Joe Davis - defeats on level terms

[Cyril]

Glad you enjoyed it. It certainly is a journey back to a different era. The standard of play in the late 40’s and 50’s was actually very high, I think. It is somewhat debatable whether the standard reached that level in the 70’s? For Fred Davis for instance to have competed near the top of the game at such an age (well in to his 60’s) can only indicate how good he was say, 20 or 25 years earlier. The decline in snooker came about partly because of a reluctance by the top players to encourage fresh faces into the game but moreover that the advent of television took away the audience. It was much the same in the case of many theatres and music halls which were forced to close as a result of people staying at home watching the box.

[kibo]

Very interesting thread!
It says on the wikipedia:
Century breaks-687,
My question is-Were the tables the same back then?Were century breaks equally difficult to achieve as today or it was easier(different table or size of holes)?If it is the same, it is very impressive to me...

[DeanH]

Joe Davis - defeats on level terms

I would say that a century was harder then with slower cloths and less reactive balls.
He made the majority (approx 2/3) of his centuries after he retired from professional events and the centuries were from challenge (money) matches and exhibitions.
I would say still an impressive achievement

[nigej]

My understanding is that he included all centuries made in competition, by which he meant - not practice. They were mostly in exhibition matches. Any century was included whatever the table.

It was different if you wanted to claim some sort of "record", like a new high break. The table need to be checked for overall size and pocket size in these circumstances.

Horace Lindrum claimed over 1,000 centuries in exhibition matches but I'm doubtful if this is true. At least with Joe's total you can look through old newspapers and find many references to his 234th century (or whatever).

[DeanH]

Joe Davis - defeats on level terms

yep many can be listed as to when, where and who

Sad I know but I have most listed

[nigej]

Just having a chuckle thinking about Joe's match against Bill Withers in the 1937 World Championship. Withers had beaten Fred in a preliminary round at a time when Fred was having eyesight problems. Withers won frame 3 against Joe on the black but Joe ran out a 16-1 winner. Sadly for Withers he had to play the remaining 14 dead frames. Joe won them all, 28 frames on the trot.

[DeanH]

Joe Davis - defeats on level terms

yep
they had money on each frame so they played the dead frames....
always have a thought to put that idea to WS now

[kibo]

I would say that a century was harder then with slower cloths and less reactive balls.
He made the majority (approx 2/3) of his centuries after he retired from professional events and the centuries were from challenge (money) matches and exhibitions.
I would say still an impressive achievement

Interesting.
From what i recall, tables were a bit different even in Hendry's time compared to today.Is that true?And how so, if you happen to know?

[DeanH]

"Tables being different" - back then the tables would have been UK makers (Riley, BCE, Karneham, etc.) but to the same template (IIRC) so the main difference would be the balls and cloths.
After 2000 etc. then the Chinese tables came in with a supplier contract with World Snooker but to the same regulation templates
Also Aramith got the ball supplier contract; so the cloth and balls became consistent across all sanctioned events where before you could have been different tables, balls and cloths for different events.

[Cyril]

I don't claim to be the fountain of all knowledge but I can only put across my view from having spent many years watching and reading snooker and billiards. Here's my take on this topic...

Without doubt centuries were harder in Joe's day. The pockets, though not actually smaller were less generously cut. The entrance to the pockets are now undercut, with a rounder edge (or a "shoulder"), whereas before it was more of a vertical drop. This meant that the ball had to get further into the pocket before it would drop in. Thus, you can imagine this made potting along the cushion much harder than today. The other differences are with the cloth and balls. The cloths on professional tables have virtually no nap at all now so they are much faster. Most club tables will tend still to have some nap to make them more durable to regular usage. Crystalite balls were replaced by a lighter Super Crystalite ball in around 1973. Now the balls are even lighter still. All in all this means that a lot less force is required to maneuver the balls around the table. Joe Davis had a powerful stance, his weight well forward on the left leg and his right elbow dropped on the stroke to enable him to get well through the ball. Top players today don't need such power as most of the shots are soft screw and stun and only the lower arm moves back and forth, like a piston. The speed of the cloths and light weight balls enable splitting the reds much easier. Modern day break building is all about getting the reds open, whereas in the past it was necessary to nibble away at the pack as you went along, bringing out one or 2 at a time. I think it is fair to say the mentality of players in the 80's was more conservative in this regard - it wasn't really until Stephen Hendry came along in the 90's and exploded modern day break building that the Reardon style was really dispelled. Even Davis, Griffiths and Thorburn etc were rather cautious and were happy to win frames in 3 or 4 scoring visits interspersed by good safety. Jimmy White was moderate and sat somewhere in the middle. Parrott should also be regarded as one of the first "power" break builders, much in the Hendry style.

[blahblah01]

That post is worth a thread on it's own, imho. a few of my thoughts...

Back then Snooker players could play Billiards, but not any more, so they had more subtle skills. The most obvious change that I have noticed from watching from the late '70s is that back then they (and Higgins in particular) were fighting for CB action, whereas now they are trying to kill it. It would be interesting to watch the current play with the old balls and cloths. (Not to mention chalk, lol)

Some may want John Spencer included for what he introduced.

On the elbow dropping: ROS for one has an active elbow, and is probably inspiring a load of kids doing the same?

[jon]

When John Spencer toured Canada in the early 70s, he found centuries much easier to come by because the lighter balls made it so much easier to split the pack.