishers.
RULES GOVERNING PROFESSIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS.
At present there are but two, whether at caroms or at fifteen-ball pool,
whose terms have not expired. The elder of these is the 18:1
(Eighteen-inch Line, One Shot in Balk), and the other the 18:2 (same
line, with Two Shots in Balk). The rules appended relate to the making
and the conduct of matches, and not to the general playing.
* * * * *
=World’s Championship at 18:1 Balkline.= 1. Contests for the Emblem
shall, in addition to the Emblem, involve a money stake amounting to
$500 a side. This amount is necessary in order that the holder of the
Emblem may not be challenged by unskillful players, whose only object in
challenging would be to gain notoriety.
2. The sum of $250 must accompany all challenges to give them validity.
3. The holder of the Emblem must cover his challenger’s money within ten
days after being notified that he has been challenged. Failure to do so,
without sufficient cause therefor, will entitle the challenger to the
Emblem. The holder of the Emblem shall not, however, be required to
cover the money of more than one challenger at a time.
4. When $250 has been put up on each side, the $500, as well as the
Emblem, becomes subject to forfeiture. The remaining $250 must be put up
at least ten days prior to the date of contest, and after such final
deposit the match shall be “play or pay,” i.e., death alone relieving
the players from their contract.
5. The holder of the Emblem may be required to play at the expiration of
sixty days from the time of being challenged, but not before. Should
either party refuse to play within the specified time, he shall forfeit
his claim to Emblem and stakes. Should both parties conspire to defeat
this or any other rule relative to the Balkline Emblem, the match shall
be declared off, and the stake money returned. The Emblem will revert to
the original donors.
6. To define the above rule, a challenge issued while a match for the
Emblem is pending, and being next in order, shall go into effect on the
next day after that match has been disposed of either through play or
forfeiture. A challenge issued while there is no match pending shall
take effect on the day of its date, provided it is not in any way
subject to the rule next below.
7. The challenge of a player who has been defeated while contending for
the Emblem shall not go into effect until fifteen days after the contest
in which he was defeated.
8. There shall be no umpires, and no one will be allowed on the platform
after the game is called, except the contending players, the referee and
the marker. Should there be no platform erected in the hall to set the
billiard table on, and for the players to walk on, then no person except
the above mentioned shall be allowed within ten feet of the table.
9. The referee and marker to be mutually agreed upon by the players. In
case of failure on their part to agree before half past seven o’clock of
the evening of the match, then the donors of the Emblem shall name the
referee and marker.
10. All games to be 500 points up.
11. The holder of the Emblem will be required to defend it for two years
against all comers. During this probation he must deposit with its
donors, The Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., the sum of five hundred
dollars ($500) to insure its preservation in good order, and its
delivery to the donors before 12 o’clock noon of the date named for any
contest in which it may devolve upon him to defend it. Failure to do so
(without good and sufficient cause) will entitle the challenger to the
Emblem and the stake money, and the donor of the Emblem to the amount
deposited as a guarantee for its safe-keeping and delivery, as
hereinbefore provided for.
12. The Emblem becomes the property of any player who wins it from the
champion and successfully defends it against all contestants for a
period of two years.
13. In all matches for the Emblem, the stakeholders shall be the donors
of the Emblem, The Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., and all challenges to
the champion must be addressed through them, in order that each
challenge may be officially recorded, and the champion officially
notified.
14. All matches for the Emblem shall be played with 2⅜-inch balls, upon
a 5 × 10 table, manufactured by the Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co., and
furnished with their “Monarch” cushions.
15. The city in which contests shall take place must be located in the
country of which either party is a resident. In case of a disagreement
between the parties as to the selection of a hall or room in which the
contest shall take place, the donors of the Emblem shall have the final
decision.
* * * * *
=World’s Championship at 18:2.= The foregoing code governs, with the
following amendments and additions as adopted by the undersigned players
finally on April 4, 1906:
Sec. 4 is made partially inoperative as to a challenge issued at any
time within sixty days of the expiration of the two years’ term. The
champion must cover the forfeit, and himself either play or forfeit,
even if challenged as late as the day before his term would otherwise
expire.
Sec. 8 is amended so as to require a railing around the table, and “not
less than seven feet from the outer edge of the table.”
Secs. 8 and 9 together are modified thus: “There shall be no marker.”
The championship term in Sec. 12 is contingently prolonged as provided
in Sec. 4 above.
15. The holder of the Emblem has the right to choose the city wherein
the contest shall take place. However, he is bound to select a city
located in the country in which he or his opponent has his legal
residence. In case of a disagreement between the parties as to the
selection of a hall or room in which the contest shall take place, the
donors of the Emblem shall have the final decision.
16. All litigious points that might be raised by either of the
competitors in connection with the challenge herein mentioned, either
before, or during, or after the contest for the World’s Championship
Emblem of the 18–inch balkline (2 shots in) game of billiards, shall be
settled, without appeal, by the donors of the said Emblem, and the
competitors shall have to sign a copy of the present rules, accepting
The Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. as supreme referee in all difficulties
that may arise between them on account of the contest.
THE ADDITIONS ARE:
1. There shall be no intermission, neither shall it be allowable to
brush the table or wipe the balls during the progress of the game.
2. Winner shall take all receipts and pay all expenses.
3. The balls shall have a medium-polish finish—that is, between a dead
finish and a high polish.
4. There shall not be any string of markers over the table.
GEO. F. SLOSSON,
JACOB SCHAEFER,
ORA C. MORNINGSTAR,
GEO. SUTTON,
LOUIS CURE,
WM. F. HOPPE,
ALBERT G. CUTLER.
INDEX.
