Talk:Century break

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Free ball[edit]

Resolved: No comment over the last 2 years. Armbrust Talk to me Contribs 16:01, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

"To score a century, there must be at least ten reds on the table when the player comes to play. If there are nine reds, then he can only score 99 (9 x 8 + 27 = 99) points at best." What is, when the player has a Free Ball with nine remaining reds? Then he can get 107 points with just nine remaining reds... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:56, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it should clarify, but it obviously means under normal circumstances. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 17:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I sorted this out a few weeks ago. I added this in:"(or nine in a free ball situation)". I don't think it needs any more detail than this. People can go to the free ball article for further clarification. Betty Logan (talk) 18:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

Resolved: Merge was completed. Armbrust Talk to me Contribs 15:47, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result was merge List of snooker players with over 100 century breaks into Century break. -- Betty Logan (talk) 15:33, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I think we should port the List of snooker players with over 100 century breaks into Century breaks, along the lines of the Maximum break article. At the moment we have two articles about different aspects of the same topic. With the Maximum break article we have one article that covers all aspects i.e. the definition of a maximum break, the list of maximums, a list of players that had multiples, and records relating to the maximum break. We could do something along those lines for century breaks: the definition of a century break, the list of players that have had one hundred centuries, and the various records relating to centuries. We can make one good article out of the two we have here and make it a one-stop shop for century breaks. Betty Logan (talk) 04:59, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Which Tournaments Count[edit]

Does anyone know if there is accepted list of tournaments that count as regards the number of centuries scored by the pros. Career totals are often quoted on the TV but no one ever explains what they really mean. I assume all ranking tournaments and PTCs count. What about qualifying rounds? Masters? Scottish Pro Championship? Premier League Snooker? etc

Also we have lists of centuries scored in each tournament in 2011/12 but not a list of the total number scored by each player for the season. (which would be much more interesting) Is there no list anywhere? Nigej 18:44, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Nigel when chris did his list the professional tournaments he didnt include were Power snooker due to the variant rules, shoot out due to the cushion rule and general cup because of the table size every other professional tournament including qualifying stages and the PIOS and q school also counted QueenAlexandria (QueenAlexandria talk) 13:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Cue tracker[edit] has a list of century breaks from 1987 until today:

isn't this a reliable source? Eddie Nixon (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I would say not, because its figures clearly contradict the figures from the BBC. For instance, the BBC say that Hendry retired on 775 centuries but Snooker Tracker thinks he only made 744. The Independent (a high quality British newspaper) says Ron has made at least 678 centuries, whereas Snooker Tracker say he made 6 less than that. We do have a big problem with this page, but while these fansites are roughly accurate there are a lot of discrepencies. Betty Logan (talk) 16:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
That's because cuetracker compiles the data from 1987 and Hendry began his career before that. But for the other players the data seems accurate. Eddie Nixon (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of interest, was the Chris Turner page ever actually confirmed as a reliable source or was it just assumed? I haven't hunted around the site to see if he backed up his info, but just going on appearances it looks like another fansite, albeit a very good one. To be honest, if we still haven't found an acceptable source nearly 18 months after Turner's death, the sensible thing to do would seem to be archiving the current list somewhere until we can provide an up-to-date one again. There doesn't seem much point in hosting an article with a list of the leading century makers in 2011, and at the moment we've got the worst of both worlds, where some entries in the list are more up to date, e.g. Hendry (from independent sources), while others haven't been updated since 2011. As a list it's more or less useless at the moment. EJBH (talk) 01:49, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
It's a real problem isn't it? The jury is out on Chris Turner's site: some claimed he wasn't a reliable source (as per WP:SPS), while others claimed he was since he qualified under the exception at WP:SPS in that he was acknowledged as an expert (he contributed data to Eurosport). Personally I'm happy with him, because we would be allowed to use stats from Eurosport which may or may not have been supplied by him. In the long run I don't really know what to do about the table; without a reliable source that actually collates and ranks the data we are fighting an uphill battle. Does anyone know if Snooker Scene publishes this data? Betty Logan (talk) 02:41, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

please don't revert information which is 3 days old with one which wasn't updated in ages[edit]

Hello, I updated this page on 27 april 2013 with information from 25 april but some people thought that information that is more than 1 year old is more valuable, so instead of reverting back (read doing absolutely nothing) because you don't like that there is only one source of information please find another one more valuable, check it, and add it.

Because of moderators laziness, wikipedia community will loose reputation

p.s: there is now snooker world championship going on, and the list changes a lot, the Eurosport sport commentators complain that information on wikipedia about players is very bad and with lot of mistakes, I wanted to help, but insted found a hostile community of people who don't care about other peoples work and time.

