The Professional Championship.—A Forecast
THE PROGRAMME
February 14-19.—Falkiner and Stevenson, 8,000 up, at New Burroughes Hall, Piccadilly.
February 14-19.—Newman and Tothill, 8,000 up, at Thurston's, Leicester Square.
February 21-26.—Reece, w.o., Inman scratched.
February 21-26.—Lawrence, w.o., Smith scratched.
Semi-finals, 8,000 Up
February 28-March 5.—Reece and Lawrence, at Thurston's.
February 28-March 5.—Falkiner or Stevenson, Newman or Tothill, at New Burroughes Hall.
Final, 16,000 Up
March 7-19. At Thurston's
The withdrawal of Smith and Inman, present and past champions, from the professional championship matches which commenced on February 14, is, of course, regret-table, and may rob the championship of a certain amount of public interest, but it is sheer flattery to those gifted, if misguided, players to describe the competition—as some writers have done—as little better than a farce without them. Judged solely from a competitive phase the championship will gain something by the absence of Smith at any rate, for in the opinion of the writer, it was as nearly a certainty as makes no matter that the Darlington ex-linotype operator would again have beaten down all the opposition. As it is the event presents a singularly open appearance, with four of the six competitors remaining eliciting solid public support. Taking the programme as set out above, the meeting of Falkiner and Stevenson should furnish an exceptionally interesting match. Stevenson is not quite the great artist of a decade ago, but is still capable of very fine billiards. Credited with an ambition to regain his former glory, the ex-champion may create a surprise by beating Falkiner, for he has been training quietly and earnestly for this game during the last few weeks. But on the form shown during the past two seasons Falkiner should repeat his last year's championship victory over Stevenson, although the two have not met since. Falkiner is in very fine form just now, and whilst he is, perhaps, more prone to "collapses" than any of his confreres, he ought to go a step further in the competition.
Tothill has created a genuine surprise with a succession of admirable displays against Harris at Manchester during the past fortnight, but he will be confronted with different metal in Newman. We all hope that the new aspirant for championship honours will make a good show, and to that extent justify his pluck and boldness in entering the lists; but his chance of winning is remote. It would be handling the truth carelessly to suggest any other ending than a fairly easy win for Newman.
Similar remarks may be applied to the Reece - Lawrence semifinal. Inconsistent as Reece is one simply cannot imagine him a loser, despite the plucky attempts that the Birmingham player is sure to make.
The other semi-final should bring Falkiner and Newman together, and here we have the key to the situation in this year's championship. In mere ability and rapidity of scoring Falkiner has the advantage, and if he should strike one of his "happiest" weeks Newman is not likely to have any further interest in the event. But the latter one imagines to be more steady under pressure, and as he invariably finds his game when pitted against Falkiner my vote goes to Newman, although not with perfect confidence, if one may put it that way. This, therefore, should bring Reece and Newman together in the final, and although a few shrewd judges have a slight leaning towards Reece, who may, of course, achieve a long-cherished ambition, I think Tom Newman will become the professional champion of 1921. Failing him the champion will most likely be Claude Falkiner.