Acute draws, 128, 160, 170
Aim and delivery, 26, 27, 56, 57, 77
“Albany Pony,” 8
Angle, false, 92, 93
Angles, 54 to 57, 64, 81, 86, 87, 90 to 92, 106 to 112
Around-the-table, 84, 85, 116 to 119
Attitude, 21 to 23;
for females, 22, 23
Averages:
how to figure, 204;
decimals best, 204, 205;
general or grand averages, 205, 206;
true and false, 206
Balkline Games described, 261, 264
Balkline Games recorded, 261 to 319
Balklining an American idea, 7
Ball:
ivory and its care, 14 to 18;
composition ball, 18;
standard size, 18;
fractional divisions, 27, 29, 41 to 44;
slowed in play, 38, 100, 103, 104, 115, 124, 127;
sometimes slides, instead of rolls, 31, 38;
illustrated cue-ball as struck for draw, follow, twist and massé, 28
Bank shots (cushion first), 167, 168, 178 to 181
Billiard-room:
its proper dimensions for various tables, 9;
how best to light it, 9, 10
Billiard-table arranged for different games, 72
Billiards:
pre-eminently a mental pastime, 1;
participation its chief charm, 1;
as a spectacle, 1;
historically considered, 4 to 8;
progress of, 1 to 8;
in its new forms, essentially American, 7;
appliances, their choice and care, 9 to 18
Bridge hand, 35, 36, 68, 69
Buist, Andrew, 8
Care of ivory, 14 to 18
Care of table, 11
Caroms illustrated and directed, 46 to 199
Carr and his magic chalk, 7
Chalk, 7, 13
Change of impingement, 56, 57
Changing habits of play, 19, 20
Close draw, 193, 199
Cloth, 12, 13
Cue, 12, 13, 24;
how to hold, 25, 26;
elevation, 38, 39
Cue-ball, 28;
divisions of, 27, 29, 43, 44;
control by means of, 53, 106, 107
Cue-leathers:
alleged origin, 6 to 7;
choice and care, 13, 24, 25
Curve, convex and concave, 48, 49;
allowance for, 53
Curve massé, 130
Cushion-carom Game, 8, 320 to 328;
change of rule, 322
Cushion first (see bank shots)
Cushion follow, 88, 89, 136, 137
Cushion kiss, 67, 137, 138, 144, 147, 149
Cushion shots illustrated, 55, 56, 58, 61, 63, 64, 72, 73, 82, 84, 86,
88, 92, 96, 99, 100, 107, 117, 119, 122, 130, 147, 154, 158, 160,
163, 167, 182, 186, 188, 191, 193
Cushion twist, 60 to 63
Cushions: their requisites and care, 13, 14
Degrees of cue-elevation, 38, 39
Degrees of strength of stroke, 47, 75
Delicacy of touch, 24
Delivery, 26, 27, 31, 50
Diagonal, retrograde, rotation and impulsion, all in one stroke, 58
Diagrams of strokes, 46 to 199
Dions in England, 8
Direct caroms, 74, 78, 82
Direct draws, 152, 153
Division of cue and object balls, 41 to 44
Doubling object-ball, 100 to 105, 134, 172
Draw, alleged origin of, 6
Draw, acute, 128, 160, 170
Draw and twist combined, 112
Draws and spreads illustrated, 32, 77, 120, 128, 130, 133, 153, 160,
163, 167, 172, 192 to 194, 199
Driving shots illustrated, 100, 103, 104, 124 to 129, 142, 143, 150,
177, 186
Early billiards in America, 5, 6
Elevation of cue, 38, 39
“English” (see twist)
Equal angles, 56, 57
Estimating odds, 202, 203
Excessive twist, 88, 91, 92
Eye at instant of stroke, 26
False and natural angles, 90 to 92
Fifteen-ball Pool, records of, 314 to 324
“Fine-cut” caroms, 117, 154, 184 to 187
Follow cushion (or cushion follow), 88, 136
Follow shots, 29 to 31, 52, 53, 77, 88, 136, 172, 174, 175
Force of delivery, 50
Forearm movement, 22;
with wrist stroke, 112
Forfeitures, 200 to 201
Four-ball Game, records of, 208 to 236
French (or Three-ball) Game, records of, 237 to 260
Games:
Four-ball, 208 to 236;
Three-ball, 237 to 260;
Champion’s, 261 to 263;
Balkline, 264 to 319;
Cushion Caroms, Straight and Triple, 320 to 336;
Fifteen-ball Pool, 339 to 354
Gaslight, height of, 9, 10
Gathering shots illustrated, 78 to 84, 150, 156 to 165
Habits, discarding wrong ones, 19, 20
Half massé, 39
Handicapping, 202, 203
Heavy cue, 24
Height of gas, 9, 10
Higham, Linley, 8
Historical, 4 to 8
Hollanders, 5
How to build a room, 9
How to hold a cue, 25, 26
Huguenots, 5
Illustrated caroms, 47 to 199
Incidence, angle of reflection and, 55 to 57
Introductory, 1 to 3
Ivory balls, care of, 14 to 18
Jump, its cause and prevention, 14, 39, 40
Kiss draw, 196, 197
Kiss follow, 196, 197
Kiss shots illustrated, 67, 123, 137, 138, 141, 144, 147, 163, 185,
193, 196, 197
Knights-Templar, 5
Ladies’ attitude at play, 22, 23
Learning from a book, 20
Leathering cues, 13
Machinery of billiards and its care, 9 to 18
Manual:
Part I., 19 to 70;
Part II., 71 to 199
Massé, 35, 37, 39, 68, 69, 148, 149, 166, 167, 198, 199
Mental drawing of angles, 56, 64
Methods of twist, 33
Mingaud, Capt., 6
Monasteries as a billiard cradle, 5
More, Cathire, 4
Movements of arm and wrist, 22
Natural angles vs. false, 92, 93
Nationalities, various, as players, 4 to 7
N. Y. City’s early English billiards, 5, 6
Nursing or holding the balls, 35
Object-ball, 40;
divisions of, 41 to 44;
driving, 100, 103, 104, 124 to 129, 134, 143, 177, 186
Objective point in calculating angles, 108
Object of play in all strokes, 72
Oiling balls, 17
Opening stroke, 72
Part I., 19 to 70
Part II., 71 to 199
Perception, quick, 1, 26
Philosophy of twist, 58
Pool, Fifteen-ball, 31, 320 to 336
Position shots illustrated, 78, 81, 82, 100 to 105, 114, 115, 124 to
129, 134, 143, 150, 156 to 165, 177, 186, 193
Principles involved in caroms, 75
Projecting cue-tips, 12
Quarter draws, 152, 153
Quick delivery of cue, 31
Requirements of table and room, 9 to 18
Reverse twist illustrated, 94 to 97, 132, 133, 176, 177, 182, 183, 188,
189
Rotation, cue-ball without, 49
Rules governing professional championships, 325, 326.
Rules of the various games, 354.
