Alex Higgins playing billiards against Fred davis.

[mattyshinobi22]

the ref seemed to be a lot quicker for fred than alex or is it just my download speed,great to watch

yep, prob did it to disturb alex, no wonder he loved ref's lol

[thelongbomber]

Super find thanks!

[Dan Shaw]

Alex Higgins playing billiards against Fred davis.

Lovely to watch my childhood hero at work! A very talented player

[mythman69]

Great video - great game of billiards !! Thanks for the link !!

[Particle Physics]

Genteel. One can immediately see that an in-off (being the opposite of a pot) can be played at a slower pace than a pot, making it more likely to be completed than a pot. The tolerance for a cannon in open space is nearly three balls wide, a bit target. So cannons and in-offs are going to dominate breaks for the serious player; it's a more sure fire way to score points, than overly risky pots. Pots occur of course, but billiards appears to me (as an outsider who could be wrong) to be about letting the balls do the work, rather than forcing the issue, with aggressive pots, or aggression per se. Therein lies its downfall for the spectator who wishes to see more wham-bam.

[Siz]

Genteel. One can immediately see that an in-off (being the opposite of a pot) can be played at a slower pace than a pot, making it more likely to be completed than a pot. The tolerance for a cannon in open space is nearly three balls wide, a bit target. So cannons and in-offs are going to dominate breaks for the serious player; it's a more sure fire way to score points, than overly risky pots. Pots occur of course, but billiards appears to me (as an outsider who could be wrong) to be about letting the balls do the work, rather than forcing the issue, with aggressive pots, or aggression per se. Therein lies its downfall for the spectator who wishes to see more wham-bam.

I am not sure that it is true that in-off's in general are easier than pots; but the billiard player's preferred shot, the thick half-ball in-off, is certainly relatively easy. The reason is because at this angle, the path of the cb after contact and also the pace of the ob after contact are both very error-tolerant.

It is right that the cannon target in the open is 3 balls wide; but in practice this is not very relevant to a billiards player - in billiards you need to control all the balls you put into play. So just hitting the ball so as to score a cannon is not much good if you want to make a break. You need to get the hit right (more or less).

I think that there are probably 2 reasons why billiards has all but died out. The first is that the repetition involved means that it is not a good spectator sport. Even with the various rule changes over the years, a skilled player will tend to repeat the same pattern of shots over and over again. The second reason is that since there are only ever 2 object balls (targets) novices find it difficult to play. Compared with snooker, the chances of having a makeable shot when they come to the table are too low. A shame IMO.

If any snooker player is interested in learning the game, there is an excellent book called a 'snooker player's guide to english billiards', available from englishBilliards.org

[Particle Physics]

I am not sure that it is true that in-off's in general are easier than pots; but the billiard player's preferred shot, the thick half-ball in-off, is certainly relatively easy. The reason is because at this angle, the path of the cb after contact and also the pace of the ob after contact are both very error-tolerant.

It is right that the cannon target in the open is 3 balls wide; but in practice this is not very relevant to a billiards player - in billiards you need to control all the balls you put into play. So just hitting the ball so as to score a cannon is not much good if you want to make a break. You need to get the hit right (more or less).

I think that there are probably 2 reasons why billiards has all but died out. The first is that the repetition involved means that it is not a good spectator sport. Even with the various rule changes over the years, a skilled player will tend to repeat the same pattern of shots over and over again. The second reason is that since there are only ever 2 object balls (targets) novices find it difficult to play. Compared with snooker, the chances of having a makeable shot when they come to the table are too low. A shame IMO.

If any snooker player is interested in learning the game, there is an excellent book called a 'snooker player's guide to english billiards', available from englishBilliards.org

Thankyou for your reply. As an outsider, my views were observations that could be wrong. I really wanted to hear what the experts had to say, and you have answered with aplomb.

[nrage]

I am not sure that it is true that in-off's in general are easier than pots; but the billiard player's preferred shot, the thick half-ball in-off, is certainly relatively easy. The reason is because at this angle, the path of the cb after contact and also the pace of the ob after contact are both very error-tolerant.

This is a good video demonstrating the ~1/2 ball contact, white ball "carom angle":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vRi3...feature=relmfu
(from ~2m05s)

The whole sequence (of 2 videos) is actually quite interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zysbW...feature=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vRi3...feature=relmfu

[franksandellsnooker]

Probably the finest instructional book ever written The Snooker Players Guide to English Billiards by Martin Goodwill and Roger Morgan is complemented with superb video on the site http://www.englishbilliards.org/ English billiards still has a good following throughout the world. Whilst the Half ball loser(in off) is error tolerant in terms of a single score the skills develop in being able to position the object ball most advantageously for the next stroke. Snooker players with a knowledge of billiard skills open a whole new area of expertise to their appreciation of cuesport in general. F. Forum consultant to the website.

[mythman69]

Wow - I love this forum - so many good bits and pieces !!

Thank frank and nrage for the links !!

It all helps !!