Modern billiards

Front matter

«-jc/ s i

"A joyous and ingenious volume." — Sportsman.

FUN ON THE BILLIARD TABLE.

Preface

T T may be as well to state at the outset that Mr. John Roberts is only directly responsible for the section of the book to which his name is attached, namely, that part which lies between pages 43 and 176. This section must not be confounded with the book under the same title which appeared some years ago. The complete work is here presented for the first time, and only thirty-five pages of it appeared in the book published under the title of The Game of Billiards and How to Play It.

Modern Billiards is distinctly an unique book. It is totally unlike any work on the game of billiards ever before published, and nothing between its covers can be found in any other book, of course with the exception above referred to.

Owing to space limitations much of the material at the Editor's disposal has been crowded out, but the selection he has made will, he thinks, prove the most instructive and interesting.

1922542

> s

°I w

IMPLEX9 Tahles,

>*-5 £

as a

55 3

O O

lo-° i

D CO ^

— % CO

P*i R^

LIST OF CONTENTS

PAGE

JOHN ROBERTS THE YOUNGER. A Sketch . i

THE GAME OF BILLIARDS AND How TO PLAY IT.

BY JOHN ROBERTS.

Introduction . . -45

The Table and Accessories . . .47

The Care of Table and Cues . 48

General Instructions . 49

Easy Losing Hazards . . 51

Mode of Using the Rest . .54

Strength . 55

Kiss Cannons . . • • 55

Losing Hazards with Side . . -58

Some Cushion Cannons . . .66

Cannons by First Striking a Cushion . 70

Some Cushion Winning Hazards . . 83

Some Cushion Losing Hazards . . 86

Close Cannons . . 89 xii CONTENTS

The Game of Billiards, etc. — continued.

PAGE

Six Typical Close Cannon Positions . , 95

Some Following Cannons . . .102

Some often-occurring Winning Hazards . 106

Some Gathering Strokes . . 1 1 1

Some Useful Baulks . . .116

Some Run-through Losers . . .120

Importance of Position . . .125

An Actual Break, giving the Reasons for each Stroke and Instructions for Playing 135

TYPICAL BREAKS.

A Break by William Mitchell, with his own

Instructions for Playing each Stroke . 179 Breaks by an Amateur and a Professional

from the same Leave . . .199

A Losing Hazard Break by William Mitchell 219

534 Break by Chas. Dawson . . .223

165 „ „ . 234

125 „ H. W. Stevenson . . 238

Break by William Spiller . . . 240

A BILLIARD "PATIENCE" GAME . . . 248

CONTENTS xiii

CELEBRATED MATCHES.

PAGE

1. The Championship, and Accounts of the Sixteen Matches which have been played

2. The Level Match between John Roberts

and Charles Dawson . . . 300

P. M. AYRES,

/Manufacturer ot all

ill, flldersflate Street, COIKlOII, 6.C.

BILLIARD * TABLES

SPECIALLY DESIGNED AND MANUFACTURED FOR HOTELS, MANSIONS, &c.,

AND FITTED WITH THE

F. H. AYRES' "International" Low Fast Cushions

AND ALL THE LATEST IMPROVEMENTS.

JOHN ROBERTS made his record break of 679 Spot and Push Barred on one of these Billiard Tables.

TO BE OBTAINED FROM ALL DEALERS.

illustrated Catalogues on Application.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

JOHN ROBERTS ..... Frontispiece

AN ENAMELLED GOLD CUP AND SAUCER . . To face page 38 Presented to John Roberts by the late Maharaja of Jeypur

LETTER OF APPOINTMENT AS COURT BILLIARD PLAYER . ., ,, 38

JOHN ROBERTS' MODE OF HOLDING THE CUE AND MAKING

JOHN ROBERTS' MODE OF USING THE REST . . ,, ., 54

JOHN ROBERTS THE YOUNGER.

A SKETCH.