Necromantiarian (talk) 16:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

You didn't face hostility, you simply chose to ignore the note which was attached to the update notice: Please do not update the century counts using the website. Snooker statistics must be sourced to a reliable source(s), and does not meet this criteria due to being self-published. We realize the problem, but replacing out of date information with unreliable information doesn't solve the problem. Besides violating WP:SPS, the webmaster of even admits his data is often incorrect: I will use a reliable source (World Snooker) rather than Wikipedia, I have made quite a few mistakes in recent times and I believe this could be the reason why and doing daily updates should help make fewer mistakes. It's basically a hobby site, and we could probably maintain the data better ourselves if that were allowed. If there was an easy solution to this problem the Snooker project would have have done it itself. Betty Logan (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Updating "List of players with at least 100 century breaks" table[edit]

The table of List of players with at least 100 century breaks is updated up to 29 April, 2013!

Note that you cannot keep the data from almost two years ago in Wikipedia article, just with the reason that you think the given reference is not a good reference!

However, in the future if you find some more reliable reference, you can express your new reference and update the data based on that.

Koorosh1234 (talk|contribs) 14:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

No matter how out of date the data is, it is not acceptable to update it from an WP:SPS hobby site, especilaly one that sometimes uses Wikipedia as a source. If we cannot find an acceptable replacement source then we should contemplate removing the data. Betty Logan (talk) 15:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok, then it's better to remove the table up to the time that a more reliable reference will be found. Because keeping the outdated data from two years ago in the article is not useful anymore! Koorosh1234 (talk|contribs) 15:23, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Century break sources[edit]

As discussed in the two sections above, the century chart was removed since an up to date WP:Reliable source could not be found. Currently, an editor keeps restoring the section with the following three sources:

The problems with each of these sources are as follows:

  1. As explained in the two sections above (#please don't revert information which is 3 days old with one which wasn't updated in ages and #Updating "List of players with at least 100 century breaks" table, is not a reliable source since it is a self-published source. This is confirmed at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/
  2. is also an WP:SPS site run by college students and school kids, who have no discernible background in sports journalism.
  3. The final site, Snooker Archive is an out of date source that used to be used to source this information; it was run by Chris Turner who supplied the snooker statistics to Eurosport, but who unfortunately died two years ago. The source is no longer suitable since it is out of date, and none of the data matches up.

The decision was taken above with another editor to remove the chart until a reliable source ccould be found, so therefore I am going to remove this data one more time, and I would appreciate it if it is not restored without a source that has professional journalistic oversight. Betty Logan (talk) 18:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Ok, thank you for detailed explanation of your opinion. I'm very surprised there is no reliable sources for such needed information. Can we comment in wiki-source the current info, not old one? Can we show the best players, maybe TOP-3 (or TOP-10), using independent media sources? NickSt (talk) 00:58, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

List of players gone again?[edit]

