Top 269 vid final edit complete & uploaded & thanks

This is now a new thread for those who took interest in helping me complete the mammoth task of creating a video that, hopefully, provides an entertaining history of the World Snooker Championships.

While the video is not entirely complete, there is still a very few snooker players missing, it is as complete as it can be in the timeframe of reasonability.

The video can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wjFEZiyu1A

Comment, rate, subscribe, tell all ur mates, yadda, yadda, yadda. Feel free to love on it or hate on it or whatever, no comments will be removed other than the usual unrelated relentless spam or the vilest of extreme boundary pushers. Usual stuff.

I'm creating this as a new thread because the old thread is now quite sprawling and no longer relates to the current video. And the video still requires help from those who enjoy giving it.

There's just no time limit to the help any more. I shan't make another version of it until at least after the next WSC in 2021 and am even thinking about not updating it every year but rather every 3 years, to give everyone the chance to properly move around a bit.

But in the mean time, this thread can act as a resource for any of the remaining missing people and people who need improving. I'll update them as and when, they just wont appear in the video until its updated version is released either next year or in 3 years time.

If it not updated after 3 years, please feel free to assume I'm dead and steal the vid and update it yourself.

Those still missing (most of which are indeed presumed dead):

Albert Cope (1927-1928)
Nat Butler (1927-1930)
Clare O'Donnell (1936)
Joe Brady (1927)
Kelsall Price (1929)
Bill Withers (1937)
Bert Terry (1936)
Ron Mares (1975)

Harry Stokes (1954-1955) is missing from the video, but someone has emailed me saying they have a pic of him, too late for this vid, but possibly no longer missing, I'll know when I see it).

Those that need improving:

John Bear (1982) (needs one age appropriate)
Mike Dunn (2002) (ditto)
Mark Fisher (1983) (current one indistinguishable, if it is even him)

And any others you think would look better than the one in the video, particularly of players who are too obscured, too fuzzy, or B/W when they should be colour.

I'll add a note to the other thread directing people to the new thread & I will no longer be following the old thread.

To those who helped on the previous thread:



If it's inspired anyone reading to make a vid, feel free to also use this thread to get any information & help out of me should you feel unconfident or unknowledgeable about anything regarding vid making.

Harry Stokes, who just missed the cut by about 12 hours (story of his life no doubt):



He will appear next time, whenever that will be.

lol @ Harry Stokes.

Cool video. It was fun seeing some players who I knew by name only. Obviously a ton of work went into it.

A very minor thing is I noticed you have Mark King pictured as Andy Hicks. That could be corrected in the next one.

Ironically 269 was the number used for Vegan demonstrations used years ago for animal cruelty awareness.

I am 269.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7qUfY1hTvA

Empire State Human wrote:A very minor thing is I noticed you have Mark King pictured as Andy Hicks. That could be corrected in the next one.

Minor!!!!!



Nooooooooow you tell me...........?



Yeah, next time.

Be a pall & write that in the video comments & I'll pin it to the top.

Off to bed now, work AM sadly.

vodkadiet1 wrote:Ironically 269 was the number used for Vegan demonstrations used years ago for animal cruelty awareness.

I am 269.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7qUfY1hTvA

You'll be amazed what weird and wonderful stuff you'll find on Youtube by typing in random searches

LDS wrote:

vodkadiet1 wrote:Ironically 269 was the number used for Vegan demonstrations used years ago for animal cruelty awareness.

I am 269.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7qUfY1hTvA

You'll be amazed what weird and wonderful stuff you'll find on Youtube by typing in random searches

Even this from the mid 70s:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA-iF45pOlI

Empire State Human wrote:A very minor thing is I noticed you have Mark King pictured as Andy Hicks. That could be corrected in the next one.

