This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.

A Complete Text-Book of the Game, Containing Plain and Practical Instructions How to Play and Acquire Skill at This Scientific Amusement

E-text prepared by Richard Tonsing
and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team
(http://www.pgdp.net)
from page images generously made available by
Internet Archive
(https://archive.org)

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

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.

2Play 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 3vulcanized 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.

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 5billiard-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 6into 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 7writer, 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.

8Cushion-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.

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.

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 10raised 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.

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 11beveled, 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.

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.

12As 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 13not 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.

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 14be 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 15guarantee 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 16would 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 17cure. 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 18merely 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 27
16 scant.

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 20teacher, 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 21forth; 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 22the “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 23is 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.)

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 25will 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 26of 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, 27let 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.

Massé Stroke.

Aft means off the perpendicular centre, directly away from the object-ball looking from above, in direction of the line of aim.

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, 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 30ball: 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.

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 32of 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 33the 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 34to 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 35cue 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.

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.

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.

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.

39The angle line 10° represents the position of cue in making the “draw-jump” shot, the stroke “very hard” ⅝ below 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 40quantity 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.

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.

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 44over which it will travel after being struck by the cue-ball at the fractional deliveries indicated.

Fractional Divisions of the Cue-Ball.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

From ball 1.—Cue-ball ⅝ right, object-ball ½ left; stroke, ½ in excess of “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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 201the 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.

202Handicapping.—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 203the 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:

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 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, 205express 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 206dozen; 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.

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

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 207of 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.

208

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 209was 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).

1861.

	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

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.

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 211and 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.

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.

FOX VS. DEERY. Washington Hall, Rochester, N. Y., September 7, 1865.—D., 1500—16.67–166; F., 1465—276.

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.

	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

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. 212protested 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.

HUBBELL VS. MICHAEL WOLLAHAN. November 15th.—First match. H., 1000—6.62—78; W., 921—47.

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.

213
	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

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.

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.

	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

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.

1865.

214
	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

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

215TOBIN VS. WILMARTH. First match, June 21st.—W., 1500—11.36—110; T., 1439—134.

TOBIN VS. JOHN H. FLACK. June 28, 1867.—T., 1500—9.15—122; F., 1470—119.

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.

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. 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.

	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

McDevitt vs. Goldthwait. Mozart Hall, Cincinnati, May 31, 1865.—$1,000 a side.—McD., 1500—22.73—267; G., 10.86—16.71—96.

216First 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.

FOLEY VS. RHINES. Bryan Hall, Chicago, October 12th.—F., 1500—12.50—84; R., 1061—47.

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.

	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

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.

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.

	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

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.

217Champion 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, 25
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.

218First 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.

219First Public Contest in United States Between Foreign Players. Cooper Institute, N. Y. City, May 24th.—Purse game for a testimonial benefit, 25
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.

HARRISON VS. PEARCE. Same hall, October 4th.—Only match. P., 1500—10.71—136; H., 1462—98.

	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

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.

220Championship 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 221winning 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.

NELMS VS. RYALL. National Hall, Philadelphia, May 27.—Only match. N., 1500—33.33—543; R., 1140—277.

	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

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.

All matches were in Crosby’s Music Hall, Chicago, and the money-stake, except in last, was $200 a side.

VERMEULEN VS. RHINES. September 2, 1868.—R., 1500—11.16—211; V., 1377—128.

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.

	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

222PARKER 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.

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.

	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

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.”

223Championship 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.

224Third 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. 225Adam 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.

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.

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).

	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

226DEERY 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. 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.

227Second 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.

228Third 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.

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.

	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

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 229and 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.

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.

Rudolphe vs. Deery. Mercantile Library Hall, San Francisco, March 17th.—$1,500 a side. R., 1500—32.61—312; D., 970—174.

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, 230surely 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.

231G. 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.

232
	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.

233Garnier 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.

KENDALL VS. JOHN HICKEY. Same hall, February 11, 1873, stake $100 a side and championship. K., 1500—31.58—186; H., 1225—168.

	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

234KENDALL 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.

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.

	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

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).

BEST RUNS ON 6 × 12 FOUR-POCKET TABLE.

BEST AVERAGES ON 5½ × 11 FOUR-POCKET TABLE.

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.)

BEST AVERAGES ON 6 × 12 SIX-POCKET TABLE.

BEST RUNS ON 6 × 12 SIX-POCKET TABLE.

177 by Dudley Kavanagh, 157 by John Seereiter, and 129 by Michael Phelan, all in 1859.

BEST AVERAGES ON 6 × 12 FOUR-POCKET TABLE.

