Post a reply

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby lhpirnie

badtemperedcyril wrote:I was just reading about the Asia - Oceana Q School on WSA news. £400 a go seems a bit unnecessary to me. What’s that for, to keep less affluent players away?

I assume part of the deal is that the tournament has to fund itself without subsidy. WST has to conserve it's money to shell out to the top players, right?

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby HappyCamper

It's cheaper nominally than the UK version, which is a grand I think. Though not sure what adjusted for PPP would be. It covers costs and should supposedly keep the absolute chancers away.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby badtemperedcyril

lhpirnie wrote:
badtemperedcyril wrote:I was just reading about the Asia - Oceana Q School on WSA news. £400 a go seems a bit unnecessary to me. What’s that for, to keep less affluent players away?

I assume part of the deal is that the tournament has to fund itself without subsidy. WST has to conserve it's money to shell out to the top players, right?

Indeed, Judd has an expensive taste in fancy shoes and fast cars.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby MarcoStaiano

lhpirnie wrote:
MarcoStaiano wrote:
lhpirnie wrote:...


I can imagine! I was just talking in an hypotehetical way about some Thai players that never achieved the best of their potential. Don't know what is the actual situation in Thailand, saw some young players in some events in the UK (obviously Mink monopolized the attention) but I also know about the high level in amateur player. I spoke with Kobkit Palajin some time ago, I didn't know that he tried his way on the Tour, he still plays fantastic snooker and told me about how good the level is in the country.

Yes, there are many players in Asia who have a lot of ability, even from such places as Myanmar. But there's a heck of a gap between talented amateurs and the professionals we see on tour. It takes several years living almost exclusively in the UK to get established, and that's extremely expensive. Only the Chinese academy system and remote CBSA funding really have any chance, apart from a few rich kids. The last Thai player to get established was Sunny Akani, who couldn't afford to play full-time for his first season, and very nearly dropped out. Since him, several Thai players have resigned their tour cards prematurely after simply running out of money. Even now, there's a chance Sunny Akani might get relegated (he's had some health issues which might wreck his career).

Thanawat's situation was a little different. He quit professional snooker after a match-fixing episode, where he was allegedly threatened. He escaped back to Bangkok a couple of days before his house in Sheffield was set on fire (the fire that nearly killed the 15-year old Lyu Haotian, who hadn't been told). That scared off a couple more Thai players, who haven't set foot in England since.

Having said that, WST have just announced a Q School in Bangkok in June, with 4 qualifiers. Apart from the Chinese, it's hard to imagine how they will be able to fund themselves.

That's definitively true and we realized it already many times. A potential champion not from the UK needs time to get accustomed to a new culture and to a professional Tour. That's why we probably never discovered the true potential of certain players.
I hope Sunny can keep his place, I love his dedication.
The example of Igor Figuereido now pop up in my mind, he was making progress in his game when he was able to stay in the UK and almost reached the Crucible, but this season played only two tournaments. Obviously is more difficult if you come from a country like Brazil...

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby MarcoStaiano

badtemperedcyril wrote:I was just reading about the Asia - Oceana Q School on WSA news. £400 a go seems a bit unnecessary to me. What’s that for, to keep less affluent players away?

Hope that we can see new players from different countries on the Tour, but as Ihpirnie said it could be something difficult especially on the economic side for a lot of players. I read that in Australia and New Zealand they created a fund (dedicated to the memory of Walter Lindrum) to support young players that need financial help. Maybe with similar programs it'll be easier to focus only on snooker for a whole generation.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby badtemperedcyril

MarcoStaiano wrote:
badtemperedcyril wrote:I was just reading about the Asia - Oceana Q School on WSA news. £400 a go seems a bit unnecessary to me. What’s that for, to keep less affluent players away?

Hope that we can see new players from different countries on the Tour, but as Ihpirnie said it could be something difficult especially on the economic side for a lot of players. I read that in Australia and New Zealand they created a fund (dedicated to the memory of Walter Lindrum) to support young players that need financial help. Maybe with similar programs it'll be easier to focus only on snooker for a whole generation.

I do believe the “Lindrum Dynasty” does sponsor young hopefuls to this day. There’s much controversy and ongoing family quarrels among the remaining Lindrum’s though.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby lhpirnie

MarcoStaiano wrote:
badtemperedcyril wrote:I was just reading about the Asia - Oceana Q School on WSA news. £400 a go seems a bit unnecessary to me. What’s that for, to keep less affluent players away?