Although it's mentioned that the list of players with over 100 centuries has been merged with this article, I cannot see it in the current page. Was it lost again? Since the original article now redirects here, this list cannot be seen anymore in any article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:35, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately yes. Since Chris Turner died (who used to maintain the "Snooker Archive" that we sourced the data from) it is impossible to find a WP:Reliable source for the chart. Some editors have attempted to restore using statistics from, but this is not a complete or a reliable source. Maybe we could have a "halfway house", just listing the players who have passed the thresholds i.e. 700 centuries, 600, 500 ... 100 without the actual totals, since this is often reported. (@Armbrust: ping) Betty Logan (talk) 01:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
You've got to at least flag up on the page that it no longer does what it says on the tin. I followed a link to a list of players who have scored over 100 century breaks only to find no such list. It has taken me the best part of half an hour to track it down in the history. Please bear in mind that the type of information defines the likely usage and hence the necessity for complete accuracy: in this case the value of the list as it stands is greater than the damage that incompleteness or unreliability of source is likely to cause - so why do I have to hunt it out in the history? Please put some disclaimers and put the list back or remove the page altogether and all the links to it (then somebody else will no doubt re-create it) --Btljs (talk) 05:03, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Reading my comment above I realise it comes across as a bit critical and further research highlights two things: 1. That the editing has been carried out by experienced Wikipedians to whom I defer (it has been several years since I have been properly involved and no doubt the process is much more rigorous now than it was then) and 2. Surprisingly there is no obvious reference point for Snooker stats (unlike, say, cricket). That being said: if it is reliability of sources which is the issue then this is being inconsistently adhered to. Cuetracker is cited for other snooker stats (e.g. prize money) and seems to me to state clearly what data it is including (list of tournaments).
The problem then, may be discovery of mistakes & discrepancies within different sources. Here I do have some experience, having worked in information analysis in the NHS and being well used to creating a meaningful 'truth' from dirty data. For example, while the number of centuries Stephen Hendry has scored may vary from source to source it is 775 +/- 5 i.e. +/- 0.7% It is acceptable then to assume that he leads Ronnnie O'Sullivan @ 730 +/- 5 given their margins of error. I would be very surprised if the top 10 would ever vary by more than a one place change. This, then, is useful information, as long as the caveats are spelled out and surely preferable to simply not having any list at all? It is certainly in line with most other Wikipedia pages and better than some. Btljs (talk) 08:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
The chart was removed—not by me I might add—because we couldn't find an acceptable solution. If you think you can then by all means take a shot at it. The chart is still in the article but just "blanked out", so it's easy enough to bring back. All I ask is that you don't use something like as a source since it uses Wikipedia as a source for its own list. Betty Logan (talk) 11:34, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Proposed solution I have spent some time looking at Cuetracker and it seems a reliable source which allows drill down to full results in all the tournaments it contains. I cannot comment on whether it contains all professional tournaments but that is certainly its aim. It is already cited in most of the individual players' pages for century breaks (and other stats). I suspect the issue with it is the difference between headline figures (e.g. Stephen Hendry 773 instead of 775 reported elsewhere) but I think this is down to other sources including non-professional early career results - they don't say and don't allow drill down so are in some ways less verifiable than Cuetracker. I propose using the Cuetracker Centuries list clearly stating that these are professional tournament centuries. I will leave this for a few days for comments (to avoid more to-ing and fro-ing on this page). Btljs (talk) 04:21, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Update As Cuetracker provides the details of where & when all the centuries come from I compared the total at May 2011 with the results from Snooker Archive (as used by this page at the time) and Cuetracker is light for all players who started in the 90's. My theory is that this is because qualifying round centuries aren't included from earlier than about 2005 and are not readily available. Chris Turner no doubt had his own sources for this period. Not only does this mean that Cuetracker shouldn't be used for this table but it also shouldn't really be cited on the player pages for their career centuries either - unless they started in the last few years. I don't know what the protocol is - I've not found a preferable source. Btljs (talk) 10:42, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Part of the problem is that there is no high quality source tracking centuries, which is why we are in the situation we are in. However, I don't think we need exact centuries counts. We can simply list players that have made 700+ centuries, 600+, 500+ etc right down to 100+. This will be easier to track due to the fact that often it is reported when players cross thresholds (see this example which reports Higgins scoring his 500th century). At least that way there is still some comparative distinction between those that have scored 500 and those that only made 100 or 200). Betty Logan (talk) 11:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. What about the players' pages? Currently they mainly cite Cuetracker (and often out of date at that). Should these be changed to e.g. "No. of centuries: 500 @ 17/04/2012 ref." ? Btljs (talk) 11:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Cuetracker seems to be a pretty good webiste but I'm not sure it qualifies under the Wikipedia' "reliable source" criteria. The main problem with Cuetracker is that it is missing data for older seasons so it may be ok for some players but not for others, so you basically then need another source to corroborate Cuetracker which we wouldn't actually need if we had another source... Betty Logan (talk) 20:14, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Reading though all of this, it seems sensible to use cuetracker for people like Robinson? Nergaal (talk) 14:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
CueTracker is a fansite and therefore not a WP:reliable source. There is nothing to stop me setting up my own CueTracker website, so it is not permitted by Wikipedia's rules. Sources need to be proper websites i.e. BBC, Eurosport etc. I have implemented the solution as discussed with Btljs above. Betty Logan (talk) 14:29, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Why??? cant we have a list with the top players? I am sure there are very reliable links for the top people so why not have at least a list with those over 200? I came here to this article looking for some top and I was really unpleasantly surprised not to find one. Even if the table is not 100% reliable, this is not a FA/FL so stop putting such a high threshold. Nergaal (talk) 12:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

WP:RS is a threshold that applies to all articles whether they are stubs or featured because it is more important. If we had such a source then we would use it, but the table you added was had inaccurate data and was misleading. As you can see we are discussing appropriate solutions and we will progress when there is a consensus. Betty Logan (talk) 13:37, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Backup table[edit]