BEST RUNS ON 6 × 12 FOUR-POCKET.

BEST AVERAGES ON A 5½ × 11 FOUR-POCKET.

BEST RUNS ON A 5½ × 11 FOUR-POCKET.

BEST AVERAGES ON A CAROM TABLE.

25.00 in 1500, push barred, crotching allowed, but none done, size 5½ × 11, 25
16 balls—Dudley Kavanagh, 1865.

39.47 in 750, push barred, but average due to crotching, 5½ × 11, 25
16 balls—J. Dion, 1866.

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.

BEST RUNS ON CAROM TABLE

BEST AVERAGE IN TOURNAMENT.

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.

[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, 25
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.]

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.

238Peter 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.

239First 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.

240January 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 25
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 25
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.

241C. 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.

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:

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.

	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

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.

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. 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.

	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

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]

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

244In 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.

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.

	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

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.

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.

	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

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 245playing 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.

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 21
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.

246First 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.

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.

	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

247DALY VS. C. DION. November 23, 1875.—Dion, 600—12.50—52; Daly, 557—104.

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. 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.

248First 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

249MILLER 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.

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

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.

251First 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

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.

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.

	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

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.

252New 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.

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 25
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

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.

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

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 254next 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.

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.

	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

255Last 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, 256for $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.

257Eugene 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.

One general average having been withheld, it is not possible to figure out the average of tournament.

	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

258McKenna 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.

1889.

	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

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.

May 12, 1900, a third annual competition having been found impracticable, the club committee awarded the Townsend Cup to Oddie.

	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

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.

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.

AVERAGES IN CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.

RUNS IN CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.

AVERAGES IN CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.

RUNS IN CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.

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).

RUNS IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.

AVERAGES IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.

RUNS IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.

327 in 600—J. Schaefer, 1878. (S. ran 429 in tie-game, but it was outside of tournament.)

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.

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.

	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

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.

263Handicap 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.

RUNS AT 14 × 28.

AVERAGES AT 18 × 38.

RUN AT 18 × 38.

AVERAGE AT 20 × 40.

RUN AT 20 × 40.

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 265match 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.

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 266Behrens, and finally, December 30, 1885, defeated Behrens by 500 to 366.

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.

Morris’s averaging 18.52 against both opponents necessarily made his general average 18.52 also.

267Line 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.

268A 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.

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.

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.

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.

270First 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.

271As 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Stake in matches, $300. Challenged by Dodds, McLaughlin won in Philadelphia, May 4th, by 400 to 181.

273Twelve 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.)

Half in Toronto and half in Galt, March 29–30, 1894.—Fourth time for championship and $500. C., 1000; S., 830.

274April, 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.

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.

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.

276The 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.

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.

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.

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 277300, 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.

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.

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.

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.

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 278$500 in entrance fees and to the net receipts. Average of tournament, four 500–point games apiece, 8.89.

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.

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.

279Amateur 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.

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.

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.

280Straight 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.

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 281more games than some others. Threshie, Smith and Kellogg’s singles are winning ones.

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.

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.

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.

282A. 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.

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, 283Burns, 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.

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.

284In 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.

285C. 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.

286Instead 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.

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.

Championship of France at 18:2. Grand Hotel, Paris, February, 500–point games.

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.

287Third and Last Annual for the A. A. U. Championship. Knickerbocker Club, N. Y. City, February.—Average of tournament, six games apiece, 5.75.

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.

Championship of Minnesota at 14:2. Opened at Ryan Hotel, St. Paul, June 16th.—300 points, 4½ × 9.

288New 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 289games, 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.

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.

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 290A. 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.

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.

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 291was 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.

292Pacific 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.

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.

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. 293Servatius 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.

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 294Smith, 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.

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.

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 295somewhat, 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 296emblem 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.

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. 297Maginniss, 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:

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.

298Jacob 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.

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 299all) 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 300tied 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.

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, 301whom 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.

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 302Nélys’ 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.

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.

303Maurice 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.

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), 304second; 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, 305begun 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:

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.

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.

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.

307Championship 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.

308That Conklin, who until then was titular champion, averaged higher as loser than as winner was due to his winning but one game.

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:

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.

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.

309Championship 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.

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.

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.

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.

310In 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:

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.

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 311Daly’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.

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.

312World’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.

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.

313Horticultural 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.

314Amateur 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.

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.

316Kennedy 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.

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.

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 317the 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.

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.

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.

318In 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.

RUNS IN CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.

AVERAGES IN CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.

RUNS IN CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.

175 in 600–point game, 18:2—M. Vignaux, Paris (championship of France), 1902.

