Topic locked

Tanking Discussion

Postby Roland

There’s been a lot of talk of players having one eye on the World Championship draw and “tanking” for position in the Welsh Open. Robertson avoided Ronnie O’Sullivan when he lost to Graeme Dott ironically sending Dott into his quarter (maybe he fancies the job more given previous Crucible history?). Carter could do the same tomorrow and “tank” to avoid Ronnie in round 2, after all Ali is the one top player with a very poor record against the Rocket.

It’s not good to think like this, but with no money changing hands is it really that bad? Do we all not possess a natural trait of self preservation?

This should NOT detract from rolling rankings which are a revelation. There was nothing worse as a fan in knowing before the World Championships has ended, who could face who in round 2 the following year. And then know for the whole season what the potential scenario was.

My own view is that if a player does not mind so much they lost a match, meaning deep inside they weren’t too bothered because they knew it could play in their favour, then they aren’t World Champion material. When the chips are down and it comes to do or die on the table, the real winners never think about a “tank”.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Wildey

sorry but players that think like that are born losers.

if you cant beat Ronnie or Higgins in the Last 16 what chance have you got in a final.

surely top players want to be WORLD CHAMPION not avoid better players so they can be World Semi finalist.

and as i said on another thread wouldn't it be better to win the Welsh than to tank it and get stuffed in a crucible first round before you actually played the player you tanked a tournament to face.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Rocket_ron

i dont think the players lose of win matches to effect who they draw with, that would be wrong and would currupt the game

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Wildey

if i was a player id rather face the best before they hit their stride once they win the first few matches you really got to play brilliantly to get rid of them.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Bourne

I still don't know why we have this silly scenario when we know half the draw for the Worlds as early as February, and even worse the defending champion automatic top-seed <doh> 1 and 2 seeds in opposite halves always, 3/4 have a 50/50 chance which half they go in, 5-8 50/50 chance which half they go in, 9-16 50/50 chance ... then the qualifiers random. Now I absolutely bet my house that Ali will have an eye on what has happened with the draw for the Worlds now and it will affect his performance today against Higgins. If the draw was done properly, like in tennis, then this scenario would be averted.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby GJ

Bourne wrote:I still don't know why we have this silly scenario when we know half the draw for the Worlds as early as February, and even worse the defending champion automatic top-seed <doh> 1 and 2 seeds in opposite halves always, 3/4 have a 50/50 chance which half they go in, 5-8 50/50 chance which half they go in, 9-16 50/50 chance ... then the qualifiers random. Now I absolutely bet my house that Ali will have an eye on what has happened with the draw for the Worlds now and it will affect his performance today against Higgins. If the draw was done properly, like in tennis, then this scenario would be averted.



i like the current format

<cool> :D :D

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Wildey

Bourne wrote:I still don't know why we have this silly scenario when we know half the draw for the Worlds as early as February, and even worse the defending champion automatic top-seed <doh> 1 and 2 seeds in opposite halves always, 3/4 have a 50/50 chance which half they go in, 5-8 50/50 chance which half they go in, 9-16 50/50 chance ... then the qualifiers random. Now I absolutely bet my house that Ali will have an eye on what has happened with the draw for the Worlds now and it will affect his performance today against Higgins. If the draw was done properly, like in tennis, then this scenario would be averted.


bourne has this right well almost we cant have a scenario again where players look at the rankings prior to the welsh and know what they got to do or not do in some cases to avoid top players the Draw should be made on monday with the China Open with a possibility of seeded 3 playing in the top half of the draw with seeded 1 and so on down the top 16.

however it makes perfect sense having the defending champion top seed to safeguard against the defending champion being a qualifier and thus not at the venue defending his title surely after winning a event that should be a privilege.

with the rankings as they are now thats not as likely however the season Dominic Dale won the shanghai masters he dropped from WN 31 to WN 32 and thus had the possibility of playing 2 qualifying matches to get back to shanghai if he only dropped one more spot to 33 in the end of season Rankings.

Rankings are only a guide to seed players in the right Round it should not be the be all and end all and Having a defending Champion Top seed at the expense of the WN 16 is a small price to play to getting the Right Players playing in the Event.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Bourne

however it makes perfect sense having the defending champion top seed to safeguard against the defending champion being a qualifier and thus not at the venue defending his title surely after winning a event that should be a privilege

Why ? I just can't think of how you can justify that ... they've got rid of it in football now with regards to World Cup winners, they now have to qualify. If you're good enough to call yourself a top seed but you're not good enough to win qualifying matches, then something's badly wrong surely ?