JOHN ROBERTS, the famous son of a father no less famous in his day, was born at Ardwick, near Manchester, on August 1 5th, 1847, his father being at the time in charge of the billiard-room of the Union Club, Manchester.

When he was about ten years of age his father took the billiard-room at the George Hotel, Liverpool, and the family removed to that town. Young Roberts attended school at the Mechanics' Institute, Mount Pleasant, but the love of billiards was in his blood, and no sooner was he released from school than he used to make the best of his way to his father's billiard-room and knock the balls about for so long as he was allowed, which depended upon whether his father was present or not. If the elder was absent, young John would have fine times with Johnny Herst, one of the markers, who afterwards became a well-known player himself. It was from this Herst that young Roberts obtained much of his early instruction, if indeed he ever had any guidance beyond his own observation.

One of the regular customers at the " George " billiard-room at this time was Mr. James Barber, well known for his connection with the turf. He was a most enthusiastic billiard-player, and it was his custom to gamble heavily on any game he played. His most frequent opponent was a Mr. Hugh Williams, and they usually played games of 50 points up for ;£ioo or £200, and the stakes in ready money were always stuffed into one of the pockets of the table. Mr. Williams always conceded Mr. Barber a start of 15 with the red hazard thrown in — that is, the red ball, instead of B being placed on the spot, was put into position for the easy loser. Barber was so enamoured of the game that he could not tear himself away from the table; in fact, on one occasion he had gone down to Liverpool to see the race for the Liverpool Cup, for which a horse of his had been heavily backed ; but he got to playing billiards at the "George," and could not make up his mind to leave, with the result that though his horse won the cup he did not see the race ! When playing billiards he would bet with the spectators on almost every stroke, stopping now and again to say in broad dialect, " Na then, aw think a'll hev a little settlin'." He was a good example of the men who make and lose fortunes on the turf. Of humble origin, he made a large fortune by horse -racing, and though he was up to all the tricks of the turf, his knowledge did not prevent his losing it again, so that he eventually died in very poor circumstances.

The elder Roberts afterwards left the "George" for the Queen's Hotel, in Lime Street, and it was here that the younger Roberts first noticed a trick of his father's, which ultimately had some bearing upon the introduction of the rule imposing a penalty for knocking a ball off the table. At that time there was no such penalty, and it was a common practice of old John's, if his opponent's score stood at 96 or 97, to knock his own ball and the red off the table, and so give himself a chance. The walls of the room were covered with dents at the height of the table where the balls had been driven against them with force, and on one occasion he actually drove a ball through a window nine feet from the ground. This was thought to be such an extraordinary feat that the pane was not put in for some time afterwards, the empty sash being covered with a curtain and shown as a curiosity.

The family came to London in 1860, and young John took his place as a regular assistant in the subscription-room of his father's rooms at Savile House, in Leicester Square. He says that money used to change hands very freely in this subscription-room, which was the resort of many well-known men about town, the late Lord Westbury and the late Earl of Dudley being two of the most regular players.

Savile House was burned down in 1864, and the elder Roberts went to Australia. He returned in 1865, and took billiard-rooms in Wellington Street, where the subject of this sketch played constantly.

The champion says that to the best of his recollection the first handicap he won was in 1866, but he has no particulars, and only remembers that his opponent in the final was H. Evans.

In 1867 he won a big handicap promoted by W. Dufton and played in the St. James's Minor Hall. The record of this handicap is valuable as showing the status of the different players before the public at that time, so it is given here in full.

Play commenced on Monday, January I4th, 1867. The heats were 400 up, and there were twenty-four players.