BEST GENERAL AVERAGES (CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS ONLY).

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.

RUNS IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP MATCHES.

AVERAGES IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.

100 in 600, 14:2—J. Schaefer in New York and F. C. Ives in Chicago, both due to anchor, 1893.

RUNS IN NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.

[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.

Cooper Institute, N. Y. City, February 15th.—$500 a side, Schaefer, 400—3.92—26; Sexton, 396—21.

321Tammany 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.

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.

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.

323This 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 (6248
451 and 6238
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 324winning 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.

325Slosson 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.

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.

326Saratoga, 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

NON-CHAMPIONSHIP RUNS.

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).

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.

330Frank 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 331how 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 332Trophy.” “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.

333Professional 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.

334Down-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.

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.

336St. 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.

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.

RUNS AT REGULAR THREE-BALL GAME.

BEST RECORD AVERAGES AT 14:2 BALKLINE.

42.86 in 300 (tie game of championship tournament)—J. F. Poggenburg, New York, 1907.

BEST RECORD RUN AT 14:2.

BEST RECORD RUNS AT 18:2.

BEST RECORD AVERAGES AT 18:2.

BEST GENERAL AVERAGES AT 18:2.

BEST PUBLIC MATCH RECORDS.

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.

A 5 × 10 table, unless otherwise stated. After the close of 1887, the game is always “Continuous Pool.”

1878.

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 340successively 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.

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.

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.

343De 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 25
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, July 31st to August 20th.—Champion Manning’s opponent was Geo. Kuntzsch, who did not appear on third night, and Manning was awarded match.

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.

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.

N. Y. City, May 6–8, 1897.—Stewart lost to Grant Eby, his first challenger: 583 to 600.

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.

Sherman vs. De Oro. Odd Fellows’ Hall, Washington, D. C., 345April 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.

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.

346Binghamton, 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.

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.

347Clearwater vs. De Oro. Pittsburg, Pa., November 2–4th.—C., 600; De O., 447.

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 348rather 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.”

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.

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.

1906.

St. Louis, October 4–6th.—J. Horgan, 600; H. B. Lean, 454. Horgan resigned emblem to Jerome Keogh.

351Rochester, 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 352them 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 353to 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.

354N. 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.

RULES GOVERNING VARIOUS GAMES

These can be had, free of charge, on application to the Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co.’s publishers.

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.

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.

3567. 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.

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:

357Sec. 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.”

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.

3. The balls shall have a medium-polish finish—that is, between a dead finish and a high polish.

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.”

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.”

NOTE—THE ONE PAGE IN MANY CASES COVERS SEVERAL GAMES BY THE ONE PLAYER. FIGURES IN PARENTHESES () INDICATE PAGE OF “BEST PERFORMANCES.”

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.”

TRIPLE.

FIRST EVENTS OF NOTE.

NON-CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENTS.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE

Table of Contents added by transcriber.
Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling.
Retained anachronistic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings as printed.
Footnotes have been re-indexed using numbers.

Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United States.

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg-tm License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided that

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm

Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.

The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org

This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

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.

	Jones.	Smith.	Brown.	Gray.
		205	250
Jones, 250	D.	625 30	1119 21
		42	38
	220		220
Smith, 220	710 30	D.	913 23
	37		41
	175	170		190
Brown, 190	815 20	79 23	D.	55 37
	29	31		41
			170
Gray, 180			422 37	D.
			23
Games Won	I	II	I
Games Lost	X		XX	X
Total Points
Total Innings
General Average

Average of Tournament,——

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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.

	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

	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.

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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 Project Gutenberg eBook, Modern Billiards, by Benjamin Garno

E-text prepared by Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from page images generously made available by Internet Archive (https://archive.org)

MODERN BILLIARDS. A COMPLETE TEXT-BOOK OF THE GAME, CONTAINING PLAIN AND PRACTICAL INSTRUCTIONS HOW TO PLAY AND ACQUIRE SKILL AT THIS SCIENTIFIC AMUSEMENT.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTORY.

HISTORICAL.

THE BILLIARD-ROOM.

BILLIARD APPLIANCES—THEIR CHOICE AND CARE.

HOW TO SELECT A TABLE.

SIZE, SHAPE, AND STYLE.

THE CLOTH.

THE CUES.

CUE-LEATHERS.

CHALK.

THE CUSHIONS.

THE MAGIC BALLS.

PART I.

MANUAL.

ATTITUDE.

SELECTION OF A CUE.

CUE-LEATHERS.

HOW TO HOLD THE CUE.

AIM AND DELIVERY.

THE CUE-BALL.

Massé Stroke.

The Follow-Stroke.

