The 1991 British Open Championship

During the earlier part of the same week the qualifying rounds for the British Open had also been held to the same format. The Semi-Finals and Final of the British Open will be held at the Barbican Centre, London, January 20th - 26th. A prestigious venue once again thanks to Wildman.

The Billiards Quarterly Review congratulates the qualifiers and especially Ian Williamson and Geet Sethi who qualified for both Tournaments. Congratulation are also due to Malcolm Lax and his team of helpers and referees who operated in their usual superbly efficient manner. There are questions that should be asked. Is the idea of Open entry to the Professional ranks such a good one after all? Whilst it does give the opportunity to take Pro. Status to those who are good enough but could not qualify under the previous system, at the same time it opens the door to those who are simply not up to standard, and B.Q.R. has been informed that there were men playing in a World Professional Billiards Tournament who could hardly make a thirty break. This is absurd. The attendances were very poor, but imagine anyone who had perhaps thought to have watched some Billiards turning up and paying money to watch players of the calibre of Sanders or Cavney, or for that matter, some of the others who, whilst quite good players, are hardly a draw in the commercial sense. Indeed, the question might be asked as to how many of the current Professional players are worth paying good money to watch.

There is another point to be made, during the course of the week three matches were won by "Walkover." Eugene Hughes had one and Clive Everton had two. Everton's, "Walkovers," took him to the quarters of the World Matchplay without ever striking a ball in anger. This was hardly the fault of the Snooker Scene Editor. However, imagine that if it had been Steve Sanders' opponents who had failed to turn up, then the Portsmouth player could have got to the quarters of a major Professional Tournament, picked up a nice little sum in prize money and all for a man who, by all accounts, would have problems getting through the first round of a Mini-Prix plate. Worse still, imagine that the quarter-final opponent had for some reason or other not arrived, such a player could then have had a very nice all-expenses-paid trip to Moscow. It doesn't bear thinking about, but if it had happened, well, at least Clive Everton is a good player. The quarter-final opponent did turn up, no less a player than Ian Williamson. The two then played the best of 7 games of 150 up Williamson winning 4 - 3 after nearly 6 hours play. Six hours for what amounts to a game of a thousand up, and it is supposed to be Walter Lindrum and the nursery cannon that killed off Professional Billiards. Be that as it may, as already said both Everton and Williamson are very good players (If only they would liven up a bit) but it could have been Steve Sanders and Paul Caveney playing for the coveted spot if the, "Walkovers," had been distributed only slightly differently.

But there is a more important point still. On the face of it The Barbican and the Dynamo Club, Moscow are prestigious venues. The Barbican as being in the Capital where there might be a few paying spectators and a bit of curiosity newspaper coverage, and the Dynamo Club, as a showpiece opportunity to present English Billiards in the U.S.S.R. The Russians might take to it, after all they have to have something to do during those long cold nights and now that restrictions on decadent, bourgeois pastimes have been lifted, why not Billiards. And what happens? The Barbican will be without the best player (Russell) and the Russians will be treated to the excitement, not to say exhilaration, of Ian Williamson. There is a place for the Williamsons and Evertons in Professional Billiards, both are capable of big breaks and fine play but neither could be described as "Exhibition," players. If Billiards is to be presented as a sport for spectators other than the genuine enthusiast, then the best players must be on show. Perhaps these Tournaments should have been played to find four players to join four exempted players, these being the most attractive stylists, chosen from, say, Russell, Sethi, Gilchrist Dagley, Foldvari or possibly based on the rankings. Four could have been invited to Moscow and a Tournament put on in England the prize being a chance to join the exempted players in an important Tournament. To play prestige Tournaments, in prestige venues, and run the risk of not having a couple of the best players (Gilchrist did not make it to Moscow and the Barbican will be without Russell) yet at the same time take a chance on having a couple of the worst players, is, in terms of presenting the game, rather eccentric to say the least. Imagine the reaction of the Snooker World to a Crucible without Davis, Hendry, and White. If anyone reading this wishes to make known his views on the above comments then please write.

Karnehm's View

If the views of this Magazine tend towards the radical then those of the 1969 World Amateur Champion and the 1980 U.K. Professional Champion are considerably more so. Jack maintains that the best players should be paid what amounts to a wage, to play what might be best described as exhibition tournaments, in smallish intimate venues, something on the lines of recent Barry Hearn promotions in Boxing and Snooker at the Cafe Royale. This, he maintains, is the way in which Billiards should be presented as a public spectacle. Jack has not indicated how the various Championships would be accommodated in such a system. B.Q.R would not totally support this view but Karnehm does have a point. Furthermore he has been around a bit and his opinion is to be respected.