Scheduling tournaments, 201
Scoring games, 203, 204
Scoring for the press, 204
Sliding cue-ball, 31, 38
Slowed cue-ball, 38, 100, 103, 104, 115, 124, 127
Spaniards and De Soto, 5
Speeding the object-ball, 38, 53
Spots on table for different games, 70, 71
Spread draws, 171
Strengths of stroke, various, 46 to 53
Stroke:
central, 29, 61;
opening, 72;
simple, 75, 82;
difficult, 156, 192, 193, 198
Table and accompaniments, 9 to 18
Table arranged for different games, 70, 71
Taking aim, 21, 22
Teaching, 19, 20
Third and fourth balls introduced, 6
Three-ball Game, records of, 237 to 260
Three-cushion Caroms, 320 to 336
Tie games in tournaments, 200
Tournaj 207
Twist, alleged origin of, 6
Twist, natural and reverse, illustrated, 32 to 35, 58, 61, 63, 88, 91
to 93, 115, 120, 133, 137, 172, 175, 182, 188, 193, 194, 196, 199
Various caroms from one position, 87
Vigne, Henri de, 4
Virginia, English Cavaliers in, 5
Weight and density of ball, 34, 35
Wrist movement, 22, 34, 112
INDEX TO BILLIARD RECORD.
FOUR-BALL GAMES (pp. 208 to 236).
NOTE.—THE ONE PAGE IN MANY CASES COVERS SEVERAL GAMES BY THE ONE
PLAYER. FIGURES IN PARENTHESES () INDICATE PAGE OF “BEST
PERFORMANCES.”
Abrams, 234
Ackerman, 215, 222, 223
Anderson, 219
Baldwin, W., 218
Beatty, 215
Benjamin, 213
Bennett, J. G., 232, 234
Bessunger, 234
Bird, 209, 213
Blaisdell, 227
Bluim, 219
Bly, 225
Bowen, 231
Brainard, 223
Broga, 215
Brooks, 214, 227
Brough, 218
Brown, 214, 217
Brown, W., 218
Bruce, 218, 221
Bryan, 218
Bullock, 233, 234
Burbank, 212, 213
Byers, 229, 231
Campbell, 230
Capron, L., 219
Carme, 211, 217, 219, 223
Carter, E., 232
Casper, J., 223, 228, 247
Chapman, 218
Cheseborough, 214, 217, 219
Cherry, 223, 228
Choate, 215, 218, 222, 223, 228, 229
Coan, 216
Colby, 227
Coon, 214, 217, 222, 229
Craft, 230
Crawford, 218
Cronn, 214, 223
Crystal, 208
Cusick, 221
Daly, M., 208, 226, 231, 232, 233, 235 (236)
Daniels, 214, 215, 217, 220, 222, 225, 226, 229
Davis, 222
“Davis,” 216
Davis, C., 215, 222
Davis, E., 221
Davis, R., 227
Deery, 209, 210, 211, 214, 219, 225, 226, 229, 231
Dennison, 227, 231, 233, 234
Derome, 232
Dion, C., 216, 217, 220, 222, 226, 229, 230, 231 (235)
Dion, F., 232
Dion, J., 211, 212, 216, 219, 224, 226, 230, 232 (235, 236)
Dodge, 225
Donahue, 216
Egener, 222, 232
Ellison, 227
Estephe, 211, 213, 218, 220, 221 (236)
Ferguson, J., 216, 231, 232
Fitch, 231, 232
Flack, 227
Foley, M., 208, 210, 211 (236)
Foley, T., 214, 216, 217, 219, 220, 223, 224
Forhan, 221
Foster, 211, 214, 216, 218, 222, 224, 227, 229, 231 (236)
Fox, 211
Francis, 232
Frawley, 215, 220, 223, 224
Frink, 214, 216, 232
Furlong, 221
Garnier, 226, 233 (235)
Garratt, 228, 229
Garst, 229
Geary, 209
Gillett, 233
Glessner, 217
Godfrey, 217
Goldthwait, 210, 212, 215, 216, 219, 220, 222, 225, 234
Gregg, 228
Griffey, 215
Grunkemeyer, 223, 228
Guillett, 216
Harding, 214
Hardy, 225
Harrison, A. H., 219, 220
Hewes, 213, 221
Hewins, 213, 223, 231
Hickey, 232, 233
Hoa, 234
Honing, 215, 223, 228
Honohan, 221
Hoyt, 221
Hubbell, 212, 213, 220
Humphreys, 227
Hunt, 212, 213
Jakes, 213, 214, 216, 222, 231, 232
Jamison, 222, 232 (236)
Karff, 225
Kavanagh, 209, 212, 217 (236)
Keating, 212
Kendall, 233, 234
Kenny, 231
Kimball, 231, 232
Kinzie, 227
Kleser, 224, 225, 229
Knox, 232
Kraker, 233
Langdon, 214, 215
Le Brun, 216, 221
Little, 210, 230
Liverman, 225
Lloyd, 218
Lynch, D., 210
Lynch, J., 209
Maggioli, 234
Manard, 219
Masters, 216
May, 213, 216, 217, 219, 222
McCarthy, 219, 220
McCleery, 230, 233
McCracken, 219, 228, 229
McDevitt, 211, 212, 215, 216, 220, 222 (235, 236)
McFarland, 219
McKeever, 214
McVittie, 216
Miller, D., 213, 214, 217
Miller, H., 234
Miller, J., 234
Miller, M. M., 219
Montgomery, 213
Morris, E., 222
Morris, G., 219
Murphy, J. F., 227
Murphy, James, 227
Myers, F. A., 218
Nelms, 211, 213, 220, 221, 232 (236)
O’Brien, 227
O’Connell, 219
Olcott, 224
Orndorff, 223
Palmer, J., 213, 221
Parker, F., 212, 222, 226, 228, 229 (236)
Pearce, 219
Peck, 214, 233
Phelan, J., 232
Phelan, M., 209, 212 (236)
Phillips, 217
Pickley, 227
Plunkett, 213, 218, 232
Porter, 213
Quaid, 234
Quill, 223
Rapelye, 230, 233
Rhines, 216, 221, 224, 225
Rivers, 222
Roberts, 230
Rockhill, 221
Rogers, 225, 230, 233
Rooney, 216
Rudolphe, 223, 225, 226, 229, 230, 231, 232 (236)
Russell, 232
Ryall, 213, 218, 221
Seavor, 225
Seereiter, 208, 209, 211 (236)
Sexton, 235
Shiel, 227, 230
Simonds, 223
Slosson, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235
Smith, C. E., 217, 227, 230
Smith, F. E., 214, 222
Smith, G., 208
Snyder, 222, 225, 228
Spear, 227
Sproul, 225
Stevens, 227
Stone, 227, 231
Terrell, 219
Tieman, 209, 211
Tobin, 214, 215, 227
Turner, 215, 222, 223
Tustin, 214, 225
Twitchell, 231, 232
Upham, 230
Vanderwerker, 225, 230, 233
Vermeulen, 216, 219, 221, 223
Wade, 219
Watkins, 227
Wharton, 225
White, J. N., 208, 209
White, T. H., 227
Wickes, 214
Wider, 219
Williams, A. B., 227
Williams, R. T., 217
Williamson, 228
Wilmarth, 214, 215, 217, 227, 233
Wilson, 227
Wilson, C. E., 231, 233, 234
Wollahan, 213
Wright, 223, 233 (236)
REGULAR THREE-BALL CAROMS (pp. 237 to 260).