The Draw-Stroke.

The “English” or “Twist”-Stroke.

The Massé.

Slowed Ball.

Elevation of the Cue.

The “Jump”: its Causes and Preventions.

Object-Ball.

General Division of the Object-Balls.

Division of the Cue and Object Balls.

Fractional Divisions of the Cue-Ball.

DIAGRAM OF STROKES.

PLATE I. EXPLANATION OF STRENGTH OF STROKE.

PLATE II. CAROMS ILLUSTRATED.

PLATE III. PLAIN CAROMS WITH DIFFERENT DEGREES OF STRENGTH.

PLATE IV. DIAGRAM OF CAROMS SHOWING PLAYER’S CONTROL OF CUE-BALL.

PLATE V.

PLATE VI. DIVISION OF ANGLES.

PLATE VII. PHILOSOPHY OF THE ENGLISH OR TWIST STROKE.

PLATE VIII. ILLUSTRATING CUSHION TWISTS.

PLATE IX. CUSHION CAROMS BY CENTRE STROKE, ENGLISH OR TWIST, FROM ONE POSITION.

PLATE X. COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XI. THE CUSHION KISS.

PLATE XII. PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATION OF THE MASSÉ STROKE.

PART II.

PLATE XIII. THE TABLE LAID OUT FOR THE SEVERAL GAMES.

PLATE XIV. THE OPENING STROKE.

PLATE XV. SIMPLE CAROMS.

PLATE XVI. DRAW AND FOLLOW STROKES.

PLATE XVII. GATHERING STROKES FROM PLAIN CAROMS.

PLATE XVIII. EAST COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XIX. PLAIN AND ONE-CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE XX. TWO-CUSHION ROUND-THE-TABLE STROKE.

PLATE XXI. VARIOUS CAROMS FROM ONE POSITION.

PLATE XXII. THE FOLLOW CUSHION—“ENGLISH” OR “TWIST.”

PLATE XXIII. CAROM BY CUSHION “ENGLISH” OR “TWIST.”

PLATE XXIV. CAROMS BY ONE-CUSHION ENGLISH.

PLATE XXV. ONE-CUSHION REVERSE ENGLISH.

PLATE XXVI. SERIAL ONE-CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE XXVII. SERIAL ONE-CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE XXVIII. SLOWING CUE-BALL, DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.

PLATE XXIX. SLOWING CUE-BALL, DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.

PLATE XXX. SLOWING CUE-BALL DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.

PLATE XXXI. COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XXXII. COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XXXIII. COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XXXIV. COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XXXV. SLOWED AND TWISTED CUE-BALLS.

PLATE XXXVI. THE “TWICE-AROUND-THE-TABLE” STROKE.

PLATE XXXVII. FURTHER ILLUSTRATION OF THE “TWICE-AROUND” STROKE.

PLATE XXXVIII.

PLATE XXXIX. “KISS” AND THREE-CUSHION CAROM.

PLATE XL. SLOWED CUE-BALL.

PLATE XLI. SLOWED CUE-BALL.

PLATE XLII. ACUTE DRAW STROKES.

E-text prepared by Richard Tonsing
and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team
(http://www.pgdp.net)
from page images generously made available by
Internet Archive
(https://archive.org)

MODERN BILLIARDS.

A COMPLETE TEXT-BOOK OF THE GAME,
CONTAINING
PLAIN AND PRACTICAL INSTRUCTIONS HOW TO PLAY AND ACQUIRE SKILL AT THIS SCIENTIFIC AMUSEMENT.

PLATE I.

EXPLANATION OF STRENGTH OF STROKE.

PLATE II.

CAROMS ILLUSTRATED.

PLATE III.

PLAIN CAROMS WITH DIFFERENT DEGREES OF STRENGTH.

PLATE IV.

DIAGRAM OF CAROMS SHOWING PLAYER’S CONTROL OF CUE-BALL.

PLATE VI.

DIVISION OF ANGLES.

PLATE VII.

PHILOSOPHY OF THE ENGLISH OR TWIST STROKE.

PLATE VIII.

ILLUSTRATING CUSHION TWISTS.

PLATE IX.

CUSHION CAROMS BY CENTRE STROKE, ENGLISH OR TWIST, FROM ONE POSITION.

PLATE X.

COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XI.

THE CUSHION KISS.

PLATE XII.

PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATION OF THE MASSÉ STROKE.

PLATE XIII.

THE TABLE LAID OUT FOR THE SEVERAL GAMES.

PLATE XIV.

THE OPENING STROKE.

PLATE XV.

SIMPLE CAROMS.