I want ahead and trimmed down the hidden table to a sensible size with a reasonable amount of refs. The complete table before my trim is below. Nergaal (talk) 12:53, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Rank Player Number of centuries Number of seasons as Pro Number of maximums Refs
1 Scotland Hendry, StephenStephen Hendry 775[1] 27 11[2]
2 England O'Sullivan, RonnieRonnie O'Sullivan 678[3] 20 11
3 Scotland Higgins, JohnJohn Higgins 500[1] 20 7[4]
4 England Davis, SteveSteve Davis 325 34 1
5 Republic of Ireland Doherty, KenKen Doherty 300[5] 22 1[6]
6 England Ebdon, PeterPeter Ebdon 300[7] 21 2
7 England White, JimmyJimmy White[a] 289 32 1
8 Wales Williams, MarkMark Williams 284 20 2
9 Scotland Maguire, StephenStephen Maguire 250[8] 15 2
10 Hong Kong Fu, MarcoMarco Fu 226 15 2[9]
11 China Ding Junhui 221 9 5[10]
12 England Parrott, JohnJohn Parrott 221 27 1
13 Wales Stevens, MatthewMatthew Stevens 220 18 1[11]
14 England Hamilton, AnthonyAnthony Hamilton[b][c] 218 22 0
15 England Selby, MarkMark Selby 214 14 1
16 England Murphy, ShaunShaun Murphy 210 15 1
17 Australia Robertson, NeilNeil Robertson 200[12] 14 1
18 Scotland McManus, AlanAlan McManus 165[13] 22 0
19 Wales Day, RyanRyan Day 162 15 0
20 England Lee, StephenStephen Lee 160 20 0
21 England Bingham, StuartStuart Bingham 156 17 3[14]
22 Thailand Wattana, JamesJames Wattana 149 23 3
23 England Hicks, AndyAndy Hicks[d] 134 21 1[15]
24 England Carter, AliAli Carter 131 16 1
25 Scotland Dott, GraemeGraeme Dott 129 18 1
26 England Harold, DaveDave Harold 126 21 0
27 England Thorne, WillieWillie Thorne 126 26 1
28 England Perry, JoeJoe Perry 124 20 0
29 England Trump, JuddJudd Trump 123 7 0
30 Republic of Ireland O'Brien, FergalFergal O'Brien 123 21 0
31 Northern Ireland Allen, MarkMark Allen 120 10 0
32 Malta Drago, TonyTony Drago 119[16] 27 1
33 Wales Dale, DominicDominic Dale 117 20 0
34 Finland Hull, RobinRobin Hull 115 16 0
35 England Davis, MarkMark Davis 115 21 0
36 England Hunter, PaulPaul Hunter 114 11 0
37 England Pinches, BarryBarry Pinches 113 23 1
38 Wales Morgan, DarrenDarren Morgan 111 18 0
39 Scotland Burnett, JamieJamie Burnett 109 20 1
40 England Walden, RickyRicky Walden 108 13 1[17]
41 England Cope, JamieJamie Cope 105 11 3[18]
42 England Ford, TomTom Ford 102 12 2[19]
  1. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference hendry-higgins was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ "Sensational Hendry Scores 147". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 21 April 2012. Retrieved 5 February 2013. 
  3. ^ "Brittle genius discovers vindication in his own serenity". 6 May 2012. Archived from the original on 9 May 2012. Retrieved 9 May 2012. 
  4. ^ "Higgins Fires UK Maximum". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 5 December 2012. Retrieved 21 December 2012. 
  5. ^ Kalb, Rolf (6 November 2012). "Snooker - Ding souverän - aber verpasst Maximum-Break" (in German). Yahoo! Eurosport. Retrieved 6 November 2012. 
  6. ^ "Doherty Joins 147 Club". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 24 August 2012. Retrieved 5 February 2013. 
  7. ^ Happe, Liam (1 April 2012). "Ebdon edges Maguire in epic final". Yahoo! Sport – UK & Ireland. Yahoo! and Eurosport. Retrieved 1 April 2012. 
  8. ^ Kalb, Rolf (18 February 2013). "Welsh Open - Maguire beendet Durststrecke" (in German). Yahoo! Eurosport. Retrieved 18 February 2013. 
  9. ^ "Fu Through With A 147". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 14 January 2012. Retrieved 5 February 2013. 
  10. ^ "Maximum Man Ding Beats Allen In Classic". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 16 March 2013. Retrieved 16 March 2013. 
  11. ^ "Maximum Madness". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 15 December 2011. Retrieved 5 February 2013. 
  12. ^ Kalb, Rolf (15 February 2012). "Welsh Open - Hendry stürmt ins Achtelfinale" [Welsh Open - Hendry storms into second round] (translation). Yahoo! Sport Deutschland (in German). Yahoo! and Eurosport. Retrieved 16 February 2012. 
  13. ^ "Alan McManus - Season 2012/2013". CueTracker - Snooker Database. Retrieved 17 April 2013. 
  14. ^ "Bingham Makes Maximum in Wuxi". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 1 July 2012. Retrieved 5 February 2013. 
  15. ^ "Handy Andy Makes UK Maximum". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. Retrieved 21 November 2012. 
  16. ^ "Tony Drago - Season 2012/2013". CueTracker - Snooker Database. Retrieved 18 April 2013. 
  17. ^ "Wonderful Walden". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 30 November 2011. Retrieved 5 February 2013. 
  18. ^ "Cope Into Last 16 With Another 147". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 19 December 2011. Retrieved 5 February 2013. 
  19. ^ "Maximum Man Ford Into Last 16". World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. 16 November 2012. Retrieved 5 February 2013. 
  20. ^ "Snooker's Leading Century Makers". Chris Turner's Snooker Archive. Archived from the original on 10 February 2013. Retrieved 30 October 2011. 