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Casey

Sorry guys but I find all of this hard to believe.

Since when did Ronnie become the man to beat again? He hasn't won a World Snooker event since September 2009.
Its clear Higgins is the man to beat the way he has played over the last few years, if the players want to avoid anybody it will be him. Even more so as he is a man on a mission.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Monique

Well avoiding ROS also means avoiding Higgins because they are in the same quarter... but I still don't think Ali would do that.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Roland

I don't think Ali will do it either. I think he'll want to take on Selby for the right to be a double Welsh winner

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Casey

Monique wrote:Well avoiding ROS also means avoiding Higgins because they are in the same quarter... but I still don't think Ali would do that.


Yea I just noticed that after I posted. That bottom quarter is tuff; Ronnie, Murphy & Higgins :?

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Roland

But Carter could displace Murphy with a win today, and if Selby beats Maguire then Carter can beat Selby to send Maguire into that section and he'll be in the Williams/Allen quarter.

I just thought it was right to start a topic on this to get it out in the open because I don't see any of the top players "tanking" for draw position, especially when there are only 2 matches to go for a ranking event win.

And besides, it's not as if a place in Robbo's section is easy.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby GJ

Wild wrote:sorry but players that think like that are born losers.

if you cant beat Ronnie or Higgins in the Last 16 what chance have you got in a final.

surely top players want to be WORLD CHAMPION not avoid better players so they can be World Semi finalist.

and as i said on another thread wouldn't it be better to win the Welsh than to tank it and get stuffed in a crucible first round before you actually played the player you tanked a tournament to face.



mate form in warm up events is irrelevent before worlds

FACTS

2007 wales champion robbo - worlds 2nd round exit
2008 wales champion selby - worlds first round exit
2009 wales champion carter - worlds 2nd round xit
2010 wales champion higgins - worlds 2nd round exit

2007 china open winner dott - worlds round 1 exit
2008 china open winner maguire - worlds quarters exit
2009 china open winner ebdon - worlds round 1 exit
2010 china open winner williams - worlds 2nd round exit

:afro: :D <cool>

robbo got stuffed in round 2 in both warm up events and what happend at crucible last year

:D :bowdown:

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Bourne

Not often GJ makes a post of statistical, hard-hitting fax but he's just done it :wave:

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Roland

It is particularly baffling how the China Open winner usually does so poor in the Worlds. There's no reason for it.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby GJ

For me no matter how bad the big players do in warm up to the worlds , they get inpired playing at the crucible and abit of tactical tanking in warm up events wont comeback to haunt them as wild suggests.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Wildey

Bourne wrote:however it makes perfect sense having the defending champion top seed to safeguard against the defending champion being a qualifier and thus not at the venue defending his title surely after winning a event that should be a privilege

Why ? I just can't think of how you can justify that ... they've got rid of it in football now with regards to World Cup winners, they now have to qualify. If you're good enough to call yourself a top seed but you're not good enough to win qualifying matches, then something's badly wrong surely ?


this is a totally different argument to this particular thread but any sponsor would want the defending champion in the event as of right just because football does it doesent make it right and far from it....

how would having Bingham as World no 16 be seeded 16th at the expense of the current champion be a positive move :huh:

its a short price to pay to seeing the defending champion defending the title.

back on subject

i also dont think Carter would do it or any player its all about racking up tournaments.... winning 1 World Championship did nothing for Joe Johnson to defy him as a Great player despite reaching the final the next year.

if a chance comes along to win you bloody take it it might never come along again.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Bourne

Wild wrote:
Bourne wrote:however it makes perfect sense having the defending champion top seed to safeguard against the defending champion being a qualifier and thus not at the venue defending his title surely after winning a event that should be a privilege

Why ? I just can't think of how you can justify that ... they've got rid of it in football now with regards to World Cup winners, they now have to qualify. If you're good enough to call yourself a top seed but you're not good enough to win qualifying matches, then something's badly wrong surely ?


this is a totally different argument to this particular thread but any sponsor would want the defending champion in the event as of right just because football does it doesent make it right and far from it....

how would having Bingham as World no 16 be seeded 16th at the expense of the current champion be a positive move :huh:

its a short price to pay to seeing the defending champion defending the title

Why number-one seed though ? Imagine a player winning the world title this year but losing R1 in every event the next season (let's face it, O'Sullivan could well have been that man in this instance) ... and then he gets top-seed status the next year, how is that fair ? Impossible to justify it.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Wildey

