Talk:Century break

Century break

I feel that the very first statement, while not incorrect, doesn't convey the entire meaning of a century break: In snooker, a century break (sometimes referred to as a ton) is a score of 100 points or more within one visit at the table without missing a shot and requires potting at least 25 consecutive balls.
I prefer this version: In snooker, a century break (sometimes referred to as a ton), is a score of 100 points or more in one visit to the table without missing a shot. This would require, at the very least, potting 25 consecutive balls.
Opinions? --Moitraanak (talk) 14:22, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Redundant references

@Betty Logan: Although those references are valid, it seems to me that there is no point in having a reference (for example) for Bingham's 500th, when the threshold reached is 600, and we have a valid reference for his 600th. If these redundant references are to be left in, then surely there should be eight for O'Sullivan, for his 500th through to his 1200th.  Alan  (talk) 10:28, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

If some of them are no longer sourcing the thresholds we have them down for then I would just remove them rather than commenting them out. Betty Logan (talk) 10:31, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I disagree. If somebody (possibly me) finds sources for all the thresholds fom 500 up, then commenting out the ones we already have makes future editing easier.  Alan  (talk) 10:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

... I'll do some searching to see if I can find references for all the thresholds fom 500 up. This could take a while, especially for Hendry.
In the meantime I will revert your edit so that only the relevant threshold is referenced.  Alan  (talk) 12:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Why do we need a source to say Hendry has passed 500 centuries when it is well sourced that he has passed 700? Betty Logan (talk) 13:34, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Well of course you are right, we don't. That is why I commented out those redundant references in the first place (which you reverted).
Do you therefore think it's not worth bothering searching for these other references? I made a start but it would take a long time.  Alan  (talk) 13:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I reverted your edit because I didn't agree with your reasoning in the edit summary i.e. that we don't need multiple references. I agree up to a point, but it seemed like you were commenting out references from much stronger sources than Snooker.org. Sometimes having a couple of sources is useful if they are both weaker sources. If your rationale is that they are sourcing outdated information, thus precipitating newer sources for higher thresholds then it would be more sensible to just delete sources that no longer source the threshold that the player is on. Betty Logan (talk) 13:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

OK - point well made. I'll remove the commented out stuff. I think I'll give up the searching I just started. Way too difficult.  Alan  (talk) 14:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

"Players with 500 or more" table

@Betty Logan: Following on from the "Redundant references" discussion above, I did carry on searching for references for the previous thresholds, and have been fairly successful. There are only seven thresholds where I haven't yet found sources: O'Sullivan's 500th, 600th, and 700th; Hendry's 500th and 600th; Higgins's 500th; and Ding's 500th.
So I have put together a table with them all in, which you can find in my sandbox. I have used footnotes rather than {{citation needed}} to avoid the table getting too wide. I'm not 100% convinced that the "Tournament" column is necessary, as it adds a lot of width to the table. I have made the table sortable, but that feature is not absolutely necessary and can be easily removed, but I like it.
I'd be interested to know what you (and Lee Vilenski, Nigej, KDayne, and anybody else) think of this table.  Alan  (talk) 17:48, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

As much as I realise this took a lot of work, is it really something that people look back on for information? In five years time, is anyone going to worry what year Mark Williams made his 600th break, or will it just be the total he finishes his career with. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

That's a fair point. I don't want to publish it without the seven missing references anyway.  Alan  (talk) 18:38, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

The thing you've got to bear in mind is that we are not all that interested in the thresholds themselves. They are just a means to an end—it is easier to find a source telling us that someone has passed 500 centuries than it is to find a source telling us they are on 543 centuries. Also, we don't want to be updating every count every tournament, so the thresholds approach helps us source the table, helps us keep it up to date without having to constantly update it, but still provides a solid overview of break-building among the top players. Betty Logan (talk) 07:50, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

