JOHN ROBERTS, Jun., Champion

JOHN ROBERTS, jun., the Champion of Billiards, whose portrait we publish to-day, was born at Ardwick, Manchester, in August, 1847. It was soon after his birth that his father, Roberts, sen., gained the first place among the billiard players of the day—a place he maintained so long and so deservedly. The mantle of the father seems, however, to have fallen on the shoulders of his first-born, and more than a double portion of his spirit inherited therewith. It was, as is usual with nearly all great players, at an early age that the child showed himself worthy of his father's name. When only eleven years of age, at the George Hotel, Liverpool, young Roberts played as few boys at that age have ever played before, or probably will ever play again.

John Roberts Jnr.

It is here perhaps worthy of notice, that we invariably find that great players have always sprung from rooms or places where they have had the advantages of seeing good play.

To watch two first-class professionals in an exhibition match is probably worth many weeks' practice. One hour's lesson in billiards in private from Roberts, jun., or Cook, would do more to advance a man's game than twenty times that amount of practice with an equal.

In the year 1866 we find Roberts, jun., in London, his father having taken the rooms in Saville House, Leicester Square, some few years before, and in this year he may be said to gave gained his first honours in winning a handicap at St.

James's Hall, in which sixteen of the best players in England contended.

But it was during the period that his father was at Saville House that Roberts, jun., made that rapid improvement in play which a few years after landed him champion of England, with the proud satisfaction of knowing that he had avenged his father's defeat.

It was in February, 1870, that the crown was plucked from off the head of the old veteran, but in two months' time the name of Roberts was again associated with that of champion, for, on the 14th of April, 1870, Roberts, jun., won for the first time the proud title that his father had held so long.

Previous, however, to his encounter with Cook for the championship, he had twice met his great rival untrammelled by the restriction of small pockets and a spot placed in a different position.

The first of these encounters took place in 1868 at the Bentinck Club, Strand, and the champion defeated Cook by 92, the match being for £200.

On the second occasion, however, Roberts was not so fortunate, as Cook defeated him by no less than 323 points.

Since 1870 Roberts has contended for the championship eight times, and been successful four times out of the eight. Cook, including the first match, has contended seven times, and been successful five times out of the seven. It is certainly much to be regretted that any alteration should have been made in the year 1870 in the size of the pockets, &c., necessitating, as it does, that the championship must be played on a table entirely different to the ordinary one. We do not for one moment mean to say but that the best player on a champion table will not be the best player on an ordinary table; on the contrary, we believe that the best on one will, as a rule, be found to be the best 011 the other.

We do, however, strongly maintain that the alteration is alike repugnant to common sense arid justice. For some time previous to the departure of Cook for America he was undoubtedly the best billiard-player in the kingdom, and showed his superiority on both tables.

Within the last six months or more Roberts, jun., has also equally shown his superiority on both, as the results of the two great American handicaps amply testify, in addition to the last match for the championship.

The alteration was originally made to favour an individual rather than billiards, and savoured of justice about as much as if some great leading cricketer were to demand a different height and width of the cricket stumps in the All England matches, because he thought it would suit his particular style of play.

We believe if a match could now be arranged between Cook and Roberts for a good large stake, the game to be played on an ordinary billiard-table, the interest would be far greater than in the next match between the two for the championship, which will take place probably next autumn. Indeed, there can be no possible reason, if the leading billiard-players do not see their way clear to alter the present championship arrangements, why both matches should not take place, and it would be extremely interesting to compare the two.

Roberts' style of play differs, as we have remarked before, from that of Cook. He, like his father, is essentially a brilliant player, famous for wonderful forcing hazards and strokes of that description, such as the public like to applaud.

He also possesses wonderful power of cue. Years

ago, when, at Saville House, he used to delight lookers-on by exhibiting such strokes as screwing back from baulk into baulk from the red ball placed on the spot. In these particular strokes, which, of course, are never attempted in matches for money, he had a famous rival in the person of John Herst at Saville House, who at one period in the earlier part of his career threatened to be even a more dangerous antagonist than Cook himself. Royal, jun,, is equally good in pyramids as he is at billiards, and though Cook holds the pyramid championship, there is but little to choose between the two.

It is perhaps a good thing for billiards as a science—for such, indeed, it is—that two men exist who are so equal in every respect that neither one can afford to rest for one moment on his oars.

It is this healthy feeling of friendly rivalry that has done so much to advance the style of play in late years. Had Royal, sen., in his prime—for it must be borne in mind that neither Royal, jun., nor Cook have attained the age of thirty— had some rival treading closely on his footsteps, he would probably have far surpassed anything that is recorded of him. It is still quite possible that there may even now exist some rising young player who may quite eclipse the performances of the present champion or Cook. The good old saying, that there are as good fish in the sea as ever came out of it, applies, we believe, to every game of skill ever invented.

By far the most brilliant public performance of Royal, jun., was in the recent Manchester handicap.

Notwithstanding that eight of the best players in England contended, and that to all, except Cook, he conceded a full number of points, Royal nevertheless won every game he played.

The heats, it will be remembered, were 500 up.

In no one game did he fail to make over 100 off the balls, and in two of them he made over 200.

One break was an all-round one of 106, attached to which, since it proved the greatest in the handicap, was a valuable prize. Throughout the game, which was with Harry Evans, no mean antagonist to give 160 points to out of 500, Royal ignored the spot stroke altogether, and ultimately succeeded in not only scoring the largest all-round break in the handicap, but in winning the game by no less than 131 points.

It was owing to his magnificent form in this handicap that we predicted his success in the recent match for the championship. The further prediction we then made—viz., that he will not retain it long, remains as yet unsolved.

All we will say, however, on the present occasion is, When they meet again, may the best man win.