PLATE XVI.

DRAW AND FOLLOW STROKES.

PLATE XVII.

GATHERING STROKES FROM PLAIN CAROMS.

PLATE XVIII.

EAST COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XIX.

PLAIN AND ONE-CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE XX.

TWO-CUSHION ROUND-THE-TABLE STROKE.

PLATE XXI.

VARIOUS CAROMS FROM ONE POSITION.

PLATE XXII.

THE FOLLOW CUSHION—“ENGLISH” OR “TWIST.”

PLATE XXIII.

CAROM BY CUSHION “ENGLISH” OR “TWIST.”

PLATE XXIV.

CAROMS BY ONE-CUSHION ENGLISH.

PLATE XXV.

ONE-CUSHION REVERSE ENGLISH.

PLATE XXVI.

SERIAL ONE-CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE XXVII.

SERIAL ONE-CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE XXVIII.

SLOWING CUE-BALL, DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.

PLATE XXIX.

SLOWING CUE-BALL, DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.

PLATE XXX.

SLOWING CUE-BALL DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.

PLATE XXXI.

COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XXXII.

COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XXXIII.

COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XXXIV.

COMPOUND ANGLES.

PLATE XXXV.

SLOWED AND TWISTED CUE-BALLS.

PLATE XXXVI.

THE “TWICE-AROUND-THE-TABLE” STROKE.

PLATE XXXVII.

FURTHER ILLUSTRATION OF THE “TWICE-AROUND” STROKE.

PLATE XXXIX.

“KISS” AND THREE-CUSHION CAROM.

PLATE XL.

SLOWED CUE-BALL.

PLATE XLI.

SLOWED CUE-BALL.

PLATE XLII.

ACUTE DRAW STROKES.

PLATE XLIII.

EFFECTIVE ONE-CUSHION “DRAWS.”

PLATE XLIV.

DRAW WITH REVERSE AND NATURAL ENGLISH.

PLATE XLV.

DOUBLING OBJECT-BALL.

PLATE XLVI.

SERIAL CAROMS, ALSO TWIST AND “KISS” CUSHION FOLLOW.

PLATE XLVII.

THREE-CUSHION AND CUSHION “KISS” STROKE.

PLATE XLVIII.

KISS CAROMS.

PLATE XLIX.

PECULIAR DRIVING STROKES.

PLATE L.

KISS CAROMS.

PLATE LI.

“KISS” AND “HUG” CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE LII.

KISS AND MASSÉ CAROMS.

PLATE LIII.

DOUBLING CUE AND OBJECT BALLS.

PLATE LIV.

QUARTER AND DIRECT DRAWS.

PLATE LV.

“FINE-CUT” AND HUG-CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE LVI.

A DIFFICULT GATHERING STROKE.

PLATE LVII.

EFFECTIVE ONE AND TWO CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE LVIII.

ACUTE DRAWS ALONG CUSHION.

PLATE LIX.

“KISS” CAROM, ALSO ONE AND THREE CUSHION DRAWS.

PLATE LX.

BANK STROKES.

PLATE LXI.

“BANK” WITH “TWIST,” CUSHION-“MASSÉ” AND “DRAW”-CUSHION STROKES.

PLATE LXII.

INTRICATE CAROM.

PLATE LXIII.

ACUTE AND “SPREAD”-DRAW.

PLATE LXIIIA.

SLOW “FOLLOW” CUSHION “TWIST” AND DRAW TWIST.

PLATE LXIV.

A FOLLOW WITH EXCESSIVE ENGLISH.

PLATE LXV.

EFFECTIVE GATHERING STROKES.

PLATE LXVI.

“BANK”-STROKE CAROMS.

PLATE LXVII.

FOUR-CUSHION AND “BANK”-STROKE CAROMS.

PLATE LXVIII.

REVERSE ENGLISH.

PLATE LXIX.

“KISS” AND “FINE” CUSHION CAROMS.

PLATE LXX.

A “FINE-CUT” BALL AND EFFECTIVE ONE-CUSHION GATHERING STROKES.

PLATE LXXI.

REVERSE ENGLISH CAROMS.

PLATE LXXII.

ONE-CUSHION AND KISS STROKES.

PLATE LXXIII.

CLOSE DRAW.

PLATE LXXIV.

TWIST AND DRAW STROKES.

PLATE LXXV.

THE KISS AND TWIST STROKE.

PLATE LXXVI.

CLOSE DRAW AND FOLLOW MASSÉ.

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.

BEST RECORD PERFORMANCES AT FOUR-BALL CAROMS
IN MATCHES FOR A GENERAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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

	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