Cuetracker updates[edit]

Yes, it is not a RS, but [1] suggests a few extra things that one might be able to find refs for:

  • Ding Junhui, Neil Robertson, Steve Davis are 350+
  • Mark Selby, Marco Fu, Shaun Murphy, Mark Williams are 300+
  • Judd Trump is 250+ (he should not be at 100 since he made 60+ just last season)
  • Stuart Bingham, Mark Allen, Ryan Day are 200+
  • Joe Perry, Allister Carter, Mark Davis, Ricky Walden, Fergal O'Brien, Dominic Dale are 150+
  • Barry Hawkins should be added at 150+
  • Michael Holt, David Gilbert, Martin Gould, Nigel Bond, Liang Wenbo, Mark King, Robert Milkins, Joe Swail should be added at 100+

Nergaal (talk) 15:04, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Missing entries[edit]

  • Ian McCullogh said he made 105; cuetracker says 97 but this also says 105

Nergaal (talk) 15:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

How about some reliable sourcing?[edit]

I find the recent flood of sometimes WP:REVERTWARring edits to be troubling. It can't be that hard to settle on which sources are reliable and mine them for data. There are not enough recorded century breaks in pro snooker on an ongoing basis to justify this level of article chaos. I'm getting more watchlist hits for this article than any other!  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  23:00, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

What article "chaos" are you referring to? There have only been three reverts so far this May (all by me) and to be fair there is always an element of instability at the time of the world championship. Yes, there is some disagreement among editors over which sources are acceptable and your input to the discussions about those at Talk:Century_break#Century_break_sources and Talk:Century_break#List_of_players_gone_again? would be most welcome. The recent flurry of activity has been due to the fact that the list of centuries was restored and we are attempting to find new sources to replace the out-of-date source that was being used. The recent edits by Btljs (talk · contribs) and myself are in accordance with what the two of us agreed was the correct approach, and my revert earlier today was only due to the fact he had used a source that had used Wikipedia as its source i.e WP:CIRCULAR. I suspect this activity will continue for some time, and I suspect that occasionally editors will try to update the counts using snooker fansites, but at the moment I see the article moving in a positive direction than being stuck in a "revert war" cycle. Betty Logan (talk) 00:00, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
My first reaction coming to this article was similar to yours SMcCandlish (talk · contribs) but since then I've done a few hours of web trawling and there is simply no obvious reliable source where you can get player century counts. I like Cuetracker a lot since you can drill down to individual seasons and tournaments to find out where a player got all their centuries but unfortunately when I did this for Jimmy White (who has a higher score on Cuetracker than other sites) I found he had been wrongly awarded 2 centuries in one Pot Black tournament which has only had 6 in its entire history (corrected by SO when I pointed it out). I'm sure that if I looked at other players I would find similar errors. No other site gives this facility and they differ from each other - so how would you choose? It is a strange thing in a sport which seems built for detailed statistics - you can't imagine having any trouble finding cricket centuries and you don't, e.g.Cricinfo but we take the world as we find it not as we wish it to be. There are news articles out there but it's a bit of a slog finding them (especially when they quote Wikipedia in a supposed interview grrr.) and they will never add up to a definitive and up to date table. On the other hand, there is little value in Wikipedia regurgitating a table from another site but there is value in it making people aware that sources should be treated with healthy skepticism. Btljs (talk) 08:30, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

remaining missing entries[edit]

Swail had 93 in Oct 2011. I am sure that with that and a few other refs one could get to 100. Apparently he had 7 just in the 2011/122012/13 season. Nergaal (talk) 23:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
This is where I'm a bit hazy on Wiki-law. Does it count as original research if you add together two totals from different references? Maybe @Betty Logan: can help? Btljs (talk) 08:18, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
You are allowed to do basic arithmetic, but you have to be careful the sources don't cover the same period. For instance, during the world championship we had a source for Robertson's century count going into the world championship and had a running total throughout so were able to deduce the overall total. Betty Logan (talk) 15:49, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
I've seen a few featured lists using something like:
  • <ref group=note> explanation of how data was obtained from ref1 and ref2. </ref> .
Nergaal (talk) 18:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Nergaal (talk) 17:43, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