NOTE.—THE ONE NAME IN MANY CASES COVERS SEVERAL GAMES ON THE ONE PAGE.
FIGURES IN PARENTHESES () INDICATE PAGE OF “BEST PERFORMANCES.”
Abrams, 242, 244, 251, 252
Bainbridge, 258
Barnard, 258, 259
Bassford, 239
Benjamin, 238
Bessunger, 242, 243, 250, 252
Blanchard, 242
Bluim, 247
Braisted, Jr., 237, 238
Briggs, 244
Burchard, 247
Burleigh, 248, 249, 252, 257
Bussey, 248, 253
Capron, J., 258
Carme, 237, 239
Carney, 253
Carter, 247, 248, 250, 252, 257
Casper, 247
Catton, 255, 256, 260
Choate, 247, 248
Cochrane, 242
Cole, 256
Coleman, H., 247
Cook, 245
Coon, 239, 240
Coste, 242, 244
Daly, M., 241 to 255 (260)
Daniels, 240, 246, 250
Dawson, 256
Deery, 237, 242, 249
Dennison, 244
Dion, C., 238, 240 to 243, 245 to 254
Dion, J., 238 to 250, 252 (260)
Dodds, 245, 255
Donahue, 258
Doyle, 239
Duhy, 259
Eames, 258
Effler, 248
Emery, 257
Estephe, 255
Flannagan, 257
Foley, T., 240
Foley, T. P., 280
Foster, 238, 246
Fox, 237
Freeman, 237
Gallagher, 247, 248, 252, 253, 254, 256
Garnier, 240, 241, 243 to 252, 254, 255
Garratt, 248, 249, 253
Haskell, 259
Hawkins, 253
Heiser, 252, 253, 254, 256
Hewins, 238, 239
Hickey, 244
Hoa, 244, 248, 253
Honing, 247, 248, 252
Honohan, 239, 253
Ives, 259
Jennings, 257, 259
Jones, 257
Kavanagh, 237
Keeney, 259
Kerkau, 259 (260, 314)
Knapp, G. L., 257
Knight, C., 252
Knight, S. F., 245
Kraker, 243, 249
Le Brun, 240
Little, 243
Liverman, 240, 248
Lowry, 255
McAfee, 248
McAlier, 239
McCleery, 243, 256, 259
McCreery, 253 to 256
McDevitt, 238
McKenna, 257, 258, 260
McLaughlin, 255, 256, 259, 260
Maginniss, 258
Maggioli, 242, 243, 244, 248, 249, 252, 256
Magnus, 255, 256
Miller, A., 258
Miller, C. P., 253
Miller, H., 239, 241, 242, 244, 248, 249, 252
Miller, J., 244, 252
Morris, G., 253
Morris, Lon, 244, 256
Morten, 257, 258
Moulton, 259
Mott, Jr., 253
Mullen, 247
Nelms, 239, 245, 255
Oddie, Jr., 257, 258 (328)
Palmer, 239
Parker, 239, 241, 248, 253
Pearce, 240
Peck, 244
Perkins, 243, 257
Pihet, 245
Piot, 255
Plunkett, 239
Poggenburg, 259
Pulsifer, 244
Quaid, 244, 251, 252
Reed, 255, 256
Rhines, 239, 241, 248, 253
Rice, 263 (Champion’s Game)
Rockhill, 239
Rudolphe, 240, 241, 243, 245, 246, 248, 249, 250, 252, 254
Saylor, B., 253, 256
Schaefer, J., 243, 249, 250, 252 to 255, 258 to (260)
Shauer, 257
Shaw, 248, 250
Seaman, 253
Sexton, 243, 247 to 254 (260)
Slosson, 243, 246 to 255 (260)
Snyder, 243, 253
Soulé, 257
Stone, 238
Sullivan, 244
Terrell, 243
Thatcher, 247, 252
Townsend, A. R., 258, 259 (328)
Trebar, 314
Ubassy, 242 to 248
Vermeulen, 240
Vignaux, 243, 246, 248, 249, 255 (260)
Wickes, 238
Wilson, 244
Wright, 243
BALKLINE GAMES (pp. 264 to 319), INCLUDING CHAMPION’S (pp. 261 to 263)
NOTE—THE ONE PAGE IN MANY CASES COVERS SEVERAL GAMES BY THE ONE
PLAYER. FIGURES IN PARENTHESES () INDICATE PAGE OF “BEST
PERFORMANCES.”