John Roberts, sen., London . . . owes 100

C. Hughes „ . . . rec. 10

Christmas ,, . . . „ 10

J. Bennett ,, . „ 10

John Roberts, jun. „ . „ 35

W. Green . . Liverpool . . ,, 70

W. Dufton . . London . „ 70

W. Cook, jun. „ . „ 70

H. Evans „ . „ 70

T. Morris „ . „ 70

G. Mulberry . . Twickenham . „ 70

F. Symes (winner of a handicap at the Phil-

harmonic) . . . „ 100

S. Bunting . . Manchester . . „ no

G. Craggs . . London . . ,, 115 Gus Baillie . . „ . . . „ 115 G. Collins . . Bristol . . „ 120 J. Bradley . . Scarborough . „ 120 Bancroft . . . Manchester . „ 120 Murray . . . Leeds . . ., 120 T. Ottoway . . London . . „ 130

The results as far as Roberts was concerned were : —

FIRST GAME. — John Roberts, jun., beat W. Moss by 32. Breaks. — Roberts: n, 23, n, 14, 16, 17, 28, 15, 21, 20, 10, 10, 15, n, 12. Moss: 10, 29, 12, 19, 21, 29, 10, 12. Betting 5 to i against John Roberts, jun., for the handicap.

TENTH GAME. — John Roberts, jun., beat John Herst by 116. Time, ih. 2im.

In the twelfth game John Roberts, sen., beat Dufton, and afterwards was freely backed for the handicap at evens, and 3 to i was taken about the chance of John Roberts, jun.

THIRTEENTH GAME. — John Roberts, jun., beat H. Evans by 101 in ih. 1701.

At the start of this heat the odds on Roberts were 5 to 4. Towards the finish, after he had made a break of 53, £50 to £i was laid on him. Other breaks were 51 and 63.

FOURTEENTH GAME. — John Roberts, sen., beat G. Davis by 90.

FIFTEENTH GAME AND FINAL. — John Roberts, jun., beat John Roberts, sen., by 97 in ih. 28m.

Betting level.

In the final heat, according to the terms of the handicap, John Roberts, sen., had to score 500, while his son had to make 375. The elder man actually scored 403, or only 28 more than his son.

At this period the subject of our sketch had charge of the billiard-room at the Exchange Hotel, Newcastle-on-Tyne. This room was frequented by all the best people in the town, but the busiest time was when the race-meetings were on. Then there were high jinks, and the billiard-room was often kept going the whole night.

During Roberts' tenancy of this room, on the occasion of a race-meeting, the late Sir William Elliott played billiards the whole of the night with a Pontefract bookmaker named Greaves. During the night, in the course of an argument between Sir William, who owned horses, and a Nottingham bookmaker named Nichol, who was also an owner, about riding, a match was made to be decided the following day, each to ride his own horse. The wager was for either .£500 or .£200 a side and the two horses. Owing probably to the "all-night sitting," which had a greater effect upon Sir William than upon the seasoned Nichol, the former was not able to do full justice to his horse, and accordingly lost the match.

Roberts played in another handicap about this time at the Post Office Hotel, Manchester. The players were almost the same as in the St. James's Hall Handicap. In this competition, however, young John owed 25 in 300 up, and his father owed 100. Young Roberts beat a player named Syddal in the first round, but in the second round he was beaten by W. Moss, of Manchester, the scores reading : Moss 300, Roberts 297. Moss won the handicap, the second prize falling to W. Green.

In the last game of the second round of this competition there was a good illustration of old-time tactics. The game was called, Green 297, Johnson 294 ; Green to play. With the object of leaving Johnson only one ball to play at and that ball on the spot, Green knocked the red and his own ball off the table. As already explained, this manoeuvre was often resorted to, the elder Roberts being its originator. In the result it served its purpose here, for Green won the game.

W. Moss, the winner of this handicap, was about the best-known player in Lancashire. He was possessed of great nerve, and was, moreover, a great gambler. He was at the Chester Meeting the year that Beeswing won the Chester Cup. At the commencement of the meeting he had very bad luck, and had come down to his last five shillings. He put this on a winner, and then commenced "playing up." He backed winner after winner, and when the time arrived for the Chester Cup to be run he had quite a respectable amount in hand, which he planked down to the last shilling on Beeswing and won .£1,100.

