Amateur Snooker Pool Championship

M. J. Vaughan Wins Title—S. H. Fry Unlucky

Snooker is more popular as a recreation than a spectacle, and in this respect differs from billiards, which is popular both from the playing and looking-on points of view. Without pausing to inquire why this should be, it is nevertheless the fact that the sixth annual Snooker Pool Championship decided at the old Burroughes Hall in Soho Square, from February 21 to March 1, again failed to attract a great deal of public patronage, snooker enthusiasts apparently preferring to read about the play rather than watch it.

The event attracted a capital entry of 26, including the champions of 1919 and 1920 (Messrs. S. H. Fry and A. R. Wisdom), but, as in the recent billiards championship, the form, with a few notable exceptions, was moderate, and in very few instances approached what one can see any day in the club or public billiard room.

Most of the twenty-six revealed good "potting" ability, but most of them had apparently left their knowledge of judgment and finesse at home, and this, after all, is the real art of snooker. To know when to take a ball or leave it alone, and the right ball to pick, is the real test of a snooker player, and there were not more than half a dozen of the twenty-six championship aspirants in the event under notice that could stand this test.

Mr. M. J. Vaughan, of Coventry, won the title for the first time, and although it was a very close thing between him and Mr. S. H. Fry in the final of seven games (the other heats comprised three games), the winner deserved his success. Taken all through, his snooker gripped the imagination, and although he made no breaks of any account, apart from a 25 against Fry in the final, his "potting" and judgment throughout were distinctly above the ordinary. He won his honours by disposing of Mr. Wisdom (the holder) in the semi-finals, and of Mr. Fry (champion in 1919) in the final, so his task was no light one. His was a solid and consistent game all through the piece, whereas Mr. Fry was brilliant and mediocre in turn, and hardly up to the standard that gained him the championship two years ago.

It was nothing in Mr. Fry's favour that he should be playing Mr. Hooper an important billiard match contemporary with the snooker championship, and not improbably this had something to do with his failure to complete the "double" (billiard and snooker championships) a feat that he accomplished in 1919. Mr. A. R. Wisdom, Mr. W. E. Foster (Kettering), Mr. E. Forshall, Captain Longman, Mr. V. Duval, and Mr. E. Berkeley Ormerod were, in my opinion, the pick of the others and quite worthy of the highest honours.

The most brilliant and dashing of the whole "field" was undoubtedly Mr. Forshall, but unfortunately he was erratic. Against Mr. Owens, in the first round, he made breaks of 26 and 24, and there were_only five breaks over 20 compiled in the whole competition. The others wore 27 (the highest) by Mr. Fry, 25 by Mr. Vaughan, and 22 by Mr. Townsend.

The method of deciding the championship by the aggregate of points scored, rather than by the games won, operated harshly in several instances, and it is open to question whether this departure from old traditions is justified. Under this scheme it is possible for a player to win six games in the final, and yet lose the championship—an absurdity, of course, if the honours are meant to go to the best player. Even with heats of three games, the best player is sometimes the loser, as was the case in a few heats in the event under notice.

Mr. Duval was fortunate to get the verdict against Mr. Berkeley Ormerod, Captain Longman against Sam Mayo, Mr. Wisdom against Mr. Foster, and Mr. Vaughan against Mr. Wisdom, the losers in these instances winning the odd game. The most unlucky, however, was Mr. Ormerod, because in the other instances there was not a great deal between the two opponents. Luck is a big element in snooker, and the authorities are, in my judgment, merely placing a premium upon it by stipulating that aggregates count to the exclusion of games won.

A summary of the whole event is appended, and may prove useful and interesting for reference purposes:—

First Round: S. H. Fry 178, T. W. Gittins 73; Sam Mayo w.o., H. A. Dixon absent; H. G. Fenn 146, G. Cordess 123, H. C. Townsend 145, N. G. Mussabini 121; Capt. W. V. C. Longman 176, L. A. Jones 153; H. Crosland 172, H. Hardy 71; M. J. Vaughan 139, R. Wiley 114; C. A. Cutbush w.o., A. Wigham-Richardson absent; V. Duval 145, E. Berkeley Ormerod 130; E. Forshall 197, A. Owens 110.

Second Round: P. J. Marvin 161, R. Michaelson 103; S. H. Fry 195, G. Samuel 90; Sam Mayo 157, H. G. Fenn 117; Capt. Longman 141, H. E. Townsend 115; M. J. Vaughan 194, H. Crosland 120; V. Duval 154, E. A. Cutbush 113; A. R. Wisdom 154, E. Forshall 141; W. E. Foster w.o., W. G. Callon, Junr., absent.

Third Round: S. H. Fry 195, P. J. Marvin 83; Capt Longman 163, Sam Mayo 115; M. J. Vaughan 182, V. Duval 129; A. R. Wisdom 156, W. E. Foster 148.

Semi-Finals: S. H. Fry 215, Capt. Longman 130; M. J. Vaughan 180, A. R. Wisdom 152.

Final: M. J. Vaughan (4 games), 384 points; S. H. Fry (3 games), 378 points.

Vaughan won the first game at 65-53 and the second at 53-43- Fry, however, took the third at 70-48, and squared the match at 166" all,"and, taking the fourth at 63-55. the billiard champion led by 8 points (229-221) at the close of the afternoon's play. Resuming in the evening Vaughan went in front again in the fifth game, which he won at 67-36, and, taking the sixth at 60-42, he looked like winning comfortably. Fry, however, made a great effort in the final game, and, with only the black remaining, he was one point in front. Amidst breathless excitement each made four futile attempts to secure the ball that was to determine the championship.

Then Fry made a most brilliant shot, but the ball " wobbled "at one corner pocket and swung across to the other corner, leaving a sure thing for Vaughan, who holed it and won the championship for the first time, by the narrow margin of 6 points.

Analysing the play of the two finalists throughout the competition, one gets the interesting fact that Mr. Fry won 14 out of 19 games played, or two wins more than Mr. Vaughan, who, of course, took part in the same number of games. Altogether Mr. Fry totalled 1,161 points, which gives an average of 61.10 per game—a very fine achievement. Mr. Vaughan's total of points was 1,079, yielding an average of 56-78 per game.

The championship was instituted in 1916, since when it has been won by:—