Hope that we can see new players from different countries on the Tour, but as Ihpirnie said it could be something difficult especially on the economic side for a lot of players. I read that in Australia and New Zealand they created a fund (dedicated to the memory of Walter Lindrum) to support young players that need financial help. Maybe with similar programs it'll be easier to focus only on snooker for a whole generation.

The biggest obstacles to true globalisation are the rigid 128-players structure, and the fact that all the tournaments are based in the UK, at least in part. But WST can't see past their 1980's model. There's the danger that Thailand and ultimately China will fade away like Canada did. Unfortunately there aren't enough young British players to carry the game. It's a very precarious position for snooker, with 9-ball pool itching to take over. Unfortunately it doesn't seem like many lovers of snooker are prepared to make the necessary reforms to keep snooker alive in 20-30 years' time.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby gallantrabbit

badtemperedcyril wrote:Joe O’Boye is a great shout. Him and Jimmy went to the World Amateur in Tasmania in 1980 and both almost got slung out for bad behaviour and getting pished. Jimmy won the tournament and promptly turned pro. Joe turned pro a couple of years later but was always a wild man - for whatever reason he just struggled to perform in the qualifiers and to make a mark. Shame there’s no TV footage of him as he was reputedly a phenomenal talent. Personally, I’ve never seen him strike a ball… Maybe the one that got away?



I practiced with Joe a few times in the mid 90s at King's X. He was trying to make a bit of a comeback and working at the same time. Decent fellow and a very good player.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby mick745

lhpirnie wrote:
MarcoStaiano wrote:
badtemperedcyril wrote:I was just reading about the Asia - Oceana Q School on WSA news. £400 a go seems a bit unnecessary to me. What’s that for, to keep less affluent players away?

Hope that we can see new players from different countries on the Tour, but as Ihpirnie said it could be something difficult especially on the economic side for a lot of players. I read that in Australia and New Zealand they created a fund (dedicated to the memory of Walter Lindrum) to support young players that need financial help. Maybe with similar programs it'll be easier to focus only on snooker for a whole generation.

The biggest obstacles to true globalisation are the rigid 128-players structure, and the fact that all the tournaments are based in the UK, at least in part. But WST can't see past their 1980's model. There's the danger that Thailand and ultimately China will fade away like Canada did. Unfortunately there aren't enough young British players to carry the game. It's a very precarious position for snooker, with 9-ball pool itching to take over. Unfortunately it doesn't seem like many lovers of snooker are prepared to make the necessary reforms to keep snooker alive in 20-30 years' time.


I dont think it has helped having a blockage of players inside the top 16. Chances are that casual viewers switch on and see the same old faces.

There is no reason why hundreds of tournaments cant be scheduled to contribute to the rankings, say in individual countries (e.g. canada, thailand, india or whatever), regional level (say north america or australasia) and the successful players come together for the bigger tournaments.

Unless snooker becomes more globally appealling it will not last. There just wont be enough of a domestic audience to sustain it. Especially if china falls out of love with it.

A chinese world champion might not happen soon enough to save any decline in that part of the world.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby gallantrabbit

But for me the greatest unexpressed talent ever, at least at pro level was Gary Filtness. I think if you asked Ken/Ebdon or even Anthony Hamilton they might say the same. Filtness was a serial winner of pro-ams. always winning/finalist or close in virtually anything he entered. This was late 80s to early 90s. What a player. Then when he turned pro he got the yips. A crying shame as he was genuine WC material, just like Ebdon and Doherty. I think he packed the game up for many years, but of course finally realised his dream by playing at the Crucible in the seniors. Top coach now.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby maske2g

This is a highly timely thread.

My Grandad's funeral was on Thursday. He was 90. My grandad was a good player, and I saw him make many big breaks well into his 70s. My grandad played almost every name you could ever think of on the London snooker scene, from the 50's to the 80's and was well known by his nickname Lardy.

Marcus Owen was his good friend, and he was unwavering until his death bed that Marcus Owen was the best player he ever saw. He spoke about him often.

Marcus had several problems in his peak, in the late 50's and 60's when he won 4 amateur championships,
he was effectively barred from the world championship, because the Davis brothers essentially excluded anyone who could challenge their throne, or he simply didn't have the entrance money to compete.