Abrams 262, 283, 285
Adair, 289
Adams, 275, 282, 284, 297
Adorjan, 287, 288, 289
Akin, 283
Alcorn, 301, 306, 312
Allen, 314
Allinger, 278
Alvarez, 294
Amidon, 298
Anson, 267
Arnold, 279, 280
Atwater, 280, 281
Bainbridge, 279
Ballard, 285, 289, 299
Banker, 315
Barker, 292, 296
Barnard, 292, 296
Barutel, 285, 286
Barrett, 304
Behrens, 265, 266
Bennett, L. W., 293
Bennie, 291, 293
Bevington, 288
Bigelow, 316
Billings, 288
Billiter, 286, 292
Bingham, 282
Blanc, 297, 313, 317
Bliss, 299
Borda, 295, 301
Boschert, 272
Boyd, 292, 302, 308, 315
Brock, 298, 310
Brown, A. J., 275, 282, 288, 289, 299, 301, 304, 310, 311, 314
Brown, 293
Brown, Jas., 316
Bullock, 272
Burns, 282, 288, 289, 297
Burris, 267, 272, 275, 276, 278
Campbell, 270, 272, 299
Canda, 293, 295, 296, 299, 311
Capron, J., 272, 274, 276, 294
Carcass, 289
Carney, 287, 292
Carter, E., 261, 262, 268 to 273
Carter, G., 275, 276
Cassignol, 317
Castel, 297
Catton, 267, 269, 270, 271, 272, 277, 278
Cayla, 298
Clark, 304
Cline, H., 276, 307
Cline, J., 267, 272, 310–11
Clough, 315
Clow, 286, 287
Cochrane, 280, 285, 289, 296, 299, 310, 314
Cody, 304
Coffin, 289, 292, 297
Coleman, 284, 297, 298, 299, 300, 303, 310, 317
Collins, 304, 314
Conly, 303
Conklin, 281 to 285, 287, 289, 293, 294, 297, 299, 304, 307, 308,
311–313, 316, 317
Conway, 306
Coste, 262
Cox, 301
Crane, 301
Cure, 286, 290 (298), 302, 309 (319)
Cutler, 281, 286, 288, 305, 306, 307, 309, 310–11, 313, 314
Daly, J., 293
Daly, M., 261, 264, 265, 267, 271, 277, 278
Darantière, 297, 302, 308, 313, 317
Davis, 263
Davis, W. E., 288
Day, 269
Deconde, 308
De Drée, 291, 297, 302, 317
Demarest, 304, 307–8, 310, 311, 313, 316, 317–18 (337)
De Sola, 288
Dethke, 285
De Young, 303
Dion, J., 264, 267
Dittman, 303
Dodds, 272, 275
Douglas, 279, 290, 295, 296, 304, 305, 313
Dubois, 288, 297, 315
Ducasse, 294, 295
Duniway, 314
Eames, 270, 272, 275, 293
Eaton, C., 295
Edwards, 301
Ehrlich, 272
Ellison, 275, 276
Emslie, 316
English, 288, 291
Farley, 293
Faroux, 297
Ferris, 287, 292
Fischer, 314
Foley, T. P., 280, 281
Foss, 279, 281, 284, 287, 289, 294, 296 (326)
Fouquet, 291
Fournil, 270, 275, 286, 298 (318)
Foy, 303, 306
Francois, 313
Franklin, 282
Fremont, 299, 312
Gallagher, 262, 267 to 270, 275, 276, 277, 282, 284, 285, 291, 305,
306, 307, 310, 311, 314, 315
Gardner, E. W., 276, 283, 286, 289, 293, 294, 299, 300, 305, 307, 315,
316, 317–18
Gardner, F. C., 283, 286
Gardner, P., 290
Gay, 270
Gerhardt, 284
Gershel, 279, 292, 293, 296, 298, 300, 303, 304, 305, 311
Gibelin, 286
Gillette, 292
Gilman, 272
Glorieux, 294, 295
Goodwin, 275
Gray, 280
Guillet, 265, 266
Hahman, 317
Hale, 288, 289, 296
Hansen, 304
Harer, F., 301
Harris, 280, 281, 285, 289, 303
Hatley, 270, 271, 275, 276, 286, 288, 292, 324
Hawks, 269
Hawley, 301, 306, 312
Hecking, 308
Heiser, 261, 262 (263), 268, 269, 271, 275
Helm, 274
Hendrick, 265, 269, 279, 281, 283, 286, 287
Hevner, 279, 281
Hogue, 296
Holden, 295, 301
Hoppe, F., 301, 312
Hoppe, W. F., 285, 294, 295, 302, 307, 308, 309, 310 (318–19)
Hovey, J., 295, 301, 306, 312
Howe, 289
Howison, 282, 284, 285
Hoxie, 295
Huntley, 296, 304
Huyck, 291, 299, 303, 312
Hyatt, 324
Ives, 270 to 278 (318, 319)
Jack 274
Jackson, 303, 306, 313, 314, 317
Jakes, 288, 291, 293
Jennings, 272, 276, 292, 306, 315
Jenkins, 299, 306
Kasey, 324
Keane, 302, 308, 315
Keeney, 272, 276, 280, 281, 283
Kellogg, R. W., 269
Kellogg, W. W., 275, 281, 282, 284, 286
Kennedy, 304, 315
Kenniston, 292
Kent, 301
Kerkau, 277, 327–28
Kinsman, 290
Kurtz, 284
Labouret, 308, 317
Lamare, 297
Lang, 281, 289
Larcher, 308
Lejeune, 291
Letellier, 302
Leonard, 302, 308, 317
Leuiller, 270
Levine, 281
Levy, M., 281
Levy, P., 267
Lewenberg, 296, 298, 299, 300, 303, 305, 310 (326–27)
Liverman, 300
Logan, 299
Lowenthal, 295
Lowry, 304
MacBisaillon, 314
McCabe, 276
McCleery, 266, 272
McCreery, 279, 281, 284
McDonald, 284
McKay, 280
McKee, 283, 284
McKenna, 268
McLaughlin, 262, 266, 267, 268, 269, 272, 275, 276, 277, 284, 285, 288,
292, 305, 306, 307, 310–11, 314
McShea, 301
Maggioli, 262, 266, 269, 270, 271, 272, 275, 276, 277, 298, 303, 311
Maginnis, 282, 296, 297
Maguire, 304, 315
Marcotte, 293, 294
Maure, 291, 297
Mayer, J., 304
Mayer, Jos., 306, 312
Mial, 278, 279, 281, 283, 284, 287, 289, 292, 293, 294, 299, 316
Milburn, 276
Miehle, 284
Miller (Pittsburg), 291