That Nigel Bond article is fine I reckon. Are you going to put him in? Youtube isn't the source: it's Eurosport or whatever, which is OK if it says it on the recording somewhere. Also I think we only need one source for each entry on the table - the most recent or most accurate. Btljs (talk) 21:26, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
As per Btljs. Youtube is just the host so the RS status of the video comes down to who made it. Since the Eurosport video has a huge Eurosport logo on it then it's it's clearly legit. Betty Logan (talk) 05:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

another site[edit]

Is this site reliable? I found a few seemingly good links there but the figures they provide are significantly below the cuetracker numbers. For updated figures see:

Nergaal (talk) 09:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I looked at this site before and personally I wouldn't touch it with a barge-pole. This is mainly because their 'top 10's are usually subjective things like 'Top 10 Sexiest Female sports stars'. Their terms and conditions page states: "2. ACCURACY:

TheRichest is an entertainment based website providing commentary, general information in relation to celebrities, luxury items, athletes, businesspersons, public figures, lifestyles, wealthy individuals, current trends and entertainment. Information on the site may contain errors or inaccuracies; the Website does not make any warranty as to the correctness or reliability of the sites content. The Website does not provide any warranty or guarantee as to the accuracy of the information. You acknowledge that such information and materials may contain inaccuracies and errors and we expressly exclude liability for any such inaccuracies or errors." This doesn't necessarily make them any worse than many other so called news sites but I wouldn't put much faith in them scrupulously researching their articles.(This is only my opinion). Btljs (talk) 11:04, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

It is user edited so doesn't qualify. Here is a profile of the author for the first link provided. Betty Logan (talk) 12:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

more records[edit]

Are these sites reliable? Nergaal (talk) 19:12, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

  • this says "Walter Lindrum compiled an unofficial 100 break in 27.5 seconds" "William (Billy) Mitchell became the first player to make a thousand break in public"
  • [2] says "Stephen Hendry ... the first player to achieve 100 century breaks in competitive play in one venue", "John Higgins scored the 1000th century to be made at the Crucible Theatre",
  • [3] "Stacey Hillyard became the first female to record a competitive century", "In four consecutive frames Jim Meadowcroft made breaks"
  • [4] says Davis, Joseph [Joe] (1901–1978) "In January 1928 he made the first public snooker century break", " In 1951 and 1954 he made century breaks in three consecutive frames and in 1955, having just made a break of 146, he achieved his dearly held ambition of a break of 147"
  • [5] "Three consecutive century breaks were first compiled in a major tournament by Steve Davis: 108, 101 and 104 at Stoke-on-Trent, Staffs on 10 Sep 1988. In 1998 John Higgins (Scotland) (b. 18th May 1975) became the first to manage the feat in a World Championship match. Peter Ebdon became the first to make four century breaks in five frames, in the European Open qualifying competition at Blackpool on 6 Sep 1992. Stephen Hendry made seven centuries in the final of the 1994 UK Championship, which is a record in a professional match. He also became the first player ever to make five centuries in seven frames""Mark Allen begun his match against Smith with a 111 break, making it a phenomenal six centuries in seven frames." "Michael White is possibly the youngest player to make a century break."

First to 100?[edit]

Who was fist to 100? Was it Davis or Hendry? Nergaal (talk) 20:22, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

still missing[edit]

had 93 in Oct 2011; had 7 just in the 2012/13 season.

Nergaal (talk) 20:34, 17 September 2015 (UTC)


hello everyone, I am the site owner of snookerinfo, I have not come here to defend my site or to try to get anyone to use my centuries list for this page, I just feel I should join the discussion, I understand the reasoning for not being able to use my site.

Firstly, I used to look at Chris Turner's centuries list with great interest, so when he sadly passed away I decided to continue the list from where he'd left off for personal interest, after a while I noticed there weren't any sites that showed the centuries information, I asked on a public forums and someone suggested me creating a site so everyone could have a look at the centuries totals, So obviously I did.

Since I created my site, I have had many discussions with people who also try to keep this data (cuetracker, alexa etc...) as well as people like Dave Hendon (EuroSport commentator) to confirm which tournaments a century break should not count as 'official' and which tournaments they do. I have also had Chris Turners official spreadsheet passed on to me, so I have been able to use all the tally's that he kept and continually update during tournaments. Every time I am watching BBC or EuroSport and they show (or mention) a players career total, I always check right away with mine, the vast majority have matched (only 2 or 3 since I started not matching but usually only by one and I then work on it to find what's gone wrong). I also once sent my totals to Dave Hendon and he said that all my totals matched the ones he had with EuroSport except for Ding (although the reasoning for this has since been resolved).

