Post a reply

ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby Pink Ball

Being posted now as I won’t be here at midnight.

Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton (Best of 20 frames)
Group: A
Date: November 30
Match: Six of six
Match day: Three of three
Venue: Tempodrom, Berlin, Germany

Vote for which of the two players you think was greater. Vote honestly, and leave your bias out of it. Don’t vote for a player just because you like them, don’t vote against a player just because you dislike them.

Consider the table conditions to be whatever conditions would have the least impact on the result.

You can use your own personal criteria for measuring greatness once it’s free of any bias towards/against (delete as applicable) players you like/dislike (delete as applicable).

Being posted now as I won’t be here at midnight.
Last edited by Pink Ball on 29 Nov 2020, edited 1 time in total.

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby Pink Ball

Donaldson leading by 1 vote to 0. If it finished that way, it would count as an 11-0 win. The winner automatically gets 11 frames, the loser gets a frames total according to the percentage of votes he got relative to the winner.

0% of 1 is 0.

The pitfalls of this format.

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby Empire State Human

Tough to say when I've never seen any footage of Walter Donaldson playing. And it's another cross-generational match-up - I still haven't decided how exactly I want to judge these.

I suspect Charlton was the better player, and may have actually been more attacking than Donaldson who was reputedly very risk-averse. But Donaldson was twice world champion whereas Eddie wasn't, and I'm sure Donaldson had the game to make it very tough for Eddie had they clashed in a straight head-to-head. So I think Donaldson shades it, despite winning in a relatively weak era.

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby SnookerEd25

This is an interesting match-up.

None of us will have seen much (if any) footage of Donaldson, so are basing our knowledge of him on what we've read and the results he generated (bare numbers).

Conversely, a large number of us will have seen plenty of footage of Charlton and there are enough posters on here who will have watched the tournaments live during the 80s/early 90s so we think we have a fair assessment of his game.

However, the unknown in this is quite how good steady Eddie may have been at his peak.

Consider this; he was born in 1929. When the TV boom really took off, the early 80s onwards, he would have been in his 50s. This could hardly be considered his 'peak' years. We would generally assume that a players peak (in most cases, though certainly not all) would be mid to late 20s - to mid thirties. Most would start to show signs of decline as they approach their 40s and although we have the anomolies of O'Sullivan & Williams winning world titles in their mid-40s in recent years, nobody would argue they are anywhere near as good as when they were at their absolute best.

So lets assume Charlton's (potential) peak years would have been his mid thirties (if not earlier) - the 1960s. A period when the sport was dead on it's a*se in the UK (the traditional power base). Though he was competing regularly in Australia it wasn't until the 1970s that he started performing regularly in the UK and, although in his mid 40s, showed enough consistency to forge a position towards the top of the World rankings and become a serious contender for the major titles, although he never quite managed to claim one. Had he been 10 years younger, he might well have done.

So a tough, gritty competitor is what we remember with a solid and reliable tactical game which made him a handful for anyone for much of the decade - in 1989 he's still holding a no.19 ranking in his 60th year.

So I'm going for Charlton - just - on the basis that at his peak he would have been a better player than the 80s version i grew up watching, and that version was still extremely hard to beat at the very least.

But there wouldn't have been much in it I suspect, I just feel Eddie would have ground out the win 11-8, 11-9 - something like that.

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby chengdufan

Born in October 1929, I have Charlton ranked as follows:
Top 8 until 1984 (aged 54)
Top 16 til 1985 (55)
Top 32 till 1989 (59)
Top 64 until 1994 (64)

Which players of the current era do you think could have a record like that?

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby Ck147

chengdufan wrote:Born in October 1929, I have Charlton ranked as follows:
Top 8 until 1984 (aged 54)
Top 16 til 1985 (55)
Top 32 till 1989 (59)
Top 64 until 1994 (64)

Which players of the current era do you think could have a record like that?

None, it were easier back in olden days.

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby chengdufan

Ck147 wrote:
chengdufan wrote:Born in October 1929, I have Charlton ranked as follows:
Top 8 until 1984 (aged 54)
Top 16 til 1985 (55)
Top 32 till 1989 (59)
Top 64 until 1994 (64)

Which players of the current era do you think could have a record like that?

None, it were easier back in olden days.

I'd say that were true up to 1990. After that though there was a massive influx of talent to the game and the old timers who couldn't hack it quickly dropped out of sight. Even giving the new players a few years to get established, Charlton was still there in the top 64 in 1994, aged 64.
I'd say the quality of the lower ranked players in the early 90s was comparable with, if not better than those around today.

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby SnookerEd25

chengdufan wrote:
Ck147 wrote:
chengdufan wrote:Born in October 1929, I have Charlton ranked as follows:
Top 8 until 1984 (aged 54)
Top 16 til 1985 (55)
Top 32 till 1989 (59)
Top 64 until 1994 (64)

Which players of the current era do you think could have a record like that?

None, it were easier back in olden days.

