STRANGE to say, this year these matches were played at Cambridge on Brown's ordinary table. When we use the word ordinary, we mean that no new table was put up for the occasion, for the table is really an extraordinary good one by Burroughes and Watts, and is in as good condition now as it was when it was first put up, twenty years ago. Of course the fact of the Oxford men being beaten under these circumstances takes a good deal of the gilt off the gingerbread. The match, in fact, somewhat resembles what the cricket match would be if the Oxford Eleven were to come over to Cambridge and play at Fenner's. Had, therefore, the billiard matches this year been at all close affairs, it might justly have been said that the result was no real test of the merits of the players. With all due allowance for the circumstances of the case, it would, however, be affectation to pretend that on the present occasion the Oxford men were anything like equal to their Cambridge opponents. Indeed the play on the side of the Oxford men was so bad, that any report of the match must almost of necessity consist of a list of the breaks made by Mr. Pontifex, of Trinity College, Cambridge, who was assisted in the double matches by Mr. Sarkies, of Caius. Pontifex plays a good round game, making his losing hazards remarkably well, especially the long ones in the top pockets. He plays decidedly a better game than his brother, who won the cue in 1863, but would probably improve wonderfully were he to witness a few first-class professionals play a little more than he has done. His game is what may be called a good, sound, old-fashioned game, with a little "spot stroke" added. He strikes his ball, however, in a far less professional style than his partner, Mr. Sarkies. Early in the four-handed match on Thursday last, we thought Mr. Sarkie would prove to be the best player of the lot. In fact, had we shut our eyes we should have imagined that Cook or Taylor were playing, from that peculiar click which accompanied each stroke. We fancy, therefore, that Mr. Sarkies is a really good player out of practice, which opinion was confirmed by his always playing the right game, but he broke down over easy strokes, and played altogether in a very careless style, as if he didn't care, and indeed, there was no cause for him to exert himself. Pontifex made one first-rate break of 55 in the double game, which proved to be the best break in the matches.
The Oxford representatives were Mr. Adey, of Balliol, and Mr. Horn, of Worcester, the best break made by the latter was 16, and by the former 17. Although they had forty-six innings between them, only six breaks occurred in the game of two figures. Now a strange table is no excuse for play of this kind, nor does a strange table excuse the fact of repeatedly playing the wrong game. Suffice, therefore, to say, that Cambridge won by 224 points.
The play in the single match the following night was no better. Mr. Adey succeeded again in reaching his limit of 17, and made one more break of two figures in. 13; all the rest of his breaks could be expressed in single figures, and a long detailed account of them would be scarcely interesting.
Mr. Pontifex made breaks of 13, 29, 37, 16, 19, 13, 12, 10, 21, 30, 20, 31, 11, &c, and won the game by 287 points.
We can echo the opinion of a grey-haired veteran who witnessed the match, and who combined the qualities in. his younger days of having taken the highest of mathematical honours, and yet having been the best billiard, cricket, racquet, and chess player in the University-viz., that it would have been far better for the Oxford men to have plainly stated that they had no one good enough to play, than to have made the miserable exhibition they did.