He was an alcoholic and alcoholism consumed him for much of his life. He spent many a night night drunk on my grandads sofa. And my aunt even recalls seeing him sleeping rough in a west end doorway in the 80's. She describes him as a very good looking man who would have been a pin up in snookers TV peak.

I know in the 70's and 80s he gave a few lessons to Steve Davis and Ronnie and heard he didn't charge Ronnie senior, just asking him to keep the glass topped up!

Wikipedia mentions that he died in tragic circumstances. I'm told he was pulled over by a dog he was walking whilst drunk in Manor Park/East Ham in 1987, hitting his head and unfortunately never waking up.

Sport is full of these stories, wasted talent, etc. But I'm sure had he been 15 years younger, Marcus Owen would still be a household name today.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby Yanfan

maske2g wrote:This is a highly timely thread.

My Grandad's funeral was on Thursday. He was 90. My grandad was a good player, and I saw him make many big breaks well into his 70s. My grandad played almost every name you could ever think of on the London snooker scene, from the 50's to the 80's and was well known by his nickname Lardy.

Marcus Owen was his good friend, and he was unwavering until his death bed that Marcus Owen was the best player he ever saw. He spoke about him often.

Marcus had several problems in his peak, in the late 50's and 60's when he won 4 amateur championships,
he was effectively barred from the world championship, because the Davis brothers essentially excluded anyone who could challenge their throne, or he simply didn't have the entrance money to compete.

He was an alcoholic and alcoholism consumed him for much of his life. He spent many a night night drunk on my grandads sofa. And my aunt even recalls seeing him sleeping rough in a west end doorway in the 80's. She describes him as a very good looking man who would have been a pin up in snookers TV peak.

I know in the 70's and 80s he gave a few lessons to Steve Davis and Ronnie and heard he didn't charge Ronnie senior, just asking him to keep the glass topped up!

Wikipedia mentions that he died in tragic circumstances. I'm told he was pulled over by a dog he was walking whilst drunk in Manor Park/East Ham in 1987, hitting his head and unfortunately never waking up.

Sport is full of these stories, wasted talent, etc. But I'm sure had he been 15 years younger, Marcus Owen would still be a household name today.

Great post. <ok>

That was a very interesting (but very sad) story.

I love stories about the 'olden days' of snooker.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby Cloud Strife

Yanfan wrote:
maske2g wrote:This is a highly timely thread.

My Grandad's funeral was on Thursday. He was 90. My grandad was a good player, and I saw him make many big breaks well into his 70s. My grandad played almost every name you could ever think of on the London snooker scene, from the 50's to the 80's and was well known by his nickname Lardy.

Marcus Owen was his good friend, and he was unwavering until his death bed that Marcus Owen was the best player he ever saw. He spoke about him often.

Marcus had several problems in his peak, in the late 50's and 60's when he won 4 amateur championships,
he was effectively barred from the world championship, because the Davis brothers essentially excluded anyone who could challenge their throne, or he simply didn't have the entrance money to compete.

He was an alcoholic and alcoholism consumed him for much of his life. He spent many a night night drunk on my grandads sofa. And my aunt even recalls seeing him sleeping rough in a west end doorway in the 80's. She describes him as a very good looking man who would have been a pin up in snookers TV peak.

I know in the 70's and 80s he gave a few lessons to Steve Davis and Ronnie and heard he didn't charge Ronnie senior, just asking him to keep the glass topped up!

Wikipedia mentions that he died in tragic circumstances. I'm told he was pulled over by a dog he was walking whilst drunk in Manor Park/East Ham in 1987, hitting his head and unfortunately never waking up.

Sport is full of these stories, wasted talent, etc. But I'm sure had he been 15 years younger, Marcus Owen would still be a household name today.

Great post. <ok>

That was a very interesting (but very sad) story.

I love stories about the 'olden days' of snooker.


I concur. That was a very interesting read.

Thanks for posting. Much appreciated.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby Cloud Strife

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:Amazing how different Snooker history could have been.


The more I read about the Davis brothers, Joe in particular, the more I think - what a pair of idiots!

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby Yanfan

maske2g wrote:
My Grandad's funeral was on Thursday. He was 90. My grandad was a good player, and I saw him make many big breaks well into his 70s. My grandad played almost every name you could ever think of on the London snooker scene, from the 50's to the 80's and was well known by his nickname Lardy.