You might not be interested in the thresholds as such, but I am. These milestones are now widely reported in the press. I find it interesting to see the chronology of the thresholds reached, which my new table provides. But, as I said above, I don't want to publish it without the seven missing references.  Alan  (talk) 08:21, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm explaining the rationale for why we have them. When Chris Turner was alive and regularly tracked centuries the list looked like this: . I just don't see the point in maintaining a list of historic thresholds. Obviously, if someone has passed 600 centuries then they have passed 500, so all you are really doing is recording the date of when a certain player passed a certain threshold. Yes, some outlets report a significant threshold when it is passed by a certain player, but it is reported as a going concern. I am not aware of any outlet maintaining a historical record of when players passed certain century thresholds. Personally I think this falls into WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Betty Logan (talk) 08:43, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

I totally understand the rationale. I just find it fascinating that, for instance, it only took 11 months for Trump to go from 600 to 700, but it took Hendry nearly four years to go from 600 to 700.
Hermund Årdalen at snooker.org does not maintain a historical record as such, but notes most of these milestones in the tournament pages.
WP:INDISCRIMINATE states: "statistics should be placed in tables to enhance readability", and that is what I have done.  Alan  (talk) 09:40, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

...and I now have references for all of the past thresholds, which I have added to the table in my sandbox.  Alan  (talk) 08:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm having a bit of a rethink about this table. With Murphy now only six below the 700 threshold, Ding 15 below 700, and even O'Sullivan only 18 below the 1,300 threshold, the table (with the previous thresholds added in) becomes much more complicated to edit and update, whereas the current table is relatively easy.
So I think it might be best to leave it for now. I will therefore update the current table to make it sortable and add a tournaments column (see my sandbox), unless anybody has any strong objections.
I will keep the new table in my sandbox, with all the additional citations (most provided by Hermund Årdalen), since I am now working on a way of automating the update process, but that might take some time, and it is way down in my list of priorities. Comments please.  Alan  (talk) 14:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

...and since nobody objected for a couple of days, I decided to be bold and so I have done that.  Alan  (talk) 10:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm fine with the re-vamp. I honestly think you would have been wasting your time by adding previous thresholds. Betty Logan (talk) 22:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I've already wasted a lot of my (and Hermund Årdalen's) time on this. I still have all the citations if I decide to revisit it.  Alan  (talk) 09:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

@Betty Logan: Kyren Wilson only needs four more centuries to hit the 500 threshold, which I expect he will do in the Championship League Winners' Group tomorrow or on Wednesday, so adding him to the table will be no problem as long as we can find a reference. If we can't get one easily, we could always put in a {{cn}} tag. Also Shaun Murphy is only three below the 700 threshold, but he's not playing again until 11 February at the Welsh Open.  Alan  (talk) 20:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

@Betty Logan: Kyren Wilson just got to 500 in the Welsh Open, so I've put it in with a {{cn}} tag for now.  Alan  (talk) 18:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

...and I just added a reference.  Alan  (talk) 18:37, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Possible 2026 additions/changes

FYI: I've done some calculations based on players' number of centuries since they turned pro, and the next thresholds to be reached. I would expect the following to reach thresholds during 2026:

• Mark Allen should get to 700. (on 682 as of 7 December 2025)
• Mark Williams should get to 700. (on 686 as of 7 December 2025)
• Ryan Day should get to 500. (on 484 as of 7 December 2025)
• Robbie Williams should get to 100. (on 95 as of 7 December 2025)
• The Class of '92 should get to 3,100. (on 3,051 as of 7 December 2025)

 Alan  (talk) 19:22, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Notes

Why have we got the exact totals (unreferenced) for the players with more than 500 now? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:36, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

I put these in. They are referenced via SnnokerInfo. If there's a problem with them, feel free to remove them.  Alan  (talk) 14:41, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

We really should cite notes inline. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:53, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

OK - I'll do that. Bit busy just now.  Alan  (talk) 14:58, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Done that now.  Alan  (talk) 15:48, 3 May 2026 (UTC)