Miller, A. B., 273, 276, 278, 279, 282, 283, 287, 296
Miller, J. M., 285, 288, 289, 293, 296, 299, 303, 306
Millette, 292, 293, 295, 302, 315
Moon, 301
Morley, 297
Morningstar, 277, 282, 284, 285, 287, 294, 295, 309, 311, 312, 314, 315
Morris, Lon, 264, 266
Mortier, 313, 317 (337)
Morton, 291, 295, 301, 306, 312
Moulds, 266, 270
Muldaur, 280, 303, 305, 310, 311
Mullen, 279, 284
Myers, 298
Naves, 291
Nélys, 291, 297, 301
Nolan, 275, 281, 282, 302, 304
Norris, 283, 287, 300, 307
Oakes, 276
Oberlander, 262
Oddie, Jr., 273
Ortiz, 284, 285, 294
Paige, 286, 295, 298
Palmer, 267
Parker, F., 267
Parker, H., 282, 284, 296, 300, 302, 304
Parker (Minn.), 291
Parker, Dr., 312
Parker (Boston), 314
Pasco, 313
Payan, 294
Pecchart, 288, 292
Peterson, C., 286, 292, 298, 310
Phillippi, 288, 291
Piot, 270
Pleindoux, 302
Poggenburg, 276, 278 to 281, 283, 286, 289, 292 to 294, 298, 300, 303,
305, 307, 315, 316, 317 (337)
Poland, 291
Powers, 288, 291, 293
Presby, 295
Prior, 314
Ranney, 273, 276
Rapp, 290
Rasquinet, 291
Rawson, 280
Reaney, 295
Rein, 263, 275, 284, 288, 289, 296, 299, 300, 302, 304, 311
Reinman, 296
Rérolle, 291, 296, 297, 302, 308, 313, 317–18 (337)
Rhines, 270
Rhoads, 276
Rice, 275
Risden, 300
Roberts (Pittsburg), 288
Robinson, 308
Rockhill, 267
Roggan, 282, 288
Rolls, 290, 291, 295, 301, 306, 312, 316
Roney, 298, 306
Rose, 301
Roudil, 301, 308
Rudolphe, 261, 265
Ryle, 289
Sanchez, 294, 295
Sawyer, 262
Saylor, B., 266, 273
Schaefer, J., 261, 262, 263 to 271, 273 to 277, 278, 280, 285, 286,
308, 312, 313 (318–19)
Scheidig, 315
Schmitt, 282, 287, 298, 300
Schweizer, 316
Servatius, 279, 292, 293, 295, 300, 302
Sexton, 261, 264, 267, 268, 275
Shaw, 272, 298
Shean, 265
Shedaker, 291, 306
Sigourney, 287, 297, 300
Slosson, 261 to 263, 266 to 271, 273, 274, 278, 280, 285, 286, 290,
308, 309, 310, 314 (318–19)
Smalley, 298
Smith, 308
Smith, J. D., 279, 281, 293, 294
Sorenson, 285
Spears, 286 to 289, 292
Spinks, 276 to 278
Stark, 273, 276, 278 to 281, 283, 286, 289
Stephenson, 300
Strauss, 310
Sutra, 308
Sutton, G., 273 to 278, 285, 286, 290, 293, 295, 298, 309, 310, 312
(318–19)
Taylor, Al, 279, 281, 292, 294, 298, 303, 307, 310–11
Taylor, F. L., 282
Thatcher, 270
Thayer, 291, 299, 303
Thomas, 274, 288, 311
Thornton, 281
Threshie, 281 to 283, 287, 298, 300
Tobias, Florian, 279, 296
Tomsone, 311
Townsend, A. R., 276, 280, 281, 283, 286, 289, 293, 294
Townsend, H., 295
Uffenheimer, 301, 306, 312
Van Dieman, 298
Van Duppen, 302
Van Haften, 306
Vantine, 299, 300
Van Vleck, 305, 311
Vignaux, 264, 265, 268, 270, 273, 286, 290, 293, 295, 307 (310, 311)
Wallace, 264
Walker (Pittsburg), 272
Walker (Chicago), 299, 303
Watson, 274
Wefers, 303
White (Canada), 284
White, C. E., 292, 295, 296, 300, 302, 305, 308, 315
White, H., 295
White, H. W., 288, 289
White, W. G., 269
Whitehead, J. B., 299
Whitehead (Trenton), 314
Wheeler, 311, 312
Wilmot, 312
Wiener, 310
Wormser, 303, 306
Wright, 315, 316–17 (317)
CUSHION CAROMS—STRAIGHT AND TRIPLE.
NOTE.—THE ONE PAGE IN MANY CASES COVERS SEVERAL GAMES BY THE ONE
PLAYER. FIGURES IN PARENTHESES () DENOTE PAGE OF “BEST
PERFORMANCES.”
STRAIGHT
Allen, T. W., 323
Baldwin, S. G., 320
Barnard, C., 324
Beard, 327
Bird, 320–21
Bullock, 325
Burris, 325
Bussey, 325
Brock, 327
Campbell, 322 to 324, 326
Carter, E., 321 to 323, 325, 326
Catton, 325
Cline, J., 325
Conklin, 327
Cotton, 324
Daly, M., 321 to 323, 325, 326
Dankleman, 325
Davis, C., 225
Day, 320
De Long, 323
Dion, J., 320, 321, 322 (328)
Donovan, 225
Eames, 324, 325, 326
Estephe, 320, 321
Flack, 320
Fournil, 326
Gallagher, 321, 323, 325, 326, 327
Garnier, 321, 325
Gilman, 324, 326
Guillet, 326
Hale, 327
Hatley, 325
Heiser, 321
Honing, 323
Hunter, 321
Ives, 325, 326 (328)
Johnson, D., 323
Kimball, 322
Levy, P., 320, 321, 325
McDevitt, 320
McLaughlin, 320, 321, 325, 327
Marshall, 321, 323, 324
Matthews, 325
Miller, S. W., 326
Morris, A., 321
Morse, 322
Moulds, 325
Muldaur, 327
Nelms, E., 320, 321
O’Neill, 324
Palmer, 320, 321, 325
Piot, 321
Poggenburg, 327
Pollard, 327
Reeves, 323
Roberts, G. A., 321
Schaefer, C., 325
Schaefer, J., 320 to (327–8)
Sexton, 320 to (327–8)
Slosson, 321 to (327–8)
Tarrant, 321
Thatcher, 323, 325
Vignaux, 321 to 323, 326
Wallace, T., 321, 322, 326
Warner, 320
West, 322
Wolff, 320
Woods, 325
Yatter, 321, 323 to 326
TRIPLE.
