BIG BREAKS AT BILLIARDS.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2584, 30 May 1871, Page 2

BIG BREAKS AT BILLIARDS.

The London Billiard Hport says that big breaks at billiards are becoming to common that they cease to excite wonder. A count of say 200 is now considered as nothing, and less excitement was caused by Cook’s rcc nt run of ’‘seven hundred and fifty-two” than was felt when, nipe years since, Joh T j| put together old. " Gr*e thing ’aeo'ins to 1)0 oveilo iked in recording the monstrous breaks made within the past two years—they have all been mule by one man ; and, with this wonderful manipulator left out, Roberts’s best performances are just as unapproachable now as when they were when made. Strange to say, also, Cook gets little or no credit for the magnificent form he exhibits—bough perhaps the greatest of all praise is that whatever be does nobody seems surprised; and if to-morrow a run of 1000 off the bails was made, no notice would be taken of it, provided it were made’by Cook. John Roberts’s 340 and the big scores of’Cook'(339, 307, 373, 378, 394, 417, 512, 531, and 752) of course been made through excellence one particular'Stroke’—the spot hazard. We need not here open up the controversy which provoked and attended the introduction of what aye now called “ championship" tables j wc have simply to call attention to Cook's break of 752, and to ask, ‘‘ Docs any person, taking a common-sense view of the game, object to this youngster’s position as champion The break in question was made at St. James’ Hall, the game standing, Cook 330, Biimet, 218, when ho commenced. After making 43 by all round play, Cook got up to spot, where he made 111, when he lost position. All over the table he made 40, at the conclusion of which number he again got jup to spot, from which he had scored 252, when time was called for the usual interval. On recommencing Cook again lost position, over his first hazard, bub after scoring nine he was up agapi, and contiiuud until game \p§i called, fte tww for 1,0 0 being 168$nin,