Re. Cyril: Generally spectators prefer quick frames with big breaks over tactical frames. I'm sure everyone likes the occasional tense frame, but I was surprised at myself at how bored I felt towards the end of the Trump-Robertson UK final when the frames started averaging 30 minutes, and clearly both players were feeling it. It would've been great just as a deciding frame, but 5 hours in that style was a bit much. Perhaps the absence of a crowd is felt particularly acutely when there's prolonged broken play.
It would be fun, as an experiment, to throw the top 16 in a tournament with a thick cloth and dull cushions to see who comes out on top/who gets most rattled by the conditions, but there's isn't a big enough audience for that style of play continuously. Although recently I found a lament by Steve Davis in an interview around 2005, basically saying what Cyril said, that the really fast cloths and one-visit scoring were an alien game to him and had effectively de-skilled break building. I was a little surprised at reading that, as I didn't remember Davis putting it in such blunt terms before, but I guess it's a sentiment probably shared by older players who had learned to breakbuild in a different way.
The problem with one scoring visits is that they decide matches on smaller margins. If a fluke or fortuitous nudge, or lucky pack split, turns into a hundred break, you'd probably need to decide matches over more frames to minimise the effects of this. However, as long as people generally agree that the best players are winning tournaments consistently - Trump, O'Sullivan, Selby, Robertson are consistent winners - then there won't be any push to change the conditions.
Re. the original question: I do find the talk about centuries monotonous. This isn't to slight the OP, but I don't want Dennis Taylor or Phil Yates telling me this is John Higgins' 837 career century break - a number which means nothing - each time they approach 100. In terms of separating skill between players, I'm really only interested in the century strike rate per frames, as all other stats are distorted by number of frames or matches played per season, length of career, etc. And even then, it's not like all players are trying equally hard to make centuries in the first place (e.g. Jimmy White, Mark Williams, etc...)