So I found out why the mix up with the baldies happened:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEy65skYibU

If you watch the first 30 seconds of this vid, it's the incident where Hicks gets into an argy bargy with Quintin Hann. The clip shows the incident, then Hicks talking, then Hann talking, then cuts to King talking. As someone who's not overly familiar with long-ago looks of two similarly bald snooker players and am not a tabloid reader and so was unfamiliar with the story, I assumed the second bald guy was still Hicks

Apparently King was involved because he stepped in to white knight for Hicks.

Oh well, that means I am indeed going to re-do the video one more time, that's way too stupid an error to leave in, so looks like Stokes will get his airing after all.

I also noticed another little error that I've been blind to for 20 watches now, which I have no idea how I missed.

So there is enough there to make another day of processing worth it.

However... are you sure you've completely revealed all of the errors you've spotted? Are you holding any more back?

Fantastic work

King the White Knight... love it

Dan-cat wrote:King the White Knight... love it

Didn't Quinten Hann batter him is a boxing match which came about as a result of that incident?

Nice video by the way. Still prefer than video with 2 cows doing a 69 you uploaded though

Yes, that's been my most popular video on a permanent basis since it was uploaded. Very depressing from a creative perspective, but it doesn't surprise me and I'm not complaining about the views. It's sequel, the two blackbirds, didn't have the same popularity, which did surprise me. I guess it lacked sex.

Thanks for the positivity about the current proper vid that no-one will care about though, Final Final Final edit will hopefully be uploaded on Monday (tomorrow sometime).

Marco (not fu) wrote:Nice video by the way. Still prefer than video with 2 cows doing a 69 you uploaded though

Brilliant vid, LDS. That must have been a lot of work.

LDS wrote:Yes, that's been my most popular video on a permanent basis since it was uploaded. Very depressing from a creative perspective, but it doesn't surprise me and I'm not complaining about the views. It's sequel, the two blackbirds, didn't have the same popularity, which did surprise me. I guess it lacked sex.

Thanks for the positivity about the current proper vid that no-one will care about though, Final Final Final edit will hopefully be uploaded on Monday (tomorrow sometime).

Hi, LDS. I only just manage to visit Snooker Island occasionally lately, mainly for lack of time. So I have not yet been able to give the video a proper, complete viewing yet. I very much intend to but, as stated (and as is the case for so many of us,) I won't be able to do that for a while.

I do wish to say a couple things to you now though, especially in regards to your pending upload quoted above. You may or may not wish to stop the presses for a short time before you do that upload if you decide to pursue what I will say below.

But first, I want to say a very sincere and well deserved, "Thank you!" Your passion for this is astonishing. I love to see passion in people, no matter what that passion may be. If someone is passionate about needlepoint (or anything really that does not readily grab one's attention), I can be well drawn into that for a time due to the enthusiasm of presentation. A very sad day for me was when the great Crocodile Hunter, Stever Irwin died. His passion for his subject was all-consuming and a viewer could not help but become excited for his excitement. I say this as the highest compliment to you because indeed, with your passion for this project, you are also approaching such levels. You want everything to be just perfect.

And it is with that that I do make a suggestion for a few very, very minor changes. The work as it is would not be diminished at all without these changes, but I expect that you wish to achieve perfection, nirvana in your work.

I will start by saying that unfortunately, I must skip through most of the video for now. If you have been able to read any of my past posts, you will immediately know that one of my passions is Rules, especially for Snooker, but also for other things in general. With this backdrop, I have written quite a few of my own rulesets for various things. And that of course explains my immediate interest in your scoring system. So I admit that I sort of popped through the video stopping here and there to understand your basic concept. Phenomenal. Again, thank you. But then I zeroed in on the end of the video where the points system is explained. The idea behind your scoring system is sound and valid and well thought out. It is a logical and objective ranking of the players. I think you did a wonderful job with font choice and background and timing and transitions, all unglorified decisions that, when done correctly, are not even noticed at all.

But where the (again, very, very slight) improvements can be made is in spellings on these screens. I hope this is something that you can do relatively easily. I really have no understanding of the nuances of filmmaking like this so I have no idea if what I am suggesting will take minutes or days. Obviously, I hope for you that it will be just the former.