He and Julius Johnson were always antagonistic. They were pretty nearly equal, not only at billiards, but at many other things, and they never met without having a dispute, with a consequent wager. They would fight, swim, play billiards, or anything else. It was not very material to them what they battled about, but they must battle about something. It is said that on one occasion, on a Sunday morning, when they were got up in silk hats, etc., they were walking on opposite sides of the river at Oxford. Though they were separated by the river, they must have the inevitable argument, which ended by both of them plunging into the stream to settle it in the middle. These two men played many matches in Manchester, when the bets would amount to thousands. Prior to a big match of this sort they would both go into training, but never in the same town ; that would not have done at all. Moss usually selected Southport as his training quarters.

C. Hughes, another player in these handicaps, was a fine exponent of billiards, and at that time a great rival to J. Bennett. Bowles, Hughes, and Bennett were constantly meeting, and used to play at evens. Hughes afterwards went to India, and died there about 1873, on his way to Calcutta after visiting the Nawab of Dacca.

Christmas, the head marker at Pook's Club, St. James's Street (afterwards the "Cocoa Tree"), another competitor, was in those days supposed to be quite as good as anyone, except John Roberts, sen.

J. Herst, who has been previously mentioned as being a marker with old John Roberts at Liverpool, was also a very good player. After Cook had got into the form which led him to aspire to the championship, Herst beat him at evens in Scotland.

W. M. Green, who also was in the St. James's Hall and Manchester Handicaps, now keeps a large billiard saloon in Glasgow, where he has been for years.

W. Dufton, who promoted the St. James's Hall Handicap, was selected by Earl Spencer to give lessons in billiards to the present King, and afterwards wrote a book on the game which he called Practical Billiards. In 1865 he played a great match for £1,000 with a well-known quasi-amateur named E. Green, who laid £600 to £400 on himself. Dufton won, and his backers thereupon presented him with an illuminated testimonial and a purse of 210 sovereigns. This testimonial was picked up in a saleroom a few years ago by William Mitchell, and is now in his possession. Dufton committed suicide, and Green, who at the time of the match was very well off, died in London about three years ago in the most extreme poverty.

H. Evans, another of the players, is still wielding the cue in Australia, and a few years ago was champion of that continent.

G. Davis, another of the players, was a turf commission agent, his principal employer being a gentleman named Nicholson, who raced under the name of Graham. As to one of this gentleman's horses, Gamos, who won the Oaks of 1870, Roberts tells a story.

He says that George Fordham, who was to ride, strongly advised him to back it, and meeting Mr. Hugh Williams, previously mentioned as being Mr. Barber's constant opponent at billiards, asked him to get .£5 on, at the same time handing him a note for the amount. Mr. Williams replied that Roberts might consider it done. The horse won at 20 to I, and Roberts, again meeting Mr. Williams about an hour after the race, asked him for £105. He said, " Good God ! I forgot all about it, and did not put the money on, but I must pay," and pay he did.

About the end of 1867 Roberts played a series of games at pyramids with L. Kilkenny, of Huddersfield. The match was the best of twenty-one games for £$o, Roberts conceding a start of one ball in each game. The score was ten games each, and seven balls all on the twenty-first game. Kilkenny got the remaining ball, and thus won the match. Roberts describes this as the closest and most exciting match he ever played.

Writing of Kilkenny brings to mind a funny story he used to tell. He was playing a match against a player named Bishop, and in the course of the game he made a simple masse stroke. This stroke was almost unknown in England at that time, and a pitman, who was in one of the top tiers of seats, was so overcome by what he thought was the unnatural behaviour of the ball that he started for the table, plunging through the spectators, and clearing his way by swinging his arms about. Arriving on the floor, he proceeded to shake Kilkenny violently by the hand, at the same time fairly shouting in a very excited way in broad Northumbrian, " By the holy , did ye ivvor see such a shot in yor life ! "

Roberts left Newcastle in the beginning of 1868, and spent most of that year between York and Scarborough playing pool and billiards. At the end of 1868 and beginning of 1869 he went on a tour in and about Lancashire with his father and William Cook. This was the time when Cook began to show promise of his future excellence by making breaks of 300 and upwards. He was then so much better than young Roberts that he used to beat him three times out of four, and had his physique and self-control been equal to that of the present champion, he might have remained his superior to the end of the chapter.