Abrams, 330
Anderson, 331
Anson, 329
Austin, 335
Avery, 332, 335 (336)
Ball, 333
Barry, 331
Barutel, 331
Bayne, 335
Berry, 331
Brock, 331
Bunker, 331
Burdick, 334
Capron, J., 329, 335
Carney, 333
Carter, E., 329, 330
Catton, 330
Chapell, 335
Clark, 335
Clark, W., 329
Clayton, 331
Cline, H., 335
Conklin, 333
Coon, 333
Cutler, 335
Daly, J., 330, 333, 335–6
Davis, W. F., 331
Day, 335 (336)
De Oro, 332, 335
“Dooley,” 334
Eames, 331
Ellison, 334
Ferguson, A. D., 331
Freeman, 334
French, 334, 336
Fuller, 335
Gallagher, 329, 332, 336
Gershel, 331
“Goodday,” 334
Gremmels, 336
Gundaker, 333
“Harris,” 331
Harrison, W. H., 330
Haskell, 329
Hatley, 333
Heineman, C., 329
Hevner, 331
Horgan, 335–6
Howard, 331
Howe, 334
Hueston, 335
Huey, 332
Hutchings, 331
Hyatt, 333
Ives, 329, 330
Jevne, 329 to 333
Johnson, S., 336
Johnson, W. S., 331
Johnston, W., 333
Jones, 333
Kasey, 335
Kenniston, 333
Kendrick, 335
Lacey, 335
Laurie, 335
Lawrence, 333
Lean, 335
Lord, 335
McCreery, 329 (336)
McLaughlin, 336
Maggioli, 334
Magnus, 329, 333
Maloney, 330
Miller, G. H., 330
Milsap, 335
Mitchell, G., 332
Morin, 332 to 334
Morningstar, 336
Myers, W. H., 330
Newland, 329
Pallasco, 334, 336
Pellage, 332
Peterson, P. (336)
Potts, 329
Presby, 332
Rapp, 331
Riley, 332
Rinehart, 334
Roux, 334
Ryan, 335
Sauer, 329
Sayles, 333
Scovil, 333
Schaefer, J., 329
Seymour, 333
“Shawt,” 334
Shea, 332, 334 (336)
Short, 333
Stanley, 335
Stiner, 329
Stone, 334
Strauss, 336
Sutton, G., 330
Tarleton, 330
Thatcher, 330
Townsend, 330
“Turners,” 334
Upton, 333
Vasquez, 330, 332, 336
“Wadsworth,” 331, 332
Wallace, 334
Wesseling, 333
Weston, 334
Wheeler, 334
Wheeler (Chicago Am.), 332
Wheeler (St. Louis), 331
White, F. R., 332
“Williams,” 331
Wilson, 329
Wright (St. Louis) 331
Zaehringer, 330.
FIFTEEN-BALL POOL.
NOTE.—THE PAGE IN MANY CASES COVERS SEVERAL GAMES BY THE ONE PLAYER.
Alana, 349
Alexander, 351
Allinger, 348
Andrews, 353
Banks, 351, 352
Barnes, 347
Barrett, 352
Barton, 345
Becker, 349
Bessunger, 341
Bien, 352, 353
Block, 341
Brumby, 350
Burns, 349
Burris, 348
Carney, 350
Carreche, 349
Carter, E., 341
Claess, 342, 343
Clearwater, 343 to 351
Collamore, 352, 353
Colton, 352, 353
Crowe, 354
Dale, 341
Daly, J., 348, 351, 352
Dankleman, 341, 343
Dawson, 351
De Oro, 338, 342 to 350, 354
Dewey, 352
Dinning, 345
Dion, C., 339, 340
Dion, J., 339, 340
Doran, 353
Dougherty, 345, 347, 348
Douglas, 352, 353
Dupree, 352
Eby, 344, 345, 348 to 350
Eden, 340
Eggleston, 343, 346
Erickson, 345
Fancher, 351
Fey, 351, 352, 354
Field, 340
Fraley, 351
Frey, A., 340 to 342
Frey, G., 339
Gamble, 352
Gillett, 349
Gould, 340
Gray, 352
Griffith, 352–3
Hamber, 349
Hamilton, 342
Hart, 352–3
Heatherton, 352–4
Heman, 341
Horgan, 348, 350
Hough, 340
Horning, 348
Hueston, 350, 351, 354
Hyman, 351
Kelly, 348
Keogh, 343 to 351
King, H., 347
King, J., 340 to 343
Kirkland, 349
Knight, S. F., 339 to 343
Kowenhoven, 351
Kryne, 353
Kuntzsch, 344, 345, 346
Lake, 351
Lambert, 341
Lawlor, 343
Lean, 350, 354
Leonard, 341
Levy, P., 348
Lewis, 351
Long, 348, 349
Lubbock, 353
Luddington, 345
McCabe, 349
McCoy, 353
McCune, 349
McNamarra, 351
McWarble, 339
Mack, 340
Malone, 341 to 343
Manning, 342 to 345
Moore, 339
Morris, A., 339, 340
Morris, G., 340
Munsey, 347
O’Donahue, 352
Payton, 344
Pearce, 353
Pelletier, 351, 352, 354
Porter, 349
Powers, 343 to 346
Price, 349
Rhoades, 348
Rice, 352
Roberts, J. (Eng.), 338, 346
Robinson, 351
Rodgers, 342, 346, 349
Roff, 352
Rudolphe, 339, 340
Saborido, 345
Schaefer, C., 339 to 342
Schaefer, J., 339, 340
Schu, 353
Schutt, 352
Sexton, 339, 340
Shaw, 343
Sherman, 344 to 350, 354
Smith, Prof., 349
Smith, 352
Smith (Houston), 353
Sneden, 349
Stewart, 344 to 346
Stofft, 348, 349
Strewe, 345
Stubbs, 348
Sutton, G., 341
Tallman, 351
Tarleton, M., 349
Thompson, E., 341
Thompson, 353
Thornton, 348
Tilt, W. A., 353, 354
Tripp, 351
Vorhoff, G., 349
Vorhoff, J., 349
Wahlstrom, 339, 340
Wallace, 341
Ward, 345
Walsh, 344 to 346, 349
Weller, 340
Wenrick, 345, 346, 349
Werner, 346
Weston, 349, 350, 354
Wharton, 343
White, T. E., 347
Williams, 353
Wilson, 347
Wilson, C. E., 339, 340
Young, Jr., 351, 352
FIRST EVENTS OF NOTE.