So, without further ado, (in other words, I think the above "ado" is plenty sufficient), beginning at time stamp 1:49:21, you may wish to make the following spelling corrections if possible:

(the way it is spelled) -- (the way it should be spelled)

recieves -- receives (occurs twice; this is a very, very common misspelling)
quater -- quarter
notariety -- notoriety
trinagle -- triangle
recoreded -- recorded

Again, I wish to acknowledge your herculean effort in this project and I expect I can likely speak the same for all the members of this forum that have followed and commented in this thread. Well earned and appreciated.

Thanks! & you have no idea! @Holden, not the post above which I haven't read yet.

acesinc wrote:So, without further ado, (in other words, I think the above "ado" is plenty sufficient), beginning at time stamp 1:49:21, you may wish to make the following spelling corrections if possible:

(the way it is spelled) -- (the way it should be spelled)

recieves -- receives (occurs twice; this is a very, very common misspelling)
quater -- quarter
notariety -- notoriety
trinagle -- triangle
recoreded -- recorded

Thanks for the kind words, much appreciated!

& Yes, those spelling issues are exactly the kind of criticism that I do indeed need. I'm an utterly-shit speller and am mildly dyslexic, so missing words, letters and typing letters in the wrong order is something I do without even realising I'm doing it & I can't easily notice it either so I'm also terrible at proof reading, inevitably.

Those kind of changes are relatively easy to fix and all those will indeed be fixed. Super + thank-you there.

And on an even bigger question of spelling, should I change Mark Williams to Mark J Williams? I've noticed this being used a lot more in recent years.

Myself, I cannot answer for the Mark J Williams question. That is by far not my area of expertise and there are so many here on the Island that know the players so well who will be much more qualified to advise you on that point. You can even try your hand at conducting a poll here on Snooker Island if you wish.

The suggestion that I would make is to not rush the re-upload. Quality takes time. You said you wanted to do it tomorrow (Monday), but I would suggest to let the stew simmer a little while. Maybe there are others (like me) who simply have not yet had opportunity to visit SI, notice your thread, and comment/suggest. The important thing for you I think is to collect the data, then implement it in the new revision when you feel confident that the suggestions/corrections have stopped entirely. I suggest giving it a few more days, maybe a week before you upload the (hopefully) final version.

Nah, it's already been 3 months & nearly a whole month of the video being public and criticisable.

I'm not a complete perfectionist, all the (proper) videos I've ever made have had errors in them and it's very important not to be a perfectionist when you create. That's why every film ever made has continuity errors. If you try too hard to erase every error and have an ambition of complete perfection then you'll never release your video, you'll be forever stuck in Tinker-Hell.

For a brilliant summary of what happens in Tinker-Hell all creators should watch the film "Synecdoche, New York" from 2008. The whole film is a treatise on creative perfectionism. Ironically, one of Youtube's most famous film critics attempted to do a complete and perfect analysis of this film, a project he started and... never completed

I can live with spelling errors, typos, glitches in the videos, sound jumps, out of sync sound, and a whole rafts of technical issues, but having Mark King's mug being in Andy Hick's screen, and for that screen to be a quite high ranking and so large a picture is something that's not acceptable. Getting a tiny-pic wrong at the end of the vid I could live with, but not someone in the top 100.

Hence, while I'm there I'll do all the other little things I've noticed.

As this vid will need to be updated one day anyway, maybe in one year, maybe in three, I'm happy for the first edition to be the 'quirky original' in many ways. But that King cock-up was a major cock-up.

There is another Mark Williams listed on cuetracker as Mark Williams (II). In my rankings revisit, I have noticed version 2 playing in the qualifiers alongside version 1 in the early 90s. I imagine this is why the J. comes in. As of the end of the 93-94 season, version 2 hasn't made it as far as the last 128 of any events.