Bourne wrote:
Wild wrote:
Bourne wrote:however it makes perfect sense having the defending champion top seed to safeguard against the defending champion being a qualifier and thus not at the venue defending his title surely after winning a event that should be a privilege

Why ? I just can't think of how you can justify that ... they've got rid of it in football now with regards to World Cup winners, they now have to qualify. If you're good enough to call yourself a top seed but you're not good enough to win qualifying matches, then something's badly wrong surely ?


this is a totally different argument to this particular thread but any sponsor would want the defending champion in the event as of right just because football does it doesent make it right and far from it....

how would having Bingham as World no 16 be seeded 16th at the expense of the current champion be a positive move :huh:

its a short price to pay to seeing the defending champion defending the title

Why number-one seed though ? Imagine a player winning the world title this year but losing R1 in every event the next season (let's face it, O'Sullivan could well have been that man in this instance) ... and then he gets top-seed status the next year, how is that fair ? Impossible to justify it.

yes i see that point he could be no 16 seed <ok>

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby SnookerFan

Can I just ask, I saw the John Higgins match this afternoon, but due to my moving house it's the only match I've seen in full televisually. I saw the first two days live at the arena. So my question is this, has the talk of tanking been restricted to internet forums, or has it been brought up by commentators?

Probably a silly question, because I doubt the television channels would wish this to come to the public attention. But even if they did, I really can't see there are any players that do this. Would you really lose on purpose due to wanting an easier draw in a more prestigious tournament? For once, Wild is talk absolute sense. If you'd really give up on winning ranking points, and trophies just because they are less prestigious then another you want an easier draw in, then you are a loser and will never be an all time great. Hendry won so much because he wanted to win everything. There was no such thing as the most important tournament to him. You asked him which one was the most important, he'd say the next one. He hated losing that much.

I'd have no respect for any player who wanted out of one tournament, to give him an easier ride in another. And I don't think anybody who does that is truly a professional.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Roland

It's purely internet forums, or more specifically Bourne and GJ but I'm sure in the wider snooker audience there will be many others who share their opinion.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby SnookerFan

Sonny wrote:It's purely internet forums, or more specifically Bourne and GJ but I'm sure in the wider snooker audience there will be many others who share their opinion.


Sorry. I didn't realise it was from such reliable sources. <laugh> :wave:

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Roland

The subject needed to be brought up so it could be addressed and kicked into touch.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby GJ

SF

we are realist's you and wild are in dark ages in some issues

:wave: <laugh>

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Bourne

Sonny wrote:The subject needed to be brought up so it could be addressed and kicked into touch.

Swept under the carpet you mean :roll:

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Tubberlad

Bourne wrote:
Sonny wrote:The subject needed to be brought up so it could be addressed and kicked into touch.

Swept under the carpet you mean :roll:

As I posted in the discussion topic:
I think it would be very naive to think certain players wouldn't do something like this, but I think it's most likely that the ones who do will not be picking up the Joe Davis trophy. They don't have the confidence in themselves to beat whoever's put in front of them, they don't have the necessary competitive drive and they don't deserve the title of World Champion

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby SnookerFan

GJ wrote:SF

we are realist's you and wild are in dark ages in some issues

:wave: <laugh>


Not really. I just think that if any player does do that in a professional tournament, I think it damages their respect as a proffesional. Especially as it was only a year ago they were crabbing there weren't enough tournaments.

I can understand some tournaments bring a bit extra prestige, and perhaps gives you more incentive, but to actually deliberately go out of a tournament two months before the Crucible starts, just to give yourself an easier draw would be an appalling attitude. And if any player admitted to doing it, then I would then hate for them to win the tournament they were deliberately tanking for. It's a shameful attitude for a snooker player to not want to win snooker matches.

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby GJ

Federer has tanked matches in small events so is he not a proper champion

list goes on

Re: Tanking Discussion

Postby Bourne

Tubberlad wrote:
Bourne wrote:
Sonny wrote:The subject needed to be brought up so it could be addressed and kicked into touch.

Swept under the carpet you mean :roll:

As I posted in the discussion topic:
I think it would be very naive to think certain players wouldn't do something like this, but I think it's most likely that the ones who do will not be picking up the Joe Davis trophy. They don't have the confidence in themselves to beat whoever's put in front of them, they don't have the necessary competitive drive and they don't deserve the title of World Champion

Disagree, if you win 5 matches at the Crucible in 17 days then you deserve to be called World Champ, doesn't matter what happens before or after. And if that means playing badly to get an easier draw, then that's life, it's just one of the nuances of sport.