In those days, however, professional billiard players led very Bohemian lives, and the all-night sittings, the drinking, smoking, and other things were responsible for many good men losing form and weakening their constitutions. Roberts was no better than his contemporaries, but in addition to having the advantage of a strong constitution, he soon discovered that extreme Bohemianism and excellence at billiards do not keep company for long.

Somewhere about this time Roberts played a very sensational match at the Bush Hotel, Manchester, with W. Timbrel, giving him a start of 300 in 1,000. Timbrel finished the game with a break of over 100 with Roberts within 9 or ii points of the game. During the course of this match one of the spectators actually laid £100 to £1 on Roberts, and, of course, lost his money. Nowadays there is practically no betting or gambling at all on professional billiard matches, but at that time any match between professionals was sure to be productive of very heavy wagering, and in subscription and public rooms the amount of money which changed hands was enormous.

In December, 1868, a match which was productive of much interest and consequent speculation was played at the old Bentinck Club, which is now the Vaudeville Theatre. The players were John Roberts, jun., and W. Cook, and the stakes were .£100 a side. Roberts was favourite at the commencement of the game, but Cook speedily deprived him of that position, and the game was called 346 to 288 in Cook's favour. Roberts then began to gain on him, and shortly after entering the fifth 100 he was again backed at odds on. Roberts won this game by 92, and his father, who was present, was so struck by the excellence of the play that he stated publicly that he doubted his ability to beat either of the players on the form displayed. Cook, however, shortly afterwards evened up matters by beating Roberts easily in a match of 1,000 up at St. James's Hall.

Now occurred the first match for the championship, and here are some remarks of the younger Roberts concerning it. He says : —

" I fancy that it was about the beginning of 1869 that the idea first occurred to Cook to challenge my father for the championship. At any rate, I quite recollect Tom Cook saying about that time that he would back his nephew to play Roberts, sen., level if Will kept on improving as he did. When it became known that William Cook was actually going to challenge, I tried to persuade my father to retire and let me play instead, but he had the idea that he could not be beaten, and would not, therefore, give way. In vain his friends put before him the value of retiring with an unbeaten record, and assured him that he would have a magnificent testimonial given to him if he retired. He knew as well as anyone what Cook's abilities were, and could not disguise from himself the fact that it was by no means a good thing for him to beat Cook, but he would play.

io MODERN BILLIARDS

" I was present at the match, which took place at St. James's Hall on February nth, 1870, and, although odds of 5 to 2 were laid successfully on Cook, I certainly think that Cook was very lucky to win. He made his last break of 60 odd off a fluke, and on many occasions during the match the balls went very favourably for him and ran very adversely for my father. Again, the offer made by Lord Dudley while the match was in progress to give my father £1,000 in the event of his winning rather upset his play for a time, and I have little doubt that it tended to defeat its own object by making him too anxious to win.

" During the match W. Dufton acted as a self-appointed master of the ceremonies. At the interval Dufton caused considerable amusement by advising the spectators to spend the most of the few minutes allowed in recovering their seats. As there were a large number of people standing, the hall being crowded and standing room at a premium, it was almost a certainty that anyone who left his seat for the interval would have to stand for the remainder of the time.

"If my father had won this match, he would probably have retired. If he had not done so, he would only have been putting off the evil day, as he must have been beaten a very short time after. After the match he had for a while the intention of trying to regain his position, but his play got worse, and with Cook and myself improving daily, he soon saw that it would be useless to make the attempt.