Marcus Owen was his good friend, and he was unwavering until his death bed that Marcus Owen was the best player he ever saw. He spoke about him often.

This is the only footage I could find of Marcus Owen. :-)

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby badtemperedcyril

maske2g wrote:This is a highly timely thread.

My Grandad's funeral was on Thursday. He was 90. My grandad was a good player, and I saw him make many big breaks well into his 70s. My grandad played almost every name you could ever think of on the London snooker scene, from the 50's to the 80's and was well known by his nickname Lardy.

Marcus Owen was his good friend, and he was unwavering until his death bed that Marcus Owen was the best player he ever saw. He spoke about him often.

Marcus had several problems in his peak, in the late 50's and 60's when he won 4 amateur championships,
he was effectively barred from the world championship, because the Davis brothers essentially excluded anyone who could challenge their throne, or he simply didn't have the entrance money to compete.

He was an alcoholic and alcoholism consumed him for much of his life. He spent many a night night drunk on my grandads sofa. And my aunt even recalls seeing him sleeping rough in a west end doorway in the 80's. She describes him as a very good looking man who would have been a pin up in snookers TV peak.

I know in the 70's and 80s he gave a few lessons to Steve Davis and Ronnie and heard he didn't charge Ronnie senior, just asking him to keep the glass topped up!

Wikipedia mentions that he died in tragic circumstances. I'm told he was pulled over by a dog he was walking whilst drunk in Manor Park/East Ham in 1987, hitting his head and unfortunately never waking up.

Sport is full of these stories, wasted talent, etc. But I'm sure had he been 15 years younger, Marcus Owen would still be a household name today.


Thanks for this post. Absolutely no question Marcus would’ve been a “star” in todays game. To win the English Amateur Championships in the 50’s and 60’s was like winning the World Championship at the Crucible today, because the professional game barely existed. So for Marcus to have won it four times is evidence of his ability. Brother Gary was also a fantastic player in the 60’s. In the 50’s the PBPA ruled the professional game and turned it into a closed shop until, it was too late and it just died a death. The public got bored with watching the same 3 or 4 players all the time and with the added introduction of TV, professional snooker struggled to command any audience at all. Nevertheless, the top amateurs (the Owen’s, Pat Houlihan, Cliff Wilson, Reardon, Gross etc) were playing in front of packed houses, such was their popularity.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby Prop

Yanfan wrote:
maske2g wrote:
My Grandad's funeral was on Thursday. He was 90. My grandad was a good player, and I saw him make many big breaks well into his 70s. My grandad played almost every name you could ever think of on the London snooker scene, from the 50's to the 80's and was well known by his nickname Lardy.

Marcus Owen was his good friend, and he was unwavering until his death bed that Marcus Owen was the best player he ever saw. He spoke about him often.

This is the only footage I could find of Marcus Owen. :-)



Heads up, embedded YT vids don’t seem to work on here any more for some reason. We can’t see it.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby HappyCamper

Prop wrote:
Yanfan wrote:
maske2g wrote:
My Grandad's funeral was on Thursday. He was 90. My grandad was a good player, and I saw him make many big breaks well into his 70s. My grandad played almost every name you could ever think of on the London snooker scene, from the 50's to the 80's and was well known by his nickname Lardy.

Marcus Owen was his good friend, and he was unwavering until his death bed that Marcus Owen was the best player he ever saw. He spoke about him often.

This is the only footage I could find of Marcus Owen. :-)



Heads up, embedded YT vids don’t seem to work on here any more for some reason. We can’t see it.


they don't work on mobile. but are fine on desktop.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby Yanfan

Prop wrote:
Yanfan wrote:
maske2g wrote:
My Grandad's funeral was on Thursday. He was 90. My grandad was a good player, and I saw him make many big breaks well into his 70s. My grandad played almost every name you could ever think of on the London snooker scene, from the 50's to the 80's and was well known by his nickname Lardy.

Marcus Owen was his good friend, and he was unwavering until his death bed that Marcus Owen was the best player he ever saw. He spoke about him often.

This is the only footage I could find of Marcus Owen. :-)



Heads up, embedded YT vids don’t seem to work on here any more for some reason. We can’t see it.

Here you go: :-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjtJGCR-HeQ

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby LDS

maske2g wrote:the Davis brothers essentially excluded anyone who could challenge their throne


Lovely post, but I just have to put in some opposition to this particular speculation that's become a bit of a truth-myth regarding a lot of the old-time nearly greats of the down-time era.

