THE following letters from H. W. Stevenson and "Huddersfield," on behalf of the champion, appeared in the Sportsman of last week, too late for inclusion with the remainder of the correspondence:
DAWSON v. STEVENSON.—To the Editor of the Sportsman.
—Sir,—In reply to "Huddersfield's" letter, which appeared in yesterday's Sportsman, I must remind him that it takes two sides to make a match. Last season Dawson challenged me through the Sportsman to concede me 2,000 in 18,000, and, although I had money down and waited three weeks for a reply, nothing came of it. I also wanted £"600 to £400 about winning the championship; the reply was a level £400, nothing more. This season I have not said anything until the letter appeared from " Huddersfield"with its numerous challenges, directed to me alone. With regard to Burroughes and Watts' Tournament, it appears to me Dawson and myself will have quite enough work to do, considering we shall have to put in six days' work in five days, playing Christmas week, and Dawson has to score 875 each sitting, and Roberts, the fastest player, never scored more. If" Huddersfield"really fancies Dawson can concede me 3,000 in 21,000 he can make a lot of money, for I am prepared to play for £500 or,£1,000 aside, and I will take £"1,000 to £500, or any part of it, I beat Dawson in the championship.—Yours, &c., H. W. STEVENSON. Or me and Sons, Ltd., Blackfriars Street, Manchester, November loth.
DAWSON (CHAMPION) v STEVENSON.—To the Editor of the Sportsman.—Sir,—Stevenson's letter in your issue of Monday last is of the most ambiguous character, (i) One can only come to the conclusion that Stevenson last season considered he had a 6 to 4 chance of beating Dawson for the Championship; at the present time he values himself at 2 to i. I am sorry Stevenson's estimate of himself has so deteriorated. It is, however, a noticeable fact that he embraced the earliest possible moment of challenging Dawson again for the premier position in the billiard world.
My offer of £300 to £200 still awaits Stevenson's acceptance. (2) Stevenson's reply to my offer to back Dawson for an even £"100, to win two events out of three of the Burroughes and Watts' Tournament now in progress is one of the most equivocal order. I admit the work at Soho during Christmas week will be somewhat hard, but I think Dawson will be equal to the occasion. Sorry Stevenson will not accept. (3) Now with respect to my offer to back Dawson for;£100, to concede Stevenson 3,000 points in 21,000. I wish Stevenson to understand that, at the present time, I have no intention of backing Dawson or anyone else for £ 1,000 My challenges on behalf of Dawson during the last twelve years have been thoroughly genuine, and not of the bluffing character. The only point at issue, as far as this event goes, is that Stevenson wants to play for ten times the amount of my offer. I am of opinion 'that the public will take just as much, if not more, interest in a match for the sum I have named than for a £"1,000 aside contest. Will Stevenson be reasonable, climb down a bit, and not indulge in "tall" talk? Weight of money will not make him play any better. I will meet Stevenson at Messrs". Burroughes and Watts', Deansgate, Manchester, any time Friday next, if he means business.— Yours, &c., HUDDERSFIELD. November 13th, 1900.
I COMMENTED at such length upon this matter last week that it is quite unnecessary for me to re-traverse much of the same ground. So far, it seems to me that Stevenson has much the better of the argument, for, as he very fairly remarks," it takes two to make a match," and, if he did not agree with the original proposals of" Huddersfield,"he was surely perfectly justified in suggesting any modifications of them that appeared advisable to him and his backers.
On the other hand, I am quite of" Huddersfield's "opinion that a bet or stake of;£100 aside is amply sufficient, especially as the public riot unnaturally, having regard to past experiences, regard thousand pound matches with a considerable amount of suspicion. The supporters of either man will doubtless have plenty of opportunity of backing their fancy for any reasonable amount, should any of the proposed matches be ratified.
Regarded purely from a showman's point of view, it was a mistake for Dawson to come out with the offers in question just at the present time, when he and Stevenson are matched for the championship, but then the champion's warmest admirers can never claim for him that he is a good "showman." Is this, however, a matter for regret? I think not. There has been far too much of the handiwork of the" showman "about billiards during the last few years, and the interest the public felt in the game was rapidly being killed. What are wanted now are a few genuine battles of the good old sort, and, where Dawson and Stevenson are concerned, we are sure to get them, for a very healthy spirit of rivalry exists between the two men, and the careers of both have been above suspicion.
SOME of the form that was shown during last week was very remarkable, as will be gleaned by a glance through the reports of the leading matches. Perhaps the most striking exhibition of all was that given by H. W. Stevenson on Thursday last, when he actually put together 2,532 points whilst Diggle was scoring 822. Thus, though he started on the day's play with leeway to the extent of 1,166 to make up, he actually wound up with a lead of 544 points.
THERE are two things to be remembered which make this very brilliant display even more remarkable than it appears at first sight. One is that, although the table upon which Diggle and Stevenson played was not officially tested and passed, it is well known that Messrs. Orme and Sons rarely manufacture any table except of" Standard " pattern, and the other that Diggle showed form of the highest class all through the match. It was no fault of his that he had to play the part of spectator nearly all through the day; he simply suffered from about the only drawback to billiards with which I am acquainted—the unfortunate impossibility that exists of two people playing at once.
It will be noted by those who study the scores of this match carefully that Stevenson fell away in his play towards the middle of the game, but this is capable of explanation.
He was suffering from great anxiety owing to the illness of his eldest boy, and, at one time, the poor little fellow's case looked to be so serious that his father had to leave Manchester by a midnight train, travel all night to Putney, and get back to Manchester in time for play on the following afternoon. This would be a severe trial for a man of highly strung temperament like Stevenson, and the only wonder is that, under the circumstances, he could play at all.
ANOTHER great performance was that of Charles Dawson's on Friday. During the preceding day or two it had almost appeared as though M. Inman would annex the £25 offered by a well-known supporter of the game, but I fancy that the champion had been taking things a little easily, and on Friday evening he virtually kept the table to himself, scoring, by the help of 441, 389, and other smaller breaks, no fewer than 1,476 points in two hours and forty minutes. Inman managed to put in one good break, but his opportunities were naturally very few and far between, and, admirable as is his losing hazard play, he is far too apt to sacrifice his game for it, and has yet much to learn.
However, he should have no difficulty in making very rapid improvement, for he was fortunate enough to get a fortnight's play with John Roberts last season, and now he has had the great advantage of watching Dawson for a week.
SPILLER proved far too good for W. Cook—eldest son of the late famous ex-champion—at Messrs. Burroughes and Watts' Dean Street Tournament last week. There is no doubt that the former, who is fast regaining his best form, is very well in the handicap, but unfortunately he is by no means in the best of health, and is apt to tire towards the end of a long break. His opponent's strongest point by far is his cannon play, by the aid of which he put in two really pretty contributions of 254 and 271 respectively on Friday last, and he will doubtless make a better struggle in future heats, as he gains confidence and becomes accustomed to the table.
WHEN talking over the remarkable pyramid performance of the late Hugh McNeil at the Eccentric Club, of which I gave a full account last week, I was reminded of another notable feat accomplished soon afterwards on the same table, the hero of it being Mr. E. Lane Campbell, who is so well known in cycling circles. A pool had been started one afternoon, and Mr. Campbell never lost a life until the middle of the third pool. Mr. Campbell was a good sound player in those days, but he would be the first to admit that there were one or two better than he taking part in the game that afternoon, whilst, to make the incident the more remarkable, there were six players in each of two of the pools, and seven in the other.