" In estimating my father's position as a billiard player, it must be borne in mind that for some time previous to this match he had had but little practice, and, in fact, never had more than could be obtained by playing an occasional match in public and by playing at his own rooms. Against this, Cook and I were always on the billiard table, and it is not surprising that while we, in the course of the four years from 1866 to 1870, improved beyond all expectation, my father deteriorated, or was at least left standing still. If the amount of practice my father had and the different conditions of play in his day and the present be taken into

MODERN BILLIARDS n

consideration, I think that most people will agree with me in the opinion I have formed that he was a greater player than has been seen since. Had he taken the advice of his friends and retired without playing Cook, he would now, doubtless, be quoted by competent authorities as the greatest billiard player of any time."

Immediately after the conclusion of the first championship match young Roberts challenged the winner, a friend in the North of England promising to find the necessary £100. A week or two before the time fixed for the match this friend suffered a serious financial loss, and asked Roberts to try and find the money elsewhere. This he was unable to do in the time, and it looked as if the match would fall through. His friend, however, eventually found the money, and the match took place on April I4th, 1870, Roberts winning by no less than 478 points.

Roberts states that just before starting play he asked Cook how he felt, and he replied, " Oh, pretty well for a man who is going to be beaten." During the course of the match Roberts took a bet of £100 to £10 that he would win by 500 points, and lost it by 22 points.

Roberts was not allowed to rest on his laurels, for he was immediately challenged by Alfred Bowles, whom he easily beat by 246 points on the 3Oth May following. It may be doubted whether Bowles was ever really up to championship form, as he was always considered to be about 300 in 1,000 inferior to the elder Roberts. The strength of his game lay in cannon play, and it may have been this fact which led him and his friends to think that he would have a chance for the championship, as the small size of the pockets discounted hazard play. After this match he appears to have recognised the fact that he had attempted something beyond his class, for he never challenged for the championship again.

Bowles once played the elder Roberts a one-handed match for £100 a side. The match was played at Bowles's rooms, in Brown Street, Manchester, and, as might have been expected, Roberts won easily.

Five days after the championship match with Bowles Roberts played on the same day two matches of 1,000 up with Cook. The first one was played in the afternoon at the Crystal Palace, opposite the Handel Orchestra, and Roberts had the best of it all the way, winning by 226, the best breaks being 116 and 100 by Roberts and 104 by Cook. The second match was played in the evening at Cook's rooms, at the Prince of Wales Hotel, Paddington, when Cook won by 53.

A few days after this again (June gth) Roberts played a somewhat sensational exhibition game at Birmingham with A If. Bennett. He gave Bennett a start of 300 in 1,000, and actually caught him in the last 100, but for all that Bennett won by 77.

Alf. Bennett was a bit of a humourist in his way, and it was sometimes difficult to know whether his remarks were in jest or earnest. For instance, he once told Roberts quite seriously that he had improved in his play so much that he had not had a fluke for three years !

Roberts had to play for the championship again on November 2Oth. His opponent was Joseph Bennett, who succeeded in beating him by 95 points. Roberts thinks that Bennett's victory was much in the nature of a fluke, and was more due to Roberts having got careless in his play and deteriorated, owing to keeping late hours and not taking care of himself generally, than to the excellence of Bennett's game. He says further that the strength of Bennett's game lay in his losing hazard play, and that though he played what might be described as a splendid mathematical game, he ought not to be classed with those players who have the resource to make a game for themselves when they get into difficulty.

By the way, the honour of inventing the spot-barred game rightly belongs to Bennett, though it is generally ascribed to Roberts. So far back as 1869 Bennett issued a challenge to play anyone in the world " spot hazard barred," and this was long enough before Roberts thought of discarding the spot stroke. When Roberts did make the spot-barred game his own, and had invented the break-making methods which every professional now aims at acquiring, someone asked Joe Bennett what he thought of it. " Think of it ? " said Bennett, " why it's a devil of a game. He goes out for all sorts of strokes — and gets 'em too ! "