Amateur championship, 225; second, 227
Amateur championship of America, 257
Amateur to become champion, 212, 213
“Average”-keeping, 208
“Average” of double figures at Three-ball Game, 241
“Averages” (single and general) exactly alike, 266
Balkline introduced and described, 261 (Champion’s Game);
264 (8:2, followed by 10, 12, 12½, 14, and 18 in.);
265, 266 (Space Game)
Balkline (14:2), 267;
in France, 270
Balkline (18:2) introduced, 276;
revived, 290
Balkline (18:1)
introduced, 276, 277;
championship series, 277, 278, 285
Balklining by amateurs (8:2, 14:2, and 18:2), 272, 273, 291, 292
Bridge barred, 214
Brunswick table in public, 222
California’s only first-class tourney, 251
Canadian tournament, 213
Champion’s Game, 261;
in France, 262
Championship tournament, 210, 211;
of world, 242
Chicago’s first-class tournament, 243
Contest between foreigners, 219
Contest between French experts, 223
Contest of multiple nights, 244;
of same at Cushion Caroms, 305
Crotch barred, 210, 239
Cushion-Carom Game, changes in cushioning rule, 302
Entrance-fees in tournament, 225;
revived, 266, 267
Five players (the whole number) tied alike, 269
Four-pocket table introduced, 210
Fournil visits America, 306
Game played over, 232;
second (Diamond Cue championship), 226
Game prohibitive of nursing, 230
Handicap in public tournament, 231, 252, 266
Home-and-home match, 210
Jawing barred, 211
Kerkau visits America, 277
Lines on table, 224
Long games in tournament, 225, 251
Lowering of height of tables, 237
Mace barred, 214
Massé barred, 210
Playing under protest, 224
Push-shot barred, 214, 225
Push-shot restored, 218
Professional tournament, 209, 210
Public or record contest, 208
Public match at West, 209
Running-out of game from start, 227
Run of triple figures at Three-ball Game, 241
State championship, 212
Sweepstakes tournament, 324
Thousand-point Three-ball Game in a night, 254
Three-ball Game officially adopted, 239, 240, 242
Three-cushion tournament, 329
Tournament in France, 255;
also the last professional one anywhere at the same game (Three-ball
Caroms)
CHIEF CAROM CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNEYS.
Of America, 210, 211, 225, 226, 246, 310, 322, 330
Of Canada, 213, 216, 217, 219, 222, 232
Of the Champions, State and Canadian, 220
Of Chicago, 253
Of France, 255, 286
Of Long Island, 225, 230, 233, 245
Of Philadelphia roomkeepers, 267, 276, 278, 281, 313
Of “Shortstops,” 270, 272, 276, 277, 294
(“Young Masters” in Paris), 301, 310
Of States—
California, 231;
Connecticut, 212, 213, 265, 269;
Connecticut and Western Massachusetts, 265, 266;
Dakota, 257;
Georgia, 218;
Illinois, 216, 221, 299;
Indiana, 219, 228, 253;
Louisiana, 234, 242, 251, 252, 310;
Maine, 217, 229, 230;
Maryland, 217;
Massachusetts, 214, 227, 233, 244;
Missouri, 224, 225;
Nevada, 223;
New England, 270, 272, 288, 335;
Northwest, 240, 292, 299;
Northwest and Southwest, 248, 298;
Ohio, 215, 223, 228, 247, 316;
Pacific Coast, 222, 233, 243, 256;
Pennsylvania, 213, 218, 220, 239, 317;
Virginia, 217;
Wisconsin, 224, 225, 316
Of the world, 242, 254, 277, 285, 286, 290, 308, 309, 312
Amateur—
First national championship, 257, 258;
A. A. U.’s, 279, 280, 281, 283, 286, 287;
N. A. A. B. P.’s, 281, 283, 286, 289, 294, 300, 304, 305, 307, 308,
316, 317;
French championship of world, 297, 301, 302 and 308 at 14:2, and 302
and 317 at 18:2;
Championship of France and Belgium (18:2), 291;
Knickerbocker A. C.’s, N. Y. City, 278, 283 (also see A. A. U.’s);
Hanover Club of Brooklyn and German Liederkranz Society of Manhattan
(see N. A. A. B. P.’s tournaments);
Interclub, Philadelphia, 290, 291, 295, 301, 306, 312;
New Orleans, 242;
Illinois, 275, 299;
Chicago, 227, 299, 300;
Cook County, Ill., 282;
St. Paul and Minneapolis, 287, 291, 296, 299, 300;
Long Island, 233, 245;
Billiard Club, N. Y. City, 295, 332;
N. Y. A. C., 290, 313;
Boston, 298, 313;
Crescent A. C., Brooklyn, 306, 315;
Massachusetts, 314, 315, 316;
Mussey’s Challenge Trophy, Chicago, 323;
Pacific Coast, 323;
three-cushions, 330, 335–6
NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.
Bookmakers’ handicaps, N. Y. City, 324
Boston, 274, 295, 305, 307, 314, 326
Brooklyn, 248, 257, 258, 259, 272, 292, 295, 302, 305, 306, 308, 315
California handicap, 315
Canada—Toronto, 284
Chicago, 263, 271, 275, 276, 277, 280, 281, 285, 288, 289, 293, 296,
298, 299, 300, 302, 303, 304, 306, 309, 310, 311, 314
Cincinnati, 274
Los Angeles, Cal., 315, 333
New Orleans, 253, 262, 283, 285
New York City, 209, 249, 251, 252, 267, 270, 271, 273, 274, 276, 279,
282, 284, 285, 293, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 303, 304, 305,
306, 307, 308, 310, 311, 319, 322, 323
Philadelphia, 250, 275, 301, 306, 307
Pittsburg, 291, 293
Portland, Ore., 304
San Francisco, 251, 266, 288, 289, 292, 297, 304, 332
Saratoga, 318
St. Louis, 253, 256, 312, 329, 331
Trenton, N. J., 307, 314
MISCELLANEOUS CONTESTS.
Amateur sixteen-hour, 214
Amateurs desperately end ties, 282
Amateur international, 257, 296
Balkline played by telegraph, 284
Best performances—
Four-ball, 235, 236;
Three-ball, 260;
Champion’s Game, 263;
Balkline, 310, 311;
Cushion Caroms, 327–8;
Amateurs’, 337
Cushion Caroms, last professional tournament at, 326
Experts’ Game, 231
Handicapping by games (14:2 vs. 8:2), 270
Irregular Billiards, 338
Ives vs. Roberts, 338
Kerkau vs. Trebar, 338
One cue-ball, 330
Revival of 8:2 Balkline, 283
Roberts vs. De Oro, 338
Space Game, 265, 266
Two styles of game in one night, 229, 338
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcriber’s note:
1. Table of Contents added by transcriber.
2. Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling.
3. Retained anachronistic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings as
printed.
4. Footnotes have been re-indexed using numbers.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Modern Billiards - A Complete Text-Book of the Game, Containing Plain and Practical Instructions How to Play and Acquire Skill at This Scientific Amusement" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.