The Davis brothers did not run from opposition, quite the opposite. Joe retired from the game prematurely precisely because he felt the game lacked excitement with him winning all the time. He didn't compete after 1946 in the professional game.

So the argument is that they didn't want competition for Fred? Well, no. They were delighted when Donaldson came along and gave Fred a whooping, because it spiced things up. Fred himself then didn't win any world titles after the 1950s and was more than happy to be a good loser for the next 3 decades, including the era under discussion.

I'm not saying they didn't exclude people, but the idea that it was because they were afraid of competition is the false myth. All of the evidence points away from this. This doesn't suggest there weren't other reasons, just this specifically wasn't the reason.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby maske2g

Sorry...not "speculation". Quotes from someone who was there, and lived it, with one of the players in question.

I think if I was to speculate, I would say, It wasn't really a "world championship" with 8 players was it? Just good branding. The Uk Amateur had 64 players, and 3 qualifying rounds. That was a proper championship

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby LDS

They might have been protective of their professional PR, but that is a completely different scenario to them being afraid of being beaten on the table.

Even in the modern era players find themselves being banned or excluded, for a whole host of reasons.

As you said, Owen was a chronic alcoholic. I've no doubt if you're trying to promote your business in places like family holiday camps, then being a chronic alcoholic might not look too good on your CV. And let's not forget, chronic alcoholism effects different people differently. Some people are bearable even in that state, some people aren't. Take late-era Alex Higgins as a good example of that.

I agree, there's an argument to be made that they were just too obsessed with their PR, to the detriment of the wider game, but society had different biases pre the permissive society than it did after. What did and didn't constitute scandalous behaviour started changing a great deal in the late 60s, and it's no coincidence that the tour started expanding soon after.

So I think the quote is "They were afraid of the tour's PR being damaged" rather than "they were afraid of losing snooker matches", when people talk about their "throne".

Just as it's the same today, but with some different and some still the same societal biases.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby badtemperedcyril

The “closed shop” situation in the professional game came down not to a fear of losing but to money. The BA&CC had been the self appointed authority of the game since the early days of the billiards championship (late 1800’s) but in 1952 the professional players broke away due to a disagreement over the distribution of prize money for the 1951 world snooker championship. From there on the PBPA took control over the professional game. Everything revolved around Leicester Square Hall (the rebuilt temple of the game - formerly Thurston’s, that had been bombed during the blitz) and the sponsorship of the News of the World. Joe Davis may have retired from the World Championship in 1946 but he certainly didn’t retire from playing. He remained the main attraction for the next decade and controlled the professional game with an iron fist. He was a director of Leicester Square and the principal negotiator with sponsors. Joe retired from championship play to protect his “unbeaten” record but his omission soon devalued it. Regardless of who won the championship, the public still regarded Joe as number one. Indeed, one of the “perks” of winning the championship was the right to play Joe off level over a week or 2 week match. This annual extravaganza was a bigger attraction than the world championship itself. The snooker season was dominated by the News of the World tournament, played at Leicester Square, with the championship fitting in around it. Joe conceded handicaps to everyone, except Fred. Rex Williams (the English Amateur champion) was admitted as a professional in 1951, just prior to the “break away” - thereafter, there would be no new professionals until 1968. By the mid-1950’s, the public were getting bored with watching the same few professionals playing week long matches - the game was crying out for fresh blood - but rather than open the News of the World tournament up, Joe’s opinion was that there wasn’t enough money to go around and so in 1956, following the closure of Leicester Square Hall, even the likes of Williams, Jackie Rea, John Barrie and Kingsley Kennerley were shut out as the News of the World was reduced to a “four man” round robin between Joe, Fred, Donaldson and Pulman. The professional game was dying a death but Joe refused to let anyone in. By this time the amateur game was thriving. The likes of Cliff Wilson, Pat Houlihan, Geoff Thompson, Ray Reardon, Ronnie Gross and of course, the afore mentioned MARCUS OWEN and brother Gary, were packing halls out all over the country. If only Joe had had the foresight to let them in to the professional ranks the record books would have looked very different. The PBPA was never a governing body in those days, rather it simply organised the News of the World and World Championship for its “private” professional club. Meanwhile, in 1965, Houlihan beat Spencer for the English Amateur title in front of 1,300 at Blackpool Tower Circus whilst Pulman and Williams were embarking on a farcical 49 match tour of South Africa for the resurrected professional title. There’s no doubt the best players of the late 50’s and 60’s were the amateurs, so although people today think of Reardon and Spencer as 70’s players, they were actually amongst the best amateurs throughout the 1960’s as well. In defence of Pulman, he showed was a great player he was by reaching the 1970 World final after the game was opened up. He beat David Taylor (1968 World Amateur champion) 31-20 and then demolished Gary Owen (twice World Amateur champion) 37-13 before losing an epic encounter with Reardon 37-33, having recovered from 13-27 down. To conclude, there’s no doubt Joe did much good to the early development of snooker but his control over the professional game ended up being part of its downfall. I do believe it was more a case of not wanting to share what little prize money there was on offer rather than shying away from the opposition. The professionals also had to contend with the advent of television taking away much of its audience - funny that when colour television was introduced it would contribute so much to the games renewed popularity.

