To know some means by which a fair estimate of one's skill at billiards may be obtained is very desirable, and many years ago I adopted a system by which any amateur can form a tolerably correct idea of his own powers. This system I called the "decimal" of a player, and this decimal is to be ascertained as follows:— Each time a player makes his first stroke, after his adversary has played, make a mark on paper, or on a slate, and call this "an entry." If the player make any number of successive scores, do not make any additional mark, except when this player makes his first stroke after his adversary has played. The number of marks will then indicate the number of entries a player has had, In order to ascertain a player's decimal, either at the end of a game or during any part of the game, divide the player's score by the number of entries; the result will give the player's decimal. Thus, suppose a player has had ten entries, and his score is 60; then 60 divided by 10 gives 6 as the decimal. Suppose the entries have been 12, and the player's score is 50; then 50 divided by 12 gives 4.17 nearly.
As another example of this method of finding the decimal, the following is given:— The player A gives a miss at the commencement of the game; his adversary B gives another miss. A plays for a cannon, and does not score; B makes 5 and leaves the balls safe. A plays and does not score. B makes 12, A follows and makes a break of 20. A has now had four entries, and his score is 21; his decimal, therefore, is 5.2.
Although during a game of one hundred up a fairly good amateur may make breaks of 25 or 30, yet the number of times that he fails to score reduces his decimal; and although he may imagine that he has played a very strong game, he will be surprised to find that his decimal is not more than about 4 or 5.
Having kept a record of more than one hundred matches that I have seen played, of five hundred up, I can state that the amateur who makes a decimal of over 7 is a hard man to beat. An average amateur rarely reaches a decimal of 4, unless the table is very easy, and in too many cases it is under 3.
When a player has ascertained by this system that his decimal rarely, if ever, exceeds 5, it is a delusion for him to imagine that he is a strong player, even though he be able to defeat all opponents aft his club.
It is knowledge worth possessing to know the quality of your game. Am amateur who, when using his own cue and playing on a table he knows, cannot attain to an average of over 4, is only a moderate player even for an amateur. Many players who have never tested their decimal, but who remember that they have made breaks, sometimes, of over 50, would be surprised to find how misses and failure to score will bring their decimal down to something very moderate; they will then realize the fact that they can be easily defeated by a good amateur, and that should they encounter a professional they will stand no chance, even though given a start of half the game.— Major-General A. W. Drayton, in "Billiards" (Geo. Bell & Sons, 1s.).
[There is no doubt that all amateurs would benefit immensely by the regular adoption of this system of recording, their games, and we have this month on page 9 indicated a method by which it can be done. The dots, of course, represent fruitless visits to the table, and as the dots and score entries, taken together, represent 20, the average in 100 up on this basis would necessarily be 5. Supposing the opponent made 50 only, his average would, of course, be 2½, but the actual figures of each player might also be entered, or one might record his two-figure breaks only.
No more reliable data for handicapping could be obtained than such averages, taken over a long series of games.]