So really, I just wanted to join this conversion as my site has been mentioned occasionally, I thought I'd get my points across, I think its a shame that no official site records centuries totals as it is a very important part of the game, like goals in football for example, I hope we can find a way to resolve this issue and everyone can see the centuries list because that's the reason I run my site, just to share stats that a lot of snooker fans want to know about. Snookerinfo (talk) 12:41, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

So if that is true, then you have access to reliable sources? You could link BBC or Eurosport articles/videos where they mention he tally where you use the numbers. Nergaal (talk) 13:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Snookerinfo for the details of your work. Sounds like this is effectively primary research? The totals that Chris Turner reached are being updated and regularly checked with other people doing the same thing. It is, therefore, entirely inconsistent to exclude these totals but continue to include those of Chris TuckerTurner. Cuetracker has significantly different totals and publishes the full breakdown of tournaments year by year. For me personally, it would be interesting to be able to compare the breakdown of Snookerinfo with Cuetracker, but I realise that Wikipedians probably shouldn't be trying to influence other sites! Btljs (talk) 14:25, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Not quite sure I understand what you are saying here, where you say 'Chris Tucker', do you mean Chris Turner or Cuetracker? Also, I know that Cuetracker is always adding older tournaments to his database but I don't see how that can affect the totals that Chris Turner got to, I certainly am not questioning the totals he came to, I am just adding onto his database, as I said, I know that mine and cuetrackers totals differ, but for me, the fact that my totals match BBC and/or EuroSport is enough to tell me that I am giving as accurate stats as I possibly can to my visitors, that to me is whats important Snookerinfo (talk) 15:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I am not disagreeing, but if you want to be truly useful and not just try to push your site beyond the external links section, you would not mind disclosing those BBC and/or Eurosport sources, would you? Nergaal (talk) 16:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

But there aren't any official sources from BBC or EuroSport, they don't very often post century totals in their articles, They just simply mention the players career totals during the commentary of a match, usually when the player is approaching another century.

And I'm not trying to push my site beyond the external links section, I just thought I should get involved in the discussion because my site has been mentioned in this talk page a few times, I'm not saying I want you to use my totals, I'm happy for people to just continue viewing the centuries list on my page whilst people coming here to view the centuries list won't be able to until BBC or EuroSport publish...which will probably not ever happen. Snookerinfo (talk) 16:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Any of those matches got posted somewhere like on youtube? Nergaal (talk) 18:21, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

You think I'm going to watch hours and hours of footage just to find when a commentator mentions a players century total and that is only so I can source one player, why waste all that time just so people can look at one player's century total on wikipedia, I might as well save myself the time and people can just come to my site if they want to know century totals. Snookerinfo (talk) 20:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry - I don't think Chris Tucker has time between making movies to keep a snooker database! Seriously, I realise I have to tread carefully where Chris Turner is concerned, and I, in no way, cast any aspersions on his totals. Or yours @Snookerinfo:. But there were lengthy discussions on this page about which sources are appropriate for Wikipedia and the conclusion was/is that no self-edited site can be used. Snookerinfo, Cuetracker and Chris Turner all seem to come under this category, however accurate they all may be. I don't know how BBC, Eurosport etc. get their stats but they may pay a subscription to a research company or the WPBSA may share this info with them but not put it publicly on their pages - that is where you should be putting pressure @Nergaal: if you want better coverage. Btljs (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Chris Turner was the snooker stat guy for Eurosport so his personal archive most likely qualifies under WP:SPS: Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. You can view some of his publications at [6] & [7]. I don't know who provides the stats now, maybe Dave Hendon who commentates for them and edits Snooker Scene. The BBC most likely maintain their own sporting stats. IMO it's one of the things that really sets snooker back as a pro sport; you can't even get something basic such as a list of titles from the official site. Even since Barry Hearn took over, snooker has still basically retained a semi-amateur approach to management (the rankings were devised on a fag packet!) so I don't hold out much hope for the WSA getting its act together in this regard. Betty Logan (talk) 09:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
As Chris Turner isn't around to defend his totals, the point is moot. But is nobody else intrigued how Cuetracker have 23 extra centuries for Jimmy White (fully documented tournament by tournament) up to the time of CT's last entry, 15 more for Steve Davis and 9 more for Willie Thorne - that's a big proportion of Thorne's total? I'd love to be able to do a tournament by tournament comparison but I don't have anything to compare Cuetracker with. There's clearly an established view and if it is challenged that can only be a good thing. Btljs (talk) 08:18, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
That's a pretty huge discrepency beween Turner and CueTracker for Jimmy White. Dave Hendon seems to concur with Chris Turner at least in so much he hadn't passed the 300 threshold by October 2011. Snookerinfo seems to back up both their positions too. I suppose it all depends on the source for their information too, since these newer sources are possibly using Chris Turner as their source for older seasons. Barring actual mistakes, the discrepencies could come from which tournaments they count i.e. maybe Chris Turner only includes WSA sanctioned competition? Either way, Jimmy White has definitely made over 300 centuries by the reckoning of all active sources now so he's in the right tier in the table. Betty Logan (talk) 10:12, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Quick example of what I've said before, Been watching the snooker this morning, John Higgins against Robert Milkins, Higgins made a century in the first frame and the commentators said during the break he'd had 557 centuries in his career, so I checked on my site and I did indeed have 557, Milkins made a century in frame 3, commentators said its his 105th century, checked my records, it is indeed his 105th.