Re: Best unexpressed snooker talent?

Postby Yanfan

badtemperedcyril wrote:The “closed shop” situation in the professional game came down not to a fear of losing but to money. The BA&CC had been the self appointed authority of the game since the early days of the billiards championship (late 1800’s) but in 1952 the professional players broke away due to a disagreement over the distribution of prize money for the 1951 world snooker championship. From there on the PBPA took control over the professional game. Everything revolved around Leicester Square Hall (the rebuilt temple of the game - formerly Thurston’s, that had been bombed during the blitz) and the sponsorship of the News of the World. Joe Davis may have retired from the World Championship in 1946 but he certainly didn’t retire from playing. He remained the main attraction for the next decade and controlled the professional game with an iron fist. He was a director of Leicester Square and the principal negotiator with sponsors. Joe retired from championship play to protect his “unbeaten” record but his omission soon devalued it. Regardless of who won the championship, the public still regarded Joe as number one. Indeed, one of the “perks” of winning the championship was the right to play Joe off level over a week or 2 week match. This annual extravaganza was a bigger attraction than the world championship itself. The snooker season was dominated by the News of the World tournament, played at Leicester Square, with the championship fitting in around it. Joe conceded handicaps to everyone, except Fred. Rex Williams (the English Amateur champion) was admitted as a professional in 1951, just prior to the “break away” - thereafter, there would be no new professionals until 1968. By the mid-1950’s, the public were getting bored with watching the same few professionals playing week long matches - the game was crying out for fresh blood - but rather than open the News of the World tournament up, Joe’s opinion was that there wasn’t enough money to go around and so in 1956, following the closure of Leicester Square Hall, even the likes of Williams, Jackie Rea, John Barrie and Kingsley Kennerley were shut out as the News of the World was reduced to a “four man” round robin between Joe, Fred, Donaldson and Pulman. The professional game was dying a death but Joe refused to let anyone in. By this time the amateur game was thriving. The likes of Cliff Wilson, Pat Houlihan, Geoff Thompson, Ray Reardon, Ronnie Gross and of course, the afore mentioned MARCUS OWEN and brother Gary, were packing halls out all over the country. If only Joe had had the foresight to let them in to the professional ranks the record books would have looked very different. The PBPA was never a governing body in those days, rather it simply organised the News of the World and World Championship for its “private” professional club. Meanwhile, in 1965, Houlihan beat Spencer for the English Amateur title in front of 1,300 at Blackpool Tower Circus whilst Pulman and Williams were embarking on a farcical 49 match tour of South Africa for the resurrected professional title. There’s no doubt the best players of the late 50’s and 60’s were the amateurs, so although people today think of Reardon and Spencer as 70’s players, they were actually amongst the best amateurs throughout the 1960’s as well. In defence of Pulman, he showed was a great player he was by reaching the 1970 World final after the game was opened up. He beat David Taylor (1968 World Amateur champion) 31-20 and then demolished Gary Owen (twice World Amateur champion) 37-13 before losing an epic encounter with Reardon 37-33, having recovered from 13-27 down. To conclude, there’s no doubt Joe did much good to the early development of snooker but his control over the professional game ended up being part of its downfall. I do believe it was more a case of not wanting to share what little prize money there was on offer rather than shying away from the opposition. The professionals also had to contend with the advent of television taking away much of its audience - funny that when colour television was introduced it would contribute so much to the games renewed popularity.

:goodpost:

I love stories about the 'olden days' of snooker. :-)