My vote would be not to add Mark's middle J. There is such a huge gap between the level of fame of the two Mark Williams' that there can be no doubt as to who is being referenced.
And I believe the J is added to distinguish the two, rather than because of Mark's personal preference.

chengdufan wrote:There is another Mark Williams listed on cuetracker as Mark Williams (II). In my rankings revisit, I have noticed version 2 playing in the qualifiers alongside version 1 in the early 90s. I imagine this is why the J. comes in. As of the end of the 93-94 season, version 2 hasn't made it as far as the last 128 of any events.

My vote would be not to add Mark's middle J. There is such a huge gap between the level of fame of the two Mark Williams' that there can be no doubt as to who is being referenced.
And I believe the J is added to distinguish the two, rather than because of Mark's personal preference.

I’m pretty sure the J was added because the Mark Williams got MJW’s prize money check once!

Iranu wrote:

chengdufan wrote:There is another Mark Williams listed on cuetracker as Mark Williams (II). In my rankings revisit, I have noticed version 2 playing in the qualifiers alongside version 1 in the early 90s. I imagine this is why the J. comes in. As of the end of the 93-94 season, version 2 hasn't made it as far as the last 128 of any events.

My vote would be not to add Mark's middle J. There is such a huge gap between the level of fame of the two Mark Williams' that there can be no doubt as to who is being referenced.
And I believe the J is added to distinguish the two, rather than because of Mark's personal preference.

I’m pretty sure the J was added because the Mark Williams got MJW’s prize money check once!

Yes, this happened!

The ‘other’ Mark was from Essex I believe, competed for a short period (2-3 years) on the pro circuit without achieving anything of note but was surprised to wake up one morning to find a cheque for some huge amount of money in his post, several days after Mark J. had won a big tournament.

They never met in competitive play, but did film a little ‘I’m Spartacus’-type piece for the BBC shortly after that I seem to remember.

So the final, final, final version has now been uploaded.

My sincerest apologies to anyone who might have sent the previous link to any friends, but the video now has a new link (I accept full responsibility for any embarrassment this may have caused anyone):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wjFEZiyu1A

The OP has also been updated with this new link.

Changes:

Andy Hicks now has the correct photo
Harry Stokes has been added
A video clip has been replaced with an identical clip due to the original glitching
Some minor adjustments to the sound placement in said video clip
Spelling errors in the Scoring System section have been corrected
The music now fades out at the end of the video instead of stopping dead, something the original had but got broken when doing the second upload.

I'm going to go and have a rest now

[but please don't forget to continue keeping an eye out for improvements for future editions]

Sorry, I know you've already uploaded the final edition but these can be put away for future updates.

An adult version of Willie Leigh of Nottingham. Pictured with the World Professional Snooker Championship Qualifying Section Runner Up trophy in 1949, after he'd just been beaten by John Pulman, 18-17 on the final black!


Also, the picture you have of Kingsley Kennerley outside Burroughes Hall, is not him. It's the other fellow!

That's excellent. Nice finds, I'll add them immediately. But sure, they'll have to wait for the next one now, whenever that is.

I mean, if I get the full set I might as well do another re-upload, as I'm not really missing any views, but in the mean time I think it's just the black and white guys that are left, and most of those are tiny pics. So we might as well take our time, I'm sure a few them will turn out to be albatrosses anyway.

10/10.

I'm going through my Billiard Player magazines but I don't get much opportunity to do so, therefore could take a while.

Well, we do have anything between 6 months and 3 years. Assuming we live that long

badtemperedcyril wrote:Also, the picture you have of Kingsley Kennerley outside Burroughes Hall, is not him. It's the other fellow!

Are you suggesting getty images LIED to me!

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/ne ... to/3364854



I feel so bamboozled

@Badtemperedcyril

I've been expecting you to post an image of Kingsley Kennerly that supports your knowledge that Getty images is wrong.

And possibly a second piece of evidence so that it's not entirely one source only versus one source only.

Have you been distracted by far more important things?

Also, with the Christmas break coming up, maybe there'll be time to flick some more pages!