I'd say that were true up to 1990. After that though there was a massive influx of talent to the game and the old timers who couldn't hack it quickly dropped out of sight. Even giving the new players a few years to get established, Charlton was still there in the top 64 in 1994, aged 64.
I'd say the quality of the lower ranked players in the early 90s was comparable with, if not better than those around today.


I think they had more of an all-round game. Today, it’s more about potting & break-building.

I watch a lot of old matches from the 80s & 90s & marvel at some of the tactical battles. Growing up back then I can appreciate them whereas a lot of fans today seem to prefer big breaks in abundance. I’d probably be the same had I started watching in the last 20yrs but as an older-school fan multiple centuries with no tactical battles can leave me cold. A mixture I can appreciate.

Thanks for posting Eddie’s Chengdu-rating, was coming on to look those up just now...

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby Pink Ball

LDS wrote:Yes, since this is comments rather than a poll, can I be allowed to ask for a draw for this one: ergo, if there's only one vote in it, then cast my vote in the direction which makes it a draw. Or, if greater than one vote, then the vote goes to whoever's losing.

No.

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby LDS

Pink Ball wrote:
LDS wrote:Yes, since this is comments rather than a poll, can I be allowed to ask for a draw for this one: ergo, if there's only one vote in it, then cast my vote in the direction which makes it a draw. Or, if greater than one vote, then the vote goes to whoever's losing.

No.


Why?

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby badtemperedcyril

I think actually for Donaldson to have beaten Fred Davis so comprehensively when Fred was close to his best (1948) tells you how good he was. Ok, so Fred sussed out how to get the beating of him thereafter but nevertheless it was a mighty performance from the 40-year old Scot.

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby SnookerEd25

Dan-cat wrote:Totally with you on that Ed. I like a mix of both really. I like sport, not tons.


Good to hear Dan, and by the same token if every frame turns into a tactical battle that too can become a dour slog.

I think my favourite frames are those where one player gets in with 50 or 60, breaks down and player 2 comes in and either steals the frame with a 60something of their own, or turns it into a battle on the colours. If it's a decider, and the midnight oil is burning - all the better :D

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby SnookerEd25

Dan-cat wrote:Yes Ed... i've heard Steve Davis describes that as the best kind of frame. Player gets 50 odd, player b comes back, and a battle on the colours :-D


Not going to argue with the nugget ...

:bowdown:

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby badtemperedcyril

Walter and Eddie were both plain ball strikers. As Fred Davis said, "Walter avoided using side as if using it would give him some sort of disease".

Walter was an outstanding potter - "the best long potter ever" (was a view held by Joe, Fred and Pulman) but his reluctance to use side meant that he often forwent ideal position. According to Fred's autobiography, Walter would make 30, 40 or 50 always with the cue-ball slightly out of position but keeping going because of his brilliant potting. Then he'd run away for safety. His long potting, although extremely consistent was mostly restricted to shot to nothings. He would rarely take on a difficult pot where there was a danger of leaving his opponent in if he missed.

In 1947, Fred tried to force the issue by taking on risky pots himself and paid the penalty. Walter, who had locked himself away in a friends loft for months of solo practice, was extremely sharp and took full advantage.

Thereafter, Fred decided that the best way to beat Donaldson was to take him on at his own game. By taking no risks, and, because Fred was generally the more fluent scorer of the two, he'd force Donaldson into taking on a few risky pots to get in. This proved a highly astute game plan by Fred but the downside was that it led to long bouts of safety and fewer large breaks. In 1948, several six frame sessions were running into 3½ hours duration. Bearing in mind, these were best of 145 frame finals played over 24 sessions (two weeks), they were the ultimate test of snooker endurance.

Fred Davis and Walter Donaldson met in EIGHT consecutive World Championship finals, with Davis winning in 1948, 49, 51, 52, 53 and 54 and Donaldson in 1947 and 50.

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby SnookerEd25

Muller wrote:Your posts are always o interesting Cyril, certainly to someone interested in the olden days as I am!
Sounds like Donaldson was a it like Perrie Mans?


Oddly enough, From Cyril’s posts Donaldson sounds more like the 80s Eddie Charlton to me...

I haven’t seen too much of Mans, but from what I have seen he is far more cavalier than steady Eddie or dear old Walter...

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby badtemperedcyril

No, I think Donaldson was far more calculated. If you left a half ball long shot to nothing, return to baulk, he'd pot them all day long. Or a long just off straight pot where he could follow through to the top cushion and back down to baulk.

Mans just hammered them in from all over the place!

S25 - I think the word "cavalier" is an exceptionally good choice!

Re: ATWSC Group A: Walter Donaldson v Eddie Charlton

Postby SnookerEd25

badtemperedcyril wrote:No, I think Donaldson was far more calculated. If you left a half ball long shot to nothing, return to baulk, he'd pot them all day long. Or a long just off straight pot where he could follow through to the top cushion and back down to baulk.

Mans just hammered them in from all over the place!

S25 - I think the word "cavalier" is an exceptionally good choice!


<ok>