The problem with linking it as you said, this match is not going to be put on YouTube, so there is nowhere online I could link it to, And I'm not going to pause my TV and video it just to link one (or two in this case) players century total.

What I'm trying to say is though, When something like this happens, I check my site and realize for the player I'm checking, I have the same total as an official source, that makes me happy and more re-assurance that I am indeed giving accurate facts to my visitors. Snookerinfo (talk) 09:50, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

It's copyright anyway, so you can't just record it, upload it and link to it. Good for validating your site but no use for WP unless the match is provided in a permanent form by the broadcaster. Btljs (talk) 13:44, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
I know, that's partly what I meant, I was referring to what someone said earlier in this conversation about me linking to a video of the commentators mentioning career totals for the player's Wikipedia page, EuroSport/BBC will not upload it, BBC do upload snooker videos and they only occasionally upload videos of century breaks, even then it is only the three major tournaments.Snookerinfo (talk) 20:13, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Review of Players with 100 century breaks list[edit]

The list is now pretty out-dated overall, but with a few accurate figures (eg. O'Sullivan).

For sourcing, the tally on the individual player articles seems to be more accurate?

For instance, see Joe Perry here:

Century breaks = 189

Yet on the list on this page he's in the 100 threshold, not the 150 one.

Perhaps it needs a systematic review? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

The Joe Perry article gets its century count from Pro Snooker Blog which is a fansite and therefore not a WP:Reliable source. The reason some of the data is out of date is because there is no official source tracking centuries, so we are reliant on things like the BBC and Eurosport publishing the data. Obviously if they don't it doesn't get updated. Betty Logan (talk) 21:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
The Beeb published figures for the top 5 when O'Sullivan equalled Hendry's record. We should include that I think. Also, could we add a column to the table for ones for which we do have an accurate reliable sourced figure? Including the date obviously: e.g. |O'Sullivan|775|13 Jan 2014|
I don't see the point really, because we will still end up with the same problem i.e. outdated figures. It would take us back to the old problem where we had counts that are several months out of date. If the BBC maintained a regular top 5 or top 10 list and updated it after every tournament then that would make the case slightly different, but it's highly likely they have only done it this time due to O'Sullivan breaking the record. Once Ronnie moves ahead of Hendry the order of the top 3 will remain constant for at least another 3-4 seasons, but there are a bunch of players around the 350 mark: Robertson, Ding, Davis, Selby and Fu and I would expect those positions to swap around fairly quickly over the next couple of seasons. The fact is, until either the BBC or World Snooker take on the responsibility of providing regularly updated stats this list will always be playing catch-up. Betty Logan (talk) 08:59, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
We already have a list with outdated figures - not only that they are limited to 'thresholds' and I'm not even sure what the division is - 25, 50 or 100? It's fair enough to round figures for say, book sales where nobody reports them accurately ever, but if they are even occasionally reported accurately, like record sales or century breaks then this should be included. Otherwise you are with-holding information that is properly sourced and accurate at a given date. Btljs (talk) 10:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
If someone has reached 300 centuries then they have still reached 300 centuries even if they have reached 340 centuries. We are not misrepresenting facts with the current system. However, if you say Mark Selby is on 348 centuries or whatever, then that will be incorrect by the next tournament. As it stands it is impossible to keep player totals completely up to date, so the whole chart becomes a nonsense if you have some players ranked by stats from last week and others ranked by stats from a year ago. You are asking for a system that is impossible to implement with the information that is currently on offer. Betty Logan (talk) 11:58, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Proposal for centuries table[edit]

This is my idea for including actual figures where possible. Not every player will have an actual figure in which case there should still be a ref for the threshold with a corresponding date. I'll wait for comments to see if there is any consensus on whether this is an improvement or not.

Still active
Retired player